Arizona House of Representatives Committee on Commerce Meeting Minutes and Agenda

Summary

Minutes and attachments of the Arizona House of Representatives Committee on Commerce regular meeting of Tuesday, February 15, 2022, in the Fifty-fifth Legislature, Second Regular Session, chaired by Mr. Weninger. The report records the members present and the committee action on each bill, including HB2200, which was amended with a strike-everything amendment on digital application distribution platforms by a vote of 5-3-2-0, and HB2700, which was held. Attachments include the revised meeting agenda and the Request to Speak report listing those registered for or against bills, with comments on the HB2200 striker. The document closes with proposed amendments to H.B. 2485 on sealed eviction records and roll call votes on HB 2485 and HB 2700.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE

Report of Regular Meeting
Tuesday, February 15, 2022

House Hearing Room 3 -- 2:00 P.M.

Convened 2:22 P.M.
Adjourned 7:58 P.M.

Members Present

Mr. Carter

Mr, Chavez

Mr. Cook

Mr. Espinoza

Mr. Kaiser

Mrs. Liguori

Mr. Meza

Mr. Wilmeth

Mr. Chaplik, Vice-Chairman
Mr. Weninger, Chairman

Agenda
Original Agenda — Attachment 1

Request to Speak
Report — Attachment 2

Committee Attendance
Report — Attachment 3

Committee Action

Members Absent

Vote
10-0-0-0
9-1-0-0
10-0-0-0
6-4-0-0
8-2-0-0
8-1-1-0
8-2-0-0

Bill Action
HB2694 = DP
HB2724 DP
HB2599 DPA
HB2656 DPA
HB2657. DPA
HB2509 DPA
HB2822 DP
HB2204 DPA/SE
HB2203. DPA/SE
HB2690 = DP
HB2202 DPA
HB2678 DP
HCR2031 DP
HB2234 =DP

9-1-0-0
10-0-0-0
10-0-0-0
10-0-0-0
8-0-2-0
6-4-0-0
10-0-0-0

MINUTES RECEIVED
CHIEF CLERK'S OFFICE

Q-18- 2Z-

Attachments
4,5

6,7

8, 9, 10

11, 12, 13, 14
15, 16, 17
18, 19, 20
21, 22

23, 24, 25
26, 27, 28
29, 30

31, 32, 33
34, 35

36, 37

38, 39, 40

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE

February 15, 2022
HB2698 DP 10-0-0-0 41,42

HB2612 DP 10-0-0-0 43,44
HB2391 DPA/SE 10-0-0-0 45, 46,47
HB2103. DP 10-0-0-0 48, 49
HB2579 DPA 10-0-0-0 50, 51,52
HB2747 DPA 10-0-0-0 53, 54,55
HB2685 DP 7-2-0-1 56,57, 58
HB2200  DPA/SE 5-3-2-0 59, 60, 61
HB2714. DP 8-0-2-0 62,63
HB2120 DP 9-0-0-1 64, 65
HB2121. DPA 9-0-0-1 66, 67, 68
HB2731 DP 10-0-0-0 69, 70
HB2679 DP 10-0-0-0 71,72
HB2484. DP 10-0-0-0 73,74
HB2485 DPA 9-1-0-0 75, 76,77
HB2700 HELD 78

\ heals Dead in if

Jacquel ifle Denlinger, Committee Secretary
February 18, 2022

(Original attachments on file in the Office of the Chief Clerk; video archives available at http:/Avww.azleg.gov)

ennvenned ° 2: Ceyn

REVISED - 2/11/22 REVISED - 2/11/22 REVISED - 2/1 1/22

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE

DATE Tuesday, February 15, 2022 ROOM HHR3 TIME 2:00 P.M.

