Will Humble Public Health Law, Wills Blog

Oral Arguments Monday in Petersen v. Hobbs Agency Director Nominations Case

After Sen. Hoffman’s failure to hear nominations for several of Governor Hobbs’ nominees to direct state agencies (and his bizarre behavior during the very few “Director’s Nominations” Committee hearings that did occur), it became clear that Hobbs’ nominees to lead state agencies wouldn’t be getting a fair shake at confirmation from the Committee or the Senate.

See: Senate committee doesn’t ‘vet’ nominees. It sabotages them

We posted a blog back then arguing that the Governor should use provisions in state law to get her nominees onto more stable ground: Time to Play Hardball with Agency Director Nominations? Here’s a Playbook. Hobbs ended up going with Option 3 in that blog post as outlined in Governor Hobbs Letter to Senate President Petersen. Hobbs first withdrew the 13 nominations of the agency directors that she had previously sent to the Senate.

See: Governor Katie Hobbs Pulls Nominees from Partisan Political Circus Created by Extremist Jake Hoffman
See: 38-211 – Nominations by governor; consent of senate; appointment

Hobbs appointed Ben Henderson as the Interim Director for each of the agencies. Mr. Henderson proceeded to name the person who had previously been nominated to be agency director to the title of Executive Deputy Director.

State Senate President Petersen sued Governor Hobbs in Maricopa County Superior Court last year, challenging Hobbs’ end-around the Senate.

Judge Blaney will hear the first round of oral arguments in court Monday at 10am in the Maricopa County Superior Court building (Room 411).

See: Civil Court Case Information: Petersen v. Hobbs Maricopa County Superior Court Case Number CV2023-019899/

My sense is this case will ultimately be appealed regardless of what Blaney decides – so it may be several months to more than a year before we have a final resolution in this important policy matter.

If the State Senate flips to the Dems or is 15-15 tie after the November election, things could change rapidly, and the case could end up being dismissed once a new Senate president is sworn in and Hoffman is discharged from the Director Nomination Committee (or it’s abolished).

I hope to be able to get a seat in the courtroom on Monday and provide an update next week.

Will Humble Reproductive Health, Wills Blog

AZPHA’s Potential Positions on November Ballot Propositions: Part 5 – Arizona for Abortion Access Act

Every cycle the Arizona Secretary of State generates a publicity pamphlet to help educate voters ahead of the general election. The pamphlet includes arguments in support of and against citizens’ initiatives and legislative referral. It’s a feature of the Clean Elections voter initiative from several years ago. The publicity pamphlet is a key educational resource for voters to use before voting.

As Arizona’s independent voice for public health, we’ve played a key role in helping voters to understand the public health implications of the various ballot measures. One way we do that is to send arguments for and against ballot propositions focusing on the good and bad public health impacts. Last cycle AZPHA placed arguments for or against 4 of the 10 ballot propositions.

This cycle the window for getting arguments filed is May 20th – June 20th. The arguments are posted in order they are received so it’s a good idea to get arguments early so voters see our stuff first.

There are already 6 ballot measures set for the 2024 ballot (not including the upcoming voter-driven Arizonans for Abortion Access). Three have direct impacts to public health / public health policy and a 4th will the AZ for Abortion Access initiative.

Our Public Health Policy Committee will be recommending arguments for the publicity pamphlet to our Board of Directors for consideration at our May 17 Board Meeting. If approved, I’ll be authorized to submit our arguments for the publicity pamphlet.

Anybody can turn in an argument. Simply write up an argument (300-word limit) and submit it to the General Election Ballot Measure Argument Portal along with the $75 fee. Portal is open from May 20 to June 20.

______

View a summary and our draft argument FOR the Arizona for Abortion Access Act
See Our Draft Argument (For)

This voter driven constitutional amendment would establish the fundamental right to abortion that the state of Arizona may not interfere with before the point of fetal viability unless justified by a compelling state interest (e.g. improving or maintaining the health of the individual seeking abortion care that does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision making).

Will Humble Public Health, Public Health Law, Wills Blog

AZPHA’s Potential Positions on November Ballot Propositions: Part 4 – Locking in Partisan Primaries

Every cycle the Arizona Secretary of State generates a publicity pamphlet to help educate voters ahead of the general election. The pamphlet includes arguments in support of and against citizens’ initiatives and legislative referral. It’s a feature of the Clean Elections voter initiative from several years ago. The publicity pamphlet is a key educational resource for voters to use before voting.

