Arizona lawmakers have a unique responsibility among their counterparts in other Colorado River states to vote on interstate deals on the river.
As we’ve written before, this probably means that lawmakers will have to come together in a special session to vote on any new Colorado River agreements. In all likelihood, this special session would be called by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has the power to dictate exactly what kinds of bills lawmakers would consider in such a scenario.
Specifically, lawmakers would be voting on a deal between the three Lower Colorado River Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada that spreads expected cuts among the states, largely in service of users in central Arizona who would otherwise be first in line for shortages.
But this week, Republican legislative leadership raised a problem with that plan.
They haven’t actually seen what they’re supposed to be voting on.
“For the Legislature to approve an agreement, it must know its specific terms and conditions,” House Speaker Steve Montenegro, Senate President Warren Petersen and other legislative Republicans wrote in a letter on Monday to the executive. “So far, the details of the proposed ‘Lower Basin Plan’ … have only outlined the plan at a high level.”
The letter Republican lawmakers sent to Hobbs. Click to read the whole thing.
And until lawmakers get the details of the agreement — elements of which we’ve discussed here and here — there’s nothing to vote on, they said.
“Any consequences resulting from the failure to adequately keep this body and the public apprised of potential or proposed terms (whether from Arizona, California, Nevada, or any other party) or resulting from the inclusion of terms that are contrary to the future water security or affordability of our state, will be your responsibility,” they wrote to Hobbs and Arizona Department of Water Resources head Tom Buschatzke.
So, the lawmakers requested essentially all drafts, documents and communications related to the three-state deal from the executive with a deadline of Thursday at 5 p.m. And they asked for live updates on the process in the future.
“If California or Nevada propose a redline, we want to see it,” they wrote. “If Arizona suggests a term or condition, we want to know what it is. These details are too important to withhold from the Legislature, which will ultimately be asked to approve them. We hope you agree.”
Now, Hobbs hasn’t actually formally requested lawmakers convene in a special session, although she has discussed it publicly, emphasizing her belief that the session needs to be as narrowly tailored as possible to avoid legislative distractions.
Nevertheless, we think the letter raises some interesting points, if not necessarily by design.
For one, Colorado River management is a mysterious science (or art?) that is already hard to grasp for normal people. It is made more mysterious by the fact that the most significant talks between states, the feds and large water users occur behind closed doors.
As the lawmakers point out, we’ve seen narrative descriptions of this not-yet-finalized three-state deal, but not the working text of a deal itself.
That’s a scary thing, especially when the three-state deal is being presented as the way Arizona will weather the kind of cuts the federal government is contemplating.
But, again, nobody claims the three-state deal is finalized.
And of course, if you thought this process wouldn’t be infected by partisan, legislative politics, you thought wrong.
In this case, we see Republican lawmakers criticizing Hobbs and Buschatzke for providing inadequate detail on a deal that apparently still isn’t finalized and thus isn’t ready to be presented to lawmakers, at least under the logic of the executive.
Lawmakers can certainly take issue with the lack of detail, and rightly so, but we imagine they would chafe if other members of the public asked them for every draft of their top piece of legislation, every communication related to it, and live updates on any future amendments and decisions. (Not that we wouldn’t ask.)
It’s not the first time a GOP lawmaker has used river negotiations as an outlet to attack Hobbs, either.
In late July, when the scope of cuts that the federal government wanted to implement became clear, Scottsdale Republican Rep. Alex Kolodin — someone with some strongly held, somewhat unorthodox beliefs about water — accused her of failing to defend the state’s interests.
“California protected its priority. Other states negotiated aggressively. Katie Hobbs failed to secure Arizona’s water and failed to protect Arizona citizens,” Kolodin wrote in a press release. “Arizonans deserve leaders who understand that water is life. Katie Hobbs clearly does not.”
You can’t fault politicians for acting politically, but this criticism leaves out the fact that under the three-state deal — at least in theory — California would actually agree to give up water before its turn in the priority line in order for Arizona to take less significant cuts.
Still, that leads us back to the original point: When people don’t know what’s going on with something as important as their water supply, they will doubtlessly speculate.
And we’re talking about elected officials here — if they’re struggling to understand the deal, imagine how in the dark your average worker or parent might be.
