January, 2025 | Arizona Capitol Times

The real reason for Arizona’s sky-high rental prices

With rents and home prices skyrocketing in the Grand Canyon State, renters received some relief as the state Legislature’s repeal of the residential rental tax went into effect on New Year’s Day. According to Arizona State University, rents have skyrocketed by 72% recently, partly because of a statewide housing shortage of over 65,000 units. Rather than address the real causes of rent price hikes, many politicians would instead find a scapegoat, which is precisely what Attorney General Kris Mayes has done.

Mayes has filed a lawsuit against several Arizona landlords, alleging that they used a rent management software service called RealPage to form an apartment cartel. She claimed the cartel was responsible for a “large part” of the 30% increase in Arizona rents over the past two years. In theory, the cartel works by holding vacant units off the market until they fetch elevated rents.

There are several problems with this theory.

Rental vacancy rates in Arizona have averaged about 10% since 1986. However, construction of new homes collapsed after the 2008 financial crisis, and because of the lack of adequate housing, vacancy rates have been well below the average for the past decade.

Rents rise when vacancies are low and decline when vacancies are high. Rents have been rising because vacancies have been too low. This is reliably how rental markets work in all cities at all times.

Mayes’ theory is nonsensical and contradicts all historical experiences regarding the relationship between vacancies and rents. Cartels work by limiting production. If Arizona had a bagel cartel, the members would agree to limit the number of bagels they baked. They wouldn’t each bake the regular number of bagels, refuse to sell some of them, and let them go stale each day.

That is what the supposed apartment cartel is doing. They are going to all the trouble of building and maintaining apartments, only to let them sit empty.

In the real world, functional cartels, as opposed to Mayes’ imagination, prevent new bagel stores or apartment buildings from opening. After limiting their production, they sell all the limited products they have produced.

Of course, the defendants in Mayes’ case don’t do that at all. They couldn’t begin to do that. They are trying to build as many new apartments as they can. And what do you think stops them from building more?

The recent failure of the proposed Sonoran Landings project in Chandler makes that clear. The project was an apartment development that would use federal subsidies to lower rents. It was located a quarter mile from Hamilton High School in one direction, Paseo Vista Recreation Area in the other direction, and residential neighborhoods across the street. It was originally proposed in 2021 as a 518-unit project for families. By the hundreds, residents sent angry letters and attended county meetings to express opposition.

The developer attempted to compromise, reducing the project to 272 units limited to seniors and veterans. At the project’s last Maricopa County Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the developer’s representatives repeatedly assured the opponents that they had “eliminated all school-aged children.”

It was not enough. The zoning commission approved, but the city of Chandler would need to provide the utilities. The city reported that it did not intend to, so facing further opposition from the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the developer finally gave up.

That is how you enforce a cartel.

Maricopa County, the city of Chandler, and the hundreds of locals who wrote letters of opposition or attended hours-long meetings to ensure that families, seniors, and veterans would live elsewhere are not listed as defendants in Mayes’ lawsuit.

Most incredibly, when asked whether rents would be lower if there were more apartment buildings, Mayes responded, “That’s bunk!”

Is Mayes running interference for the actual cartel? Or is she just honestly confused? Who should the kids who won’t be walking to school at Hamilton or visiting their grandparents down the road from it, or whose families will be paying 30% elevated rents elsewhere or living on street corners, blame? The city, the county, the attorney general, or RealPage?

Gilbert resident Kevin Erdmann is the author of “Shut Out: How a Housing Shortage Caused the Great Recession and Crippled Our Economy” and “Building from the Ground Up: Reclaiming the American Housing Boom” and writes at the Erdmann Housing Tracker.

Water bill focuses on converting ag land to housing

Correction: A previous version of this story left a digit off of the number of acres of irrigated farmland in the Phoenix, Pinal and Pima Active Management Areas that could use the ag-to-urban program. It has been corrected to 425,232 acres.

Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, is preparing to reintroduce a bill that would give farmers an option to sell agricultural land to developers in hopes of increasing the state’s housing supply, improving home affordability and preserving groundwater.

Shope’s “ag-to-urban” legislation is designed to address the lack of housing in communities where there’s also shortage of groundwater, especially in areas where restrictions have been placed on new home construction, because single family homes use less water than agricultural land.

Shope, Senate, attendance — Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge

The Legislature passed a similar version of the bill last year, but Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed the legislation. In her veto letter, Hobbs said she supported the concept of the bill but the data among the state’s initial Active Management Areas in Phoenix, Tucson, Prescott and Pinal County didn’t support universal adoption of the program.

If this version of the bill is passed, Shope said the program could serve as a boon to the state’s housing supply.

According to numbers shared by Republican Senate staff, there are 425,232 acres of irrigated farmland in the Phoenix, Pinal and Pima Active Management Areas that could use the ag-to-urban program. If half of the farmland is converted for development, more than a million homes could be built since new developments average five homes per acre.

Shope said he has begun holding stakeholder meetings and will look to work with the Democratic caucus, Governor’s Office, the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Gila River Indian Community, private water companies, and officials from cities, counties and towns across the state.

Some water policy experts say the program could be a good idea depending on how it protects water in the aquifers and what kind of provisions are made for the future.

“The biggest source of depletion is agriculture. So shifting water use from agriculture to a lower water use … is a good thing for water supply,” said Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy. “But there are formulations of the ag-to urban transfer that don’t, over the long term, protect the aquifer. So it will be important to come up with a formulation that actually benefits the aquifers.”

