PHOENIX — A company that runs mobile home parks throughout the United States is backing Senate President Warren Petersen to be the next Arizona attorney general after running afoul of the current officeholder.
New financial disclosure reports show that The BoaVida Group and its subsidiaries have given more than $600,000 to the Restore Order Arizona political action committee. That organization has spent more than $1.2 million in advertising to promote Petersen’s candidacy in the Republican primary and attack Rodney Glassman, his foe.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes sued the company last year on allegations that it failed to repair the electrical system at the Redwood Mobile Park in Tucson, something her office said has left residents without air conditioning during summer months.
While some changes have been made, an aide to Mayes said they are not to the office’s satisfaction. The lawsuit is still pending.
BoaVida, a Sacramento-based real estate investment and property management firm, owns manufactured housing communities and RV resorts in Arizona and across the United States.
“We’re not a fan of the AG’s practices,” BoaVida founder Eli Werner said in a statement. “It seems like she’s looking for targets of publicity.”
Werner said that, by contrast, Petersen has supported bills favorable to mobile homes, which he considers affordable housing.
Another $50,000 came from Blue Sky Vantage, a consulting group managed by Jack McCain, son of former Sen. John McCain. And $100,000 came from Services Group of America, which invests in food companies and property development.
One PAC commercial attacked Glassman, a former Democrat, as someone who “can’t be trusted.”
Political action committees can take individual contributions beyond the $5,500 limit, as well as corporate money, which is forbidden to candidates. Arizona law, however, prohibits candidates from coordinating the expenses of these PACs with their own expenditures.
Petersen reported $1.8 million in donations directly to his campaign, and about $524,000 cash on hand as of June 30, the end of the latest reporting period.
Glassman’s report shows $3.6 million in donations. He also reported $2.4 million in available cash that, while not broken out in his latest report, apparently includes $1 million he gave to his own campaign.
He also has not been shy about attack ads. A new one paid for from his own campaign funds highlights Petersen’s 2021 divorce. It noted that he sponsored a 2022 law limiting spousal maintenance awards to “only for a period of time and in an amount necessary to enable the receiving spouse to become self-sufficient.”
Earlier this year, Petersen backed an even more restrictive measure to set an absolute four-year limit on spousal maintenance. The Senate president said that it would not have benefited him because his wife had since remarried.
Incumbent Mayes, not facing a primary foe, reported donations so far of $4.3 million, with $2.3 million in the bank. There so far have been no reports of outside money spent for or against her.
Secretary of State race
In another high-profile Republican race, state Rep. Alexander Kolodin reported he has collected more than $398,000 in his bid to be the party nominee for secretary of state. After expenses, Kolodin said he had nearly $292,000 cash on hand.
Gina Swoboda, the former chair of the Arizona Republican Party, said she has raised about $227,000 since entering the race after giving up on a congressional bid. That also includes nearly $54,000 in personal loans.
That leaves her with about $22,600 in the bank. But she also has something that Kolodin does not: a history of backing by President Donald Trump, including a specific endorsement when she was first considering a run for Congress this year.
So far, the president has made no formal endorsement in the secretary of state race. But Trump did repost, on his own Truth Social platform, Swoboda’s endorsement from the Arizona Police Association.
The winner of the GOP primary will take on incumbent Democrat Adrian Fontes, who has no primary opposition. He listed more than $1.8 million in donations and more than $1 million cash on hand.
State superintendent race
Tom Horne is attempting to hang on to his post as state schools chief for another four years.
Like some others with a close primary, his $474,500 in spending for the past three months far exceeds the $34,200 he took in. Still, that leaves him with almost $390,000 in the bank, with Horne’s campaign aided by $561,000 of his own money.
State Treasurer Kimberly Yee, trying to oust Horne, had a more balanced cash flow in the last reporting period, with receipts pretty much equaling expenses. Her cash on hand is listed at nearly $246,000.
But there’s another player in this two-way election.
A group called Arizonans for Election Integrity spent close to $200,000 on a TV commercial that uses stereotypical Chinese imagery and music to attack Yee as the “Empress of DEI.” In a social media post, Yee condemned the ad as a “disgusting racist attack.”
Horne denied any role in the ad and condemned it himself. Campaign finance reports show that Arizonans for Election Integrity got all of its funds from another group, Citizens for Effective Government. But there is no record in the Secretary of State’s Office of any such registration.
On the Democratic side, Brett Newby’s campaign for schools chief is pretty much self-funded with $125,000 of his own money. His latest report listed less than $19,000 in expenses, leaving him with about $109,000 cash on hand.
Teresa Ruiz, the other Democrat in the race, has reported raising nearly $283,000, with about $146,000 in the bank.
Treasurer race
The race to replace Yee as treasurer has set up a Republican primary between Elijah Norton and Katherine Haley.
Norton also is largely running a self-funded campaign, with $2.7 million of the nearly $3 million coming from his own pocket. After expenses so far, that leaves him with close to $302,000.
Haley also has put her own money into the race, though only $75,000 of the $301,000 in revenues. She reports nearly $82,000 in cash on hand.
Nick Mansour, running unopposed in the Democratic primary, reports having raised more than $1.25 million, leaving him with almost $822,000 after expenses.
Corporation Commission race
In the race for the corporation commission, incumbent Republicans Nick Myers and Kevin Thompson are looking to run with public funding after agreeing not to take special interest dollars.
That entitles them to $147,836 for the primary and another $221,754 if they advance to the general election. One of them will, with Ralph Heap the only GOP challenger, who also intends to run with public funds,
The same is true of Democrats Jonathon Hill and Clara Pratte, who also are publicly funding their campaigns.
Republican leaders seek to block court order to fix school funding system
Judge Dewain Fox declares current system unconstitutional, citing unsafe buildings and lack of equipment
His ruling may halt state funding if schools remain unfixed
Calling it an illegal intrusion on their authority, Republican legislative leaders are moving to block — or at least delay — a court order requiring them to fix the system of public school funding that left some students in disrepaired buildings and without the equipment necessary to learn.
Attorneys for Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro are telling the Arizona Court of Appeals that the directive to fix the system from Maricopa County Superior Court Dewain Fox is flawed.
They argue that the judge exceeded his authority and that it is solely up to the Legislature to determine education policy. And what that means, they are telling the state Court of Appeals, is it is lawmakers — and not the courts — who decide what minimum facilities are needed and, by extension, how much the state needs to spend.
But attorneys representing school districts and education groups said nothing in the court order interferes with legislative prerogative.
They pointed out to appellate judges that it was the Legislature itself that directed what was originally known as the School Facilities Board to craft the standards. That came after a 1994 Arizona Supreme Court ruling that voided the school finance system in place at the time.
And that, in turn, led to creation of “minimum adequacy guidelines.”
But what came out at trial, the lawyers for the schools said, showed that lawmakers have not actually provided the money to meet those standards that they created. And that, they said, violates the self-imposed constitutional requirement for the Legislature to both maintain — and fund — a “general and uniform public school system.”
Fox, in his 114-page decision released in August, said many schools lack the resources to ensure that students have what they need to learn, including equipment and well-kept buildings.
He cited a laundry list of unmet needs including, in some cases, buildings that are unsafe because of cracks and other deficiencies.
Also missing, the judge said, was the money to fund a requirement — again, in the state standards — for certain academic equipment, like computers for students. And Fox said the state has failed to provide the money for other legally required improvements, including keeping students safe from shooters invading schools.
The judge, however, did not direct how to fix all that.
Instead, he gave lawmakers and the governor until early November to come up with — and fund — a system that ensures schools have what they need to meet those “minimum adequacy guidelines” so that students have what they need to learn, including equipment and well-kept buildings.
That’s partly because Fox has conceded that he doesn’t have the authority to order a specific resolution — or even direct lawmakers to allocate a specific amount of dollars for a problem that both sides agree could cost billions to correct.
But he does have other powers.
If that November deadline is not met, the judge could bar the state from maintaining an education funding system that does not meet both the requirements for adequate facilities as well as other capital needs. And that means if the state does not come up with a constitutionally acceptable plan, Fox could simply block the state treasurer from distributing any funds at all to any schools — something that would effectively shut down the K-12 system.
It is that deadline — and that threat of school closures — that the GOP legislative leaders want the Court of Appeals to delay, giving them time to argue that Fox is off base and his order to fix the problems should be voided.
All that starts with cost.
“Compliance with its edicts could require outlays totaling possibly in the billions,” they said in their appellate court filings.
“These funds do not materialize out of ether,” the attorneys for lawmakers wrote. “They must either be extracted from the wallets of Arizona citizens and businesses or transferred away from other agencies and departments that provide vital health, safety, and social services.”
On top of that, they said it’s unclear exactly how much cash it would take to comply with what Fox said is the constitutional standard and avoid a court order shutting down the school finance system.
