[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6302195,"mediaKeyId","2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415","parentId",2482192,"title","Medical board opposes one-year complaint deadline bill; committee holds measure for now","audioSeconds",2611,"startMs",2611000,"endMs",-1,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415&start=2611&end=0","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415/thumbnail_2611000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6302195/Arizona/Medical-board-opposes-one-year-complaint-deadline-bill-committee-holds-measure-for-now","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6302195-57da88beae98b838a61e562898f2cec4/orig.mp4?Expires=1773620924&Signature=XFWYrrL~zZ6RFUVtIif68Xoad-85JALz4TE24zT1wvsEidZ0BfsCljlhriZtlFIGyFWO37wDlPycmtmBXdtormbpSs-k93a~OFbR~hpvTjhQucuxRQ~cDY6vhGXgqZWmz9MBMyB6qJk-4n4yp2rLnoAqxj1R8PyxA9RBWsLaCjIdnd5h9-SbGRPA~yE8nZTx8DUJk9aHHLidYYg4MT~fZjiuoOXHePHYrfjM6CrGPSNZoAhGQ0uU-TXb-XcPEiIBeE7Ry--eaQXU2cUf55Bffxi99YxoW3-ld8LBEuSVUdbMQCzCntikZ57J0DRYmElST2vYbRkjmB9FJZbktPgNeQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Arizona Legislature","date","2025-03-03T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Bill 1072, which would require the Arizona Medical Board and the Board of Osteopathic Examiners in Medicine and Surgery to take final action on complaints unrelated to protecting public health and safety within one year or have the complaints deemed administratively closed, drew opposition from board staff and was held by the committee.

Raquel Rivera, deputy director for the Arizona Medical Board and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants, said the boards spoke in respectful opposition. Rivera said the boards limit investigations to alleged violations of the Arizona Medical Practice Act, which are intended to protect public health and safety, and expressed concern about imposing a one-year deadline that could be affected by factors outside the board’s control, including delays in obtaining records, retaining expert reviewers, attorney scheduling and other litigation-related timing issues.

Rivera provided board workload figures: she said there are 31,721 licensed allopathic physicians in the state and that in fiscal year 2024 the board opened 1,301 cases and closed 1,111, with an average of 264 days to complete an investigation. She told the committee the board currently has about 1,166 open investigations across stages and that staffing constraints — the board reported it requested four investigators for FY2025 but was granted two — affect timeliness.

Rivera also said the board is unclear which complaints the bill is intended to target; she said the board does not investigate complaints that do not fall within the Medical Practice Act (for example, bedside-manner comments, complaints without a physician–patient relationship, or allegations older than four years). The executive director had contacted the bill sponsor for clarification about the bill’s intent, Rivera said.

Committee action: With no supporters present to testify at the hearing, the committee held SB 1072 for now. Members asked the board for clarification about resource needs and the provenance of the bill’s request; the deputy director suggested the sponsor had raised billing complaints as an origin of the proposal but said the board’s authority to investigate billing allegations is limited and often tied to clinical concerns.

Details and next steps: Rivera urged caution about imposing a statutory deadline given the investigative and legal complexity of many cases and recommended further discussion about scope and resourcing before moving the bill forward.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","03/03/2025 - House Health & Human Services","oneSentenceSummary","The Arizona Medical Board told a legislative committee it respectfully opposes Senate Bill 1072, a measure that would require final action on certain complaints within one year or deem the complaints administratively closed.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature Arizona, Arizona","taxId",78572,"location","Arizona","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6302201,"Committee backs bill to add Duchenne muscular dystrophy to Arizona newborn screening panel",911,1701000,2612000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415&start=1701&end=2612","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415/thumbnail_1701000.jpg","/articles/6302201/Arizona/Committee-backs-bill-to-add-Duchenne-muscular-dystrophy-to-Arizona-newborn-screening-panel","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6302201-26b0b0e1fdc82d2697a41fc85d397a91/orig.mp4?Expires=1773620924&Signature=HNozCpFnPKcj8ABnWtsa5ORGjOAk3HP2boQsOWpQrkhQCDTCCk992ClFBQuq-fI2bi~FA1U02Gvzj1dWsDMJi6EFgYA-MdvEdyQ1rIYblt5Ko4gKoG2S6HJ5ZQZpvju5cyYxxLRCoS6brwDTOucRUoq4H5zbTPPnhPRWdyHTOpMXrI-fjjQQzL5Rk24ogIKh5wYYF47T1hdoQNqHRDvywM-Ou8hUe6fvJHGn99T4i~6quJBZ1kPyXyR4wYPIDgFB74tlTBwZuE2W4R-KwJcsnP2ieQQghweo0O~7QPIDnVvtTWJremzYOyV6f5aT0p208o1kEKd8vltluVsaMbzmeg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 1076, which would require the Department of Health Services to add Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) to Arizona’s newborn screening panel once DMD is added to the federal recommended uniform screening panel, received a due-pass recommendation from the House Health and Human Services Committee.