The Kyl Center for Water Policy released a report examining the connection between areas with restrictions on new home development due to long-term water supply concerns and its effect on home prices.

According to the report, housing affordability can depend on a number of factors such as zoning and development codes, local, state and federal government policies, and how individual municipalities choose to plan for more affordable housing.

“A lot of the housing affordability is not about buying a single family home,” Porter said.

Shope points to science as proof that this type of program could help serve as a remedy for the housing shortage and water issues across Maricopa, Pinal and Pima counties.

“Because of the advancements in agriculture science over the decades, you don’t need to farm as much of that land in order to have the yield that you get,” he said.

Those advancements have led to the state using approximately the same amount of water as it did in the 1950s despite the fact that there were only about 1 million people living in the state at the time compared to more than 7 million people today.

Shope highlighted the transformation of agricultural land to home subdivisions in Chandler, Gilbert and areas of the West Valley as an example of how the program could work.

“We’ve seen those lands be transformed into housing development, mainly single family homes,” he said. “And we have seen water use, as a result of that, go down tremendously.”

Porter said that while it’s true homes use less water than agriculture, the benefit could be negated depending on how much water developments are allowed to pump.

“If it goes on forever, it might wind up using more water than the agriculture that it replaced. So that’s another important consideration,” she said.

Shope said this bill could be one of the most important water bills to hit the governor’s desk if the Legislature passes it.

“I do think it’s going to be the most consequential water bill that has a chance of passing,” Shope said. “I don’t know that some of the other proposals that are out there for different things, whether it’s rural groundwater or other water issues, reach the level of importance and the possibility to have as much of an impact like this bill and also have a chance to be signed.”

Laura Terech: Teacher, lawmaker, historic planner

Former Democratic state Rep. Laura Terech sat down with the Arizona Capitol Times to discuss her new role at the Secretary of State’s Office working on the Arizona America250 Commission, which is planning several events to celebrate the 250th anniversary of independence in the United States. Terech, who resigned from the Legislature in June 2024, also reflected on her experience in the state House.

The questions and answers have been lightly edited for style and clarity.

So what have you been up to at the Secretary of State’s Office?

I’m the executive director of the Arizona America250 Commission. Every state has one. We’re tasked with all of the public programming around the semiquincentennial. Our commission has broken out into a number of different committees so that they can narrow in on their areas of expertise. We’re a governor-appointed commission housed at the Secretary of State’s Office. We focus on things like tourism, municipal outreach and tribal affairs, arts, culture, museums, history, historic preservation and civic engagement. There are a lot of really exciting projects and I sort of help keep everyone moving and fundraising.

Can you give me some details on your event this April?

Our big kickoff event is April 18th, 2025. It’s called “Two Lights for Tomorrow” and this is a national initiative coming out of Wisconsin on the 250th anniversary of Paul Revere’s ride. They’ve called on state capitals across the country to display two lights. What we want to do is really turn this into the Arizona America250 kickoff event. We’re going to be inviting elected officials, notable community leaders, and members of the public to come and celebrate this with us. We want to put a big spotlight on the roof of the House and another on the roof of the Senate to really serve as a message of unity striped together, a light shining out of darkness as we think about striving for that more perfect union. We’ll have a military aircraft flyover. We also want to make it an educational experience so we’ll have historical reenactments and display tents to show this is what life looked like in 1776 in the original 13 colonies, but then also what was happening in Arizona in 1776 as well. Arizona wasn’t a state then but that doesn’t mean there was no history happening here and we wanted to tell that complete story.

What’s up with the traveling museum?

We got permission from Legislative Council to pick up the replica Liberty Bell. The challenges of moving that around the state are formidable, but not insurmountable. I think we’ll have some fun with that but we’re going to pick that up and tour it around all 15 counties and we want to pair it with historic documents, art pieces, interactive exhibits and stop at schools and community centers.

What else are you planning?

The Military and Veterans Affair Committee is planning on dividing the Arizona Trail, which runs from the southern part of the state all the way up to to Utah, into either 250 different sections or gathering together a group of 250 military members, veterans, their families and do a relay along that trail. We’re also in exciting talks with Arizona State University Gammage to host a history themed performance that will be a special celebration so I can’t say too much more than that yet.

How are you going to move the Liberty Bell?

We’re working really closely with Legislative Council. At first, I think they thought I just wanted to clean it and I was like, I don’t want to clean it. I do want to take it. Maybe we can clean it at the same time. They have some very specific guidelines that they’d like us to follow to ensure the safety of the bell. It won’t be in an open trailer heading down the highway.

How would you describe the significance of 250 years of this country’s independence

I am really excited about how people will use this as an opportunity to reflect on the values this country was founded on. I mean, we hear a lot about “striving for a more perfect union.” I think this is an excellent opportunity for us all to reflect on what that means. What does that mean for me personally? What does that mean in my community? Unity is often in short supply and I’m hoping this is an opportunity for us to come together and tell all of these stories because the American story is one of challenges and triumphs alike.

On to our favorite subject, the Legislature. What did you enjoy about being in the House?

I am going to link it to 250. I was a kindergarten teacher before I did this. So collaboration and communication are things that really appealed to me on a cellular level. One of the things that I loved about being in the Legislature – I still get to do so many of those things here. I meet Arizonans from across the state who are doing really interesting, wonderful work in their communities. This is a deeply non-partisan initiative. This is our country and our state – our history. And I like that I get to travel the state, meet all kinds of people and really focus on bringing Arizonans together, and I think that’s what I tried to do at the Legislature as well.

