NOTICE OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES & TOWNS
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
League Office Building
1820 West Washington, Phoenix
Notice is hereby given to the members of the Executive Committee and to the general public that the
Executive Committee will hold a meeting open to the public on February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Members of the Executive Committee will attend either in person or by telephone conference call. The
Executive Committee may vote to recess the meeting and move into Executive Session on any item on
this agenda. Upon completion of Executive Session, the Executive Committee may resume the meeting,
open to the public, to address the remaining items on the agenda. A copy of the agenda is available at the
League office building in Suite 200 or on the League website at www.azleague.org.
Agenda
All items on this agenda are scheduled for discussion and possible action, unless otherwise noted.
CONSENT AGENDA: All items will be considered as a group by the Executive Committee and
will be enacted with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a
member requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and
considered as a separate item in its normal sequence on the Agenda.
Call to Order; Flag Salute
Consent Agenda
*1. Minutes
*2. League Conference Planning Meeting Lunch
*3. Resolution of Appreciation
Regular Agenda
4. TPT Implementation Update
5. Legislative Policy Discussion and Updates
6. Report from Budget Subcommittee
7. PSPRS Task Force Report
8. NLC Congressional Cities Conference Report
Adjournment
Additional informational materials are included in the agenda packet but are not part of the agenda.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Consent Agenda
Item #1*
Minutes
Summary:
Minutes of the previous meeting are enclosed for your review and
approval.
Responsible Person:
President Mark Mitchell
Attachments:
November 14, 2014 Executive Committee Minutes
Action Requested:
Approval
MINUTES
LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, November 14, 2014 at 10:00 a.m.
League of Arizona Cities and Towns
1820 W. Washington St.
Phoenix, Arizona
MEMBERS
Jerry Weiers, Mayor, Glendale
Thomas L. Schoaf, Mayor, Litchfield Park
Ed Honea, Mayor, Marana
Christian Price, Mayor, Maricopa
John Giles, Mayor, Mesa
Kenny Evans, Mayor, Payson
Bob Barrett, Mayor, Peoria
Greg Stanton, Mayor, Phoenix*
Harvey Skoog, Mayor, Prescott Valley
W.J. "Jim" Lane, Mayor, Scottsdale
Daryl Seymore, Mayor, Show Low
Rick Mueller, Mayor, Sierra Vista
Sharon Wolcott, Mayor, Surprise
Bob Rivera, Mayor, Thatcher
Jonathan Rothschild, Mayor, Tucson
Douglas Nicholls, Mayor, Yuma
President
Mark Mitchell, Mayor, Tempe*
Vice President
Jay Tibshraeny, Mayor, Chandler
Treasurer
Mark Nexsen, Mayor, Lake Havasu City
Doug Von Gausig, Mayor, Clarkdale
Gilbert Lopez, Councilmember, Coolidge
Lana Mook, Mayor, El Mirage
Gerald Nabours, Mayor, Flagstaff
Linda Kavanagh, Mayor, Fountain Hills
John Lewis, Mayor, Gilbert
*Not in attendance
League Vice President Jay Tibshraeny called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. He also welcomed new
members of the Executive Committee – Flagstaff Mayor Jerry Nabours, Fountain Hills Mayor Linda
Kavanagh, Maricopa Mayor Christian Price, Pinetop Mayor Daryl Seymore, and Yuma Mayor Douglas
Nicholls.
1. RESIGNATION AND APPOINTMENT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER FROM
CITY OF MESA
League Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized Mayor Bob Rivera, Chairman of the Nominating
Committee, to discuss the appointment of an Executive Committee Member from the City of Mesa. When
the League Nominating Committee met last August in Phoenix, Mayor Finter from Mesa was nominated
to the Executive Committee, serving as the Mayor for Mesa. As Mayor John Giles has since been elected
Mayor of Mesa, the Nominating Committee recommended appointing Mayor John Giles as the
representative from the City of Mesa.
1
Mayor Doug Von Gausig made a motion to accept the resignation of Mayor Alex Finter and nominate
Mesa Mayor John Giles to the League Executive Committee; Mayor John Lewis seconded the motion and
it carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
2. *MINUTES
3. *POLICY COMMITTEE CHAIRS AND PROCESS MEMO; BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE
CHAIR
4. *RECENT LEAGUE AMICUS BRIEFS
5. *RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION
Mayor Kenny Evans moved to approve the consent agenda; Mayor Bob Barrett seconded the motion and
it carried unanimously.
6. TPT IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE
Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized League Deputy Director Tom Belshe to provide the TPT
Implementation Update.
Deputy Director Belshe announced to the Executive Committee that a delay had been secured for
implementation of the electronic portal portion and most of the administrative portion of Transaction
Privilege Tax. The new date will be January 1, 2016.
Mr. Belshe told the committee that the construction industry is not pleased with some interpretations that
the Department of Revenue (ADOR) has made about how they will conduct the issuance of exemption
certificates. Some construction groups tried to call for a special session, but were not met with much
enthusiasm by the governor’s office, and a special session did not occur. The construction industry
suggested a new system for construction sales tax that would allow for simplicity of administration;
whatever community they do the work in is where they collect retail tax from the customer and remit to
the city. There will also be tools in place to help the companies know which city they are in and what the
tax rate will be, making it simple for them to add retail tax and remit into the system.
Mr. Belshe informed the Executive Committee that the group had positive meetings with the Department
of Administration (ADOA) to create a new plan regarding programmers. ADOR will handle interagency
issues and will track what is accomplished and what modules are currently being programmed.
Mr. Belshe also noted that the development of the audit portion of the implementation continues to go
well, as all the municipal and ADOR auditors are going through the same training annually.
League Executive Director Ken Strobeck emphasized that Mr. Belshe and representatives from all of the
cities and towns were meeting constantly to work on the project. He reminded the Committee that when
the bill was passed two years ago, the municipalities were assured that the process would be successful;
unfortunately, the programming has caused issues. He noted that when the language for HB 2111 was
written, a clause was included that stated that the data must be sufficient to satisfy the municipalities prior
to the enactment of the switch.
Mr. Strobeck also told the Committee that the League would be creating a series of newsletters to send to
the Legislature so that they understand the process and are aware when benchmarks are achieved moving
forward.
2
7. LEGISLATIVE POLICY DISCUSSION
Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized League Executive Director Ken Strobeck for the Legislative
update.
Executive Director Strobeck told the group that with the election results, there would be changes coming,
including a new governor, new legislature and new committee chairs. He welcomed League Legislative
Director René Guillen to give an overview of the new leadership at the legislature.
Makeup of Legislature
Mr. Guillen told the Executive Committee that there were several new faces at the Capitol. He then
walked the Committee through the makeup of the legislature, noting that there was similar political
breakdown as the group saw in the 2014 session. He also gave an overview of individuals serving in
leadership position, noting that many of the individuals had prior relationships with the League and
foresaw this providing the League with some positive and communicative relationships heading into the
session.
Shared Revenue Issues
Mr. Guillen told the Committee that the budget would be one of the main focuses of the Legislature this
session. He said that the JLBC had released a document in October with their brief analysis of the current
fiscal year, indicating that there was a shortfall of half a billion dollars. Assuming that this shortfall is
paid off in FY 2015, their analysis was that the FY16 shortfall would be just one billion dollars. Mr.
Guillen reminded the Committee that the state had been in a similar financial position previously and had
taken care of the shortfall without hitting some key economic sources.
He noted that the League’s approach for interaction with the legislature regarding the budget will be
education. Mr. Guillen advised the Committee that when discussing items with legislators, it is important
to provide them with positive messaging and demonstrate how much State Shared Revenue matters, by
emphasizing where the money goes within the communities.
Mr. Strobeck informed the Executive Committee that this positive messaging strategy was discussed
amongst the League and intergovs. He noted that it would be advisable for the League and municipalities
to approach legislators with a shared objective; strong and healthy cities produce a strong state economy.
Mr. Guillen said that another topic of interest this session would be HURF. He indicated that there had
been some previous discussion with legislators about an alternative funding policy for DPS, saying that if
something were to arise, the League would become a partner in this area. Mr. Guillen also told the group
that collaboration would be crucial in regards to HURF, with collaboration happening on both the public
and private side.
Resolutions
Mr. Guillen apprised the Executive Committee of changes occurring regarding the League’s Resolutions
process. He reminded the Committee that many municipal issues were passed in August, with the
League’s Legislative Associate, Dale Wiebusch, taking a lead to develop model ordinances on these
topics. Mr. Guillen suggested that the execution of these resolutions would involve many League
partnerships, as there were certain issues passed as resolutions that would be better suited for other
organizations to take the lead on, with support from the League. He noted that these partnerships would
allow for the League to take the lead on strictly municipal issues.
3
PSPRS Task Force
Mr. Guillen then welcomed Mr. Scott McCarty, Finance Director for the Town of Paradise Valley and
Chair of the League’s PSPRS Task Force, to present an update on the Task Force.
Mr. McCarty thanked the Executive Committee for the opportunity to chair the PSPRS Task Force and
told the Committee that the group was putting together a work plan and had also developed a list of
immediate issues employers could take now to reduce their liability.
Mr. McCarty reminded the Committee that the Task Force was a collaboration between the League,
ACMA and GFOAz and that it was comprised of 15 members from organizations throughout the state. In
the early stages of the process, the Task Force focused on education, learning through a variety of
presentations about the PSPRS system. He indicated that the group held discussions with PSPRS
administration, actuaries, legal teams and labor associations. Mr. McCarty told the Committee that a goal
of the Task Force was to develop a better relationship with those organizations.
Mr. McCarty informed the Executive Committee that the PSPRS Task Force had focused on immediate
opportunities to present to cities and towns that will enable them to benefit financially, even prior to
possible legislation taking place in the long run. He recommended that municipalities learn the details of
their organizations’ contributions, focusing on the costs of their particular plan. He told the Executive
Committee that their cities and towns should look at the frequency they were making payments to PSPRS.
Mr. McCarty indicated that these suggestions would be included on a document that the Task Force was
compiling.
8. LEAGUE ANNUAL SURVEY RESULTS
Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized League Communication and Education Director Matt Lore for
the League Annual Survey Results.
Mr. Lore reminded the Executive Committee that the annual survey is sent to elected officials and staff
from the 91 cities and towns each October. He noted that this year’s survey had also been sent to the
additional associations the League works closely with, including the Arizona City/County Management
Association, Government Finance Officers Association of Arizona, the Arizona Municipal Clerks
Association and the Arizona City Attorneys Association.
Mr. Lore invited League Member Services Assistant Amy Price to present the specifics of the Annual
Survey.
Ms. Price told the Executive Committee that the questions from the survey had remained the same since
the online survey was initiated in 2004, allowing for comparison across the years. She noted that the
survey results include demographics, overall performance and the services which the League provides.
Ms. Price announced that 1,700 surveys were sent out and there were 147 respondents. She then gave a
general overview of the survey to members, noting that the results were included in the Executive
Committee packet.
9. REPORT ON AZ CITIES@WORK CAMPAIGN
Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized League Communication and Education Director Matt Lore for
the report on the Arizona Cities@Work campaign.
4
Mr. Lore explained to the Executive Committee that the AZ Cities@Work campaign is an ongoing
collaborative education and PR program that began in 2013 at the request of the Executive Committee.
The campaign is designed to create positive messaging reagrding Arizona’s municipalities with materials
that are appropriate for use in all 91 cities and towns.
Mr. Lore asked League Communication and Education Assistant Samantha Womer to give an update on
the continuation of the campaign.
Ms. Womer told the Executive Committee that since the last update was given to the Executive
Committee, the League had produced three seasonal projects to enhance the existing components of the
Arizona Cities@Work campaign. These included an educational video and materials related to the
municipal budget process, a multi-platform print and digital magazine that showcased summer tourism in
Arizona’s cities and towns, and the annual Arizona Cities and Towns Week, held in October. She said
that the campaign components continue to be utilized by the municipalities and noted that the campaign is
focusing more efforts on social media and citizen interaction.
10. RECAP OF 2014 ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized League Communication and Education Director Matt Lore to
present a recap of the 2014 Annual Conference.
Mr. Lore referred the Executive Committee to the full financial report, included in the Executive
Committee packet, noting that 83 of the 91 cities and towns were represented at the conference, with
1,187 attendees’ total.
Mr. Lore also told the Committee that planning was already underway for the 2015 Annual Conference
and invited interested Committee members to participate in the planning meeting to be held in the Spring.
He also reminded the Committee that the 2015 Annual Conference would be held in August at the Starr
Pass Resort in Tucson.
11. 2012-2013 AUDIT REPORT
Vice President Jay Tibshraeny recognized League Executive Director Ken Strobeck for the Audit Report.
Executive Director Strobeck informed the Executive Committee that it was a clean audit and there were
no deficiencies to report.
Councilmember Bob Rivera moved to approve the 2012-2013 Audit Report; Mayor Douglas Nicholls
seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
Seeing no further business, Vice President Jay Tibshraeny adjourned the meeting at 11:57 a.m.
5
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Consent Agenda
Item #2*
League Conference Planning Meeting Lunch
Summary:
The League invites all members of the Executive Committee to
participate in a brainstorming planning session for the League’s 2015
Annual Conference. This year’s conference will be held at the Tucson
Starr Pass Resort, August 18-21. As a member of the Executive
Committee, it is important to get your input to assist staff in planning
this year’s event. The lunch planning meeting is where members provide
direction to staff on important conference topics, concurrent session
ideas and possible keynote speakers.
Responsible Person:
Matt Lore, Communication & Education Director
Action Requested:
Approval
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Consent Agenda
Item #3*
Resolution of Appreciation
Summary:
A Resolution of Appreciation for former Mayor Bob Barrett of Peoria is
enclosed for action by the Executive Committee.
Responsible Person:
President Mark Mitchell
Attachment:
Resolution of Appreciation
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR
Bob Barrett
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE LEAGUE
OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS TO BOB BARRETT FOR HIS DEDICATED SERVICE TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT IN ARIZONA.
WHEREAS, BOB BARRETT served the citizens of the City of Peoria as an elected official
for thirteen years – five years on the council and for eight years as Mayor; and
WHEREAS, BOB BARRETT has provided outstanding service to the League as a member of
the Executive Committee from 2008-2014; and
WHEREAS, BOB BARRETT served on the League Resolutions Committee, the League
Resolutions Subcommittee, the League Nominating Committee and other special League
committees; and
WHEREAS, BOB BARRETT was an active participant in League meetings and Conferences
as a speaker and a presiding officer; and
WHEREAS, BOB BARRETT was actively engaged with legislators about League issues of
importance to cities and towns;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the grateful appreciation of the League of
Arizona Cities and Towns be extended to BOB BARRETT for his service to city government in
Arizona and to the League.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Agenda Item #4
TPT Implementation Update
Summary:
League staff has been working with members of the legislature, the
construction industry and other interested stakeholders to come to a
resolution on the matter of TPT policy for the construction industry.
The major challenge is defining a “bright line” between MRRA
(maintenance, repair, restoration, alteration) and prime contracting.
After much discussion and give and take, a compromise has been
reached, language has been drafted and bills introduced in both the
Senate and House (SB1446 and HB 2590). If approved, this will be
retroactive to the beginning of the year to provide “safe harbor” to
contractors who tried in good faith to comply with the law, but were
confused by conflicting advice. This agenda item will provide
background on the discussions and where the matter stands currently.
Responsible Person:
Tom Belshe, Deputy Director
Attachments:
TPT Update Newsletter sent to legislators
TPT Reform Bill Key Provisions
Prime Contracting TPT Overview
TPTUPDATE
The latest in sales tax simplification
January 2015 | Issue 1
HB 2111 (Laws 2013, Ch. 255) brought landmark changes to how
both state and local sales taxes are administered in Arizona. It is all
too easy to forget about what happens after a bill is passed. This
periodic newsletter is intended to keep the Legislature updated on the
progress being made in reaching full implementation.
Administration:
Recognizing that the provisions of HB 2111 were set to become effective
January 1, 2015 and the magnitude of the reform, municipalities
began work with DOR shortly after Governor Brewer signed the bill
into law. We are pleased to report that we have made significant
progress in achieving that goal. However, it became evident that there
are some technological challenges that require more time to overcome.
We came to agreement with the previous administration to delay
implementation in order to provide the best product for the taxpayer
and tax administrators. A Project Manager is now in place and specific,
measurable benchmarks have been established. We remain committed
to supporting those efforts and implementing these reforms correctly
and as quickly as possible.
Prime Contracting:
The bill was intended to simplify state and local TPT tax filing for those
engaged in maintenance, repair, replacement and alteration by having
them pay the retail tax on materials they use on the job. However, it
has become clear that further refinement of these provisions is needed
and efforts are currently underway to finalize a consensus bill to address
these issues. We are grateful to Senator Lesko, who is leading the
discussions with the construction industry and other interested parties to
accomplish final language as soon as possible.
Audit:
HB 2111 requires DOR to create one set of TPT audit procedures for
use by all taxing jurisdictions and declares multi-jurisdictional audits
are the responsibility of the state. Municipalities will continue to have
the authority to directly audit single-jurisdiction businesses according
the audit procedures established by DOR. This new audit program is
successfully in effect today, providing greater simplicity to the taxpayer.
In 2013, Lawmakers passed
HB 2111 to streamline Arizona’s
Transaction Privilege Tax (TPT)
system. The bill establishes the
Arizona Department of Revenue
(DOR) as the sole collection agency
for municipal and state TPT. The bill
also changes the way businesses
that do repair and maintenance
work pay TPT.
Finally, the bill integrates
municipal and state TPT audits
into a program that all taxing
agencies will use to ensure
taxpayer compliance.
QUESTIONS?
CALL 602-258-5786
ARIZONA STATE AND LOCAL PRIME CONTRACTING TRANSACTION PRIVILEGE TAX OVERVIEW
Overview - as of 2-2-2015
This document was prepared for the general use of the Construction Industry. It is not intended to be a comprehensive summary, or to be relied upon as legal or tax advice.
PROPOSED 2015 Legislative and Administrative Changes
Current DOR and TPN positions
"no change" means the "Current DOR and TPN positions" remain
as stated
Based on House Bill 2389 enacted in 2014 and Arizona
Transaction Privilege Tax Notice TPN 14-1
Based on SB1446/HB2590 introduced on 2-2-2015
1
Modification : Prime
Contracting tax (tax on
revenues received by
contractor)
Modification activities encompass construction, improvement,
movement (including removal), wreckage, or demolition activities,
to the extent that they cannot otherwise be characterized as
maintenance, repair, replacement, or alteration activities.
Modification means construction, grading and leveling ground,
wreckage or demolition; but does not include a) MRRA work as defined
in Subsection "O", or b) wreckage or demolition, or any modification
activity necessary for MRRA work or c) project mobilization.
2a
Maintenance, Repair,
Replacement, Alteration
(MRRA): Retail tax on
contractor's cost of
materials
“Maintenance” is the upkeep of property or equipment. Examples
of maintenance include: an annual system checkup that includes
toping off any fluids, restaining a wood deck, and refinishing
hardwood floors.
no change
2b
“Repair” is an activity that returns real property to a usable state
from a partial or total state of inoperability or nonfunctionality.
Examples of repairs include: recharging partially or totally
nonfunctional air-conditioning units with refrigerant, clearing
partially or completely blocked pipes of debris, readjusting
satellite dishes to restore reception, and replacing worn washers
in leaky or totally inoperable faucets.
no change
2c
“Replacement” is the act of replacing something that exists with
something else, including the upgrading of existing systems.
Examples of replacement include replacing an HVAC system that
is no longer functioning at optimum levels with a new, more
efficient unit or replacing a deteriorated shingled roof with a new
one.
"Replacement" means the removal of one component or system of
existing property or tangible personal property installed in exiting
property and installing a new component or system that provides the
same or upgraded functionality, regardless of the contract amount.
Item #
Issue
Comments to Proposed 2015 Changes
Effectively, this means that a project that meets any of the
components of MRRA will be treated as MRRA, unless: (1)
Modification activities exceed 15% of the contract revenues
under the De Minimis rule, or (2) the Alteration activities
exceed the limitations outlined in section 2d below.
This document was prepared for the general use of the construction industry. It is not intended to be a comprehensive summary, or to be relied on as legal or tax advice.
Page 1
Item #
Issue
4
"no change" means the "Current DOR and TPN positions" remain
as stated
Based on House Bill 2389 enacted in 2014 and Arizona
Transaction Privilege Tax Notice TPN 14-1
Based on SB1446/HB2590 introduced on 2-2-2015
“Alteration” is an activity that causes a direct physical change to
real property without causing a change in the identity of the real
property. Examples of alterations include: enlarging a patio,
sandblasting a building façade, and tamping railroad ties.
2d
3
Current DOR and TPN positions
Residential: If the contract for the project is more than 25% of the
most recently available Full Cash Value of the existing property
(including land) from the County Assessor for property tax purposes,
then the project will be treated as a taxable prime contracting project.
This includes all single-family residential, multi-family residential,
condos, assisted living, student housing, etc.
Commercial: Will be a taxable prime contracting project if ANY of the
following are true:
1) The contract for the project is more than $750,000, OR
2) The scope of work directly relates to more than 40% of the existing
square footage of the existing property, OR
3) The scope of work involves expanding the square footage by more
than 10% of the existing property.
NOTE - 25% SAFE HARBOR : If the parties have a "reasonable belief"
on contract date that the project would qualify as an Alteration but, at
project completion, the project exceeds the applicable threshold by no
more than 25%, no change in tax treatment. If any aspect of the
project causes the applicable threshold to be exceeded by more than
25%, the project is no longer deemed an Alteration, and the ENTIRE
project will be taxed as a prime contracting job.
Who is "owner" of real
property
Owner includes agent or other person with authority to contract for
work. If a contractor is working under another contractor who is
contracted with an owner, the sub tier contractor is considered to
be also working for the owner for TPT purposes.
Some language clean up included, but the intent is in line with current
DOR and TPN positions.
