Arizona Celebrates Freer & Fairer Election Thanks to Efforts of State Legislature

STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX – Arizonans celebrated rapid results for the 2024 primary election cycle thanks to the historic election reform bill passed by the Arizona State Legislature.   For the first time, HB 2785 (Kolodin/Rogers) required elections officials to continue tabulation through the night “without delay until complete.” It also clarified that elections officials may begin tabulating early ballots upon receipt, with robust protections to ensure that vote totals were not prematurely accessed. Now, just the day after the election, results are known for most major races, reducing unnecessary delay and limiting the time during which administrative or other errors could occur.   In addition, thanks to a year-long joint investigation by Chairman Alexander Kolodin of the Committee on Oversight, Accountability and Big Tech and Chairwomen Jacqueline Parker and Wendy Rogers of the House and Senate Committees on Elections, partisan observers are in place at Runbeck for the first time. This, combined with HB 2785’s new requirement to hard count election-day drop-offs on site, helped to facilitate a smoother and more secure operation of that part of the process as well.   Representative Kolodin, the bill’s sponsor, had this to say:   “The House Committee on Municipal Oversight and Elections is thrilled to see our historic elections reform bill is paying off with a better experience for Arizona voters than ever before. I am very grateful to all of my colleagues, especially Speaker Toma, Senator Rogers, Representative Heap, and Representative Terech, for being wonderful partners to help bring about this historic reform.   “We are grateful to the election workers who, for the first time, labored through the night to hard count election day drop-offs and tabulate ballots. Voters can see that the good work of the legislature has been paying off in terms of faster results, a smoother process, and a more secure system! Seeing these concrete gains only reinforces our resolve to continue to improve upon the efficiency, security, and integrity of Arizona’s election system.”

Grand/35th Ave and Indian School Rd project receives final clearance

PHOENIX – The Arizona Department of Transportation has released the final Environmental Assessment (EA) and Design Concept Report for the planned project to reconstruct the Grand Avenue (US 60) intersection with 35th Avenue and Indian School Road in Phoenix. Completion of the EA, which resulted in a finding of No Significant Impact, allows the project to advance into final design and right-of-way acquisition. Project plans include raising 35th Avenue to create a new elevated intersection with Indian School Road above Grand Avenue and the BNSF Railway tracks to improve traffic flow and safety. This will allow Grand Avenue traffic to flow freely at this location without any cross traffic, and eliminate 35th Avenue and Indian School Rd traffic crossings with the railroad.  ADOT will design and build the project in coordination with the city of Phoenix and the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), the metropolitan planning organization for the greater Phoenix region. The project is identified in MAG’s Regional Transportation Plan and is funded in part by Proposition 400, a half-cent sales tax approved by Maricopa County voters in 2004.  For more information about the project and to review study documents visit the project website at azdot.gov/Grand-35 .