You played a vital role in that elections timeline fix bill last year. What do you take away from that experience?

That was born out of a lot of communication and compromise and it was built on the relationships that I already had with my colleagues across the aisle. When it came time for those really tough negotiations, we could do so in good faith and that’s important.

What was the hardest part about being a legislator?

Oh my goodness – the pay. I mean, I worked three jobs. I worked for a nonprofit. I substitute taught on Friday, so it’s really difficult to make a living. I like collaboration and compromise like I said, but then the idea of working together, that doesn’t get the clicks, right? That doesn’t get the social media engagement and things like that. It can sometimes seem like it’s a place where there’s outrage for outrage sake. There are plenty of things to disagree on and have really spirited disagreements, but at the end of the day, I wish there was more coming together. I can point to the election recount fix bill, the work that I did on Rio Verde or some of the bills of mine that I passed off to members across the aisle. We had good collaboration there but even that speaks to how dysfunctional the Legislature can be sometimes. To get anything moving, even small pieces of well-supported policy, it can’t come from a minority member, much less one in a competitive district. So, it’s a place with some dysfunction, but I am always hopeful there are great people there and I’m very excited to see what they’ll turn out this year.

Would you ever want to do it again?

No, and I say this with my whole heart. It was the honor of my lifetime to be there. I’m so glad I did it. I met so many people and did work that I’m really proud of. I think I made my community proud. I could have never imagined that when I was teaching my kindergarten students and the ceiling collapsed over us, which is what inspired me to run in the first place, that one day I’d be in a position to advocate for good education policy statewide. That’s an incredible gift. But I also learned through that experience that there are so many different ways to serve your state and broadening your perspective and seeing that it doesn’t have to look like any one thing has been really meaningful. It’s one of the things I love about being here. I can still do a lot of what I love from that experience in a way that’s not quite so divisive.

We can’t forget about the Arizona250 logo.

The secretary had this wonderful idea to put on a logo contest. Anyone could submit a design for it to become the official logo. We received beautiful submissions.The commission chose 10 to go forward for a public vote and our winner just happened to be this 17-year-old high school student (Riley Hammett), who through this process learned that she loves graphic design and applied to ASU and Northern Arizona University, and is now thinking about attending college as a result of his contest, which is so special. It’s been so wonderful to interact with her and her family and see how excited they are about this. Those are the kinds of stories that we can tell as a part of this project.

Termination of Criminal Justice Commission would harm public safety

The introduction of House Bill 2702 to terminate the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC) at the end of this calendar year states the following two findings: The agency’s current operations and practices do not align with and are contradictory to the legislative purpose of the creation of ACJC; and, the ACJC has lobbied, using taxpayer money, to collect information on law-abiding citizens and to create a registry of gun owners.

ACJC respects the important role that the legislative oversight process plays in ensuring the effective implementation of government. However, the legislative findings outlined in HB2702, upon which the decision to terminate ACJC is based, are factually inaccurate information and false assertions designed to misrepresent and cast in a negative light the work that the agency has done on behalf of the citizens of Arizona.

During the two Committee of Reference Sunset hearings, the assertion was made that ACJC lobbied to create a gun registry of concealed carry permit holders. This assertion is factually wrong, and despite providing a detailed response to the committee members on the actual purpose of the bill, it continues to be put forward as a finding in HB2702 as a reason for termination.

Here are the facts. During a previous legislative session, ACJC worked on HB2437, a narrowly tailored bill to address a loophole in the CCW permit revocation process that allowed individuals with revoked permits that had not been collected to bypass criminal background checks when purchasing firearms. The bill would have created an electronic check system for licensed dealers to inquire whether a permit was valid. That is it.

ACJC’s data collection efforts strictly align with Arizona state laws and legislative mandates. They are focused on criminal justice trends, funding allocations, and program evaluations — not on monitoring law-abiding citizens.

HB2702 also makes a finding that the current chairperson of ACJC, in their role at a different agency, was responsible for creating a judiciary task force to counter disinformation, which was part of a nationwide censorship apparatus that spied on and suppressed the voices of the people of Arizona. That this is included as a finding for the termination of ACJC is both troubling and completely misleading.

Here are the facts. The Courts Task Force on Disinformation was not an attempt to suppress free speech. The order establishing the task force explicitly emphasized the importance of maintaining free speech while addressing the growing threat of disinformation. The task force was created to respond to efforts by state actors, particularly Russia, to undermine the American justice system.

ACJC had no role in this task force, and no work under ACJC was linked to it. Any assertion that ACJC engaged in censorship activities is entirely false and misrepresents the agency’s mission and responsibilities.

Using these two “findings” to terminate ACJC would have severe consequences for public safety, law enforcement funding, and statewide criminal justice coordination.

ACJC administers critical state and federal grants that fund law enforcement operations, victim services, substance abuse treatment, and reentry programs. Termination would jeopardize millions in public safety funding. Since the last sunset review in 2016, ACJC has responsibly administered over $181 million in pass-through funding across 1,339 projects in Arizona.

ACJC provides nonpartisan data and analysis that inform legislative decisions on criminal justice reform and policy initiatives. Without ACJC, lawmakers, criminal justice stakeholders, and community partners would lose access to objective research needed for data-driven decision-making.

ACJC is a central hub for collaboration among criminal justice agencies. Eliminating the commission would weaken coordination efforts at a time when interagency cooperation is crucial for addressing complex criminal justice issues.