Form 5000
This form maintains its current use for Modification (prime
contracting) projects. HOWEVER, should a contractor utilize this
form to purchase materials tax-exempt for an MRRA project, the
contractor must report and pay the tax no later than in the period it
receives final payment (subject to penalty and interest, if
reported/paid after the reporting period when purchased);
sourcing discussed below.
Contractors who will retain their TPT license because they do both
MMRA and Modification projects may issue blanket 5000s and
purchase materials tax-exempt. This will allow those whose purchase
materials in bulk to purchase tax-exempt. Materials that are later
incorporated into an MRRA project will require sales tax be reported
and paid as discussed below. Purchasing all materials with Form 5000s
will entitle the contractor to an offset for tax paid on materials against
the prime contracting tax, if the project is ultimately determined to be
prime contracting.
Comments to Proposed 2015 Changes
Residential: Full Cash Value can be obtained on the
County Assessor website (HINT: print out the screen to
prove value at time of bid for your records) or by asking
owner to provide a copy of most recent valuation notice.
*Threshold with Safe Harbor is 31.25% of Full Cash Value.
Commercial: The $750,000 contract price threshold is the
ROC threshold distinction between a B-02 license for "small
commercial projects" and the B-01 license required for larger
commercial contracts.
Threshold components with Safe
Harbor are: 1) Contract amount >$937,500; 2) Work within
existing property >50% of existing square footage; 3)
Expansion >12.5% of existing square footage
NOTE : Alteration does not include Maintenance, Repair or
Replacement.
NOTE: This form can also be used on a "project specific"
basis by checking the "single transaction certificate" box and
specifying the contract and project description just to the
right of this box in that section of the form; then also
checking box 3 under "Reason for Exemption", if prime
contracting, or noting on page 2 in the description section
"Materials to be used in MRRA project".
This document was prepared for the general use of the construction industry. It is not intended to be a comprehensive summary, or to be relied on as legal or tax advice.
Page 2
Item #
5
6
7a
Issue
Form 5005
Form 5009L
Inventories/Material
purchases
Current DOR and TPN positions
"no change" means the "Current DOR and TPN positions" remain
as stated
Based on House Bill 2389 enacted in 2014 and Arizona
Transaction Privilege Tax Notice TPN 14-1
Based on SB1446/HB2590 introduced on 2-2-2015
This form maintains its current use: It is used by GCs who are
doing a Modification project (prime contracting) to communicate
to subs that the GC will be the taxable prime contractor, and that
the GC assumes liability for the tax that the sub would otherwise
owe.
This form is ONLY for a prime contracting taxable project and
ONLY IF a prime contractor is using a subcontractor who is NOT
TPT LICENSED on the project - use of this form should be a rare
exception. If the situation meets this criteria, the prime contractor
must submit an application to DOR for approval, and once
returned from DOR, the prime contractor should pass on to the
non-TPT licensed sub. The non-TPT licensed sub will not be able
to purchase materials tax-exempt until he has such form to
provide to supplier. This form is NOT to be used for MRRA
projects.
A: TAXPAYERS NOT RENEWING TPT LICENSE (Contractor
who will only do MRRA work going forward): Inventories will need
to be calculated as of 12/31/2014, then reported and tax paid over
12 months during 2015 - 1/12th each month. Sourcing of tax
discussed below.
The legislation provides for the use of a form for MRRA projects that
mirrors the current Form 5000 for Modification projects.
Comments to Proposed 2015 Changes
Currently, it is anticipated that the Form 5005 will be updated
to provide for its use in MRRA projects (in addition to Prime
Contracting projects) so that contractors will only have one
form to issue to subs, regardless of the type of project.
Effectively, a contractor will be able to issue this form to
advise the down-chain subcontractor that the tax obligation
will be at the contractor level. And, even if the project is
MRRA, and the subcontractor is purchasing materials
exempt (via Form 5000), the sub will not pay the tax; rather
the contractor issuing the 5005 will report and pay the tax.
Some language clean up included, but the intent is in line with current
DOR and TPN positions.
A: Taxpayers with a canceled license will be required to pay tax on
materials as they are a) incorporated into a project where tax would be
required on the materials or otherwise used or consumed, or b) sold or
disposed of.
If the materials are incorporated into an MRRA project, the
tax due is based on the purchase price of the materials; if
sold or disposed, the tax is based on the revenue received.
NOTE A: There will be a transition period exclusion from tax
on the first $10,000 of ''on hand" materials (inventory), but
ONLY for contractors with licenses canceled before the last
day of the month that is 60 days after the bill is signed by the
Governor (or enacted without signature). Materials on hand
in excess of this threshold will be subject to the terms of this
provision.
NOTE B: There is also the option for these license-canceling
contractors to determine materials on hand (inventory) as of
the day before their license cancellation is effective, and to
report and pay tax on such value (in excess of $10,000), in a
lump sum or over a 12 month period, based on the
contractor's cost of the materials, at the retail rate, and
based on the contractor's principal place of business. This
is a simple process to avoid needing to have two inventory
systems during the period while materials purchased tax-free
are stored awaiting for future use, without special reporting
or recordkeeping.
This document was prepared for the general use of the construction industry. It is not intended to be a comprehensive summary, or to be relied on as legal or tax advice.
Page 3
Current DOR and TPN positions
"no change" means the "Current DOR and TPN positions" remain
as stated
Based on House Bill 2389 enacted in 2014 and Arizona
Transaction Privilege Tax Notice TPN 14-1
Based on SB1446/HB2590 introduced on 2-2-2015
7b
B: TAXPAYERS RETAINING TPT LICENSE, who will be doing
both MRRA and Modification projects, will establish 12/31
inventories, and any inventory materials that are used in an
MRRA job will be reported and tax paid as they are used.
Sourcing of tax discussed below.
B: no change
7c
C: TAXPAYERS RETAINING TPT LICENSE, who will be doing
both MRRA and Modification projects, should track materials
purchased after 1/1/15 for MRRA projects separately from
Modification projects; any purchases made exempt (via form
5000) that are utilized in MRRA work must be reported and tax
paid no later than in the period you receive final payment (subject
to penalty and interest). Sourcing of tax discussed below.
C: TAXPAYERS RETAINING TPT LICENSE, who will be doing both
MRRA and Modification projects, will be allowed to EITHER purchase
material for MRRA projects and pay the tax to the supplier at the time of
purchase, OR purchase materials exempt (via form 5000) and then
report and pay the tax on materials that are utilized in an MRRA project.
The reporting period and tax payment is based on the period when the
material is incorporated into the project. Sourcing of tax discussed
below.
Item #
8a
Issue
Sourcing of taxes (what
jurisdiction they are
reported to?)
A: Principal place of contractor's business
Comments to Proposed 2015 Changes
See also comment under item 9
A: If incorporated into a MRRA project, the sourcing is the project
location; all other circumstances, the sourcing is the principal office
location
B: Sourced to project location
8b
B: Principal place of contractor's business
8c
C: Principal place of contractor's business
C: Purchases where the tax is paid at purchase, is sourced at the seller
location, as seller will report the tax. Purchases exempt, and later
incorporated into a MRRA project will be sourced at the project
location.
What happens if, upon
audit, an MRRA project is
determined to be a prime
contracting project?
Not addressed
Payment of tax on tangible personal property believed to be for MRRA
project and later determined to be prime contracting will be allowed an
offset for the tax paid against the prime contracting tax assessed.
NOTE: This offset will ONLY be allowed if proof of payment
of the tax is provided. The DOR will not consider an offset
for taxes paid by any other person, whether in the contracting
chain or a vendor.
Use tax
No change to pre-existing rules. Applicable only for purchases
from vendors out of state w/o nexus in AZ. If purchased for an
MRRA project, the materials are now taxable and must report use
tax. If for a Modification project, materials will continue to be
purchased exempt.
All materials purchased tax-free for incorporation or fabrication into a
project, if they are not otherwise exempt from tax, will now be subject to
an amount equal to retail TPT at the job location.
Effectively, all materials that are incorporated or fabricated
into an MRRA project are subject to retail tax at the job
location if tax was not paid to the vendor when the materials
were purchased. This is true regardless of whether the
vendor was located outside of Arizona or has nexus with
Arizona. In other words, use tax won’t apply to materials that
are used in a project."
9
10
This document was prepared for the general use of the construction industry. It is not intended to be a comprehensive summary, or to be relied on as legal or tax advice.
Page 4
Item #
Issue
Current DOR and TPN positions
"no change" means the "Current DOR and TPN positions" remain
as stated
Based on House Bill 2389 enacted in 2014 and Arizona
Transaction Privilege Tax Notice TPN 14-1
Based on SB1446/HB2590 introduced on 2-2-2015
Comments to Proposed 2015 Changes
11
Change orders
Each change order is a separate contract - and must be
evaluated for Modification vs. MRRA tax application; and taxes
applied according to this determination
Each change order is to be evaluated as to its "relationship" to the
original contract. If the change order is "directly related" to the original
contract, it is taxed the same as the original contract. If the change
order is NOT directly related to the original contract, it must be
evaluated independently as a new contract, with the tax treatment
based solely on that change order. The tax treatment of subsequent
change orders will track the tax treatment of the related "original"
contract/change order.
12
De Minimis test
Established at 15%; any MRRA project that includes 15% or
more of Modification activities becomes subject to Prime
Contracting tax
no change
Not addressed
Retroactivity: For bids submitted or contracts entered into, or any other
binding obligation executed prior to the last day of the month that is 60
days after the bill is signed by the Governor (or enacted without
signature), the contractor may treat such contracts as: a) prime
contracting, with receipts taxed in accordance with A.R.S. Section 425075, or b) MRRA, with post 1/1/15 receipts and material purchases
taxed in accordance with Section 42-5075(O).
Within this timeframe, contractors are allowed to treat
contracts/commitments (on a contract-by-contract basis) as
either prime contracting or MRRA. However the contractor
must make a good-faith effort in determining which taxing
method is applied. Safe Harbor applies to additional tax,
penalties and interest.
Not addressed
Contracts for surface or subsurface improvements subject to Titles 28
and 34 will NOT be subject to MRRA treatment.
There are many Special Taxing Districts that are not
excluded here; the State is not excluded, either, other than
projects covered by Title 28; NOTE: Private owners will not
be exempt
13
Safe Harbor
14
Excluding certain Heavy
Highway contracts from
MRRA treatment
15
Exempting certain projects
and materials previously
exempt under prime
contracting
Not addressed
Any project previously exempt (such as a contract with a Native
American Tribe) or materials previously exempt (such as hospital
tangible personal property) or machinery & equipment previously
exempt (such as manufacturing, mining, electric generation, etc.) will be
exempt under MRRA projects
16
ROC requires TPT license
Not addressed
Eliminates TPT license requirement for ROC license
17
City and County Permits TPT license requirement
Not addressed
Eliminates TPT license requirement as a condition for issuing permits
18
Landscaping activities
Not addressed
Statutory language to remove "modifying" and "repairing sprinkler or
watering systems" in the definition of Landscape activities
This eliminates the possible confusion over language found
in MRRA terminology; effectively places Landscaping
activities in same position as other contracting activities.
Note that Landscaping as defined in statute is not the same
as "lawn maintenance services", which are not taxed as
prime contracting.
This document was prepared for the general use of the construction industry. It is not intended to be a comprehensive summary, or to be relied on as legal or tax advice.
Page 5
TPT REFORM – PRIME CONTRACTING
2015 Pending Legislation (SB1446 and HB2590) – Key Provisions – 3 February 2015
1. Contractors Can Once Again Purchase All Project Materials on Tax-Exempt Basis (ARS 42-5061(A)(27))
• Contractors can once again issue a blanket Form 5000 for both:
o Prime Contracting projects
o Maintenance, Repair, Replacement and Alteration (MRRA) projects
• Vendors can rely on a Contractor’s blanket Form 5000
• Avoids impractical “dual inventory” problem
2. Contractors Pay Tax When They Use Materials if Purchased Tax-Exempt (ARS 42-5008.01(A) and (B))
• Materials purchased tax-free for MRRA projects (see #1) are taxed as they are used, based on job location
• This applies even when a contractor cancels its Prime Contracting license
3. GC May Issue Form 5005 to Subs for Materials Used in MRRA Project (ARS 42-5008.01(A) and (B))
• Allows Subs to use Form 5000 to avoid tax when purchasing materials for use in an MRRA project
• GC assumes tax liability for materials used by Subs in an MRRA project
• If audited and project is found to be Prime Contracting, GC gets offset for tax it paid on materials used by Subs
4. Change Orders (ARS 42-5075(O)(2))
• If the scope of work of a change order directly relates to the scope of work of the original contract, then the tax
treatment of the change order follows the original contract
• If the scope of work of a change order does not directly relate to the original, the tax treatment of the change
order will depend solely on the scope of work of the change order
5. Definition of Alteration (ARS 42-5075(R)(1)) Creates thresholds for determining tax status of project:
• Residential Property: Tax on materials, if the contract price for the work is 25% or less of the property’s Full Cash
Value for property tax purposes (31.25%, with 25% cushion described below)
• Commercial Property: Tax on materials, if all of the following are true:
o Contract amount is $750,000 or less ($937,500, with 25% cushion)
o Scope of work directly relates to 40% or less of existing square footage (50%, with 25% cushion)
o Scope of work includes an expansion of existing square footage that is 10% or less of pre-existing square
footage (12.5%, with 25% cushion)
• 25% Cushion for All Property: If project qualifies for Alteration treatment when work begins, it will continue to
qualify even if the threshold is blown by no more than 25% (cost overruns, change orders, etc.)
6. Clarifies Definition of Prime Contracting Taxable “Modification” (ARS 42-5075(R)(6))
• Deletes terms that cause confusion (“improvement” and “movement”)
• Specifically excludes MRRA activities (MRRA trumps Prime Contracting)
• Specifically excludes mobilization and demobilization (e.g., erection of temporary facilities, fencing)
7. Provides Consistent Treatment for MRRA Projects with Tax-Exempt Parties or for Tax-Exempt Property
• Qualifying hospitals, qualifying health care organizations, etc. (ARS 42-5061(A)(25))
• On-reservation projects for Tribal government or Enrolled Member (ARS 42-5061(A)(60))
• Electric generation, mining, manufacturing, etc. machinery and equipment (ARS 42-5008.01(A)(2), (B)(5))
8. Excludes Roadway and other Surface/Subsurface Projects from MRRA Treatment (ARS 42-5075(P))
• Maintain Prime Contracting tax treatment for most public works projects without vertical construction
• Does not apply to state projects other than ADOT
• Does not apply to most Special Taxing Districts
9. Safe Harbor to Protect Industry During Transition Period (Session Law)
• Protection provided for good-faith bids/contracts entered into before May 1, 2015, assuming the Governor signs
the bill in February 2015
• Prime contracting treatment permitted for all projects started during this period, regardless of when completed
20489313.8
Craig R. McPike
Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
CONSULT YOUR TAX ADVISOR
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Agenda Item #5
Legislative Policy Discussion and Updates
Summary:
The 2015 legislative session is well underway with League staff actively
engaged on dozens of bills that affect the finances and operations of
cities and towns in Arizona. In light of the resignation of Legislative
Director Rene Guillen to take a position in the office of Governor Doug
Ducey, we have adjusted responsibilities for legislative coverage.
Executive Director Strobeck and Deputy Director Belshe, as well as
other members of the staff, are working with the legislative team of Dale
Wiebusch and Ryan Peters, who have picked up additional portfolio
areas. We have also added a full-time, limited duration Legislative
Associate position that is being filled by Gregory Karidas.
The principal issues to discuss under this agenda item are HB2254, the
proposed elimination of the residential rental tax resulting in a loss of
$87 million per year to cities and towns, and the impact of the
Governor’s proposed budget on cities and towns.
Responsible Person:
Ken Strobeck & League Staff
Attachments:
Summary of Governor Ducey’s Proposed Budget
Capitol Media Services news story on budget proposal
Articles regarding repeal of city home rental taxes
2015 Municipal Policy Statement (located inside front cover of binder)
The Voice and Legislative Bulletins to date
Good Bill/Bad Bill List
Governor Ducey budget proposal relating directly to cities and towns:
Department of Revenue
•
•
TPT:
1. A charge of $0.76 per resident for the non-program cities for temporary staff to
implement TPT simplification. This equals $2.9 million. As of January 1, 2016, all cities
are scheduled to become program cities.
2. An allocation of $8.2 million from cities' TPT shared revenue statewide for DOR
operations. This is a permanent charge for administering cities’ and towns’ portion of
DOR operations for TPT collections.
3. A charge of $2 million to create the DOR Collections Fund for additional collections staff.
This money will come out of the base TPT revenues, before distribution to the state,
counties and cities. The estimated impact to cities and towns is approximately $500,000.
This is also permanent.
The Governor’s budget assumes cities and towns will receive an additional $6.5 million in TPT
revenue due to enhanced collections activities.
HURF
•
•
The Governor's proposal recommends using Motor Vehicle Registration Fees (which currently
sends $35 million into HURF) to fund a portion of DPS as a permanent mechanism. The proposed
budget allows the ADOT director to increase that fee to cover 50% of DPS operations.
The HURF diversion for FY2016 and FY2017 will be $54 million. In FY2015 it was $89 million.
WIFA
•
The state will not appropriate $1 million to WIFA for the Water Supply Development Fund.There
are other monies from other sources that still go to WIFA.
State Aviation Fund
•
The Governor’s proposal transfers $15 million out of the State Aviation Fund to the general
fund. The current balance is $37.5 million.
Ducey’s budget heavy on cuts
By Howard Fischer Capitol Media Services | Posted: Saturday, January 17, 2015 10:26 am
PHOENIX — Gov. Doug Ducey proposes to balance the state budget by cutting aid to universities by
more than 10 percent, taking away some revenue sharing dollars for cities and counties and imposing
what amounts to a new tax on motorists.
Ducey’s nearly $9.1 billion spending plan also cuts funding to promote tourism and raids other state
funds to the tune of $304 million.
The governor said, though, his budget increases classroom funding by $134 million. But there is
really less there than meets the eye.
Most of that is in what voters already have told lawmakers to increase aid to schools to account for
inflation. But even here, the governor proposes giving schools only what the Legislature contends the
state owes schools rather than the $330 million a court already has ruled is owed.
And even that does not tell the whole story.
Ducey proposes to force schools to spend 5 percent less on things outside the classroom, ranging
from administration to transportation and utilities. That and other changes total $123.7 million.
The bottom line is that the actual year-over-year increase in state funding for public schools is a mere
$11 million out of close to $3.8 billion.
Gubernatorial press aide Daniel Scarpinato acknowledged that the more than 200 locally elected
school boards already have the ability to move as much as they can from other expenses into the
classroom.
“But they haven’t done that,” he said, saying the mandate will force the issue.
Tim Ogle, executive director of the Arizona School Boards Association, said that edict ignores the
reality of what is being paid for out of the non-classroom side of the budget.
“You have bond obligations and utilities and maintenance on your buses and transportation and food
service,” he said. “There’s just nothing to cut.”
Ogle said if Ducey is really interested in adding more funds to classrooms he will force a settlement
of the pending lawsuit over inflation, at a figure far closer to the $330 million the judge says the state
owes, and do it with new funds instead of forcing schools to take money from one pocket and put it in
another.
While Ducey is cutting in various places, he does plan to spend more money on some of his
priorities.
One of those is paying private companies to build and operate more prison beds. John Arnold, the
governor’s budget director, said the cost of that starts at just $5.3 million for the coming fiscal year
but eventually will add $60 million to the state budget.
There is nothing in Ducey’s budget, public comments or policy statements addressing the possibility
suggested by some people that the state look at its laws on mandatory sentencing as an alternative to
building more prisons.
The new charge for motorists is an effort by Ducey to divert general fund tax dollars now going to
fund the Department of Public Safety and instead use them elsewhere.
Today, the state charges an annual $8 registration fee on top of a separate levy based on the value of
the vehicle. Arnold said the new charge would raise levy by $6 or $7 a year, raising an extra $30
million for DPS.
“This is not a tax increase,” said Scarpinato. Yet it is the very kind of authority to an agency to
increase a levy that lawmakers gave two years ago to Gov. Jan Brewer to fund expansion of Medicaid
— an increase that Republican legislative leaders have sued to prove is a tax that was illegally enacted.
The cuts to universities total about $75 million. Arizona State University would take a $40.3 million
hit, with a $21.6 million reduction to the University of Arizona. Northern Arizona University would
see its state aid reduced by $13.1 million.
Ducey made no bones about the fact he intends to shift the costs to students.
“We believe the universities are investments for our state,” he said. But Ducey said the schools are
“also an investment for individual students.”
And Ducey said he sees funding K-12 as a higher priority.
“We’re asking everyone to share in this sacrifice while we’re protecting these classrooms,” he said,
even though that is really being paid for by public schools being told to shift money out of other areas
of their budgets.
The budget plan also further cuts state aid for the Pima, Pinal and Maricopa community college
systems. Smaller colleges would remain untouched.
Ducey’s budget is also balanced with funds from local governments.
The state now provides “revenue sharing” with cities, towns and counties. That was part of a deal to
keep cities from levying their own income taxes.
Arnold said since the state is collecting those dollars for the localities, they should help pay to run the
Department of Revenue. So the governor’s budget reduces their aid payments by a total of $14.1
million.
YOUR MUNICIPAL VOICE
AT THE CAPITOL
FOR MORE INFORMATION: CALL 602-258-5786
VISIT: WWW.AZLEAGUE.ORG • TWITTER: @AZCITIES
This document is to help you, as a municipal official, to better understand the process and the personnel
at the Arizona State Capitol. As always, the League’s legislative staff is here to support you. You can contact us
anytime at 602-258-5786 or [email protected].
Legislature 101: An Introduction to
Lawmaking and the Capitol in 2015
How a Bill Becomes Law
Each session state legislators introduce approximately
1,200 bills, nearly a quarter of which have some
relevance to cities and towns.
On Monday, January 12, the Legislature convened.
Bills start in either the House or the Senate, depending
upon who sponsors the bill. Senate bills start with
“1001,” House bills start with “2001” and are then
numbered sequentially. Although there are some
differences in how each chamber operates, the basic
process is the same. There are six sequential steps
that take place in each.