For example, they told the appellate judge that the districts that sued said “building renewal” — money for major renovations, repairs and certain upgrades to academic buildings — has been “underfunded” by $3.8 billion.
Yet the entire state budget in the 2025 school year was about $16.2 billion, with nearly half of that already dedicated to K-12 education.
“At the risk of stating the obvious: money is finite,” they told the appellate judges.
“The state cannot print more currency,” the lawyers for the GOP leaders said. “Every additional dollar allocated to school capital funding must be either obtained from Arizonans’ bank accounts in the form of tax increases or siphoned from other components of the budget.”
Attorneys for educators, however, said that doesn’t paint an accurate picture.
Yes, they acknowledged that $3.8 billion figure of cumulative shortfalls. But that, they said, does not necessarily represent the cost of bringing the education system right now into compliance.
They also said there’s nothing in Fox’s order that requires all the money be found in the first year.
But, ultimately, their case revolves around the argument that, as Fox found, the system is broken, that it affects the ability of students to learn — and that it has to be fixed.
For example, the judge mentioned leaks in the roof of Elfrida Elementary School.
“The leaks disrupt the learning environment because students stop what they are doing to position trash cans to collect the dripping water,” Fox wrote.
And in Chino Valley, the judge said, classroom temperatures “can reach into the 90s which impacts student learning.”
All of that, the lawyers for the schools said, is a reason for the appellate court to refuse to delay Fox’s order and deadline.
“The superior court’s ruling documented a massive number of problems that existed for many years and continue to exist today,” they said.
In seeking a delay, however, attorneys for the GOP leaders said that they haven’t flatly refused to fix problems. Instead, they said that questions of the timing and prioritization of the funds that are made available are beyond the reach of the courts.
“Nonsense,” responded the lawyers for the schools.
It starts, they said with evidence that the problems are only getting worse. But they told the appellate judges there’s an even bigger reason to reject that contention — or even to allow a delay in bringing the schools into compliance.
“Children get one shot at elementary school,” the attorneys for schools wrote.
“A child in Chino Valley who spent her education in 90-degree classrooms while the district waited more than a decade for an HVAC replacement does not benefit from a remedy that may arrive after she is done with school,” they said.
Ditto, they said, of children in schools with leaking roofs, excessive carbon dioxide buildup, mold and inadequate air conditioning.
“These are Arizona children, not widgets,” they said.
The lawyers for GOP lawmakers, in seeking to void Fox’s orders, have another argument.
What is missing, they are telling the Court of Appeals, is any evidence that students are not getting an adequate education despite the complaint of and evidence presented — of inadequate funding. In fact, they argued, the record shows otherwise.
“Representatives of the very school districts that the trial court deemed ostensibly underfunded — including Crane, Tolleson Elementary, Blue Ridge, Wickenburg, Mohawk, Laveen, and Somerton — all testified that they provide their students with an education outcome that meets the state’s minimum academic standards,” the lawyers argued.
“They offered no examples of students at their schools whose educational experience did not meet those standards,” they continued. “These admissions and omissions, which the trial court ignored, extinguished the plaintiffs’ claims.”
But the attorneys for the schools said such a direct link between deficiencies and outcomes is not necessary for a finding of inadequate funding and an order to fix the problems.
“For example, a teacher in a sweltering, noisy, moldy classroom with excessive CO2 and a leaking roof can technically ‘teach’ a lesson aligned with academic standards,” they said. “But it would be impossible to show that a certain deficiency caused specific students to fail a test.”
More to the point, they said that’s exactly why state law and regulations actually define minimum acceptable guidelines for the quality and quantity of facilities students need to achieve high academic standards.
And they pointed out something else: the state’s own School Facilities Board — the one created by lawmakers after they lost that 1994 ruling — itself links those guidelines directly to student performance. In fact, the expert witness called by the GOP lawmakers in the case conceded at trial that “your leaking roof I would expect to be tied to student performance, because students don’t do well when the roof is leaking.”
The appellate court has not set a date to hear arguments about delaying Fox’s order.
Hobbs, for her part, has been pretty much silent on the whole dispute.
Her last comment came after the August ruling where she said she was aware of it but had not actually seen the order setting the deadline. Instead, she provided a general comment on how she has “worked diligently” with lawmakers to address underfunding in facilities.
But the judge, in that ruling, said the governor is not blameless.
He pointed out that in planning for the 2024-2025 school year, the School Facilities District — the successor to the School Facilities Board which is responsible for funding construction and repairs — estimated it needed more than $587 million to meet all the identified needs of all the schools. Yet the Department of Administration, which is under the governor’s purview, requested less than $222 million.
“And the governor’s budget proposal providing for Building Renewal grant funding of less than $200 million,” Fox wrote.
There was no response to repeated requests to the governor’s press aide for comments about the case, her funding plans and her own role in the problem.
State treasurer manages Arizona’s $32B in investments
Outgoing Treasurer Kimberly Yere endorses Katherine Haley
Elijah Norton touts backing of Turning Point
State treasurer hopeful Elijah Norton is charging that his Republican primary foe is totally unqualified to manage the state’s $32 billion in investments.
During a televised debate May 19, Norton cited his experience as founder and CEO of what is now known as Veritas Global Protection, a company which sells extended warranties on vehicles. And that, he said, means he has to invest premiums in a way to ensure that the funds will be there when claims are made.
By contrast, Katherine Haley cites her experience as owner of Oak Rose Group, an investment advisory firm.
“We maintain balance sheets,” she said.
“We have to make sure we balance our checkbook every day,” Haley said. “We have to make sure we pay our bills.”
Norton sniffed at that.
“I think my opponent’s a lovely person,” he said.
“But this is about experience,” Norton said. “She’s not qualified frankly — and I mean this with all due respect — to be the bookkeeper at a pizza parlor.”
Haley responded that the job goes beyond deciding where to invest the dollars that come into the Treasurer’s Office. She said it also requires leadership and planning, both skills she says she has.
Beyond that, Haley said much of what treasurers can do with the dollars under their control is not on whim of the person heading the office but constrained by statutory restrictions as well as oversight by the State Board of Investment.
“At the end of the day, you are following state statute and also what is defined in the Constitution,” she said. And Haley chided Norton, saying he has said the state should manage its investments like Texas and Florida.
“They’re very different states,” she said.
What Haley said she does have is broader experience, including working as a policy adviser in Washington for Republicans John Boehner and Paul Ryan when they were speakers of the U.S. House. Norton dismissed both as “swamp rats,” a derisive term that had been used against both by some hardline conservatives to criticize more establishment politicians.
Haley’s view of the role of the office is also much closer to that of Republican Kimberly Yee, the current treasurer, who after serving two four-year terms, is now running for state superintendent of public instruction. And Yee told Capitol Media Services after the debate that whoever is in that office should not be making individual decisions on investments.
“The treasurer should be the manager of the agency and hire the best individuals qualified,” said Yee.
Haley made it a point during the debate to say she has been endorsed by Yee. Norton clapped back with his endorsements by the Free Enterprise Club, Turning Point and Senate President Warren Petersen.
Norton also dismissed the argument that it is the job of the treasurer to run the office and ensure it is staffed by the people who are the actual experts in their fields.
“We’re not trying to hire a glorified HR manager to manage unelected bureaucrats,” he said. “We’re electing the chief banking and investment officer of our state.”
Haley said all that is true, but that doesn’t mean Arizona should have a treasurer who has overly broad ideas of how to earn more money with the cash that the state needs to pay its bills.
“We cannot make risky bets,” she said. And Haley said what Norton wants is to “sell our portfolio to the highest bidder with the goal of, oh, perhaps, we’ll get higher yields.”
Norton makes no secret of his belief that the state could make more on the money it has invested.
He poked fun at Yee who, in press releases, said that the assets her office is managing nearly doubled from $15.4 billion in 2019 when she was first elected.
He said during that time there was growth in state population and property value, state lands were sold off and the proceeds put into the trust, and cities, who can invest through the Treasurer’s Office have gained the ability to tax internet sales.
“If you take our portfolio to somebody who actually understands investments, they’re going to say we should have about $3 billion to $5 billion more than we actually do,” Norton said.
“I’m not saying we should take risky bets,” he said. “I want to go to the office every day, do my job, and apply my experience to getting better returns for the taxpayers.”
One place where the treasurer has played a role — or at least has had some input — has been on the question of how much extra money can be withdrawn from the special education trust account.
Arizona received about 10 million acres of land from the federal government when it became a state in 1912, with the restriction that the land be held for the benefit of certain entities, primarily public schools. About 9.2 million acres remain, along with more than $10 billion the trust invested from sales and leases of the land.
A former formula in place for years gave schools 2.5% of the value of the trust annually, a figure that was designed to ensure level distributions without endangering the principal.
In 2016, however, voters narrowly approved Proposition 123, a measure to boost that annual distribution to 6.9%, generating an extra $300 million.
