Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Month: January 2025

Republicans, Democrats cheer Hobbs’ homeless vets proposal

When Gov. Katie Hobbs introduced a plan during her State of the State Address to reduce the number of homeless veterans in the state, many veterans advocates and lawmakers met the proposal with optimism.

Hobbs released her budget proposal Jan. 17 that calls for $5 million to be allocated to the Homes for Heroes Fund, which would aid in the development of a statewide plan that would focus on housing solutions, counseling, social services, veteran treatment courts and other programs for homeless veterans. The money would also pay for grants that allow community organizations to expand their services. The plan would be implemented for the 2027 fiscal year.

Support for homeless veterans has emerged as a bipartisan issue with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle joining advocacy groups and nonprofit organizations that  have spent years tackling the issue by feeding veterans and providing mental health services and transitional housing.

“Veterans housing has been an issue and it’s an issue everywhere regardless of what state you go to,” said Rep. Stacey Travers, D-Phoenix. Travers, an Army veteran, put in a budget request for veterans housing and has been working with the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to address the issue. 

“The governor cares deeply about veterans and veterans issues and (I’m) more than happy to see her investing in the veteran community here in Arizona,” Travers said.

Homelessness statistics for veterans have fluctuated throughout the years but the number decreased by 13% in 2024 from the previous year to 440, according to the 2024 Point-in-Time Count Report published by the Maricopa Association of Governments.

Homeless veterans can face a number of unique issues such as PTSD, which is compounded by a lack of access to medication and services if they are living on the street.

“If they’re homeless, they’re not getting the medication to push that down,” said Rep. Walt Blackman, R-Snowflake. “If we’re talking about physical needs when a veteran has been injured either in a combat zone or not in a combat zone, they don’t have the resources to be able to take care of it. So being homeless adds additional burdens to that veteran.”

Blackman, an Army combat veteran, supported Hobbs’ proposal, viewing it as an issue that transcends party lines.

 “This isn’t a partisan issue,” he said. “I welcome any ideas to help veterans.”

Blackman has introduced HB2393, which would appropriate $5 million from the state general fund to the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to expand a warming center for veterans in Payson.

Homeless veterans can encounter other obstacles such as not being aware of the various services available to help them find housing and other assistance, said Michelle Jameson, executive director of U.S.VETS Phoenix.

“We have encountered veterans who are either unaware of their benefits or feel that another veteran is more deserving, leading them to decline benefits in the past,” Jameson said. “These benefits are not only important financially but also crucial for establishing access to mental and physical health care.”

U.S. VETS works with the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Veterans’ Services and other groups to help veterans enroll in benefit programs. The organization also operates a transitional housing program and offers other services such as rental assistance, mental health and substance abuse treatment programs, medical and dental care, and employment services.

Some local governments have taken steps towards helping homeless veterans in their own cities. 

Glendale is working with the Maricopa County Human Services Department and the Kansas City-based Veterans Community Project to build 50 units for transitional housing on city owned property. The city will start by building between eight to ten cottages before eventually expanding, said Glendale Mayor Jerry Weiers.

The city will host a groundbreaking for the project on Feb. 1 where Hobbs is expected to speak, Weiers said.

Weiers said he didn’t know all of the details of Hobbs proposal but that he and the governor are “in tune on this particular issue.”

“She has been a great advocate for the homeless and a great advocate for our veterans,” he said. “We both can do everything we can to make sure that we take care of that issue.”

 

Lawmakers set their sights on Corporation Commission, utilities

Lawmakers in both parties have introduced several bills this session that could affect the Arizona Corporation Commission, utility companies and ratepayers. 

The commission is the state’s utility regulation body and recently swore in a 5 to 0 Republican majority. The outgoing commission voted on a few different legislative priorities that it asked lawmakers to consider in 2025, but so far no bills related to those priorities have been introduced. 

One lawmaker, Rep. Justin Olson, R-Mesa, comes to the Legislature with a unique perspective as a former ACC commissioner. He has proposed two bills that would restrict the “revolving door” between the commission and utility companies and another that would aim to ensure stability for the state’s electrical grid. 

House Bill 2518 would prevent utilities that are regulated by the Corporation Commission — like Arizona Public Service and Tucson Electric Power — from employing individuals who have worked for the commission in the last four years. The Commission conversely may not employ individuals who worked for a utility company it regulates in the past two years. 

Sandy Bahr, director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon chapter and a longtime environmental lobbyist, said she was “pleasantly surprised” to see Olson’s bill. 

“I don’t see any reason why we wouldn’t support that kind of an anti-revolving door measure – it’s certainly of concern when it comes to both the commission and utilities.” Bahr said. 

Olson’s other piece of legislation, House Bill 2527, would prohibit the ACC from authorizing the retirement of an electrical generation facility unless there is a new facility with equal or greater power generation on the grid. It would also task the commission with increasing dispatchable, or on demand, energy by at least 5% between 2025 and 2030. 

Those provisions are aimed at increasing the reliability of the state’s energy grid to avoid outages, especially during hot summer months. However, Bahr said the bill would make it harder to close fossil fuel plants in favor of building renewable energy plants. 

