Mesa voters are backing an effort to recall their council member, Julie Spilsbury, a self-identified Republican representing district two.
The recall effort focuses on several of Spilsbury’s past votes and her support for Democratic candidates last year.
JoAnne Robbins, a resident, filed the petition to recall Spilsbury. Robbins’ petition cited Spilsbury’s past votes approving a permit changing the use of a hotel into a homeless housing program, as well as increasing both city council salaries and citywide utility rates.
Other residents blame Spilsbury and the rest of council for the homelessness nuisance they endure. Earlier this month, failed Mesa mayoral candidate Scott Neely offered a first-person view of his average experience navigating the homeless while driving around the city.
“My neighborhood is a war zone in Mesa Arizona,” said Neely. “Thank you Julie Spilsbury and Mayor-Elect Mark Freeman for shoving this low income housing down our throats that our neighbors voted against.”
Spearheading the signature gathering effort is Turning Point Action (TPA). The activist arm of Turning Point USA launched a “super chase” initiative: door knocking efforts to gather enough signatures to oust Spilsbury. TPA has four different events scheduled over the coming week and some odd days.
The recall effort needs around 3,100 signatures by May 30 in order to launch a special election.
Working hard today to make sure we recall Julie Spilsbury! Thank you to all who showed up to help or those who swung by to pick up supplies. Every signature matters!@TPAction_@TPACoalitionspic.twitter.com/z5nfU79gef
Spilsbury responded to the recall with a statement on social media pledging her continued commitment to nonpartisanship. She justified her past votes over which the recall participants took offense by citing the wide margin of her reelection victory. Spilsbury also cautioned against supporting a special election due to its costliness.
“You might not agree with every decision or action I’ve made on the City Council but I have put every part of my heart into this job,” posted Spilsbury on Facebook. “I care deeply for the City of Mesa and for this community that is not only where I grew up but where Jeremy and I decided to raise our 6 kids. I love to serve our community! I care deeply about EVERY person in our city, not just the ones who look like me or think like me. I have tried to vote and make decisions on what is best for our entire city and to be true to what I feel is right in my soul.”
Beyond her voting history, it was Spilsbury’s personal political beliefs that spurred the recall effort. Spilsbury endorsed failed Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris and successful Democratic Senate candidate Ruben Gallego last year, much to the chagrin of mainstream Republican voters. Spilsbury joined groups like “Republicans for Harris” and “Republicans and Independents for Gallego.” Spilsbury and her husband were featured several times in media reports documenting the Mormon split away from Donald Trump and the Republican Party last year.
One signature gatherer, Cynthia, reported most voters she met have expressed an overall disappointment in Spilsbury’s representation.
“They feel betrayed because there was a promise to protect their kids, a promise to protect their community, and a promise to protect their money, and all three of those things she’s turned her back on,” said Cynthia.
Actions have consequences and the people of Mesa feel betrayed
Broken promises Protect the children – no Protect the city – no Protect the taxes – no
Spilsbury won reelection last summer outright in the primary after the general election was canceled.
Fellow council member Jennifer Duff also defended Spilsbury after early reports of the recall emerged.
“Julie Wold Spilsbury is an excellent council member, serving in a non partisan position,” posted Duff on Facebook. “Please don’t bring partisanship to city council. It’s actually where government works. I support Julie! Don’t sign a petition that is destructive to our city council.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
During a city council meeting this week, Mayor John Giles and the Mesa City Council voted to approve across-the-board increases in the city’s utility rates and fees covering solid waste removal, electricity, gas, water, and wastewater. Over two-dozen Mesa citizens spoke during the meeting, which stretched over two-hours. Mesa, lacking a primary property tax, derives much of its funding from utility rates and fees.
The city is facing increases in electric rates of up to 39% for Winter Tier 2 usage charges for residents and a $2.75 per month service charge increase according to the council report. Non-residential users will face increases from 2-6 percent. Solid waste residential barrel rates will increase 5.5%, with commercial roll-off rates jumping 6.5%. Gas rates are increasing 6-15% for residences and from 9-25% for non-residential users. Water rates are increasing 4-9% for residents, 5.5% for non-residential, 8.5% for commercial users, and 19.5% for large commercial or industrial users. Finally wastewater service and usage components charges will increase by 7.5% for residents and 8.5% for non-residential.
City staffers told The Mesa Tribune that the typical residential bill for water, wastewater, and solid waste will see an increase of about $5.60, from the current average of $100.21 to $105.81
As reported by the Tribune, Giles answered criticism at a meeting in late November telling the frustrated residents, “This proposed water-rate increase of less than 5% in Mesa is dramatically less than you see in every other community,” said Giles, zeroing in on the water utility increase.