AZ Supreme Court Strikes Down Union ‘Release Time’ on Taxpayers’ Dime

A unanimous Arizona Supreme Court today struck down one of the most egregious taxpayer abuses in the state—a type of subsidy to public-sector unions known as “release time. And the court made clear once again that Arizona’s constitutional ban on government subsidies means what it says. Today’s decision is the first time that a state high court has squarely struck down release time as unconstitutional. It came after the Goldwater Institute sued the city of Phoenix on behalf of two city employees and taxpayers who objected to being forced to pay for unions to engage in recruiting, political lobbying, and other practices that don’t benefit the taxpaying public. “The costs and benefits here are so one-sided,” declared the justices, that the arrangement “represents an impermissible subsidy to a private entity.” Release time is a practice that city, state, and federal governments engage in, whereby government workers are released from the jobs they were hired to perform to work full-time for the union instead—yet are still paid their taxpayer-funded salaries and benefits. While on release time, these government employees engage in political and lobbying activities, attend union conferences and meetings, recruit new members to the union, and do other things that advance the union’s own interests, not those of the public. In this case, the city signed a Memorandum of Understanding, or MOU, with a local unit of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees union. Under that MOU, the city gave the union several release time benefits, including four full-time release positions. In other words, the city paid four employees to work exclusively for the union on the taxpayers’ dime. The MOU said the cost of release time counted as part of the “total compensation” paid to all unit employees, whether members of the labor union or not. But that raised a problem: if release time was being paid as part of their “total compensation,” then it violates the free expression and association rights of these employees to force them to give up their compensation to fund the political speech of union representatives with whom these employees disagree. That was just what the U.S. Supreme Court said in the 2018 landmark Janus ruling . On the other hand, if release time did not count as part of their compensation, and was instead paid for out of the city’s own pocket, then it was a direct subsidy to the union, which violates the Gift Clause, the part of Arizona Constitution that forbids government from giving public resources to private entities. In today’s 7-0 ruling, the Supreme Court chose the second option: the city pays for release time, it said, and that means release time violates the Gift Clause. First, what the city pays is so disproportionate to what the city gets in return (which is effectively nothing), that paying for release time is effectively a handout, which is illegal. Second, the justices rejected the city’s argument that as long as the MOU as a whole passes muster, any specific expenditure of public resources included within it must also be OK. “It would negate the purposes of the Gift Clause if scrutiny could be avoided merely because a gift is contained within a larger contract,” the court declared . Instead, “in all Gift Clause cases, courts must probe the reality of the transaction”—and including release time provisions “as part of a larger contract does not insulate them from review.” What’s more, the court expressed skepticism that release time serves any beneficial public purpose at all . “The plain language of the Gift Clause aims to prevent subsidies to private individuals, associations, and corporations,” it held, and in this case release time employees are paid public funds to engage in private “union activities.” Since that doesn’t benefit the general public, the expenditure might be categorically prohibited. The justices found it unnecessary to definitively rule on that question, however, since the fact that the city gets nothing for its money was alone enough grounds to find the MOU unconstitutional. Today’s ruling is a watershed decision that ensures taxpayer dollars will be spent to advance public interests, not private special interests, including the politically powerful special interests of government labor unions. And that will have nationwide ramifications, too. Just weeks ago, the Texas Supreme Court issued a lengthy decision making clear that the Lone Star State’s Constitution also bars government from giving away taxpayer money to private interests. Government entities throughout Arizona—and the United States—should take notice when they seek to transfer taxpayer funds to their political cronies. Read the decision here , and read more about the case here .

Special Open Meeting Reminder: Integrated Resource Planning Workshop

Phoenix, Ariz. –  The Arizona Corporation Commission will host an Integrated Resource Planning Workshop on Wednesday, July 31, 2024, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.  The purpose of the workshop is to provide regulated electric utilities an opportunity to present to the Commission and stakeholders an overview of their IRP’s including expected resource portfolios, planned procurement, and other key elements of their IRP’s.  The IRP’s must propose how they will meet reliability, stability, and affordability goals over the next 15 years, given the expected rapid growth of customers’ energy needs.  Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) and UNS Electric (UNSE), and Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (AEPCO) are scheduled to deliver presentations and answer questions on their IRP’s.  Stakeholders such as Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (AriSEIA) and Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP) will also deliver presentations on their assessments of the IRP’s and take questions.   Three or more Commissioners may attend for consideration and discussion, but no votes will be taken.  Other decision makers including Commissioners; advisors and administrative law judges may also attend the workshop.  There will not be an opportunity for public comments during the workshop, however, public comments may be filed to eDocket in this matter.  Resource Planning Advisory Council (RPAC) members will be allowed to ask clarifying, specific questions only during the workshop and may not provide commentary.     Members of the public have three options to attend the workshop:
  1. In person :  Hearing Room One, 1200 W. Washington St, Phoenix, AZ 85007
 
  1. Over the phone:  1-877-309-3457   Passcode: 801972877##
 
  1. Watch a livestream online:  http://www.azcc.gov/live
  All documents can be viewed, and public comments may be filed to this docket at https://edocket.azcc.gov/ under Docket #E-99999A22-0046.

Remain to Be Counted

MOHAVE COUNTY, AZ (July 31, 2024) – As in every election, additional ballots tabulated after election day can change the outcome of any contest. Although most tabulations were completed late Tuesday night, following the primary election, early ballots received just prior to election day remain to be signature verified and then processed and tabulated. This is standard practice in all elections. Due to receiving them late in the election process, these ballots cannot be fully processed before election day cutoff time.  Due to the above process outlined, there are a total of 6,692 early ballots to be signature verified starting this morning, July 31 at 8am. Three thousand-605 of those 6,692 early ballots were dropped off by voters at poll sites. Additionally, 350 provisional ballots were cast by voters on election day, which need to be vetted by the voter registration staff to determine their validity to be tabulated.  Valid early ballots and provisional ballots will be received by the elections department from the recorder’s office starting Thursday morning, August 1. Then, the elections department will tally the ballots and report the results daily at the end of the workday. Ballot tallying and reporting of tallies will continue until all valid ballots are counted.  All ballots will be tabulated in the unofficial election results not later than Monday, August 5. It is expected that the vast majority of ballots will be tabulated by this Saturday and those interested can view those result on our county site. This is except for a minimal amount of ballots that will be cured by the voter registration department over the weekend. Early ballots can be tracked at www.myarizona.vote for received, pending, or accepted ballot status, as well as the status of a provisional ballot. Those interested in following the outcome of tabulations can go to Arizona Election Results on the county website.

Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee Releases the July 2024 Permanent Land Endowment Trust Fund Highlight Report

PHOENIX, AZ – Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee highlighted the June 2024 performance of the Permanent Land Endowment Trust (PLETF) at the State Board of Investment Meeting yesterday. Treasurer Yee reported that the PLETF had a record-high month-end market value of over $8.67 billion as of June 30, 2024, an increase of 50% since Treasurer Yee took office in January 2019. Treasurer Yee reported that the PLETF had a 10-year annualized total return of 7.79%, noting that the PLETF 10-year returns have outperformed average U.S. college and university endowments for 10 years in a row. Treasurer Yee also reported that the over $456.1 million in PLETF distributions were made to 13 beneficiaries in FY24, which will increase to $481 million in FY25.

Attorney General Mayes Issues Statement on Uranium Hauling Across Tribal and Rural Lands

PHOENIX — Attorney General Kris Mayes today issued the below statement following reports of uranium being hauled across rural and Tribal lands without the promised notification and lack of transparency on emergency preparedness planning: Yesterday, I was notified by Navajo Nation President Dr. Buu Nygren, Navajo Nation Attorney General Ethel Branch and Coconino County Supervisor Patrice Horstman that the U.S. Forest Service had informed them that Energy Fuels Resources, Inc. (EFRI) was transporting uranium ore from the Pinyon Plain Mine through our northern Arizona rural communities, including through the ancestral lands of the Havasupai Tribe onto the Navajo Nation and through a portion of Hopi lands as well. The U.S. Forest Service was also reportedly notified hours after the trucks had already left the mine. Per these conversations, I was informed that EFRI and the mine owners had vowed to give all of the stakeholders at least a two week notice prior to hauling of the uranium ore from the mine to a processing facility in Blanding, Utah. I was also informed by Supervisor Horstman that the County and other stakeholders had asked for EFRI’s emergency plan on several occasions, yet they had still not received it from the company as of yesterday. My office is currently researching our options, but I remain deeply committed to doing everything in my power to protect the health and safety of all Arizonans. Hauling radioactive materials through rural Arizona, including across the Navajo Nation, without providing notice or transparency and without providing an emergency plan is unacceptable. I also remain concerned about the potential risks to Arizona’s groundwater associated with the activities of this mine, including the risks posed to the only source of drinking water for the Havasupai Tribe. The Havasupai are the guardians of the Grand Canyon – our Arizona and National treasure, and they deserve to know that their groundwater will be protected. It is important to highlight that the Environmental Impact Statement for Pinyon Plain Mine was conducted decades ago (1986). And it is also important to remember that the Navajo, Hopi and Havasupai Nations are sovereign nations and have the right to protect the health and safety of their people. We will continue to work together with our sovereign Tribal partners, rural county and city leaders, U.S. Forest Service and other stakeholders to protect our communities.

Legislative Coordinating Council renews contract with KanFocus, wants bids for servicer to track 50 states

The Legislative Coordinating Council on Tuesday renewed its bill tracking services contract with KanFocus but also authorized a subcommittee to kick-start a process to solicit bids for providers with the ability to track legislation in all 50 states. 

The initial recommendation was to renew the contract with KanFocus for four months to bridge the gap of the expired contract until the start of the 2025 legislative session.

The council reached a compromise with a representative of KanFocus, allowing the contract to be renewed for a year at approximately $108,000, the 2022 price point. KanFocus, which has provided its bill tracking services to the Kansas Legislature for the past 18 years, entered the meeting in search of a rate increase. A two-year extension was also on the table. 

Speaker Pro Tem Blake Carpenter, R-Derby, objected to the one-year contract renewal, asserting that legislative staff and revisors immediately need the “best product available” and waiting another year would be counterproductive. 

“We should give them as many tools as possible in order to make their jobs as easy as possible,” Carpenter said. “And a search function of the 50 states would make their jobs a whole lot easier if it’s already built into the system they’re using.” 

Carpenter added that a company that can track in every state shouldn’t have an issue getting “the software up and running before the 2025 session.” 

“I think we are needlessly binding our hands at this point,” he said. “And I think we can, and should, look at what alternatives are out there to get our members the best product available.” 

Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes, D-Lenexa, indicated she wasn’t that concerned about KanFocus’ ability to track bills beyond Kansas because her office relies on other providers and the Legislative Research Department for bill tracking.

“I do have concern that we say, ‘They have to have access to all 50 states,’” Sykes said of the request-for-proposals document provided by Tom Day, director of Legislative Administrative Services. “My staff works really well with KanFocus.” 

Sykes added that she’s heard positive feedback from representatives of other governmental agencies using KanFocus, highlighting the company’s ability to provide real-time updates of legislation.

“They really like [KanFocus] for Kansas specifically because it’s up-to-date as amendments are being included and addressed,” she said. “Whereas some of those other options don’t have access to that in-the-moment [activity].” 

Day indicated during the meeting that KanFocus might be equipped to track in all 50 states if it linked its services to other states’ “application programmable interfaces.”

Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover, asked if KanFocus would be qualified to submit a contract bid if it’s not equipped to track services in all 50 states. House Speaker Dan Hawkins, R-Wichita, replied that Day’s request-for-proposals memo stipulates the servicer must be able to provide legislation for every state. But Day told State Affairs that his document was merely a draft and “things could change considerably.” 

Masterson contended that the expiring contract should be renewed in order to avoid a service interruption but wanted further review of the expanded tracking option via the council’s subcommittee on administration.

Carpenter objected to Masterson’s motion to approve the one-year contract and refer the request for proposals to the subcommittee, asking that it be divided into separate motions. Carpenter argued that the subcommittee is unevenly composed of two Senate members and only one House member. Instead of referring the item to the subcommittee, Carpenter asked that the council resume discussion at a future meeting. 

Masterson did not appear amused by Carpenter’s substitute motion, asking if “Robert’s Rule of Order” applied to the request. It was determined that Hawkins, who chairs the council, makes the determination. 

“I’ve never been in an LCC meeting that divided a question,” Masterson said.

“The House and Senate should have an equal voice in this matter,” Carpenter said, adding he wants “a place at the table” to engage in dialogue.

Carpenter further noted he is passionate about the issue while also calling for a “legitimate” vetting process. 

“I want to make sure that as many people are able to participate as possible, including the folks over at KanFocus,” he said.

Sykes clarified for Carpenter that the subcommittee would merely be reviewing the parameters of Day’s draft proposal, not evaluating and choosing a bid submission, which the council selects. 

“This is a way to widen it and see everything that is out there,” Hawkins said. 

Carpenter ultimately dissented on the motion to renew the agreement with KanFocus. 

Matt Resnick is a statehouse reporter at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected].

Summit Truck Bodies invests $50M in 2nd Wathena plant

Summit Truck Bodies will invest $50 million to build a new plant in Wathena and double the company’s output.

Gov. Laura Kelly announced the plan Wednesday.

The plant will go next to the existing production and warehouse facility, with construction scheduled to be completed in 20 months. The company expects the expansion to create 80 new jobs.

“Summit Truck Bodies’ expansion is proof that our dedicated workforce, quality of life, and central location draw businesses across various industries,” Kelly said in a news release. “Kansas will continue to partner with first-class companies like Summit Truck Bodies to ensure communities throughout the state have opportunities to prosper.”

The new facility will include a 200,000-square-foot manufacturing space for service body production and the final assembly of service trucks. The plant also will have 20,000 square feet for office spaces and showrooms.

The company will use the current 132,000-square-foot facility for manufacturing lube trucks, drawer systems, cranes, body refurbishments and parts sales.

“A concerted focus on strengthening our state’s advanced manufacturing sector is not only attracting companies from around the world but encouraging existing companies to expand operations right here in Kansas,” Lt. Gov./Commerce Secretary David Toland said in the release. “Working with companies like Summit Truck Bodies is what will keep our state on the dominant trajectory of growth we’re experiencing.”

Summit Truck Bodies Plant Manager Chris Walter said the expansion will “maximize our production efficiency.”

“The advanced equipment will improve fabrication and paint speed, reduce physical strain on our workers, and ensure consistent high quality,” he said in the release.

Wathena Mayor John Hontz said in the release the city is excited about the expansion.

Bryan Richardson is the managing editor at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected] or on X @RichInNews.

Nearly all of Indiana’s public universities critical of state’s proposed high school diplomas

Nearly all of Indiana’s public universities have criticized the state’s proposed high school diplomas, letters sent to top state education officials show.