Olson did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Olson’s Republican colleagues have also introduced legislation related to the ACC, with Rep. Walt Blackman, R-Snowflake, attempting to increase fees for applications to the commission’s line siting committee, and Sen. Tim Dunn, R-Yuma, proposing a clarified definition for the purpose of the Residential Utility Consumer Office, or RUCO. 

Bahr said the Sierra Club is less sure about the impact of those bills, but she is leaning toward opposing them. She said Blackman’s bill has potential but might need a bit more workshopping, while Dunn’s bill might pull RUCO’s focus away from consumer advocacy.

RUCO represents utility customers in rate cases before the commission, but Dunn’s bill would define “represents the interests of” in statute as “advocating for the safest and most reliable utility service achievable at the lowest retail electric rate possible.” 

Democrats have also gotten in on the Corporation Commission bills. Rep. Mariana Sandoval, D-Goodyear, is proposing prohibiting utility companies from using money collected from customers in lobbying efforts, charitable giving, advertising or marketing, or litigation of rate cases, among other prohibited activities.

Rep. Oscar De Los Santos, D-Laveen, introduced a bill that would reduce the threshold for the definition of a power plant. Currently, power plants are defined as generating units with a name plate rating of 100 megawatts, while De Los Santos is proposing lowering the rating to 25 megawatts.

That bill is likely inspired by a controversial decision made by the commission in 2024, when it voted to exempt UniSource Energy Services from receiving a certificate of environmental compatibility to expand a power generating station in northern Arizona. The commission said the expansion did not need environmental review because it was adding four generators of 50 megawatts, while statute only requires review for generators with 100 megawatts or more. 

Three separate lawsuits were filed over the decisions, arguing that the four generators of 50 megawatts should receive environmental review given their total wattage of 200 megawatts. That legal battle is pending, but the ACC said it based its decision on state statute and could vote differently in the future if the statute was changed. 

Bahr said she thinks De Los Santos’ bill is unnecessary because she thinks the interpretation of the statute was wrong — not the statute itself. 

“It is contrary to how things have been interpreted for decades, and so we don’t think it’s necessary,” Bahr said. 

Overall, Bahr said she supports any legislation that would provide more accountability to the commission and utility companies. But, she said she’s not holding her breath.

“It’s not something that we have seen come from the Republican legislators, just because they’re usually pretty friendly with the utilities,” Bahr said. 

Sex-based ID measure gets committee OK from Republicans

A House panel blocked an attempt from Democratic lawmakers to expand non-discrimination protections to include sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. 

The issue was raised during a House Government Committee hearing Jan. 22. The committee passed HB2062 on party lines, which would define sex-based terms such as “male,” “female,” “man,” and “woman,” in Arizona law. 

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lisa Fink, R-Peoria, said the measure is also intended to protect single-sex spaces including bathrooms and women’s sports.

“This bill was carefully drafted to ensure it does not create any special rights for women, nor does it take away any rights from others,” Fink said. 

Many Democrats and LGBTQ advocates disagree with Fink’s assessment of the bill, titled the “Arizona Sex-based Terms Act.” 

During a press conference before the bill was heard in committee, Rep. Betty Villegas, D-Tucson, announced her intention to introduce an amendment to Fink’s bill that would instead expand non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ individuals in housing and public accommodations and services.

“It is long past time to correct this glaring injustice,” Villegas said. “Discrimination and inequity have no place in Arizona.”

Republicans on the committee voted against moving Villegas’s amendment and proceeded with Fink’s bill, coming just days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order prohibiting federal agencies from funding, promoting or communicating statements related to “gender ideology.” 

Several LGBTQ activists attended the hearing to express their opposition to the measure, including Ruth Carter, an attorney based in Phoenix who identifies as nonbinary. 

Carter told the committee that they weren’t sure what sex they would have to choose if Fink’s bill became law. The Arizona Motor Vehicle Division currently allows people to select “X” on their driver’s licenses and IDs if they identify as nonbinary. 

Another group of people Cater said they were concerned for are people born intersex, or individuals born with reproductive anatomy that doesn’t fit into a binary sex classification. 

The National Institute of Health estimates about one in 5,000 people are born with “ambiguous” genitalia.

“Think of nonbinary people like people with green eyes. We are rare, but we are real,” Carter said. 

Republicans in the Legislature have tried numerous times in the past few years to pass laws aimed at replacing definitions of gender in administrative code and statute with definitions of biological sex. Gov. Katie Hobbs has vetoed all attempts. 

The advocacy group Independent Women’s Voice applauded Fink’s bill and called on Hobbs to sign the measure after the governor vetoed a similar bill in 2024. 

Hobbs wrote in her veto letter of the 2024 bill: “As I have said time and again, I will not sign legislation that attacks Arizonans.” 

Fink said her bill is not intended to “erase” anyone and supporters of the bill say the measure protects women’s rights and women’s safety in public spaces like bathrooms and locker rooms. 

“There are people that use this, men, that use this as a loophole to go into women’s spaces and assault them,” said Rep. Rachel Keshel, D-Tucson. “We need to keep those girls safe. This bill has nothing to do with gender identity and everything to do with sex.”

