Key Points: 

• Special session could resolve ESA ballot measure standoff before November

• Proposed compromise swaps reforms for withdrawal of ballot measures 

• Lawsuit aims to shield ESA reform measure from referral voiding the act

A rumored special session could cut through a controversial ballot measure attempting to reform the Empowerment Scholarship Account program.

After a failed attempt before sine die, lawmakers are once again contemplating passing a modest package of reforms in exchange for the elimination of the Protect Education Act, a ballot measure proposing stricter guardrails on enrollment, account balances and academic oversight.

As part of negotiations, the Republican majority would supposedly back-pedal on three legislative referrals.

House Concurrent Resolution 2048 voids the Protect Education Act. House Concurrent Resolution 2040 limits the abilities of educators to participate in unions and Senate Concurrent Resolution 1032 dictates and restricts school district spending.

But to bring lawmakers back to the chamber floor, Gov. Katie Hobbs would have to call a special session or the Legislature would have to agree to reconvene with a three-fourths vote.

As of June 25, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle were still negotiating the contours of a supposed deal and the prospects of a special session.

But in a press conference June 25, Hobbs noted that, even though she was not privy to the ongoing conversations around the ESA deal, she was open to the idea.

“If we can get to a solution that addresses the concerns, then that is a tool that’s on the table,” Hobbs said.

The Legislature already attempted this deal once.

After negotiations between Republican leadership, the Arizona Education Association and school choice groups during the last week of session, lawmakers put a last minute measure on the board.

As introduced, the proposal would have explicitly banned the purchase of luxury items, require background checks and fingerprints for ESA educators and restrict the amount of money a participant could stockpile in their account.

The bill would have also added 15 more full time employees to the Arizona Department of Education to administer the ESA program.

If passed, the AEA agreed to cut the Protect Education Act from the ballot.

The voter initiative, spearheaded by AEA and Save Our Schools Arizona, would restrict enrollment in the program to households making less than $150,000, prohibit luxury purchases, enact more stringent safety requirements for tutors, educators and private schools, require academic testing and sweep all unused funds sitting in ESA accounts back to public schools.

For lawmakers’ part, the Republican majority agreed not to move forward with HCR2040 and SCR1032.

While AEA took the lead on negotiations, SOSAZ, its initiative partner, stood in staunch opposition. Organizers showed up to the Senate gallery donning red shirts as lawmakers took up the measure.

Democrats voted against the bill, and opposition from Senate President Warren Petersen and chair of the Arizona Freedom Caucus Sen. Jake Hoffman put a final nail in the coffin.

After the deal failed, the majority went on the offense.

Republican lawmakers passed HCR2040 and SCR1032.

Lawmakers also advanced a proposal via strike-everything amendment to prohibit scholarship confiscation from military families. The fine print voided any ballot measure in violation of the act, effectively dooming the Protect Education Act if passed.

Now, all four measures are on the table. On June 24, special session rumors started making the rounds.

School choice groups pressured legislative leadership and lawmakers to act.

The Center for Arizona Policy called the deal “the best chance to ensure that more than 102,000 ESA students continue to thrive in learning environments that meet their educational needs.” The Arizona Christian Education Coalition prodded its supporters to reach out to their lawmakers and voice support for a special session.

The Arizona Police Association put its weight behind a special session, too, amid fears HCR2040 would inadvertently decimate the organizing powers of police and fire unions.

In letters to Hobbs, Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro, Joe McClure, executive director of the Arizona Police Association, urged repeal.

“Matters of public safety should never be a partisan topic or be used as a political pawn,” McClure wrote.

Montenegro showed early signs of support.

“We’ve worked too hard for too many years, giving parents greater choices and opportunities. Together we will save school choice in Arizona,” Montenegro wrote in a post on X.

But the majority is not unified, as Hoffman once again expressed his distaste for any deal.

“Establishment House Republicans will be handing Hobbs her crowning achievement,” Hoffman wrote. “Establishment House Republicans will energize the Democrat base, while infuriating our own base and depressing turnout in November.”

Tommy Schultz, chief operating officer of American Federation for Children, a national school choice group involved in the first ESA deal, claimed Hoffman was “willing to risk kicking 100,000 kids off of Arizona’s biggest school choice program – all while giving the unions a MASSIVE turnout machine in November.”

A spokesperson for AEA said the group was monitoring discussions at the capitol but declined to comment on involvement in negotiations. Its partner, SOSAZ, reaffirmed its opposition to any deal and its commitment to see the ballot measure through.

“Republicans are terrified of the Protect Education Act. They know Arizona voters are ready to pass this long-overdue voucher reform in November, so politicians are doing everything they can – including cutting backroom deals – to prevent Protect Education from reaching the ballot,” the organization said in a statement.

Signatures are due to the Secretary of State’s Office on July 2. And if the special session ends up a spectre and all measures head to the ballot, the Protect Education committee is still working to see HCR2048 invalidated by the court.

In a lawsuit filed June 24, the Protect Education, Accountability Now Committee and Save Our Schools Arizona, represented by the Center for Law in the Public Interest, claim the Legislature’s measure to void the voter initiative under the guise of military family protection is unconstitutional.

The complaint alleges the legislative referral violates the state constitutions requirements to submit distinct issues to voters in separate amendments and to reflect the subject matter of an act in its title.

“The result is a single, take-it-or-leave-it ballot question that forces Arizonans to surrender their courts’ remedial authority and to entrench an entire spending program under the guise of safeguarding military families,” attorneys Daniel Adelman and Sambo Dul wrote.