The bill, as drafted, directs DHS to notify legislative counsel within 10 days after DMD is added to the recommended uniform screening panel and sets the bill effective on the earlier of Oct. 1, 2027, or two years after DMD is added to the recommended panel.

Advocates and family testimony: Dr. Brett Farrell, an emergency medicine physician and father of two sons with Duchenne, described the family’s experience: his older son was diagnosed at age 4 after about two years and roughly 15 specialist visits, while his younger son was diagnosed at birth due to newborn screening elsewhere. “If we'd been tested at birth, the results would have saved us those two years worth of searching and stress,” Farrell said, and added that earlier diagnosis allowed families to begin recommended therapies and plan for equipment and specialist access.

Fiscal and implementation notes: Rick Hazelton, with Public Policy Partners speaking on behalf of Sarepta Therapeutics, said the Department of Health estimated an up-front validation study cost of about $204,000 for the state laboratory. Hazelton also reviewed prevalence figures and said Arizona sees an estimated four to six boys born with Duchenne annually and cited a working prevalence estimate of about 249 current cases in the state based on standard incidence calculations. Damien Carpenter of Access (the Medicaid agency) said the agency is neutral and provided a fiscal estimate tied to an assumed Oct. 1, 2027, implementation: Access estimated general fund costs of about $88,000 and total fund costs of roughly $285,000 in the first year, noting the program fee that funds newborn screening may increase by about $10 per birth as a rough estimate.

Committee action: After testimony and questions about fiscal impacts and testing logistics, the committee voted to return SB 1076 with a due-pass recommendation by voice roll call. The committee recorded 12 ayes, 0 nays.

Details and next steps: Witnesses emphasized that newborn screening for DMD would shorten the diagnostic journey for many families and enable earlier initiation of recommended care and planning. The department will need to validate the test in the state lab prior to routine screening; the validation cost and program-fee impacts were discussed as part of budget negotiations.","The House Health and Human Services Committee advanced Senate Bill 1076, which would add Duchenne muscular dystrophy to Arizona’s newborn screening panel after federal recommendation and set an implementation timeline tied to federal action.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6302208,"Committee advances bill saying poverty alone cannot be treated as child neglect, members voice concerns about vague language",627,780000,1407000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415&start=780&end=1407","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415/thumbnail_780000.jpg","/articles/6302208/Arizona/Committee-advances-bill-saying-poverty-alone-cannot-be-treated-as-child-neglect-members-voice-concerns-about-vague-language","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6302208-09509b427ac642f72665fd9881dee01a/orig.mp4?Expires=1773620924&Signature=hGL1ChZDvcIToiMKu8eSBB5ww9L0OK3Dk-pSH9qmh4I95AyfaqwC1qDNjJ9UT6NJDv7k0zH~Qka6JARlP8sBgY8lldtD0Q-qbjRXc97FO561s12XXaR8-tTDGWEJTmfxfiJQGvbKp2p6BGqOD48fkI2hM~ieE6VTmZdd41EmNt9aPp6rpYPU8o90jPb8IIFuhm4Km5oSWAVQQJKrFMYhWeZeoW6RP0dhwkPdgNEAVDJtKWrgD8QrTdGGJmcLk9TxcJSjF~BWm-pt8OfGfyau8bF3SbcXk8SvEZD-h7rCSl22VA1ZD--Fwa2oLN3gOMzlVa7qbqMGgCZAFdGXKX3HZQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona House Committee on Health and Human Services recommended Senate Bill 1246 with a due-pass recommendation after testimony that mixed support with caution. The measure would bar considering a parent, guardian or custodian as having neglected a child solely because they lack financial resources to provide supervision, food, clothing, shelter or medical care. The bill also modifies the statutory definition of neglect to cover situations where the inability or unwillingness to provide those items creates a substantial risk of serious harm to a child’s health or welfare.

