Arizona generated $429 million in economic impact from hosting the Men’s Final Four in April according to a new report released Tuesday.

But Gov. Katie Hobbs said she is “really concerned” that it will be the last time Arizona gets to host a national sporting event of this caliber if voters approve what Republicans put on the ballot as the “Border Security Act.”

Proposition 314 would allow state and local police to arrest those who enter the country at other than a port of entry. It also would create criminal penalties for using false documents to seek public benefits or apply for a job.

And it would provide for a presumptive 10-year prison term on those who sell fentanyl if it results in the death of another person.

Hobbs said Tuesday she does not believe that the proposal would deal with the problem of people crossing the border illegally. She said at least part of the solution needs to come from Congress where Republicans refused to support what had been crafted as bipartisan border legislation.

But the new report also highlights another side of the issue: what economic effect Prop 314 could have on the state.

“This will put Arizona in the worst negative spotlight nationally that we can imagine,” the governor said.

There is some reason for her concern.

Arizona lost several national conventions and conferences after lawmakers here approved SB 1070 in 2010, a measure designed to give police more power to detain and question those they believed were not in the country legally. Parts of that were overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court though at least one provision remains: the so-called “papers, please” language that permits officers, if they have stopped someone for another reason, to inquire if there is “reasonable suspicion” that person is in the country illegally.

There also was a call to have Major League Baseball move its 2011 All-Star Game from Phoenix, though that did not materialize.

More recently, the NCAA, which puts on the Final Four, stripped North Carolina of its ability to hold championship games there in protests over state legislation restricting which bathrooms transgender individuals could use. That decision was reversed after the state repealed the law in 2017.

Looking forward, Prop 314 comes as Arizona is in the pipeline for future NCAA events, That includes plans for the Women’s Final Four in 2026.

Hobbs said that the $429 million economic impact figure for this year’s event is more than $100 million more than the last time the state hosted the event in 2017.

The report prepared by the Seidman Research Institute at Arizona State University estimated that nearly 115,000 out-of-state visitors came to Arizona over the three days of the tournament primarily for the event.

It also says more than 68,000 of these visitors had tickets to at least the Saturday semifinal games. They stayed an average of 3.9 nights and spent an average of $482 per person per day.

Hobbs said these kinds of events “put Arizona in the best possible national spotlight.”

And Prop 314?

“It’s a contrast to the harm that this proposition will cause if it’s passed,” the governor said.

Her comments about fallout from the measure drew an angry reaction from House Speaker Ben Toma who is the sponsor of what became Proposition 314.

“That suggestion is both absurd and indefensible,” the Peoria Republican told Capitol Media Services, saying it is a response to Arizonans being “fed up with the open-door policies” of the current Democratic administration in Washington.

“Proposition 314 presents voters with meaningful, commonsense reforms that will help protect our communities,” Toma continued. “Instead of resorting to fear-mongering, the governor should be supporting these efforts.”

The upcoming campaign is anticipated to be both high profile and divisive.

Lawmakers actually approved part of what is in the measure earlier this year: giving police the power to arrest border crossers. That bill, sponsored by Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, was modeled after Texas’ controversial SB 4.

That was vetoed by Hobbs.

“I absolutely understand Arizonans’ frustration and put me on the top of that list of the federal government’s failure to secure our southern border and the feeling of wanting to take it into your own hands,” the governor said at the time, saying that bill is “not the answer to that problem.”

Undeterred, Toma recrafted it as a ballot measure, one that is not subject to a gubernatorial veto.

Lawmakers added in the provisions on public benefits and employment. They also tacked on a variant on another Hobbs-vetoed measure on harsher penalties for fentanyl sales.

It squeaked out of both the Republican controlled House and Senate with the bare minimum of votes needed to refer it to the ballot, all of them coming from Republicans.

The new plan is opposed by some business interests.

James O’Neill, political director of the American Business Immigration Coalition, said during the debate over the measure that its concerns reflect what happened in 2010.

“Everybody still remembers the reputational damage that 1070 did,” he said. “Everybody remembers the damage that it caused and so I think that’s why folks are ready, willing and poised to defeat this initiative.”

Other groups, including the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce, the West Valley Chamber of Commerce Alliance and the Chandler Chamber of Commerce signed in opposing the measure.

The Arizona Chamber of Commerce, however, has taken a more nuanced stance.

Prior to a vote on sending the plan to the ballot, chamber President Danny Seiden issued a statement saying his group shares with lawmakers the “frustration with the lack of federal action on immigration and border enforcement.”

“We also recognize that lawmakers at the ballot box is fraught with the potential for unintended consequences,” he said. And Seiden pointed out that a constitutional amendment leaves lawmakers pretty much powerless to make changes if the measure is approved.

But the organization is going to sit out this fight.

“The chamber has not taken a position on 314 and does not plan to,” organization spokeswoman Annie Dockendorf said Tuesday.

She acknowledged Seiden had made some comments about the proposal. But Dockendorf also said it “morphed throughout the process.”

“This is a ballot measure we’re staying out of though,” she said.