ACJC is committed to operating with transparency, accountability, and a steadfast dedication to serving Arizona’s criminal justice system. We welcome constructive dialogue with the Legislature and are open to discussions on improving our operations. However, we strongly oppose the mischaracterization of our work and the misguided rationale for terminating an agency that provides invaluable services to the state.

Andrew LeFevre is executive director of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission.

Republicans target state agencies and boards, bring Trump’s ‘DOGE’ to Arizona

After the November 2024 election, legislative Republicans pledged to follow in President Donald Trump’s footsteps and rein in state government.

They’re attempting to make good on that promise with their own committees modeled after Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and several bills targeting state agencies, boards and commissions.

Trump’s DOGE was introduced shortly after he was elected to a second term in November and will focus on reducing federal government spending. Republican lawmakers in Arizona praised Trump for the idea and created two committees at the Legislature — House Regulatory Oversight Committee and Senate Regulatory Affairs and Government Efficiency Committee — aimed at doing the same for state government.

Rep. Alex Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, has taken the DOGE mentality to heart and introduced bills that would repeal several state boards and commissions, give lawmakers and the public the power to challenge agency rules and allow citizens to sue individual government officials for actions taken in their official capacity. Kolodin said he was inspired by the “groundswell of support” he saw for the idea of DOGE after it was introduced by Trump.

“We want to take an axe to the size of government and its interference in the lives of Arizonans,” Kolodin said.

One way he hopes to do that is by eliminating at least nine state boards and commissions that regulate different industries in the state. Those serving on state boards and commissions usually serve without pay, but many do have paid staff or executive directors who assist in day-to-day operations.

Kolodin is starting with smaller, more obscure boards and commissions like the Citrus Research Council and the Acupuncture Board of Examiners, but said he’d eliminate every state agency, board and commission in existence if he had his way. He also introduced a bill to terminate the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, though other lawmakers want to continue the commission for eight more years.

Rep. Lupe Diaz, R-Benson, is also taking a stab at state agencies, specifically the Arizona Department of Water Resources. He introduced two bills, one that would cut ADWR’s budget in half and another that would move up the agency’s regularly scheduled audit to next year, saying he wants to address “the lack of transparency and regulatory overreach” at the department.

“Unfortunately, ADWR, under the direction and control of Governor Hobbs, has been sidetracked by extrastatutory activities that lack legislative authorization,” Diaz said in a statement released on Jan. 28. “The agency has been diverting critical time and resources away from its core functions to frivolous policymaking councils and focus groups, driving up housing costs for thousands of Arizonans.”

Diaz highlighted the governor’s Water Policy Council, the designation of the new Willcox Active Management Area, the Alternative Path to Designation of Assured Water Supply rules and proposed ag-to-urban rules as examples of “extrastatutory” activities. A spokesperson for ADWR declined to comment on Diaz’s bills, as did a spokesperson for Gov. Katie Hobbs.

Another idea from Kolodin involves bringing back Proposition 315, a legislative referral rejected by voters in November that would have required state agencies to receive legislative approval for regulatory rulemakings that would cost the state $500,000 or more over five years. Kolodin’s version would allow the Legislature to use concurrent resolutions to repeal agency rules costing more than $1 million and would allow citizens and businesses to request a review of a rule’s impact on taxpayers.

And Kolodin’s government-shrinking ideas don’t just apply to the executive branch — some target state lawmakers like himself. He sponsored a legislative referral that would prohibit lawmakers from introducing more than 10 bills per session and would stipulate that bills introduced during the second session of a Legislature could only repeal statutes, not amend or create new ones. Kolodin has introduced 99 bills so far this session.

Kolodin’s reasoning for the resolution can be found in the text, which says “The People of this State find that there are already enough laws.” If the resolution makes it out of the Legislature, voters would have a chance to let lawmakers know whether they agree with that sentiment at the next election.

Another Republican, Sen. J.D. Mesnard, introduced a legislative referral that would amend Proposition 108, a measure approved by voters in 1992 that requires a two-thirds majority approval in the Legislature for state tax and fee increases. Prop. 108 excluded most state agency fees from the two-thirds rule, allowing them to increase fees for certain programs through the traditional regulatory review process.

Mesnard said in a press release on Jan. 28 that the exception has led to the approval of far more increases than originally intended and that the Legislature has often used the exception as a loophole to avoid the two-thirds rule.

“The people have entrusted their elected officials with the power to make policies, including assessing any taxes or fees, not delegate that responsibility to unelected government officials,” Mesnard said in a prepared statement. “When Arizona voters approved Prop. 108, their intentions were clear; they wanted to set a higher threshold when imposing a greater financial burden on the people, not make it easier to do so.”

Will Humble, a former director of the the Department of Health Services, said the resolutions from Mesnard and Kolodin would result in a “slow starvation” for agencies. Mesnard’s resolution would impact agencies like the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Water Resources that rely on fees to regulate health care industries and the environment, according to Humble.

He said he agrees that state government could be more efficient, but repealing regulatory boards and cutting resources for agencies isn’t the way to accomplish that.

“It’s not rocket science,” Humble said. “It’s having talented people making the decisions inside these agencies. That’s how you make government more effective.”

He said lawmakers could also pour more money into the Auditor General’s Office to ensure agencies are being held accountable. The auditor general does periodic reviews of all agencies, boards and commissions, but due to a lack of funding recently allowed some agencies to do self-audits.