Last week, we introduced you to the newest member of the Agenda family: the Agendowl.
He’s already settled in pretty well around here. But he’s eagerly waiting to be unleashed on an Agenda T-shirt.
If eight more of you free readers upgrade to a paid subscription by Friday, we’ll start printing shirts. (And you new subscribers will get one as a bonus!)
He’s also getting a little tired of answering to “Agendowl.”
So today, we’re handing it over to you readers.
Submit your best name with the button below. We’ll pick our favorites, then put the finalists to a vote to decide what we’ll call this little guy for good.
Keep calm and mail on: Secretary of State Adrian Fontes reassured voters they can continue to vote by mail after the U.S. Supreme Court removed a legal roadblock to President Donald Trump’s executive order to change mail-in ballot rules, per the Capitol Times’ Carsten Oyer. Trump directed the U.S. Postal Service in March to develop the new ballot rules, including requiring the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of eligible U.S. citizen voters for state election officials. Attorney General Kris Mayes joined 22 other states in suing to stop the order, but the Supreme Court didn’t rule on whether it was legal — only that a lower court lacked jurisdiction to block it. There’s still a separate injunction on the executive order thanks to a lawsuit by the League of Women Voters.
Council pay probe: Glendale city officials are resisting Mayes’ investigation into whether the city improperly increased city council members’ pay without voter approval, the Republic’s Elena Santa Cruz reports. The dispute centers on a city policy that lets council members collect a $900 monthly stipend plus a vehicle allowance, worth a combined $16,000 a year. Former (and now reinstated, pending appeal) Council member Lupe Conchas alleged his colleagues tried to expel him for criticizing the policy, and now, City Attorney Michael Bailey told the Attorney General’s Office it doesn’t have authority to investigate the city’s pay plan.
What could go wrong?: Arizona’s own Taser maker, Axon, says it’s building AI tools to prevent police from misusing license plate reader data, FOX10’s Steve Nielsen reports. Several Arizona law enforcement agencies have canceled or scaled back their Flock contracts amid revelations that officers used the system for personal purposes. Axon, which makes plenty of police surveillance technology of its own, is hoping its slightly less sullied reputation can help it capitalize on Flock’s troubles.
Rental market renegades: Mayes announced that she and four counterparts from other states reached a settlement with apartment-listing websites Zillow and Redfin for an alleged anticompetitive scheme, 12News’ Gabe Trujillo reports. According to prosecutors, Zillow paid Redfin $100 million in 2025 for the latter to stop advertising multifamily rental units and, instead, refer customers to Zillow. The two companies are blocked from making any such deals in the future and will pay $2 million to a coalition of five states and the Federal Trade Commission.
We don’t have $100 million to spend on an anticompetitive scheme, but you can help us afford rent by becoming a paid subscriber.
Cops <3 Amish: A second law enforcement union has endorsed Democrat Amish Shah over Republican and former NFL kicker Jay Feely in the race to represent Scottsdale and Phoenix in Congress, Zach Buchanan reports for Axios. The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Deputies Law Enforcement Association said the endorsement was largely based on the union’s “long-standing history” of working with Shah at the Arizona Legislature and not out of concern about Feely. Last week, Shah was also endorsed by the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Arizona, and the two nods from cops are making it more difficult for Republicans to paint him as an anti-police radical.
It looks like Republican candidate for Arizona public schools superintendent Kimberly Yee just learned a lesson, to paraphrase a “Tropic Thunder” line: You never go full MAGA.
The video of Yee spouting nonsense about Arizona public schools putting kitty litter boxes in classrooms for students who “identify as cats” — which we were laughing at earlier this week — has now been taken down.
It’s not the first time that a notable Republican has shown an outsized fascination with people identifying as cats.
Back in February, Senate President and attorney general candidate Warren Petersen took to the Senate floor to tell his colleagues:
“I’m a cat! I’m a cat, everybody. I’m gonna take whiskers, I’m gonna glue them on to my face. I’m gonna take claws and glue them on to my toenails. And I’m gonna wear a furry cat coat. I’m a cat.”1
1 Yes, we did mock up what Petersen would look like as a cat. Thanks for asking!