Judge dismisses residency complaint against LD 15 House candidate

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

A Maricopa County Superior Court Judge dismissed the complaint filed against LD15 GOP House candidate Michael Way that challenged his eligibility for office. Judge Rodrick Coffey’s ruling was submitted Friday and filed to the court’s clerk Monday morning. Coffey ruled that Arizona law precludes courts from performing duties that are expressly delegated to the Arizona Legislature, including determining the qualifications of those who are elected as legislators. “If Way is elected, it will be up to the Arizona Legislature to judge his qualifications,” Coffey wrote in his ruling. Coffey didn’t address the arguments about Way’s residency in his ruling and wrote that plaintiff Deborah Kirkland was asking for an advisory opinion on what would happen if Way is determined to be unqualified and he gets enough votes to be elected into office. The AZGOP celebrated the dismissal. “The decision upholds Way’s qualifications to serve, rebuffing baseless attacks from Democrats and their allies attempting to challenge his candidacy. But Kirkland is an LD15 GOP precinct committeewoman who supported Hoffman’s running mate, Peter Anello, in the primary election. Way’s attorney Andrew Gould told our reporter he didn’t know who was financing the lawsuit and asked Kirkland about it in court in the hopes to determine who was. Kirkland said during the evidentiary hearing she didn’t know, but Gould said that was unusual from a plaintiff in a case like this. “Sometimes in these cases there are third parties that fund because they have some political agenda. I don’t know that to be the case here but I was curious if that’s what was going on,” Gould said. “Not everyone has the money to pay for a lawsuit like this.” Way also said during the evidentiary hearing last week he believed the challenge against him was organized by the Freedom Caucus because a Freedom Caucus leader in North Carolina had called for an investigation into Way’s voting record. “This is going to be a very tight election for the legislature, and this type of baseless attack at the 11th hour that really is barred by the law is troubling,” Gould said. “For Republicans, it jeopardizes their majorities in the legislature.”

Court asks for a new complaint in latest dual language legal fight 

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

A judge hit the reset button on the latest legal challenge to dual language learning models at a hearing this morning after lead attorney and Horne’s wife, Carmen Chenal Horne, dismissed her damages claim, throwing into question key issues of standing and ability to bring the suit under state law.  A parent of a Scottsdale Unified High School student, represented by Chenal Horne, sued Creighton Elementary School District, five school board members and its superintendent, claiming a violation of a 2000 voter initiative requiring students be taught English by being taught in English. Both Creighton and the AG filed motions to dismiss and claimed the parent plaintiff lacked standing because  her child did not attend a Creighton school, and therefore was not entitled to sheltered English immersion under the statute, nor positioned to bring a lawsuit. The question before Judge Frank Moskowitz, a Brewer appointee, at a hearing today was whether to consider dismissal before considering the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Nathan Arrowsmith, assistant AG, asked Moskowitz to put a hold on the motion for summary judgment until the motion to dismiss is decided, given key issues of standing. Robert Haws, attorney for Creighton, echoed the same point. “There’s no reason to put the cart before the horse,” Haws said. He contended if the court were to take up the motion for summary judgment, Creighton and the AG would be entitled to some discovery. But Chenal Horne, joined by her paralegal, Tom Horne, told the court to consider the motion for summary judgment first and claimed discovery would not be necessary given the language of the statute, which she printed on a large poster board. Chenal Horne said Moskowitz should simply take a look at the statute “and with your legal expertise, determine whether the statute says English immersion does not provide for dual language. Simple. Then, address standing.” But Arrowsmith claimed Chenal Horne’s plan did not account for clearing the necessary hurdles to have the court adjudicate a case in the first place. The discussion then pivoted to implications of the statute that grants standing to “the parent or legal guardian of any Arizona school child” to legally compel compliance with sheltered English immersion and ensures attorneys’ fees and damages if successful. Earlier in the hearing, Chenal Horne told the court she was voluntarily dismissing the five board members and the superintendent from the suit without prejudice, effectively taking the damages claim along with it. Arrowsmith claimed the damages portion of the law implies that a plaintiff would need to establish an injury. “An individual who does not live in the Creighton School District, or has a child that attends a Creighton school cannot have any actual or compensatory damages against Creighton,” Arrowsmith said. Moskowitz said he would consider the standing issue first, but ordered Chenal Horne to file a new complaint, removing the since-dismissed defendants and considering the damages issue, and asked Creighton and the AG to file supplemental briefing in response so “we’re all talking about the same world, the same universe.” Chenal Horne’s amended complaint is due to the court on Sept. 23.