“If you want efficiency, you want oversight and you want accountability, use the Auditor General’s Office to do that and then stop standing in the way of the governor getting talented people into these jobs,” Humble said, referring to the drawn out battle between Hobbs and the Senate over her director nominations.

Republicans have also taken inspiration from other Trump administration policies when crafting state legislation. Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, introduced a bill aimed at prohibiting state entities from using diversity, equity and inclusion programs, which echoes Trump’s executive order ending DEI programs in the federal government.

Most, if not all, of the bills aimed at enacting DOGE in Arizona are likely headed for Hobbs’ veto stamp, but a few would bypass her and head straight to voters in 2026. Kolodin said he is optimistic that Arizonans will agree with Republicans that the state government is out of control, but Humble isn’t so sure.

“I’ve been around long enough to know that the pendulum does swing, especially when there’s a lot of overreach,” Humble said. “The more people are personally affected by these decisions, the more unpopular they are going to become. And I think two years from now, it’s going to be a different policy world.”

Bipartisan measure aims to protect students from sexual abuse

When Gretchen Jacobs’ autistic and non-verbal daughter was sexually abused at Chaparral High School in 2021, the veteran lobbyist was determined to work with state lawmakers to make sure school districts would be held accountable for not conducting thorough background checks.

Jacobs’ crusade hit an obstacle last year after Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill that would’ve removed immunity for schools and other public entities that didn’t rigorously check into the history of an employee and it led to a student getting sexually abused.

However, Jacobs knew she was going to keep returning to the Legislature until a bill was passed. This year, she collaborated with lawmakers to introduce a new version of the bill, SB1106, known as “Ava’s Law.”

“Ava’s Law” – named after Jacobs’ daughter – would hold a school district liable if a student is sexually abused and the district didn’t conduct an appropriate background check on an employee.

Sen. Catherine Miranda, D-Laveen, sponsored the bill, which has a long list of bipartisan cosponsors.

Jacobs said she began pursuing legislation after she learned that the Scottsdale Unified School District completed a criminal background check on the employee who was accused of molesting her daughter but didn’t delve deep enough into his work history.

“They didn’t contact the prior employers and ask the questions that are required by law that their board had adopted,” Jacobs said. “The information they requested was so nominal that it didn’t provide really any information about discipline history or problems.”

The employee, Nicholas Alan Claus, was arrested at the time on suspicion of sexual abuse, child abuse, and public sexual indecency, according to media reports. He pled guilty to two counts of attempted sexual abuse in October 2022 and placed on probation, according to the Maricopa County Superior Court docket.

Jacobs then learned that she couldn’t hold the district accountable directly because of current laws.

She set out last year to change the law with a bill sponsored by Sen. Shawnna Bolick, R-Phoenix. But she was unable to hold stakeholder meetings with legislators and other education groups because she was involved in a lawsuit against the school district. She eventually reached a settlement with the school district, she said.

In Hobbs’ veto letter, the governor said the bill was not “carefully tailored and thoughtfully executed” enough to expand the liability of public entities.

“They thought it was not narrowly tailored enough,” Jacobs said.

Jacobs regrouped this year with three weeks of stakeholder meetings with lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, and education groups. The stakeholders recommended changing a section of the bill to where a district could face liability for a violation of the law instead of its own policies.

“The feedback was really helpful to me, understanding their concerns and being able to address them with Senator Miranda,” Jacobs said.

Miranda, who voted for the bill last year, feels her fellow legislators and other stakeholders took all the necessary steps to make it a stronger bill.

“It’s a bill to protect children against sexual offenses, and that should get everybody’s attention,” Miranda said. “They should all be aware that it’s a better bill that everybody agrees on or is neutral in so there’s absolutely no reason for it to be vetoed.”

Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, viewed the law as a bipartisan measure that aims to protect children who are in the care of schools and other entities, she said.

“It’s a position of trust, and I think that everyone needs to have background checks. When parents send their children to school, they’re trusting their children are going to be safe,” Shamp said.

If the bill becomes law, Jacobs hopes it will incentivize districts to dig deeper into the employment histories of those who are hired.

“Now, there’s an incentive to know less, because the less you know, the less you’re liable for,” she said. “This would get rid of … a perverse incentive to not comply with the law and obtain information about the people who are going to be with children, especially children who are unable to communicate.”

Arizona Capitol Times – Jan. 31, 2025

Trade and trust – the power of interdependence

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is far more than just a trade pact. It is a framework for economic cooperation, designed not only to increase trade, create jobs, and foster cross-border investment, but to build enduring relationships between three of the world’s largest economies. A key to the USMCA’s success lies in its application of interdependence. This model reveals how repeated interactions and cooperation over time can build trust, mitigate the risks of short-term self-interest, and ultimately create a system of mutual benefit.

The concept of interdependence in negotiations highlights how the choices of each party can significantly impact the outcomes for all involved. When faced with a single negotiation, the focus may naturally fall on immediate gains, potentially leading to less-than-ideal results for everyone. However, when these negotiations are ongoing and repeated, a different dynamic emerges. Recognizing the value of continued interactions, countries are incentivized to prioritize cooperation and seek mutually beneficial solutions, leading to sustained and mutually advantageous outcomes. This understanding of interdependence is central to the USMCA and the framework’s success.