The measure would also require the state’s political subdivisions, including public school districts, to collect sex-related statistics to identify  people as either male or female. Fink noted her bill still allows the Legislature to create laws protecting specific groups of people in certain contexts, leaving the door open for the Legislature to pass legislation that enhances protections for LGBTQ individuals like Villegas proposed Jan. 22. 

“Rep. Lisa Fink’s legislation to define ‘woman’ so women’s rights aren’t erased is so important,” said Independent Women’s Voice’s Legislative Liaison Paula Scanlan in a news release. Scanlan was a collegiate swimmer who shared a locke rroom with transgender swimmer Lia Thomas. 

“Hopefully, after the election mandate of 2024, bipartisan passage of similar legislation in Congress, and executive action by President Trump, the Legislature can pass this bill quickly, and Gov. Hobbs can make the right choice this year. 2025 is the year for women’s rights in Arizona to be protected,” Scanlan said. 

It’s unlikely that Hobbs will sign the bill given her history on the issue. Villegas said she was glad the bill would need to go through Hobbs after Republicans shot down her amendment. 

In 2023, Rep. Lorena Austin, D-Mesa, announced she identifies as nonbinary. Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton, D-Tucson, said during the Jan. 22 House Government Committee hearing that she was disappointed to see another attempt from Republicans on this issue because she believes it negates the experience of their colleague. 

Rep. Patty Contreras, D-Phoenix, said she probably would consider herself nonbinary if she was younger in today’s world based on her preferences for activities and clothes that have traditionally been designated for boys and men. 

“Here we are again. Instead of spending time to work on issues, such as housing affordability, education and water, we are again wasting time to define sex,” Contreras said.

“Our own member that every time that we try to bring this up and we try to justify our stances, we denigrate them and it’s one more attempt at trying to remove them from their experience,” Stahl Hamilton said.

The Government Committee’s chairman Rep. Walt Blackman, R-Snowflake, said he holds deep respect for Austin and wants her story to be told on the House floor. He said moving the bill out of the committee would open the discussion for other members and learn about Austin’s experience. 

“Committee rooms and committees are engaged to get the conversation started and to move the conversation forward,” Blackman said. “I expect to hear conversation on the floor so everyone can speak on this bill.

House Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos, D-Laveen, is also sponsoring legislation that would include explicit protections for sexual orientation and gender identity with HB2364. 

 

Teacher Academy funding advances, adds private universities

If the governor wants any more money for a program covering tuition for students who agree to teach in the state, then Republicans say she has to loop in private universities. 

Gov. Katie Hobbs’ executive budget proposed a $15 million one-time allocation to the Arizona Teachers Academy. A proposal from Rep. Matt Gress, R-Scottsdale, counters with $10 million to the program, with the caveat that students attending private universities can access tuition assistance, too. 

“I’ve seen these budgets come and go, and what is pretty clear to me is that this side of the aisle is in favor of funding the Teachers Academy with the proviso that we make some changes to the academy and expand it to private post-secondary education,” Gress said. “I would just say to my friends on the other side of the aisle that this will be a key factor in getting the governor’s $15 million.”

Christian Slater, spokesperson for Hobbs, declined to comment on whether the governor would entertain adding private universities to the list of ATA recipients.

The Arizona Teachers Academy is a state-funded year-to-year scholarship which requires recipients to commit to teaching in a district or charter school in Arizona for each year they receive funds. 

Created in FY2018, ATA has served as a salve for public schools running into difficulties recruiting and retaining educators. 

Both Gress and Hobbs pitched another infusion of dollars into student scholarships this session – but whether the inclusion of a private university could come as part and parcel of an appropriation in the final budget remains an open question. 

Participants now include the state’s three universities, Pima Community College, Maricopa Community Colleges and Central Arizona College. 

House Bill 2018, sponsored by Gress and advanced by the House Education Committee on Jan. 21 and the House Appropriations Committee on Jan. 22, would loop in the state’s private universities, with a requirement the scholarship provided to private school students stays below the average in-state tuition and fees charged by public universities. 

The base tuition for GCU students hovers around $16,500, compared to in-state tuition at public universities, which hovered between $11,000 to $12,000 in 2024-25. 

At least two private universities, Grand Canyon University and Arizona Christian University, offer teaching courses in the state, though the legislation chiefly targets GCU, with Gress dubbing them the “big dog.” 

GCU’s College of Education Dean Meredith Critchfield told lawmakers the school had graduated 600 education students last year and said the university is seeing anywhere from 70% to 90% of students staying in state, with 75% to 90% of students teaching in public schools. 

Critchfield said GCU works with students to mitigate costs, with the university receiving just under $400,000 from the Arizona Teacher Student Loan Program, but is looking to further mitigate financial barriers. 

The bill comes with a $10 million appropriation in tow. 

In the House Education Committee hearing, representatives from the Arizona Board of Regents, Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University, University of Arizona, Maricopa Community Colleges and Pima Community Colleges gave an overview on their respective ATA programs. 

ABOR administers the program and reported a total of 3,330 students in FY2024, compared to 2,400 students in FY2020. 

Since its inception, the program has seen a steady yearly allocation of about $15 million. In FY2024, it jumped to $30 million, but then returned to $15 million in FY2025. 

Brad Kendricks, vice president for finance strategy and governance at ABOR, said funding is typically prioritized for students already enrolled in the program. 