1) Bill Assignment - A bill is “first and second read”
on the floor; and then assigned to a committee based
on subject matter.
2) Committee - Committees are comprised of members
from each party, with the majority party having the
most seats. This is the only step in the entire legislative
process that is truly “open to the public” for comment.
Members of the committee may offer amendments
to change the language of a bill. If a bill fails here,
the bill is “dead,” although there are many methods
available to resurrect it. If it passes, it moves on to
Rules Committee.
3) Rules Committee - Every moving bill must go through
Rules Committee for legal review, discussing whether
the bill is constitutional, germane with existing statute
and in the proper format. The committee does not give
a bill a pass or fail recommendation.
4) Caucus - The members of each party meet to review
bills and the “party position” is vetted. No formal action
takes place.
5) Committee of the Whole (COW) - The entire
chamber comes together for a floor debate. At this
point committee amendments as well as floor
amendments are formally offered and adopted.
Discussions can be a few minutes or several hours.
In COW, a voice vote is used.
6) Third Read - All changes adopted in COW are officially engrossed into the bill and prepared for a
final vote. This vote is electronically tallied. Like the committee process, if a bill fails on third read it is considered “dead” with the possibility of procedural resurrection. If it passes, the bill then goes to the other chamber and the same steps are repeated.
HOW A BILL BECOMES A LAW IN ARIZONA
Each session state legislators introduce approximately 1,200 bills,
nearly a quarter of which have some relevance to cities and towns...
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
•
•
•
•
•
•
SENATE
of Bill
(First Read, Second Read,
Assignment)
(Public Hearing)
(Legal Review)
Rules
Caucus
of the Whole
(Floor Debate)
Third Read (Final Vote)
•
•
•
•
•
•
of Bill
(First Read, Second Read,
Assignment)
(Public Hearing)
(Legal Review)
Rules
Caucus
of the Whole
(Floor Debate)
Third Read (Final Vote)
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
• Original Version
• Amended Version
• New Version
approved by
final vote in both chambers)
OUTCOME
Unamended
Amended
& Accepted
Amended
& Rejected
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE
Sign Bill
If an identical bill passes both chambers without any
amendments, it goes straight to the governor’s office.
If a bill is approved in one chamber, amended in the
other chamber (but that amendment is approved by
the sponsoring chamber) it also advances to the
governor’s office. If a bill comes out of its second chamber
different than it went in (through the amendment process)
it will go to a conference committee. This committee is
made up of members from both chambers who will work
towards a version of the bill amenable to both chambers.
If a chamber rejects the committee’s recommendation,
the bill is considered “dead.” If a bill is amended by
a conference committee it is then final read by both
chambers. If it passes final read, it is transmitted to the
governor’s office.
Veto Bill
Enact Without
Signature
Once a bill is in the governor’s office, he or she can
sign it into law, veto the bill or allow the legislation to
become enacted without his or her signature.
Bill language, hearing schedules, live feeds and
status information are available at the Arizona State
Legislature’s website; www.azleg.gov. During the session League staff spends countless
hours at the legislature tracking bills. We encourage
our members to stay abreast of legislative issues
impacting cities and towns through our weekly
Legislative Bulletin and by contacting the League at
602-258-5786. You may also visit the Legislative
Issues section of the League’s website where you will
find a number of resources to help city and town
officials navigate the legislative process.
A Look at the Executive and Legislative
Branches for 2015
2015 has brought a number of changes to the Capitol. We have a new governor leading Arizona
along with three sets of new caucus leaders in the Legislature. Below is a brief overview of the new
executive and legislative leadership.
Governor of Arizona –
Doug Ducey
Speaker of the House –
Representative David Gowan
The governor is the chief
executive officer of the
state and is in charge
of the executive branch
of government.
The speaker is in charge of the House
and represents the House with the
governor and the Senate president.
Senate President –
Senator Andy Biggs
The president is in charge of the
Senate, and represents the Senate
with the governor and the speaker
of the House.
House of Representatives
Majority Leader –
Representative Steve Montenegro
Assistant Minority Leader –
Representative Bruce Wheeler
The majority leader is in charge of
that party’s caucus, after the speaker.
The assistant minority leader is in
charge of that party’s caucus, after
the minority leader.
Majority Whip –
Representative David Livingston
Minority Whip –
Representative Rebecca Rios
The majority whip’s job is to gather
the necessary votes on a bill for that
party.
The minority whip’s job is to gather
the necessary votes on a bill for that
party.
Minority Leader –
Representative Eric Meyer, M.D.
The minority leader is in charge of his
or her caucus, and is the main liaison
with the majority leadership.
Senate
Majority Leader –
Senator Steve Yarbrough
Minority Co-Whip –
Senator Lupe Contreras
The majority leader is in charge
of that party’s caucus, after the
president.
The minority whip’s (and co-whip’s)
job is to gather the necessary votes
on a bill for that party.
Majority Whip –
Senator Gail Griffin
Minority Co-Whip –
Senator Martin Quezada
The majority whip’s job is to gather
the necessary votes on a bill for
that party.
The minority whip’s (and co-whip’s)
job is to gather the necessary votes
on a bill for that party.
Minority Leader –
Senator Katie Hobbs
Rural Liaison –
Senator Barbara Maguire
The minority leader is in charge of his
or her caucus, and is the main liaison
with the majority leadership.
The rural liaison addresses issues
related to non-metropolitan areas.
Assistant Minority Leader –
Senator Steve Farley
The assistant minority leader is in
charge of that party’s caucus, after
the minority leader.
Minority Leader Pro Tempore –
Senator David Bradley
The minority leader pro tempore acts
for the minority leader in that person’s
absence.
2015 Legislative Contact List
The list on the following pages includes:
• the name of each senator and representative and the district and the cities and towns they represent
• the Capitol address and toll-free number
• legislators’ office phone numbers
• legislators’ e-mail addresses
A useful tool for accessing legislative information is the Legislature’s web site; www.azleg.gov. In addition,
the League provides legislative information and services specifically for city and town officials on the
Legislative Issues section of the League’s Website.
SENATOR
REPRESENTATIVES
CITIES/TOWNS
DISTRICT 1
Steve Pierce(R)
Noel Campbell(R)
Karen Fann(R)
(602) 926-5584
(602) 926-3124
(602) 926-5874
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Carefree, Cave Creek,
Chino Valley, Dewey-Humboldt,
Peoria, Phoenix, Prescott,
Prescott Valley, Wickenburg
DISTRICT 2
Andrea Dalessandro(D) John Ackerley(R)
Rosanna Gabaldon(D)
(602) 926-5342
(602) 926-3424
[email protected]
(602) 926-3077
[email protected]
[email protected]
Nogales, Patagonia,
Sahuarita, South Tucson,
Tucson
DISTRICT 3
Olivia Cajero Bedford(D) Sally Ann Gonzales(D) Macario Saldate(D)
(602) 926-5835
[email protected]
(602) 926-3278
[email protected]
Tucson
(602) 926-4171
[email protected]
DISTRICT 4
Lynne Pancrazi(D)
(602) 926-3004
[email protected]
Charlene Fernandez(D) Lisa Otondo(D)
(602) 926-3098
(602) 926-3002
[email protected]
[email protected]
Kelly Ward(R)
Sonny Borrelli(R)
Regina Cobb(R)
(602) 926-4138
(602) 926-5051
(602) 926-3126
Sylvia Allen(R)
Brenda Barton(R)
Robert Thorpe(R)
(602) 926-5409
(602) 926-4129
(602) 926-5219
Buckeye, Gila Bend,
Goodyear, San Luis,
Somerton, Tucson,
Yuma
DISTRICT 5
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Bullhead City, Colorado City,
Kingman, Lake Havasu City,
Parker, Quartzsite
DISTRICT 6
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Camp Verde, Clarkdale,
Cottonwood, Flagstaff, Holbrook,
Jerome, Payson, Sedona,
Snowflake, Star Valley, Taylor,
Tusayan, Williams
SENATOR
REPRESENTATIVES
CITIES/TOWNS
DISTRICT 7
Carlyle Begay(D)
Jennifer Benally(D)
Albert Hale(D)
(602) 926-5862
(602) 926-3079
(602) 926-4323
Barbara McGuire(D)
Frank Pratt(R)
T.J. Shope(R)
(602) 926-5836
(602) 926-5761
(602) 926-3012
[email protected]
Casa Grande, Coolidge, Eloy,
Florence, Globe, Hayden,
Kearny, Mammoth, Miami,
Superior, Winkelman
Steve Farley(D)
Randall Friese(R)
Victoria Steele(D)
Marana, Oro Valley, Tucson
(602) 926-3022
(602) 926-3138
(602) 926-5683
David Bradley(D)
Stefanie Mach(D)
Bruce Wheeler(D)
(602) 926-5262
(602) 926-3398
(602) 926-3300
Steve Smith(R)
Mark Finchem(R)
(602) 926-5685
(602) 926-3122
Vince Leach(R)
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Eagar, Fredonia, Page,
Pinetop-Lakeside, Show Low,
Springerville, St. Johns,
Winslow
DISTRICT 8
[email protected]
[email protected]
DISTRICT 9
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
DISTRICT 10
[email protected]
[email protected]
Tucson
[email protected]
DISTRICT 11
[email protected]
(602) 926-3106
[email protected]
[email protected]
Andy Biggs(R)
Eddie Farnsworth(R)
Warren Petersen(R)
(602) 926-4371
(602) 926-5735
(602) 926-4136
Casa Grande, Eloy, Marana,
Maricopa, Oro Valley,
Tucson
DISTRICT 12
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Chandler, Gilbert,
Queen Creek
SENATOR
REPRESENTATIVES
CITIES/TOWNS
DISTRICT 13
Don Shooter(R)
Darin Mitchell(R)
Steve Montenegro(R)
(602) 926-4139
(602) 926-5894
(602) 926-5955
Gail Griffin(R)
David Gowan(R)
David Stevens(R)
(602) 926-5895
(602) 926-3312
(602) 926-4321
[email protected]
Benson, Bisbee, Clifton, Douglas,
Duncan, Huachuca City, Pima
Safford, Sierra Vista, Thatcher,
Tombstone, Tucson, Willcox
Nancy Barto(R)
John Allen(R)
Heather Carter(R)
Cave Creek, Phoenix
(602) 926-5766
(602) 926-4916
(602) 926-5503
David Farnsworth(R)
Doug Coleman(R)
Kelly Townsend(R)
(602) 926-3020
(602) 926-3160
(602) 926-4467
Steve Yarbrough(R)
J.D. Mesnard(R)
Jeff Weninger(R)
(602) 926-5863
(602) 926-4481
(602) 926-3092
Jeff Dial(R)
Jill Norgaard(R)
Bob Robson(R)
(602) 926-5550
(602) 926-3140
(602) 926-5549
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Buckeye, El Mirage, Glendale,
Goodyear, Litchfield Park,
Surprise, Wellton,
Wickenburg, Yuma
DISTRICT 14
[email protected]
[email protected]
DISTRICT 15
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
DISTRICT 16
[email protected]
[email protected]
Apache Junction, Mesa,
Queen Creek
[email protected]
DISTRICT 17
[email protected]
[email protected]
Chandler, Gilbert
[email protected]
DISTRICT 18
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Chandler, Guadalupe, Mesa,
Phoenix, Tempe
SENATOR
REPRESENTATIVES
CITIES/TOWNS
DISTRICT 19
Lupe Chavira Contreras(D) Mark Cardenas(D)
Diego Espinoza(D)
(602) 926-5284
(602) 926-3014
(602) 926-3134
Kimberly Yee(R)
Paul Boyer(R)
Anthony Kern(R)
(602) 926-3024
(602) 926-4173
(602) 926-3102
Debbie Lesko(R)
Rick Gray(R)
Tony Rivero(R)
(602) 926-5413
(602) 926-5993
(602) 926-3104
Judy Burges(R)
David Livingston(R)
Phil Lovas(R)
(602) 926-5861
(602) 926-4178
(602) 926-3297
John Kavanagh(R)
Jay Lawrence(R)
Michelle Ugenti(R)
(602) 926-5170
(602) 926-3095
(602) 926-4480
Katie Hobbs(D)
Lela Alston(D)
Ken Clark(D)
(602) 926-5325
(602) 926-5829
(602) 926-3108
[email protected]
[email protected]
Avondale, Phoenix, Tolleson
[email protected]
DISTRICT 20
[email protected]
[email protected]
Glendale, Phoenix
[email protected]
DISTRICT 21
[email protected]
[email protected]
El Mirage, Peoria,
Surprise, Youngtown
[email protected]
DISTRICT 22
[email protected]
[email protected]
Glendale, Peoria, Surprise
[email protected]
DISTRICT 23
[email protected]
[email protected]
Fountain Hills, Paradise Valley,
Scottsdale
[email protected]
DISTRICT 24
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe
SENATOR
REPRESENTATIVES
CITIES/TOWNS
DISTRICT 25
Bob Worsley(R)
Russell Bowers(R)
Justin Olson(R)
(602) 926-5760
(602) 926-3128
(602) 926-5288
Ed Ableser(D)
Juan Mendez(D)
Andrew Sherwood(D)
(602) 926-4118
(602) 926-4124
(602) 926-3028
[email protected]
[email protected]
Mesa
[email protected]
DISTRICT 26
[email protected]
[email protected]
Mesa, Phoenix, Tempe
[email protected]
DISTRICT 27
Catherine Miranda(D) Reginald Bolding(D)
(602) 926-4893
[email protected]
(602) 926-3132
[email protected]
Rebecca Rios(D)
Guadalupe, Phoenix, Tempe
(602) 926-3073
[email protected]
DISTRICT 28
Adam Driggs(R)
Kate Brophy McGee(R) Eric Meyer(D)
(602) 926-3016
(602) 926-4486
(602) 926-3037
Martin Quezada(D)
Richard Andrade(D)
(602) 926-5911
(602) 926-3130
Ceci Velasquez(D)
[email protected]
[email protected]
Paradise Valley, Phoenix,
Scottsdale
[email protected]
DISTRICT 29
[email protected]
El Mirage, Glendale, Phoenix
(602) 926-3144
[email protected]
[email protected]
Robert Meza(D)
Jonathan Larkin(D)
Debbie McCune Davis(D)
(602) 926-3425
(602) 926-5058
(602) 926-4485
DISTRICT 30
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Glendale, Phoenix
DISTRICT 29
If you wish to reach a legislator by mail at the Capitol, simply address the correspondence to:
Martin Quezada(D)
Richard Andrade(D)
Ceci Velasquez(D)
El Mirage, Glendale, Phoenix
(602) 926-5911
(602) 926-3130
The Honorable Senator's
Name
[email protected]
[email protected]
State Senator
1700 West Washington Street - Senate
Phoenix,
DISTRICT
30 Arizona 85007
(602) 926-3144
The Honorable Representative's Name
[email protected]
State Representative
1700 West Washington Street - House
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Robert Meza(D)
Jonathan Larkin(D)
Debbie McCune Davis(D)
[email protected]
[email protected]
(602) 926-3425
[email protected]
Glendale, Phoenix
(602) 926-5058
Toll-free
number: 1-800-352-8404
(602) 926-4485
f you wish to reach a legislator by mail at the Capitol, simply address the correspondence to:
The Honorable Senator's Name
State Senator
1700 West Washington Street - Senate
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
The Honorable Representative's Name
State Representative
1700 West Washington Street - House
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Toll-free number: 1-800-352-8404
FOR MORE INFORMATION: CALL 602-258-5786
VISIT: WWW.AZLEAGUE.ORG • TWITTER: @AZCITIES
Issue 1 - January 16, 2015
Legislative Overview
On M onday, January 12, the first regular session of Arizona's 52nd Legislature convened. M any mayors, council
members and municipal staff attended the Opening Day ceremonies. In addition to the excitement and activity
associated with welcoming legislators, Governor Doug Ducey delivered the annual State of the State Address, where
he touted state fiscal responsibility and educational reform. You can find his speech here.
The legislature held only a few committee hearings this week, most notably on the Governor's push to include a
civics test as a high school graduation requirement. That bill, HB 2064, passed both chambers on Thursday and was
signed by the Governor that night.
Today the Governor reveals his budget. The League will provide information and analysis in the coming weeks as
more details are made available.
Session Deadlines
Every session has deadlines pertaining to bill submissions and hearings. These are established by rule and are subject
to change. This year, the schedule is as follows:
January 2015
M onday, the 12th - First day of session
Thursday, the 15th - House 7-bill Introduction Limit Begins (5 p.m.)
February 2015
M onday, the 2nd - Senate Bill Introduction Deadline (5 p.m.)
M onday, the 9th - House Bill Introduction Deadline (5 p.m.)
Friday, the 20th - Last Day to hear bills in the chamber of origin
March 2015
Friday, the 20th - Last Day to hear bills in the opposing chamber
April 2015
Tuesday, the 21st - 100th Day of Session
Monday Legislative Call
The League will continue to host a weekly conference call to report on the status and impact of various legislative
bills in the 2015 session. The calls are scheduled for M onday mornings promptly at 10:00 a.m. M ayors, managers and
other city or town staff who are interested in legislative activities are invited to participate. Call-in numbers and a
brief agenda will be sent out prior to the calls. If you would like to receive the M onday agendas, please contact
[email protected] and request to be added to the distribution list for the M onday teleconference. Note that due
to the M onday holiday and the limited number of bills to discuss this early in the session, there will not be a call on
January 19th.
Legislative Bulletin
The League will electronically distribute the Legislative Bulletin every Friday during the legislative session. The
Bulletin serves as a way for the League to communicate to elected officials, staff and other interested parties about
activities at the Le gislature that are relevant to cities and towns. If you know of any municipal official or staff
member that would like to subscribe to the Bulletin please have them send their name and email to
[email protected] and request to be added to the Legislative Bulletin distribution list.
This year will see the continuation of the preferred streamlined format introduced two years ago. The Bulletin will
highlight only the top half-dozen or so topics and bills from each week. Other legislation that the League is actively
tracking will still be monitored and updated; however, that information will be available on our Legislative Bill
M onitoring page on the League website. The Bulletin will contain links to legislation that has been updated in our
Legislative Bill M onitoring Section. We hope this will make it more convenient for you to keep up to date on the
latest legislative activities, while still providing a resource for more detailed information.
APS Legislative Intern
The League is pleased to welcome Erin Gantman as its new legislative intern for the 2015 session. Erin's background is
in customer service as well as assisting the California League of Cities in Southern California in the summer of 2014.
Currently, Erin is in her last semester at Arizona State University and will be receiving her bachelor's degree in both
Political Science and Communications. Erin plans to go to law school in the fall of 2015. Erin will be assisting the
League's legislative staff for the duration of the spring 2015 semester. Her stipend is being paid by a grant from APS.
Your Voice
The 2015 edition of Your Voice at the Capitol, our listing of senators and representatives, is available here. Please
use this document to find contact information for your delegation. Early communication with your legislative
delegation is strongly recommended in order to establish a relationship with the legislators representing your city or
town. M aintaining good communications provides your legislators with invaluable insight as to how proposed
legislation may affect their communities.
Additionally, you can contact our legislative division at (602) 258-5786 or email using the information below:
Ryan Peters, Legislative Associate: [email protected]
Dale Wiebusch, Legislative Associate: [email protected]
Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Ar izona Cities and Towns.
For war d your comments or suggestions to [email protected] g.
Issue 2 - January 23, 2015
Legislative Overview
This week saw minimal bill action related to municipal concerns. We expect that to change next week as agendas
get more fully developed. Last Friday Governor Ducey released his budget proposal which is analyzed further in the
article below.
To date there have been 665 bills introduced, with 39 memorials and resolutions. One bill has been signed, HB2064,
the graduation requirement, civics test bill.
Governor's Budget Proposal
The Governor's budget proposal came out last Friday afternoon. Here is our analysis of the sections that most
directly affect cities and towns.
Department of Revenue
TPT
A charge of $0.76 per resident for the non-program cities for temporary staff to implement TPT
simplification. This equals $2.9 million. As of January 1, 2016, all cities are scheduled to become
program cities.
An allocation of $8.2 million from cities' TPT shared revenue statewide for DOR operations. This is a
permanent charge for administering cities' and towns' portion of DOR operations for TPT collections.
A charge of $2 million to create the DOR Collections Fund for additional collections staff. This money
will come out of the base TPT revenues, before distribution to the state, counties and cities. The
estimated impact to cities and towns is approximately $500,000. This is also permanent.
The Governor's budget assumes cities and towns will receive an additional $6.5 million in TPT revenue due to
enhanced collections activities.
HURF
The Governor's proposal recommends using M otor Vehicle Registration Fees (which currently sends $35
million into HURF) to fund a portion of DPS as a permanent mechanism. The proposed budget allows the ADOT
director to increase that fee to cover 50% of DPS operations.
The HURF diversion for FY2016 and FY2017 will be $54 million. In FY2015 it was $89 million.
WIFA
The state will not appropriate $1 million to WIFA for the Water Supply Development Fund. There are other
monies from other sources that still go to WIFA.
State Aviation Fund
The Governor's proposal transfers $15 million out of the State Aviation Fund to the general fund. The current
balance is $37.5 million.
This link will take you to all of the Governor's budget documents.
Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Ar izona Cities and Towns.
For war d your comments or suggestions to [email protected] g.
Issue 3 - January 30, 2015
Legislative Overview
Activity in committee and the floor picked up this week as legislators finished their third week of session. To date,
943 bills and 64 resolutions and memorials have been introduced. There is still only one bill signed, HB 2064,
graduation requirement; civics test.
Residential Rental
The House Ways and M eans Committee will be considering HB 2254 (municipal tax exemption; residential lease)
M onday afternoon. Sponsored by Representative Darin M itchel (R-Litchfield Park), this bill prohibits municipalities
from imposing a residential rental tax and requires those that already have this tax to reduce the rate by 25% each
year until the rate is zero. This will be a tremendous revenue loss to many of our cities and towns, with a local
budget impact of more than $87 million. We encourage you to register your strong opposition to the bill, both in
committee and with your legislative delegation.