But that authorization has since expired. And lawmakers along with Gov. Katie Hobbs are now debating whether to ask voters to renew that rate — and at what level.
That’s where the views of the treasurer can come in.
The governor at one point proposed boosting the distribution to 8.9%, with GOP lawmakers proposing to keep it at 6.9%.
Yee has already weighed in, rejecting both proposals as unwise and saying the prudent figure would be more in the neighborhood of between 4% and 5%.
“We do have to protect the principal,” Haley said when asked her views on renewal. “It’s an endowment,” she said, having to last not just through today but well into the future.
“On average, an endowment distributes about 5%,” Haley said, saying she would consider that a safe figure going forward.
Norton blasted the numbers originally proposed by Hobbs as “absolutely ridiculous,” though the governor, in her proposed budget released in January, is not on the same page as the Republicans at 6.9%. But Norton refused to say, both during the TV appearance and when asked afterward, whether he agrees with that GOP figure — or what he believes would be the proper level of withdrawal going forward to both protect the trust and yet still provide more dollars for K-12 education.
What history has shown is the difficulty of making predictions of a return on investment on a long-term basis.
When Proposition 123 went to the ballot in 2016 it was opposed by Jeff DeWit, the state treasurer at the time. He predicted that the higher withdrawal would cut into the principal of the trust and ultimately leaves public schools with less money.
As it turned out, the economy — and the rate of return on investments — remained strong enough so that the principal actually increased even with the higher withdrawals.
Whoever wins the July 21 primary will face off against Democrat Nick Mansour.
Republicans face divisive primaries amid shifting political dynamics, voter makeup
Turning Point influence tested against independent voters’ growing electoral hold
Conservative incumbents battle fellow Republicans across multiple statewide races
Thirteen Republicans are vying for statewide office this year, but before they can take on their Democratic opponents, they’ll have to navigate increasingly contentious and fragmented primary challenges.
There isn’t a single Republican running unopposed in a statewide primary this year, while most of the Democrats hoping to keep or flip those same seats will not face any meaningful competition within their own party. Even Republican incumbents have not been spared; three officeholders with proven conservative chops are facing challenges from the right.
“That’s a Turning Point thing,” said Chuck Coughlin, a Republican-turned-independent consultant. “Are they going to be able to marshal Republican voters in opposition to fairly conservative candidates?”
Hanging over it all is diminished public support for President Donald Trump, his policies and the Republican Party as a whole. Each candidate is walking a delicate tight rope between supporting the president enough to win over an engaged GOP primary voter and keeping enough distance so as to not alienate Arizona’s growing bloc of independent voters.
Some Republicans argue even Turning Point, the conservative youth organization founded in Arizona, might be losing its influence in the state after less than resounding results for TP-backed candidates in April’s Salt River Project Board elections.
“Turning Point puts their money behind people, and that machine rolls, but it turns off the independent voters,” said Lisa Everett, the former chair of Legislative District 29 Republicans. “Since they are the ones that decide the elections in Arizona, we need to figure out how to court them.”
With the exception of the Republican primary for governor, GOP voters seem largely undecided about primary candidates in down-ballot statewide contests. Polling suggests that some of those candidates are unknown to the Republican electorate, even though most have held some form of elected office in Arizona.
Governor
U.S. Congressman Andy Biggs speaking with attendees at the April 2026 “Build the Red Wall” rally at Dream City Church in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
Congressman Andy Biggs is widely viewed as the frontrunner in the GOP gubernatorial primary. His closest rival — fellow Congressman David Schweikert — is still behind by double-digits according to most polls and by several hundreds of thousands of dollars in fundraising.
“I’m trying to unify the Republican Party right now to win this governor’s race,” Biggs told reporters when asked about Schweikert on May 5. “I don’t talk about my primary opponent, because the reality is, I’m staying focused on Governor (Katie) Hobbs, what she’s not doing and what she is doing, and I’m trying to bring that message out.”
Schweikert has maintained since he entered the race in October 2025 that Biggs cannot defeat Hobbs in the general election.
U.S. Congressman David Schweikert speaking with attendees at the 2022 Legislative Forecast Luncheon hosted by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry at Chase Field in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
“The left is so giddy (and) wanting him to be the nominee because you see the polling, he can’t come within 10, 11 points of Katie Hobbs,” Schweikert told KTAR on May 7.
Everett endorsed Schweikert on social media for precisely that reason, though she knows her opinion is not widely shared among the conservative grassroots.
“I attend lots of meetings, LD meetings, club meetings, council board meetings, etc. and what I am seeing is Republicans are coming up to me, and they’re whispering, ‘I’m supporting David Schweikert,’” Everett said. “They’re afraid to say it out loud, because the other candidates that are supported by these larger organizations are taking up all the oxygen in the room.”
One slight wrinkle in Schweikert’s election theory is that polling numbers actually show he’s doing worse than Biggs in the matchup against Hobbs. According to a February survey from local pollster Noble Predictive Insights, Biggs trailed Hobbs by five points among registered voters, while Schweikert trailed the governor by nine points.
Biggs, the only candidate in the race with a Trump endorsement after Karrin Taylor Robson dropped out in February, doesn’t see the president’s support as a deterrent for voters.
“If I had an issue, I would just call (Trump) up and say, ‘Hey, what’s going on here?,’” Biggs told reporters on May 5. “… I think you need to have somebody in office as the governor here who can actually call up the president … I think those relationships are important, and I think they benefit the state.”
Secretary of State
State Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, speaking with attendees at a campaign rally for Andy Biggs for Governor at the Arizona Biltmore in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
Rep. Alex Kolodin, a state lawmaker and election attorney, was the first candidate to cut into the secretary of state’s race. But, he did so as rumors of a run by Gina Swoboda, chair of the Republican Party of Arizona and the Legislature’s election policy lead, started to swirl around the political sphere.
Swoboda initially launched a campaign for the 1st Congressional District, but, in early February, she filed her statement of interest for the Secretary of State’s Office and pivoted her run.
“I love the office so much, and I love the people in it, and I love the work,” Swoboda said. “And I’m sad by how politicized it’s become, and I’m sad at where I think it will go if this continues for another four years.”
Kolodin, with the endorsement of Turning Point Action, is angling his campaign at some election nerves frayed among his base. Along the campaign trail, Kolodin has focused on alleged noncitizen voting, championed the SAVE Act and pledged to cooperate with the federal government in granting access to state voter rolls.
“When I’m elected the very first thing that we need to do is partner up with our friends in the federal government who have graciously offered to allow us to use their SAVE Act database to ensure that we don’t have noncitizens on our voter rolls,” Kolodin said in an interview with former U.S. Congressman Matt Gaetz.
Gina Swoboda speaking with attendees at the Restoring National Confidence Summit at Planet Hollywood in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
Swoboda, meanwhile, aims to capture the growing sect of Arizona’s independent voters through a focus on policy and operations.
“What I want to run on is transparency, accountability and competence. That’s all I want. And that’s what I think the voters want. I think that they are exhausted,” Swoboda said. “The last thing (people) need to worry about is what did the secretary of state do today? Why do people have to think about that?”
She expressed some doubt that Kolodin could win over the third of the state’s voters who have no declared party affiliation. And Swoboda stressed the need to work well across the state with officials in every corner on election administration, a skill she claimed her opponent lacked.
Swoboda referenced the ongoing legal dispute between the Maricopa County Recorder and the Board of Supervisors as one example.
“It’s a disaster. I got into the race because I don’t want that to happen on a statewide level,” Swoboda said. “It will dissolve into dysfunction and infighting, and the voters will not have confidence in the process. Nobody needs that.”
Attorney General
Senate President Warren Petersen and Rodney Glassman framed campaigns for the Attorney General’s Office as a matter of legal experience.
Rodney Glassman speaking with attendees at a campaign rally for Andy Biggs for Governor at the Arizona Biltmore in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
Glassman, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. JAG Corps Reserve, former Tucson City Councilmember and longtime candidate for office — with past runs for the Arizona Corporation Commission, Maricopa County assessor and the U.S. Senate, as a Democrat — claims he is the only candidate who has ever practiced law, taken on a client or prosecuted someone in court.
“My primary opponent is a termed-out career politician, a part time Realtor, and received his law license less than 28 months ago,” Glassman said. “He’s never had a client. He’s never prosecuted a criminal, and he doesn’t even carry professional liability insurance, aka, he doesn’t practice law. He’s never practiced law.”
Petersen was licensed to practice law in 2023, though he passed the bar in 2020. And he corrected Glassman, noting he is not yet termed out from the Senate.
State Senate President Warren Petersen speaking with attendees at a campaign rally for Andy Biggs for Governor at the Arizona Biltmore in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
Petersen claimed he is the most experienced person in the race, pointing to his part in a swell of litigation from the Legislature to defend public laws Attorney General Kris Mayes left by the wayside.
