As Sunshine Residential Homes remains at the center of an ongoing investigation into alleged “pay-to-play” conduct involving Gov. Katie Hobbs, public records link founder and CEO Simon Kottoor to a Paradise Valley residence that Zillow estimates is worth nearly $10 million. The property has drawn renewed attention amid scrutiny of Sunshine’s political donations and subsequent state-approved rate increases.
Arizona campaign finance records reviewed by AZ Free News show that Gov. Katie Hobbs was the only Arizona candidate to receive contributions from Simon and Elizabeth Kottoor during the 2022 and 2024 election cycles. Simon Kottoor’s only other recorded contribution to a political candidate was a 2023 donation to New York Democratic congressional candidate Kevin Thomas.
Simon Kottoor founded Sunshine Residential Homes (formerly Sunshine Group Homes) in 1996, according to the company’s website. Sunshine says it provides congregate foster placements for Arizona children, has served more than 25,000 children since its founding, and currently has more than 300 children in care with approximately 200 employees.
Maricopa County property records reviewed by AZ Free News list the residence under the Kottoor Family Trust, with Simon M. Kottoor and Elizabeth Kottoor named as trustees. AZ Free News has withheld the street address from publication.
Zillow describes the property as a 7,719-square-foot, five-bedroom, six-bathroom home on 1.08 acres and estimates its value at approximately $9.53 million. Realtor.com estimates the property’s value at about $8.71 million and reports it last sold for $1.55 million in 2020.
Sunshine Residential Homes and Kottoor have faced scrutiny over political donations connected to Hobbs and subsequent state-approved rate increases. The Arizona Republic reported in June 2024 that Sunshine Residential Homes received a large rate hike from the Arizona Department of Child Safety (DCS) after making six-figure contributions to Hobbs’ inauguration fund and the Arizona Democratic Party. The outlet reported that Sunshine applied for a rate increase in December 2022, was denied in February 2023, then applied again in May 2023 and was approved, citing DCS records.
The Republicreported in July 2024 that both the Kottoors’ and Sunshine Residential Homes’ donations to Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party amounted to approximately $420,000 from 2022-2024.
According to the Arizona Capitol Times, Sunshine Residential Homes gave $100,000 to Hobbs’ inaugural fund and separately gave $300,000 to the Arizona Democratic Party. The outlet also reported that the Arizona Republic found Hobbs personally called Kottoor shortly after winning the 2022 election and asked him to serve as a gold-level sponsor of her inauguration. The same report said the Department of Child Safety later increased payments to Sunshine in 2023 to nearly 40 percent above the average for other group homes.
Kottoor was also on Hobbs’ inaugural committee, and he and his wife made maximum contributions to Hobbs’ campaign, according to reporting cited by Governing. That report also noted that Hobbs attended a private event at the Kottoor’s Paradise Valley residence.
Calls for investigation from Arizona lawmakers followed within days of the initial reporting.
From @GovernorHobbs spokesperson: "Like every other 'investigation' launched by this chaotic and radical legislature, this is another desperate, partisan stunt. It will do nothing but show the administration put the best interest of Arizona first." https://t.co/taQAZTmb52
The Arizona Attorney General’s Office opened an investigation into the Sunshine Residential matter in June 2024. The office’s public records archive lists communications and records related to the Sunshine Residential Homes investigation, including correspondence with Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell and Auditor General Lindsey Perry, as well as a criminal referral.
I requested an investigation by the Maricopa County Attorney into Governor Hobbs' alleged "pay to play" scheme. Arizona taxpayers deserve financial accountability. Giving state dollars to political donors is a grave misuse of public funds.
— Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee (@AZTreasurerYee) June 10, 2024
Hobbs’ office has denied wrongdoing. Axios reported that Hobbs spokesman Christian Slater said the administration would be “cleared of wrongdoing” and called the allegations partisan. Slater and DCS spokesman Darren DaRonco told Axios that Hobbs and her office had no involvement in agency decisions regarding Sunshine Residential Homes. Sunshine told the Arizona Republic that it remained committed to cooperating with any inquiry, Axios reported.