“These are not one-year scholarships, while they are awarded on a one-year basis but we have students who are really relying on this funding to be available for the entirety of their two-year graduate program or four-year undergraduate program,” Kendricks said. 

When the funding did increase in FY2024, universities did steadily increase the student pipeline, but ABOR directed universities not to spend all the money up front given the need to keep funding students already enrolled. 

According to ABOR’s annual report on ATA, in FY2024, the average scholarship was $7,198, with a total of 3,266 students enrolled in the program. 

Kendricks said if the funding level continues at the status quo, ABOR anticipates reducing the number of students entering the program by 36% in FY2026 and 53% in FY2027 to ensure a sustained support of students. 

Universities reported varying waitlists.

Carole Basile, dean of ASU’s Mary Lou Fulton College for Teaching and Learning Innovation, said ASU has 589 students on the waitlist. NAU had a wait list ranging from 70 to 100 students last year and had held off on recruiting given unknown funding. UofA similarly set a waitlist at zero. 

Gress said he estimated just shy of half of the appropriation would go toward remedying waitlists at participating colleges and universities, with the remainder going to qualifying private universities. 

The bill passed both House Education and House Appropriation, though with some pushback from Democrats. 

Rep. Lorena Austin, D-Mesa, said despite additional appropriations, the measure would still “siphon funds away from public universities,” and noted, too, the cuts to university budgets in recent sessions. In FY2025, the state’s public universities lost a cumulative $74.5 million.

Rep. Nancy Gutierrez, D-Tucson, said the proposal was like an “ESA voucher for private universities.” 

“If we fully fund the ATA in our public universities, we will boost the amount of teachers that are working in our state,” Gutierrez said.  

Gress still maintains there is enough money to go around.

“We have an urgent crisis in the classroom as we face thousands of vacant teacher positions. Our work to expand the teacher pipeline is needed now more than ever, and Arizona higher education institutions like Grand Canyon University are essential in that effort,” Gress said in a text. “I support the Governor’s $15 million proposal, and our $10 million proposal is more than enough to cover the waitlist of public universities and offer students attending private postsecondary institutions an opportunity to participate as well.” 

 

Republican schools chief opposed to Trump immigration directive

The state’s top education official is opposed to a new Trump administration directive allowing immigration officials to pursue those not here legally in schools.

“People would stop sending their kids to school,” Tom Horne told Capitol Media Services, saying they or their parents might be afraid. Anyway, he said, even if a child was brought to this country illegally, “it’s not their fault.”

What it also would do, Horne said, is undermine a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court ruling which concluded the state cannot refuse to educate children regardless of the legal status of the parents or the students themselves.

On Tuesday, Benjamine Huffman, named by Trump as acting director at the Department of Homeland Security, voided a 2021 policy enacted by the agency’s prior director that made enforcement of immigration laws off limits in certain “sensitive locations.” These included health care facilities, religious institutions, playgrounds and schools.

“Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” said an agency spokesman in prepared comments. “The Trump administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense.”

And this comes on the heels of Trump’s separate executive order directing federal agencies to no longer recognize birthright citizenship, something that, on a prospective basis, would deny legal status to the children of those not here legally and making them subject to arrest and deportation themselves.

Horne said he’s not convinced that, despite the new directive, that agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement will now start showing up at schools.

“If they’re going to arrest anybody, it’s the parents, not the kids,” he said.

But Horne, a Republican like Trump, said it’s not good policy. Still, he said that there may be little that schools can do if ICE agents show up at their doors.

“I don’t know how they would stop them if they wanted to go in,” he said.

“There’s a supremacy clause in the Constitution,” he continued. “You don’t want to resist the federal government.”

It’s not just Horne who believes that having immigration agents showing up at schools is a bad idea.

“The attorney general disagrees that ICE should be operating on school campuses, let alone hospitals or churches,” said Richie Taylor, press aide to Democrat Kris Mayes. “There are myriad other ways that federal immigration law can be enforced without disrupting the work of medical professionals or scaring children who are just trying to receive an education.”

And Taylor, speaking for Mayes, also had no clear advice for what actions school officials can or should take to deal with immigration raids.

“First, consult with their legal counsel before moving forward with anything,” he said. Taylor also said schools should also be “communicating with parents about these possibilities.”

Mayes previously has said she will take on the Trump administration when she believes it is acting in ways that are unconstitutional or illegal. That most recently occurred Tuesday when she joined with other states to oppose the president’s directive to federal agencies to no longer recognize the citizenship of children who are born in the United States to parents who are not here legally.

But Richie said his boss may not pursue a challenge to the new policy allowing ICE raids in places that the Biden administration had considered off limits.

“I think it’s going to depend on how it is enforced,” he said.

Horne said what is crucial in all of this is that 1982 case of Plyler v. Doe about the rights of all children, regardless of legal status, to get a public education.

That stemmed from a 1975 Texas law withholding state funds for the education of those who were not “legally admitted” into the United States. It also authorized local school districts to deny enrollment in their schools to those students.

In that case, the justices said the law runs afoul of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. It says no state shall “deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

“Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is surely a ‘person’ in any ordinary sense of that term,” wrote Justice William Brennan for the majority. “Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as ‘persons’ guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment.”

