Over the past two years, Arizonans have experienced higher inflation than other parts of the country, and their state legislators are working on a solution to combat these higher prices.
This week, Republican legislators held a press conference at the Arizona State Capitol Rose Garden in Phoenix, promoting their efforts to eliminate the rental tax to help constituents struggling with high inflation.
Representative Neal Carter introduced HB 2067 in the House, and Senator Steve Kaiser introduced SB 1184 in the Senate. The bills would prohibit “municipalities from levying municipal tax on the business of renting or leasing real property for residential purposes effective January 1, 2024,” according to the overview provided by the Arizona House of Representatives.
SB 1184 was co-sponsored by six Senators (Ken Bennett, Jake Hoffman, Warren Petersen, Wendy Rogers, Janae Shamp, and Justine Wadsack). HB 2067 was co-sponsored by twenty Representatives (Leo Biasiucci, Selina Bliss, Joseph Chaplik, John Gillette, Travis Grantham, Gail Griffin, Liz Harris, Justin Heap, Rachel Jones, David Livingston, David Marshall, Cory McGarr, Quang Nquyen, Barbara Parker, Jacqueline Parker, Michele Peña, Beverly Pingerelli, Austin Smith, Ben Toma, and Justin Wilmeth.
In an exclusive interview with AZ Free News, House bill sponsor Neal Carter shared his thoughts on why he led this legislation in his chamber: “A tax on a citizen’s rent is terrible tax policy because it’s unfair. It’s anti-progressive, it inordinately affects lower-income Arizonans, and at a time of unprecedented rising inflation, taxing rents further exacerbates the affordability crisis that we are facing. Consider the neighborhood that I live in: about one-third of the houses are rentals, so about one-third of the people I see at the community center, or pass on the sidewalk walking our dogs are paying a tax that I don’t pay to live there, just because they pay rent but I pay a mortgage? It’s unfair.”
Legislative Republicans are serious about sending these bills to Governor Hobbs’ desk without delay. SB 1184 passed the Arizona Senate on February 9 with a party-line 16-14 vote. On Wednesday, February 14, the House passed SB 1184 with a 32-28 vote.
After the House vote on Wednesday, Representative Matt Gress tweeted, “NEW: I just voted to eliminate rental taxes in the state of Arizona #CommonSense”
Following the conclusion of the press conference, the Arizona Senate Republicans released a statement on Twitter, writing, “Your Senate and House Republicans are calling on @GovernorHobbs to support inflation relief for the hard-working citizens of our state, who are struggling to make ends meet in the face of historic inflation. SB1184 would eliminate the rental tax tenants are paying. This tax ranges from $20 to a couple-hundred bucks each month. That extra cash could help with a medical bill, gas, groceries, or other necessities. Governments are FLUSH with cash. It’s time to give back to families that are hurting right now. We are urging the Governor to sign SB1184.”
Your Senate & House Republicans are calling on @GovernorHobbs to support inflation relief for the hard-working citizens of our state, who are struggling to make ends meet in the face of historic inflation.
According to analysis from the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC), it is estimated that “municipalities will collect a total of $200.9 million in sales tax revenue from residential leases in FY 2023,” and “the municipal revenue loss is an estimated $(230.2) million” in FY 2025 – the first full-year impact of the legislation if signed into law.
When asked by AZ Free News about his support for this historic bill, House Speaker Pro Tempore Travis Grantham replied, “There is nothing more evil than taxing people’s food or the roof over their head. It’s time to get rid of this immoral residential lease tax and bring some needed relief to renters in our state.”
Democrats are not supporting their Republican colleagues’ attempt to give Arizonans a break from the rental tax. All committee action in both the House and Senate – as well as the vote from the entire Senate and House – has featured party-line votes, which may give a strong indication on what the Ninth Floor will do with the bill after it clears both chambers. Governor Hobbs has already set her sights on eliminating another tax, though – the state sales tax on feminine hygiene products.
