Arizona Senate wasting taxpayers' money

Between per diem payments while on unnecessary breaks and expenses accrued from the "audit," here's how much taxpayer money is going down the drain.

Quick note: I decided to drop the monthly and yearly prices to subscribe for the remainder of 2023 (and maybe beyond) due to the fact I’m not where I wanted to be at this point with paid subscriptions. Which in part is fair given I had to take two months off of work, but yesterday I posted how you all can help me beyond subscribing yourselves. Earn yourself a comped subscription and see posts behind the paywall just by getting others to subscribe (free or paid). Prices are now back down to $5/month and $50/year. Please subscribe so I can keep holding the Arizona government accountable by bringing the receipts.

---

Time and again it’s been reported on how the Arizona Senate “audit” of ballots in 2020 was supposed to cost $150,000 from taxpayers, but instead wound up costing millions of dollars either from the Senate’s coffers, from Maricopa County buying new machines that Cyber Ninjas didn’t touch or other areas.

Following the news a few months ago that the Arizona Senate, who spent months fighting a public records battle it repeatedly lost in every court, settled a lawsuit with American Oversight for, coincidentally, $150,000, I filed a records request to see just how much taxpayer money the Arizona Senate wasted on this entire ordeal and it unsurprisingly crossed the $1 million threshold.

That’s from the Senate alone.

$1,486,553.18 to be exact and a majority of that went to fight ridiculous legal battles where the public’s right to know won again and again.¹

On top of the $150,000 settlement with American Oversight, records show $484,000 went to Statecraft PLLC, a law firm operated by noted elections attorney and Trump attorney Kory Langhofer; $33,000 went to Kolodin Law Group, owned by now State Rep. Alex Kolodin who for a brief time represented Cyber Ninjas before being fired. Kolodin, the last time I checked, was still under a two-year long investigation from the State Bar with his law license hanging in the balance.

The Senate also paid law firm Wilenchik & Bartness $17,000.

In non legal fees, the Senate paid $50,000 to EchoMail. Nearly $6,000 to Ken Bennett in reimbursements (Bennett is now back in the Senate) and other small fees paid out.

---

Separately, being reported elsewhere in Arizona is the per diem saga where lawmakers are receiving a daily allowance ($10 for Maricopa County lawmakers and $119 for rural lawmakers) while they are not doing any legislative business. There’s no reason for the legislature to still be in session in the first place, but the longer they refuse to sine die the more taxpayers will have to pay for them not to show up.

Arizona Capitol Times reporter Camryn Sanchez did the math and found I taxpayers would have to foot the bill for more than $1 million in per diem payments this entire legislative session.

“If the Legislature adjourns sine die on July 31, the total amount all lawmakers would earn in per diem payments plus salary will equal just over $3.78 million this year. More than $1.6 million of that is for subsistence payments alone. And that doesn’t include mileage. Each “rural” lawmaker representing an area outside of Maricopa County will have made about $38,000 in per diem subsistence payments from the start of this session to June 17. Until the session resumes on July 31, they’ll each make another $5,355,” Sanchez writes.

Rural lawmakers will receive more in subsistence payments than their $24,000 salary even though it appears that lawmakers, who will surpass the longest session in Arizona history on June 30, have only really worked for roughly 75 days. Today is Day 165.

So far, the only lawmakers who taxpayers won’t be footing the bill for are Senator John Kavanagh and Senator Sine Kerr, both Republicans. They alerted the Senate comptroller of their intentions to opt out unless they are actually doing work for the Senate. See their notices below:

“Immediately, I would like to opt out of receiving subsistence pay, except for on days in which I am in my Senate office on official Senate Business, until the 2023 56th Legislature - First Regular Session adjourns Sine Die,” Kavanagh wrote.

Kerr wrote, “I respectfully request to opt out of my subsistence payment effective Monday, June 26, 2023. I elect to be paid when in the office for official legislative business. Once the 56th Legislature 1st Regular session adjourns sine die, please return my payment to the original senate policy.”

The Arizona Senate Democrats have complained, but none of the 14 members opted out of their per diem payments.

Since the House’s interpretation of the rules differs from the Senate, it’s not likely any of those members will opt out if there’s a chance they lose payments for all of next year.

I already sent records requests to the House and Senate relating to per diem payments and will continue to report on this topic as soon as I receive documents, but until then for my fellow I Think You Should Leave fans, comment who you think is most likely to spend all their per diem on shirts with WILD patterns.

1. In an related note, there have been two huge stories regarding public records battles in Arizona. One between local journalist Amy Silverman (currently with KJZZ’s The Show) and the Arizona Daily Star over records from the Department of Economic Security and its division of Adult Protective Services. That case hinges on whether Silverman’s investigative journalism is considered “bona fide research.” Spoiler: it is, but that term is not defined in state law. A second story from AZCIR where they won a public records battle with the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office; receiving the records sought and $8,000.