As Arizona’s independent voice for public health, we’ve played a key role in helping voters to understand the public health implications of the various ballot measures. One way we do that is to send arguments for and against ballot propositions focusing on the good and bad public health impacts. Last cycle AZPHA placed arguments for or against 4 of the 10 ballot propositions.

This cycle the window for getting arguments filed is May 20th – June 20th. The arguments are posted in order they are received so it’s a good idea to get arguments early so voters see our stuff first.

There are already 6 ballot measures set for the 2024 ballot (not including the upcoming voter-driven Arizonans for Abortion Access). Three have direct impacts to public health / public health policy and a 4th will the AZ for Abortion Access initiative.

Our Public Health Policy Committee will be recommending arguments for the publicity pamphlet to our Board of Directors for consideration at our May 17 Board Meeting. If approved, I’ll be authorized to submit our arguments for the publicity pamphlet.

Anybody can turn in an argument. Simply write up an argument (300-word limit) and submit it to the General Election Ballot Measure Argument Portal along with the $75 fee. Portal is open from May 20 to June 20.

______

View a summary and our draft argument AGAINST the Partisan Primaries Regardless of Party Affiliation Amendment
See Our Draft Argument (Against)

This measure (referred to the ballot by the legislature) would require partisan primary elections for partisan offices; prohibits primary elections where all candidates, regardless of political party affiliation, run in the same primary election, such as top-two, top-four, and top-five primaries; and provide that the state’s direct primary election law supersedes local charters and ordinances.

Will Humble Public Health, Public Health Law, Wills Blog

AZPHA’s Potential Positions on November Ballot Propositions: Part 3 – Open Primaries

Every cycle the Arizona Secretary of State generates a publicity pamphlet to help educate voters ahead of the general election. The pamphlet includes arguments in support of and against citizens’ initiatives and legislative referral. It’s a feature of the Clean Elections voter initiative from several years ago. The publicity pamphlet is a key educational resource for voters to use before voting.

As Arizona’s independent voice for public health, we’ve played a key role in helping voters to understand the public health implications of the various ballot measures. One way we do that is to send arguments for and against ballot propositions focusing on the good and bad public health impacts. Last cycle AZPHA placed arguments for or against 4 of the 10 ballot propositions.

This cycle the window for getting arguments filed is May 20th – June 20th. The arguments are posted in order they are received so it’s a good idea to get arguments early so voters see our stuff first.

There are already 6 ballot measures set for the 2024 ballot (not including the upcoming voter-driven Arizonans for Abortion Access). Three have direct impacts to public health / public health policy and a 4th will the AZ for Abortion Access initiative.

Our Public Health Policy Committee will be recommending arguments for the publicity pamphlet to our Board of Directors for consideration at our May 17 Board Meeting. If approved, I’ll be authorized to submit our arguments for the publicity pamphlet.

Anybody can turn in an argument. Simply write up an argument (300-word limit) and submit it to the General Election Ballot Measure Argument Portal along with the $75 fee. Portal is open from May 20 to June 20.

______

See a summary and our draft argument FOR the Arizona Eliminate Partisan Primaries Amendment
See Our Draft Argument (For)

This voter-driven amendment would eliminate partisan primaries and replace them with an electoral system where individuals may vote for the candidate of their choice, regardless of the party affiliation of the voter or the candidate.

Will Humble Public Health, Social Determinants, State Legislature, Wills Blog

AZPHA’s Potential Positions on November Ballot Propositions: Part 2 – Signature Distribution Requirement for Voter Initiatives

Every cycle the Arizona Secretary of State generates a publicity pamphlet to help educate voters ahead of the general election. The pamphlet includes arguments in support of and against citizens’ initiatives and legislative referral. It’s a feature of the Clean Elections voter initiative from several years ago. The publicity pamphlet is a key educational resource for voters to use before voting.

As Arizona’s independent voice for public health, we’ve played a key role in helping voters to understand the public health implications of the various ballot measures. One way we do that is to send arguments for and against ballot propositions focusing on the good and bad public health impacts. Last cycle AZPHA placed arguments for or against 4 of the 10 ballot propositions.

This cycle the window for getting arguments filed is May 20th – June 20th. The arguments are posted in order they are received so it’s a good idea to get arguments early so voters see our stuff first.