License Accountability
The House Judiciary Committee approved HB 2212 (licensing; accountability; enforcement; exceeding regulation)
with a 5-1 vote. Current law prohibits municipalities from basing licensing decisions in whole or in part on licensing
requirements not specifically authorized by statute, rule, ordinance, or code. This bill, sponsored by Representative
Warren Petersen (R-Gilbert), expressly states that violating this statute can be enforced by private civil action and
requires that the language of this section of statute to be printed on license applications. The sponsor agreed to
amend the bill to address the League's concerns about opening the door to frivolous lawsuits.
Alarm Installers
HB 2504 (board of technical registration; alarms), removes alarm installers from the Board of Technical Registration
and also eliminates the requirement for alarm installers to have criminal background checks. The League opposed
the bill and believes that alarm installers should be fingerprinted and checked for serious crimes before being
allowed access to citizens' homes. The bill passed the House Commerce Committee by a vote of 6-2. The sponsor
Rep. Warren Peterson (R - Gilbert) did say he would be willing to amend the bill to return some level of criminal
background checks for the installers. The bill now proceeds to the Rules Committee.
Inclusionary Zoning
On Wednesday, the Senate Government Committee passed SB 1072 (local planning; residential housing; prohibitions)
by a vote of 4-2. S ponsored by Sen. Steve Smith (R - M aricopa), the bill prevents cities and town from requiring
developers to set aside a portion of their new apartments as low income housing. The League opposed the bill as
there are no current municipalities that do this and there are current state laws that prohibit rent control and
regulatory takings. SB 1072 now goes to the Rules Committee.
Waste Management
SB 1079 (solid waste collection; multifamily housing) passed the Senate Government Committee on Wednesday by a
vote of 5-1. The bill, sponsored by Senator Gail Griffin (R - Hereford), seeks to treat multi-family housing the same as
commercial properties, therefore allowing private waste haulers the ability to provide service without having to
serve single family homes in the same area. The League opposed the measure based on the need to ensure proper
service provision and not require the municipalities to be the provider of last resort. The proponents of the bill did
state that they would be willing to work on some of the League's concerns. The bill now moves on to the Rules
Committee.
Legislative Bill Monitoring
(All bills being actively monitored by the League can be found here.)
HB 2212: licensing; accountability; enforcement; exceeding regulation
HB 2504: board of technical registration; alarms
SB 1072: local planning; residential housing; prohibitions
SB 1079: solid waste collection; multifamily housing
Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Ar izona Cities and Towns.
For war d your comments or suggestions to [email protected] g.
By: Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services
February 3, 2015 , 7:33 am
State lawmakers took the first steps
Monday to strip cities of their ability
to tax rents on homes and
apartments.
The 5-4 vote by the House
Committee on Ways and Means
came after proponents said the levy
is unfair to the one third of
Arizonans who rent. Rep. Darin
Mitchell, R-Litchfield Park, sponsor
of the measure, said this hits the
poor who are renting because they
can’t afford to buy a home.
But Rep. Andrew Sherwood, D-Tempe, pointed out that the tax is legally the responsibility of the landlord. More to
the point, there is nothing in HB 2254 that requires the landlords to pass on any savings to their tenants.
Monday’s vote came over the objections of several mayors who said the loss of revenues would cause financial
problems. Overall, the League of Arizona Cities and Towns figures the legislation when fully implemented would
reduce tax revenues by more than $87 million.
The legislation bars communities from imposing a new rental tax. Those that now have them would be required to
cut the rate by 25 percent at the end of this year and each consecutive year until the levy goes away.
Cities and towns could keep any taxes – and even impose new ones – on short-term rentals, defined as less than 30
consecutive days. That also preserves any levies on hotels and motels.
Mitchell said the tax “rubs me the wrong way.”
He said renters, on average, have just half the income of homeowners. Mitchell said his legislation would provide
“real tax relief for Arizona citizens who need it the most.”
Courtney LeVinus, lobbyist for the Arizona Multihousing Association, said the levy amounts to double taxation. She
said when landlords pay their property taxes for municipal services those already are passed on to the tenants.
Christian Price, mayor of Maricopa, said the legislation takes needed revenue from his community. Price said his city
is largely a bedroom community for the Phoenix area and lacks the ability to raise the money elsewhere.
And he said that his police chief told him that renters do impose costs on the community.
LeVinus jumped on the assertion.
“It’s actually a little offensive to say that because you rent your home, either by choice or out of necessity, that that
means you have a higher propensity to commit crime,” she told lawmakers.
LeVinus said any data supporting that is based on the fact that some apartment complexes have a single street
address, making the number of calls to that rental address not exactly representative.
The committee vote did not occur along party lines.
Rep. Michelle Ugenti, R-Scottsdale, said she could not back a ban on the taxes.
But Rep. Bruce Wheeler, D-Tucson, supported the measure, calling the tax “regressive.” Wheeler noted, though, that
his home city does not impose the levy.
Tw eet
2
Like
18
0
Share
Copyright © 2014 Arizona Capitol Times 1835 W. Adams Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007 (602) 258-7026
Arizona House panel OKs repeal of city home rental
taxes
BOB CHRISTIE, Associated Press | Posted: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 2:34 am
PHOENIX — An Arizona House committee on Monday voted to force cities and towns to stop
charging tax on rental properties, a move that cities argue could trigger major cuts but proponents say
eliminates a double tax on renters.
House Bill 2254 by Litchfield Park Republican Rep. Darin Mitchell would force 71 cities and towns
that now levy rental tax to eliminate residential rental taxes over five years. Phoenix is the largest
recipient of the tax money, getting $30 million last year.
Twenty cities and towns don't levy the fee, including Flagstaff and Tucson.
Mitchell and supporters like the Arizona Multihousing Association call the tax an unfair double tax on
renters, who already pay their landlord's share of property taxes through their rents.
"There's a genuine disagreement between some of the cities and probably what we are trying to do
here," Mitchell said at a Ways and Means Committee hearing. "But the way I see it, it is a regressive
double tax. It hits people at the lower level of the economic strata harder than it does others."
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns opposes the tax, which raised $87 million last year for
services like police and fire departments. Eliminating the tax would hurt city services and be a
giveaway to big apartment house owners who aren't required to pass on their savings, league Executive
Director Ken Strobeck said.
"This is not going to make the economy of our state any better. It's simply going to take $87 million
out of our public services and require it to be replaced with new taxes elsewhere," Strobeck said in an
interview. "This is just another special-interest group carving out an exemption for itself and
narrowing the tax base."
The House committee approved the bill on a 5-4 vote, with one Democrat supporting the measure and
one Republican opposing it. The committee has nine members, six of whom are Republicans.
Courtney Levinus, a lobbyist for the apartment association, said members should discount arguments
that multifamily units put more stress on public services.
"Shelter is a basic need," Levinus said. "It shouldn't be taxed more because your only option is to rent
your home rather than own your home."
LOLA Print Report
New Title
52nd Legislature - 1st Regular Session, 2015
Tuesday, Feb 3 2015 10:49 AM
Bill summaries and histories copyright 2015 Arizona Capitol Reports, L.L.C.
Bad Bills
Posted Calendars and Committee Hearings
H2013: COURTS; DAYS; TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS
Calendar: 2/3 House Caucus
Calendar: 2/5 House Consent
H2061: ONLINE TPT; INCOME TAX REDUCTION
Calendar: 2/3 House Caucus
Calendar: 2/5 House Consent
H2129: MUNICIPAL TAX CODE COMMISSION; CONTINUATION
Calendar: 2/3 House Caucus
H2140: AMBULANCE SERVICES; TEMPORARY AUTHORITY
Hearing: House Health (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 2:00 PM, House Rm. 4)
H2320: FIREARMS; PERMIT HOLDERS; PUBLIC PLACES
Hearing: House Military Affairs & Public Safety (Thursday 02/05/15 at 9:30 AM, House Rm.
5)
H2358: TPT; EXEMPTION; CROP DUSTERS
Hearing: House Rural & Economic Development (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 2:00 PM, House Rm.
5)
S1069: ORDINANCES; BUSINESSES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
Hearing: Senate Rules (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 10:00 AM, Senate Caucus Rm.)
Calendar: 2/3 Senate Caucus
S1079: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION; MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
Hearing: Senate Rules (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 10:00 AM, Senate Caucus Rm.)
Calendar: 2/3 Senate Caucus
S1145: RESTORATION TO COMPETENCY; STATE COSTS
Hearing: Senate Government (Wednesday 02/04/15 at 2:00 PM, Senate Rm. 3)
S1169: FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS; FIRE WATCH
Hearing: Senate Rural Affairs & Environment (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 9:00 AM, Senate Rm.
109)
Bill Summaries
H2048: RECALL; PRIMARY; GENERAL ELECTION
Recall elections must have a primary election and, if necessary, a general
election. If the office subject to the recall is regularly subject to a partisan
primary, the recall primary must also be held as a partisan primary election. If
there is only one candidate remaining for office after the recall primary, the
recall general election may not be held and the winner of the recall primary is
declared elected.
First sponsor: Rep. Townsend
Others: Rep. Finchem, Rep. Lawrence, Rep. Mitchell
H2048 Daily History Date Action
RECALL; PRIMARY; GENERAL ELECTION 1/14 referred to House elect.
H2056: TECH CORRECTION; STATE BONDS
Minor change in Title 35 (Public Finances) related to state tax anticipation
bonds. Apparent striker bus.
First sponsor: Rep. Thorpe
H2056 Daily History No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
Date
Action
LOLA Print Report
H2060: STATE BUDGET; CONSENSUS FORECAST
On March 1, September 1 and December 1 of each year, the Directors of the
Joint Legislative Budget Committee and the Governor's Office of Strategic
Planning and Budgeting are required to jointly compile a consensus revenue
forecast for the current fiscal year and te next three fiscal years. The
consensus revenue forecast must consist of specified information and must be
transmitted to the Governor and the Legislature. Revenue estimates in the
annual budget submitted to the Legislature by the Governor and in the general
appropriation act are required to be based on the most recent consensus
revenue forecast.
First sponsor: Rep. Mesnard
H2060 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
H2061: ONLINE TPT; INCOME TAX REDUCTION
The Department of Revenue is required to determine the amount of additional
revenue collected during the first full taxable year following the date the Dept
begins collecting, as a result of a "qualifying federal law" (defined), transaction
privilege and use taxes from out-of-state retailers on purchases made by
Arizona residents. After the Dept makes this determination, the Dept is
required to determine the amount that individual income taxes may be
reduced in the following tax year in order to decrease individual income tax
revenue by the amount of TPT collected. The Dept must certify these
determinations to the Governor and the Legislature and must specify in the
certification that the new tax rates take effect in the following tax year.
First sponsor: Rep. Mesnard
H2061 Daily History Date Action
ONLINE TPT; INCOME TAX REDUCTION 1/26 from House ways-means do pass.
ONLINE TPT; INCOME TAX REDUCTION 1/26 House ways-means do pass; report awaited.
ONLINE TPT; INCOME TAX REDUCTION 1/14 referred to House ways-means.
H2071: CANDIDATE'S RESIDENCE ADDRESS; NONDISCLOSURE
At the request of a candidate, the filing officer is prohibited from publicly
disclosing the candidate’s residence address, and the candidate’s residence
address does not constitute a public record. A candidate is permitted to omit
the candidate’s specific residence address from nomination petitions and may
instead state the s/he resides in the political division or district as appropriate
for that office.
First sponsor: Rep. Townsend
Others: Rep. Borrelli, Rep. Cobb, Rep. Lawrence, Sen. Miranda, Rep. Thorpe, Sen. Ward
H2071 Daily History Date Action
CANDIDATE'S RESIDENCE ADDRESS; NONDISCLOSURE 1/14 referred to House elect.
H2131: TAX ADJUDICATIONS; ATTORNEY FEES
The court is required, instead of permitted, to award fees and other expenses
to any party other than the state or a county or municipality that prevails by
an adjudication on the merits in an action brought by that party against the
state or a county or municipality challenging the assessment or collection of
taxes, or the denial of a tax refund. The definition of “fees and other
expenses” is expanded to include contingent fees.
First sponsor: Rep. Mitchell
H2131 Daily History Date Action
TAX ADJUDICATIONS; ATTORNEY FEES 1/27 referred to House jud.
H2156: NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES; TPT REVENUES
Each Indian tribe in the state is to receive 50 percent of transaction privilege
tax collections from its reservation. Funds are to be used for
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
telecommunications infrastructure and community development projects. The
remainder of collections are deposited in the state general fund.
First sponsor: Rep. Hale
Others: Rep. Alston, Sen. Begay, Rep. Benally, Rep. Bowers, Rep. Gabaldon, Rep. Gonzales,
Rep. Larkin, Rep. Meyer, Rep. Otondo, Rep. Rios, Rep. Saldate, Rep. Sherwood, Rep. Shope,
Rep. Steele, Rep. Wheeler
H2156 Daily History Date Action
NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES; TPT REVENUES 1/29 referred to House ways-means, appro.
H2160: TPT; INDIAN TRIBE; MOTOR VEHICLES
The list of items exempt from retail transaction privilege taxes is expanded to
include the sale of a motor vehicle to multiple purchasers who are enrolled
members of an Indian tribe who resides on the Indian reservation established
for the tribe of any of the purchasers.
First sponsor: Rep. Hale
Others: Rep. Alston, Sen. Begay, Rep. Benally, Rep. Bowers, Rep. Gabaldon, Rep. Gonzales,
Rep. Larkin, Rep. Meyer, Rep. Otondo, Rep. Rios, Rep. Saldate, Rep. Sherwood, Rep. Shope,
Rep. Steele, Rep. Wheeler
H2160 Daily History Date Action
TPT; INDIAN TRIBE; MOTOR VEHICLES 1/29 referred to House ways-means, appro.
H2209: GOVERNMENT-OWNED REAL PROPERTY; ANNUAL REPORT
Beginning in FY2015-16, municipal governing bodies and county boards of
supervisors are required to publish a report by June 30 of each year of all the
real property owned by the municipality or county. Information that must be
included in the report is specified.
First sponsor: Rep. Finchem
Others: Rep. Barton, Rep. Borrelli, Rep. Campbell, Rep. Cardenas, Rep. Cobb, Rep. Lawrence,
Rep. Leach, Rep. Petersen, Sen. Smith, Rep. Thorpe
H2209 Daily History Date Action
GOVERNMENT-OWNED REAL PROPERTY; ANNUAL REPORT 1/22 referred to House county-muni.
H2212: LICENSING; ACCOUNTABILITY; ENFORCEMENT; EXCEEDING REGULATION
Statute prohibiting municipalities, counties, special taxing districts and state
agencies from basing licensing decisions on requirements or conditions that
are not specifically authorized by statute, rule, ordinance or code may be
enforced in a private civil action and relief may be awarded against a
municipality, county, special taxing district or the state. The court is required
to award reasonable attorney fees, costs, damages and license application fees
to a party that prevails in an action against the municipality, county, special
taxing district or state. The language of these statutes must be prominently
printed on all license applications.
First sponsor: Rep. Petersen
H2212 Daily History Date Action
LICENSING; ACCOUNTABILITY; ENFORCEMENT; EXCEEDING REGULATION 1/29 withdrawn from House gov-higher
ed.
LICENSING; ACCOUNTABILITY; ENFORCEMENT; EXCEEDING REGULATION 1/28 from House jud do pass.
LICENSING; ACCOUNTABILITY; ENFORCEMENT; EXCEEDING REGULATION 1/21 additionally referred to House govhigher ed.
LICENSING; ACCOUNTABILITY; ENFORCEMENT; EXCEEDING REGULATION 1/20 referred to House jud.
H2254: MUNICIPAL TAX EXEMPTION; RESIDENTIAL LEASE
Municipalities or other taxing jurisdictions are prohibited from levying a
transaction privilege or other similar tax or fee on the business of renting or
leasing “real property for residential purposes” (defined). A municipality or
other taxing jurisdiction that levies a tax or fee on the business of renting or
leasing real property for residential purposes on January 1, 2015 is prohibited
from increasing the rate of the tax or fee and is required to annually reduce
the rate by 25 percent of the initial rate for four consecutive years beginning
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
on July 1, 2016 and each July 1 thereafter. Beginning July 1, 2019,
municipalities and other taxing jurisdictions are required to repeal any tax or
fee on the business of renting or leasing real property for residential purposes.
Retroactive to January 1, 2015.
First sponsor: Rep. Mitchell
H2254 Daily History Date Action
MUNICIPAL TAX EXEMPTION; RESIDENTIAL LEASE 2/2 House ways-means do pass; report awaited.
MUNICIPAL TAX EXEMPTION; RESIDENTIAL LEASE 1/22 referred to House ways-means.
H2264: TPT EXEMPTION; SCHOOL PURCHASES
The lists of exemptions from the retail classification of transaction privilege
and use taxes are expanded to include tangible personal property sold to a
school district or to a public or private elementary or secondary school for use
by the district or school.
First sponsor: Rep. Bowers
H2264 Daily History Date Action
TPT EXEMPTION; SCHOOL PURCHASES 1/22 referred to House ways-means, appro.
H2315: FINANCIAL INFORMATION; COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE; POSTING
If a “local government” (defined) fails to comply with the requirement to
establish and maintain an official internet website that is available to the
public and that contains a comprehensive reporting of all revenues and
expenditures over $5,000 of local monies, the public officer responsible for
posting the information is subject to removal for malfeasance in office.
First sponsor: Rep. Barton
Others: Rep. Bowers
H2315 Daily History Date Action
FINANCIAL INFORMATION; COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE; POSTING 1/27 referred to House gov-higher ed.
H2320: FIREARMS; PERMIT HOLDERS; PUBLIC PLACES
It is not considered misconduct involving weapons to carry a deadly weapon at
a public establishment or event if the person possesses a valid concealed
weapons permit. Does not apply to public establishments or events that have
security personnel and electronic weapons screening devices and that require
each person carrying a deadly weapon to leave it in possession of the security
personnel while the person is in the establishment or event.
First sponsor: Rep. Barton
Others: Rep. Borrelli, Rep. Bowers, Sen. Burges, Rep. Finchem, Rep. Lawrence, Rep. Shope,
Sen. Smith, Rep. Thorpe
H2320 Daily History Date Action
FIREARMS; PERMIT HOLDERS; PUBLIC PLACES 1/27 referred to House mil-pub.
H2328: TPT; HOST FACILITY; SPORTING EVENT
The State Treasurer is required to pay from the transaction privilege tax
distribution base a specified amount to the Office of Tourism for the sole
benefit of the “host facility” of a “special sporting event” (both defined) where
the cost of the event is at least $50 million. The amount to be paid is $1
million to $2 million, based on the total amount spent by the owner of the host
facility on the special sporting event. The Office is required to use the monies
for the promotion and marketing of the special sporting event and its host
facility.
First sponsor: Rep. Robson
H2328 Daily History Date Action
TPT; HOST FACILITY; SPORTING EVENT 1/27 referred to House ways-means.
H2354: PUBLIC RECORDS; ATTORNEY FEES
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
The court is prohibited from awarding attorney fees to a public officer or public
body in an action under public records law.
First sponsor: Rep. Gonzales
Others: Rep. Andrade, Rep. Gabaldon, Rep. Steele, Rep. Velasquez
H2354 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
H2358: TPT; EXEMPTION; CROP DUSTERS
The list of deductions from the tax base for the retail classification of
transaction privilege taxes and use taxes is expanded to include the gross
proceeds of sales or gross income derived from sales of “agricultural aircraft,”
defined as an aircraft built for agricultural use for the aerial application of
pesticides or fertilizer or for aerial seeding. Retroactive to taxable periods
beginning October 1, 1988.
First sponsor: Rep. Shope
Others: Rep. Barton, Rep. Leach, Rep. Mitchell, Rep. Pratt, Sen. Smith, Rep. Townsend
H2358 Daily History Date Action
TPT; EXEMPTION; CROP DUSTERS 1/28 referred to House rural-econ.
H2381: TPT; USE TAX EXEMPTION; AIRCRAFT
The list of deductions from the tax base for the retail classification of
transaction privilege taxes and use taxes is expanded to include the gross
proceeds of sales or gross income derived from sales of aircraft, navigational
and communication instruments and related equipment leased or otherwise
transferred to a specified list of persons, in addition to sold to those persons.
The list of persons to whom the exempted aircraft and related equipment may
be sold, leased or transferred to is expanded to include a certificated or
licensed carrier of persons for hire to be used to transport persons or property
for hire in intrastate, interstate or foreign commerce.
First sponsor: Rep. Olson
H2381 Daily History Date Action
TPT; USE TAX EXEMPTION; AIRCRAFT 1/28 referred to House ways-means.
H2382: LOW-INCOME HOUSING; PROPERTY TAX
Adds a new article to Title 42 (Taxation) governing the valuation of "lowincome multifamily residential rental property" (defined). The owner of such
property may elect a statutory income method for valuing the property by
submitting specified information to the county assessor. Properties valued
according to this method are added to class 4 property for property tax
purposes.
First sponsor: Rep. Olson
H2382 Daily History Date Action
LOW-INCOME HOUSING; PROPERTY TAX 1/28 referred to House ways-means.
H2383: CONTRACTING; TPT; LAND VALUE
The list of deductions from the tax base for the prime contracting classification
of transaction privilege taxes is modified to include the value of any land
included in the sales price, instead of the sales price of land. Applies
retroactively to taxable periods beginning June 1, 2002. Any claim for refund
based on the retroactive application must be submitted to the Department of
Revenue by December 31, 2015. The aggregate amount of refunds cannot
exceed $10,000, and interest is not allowed on any refundable amount if paid
before July 1, 2016.
First sponsor: Rep. Olson
H2383 Daily History Date Action
CONTRACTING; TPT; LAND VALUE 1/28 referred to House ways-means.
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
H2504: BD OF TECHNICAL REGISTRATION; ALARMS
Statutes requiring alarm businesses and alarm agents to be certified by the
Board of Technical Registration and specifying requirements for certification
are repealed.