That ruling, however, didn’t stop some Arizona lawmakers from seeking to provoke a new challenge of their own.

In 2009, then-Sen. Russell Pearce proposed requiring public schools to ask parents to provide documents showing their children are in this country legally.

The Mesa Republican insisted he wasn’t trying to keep those children out of school, at least not initially. Instead, he said, the state was merely trying to get information so it could calculate the cost on Arizona taxpayers.

But Pearce admitted that one goal was to challenge the 1982 Supreme Court ruling.

“To take Plyler v. Doe on, you have to have the data,” he said. Pearce said he believed the Supreme Court might be willing to reconsider once Arizona could show the financial burden.

His measure cleared the Senate Education Committee but died when it was held in the Rules Committee which is supposed to review legislation for constitutionality.

 

 

Get serious about reaching the state education attainment goal

In 2016, seeing the correlation to Arizona’s economic competitiveness, the state set a bipartisan goal for education attainment. Known as Achieve60AZ, the goal calls for 60% of Arizona adults ages 25 to 64 to have a workforce certificate or an associate’s or bachelor’s degree by 2030. 

In the nine years since the goal was passed, Arizona has increased attainment by only 6%, to 48%. With approximately 4.3 million working adults ages 25 to 64 and only five years to go, Arizona will need 500,000 more degrees or certificates than we have today to hit the target. 

Creating those half million additional degrees and credentials should be squarely on the agenda for the executive and legislative branches of Arizona government as well as for Arizona’s business leadership. 

Rich Nickel

The case for doing so is undeniable. Billions to Gain research released by Helios Education Foundation and Education Forward Arizona, shows that:

  • If Arizona increases postsecondary enrollment by 20%, the expected economic gains will exceed $5 billion — each year.
  • Arizona could see nearly $8.7 billion in economic gains if underrepresented groups enrolled and completed education after high school at the same rate as their peers.
  • Higher attainment leads to increased revenue and reduces public expenditures.
  • Individuals benefit through higher earnings, improved health, and greater community contributions.

This is more than just an education issue: Creating more degrees and certifications is fundamental to Arizona’s economic growth and our quality of life.

John Fees

Voters want this too. Indeed, they’re demanding it. Polling from Education Forward Arizona’s Everything to Gain campaign shows strong support for expanding opportunities to education and training: 

  • 95% of Arizona voters support increasing career training programs such as apprenticeships and professional certificates.
  • 93% back the expansion of advanced placement and dual enrollment courses for high school students.
  • 89% favor increasing online education and training programs for working adults, parents, and rural residents.

Still, despite evidence of the benefits of postsecondary education and extremely strong voter support for it, Arizona leaders simply aren’t doing enough to reach the Achieve60AZ goal.

Last week, Gov. Katie Hobbs spoke of reaching “Arizona’s Promise” in her State of the State Address, an ideal she described as the ability to “build a good life for yourself and your family and leave your kids with a better tomorrow.”

But the FY2026 Executive Budget proposal is not ambitious enough to make serious traction in creating the college degrees and workforce certifications needed to generate the economic growth that will put Arizona’s Promise in reach. 

Restoring funding for some of the essential programs decimated in last year’s budget is necessary, but for a budget proposal that mentions the state attainment goal, it is not sufficient to help reach it. To make meaningful progress toward the half million degrees and certificates Arizona needs, investments in programs like dual enrollment and student financial aid must be substantially higher. And, if Arizona is to hit our Achieve60AZ goal by 2030, these investments need to be made now.

Proposed funding for dual enrollment is at only 30% of where it was two years ago and only 20% of what education leaders asked for then. A bedrock strategy in many other states, dual enrollment enables high school students to earn college credit. Data show that dual enrollment can reduce eventual college tuition costs and accelerate degree attainment. Students taking dual enrollment classes in Arizona are twice as likely to attend college. Yet only 24.4% of Arizona high school graduates in 2022 took at least one dual enrollment course. Many more need to. 

Arizona’s first statewide financial aid program (actually titled Arizona Promise) gets a $40 million total request in this year’s budget. That may look like a lot. But in order to fulfill the promise, by making higher education more accessible and affordable for students and families, Arizona must invest hundreds of millions more. Many states do invest hundreds of millions in financial aid, and the top five states each invest more than one billion.

Underfunding effective programs and restoring funding to the inadequate levels some other programs were at two years ago isn’t progress. Substantial investments in postsecondary education and training are required to move Arizona’s economy forward. And new and innovative programs and incentives must be created if the state is serious about meeting workforce demands and achieving Arizona’s economic promise. 

We need more than merely replacing budget cuts of the past. What’s needed in Arizona today is leadership — from the executive and legislative branches and from business — that imagines what can happen when Arizona’s promise is truly fulfilled. We need leadership that commits to high performance at all levels of our education system. We need leadership that provides access to a high-quality education for all students, regardless of zip code. We need leadership that assures accountability. And we need leadership that creates policies and incentives so that all students have access to a path toward a credential that helps fulfill Arizona’s economic growth and their place in it. 

Rich Nickel is president and CEO of Education Forward Arizona. John Fees is co-founder and CEO of NextGen Insurance Group and board chair of Education Forward Arizona. 