There are already 6 ballot measures set for the 2024 ballot (not including the upcoming voter-driven Arizonans for Abortion Access). Three have direct impacts to public health / public health policy and a 4th will the AZ for Abortion Access initiative.

Our Public Health Policy Committee will be recommending arguments for the publicity pamphlet to our Board of Directors for consideration at our May 17 Board Meeting. If approved, I’ll be authorized to submit our arguments for the publicity pamphlet.

Anybody can turn in an argument. Simply write up an argument (300-word limit) and submit it to the General Election Ballot Measure Argument Portal along with the $75 fee. Portal is open from May 20 to June 20.

______

Below is a summary and a draft argument AGAINST the Arizona Signature Distribution Requirement for Initiatives Amendment
See Our Draft Argument (Against)

This proposition (referred to the ballot by the legislature) adds a new signature distribution requirement to get citizen initiatives on that ballot. It would require organizers of future voter initiatives to gather 10% of votes cast for governor from each of the 30 legislative districts in order to qualify for the ballot. For constitutional amendments voters would need to collect 15% from each legislative district.

Future voter initiatives designed to address public health threats (such as the Arizona Abortion Access Act), the Smoke Free Arizona Act, the Predatory Debt Collection Protection Act and the voter initiative that expanded Medicaid to 100% of poverty would be MUCH harder time making it to the ballot if voters approve this measure.

Will Humble Emergency Management, State Legislature, Wills Blog

AZPHA’s Potential Positions on November Ballot Propositions: Part 1 – Emergency Authority

Every cycle the Arizona Secretary of State generates a publicity pamphlet to help educate voters ahead of the general election. The pamphlet includes arguments in support of and against citizens’ initiatives and legislative referral. It’s a feature of the Clean Elections voter initiative from several years ago. The publicity pamphlet is a key educational resource for voters to use before voting.

As Arizona’s independent voice for public health, we’ve played a key role in helping voters to understand the public health implications of the various ballot measures. One way we do that is to send arguments for and against ballot propositions focusing on the good and bad public health impacts. Last cycle AZPHA placed arguments for or against 4 of the 10 ballot propositions.

This cycle the window for getting arguments filed is May 20th – June 20th. The arguments are posted in order they are received so it’s a good idea to get arguments early so voters see our stuff first.

There are already 6 ballot measures set for the 2024 ballot (not including the upcoming voter-driven Arizonans for Abortion Access). Three have direct impacts to public health / public health policy and a 4th will the AZ for Abortion Access initiative.

Our Public Health Policy Committee will be recommending arguments for the publicity pamphlet to our Board of Directors for consideration at our May 17 Board Meeting. If approved, I’ll be authorized to submit our arguments for the publicity pamphlet.

Anybody can turn in an argument. Simply write up an argument (300-word limit) and submit it to the General Election Ballot Measure Argument Portal along with the $75 fee. Portal is open from May 20 to June 20.

______

Below is an analysis and Draft Argument AGAINST the Arizona Emergency Declarations Amendment
See Our Draft Argument (Against)

This proposition (referred to the ballot by the legislature) ends states of emergency and emergency powers after 30 days unless the legislature extends the emergency powers granted to the governor. Emergencies related to floods and fires are exempt.  I’m crossing my fingers that the next governor serving during a public health emergency will use that emergency authority as intended. If approved, this ballot referral would severely restrict that future governor’s ability to save lives.

Will Humble Air Quality, Social Determinants, Wills Blog

The AZ Corp Commission & Public Health (Part III): Southwest Gas

At first glance, the Arizona Corporation Commission might seem like it has pretty much nothing to do with public health. But when you scratch the surface just a little, you’ll discover that the Commission does in fact influence public health.

In our first piece we discussed how the Commissioners’ rubber stamping of APS rate increases over the last couple of years is harming the social determinants of health. Last week we wrote about how recent Commissioner decisions are disincentivizing rooftop solar.

This week we’ll cover the Commission’s regulation of methane gas monopoly rates and how that impacts the social determinants of health.