“Cities around the Valley are increasing water 25%, talking about increasing wastewater charges 95%. We’re not doing anything remotely like that in the City of Mesa.“
“So if you’re upset about the increasing price of water, I’m with you. But if you want to vent those feelings, probably every other city council in the state would be a more appropriate place to do that because the increases are less than what you’re seeing in other cities.”
Kevin Medema, a Mesa resident who led the organization of a petition opposing the utility increases reportedly signed by 2,000 people, stressed, “We have citizens that are hurting financially. The city shoots for that 20% reserve (in the utility accounts). Well, you know a lot of residents won’t have that in themselves. So, please consider voting ‘no.’’’
Medema suggested that residents have offered to help the city find ways to reduce spending.
During the November 18th meeting, one Mesa resident, Lynda Patrick-Hayes poignantly called upon the council to “entertain the idea of cutting the utility rates and encourage the city manager to eliminate government waste. The City of Mesa has no revenue problems. It has a spending problem.”
Citing the city’s reliance on utility charges and sales tax due to lacking a property tax, Giles told the citizens, “There’s not an apples-to-apples comparison because the City of Mesa has a different model. We’re going to use utilities to help subsidize city services.”
Multiple attempts to reinstate a primary property tax, eliminated in 1945, have failed over the years.
“Now if you don’t like that model…the answer is not to come to the City of Mesa and say, ‘We don’t want you to raise utilities because that’s denying the reality of math.’”
Responding to calls to reduce city spending, Giles told the gathered objectors, “What your proposal is, you’re saying, ‘I want to dramatically cut spending on public safety in the City of Mesa.’ That’s what you’re asking us to do.”
Republican State Representative Barbara Parker spoke on behalf of her constituents in the area and told the council, “They call me when they lose their homes. They call the state when they can’t afford their insurance. And on behalf of them, I am telling you they are hurting and even one dollar makes a huge difference.”
Parker castigated the mayor and council for suggesting the city cut public safety spending, “The fact that we use the threat of fear and emotion that we are going to cut police and fire is so disingenuous and inappropriate. And to all the gentlemen and women in uniform tonight: I am one of you and I have trained many of the firefighters, and I want you to know we have your backs. And we need to elect people who will fund you first and then find funding for everything else. We are never going to cut funding to police and fire. That is always a tactic. It’s disingenuous, it is inappropriate, it lacks accountability, it is intellectually dishonest, and they are not pawns and you deserve better. Don’t let them use you as a pawn police and fire. It’s inappropriate to have a bond and then immediately after that election to suddenly have a tax increase or a rate payers increase.”
She concluded, “One of the things I was able to communicate to the legislature as a member of the Appropriations Committee is that: EVERY. SINGLE. DOLLAR. IS. SACRED. Every single penny is sacred. And when I’ve asked the citizens would they rather have one more penny in their pocket than have it go to waste or redundancies or excesses. Absolutely they say yes. I hope you’ll have the courage to do the right thing tonight. I can tell you on behalf of the state: we were able to cut budget, balance our budget, give money back to the taxpayers and fund every single program. And if the state of Arizona can do it, Mesa can do it better.”
The rate increases were passed by the city council unanimously with Giles stating, “I know all of that is not appreciated by this crowd to the extent that we’d like it to be, but it’s the facts. For those reasons I am compelled by math and the reality of the situation to support this increase.”
Over Veteran’s Day weekend, personal-finance website WalletHub released a ranking of the Best and Worst Places for Veterans to live. And the state of Arizona was represented by seven of our cities.
According to WalletHub, the rankings were based on a series of “19 key indicators of livability, affordability and veteran-friendliness,” including the availability of jobs related to military skill-sets, records of veteran income growth over time, and the availability of VA Healthcare.
WalletHub Analyst Chip Lupo explained, “When veterans return home from serving our nation, it’s important for them to live in a place that provides good education and employment opportunities, along with access to quality care for their physical and mental health. The best cities for veterans have all these characteristics, plus added bonuses like large veteran populations for community support, plus many restaurants and entertainment venues that offer veteran discounts.”
All told, the seven Arizona cities ranked were, in order: Scottsdale, leading at #7; Gilbert at #15; Chandler at #16; Mesa at #29; Glendale at #44; Tucson at #62; and finally, Phoenix came in at #75.
Gilbert and Chandler ranked 2nd and 5th, respectively, for the lowest percentage of veterans in poverty. Otherwise the state failed to rank in the top 5 of the study’s focus areas.
Essentially, this places Arizona firmly in the middling range of neither the worst nor the best.
