For residents of Yuma County, concerns over biosolids are nothing new.
For years, residents, growers, businesses, and local officials have raised concerns about odors, flies, dust, debris, and the sheer volume of treated sewage sludge being brought into southern Yuma County and applied to agricultural land.
And for years, Yuma kept asking for action.
On September 10, the Arizona State Land Department finally acted, finding AgTech LLC in default on one State Trust Land lease and declining to renew four others after determining that continued leasing was not in the best interest of the State Land Trust.
According to the state, AgTech applied more than 68,000 dry metric tons of treated sewage sludge in 2025 alone, with more than 97 percent originating from California utilities.
But Yuma’s fight over biosolids did not begin in 2026.
Yuma County’s own timeline shows the Board of Supervisors formally discussing nuisance and public health concerns surrounding biosolids as far back as 2016. In 2020, the Board formally opposed a proposed 6,000-acre biosolids site. Then, in 2025, the Board formally asked the Arizona State Land Department to terminate AgTech’s lease in response to continuing complaints about odors, flies, dust, and debris.
The County could not terminate the lease itself. That authority belonged to the state.
Still, another year passed.
The issue has since received considerably more attention from statewide officials, with the recent action publicly highlighted by both the Governor’s Office and Attorney General’s Office.
Then, on September 10, 2026, after years of local complaints and more than a year after Yuma County formally requested termination of the lease, the State Land Department acted. The decision came less than two months before Arizona’s general election.
For local grower Tyler Woodman, however, the story goes back much further.
“I have been ‘dealing with it’ for about 20 years,” Woodman said.
Woodman farms roughly a mile north of some of the sites and described years of smelling trucks and odors when the wind shifted, watching the number of trucks traveling through the area and hearing concerns from agricultural workers and neighbors about flies.
Eventually, he said, frustration turned into action.
“Seeing that every route that everyone has ever taken never seemed to bear fruit for whatever reason, I just simply had enough,” Woodman said.
Woodman began filing public records requests with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Arizona State Land Department and digging through inspection reports and other records himself.
“After that, I did FOIAs for ADEQ and ASLD, and the stuff I was reading in their inspection reports troubled me deeply,” Woodman said. “So, I just kept digging.”
His questions increasingly centered on the amount of biosolids being applied, the acreage being used, and whether existing oversight was sufficient.
Woodman said one of the things that troubled him most was the feeling that responsibility for oversight was fragmented among agencies.
“Overall, I just kinda got this weird feeling that no one was really in charge and ADEQ didn’t really have the tools they needed to enforce things even if they wanted to,” he said.
The recent State Land Department decision does not settle every question surrounding biosolids in Yuma. Residents continue to call for additional environmental testing, while AgTech disputes the state’s conclusions and has said it intends to appeal the lease decision. The company maintains that it has been a responsible steward of the land and has challenged the process used by the state.
Woodman himself is also now facing a defamation lawsuit filed by AgTech over statements he made while speaking publicly about the company’s operations.
But perhaps his explanation for continuing to dig best captures why the issue has resonated with so many people in Yuma.
“It’s a double-edged sword,” Woodman said. “You don’t want to be wrong about what you think is going on, but you also don’t want to find out you’re living next to a superfund site.”
Whatever comes next, one part of the history is already clear: Yuma did not suddenly discover this issue in 2026.
Residents had been complaining. Growers had been asking questions. County officials had been pressing state agencies for action. The Board of Supervisors had formally requested termination of the lease.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has issued two drought disaster designations covering several Arizona counties, making eligible farm operators in affected areas able to seek emergency loan assistance through the Farm Service Agency.
The designations name multiple Arizona counties as primary or contiguous natural disaster areas because of drought conditions, according to an announcement from Rep. Eli Crane’s office. The first designation, issued June 29, named Coconino and Maricopa counties as primary natural disaster areas. Gila, La Paz, Mohave, Navajo, Pima, Pinal, Yavapai, and Yuma counties were listed as contiguous counties.
In a post to X on Wednesday, Crane wrote, “The @USDA’s drought designations give our farmers and ranchers access to meaningful financial support during a difficult period. I appreciate @SecRollins and her team for recognizing the seriousness of these conditions and taking action.”