Education officials have published a draft rule that would create two high school diplomas: the Indiana Graduates Prepared to Succeed diploma and the Indiana Graduates Prepared to Succeed Plus diploma. They would replace Indiana’s four current diplomas and are designed to give students more coursework flexibility. They also place a greater emphasis on students earning college credit and completing work-based learning opportunities in high school.

At the request of education officials, Indiana’s public universities have shared their feedback on the proposed diplomas. Letters to Indiana’s top education officials show most of the universities are wary of the proposed diplomas in their current state.

Their responses came during the draft rule’s first comment period, which closed Tuesday. Indiana Secretary of Education Katie Jenner has said education officials will make changes to the proposed diplomas based on feedback and open a second comment period. The Indiana State Board of Education is expected to unveil the adjustments during its Aug. 14 meeting.

In the letters, many of the universities lauded the state’s goals but questioned if the proposed diplomas would result in unintended consequences. Several universities noted the diplomas, as proposed, appear to conflict with the Indiana Commission for Higher Education’s HOPE Agenda, particularly its goal of improving the state’s slumped college-going rate.

Tony Hahn, Vincennes University’s vice president of government and legal affairs, and Lori Pence, its associate provost of K-12 programs and partnerships, wrote earlier this month that the proposed diplomas should, at a minimum, have equivalent math and English requirements to Indiana’s current Core 40 diploma. They also argued work-based learning opportunities should have credits and grades attached to them to ensure consistent outcomes.

“We applaud the effort to include new opportunities for credit, but we must not lose sight of the need for rigor and baseline mastery to ensure that every high school graduate, regardless of ZIP code, socio- economic status, high school size, or family situation has an opportunity to succeed at Vincennes University,” Hahn and Pence wrote.

Aaron Trump, vice president for government affairs and general counsel at the University of Southern Indiana, wrote that the proposed diploma’s “lack of required, global knowledge is concerning.” In his letter, he suggested Indiana retain the Core 40 with Academic Honors diploma or produce an equivalent diploma.

“Historically students with the Core 40 Honors diploma have been most prepared and most successful in post-secondary education,” Trump wrote. “Eliminating this rather than replacing it creates a gap for best achieving and most ambitious students.”

In June, education officials put forward three optional diploma seals — one each for enrollment, employment and enlistment — as a solution to critics’ worries and a way to signal a student’s competency. The seals would be jointly developed with corresponding experts and would appear on a student’s transcript, the officials say.

The universities’ letters indicate the institutions have coalesced around a tiered enrollment seal in an effort to address their concerns.

Purdue University President Mung Chiang sent a letter to Jenner and Chris Lowery, commissioner of the Indiana Commission for Higher Education, explaining the state’s proposed diplomas do not meet his university’s admission requirements in the subject areas of math, lab sciences, social studies and world language. In another letter, Purdue asked education officials to consider a tiered enrollment seal. Under Purdue’s recommendation, one tier would incorporate Indiana’s Core 40 diploma requirements. A second tier would incorporate most, but not all, of the state’s Core 40 with Academic Honors diploma requirements.

Ball State University also suggested a two-tiered enrollment seal, along with course sequencing and a comprehensive communications campaign for students, families and schools. Indiana University President Pamela Whitten, in a letter to Jenner and Lowery, called for the universities to be involved in crafting the enrollment seal.

Indiana State University President Mike Godard, in another letter, indicated a tiered enrollment seal is being contemplated. He expressed reservations about the approach, though, saying it could confuse students and families.

“We don’t have any concerns about the current diploma options,” Godard wrote.

For months, educators, students and parents have criticized the state’s plan to “reinvent” high school, arguing the proposed diplomas lack rigor and present many financial, transportation, equity and safety challenges.

Education officials have listened to hours of public comments and invited the public to submit feedback online. In addition, they have met with stakeholders and industry leaders who have shared their thoughts.

“This feedback is an indispensable and statutorily required part of the process and is helping to shape not only the foundational courses and competencies required for all students, but also the proposed and still in-development enrollment-ready seal, specifically designed to guide and academically prepare students who will or may want to go to college,” an Indiana Department of Education spokesperson said in an email to State Affairs.

The department believes the enrollment seal “will be key to ensuring every Hoosier student and their parents clearly understand the specific courses and experiences they need in high school in order to be successful in higher education. Continued partnership with higher education institutions, as well as the Indiana Commission for Higher Education, will be essential to this process.”

Contact Jarred Meeks on X @jarredsmeeks or email him at [email protected].

Your search query contained invalid characters or was empty. Please try again with a valid query.