Katie Hobbs | Arizona Capitol Times

Mayes expects ‘pay-to-play’ investigation to wrap before election

PHOENIX — Gov. Katie Hobbs said Tuesday she’s looking forward to the end of Attorney General Kris Mayes’ two-year-long investigation into whether she was involved in a “pay-to-play” scheme.

But the governor still won’t commit to actually sitting down for an interview with Mayes’ investigators about the state’s decision to sharply boost the money it paid to a company housing children in foster care. The company was owned by a major political contributor to Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party.

Mayes, a Democrat like Hobbs, said earlier this week she plans to complete the inquiry into the contract with Sunshine Residential before the November general election.

Mayes confirmed four months ago she had asked the governor to answer questions.

Christian Slater, the governor’s press aide, said at the time that the governor’s office had been in contact with Mayes and was “looking forward to this wrapping up.”

“We are in communication with her,” Hobbs said on Tuesday in response to questions from Capitol Media Services. “I look forward to the conclusion of the investigation.”

The governor also repeated her assertion that she was not involved in the Department of Child Safety’s decision to give back-to-back increases in state payments to Sunshine Residential.

“That is all I have to say on that,” the governor responded.

In 2022, Sunshine gave $100,000 to a committee that was seeking donations for the governor’s 2023 inaugural. Only Arizona Public Service, at $250,000, was a larger contributor.

Nearly $1.7 million was raised for the event, which the governor’s office said ultimately cost $207,000. And under the law at that time, everything not spent on the fundraiser could legally be used for political purposes.

Even before the 2022 election, though, Sunshine contributed $200,000 to the Arizona Democratic Party. And there was another $100,000 donation in 2023.

This is relevant because the state was deciding in 2023 whether to increase the amount of money DCS was paying Sunshine for housing of foster children.

Sunshine initially requested more money from DCS in early 2023. Matthew Stewart, the governor’s first pick to head the agency, rejected that.

The governor withdrew his nomination after it became clear the Senate would not confirm him.

But in May, DCS, now led by former state lawmaker David Lujan, agreed to raise the standard rate from $140 per bed to $195, a 30% increase.

Sunshine said unless it got more money, it would make more of its beds available to the federal government, which was looking for places for immigrant children, according to DCS spokesman Darren DaRonco. He said such a move — the feds were paying $225 — would have meant fewer places for DCS to place its foster children.

Then Sunshine got a new contract boosting its rate to $234.

The Arizona Republic reported that Hobbs and her campaign manager had dined with Simon Koottor and other company leadership as the contract was being finalized. But her office has maintained she never influenced the contracting decision.

Mayes opened her probe in June 2024.

The attorney general was asked earlier this week whether, in refusing to answer questions, Hobbs had decided to ignore the investigation.

“The answer is ‘no,’” Mayes responded.

“You cannot blow off the Attorney General’s Office,” she said. “Full stop. No one can.”

But the attorney general also suggested that she will move ahead on the probe — with or without the governor’s cooperation.

“We are going to get the information that we need,” Mayes said.

“When we have a result, we will make an announcement,” she said. “And we are near the end of the investigation.”

Hobbs on Tuesday said she is confident that Mayes’ inquiry “is going to show exactly what the director (Lujan) said, that I was not involved in the decision … and the department acted in the best interests of foster kids in Arizona.”

Despite the governor’s assurances, the probe has resulted in political fallout.

That includes legislation crafted by Sen. T.J. Shope, R-Coolidge, which sought to require anyone seeking a state contract to disclose any money donated to the campaigns of the governor, gubernatorial candidates and any of their committees.

Hobbs vetoed that bill twice calling it a “political stunt” because it was aimed only at candidates for the governor’s office. Shope responded by saying it is the governor’s office and the agencies it oversees that award contracts, not state lawmakers.

Republican gubernatorial hopeful Andy Biggs has keyed in on that.

“Katie Hobbs has shown throughout her term she’s willing to hide donations and veto bills that would shine a light on the contractors and corporations trying to influence her administration,” he said in a statement in June.

The most competitive governor’s races of 2026

In an age of hyperpartisan politics, governors stand apart. Voters see them differently than they view federal candidates: Your governor fixes roads and bridges, funds your local public school, handles issues that don’t break down along the neat lines of party preference.

That makes for a more convoluted set of contested gubernatorial races than the battle for the U.S. House or Senate. A state like Kansas hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since the 1930s — but Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, is finishing up her second term. A state like Vermont is solidly in the Democratic column — but Gov. Phil Scott, a Republican, is so popular he didn’t even need to run television ads in his last election.

Governor’s races are also unique because it’s exceptionally rare for an incumbent to lose. In fact, it’s getting harder to do so: Re-election rates for incumbent governors have grown to more than 95% in the last two decades, well above those of members of Congress.

This year, only two incumbents make our list of the most competitive races. Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, is seeking re-election in the swing state President Donald Trump carried by the widest margin in 2024. Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, a Republican who pulled off the rare feat of beating a sitting governor four years ago, faces a well-known attorney general.

The seven other most-competitive races are for open seats, in which incumbents are either retiring or term-limited. Both parties say they are confident their candidates can sweep the board in November.

“Republican governors dominate rankings for wage growth, job creation, affordability and lower energy costs. Meanwhile, Democrat states are riddled with fraud, out-of-control spending and rising crime,” said Kollin Crompton, communications director at the Republican Governors Association. “It’s clear to Americans what’s at stake this election: It’s commonsense versus crazy. If you want your family to thrive and succeed, elect a Republican governor.”

“In battleground and red state races for governor this year, Democratic candidates are going on offense on the economy and running on plans to lower costs, while forcing their Republican opponents to own the rising cost of groceries, gas, and utility bills, along with major health care cuts,” said Sam Newton, communications director at the Democratic Governors Association.

“Republicans’ close alignment with Donald Trump and the disastrous policies coming out of DC are going to be an especially massive liability for their campaigns. There’s no doubt we have the momentum, but the stakes have never been higher so we’re keeping our foot on the gas to win key flip opportunities like Georgia, Ohio, Nevada and Iowa — and have the winning record to get it done.”

Here are our ratings of the nine most competitive races of the year, in alphabetical order:

ALASKA

The combination of a massive field of candidates and Alaska’s unique primary system — in which the top four candidates advance to a November showdown, regardless of party — make this race the most unpredictable in the nation. Seventeen candidates have filed to run, and while not all of them will formally qualify, that’s still a crowded ballot. At least one candidate, former Democratic state Rep. Jonathan “JKT” Kreiss-Tomkins, is airing ads on television. But, in a measure of how weird this race is, he’s not even the only candidate known by an acronym in the race: Former Angoon City Councilman James “JP4” Parkin IV, a Republican, is also running.

Rating: Tossup

ARIZONA

Gov. Katie Hobbs is the most endangered incumbent Democrat running for re-election. Hobbs won election in 2022 against Kari Lake, the election-denialist Donald Trump ally who proved a flawed candidate, to be generous, by less than a percentage point. Working in her favor: She faces another election-denialist Trump ally in U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs, who has the added baggage of being associated with Washington, D.C. Working in Biggs’s favor: Trump carried the state by nearly 6 points in 2024, his largest winning margin of any swing state.

Rating: Lean Democrat

GEORGIA

Six months ago, Rick Jackson was known in Republican political circles as a big-dollar donor, and that’s it. Today, after dumping $100 million into his first campaign for office, he’s the Republican nominee for governor, beating out three statewide officeholders to win the nod. He faces former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, who romped through the Democratic primary.

Both parties see this as one of the marquee races of the year. Jackson benefits from a bottomless wallet, and he’ll point to Bottoms’s leadership in Atlanta and tenure in the Biden administration. Bottoms benefits from a favorable environment for Democrats, significant primary turnout, and her tight partnership with U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff, a Democrat running for re-election. Democrats in the state say the two are acting like running mates, and their appeals to different elements of the party’s coalition will help both of them.

Rating: Tossup

IOWA

Both Democrats and Republicans agree there may not be a better candidate running for governor this year than state Auditor Rob Sand, a Democrat who has proven his fundraising chops and his electability in a red state. Sand is the rare Democrat who’s comfortable talking about his faith, love of hunting and connection to his rural roots. He faces investment executive Zach Lahn, the surprise winner of a contested Republican primary. Lahn has his own money, and Iowa hasn’t elected a Democratic governor since Chet Culver won in the 2006 blue wave. The question is whether a similar wave is developing this year — and whether it’s large enough for Sand to overcome Iowa’s increasingly red tilt.

