by Daniel Stefanski | Nov 24, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
One of the Arizona Governor’s chief nemeses will be returning for duty in the upcoming legislative session.
Last week, it was reported that Senator Jake Hoffman would be reprising his role as the Chairman of the Arizona Senate Committee on Director Nominations (DINO).
“We’ve seen the tragic fallout from Katie Hobbs’ fake director scheme and its impacts on Arizonans in recent months, including the death of a child in DCS custody and a major $2 million fraudulent transfer of taxpayer dollars from DOH,” said Chairman Hoffman. “These heartbreaking or otherwise incredibly serious incidents could have been avoided had she followed the law and taken the Senate confirmation process seriously. When her illegal ploy didn’t work, she spent millions of dollars trying to flip control of the Legislature to get her radical nominees approved by Democrats and failed miserably. The committee invites Katie Hobbs to come to the table with sane, nonpartisan, qualified nominees, and we will approve them. What we won’t do is rubberstamp unqualified radicals.”
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen told AZ Free News, “I formed the DINO committee to make sure nominations are competent and nonpartisan. In the past, we have seen Governor nominees get approved with very little vetting. With a thorough review of each nominee, we will assure that our citizens have the best directors possible.”
On February 2, 2023, Petersen announced the formation of the Senate Committee on Director Nominations, tasking this panel “with gathering information and evaluating qualifications on the governor’s executive appointments in order to recommend a course of action for the Senate to take on each individual.” The Senate President appointed five members to serve on the committee – three Republicans and two Democrats.
Over the next several months, the committee held multiple hearings for Hobbs’ nominees. Although Hobbs was upset that not every one of her nominees received a passing grade, Petersen reminded observers that the process chosen by the Senate had “approved 70 percent of her nominees,” adding that “we are not a rubber stamp.”
In September 2023, Hobbs sent a letter to Petersen, informing him that she would “withdraw all director nominations that remain pending before the Senate and pursue other lawful avenues of ensuring State government can continue to function for Arizonans.” The governor blamed Senate Republicans for not “fulfilling (their) statutory obligations in good faith.”
After receiving Hobbs’ correspondence, Petersen stated, “This move by the Executive Branch showcases another prime example of an elected official who believes they’re already above the law and will go to extreme measures to bypass the requirements of the law when they don’t get their way.” Petersen also warned of the consequences of Hobbs’ unprecedented actions, saying, “Without directors fulfilling these obligations, the legality of every decision made by these state agencies is dubious, and litigation against the state would surely prevail.”
It didn’t take long for Petersen’s warning to come to fruition. One day after his statement, Arizona State Treasurer Kimberly Yee held a Board of Investment Meeting and refused to recognize “employees from the Department of Administration or the Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions as legally participating members.”
The Arizona State Senate then filed a lawsuit in the Maricopa County Superior Court against Hobbs in December 2023 over her refusal “to nominate agency directors, bypassing the Senate’s advice and consent processes.” The lawsuit asked the Court to declare that the Governor has violated state law and to require her to nominate directors to any of the agencies missing Senate-confirmed heads.
Earlier this year, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott A. Blaney issued a ruling in the lawsuit, concluding that the Governor “has improperly, unilaterally appointed de facto directors for these 13 agencies, [and] must comply with the procedures and deadlines in ARS 38-211 (B) & (C) for appointment of the agency directors.”
In his ruling, Judge Blaney wrote, “It is also not lost on the Court that the Executive Deputy Directors are the same individuals that the Governor previously nominated and forwarded to the Senate for review, but withdrew when she grew frustrated with the Senate…Under Arizona law, directors run the respective administrative agencies and are appointed to their important positions through a statutorily defined process. That process requires oversight by the legislative branch. Here the Governor willfully circumvented that statutory process and eliminated the Legislative branch from its oversight role.”
Judge Blaney also asserted that “if the Court were to agree that the Governor can side-step applicable statutes in this manner to arrive at her desired end state, it would render meaningless [all statutes governing this process].” The judge stated that “the Court therefore cannot arrive at any statutory interpretation that results in elimination of the Senate’s consent role from the statutory scheme.”
Blaney ended his ruling by expressing his desire for both the Governor’s Office and Senate Republicans to come together to resolve the matter between them. He wrote, “The Court will set a separate evidentiary hearing or oral argument for a date in late July or early August 2024. This will give these co-equal branches of government an opportunity to meet and confer in an attempt to reach a mutually agreeable resolution of this dispute.”