  • Just last year (2023), Southwest Gas and its shareholders were celebrating the “largest revenue increase in company history,” thanks to the company’s back-to-back rate hikes on customers in 2022 and 2023 in Arizona. Like we discussed in week one – those rate increases disproportionately impact the budgets of low-income Arizonans.
  • While many Arizonans struggle to pay their bills, gas utility executives are getting rich. Southwest Gas reaped $54.3 million in record revenue in Arizona, while its executives pulled in huge salaries. For example, President and CEO Karen S. Haller made more than $4.3 million in 2022, while former CEO John P. Hester took in more than $6 million
  • Now Southwest Gas is asking the Commission for another large rate increase – its third increase in three years on Arizona customers. The utility is seeking a $125 million increase to its revenues, a nearly 12% increase.
  • They’re also asking Commissioners to allow it to charge ratepayers $385K each year to support their membership to trade associations, including the American Gas Association, a special-interest group that has organized legislative attacks on electrification, including in Arizona.
  • On top of that, Southwest Gas is continuing to seek a subsidy, known as a “line extension allowance,” forcing customers to pick up to pay for new gas lines to commercial and residential properties for wealthy developers. 

Utility regulators (elected Corporation Commissioners) should be protecting consumer interests, but recent history shows they’ve been on the side of utility executives and shareholders rather than everyday Arizonans.

My point with this post is that the elected Commissioners in the Arizona Corporation Commission can have a substantial impact on the social determinants of health – especially when they defer to well-heeled utility executives instead of their constituents.

If you care about the social determinants of health – and I know you do – make sure you do your homework vetting candidates to decide whether you think they’ll have the backs of utility executives and investors or ordinary Arizonans.

Will Humble Climate Change, Injury Prevention, Wills Blog

Maricopa County Launches 2024 Heat Relief Efforts

Maricopa County Public Health investing in community support to prevent another record-breaking year of heat deaths

In response to the largest number of heat-related deaths since tracking began, Maricopa County Department of Public Health is ramping up its heat response efforts for 2024 to expand the Maricopa County Heat Relief Network.

The Network was initiated in 2005 by the Maricopa Association of Governments and is comprised of public, private and non-profit volunteer organizations that all come together with one goal: reduce the number of heat related deaths in Maricopa County.

This year MCDPH is coordinating cooling and respite centers throughout the County along with ensuring that Maricopa County residents know how to access these centers.

In response to this assessment, MCDPH has developed a robust plan to support the community:

  1. Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) with Phoenix, Glendale, Chandler, Mesa and Tempe. In partnership with these large cities, cooling and respite centers will be available to those needing to get out of the heat. At least one heat relief site in each city will be open until 7 p.m. Monday through Friday and open on at least one weekend day. 
  2. Partnership with 2-1-1. MCDPH has contracted with AZ 2-1-1 to staff their call center with community health workers or promotoras that speak English and Spanish to help residents find cooling and respite centers, water and other heat relief support like utility assistance and A/C repair and replacement from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily.
  3. Partnership with large organizations providing cooling and respite centers. MCDPH will also be contracting with larger non-profits providing heat relief center support to ensure that cooling and respite centers are staying open until at least 7 p.m. and on weekends throughout the county whenever possible.

MCDPH has invested in its workforce to support climate and health. It has hired a Climate and Health Program Manager, as well as a Heat Relief Coordinator to focus specifically on supporting the county’s heat relief site infrastructure. This work is in addition to MCDPH’s robust surveillance to track heat-related deaths, which it has done since 2006.

Every year since 2016, Maricopa County has set a new record in the number of heat-related deaths confirmed. To break this tragic streak, it will require everyone to play a role, and at the center of this is the Heat Relief Network.

Will Humble Professional Development, Public Health, Wills Blog

Oral Arguments in the Petersen v. Hobbs ‘Director Nominations’ Case Delayed Until May 20

After the shenanigans in early 2023 at the “Director’s Nominations” Committee it became clear that Governor Hobbs nominees to lead state agencies wouldn’t be getting a fair shake from the Committee or the Senate.

We posted a blog back then arguing that the Governor should use loopholes in the statute to get her nominees onto more stable ground: Time to Play Hardball with Agency Director Nominations? Here’s a Playbook

Hobbs ended up going with Option 3 from that blog post as outlined in Governor Hobbs Letter to Senate President Petersen. Hobbs first withdrew the 13 nominations of the agency directors that she had previously sent to the Senate.

The statutes about senate confirmation requirements are sufficiently vague and provide loopholes that gave Team Hobbs options to provide stability and governance options. See: 38-211 – Nominations by governor; consent of senate; appointment 

See: Senate committee doesn’t ‘vet’ nominees. It sabotages them

She then appointed a guy named Ben Henderson as the Interim Director for each of the agencies. Mr. Henderson proceeded to name the person who had previously been nominated to be director to the title of Executive Deputy Director.