“We basically set up a mini Solicitor General’s Office here at the Senate,” Petersen said.
More significantly, Petersen pointed to Glassman’s past history of switching parties and continuing to pursue election as a downside.
“The people, they’re tired of him running for office. If you run twice and lose twice, normal people quit,” Petersen said. “If you run more than twice and you keep running, I think you’re achieving sociopath level.”
Support and endorsement is currently split among both candidates.
Glassman has courted support from Congressman Paul Gosar, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, Maricopa County Sheriff Jerry Sheridan, and former Senate President Karen Fann.
Petersen meanwhile has shored up support withCongressman Biggs, a slate of Republican state lawmakers and Idaho and West Virginia’s attorneys general.
During Trump’s recent visit to the state, he declined to dole out any formal endorsement, but he did give Petersen a shoutout from the stage. And when Gosar voiced his support for Glassman, it drew a mixed reaction from the crowd.
Superintendent of Public Instruction
The Arizona Freedom Caucus and Turning Point Action placed veteran incumbent Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne in its crosshairs early on, recruiting outgoing Treasurer Kimberly Yee to oust him from office.
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne speaking with attendees at the 2024 Legislative Forecast Luncheon hosted by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry at Chase Field in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
Horne is keeping his messaging on improving academics across education and is hoping voters will keep him around for another four years to finish what he set out to do at the start of his term.
He pointed to the department’s Project Momentum, which lifted 80% of schools in the bottom 5% for academic performance to a higher bar.
“That’s an eight-year job, not a four-year job,” Horne said. “I want to finish the job. If the voters were to switch horses after four years, somebody else would start all over again and it would never get done.”
Horne is continuing his crusade against critical race theory, diversity, equity and inclusion and “woke ideology” as well. And in that vein, he did not have much to say about his opponent, other than claiming she had served on a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee for the National Association of State Treasurers.
Yee denies serving on any DEI committee and went so far as to send a cease and desist letter.
State Treasurer Kimberly Yee speaking with attendees at the “Rally to Protect Our Elections” hosted by Turning Point Action at Arizona Federal Theatre in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / The Star News Network)
In her own campaign, Yee claims academic performance has not improved significantly under Horne.
“He’s had four years, and those numbers have not changed,” Yee said. “I see complete chaos in the Department of Education when it comes to management. I also see a real non-presence of this current superintendent with respect to his role as a statewide official.”
The two must also contend with the Empowerment Scholarship Account program, a live wire for Republicans staunch on supporting school choice, which has formed significant party lines surrounding the issue of ensuring there’s no misspending, fraud or abuse in the program.
Horne maintains the department is continuing to finetune its oversight of the program.
Meanwhile, Yee, in her role as state treasurer, recently put out a request for information to assess the field of financial vendors. She stopped short of wading into any policy questions for the program, though, claiming the specifics are better left to the Legislature.
“We have a superintendent of public instruction who has exceeded that authority and has gone beyond what an administrator is required to do by the law,” Yee said. “And if there ever is a question of administration or properties of educational definitions, those really need to be brought back to the Legislature.”
Corporation Commission
Corporation Commissioners Nick Myers and Kevin Thompson are not exactly known as moderate Republicans. But that did not stop the Arizona Free Enterprise Club and the state’s Freedom Caucus from recruiting two state lawmakers to run against them in the Republican primary.
That challenge lost a bit of steam recently, with former Rep. David Marshall ending his bid for the commission to accept a new role as Navajo County recorder. Marshall’s exit leaves Rep. Ralph Heap, R-Mesa, to fend for himself against the two incumbents.
State Rep. Ralph Heap, R-Mesa, speaking with attendees on the floor of the Arizona House of Representatives on opening day of the 57th legislature in Phoenix. (Gage Skidmore / Flickr)
“If you have two people on the commission that have similar ideas in terms of how to produce energy and what we need to do, that’s a stronger position,” Heap said. “So that does weaken the message I have and that’s frustrating.”
Heap’s main message is that Myers and Thompson have not done enough to end “Green New Deal” policies at the state’s utility companies, nor have they done enough to support Trump’s coal-centric energy priorities.
“We need to immediately adopt the principles that are in the Trump energy agenda, which are continuing with reliable, affordable fossil fuels, and then move towards nuclear energy as fast as we possibly can.” Heap said.
This combination photo features Arizona Corporation Commissioners Kevin Thompson (left) and Nick Myers. (Photos by Gage Skidmore)
Myers and Thompson say they have done exactly what they set out to do, pointing to their votes to repeal the energy efficiency and renewable energy requirements past commissions imposed on utilities.
“We’ve delivered the promises that we campaigned on the first time, which was to eliminate the Green New Deal, eliminate mandates and subsidies,” Thompson said.
Myers noted that the pair is in favor of an “all of the above” approach to energy generation, though they believe natural gas is far more affordable and reliable than solar or wind. The two also said they have done everything in their power to cut the fat out of utility budgets in rate cases, though they know customers are still struggling with high bills.
“We’ve been saving as much money as we possibly can and trying to keep those rate increases as low as we can, but we’re fighting an uphill battle when it comes to the weather and the things that we don’t have control over,” Myers said.
The duo said they are more focused on the general election than defeating Heap in the primary.
“We’re just going to continue focusing on things that got us here, and talk about the great things the commission has done over the last three years and hope that the people of Arizona see that and decide they want to keep us in place,” Thompson said. Treasurer
Katherine Haley, president of the State Board of Education, lodged her challenge against Elijah Norton, former treasurer for the AZGOP, late in the game, with an endorsement from sitting Treasurer Kimberly Yee in tow.
Norton has painted himself as the candidate with the most relevant experience. Besides guarding the AZGOP coffers, he founded and currently serves as president of Veritas Global Protection Services, an international vehicle insurance company.
“I don’t just have business experience. I also have experience investing money,” Norton said. “And that’s literally the treasurer’s job, the chief Banking and Investment Officer of Arizona.”
He said Haley was a “nice person” but doubted her ability to manage the state’s $32 billion in assets.
“I always use the example of the Treasurer’s Office being like an airplane. Do you want someone flying a $32 billion airplane from Phoenix to Australia who’s never set foot in a cockpit before?” Norton said. “Or do you want a veteran person that has proven experience piloting that flight?”
Haley is leaning on her background in public service to make her case to voters and pointed to her experience on the State Board of Education overseeing district budgets and the Empowerment Scholarship Account program.
“It’s about the mentality of service. It’s focused on Arizona taxpayers and what they need, rather than personal interest,” Haley said. “My opponent has a life career in sales, and I think that is just a different skillset than one that is focused on Arizona taxpayers.”
Norton noted, though, as the two have convened at legislative district meetings that straw polls have swung in his favor.
At the Legislative District 27 meeting on May 12, Norton said a straw poll yielded 68 votes for him and four votes for Haley.
“When people actually get into the weeds, and they listen to us talk about policy. There’s an obvious dichotomy, that she does not have the experience,” Norton said.
A recent op-ed by an animal law attorney and three-time donor to Rodney Glassman’s campaign got both the law and the facts wrong about the race for Arizona Attorney General. The piece deserves a rebuttal for misleading voters on a matter as serious as who is legally and practically qualified to serve as the state’s top law enforcement officer.
The column leaned heavily on A.R.S. § 41-191, asserting that Warren Petersen fails to meet the statute’s supposed tenure requirements. That claim collapses under scrutiny for three independent reasons.
First, the statute has been struck down. It is a dead-letter law with no remaining force or effect. As a litigator, if one were to attempt to brazenly utilize dead law in court to convince a judge of one’s arguments, that person could be subject to sanction.
Second, the statutory deadline for any candidate challenge expired on April 6, 2026. That window is closed.
Third, and most obvious to anyone thinking clearly, if the author’s allegation were true, Glassman could have walked into court, filed a simple challenge, and have Petersen removed from the ballot for roughly $10,000. Instead, he is preparing to spend millions trying (and failing) to beat Petersen in the primary. The math tells the story. If Glassman’s campaign were serious about their legal claims, they would have pursued it. They didn’t, because they knew it’s frivolous and could subject Mr. Glassman to a Rule 11 violation or other sanction.
Beyond the legal fiction, the real measure of a candidate is record, experience and support within the legal and law-enforcement communities. Petersen is the only person in this race who has been asked to run by former Assistant Attorneys General who actually served in the office. He is the only candidate endorsed by four conservative state attorneys general, four county prosecutors, and two of Arizona’s largest police associations. Those endorsements did not appear by accident. They reflect a consensus among citizens and attorneys like me who understand what the job demands.
As Senate President, Petersen is managing over 110 cases or amicus briefs. Some of the biggest-like Jane Doe v. Warren Petersen, which defends Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act, and Mi Familia v. Warren Petersen, which ensures only citizens are voting, have gone all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. These high-stakes battles show a leader willing to fight for conservative principles at the highest levels.