Appeals Court rules transgender sports ban discriminatory

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

Arizona’s transgender sports ban discriminates based on transgender status, according to an opinion from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued Monday. In a ruling, the panel upheld a district court’s injunction on the law as it pertains to two transgender girls seeking to play school sports at their middle and high schools. Parents of two unnamed transgender girls, represented by attorneys for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, sued Horne to see the “Save Women’s Sports Act” struck down for violations of the Equal Protection Clause, Title IX and the Americans with Disabilities Act in addition to asking the two girls be allowed to participate on their respective school sports teams. Arizona District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps, an Obama nominee, entered an injunction on the law as it applied to the two girls. She further found the two were likely to succeed on their equal protection and Title IX claim as the act discriminates against transgender girls, and Horne, Petersen and Toma failed to demonstrate an important government interest to justify such a ban. Zipps wrote that Horne and the legislative leaders’ stated aim to “protect girls’ sports” to be “based on overbroad generalizations and stereotypes that erroneously equate transgender status with athletic ability.” On appeal to the Ninth Circuit, Horne, Petersen and Toma argued the district court’s findings relied on erroneous evidence showing no significant difference between pre-pubescent boys and girls and offered their own counter-evidence they claimed showed pre-pubescent boys did, in fact, have a biological advantage. But the Ninth Circuit found Horne and the legislative leaders relied on information that was disputed and selectively cited. As for the equal protection claim, the superintendent and legislative leaders again claimed the law served an important governmental interest in preventing cisgender women and girls’ displacement, injury or competitive disadvantage. The appeals court found their claims to be unfounded and insufficient to justify the ban’s application to “all transgender women and girls in Arizona, regardless of circulating testosterone levels or other medically accepted indicia of competitive advantage” and to “all sports, regardless of the physical contact involved, the type or level of competition, or the age or grade of the participants.” The panel found the act to be discriminatory as its “burden falls exclusively on transgender girls.” Judge Morgan Christen, an Obama nominee, wrote, “This conclusion is consistent not only with common sense—there is simply no denying that a transgender sports ban discriminates based on transgender status—but also with the decisions of other courts, which have held that transgender sports bans like the one challenged here discriminate on their face against transgender women and girls.” 

Maricopa County Recorder debates scheduled; Heap may not show

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

Two debates are scheduled this week for the candidates running for Maricopa County Recorder, but it’s unclear if Heap will show up to either. Both Arizona PBS and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission will hold debates on Wednesday and Thursday respectively, with Democratic candidate Tim Stringham signed on to attend both. But according to the Clean Elections website, Heap has not yet responded to a request to attend that debate, and it’s unclear whether he will attend the AZPBS debate. Stringham did not directly answer a question from our reporter about whether Heap will attend either debate, but sounded hopeful that he would face off against his opponent this week. “The debates are still a few days away and everyone runs behind when campaigning so still plenty of time for him to respond,” Stringham said in a statement. Polls in the race began to circulate last week, indicating Stringham has a lead over Heap. The first poll, conducted by Noble Predictive Insights, showed 38% of voters surveyed choose Stringham and 34% prefer Heap. An internal poll conducted by Stringham’s campaign and obtained by Garrett Archer of ABC15 showed similar numbers, with Stringham up 45% to Heap’s 42%, with fewer voters indicating they were undecided. Stringham’s internal poll also found 57% of voters surveyed have trust in reliable election results, compared to 34% who don’t. The first debate, hosted by AZPBS, will air at 5 p.m. Wednesday. The Clean Elections debate will air at 4 p.m. Thursday.