Addressing Arizona’s water supply challenges requires common sense, fairness

In the middle of a critical housing crisis, Gov. Katie Hobbs halted the construction of homes in large swaths of Arizona. She did so without legal authority, and based on a deeply inaccurate and flawed claim that Arizona is running out of groundwater. In a state where home affordability ranks among the worst in the country, her action is already having devastating consequences for Arizonans that will only get worse.

Before a subdivision can be approved, the state must issue a certificate showing proof of a 100-year water supply. Since 1980, home builders have proudly adhered to this longstanding policy that for generations has allowed our state’s population to grow while preserving our precious natural resources at the same time. That’s how our state manages to use the same amount of water with 7.5 million residents today as it did 70 years ago when we had fewer than 1.5 million residents. 

Jackson Moll

Citing what the state has called an “unmet demand,” the Hobbs administration now refuses to issue permits for home construction in areas that rely on groundwater for their main water supply. The administration took this drastic action outside of the normal regulatory process in violation of state law, placing an undue burden on both the home building industry and hard-working Arizonans desperate for more affordable housing. It’s one of the most significant bureaucratic overreaches in the history of our state, and it’s why the Goldwater Institute sued the Hobbs administration on behalf of the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona, to protect our state’s ability to conserve its precious natural resources and grow economically for the future.

The Hobbs administration’s Phoenix Active Management Area (AMA) Groundwater Model attempts to show where future development can and cannot occur. Importantly, it shuts down home building in the fastest growing, most affordable areas within the Phoenix market. The lawsuit we’ve filed challenges the lack of a rulemaking process behind the Hobbs administration’s water model, which was completed without following any of the legally required rulemaking procedures that exist to give citizens and regulated businesses the opportunity to comment on proposed rules. This robbed the people of Arizona of any opportunity to evaluate and publicly comment on the assumptions which form the basis for the model. 

Jon Riches

Moreover, the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ concept of “unmet demand” is a term created by the agency that appears nowhere in statute or regulation. It moves the goalposts that previously required applicants to demonstrate “sufficient groundwater for the proposed subdivision.” Without legal authority, the Hobbs administration upended the statutorily mandated process, creating rules that hurt hard-working Arizonans’ ability to buy a home and leaving billions of dollars of stranded investment. 

Arizona law makes clear that these sorts of decisions cannot be made by a bureaucrat with the stroke of a pen. Instead, our elected state lawmakers should properly determine Arizona’s water policy. 

In Arizona, water use regulations are not evenly applied across residential and commercial development. There is a fundamental difference between groundwater used for residential developments and groundwater used by commercial, industrial, or rental buildings. 

For nearly 30 years, home builders have been protecting our groundwater tables by replenishing pumped groundwater. No other industry has put water back into our aquifers to replace the water that is pumped out to the extent of home builders. This sustainable practice ensures a steady supply of affordable homes for Arizona’s hard-working families and protects our groundwater aquifers. The application of the “unmet demand” rule results in home builders being unfairly targeted while other industries are able to mine groundwater without restriction or without having to offset their pumping. 

An illegal halting of the construction of all homes in large swaths of the state is not the answer. Arizona was recently ranked as the ninth-least-affordable state to buy a house in the United States. Buckeye and Queen Creek are two large developments that represent the only affordable communities for many in the greater Phoenix area. Over the last year, median home prices in Queen Creek have risen more than twice as fast as Phoenix, and in Buckeye, they have grown more than three times as fast. Without appropriate action, our housing market will become untenable, reaching a breaking point where a working-class family’s dream of buying a home is no longer attainable. 

The governor and her state agency have acted unlawfully to prevent affordable housing from being built in Arizona. We have an obligation to ensure our water supply is protected, but also a desire to make Arizona the best state to live, work, and raise a family. Governor Hobbs should immediately rescind the unlawful rules that have led to this predicament and ensure that Arizona continues to be a leader on this critical issue.  

Jon Riches is vice president for litigation at the Goldwater Institute. .

Jackson Moll is CEO of the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona. 

Bill would require sheriffs, state prisons to partner with feds on immigration

Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, introduced a bill Tuesday that would require the county sheriff departments throughout the state and the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry to collaborate with the federal government on immigration enforcement.

SB1164, dubbed the Arizona Immigration Cooperation and Enforcement Act (AZ ICE), calls for sheriff departments and the Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry to enter into 287(g) agreements with the federal government by Jan. 1, 2026. 

freedom, Senate, House, tax rebate, families, St. Mary's Food Bank, Republicans
Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert

This would allow law enforcement to identify and process those who enter the country illegally and are in custody for violating laws, according to a press release from Senate Republicans. The law would also call for law enforcement to comply with immigration detainer requests, which would prevent detainees from being released back on the streets. 

“Ending the border crisis requires an all-hands-on-deck approach. This commonsense legislation will not only allow federal and local law enforcement to work together to protect our citizens, but it will also prevent government obstruction,” Petersen said in a prepared statement. “Arizona voters spoke loud and clear last November. They overwhelmingly approved the ‘Secure the Border Act’ that Republicans referred to the ballot because they want the law enforced, and they want safe communities. I look forward to the AZ ICE Act passing the Legislature, and I’m hopeful the Governor will listen to our citizens by signing the bill when it hits her desk.”