Petersen has led a large public institution for years and built a proven conservative record of results. He has won seven elections in a row. When we served together in the Legislature, I knew Warren to be a commanding presence, leading thoughtful reform to make our lives safer, more prosperous and freer.
The contrast against the competition could not be starker.
The Attorney General’s Office demands someone with real executive experience, a track record of winning tough fights, and broad respect from prosecutors, police, and the conservative legal community. Warren Petersen meets every test with aplomb.
Arizonans deserve straight facts. The choice is clear: the most qualified, experienced and electable candidate for Arizona Attorney General is Warren Petersen.
Adam Kwasman is the Managing Attorney of Kwasman Law, PLLC. He currently serves as the Vice Mayor of Scottsdale, and previously served in the Arizona House of Representatives.
A.R.S. § 41-191 clearly states that Arizona’s attorney general “shall have been for not less than five years immediately preceding the date of taking office a practicing attorney before the supreme court of the state.” That requirement is mandatory, time bound and tied directly to the office.
The attorney general is the largest law office in the state, overseeing hundreds of attorneys, directing complex litigation, and making legal decisions that affect millions of Arizonans. The Legislature’s five year practice requirement is common sense: the state’s top lawyer should have meaningful experience practicing law.
Based on the State Bar of Arizona’s official records, Warren Petersen was admitted to practice law on December 21, 2023. By January 2027 when the next attorney general will be sworn in, he will still be well short of the five years the statute requires.
Despite holding a license to practice law, there is no readily available evidence that Petersen has actually practiced law or worked as an attorney. In fact his official Arizona Senate biography listed his occupation not as a lawyer, but as “real estate,” up until the first session of 2025 — reinforcing that law is not his profession. That matters.
The attorney general is not an entry-level legal position. It is the state’s top legal job, requiring real-world experience handling cases, making legal judgments, and managing attorneys who do this work every day on matters that will impact people’s lives. A law license without practice is not preparation for that responsibility even if he had met the five year qualification. Petersen may be a licensed attorney, but he does not meet the statutory qualification and he certainly does not have the experience that the office demands. Put simply, Petersen is not qualified to serve as Arizona’s attorney general.
Petersen’s supporters may point to a court case called State ex rel. Sawyer v. LaSota, arguing that the Legislature cannot add extra qualifications for attorney general beyond what the Arizona Constitution lists. That idea is partly true, but it doesn’t really apply here. In that case, the person elected attorney general wasn’t a lawyer at all and had never been admitted to the bar. Enforcing the law would have permanently blocked (Jack) LaSota from ever holding the office, which is why the court rejected it. That’s not the situation here. Petersen isn’t being barred from serving forever, he just doesn’t have the required experience at this time.
More troubling is that Petersen is not just any candidate. He is the president of the Arizona Senate and has spent 14 years in the Legislature, the very body that enacted and has left this law in place. If he believed the five-year requirement was bad policy, he had ample opportunity to repeal it. He did not. Instead, he now expects voters to ignore it when it applies to him.
That “rules for thee but not for me” mindset is dangerous in any office, but especially for the attorney general. The role demands public trust and a commitment to enforcing the law consistently and without exception. The attorney general cannot pick and choose when the law applies based on personal convenience. If a candidate treats the law as optional before taking office, there is little reason to believe he will treat it as binding once entrusted to enforce it.
Republicans need to confront the political reality here and choose wisely in the primary. If Republican voters nominate Petersen, they are handing Democrats a built in advantage. Kris Mayes will almost certainly challenge his eligibility, forcing immediate litigation that will dominate the race. If the challenge succeeds, the seat is lost before the general election begins. If it fails, Republicans are still left defending a nominee without the legal or managerial experience to credibly run the state’s largest law office.
Adam Trenk is an Arizona attorney, entrepreneur and former vice mayor of Cave Creek.
Arizona officials tell counties to refuse grand jury subpoenas for voter records
Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes cite ongoing federal lawsuit
Arizona officials released documents contradicting claims of widespread election fraud
Fearing an end-run around the courts, two top state officials are telling counties to refuse to comply with any grand jury subpoenas for their voter records.
In a joint letter to county recorders, Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes remind them that there is already a lawsuit in federal court over whether the Department of Justice is entitled to a full, unredacted list of voter information. There is no date set for a hearing.
But what has changed since the lawsuit was filed, they said, is that Senate President Warren Petersen, responding to a grand jury subpoena, turned over records related to the Senate’s audit of the conduct and results of the 2020 election. And that, they warned, appears to be part of an end-run around the federal court for the Trump administration to get the documents it wants — regardless of what a federal judge rules.
That’s not all. It also comes as the Department of Homeland Security, apparently conducting its own probe, has asked Mayes’ office for some documents it has related to the 2020 election.
Richie Taylor, a spokesman for Mayes, said it surrendered both a report that was done reviewing the audit by her predecessor, Mark Brnovich, as well as some documents that Brnovich did not make public before he left office at the end of 2022.
Taylor said there was no subpoena, as all those documents are public records. But he said that nothing else has been provided to Homeland Security.
All that, according to Mayes and Fontes, leads them to believe that federal agencies will use the grand jury process — and the ability of prosecutors to subpoena documents — to circumvent the question before the federal judge of whether the agencies have a legal right to demand what they are seeking. And the two Arizona officials said they want to be sure that county recorders do not play a role in letting that happen.
“We reiterate our offices’ position here just in case you may be contemplating disclosure,” the pair wrote. “We write to inform you that doing so would violate both federal and state law.”
The disclosure of the Homeland Security inquiry drew a sharp response from Gov. Katie Hobbs who was the secretary of state in 2020.
“Arizona’s 2020 election has been investigated and verified in Republican-led audits,” she said in a comment March 10 night posted on social media. “Pulling agents off serious work like combating human trafficking to chase debunked election conspiracies is irresponsible and a threat to public safety.”
This all comes as the Trump administration has shown renewed interest in revisiting the 2020 election, particularly in states where he was outpolled by Joe Biden. That occurred in enough states, including in Arizona, to deny him the electoral votes needed at that time for a second term.
Now back in office, Trump has expressed frustration that Attorney General Pam Bondi has not done more to investigate his claim that the election was stolen from him.
Arizona is among 29 states and the District of Columbia where the Department of Justice has filed suit to demand full voter files after state officials refused to comply. That includes not just things that are public like name and party registration, but also what Fontes said is legally protected private information like birth dates, driver license numbers, signatures and the last four digits of Social Security numbers.
The agency, however, has said it is not investigating any particular violations of law but simply fulfilling its mission to be sure that states are keeping voter rolls updated.
Fontes, however, told a federal judge it appears the real goal is for the federal government to amass a national centralized database on millions of Americans. And he said that appears to be part of a plan to check the immigration status of those on the voter rolls.
And now there is the request by Homeland Security to Mayes for information about the 2020 race.
Taylor said that Mayes did turn over some findings released in 2022 by Brnovich in which he claimed his office had “uncovered instances of election fraud by individuals who have been or will be prosecuted for various election crimes.”
That, however, wasn’t all Mayes turned over to Homeland Security. Taylor said they also got a follow-up report she released after taking office in 2023, a report that included evidence that Brnovich and his top aide had been told by their own staffers, even before releasing the 2022 report, that there was no basis for such claims of fraud.
And Taylor said that, in response to further requests from Homeland Security, the Attorney General’s Office last week even prepared a Power Point presentation. But he said that there has been no further cooperation with Homeland Security since then.
Now Mayes and Fontes want to be sure that county recorders aren’t providing anything that is not already a public record — even if they are served with a subpoena.
“I implore you to fulfill your oath by declining any such illegal demands,” the letter to the recorders says.
“If your office receives a federal grand jury subpoena demanding that you turn over voters’ private data, we urge you to notify our offices immediately,” they wrote. “The grand jury should not serve to circumvent Arizona’s ongoing lawsuit, and our offices will pursue all legal actions available to prevent the Department of Justice from misusing the grand jury process.”
What makes the information Mayes turned over to Homeland Security significant is that it represents two different views of what did and did not happen in the 2020 election — views that Homeland Security could choose to use or ignore as it pursues any investigation.
Brnovich, a Republican, was running in 2022 for U.S. Senate. And his report included various allegations that signatures may not have been properly verified on early ballot envelopes and that “there are problematic systemwide issues that related to early ballot handling and verification.”
But Mayes, a Democrat who won her 2022 election to replace Brnovich, disclosed in her 2023 report information she said Brnovich had withheld from the public, including a memo from the agency’s Special Investigations Section — information she said showed that her predecessor knew there was no basis for what the attorney general was reporting in 2022,
That 2022 memo said that agents and support staff had spent more than 10,000 hours investigating and reviewing alleged instances of illegal voting submitted by various private parties. Those came not only from Cyber Ninjas, the private firm without any election auditing experience hired by Senate President Karen Fann to conduct the audit, but also True the Vote which has been at the forefront of denying the results of the 2020 election.