Rating: Tossup

KANSAS

Republicans see Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s exit as their best chance to make a pickup this year. The Republican primary features another showdown between the state’s conservative wing — state Senate President Ty Masterson, who has Trump’s endorsement, and Philip Sarnecki, a wealthy financial executive — and the more moderate wing represented by Insurance Commissioner Vicki Schmidt. Most Republicans see Masterson leading the pack, without running away from the rest of the field.

On the other side, Kelly sees state Sen. Ethan Corson as her heir apparent, though Corson faces fellow Sen. Cindy Holscher and Overland Park Mayor Curt Skoog in the Democratic primary.

Rating: Lean Republican

MICHIGAN

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is cruising to the Democratic nomination over Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson. She’s likely to face U.S. Rep. John James, who won Trump’s endorsement in the GOP primary, though businessman Perry Johnson is spending heavily out of his own pocket. Democrats are optimistic about Benson, all the more so because the Republican primary turned ugly, early. But Michigan is a swing state, and neither party has elected successive governors since William Milliken followed George Romney in 1970.

Rating: Lean Democrat

NEVADA

Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo was the only challenger to defeat an incumbent in 2022, and he’s the most vulnerable Republican up for re-election this year. Lombardo is a Republican more in the vein of George W. Bush than Trump — which helps in a swing state but puts him on the defensive any time he’s asked to contrast himself with the famously sensitive sitting president.

He faces Attorney General Aaron Ford, who won re-election by a wider margin, and with more votes, than Lombardo did on the same ballot. Count on Ford to tie Lombardo to the president and the economy. And expect this to be one of the most competitive races in the country.

Rating: Lean Republican

OHIO

Former state health director Amy Acton has been the surprise of the cycle, proving herself an able fundraiser and the best shot Democrats have had at the governorship in two decades. She faces entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, the former presidential candidate who has dumped millions into his own campaign. Both parties see this as one of the most competitive races of the year. Ramaswamy will have the cash edge in a state that has trended to the right, but his association with the Department of Government Efficiency and his past work as a healthcare executive give Democrats something to target. Polls show a virtually tied race in spite of Ramaswamy’s early advertising blitz.

Rating: Lean Republican

WISCONSIN

Democrats face the potential for a major disaster in the consummate swing state: The party’s leading gubernatorial contender, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, dropped out of the race after discovering her campaign manager allegedly misappropriated the TV ad budget. Republicans are meddling in the primary by boosting state Rep. Francesca Hong, a democratic socialist who many Democrats don’t think can win a statewide race, as “too liberal.”

Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley jumped back in the race with Gov. Tony Evers’s support 10 days after quitting and endorsing Rodriguez. And former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes hasn’t been able to catch fire. Democrats are planning to paint the GOP nominee, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, as a Trump acolyte from swampy Washington. Tiffany couldn’t be more pleased at the infighting he’s seeing on the other side of the aisle.

Rating: Tossup

7 govs have banned state employees from prediction market wagering

Key points:

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs is among seven governors to bad state employees from insider trading on prediction markets
Trump administration employee on unpaid leave for alleged use of inside information
Kalshi has taken action against those deemed to have been wagering with nonpublic info

At least seven governors have banned state employees from using insider information to place bets, as questions around ethics and insider trading continue to hound prediction market operators.

The governors of Arizona, California, Illinois, Maryland, New York, North Carolina and Wisconsin all signed executive orders to ensure no one uses information gleaned from performing their jobs to enrich themselves.

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs’s July 9 order further designates all nonpublic information as confidential.

“All Arizona State executive branch employees are strictly prohibited from disclosing or using any nonpublic information obtained due to their public service to personally profit from, avoid loss from, or assist another person or entity, in profiting or avoiding loss from participation in prediction markets,” Hobbs’s executive order reads.

The moves came before the Commodity Futures Trading Commission investigators reportedly began looking into Gabriel Perez, President Donald Trump teleprompter operator for the past decade, for allegedly using his knowledge of what the president would say to win more than $100,000 on bets on Kalshi.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Perez was placed on unpaid administrative leave. The White House issued a memo in March warning staff against “using nonpublic government information to place wagers.”

Suspicions over government insider trading were raised in January when a Polymarket user appeared to win more than $400,000 by betting that the United States would “invade Venezuela” by Jan. 31. The site refused to pay out the bet, ruling the special operation did not constitute an invasion.

Federal authorities in April arrested a special operations soldier involved in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro for being behind the account. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, Kathy Hochul of New York, Wes Moore of Maryland, Tony Evers of Wisconsin and Hobbs all cited the incident in their executive orders as an example of why a ban was necessary.

That same month, Kalshi announced it had suspended three accounts belonging to congressional candidates that allegedly bet on their own races. They were all fined and banned from the platform for five years. The company previously fined and banned a long-shot candidate for California governor in February for allegedly wagering on his own race.

Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Timmer on Tuesday confirmed in a press release that the policy outlined in Hobbs’s executive order is already in place for state judiciary employees.

Arizona has been in the legal throes with Kalshi, the largest CFTC-regulated prediction market in the United States, since the platform sued the state in March. The Arizona Gaming Commission had sent the company a cease-and-desist order a year prior, but the company preemptively sued after catching wind that the Arizona attorney general was planning to file criminal charges.

The state filed a 20-count criminal indictment against Kalshi on March 17 alleging it was “operating an illegal gambling business” by accepting sports wagers and betting on elections. It was the first time a state filed criminal charges against the platform for violating state gaming laws.

The CFTC later sued the state, arguing it held federal preemption over prediction markets; a federal judge in May sided with the CFTC on the issue of whether the state could bring charges and permanently blocked the state’s criminal case against Kalshi.

Newsom in March became the first governor to ban state employees from participating in insider trading on prediction markets. The order prohibited the use of non-public information for personal profit and expanded the existing statewide insider trading ban for California elected officials to also cover prediction markets.

“Public service should not be a get-rich-quick scheme,” Newsom said in a statement at the time. “At a time when Trump’s Washington is riddled with ethical failures and insider profiteering, California is drawing a bright line: If you serve the public as a political appointee, you serve the public — period. We’re not going to tolerate this kind of corruption in California.”

All but one of the states where an executive order was issued are involved in some form of prediction market litigation. In the one that isn’t, North Carolina, lawmakers passed a provision in the state budget (Senate Bill 257) to formally authorize prediction markets in the state — becoming the first state to do so.

Emma Kinery is a State Affairs national reporter covering state politics and policy out of our Washington, D.C. office. Contact Emma Kineryat ekinery@stateaffairs.comor on X @EmmaKinery.

Hobbs vetoes state contract transparency measure amid GOP ‘pay-to-play’ allegations

Key Points:

Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoes financial disclosure measure
Measure would have required companies to disclose donations to governor and her allies
Hobbs’ veto leaves gaps in laws on contractor donations and transparency

Calling it a “political stunt,” Gov. Katie Hobbs has quashed a financial disclosure measure that was inspired by a state contract controversy within her Department of Child Safety.

The measure crafted by Sen. T.J. Shope would have required any company bidding on state contracts to immediately disclose any donations made to the governor, any campaign committees or inaugural funds, and any entity that “advocates for the election of the governor or for the defeat of an electoral opponent of the governor.” That requirement would extend to a company’s officers, directors and their family members, covering donations made in the prior five years..

The Coolidge Republican first introduced the measure last year after a public disclosure statement proved that Sunshine Residential, which provides group homes to children in the state’s foster care system, had donated $400,000 to Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party. It was later awarded a more than 60% increase for the same services — a rate that ultimately climbed from $140 to $234 per bed.

That led to ongoing investigations of what Shope has called a “pay-to-play” scheme by both Attorney General Kris Mayes and Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell.

The governor made no reference to any of that in her veto message.

“This proposal is a political stunt that applies only to one elected official,” the governor wrote in her veto message. “What we really need is real transparency and accountability for all elected officials, campaigns, and affiliated political committees.”

Shope, for his part, told Capitol Media Services that it is the governor who is playing politics.

The proof, he said, was that the governor, with the help of Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan, sought to add new restrictions about donations from those bidding on state contracts — restrictions that would apply not just to state officials but to lawmakers.

“The Legislature, in and of itself, is not involved in procurement,” Shope said. He said decisions on who gets a contract, the terms of the contract and any amendments are strictly within the purview of the Governor’s Office and the department heads who report to her, making any proposals to add verbiage on donations to legislators a diversion.

Even so, Shope said the veto accomplished something.

The veto, he argued, puts the pay-to-play issue squarely before voters in November.

