by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Mar 13, 2026 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
While some legislators are working to keep California-style policies out of Arizona, corrupt municipal leaders in cities such as Phoenix and Tucson clearly haven’t gotten the memo. For years, these cities have subjected businesses to an unfair fee for their own shopping carts being stolen. Rather than targeting theft, homelessness, or law enforcement strategies, this policy shifts blame onto retailers, effectively punishing the victims. A classic California-esque idea infecting our Arizona cities.
Representative Nick Kupper introduced HB2460 this legislative session to combat this insanity and introduce some common sense. This bill prevents local governments from fining retailers over abandoned movable property, such as shopping carts and handheld baskets. Retailers already lose money from cart theft; charging them to reclaim their own stolen property is ridiculous.
This type of policy is the definition of “California-ing Arizona.” California has regulated abandoned shopping carts for decades, with state law dating back to 1992 authorizing cities to penalize retailers when carts are not retrieved from public spaces. Tucson and Phoenix are now following in those footsteps…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by Matthew Holloway | Mar 4, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that prevailing wage ordinances enacted by the cities of Phoenix and Tucson violate state law, ruling in favor of the Associated Minority Contractors of Arizona, represented by the Goldwater Institute in a lawsuit challenging those laws.
The decision holds that local ordinances requiring contractors on certain public works projects to pay “prevailing wages” are prohibited under a 1984 state statute, A.R.S. § 34-321(B), that forbids cities from imposing prevailing wage requirements. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s judgment that the ordinances conflict with state law.
Goldwater’s lawsuit was brought on behalf of the Associated Minority Contractors of Arizona, the Arizona Builders Alliance, and the Arizona Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America, who argued that the ordinances exceeded cities’ authority under Arizona statute.
In a statement, Timothy Sandefur, Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Goldwater Institute, said, “The real winners in today’s ruling are Arizona taxpayers—as the court itself made clear.”
Sandefur then quoted the court’s language, writing: “The Cities’ interpretation would grant the Cities broad power. With that power, the Cities could dictate how much any employer pays any employee anytime an employer contracts or subcontracts with the Cities. Put differently, the Cities by ordinance could dictate pay whenever an employee works under a public contract, regardless of the contract’s value or the nature of the work performed.”
He added, “That, of course, would cost taxpayers more—reducing their freedom of choice and their ability to invest in their own futures—all for the benefit of politicians and politically well-connected lobbyists.”
In a post to X, he wrote, “The decision’s an important victory for taxpayers throughout the state, who’d otherwise be forced to pay inflated prices for public works projects even though a state law approved by voters abolished ‘prevailing wages’ over 40 yrs ago.”
Prevailing wage laws, distinct from minimum wage laws, require employers on public contracts to pay workers based on wage rates calculated by formula, often higher than standard minimum wages. The 1984 state law expressly prohibits cities from requiring public works contracts to include prevailing wage provisions.
In the case before the appellate court, Phoenix and Tucson had passed ordinances applying prevailing wage rates to city contracts exceeding defined monetary thresholds, $4 million for Phoenix and $2 million in Tucson, and set wage requirements by reference to federal Davis-Bacon Act wage schedules.
Attorneys for the cities had argued that subsequent voter-approved minimum wage measures, including the 2006 voter-approved Minimum Wage Act and subsequent amendments, allowed local governments to regulate minimum wages and thus could support prevailing wage requirements. The court rejected that interpretation, finding that the statutory authority for cities to regulate minimum wage does not extend to prevailing wage mandates.
In its ruling, the appellate panel wrote that prevailing wage provisions do not qualify as “minimum wages” under the relevant Arizona statutes, noting that prevailing wage requirements apply only to a subset of workers on specific public contracts, whereas minimum wage laws apply generally to all employees once employed.
“Section 34-321(B) prohibits political subdivisions from requiring contractors or subcontractors to pay the prevailing rate of wages on public works contracts,” the court wrote. The panel further held that Phoenix’s and Tucson’s ordinances “conflict with § 34-321(B) and are therefore invalid.”
The court concluded that the 1984 prohibition on prevailing wage requirements remains in effect and was not repealed by later minimum wage laws, determining that the newer statutes and the prevailing wage prohibition can coexist without conflict.
“The Local Permission Provision authorizes regulation of minimum wages,” the court wrote, referring to § 23-364(I). “Prevailing wages are not minimum wages.”
Prevailing wage ordinances have been the subject of multiple legal challenges in Arizona. In 2024, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge similarly ruled against prevailing wage ordinances in Phoenix and Tucson, finding they violated the same state prohibition.
The appellate decision affects not only Phoenix and Tucson but also any Arizona city considering similar prevailing wage mandates under state law, consistent with the court’s interpretation of A.R.S. § 34-321(B) on municipal wage-setting authority for public works contracts.