The 287(g) program allows state law enforcement agencies to perform functions of federal immigration officers “in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States” so long as it is consistent with local, state and federal law. Law enforcement jurisdictions must enter memoranda of understanding, with attestation in ink that local officers are adequately trained to enforce federal immigration laws. 

Agreements between federal and state law enforcement come in two forms: a Jail Enforcement Model or a Warrant Service Officer. The Jail Enforcement Model allows officers the authority to interrogate any person detained “who the officer believes to be an alien about his or her right to remain in the United States,” as well as serve and execute warrants of arrest and of removal, prepare charging documents, and detain and transport those in custody.

And slightly more limited in scope, the Warrant Service Officer, allows ICE to train state and local law enforcement to execute warrants on noncitizens who have already been flagged by ICE as potentially removable.

Petersen said he doesn’t have any projections yet on how much it will cost to implement the law, but that shouldn’t stop the bill from reaching the governor’s desk. “We do have the resources and will make sure law enforcement has what it needs to enforce the law,” he said in a text message.

The Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry, and the La Paz County Sheriff’s Office, Pinal County Sheriff’s Office, Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office and the Mesa Police Department are already under a Jail Enforcement Model agreement with ICE. The La Paz County Sheriff’s Office has an active WSO agreement, as well.

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office was formerly involved in the 287(g) program, but the U.S. Department of Homeland Security opened an investigation into the program in 2009 following reports of Latino inmates being mistreated in Maricopa County jails.

DHS said the county, under Sheriff Joe Arpaio, was engaging in racial profiling and violating the civil rights of those held in custody.

After a three-year investigation, DHS ended its 287(g) agreement with Maricopa County jails in 2011. 

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office confirmed Tuesday that the agency is still prohibited from enforcing any immigration laws due to a federal court order.

Capitol Times reporters Reagan Priest and Kiera Riley contributed to this report. 

 

Time for leaders to stand with women again in Arizona, support HB2062

The Arizona Legislature passed a bill that would have codified “male” and “female” terms in Arizona state law last year. But Governor Katie Hobbs was the second female governor to veto this common sense, pro-woman legislation. 

That’s why I, Paula Scanlan, am here again in Arizona to share my story and support Rep.  Lisa Fink’s HB 2062. 

As a former NCAA Division 1 swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania, I was forced to not only compete with, but also to undress in the presence of Lia Thomas, a six-foot-four-inch-tall man fully intact with male genitalia. This was not a one-time occurrence. It was 18 times per week. As a sexual assault survivor, I was adversely impacted by having a male in my locker room without my consent. I wish no woman would have to go through an experience like this.

Paula Scanlan

But unfortunately my story is not unique. Arizona champion cyclist Natalie Church was just 17 years old when she was forced to compete against a 40-year-old male. When she expressed concerns, USA Cycling ignored them. 

Without defining sex-based words in Arizona, we can never prevent sex discrimination like this. HB 2062 would legally define sex-based words and help to ensure Arizonan women, like Natalie, have access to single-sex spaces and opportunities, not only in sports, but also prisons, locker rooms, rape crisis centers, and domestic violence shelters. 

Rep. Lisa Fink

With my work at the Protect Arizona Children Coalition, I, Rep. Fink, saw the need for defining common sex-based words, such as “woman” and “female,” used in 107 state statutes, and so I introduced HB 2062. 

If passed into law, this bill would do three common-sense things: define sex-based terms already used in state law, declare the state’s interest in protecting single-sex spaces, and ensure the accuracy of publicly collected data. 

It will help protect women’s hard-earned rights and safeguard female opportunities and private spaces from attack by those who seek to manipulate the definition of words to achieve policies that would never be supported by most Arizonians. 

With the recent bipartisan U.S. House passage of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, it should be easy for Arizona leaders across the aisle to support this common-sense piece of legislation. This passage follows the Federal District Court in Kentucky’s decision to strike down the Biden Administration’s unlawful attempt to redefine “sex” in Title IX to include “gender identity.” The Court’s ruling applies to Arizona, a major win for women and girls. 

Further showcasing momentum, over three-fourths of voters nationwide said preventing men from accessing women’s private spaces, athletics, and educational opportunities was important to them in deciding who to vote for in November. Leaders across the country are starting to take action on this national mandate from the American people. Now Arizona leaders must also stand up for objective truth and preserve the privacy, safety, and equal opportunities of women and girls. 

Stand with Women champions in the Arizona Legislature have already passed this legislation. It’s time to give Governor Hobbs another chance to do the right thing and ensure the 3 million women and girls across the state have equal rights and opportunities. 

Paula Scanlan is a Legislative Liaison at Independent Women (iwv.org) and a former swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania, where she was a teammate of Lia Thomas.

Rep. Lisa Fink represents Legislative District 27.

Legislature should resist new health care mandates and embrace reforms

This time last year, we teamed up to encourage the governor and Legislature to fight new health care mandates and take a hands-off approach to new regulations that would increase costs to employers and hardworking Arizonans. 