“It is now truly the proverbial political football in the sense that the voters will get their opportunity to weigh in in November,” Shope said.

Hobbs has been on the political defensive since it was first revealed that Sunshine Residential gave $100,000 to her 2023 inaugural fund. Close to $1.7 million was raised for the event, and everything not spent on the fundraiser can legally be used for political purposes, including Hobbs’ efforts to elect Democrats.

It ultimately turned out that Sunshine, owned by Paradise Valley businessman Simon Kottoor, also gave $300,000 to the Arizona Democratic Party.

All this came as the state was deciding whether to increase the amount of money the Department of Child Safety, run at the time by David Lujan, a Hobbs appointee, was paying Sunshine for out-of-home cases for foster children.

An agency spokesman said Sunshine’s initial bid for more money in 2023 was rejected.

Agency spokesman Darren DaRonco said Sunshine threatened to shift beds to house federal immigrant children unless it received more funding — a move that would have reduced placements for Arizona foster children. DCS agreed, raising the rate from $140 to $195 per bed, then later $234 under a new contract.

Hobbs had already vetoed Shope’s first disclosure bill in 2025, but said earlier this year she would consider the issue if the approach were more comprehensive — including a blanket ban on registered lobbyists covering food, beverages, lodging and speaking engagements for state officials, employees and legislators.

Gubernatorial spokesman Christian Slater said Hobbs agreed to scrap that language after Shope showed no interest in including such a blanket ban in contract disclosure legislation.

But he also acknowledged that Shope is not alone among lawmakers in having no particular desire to cut off lobbyist largesse: Not a single Democrat, including Sundareshan, offered a similar proposal this session.

Sundareshan said there may be a time to discuss such a ban. But not now.

Sundareshan, who noted she relies on her $24,000 lawmaker salary, said she finds herself attending lobbyist receptions to help offset expenses — something, she said, a salary hike approved by voters could change.

Still, she was willing to vote for Shope’s original plan for that five-year lookback disclosure — with some additions.

Most significantly, she wants to outright bar any contribution, gift or other item worth more than $50 to any candidate for legislative or statewide office or political action committee from anyone connected with a bidder from the time a bid is submitted through 90 days after the award of a contract. That, said Slater, is far more comprehensive than simple disclosure.

Shope, however, got the Republican-controlled Senate to reject Sundareshan’s addition.

“I look forward to chatting with the sponsor at a future date,” he said. But Shope conceded he never contacted Sundareshan, instead sticking with his original plan which got through the House — unamended — and sent to the governor where he acknowledged it would be rejected.

So, knowing that his plan was headed for yet another veto, why didn’t he reach out?

“I think that that’s a fair question,” Shope acknowledged Monday. But he said that Sundareshan’s amendment “was also equally a political statement” and not an honest effort to come up with an acceptable plan.

The veto leaves intact the gaps in disclosure law that allowed the Sunshine contract increase to go largely unscrutinized — and hands voters a live issue heading into November.

Veto blitz: Hobbs blocks 88 bills before the weekend

Key Points:

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs vetoes 88 bills passed by GOP-controlled Legislature
Hobbs rejects bills banning Sharia Law and restricting gender transition hormone therapy for minors
Hobbs is still short of her 2025 veto record

Arizonans cited by speed cameras won’t see their fines capped $75.

Teens won’t be able to get a learner’s permit at 15.

There won’t be a new state ban targeting Sharia law.

And there won’t be new restrictions on gender transition hormone therapy for minors.

These are just four of the 88 bills approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature that Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed last Friday. That brings her veto tally up to 151, just short of the 174 vetoes she issued last year.

Whether she has time to break that record is unclear. While the Legislature adjourned a week ago, an aide to the governor said she still has over 40 measures on her desk awaiting action.

Her latest vetoes touch on everything from religious law and immigration to traffic enforcement and teen driving.

Religious laws, bank practices

Among the bills on the governor’s hit list Friday were two measures designed to preclude the use of any religious law in Arizona.

One sponsored by Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, would have specifically barred the use of Sharia Law in Arizona.

Hobbs, in her veto message, noted that the measure had a list of what she called “abhorrent practices” that it would prohibit. That includes honor killings, coerced marriages, female genital mutilation, polygamy, and domestic violence or spousal abuse “that is justified by cultural, religious or family authority.”

Hobbs said those practices are already outlawed under existing federal and state statutes. All this would do, she said, is result in the state defending an unconstitutional measure “that the state of Arizona will lose, costing taxpayers millions of dollars.”

Hobbs also rejected a broader measure that would have made it illegal for judges to rely on any religious sectarian law to influence their decisions.

Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, built in some exceptions, saying it doesn’t apply to any law “based on Anglo-American legal tradition and principles on which the United States was founded. And courts still could recognize “traditional marriage between a man and a woman” performed by a member of the clergy.

“This bill is a solution in search of a problem and therefore unnecessary,” the governor wrote.

Hobbs also rejected several other proposals from Rogers.

One would have made it illegal for banks, credit unions and even check-cashing services to do business with people who are in this country without legal immigration status. It also would have barred financial institutions from sending any money from those same people to other countries, something Rogers said was designed to reduce the number of people in this country without legal status.

Hobbs didn’t address any of that, saying in her veto message that it would impose “additional red tape” on Arizona financial institutions.”

The governor also vetoed a separate Rogers-sponsored measure which would have required the state and all agencies to provide the federal government with any information it wants about people in Arizona who are undocumented.

Photo radar, learner’s permits

Sen. David Gowan’s now-vetoed proposal would have capped fines for speeders at $75, far short of the $200 penalty some cities imposed.

More significantly, it would have barred the Motor Vehicle Division from informing insurance companies of those speed violations. And the citations could not be used as “points” to determine when someone has a license suspended.

The final version of the bill limited the protections solely for those exceeding the posted speed limits on streets and highways. It would not aid motorists who were caught on camera running red lights, speeding in school zones, and who were guilty of criminal speeding, which means traveling more than 20 miles an hour over a posted limit. None of that convinced Hobbs to sign.

“This bill undermines cities’ ability to keep communities safe by making their own decisions about law enforcement policies,” the governor wrote in her rejection letter.

Hobbs also decided that 15 is too young to get a learner’s permit.

Current law requires teens to wait until they are 15 1/2. Rep. Nick Kupper, R-Surprise, said this would give youngsters extra time to practice, including additional required time on the road with parents. But foes still said teens that age lack the required discipline to be safe drivers.

Hobbs agreed, pointing out that the current driving age is already below the recommendation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which suggests waiting until 16.

Nuclear energy and vaccine mandates

Hobbs also said she does not want to override local control when it comes to placing small “modular” nuclear reactors in rural communities.

Supporters said that there is no reason to give county supervisors the power to deny zoning, as these would be going in near large industrial users, presumably data centers. They said it would provide needed economic development in the state’s rural counties.

“Given record power demand growth projections, Arizona must responsibly reduce barriers to developing new energy projects quickly,” Hobbs wrote.

But the governor said while the technology for such modular reactors is “promising,” it is still emerging. And Hobbs also took a swipe at lawmakers for creating special rules citing nuclear reactors but not other forms of energy.

Hobbs also rejected GOP-backed efforts to roll back public-health rules.Also rejected were two bills dealing with vaccinations.

One would have banned state and local governments from requiring vaccinations, masks or other face coverings.

Hobbs said Arizona already has “robust exemptions” to vaccination requirements. That includes allowing opting out of school requirements for medical, religious and even personal reasons.

But she said there’s another issue.

“It’s concerning diseases that were once eliminated are making a comeback in Arizona’s playgrounds and classrooms because of dangerous information,” the governor wrote.

The other bill Hobbs vetoed would have said that businesses cannot refuse to employ or provide services to those who aren’t vaccinated.

Gender transition limitations

Also meeting with the governor’s displeasure were three bills on gender transition.

A 2022 Arizona law, signed by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, already makes gender reassignment surgery on minors illegal.

One bill this year would have enabled minors to file civil suits against those who perform transitions for up to 25 after they reach adults.

Another would have extended that ban on surgery to any form of what proponents call gender-affirming care for minors, including hormone treatments.

And a third would have built on that and said healthcare providers who provide any such care to minors are responsible for the costs of any detransition treatments as well as legal fees and costs.

Hobbs wrapped all three into a single veto, saying that the law against gender reassignment surgery makes the bills “unnecessary.”

Her veto message focused on the existing surgical ban and did not grapple with the bill’s attempt to extend restrictions to hormone therapy.