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 AZ Free Enterprise Club | Feb 26, 2026 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
It’s not an accident that the top issue talked about by politicians these days is affordability. Over the last 5 years the cost of pretty much everything has gone through the roof, largely caused by the trillions in reckless spending by Joe Biden and the Democrats in Washington.
Taming inflation must remain our top economic priority, and the good news is that Arizona Republicans are taking meaningful steps to bring costs down. After adopting a 2.5% flat income tax under Governor Doug Ducey in 2022, state lawmakers have fought to slash grocery taxes, residential rental taxes and eliminate regulations that are driving up the cost of energy and housing.
Yet while the Republican controlled legislature is doing everything it can to make sure hardworking taxpayers get to keep more of their hard-earned dollars, municipalities throughout Arizona are passing an avalanche of tax and fee increases that are costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars every year…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by Staff Reporter | Feb 25, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Arizona House passed a bill increasing prison time for adults who target teenagers with sexual extortion, or “sextortion.”
HB 2666 passed out of the House with unanimous bipartisan support on Monday. The bill increases the penalty for adults who commit sextortion against minors ages 15 through 17 by increasing the offense level from a class 3 to class 2 felony. It also requires sentencing to be consecutive to any other sentence imposed for sextortion.
The bill would prohibit offenders from eligibility for sentencing suspension, probation, pardon, or release from confinement unless the court-imposed sentence has been served or commuted.
Arizona statute already has sextortion of minors under the age of 15 listed as a class 2 felony.
The bill did receive an amendment to address certain concerns by stakeholders.
Vicky Lopez, an attorney with Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice (AACJ), spoke against the bill during its committee hearing. Lopez expressed concerns that the bill as written would provide offenders with an affirmative defense that they didn’t know their victim’s age, and that the bill failed to address the circumstance of both the offender and victim being minors.
The Arizona Anti-Trafficking Network and Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) expressed support for the bill as written. The MCAO said it was against amending the bill.
Rebecca Baker on behalf of the MCAO rejected AACJ’s stance that this bill would provide an affirmative defense, and that minor offenders shouldn’t be held equally accountable.
“We’re talking about coerced conduct. We’re talking about one person forcing another person to have sex, and that’s analogous to sexual assault. I see that very differently than something like sexual conduct with a minor or even exchanging photos openly that are somehow later misused. This is forced conduct,” said Baker. “Regardless of whether the perpetrator is 15, 16, 17, or even 35, it’s still having that same effect on the victim.”
However, legislators who spoke up on the bill during the committee hearing seemed inclined to agree with AACJ. One committee member, Rep. Khyl Powell (R-LD14), agreed that minor offenders needed to have special considerations.
“I want discretion to be given back to judges. If we’re going to protect our juveniles who do something stupid, then we need to open up the door and give back to the judges’ discretion,” said Powell. “If we continue to mandate and we lock in these laws, then we will create additional victims.”
The bill author, Rep. Pamela Carter (R-LD4), said in a press release on Monday that sextortion of minors was an especially heinous type of exploitation that merits a harsher punishment.
“Sexual extortion is hitting Arizona teens hard, and the predators behind it know exactly what they’re doing,” said Carter. “If you prey on teens for money or sexual favors, you should face a class 2 felony and mandatory consecutive prison time. No probation. No shortcuts. No easy way out.”
Sextortion crimes occur often through social media platforms, namely Snapchat, Instagram, and Discord.
One recent case that occurred in Arizona concerned a ringleader of an online violent terror network, 764. The Tucson man arrested for those crimes, Baron Martin, was arrested in December 2024 for committing sextortion against minors. This past October, Martin was indicted on 29 charges.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Feb 13, 2026 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
On March 10, Pima County residents will decide whether to fund another 20-year, $2+ billion transportation plan after the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) failed to deliver on the last one. Two propositions will appear on their ballot this month related to this plan.
Proposition 418 would approve the new “RTA Next” transportation plan. Proposition 419 would extend the existing ½-cent sales tax to fund it. Both propositions must be passed for the plan to move forward. If approved, the new tax would begin April 1, 2026, just a few months before the original RTA plan officially expires in June.
The RTA is an independent taxing district specifically for Pima County. Its board is comprised of elected officials from local, tribal, and state governments that approve and oversee transportation projects. Back in 2006, voters were promised countywide improvements to roads, transit, and other infrastructure, funded by a 20-year timeline and a dedicated ½-cent sales tax increase. Fast forward to 2026, and several projects are unfinished, or never even started at all. Now, voters are being asked to extend the tax for another 20 years to finish what should have already been completed. That’s not a plan; it’s a bailout.
The project list for the RTA Next consists of multiple road improvements, bicycle infrastructure upgrades, transit improvements, and more. Many of these are the projects left unfinished during the first 20 years. They continue to blame their failures on Covid, the great recession of 2008, population growth not matching projections. The reality is that the actual problem is staring themselves in the mirror…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