The investigation remains a prominent political issue in Arizona well into 2026. In April, KJZZ reported that Mayes’ team had asked Hobbs for an interview as part of the investigation and that Hobbs would not publicly commit to sitting for one. KJZZ reported that Hobbs continued to deny wrongdoing.
Republican lawmakers have cited the Sunshine controversy as they advance legislation requiring more disclosure from companies seeking state contracts. The Arizona Senate Republican Caucus announced last week that SB 1186, sponsored by Arizona Senate President Pro-Tempore T.J. Shope (R-LD16), had been sent to Hobbs’ desk. The bill would require companies seeking taxpayer-funded contracts and grants to disclose political donations, gifts, and other things of value connected to the governor and affiliated political organizations. A House summary of SB 1186 states that the measure establishes disclosure requirements for the request-for-proposal and grant-application processes.
Hobbs announced her own ethics reform proposal in February, calling it a sweeping transparency package intended to strengthen public trust in government. According to the Governor’s Office, the proposal includes a public transparency and disclosure database, contracting reforms, and a lobbyist gift ban.
The Sunshine Residential Homes matter remains under investigation, and no public finding of wrongdoing by Hobbs, Kottoor, or Sunshine Residential Homes has been announced.
This week, the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the Supreme Court to uphold Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship requirements for voting.
The DOJ filed a brief in Republican National Committee, et al. v. Mi Familia Vota, et al. (case Nos. 25-1017, 25-1019, and 25-1022).
The case will determine whether the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) prohibits states from: removing noncitizens from voter rolls within 90 days of an election, requiring individuals to provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections using the state registration form, and denying individuals the ability to vote by mail if they don’t provide documentary proof of citizenship.
These questions emerged from House Bills 2243 and 2492; both passed in 2022. Together, these bills require the secretary of state and county recorders to regularly review voter rolls, mandate registrants using the state registration form provide proof of citizenship, and prohibit vote by mail for federal-only voters.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the NVRA does preempt that legislation, impacting any similar citizenship proof measures taken by other states concerning their voting laws.
The federal court ruled the provisions in the Arizona laws amounted to unlawful voter suppression and were therefore unconstitutional. The court determined that voters must be allowed to vote federal ballots at least, even when they fail to provide proof of citizenship.
The respondents in the present litigation — Mi Familia Vota, Voto Latino, Arizona Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander for Equity Coalition, Democratic National Committee, and the Arizona Democratic Party — want to preempt Arizona and other states from imposing proof-of-citizenship limitations on voting.
Jesus Osete, principal deputy assistant attorney general for civil rights, said in the DOJ announcement that the NVRA doesn’t prohibit states from removing noncitizens from voter rolls.
In its filing, the DOJ argued the lower court’s ruling conflicted with the NVRA since it would effectively render state forms into mere replicas of the federal form. States would lack the flexibility afforded by the NVRA, said the DOJ.
The DOJ filing argued that proof-of-citizenship requirements were harmonious with NVRA requirements to increase the number of eligible citizens registered to vote and ensure the maintenance of accurate and current voter rolls.
“When noncitizens with no right to shape American government vote in American elections, the ballot box no longer speaks for the People, because its tally no longer reflects their voice,” argued the DOJ.
Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14) said he was “thrilled” by the Trump administration’s intervention.
“Only U.S. citizens should vote in our elections,” said Petersen. “Excited for SCOTUS to take up this important case.”
Thrilled the Trump DOJ is backing Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship requirements! Only U.S. citizens should vote in our elections. Excited for SCOTUS to take up this important case. https://t.co/xWBiciTxjV
The Supreme Court has already overruled the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on one of the issues in 2024. The Supreme Court allowed Arizona to enforce its proof-of-citizenship requirement for state voter registration forms, but refused to allow enforcement of the requirement for those registering with federal forms.