First sponsor: Rep. Petersen
H2504 Daily History Date Action
BD OF TECHNICAL REGISTRATION; ALARMS 1/28 from House com do pass.
BD OF TECHNICAL REGISTRATION; ALARMS 1/22 referred to House com.
H2560: COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK FACILITATORS; REGULATION
“Communications network facilitators” (defined) may only be regulated or
required to obtain licensure or certification in the role of an operator of a
communications network. The regulation of communications network
facilitators is of statewide concern and is not subject to further regulation by
counties or municipalities. Communications network facilitators and the
Attorney General are authorized to bring an action in superior court to enjoin
any unlawful regulation by the state or political subdivisions.
First sponsor: Rep. Petersen
H2560 Daily History Date Action
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK FACILITATORS; REGULATION 2/2 referred to House com.
H2564: PHOTO RADAR; LAW ENFORCEMENT OPERATION
A violation of traffic signal or speed restriction regulations that is detected by
a photo enforcement system may result in a traffic ticket and complaint only if
the system is manned, operated and monitored by a uniformed law
enforcement officer who is a member in good standing of a local law
enforcement agency in the municipality or county where the system is located.
First sponsor: Rep. Thorpe
H2564 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
H2570: MUNICIPALITIES; VEGETATION REQUIREMENTS; PROHIBITION
Municipalities are prohibited from adopting any ordinance or other legal
requirement that requires a property owner to salvage or install plants, trees
or other vegetation species or to install a density of landscaping that exceeds
the recommendations of a registered landscape architect or specified
landscaping standards.
First sponsor: Rep. Mitchell
H2570 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
H2579: TOBACCO RETAILER; LOCATION RESTRICTION
Municipalities are prohibited from adopting a zoning ordinance that allows a
“tobacco retailer” (defined) to be located within 300 feet of a licensed child
care facility, public or private school, public playground or public recreational
facility.
First sponsor: Rep. Otondo
Others: Rep. Boyer, Rep. Cardenas, Rep. Carter, Rep. Coleman, Rep. Lawrence, Rep. Pratt,
Rep. Thorpe
H2579 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
HCR2001: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS; SIXTY PERCENT APPROVAL
The 2016 general election ballot is to carry the question of whether to amend
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
the state Constitution to require initiatives and referendums that propose
amendments to the state Constitution to be approved by at least 60 percent of
the voters for passage.
First sponsor: Rep. Lovas
Others: Rep. J. Allen, Rep. Shope
HCR2001 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
S1013: EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION; ENFORCEMENT; DAMAGES
Increases the statute of limitations on filing employment discrimination
charges to 2 years from 1 year. Allows the recovering party in unlawful
employment practice cases to recover punitive or compensatory damages if
specified conditions are met.
First sponsor: Sen. Ableser
S1013 Daily History Date Action
EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION; ENFORCEMENT; DAMAGES 1/12 referred to Senate gov.
S1069: ORDINANCES; BUSINESSES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
Municipalities and counties are prohibited from adopting an ordinance requiring
a retail business to comply with specific security requirements. Does not
include a bar or restaurant.
First sponsor: Sen. Smith
S1069 Daily History Date Action
ORDINANCES; BUSINESSES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS 1/29 from Senate pub-mil-tech with amend
#4020.
ORDINANCES; BUSINESSES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS 1/28 Senate pub-mil-tech amended; report
awaited.
ORDINANCES; BUSINESSES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS 1/20 referred to Senate pub-mil-tech.
S1079: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION; MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
Municipalities cannot prohibit or unreasonably restrain a private enterprise
from delivering recycling or solid waste management services to “multifamily
residential properties” (defined) within the municipality. Effective January 1,
2016.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
Others: Sen. S. Allen, Sen. Begay, Rep. Boyer, Rep. Carter, Sen. McGuire, Sen. Meza, Rep.
Mitchell, Rep. Pratt, Sen. Shooter, Rep. Shope, Rep. Stevens, Rep. Thorpe
S1079 Daily History Date Action
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION; MULTIFAMILY HOUSING 1/29 from Senate gov with amend #4024.
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION; MULTIFAMILY HOUSING 1/20 referred to Senate gov.
S1133: TPT; MUNICIPALITIES; CUSTOMER REFUND CLAIMS
A customer who paid to a “vendor” (defined) an amount equal to a transaction
privilege tax that was passed on by the vendor to the customer or who paid a
use tax to a vendor is permitted to file a claim for a refund of the tax if the
vendor assigns to the customer its right to claim an amount equal to any tax
and interest that the vendor could otherwise claim. The process for customers
to file claims under these provisions is specified. If a vendor fails or refuses to
assign its right to a claim within 60 days of the customer’s written request or
if the vendor is no longer in business, the customer may provide the
Department of Revenue or municipal tax collector with a statement explaining
the efforts made to obtain an assignment from the vendor, which must contain
specified information. The Dept or tax collector must attempt to notify the
vendor of the claim and continue processing the claim. On paying or crediting
monies to the customer pursuant to the claim, the Dept or tax collector must
amend the vendor’s returns or account to reflect the amount paid or credited.
The Dept or tax collector may disallow a claim filed by a customer if the Dept
already paid or credited a refund arising from the same transaction. The Dept
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
or tax collector is required to notify the customer and the vendor of any
disallowed claim.
First sponsor: Sen. Lesko
S1133 Daily History Date Action
TPT; MUNICIPALITIES; CUSTOMER REFUND CLAIMS 1/22 referred to Senate fin.
S1145: RESTORATION TO COMPETENCY; STATE COSTS
If the state pays the costs of a defendant’s inpatient, in custody competency
restoration treatment, the municipality or county is required to reimburse the
Department of Health Services for 100 percent of these costs for FY2015-16.
Reimbursements must be deposited in the Arizona State Hospital Fund. County
contributions made for reimbursements are excluded from the county
expenditure limitations.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
S1145 Daily History Date Action
RESTORATION TO COMPETENCY; STATE COSTS 1/27 referred to Senate gov, appro.
S1169: FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS; FIRE WATCH
The State Fire Safety Committee, county boards of supervisors and
municipalities are prohibited from requiring the use of a “fire watch,” defined
as a person who is stationed in a building or in a place relative to a building to
observe building openings when the fire protection system for the building is
temporarily nonoperational or absent.
First sponsor: Sen. S. Allen
Others: Sen. Burges, Sen. Dial, Sen. Driggs, Sen. Griffin, Sen. Shooter, Sen. Yee
S1169 Daily History Date Action
FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS; FIRE WATCH 2/3 Senate rural-env amended; report awaited.
FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS; FIRE WATCH 1/26 referred to Senate rural-env.
S1224: MUNICIPALITIES; COUNTIES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
Municipalities and counties are prohibited from adopting an ordinance requiring
a business to comply with specific security requirements. Does not include a
bar or restaurant.
First sponsor: Sen. Kavanagh
Others: Sen. S. Allen, Rep. Coleman, Rep. Espinoza
S1224 Daily History Date Action
MUNICIPALITIES; COUNTIES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS 1/27 referred to Senate pub-mil-tech.
S1291: FIREARMS; STATE PREEMPTION; PENALTIES
If a political subdivision enacts any ordinance, regulation, tax or rule that
violates statute limiting political subdivisions regulating firearms, a court is
required to declare the improper act invalid and issue a permanent injunction
against the political subdivision from continuing the act. If a court determines
the violation was knowing and willful, the court is required to assess a civil
penalty of up to $5,000 against the elected or appointed government official or
administrative agency head under whose jurisdiction the violation occurred. A
person or organization whose membership was adversely affected by an act is
permitted to file a civil action against the political subdivision in any court
having jurisdiction over any defendant for declaratory relief and actual
damages. The court is required to award the prevailing plaintiff in any civil
action reasonable attorney fees and the actual damages incurred, up to
$100,000.
First sponsor: Sen. Smith
Others: Sen. S. Allen, Sen. Barto, Rep. Borrelli, Sen. Burges, Sen. D. Farnsworth, Sen.
Kavanagh, Rep. Leach, Sen. McGuire, Sen. Shooter, Rep. Shope, Rep. Thorpe, Rep. Townsend
S1291 Daily History Date Action
FIREARMS; STATE PREEMPTION; PENALTIES 1/29 referred to Senate pub-mil-tech, fed-man-fiscal.
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
S1292: DOG BREED RESTRICTIONS; PROHIBITION
Municipalities may regulate the control of dogs if the regulation is not specific
to any breed.
First sponsor: Sen. Smith
Others: Rep. Borrelli, Sen. Shooter
S1292 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
S1300: LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS; BODY CAMERAS
Law enforcement agencies are authorized to employ a law enforcement officer
body camera that operates on a continuous basis or that is manually turned on
or off by the officer. If a body camera is continuously on, an officer is
permitted to turn the camera off during specified “nonrecordable incidents”
(defined) or during specified “recordable incidents” (defined) if the officer
announces on the recording that the camera is being turned off. If a body
camera does not operate continuously, an officer may activate the camera only
during a recordable incident or any other situation when a person informs the
officer that the person is going to submit a complaint against the officer or
when all parties consent to the recording. Also establishes regulations for the
viewing, erasing and release of law enforcement officer body camera
recordings.
First sponsor: Sen. Kavanagh
S1300 Daily History Date Action
LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS; BODY CAMERAS 2/2 referred to Senate pub-mil-tech, appro.
S1335: FIRE ACCESS ROADS; LIMITATIONS; ENFORCEMENT
Statute prohibiting counties and municipalities from adopting a fire code or
other legal requirement for an approved fire apparatus access road that
requires the installation of fire sprinklers may be enforced in a private civil
action, and relief may be awarded against the county or municipality, including
an injunction, reasonable attorney fees, and other specified costs. The
Legislature determines that property rights are a matter of statewide concern,
and this statutory prohibition preempts any regulation adopted by a county or
municipality regarding an approved fire apparatus access road.
First sponsor: Sen. D. Farnsworth
Others: Sen. Begay, Sen. Burges, Sen. Lesko, Sen. Miranda, Sen. Yee
S1335 Daily History Date Action
FIRE ACCESS ROADS; LIMITATIONS; ENFORCEMENT 2/2 referred to Senate pub-mil-tech.
S1342: RESPONSIBILITY OF PAYMENT; UTILITY SERVICES
For residential property of four or fewer units, a garbage collection service
provider, private water company or sewer corporation is prohibited from
requiring payment of garbage collection service rates and charges by anyone
other than the person who the provider or company contracted with to provide
the service, who physically resides or resided at the property and who receives
or received the service. For residential property of four or fewer units,
municipalities are prohibited from requiring payment of unpaid utility user fees
by anyone other than the person who the municipality contracted with to
provide the service, who physically resides or resided at the property and who
receives or received the service.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
S1342 Daily History Date Action
RESPONSIBILITY OF PAYMENT; UTILITY SERVICES 2/2 referred to Senate gov.
S1345: GOVERNMENT PURCHASE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY
If a “government entity” (defined) purchases, acquires an option to purchase
or files an action to condemn privately owned real property, the government
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
entity is required to make available for sale to private parties real property
that the entity owns and that has an appraised value equal to the appraised
value of the real property acquired. The ownership of real property by a
government entity is an issue of statewide concern and is not subject to
further regulation by a county, municipality or other political subdivision.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
S1345 Daily History Date Action
GOVERNMENT PURCHASE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY 2/2 referred to Senate gov.
S1368: MUNICIPALITIES; ADDITIONAL BUSINESS LICENSES; PROHIBITION
Municipalities are prohibited from requiring a licensed real estate broker or
salesperson to obtain an additional business license to do business within that
municipality if the person is licensed to do business in the municipality in which
the person’s primary place of business is located.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
S1368 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
Good Bills
Posted Calendars and Committee Hearings
H2013: COURTS; DAYS; TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS
Calendar: 2/3 House Caucus
Calendar: 2/5 House Consent
H2061: ONLINE TPT; INCOME TAX REDUCTION
Calendar: 2/3 House Caucus
Calendar: 2/5 House Consent
H2129: MUNICIPAL TAX CODE COMMISSION; CONTINUATION
Calendar: 2/3 House Caucus
H2140: AMBULANCE SERVICES; TEMPORARY AUTHORITY
Hearing: House Health (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 2:00 PM, House Rm. 4)
H2320: FIREARMS; PERMIT HOLDERS; PUBLIC PLACES
Hearing: House Military Affairs & Public Safety (Thursday 02/05/15 at 9:30 AM, House Rm.
5)
H2358: TPT; EXEMPTION; CROP DUSTERS
Hearing: House Rural & Economic Development (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 2:00 PM, House Rm.
5)
S1069: ORDINANCES; BUSINESSES; PROHIBITED SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
Hearing: Senate Rules (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 10:00 AM, Senate Caucus Rm.)
Calendar: 2/3 Senate Caucus
S1079: SOLID WASTE COLLECTION; MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
Hearing: Senate Rules (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 10:00 AM, Senate Caucus Rm.)
Calendar: 2/3 Senate Caucus
S1145: RESTORATION TO COMPETENCY; STATE COSTS
Hearing: Senate Government (Wednesday 02/04/15 at 2:00 PM, Senate Rm. 3)
S1169: FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS; FIRE WATCH
Hearing: Senate Rural Affairs & Environment (Tuesday 02/03/15 at 9:00 AM, Senate Rm.
109)
Bill Summaries
H2007: MARIJUANA; REGULATION; TAXATION
A person who is at least 21 years of age may possess, consume, use, display,
purchase or transport one ounce or less of marijuana, may grow up to five
marijuana plants and may possess, process or transport the marijuana
produced by the plants on the premises where the plants were grown. Some
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
restrictions. It is unlawful to smoke marijuana in a public place. Establishes
regulations for marijuana accessories and retail marijuana stores. Establishes
an excise tax on the sale or transfer of marijuana at the rate of $50 per ounce.
Revenues generated by the tax must be used to enforce these regulations,
and any remaining monies are distributed as follows: 30 percent to the
Department of Education, 20 percent to the Department of Health Services for
specified drug programs, and 50 percent to the general fund. The Department
of Health Services is required to adopt rules necessary for implementation.
Due to a potential increase in state revenue, this bill requires the affirmative
vote of at least 2/3 of each house of the Legislature for passage.
First sponsor: Rep. Cardenas
H2007 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
H2013: COURTS; DAYS; TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS
Municipal courts are authorized to transact business on the second Monday in
October if the municipality is open on that day and the presiding judge of the
municipal court approves.
First sponsor: Rep. Coleman
H2013 Daily History Date Action
COURTS; DAYS; TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS 1/26 from House county-muni do pass.
COURTS; DAYS; TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS 1/14 referred to House county-muni.
H2095: JOB-ORDER-CONTRACTING; BOND; WAIVER
For job-order-contracting construction services, the agent or purchasing
agency may waive the required performance bond if the amount of
construction under the contract does not exceed $500,000, including change
orders.
First sponsor: Rep. Coleman
H2095 Daily History Date Action
JOB-ORDER-CONTRACTING; BOND; WAIVER 2/2 House county-muni amended; report awaited.
JOB-ORDER-CONTRACTING; BOND; WAIVER 1/26 House county-muni held.
JOB-ORDER-CONTRACTING; BOND; WAIVER 1/22 referred to House county-muni.
H2123: COMPETENCY RESTORATION; TREATMENT; COSTS
The requirement contained in the FY2014-15 budget for municipalities and
counties to reimburse the Department of Health Services for 100 percent of
the costs of a defendant’s inpatient competency restoration treatment for
FY2014-15 applies only if the competency proceeding occur in a county with a
population of 500,000 persons or more (Maricopa and Pima). Retroactive to
July 24, 2014. The Dept is required to refund all monies that were paid by a
municipality or county to the Dept in FY2014-15 if the competency
proceedings occurred in a county with a population of less than 500,000
persons. Emergency clause.
First sponsor: Rep. Gabaldon
Others: Rep. Andrade, Rep. Benally, Rep. Cardenas, Sen. Dalessandro, Rep. Espinoza, Rep.
Gonzales, Rep. Hale, Rep. Mendez, Sen. Quezada, Rep. Saldate, Rep. Velasquez
H2123 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
H2124: WQARF FUNDING; STATE TREASURER; TRANSFERS
Repeals the cap on the appropriation from the general fund to the Water
Quality Assurance Revolving Fund for FY2014-15 of $7 million that was
contained in the FY2013-14 budget. The State Treasurer is required to make
the transfers to WQARF required by statute to assure an annual funding
amount of $18 million for FY2014-15.
First sponsor: Rep. Gabaldon
Others: Rep. Andrade, Rep. Benally, Rep. Bolding, Rep. Cardenas, Rep. Clark, Sen.
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
Dalessandro, Rep. Espinoza, Rep. Gonzales, Rep. Hale, Rep. Mendez, Rep. Saldate, Rep.
Steele, Rep. Velasquez
H2124 Daily History Date Action
WQARF FUNDING; STATE TREASURER; TRANSFERS 1/29 referred to House agri-water-land, appro.
H2129: MUNICIPAL TAX CODE COMMISSION; CONTINUATION
The statutory life of the Municipal Tax Code Commission is extended 10 years
to July 1, 2025. Retroactive to July 1, 2015.
First sponsor: Rep. Mitchell
H2129 Daily History Date Action
MUNICIPAL TAX CODE COMMISSION; CONTINUATION 1/26 from House ways-means with amend #4015
MUNICIPAL TAX CODE COMMISSION; CONTINUATION 1/26 House ways-means amended; report awaited.
MUNICIPAL TAX CODE COMMISSION; CONTINUATION 1/15 referred to House ways-means.
H2133: COUNTYWIDE ELECTIONS; VOTE BY MAIL
On approval of the county board of supervisors, a county is authorized to
conduct a mail ballot election for all elections administered by that county,
including elections for federal and state offices and measures, and elections for
county, municipal, school district and special districts. Counties that conduct
mail ballot elections are required to report specified information about the
election to the Legislature by January 1 of each year following a mail ballot
election.
First sponsor: Rep. Shope
H2133 Daily History Date Action
COUNTYWIDE ELECTIONS; VOTE BY MAIL 1/21 referred to House elect, county-muni.
H2138: MAY PRIMARY ELECTION DATE
The primary election is moved to the 24th Tuesday before a general election,
from the 10th Tuesday before.
First sponsor: Rep. Shope
H2138 Daily History Date Action
MAY PRIMARY ELECTION DATE 1/22 referred to House elect.
H2140: AMBULANCE SERVICES; TEMPORARY AUTHORITY
The Director of the Department of Health Services may grant temporary
authority to provide needed ambulance service for up to 365 days, increased
from 90 days, and may be renewed once.
First sponsor: Rep. Carter
H2140 Daily History Date Action
AMBULANCE SERVICES; TEMPORARY AUTHORITY 1/22 referred to House hel.
H2142: WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE AUTHORITY; PREPAYMENT
For financial assistance from the clean water revolving fund or drinking water
revolving fund, the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority (WIFA) is prohibited
from unilaterally amending the financial assistance agreement, loan or bond
after its execution. WIFA is prohibited from imposing a redemption premium as
a condition of refinancing or receiving prepayment on a financial assistance
agreement, loan or bond if the agreement, loan or bond did not contain a
redemption premium. Applies to all financial assistance agreements, loans or
bonds issued or executed by WIFA before or after the effective date of this
legislation. Emergency clause.
First sponsor: Rep. Borrelli
Others: Rep. Ackerley, Rep. Barton, Rep. Bowers, Rep. Boyer, Rep. Campbell, Rep. Cardenas,
Rep. Carter, Rep. Cobb, Rep. Coleman, Rep. Fann, Rep. Finchem, Sen. Griffin, Rep. Hale, Rep.
Kern, Rep. Larkin, Rep. Lawrence, Rep. Mitchell, Rep. Pratt, Rep. Shope, Rep. Thorpe, Rep.
Townsend, Sen. Ward, Sen. Yee
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
H2142 Daily History Date Action
WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE AUTHORITY; PREPAYMENT 1/21 referred to House agri-water-land.
H2147: MUNICIPAL TAX; POLE ATTACHMENT
The list of items exempt from the utilities, telecommunications, commercial
lease and personal property rental classifications of transaction privilege taxes
is expanded to include the leasing or renting of space to make attachments to
“utility poles” (defined) by or to a person engaged in business under the
utilities or telecommunications classifications or to a person that is a “cable
operator” (defined elsewhere in statute). The list of items of items that
municipalities are prohibited from levying a transaction privilege tax or other
similar tax on is expanded to include the charges for leasing or renting of
space to make attachments to utility poles by or to a person engaged in the
business of providing “electrical services” or “telecommunications services”
(both defined) or that is a cable operator. The exemption from the personal
property rental classification applies retroactively to taxable period beginning
September 1, 2006. Any claim for a refund of transaction privilege tax paid
based on the retroactive application of this legislation must be submitted to
the Department of Revenue by December 31, 2015. The burden is on the
taxpayer to establish by competent evidence the amount of any such refund
claim. The total amount of refunds issued based on the retroactive application
cannot exceed $200,000. Interest is not allowed or compounded on a refund
paid before June 30, 2016.
First sponsor: Rep. Olson
Others: Sen. Lesko, Rep. Mitchell, Sen. Shooter
H2147 Daily History Date Action
MUNICIPAL TAX; POLE ATTACHMENT 2/2 House ways-means amended; report awaited.
MUNICIPAL TAX; POLE ATTACHMENT 1/22 referred to House ways-means, appro.
H2324: INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS; PUBLIC AGENCY INDEMNIFICATION
An intergovernmental agreement may require one public agency to defend,
indemnify or hold harmless the other public agency for liabilities, damages,
losses and costs only to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness or
intentional wrongful conduct of the indemnifying public agency. Any other
indemnity clause in an intergovernmental agreement is void.
First sponsor: Rep. Weninger
Others: Rep. Barton, Rep. Cobb, Rep. Fann, Rep. Shope
H2324 Daily History Date Action
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS; PUBLIC AGENCY INDEMNIFICATION 2/2 House county-muni do pass;
report awaited.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS; PUBLIC AGENCY INDEMNIFICATION 1/28 referred to House county-muni.