Instead, Democrats have introduced other policies aimed at combatting the massive increase Arizonans have experienced in housing costs – specifically those in the rental market. On Thursday, House Democrats held their own press conference in the Rose Garden to push strategies to make the state’s housing more affordable. One of the Democrats’ solutions was HB 2161, a bill introduced by Representative Judy Schwiebert, dealing with caps on rental increases. That bill has been assigned to both the House Regulatory Affairs Committee and the Commerce Committee, and it has not been heard in committee.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona now prohibits health care providers from using an individual’s disability as a disqualification from an organ transplant. The sole exception would be in the case that a patient’s disability poses a medical problem when receiving an organ transplant, excluding that patient’s ability to comply independently with the procedure.
The legislation also requires health care facilities to accommodate their organ transplant-related services for disabled patients, such as communications and counseling. It included specific provisions for patients with hearing and visual impairments, as well as cognitive, neurological, developmental, or intellectual disabilities.
Comprehensive information on all organ transplant centers’ policies regarding patients with disabilities doesn’t exist — only studies exist. A 2019 study from the National Council of Disability, a federal agency, confirmed that to be the case, observing a lack of transparency and consistency concerning organ transplant policies. What’s more, the council reported that individuals with disabilities and their families actually face pressure to donate organs. One of the most comprehensive studies, conducted in 2008, estimated that 43 percent of organ transplant centers “always” or “usually” deny children with a neurodevelopmental disability, while about 39 percent “rarely” or “never” do.
One Arizona mother, Felicia (Josie) White testified to the House Health & Human Services Committee that she supported this bill because Phoenix Children’s Hospital policy didn’t confirm that they would approve her daughter for a heart transplant, due to her having Down Syndrome. The White family felt compelled to seek treatment across the country, 3,000 miles away, in Boston, Massachusetts.
“We know individuals with Down Syndrome live full and fruitful lives well into adulthood. If transplant centers can teach illiterate, non-English speaking parents to dose meds, there’s no reason someone with Down Syndrome could not be taught,” said White. “I understand that organ allocation is a limited resource, but I also know that labeling anyone with cognitive delays ‘unable to transplant’ is a slippery slope that could include everything from ADHD to who knows what.”
Another mother, Andrea Temarantz, shared that her son also has Down Syndrome and would be jeopardized if he needed an emergency organ transplant. Temarantz informed the legislators of the studies on organ transplant discrimination. She insisted that the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) already prohibited such discrimination, but that there weren’t any enforcement mechanisms to protect patients with disabilities from ADA violations in Arizona.
“Every life is precious, and no one should be blocked from a transplant because of stereotypes about persons with disabilities,” said Temarantz.
Governor Doug Ducey signed that anti-discrimination bill, HB2659, into law in March.
Every single life has value, and everyone deserves equal access to critical health care like organ transplants — H.B. 2659 will help us attain that for those with disabilities. @kaiser4azpic.twitter.com/EDgJQun9FK
AZ Free News sampled 46 legislators’ latest campaign finance reports of the state legislature and found that 22 of 47 legislators sampled received 50 percent or more of their campaign contributions from either lobbyists or PACs.
PACs and lobbyists have significant footing in the legislature. That would explain why the first week of January is known as “hell week” within the legislature — not because they’re in preparation for the new session kicking off, but because lobbyists are scrambling to fundraise for legislators. Arizona law prohibits legislators from receiving lobbyist campaign contributions while in regular session.
The following are state legislators that receive 50 percent or more of their campaign funds from PACs and lobbyists combined:
In the House, Richard Andrade (D-Glendale), about 51 percent; Ben Toma (R-Peoria), about 56 percent; Lorenzo Sierra (D-Avondale), about 62 percent; Steve Kaiser (R-Phoenix), about 64 percent; John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills), about 64 percent; Rusty Bowers (R-Mesa), about 64 percent; Diego Espinoza (D-Tolleson), about 66 percent; Joanne Osborne (R-Goodyear), about 74 percent; David Cook (R-Globe), about 75 percent; Justin Wilmeth (R-Phoenix), about 79 percent; John Fillmore (R-Apache Junction), about 83 percent; Tim Dunn (R-Yuma), about 87 percent; and Kelli Butler (D-Paradise Valley), about 96 percent.