“In each instance and in each matter, the aforementioned parties did not provide any evidence to support their allegations,” that memo stated. “The information that was provided was speculated in many instances and when investigated by our agents and support staff, was found to be inaccurate.”
And there was something else in the memo.
The investigators said that there were elected officials who had made public statements asserting that voting fraud had occurred and that fraud was a factor in the outcome of the 2020 election.
Yet when actually questioned by investigators — under circumstances where they were told they could be prosecuted for making false reports to law enforcement agencies — “the elected officials did not repeat or make such assertions.”
That included Mark Finchem, at the time a Republican representative from Oro Valley and now a state senator from Prescott. Finchem had publicly stated he had a source reporting that more than 30,000 fraudulent or fictitious votes were registered in Pima County during the 2020 general election. Investigators then requested to speak with him.
“During that meeting, Mr. Finchem did not repeat those allegations, specifically stating he did not have any evidence of fraud and he did not wish to take up our time,” the investigators reported.
What he did provide were four ballots he said was evidence of a flawed process for mailing and counting ballots.
The investigators, however, said they found the ballots had been mailed to prior residents of the address on file, the residents had moved, the ballots cannot be forward and they were unopened and not counted.
They also said that Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, who had alleged widespread fraud in the 2020 election “refused to meet with us, saying she was waiting to see the ‘perp walk’ of those who committed fraud during the election.”
Federal grand jury subpoenas records from 2020 Arizona election audit
Senate President Warren Petersen complies with federal subpoena for audit records
Attorney General Kris Mayes calls the grand jury inquiry “weaponization”
A federal grand jury apparently is looking at the results of a long-ago-debunked “audit” of the 2020 Arizona election.
Senate President Warren Petersen said in a social media post on Monday that he “received and complied with” a federal grand jury subpoena for records related to the Senate audit of Maricopa County results following the 2020 election. That is a race where Joe Biden outpolled Donald Trump.
“The FBI has the records,” Petersen said.
He declined to comment further.
This comes just weeks after the FBI raided Fulton County, Ga. — another state where Trump lost in 2020 — seizing their election records from that year.
Both events come amid ongoing claims by Trump, who lost the 2020 election, that there was extensive fraud. And he has publicly urged his Department of Justice to investigate.
“Great!!!” the president posted on social media in response to the reports of the subpoena in Arizona.
There was no immediate response from the FBI.
But what Trump — or his agency — hopes to get out of it remains unclear.
In fact, Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, who reviewed what he got in 2022 from then-Senate President Karen Fann, found the report prepared by Cyber Ninjas as deeply flawed.
Brnovich for example, noted that the report claimed that 282 people who had allegedly died in early October 2020 cast ballots in the November general election.
“Our agents investigated all individuals that Cyber Ninjas reported as dead,” he said. “Many were very surprised to learn they were allegedly deceased.”
In fact, the attorney general said, only one of 282 listed voters on that report actually was deceased. The others were not only quite alive but also current voters.
But it wasn’t just what Cyber Ninjas had provided that Brnovich concluded was largely unfounded.
He said his agency’s Election Integrity Unit looked at the names of another 409 allegedly dead voters that came from other sources. And then investigators went through yet another report of 5,943 names, which made no distinction between dead voters and dead registrants.
“Once again, these claims were thoroughly investigated and resulted in only a handful of potential cases,” Brnovich told Fann.
“Some were so absurd the names and birth dates didn’t even match the deceased,” he reported. “And others included dates of death after the election.”
And Brnovich said while his agency has previously prosecuted other instances of dead people voting, even those cases “were ultimately determined to be isolated incidents.”
Of note is that the audit also included a hand count of the 2.1 million Maricopa County ballots. And it found that Biden actually outpolled Trump by an even larger margin than the official tally.
Responding to the reports of a grand jury subpoena, Kris Mayes, the current attorney general, cited the Brnovich investigation into the Cyber Ninjas report. And she said that complaints and allegations submitted to the AG’s office “were also unsupported by factual evidence.”
“Warren Petersen knows all this,” she said. “He has known it for years.”
Mayes also said that Petersen, who is running to be the GOP nominee for attorney general to take her on in November, has been “an unrepentant election denier.” She pointed to a rally he had after the election in 2020 claiming “we certified the vote prematurely.”
Petersen then co-chaired the oversight of the Cyber Ninjas inquiry with Fann.
Mayes also took a shot at the president, saying that what his administration appears to be pursuing is not a legitimate law enforcement inquiry.
“It is the weaponization of federal law enforcement in service of crackpots and lies,” she said.
The 2022 report by Brnovich was only one of several that concluded that Cyber Ninjas’ findings, which had never conducted an election audit before being hired by Fann, were misleading or outright wrong.
Other claims had since been debunked, including people voting duplicate ballots, machine-filled-in ballots, missing signatures on absentee ballots, and tallying machines linked to the internet.
For example, Doug Logan, CEO of Cyber Ninjas, claimed that the county logged 74,232 more early ballots than the number of requests sent out.
County spokesman Fields Moseley, whose staff worked with the county recorder to research the claims, said in response at the time, there were two problems with that.
First, he said the records show there were 2,364,426 requests for early ballots, with 1,918,024 returned.
“So the claim is not just wrong but completely wrong,” he said.
Aside from that, Moseley pointed out that there are two ways to vote early: with a mail-in ballot or going directly to one of the early voting locations. And in the latter case, people are handed ballots that are prepared there but lumped into the early ballot category.
“So it’s not unusual that we would have more early votes than mail-in ballots sent,” Moseley said.
There even was a lawsuit over a related issue of whether the tabulation machines were properly recording votes when ballots, which had been damaged or had extra marks, had to be redone by hand so they could be fed through counting machines.
In that case, Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Brutinel said that a random check of 1,626 of these ballots, ordered by a trial court, found an error rate of as low as 0.37% or as high as 0.55%.
But the justice said that extrapolating that out to the 27,869 ballots that had to be duplicated to be able to be counted would have gained Donald Trump just 103 votes or, at best, 153 votes, “neither of which is sufficient to call the election results into question.”
Arizona state senators propose bill to restrict medical care for transgender children
Senators claim children are being “mutilated” by transgender surgery, despite it being illegal for years
Democrats argue the measures send a message that the state is trying to “erase” transgender children
State senators are using the claim that children are being “mutilated” by transgender surgery to block any form of hormone treatment or medical help for transgender children — even though it’s been illegal for years for doctors to conduct “gender-affirming surgery” on minors in Arizona.
“We are now starting to see these children grow up,” said Senate President Warren Petersen.
“They have been mutilated, they have been chemically castrated, they have been basically treated as experiments by adults,” said the Gilbert Republican. “This is a barbaric practice, this is torture, mutilation.”
However, a 2022 law already makes it a crime to perform “irreversible gender reassignment surgery” on minors.
But that fact did not stop proponents of SB 1095 from using that to advance a measure that would cut off the ability of minors who already are getting other treatments, like hormone treatments, from getting further care from their doctors in Arizona.
“Blocking access to these drugs for the minors who rely upon them is cruel and dehumanizing,” said Sen. Lauren Kuby.
Kuby said doctors already follow a standard of care.
“Why are we interfering with that standard of care,” she asked. “Any decision to move down this path of puberty blockers or hormones is already taken slowly according to specified criteria based on medical science.”
And she said that all medical treatment is performed with the informed consent of both the minor and the parents.
The move to further restrict certain care for transgender individuals was just one of several measures also approved Monday by the Senate on party-line votes.
Other measures would:
Restrict the use of bathrooms and locker rooms at schools to the gender a student was assigned at birth;
Prohibit teachers from referring to a student by a preferred pronoun or name unless the parents first approve;
Making doctors who perform gender transition procedures on minors subject to strict personal liability for all costs if that person wants to “detransition” within 25 years of when the process starts.
The proposals on bathrooms and pronouns are being combined into a single measure — and done in a way that would leave the final word to voters in November. That is designed to get around Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has already vetoed both of these ideas.
Monday’s votes came over the objections of Democrats who said that all these measures send a message to transgender children that the state is trying to “erase” them.
But Sen. Mark Finchem said the issue is more basic.
“The operable word in this bill is ‘minors,’ not adults capable of making long-term decisions,” said the Prescott Republican. Consider, he said, the fact that lawmakers have decided that minors cannot buy cigarettes, alcohol or certain other products “because it damages their bodies.”
But Finchem, like Petersen, promoted the bill based on the already illegal surgery.
“It’s been testified in hearings that many of these young people were convinced that if they didn’t alter their body … they’d kill themselves,” he said. “I think it’s reprehensible for a medical professional to tell a child that,” saying they are “children incapable of making decisions that are long term.”