H2517: INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN; FUND
Establishes the Internet Crimes Against Children Enforcement Fund, to be
administered by the Attorney General to continue the operation of the
federally recognized Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program. Of
the monies remaining in the State Lottery Fund each fiscal year after
appropriations and statutory deposits, $4.5 million is deposited in the Internet
Crimes Against Children Enforcement Fund and $500,000 is deposited in the
Victims’ Rights Enforcement Fund. If a law enforcement agency receives
information that a communication service provider is hosting a website
containing an alleged violation of crimes of sexual exploitation of children, the
agency is required to serve a notice of the alleged violation on the statutory
agent of the communication service provider. In any prosecution for a violation
of crimes of sexual exploitation of children, the defendant or any person
assisting the defendant is prohibited from removing any visual depiction or any
computer or other device that contains a visual depiction that is alleged to be
in violation and that is in the possession of a law enforcement agency or the
prosecutor. Emergency clause.
First sponsor: Rep. Boyer
Others: Sen. Ableser, Rep. Ackerley, Rep. J. Allen, Sen. S. Allen, Rep. Alston, Rep. Andrade,
Sen. Barto, Rep. Barton, Sen. Begay, Rep. Benally, Rep. Bolding, Rep. Borrelli, Rep. Bowers,
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
Sen. Bradley, Rep. Brophy McGee, Sen. Burges, Sen. Cajero Bedford, Rep. Campbell, Rep.
Cardenas, Rep. Carter, Rep. Clark, Rep. Cobb, Rep. Coleman, Sen. Contreras, Sen.
Dalessandro, Sen. Dial, Sen. Driggs, Rep. Espinoza, Rep. Fann, Sen. Farley, Sen. D.
Farnsworth, Rep. E. Farnsworth, Rep. Fernandez, Rep. Finchem, Rep. Friese, Rep. Gabaldon,
Rep. Gonzales, Rep. Gray, Sen. Griffin, Rep. Hale, Sen. Hobbs, Rep. Kern, Rep. Larkin, Rep.
Lawrence, Rep. Leach, Rep. Livingston, Rep. Lovas, Rep. Mach, Rep. McCune Davis, Rep.
Mendez, Rep. Mesnard, Rep. Meyer, Sen. Miranda, Rep. Mitchell, Rep. Montenegro, Rep.
Norgaard, Rep. Olson, Rep. Otondo, Rep. Petersen, Sen. Pierce, Rep. Pratt, Sen. Quezada,
Rep. Rios, Rep. Rivero, Rep. Robson, Rep. Saldate, Rep. Sherwood, Sen. Shooter, Rep. Shope,
Sen. Smith, Rep. Steele, Rep. Thorpe, Rep. Townsend, Rep. Velasquez, Sen. Ward, Rep.
Weninger, Sen. Worsley, Sen. Yee
H2517 Daily History Date Action
INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN; FUND 1/28 from House jud with amend #4022.
INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN; FUND 1/26 referred to House jud, appro.
H2543: MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS; MAJORITY VOTE CALCULATION
Establishes a formula for determining the majority of votes cast in municipal
elections for the office of mayor or city council. If more candidates receive a
majority of votes cast than there are seats to be filled for that office, the
candidates who receive the highest number of votes shall be declared elected
to that office. If no candidates or not enough candidates receive the majority
of votes cast, the number of candidates who advance to the general or runoff
election must be equal to twice the number of seats to be filled.
First sponsor: Rep. Ugenti
H2543 Daily History Date Action
MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS; MAJORITY VOTE CALCULATION 2/2 from House elect do pass.
MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS; MAJORITY VOTE CALCULATION 1/29 referred to House elect.
H2558: MUNIS; PROPERTY SALE THRESHOLD; ELECTION
The value of real property being sold by a municipality that triggers a special
election for voter approval of the sale is increased to $1.5 million, from
$500,000.
First sponsor: Rep. Pratt
Others: Rep. Finchem, Rep. Leach, Rep. Shope
H2558 Daily History Date Action
MUNIS; PROPERTY SALE THRESHOLD; ELECTION 1/29 referred to House county-muni.
H2563: HEALTH FACILITIES; SUBSTANCE ABUSE RECOVERY
For the purpose of statutes regulating health care institutions, the definition of
“facilities” is expanded to include any residential property owned or operated
by or affiliated with a health care institution even if services are not offered at
those locations, and the definitions of certain services are expanded to include
substance abuse recovery support.
First sponsor: Rep. Campbell
Others: Rep. Andrade, Sen. Begay, Rep. Bolding, Rep. Borrelli, Rep. Boyer, Rep. Cobb, Rep.
Fann, Rep. Fernandez, Rep. Finchem, Rep. Hale, Rep. Lawrence, Rep. Meyer, Rep. Norgaard,
Rep. Rios, Rep. Robson, Rep. Townsend, Rep. Wheeler
H2563 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
HCM2003: URGING CONGRESS; INCREASE CUSTOMS PERSONNEL
The Legislature urges the U.S. Congress to increase and maintain staffing for
Customs Field Office personnel at the ports of entry in Nogales, Douglas and
San Luis, Arizona in order to speed the flow of goods and commerce. The
Secretary of State is directed to transmit copies of this memorial to the
President of the U.S. Senate, the Speaker of the U.S. House and each member
of Congress from Arizona.
First sponsor: Rep. Steele
Others: Rep. Ackerley, Rep. J. Allen, Rep. Andrade, Rep. Barton, Rep. Benally, Rep. Bolding,
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
Rep. Bowers, Rep. Boyer, Rep. Campbell, Rep. Cardenas, Rep. Carter, Rep. Clark, Rep. Cobb,
Rep. Coleman, Rep. Espinoza, Rep. Fann, Rep. Fernandez, Rep. Finchem, Rep. Friese, Rep.
Gabaldon, Rep. Gonzales, Rep. Gray, Rep. Hale, Sen. Hobbs, Rep. Larkin, Rep. Lawrence, Rep.
Leach, Rep. Mach, Rep. McCune Davis, Rep. Mendez, Rep. Mesnard, Rep. Meyer, Rep. Mitchell,
Rep. Olson, Rep. Otondo, Rep. Petersen, Rep. Rios, Rep. Rivero, Rep. Robson, Rep. Saldate,
Rep. Sherwood, Sen. Shooter, Rep. Shope, Rep. Stevens, Rep. Thorpe, Rep. Velasquez, Rep.
Weninger, Rep. Wheeler
HCM2003 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
S1048: VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS; FEES; COSTS; DESIGNATION
A party is permitted to make an amended request for the superior court to
designate a pro se litigant a vexatious litigant if specified conditions are met.
The court is prohibited from granting a waiver of court fees or costs for civil
actions filed by a pro se litigant who has previously been declared a vexatious
litigant.
First sponsor: Sen. Kavanagh
S1048 Daily History Date Action
VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS; FEES; COSTS; DESIGNATION 1/27 from Senate rules okay.
VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS; FEES; COSTS; DESIGNATION 1/22 from Senate jud with amend #4005.
VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS; FEES; COSTS; DESIGNATION 1/13 referred to Senate jud.
S1050: ANIMAL ABUSE; PROHIBITED ANIMAL OWNERSHIP
A person who is convicted of specified animal cruelty related crimes is
prohibited from adopting, owning or otherwise having care or custody of any
animal in the person's household. Violations are a class 1 misdemeanor. Within
90 days after conviction of specified animal cruelty related crimes, the person
must transfer all animals to another person who is not in the same household.
After two years, the person may apply to the sentencing court to have their
right to possess an animal restored, unless the person was convicted of a
subsequent violation.
First sponsor: Sen. Kavanagh
S1050 Daily History Date Action
ANIMAL ABUSE; PROHIBITED ANIMAL OWNERSHIP 1/13 referred to Senate jud, gov.
S1055: EORP; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIREMENT BENEFITS
If a member of the Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan who is eligible for group
health and accident coverage benefits forfeits his/her interest in the account
before the termination of the plan, an amount equal to the amount of the
forfeiture must be applied as soon as possible to reduce employer
contributions to fund the benefits. Retroactive to May 16, 1990. Also, lump
sum payments made for an increase in retirement benefits under specified
conditions are no longer eligible for a direct rollover distribution.
First sponsor: Sen. Lesko
S1055 Daily History Date Action
EORP; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIREMENT BENEFITS 1/29 passed Senate 28-0; ready for House.
EORP; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIREMENT BENEFITS 1/27 from Senate rules okay.
EORP; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIREMENT BENEFITS 1/26 to Senate consent calendar.
EORP; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIREMENT BENEFITS 1/21 from Senate fin do pass.
EORP; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIREMENT BENEFITS 1/14 referred to Senate fin.
S1057: PSPRS; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIRMENT BENEFITS
If a member of the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System who is eligible
for group health and accident coverage benefits forfeits his/her interest in the
account before the termination of the plan, an amount equal to the amount of
the forfeiture must be applied as soon as possible to reduce employer
contributions to fund the benefits. Retroactive to September 30, 1988. Also,
lump sum payments made for an increase in retirement benefits under
specified conditions are no longer eligible for a direct rollover distribution.
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
LOLA Print Report
First sponsor: Sen. Lesko
S1057 Daily History Date Action
PSPRS; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIRMENT BENEFITS 1/29 passed Senate 28-0; ready for House.
PSPRS; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIRMENT BENEFITS 1/27 from Senate rules okay.
PSPRS; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIRMENT BENEFITS 1/26 to Senate consent calendar.
PSPRS; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIRMENT BENEFITS 1/21 from Senate fin do pass.
PSPRS; HEALTH BENEFITS; RETIRMENT BENEFITS 1/14 referred to Senate fin.
S1108: TASK FORCE; GAS TAX REPLACEMENT
Establishes a 24-member Highway User Fee Replacement Task Force to
develop a design for revenue collection for the state's transportation system
that will replace the motor fuel tax and use fuel tax. The Task Force is
required to design pilot programs to be used to test alternative approaches by
December 15, 2016. By October 1, 2017, the Department of Transportation is
required to develop and implement pilot programs as directed by the Task
Force to test alternatives to motor vehicle fuel taxes and use fuel taxes to pay
for highway use. The Dept is authorized to use monies in the State Highway
Fund to implement and support the Task Force and pilot programs. Effective
September 1, 2015. Self-repeals October 1, 2025.
First sponsor: Sen. Farley
Others: Sen. Begay, Rep. Gabaldon, Sen. Hobbs, Rep. Sherwood, Rep. Steele
S1108 Daily History Date Action
TASK FORCE; GAS TAX REPLACEMENT 1/22 referred to Senate trans, appro, fin.
S1183: IMPROVEMENT DIST; ENHANCED MUNICIPAL SVCS
Improvement districts for enhanced municipal services are no longer required
to be formed within a "designated area" (defined elsewhere in statute).
First sponsor: Sen. Ward
Others: Rep. Barton, Rep. Borrelli, Rep. Cobb, Sen. Dial, Rep. Fann, Rep. Gray, Rep. Shope
S1183 Daily History Date Action
IMPROVEMENT DIST; ENHANCED MUNICIPAL SVCS 1/26 referred to Senate fin ins.
S1369: SPEED LIMITS; LOCAL AUTHORITIES; SIGNAGE
On the request of an interested party, a local authority is permitted to
determine the proper maximum speed and erect a speed limit sign for a street
even if the street is not maintained by the local authority but is in the local
authority’s jurisdiction.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
S1369 Daily History Date
Action
No actions posted for this bill within the requested time frame.
SCM1013: RULEMAKING; ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS; OPPOSITION
The Legislature urges the U.S. Congress to oppose the implementation of rules
for existing electric generating units that exceed the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s legal authority, and to exercise oversight over the EPA to
ensure that the primary role of states in establishing rules under the Clean Air
Act (CAA) is respected. The Legislature urges the Governor and the Attorney
General to take appropriate actions to uphold the state’s responsibilities under
the CAA and defend the state against overreaching regulations. The Secretary
of State is directed to transmit copies of this memorial to the President of the
U.S., the President of the U.S. Senate, the Speaker of the U.S. House, each
member of Congress from Arizona, the EPA Administrator, the Governor and
the Attorney General.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
Others: Sen. S. Allen, Sen. Burges, Rep. Cardenas, Sen. D. Farnsworth, Rep. Leach, Sen.
Lesko, Sen. McGuire, Sen. Miranda, Rep. Pratt, Sen. Shooter, Sen. Ward
SCM1013 Daily History file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
Date Action
LOLA Print Report
RULEMAKING; ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS; OPPOSITION 2/2 Senate water-energy amended; report awaited.
RULEMAKING; ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS; OPPOSITION 2/2 referred to Senate water-energy.
SCR1014: MILITARY BASES; EXPRESSING SUPPORT
The members of the Legislature express their continued support for and
acknowledge the extreme importance of Arizona’s military facilities.
First sponsor: Sen. Griffin
SCR1014 Daily History Date Action
MILITARY BASES; EXPRESSING SUPPORT 2/2 referred to Senate pub-mil-tech.
file:///H|/Everyone/Legislature/2015/Good-Bad%20bill.html[2/3/2015 11:15:54 AM]
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Agenda Item #6
Report from Budget Subcommittee
Summary:
Presentation from League Budget Subcommittee of preliminary FY
2015-16 League Budget and Adoption of FY16 Dues
Responsible Person:
Mayor Thomas Schoaf, Budget Subcommittee Chairman; Ken Strobeck
Attachments:
Preliminary FY 2015-16 League and Property Corporation Budgets
Recommended FY 2015-16 League Dues
Action Requested:
Information/Discussion of budgets; Approval of FY 2016 Dues
Schedule
PRELIMINARY 2015-2016 League Budget
REVENUES
Affiliate Group Contracts
Annual Conference
Dues
Executive Recruitment
Interest
Miscellaneous
Property Corporation - Mgmt Fee
Risk Pool
Seminars and Meetings
US Communities Purchasing Program
Valley Schools Health Pool
TOTAL REVENUES
Budget
FY 2015
136,200
Expected
FY 2015
Over /
(Under)
PROPOSED
FY 2016
136,200
0
350,000
457,092
107,092
1,818,423
1,749,423
6,000
5,000
14,000
--138,898
50,000
13,000
25,000
0
2,531
22,500
--140,666
29,546
10,952
25,000
(69,000)
(6,000)
(2,469)
8,500
--1,768
(20,454)
(2,048)
0
% of
%
Total
Change Budget
131,450
-3.5%
17.8%
375,000
7.1%
50.9%
TBD
Notes
ACMA reduced contract by 7%
beginning July 1, 2014.
Range: $1,907,816 - $1,929,533
6,000
0.0%
2,500 -50.0%
14,000
0.0%
--141,000
1.5%
30,000 -40.0%
12,000
-7.7%
25,000
0.0%
0.8%
0.3%
1.9% Received $9400 for APS Intern
19.1% ($35,313.73 quarterly)
4.1%
1.6%
3.4%
$2,556,521
$2,573,910
$17,389
$736,950
-71.2%
EXPENDITURES
Annual Conference
220,000
277,550
57,550
220,000
0.0%
7.8%
Benefits
525,000
527,385
2,385
596,000
13.5%
21.2%
Capital Outlay
Contingency
Equipment Rental & Maintenance
Executive Committee
Executive Recruitment
Insurance
Postage & Shipping
PR & Communications
20,000
10,000
25,000
12,000
3,000
7,600
4,000
110,000
18,900
0
19,400
10,875
0
7,520
4,368
66,330
(1,100)
(10,000)
(5,600)
(1,125)
(3,000)
(80)
368
(43,670)
20,000
10,000
25,000
12,000
3,000
7,600
4,000
70,000
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-36.4%
Printing
Professional Services
10,000
162,000
10,260
126,990
260
(35,010)
10,000
162,000
0.0%
0.0%
Accounting
42,000
41,875
(125)
42,000
5.8%
1.5% Includes audit & accountants
Contract Lobbying & Consulting
80,000
55,200
(24,800)
80,000
2.8%
Legal
Rent
Salaries
40,000
29,915
(10,085)
40,000
105,000
105,000
0
105,000
0.0%
1,255,000
1,257,375
2,375
1,361,500
8.5%
50,000
55,000
35,000
32,000
26,000
48,200
54,913
38,996
31,498
20,594
(1,800)
(87)
3,996
(502)
(5,406)
50,000
58,000
38,000
32,000
26,000
0.0%
5.5%
8.6%
0.0%
0.0%
$2,666,600
$2,626,154
($40,446)
$2,810,100
5.4%
Estimated 15% increase to UHC;
estimate a 10% increase to dental.
(Additional coverage for new
position and FT General Counsel.)
0.7%
0.4%
0.9%
0.4%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
2.5% Includes Scutari & Ideas Collide
0.4%
Includes directory, MPS, calendar
& legis poster
Includes Cathy & HighGround;
additional lobbying contingency
1.4%
3.7%
Additional position-Tax Policy
48.5% Analyst (Jan '14) & FT General
Counsel (Jan '15)
Seminars and Meetings
Subscriptions and Dues
Supplies / Office Expenses
Telecommunications
Travel
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures
($110,079)
($52,244)
$57,835
TBD
Beginning Fund Balance
$1,827,844
$1,827,844
$1,775,600
Ending Fund Balance
$1,717,765
$1,775,600
$1,775,600
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2014
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2013
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2012
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2011
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2010
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2009
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2008
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2007
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2006
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2005
Total fund balance as of July 1, 2004
Ending
Balance
$1,827,844
$1,624,059
$1,458,676
$1,257,723
$1,311,436
$1,213,123
$1,000,197
$677,128
$485,033
$383,472
$406,717
FY
13-14
12-13
11-12
10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
05-06
04-05
03-04
Rev over
Exp
$203,785
$165,383
$200,953
($53,713)
$98,313
$212,926
$323,069
$192,095
$101,561
($23,245)
($11,936)
1.8%
2.1%
1.4%
1.1%
0.9%
Range: ($165,334) - ($143,617)
PRELIMINARY 2015-2016 Property Corporation Budget
REVENUES
Rental Income
Interest
Miscellaneous
TOTAL REVENUES
Budget
FY 2015
Expected
FY 2015
Over /
(Under)
119,400
119,400
0
50
67
17
3,100
3,320
220
122,550
122,787
237
6,450
25,000
6,450
2,697
PROPOSED
FY 2016
119,400 LACT: $105,000; Press: $14,400
50
3,100 AGC's 1/2 share of dumpster cost
122,550
EXPENDITURES
Accounting and Auditing
Capital Outlay
Contingency
Insurance
Maintenance Services/Agreements
Management Services
0
(22,303)
6,700 $4200 accountants; $2500 audit
25,000 replaced elevator door
0
0
0
0
4,900
5,039
139
5,050
32,000
32,085
85
33,000
0
0
5,000
4,771
Repairs and Maintenance
12,000
12,000
Utilities
36,000
35,000
(1,000)
36,000
121,350
98,042
(23,308)
122,550
$1,200
$24,745
$23,545
Beginning Fund Balance
$83,073
$83,073
Ending Fund Balance
$84,273
$107,818
Operating Expenses
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures
0
(229)
0
0
4,800 League no longer pays Phx rental tax
12,000
$0
$107,818
$23,545
$107,818
PROPOSED FY 15-16 DUES
Option C - 2014
Adjusted populations to the 2014 DES estimates; added 4% to caps; added 1¢ to per capita rates.
Provides $112,393 increase to budget.