Hobbs also rejected a proposal by Rep. Rachel Keshel, D-Tucson, to direct the state Board of Education to develop “age appropriate” programs to teach school children about prenatal development. The governor said instructional requirements “should be left to experts, not politicians trying to force mandates on our teachers.”

Other vetoed bills include:

– Barring the state Game and Fish Department from using public monies to transport Mexican wolf pups into Arizona;

– Requiring paid petition circulators for ballot measures to disclose to would-be signers that they are not from Arizona;

– Expanding child neglect statutes to cover women who expose a fetus to prenatal drugs or if a newborn is found to have fetal alcohol syndrome;

– Mandating that ballots have some built-in fraud countermeasures like watermarks, holograms or paper that changes color under heat.

Biggs, Schweikert skip the fireworks in tame GOP governor debate

Key Points:

Two Republican frontrunners largely avoided attacking each other on the debate stage
Congressman Andy Biggs is the clear GOP favorite and emerged unscathed
Congressman David Schweikert maintains he’s the stronger general election candidate

Those tuning in to the Republican gubernatorial primary debate on June 17 expecting to see two frontrunners at each other’s throats likely left disappointed.

Instead, Congressmen Andy Biggs and David Schweikert shared their allotted time courting independent voters, “geeking out” on state budget math and taking shots at incumbent Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs.

Biggs, who entered the race in early 2025, is expected by many to handily defeat Schweikert in the July 21 Republican primary. Polling numbers, political donations and local endorsements have all leaned in Biggs’ favor, and he also nabbed the coveted blessing from President Donald Trump.

Political consultants told the Arizona Capitol Times in a post-debate briefing that Schweikert did not do much to shift those tailwinds in his direction.

“Schweikert seems to be content with second place,” said GOP public relations consultant Barrett Marson.

Schweikert continues to run a campaign that vexes political consultants and dedicated GOP voters. Despite polls suggesting otherwise, the congressman maintains that he is the only Republican in the race who can defeat Hobbs in the Nov. 3 general election, even when pressed on the issue by reporters after the debate.

“I do pretty darn well with independents in one of the toughest congressional districts in America, and have election after election after election,” Schweikert said, referring to the 1st Congressional District in northeast Phoenix and Scottsdale.

Schweikert has lobbed an occasional attack against Biggs, criticizing his relationships with far-right groups and personalities. But he did not come out swinging on the debate the way many expected he might.

“He didn’t swing at all,” Marson said. “Going in, I thought it was going to be a heavyweight bout, I thought it was going to be a little scrappy MMA fight between Schweikert and Biggs, and it wasn’t.”

Schweikert saved his criticism for the end of the debate, instead focusing more on the negative impact of Turning Point USA on Republican politics in Arizona. In contrast, Biggs frequently touts the endorsement of late TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk, and the group’s political action committee has already spent nearly $500,000 to bolster his campaign.

“When you’re wholly owned by Turning Point, and you’ve lost election and lost election and lost election, it puts everything in our future at risk,” Schweikert said in his closing remarks.

After the debate, Biggs told reporters that “TPUSA and I are not what I would call bedfellows,” but acknowledged that they are significant backers of his bid for the Ninth Floor.

Biggs has largely avoided going on the attack against Schweikert, with the exception of the occasional quip teasing his fellow congressman for not having a direct line to the president. During the June 17 debate, Biggs spent more time name-dropping Democrats he has worked alongside in Congress than he did his Republican opponent.

“The fact that Biggs is trying to present himself as a bipartisan moderate means he’s that confident he’s getting out of the primary,” said Democratic consultant Stacy Pearson. “He name-checked (U.S. Rep.) Greg Stanton, (former U.S. Sen.) Kyrsten Sinema, (U.S. Rep.) Hakeem Jeffries. I mean, he went through the who’s who of Democrats.”

Biggs also shed more light on his policy goals, some of which were slightly surprising. He pledged to eliminate tax incentives for data centers, expand Arizona’s already-universal school voucher program and use the state land trust to fund education.

Hobbs secured a three-year moratorium on new data center tax incentives, a compromise that Biggs attributed to legislative Republicans. However, GOP members of the Legislature fought back against repealing the data center tax incentive entirely, arguing it would send the wrong message to investors eyeing the state for development.

All of the candidates on the debate stage, including long-shot contenders Scott Neely and Ken Miceli, expressed uncertainty about the security and efficacy of Arizona’s mail-in voting system. Biggs pledged to sign the “Florida-style” election reform bill introduced by GOP state lawmakers, while Schweikert claimed his deceased mother received ballots in the mail for several years after her death.

Marson and Pearson criticized Citizens Clean Elections’ debate moderators for not asking the candidates about the results of the 2020 elections. In 2021, Biggs voted against certifying Arizona’s election results, which helped elect former President Joe Biden, while Schweikert voted against certifying Pennsylvania’s election results.

Hobbs has not yet committed to debating her eventual Republican opponent after skipping the 2022 debate with then-GOP nominee Kari Lake, citing Lake’s promotion of conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 election. Pearson said Hobbs should skip a debate with Biggs unless he can acknowledge that Biden won in 2020.

“She owes the voters (an) appearance in front of the voters, she doesn’t owe (participation in) a format that allows for him to sidestep questions,” Pearson said. “They weren’t even asked about the (January 6th) insurrection, which I thought was slightly terrifying.”

Marson argued Hobbs would only stand to lose from participating in a debate with Biggs because he would “destroy” her, which is why she likely won’t agree to face off against him.

Mail-in ballots for the July 21 primary election are set to go out to voters on June 24.

New law aims to curb squatting in vacant homes

Key Points:

A new law should stop squatters faster and allow property owners to get them out in about five days
Exact statistics don’t exist for the number of squatter cases per year in Arizona, but law enforcement and real estate agents say it is a problem
The new law does not affect rights and remedies under the state’s landlord and tenant act

Goldilocks won’t be squatting for long in any Arizona homes after a new law takes effect.

Sen. Wendy Rogers made the fairy tale comparison herself at a press conference on June 1 after her Senate Bill 1426 was signed into law by Gov. Katie Hobbs. The new regulations intend to make it easier for property owners to evict squatters faster.

“It’s like Goldilocks and the Three Bears,” she said. “This is when Goldilocks goes into a home, enters the bears’ home without permission when they’re out. She eats their porridge, sits in and breaks their chairs, sleeps in their beds, making her the classic intruder squatter.”

It’s what happened to D’Andrea Turner and her then-husband Keith. D’Andrea had been traveling back and forth to Michigan to take care of her elderly mother and also recovering from surgery after an aneurysm. Keith was a long-haul trucker on the road and when he came back, he discovered squatters in their home.

They tried to remove the squatters, but they kept coming back and eventually, the Turners found out their identities were stolen from documents in their home and their home had been fraudulently sold. Affidavits and forms had been notarized and submitted through Maricopa County and the sale wasn’t stopped until the squatters tried to cash the check in the Turner’s names multiple times but were unsuccessful, according to previous media reports.

Turner said the hardest thing was the identity theft and the property being defrauded, plus losing irreplaceable items in their home, such as photos of her children, a teddy bear and computers. They raised their children and lived in their home for over 12 years, she said.

“I had many tearful nights, many terrible nights because of this,” she said. “As working class people that’s putting our money into mortgages and things that we think is going to sustain us for when we’re done. We buy properties so that we can leave it for generations.”

Turner said she’s grateful to Rogers for getting the bill passed. In the Turners’ case, two people were eventually charged with identity theft, forgery and fraudulent schemes. Despite that progress, the Turners are still sorting out the mess with their insurance company.

“I feel very fortunate that someone heard me. It’s like you’re screaming at the top of a mountain and someone can hear you,” she said. “I feel very confident that the senator heard me and she understands that we, as Arizonans, will not accept this.”

A squatter is different from a trespasser. Whereas trespassers usually leave after they’re told, squatters can use tactics to make it look like they live at the property or create a false lease to try to prove they have a rental agreement.

The law requires the court to issue a writ of restitution immediately after the court signs any judgement against an unauthorized person, according to the bill language. It outlines conditions that constitute an eviction lawsuit, such as an unauthorized person unlawfully occupying the property and the property owner has directed the person to leave. Another condition is the person did not have a prior verbal or written agreement to cohabitate with the property owner at a residential property.

The new law would not apply or modify the rights and remedies available to landlords and tenants as prescribed by the Arizona Residential Landlord Tenant Act. The law will not affect current or former tenants, immediate family members or people who had a verbal or written agreement to live on the property with the owner.