And Finchem insisted that some of what passes for a person’s belief that he or she is in the wrong body is transitory.
“When you have a young lady who thinks she is a tomboy — and I know plenty of them, that’s kind of a country thing — they move past that given time and they work through whatever adolescent challenges they might have,” he said.
But Kuby, in discussing the related measure on physician liability, said there is no data to suggest that there is a large percent of people who, having undergone sexual reassignment, are looking to go back.
She said a survey of more than 84,000 transgender, non-binary and gender nonconforming individuals who were older than 18 found that less than one-half percent had detransitioned back to the gender of their birth.
“The same survey said 98% felt happier and healthy after they embraced the person they were meant to be,” Kuby said.
Sen. Analise Ortiz, D-Phoenix, argued that there is a broader reason for lawmakers to reject any effort to decide what medical treatments are available — bad precedent.
“If we pass something as broad and far-reaching as SB 1095 for one medical treatment today, what stops this body from doing it to other medical treatments or procedures?” she asked. “What’s the next procedure we will attack because it offends the sensibilities of someone on this floor,” Ortiz continued.
SCR 1006 is a retread of previously vetoed efforts by Senate Majority Leader John Kavanagh to control who uses which bathrooms and locker rooms, and whether teachers must honor a student’s request to be addressed by a name or pronoun of their choice. But the Fountain Hills Republican acknowledged that the underlying issue is that voters, who will get to decide the issue, do not believe there is such a thing as transgenderism.
“Our society has not gotten to that point where a sizable number of people think that you can will yourself to a different biological gender,” he said. More to the point, Kavanagh said, it “recognizes that human beings have modesty, especially that 16-year-old female who may have to be standing in an open school shower next to an 18-year-old biological male who identifies as female.”
Foes questioned whether most schools actually have open showers. But they also asked exactly how all this would be enforced.
“What are we going to have, the penis police here?” asked Kuby.
Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan said there’s more to SCR 1006.
She said the same measure that senators voted to put on the ballot says if someone was born a boy, a teacher must address that person as “he.” Nor can the teacher respect a biological male student’s request to be called a different name than one that normally aligns with their gender.
“I really do not understand the Republican obsession with genitals, children’s genitals, here, when it’s no surprise the leader of their party, the president of the United States, continues to block accountability for the Epstein files,” said Sundareshan.
Kavanagh, however, said that the issue of preferred pronouns is important because it may be an indication of gender dysphoria, something that should be brought to a parent’s attention because he believes it could lead to suicide.
Sen. Mitzi Epstein said it is true that depression and suicide are higher among transgender individuals.
“And the reason is not because of who they are,” said the Tempe Democrat.
“The reason for that depression is because of the way that society treats them,” she said. “And the way that society treats them is shown in bills like this.”
Proposals dealing with the question of biological sex versus gender are not new at the Legislature.
There is, for example, a 2022 law that says that sports designated for women or girls “may not be open to students of the male sex.” And by “sex,” the law means the one assigned at birth.
There are also efforts to overrule a federal judge’s decision that individuals undergoing transition are entitled to seek an amended birth certificate from the Department of Health Services.
GOP senators want to honor late conservative activist Charlie Kirk with two bills
Senate Bill 1010 renames Loop 202 as “Charlie Kirk Loop 202”
Lawmakers also propose a bill to create specialized Charlie Kirk license plates
Republican state senators found not just one but two ways to honor the late Charlie Kirk.
And one is crafted to help raise money for Turning Point USA, the organization he co-founded.
On a party-line vote, the Senate approved SB1010 to rename the entire 78-mile Loop 202 around the Phoenix metro area as the “Charlie Kirk Loop 202.” The proposal comes from Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Queen Creek, who said it will ensure that “Arizonans are regularly reminded of the tremendous legacy of this champion of free speech who was assassinated for his stand.”
Moments later, on the same 16-12 margin, the Senate gave its blessing to SB1439. This second separate measure would authorize the state Department of Transportation to create a special license plate that Arizonans could purchase to memorialize Kirk.
Both measures now go to the House. And, if approved there, both would require the signature of Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs to become law
A spokeswoman for Hobbs declined to comment about her intent.
The votes followed some debate about whether the controversial Kirk, assassinated last year, is worthy of the honor and the maneuver to bypass the normal procedure to name a highway — a procedure that requires someone to have been dead for at least five years.
It starts with the highway.
Sen. Mitzi Epstein read a series of messages she said she got from constituents opposed to honoring Kirk. One read by the Tempe Democrat expressed the view that such honors should be reserved for those who bring communities together and advanced the common good, “not those whose public record is defined by divisive rhetoric and promotion of hatred.”
Green Valley Democratic Sen. Rosanna Gabaldón said the proposal bypasses the normal process — one set up by the Legislature itself — that assigns the task of reviewing name changes to the Arizona State Board on Geographic and Historic Names.
“SB1010 politicizes the state highway naming process,” she said, with the board designed to pursue a process “that’s supposed to be neutral (and) reflective.”
“Our transportation system should unite Arizonans, not be used for political statements,” Gabaldón said.
Sen. Lauren Kuby pointed out that the board policy — the one lawmakers are overriding — is not to name anything after someone until at least five years after they have died. That, said the Tempe Democrat, “both avoids political controversy and allows historical perspective.”
And Sen. Kiana Sears said this whole controversy was avoidable.
The Mesa Democrat pointed out that when the measure was being heard in the Senate Committee on Public Safety she offered a compromise: Call Loop 202 the “Freedom of Speech Highway.” That gained no traction.
Petersen, in a prepared statement after the vote, defended his bill and the decision for lawmakers to create this honor for Kirk.
“He believed Americans could disagree and still engage one another civilly and respectfully,” the Senate president said.
“He encouraged people, especially young people, to get involved in civic life and help shape the future of their communities,” Petersen continued. “Designating Loop 202 ensures his contribution to civic engagement and public participation won’t be forgotten.”
The approval of the license plate bill, SB1439, despite its party-line vote, provoked less debate.
That is not surprising, given the long history of lawmakers of both parties approving a series of requests by various organizations to create special license plates. In fact, there are now more than 100 options from which motorists can choose, from Boy Scouts and promoting organ donations to funding research into Alzheimer’s diseases and funding the Arizona Life Coalition to promote its anti-abortion measure.
Part of the reason for these requests is to visibly promote the cause. But most of it is designed to raise money.
It can be lucrative: ADOT reports the charities that have these plates collected $12 million in 2024.
In this case, as in for all special plates, that starts with the group that seeks to benefit by raising the $32,000 to start the process, including design of the plates. Once that is raised, ADOT adds it to the list of available options — if the vehicle owner pays an extra $25 a year.
Of that fee, $8 goes to ADOT, with the sponsoring organization getting the $17 balance.
There is an interesting quirk with how all that happens: Lawmakers cannot approve a special plate and say in statute that only a particular organization can qualify. Instead, they legally have to craft each measure that — at least on paper — is designed to let any group that qualifies to get the plate and benefit from the sales.
But there are ways around that. The key is in the wording.
So, strictly speaking, there’s nothing in SB1439 that says the money will go to Turning Point USA.
Instead, it says the entity wanting the cash must “educate people through the development of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to engage in communities to restore traditional values, including patriotism and fiscal responsibility and the respect for life, liberty and family.”
But to further ensure that Turning Point — and only Turning Point — qualifies, it adds a requirement to have a grassroots activist network on high school and college campuses in the state and that it assists college students in registering to vote and obtain absentee ballots.
And if that doesn’t narrow it enough, there’s one other condition: The qualifying group must “have been founded in 2012,” which happens to be the year that Turning Point was founded.
Republican Rodney Glassman claims to have most cash on hand in Arizona attorney general race
Glassman’s $3.3 million includes $1 million of his own money, campaign finance report shows
Democrat Kris Mayes, the incumbent, has raised over $3.7 million for reelection
Rodney Glassman, a Republican contender for attorney general, is boasting that he has more cash on hand than anyone else in the race. What Glassman does not say — and what his latest campaign finance report does not make clear — is that his $3.3 million war chest includes $1 million of his own money.
Still, that still leaves him more than both of his other GOP foes in the race combined.
But incumbent Attorney General Kris Mayes reports more than $2.8 million cash on hand from contributions alone, with no reported self-funding spent for another four years in office.
In broader strokes, Glassman has collected $2.3 million — not counting his personal loan — in the race, with about $268,000 in expenses so far.
Senate President Warren Petersen, in his own bid to be the Republican nominee, listed total contributions of more than $1.2 million. He, too, self-funded by providing $123,500 in loans to his campaign.
With expenses of about $106,000, that leaves him with $1.3 million in the bank — including his own money.
Also in the hunt for the GOP nomination is Greg Roeberg.
His latest campaign finance report lists more than $426,000 in donations, but $400,000 of that is a loan he made to his campaign on the last day of 2025.