That follows the precedent set in 2013, when the Supreme Court ruled that the NVRA prohibited Arizona from requiring proof of citizenship of those voters registering to vote with the federal voter registration form.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Democratic infighting is escalating in Arizona’s First Congressional District race after former state lawmaker Amish Shah publicly criticized the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) over its involvement in the primary contest.
During a televised interview this week, Shah accused national Democratic leaders of interfering in the race despite prior assurances that the primary would remain open and competitive.
“We had been told multiple times there was not going to be any interference,” Shah told 12News’ Brahm Resnick on Sunday, criticizing what he described as “hubris” from national party officials.
The dispute follows the DCCC’s recent endorsement of Democrat Marlene Galán-Woods in Arizona’s First Congressional District, a seat currently held by Republican Congressman David Schweikert. The district is expected to be one of the nation’s top battlegrounds in the 2026 midterm elections.
Galán-Woods has already faced early controversy tied to her campaign’s use of Findraiser, an artificial intelligence-based fundraising company tied to embattled former California Congressman Eric Swalwell. The California Democrat resigned from Congress earlier this year and suspended his gubernatorial campaign following multiple allegations of sexual misconduct and sexual assault, which he has denied.
The endorsement was viewed by some Arizona Democrats as the national party “playing favorites” in a contested primary race. Shah previously won the Democratic nomination in the district in 2024 before losing to Schweikert in the general election.
Shah also criticized Galán-Woods directly during the interview, arguing that she had previously worked “to defeat Obama in two different elections,” a reference to her past political activity before becoming a Democratic candidate.
The DCCC endorsement has reportedly intensified tensions among Democratic activists and consultants in Arizona. Following the endorsement, Democratic consultant Stacey Pearson of Lumen Strategies compared the move to the “Sports Illustrated cover curse,” suggesting the backing could politically damage Galán-Woods rather than strengthen her candidacy.
Shah additionally acknowledged broader dissatisfaction among Democratic voters with national party leadership.
“Democratic voters right now, when they’re talking to me, aren’t exactly happy with the Democratic establishment,” Shah said during the interview.
The endorsement of Galán-Woods is part of the DCCC’s broader national effort to shape competitive House races through its “Red to Blue” program, which provides select candidates with fundraising and organizational support. The committee identified Galán-Woods as one of its preferred candidates in its effort to reclaim control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
The controversy in Arizona mirrors broader tensions within Democratic politics nationwide, as progressive groups and some party activists increasingly criticize the DCCC’s involvement in contested primaries. According to Axios, some progressive-aligned Democrats and Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC leaders have argued that primary voters, rather than national party organizations, should determine Democratic nominees in competitive races.
Supporters of Galán-Woods have argued that she enters the race with significant institutional support, including backing from the Arizona AFL-CIO and national Democratic organizations. Polling circulated by CHC BOLD PAC showed Galán-Woods leading in a hypothetical matchup with Republican candidate Gina Swoboda.
Swoboda, however, reportedly abandoned her congressional race and filed a statement of interest for the Secretary of State’s race in February. The polling from CHC BOLD PAC did not address former Arizona Rep. Joseph Chaplik or Trump-endorsed candidate Jay Feely, who led District 1 primary polling from NextGen Polling in April with 24 percent and 15 percent, respectively.
Chaplik Holds Early Lead in AZ-CD1 GOP Primary
BALLOT TEST Chaplik 24% Feely 15% Trobough 6% Undecided 54%
Joseph Chaplik holds the highest net approval rating at +20% while Jay Feely follows at a +8% net approval rating and John Trobough has a net approval rating of +3%
Shah’s campaign, meanwhile, has pointed to a February local independent poll from HighGround Public Affairs Consultants showing him leading in the race with 32.6 percent support, while Galán-Woods trailed by more than twenty-one points.