The law will take effect 90 days after it was signed. This was Rogers’ third attempt to get the bill passed. The bill originally came to Rogers from a constituent who is a real estate attorney and told her it’s a prevalent problem.

“Arizona is sending a clear message. Unlawful occupation of someone else’s property will not be tolerated,” Rogers said. “Our border is secure, but we still have nefarious actors inside our country who would perpetuate this on property owners.”

The game changer this year was an early start in collaboration and most notably, the constables’ support, along with realtors, she said, and added she was pleasantly surprised by the amount of bipartisan support the bill received.

“That’s the way we should get stuff done,” she said.

Tim Beaubian, senior director of government affairs at Arizona REALTORS Association, said the bipartisan support of this bill this year shows what an impact this is going to be for the state of Arizona and that private property rights are a bedrock.

The bill passed with wide bipartisan support in both chambers. Sen. Catherine Miranda cast the lone no vote. She said she understood the need to protect homeowners, but she cited homelessness and a lack of support from the state and the city of Phoenix.

“The state isn’t doing enough to help homelessness,” she said. “I’m not willing to attack any efforts that homeless people are trying to make to survive.”

In October 2025, Hobbs announced $13.5 million in grant funding in the Arizona Promise budget to support eviction prevention, homelessness response and referral efforts across Arizona, according to a news release. At that time, it put the Hobbs Administration’s total investment in services to over $150 million.

Constable Scott Blake, who works in the Hassayampa district in northwest Maricopa County, said the new law should help people remove squatters faster.

Currently, the law says people have to go through an eviction process, starting with a five-day notice, Blake said. A court summons and complaint is required, in addition to showing the judge the “lease” and showing it’s illegitimate. After another few days of waiting, the judge can order a writ and then a constable can come and do the eviction. That whole process takes over two weeks.

“The new law shortcuts all of that, you’re going to be able to get into court and say, ok, this person’s going to have to leave and you’re going to get a writ and somebody’s going to come out there and take care of that,” he said. “I think in less than five days you’d be able to remove somebody who is a squatter and unauthorized occupant.”

It will help a small handful of people right now with the possibility of more in the future as things tighten up, he added.

Blake said another trend he has started to see more often is people squatting on vacant, rural land, which is usually owned by the state or a private property owner. Systemic issues like the increased cost of living will likely keep contributing to people looking for places to live, he added.

“I’m not sure that we’ve seen the end of financial difficult times,” he said.

The new law would require a five-day notice to vacate before going to court. If the criteria listed in the law is met, a judge may order the immediate eviction of that tenant, and it gives the property owner a legal hammer too, the spokesperson said.

There’s technically two different types of squatters: ones with an agreement to live at the property for a limited time and those who do not have an agreement with the property owner, a spokesperson for the Maricopa County Justice Courts said. Both types of cases come to justices of the peace.

The second type is what the new law speaks to and is rare. If there is no written, verbal or implied tenancy agreement, the case can come to court, but a judge may dismiss it and say the court has no jurisdiction because there’s no agreement. Then it would be a trespassing issue for the police to write a citation, which is a different court process, they said.

The data on how many squatter cases happen per year in Arizona does not exist because landlords have to deliver a notice to vacate before they go to the courts. The courts don’t track what type of criminal activity or other breach might have triggered an immediate eviction and essentially, it doesn’t matter once the case reaches court, the spokesperson said.

There is a category of evictions called “immediate,” which usually involves a breach of the lease that is not fixable, such as if criminal activity took place. The landlord has to give notice of the breach and may file the court case the same day. If the tenant is found guilty in court a few days later, the judge can order the immediate eviction, which means they have to be out the day following the court appearance.

As for statistics on that type of case, landlords brought 84,805 cases to court and 406 of those were immediate evictions in 2025, but it’s likely few to none of those involved squatters, the spokesperson said.

Say hello to the ‘New’ guy: Comedian aims to shake up Arizona governor’s race

Key Points:

Fictional character New Amato enters Arizona governor’s race
Amato takes aim at real politicians like Gov. Katie Hobbs and Congressman Andy Biggs
Votes for Amato likely won’t count, but real third-party candidates could sway results

In case anyone was worried about a lack of candidates in Arizona’s gubernatorial race, a “New” satirical contender has joined the pack with an offbeat platform and the backing of a “New” party.

New Amato, a businessman based in Lake Havasu City, will join Republican Congressmen Andy Biggs, David Schweikert and No Labels Party candidate Hugh Lytle in challenging Gov. Katie Hobbs this November. Amato has three simple priorities: ending taxes for families and companies, bringing the Seven Wonders of the World to Arizona and shutting down the state’s last Sizzler steakhouse.

“I’ve just grown to love it here. I love the people, I love the climate, and the general energy here,” Amato told the Arizona Capitol Times. “I looked at sort of the problems that the state has been having and realized that some of the great qualities of Lake Havasu that I see every day, we could expand on a statewide level and I’d want to be at the center of that, making that happen.”

Amato said his day one goal will be shutting down the final Sizzler in Flagstaff. He also envisions bringing the Eiffel Tower to Phoenix and the Great Wall of China to the border between Arizona and Mexico. While Biggs supports eliminating the state’s income tax, Amato described it as a “half measure,” saying he wants to get rid of all taxes.

“The two steps we’re going to do as soon as I become governor would be to eliminate nearly all regulations, and then eliminate all taxes on businesses and homes, families, and so that’s going to spur an economic explosion within the state,” he said.

Amato is, of course, not a real candidate, which one might realize after he urges voters to cast their ballot for him in October. He is the fictional creation of comedian Tim Heidecker, known widely for producing the Adult Swim comedy sketch series Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job!, who launched the Amato campaign with a stuttering YouTube video and a typo-laden website on May 27.

Heidecker’s character is part of a web series called “On Cinema,” hosted on the comedian’s own streaming platform, HEI Network.

Amato might be fictional, but that did not stop him from taking shots at his opponents — two real Arizona politicians. In his campaign launch video, Amato calls Hobbs “a joke” before accusing her of being “competent, inpo- incompetent and corrupt.”

In an interview with the Arizona Capitol Times on May 29, Amato went even further by comparing Hobbs and Biggs to barnyard animals while stuttering over or even completely butchering their names.

“I like to say, you’ve got Pigs versus Hogs,” Amato said. “In other words, Andy Piggs versus Deborah-Katie Hobbs, Katie Hoggs, I say. So you have basically the same beast, the same animal, pigs and hogs are very similar, and I am a different breed.”

Hobbs has frequently told reporters that she would welcome any candidate into the race to challenge her in November, though it’s likely that Amato was not the kind of candidate she had in mind.

In his campaign launch video, Amato notes he supports the policies of the “current Republican government candidate Andy Piggs and the woman that’s running,” though it’s unclear whether he’s referring to withdrawn Republican candidate Karrin Taylor Robson or the governor. Nevertheless, Amato argues neither have what it takes to “turn things around and take this state to the next level.”

The campaign video makes no mention of Schweikert, Biggs’ current primary opponent. That exclusion, intentional or otherwise, sums up the impact many Arizona politicos predict Schweikert will have on the governor’s race this year.

Amato also plans to create his own party, the “New Party,” which might inspire a feeling of déjà vu in anyone who has been following the Arizona Independent Party saga.

“I think it’s time for a new voice, a new party, the New Party,” Amato said in his campaign video. “As head of the New Party, I will be running for governor as a third party candidate under the New Party banner.”

Amato seemed uninterested in discussing other third party candidates in the race, like Lytle, who will appear on the No Labels Party ballot line following a lengthy court case over the party’s name earlier this spring. He told the Arizona Capitol Times that he’s been too focused on his own write-in campaign.

In all seriousness, third party candidates could play an outsized role in this year’s gubernatorial contest, a fact that both major party candidates acknowledge. In a memo sent to reporters, Hobbs’ campaign manager Nicole DeMont wrote that the campaign is not resting on its laurels despite polling showing the governor slightly ahead of both Republican contenders.

“While most polling tests Hobbs versus Biggs, they will be joined on the November ballot by No Labels and Green Party candidates,” DeMont wrote. “Arizona statewide races often come down to just a few hundred or few thousand votes, so even a small percentage of votes for a third party cannot be ignored and injects a degree of uncertainty into polling.”

An early May survey conducted by Noble Predictive Insights shows third party candidates could pull up to 6 or 7% of the vote from the Republican and Democratic candidates. Lytle supporters make up most of those numbers, with only around 1% of voters saying they would vote for another third party candidate.

