[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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],{"_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",6190483,"mediaKeyId","5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789","parentId",5049031,"title","Committee recommends SB1470 in proper form while flagging voter-protection ambiguity on enrollment freeze","audioSeconds",152,"startMs",308000,"endMs",460000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789&start=308&end=460","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789/thumbnail_308000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6190483/Arizona/Committee-recommends-SB1470-in-proper-form-while-flagging-voter-protection-ambiguity-on-enrollment-freeze","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6190483-592d92d539ca5e86ddf7b2ab178ca591/orig.mp4?Expires=1773709349&Signature=ovV6yhzNC2pVbH5KhsH3THi~90P-Qm0fSYoIM4VmVMBu3TLYKdvDc~V72SQ4osB5pR5HD44f05E4txmLQYUctMJg-NaGvnec3ka3mC1Sv3whA8S8K3SvLuNs5gPM9VLMm4Nv~a6vK-WeT~Zr0tWSG1rjFk~aV4bKiANpKyZwMghPMj0HJnLAovH-PbUMNuzRi6sbHanFYGWp00AGnJpQOcUuGhSKZd6OCTf2B7p00GYvb4371O3ACwHh6R1Vmx6EcPhsc-8MGdKjx3kAptq2TI3gWf9j~LDVxGrh77zVCfMBSTdzRKfoaaUric5MUjNe64qTuAtZ-icotLpN20ikCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Arizona Legislature","date","2025-06-18T00:00:00Z","article","The Arizona Senate Rules Committee recommended Senate Bill 1470 is constitutional and in proper form after the rules attorney said it is unclear whether the measure must satisfy voter-protection requirements tied to Proposition 204 and ARS 36-2901.01.

The rules attorney described the strike-everything amendment as addressing access by creating a reduction in appropriations from the state general fund that would result in a freeze on enrollment for individuals without dependent children who are otherwise eligible under ARS 36-2901.01, which was enacted by the voters as Proposition 204. The attorney said the committee applied a VPA review and recounted a 2011 Arizona Court of Appeals case in which a budget reduction and an enrollment freeze were at issue. In that case, the court held the supplemental funding provision in Proposition 204 was not itself an appropriation and characterized whether the legislature had used other funding sources as a nonjudicial political question, limiting the court's ability to resolve the VPA issue. The attorney summarized, \"we do not think it's clear whether this bill needs to meet the VPA requirements,\" and stated the bill \"is constitutional and in proper form.\"

Vice Chairman Carter moved that SB1470 is constitutional and in proper form. The committee recorded the following votes: Representative Carbone (Aye); Representative De Los Santos (Nay); Representative Mathis (Nay); Speaker Montenegro (Aye); Representative Willoughby (Aye); Vice Chairman Carter (Aye); Chairman Hendricks (Aye). The clerk reported the tally as five ayes, two nays, and one absent. The committee recommended the bill move forward as constitutional and in proper form.

The committee's discussion emphasized legal uncertainty about whether reductions in appropriations that lead to enrollment freezes implicate the voter-protection analysis; no formal amendments or staff directions were noted in the committee record.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","06/18/2025 - House Rules","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 1470, which would freeze enrollment for childless adults under ARS 36-2901.01 by reducing general-fund appropriations, was recommended as constitutional and in proper form; the rules attorney said it is unclear whether the bill must meet voter-protection requirements tied to Proposition 204.","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},6190488,"Rules committee clears SB1299 despite voter-intent questions over $2.5 million transfer",156,168000,324000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789&start=168&end=324","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789/thumbnail_168000.jpg","/articles/6190488/Arizona/Rules-committee-clears-SB1299-despite-voter-intent-questions-over-25-million-transfer","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6190488-11475fa657e17aa1d9c5a62466da9b5e/orig.mp4?Expires=1773709349&Signature=apvlerqD2Jrg5ovmfhTInr~c7JoYC3jdC68VK2-Zjp53lS5BG1tLn73MgA5HDxDvG92I6IqCkqKNeDuNAQVflaZ3S7DurOb4bzEHhCE5HJEdISUPHYJMsn2oBbub8BY~Bqu4UNP1RCh0tfPYaQitYgu8kzV6UTug6~CO12mEQZJ0ce-foyZP0FIcNLSsZbNywACbaBO~zQDmZmC8S9yESFmimAiLmpNgoXiumE1V54IiKSAIq3C9GqWNBj0Bs3BcJ9Sz3Ewi9GOykepWt95Lwz~9YsoGuAdxUL6-Kxo6nh6WNnMXro1xSXgIAVnR~BYRAhCzDX2GomDDO89NmgBisQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona Senate Rules Committee recommended Senate Bill 1299 is constitutional and in proper form, but the committee's attorney warned that the bill may raise issues under the state's voter-protection analysis because it would transfer $2,500,000 from the Smart and Safe Fund to a Department of Public Safety (DPS) administered enforcement fund for recreational marijuana regulations.