He has about $416,000 cash on hand.
Mayes got to her $2.8 million in the bank with total contributions so far of $3.7 million. But she already has spent more than $1 million of that on her reelection bid.
The race for secretary of state is shaping up to be nowhere near as expensive.
Incumbent Democrat Adrian Fontes has collected more than $780,000 in donations against nearly $380,000 in expenses, leaving him with about $461,000 the bank.
Republican Alexander Kolodin, currently a state lawmaker, has collected about $249,000 against expenses of less than $22,000, with about $252,000 cash on hand.
In the contest for state treasurer, Republican Elijah Norton listed his total donations at $2.3 million. But of that, $2.1 million came out of his own pocket. And, after expenses, the amount he has listed in the bank pretty much matches that $2.1 million figure.
Democrat Nick Mansour has about $245,000 cash on hand after donations of more than $410,000 and expenses approaching $148,000.
Incumbent Republican Kimberly Yee, having served two terms, cannot run for reelection. But Yee now has her sights set on another office – that of state superintendent of public instruction.
Yee reported having collected more than $287,000 since entering the race against just $26,295 in expenses, leaving her with more than $257,000.
She hopes to beat incumbent Tom Horne in the Republican primary.
His donations so far are listed at about $416,000 against less than $20,000 in expenses, resulting in cash on hand of about $396,000.
Several Democrats have lined up to take on who survives the GOP primary.
The one with the most money in the bank is Brett Newby with $162,000, but only about $4,000 of that comes from donors, with the balance being his own money.
Teresa Ruiz lists donations of more than $117,000. She, too, has put her own money into the campaign, but just $10,000.
With expenses of about $68,000, that leaves her close to $49,000.
Also in the Democratic race is Michael Butts.
But he is taking only limited campaign donations in hopes of qualifying for public financing. If he gets 1,500 $5 donations he will be entitled to $147,836 for his primary campaign.
There also is a candidate from the Arizona Independent Party running for state schools chief.
Stephen Neal, who has put more than $1,000 of his own money into the race, has just $304 in the bank after listing receipts totaling $4,200.
Arizona Republic reporter Don Bolles was killed in a car bombing 50 years ago
Rep. Selina Bliss is pushing for a memorial to Bolles to be placed at Wesley Bolin Plaza
Don Bolles’ assassination sparked a unique investigation into Arizona’s organized crime
Don Bolles (archive photo)
It will be 50 years this coming June since Arizona Republic reporter Don Bolles was killed in a car bombing linked to an investigation he was doing.
And Rep. Selina Bliss says she thinks the timing may finally be right to line up the votes – and overcome some opposition from a few within her own Republican Party – to allow a memorial to him to be placed across the street from the Capitol in Wesley Bolin Plaza.
It isn’t a question of money.
HB2079, sponsored by the Prescott lawmaker, says any funds for its construction must be privately raised. And that’s been the financial case now for the entire time since the idea was first proposed in 2023 by Phoenix Democratic Rep. Jennifer Longdon and Republican Sen. T.J. Shope from Coolidge.
What prior efforts have run up against is Sen. Jake Hoffman who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Queen Creek Republican, who has never explained his opposition, has used his position to block any such plans.
And Senate President Warren Petersen has, in the past, chosen not to exercise his ability to have the proposal sidestep Hoffman’s committee.
Bliss, a Prescott Republican, picked up the cause after Longdon left the Legislature. She said she thinks this might be the year, particularly since prior efforts by her and others have generated more than enough bipartisan support to secure the necessary votes.
“I spoke with his daughter,” she told Capitol Media Services, referring to Diane. “She is stepping up to support the effort,” with an eye on the 50th anniversary.
“This is it,” Bliss said.
Her original bill, which earlier cleared the House on a 45-15 bipartisan margin, was assigned by Petersen to Hoffman’s committee, where it died.
So she cooked up a plan: Bliss got permission from Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, to tack the exact same language onto an unrelated bill that had already passed the Senate when it went to the House. Again, a 45-11 approval.
That sent the now-amended bill back to the Senate where Petersen could simply have brought the new version up for a final vote of the full chamber, without further committee action. He did not. And the bill died.
“Senate leadership failed to move it forward,” Bliss said.
And this year?
“I wonder if Senate President Petersen can assign it to a different committee to give it a chance?” Bliss asked.
Petersen did not respond to multiple inquiries asking whether he would again assign any House-passed bill to Hoffman’s committee where it would again meet the same fate. Nor would he say whether he would use his power to get around Hoffman.
Still, some things are different this year.
Petersen, now running for state attorney general, is looking at a larger constituency than just his home community.
And there’s something else.
The Senate president is pushing his own plan to create an honor for someone else who was struck down. He wants to rename a 78-mile of freeway that loops in and around Phoenix for conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who was killed in a shooting earlier this year in Utah, as a memorial.
“It is right that Arizonans are regularly reminded of the tremendous legacy of this champion for free speech who was assassinated for his stand, which is why I introduced this bill,” Petersen explained earlier this month.
Bliss took note.
“When I saw the Charlie Kirk proposal, I thought, ‘Well, this is perfect,’ because the precedent will be set that Sen. Warren Petersen is going to run an individual out there that’s part of our history,” she said. “So this makes the Don Bolles bill even more applicable to this movement to acknowledge these individuals and their important part of history.”
That history, Bliss said, is what drives her on this issue.
“I think I was 13 when this happened,” she said. “It very much affected me to think that this could happen in the United States of America, someone being assassinated with a car bomb for discovering the truth.”
Bolles had gone to the Clarendon Hotel in midtown Phoenix in 1976 to meet with a source. That person, later identified as John Harvey Adamson, never showed up.
As he was backing out, six sticks of dynamite which had been attached to his 1976 Datsun 210, were detonated by remote control. He died 11 days later.
Adamson, seeking to avoid the death penalty, agreed to testify against Max Dunlap, saying he had ordered Bolles to be killed, with police saying that was because of a story the reporter had written about a friend, liquor magnate Kemper Marley.
Dunlap eventually was sentenced to life behind bars after a first conviction was overturned. He died in prison after a clemency plea was rejected.
Adamson and James Robison, who was accused of actually planting and detonating the bomb, also have since died.
Bliss said it’s important for people to be told that story.
“We have so many people that come to Arizona and they do not understand our important, rich history,” Bliss said. “And this is very much a part of it.”
Now the question for lawmakers is whether Bolles deserves to be honored in Wesley Bolin Plaza, alongside Arizona’s various veterans, pioneer women, the Ten Commandments, and Jesuit missionary Father Kino. The plaza already is home to more than two dozen plaques, statues, and other memorabilia, including large guns from the USS Arizona and USS Missouri.
State law requires that any memorial, regardless of whether, as in this case, the tab is to be picked up through private donations, must receive legislative approval and the governor’s signature.
The idea has had its detractors.
One was Rep. Jacqueline Parker, a Mesa Republican in 2023.
“So, the only thing this guy accomplished is that he was a reporter?” she asked in voting against the measure.
It also initially drew opposition from Rep. Alexander Kolodin.
But the Scottsdale Republican, now running for secretary of state, later changed his mind after saying he had developed a new appreciation for Bolles – even if it came with a slap at other reporters.
“Don Bolles, as opposed to the current hacks that we have in the liberal media, was actually a newsman,” Kolodin said.
Bolles’ assassination, unusual in a country like the United States, provoked an immediate and unique response within the journalism community. Nearly 40 reporters from newspapers around the country, sponsored by Investigative Reporters and Editors Inc., launched an extensive probe that resulted in a series of stories about organized crime in Arizona.
The series was printed in the Arizona Daily Star and in many newspapers around the country, though not in The Arizona Republic, where Bolles had worked.
Memorials at Wesley Bolin Plaza have not been without their controversy.
In 2011, the Senate voted to tear down part of a memorial to the victims of the 2001 terrorist attack at the World Trade Center after some lawmakers said they were upset by some of the phrases carved into the ring. Then-Sen. Al Melvin, R-Tucson, said the memorial should have only “patriotic, pro-American words” and not phrases that represented attitudes at the time, like “fear of foreigners.”
And in 2020, a monument to Confederate troops was removed from the park at the request of the United Daughters of the Confederacy. This group placed it there in 1961 during increased activity in the civil rights movement.
The group stated that the monument needed repair. But there was something else, with demonstrations and it being vandalized since the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. The organization said it would be “unwise” to repair it where it is located, due to the current political climate.”
It has never been replaced.
Among others memorials and monuments still in place are those honoring Purple Heart recipients, crime victims, canines that worked with law enforcement, former Gov. Ernest McFarland, and the 19 members of the Granite Mountain Hotshot Crew killed during a 2013 fire.
You don't have credit card details available. You will be redirected to update payment method page. Click OK to continue.
Sign In
Free Newsletter