In a statement released following Shah’s comments, National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) spokesman Ben Petersen criticized Democratic leadership for intervening in the Arizona race.
“D.C. Democrat elites’ ham-fisted interference blew up spectacularly,” Petersen said. “When Democrats are this busy destroying each other, they’re proving they’re far too liberal and too chaotic to represent Arizonans.”
The Arizona Democratic Party (ADP) is heading into the second quarter of this pivotal election year with a negative cash balance exceeding $720,000.
Their latest campaign finance report, filed last week, reflected total-to-date expenditures that nearly tripled their income: over $2.8 million compared to $1 million.
For this first period, ADP’s expenditures did fall below their income: about $67,500 compared to $151,500.
ADP experienced much stronger fundraising in the first quarter of 2022, the last midterm election year. The party’s reported income was over $370,000 and expenditures were $146,000 in that first quarter.
A stark difference was evident between ADP’s campaign finances for the last two off-years as well.
The party’s campaign finance report data for all of 2025 reflected income just below $857,000, but expenditures totaling over $2.7 million. In the first quarter of 2025, the party raised only about $210,000 and spent nearly $360,000.
Comparatively, by the end of 2023, ADP had $1.5 million more in income than expenditures. In the first quarter of 2023, ADP raised nearly $1 million and expended about $227,000.
Some among ADP leadership did warn last summer that the party would go broke by the end of the year. The party has dealt with publicized infighting for about a year.
Unlike other transfers listed, shared expenses with the Navajo County Democratic Committee (NCDC) were categorized as an “unlimited transfer” routing arrangement for ADP funds.
NCDC has a surplus of nearly $1.6 million. Since the beginning of last year, NCDC has sent over $61,000 to ADP.
In that same time period ADP sent back over $107,000 to NCDC, or $46,000 more than NCDC has sent. Their cycle to date reported a cash flow between the two totaling nearly $150,000.
Navajo County accounted for ADP’s second-largest expenditure last year.
AZ Free News contacted ADP about the state of their finances and their fiscal arrangement with NCDC. ADP didn’t respond to our inquiry.
Apart from NCDC, ADP’s number-one expenditure last year by far was $1.7 million last August to the Copper State Values PAC, established and run by Gov. Katie Hobbs’ campaign manager Nicole DeMont and treasurer Dacey Montoya. Since DeMont set up the PAC in December 2024, its primary function has appeared to be a funding arm for the Hobbs reelection campaign.
The PAC sent back $94,500 a few months later, last December.
Discounting the $49,000 received from NCDC last year, ADP’s biggest sources of income were:
United Food and Comm Workers (UFCW) Union Local 99, the largest private-sector union in the state: $100,000
Estate of the late Janet Delesanti: $49,000
Arizona Public Service: $30,000
Elevance Health Inc (formerly Anthem), an Ohio-based insurance company: $25,000
Donalyn Mikles, former attorney for the defunct Arizona Summit Law School and director of the California-based Kling Family Foundation: $20,000
Moms Fed Up, a D.C.-based political activist organization: $20,000
William (Bill) Roe, former chair of the Arizona Democratic Party: $15,000
Pam H. Grissom, founder and longtime (not current) board member for Arizona List: $15,000
AFSCME People, AFSCME’s D.C.-based political action arm: $15,000
The following donated about $10,000 each: University of Phoenix, PMI US Corporate Services, Nextera Energy Resources, Arizona Education Association Fund for Public Education, Arizona State Association of Electrical Workers, and Daniel T. Ling.
None of the Democrats’ other legislative districts or county parties in the state have reported a negative cash balance, with the exceptions of Santa Cruz County Central Democratic Committee and La Paz County Democratic Central Committee.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes lacked the authority to approve a political party’s name change, invalidating the transition of the No Labels Party of Arizona to the Arizona Independent Party (AIP).