The rules attorney summarized the measure and explained the committee applied a VPA (voter-protection) analysis because recreational-marijuana legalization was voter-approved. The attorney said the fund \"establishes the safe enforcement fund under the administration of DPS to enforce the recreational marijuana laws,\" and added that \"we can certainly see an argument that the voters intended to legalize recreational marijuana subject to regulations and, therefore, the enforcement of those regulations.\" The attorney cautioned, however, that transferring $2,500,000 from the Smart and Safe Fund to a DPS-administered fund \"could be problematic\" because the Smart and Safe Act contains a statutory distribution scheme that does not include DPS.

The attorney said whether the transfer furthers the purpose of the Smart and Safe Act depends on facts that would need to be developed in court and could implicate whether the voters' distribution scheme is being altered. The attorney concluded that \"the bill is otherwise in proper form.\"

Vice Chairman Carter moved that SB1299 is constitutional and in proper form. The committee recorded the following votes: Representative Carbone (Aye); Representative De Los Santos (Nay); Representative Mathis (Nay); Speaker Montenegro (Aye); Representative Willoughby (Aye); Vice Chairman Carter (Aye); Chairman Hendricks (Aye). The clerk reported the tally as five ayes, two nays, and one absent. The committee recommended the bill move forward as constitutional and in proper form.

The committee\u0000discussion focused on whether the proposed transfer of funds respects the voter-approved distribution scheme for Smart and Safe monies; the rules attorney said resolution of that question could require factual development in litigation. No amendments or staff directions were recorded during committee consideration.","The committee recommended SB1299 is constitutional and in proper form while the rules attorney flagged a VPA analysis and concerns that a $2.5 million transfer from the Smart and Safe Fund to a DPS-administered enforcement fund could conflict with the voter-approved distribution scheme.",{"_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},6190491,"Senate Rules Committee finds SB1082 in proper form amid federal preemption concerns",177,12000,189000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789&start=12&end=189","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5049031-44147d7eb83b3de11d27b6ac7f706789/thumbnail_12000.jpg","/articles/6190491/Arizona/Senate-Rules-Committee-finds-SB1082-in-proper-form-amid-federal-preemption-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6190491-a4f52e512a565be6bc4d6b014edb1e5c/orig.mp4?Expires=1773709349&Signature=GqO0ZpTLo4oH6srrAxAqQOJwnuc4XYJXIJDWv10m5m46giiP0m4ZOYlvMmJL5nQR~tf43eDPY31-cLwbPGu4yEVCnacrzNz1UDqn8BvRzTlvWMAu4irLOpVXwkwLEKLslr9dASkqISi6NUPNe3zWoCuj-bUZSyhGfx1ky8LwtmdMl0MejSDm~Kp1fKI3rKarK2zATUu~lypazvblI2TzimagZM3kMFDwPC4KLOWPGkAPImPlx6QTSeO5qwdA3zjIDt964y9Wre8F0ckjsBVM3ubBufYLJN94OHKx5NfrhhvI7Busx8cdco-2vdFBvbIxvE7B2sThsR46~a6LUUV6iQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Arizona Senate Rules Committee recommended Senate Bill 1082 is constitutional and in proper form after the rules attorney raised concerns that the measure, which would limit certain foreign principals\u0000from acquiring substantial interests in Arizona real property, could conflict with federal law.

The rules attorney told the committee that the strike-everything amendment \"prohibits a foreign principal from a designated country to purchase, own, acquire, or have a substantial interest in real property in the state, subject to some exceptions,\" and warned \"there's always a possibility of federal law conflict because Congress and the president are empowered to make rules relating to the relations between The United States and foreign countries.\" The attorney concluded, \"the bill is in proper form.\"

The attorney noted a specific federal statute, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018, as a potential source of preemption and said a recent Eleventh Circuit decision challenging a state law that restricted property ownership by Chinese nationals resulted in an injunction. The attorney also raised equal-protection concerns about whether language that singles out nationals of particular countries could discriminate on the basis of national origin. \"So far, we have no case law in the Ninth Circuit, and the bill is in proper form,\" the attorney said.

Vice Chairman Carter moved the committee recommendation that SB1082 is constitutional and in proper form. The committee recorded the following votes: Representative Carbone (Aye); Representative De Los Santos (Nay); Representative Mathis (Nay); Speaker Montenegro (Aye); Representative Willoughby (Aye); Vice Chairman Carter (Aye); Chairman Hendricks (Aye). The clerk reported the tally as five ayes, two nays, and one absent. The motion carried and the committee reported the bill as constitutional and in proper form.

The committee\u0000discussion focused on federal preemption risk and equal-protection questions; no formal directions to staff or amendments were recorded during the committee's consideration. The committee proceeded next to other bills on the agenda.","The Arizona Senate Rules Committee recommended Senate Bill 1082 is constitutional and in proper form while the committee\nttorney flagged possible conflicts with federal law and equal-protection questions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee recommends SB1470 in proper form while flagging voter-protection ambiguity on enrollment freeze

Rules committee clears SB1299 despite voter-intent questions over $2.5 million transfer

Senate Rules Committee finds SB1082 in proper form amid federal preemption concerns