Chris Gustafson, speaking for the Department of Child Safety, said the department supported amendments that make clear poverty alone should not result in substantiation. “Our goal was to make sure that nobody is substantiated for, for poverty alone,” Gustafson said and added the department still wants to retain the ability to investigate when other factors may be present.

Gustafson told the committee that differences in intent and circumstance matter: if a parent is actively seeking services or working with social supports but lacks resources, the department would aim not to substantiate neglect solely for poverty; by contrast, failure to take available steps that amount to neglect could still be substantiated. He provided a hypothetical in which a homeless parent with a newborn who has a serious medical issue might prompt temporary custody to stabilize the child but not a long-term substantiation if the parent is actively working toward stability.

Several legislators raised concerns about the bill’s brevity and the potential for courts or investigators to interpret terms such as “supervision” too literally. Representatives asked how the language would apply in situations where parents must leave older children alone for work or where lack of resources contributes to malnutrition; Gustafson responded that investigators and courts would evaluate circumstances and the child’s age and needs.

Committee action: After discussion, the committee returned SB 1246 with a due-pass recommendation. The roll call recorded 11 ayes and 1 nay. Members who spoke during the hearing urged sponsors to consider tightening definitions, especially of “supervision,” before further action on the floor.

Details and next steps: The Department of Child Safety said it does not intend to substantiate parents for poverty alone and supported the amendment to that effect. Lawmakers drawn to the bill’s intent said they nonetheless worry that plain language changes may invite unintended legal results without clarifying definitions or guardrails.","Senate Bill 1246, which would prevent poverty alone from being used to substantiate child neglect, was advanced by the House Health and Human Services Committee amid assurances from the Department of Child Safety and concerns from some lawmakers about vague language.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6302213,"Committee backs bill to limit midyear PBM formulary switches, require 60-day notice",693,77000,770000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415&start=77&end=770","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415/thumbnail_77000.jpg","/articles/6302213/Arizona/Committee-backs-bill-to-limit-midyear-PBM-formulary-switches-require-60-day-notice","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6302213-13de784a54be483ea5ff8bc60899c5ec/orig.mp4?Expires=1773620924&Signature=PSp1soGfcKPFp-gKnQxslWYdFzpUNw-kxX5XKBx-LYvCG7YheJMoTAbf6lmhxXokW3AaiwjKIUA6OVQ5OmtbGk33dkXdvC2RkB2oQFY1xweDpzwRBHaAPjsElopGnfQBgA-s7dflQfcHRRMiPNNmtln2SoR-dFhxsUcC2fuaffOuqudjNzv~6YVFZmwTRpcp9mWaTHHfjdfAdJ9JXHubiGt6IaiT34czEXFruorLRpOge748grhXevwYdMdVzfB3DRigS14UaPcbZChBXytNq5bVMs2Epnsab~pjsqNJYcEi1SC4KgsABhgrGrBW1fTC9nua9FLVDocFz5k049rE5w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona House Committee on Health and Human Services on a unanimous vote recommended passage of Senate Bill 1102, a measure that would restrict pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and insurers from limiting or excluding coverage of prescription drugs for covered individuals midplan year and would require at least 60 days’ written or electronic notice to affected patients and prescribing providers before such a formulary change.

The bill also establishes a formulary exception process and an exception route for covered individuals in future plan years under specified criteria.

Why it matters: Supporters said the measure addresses clinical disruptions when health plans or PBMs switch a patient’s biologic or specialty medication in the middle of a plan year. Helena Entfeld, a nurse practitioner specializing in gastroenterology, described severe outcomes she has seen in inflammatory bowel disease patients when their therapy is interrupted. “A flaring IBD patient might have 10 to 15 bowel movements per day, rapid weight loss, nutritional deficiencies, and if sick enough, require hospitalization, and even emergency surgery,” Entfeld told the committee, and said nonmedical switching can cause lapses in therapy and downstream harm.

Diane McAllister, representing the Independent Pharmacy Coalition and the Arizona Pharmacy Association, said the bill would keep “decisions between the health care provider and their patient when in the middle of the plan year” and prevent forced midyear switches when a drug was previously approved. McAllister cited stakeholder data she said shows switching is frequently harmful: “When the patients are forced to switch, 68 percent of the time they’re switched to a less effective drug. 60 percent of the time patients are leading to complications, which means hospitalizations, more testing, more doctors appointments,” she said.

Kelsey Lundy of Compass Strategies spoke in a neutral capacity on behalf of the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association. Lundy said stakeholders negotiated changes to reduce fiscal and operational impacts and argued that plans do not change formularies “willy nilly,” noting reasons such as manufacturer price changes and the availability of biosimilars. She told the committee that earlier fiscal estimates for the state health plan were reduced after stakeholder work.

