On Tuesday, Petersen issued a statement touting the importance of the Senate Committee for Director Nominations, which he said is ensuring that agency directors nominated by Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, are qualified.
Petersen told the Arizona Mirror via email that the two situations did not make for an apples-to-apples comparison.
“The difference is that the confirmation process on director nominees exists to further the system of checks and balances,” he said. “The Legislature amending the way the Legislature makes board selections has nothing to do with separation of powers or checks and balances. The (current) qualifications are so narrow that they may eliminate more qualified individuals.”
The Director Nominations Committee, which Petersen created in 2023 specifically to vet Hobbs’ director nominees, has held a series of contentious and combative nomination hearings since then. A number of Hobbs’ choices to head up state agencies have faced intense partisan questioning of their past political activity and demands that they explain their views on culture war issues far outside the scope of their jobs.
Petersen’s proposal, which already passed through the Senate, also on a party-line vote, will head back to that chamber for final approval after being amended in the House before it’s sent to Hobbs to either sign or veto it.
Senate Bill 1649 eliminates requirements for entities such as special taxing districts, the Arizona Water Protection Fund Commission and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to have specific expertise or interest in the issues that they govern.
For instance, it removes the requirement that legislative appointees to the Economic Estimates Commission be knowledgeable about economics and that appointees to the Arizona Water Protection Fund Commission “have demonstrated an interest in natural resources” — and that they represent geographically diverse areas of the state.
It also throws out a requirement for legislators appointed to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to be selected “based on their understanding of and interest in legislative audit oversight functions.”
Democratic Sen. Lauren Kuby, of Tempe, said during a March 6 debate on the Senate floor that, as a former Tempe City Council member who voted on board appointments, she sympathized with the struggle to find willing and qualified applicants.
“I’m really worried about the wholesale removal of expertise from 11 different boards and commissions,” she said.
Kuby is a member of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, which makes recommendations to the Legislature on all facets of the complicated state budget.
“It’s really not clear to me what this bill is trying to accomplish,” she said.
Petersen told the House Government Committee on March 26 that it was a “very straightforward” bill, the same way that Sen. Jake Hoffman described it in the Senate Government Committee meeting on Feb. 19.
“This just simply opens it up so that we have more applicants available for these appointments to boards and commissions,” Petersen said, adding that it’s been difficult to find applicants who meet all the qualifications laid out in statute, but that “we’ve been able to find people that are otherwise qualified for these positions.”
House Government Committee Chairman Walt Blackman initially voted against Petersen’s proposal on March 26, but after a recess during which Blackman said they “worked out some legal issues, so we don’t end up in jail,” he voted to approve the bill.
During an April 1 Republican Caucus meeting, Blackman said that he wasn’t sure if Senate Bill 1649 would pass a vote of the full House, given that there were a lot of questions about it.
Blackman never explained his concerns about the bill and did not respond to requests for comment, but he ultimately voted to approve the proposal on May 5.
Between the Government Committee hearing on March 26 and the May 5 vote, Petersen’s bill was amended to remove proposed changes to qualification requirements for appointees to the Arizona Commerce Authority. The ACA is an economic development organization that was accused by Attorney General Kris Mayes last year of violating the Arizona Constitution’s gift clause by hosting forums that amounted to pricey gifts to the CEOs who attended them.
During an April 16 floor debate, after SB1649 had been amended, Democratic Rep. Nancy Gutierrez, of Tucson, called the proposal “dangerous.”
“I just want to point out that this takes away that the appointees have to have any kind of expertise or knowledge of the board that they are sitting on,” she said. “This sets Arizona up to have boards and commissions with people who literally have nothing to do with them.”
During the same discussion, Democratic Rep. Betty Villegas, also of Tucson, said she was confused about whether Republicans wanted qualified people on the job or not, referencing a push from legislative Republicans this year to ban diversity, equity and inclusion in hiring, to be replaced with a focus on “merit.”
“I’ve been on plenty of commissions and boards where I was qualified, and when you have people that are not qualified, it really hurts moving forward on your goals,” she said.