The @USDA’s drought designations give our farmers and ranchers access to meaningful financial support during a difficult period.
A second designation elevated Gila, Pinal, and Yuma counties to primary status. Coconino, Graham, La Paz, Maricopa, Navajo, Pima, and Yavapai counties were listed as contiguous counties under the second designation.
The determinations were made under 7 CFR 759.5(a), which provides for Secretarial disaster area designations when any portion of a county experiences D3, or extreme drought, or higher during the growing season, or D2, or severe drought, for at least eight consecutive weeks during the growing season of affected crops.
The Arizona Department of Water Resources says the U.S. Drought Monitor is the official record for federal drought relief claims. The department’s drought status page said Arizona’s Drought Monitoring Technical Committee advises U.S. Drought Monitor authors on current drought conditions in the state using precipitation, streamflow, drought indices, and impact data.
ADWR’s May drought status summary reported that severe short-term drought had advanced in Mohave, Coconino, Navajo, Gila, Maricopa, and Yavapai counties, covering 60% of the state, while extreme short-term drought expanded in Apache County. The department’s long-term drought update for January through March said Arizona experienced the hottest and 28th driest January-to-March period on record, as well as the hottest and 27th driest four-year period from April 2022 through March 2026.
Crane said the designations will give agricultural producers in affected counties access to federal assistance after years of drought pressure in rural Arizona.
“For years, rural Arizonans have faced worsening drought conditions without adequate federal assistance,” Crane said. “These designations finally give our farmers and ranchers access to meaningful financial support and help our producers during a difficult period.”
Crane thanked Agriculture Secretary Rollins and the USDA for recognizing the drought conditions and urged eligible applicants to work with their local Farm Service Agency office to determine whether low-interest loans could help offset recent losses.
Under Section 321(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, USDA may extend disaster designations beyond counties that meet the drought criteria directly by naming neighboring counties as contiguous disaster areas. Crane’s office said both primary and contiguous classifications make farm operators eligible to be considered for FSA emergency loan assistance.
The FSA stated that emergency loans may be used to replace essential items such as equipment or livestock, reorganize a farming operation, or refinance certain debts. The agency reviews loan applications based on the extent of losses, available security, and repayment ability.
Farmers and ranchers in the affected counties have eight months from the date of their county’s listing to apply. Crane’s office said applicants should contact their local FSA office for help with the application process and required documentation.
Applicants with questions may also email FPAC.BC.Congressional@usda.gov and reference disaster designation number 2026N00000369 for the June 29 announcement or 2026N00000419 for the Monday announcement.
Taxpayer-funded resources should not be used to tilt the scales of any election. This isn’t a difficult concept to understand. So, when Arizona State University (ASU) and PBS were exposed for colluding to help Katie Hobbs in the 2022 governor’s race against Kari Lake, we demanded accountability. We called on Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell to launch a full investigation. After all, Arizona law is clear that universities must remain impartial and neutral in election-related activities.
In a ridiculous decision, both Mayes and Mitchell refused to take action on our complaint. But this battle is far from over.
The Illegal Use of Public Funds
This all began back in 2022 when Katie Hobbs was ducking just about everyone during her campaign for governor, most especially Kari Lake. It culminated in Hobbs’ refusal to debate Lake on Arizona PBS. From there, the process should’ve been simple. According to long-standing Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission (AZCCEC) rules, Kari Lake should have been provided with airtime, and the AZCCEC planned to do just that. But hours before Lake’s interview was scheduled to take place, the AZCCEC learned that Arizona PBS went behind their back to schedule an exclusive interview with Katie Hobbs—moving them to postpone Lake’s interview.
Then, last month, a series of emails came to light revealing that ASU leaders including President Michael Crow, former Arizona Republic publisher Mi-Ai Parrish, and Arizona PBS leaders allegedly colluded to jettison the debate rules to help Hobbs. This was a blatant and illegal use of taxpayer funds, and that’s why we filed a Hatch Act complaint with Mayes and Mitchell against ASU. But in a shocking and shameful decision, both decided against taking action…
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club escalated its call for accountability, urging the County Attorneys of Mohave, Pinal, and Yuma Counties to launch investigations into Arizona State University (ASU) leadership for allegedly manipulating 2022 gubernatorial debate rules to favor Democratic Katie Hobbs over Republican Kari Lake.