DCS seeks more money for foster youth housing, new vehicles

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

The Department of Child Safety submitted its FY 2026 budget request to Hobbs on Sept. 1, asking for an additional $99.7 million in funding compared to the upcoming fiscal year. If approved, that would amount to about $1.4 billion as the agency surpasses 10 years since its formation. The request, rubber-stamped by interim director Ben Hendersen, highlighted a $32.6 spending increase request to put toward kinship support and caseload for developmentally disabled children. The second-highest request was $29.4 million for operation of the Comprehensive Child Welfare Information System and other software programs. The agency also asked for about $6 million to put toward 90 new vehicles to supplement the agency’s “aging fleet” and vehicle maintenance and repairs. The department requested an increase of $2.2 million to focus on growth in “durable permanency strategy while maintaining relationships with the child’s family.” Notably, DCS also asked for $400,000 to put toward stable housing for youth aging out of the foster care system. The department hopes to maintain its increase in hiring and retaining caseworkers, an issue that has “plagued the Department for the last 4 years,” primarily through pay increases, improved training and recruitment, according to the letter. “Reasonable caseloads lead to improving caseworker retention, which ultimately produces better outcomes for children and families, permitting caseworkers the time they need to invest in activities to support families,” the letter said. DCS also asked for $75.1 million in supplemental funding for FY2025 to “address the unexpected rise of caseworker filled rates; service provider stability, permanent guardianship caseload growth and kinship caregiver supports and the AHCCCS State Directed programs.”

Justices, judges up for retention receive high marks

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

 The Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review released the official survey results underpinning decisions on whether judges and justices met or failed to meet standards necessary for the bench. The results show how judges scored in surveys on legal ability, integrity, communication, temperament and administrative performance circulated to litigants, attorneys, jurors, witnesses and court staff. In April, the commission found only one judge, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Jo Lynn Gentry, did not meet JPR standards. Members found the remaining 69 judges and two Supreme Court justices met judicial standards in a single vote. The judicial reports come as campaigns and counter-campaigns target the retention of Justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn King. About 99% of those surveyed lauded Bolick’s integrity and communication skills as satisfactory, superior or very good; 98% found the same of his legal ability and judicial temperament. As for King, 96% found her judicial temperament and communication skills satisfactory or above, 94% greenlit her legal ability and administrative performance and 90% of survey respondents found King had above-board integrity. Four judges across both divisions of the Court of Appeals similarly received high marks across the evaluated categories, as did the vast majority of superior court judges across Maricopa, Pima, Coconino and Pinal County. The judges’ survey scores and the commission’s “meets JPR standards” designation will appear in the Secretary of State’s publicity pamphlet. The commission’s website houses the same, along with a link to full bios for all judges, and lists of decisions for appellate judges and justices. 

Presidential race aside, what’s at stake for Georgians in the November election?

Posted on by Tammy Joyner

The Gist

Despite all 236 members of the state House and Senate up for reelection in November, the presidential race has taken center stage in Georgia with the nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris for U.S. president.

Nonetheless, Georgia Democrats  will be in a push-and-pull contest to gain more seats in both the House and Senate while Republicans stay focused on maintaining their solid control of state government. Republicans hold the governor, attorney general and secretary of state seats as well as both legislative chambers. The House could be particularly vulnerable.

“Democrats might actually get Republicans knocked down to below 100 seats in the House, which would be the first time since 2005,” University of Georgia political science professor Charles Bullock III told State Affairs. 

Continue reading “Presidential race aside, what’s at stake for Georgians in the November election?”

Half a billion dollars in Opportunity Scholarship funding approved by Senate

Posted on by Matthew Sasser

Most of the Senate debate Monday revolved around the conference report for House Bill 10, a series of spending items added to a bill requiring the state’s sheriffs to comply with federal detainer warrants from immigration officials. 

The most discussed of the spending measures was the $463.5 million in increased funding for private school vouchers. The money would clear the Opportunity Scholarship waitlist for the current school year and be retroactive, making families eligible for tuition reimbursement from schools.

“I hope we can reconsider our priorities because one of the things that happens in these local communities when voucher funds are draining public funds from local schools is you’re going to see job losses in local school systems,” Sen. Lisa Grafstein, D-Wake, said about the voucher program. 