CITY/TOWN
WINKELMAN
JEROME
TUSAYAN*
HAYDEN
DUNCAN
PATAGONIA
FREDONIA
TOMBSTONE
MAMMOTH
HUACHUCA CITY
MIAMI
GILA BEND
SPRINGERVILLE
KEARNY
STAR VALLEY
PIMA
SUPERIOR
WELLTON
WILLIAMS
PARKER
CAREFREE
ST. JOHNS
WILLCOX
QUARTZSITE
DEWEY-HUMBOLDT
CLARKDALE
TAYLOR
PINETOP-LAKESIDE
CLIFTON
COLORADO CITY
EAGAR
BENSON
HOLBROOK
THATCHER
CAVE CREEK
BISBEE
SNOWFLAKE
SOUTH TUCSON
LITCHFIELD PARK
GUADALUPE
YOUNGTOWN
WICKENBURG
TOLLESON
GLOBE
PAGE
WINSLOW
SAFFORD
SEDONA
CHINO VALLEY
CAMP VERDE
SHOW LOW
COTTONWOOD
COOLIDGE
PARADISE VALLEY
SOMERTON
PAYSON
ELOY
July 1, 2014
Population
Estimates
353
444
579
661
840
953
1,324
1,344
1,451
1,810
1,826
1,960
1,971
1,989
2,321
2,479
2,869
3,083
3,129
3,199
3,453
3,475
3,674
3,801
3,910
4,102
4,178
4,340
4,459
4,800
4,909
5,027
5,067
5,113
5,354
5,394
5,697
5,751
5,893
6,084
6,415
6,602
6,777
7,525
7,582
9,672
9,734
10,176
10,844
10,925
10,958
11,402
12,027
13,457
15,499
15,551
16,531
$3,750
BASE
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
PER CAPITA
$173
$218
$284
$324
$412
$467
$649
$659
$711
$887
$895
$960
$966
$975
$1,137
$1,215
$1,406
$1,511
$1,533
$1,568
$1,692
$1,703
$1,800
$1,862
$1,916
$2,010
$2,047
$2,127
$2,185
$2,352
$2,405
$2,463
$2,483
$2,505
$2,623
$2,643
$2,792
$2,818
$2,888
$2,981
$3,143
$3,235
$3,321
$3,687
$3,715
$4,739
$4,770
$4,986
$5,314
$5,353
$5,369
$5,587
$5,893
$6,594
$7,595
$7,620
$8,100
TOTAL DUES
FY 15-16
$3,923
$3,968
$4,034
$4,074
$4,162
$4,217
$4,399
$4,409
$4,461
$4,637
$4,645
$4,710
$4,716
$4,725
$4,887
$4,965
$5,156
$5,261
$5,283
$5,318
$5,442
$5,453
$5,550
$5,612
$5,666
$5,760
$5,797
$5,877
$5,935
$6,102
$6,155
$6,213
$6,233
$6,255
$6,373
$6,393
$6,542
$6,568
$6,638
$6,731
$6,893
$6,985
$7,071
$7,437
$7,465
$8,489
$8,520
$8,736
$9,064
$9,103
$9,119
$9,337
$9,643
$10,344
$11,345
$11,370
$11,850
FY14-15
Dues
$3,919
$3,963
$4,018
$4,068
$4,084
$4,188
$4,381
$4,412
$4,434
$4,639
$4,632
$4,673
$4,691
$4,686
$4,859
$4,896
$5,112
$5,133
$5,201
$5,230
$5,364
$5,420
$5,553
$5,515
$5,619
$5,717
$5,724
$5,805
$5,339
$6,064
$6,095
$6,200
$6,175
$6,085
$6,157
$6,426
$6,433
$6,463
$6,378
$6,401
$6,705
$6,804
$6,892
$7,365
$7,229
$8,384
$8,342
$8,565
$8,942
$8,969
$8,867
$9,157
$9,426
$9,904
$10,608
$11,094
$11,733
%
Difference increase
$4
0.09%
$4
0.11%
$16
0.39%
$6
0.15%
$78
1.90%
$29
0.69%
$18
0.41%
-$4
-0.09%
$27
0.60%
-$3
-0.05%
$13
0.28%
$38
0.81%
$25
0.52%
$39
0.82%
$28
0.59%
$69
1.41%
$44
0.86%
$127
2.48%
$82
1.58%
$88
1.68%
$78
1.45%
$32
0.60%
-$3
-0.06%
$98
1.77%
$47
0.83%
$43
0.76%
$73
1.28%
$71
1.23%
$596 11.16%
$38
0.63%
$61
0.99%
$13
0.21%
$57
0.93%
$170
2.80%
$216
3.51%
-$33
-0.51%
$108
1.68%
$105
1.63%
$259
4.06%
$330
5.16%
$188
2.81%
$181
2.66%
$179
2.60%
$72
0.98%
$237
3.27%
$105
1.25%
$178
2.13%
$171
2.00%
$121
1.36%
$134
1.50%
$253
2.85%
$180
1.96%
$217
2.30%
$440
4.45%
$737
6.95%
$276
2.48%
$117
1.00%
PROPOSED FY 15-16 DUES
Option C - 2014
Adjusted populations to the 2014 DES estimates; added 4% to caps; added 1¢ to per capita rates.
Provides $112,393 increase to budget.
CITY/TOWN
DOUGLAS
NOGALES
FOUNTAIN HILLS
FLORENCE
SAHUARITA
KINGMAN
QUEEN CREEK
EL MIRAGE
SAN LUIS
APACHE JUNCTION
BULLHEAD CITY
MARANA
PRESCOTT VALLEY
PRESCOTT
ORO VALLEY
SIERRA VISTA
MARICOPA
CASA GRANDE
LAKE HAVASU CITY
BUCKEYE
FLAGSTAFF
GOODYEAR
AVONDALE
YUMA
SURPRISE
PEORIA
TEMPE
SCOTTSDALE
GLENDALE
GILBERT
CHANDLER
MESA
TUCSON
PHOENIX
July 1, 2014
Population
Estimates
16,989
21,647
23,090
26,828
27,476
28,620
31,767
32,857
33,190
37,639
39,465
40,342
40,485
40,520
42,190
44,286
46,708
50,821
53,193
58,795
69,391
74,743
78,090
96,522
123,797
163,839
169,529
225,698
232,680
235,493
249,423
455,567
529,336
1,506,439
5,258,198
$3,750
BASE
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
$3,750
PER CAPITA
$8,325
$10,607
$11,314
$12,877
$13,188
$13,738
$15,248
$15,771
$15,931
$18,067
$18,943
$19,364
$19,433
$19,450
$20,251
$21,257
$22,420
$23,886
$25,001
$27,634
$32,614
$35,129
$36,702
$45,365
$56,947
$75,366
$77,983
TOTAL DUES
FY 15-16
$12,075
$14,357
$15,064
$16,627
$16,938
$17,488
$18,998
$19,521
$19,681
$21,817
$22,693
$23,114
$23,183
$23,200
$24,001
$25,007
$26,170
$27,636
$28,751
$31,384
$36,364
$38,879
$40,452
$49,115
$60,697
$79,116
$81,733
$91,780
$91,780
$91,780
$91,780
$106,340
$106,340
$147,940
$1,907,816
FY14-15
%
Dues
Difference increase
$12,091
-$17
-0.14%
$13,752
$605
4.40%
$14,545
$519
3.57%
$15,752
$876
5.56%
$15,622
$1,317
8.43%
$16,942
$546
3.22%
$16,140
$2,858 17.71%
$18,695
$827
4.42%
$15,737
$3,944 25.06%
$20,595
$1,222
5.93%
$22,334
$359
1.61%
$20,182
$2,932 14.53%
$21,996
$1,186
5.39%
$22,476
$723
3.22%
$23,025
$976
4.24%
$24,377
$630
2.58%
$24,187
$1,983
8.20%
$26,578
$1,058
3.98%
$27,912
$838
3.00%
$27,153
$4,231 15.58%
$34,050
$2,314
6.79%
$33,777
$5,103 15.11%
$38,819
$1,633
4.21%
$46,559
$2,556
5.49%
$56,633
$4,064
7.18%
$73,079
$6,037
8.26%
$76,524
$5,210
6.81%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$102,250
$4,090
4.00%
$102,250
$4,090
4.00%
$119,250
$28,690 24.06%
$1,795,423
$112,393
6.26%
Current dues formula was adopted by the Executive Committee at their October 27, 2006 meeting.
*For FY 09-10, the Executive Committee approved to keep dues at the same rate as 08-09.
*For FY 10-11, the Executive Committee approved a 5% reduction to the 09-10 rate.
*For FY 11-12, the Executive Committee approved a base increase to $3500; a per capita increase of .025; with dues figures calculated using
the 2009 DES estimate figures; also increased the caps by ~3%.
*For FY 12-13, the Executive Committee approved a base increase to $3750 with dues figures calculated using the 2010 census figures; also
increased the caps by $250.
*For FY 13-14, the Executive Committee approved to keep dues at the same rate as 12-13.
*For FY 14-15, the Executive Committee approved to keep dues at the same rate as 12-13.
PER CAPITA RATES
0 - 25,000
25,001 - 50,000
50,001 - 100,000
100,001 - 200,000
DUES CAP FORMULA
Populations over 1.5 million
Populations over 1 million
Populations 400,000 - 999,999
Populations 200,000 - 399,999
FY09, FY10,
FY11
.455
.445
.435
.425
FY09, FY10,
FY11
$138,000
$115,000
$99,000
$85,000
FY12, FY13,
FY14, FY15
.48
.47
.46
.45
FY12
$142,000
$119,000
$102,000
$88,000
FY16
.49
.48
.47
.46
FY13, FY14,
FY15
$142,250
$119,250
$102,250
$88,250
FY16
$147,940
$124,020
$106,340
$91,780
PROPOSED FY 15-16 DUES
Option A - 2014
Adjusted populations to the 2014 DES estimates; added 4% to caps and $150 to base; added 1.5¢ to per capita rates.
Provides $134,111 increase to budget.
CITY/TOWN
WINKELMAN
JEROME
TUSAYAN*
HAYDEN
DUNCAN
PATAGONIA
FREDONIA
TOMBSTONE
MAMMOTH
HUACHUCA CITY
MIAMI
GILA BEND
SPRINGERVILLE
KEARNY
STAR VALLEY
PIMA
SUPERIOR
WELLTON
WILLIAMS
PARKER
CAREFREE
ST. JOHNS
WILLCOX
QUARTZSITE
DEWEY-HUMBOLDT
CLARKDALE
TAYLOR
PINETOP-LAKESIDE
CLIFTON
COLORADO CITY
EAGAR
BENSON
HOLBROOK
THATCHER
CAVE CREEK
BISBEE
SNOWFLAKE
SOUTH TUCSON
LITCHFIELD PARK
GUADALUPE
YOUNGTOWN
WICKENBURG
TOLLESON
GLOBE
PAGE
WINSLOW
SAFFORD
SEDONA
CHINO VALLEY
CAMP VERDE
SHOW LOW
COTTONWOOD
COOLIDGE
PARADISE VALLEY
SOMERTON
PAYSON
ELOY
July 1, 2014
Population
Estimates
353
444
579
661
840
953
1,324
1,344
1,451
1,810
1,826
1,960
1,971
1,989
2,321
2,479
2,869
3,083
3,129
3,199
3,453
3,475
3,674
3,801
3,910
4,102
4,178
4,340
4,459
4,800
4,909
5,027
5,067
5,113
5,354
5,394
5,697
5,751
5,893
6,084
6,415
6,602
6,777
7,525
7,582
9,672
9,734
10,176
10,844
10,925
10,958
11,402
12,027
13,457
15,499
15,551
16,531
$3,900
BASE
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
PER CAPITA
$175
$220
$287
$327
$416
$472
$655
$665
$718
$896
$904
$970
$976
$985
$1,149
$1,227
$1,420
$1,526
$1,549
$1,584
$1,709
$1,720
$1,819
$1,881
$1,935
$2,030
$2,068
$2,148
$2,207
$2,376
$2,430
$2,488
$2,508
$2,531
$2,650
$2,670
$2,820
$2,847
$2,917
$3,012
$3,175
$3,268
$3,355
$3,725
$3,753
$4,788
$4,818
$5,037
$5,368
$5,408
$5,424
$5,644
$5,953
$6,661
$7,672
$7,698
$8,183
TOTAL DUES
FY 15-16
$4,075
$4,120
$4,187
$4,227
$4,316
$4,372
$4,555
$4,565
$4,618
$4,796
$4,804
$4,870
$4,876
$4,885
$5,049
$5,127
$5,320
$5,426
$5,449
$5,484
$5,609
$5,620
$5,719
$5,781
$5,835
$5,930
$5,968
$6,048
$6,107
$6,276
$6,330
$6,388
$6,408
$6,431
$6,550
$6,570
$6,720
$6,747
$6,817
$6,912
$7,075
$7,168
$7,255
$7,625
$7,653
$8,688
$8,718
$8,937
$9,268
$9,308
$9,324
$9,544
$9,853
$10,561
$11,572
$11,598
$12,083
FY14-15
Dues
$3,919
$3,963
$4,018
$4,068
$4,084
$4,188
$4,381
$4,412
$4,434
$4,639
$4,632
$4,673
$4,691
$4,686
$4,859
$4,896
$5,112
$5,133
$5,201
$5,230
$5,364
$5,420
$5,553
$5,515
$5,619
$5,717
$5,724
$5,805
$5,339
$6,064
$6,095
$6,200
$6,175
$6,085
$6,157
$6,426
$6,433
$6,463
$6,378
$6,401
$6,705
$6,804
$6,892
$7,365
$7,229
$8,384
$8,342
$8,565
$8,942
$8,969
$8,867
$9,157
$9,426
$9,904
$10,608
$11,094
$11,733
%
Difference increase
$155
3.96%
$157
3.95%
$169
4.20%
$159
3.92%
$232
5.67%
$183
4.38%
$175
3.99%
$153
3.46%
$184
4.14%
$157
3.37%
$172
3.72%
$198
4.23%
$184
3.93%
$199
4.24%
$190
3.91%
$231
4.73%
$208
4.08%
$293
5.70%
$248
4.76%
$254
4.85%
$245
4.57%
$200
3.68%
$165
2.98%
$267
4.83%
$216
3.85%
$214
3.74%
$244
4.27%
$243
4.18%
$768 14.38%
$212
3.49%
$235
3.86%
$188
3.03%
$233
3.77%
$346
5.68%
$393
6.38%
$144
2.24%
$287
4.46%
$284
4.39%
$439
6.88%
$511
7.98%
$371
5.53%
$364
5.35%
$363
5.27%
$260
3.52%
$425
5.87%
$303
3.62%
$377
4.52%
$372
4.35%
$326
3.64%
$339
3.78%
$457
5.16%
$387
4.22%
$427
4.53%
$658
6.64%
$964
9.09%
$503
4.54%
$350
2.98%
PROPOSED FY 15-16 DUES
Option A - 2014
Adjusted populations to the 2014 DES estimates; added 4% to caps and $150 to base; added 1.5¢ to per capita rates.
Provides $134,111 increase to budget.
CITY/TOWN
DOUGLAS
NOGALES
FOUNTAIN HILLS
FLORENCE
SAHUARITA
KINGMAN
QUEEN CREEK
EL MIRAGE
SAN LUIS
APACHE JUNCTION
BULLHEAD CITY
MARANA
PRESCOTT VALLEY
PRESCOTT
ORO VALLEY
SIERRA VISTA
MARICOPA
CASA GRANDE
LAKE HAVASU CITY
BUCKEYE
FLAGSTAFF
GOODYEAR
AVONDALE
YUMA
SURPRISE
PEORIA
TEMPE
SCOTTSDALE
GLENDALE
GILBERT
CHANDLER
MESA
TUCSON
PHOENIX
July 1, 2014
Population
Estimates
16,989
21,647
23,090
26,828
27,476
28,620
31,767
32,857
33,190
37,639
39,465
40,342
40,485
40,520
42,190
44,286
46,708
50,821
53,193
58,795
69,391
74,743
78,090
96,522
123,797
163,839
169,529
225,698
232,680
235,493
249,423
455,567
529,336
1,506,439
5,258,198
$3,900
BASE
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
$3,900
PER CAPITA
$8,410
$10,715
$11,430
$13,012
$13,326
$13,881
$15,407
$15,936
$16,097
$18,255
$19,141
$19,566
$19,635
$19,652
$20,462
$21,479
$22,653
$24,140
$25,267
$27,928
$32,961
$35,503
$37,093
$45,848
$57,566
$76,185
$78,831
TOTAL DUES
FY 15-16
$12,310
$14,615
$15,330
$16,912
$17,226
$17,781
$19,307
$19,836
$19,997
$22,155
$23,041
$23,466
$23,535
$23,552
$24,362
$25,379
$26,553
$28,040
$29,167
$31,828
$36,861
$39,403
$40,993
$49,748
$61,466
$80,085
$82,731
$91,780
$91,780
$91,780
$91,780
$106,340
$106,340
$147,940
$1,929,533
FY14-15
%
Dues
Difference increase
$12,091
$218
1.80%
$13,752
$864
6.28%
$14,545
$785
5.40%
$15,752
$1,160
7.36%
$15,622
$1,604 10.27%
$16,942
$839
4.95%
$16,140
$3,167 19.62%
$18,695
$1,141
6.10%
$15,737
$4,260 27.07%
$20,595
$1,560
7.58%
$22,334
$707
3.16%
$20,182
$3,284 16.27%
$21,996
$1,539
7.00%
$22,476
$1,076
4.79%
$23,025
$1,337
5.81%
$24,377
$1,001
4.11%
$24,187
$2,367
9.79%
$26,578
$1,462
5.50%
$27,912
$1,254
4.49%
$27,153
$4,675 17.22%
$34,050
$2,811
8.25%
$33,777
$5,626 16.66%
$38,819
$2,173
5.60%
$46,559
$3,189
6.85%
$56,633
$4,833
8.53%
$73,079
$7,006
9.59%
$76,524
$6,207
8.11%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$88,250
$3,530
4.00%
$102,250
$4,090
4.00%
$102,250
$4,090
4.00%
$119,250
$28,690 24.06%
$1,795,423
$134,111
7.47%
Current dues formula was adopted by the Executive Committee at their October 27, 2006 meeting.
*For FY 09-10, the Executive Committee approved to keep dues at the same rate as 08-09.
*For FY 10-11, the Executive Committee approved a 5% reduction to the 09-10 rate.
*For FY 11-12, the Executive Committee approved a base increase to $3500; a per capita increase of .025; with dues figures calculated using
the 2009 DES estimate figures; also increased the caps by ~3%.
*For FY 12-13, the Executive Committee approved a base increase to $3750 with dues figures calculated using the 2010 census figures; also
increased the caps by $250.
*For FY 13-14, the Executive Committee approved to keep dues at the same rate as 12-13.
*For FY 14-15, the Executive Committee approved to keep dues at the same rate as 12-13.
PER CAPITA RATES
0 - 25,000
25,001 - 50,000
50,001 - 100,000
100,001 - 200,000
DUES CAP FORMULA
Populations over 1.5 million
Populations over 1 million
Populations 400,000 - 999,999
Populations 200,000 - 399,999
FY09, FY10,
FY11
.455
.445
.435
.425
FY09, FY10,
FY11
$138,000
$115,000
$99,000
$85,000
FY12, FY13,
FY14, FY15
.48
.47
.46
.45
FY12
$142,000
$119,000
$102,000
$88,000
FY16
.495
.485
.478
.465
FY13, FY14,
FY15
$142,250
$119,250
$102,250
$88,250
FY16
$147,940
$124,020
$106,340
$91,780
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Agenda Item #7
PSPRS Task Force Update
Summary:
The League-sponsored PSPRS Task Force is doing a two-tier effort to
assist employers in managing the costs of the PSPRS system. First, the
Task Force is holding a series of workshops around the state to educate
employers about steps they can legally take today to lower their PSPRS
liability. Secondly, the Task Force has divided up into three
subcommittees to develop the various components of the yardstick.
There is a group looking at cost sharing, another on unfunded liabilities,
etc., and another looking at COLAs. On March 6, the entire Task Force
will meet to discuss the recommendations of each subcommittee. At
that point, they expect to be in a position to then prepare a draft
“yardstick” document to be used to evaluate any legislative proposal that
is put forward. The initial draft is expected to be completed by March
20.
Responsible Person:
Scott McCarty, Chairman of PSPRS Employer Task Force
Attachments:
PSPRS Update report sent to legislators
Schedule of PSPRS Employer Workshops
PSPRS PowerPoint presentation
January 20, 2015
Dear Arizona Senator/Representative,
The state of Arizona's various retirement systems have a major impact on both local
governments as well as the state. . The unfunded liabilities within our various plans put greater
stress on budgets and greater pressure on our taxpayers. Undoubtedly, the topic of pension
reform will carry through the halls of the Capitol this session. Therefore, I would like to take the
opportunity to update you on the steps the League has taken to tackle this critical issue.
With the problem of increasing contribution rates in the Public Safety Personnel Retirement
System (PSPRS), which was only exacerbated by the decision in the Fields lawsuit, and the
important role our first responders play in keeping our communities safe, the League is currently
focusing just on PSPRS.
On June 24, 2014, the League, in partnership with the Arizona City/County Management
Association and the Government Finance Officers Association of Arizona formed a Pension
Reform Task Force (PTF) to examine the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS)
system. The PTF is reviewing all aspects of PSPRS to identify areas for improvement and make
recommendations for reform. The PTF dedicated the remainder of 2014 to education, bringing in
both local and national experts to discuss the various forms of public pensions outside of Arizona
so that we can learn from their experience. The materials from those meetings can be found on
the PTF website at www.leagueaz.org/pension.
Currently, the PTF is working to help educate Arizona public employers about how they can
impact their individual PSPRS accounts, and arm them with the tools to begin reducing their
unfunded liability today. The unfunded liability is the main reason contribution amounts and
rates are currently so high and there are specific actions employers can take to reduce some of
those costs now, without legislative changes.
To provide this education, the PTF has partnered with PSPRS to host a series of employer
workshops across the state to discuss the most recent actuarial reports and the options available
to employers in the wake of the Fields decision. Additionally, the PTF is developing a "best
practices" document for employers that provides tips on evaluating the status of their individual
plans and determining what steps they can take to address their concerns even without action
from the Legislature or the PSPRS board. We believe it is important that employers get their
house in order before turning to outside groups for assistance.
I recognize that there are many individuals and groups keenly interested in pension reform and
their ideas may very well be introduced this session. Rather than sit on the sidelines, the League
has directed the Pension Task Force to create a “guiding principles” document for sound pension
plan design. This "yardstick" can then be used as the tool to evaluate any proposed legislation
regarding reform. If any group wishes, we will have the PTF evaluate their proposal against this
"yardstick" and provide a response highlighting how it does, or does not, meet the needs of
employers and employees as identified by the PTF. This process can serve as a starting point for
potential collaboration on a unified pension reform proposal. This approach demonstrates our
willingness to work with any interested party without unduly hindering our efforts to craft our
own PSPRS reform proposal.
After the "yardstick" is completed, the PTF will turn its labors towards developing reforms for
the consideration of the League Executive Committee. The task force is working with a deadline
of having legislation ready for the 2016 legislative session. Ideally, the PTF will have a product
available for review at our League Annual Conference (August 18-21), affording time to gain
input from additional sources and stakeholders.
I hope this update gives you a better understanding regarding the League's approach to pension
reform for this session. Please feel free to contact me if you have additional questions.
Thank you.
Ken Strobeck
Executive Director
The past, present and future of pension debt and what
employers can do about it today
Jared Smout from PSPRS will discuss the current state of PSPRS with regards to
unfunded liability and the impact of recent court decisions. Jared will also unveil
tools developed by PSPRS designed to aid employers in making decisions
impacting their account. Scott McCarty will discuss options currently available to
employers to help assess their own situation and the tools they can utilize to pay
down their unfunded pension liabilities. Scott’s presentation will include
discussion of a document being developed by the Task Force highlighting
employer best practices for managing your individual PSPRS account.
You can always get more information about PSPRS by heading to their website
www.psprs.com and you can find out more about the work of the League’s
Pension Task Force on their website, www.leagueaz.org/pension.