Political consultants agree that third party candidates are more likely to pull votes from a Democratic candidate like Hobbs, given that Republicans still have a slight voter registration advantage over both Democrats and independents in the state. Hobbs’ campaign seems acutely aware of that fact, given that attorneys with ties to the governor aided legal challenges to the candidacies of Lytle and Green Party contender Risa Lombardo.

Election officials seem to agree that it is unlikely that Amato’s fictional campaign will have a real impact on Arizona’s gubernatorial race. Amato is encouraging voters to write him in on their ballots, but according to the Secretary of State’s Office, those votes can only be counted if Amato is registered as a write-in candidate.

After seeing Amato’s video, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes took to social media to encourage voters seeking accurate information about the elections to visit arizona.vote.

“I enjoy a good joke as much as the next guy does, but elections in all reality are not a laughing matter,” Fontes said.

The filing period for write-in candidates who hope to appear on the general election ballot opens June 6 and ends Sept. 4, so it’s unclear whether Amato will make a bid for an official appearance. If he does, it’s likely that any write-in votes would be disqualified considering Amato said he has only lived in “Lake Hasafoo” since January and gubernatorial candidates are required to have been Arizona residents for at least five years.

And, at the end of the day, it’s unlikely that Arizona election officials will be able to count votes cast for a fictional character.

Supporters maintain pressure for prison oversight appropriation

Key Points:

Lawmakers push funding for prison oversight office passed into law last year
Advocates cite receivership, violence, worsening conditions in state prisons
Budget negotiations could bring funding, but advocates brace to look elsewhere

Lawmakers and advocates are waiting to see whether the allegedly incoming bipartisan budget will include $1.5 million to actualize an oversight office to monitor state prisons.

So far, the line item has been absent from every budget proposal from Gov. Katie Hobbs and the Legislature.

And though the original legislation did include a provision allowing the office to rely on alternative funding sources, proponents hope the state prioritizes prison oversight, citing an ongoing line of complaints from staff, inmates and their families.

“When you are basically a ward of the state, you should be making sure that things are moving pretty fluidly inside the prison walls and not having fights breaking out, people getting murdered,” Sen. Shawnna Bolick, R-Phoenix, said. “The issue is not going away.”

Senate Bill 1507, sponsored by Bolick last session, created the Independent Correctional Oversight Office.

It passed with bipartisan support and was signed into law by the governor in July but lacked any funding from the state budget to get started.

Under the legislation, the office would be led by a director, appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

The office is tasked with keeping a close eye on the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry, with obligations to monitor conditions of confinement, ensure compliance with state and federal regulations, provide information to inmates, family members or department employees and man a hotline and a complaint system.

Each year the office would also have to transmit a report detailing data on complaints received and resolved, inmate deaths, suicides, assaults, drug overdoses, lockdowns, housing assignments, and information on inmate classification policies, staffing statistics and transition and reentry programs.

Staff would also have near-unfettered access to department records and facilities, though all communications with the department are deemed confidential.

Though the office was left unfunded last year, Bolick said she added in a provision in the final language allowing for the corrections oversight fund to consist of legislative funds, federal funding, private grants, gifts and contributions, fearing funding from the state would fall through.

“We got the bills through, and it got signed,” Bolick said. “But it’s on paper only. It doesn’t actually do anything.”

This session, allocating money for the office emerged as an early priority for Bolick and Rep. Walt Blackman, R-Snowflake, who both introduced appropriation bills to funnel $1.5 million to fund the office.

Blackman and Bolick’s bills passed their respective chambers unanimously, but the appropriation has made little legitimate headway in proposed budgets so far.

Hobbs omitted the $1.5 million from her executive budget proposal unveiled at the start of the session, but at a Joint Appropriations Committee meeting in January, budget director Ben Henderson said the governor was open to a conversation “about how to make sure there’s funding for that office.”

The Legislature’s budget, vetoed by Hobbs in early May, skipped funding the office too.

Estrella Lopez, senior state policy manager for Justice Action Network, a criminal justice group that lobbied for the oversight office’s passage, acknowledged the fiscal landscape has become more difficult this year given the limited state coffers.

She compared the corrections budget and ongoing costs accrued from lawsuits to the $1.5 million funding request.

“You can find $1.5 million when you’re talking about a $1.6 billion budget,” Lopez said. “I don’t want to say it’s change in the couch cushions. But if you look at the scale of it, kind of.”

If the office is not funded in the state budget this year, advocates remain hopeful in sourcing funds from elsewhere.

Bolick said she had spoken to a few groups and sensed some appetite for nonprofits to pool resources. Lopez added, however, that stakeholders have not been actively pursuing funds thus far.

“The fact that it hasn’t been in any of the versions so far, I’m not taking that as an indication that all parties won’t come together and fund this important issue,” Lopez said. “We do still have a hope and expectation that the state will find it in this budget, that would be the best place for it.”

At bottom, though, lawmakers and advocates stress the continued need for independent oversight.

Bolick said she continues to get emails and letters detailing issues inside the state prison system. Lopez pointed to a federal judge’s decision to order the department’s health care system under receivership.

John Fabricius, executive director of Praxis Initiative, longtime advocate for oversight and former inmate, pointed to the problems entrenched in the department.

“It is not a rehabilitative engine. It is a mess, and it is a morass that you have to navigate and survive, and it is getting exponentially worse,” Fabricius said. “We can’t kick the can down the road anymore, we’re out of road.”

And though he too hopes for funding in the budget, he voiced a commitment to getting the office running in any case.

“It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when,” Fabricius said.

Can state election officials still exercise their free speech rights?

Key Points:

Arizona election officials may face conflict of interest concerns
Secretary Adrian Fontes endorses candidate who filed campaign finance complaint
Arizona law does not bar election officials from endorsing candidates

A campaign finance complaint filed with the Arizona Secretary of State has unwittingly provoked a perennial election question in Arizona: Can state officials carry out their election duties while also exercising their free speech rights?

To Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, who has endorsed the candidate making the complaint, the answer is simple.

“I can chew gum and walk at the same time,” said Fontes, a Democrat who is backing fellow veteran Dan Toporek in a contested legislative district in north Phoenix. “I’m a voter, too, and I have a First Amendment right to express myself.”

There is no clear answer to the possible conflict of interest. Arizona law doesn’t bar endorsements or block an election official’s management and oversight of elections when they themselves are on the ballot.

The National Association of Secretaries of State had a similar assessment when looking at conflict of interest policies nationwide.

However, a recent Utah state law requires election officials to take steps to avoid potential conflicts, said John Milhofer, research director for the association. And, he noted, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who is now running for governor, has said she would formally recuse herself from actions that would affect the gubernatorial race.

While there are guidelines and codes of conduct, in Arizona and elsewhere, it often comes down to the official’s own discretion, said Tammy Patrick, chief executive officer for programs with the Election Center, which is run by the National Association of Election Officials.

“These types of questions arise and surface when we start to talk about our election infrastructure,” Patrick said.

The questions are not new.

In 2000, the issue became a national hotpoint when then-Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris oversaw the contentious recount of Florida’s presidential election results, and certified George W. Bush as the winner of that state’s votes. Harris also was co-chair of Bush’s campaign in Florida.

Four years ago, then-Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs also faced questions about her ability to oversee the 2022 election, given she was running for governor. Hobbs did not recuse herself and said she would follow ethical guidelines to keep her political ambitions separate from her formal duties.

She followed in the footsteps of her predecessors in the secretary’s office, who continued their work as secretary of state even while their name was on the ballot. They include Jan Brewer, who was re-elected to the state’s top election office in 2006; Ken Bennett in 2010 and Michele Reagan in 2018, who lost in the primary election that year.

Fontes said he is tending to his secretary duties in the upcoming primary and general elections as he seeks a second term.

“No secretary has ever recused for that purpose and that won’t start now,” he said.

It’s similar to what he did in 2020, when he served as Maricopa County recorder.

He was on the 2020 ballot as a candidate, seeking re-election. He lost that race and stepped down, a point Fontes’ supporters say indicates he did not use his post for his own political benefit.

Gina Swoboda, who is running for the Republican nomination for secretary of state this year, said the public doesn’t grasp the fairly limited role the secretary of state plays in elections. The secretary does not run elections; that is done by each of the 15 county recorders. The secretary has an oversight role and is required to certify election results.

“I think there’s a perception these leadership roles have more power than they do,” she said.