Danny Seiden (Photo by Jennifer Stewart)

For the most part, the Legislature did just that, making incremental changes to improve the health care delivery system in Arizona without burdening providers, job creators, and families. We wrote last year in response to public remarks that signaled a desire to make dramatic changes in the marketplace that inevitably increase prices. We have all felt the impact of inflation and market-driven cost increases to insurance, so it was critical that our lawmakers not exacerbate the problem.

As we begin the 2025 legislative session and assess the economic environment, Arizona is arguably better positioned to continue its employment growth and capital investment than at any other point in state history. Leadership throughout the years laid the groundwork with aggressive policies to attract new companies and grow existing businesses, which has led to historic growth in our manufacturing sector, the diversification of industry, and explosive investment in chip manufacturing in Arizona.

Todd Sanders

The success we have enjoyed is not accidental, nor is it guaranteed. Legislators and the governor must be careful not to follow the misguided path other states have taken in overregulating the health care marketplace, increasing insurance costs, and negatively impacting overall affordability. 

We have watched other states attack ERISA protections, which are federal minimum standards for private sector health plans. ERISA standards historically impacted unions the most, but they have an equal consequence for self-insured businesses of all sizes.

Additionally, new mandates on select sectors of the healthcare delivery system will drive up costs for employers, employees, and families. Mandates in one sector of health care ripple throughout the entire system.

We encourage lawmakers to take a thoughtful look at all legislation that will directly impact the health care delivery system. Let’s learn from the mistakes of our neighboring states – and even those a coast away and remember that government is best and most effective when it intervenes with a light touch, if at all. Let’s resist new mandates and embrace reforms that will benefit everyone and improve the overall delivery of health care in Arizona. 

Danny Seiden is the executive director of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Todd Sanders is the executive director of the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce. 

 

Arizona’s looming wildfire threat: a call for immediate action

As wildfires devastate the Los Angeles region, leaving thousands of structures destroyed and countless lives altered, Arizonans must confront an uncomfortable truth: we could face a similar catastrophe, and our risk increases yearly.

The threat isn’t limited to remote wilderness. Across Arizona, communities have expanded into wildland-urban interfaces (WUIs)—areas where residential development meets natural landscapes. These regions, including Scottsdale, Fountain Hills, Goodyear, and Cave Creek, contain dense vegetation that becomes dangerous fuel during prolonged droughts and extreme heat. Population growth and strong winds further complicate both prevention and emergency response efforts.

Despite these escalating risks, Arizona remains dangerously unprepared for a large-scale wildfire. Our emergency response capabilities fall far short of national standards. While fire services should respond within four minutes 90% of the time, Phoenix’s average response time is more than nine minutes – double that benchmark—an unacceptable delay when seconds can mean the difference between life and death. Rural areas, where fire districts have been plagued for years by underfunding and understaffing, often face far longer delays, with response times to emergency often in excess of an hour or more.

The state’s chronic underinvestment in fire services reached a critical juncture in 2022 when voters rejected Proposition 310, a sales tax proposal meant to create stable funding for fire districts. This defeat left more than 140 fire districts statewide struggling to maintain basic services. The consequences have been severe: station closures, worsening personnel shortages, and compromised emergency response capabilities. This crisis affects everyone—when districts can’t respond, neighboring municipalities must step in, straining the entire emergency response system.

Our political leadership has long acknowledged these challenges but has failed to implement meaningful solutions. As a career firefighter and the President of the state fire fighters association, which represents more than 8,000 first responders, I’ve repeatedly joined other fire service representatives in urging the legislature to address these systemic funding shortfalls. Their inaction leaves Arizona communities increasingly vulnerable to catastrophic wildfires.

Recent events highlight these dangers. The 2020 East Desert and Ocotillo fires nearly devastated Cave Creek, and only coordinated efforts from multiple departments prevented widespread destruction. Since then, Arizona’s population growth has increased demand for emergency services, while resources remain stagnant. A similar event today could prove catastrophic.

The threats we face aren’t theoretical. Arizona’s history includes the devastating Rodeo-Chediski Fire of 2002, which consumed nearly half a million acres, and the tragic Yarnell Hill Fire of 2013, which claimed the lives of 19 members of the Granite Mountain Hotshots crew. These events demonstrate the terrible cost of inadequate resources and preparation.

To protect our communities, Arizona must prioritize investment in fire service infrastructure. This means reconsidering the objectives of Prop 310 and exploring new funding models that can sustain both fire districts and municipal departments. Public safety cannot be treated as a discretionary expense or a budget item to be minimized. The cost of inaction isn’t just economic—it’s measured in lives disrupted or lost.

As firefighters, we’re problem solvers, responding to every call for help despite personal risk. Arizona’s political leaders must now demonstrate similar dedication to protecting public safety. We’ve spent years discussing these challenges; now we need action. Without immediate steps to strengthen our fire services, Arizona remains unnecessarily vulnerable to a catastrophic wildfire that could mirror or exceed the devastation we’re witnessing in California.

The time for studies, committees, and deliberation has passed. Arizona needs immediate, concrete action to protect its communities from the growing wildfire threat. Our state’s safety depends on it.

A Goodyear fire fighter since 2007, Dan Freiberg is the President of the 8,000-member Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona.

You don't have credit card details available. You will be redirected to update payment method page. Click OK to continue.