Dates & Locations
Monday, February 2, 2015 – Oro Valley
Tuesday, February 10, 2015 – Yuma
Monday, February 23, 2015 – Phoenix
Tuesday, February 24, 2015 – Flagstaff
Friday, February 27, 2015 – Show Low
1/30/2015
LEAGUE OF ARIZONA’S
CITIES AND TOWNS:
PENSION TASK FORCE
UPDATE #2
Executive
Committee
Scott McCarty, Chair
[email protected]
480-392-1711
F e b r u a r y 1 3 , 2 01 5
TASK FORCE APPROACH
Phase 1
 Information and Education (11/14/14 meeting)
Phase 2
 Employer Recommended Practices
Phase 3
 Characteristics of a Well-Designed Plan
(A Yardstick)
2
Phase 1
3
1
1/30/2015
PHASE 1
MAJOR OBSERVATIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Causes of Deteriorating Financial Condition
Success is a Combined Responsibility
Employers are Managing a Pension Plan
“Know Your Numbers”
Improve Employer Engagement
Plan Changes that Effect Current Members
are Legally Challengeable
4
Phase 2
5
PHASE 2
EMPLOYER RECOMMENDED PRACTICES
 Employers Can Improve Their Plan’s
Financial Condition Today Without
Waiting for Resolution of Pending
Litigation or Legislative Changes
6
2
1/30/2015
RECOMMENDED PRACTICES ARE DESIGNED TO
ANSWER T WO KEY QUESTIONS
1. What is the Financial Condition of My
Plan?
2. How Can I Improve the Financial
Condition of My Plan Now?


Increase Assets
Decrease Liabilities
7
EMPLOYER RECOMMENDED PRACTICES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Budget Contributions for DROP Members
Prepay Your Budgeted Contribution
Do Not Defer the Fields’ Case
Review Local Board Practices
Prepare a Comprehensive Study
Payoff Unfunded Liability (Debt) Earlier
Create a Pension Funding Policy
8
RECOMMENDATION #3: DO NOT DEFER
THE FIELDS CASE
 PSPRS Board Adopted a Policy to Allow for
a 3-Year Deferral Due to the Potential
Financial Impact
 ER Decision Due by 3/1/15
 Deferring Will Cost More In the End
 Model Created to Calculate Cost of Deferral
 Available on PSPRS and League’s Website
9
3
1/30/2015
RECOMMENDATION #3: DO NOT DEFER
THE FIELDS CASE ( C O N T I N U E D )
Fields’ Case Deferral Decision Model
6/30/14
Unfunded
Liability
Cost of
Deferral
City of Tucson Police
$466M
$15M
City of Tempe Police
$146M
$4M
City of Chandler Fire
$35M
$1.4M
City of Bisbee Fire
$9.8M
~$270k
10
CIT Y OF TEMPE POLICE: $4M DIFFERENCE
DEFERRING VS. NOT DEFERRING
Annual Contribution (in millions)
$13
$12
$11
$10
$11.1
$10.0
$9
$10.4
$10.9
$11.6
$11.3
$12.1
$11.7
$9.4
$8
$7
$7.9
$6
FY 15-16
FY 16-17
FY 17-18
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
Years
11
CIT Y OF BISBEE FIRE: ~$270K DIFFERENCE
DEFERRING VS. NOT DEFERRING
$900,000
Annual Contribution
$800,000
$700,000
$673,665
$600,000
$500,000
$700,612
$744,523
$728,636
$774,304
$757,782
$805,276
$788,093
$631,261
$540,297
$400,000
$300,000
FY 15-16
FY 16-17
FY 17-18
FY 18-19
FY 19-20
12
4
1/30/2015
RECOMMENDATION #3: DO NOT DEFER
THE FIELDS CASE (CONCLUDED)
Reasons Not to Defer:
1. It’s Not About Fields…It’s a Correction
2. Another Increase Coming if Hall Case
Upheld
3. Best to Offset Bad News Against Today’s
Good Investment Earnings
4. Sooner is Better… Deferring Masks Your
Plan’s True Financial Condition
5. Recommendation in Governor’s Budget
13
Phase 3
14
PHASE 3
DESIGN A WELL-STRUCTURED PLAN (A YARDSTICK)
Goal
Principles
Plan Design
Elements
15
5
1/30/2015
KEY QUESTIONS
What should the Employee, Retiree,
Employer, and Taxpayer get out of
the System?
How is this Accomplished?



Type of Plan, Cost Sharing, Annual
Pension Increase (PBI), etc.
16
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
1. Adequate and Affordable
2. Financially Solvent
3. Transparent and Accountable
17
KEY PLAN DESIGN ELEMENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Pension Amount
Retirement Age
COLA / PBI
Cost / Risk Sharing
Funded Status
DROP
Pooled Assets and
Liabilities
8. Investment Strategies
9. Dedicated Revenues
10.Governance
11.Loan Program
12.Legal
13.Smoothing (Deferring)
14.Funding Policy
15.Healthcare
18
6
1/30/2015
USE THE MARKET CYCLE TO EVALUATE
YOUR FUNDED STATUS
140%
Market Cycle (Asset Value)
Funded Status
120%
100%
80%
60%
A
B
40%
20%
0%
19
THE YARDSTICK
 Tool to Evaluate Reform Proposals
 Recommendation to League Executive
Committee
 Fire/Police Associations Requested Task
Force Formally Evaluate Their Proposal
20
STATEWIDE EDUCATIONAL MEETINGS
February
2
Oro
Valley
February
10
Yuma
February
23
Phoenix
February
24
Flagstaff
February
27
Show
Low
21
7
1/30/2015
WHAT ARE EMPLOYERS DOING?
 Paradise Valley
 Completed Comprehensive Analysis
 Developing Pension Funding Policy
 Sierra Vista, Apache Junction
 Developing Comprehensive Report
 Youngtown
 Considering Payoff of Entire Unfunded Liability
22
Comments
and
Questions
23
8
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, February 13, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Agenda Item #8
NLC Congressional Cities Conference Report
Summary:
The National League of Cities Congressional Cities Conference will be
in Washington DC, March 7-11. A group of approximately 80 Arizona
delegates typically attend the conference. A joint meeting with Senators
McCain and Flake is schedule for the Arizona group on Wednesday,
March 11.
Responsible Person:
Ken Strobeck
Attachments:
NLC CCC Schedule of Events
Schedule of Arizona-specific events at NLC
Preliminary Conference Schedule and Travel Planner
Main Conference Events: Monday, March 9– Tuesday, March 10
(note times are subject to change)
Monday, March 9
7:30 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. Celebrate Diversity Breakfast*
9:00 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Opening General Session
10:45 a.m. – 12:15 p.m. Concurrent Workshops
1:45 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. Concurrent Workshops
3:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. General Session
5:15 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. State League Caucuses and Receptions
Constituency and Special Group Meetings/Events*
Tuesday, March 10
8:45 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Concurrent Workshops
10:30 a.m. – Noon Concurrent Workshops
12:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. General Session and Lunch
2:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Delegates’ Pre-scheduled Capitol Hill Visits
5:15 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. State League Caucuses and Receptions
6:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. The Capitol Steps
Wednesday, March 11
All-Day-Delegates’ Pre-scheduled Capitol Hill Visits
Pre-conference Activities:
Saturday, March 7
9:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. NLC University Seminars*
5:30 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Constituency and Special Group Meetings/Events*
Sunday, March 8
8:30 a.m. – Noon NLC Board of Directors Meeting
NLC Advisory Council Meeting
9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. NLC University Seminars*
1:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Policy and Advocacy Committee Meetings/Events*
5:15 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Constituency and Special Group Meetings
5:30 p.m. – 6:45 p.m. Orientation to NLC for First Time Attendees
* Additional fees may apply
2015 NLC Congressional City Conference
Washington, D.C., March 7-11
When you are in Washington D.C. for the NLC Congressional City Conference, please make plans
to attend these two events planned specifically for Arizona conference delegates.
1.
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns will host our annual Arizona Reception during
the conference. All Arizona delegates, spouses and guests are invited to attend. The
reception will take place:
Monday, March 9, 2015
5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Marriott Wardman Park Hotel
Room: Thurgood Marshall South
2.
U.S. Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake will also host our traditional Q&A session for
AZ delegates during the conference. The meeting will take place:
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
8:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.
Russell Senate Office Building, SR – 236
There will be light refreshments available at this meeting. If you have specific topics you want to
discuss at the meeting with our senators, please let Ken Strobeck know in advance at
[email protected] so he may brief their staff.
Please Note: If you are planning to set up city or individual meetings with your congressman, we
suggest you do so right away. Their schedules are always very full. Because they are sometimes
traveling during these dates, many cities have found a meeting with congressional staff very
productive.
Ken Strobeck from the League will be attending the conference. If you need to reach him at any
time you may call him or text him on his cell phone at (602) 501-4989.
Additional Informational Materials
Not Part of the Agenda
League Budget Report
Property Corporation Budget Report
ARTICLE: George Miller, Tucson mayor in 1990s, dies
ARTICLE: No traffic-ticket quotas? Sounds nice, but bad idea
League of Arizona Cities & Towns
FY 2014-2015 Budget vs. Actual
July through December 2014
Jul - Dec 14
Ordinary Income/Expense
Income
4057 · Valley Schools Health Pool
4000 · Affiliate Group Contribution
4005 · Annual Conference
4010 · Dues
4012 · Executive Recruitment Income
4020 · Miscellaneous
4030 · Risk Pool
4035 · Seminars & Meetings
4040 · Interest Income
4055 · US Communities Purchasing Prog
Total Income
Expense
5005 · Annual Conference (Expense)
5010 · Benefits
5015 · Capital Outlay
5025 · Contingency
5030 · Equipment Rental & Maintenance
5035 · Executive Committee
5043 · Executive Recruitment
5050 · Insurance
5055 · Postage & Shipping
5057 · PR & Communications
5060 · Printing
5065 · Professional Services
5065-1 · Accounting Services
5065-3 · Legal Services
5065-2 · Contract Lobbying & Consulti...
Total 5065 · Professional Services
5070 · Rent
5071 · Salaries
5075 · Seminars and Meetings
5085 · Subscriptions & Dues
5090 · Supplies
5095 · Telecommunications
5100 · Travel
Total Expense
Net Ordinary Income
Net Income
Budget
$ Over Budget
% of Budget
0.00
54,770.84
457,091.90
1,749,420.00
0.00
16,868.38
70,038.47
12,485.84
1,478.92
3,951.82
25,000.00
136,200.00
350,000.00
1,818,423.00
6,000.00
14,000.00
138,898.00
50,000.00
5,000.00
13,000.00
-25,000.00
-81,429.16
107,091.90
-69,003.00
-6,000.00
2,868.38
-68,859.53
-37,514.16
-3,521.08
-9,048.18
0.0%
40.2%
130.6%
96.2%
0.0%
120.5%
50.4%
25.0%
29.6%
30.4%
2,366,106.17
2,556,521.00
-190,414.83
92.6%
277,550.43
260,151.52
8,009.68
0.00
8,981.31
3,699.17
0.00
3,819.76
3,346.62
28,330.95
1,792.36
220,000.00
525,000.00
20,000.00
10,000.00
25,000.00
12,000.00
3,000.00
7,600.00
4,000.00
110,000.00
10,000.00
57,550.43
-264,848.48
-11,990.32
-10,000.00
-16,018.69
-8,300.83
-3,000.00
-3,780.24
-653.38
-81,669.05
-8,207.64
126.2%
49.6%
40.0%
0.0%
35.9%
30.8%
0.0%
50.3%
83.7%
25.8%
17.9%
23,790.70
24,164.88
22,599.96
42,000.00
40,000.00
80,000.00
-18,209.30
-15,835.12
-57,400.04
56.6%
60.4%
28.2%
70,555.54
162,000.00
-91,444.46
43.6%
52,500.00
588,391.42
4,132.45
41,168.72
15,951.51
17,040.53
8,002.47
105,000.00
1,255,000.00
50,000.00
55,000.00
35,000.00
32,000.00
26,000.00
-52,500.00
-666,608.58
-45,867.55
-13,831.28
-19,048.49
-14,959.47
-17,997.53
50.0%
46.9%
8.3%
74.9%
45.6%
53.3%
30.8%
1,393,424.44
2,666,600.00
-1,273,175.56
52.3%
972,681.73
-110,079.00
1,082,760.73
-883.6%
972,681.73
-110,079.00
1,082,760.73
-883.6%
Property Corporation
FY 2014-2015 Budget vs. Actual
July through December 2014
Jul - Dec 14
Ordinary Income/Expense
Income
4000 · Rental Income
4005 · Miscellaneous
4010 · Interest
Budget
$ Over Budget
% of Budget
66,043.20
0.00
28.54
119,400.00
3,100.00
50.00
-53,356.80
-3,100.00
-21.46
55.3%
0.0%
57.1%
Total Income
66,071.74
122,550.00
-56,478.26
53.9%
Expense
5000 · Maintenance Services/Agreements
5015 · Utilities
5020 · Repairs and Maintenance
5025 · Operating Expenses
5030 · Accounting and Auditing
5035 · Insurance
5040 · Capital Outlay
17,779.10
16,765.74
2,204.09
2,681.72
4,000.00
2,519.74
2,697.06
32,000.00
36,000.00
12,000.00
5,000.00
6,450.00
4,900.00
25,000.00
-14,220.90
-19,234.26
-9,795.91
-2,318.28
-2,450.00
-2,380.26
-22,302.94
55.6%
46.6%
18.4%
53.6%
62.0%
51.4%
10.8%
Total Expense
48,647.45
121,350.00
-72,702.55
40.1%
17,424.29
1,200.00
16,224.29
1,452.0%
17,424.29
1,200.00
16,224.29
1,452.0%
Net Ordinary Income
Net Income
George Miller, Tucson mayor in 1990s, dies
DECEMBER 25, 2014 8:00 PM • BY TIFFANY KJOS
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
Former Tucson Mayor George Miller died
minutes after midnight Christmas morning at 92.
“There was no greater advocate for peace on
earth and good will towards men,” his stepson,
Gene Einfrank, said via email.
Miller died at 12:15 a.m. at a nursing home
here, Einfrank said.
“He was sharp as a tack all the way to the end.
He just had a body that was failing. He always
loved to tell jokes, and he told jokes to the very
end.”
Miller, a Democrat, served more than two
decades at City Hall. He spent 14 years as a
city councilman and eight years as mayor. He
retired in 1999.
The family will have a small private gathering
today and is planning a larger community event
in the next couple of weeks.
“George was a really kind man who cared enormously about social conditions, both in the
community around him and nationally,” said Tom Volgy, who was elected to the City
Council along with Miller in 1977, and later became mayor.
Miller took over as mayor in 1991.
“He dedicated a very large part of his adult life dealing with social-justice issues. He did so
on the council and he did so as an activist before the City Council,” Volgy said. “He was
involved in one of the first sit-ins in the late ’50s and early ’60s in Tucson on the lunch
counters when they were racially segregated. It was a kind of orientation to life that carried
with him all the time.”
Although in private Miller demonstrated his sense of humor, “in the public he was always
business,” Volgy said, “He took his job very seriously.”
And it was a serious time, with many challenges, Volgy said.
“It was a period of ups and downs in the economy. He and I came into the office recognizing
there was an enormous amount of poverty in Tucson and that we needed to work to deal
with that.”
Ward 4 Councilwoman Shirley Scott served with Miller for eight years on the City Council,
she said.
“He invited homeless people up to his office to talk to him about their needs. … He really did
care about the issues and the people.”
Miller pushed to create JobPath, a program that helps low-income workers learn and refine
skills. And he served as a kind of mentor to everyone from Volgy to current Mayor Jonathan
Rothschild.
“I’ve known George for close to my whole life. In the last few years, I would upon occasion go
to him for not so much advice as perspective,” said Rothschild, who last met with Miller about
six weeks ago.
“His mind was as strong as ever. And we just talked about the perspective of representing a
city — the relationships with your council people, your citizens and doing the best for the
community as a whole. And that was a passion that George had until his final days.
“George’s obvious legacy was one of service to the community and, again, guiding the city
through a time of great change, from the late 1970s to practically 2000. His last real strong
political act was helping create the Rio Nuevo district,” Rothschild continued, referring to
what some view as a bungled opportunity for the city but is now showing signs of success.
“He obviously expressed some dissatisfaction in what occurred over the years of the district,
but I think he was hopeful over the last few years that we were regaining the spirit of what he
was hoping would be achieved, which was a downtown revitalization,” Rothschild said.
Miller’s family provided a list of his achievements, which as a councilman included passing
legislation prohibiting smoking in restaurants, hiring magistrates based on merit, establishing
a sign code and developing Kidco after-school programs.
He advocated for the creation of the Domestic Violence Commission and the GLBT
Commission and forged an intergovernmental agreement with the Tucson Unified School
District allowing for the purchase of land for a new Drachman school.
Miller was born in Detroit. He moved to Tucson in 1939, where he attended Tucson High
during his senior year but graduated after summer school in Detroit, according to his family.
He returned to Tucson for its climate and attended the University of Arizona until World War
II, when he joined the Marine Corps.
In the Battle of Saipan, he was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart. After the war, he
earned both his bachelor’s degree and master’s in education at the UA.
Miller practice-taught at Tucson High in 1947, then taught summer school classes in
American history and American problems.
He taught social studies in the Amphitheater Public Schools district, then returned to
Michigan. While there he refused to testify before the House Un-American Activities
Committee during the McCarthy era and was forced to leave teaching. He became a painting
contractor, operating a business for 31 years.
From 2000 to 2010, Miller taught history and government at Pima Community College. Later,
as a volunteer, he taught citizen-preparation classes through the Pima County Adult
Education program.
In addition to the Purple Heart, Miller earned many awards, including the UA Alumni
Association Distinguished Citizen Award (1993), the Tucson Urban League’s Whitney
Young Humanitarian Award (2000) and the ACLU Civil Libertarian Award (2000). The MillerGolf Links Library is named after him, and he was a Father of the Year Honoree in 1995.
He is survived by his wife, Roslyn, and their eight children, 12 grandchildren and five greatgrandchildren.
Miller's public life
1953: Miller is called before U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy's House Un-American
Activities Committee to explain why he refused to sign a loyalty oath required to keep
his teaching job. He refused to testify, ending his teaching career.
1963: Miller joins pickets in a 10-day NAACP protest at the Pickwick Inn, one of
Tucson's last segregated restaurants. The demonstration forced the southside eatery
to open its doors to all races and prompted the city to enact laws desegregating the
remaining white-only businesses.
1977: Miller is elected to the first of four terms on the City Council.
1978: The newly seated councilman sues the city to block the city's takeover of Old
Pueblo Rapid Transit and the creation of a single consolidated bus service for the
metropolitan area.
1981: Miller and other council members are charged with criminal violations of the
state Open Meetings Law after going into an unannounced closed session where
they threatened to fire the police chief and deputy police chief over remarks they
made in an Arizona Daily Star story. The remarks were based on racial incidents at
what is now Reid Park. They were acquitted.
1991: Miller steps down in the middle of his fourth council term to run his first
successful campaign for mayor.
1992: Hughes Aircraft (now Raytheon) announces the first of several moves that
result in thousands of jobs being shifted from California to Tucson. Miller was a
leader in the Hughes recruitment.
1993: Central Arizona Project water, which the city started delivering in late 1992,
starts corroding water mains. Miller had been an advocate of bringing Colorado
River water to Tucson.
The smelly, brown water delivered to many homes was undrinkable, damaged
appliances and plumbing, and led to voter approval of an initiative restricting the use
of CAP water in 1995.
1995: Miller spearheads the adoption of a hate-crimes law, making Tucson the first
city in Arizona and one of the first in the country to have such a law.
1995: Miller is elected to a second term as mayor.
1999: After 22 years in public office, Miller announces he won't seek another term.
Source: Star archives
No traffic-ticket quotas? Sounds nice, but bad idea
Editorial board, The Republic | azcentral.com
3:35 p.m. MST January 27, 2015
Our View: We all hate traffic tickets. But a quota ban usurps local control. And don't lawmakers say they hate
that?
There must be a lot of lead-footed red-light runners in the House County and Municipal Affairs Committee.
Or maybe committee members are big-time boosters of government meddling in local affairs.
On Monday, Republicans and Democrats gave unanimous approval to House Bill 2410
(http://www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=HB2410&Session_ID=114), a bill that would prohibit
municipalities and police departments from instituting quotas for traffic tickets. It would also forbid judging
(Photo: The Republic)
cops based on how many tickets they write.
A welcome relief for the rule-challenged driver.
RELATED: Police union calls for end to quotas (http://tucson.com/news/blogs/police-beat/police-union-calls-for-elimination-of-traffic-ticketquota/article_2cde50a7-10a0-5e18-8908-7335510ce811.html)
OK. OK. There can be pressure for police to write citations. In June, the Tucson Police Department imposed a quota of one ticket per day.
One.
If you've driven in Tucson lately, you know a traffic cop would have to be unconscious not to see at least one infraction per hour, let alone one per day.
Besides, Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villasenor subsequently backed off, requiring one "traffic contact" per day. He decided a good talking to can
sometimes get the job done.
Which brings up a question you might miss if you go by at 100 mph: Whose job is this? Police departments deserve the autonomy to handle traffic in
local communities.
Sierra Vista Republican Rep. David Stevens' bill (http://tucson.com/news/local/crime/arizona-bill-would-outlaw-police-traffic-ticketquotas/article_d6bf8125-aec6-5e2e-ad0d-4ab16b181d4c.html) takes away a tool that police chiefs might need and local communities might want.
We suspect the rare show of bipartisan support for this bill springs from a deep and lingering grudge over some undeserved (aren't they all?) citation.
But a shared sense of ticket victimhood is no reason to micromanage municipalities.
RELATED: Chandler scales back motorcycle enforcers (/story/news/local/chandler/2015/01/21/chandler-police-motorcycles-duienforcement/22108801/)
Whenever Uncle Sam tries to impose rules on the states, lawmakers are ready with homilies about local control.
The same goes for the state's relationship with local law enforcement. Unless there is some egregious problem — which has not been demonstrated —
traffic tickets are none of the Legislature's business.
So, c'mon, lawmakers: Focus on state issues. And drive safely.
Read or Share this story: http://azc.cc/1CeiSAr