That said, if elected, Swoboda said she would refrain from participating in the logic and accuracy tests that are done on ballot-counting machines, arguing it’s not a good look. And she would seek legislative scrutiny of any other “significant” changes to the state’s Elections Procedures Manual that could affect the secretary of state race.

Her Republican challenger, state Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, did not return requests for comment.

The focus on the secretary’s office often obscures scrutiny of conflict issues at the county and local levels, where the elected officials actually run elections.

“That can be a particular issue in rural counties, where there aren’t big staffs,” said Patrick, of the Election Center.

If the elected official running the office has a conflict, who handles the work, she asked. She cited a 2022 report from Reed College in Portland that found 34% of election offices nationwide have no full-time staff dedicated to elections.

The Election Center has suggested standards for dealing with conflict issues, encouraging election officials to create guardrails to guide situations where they are on the ballot. Recusal from decisions that directly impact their own race should be one of those guardrails, “to the extent feasible,” according to the center’s report.

Another organization that is working to reduce partisanship in elections has suggested that election officials take a cue from the judiciary when it comes to dealing with potential conflicts.

Federal law, as well as many state and local laws, require judges to recuse themselves in potential conflict situations.

“Election officials are enough like judges that recusal guidelines should at least exist for elections,” the Election Reformers Network stated in a 2024 report.

Patrick said the issue of endorsements is less clear cut than oversight of elections. Elected officials have a First Amendment right to support the candidates of their choosing, but it can create the perception of a conflict.

Fontes said his office is set up so that issues such as the campaign-finance complaint filed by the candidate he endorsed won’t even get to his desk. He had not even seen it, he said on May 15, as his staff is still reviewing it to determine if there is reasonable cause to forward it to the state attorney general for investigation.

“We’re operating under this basic understanding that if there is a political matter, I’m not involved,” Fontes said in an interview. Any decision, if needed, would fall to the assistant secretary of state, he said.

Senate solidifies National Guard leadership despite concerns over combat experience

Key Points:

Arizona Senate confirms Gov. Katie Hobbs’ pick for National Guard head
John Conley’s selection sparks debate over his lack of combat experience
Conley’s tenure as adjutant general may be limited to the governor’s term

The state Senate voted Monday to confirm Gov. Katie Hobbs’ appointee to head the Arizona National Guard.

The approval came despite objections from Sen. Wendy Rogers, a veteran, who pointed out that John Conley has no combat experience. In fact, the Flagstaff Republican said, he’s never actually commanded any troops anywhere.

Rogers did not dispute that Kerry Muehlenbeck, Conley’s predecessor, was also a lawyer, just like Conley, and also had never led combat troops.

But she said that might have been fine, not only when Ducey appointed Muehlenbeck in 2021 but last year when Hobbs tapped Conley to replace her. Now, she said, everything has changed.

“We’re at war now,” Rogers said.

“And this Arizona National Guard is not a weekend paper-shuffling, coffee drinking entity,” she said. “It is a combat unit that can be deployed to combat.”

But Rogers was unable to convince even a majority of her Republican colleagues that Conley’s background and lack of command experience disqualified him from having purview over more than 8,000 soldiers and airmen and all the aircraft and equipment at their disposal. And several of those GOP lawmakers said that, based on what they’ve seen from Conley since he was named acting adjutant general — the official title for the National Guard chief — there was no reason to deny him the job.

During a Republican caucus to discuss the governor’s pick, Rogers, who served 20 years in the Air Force as a jet pilot and retired in 1996 as a lieutenant colonel, insisted Monday that her problems with Conley were not personal.

“This is a situation of what someone’s background is, not so much that person himself,” she told her GOP colleagues.

“The National Guard needs to be led by an operator. That is someone who has operated in a capacity that’s not a support role,” Rogers said. By contrast, she said, Conley, a brigadier general, is an officer in the Judge Advocate General corps.

“A lawyer,” Rogers said. “He is not appropriate for this job.”

The lack of combat experience also bothered Sen. John Kavanagh.

The Fountain Hills Republican told the story of being a young police officer who, because of his experience before joining the force, spent his first years teaching others in the academy about first aid and other subjects. But after three years, and after passing the test to be promoted to sergeant, he said he was passed over because, as a superior said, he had no field experience.

“Unfortunately, he was right,” Kavanagh said.

And he said the same is true of why Conley should not be named to head the National Guard.

“I don’t say he has to be in combat,” Kavanagh said.

“But he’s never actually commanded a group that could go to combat,” he continued. “How could he possibly lead if he’s never done it?”

But Sen. T.J. Shope, who was on the same committee as Rogers that interviewed and screened Conley, pointed out that Conley actually has been serving in an acting capacity for nearly a year.

The Coolidge Republican said he spoke with people who are currently serving in the Guard.

“They had nothing but glowing things to say,” he said.

And Sen. David Gowan said he believes that Conley, who he met, is qualified to head the Guard. The Sierra Vista Republican spoke of an experience at the Tucson guard facilities.

“I saw the general around the soldiers there and you could see there was an air of leadership there,” Gowan said. “So I think leadership is not just on the combat field.”

Rogers, for her part, said she remained unconvinced that a 58-year-old lawyer should be commanding the Guard. She cited comments by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that “we are harkening back to a warrior ethos.”

How long Conley can keep the job, though, is unclear.

The person in that position, who also is the director of the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, serves at the pleasure of the governor. And if Hobbs loses in November, that allows whoever replaces her to choose someone else.

Sen. David Farnsworth said that was a factor when he agreed to support Conley despite any doubts about whether he was the right choice.

“I’m very optimistic that Andy Biggs will be the next governor,” said the Mesa Republican.

Judge looking for swift appointment of new state prison healthcare receiver

Key Points:

Federal judge to appoint receiver for Arizona’s prison healthcare system
Receiver to oversee care for over 25,000 state inmates
Arizona’s prison healthcare system is understaffed and underfunded

The federal judge who ordered the takeover of Arizona’s prison healthcare system earlier this year is looking to quickly appoint a receiver to oversee the care of more than 25,000 state inmates.

Having a receiver in place soon is critical, U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver noted, because she wants that person to participate in negotiations between Gov. Katie Hobbs and Republican lawmakers for the next fiscal year starting on July 1.

The goal is to ensure that the new budget has enough money to bring inmate care up to minimum standards demanded by the U.S. Constitution.

Silver issued an order last week telling attorneys for the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry and lawyers for the inmates who sued to interview the former Ohio corrections director and agree on whether she should get the job by the end of this month.

Silver said she wants the lawyers’ written reports on Annette Chambers-Smith by June 1 and said she’ll also interview her as part of her due diligence in picking someone for the job.

Chambers-Smith was the only person recommended to be receiver by the Department of Corrections. The inmates’ attorneys recommended two people as possible receivers, both former state corrections directors, but agreed to support Chambers-Smith.

Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs wants the Legislature to add $108 million to the prison healthcare budget this coming year to help it comply with Silver’s orders on staffing and healthcare.

But the Republican-controlled Legislature passed a budget earlier this month that largely ignored Hobbs’ executive budget and did not include the extra money to help comply with the judge’s order. Hobbs promptly vetoed that spending plan.

Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh. R-Fountain Hills, declined to say on Friday why Republican lawmakers didn’t include new money to deal with the prison healthcare case, other than to say the state is appealing and it may be premature.

“Since the courts are involved, no,” Kavanagh said. “We’ll seek legal advice.”

He did call Silver’s February decision to appoint a receiver to oversee healthcare “a federal usurpation of state government.”

Hobbs herself issued a lengthy statement after the receiver decision, saying she “strongly disagrees” with it and arguing that it “overlooks the significant progress the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry has made in recent years.”

The case was originally filed in 2012 on behalf of Arizona inmates by attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union, the Prison Law Office and other prisoner rights groups.

It alleged grossly inadequate care that harmed and even killed inmates. The state agreed to a settlement in 2014.

But in the following years, federal judges overseeing the case ruled repeatedly that mental and physical healthcare provided to prisoners failed to live up to basic constitutional standards and amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. They twice found the state in contempt and issued multi-million-dollar fines.

Five years ago, Silver finally had enough.

She threw out the settlement because of the ADCCR’s “pervasive material breaches” of the agreement. And during a 15-day trial under Silver in late 2021, attorneys for prisoners presented evidence of repeated and horrific consequences suffered due to poor or inadequate healthcare.

In a sweeping 2022 ruling, the judge said care provided by the state at prisons is “plainly, grossly inadequate” and state officials were acting “with deliberate indifference” to the substantial risk of harm to inmates.