While cities like the top five: Austin, TX; Orlando, FL; Raleigh, NC; Tampa, FL; and Virginia Beach, VA, have cause to celebrate the ranking, the release could leave Arizonans asking questions.
As of late 2023, the U.S. Census Bureau, cited by ABC15, recorded that there were 454,620 veterans of the Armed Forces living in the state or approximately 62 of every 1,000 adults, ranking us at 13th in the nation statistically.
By concentration, most resided in Sun City and Sun City West, Sun Lakes, Carefree, Apache Junction, and Union Hills.
Over a third served during the Vietnam War, 43% served in either the Cold War period or Gulf War, with just 17% of the veterans in the youngest cohort: those who served in the Global War on Terror. The number who served in Korea and the Second World War are dwindling fast at just 3% and 1%, respectively.
Arizona plays home to defense contractors as Honeywell, Raytheon, General Dynamics, BAE Systems, and Northrup Grumman. However, the Bureau of Labor Statistics examined the unemployment figures as of March 20th, specifically targeting veterans, and found that only 47% of those surveyed were employed, while 2.9% were collecting unemployment and a staggering 51% were “not in labor force.” That means they were either on disability, retired, on other benefits, or simply stopped trying to find work. This gives a potential glimpse into why more young veterans aren’t making Arizona their home, and instead serves as a retirement destination.
A radical Democrat state representative is attempting to return to her middle-of-the-road legislative district for a new term in office.
State Representative Lorena Austin is running for reelection in Arizona Legislative District 9, which covers the city of Mesa. According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, the district is likely one of the most competitive in the state, with a 2.6% vote spread in the Commission’s nine focus elections. Democrats are slightly favored in the district, having won in five of those nine focus elections.
Despite her district being more moderate in its political makeup, Austin has demonstrated a propensity to become one of the most extreme leftist members of the Arizona Legislature on almost every issue.
In a struggling state and national economy, where many families are struggling to get by in life, keep their jobs, and save for their children’s futures, Austin showed no mercy with her votes. This year, she was one of a handful of members to vote against HCR 2002, which stated that the legislature recognizes, encourages, and continues to support Arizona’s beef producing farmers, ranchers, and families. Last year (2023), she voted no on SB 1131, which would have prohibited a county, city, or town from levying a tax on rental property.
Austin is also opposed to individual property rights, as her votes have indicated. In 2023, she was one of 14 members to vote against final passage of a bill prohibiting protestors from targeting people in their own homes by protesting on their residential property (SB 1023).
This latest legislative session (2024), Austin voted no on SB 1129, which would have allowed a property owner or the owners’ agent to request from law enforcement the immediate removal of a person who is unlawfully occupying a residential dwelling. She also opposed SB 1073, which would have established a new form of the existing offense of obstructing a highway or other public thoroughfare and classified this new form of the offense as a class 6 felony (which was introduced in response to protestors blocking traffic).
Austin’s legislative record extends, too, into bouts of radical socialism. In 2023, she co-sponsored HB 2610, which would have created a state-owned bank. Additionally, she co-sponsored HB 2653, which would have established that “restaurants and other food service establishments in this state may only serve water and disposable straws to customers on request.” Earlier this year, Austin voted no on HB 2629, which would have established November 7 of each year as Victims of Communism Day and required the State Board of Education to create a list of recommended resources for mandatory instruction on the topic in certain public school courses.
The Democrat lawmaker has refused to support solutions to help her state end the border crisis affecting almost every community in Arizona – not to mention elsewhere in the nation. In 2023, Austin co-sponsored HB 2604, which would have permitted the Arizona Department of Transportation to issue a driver’s license or nonoperating ID to a person without legal status in the United States. And in this most recent legislative session, she voted no on HB 2621, which would have deemed that the trafficking of fentanyl across Arizona’s border is a public health crisis and directed the Arizona Department of Health Services to do everything within its power to address the crisis. She also opposed SCR 1042, which proclaimed the legislature’s support for the people and government of the state of Texas in its efforts to secure our nation’s southern border.
Austin has an awful record in office on crimes against children. In 2023, she voted against SB 1028, which would have prohibited a person or business from engaging in an adult cabaret performance on public property or in a location where the performance could be viewed by a minor. She also voted no on SB 1583, which would have mandated that a level one sex offender who commits specified sexual offenses is required to register on the internet sex offender website if the offender was sentenced for a dangerous crime against children.