The action follows a complaint filed by the Club in August 2025, with the Arizona Attorney General and Maricopa County Attorney, which was dismissed without a thorough review, prompting a broader push for enforcement under state law.
Breaking: The Arizona Free Enterprise Club has filed a Hatch Act complaint against ASU for using taxpayer-funded resources to meddle in the 2022 Governor’s race.
Internal communications reveal ASU leadership broke long-standing debate rules, blocking equal airtime for Kari Lake… pic.twitter.com/yqyB7eRHkK
In a sharply worded letter addressed to the Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller, and Yuma County Attorney Karolyn Kaczorowski, Club President Scot Mussi detailed evidence of ASU’s deviation from established debate protocols, accusing university officials of using public resources to influence the election in violation of A.R.S. § 15-1633.
The statute states: “A person acting on behalf of a university or a person who aids another person acting on behalf of a university shall not spend or use university resources for the purpose of influencing the outcomes of elections or to advocate support for or opposition to pending or proposed legislation.”
This call-to-action stems from a September 2022 debate co-sponsored by ASU, Arizona PBS, and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission (CCEC).
Under longstanding CCEC regulations (Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-20-107(K)), a candidate declining an invitation to debate their political opponent forfeits airtime, granting the attending opponent a 30-minute solo interview.
When Hobbs announced she would skip the debate, ASU and PBS bypassed set regulations, granting her an exclusive 30-minute interview, a first in years to do so.
Internal communications, obtained and reported by the Arizona Republic, exposed the intent behind the decision. ASU President Michael Crow, Chief of Staff James O’Brien, and ASU Media Enterprise Managing Director Mi-Ai Parrish allegedly prioritized Hobbs’ comfort over neutrality.
Parrish’s emails to O’Brien highlighted concerns that “Katie is getting roasted hard” for dodging the debate and pressed CCEC staff to limit Lake’s discussion of election integrity, arguing that airing “a person with those views was wrong.” CCEC Executive Director Tom Collins confirmed to the Republic that Parrish sought to suppress Lake’s platform.
Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly listed the names of the County Attorneys. They have now been corrected.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen recently led a delegation of nearly a dozen state attorneys general and local law enforcement officials to the U.S.-Mexico border, aiming to assess conditions on the ground and observe changes in federal immigration enforcement.
The bipartisan delegation, which included state attorneys general from as far away as Indiana, Mississippi, and South Dakota, met with local police, government leaders, medical professionals, and nonprofit organizations to get a clearer picture of the current border environment.
According to Petersen, the group found dramatically reduced migrant crossings, fewer than five per day in some areas, a stark contrast to the thousands reported daily in previous years. Officials attributed the drop to a return to stricter immigration enforcement policies, including the end of the “catch and release” practice and increased prosecutions under the U.S. Department of Justice.
“For the first time in recent history, most Americans say the country is on the right track,” Petersen said in a statement. “We didn’t need a new law. We just needed a new president to enforce the laws already on the books.”
Petersen framed the visit as a testament to the Arizona Legislature’s support for enhanced federal enforcement at the border. He emphasized the state’s continued commitment to addressing cross-border crime and public safety.
Other officials echoed Petersen’s message, citing improvements in morale among border agents and the impact of reduced immigration on state-level services.
Utah Attorney General Derek Brown linked the border situation to fentanyl trafficking, which he said has contributed to thousands of overdose deaths in his state. Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch also referenced her office’s work with ICE through the 287(g) program, calling President Trump’s policies essential for restoring border integrity.
South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley and South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson both emphasized the criminal aspect of illegal immigration. Wilson, calling the previous administration’s approach “reckless,” said, “Every state is now a border state, and South Carolina is no exception.”
Local law enforcement also played a key role in the visit. Yavapai County Sheriff David Rhodes described the tour as a valuable educational tool for law enforcement across the country, citing the challenges posed by human and drug smugglers.
Yuma County Sheriff Leon Wilmot and County Supervisor Jonathan Lines, who hosted the delegation, expressed gratitude for national support. “We are grateful to again have officials in the White House who understand our plight,” said Lines. “Together, we are making a difference for residents of the border communities.”
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
