Request to Speak on bill endangering washes and Citizens Initiatives

The State Legislature is back in session. Among the bills being proposed is one that makes it more difficult to advocate with citizens’ initiatives and another that puts our desert washes in jeopardy.

Please, make sure you are registered on the Request to Speak system so you can weigh in on bills while they are still in committee. Here is a link for signing up. 

NOTE: It may take a couple of days since someone has to go to the capitol to sign you up. 

Once you’re signed up, you can sign onto the Request to Speak system on the State Legislature website and select for or against a bill and write a short one or two sentence comment explaining your response. This becomes a part of public record. I have seen committee members ask to see RTS responses before voting on a bill. Sometimes it gives them courage to do the right thing when they know their constituents support that. Advocates like us stopped some bad water bills from going through in the past.

You can weigh in anytime before the bill is heard in committee. For example, you can do RTS on SCR1002 any time before it is heard at 2 p.m. on Monday. I suggest you get them all done at once while you’re on the site.

Here’s the written directions:

http://desktopactivisttucson.blogspot.com/2018/03/request-to-speak-time.html

To learn more about how to use the Request to Speak System, you can sign up for one of the trainings sponsored by Civic Engagement Beyond Voting. Here is their sign up link.

It can be a little confusing at first, but once you get the hang of it, it’s pretty quick and easy. Copy the bill number so you're ready to paste it into the Search Phrase box. (Example: SCR1002) 

Ready? If you've registered for Request to Speak sign in here:
https://apps.azleg.gov/account/signon


Monday, January 23rd, Senate Committee on Elections at 2:00 PM 

SCR1002 constitutional amendments; sixty percent approval (Kern) continues the legislature’s attack on citizen ballot initiatives after they successfully got a ballot measure passed in the last election that would require any initiative that imposes a new tax to pass by a super-majority vote (60%). This, of course, is nearly impossible in the current political environment in Arizona. This bill would extend the supermajority requirement to ALL ballot initiatives – effectively killing the citizen initiative process. OPPOSE.

Tuesday, January 24th, House Committee on Natural Resources, Energy, and Water at 2:00 PM

HB2056 dry washes; permit program exemption (Diaz: Carbone, Dunn, et al.) says that "dry washes" on private property are exempt from the Clean Water Act and state permitting. This is a bad idea as desert washes provide important benefits to our rivers and streams, recharge groundwater, provide flood protection, and limit sediments downstream. Besides, state law cannot exempt waters from federal law. OPPOSE

 
HB2442 temporary non-expansion area (Griffin) allows for establishment of temporary non-expansion areas that would limit new irrigated agriculture, but that would expire after five years. We don't need temporary measures that create the illusion that we are really doing something to address the serious groundwater issues we have. OPPOSE

Wednesday, January 25th

House Committee on Government at 9:00 AM

HCR2004 legislators; minimum age of eighteen (Gress: Aguilar, Austin, et al.) refers to the ballot a measure to change the minimum age to be a legislator from 25 to 18. This seems like a fine idea to get more young people engaged at the legislature. SUPPORT

House Committee on Municipal Oversight & Elections at 2:00 PM

HB2305 ballots; signature verification; observers (McGarr: Biasiucci, Carter, et al) requires county recorders to allow representatives of the two largest parties to have observers for every stage of the signature verification process. So unnecessary. OPPOSE

HB2308 secretary of state; election; recusal (Jones: Harris, McGarr, et al) limits the secretary of state from administering the election portion for which they are a candidate. OPPOSE

Should the AZ Attorney General investigate & pursue litigation so the state can take control of public lands?

Ask your legislators to oppose HB2210 (public lands; ownership; control; litigation) a bill that directs the state attorney general to investigate and pursue litigation in order to have the state take control of federal public lands such as national forests, national wildlife refuges, and more.

HB2210 public lands; ownership; control; litigation (Finchem, J. Allen, Barton, et al.) directs the state attorney general to investigate and report his findings on a number of theories related to the state takeover of public lands, including equal sovereignty and equal footing, among others. These claims have been rejected repeatedly by governors, judges, and by the people. After consulting with the president of the senate and the speaker of the house, the attorney general is then supposed to consider taking action to “gain ownership or control of the public lands within this state.” These lands -- national parks, national forests, national wildlife refuges, Bureau of Land Management lands -- belong to the American people, not the state. This is a waste of resources and also contrary to what the people of our state have expressed time and again.

To ask your legislators to oppose HB2210 sign petition here.

A little history...

Over the years, the Arizona Legislature has sought more control of our federal public lands, attempting to privatize and eliminate or weaken protections for the land, water, and wildlife. In 2012, several bills were introduced that took these efforts a step further. SB1332 passed the Legislature in 2012, but was vetoed by Governor Brewer. 

Unfortunately, legislative leaders did not stop there and passed another measure, HCR2004, which was referred to the ballot and became Proposition 120. Proposition 120 would have amended the Arizona Constitution to assert state sovereignty and to establish that the state had exclusive authority and jurisdiction over air, water, public lands, minerals, wildlife, and other natural resources within Arizona. It was an attempt to gain control of federal public lands and to undermine important federal environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act.

Proposition 120 was defeated by more than a two-to-one margin (68% voted no and 32% voted yes) and failed in every county in Arizona!

In 2015, the attacks continued, with GOP lawmakers stating they wanted to use federal public lands as a new stream of revenue for the State. Governor Doug Ducey vetoed two bills that sought to turn public lands over to the State.

The state is not situated nor does it have a budget to manage these lands, so they would likely be sold to the highest bidder for financial gain. The highest bidders would in many instances be the extractive industries for mining and energy development, developers who would continue urban sprawl, and the wealthy who could afford large tracts of land. The priority must be to use public lands to maximize carbon storage, biodiversity, and ecological function – and to support one of our strongest industries, tourism.

In 2017, both Coconino and Pima Counties, along with a coalition of 27 hunting and angling groups from Arizona, passed resolutions excoriating the public land takeover idea and defending the lifeblood of the $10.6 billion outdoor recreation economy that brings 103,000 jobs and $3.3 billion in wages and salaries to the state.

Arizona is fortunate to have public lands that provide wildlife habitat, watershed protection, and a multitude of recreational opportunities. Please ask your legislators to recognize the importance of these lands and join the voters and the last two governors in opposing bills such as HB2210.

- The Sierra Club