“When I think about these taxpayer-funded vouchers for private schools, I think the majority of taxpayers know that we are looking at fool’s gold,” Sen. Graig Meyer, D-Orange, said. “I understand every parent’s desire to make sure that their child is well educated. I cannot understand how we, as a body, would sanction taxpayer-funded spending on private schools that have almost no standards to ensure that children actually receive the education we know they deserve.”

On the Senate floor, Sen. Michael Garrett, D-Guilford, called the Opportunity Scholarship proposal a “betrayal of our state’s core values, one that threatens the very foundation of our public education system, and the principles of equality and opportunity that I know we all hold dear.”

Senate leader Phil Berger characterized concerns from Democrats as more of the same. 

“We’ve heard those concerns,” he said after the session. “I would just say that the emphasis that we have placed on opportunity scholarships is in giving parents more of a say in their child’s education. And every bill that we’ve had that addresses those kinds of issues, the Democrats have been opposed to. Whether it was a Parents Bill of Rights, whether it’s Opportunity Scholarships, they seem to be more inclined to be supportive of bureaucracies, as opposed to parents and students.”

In a news release, Sen. Michael Lee, R-New Hanover, said that as school choice is expanded, North Carolina will have an educational landscape that provides a high-quality option for those who choose private, traditional, charter or home schooling. 

HB 10 also allocates $377 million to cover a Medicaid rebase to account for projected changes in enrollment, $95 million to the Department of Public Instruction to fund growing public school units, $64 million to the Community College System general fund for enrollment adjustment and $24.7 million to the State Education Assistance Authority to clear a waiting list for the Children with Disabilities Program.

Sen. Ralph Hise, R-Mitchell, said the conference report also permits the authorization of a broadband funding expansion to make the state eligible to receive $1.5 billion in federal dollars. 

The Senate approved HB 10 on Monday along party lines, with 27 Republicans voting yes and 17 Democrats voting no. The House is expected to take up a vote on Wednesday.

For questions or comments, or to pass along story ideas, please write to Matthew Sasser at [email protected] or contact the NC Insider at [email protected] or @StateAffairsNC 

Committee sends appointment of child advocate to full Senate

Posted on by Brett Stover

The Confirmation Oversight Committee advanced Kerrie Lonard’s appointment Monday, sending the state’s first child advocate to the Senate next session.

Senate Bill 115, passed by the Legislature last session, established the Office of the Child Advocate, an independent agency designed to help children and families “receive adequate coordination of child welfare services for child protection and care.”

Lonard previously led the Division of the Child Advocate, which Gov. Laura Kelly established in a 2021 executive order, since December of that year. SB 115 codified the position, and the governor appointed Lonard to continue in the new role.

Leading the new agency during the transition period provides a unique opportunity, Lonard said. In response to a question from Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover, Lonard said that “when necessary, I will push back” against the governor and administration that elevated her to the position. 

Although SB 115 calls for a five-year term, Sen. Larry Alley, R-Winfield, said the Legislature will revise the statute in 2025. If that revision passes, and if she’s confirmed by the full Senate, Lonard’s term would expire June 30, 2028.

Before joining the child advocate office, Lonard worked as an attorney with Kansas Legal Services. She has experience representing children and parents in “child in need of care” proceedings and was a social worker before attending law school at Washburn University.

“My devotion to child welfare has been long-standing, as my career path has shown,” Lonard said.

The committee approved several other appointments and reappointments, including Paul Schneider as Brigadier General of the Kansas National Guard.

Col. Schneider previously served as director of the state guard’s joint staff. He first joined the military in 1987. His service includes participation in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2004-2005 and Operation Spartan Shield, a U.S. Central Central Command operation, in 2021, and has earned a long list of awards including the Bronze Star.

Wildlife and Parks secretary decision postponed

One appointee wasn’t approved Monday: Acting Wildlife and Parks Secretary Chris Kennedy.