In practice, applying this understanding of interdependence within the USMCA means recognizing the long-term stakes of these relationships and prioritizing cooperation over short-term gains. For instance, Mexico’s agreement to raise labor standards was reciprocated by the U.S. ensuring continued agricultural market access. This cycle of mutual concessions creates a stable and predictable environment for both nations. With $700 billion in annual trade between the U.S. and Mexico and over $600 billion in trade with Canada (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023), this trust-based collaboration strengthens the economic foundation of North America.

This approach, which emphasizes interdependence in negotiations, not only addresses current trade issues but allows for the flexibility to adjust priorities over time. Canada, for example, values continued access to U.S. markets for dairy and timber, while Mexico focuses on infrastructure and labor reforms. The U.S., in turn, seeks protection of intellectual property and reducing trade imbalances. The $112 billion U.S. trade deficit with Mexico in 2022 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023) underscores the necessity of ongoing negotiations to address imbalances and ensure fairness. By engaging in repeated negotiations and adjusting priorities incrementally, all three countries ensure the durability of their trade relationships.

The impact of the USMCA has been significant. The agreement has already created more than 76,000 new jobs in the U.S., expanding opportunities in agriculture, digital trade, and intellectual property protection (U.S. International Trade Commission, 2023). The combined $1.7 trillion in annual trade between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada underscores the deep interdependence that has been built through years of reciprocal cooperation and mutual trust.

However, the success of this framework faces external challenges. The rise of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) as a growing economic bloc is reshaping the global trade landscape. Together, BRICS countries represent 24% of global GDP and over 40% of the world’s population (Statista, 2023), and their growing influence presents a real challenge to North American dominance. The Belt and Road Initiative launched by China, projected to cost $8 trillion by 2049 (China Daily, 2023), shows how new trade routes and partnerships could shift global economic power.

To counter these challenges, the U.S., Mexico, and Canada must remain united under the USMCA, ensuring that their cooperation continues to evolve. Mexico is the largest market for U.S. agricultural exports, valued at over $20 billion annually (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2023), and the U.S. benefits from continued access to $3.5 billion worth of Canadian dairy products each year (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2023). These reciprocal trade arrangements are the direct result of the iterative, trust-based negotiations supported by the USMCA.

Another critical success of the USMCA is its protection of intellectual property, which has already generated $2.8 billion in additional revenue for U.S. companies (U.S. International Trade Commission, 2023).

The evolving global economic landscape, particularly the rise of China, underscores the need for continued strategic cooperation under the USMCA. The $1.7 trillion in annual trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico is a testament to how trust, iterative cooperation, and long-term thinking can ensure continued prosperity in the face of external pressures.

Julio Espinoza is an international trade analyst with Molera Alvarez LLC.

Unelected bureaucrats decide whether you can buy a home

During this last election, I heard from the voters in my district that they were fed up with high inflation costs, with many hard-working families wanting the high cost of housing addressed. Yet, in the middle of a housing crisis, the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) issued an order halting home construction in large swaths of our state that rely on groundwater as their main water supply. This is not only an overreach of power exerted by unelected bureaucrats, it completely sidesteps the legislative process, stripping power away from legislators and the Arizonans who voted them into office.

Simply, this decision was made without the proper authority. It was made by officials who are not obligated to consider the need for affordable housing, the critical need for shelter, the loss of jobs, and the economic impacts to our local cities and towns.

Arizona has a rich, robust and proud management system for protecting our environment and most vital resource, Arizona’s groundwater supplies. This system has created programs that are the envy of the Western United States, such as the largest groundwater replenishment district in the country, the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District (CAGRD), the Arizona Water Bank, Arizona’s Groundwater Management Act, and numerous programs to recycle our existing water supplies.

These programs are the reason that Arizona uses the same amount of water that we used way back in 1957, even though we have grown by over 6 million new residents.

During the creation of these historical conservation programs, one critical and important principle has always remained constant – they were adopted through our constitutional process of creating laws, which requires approval by the elected officials who serve in the Arizona Senate, the Arizona House of Representatives, and ultimately signed into law by the governor.

Today it seems that this is no longer the case.

In 1995, Arizona’s legislative process created a system to protect our groundwater aquifers that requires home builders to secure a 100-year water supply prior to building a home. In addition, if that home is served by groundwater, then that groundwater must be replaced. No other industry or land use is held to this standard, which was intended to strengthen Arizona residents’ ability to achieve affordable home ownership with a reliable water supply.

This heightened standard was also designed to ensure that if our groundwater supplies were in jeopardy, that the state would look to land uses other than housing (such as commercial development or agriculture) for possible reform. Prioritizing homeowners over corporations seemed like the right thing to do.

But the opposite is happening today. Unelected bureaucrats at ADWR have decided to deny groundwater for housing sorely needed to address Arizona’s critical housing affordability crisis. This has not only stalled housing projects, it has taken more affordable areas of the Valley out of the housing market entirely. Allowing housing in some areas, and not others, has raised housing prices substantially.

If we cannot provide groundwater for homes, then you would think that all types of development would be denied access to groundwater as well. This is not the case. In some areas of the Greater Phoenix Metro Arizona, you cannot build a home, but any corporation can build a large groundwater using facility like a manufacturing plant. This adds more pressure to our housing crisis as we attract workers, who are also struggling to afford a home, and leads to the draining of our aquifers.

This decision has significant implications for all of Arizona from the increased cost of housing, the questionable management of our aquifers, and the economic implications to our local cities and towns.