Both sides were able to reach an accord soon after the court decision. In August, Arizona Senate Republicans announced that “Governor Katie Hobbs admit[ted] she violated state law through her scheme to circumvent the Senate confirmation process for director nominations and has agreed to submit new candidates for consideration, as required by law.”
Many of those new nominees from the Governor’s Office are expected to be sent to the Arizona Senate at the start of the 57th Legislature in January, setting up potentially contentious battles over their qualifications with legislative Republicans.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 23, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Republicans raised serious allegations Thursday around Democrat Gov. Katie Hobbs’ approval of a $700,000 upgrade of the state logo by Urias Communications, owned by the brother of Office of Tourism Director Lisa Urias. On Friday morning, the Governor’s office announced that Urias would resign. Hobbs told reporters, ”This appearance of conflict is not acceptable.”
Arizona State senator Jake Hoffman laid out his allegations in a lengthy post to X in which he cited a report from Arizona Agenda. The Agenda reported that the Arizona Office of Tourism spent a sum of $700,000 originating from COVID-19 federal relief funds “on 57 in-person and digital listening sessions across the state, not to mention the $27,500 that went to the brother of the CEO of Urias’ marketing agency. He helped work on the logo with a separate graphic design company.”
Hoffman wrote, “’And of all the artists in the state who could have drafted that logo, the contract just happened to go to one who has close ties to the Office of Tourism Director Lisa Urias’—her brother.”
Hoffman added, “Katie Hobbs continues to exploit her office, break the law, and take advantage of the people of Arizona. This is what it looks like when Democrats are in control of your government.”
Senator John Kavanagh, when briefed by the outlet, reportedly called the matter “clearly an ethical violation. Whether or not it’s a legal violation is another issue.”
According to the report from Arizona Agenda, Urias’ mandate upon taking office included the hefty rebranding of Arizona to include “elements of Arizona’s Native American cultures in the design.” To that end the Office of Tourism engaged the services of Urias Communications, a company that is still owned by the director, although she “doesn’t have any role in its day-to-day operations,” as claimed by the tourism department’s communications director Josh Coddington.
The outlet noted that the Office of Tourism under Urias is leveraging a tax-funded budget of $8 million to woo tourists to come to Arizona, adding, “The appointment seems to have been an economic driver for Urias Communications as well.”
The Agenda concluded, “But even if she isn’t involved with the day-to-day operations of the company that she founded, Urias seems to be financially benefiting from the state’s contract with her company at the same time she is pulling a salary from the state.”
The report added that over a year after Urias became Director of Arizona’s Office of Tourism, her firm went on to win a $250,000 five-year contract from the Arizona Department of Education. This led Hoffman to remark that Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne “is wrapped up in this scandal too.”
However, Horne refuted this in a response posted to X saying “Senator, we paid $15K on an expiring 1-year contract with Urias. ADE does not, nor will it, have a $250K contract with Urias. Get your facts straight.”
Hoffman replied, “Public reporting says otherwise. Send the receipts to back up what you’re saying to my Senate office. Would be glad to find out the public reporting is wrong. Need the receipts though.” Horne followed up that the documentation had been sent to Hoffman’s office, even posting an image of the documentation. He added, “Documents are at your office. Unlike the Governor we don’t know Urias personally. Next time ask first.”
In a letter to Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, Majority Whip Sen. Teresa Martinez called for an investigation into the allegations. Within twenty-four hours, Urias’ resignation was announced.
Urias responded to the allegations in a statement Friday saying, “In light of the Senate Confirmation members making it clear they will not confirm me as Tourism Director—despite the recent allegations being untrue and unfounded—I have tendered my resignation to the Governor.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 15, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Bruce Cohen has chosen to recuse himself from the alternate electors case after reports revealed a series of emails he sent to his colleagues that openly defended Vice President Kamala Harris and urged other jurists to do likewise.
As previously reported by AZ Free News, the controversy that preceded Cohen’s recusal centered around a series of emails in which he demanded that his fellow judges and commissioners stand in defense of then-Democratic Presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris. The Judge offered these emails in response to criticisms levied against Harris that she was a “DEI Hire.” Cohen particularly characterized the issue in racial and gender-based terms calling upon white men in particular to defend Harris, along with any colleagues who identified as “person(s) of color.”