Kennedy, who started in the role March 18 after the retirement of former Secretary Brad Loveless, will answer more questions at a virtual meeting in the next 10 days, Alley said. After the meeting, the committee chair said interested parties didn’t realize until late in the process that Kennedy’s confirmation hearing was on the docket.

“It’s just like everything else that happens: all of a sudden, ‘Oh my gosh, they’re having a confirmation hearing today, I got to send in questions,’” Alley said, and committee members didn’t have a chance to fully review those questions.

Born in Missouri, Kennedy worked for that state’s conservation agency for nearly three decades before Kelly appointed him to lead Kansas’ department earlier this year. He faced a question from Sen. Rick Wilborn, R-McPherson, about his most recent role in Missouri as Assistant to the Director for Inclusion and Diversity.

Kennedy said his job in that role was to ensure internal collaboration at the Missouri Department of Conservation and to prepare agency staff “to go out and reach anybody within the state, no matter their color, no matter their creed, how they identify.”

“In my eyes, it really doesn’t matter,” he continued. “We’ve got to, as responsible advocates for fish and wildlife, we’ve got to be prepared to reach across the board to all of our citizens.”

Kennedy answered other questions about his views on various issues the department handles, including feral hogs, the deer population and a proposed regulation on fire extinguishers for boats — a new rule some lawmakers felt ran afoul of House Bill 2648.

After Alley announced the committee wouldn’t vote Monday, Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes, D-Lenexa, said she felt ready to advance Kennedy’s nomination without an additional meeting.

Kennedy told State Affairs he wished the process could’ve been completed but said he’s not concerned about the delay.

“I think everybody has to do due diligence in their job, and I think the committee is — hopefully — that’s what they’re doing,” he said. “I’m prepared to be transparent and answer any questions that they may have.”

Brett Stover is a Statehouse reporter at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected] or on X @BrettStoverKS.

Legislative Coordinating Council greenlights wage increases for temporary staffers

Posted on by Matt Resnick

The Legislative Coordinating Council on Monday approved a pay scale and wage policy for temporary staffers employed during the 2025 legislative session.   

The newly minted pay schedule resembles the roughly 5% pay hike state employees received in July. In contrast, legislators secured a 93% pay boost — including salary and per diem— with the average legislative salary skyrocketing to approximately $58,000 from $30,000 annually.

The increase for legislative office staffers moved up to $17 from $16 hourly — $1,360 on a biweekly basis. Additionally, retention payments of $250 for office assistants will continue for another session.  

Wages for committee assistants, whose assignments are determined by Legislative Administrative Services, vary depending on the committee designation:

  • Committees in Range 26 (of 28 on the state’s salary matrix) are Senate: Assessment and taxation, Federal and State Affairs, Judiciary and Ways and Means. House: Appropriations, Federal and State Affairs, Judiciary, and Taxation. 

The pay rate for Range 26 is $25.40 hourly up from $23.90  or $2,032 biweekly. The council approved House Minority Leader Vic Miller’s motion to move the Senate Federal and State Affairs and House Judiciary committees from Range 25 to 26. 

  • Committees in Range 25 on the salary schedule are: Senate: Commerce, Education, Financial Institutions and insurance, and Public Health and Welfare. House: Commerce, Labor and Economic Development, Corrections Juvenile Justice, Education, Financial Institutions, Health and Human Services, Insurance, and Transportation. 

The pay-rate for Range 25 is $24.20 hourly, up from $22.75 — or 1,936 biweekly. 

  • Committees in Range 24 on the salary schedule are Senate: Agriculture and Natural Resources, Confirmation Oversight, Local Government, Transparency and Ethics, Utilities. House: Agriculture and Natural Resources,  Child Welfare and Foster Care, Elections, Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications, K-12 Education Budget, Legislative Modernization, Local Government, Veterans and Military, Water, and Welfare Reform. 

The pay-rate for Range 24 is $22.95 hourly, up from $21.60 — or $1,836 biweekly. 

  • Committees in Range 20 on the salary schedule are House: Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget, General Government Budget, Higher Education Budget, Social Services Budget, Transportation and Public Safety Budget.

The pay-rate for Range 20 is $18.75 hourly, up from $17.65, or $1,500 biweekly.

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

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