This most recent legislative session (2024), Austin continued her spree of opposing legislation that would have protected more Arizona children from horrific crimes committed against them. She voted no on SB 1236, which would have specified that any offender who was convicted of or adjudicated guilty except insane for sexual crimes against children, whether completed or preparatory, and was 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense, must be included on the internet sex offender website. She also opposed HB 2835, which would have established knowingly observing a nude minor for the purpose of engaging in sexual conduct for a person’s sexual gratification as a form of criminal sexual exploitation of a minor. And Austin voted no on a ballot referral (SCR 1021), which would statutorily require an adult who is convicted of a class 2 felony for any child sex trafficking offense to be sentenced to natural life imprisonment.
As with many of her fellow Democrats running for the state legislature, Austin promotes endorsements from left-leaning organizations for her campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives, including Moms Demand Action, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, Save Our Schools Arizona, Progressive Turnout Project, HRC in Arizona, AEA Fund for Public Education, NARAL Pro-Choice Arizona, Stonewall Democrats of Arizona, Arizona Education Association, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Emily’s List, and Human Rights Campaign PAC.
There is one endorsement for Austin that appears to be absent from her website, from the Jane Fonda Climate PAC. Austin’s support from this PAC may be one of the most concerning for voters researching her record and determining which direction they want to see for their district. This PAC asserts that “major solutions are stopped cold: the Green New Deal, Build Back Better, clean energy investments, ending billions in tax subsidies to the fossil fuel industry – all because of politicians backed by Big Oil.”
The Green New Deal pushed by the Jane Fonda Climate PAC is the same championed by New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is one of the most progressive lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The district is currently represented by two Democrats in the state House of Representatives. Austin and her fellow Democrat incumbent, Seth Blattman, ran unopposed in the recent primary election. Austin received 10,353 votes, and Blattman obtained 8,741 votes. They will face off against Republicans Mary Ann Mendoza and Kylie Barber, who also ran unopposed in the primary election. Mendoza garnered 10,429 votes, and Barber received 10,136 votes.
November’s General Election will be the second time that Mendoza has been pitted against Austin and Blattman. In 2022, Austin and Blattman defeated Mendoza and her running mate, Kathy Pearce, to assume their offices for the 2023 Arizona legislative session.
Correction: A previous version of this article listed the incorrect vote totals for the candidates. The totals have now been updated with the latest results from the Arizona Secretary of State website.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona Senator Jake Hoffman recently responded to the launch of an Arizona chapter of “Republicans For Harris” with a blistering comment.
In his scorching post to X, Hoffman quipped “Strange… I thought prostitution was illegal in Arizona.” He advised his fellow Republicans to “Ignore these whores,” and asserted confidently, “Donald J. Trump will win Arizona.”
Strange… I thought prostitution was illegal in Arizona
In the image shared by Delaney Corcoran, Communications Director for the Harris campaign, Mesa Mayor John Giles is shown headlining the rally. “Our party used to stand for the belief that every Arizonan, no matter their background or circumstances, should have the freedom, opportunity and security to live out their American Dream,” he wrote, in his endorsement of Harris according to The Hill.
“But since Donald Trump refused to accept the outcome of the 2020 election, Republicans have yet to course correct,” Giles claimed. “The Republican Party with Trump at its helm continues down the path of political extremism, away from focusing on our fundamental freedoms.”
Expressing a similar sentiment, former Maricopa County GOP Chair Tyler Bowyer wrote, “For those not aware— John Giles is not a real Republican. He sold out in exchange for switching his party later to run for Congress next term to replace Democrat Greg Stanton in CD4. This is simple backroom politicking. He is supporting the most radical leftist ticket ever.”
For those not aware— John Giles is not a real Republican. He sold out in exchange for switching his party later to run for Congress next term to replace Democrat Greg Stanton in CD4.
This is simple backroom politicking. He is supporting the most radical leftist ticket ever https://t.co/dwz92oRyBO
In the aftermath of his initial comment, Hoffman addressed concerns over his choice of words from one commenter Kenny Jacobs, writing, “This commie is crying because I used textbook definitions to describe fake Republicans who’ve decided their virtue signaling and future pay day is more important than your future[.] Sorry losers Pimp yourself out to the Left at the expense of hardworking Americans… you’re a whore.”
This commie is crying because I used textbook definitions to describe fake Republicans who’ve decided their virtue signaling and future pay day is more important than your future
He cited The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 5th Edition definition of “Prostitute” which reads, “A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.
Hoffman is currently one of several defendants in an ongoing organized lawfare campaign by Arizona’s Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes. He is being prosecuted for his 2020 role on the GOP slate of alternate electors who prepared documentation to be presented to Congress in the event that the slate favoring President Joe Biden was rejected.
In a more recent post, he has also revealed a letter from an Instagram whistleblower with nearly 150k followers, “exposing a sophisticated Astroturfing effort underway by the Harris-Walz campaign. Social media users are being PAID to post pro Harris-Walz content on Instagram.”