State Senate President Petersen sued Governor Hobbs in Maricopa County Superior Court a few months ago. Several briefs have been filed by both parties, and Judge Blaney had scheduled the first round of oral arguments in court last week but later delated oral arguments until Monday, May 20: Civil Court Case Information: Petersen v. Hobbs. 

Maricopa County Superior Court CV2023-019899

My sense is this case will ultimately be appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court – so it may be several months to more than a year before we have a final resolution in this important policy matter. However, if the State Senate flips or ends in a 15-15 tie or if Dems take control of the chamber things could change rapidly and the case could end up being dismissed once a new Senate president is sworn in.

Note: The Chair of the Director Nominations Committee, Jake Hoffman, was recently indicted by an Arizona Grand Jury on numerous serious felony charges. Nevertheless, Senate President Hoffman has not removed Hoffman from his Director Nomination and Government Committee perches.

See: Governor Katie Hobbs Pulls Nominees from Partisan Political Circus Created by Extremist Jake Hoffman
Will Humble Reproductive Health, Wills Blog

Governor Signs Repeal of the Near Total Ban on Abortion Care: AzPHA’s Draft Voter Initiative Argument

You undoubtedly know that both the legislature narrowly passed and the governor signed a bill repealing the near total abortion ban that was originally passed during the first territorial legislature in 1864.  It’s unclear when the repeal will actually take effect – most likely around October 1 (90 days after the end of the legislative session).

Meanwhile, as a result of the state Supreme Court’s decision awhile back, that very same territorial law is set to take effect at the end of June, meaning – unless something changes – there will be virtually no abortion care in Arizona during July, August and September. Beginning in October that care would be restored up to 15 weeks gestation.

Meanwhile, folks working on the Arizona Right to Abortion Initiative continue to be busy collecting signatures to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would place the right to abortion care in the state constitution.

AZPHA has a series of Resolutions in place (going back decades) AzPHA Resolutions on Women’s Reproductive Rights Go Back to 1938 and AZPHA will be supporting the Act.

Every cycle the Arizona Secretary of State generates a publicity pamphlet for the ballot to support voter education which is mailed to registered voters ahead of the general election. The pamphlet includes arguments in support of and against citizens’ initiatives and legislative referrals.

The publicity pamphlet is a key educational resource for voters to use while navigating the ballot, or before going to the polls.

AZPHA has a history of including arguments for and against ballot propositions focusing on the good and bad public health impacts that could occur to help inform voters. Last cycle AZPHA placed arguments for or against 4 of the 10 ballot propositions.

We’re working on arguments for up to 5 of the ballot measures that’ll be on the ballot – including the Arizona Right to Abortion Initiative. Below is a working draft of what we’ll be including in the voter guide: 

______

Vote For Sexual & Reproductive Health Fairness

Vote Yes on Proposition xxx

We urge you to vote Yes on Proposition xxx because it helps ensure sexual and reproductive fairness for all Arizonans.

Arizona’s record of ensuring fair reproductive health policy equality is checkered. You’re no doubt familiar with the law from 1864 that criminalized abortion care has been repealed (for now).

While the Arizona Public Health Association is grateful for the sensible repeal of that territorial-era law, we also know a similar restriction could be revived at any time by the state legislature.

In fact, a resurrection of that territorial era abortion ban may be just a couple of legislative sessions away…  that is unless we change the Arizona State Constitution to protect abortion care by voting YES on the Arizona Right to Abortion Initiative (Proposition xxx).

A large body of published evidence shows policy restrictions on sexual & reproductive health care cause health inequality and harm public health outcomes. Public health evidence shows that unreasonable restrictions on access to abortion negatively affect the provision of care, the availability of patient-centered services and reproductive autonomy.

Policy solutions that center and promote sexual and reproductive health equality like Proposition XXX are essential for building fair reproductive health care.

We hope you’ll join us by voting YES on Proposition XXX & continue to help us strive for other evidence-based reproductive freedoms like:

  • Ensuring sexual & reproductive health care programs provide person-centered care;
  • Requiring all health insurance plans and programs to provide comprehensive coverage for all contraceptive options;
  • Ensuring patients have multiple options for accessing reproductive health care;
  • Strengthening federal Title X Family Planning; and
  • Removing restrictions that silo abortion care.

Access to abortion care with reasonable restrictions is also a core element in reproductive care fairness.

Please vote YES on Proposition xxx

1 2 3