In the Senate, Vince Leach (R-Tucson), about 53 percent; T.J. Shope (R-Coolidge), about 56 percent; David Gowan (R-Sierra Vista), about 71 percent; Rosanna Gabaldon (D-Sahuarita), about 73 percent; Lupe Contreras (D-Avondale), about 75 percent; Sonny Borrelli (R-Lake Havasu City), about 79 percent; Tyler Pace (R-Mesa), about 82 percent; Sine Kerr (R-Buckeye), about 90 percent; and David Livingston (R-Peoria), about 91 percent.
Of note, all of Gowan’s 32 contributions came from outside of his district — 28 came from Maricopa County. Additionally, $5,000 of Gowan’s $8,950 non-lobbyist contributions came from Phoenix Coyotes owner Alex Merulo.
Butler received over $10,000 from the Tucson branch of one of the largest labor unions in the country: the United Food and Commercial Workers (UCFW). Her PAC contributions totaled $13,000, and $150 of her individual contributions were from lobbyists. There were several inactive lobbyist donors among the individual contributions totaling $250. In all, Butler’s total contributions were over $13,700.
Wilmeth’s ten non-lobbyist donors included three inactive lobbyists and one wife of an inactive lobbyist.
Five legislators sampled reportedly received less than 10 percent of funds from PACs and lobbyists: Morgan Abraham, about 4 percent; Quang Nguyen, about 7 percent; Judy Burges, about 7 percent; Amish Shah, about 7 percent; and Joseph Chaplik, about 8 percent.
There were several legislators sampled that we couldn’t review because their reports haven’t been filed yet — even though they were due well over two months ago.
State Representative Alma Hernandez (D-Tucson) still hasn’t filed her campaign finance report due April 15. Hernandez has been late consistently since her first year in office (2018), accruing $3,500 in fines altogether. Her latest campaign finance report, which she has yet to file, is 76 days late and she owed $1,675 currently — her highest single fine to date. It took Hernandez 69 extra days to file her 2021 cumulative finance report: it was due January 15, but she filed it March 25.
Just over half of Hernandez’s individual donors from her last report, the cumulative one for 2021, were from out of state and made up the majority of those contributions: $5,980 versus the $3,920 from Arizona. Among them were several prominent figures in the Jewish community including acclaimed author and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel’s son, Elisha Wiesel, as well as Broadway star Jonah Platt.
State Senator Stephanie Stahl Hamilton (D-Tucson) did file her report on time — but like Hernandez, over half of the individual contributors on her latest campaign finance report were from out of state.
It appears that the Hernandez siblings are alike when it comes to campaign finance reports. Since the year his sister took office, Hernandez grew increasingly tardy with filing the reports. For two separate 2020 reports, he accrued over $5,100 in fines. His 2021 cumulative report was filed late by 67 days, and he was fined $1,450 for that. Both the Hernandez siblings are 76 days late on their first quarter report.
Another perennially tardy filer is State Representative César Chávez (D-Maryvale). Like Hernandez, he is 76 dates late and owes $1,675, but for his senate campaign’s first quarter report. Chávez was also late by 58 days to file his senate campaign’s 2021 cumulative report, owing $1,225.
Similarly to Hernandez, Chávez has a history of late filings, the highest of which were 121 days late to file his 2020 pre-general election filing, 163 days late to file his 2016 pre-general election report, and 953 days late to file his 2016 first report for the fourth quarter and post-general election report.
One interesting campaign finance report came from State Senator Wendy Rogers (R-Flagstaff). The report totaled nearly 600 pages, with 586 dedicated to individual contributions alone that totaled nearly $360,000. No lobbyists could be discerned among the over 7,000 contributors, and over 1,600 of them were Arizonans. A vast majority were retired, nearly 4,500 of them, bolstered by the self-employed and small business owners.
Only one PAC donated to Rogers: the Save America PAC gave one contribution of $5,000 in January.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
SB1211, which would require schools to publish curriculum lists on their websites, failed in the House 28-30 on Monday.
