Quantcast
Don't Miss
Home / Election 2014 / Farnsworth seeks return to AZ House

Farnsworth seeks return to AZ House

Eddie Farnsworth, a former Republican legislative leader, is hoping to return to the Arizona House of Representatives this fall after a 2008 defeat in a Republican Senate primary race.

Farnsworth, a 48-year-old Gilbert father of seven, previously served in the House from 2001 through 2008. From 2003 to 2004, he was majority leader of the House GOP caucus.

In 2008, facing term limits in the House, he challenged incumbent Thayer Verschoor for the Senate seat but lost by about 600 votes.

Farnsworth formed a campaign committee March 18 and said he will campaign on his experience, both as a legislator and a businessman.

“Nobody can question the experience that I have,” he said. “I bring the full package to the table at a time when it’s needed.”

He said he had been asked by former constituents to run. One of the District 22 House seats will be vacant in the next election because Rep. Andy Biggs is term-limited out and running for the Senate.

Farnsworth will be the seventh Republican candidate in the field. He joins incumbent Rep. Laurin Hendrix; business owner Adam Armer; teacher Paul Howell; contractor Brett Petillo; Tea Party activist Kelly Townsend; and Gilbert councilman Steve Urie.

Farnsworth also said he expects his conservative record to be a selling point to voters in the heavily Republican district.

“People know who I am. I’m conservative, and unapologetically so,” he said.

2 comments

  1. Homeowner Rights Advocates would welcome back Mr. Farnsworth with open arms. His effort to bring due process to HOA disputes by an independent tribunal, the Off. of Administrative Hearings, was defeated after successfully functioning for two years by CAI special interests. Homeowners, mostly unrepresented, had won some 42% of the cases against HOAs and their attorneys — the reason why the special interests sought to defeat bona fide adjudication.

    Today, HOA control of public streets, allegedly for safety reasons, is being contested with HB2153, now in the Senate. If there are legitimate concerns about safety, the individual HOA could use existing legal means to amend any ordinance for this purpose. There is no need to permit people under a private contract to generally be allowed supersede the laws of the state when alternate means are available.

    No, HB2153 is really about who controls public streets. The people or undemocratic private government HOAs? (The NJ appellate court held last week that HOAs do not need to be democratic).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top