Cohen wrote in part, “It does matter if your chromosomes are made up of ‘XY.’ It matters even more if your skin color is characterized as ‘white’ or Caucasian. We must speak out. We must tell those within our circles of influence that this s**t must stop. NOW! We cannot allow our female colleagues to feel as if they stand alone when there are those who may intimate that their ascension was anything other than based upon exceptionalism. We cannot allow our colleagues who identify as being a ‘person of color’ to stand alone when there are those may claim that their ascension was an ‘equity hire’ rather than based solely upon exceptionalism. We no longer can stay silent merely because others are exercising their right to free speech — we, too, have that same right and must exercise it.”
Attorneys representing Republican state Sen. Jake Hoffman, a defendant alongside several other prominent Republican figures facing charges for their participation in an alternate slate of Electoral College votes during the 2020 Presidential Election, told the Associated Press that Judge Cohen “bears a deep-seated personal political bias that overcame his professional judgment.”
Arizona attorney Mark L. Williams, who represents former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, told the AP, “Given the statements the judge made, I think it’s appropriate that he recuse himself.”
He added, “The way I see it, the case against Mr. Giuliani and the other defendants is falling apart and I think the attorney general should just wind down the case and dismiss it.”
Michael Colombo of Dhillon law group, writing on Hoffman’s behalf in a motion for recusal, explained, “The utter contempt Judge Cohen displayed against President Trump in his Aug. 29 email makes it clear that Senator Hoffman — who is on trial for exercising his First Amendment rights as a supporter of President Trump — cannot receive a fair trial before Judge Cohen.”
Columbo also took aim at Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes writing, “While Judge Cohen is entitled to his political opinions and speech, his rhetoric and exhortation precisely mirrors the evidence of hostile partisan political zealotry at the heart of the motions to dismiss that have been languishing before the Court for months. In short, the evidence before the Court of the Attorney General’s unlawful retaliation against Defendants includes her demonization of Republicans as well as her Chief Deputy comparing Republicans to Nazis and the Defendants in this case to Vladimir Putin.”
He added, “Even if Judge Cohen can somehow separate his apparent detestation of President Trump from his adjudication of a case that centers around defendants’ political activity in support of President Trump, the appearance of impropriety is a stain on this case that cannot be removed.”
Cohen, scheduled to retire in January, defended his actions in the text of his order, and even doubled down claiming, “This judicial officer expressed in an email support for the exceptionalism of the judicial officers of Maricopa County and was a stand for decency and respect. What was contained in the email is not reflective of bias.”
Per Courthouse News, all scheduled hearings are now vacated and the case is on hold pending the assignment of a new judge.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Nov 12, 2024 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona Board of Regents held special board and committee meetings last week. And despite a year of scandal and serious allegations, Arizona State University (ASU) President Michael Crow received a significant pay increase along with a contract extension.
For those who’ve been keeping up with the news regarding ASU over the past year, scandals included:
Given all of the above, one might expect that university leaders would face a reckoning from the Arizona Board of Regents, but they would be wrong.
According to AZCentral, Crow will now receive a base salary of $892,500, around a 7% increase over his last contract, and the new agreement will keep him with the university until June 2029.
The ASU President has also received an additional $305,000 in bonuses for meeting goals laid out for him by the board. According to the report, these goals included “launching a training center to support the semiconductor industry in the state and creating a strategic plan to implement AI at the school.” He was also up for an additional $35,000 if the university exceeded a 10% enrollment growth goal over 2021 numbers, which ASU missed.
As reported by The College Fix, College Republicans at ASU called for an investigation into possible election interference when “70,000 Arizona State students received a text from the Kamala Harris campaign which is data from the Arizona state database and should be confidential!”
Carson Carpenter, president of College Republicans at ASU, told the outlet that the group had confirmed that the text message from Kamala Harris’ failed campaign was sent to “students from [all] Arizona universities,” including ASU, Northern Arizona University, and the University of Arizona.
The group asked, “If Kamala Harris has access to all of Arizona college students’ phone numbers, what ELSE do they have?”
In an emailed statement to College Fix, an ASU Spokesman told reporters on condition of anonymity, “Under Arizona Public Records Law, ASU’s records are public unless there is a specific confidentiality requirement.”
“While most student records are confidential under [the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act], FERPA exempts from confidentiality ‘directory information,’ which includes contact information. ASU is therefore required to release student directory information upon request.”
State Representative Jake Hoffmann posted to X that he would be launching a full Senate investigation into the matter, which he called, “a MAJOR security breach!”
He added, “I’m receiving lots of evidence from many Arizona public university students who received unsolicited text messages promoting Kamala Harris for president that appear to have come from Arizona universities illegally providing their personally identifiable information to her campaign. This seems like yet more election interference in Arizona, which is why my investigation for the Arizona Senate has already begun.”
Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs and Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne serve on the board as ex-Officio members. However, neither were present for the meeting or took part in the vote to approve Crow’s contract. According to the annotated meeting agenda, the vote to approve was unanimous with seven of the twelve voting members present, “Regents Mata, Goodyear, DuVal, Penley, Pacheco, Brewster, Archuleta, Stein, and Zaragoza voted in favor. None opposed and none abstained.”
The regents are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate. With the exception of the Governor, Superintendent, and two student members, they serve 8-year terms.
In the meeting agenda and annotation, no mention is made of the ongoing controversies that have rocked ASU in 2024.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Daniel Stefanski | Oct 10, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
An Arizona Republican legislator continues to hold a government agency accountable to the law.
Last week, State Senator Jake Hoffman sent a letter to the Arizona Clean Elections Commission, which was his second letter to this agency, over a new rule it had adopted “requiring candidates to receive at least 1% of total ballots cast in all primaries for their office to qualify for general election debates.” Hoffman’s latest letter called on the Commission “to submit the rule through the standard rule-making process and to invite all qualified candidates to general election debates until any new rules are appropriately adopted in a transparent and lawful manner.”
In a statement, Hoffman said, “Arizona law only gives the Commission discretion to determine the manner in which debates are conducted. It does not give the Commission unfettered discretion to pick and choose which candidates get to participate. If the Commission believes this rule is a good idea, then there should be nothing to fear from holding an open and public process for promulgating rules. Evading this process invites litigation, calls into question the independence of the Commission, and deprives Arizona citizens of the protections afforded under the APA.”
The issue that prompted the initial inquiry by Hoffman was the confirmation from the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission that Eduardo Quintana, the Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate, would not be allowed in the upcoming October debate with Republican Kari Lake and Democrat Ruben Gallego. Quintana received 282 votes in the primary – far less than the one percent threshold established by the Commission.
Hoffman has contended that due to the Commission’s rule not being “submitted for approval to the Governor’s Regulatory Review Council for compliance with the Arizona Administrative Procedures Act, [the] maneuver violates the 2018 voter-approved Proposition 306.”
Thomas Collins, the Executive Director of the Commission, sent a letter in response to Hoffman’s first inquiry. He said, in part, that the report of the new rule “mischaracterizes a discretionary decision by the Commission, based on input from its contracted debate production and broadcast consultants, to not include the candidates who had received less than 1% of votes cast in their primaries in the 2024 Commission-sponsored debates.” Collins added, “It is both factually inaccurate and inconsistent with the APA requirements to characterize this decision as adoption of a new ‘rule’ for purposes of the APA.”
Collins’ letter prompted this most recent letter from Hoffman, who argued against the Commission’s justification for its action. Hoffman wrote, “You are sorely mistaken if you expected the serious concerns raised in my letter to be assuaged by a lengthy letter filled with fluff about why you think it’s a good idea to remove candidates from state-recognized parties from public debates. While these policy arguments may be convincing to you, it is really beside the point. I shouldn’t need to remind you that the Commission, as part of the executive branch, implements legislative policy – it does not set it.”
Hoffman concluded his communication to the agency, stating, “Because Arizona requires the Commission to ‘sponsor debates among candidates’ and the Green party candidate certainly meets Arizona’s liberal definition of ‘candidate,’ the only conceivable way the Commission could exclude a Green Party candidate from participating would be through a duly passed rule that complies with Arizona’s APA. This, however, the Commission has not done.”
After Hoffman’s newest letter to the Commission, the Arizona Green Party posted the following to its X account: “By barring the Green Party candidates for statewide & federal offices in Arizona from the televised debates over an arbitrary rule, we believe that the Arizona Clean Elections Commission has violated A.R.S. 16-192, which prohibits the use of public resources to influence the outcome of an election. The commission has used taxpayer dollars to present a false, binary choice between Democrats and Republicans in the races for Senate, Congress, and AZ Corp. Commission. This action deprives AZ voters of the knowledge that they have other options, which WILL influence the outcome.”
The Arizona Green Party also stated, “The Arizona Clean Elections Commission & the AZ Media Association, a private entity interested in profit rather than providing the people of Arizona with all perspectives from all parties, are favoring the duopoly candidates in these races over the grassroots & non-corporate Green Party candidates. Following the lead of candidates such as Quintana for Senate, the AZGP is currently in the process of filing official election complaints on these grounds.”
The Commission’s U.S. Senate debate between Republican Kari Lake and Democrat Ruben Gallego took place on October 9.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