Previous elected officials created this system to ensure that this exact scenario would not happen. Rather than halt housing projects and make our affordable housing crisis even worse, elected officials, not bureaucrats, need to consider the needs of our citizens to ensure they, their families, and their futures are protected.

Sine Kerr, a Republican, is a former state senator in Legislative District 25, and a former chair of the Senate Natural Resources, Energy, and Water Committee.

Powering Arizona’s future with smart energy solutions

When it comes to powering Arizona — our homes, businesses, and rapidly growing industries — reliable and affordable energy is non-negotiable. As energy demand surges and the push for cleaner, more efficient systems intensifies, our state faces an urgent challenge: how to modernize our energy infrastructure without placing undue financial strain on families and businesses.

One proven solution is securitization, a financial tool that allows utilities to recover costs more efficiently while protecting ratepayers from unnecessary spikes in their bills. Think of it like refinancing a mortgage: securitization lets utilities refinance certain costs, such as retiring outdated facilities, at a lower interest rate. The result? Billions saved for consumers and businesses, all while paving the way for a cleaner, more resilient energy future.

Danny Seiden (Photo by Jennifer Stewart)

Securitization isn’t a new concept. Thirty-three states have successfully implemented it, helping utilities retire aging power plants and assets and invest in modern energy infrastructure without overburdening customers. Now, thanks to House Bill 2679, sponsored by Rep. Gail Griffin, Arizona has the opportunity to adopt this approach and cement itself as a leader in tackling energy challenges.

Here’s why this is critical: Arizona’s energy needs are growing faster than ever. Industries like advanced manufacturing, aerospace, and semiconductors are expanding at a rapid clip, driving demand for reliable power. Without tools like securitization, costs get passed directly to consumers and businesses, leading to higher rates and putting Arizona’s economic competitiveness at risk.

Securitization offers a practical path forward. By reducing the cost of decommissioning old facilities and enabling investments in clean energy and infrastructure, it ensures Arizona can meet its energy needs without sacrificing affordability or reliability. The savings benefit everyone: ratepayers enjoy lower bills, utilities gain the resources they need to innovate, and the state maintains its reputation as an economic powerhouse.

HB 2679 provides the legislative framework necessary to make securitization a reality in Arizona. It gives bond issuers the certainty they need to offer the lowest possible interest rates, maximizing savings for customers. It also ensures transparency and accountability, giving the Arizona Corporation Commission the authority to oversee how securitization is implemented and ensure it delivers on its promises.

The benefits go far beyond lower electric bills. For businesses considering Arizona as a destination, affordable energy is often at the top of their list. Companies in advanced manufacturing, data centers, and other energy-intensive sectors want access to clean, reliable power at predictable costs. Securitization aligns with these priorities, helping attract new investments, create jobs, and generate additional tax revenue for our state.

The Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry is committed to supporting smart policies that balance affordability, reliability, and innovation. HB 2679 is a win-win solution for customers, utilities, and our state’s economy. It’s a responsible approach to managing energy costs while ensuring Arizona remains a leader in economic development and sustainability.

As we dive into another legislative session, securitization is a proven policy solution Arizona can’t afford to overlook. Let’s work together to make it happen.

Danny Seiden is president and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Our national debt demands immediate action

As a dad of six young children, I understand firsthand the need to balance the budget each month to make sure the needs of my family are met. Whether at the grocery store or the gas pump, it is a constant effort to stretch every dollar and avoid living beyond our means – a reality that millions of hard-working Americans face each day.

However, with inflation causing the price of everyday goods to skyrocket, it’s incredibly frustrating to see how out of touch Washington D.C. has become, ignoring accountability and responsibility and consistently spending beyond their means. For decades, the government has failed to rein in reckless spending, saddling our future generations with debt. This needs to change.

The United States’ national debt recently surpassed $36 trillion and is becoming increasingly unsustainable, putting our nation’s fiscal stability at risk. This staggering figure is not an abstract statistic, it’s the result of decades of overspending and mismanagement that demands immediate and resolute action from both chambers of Congress and the incoming administration.

Of this staggering total, roughly $28 trillion is held by the public in the form of treasury bonds, equivalent to nearly 98% of our annual gross domestic product (GDP). Worse yet, if we do not change course, the national debt is set to climb to 122% of GDP in the next decade. This staggering number is not just unsustainable, it represents a grave threat to the economic well-being of our future generations. 

The costs and consequences of this unchecked spending are not contained in Washington D.C., they are felt in the pocketbooks of everyday Americans who have seen record inflation and surging interest rates cause the costs of goods, whether at the pump or the grocery store, to skyrocket. Without decisive action, the scale of this crisis will only continue to grow, opportunities for homeownership will continue to diminish, and our future generations will have to shoulder the burden of today’s inaction. 

Servicing our national debt has become the second fastest growing expense in the federal budget and could’ve instead been invested in critical federal programs, our military and veterans, infrastructure, and cutting-edge technology, like artificial intelligence and semiconductors. 

The scale of our debt crisis is unprecedented in American history. While our national debt peaked at 106% in the aftermath of World War II, America was rebuilding after a deadly and destructive global conflict and was installing itself as the leader of the free world. Today, we are simply living beyond our means – and it is our future generations that will pay the price.

Addressing this crisis will require strong leadership and a commitment to reduce waste, cut unnecessary and burdensome regulations, and follow regular order when crafting the federal government’s annual budget.

This is why, as Arizona’s sole House appropriator, I was proud to join the Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency (DOGE) Caucus to work closely with President Trump’s newly formed Department of Government Efficiency to rein in wasteful spending, streamline bloated government bureaucracies, and put America back on the path of fiscal responsibility. 