The votes weren’t panning out in the way Republicans hoped, so several legislators voted to kill the bill in order to salvage it for later discussions. State Representatives Joel John (R-Buckeye), Steve Kaiser (R-Phoenix), and Justin Wilmeth (R-Phoenix) voted with Democrats to kill the bill. Kaiser explained during the floor vote that he and Wilmeth did so in order to keep it active and open for discussion.
John, however, argued as a former teacher that the bill was too much of a burden for educators. He characterized the transparency bill as an “unfunded mandate” foisted on those in a “low-paying, thankless job.” John issued the false claim that he was only one of two other educators in the House. Other past and present educators include State Representatives Neal Carter (R-Queen Creek), Shawnna Bolick (R-Phoenix), Michelle Udall (R-Mesa), and Jennifer Pawlik (D-Chandler).
“The laws are quite robust already. I think this bill frankly goes too far and puts too many extra burdens [on teachers], as some of our colleagues have already pointed out,” said John.
Kaiser responded that the laws clearly don’t go far enough because K-12 schools are rampant with transparency issues.
“The reason we need to have a bill about this is because there’s problems happening in schools across Arizona,” said Kaiser. “If you don’t think this is a problem, look at the board [of votes]. This is a direct reflection of what’s happening to parents in schools. ‘There’s not a problem,’ they say. ‘Go home,’ they say. ‘We gave you a thumbnail sketch of what we’re talking about, go home.’ I’m so disappointed in how these votes are turning out.”
Apart from John, teacher perspectives on the bill differed along party lines.
Udall, a current teacher, supported the bill. She suggested that additional funding should be established to help ease the additional burdens of the bill. Udall noted the importance of proactive forms of transparency, rather than retroactive.
Conversely, Pawlik, also a teacher, asserted that educators shouldn’t have to be concerned about posting last-minute tweaks to curriculum or learning materials. Pawlik argued that it would not only inhibit teachers’ flexibility, but ultimately stunt students’ education.
The Senate passed the bill along party lines last month. Left-wing activist organizations celebrated the bill’s rejection.
We are so grateful for all lawmakers who voted today against SB1211, a harmful bill that would have created undue burden, more red tape and onerous requirements for our teachers. AZ teachers deserve support, not additional work, punishments & threats of lawsuits. pic.twitter.com/N38MXfp4my
SB1211 would enable parents access to all curriculum, learning materials, and teacher training at their school, organized by subject, grade, and teacher. Democratic legislators argued that parents should switch schools if they weren’t happy with the transparency at their current schools. They contended further that the legislation would create more red tape and punishment for educators. One legislator went so far as to argue that the bill constituted an effort to control speech.
For now, #SB1211 is stopped in the House. It would have been an unfunded mandate. It would have caused teachers to spend more time on red tape. ⛔ This bill is a sledge hammer that could have bad unintended consequences. #TeachersDeserveRespectpic.twitter.com/tUawQg5Mqb
If the Republican representatives hold to their promise, SB1211 may be resurrected this session in one form or another. As of press time, no exact solution was made apparent.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Monday, the Arizona Senate passed HB2161, a bill prohibiting state employees, political subdivisions, governmental entities, or any other institution from withholding a minor’s records from parents. Parents may sue any entity or institution that withholds their child’s records in violation of the legislation. It’s likely that HB2161 will most heavily impact school districts.
The bill passed along party lines. State Representative Steve Kaiser (R-Phoenix), the bill sponsor, explained that the legislation would ensure recourse for parents whose rights had been violated.
The bill was transmitted to the State House for review of the amendments made in the Senate. If approved, the version passed on Monday will head to Governor Doug Ducey for his signature.
Democrats’ opposition to the bill focused on the impact on educators. One of the main arguments concerned the fact that educators wouldn’t be able to withhold the sexuality or gender identity of LGBTQ+ minors from their parents.
Must see testimony against HB2161 and how deeply it will harm LGBTQ young people https://t.co/nlTUHIJAeT
— Arizona Senate Democrats (@AZSenateDems) March 16, 2022
Those arguments echo incidents making headlines nationally, in which parents discover that educators or school counselors coached their children into adopting a deviant sexuality or gender identity. Just this past week, it was discovered that a Massachusetts public middle school promoted the gender transitions of a pair of siblings without their parents’ knowledge.