The following year, Silver issued an injunction requiring the state to vastly improve its prisoner healthcare system. And while there have been improvements, the state still isn’t providing adequate care. Last year, attorneys sought a court takeover of the system, and Silver agreed to appoint a receiver to run the system in February.

In the 83-page order giving control of the prison healthcare system to a receiver, the judge detailed complaints about continued inadequate physical and mental healthcare at the nine prison complexes across the state.

“But now, after nearly 14 years of litigation with defendants having not gained compliance, or even a semblance of compliance with the injunction and the Constitution, this approach has not only failed completely but, if continued, would be nothing short of judicial indulgence of deeply entrenched unconstitutional conduct,” the judge wrote.

Hobbs has not denied that history but instead insisted, in a February statement, that things are getting better.

“This system was in crisis for a decade, and we’ve worked tirelessly to turn things around,” her statement said. “While progress is not achieved overnight, the improvements we’ve made in a short amount of time are undeniable.”

She said the state had made over $1 billion in new investments over the last three years to improve inmate healthcare, tripling the number of physicians and taking multiple other steps to improve the system. And the governor said Silver’s decision “imposes unrealistic demands and timelines that fail to account for the complexity of these challenges,” pointing to recruiting and hiring challenges.

“Real, lasting change takes time, and we are committed to continuing the progress we’ve made. Arizona’s corrections system is on the right path, and we will not let this decision derail the important work being done to improve outcomes for those in our care,” Hobbs said.

It’s unclear what the governor is prepared to do in budget negotiations to get new inmate healthcare funding.

Hobbs spokesman Christian Slater didn’t respond to numerous messages seeking comment on whether the governor would sign a state budget without the prison healthcare funding she sought in January.

The state filed a notice of appeal on the receiver decision, but has agreed to wait until a one is actually appointed to move ahead.

In the meantime, a panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is set to hear arguments May 18 on a separate appeal of another of Silver’s orders, the one from June 2025 that set minimum staffing levels for doctors, nurses and other providers.

Although she hasn’t yet laid out in detail the receiver’s powers and responsibilities, the judge said in the May 11 order that they would be sweeping.

The most important task for whoever is ultimately appointed will be “correcting the systemic constitutional failures that have plagued defendants’ healthcare delivery for over a decade,” Silver wrote.

They include fixing chronic understaffing and the state’s failure to enforce its contract with the private company overseeing inmate care, ensuring inmates are treated by physicians instead of nurses, addressing persistent failures in system of patient referrals, data collection and reporting and ensuring the medical system has the needed funding and facilities to care for ill inmates.

“Critically, the receiver must have the powers and authorities necessary to address each of these areas,” Silver wrote.

And the judge left no doubt as to how far that extends, saying the receiver “shall be granted all powers vested by law in the Director of the ADCRR, as they relate to the administration, control, management, operation, and financing of the provision of health care services to class members.

“This authority will embrace the power to negotiate, enforce, terminate, or renegotiate contracts in accordance with the law; implement permanent policy changes; manage resource(s), participate fully in budgeting processes; and make recommendations and requests to the Court,” Silver’s order said.

Finally, the receiver will have the job of developing objectives the prison healthcare system must meet before court oversight ends.

Chambers-Smith ran the Ohio Department of Rehabilitations and Corrections from 2019 through March, when she left the director’s job and began working with Gov. Mike DeWine on criminal justice policy issues.

As corrections director, she was responsible for overseeing 28 prisons holding about 46,000 inmates. Three of the prisons were privately run.

She was also tasked with overseeing prisoner healthcare, with Ohio budgeting $375 million of the $1.5 billion prison budget for that use. And prior to being nominated as corrections director in 2019, she held other Ohio corrections posts for two decades, including overseeing prison healthcare.

Ohio faced a similar class action lawsuit filed on behalf of inmates in 2002, with the state eventually settling the case in federal court by agreeing to vastly improve its prison healthcare system.

As head of the state prison health bureau at the time, Smith-Chambers was the lead corrections official working with the plaintiffs’ lawyers to ensure changes were made, according to David Singleton, currently a professor of law at the University of the District of Columbia.

Singleton was executive director of the Ohio Justice & Policy Center, which filed the 2002 lawsuit, for 21 years and was intimately involved in ensuring the settlement agreement was carried out in full.

“She was pretty much the point person from the prison system standpoint, in terms of trying to make sure the reforms happened,” Singleton told Capitol Media Services. “It happened in a way that obviously was carrying out the settlement, making sure that incarcerated people got the healthcare they needed, but also responsive to the institution’s concerns. So a tough balancing act, but she was really terrific in that role.”

Singleton lavished praise on Smith-Chambers’ ability to juggle needed reforms with the realities of the prison system.

“I found her to be incredibly pragmatic, solutions-oriented,” he said.

“She’s one of the smartest people that I know, and not in an arrogant way,” Singleton said. “She is whip smart and is always trying to figure out … what is the evidence-based way to do something that is going to ensure that incarcerated people are treated like the human beings that they are as well as being sensitive to the needs of the state. So she walks that line very, very well.”

Arizona is spending about $380 million a year on inmate healthcare out of its $1.6 billion corrections budget for 2026 fiscal year, which ends June 30. The state has fewer prisoners than Ohio, with the latest report from March showing just over 34,000 inmates. About 25,200 are held in nine state prisons and the remaining 9,400 split among six private prisons. Private prisoners aren’t part of the current lawsuit.

Unlike Arizona, Ohio primarily uses state employees to provide care and is partnered with the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center to provide surgeries and other acute care services.

Staffing reports filed with the court show Arizona is still struggling to fill positions as required by Silver.

The reports show Arizona’s prison health contractor, NaphCare, has just 14 of 34 required doctors on staff, 7.25 of 29.7 psychiatrists, 70 fewer registered nurses than the 372 it’s required to have, and just 28 of the 102 emergency medical technicians it should have. Other positions are closer to targets, but in all just three of 13 medical classifications are at or above target levels.

Corene Kendrick, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who has worked on the case for more than a decade, said it’s well past time to see Arizona prisoners get the care they need. After years of failures, that means getting a receiver in place to make it happen.

She called inmate healthcare privatization, which siphons off money for profits that could be going to care, a big driver of the problem. Arizona privatized prison healthcare under a provision slipped into the 2009 state budget.

Unmet required staffing is a major reason that Silver decided to appoint a receiver who can unilaterally make changes.

“It’s done rarely, but, as (Judge Silver) said in her order in February …. she can’t just sit by and sit on her hands and watch the state of Arizona and the Department of Corrections ignore federal court orders and ignore the Constitution, and people are dying, and so she needed to act,” Kendrick said. “And so that’s where we are.”

Key points:

Key Points:

Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoes financial disclosure measure

Measure would have required companies to disclose donations to governor and her allies

Hobbs’ veto leaves gaps in laws on contractor donations and transparency

Key Points:

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs vetoes 88 bills passed by GOP-controlled Legislature

Hobbs rejects bills banning Sharia Law and restricting gender transition hormone therapy for minors

Hobbs is still short of her 2025 veto record

Key Points:

Two Republican frontrunners largely avoided attacking each other on the debate stage

Congressman Andy Biggs is the clear GOP favorite and emerged unscathed

Congressman David Schweikert maintains he’s the stronger general election candidate

Key Points:

A new law should stop squatters faster and allow property owners to get them out in about five days

Exact statistics don’t exist for the number of squatter cases per year in Arizona, but law enforcement and real estate agents say it is a problem

The new law does not affect rights and remedies under the state’s landlord and tenant act

Key Points:

Fictional character New Amato enters Arizona governor’s race

Amato takes aim at real politicians like Gov. Katie Hobbs and Congressman Andy Biggs

Votes for Amato likely won’t count, but real third-party candidates could sway results

Key Points:

Lawmakers push funding for prison oversight office passed into law last year

Advocates cite receivership, violence, worsening conditions in state prisons

Budget negotiations could bring funding, but advocates brace to look elsewhere

Key Points:

Arizona election officials may face conflict of interest concerns

Secretary Adrian Fontes endorses candidate who filed campaign finance complaint

Arizona law does not bar election officials from endorsing candidates

Key Points:

Arizona Senate confirms Gov. Katie Hobbs’ pick for National Guard head

John Conley’s selection sparks debate over his lack of combat experience

Conley’s tenure as adjutant general may be limited to the governor’s term

Key Points:

Federal judge to appoint receiver for Arizona’s prison healthcare system

Receiver to oversee care for over 25,000 state inmates

Arizona’s prison healthcare system is understaffed and underfunded