This isn’t just about numbers on a spreadsheet — it’s about safeguarding the prosperity and security of the United States for generations to come. It’s time for Washington to roll up its sleeves, rise to the challenge, and ensure that our best days are still ahead of us.

Rep. Juan Ciscomani, a Republican, represents Arizona’s 6th Congressional District, which includes parts of Pima, Pinal, Cochise, Graham and Greenlee counties. He serves on the Appropriations and Veterans’ Affairs committees.

Governor Hobbs appoints Maria Elena Cruz, 1st Black and Hispanic woman to Arizona Supreme Court

Gov. Katie Hobbs on Monday placed the first Black and Hispanic woman on the Arizona Supreme Court.

The governor chose Maria Elena Cruz, now a judge on the Court of Appeals, from among the five names submitted by the Commission on Appellate Court Appointments. By law, Hobbs was required to choose from that list.

Cruz had been considered the odds-on favorite, and not only because she was the only nominee who got unanimous approval from the commission.

While the governor’s office called the appointment a “historic” moment for the state, Hobbs bristled when asked about how important it was to her to choose a Black Latina. “Do not insult with this question,” Hobbs responded. “She is eminently qualified.’”

Cruz said there is a good reason for having someone with her background and who looks like her on the court.

“My question would be the opposite: Why should the courts not reflect the population?” she said. “Why should a state that is so diverse have a Supreme Court that looks like one racial aspect of our state?

“The fact that we’ve had 49 justices and only had five women does not engender trust from citizens in the court,” said Cruz, who is from Yuma. There is one Hispanic judge on the High Court — John Lopez who joined the court in 2017 after being tapped by then-Gov. Doug Ducey.

“The courts are an expression of people’s self governance, right?” continued Cruz. “And if we are self-governing, then the court should be the ‘self.’ ”

Cruz, who replaces Robert Brutinel who retired at the end of last year, pointed out that the Arizona Constitution requires both the commission that screens applicants and the governor to “consider the diversity of the state’s population” when recommending and appointing judges to the High Court.

Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer pointed out that Brutinel was the only one of the seven justices who came from outside of Maricopa County. And she said there is no geographic diversity requirement for the Supreme Court — nor, she said, a “rural perspective on what the law is.’”

“However, there is a tremendous need for a rural perspective on the regulatory aspects of the court,’” Timmer said, adding that it is important when the court is considering new rules and regulations, including those that determine the ease of access to the courts, to determine how — and whether — they would work in rural areas.

“So having someone from Yuma, and a former Superior Court judge to boot, is a tremendous boon to our Court,” the chief justice said.

Timmer, who has known Cruz for years — she tapped her to be presiding judge in Yuma County — also credited her with having “a strong voice,” and important feature, says Timmer, if Cruz is to “hold her own in the room’” with the other six justices “and to contribute to ensuring the correct decisions are made at our court.”

Cruz becomes the only Democrat on the court which consists of five Republicans and a political independent.

At a press conference Wednesday, Cruz said it was never her goal to be appointed to the Supreme Court.

“My goal was to serve my community, an area that is known as a legal desert where it’s very difficult to get an attorney,” she said. That was brought home, Cruz said, when she had a car accident and needed an attorney.

“In order for an attorney to even give me a consult — I know this is strange to people in Maricopa County where you can’t take two steps without running into a personal injury lawyer, but my father knew someone who knew someone who was able to get me an appointment,” Cruz said. “And I saw in that person someone who could champion my cause. And I thought, ‘This is something I can do to help vindicate people’s rights.’ “

Cruz, who will be sworn in on Monday, sidestepped a question on her views on immigration issues, noting that judges are not supposed to give answers to legal questions that are not formally before the court.

“What I will say is when the people in our state, whether they are directly impacted by these policies and rules, when they look at our court, now all the way up to the Supreme Court of our state, they’ll be able to see themselves reflected, and they’ll have a little bit more confidence in the fact that decisions that are going to be made are not going to be made from a perspective that doesn’t take into account their diversity.’”

A native of Puerto Rico, Cruz said she moved to Arizona at age 14 and has been in Yuma for 32 years. A graduate of the University of Arizona College of Law, she worked for the Pima County and later the Yuma County attorneys offices before becoming a public defender.

While in private practice, Cruz also served as a judge for the Cocopah Indian Tribe before being elected to Yuma County Superior Court in 2008 where she served until Gov. Ducey named her to the Court of Appeals in 2017.

Hobbs also mentioned that Cruz, while a judge, was tapped to manage the Swift Accountable Fair Enforcement court program which aims to reduce recidivism. And Cruz also started Yuma County’s first-ever “restitution court,” which worked to ensure that those convicted of crimes compensated their victims.

Cruz was chosen from five nominees submitted to Hobbs by the appellate court nominating commission. Others on that list were:

Nicole Davis, deputy director of the Department of Economic Security and the agency’s general counsel, a political independent
Andrew Jacobs, an attorney in private practice at a Phoenix law firm, registered as a Democrat
Regina Nassen, principal assistant attorney for the city of Tucson, who is currently registered as a political independent;
Alexander Samuels, an assistant state attorney general who is a Democrat

Under constitutional rules, no more than 60% of nominees can be from the same party. And since no Republicans applied for the vacancy, that forced the panel to send Hobbs the names of political independents.

Upcoming Event

Month: January 2025