In a ruling issued March 25, Judge Greg Como found that Arizona law does not permit a recognized political party to change its name without completing the statutory process required for ballot access under the new name.
“Arizona does not have a procedure for a party, once formally recognized, to use a different name on the ballot,” the ruling states. “There is no other path for a party to appear on the ballot, under any name … To do so, the party must complete the process of obtaining the required number of valid signatures under the name it seeks to use on the ballot.”
The No Labels Party of Arizona originally qualified for ballot access after gathering the required number of signatures in 2023, allowing it to appear on ballots through the 2026 general election.
In October 2025, the party filed a notification with the Secretary of State’s Office to change its name to the Arizona Independent Party. Fontes approved the request, and the new name was set to take effect in December 2025.
The Secretary of State’s Office then issued guidance directing county recorders to update voter registrations to reflect the new party name.
The Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission, along with the Arizona Democratic Party and Republican Party, filed a lawsuit challenging the name change, arguing that it could create confusion among voters.
In his ruling, Como determined that while the No Labels Party had met statutory requirements to gain recognition, the Arizona Independent Party had not completed the required process for ballot access under that name.
Como reasoned, “When a person signs a petition on behalf of an aspiring party, it is reasonable to infer that they are largely motivated by how the party describes itself, i.e., the party’s name. Would the same 41,000 people who signed petitions to recognize the No Labels Party have signed to support the ‘Arizona Nazi Party’ or the ’Arizona Anarchists’?”
He stated, “By approving a party’s requested name change, without it obtaining the necessary signatures for party recognition, the Secretary permits a political bait and switch. A party can gather signatures using an innocuous-sounding name and then change it to something completely different. If the Secretary is to have such power, it must be prescribed by the Arizona Constitution or state statutes. It is not.”
The judge also found that the Secretary of State did not have the authority to direct how voters are registered with political parties.
“The Secretary does not have statutory authority to dictate which party a voter belongs to,” the ruling states. “The decision belongs to the voter.”
The ruling voided the name change and restored the party’s prior designation under state law.
“The Republican Party of Arizona is grateful for the judge’s ruling in the matter before him, finding Secretary of State Adrian Fontes exceeded his authority and allowed a fraudulent party to appear on the ballot. The judge noted that even Fontes admitted this issue would cause confusion for the voters, but Fontes disregarded that concern and the obvious truth, and proceeded to allow them to continue the charade,” stated AZGOP Chairman Sergio Arellano.
“Secretary Fontes announced he will not appeal this ruling. That is wise, as he has already cost taxpayers too much money, and his effort to sow confusion with this stunt, allowing the No Labels Party to unilaterally change their name to the Arizona Independent Party, has further eroded trust in our election officials at a time when that trust is already at an all-time low,” continued Arellano. “We are pleased that Secretary Fontes recognizes that the voters are a now a priority for him. They have always been a priority for Republicans, and we welcome all of them into our very big tent to usher conservative candidates into office on every level of government this November.”
AZGOP Chairman Sergio Arellano's statement on Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Gregory Como's ruling in Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission, et al. vs. Adrian Fontes pic.twitter.com/qqyQ5dL0XR
According to 12News, former Phoenix Mayor and AIP Chairman Paul Johnson said via text message that he intends to appeal the ruling. Secretary Fontes said on social media that he would not join the appeal.
“I acted in favor of the law as I saw it,” Fontes said. “Considering the fast approach of the election and the challenging job election administrators have before them, we will not participate in an appeal.”
Axios reported that Johnson said he believes that the 11 candidates who qualified for AIP will be permitted to run under the No Labels name pending appeal. However, he told the outlet he suspects Arizona’s Democratic and Republican parties will challenge this, adding, “They hate us existing.”
The case stems from broader disputes over election procedures and ballot access in Arizona, where multiple lawsuits have been filed in recent years over the administration of elections and political party recognition.