Patient testimony came from Mara Crosson, a resident and multiple sclerosis patient, who said midyear formulary changes delayed her care and led to additional illness and health complications.

Committee action: After public testimony, Vice Chair Heap moved that the committee return SB 1102 with a due-pass recommendation. The roll call recorded 12 ayes, 0 nays; the committee gave the bill a due-pass recommendation.

Details and next steps: The bill text requires notice to patients and prescribers at least 60 days prior to a formulary change that limits or excludes coverage, creates an exception process, and contains limited criteria for maintaining a prior-authorized drug into a subsequent plan year through an exception. The committee did not adopt additional amendments on the record during the hearing.","The Arizona House Committee on Health and Human Services on a unanimous vote recommended passage of Senate Bill 1102, which would limit midplan-year formulary exclusions by pharmacy benefit managers and require 60 days' notice to affected patients and prescribers.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6302206,"Panel advances bill banning nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries within 500 feet of child-care and preschool facilities",278,1434000,1712000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415&start=1434&end=1712","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2482192-7061ab20dd1f8a63afb8d87b4e4f3415/thumbnail_1434000.jpg","/articles/6302206/Arizona/Panel-advances-bill-banning-nonprofit-medical-marijuana-dispensaries-within-500-feet-of-child-care-and-preschool-facilities","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6302206-465f77f9f110fa42213688403c6a9382/orig.mp4?Expires=1773620924&Signature=J5Mp2Sk6n~NLrz3FkXmAq5OrDwEkbEP3PyMe6wcUAs34ASoWu4hxsPfRHFq8p6OhhZo5yD~~VoNOmcuFYd1b2N7z0tUA00guNAxoLpJvGq37MaTgpKXhTWRJbNHC-yDgW5~KFgmhSs5H6AVNqRn0anL4WlOvb~-EIfjgIKl42I0DtG3k~RJ34qaoYj4UwuuIlEkZeSYj-wc4Gk6Oe4R5etLZlRZcv7AIRdhGXgiwOdyXu-n23yCIufkAK~ei6-dKf8ifIjMDslAzCayEYUnQeumxVURFSWivdRTZbaO5nQSldpVt11ZSQPUPKgWJUXzzTU~j0i5m~hbdFN5DGlV67g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 1105, which would bar nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries or cultivation sites from locating within 500 feet of a childcare facility or preschool provider, received a due-pass recommendation from the House Committee on Health and Human Services.

Sponsor remarks: Senator Shauna Bollick, sponsor of the bill and a state senator from District 2, told the committee the measure closes a drafting gap from the 2010 medical marijuana law that did not explicitly treat childcare and preschool programs as schools for the purposes of location restrictions. “I believe that the bill addresses some things that were missed whenever the medical marijuana was drafted back in 2010,” Bollick said.

Grandfathering and renewals: Committee members asked whether existing dispensaries would be grandfathered and how renewals would be treated. Bollick confirmed that dispensaries and cultivation sites operating before the bill’s effective date would be grandfathered and could renew; however, if a grandfathered location voluntarily closed, the sponsor said that location could not later reopen in that same place if it fell within the 500-foot buffer.

Committee action: Vice Chair Heap moved to return SB 1105 with a due-pass recommendation; the committee voted 12 ayes, 0 nays. No public witnesses registered to speak in opposition or support in the hearing room.

Details and next steps: The bill also includes a Proposition 105 clause and applies the 500-foot restriction prospectively to certificates and licenses issued after the general effective date. Committee members asked follow-up questions about pending litigation and renewal impacts; the sponsor said current locations would remain licensed but the restriction would apply to new authorizations and relocations.","Senate Bill 1105 would prohibit nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation sites from locating within 500 feet of childcare facilities or sites that provide preschool programs; current dispensaries would be grandfathered. Sponsor said the change addresses a 2010 drafting gap. Committee voted 12-0 to return the bill with a due-pass","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Medical board opposes one-year complaint deadline bill; committee holds measure for now

Committee backs bill to add Duchenne muscular dystrophy to Arizona newborn screening panel

Committee advances bill saying poverty alone cannot be treated as child neglect, members voice concerns about vague language

Committee backs bill to limit midyear PBM formulary switches, require 60-day notice

Panel advances bill banning nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries within 500 feet of child-care and preschool facilities