Members of the public may access a livestream of the meeting here:
https://www.azleg.gov/videoplayer/?clientID=6361 162879&eventID=202202 1074

Members:
Mr. Carter Mr. Kaiser Mr. Wilmeth
Mr. Chavez Mrs, Liguori Mr. Chaplik, Vice-Chairman
Mr. Cook Mr. Meza Mr. Weninger, Chairman
Mr. Espinoza
Bills Short Title Strike Everything Title
H 03 D trademarks; service marks; trade names
8) ooo CY
COM, RULES
HB2120 injury reports; medical treatment
OP) QE tain
aM, RULES
HB2121 » P A workers' compensation; medical-only loss
3-0-0-] (Kaiser)
COM, RULES
**1B2200 da nse Ke technical correction; municipal platting S/E: digital application distribution platforms;
(Kaiser) prohibitions

S- 3~2-0 com, RULES

HB2202 DP A industrial commission; fee schedule; notice
(Weninger)

= 4
nO 9 COM, RULES

Page 1 of 4

Attachment (
Bills Short Title

- technical correction; cosmetology schools;

HB2203 2G
G DPA [6 “__ contracts
~ 19-0 0 0 (Weninger)
COM, RULES

**HB2204 _- technical correction; wage board; powers
DPA se eevee

(3 ) - (Weninger)
Y-I-0-9 COM, RULES

*HB2234 DP
———— (Kaiser: Mesnard)
ib-O-0 COM, RULES

i) DPA Ks a technical correction; bingo license; transfer
} G.-C) (Dunn)

COM, RULES

forcible entry; detainer; filing fee
(Wilmeth: Weninger)
COM, RULES

lene ayy
% 16-0 -0-O

ri

H eviction dismissal; sealed records

B2485_.
DPA
(Wilmeth: Blackman, Weninger)
4-0-0

COM, RULES

*HB2509 DP. racing; boxing; transfer; gaming commission.
() TPT (Biasiucci)

COM held 0-0-0-0-0, RULES

residential zoning; park model trailers
(Cook: Carter)
COM, RULES

os e DPA
10-6-0-9

HB2599 DP A administrative hearings; GRRC

0-0 -O-O (Grantham)

COM, RULES

occupational regulation

HB26 12 DO
up 2 Qe)
COM, RULES
certain affiliations; banks; prohibition
(Hoffinan: Biasiucci, Blackman, et al)
COM, RULES

HB2656 DPA
S-0-0

Page 2 of 4

vacation rentals; short-term rentals; enforcement.

Strike Everything Title

S/E: special purpose banks; comparable; rights

“a

S/E: taxation; subtraction; virtual currency

S/E: video services providers; enforcement;
jurisdiction
Bilts Short Title Strike Everything Title

HB2657 DP A forced labor; manufactured goods
S (Hoffman: Biasiucci, Blackman, et al)

COM, RULES

e)

+ B-20H

HB2678 VP state broadband office
{5-26 (Cobb)

COM, RULES
1B2679 employment discrimination; sexual harassment;
DP definition
19-0-~04) (Wilmeth)
COM, RULES

HB2685 DP artificial intelligence; requirements
GH) —-—— (Carroll)
7-7O- |

COM, RULES

HB2690 cybersecurity risk; insurance
DP a
t r@) Se (Weninger)

lyO-Q-
v9 8 COM, RULES

HB2694 D P department of real estate; fees

Cr) ray A (Toma)
0-0-0 0 COM, RULES

HB2698 insurance; assignment of benefits
268 DP

——$_—— (Martinez)
2) 195-0-0 $
9 COM, RULES

condominiums; planned communities; amendmentsS/E; condominiums; amendments; planned

HB2700 HE
(Carter: Biasiucci, Burges, et al) communities
COM, RULES
HB2714 DP office of tourism; continuation
——.—_ (Kaiser)
=h-?) -
3 du Ocom, RULES

assisted living; distance requirements; prohibition

HB2724
_ iP (Toma)

4-1 “Qcon, RULES

regulatory sandbox; expansion

HB27331 =}
cae DP (Kaiser)
~ —-9-~0-0 COM, RULES

Page 3 of 4
Bills Short Title Strike Everything Title

HB2747 D p wholesale real estate buyers; disclosure
10-0 -6-0 (Espinoza: Toma)
COM, RULES
HB2822 De personal property; additional depreciation

6 (Weninger)
COM, RULES

HCR2031 be employee benefits; compensation; state preemption
{2 (Cobb)

ie | a
6-4-0-0

2-6

COM, RULES
*% If printed, first read and assigned
* On previous agenda

ORDER OF BILLS TO BE SET BY THE CHAIRMAN

DF
02/11/2022

People with disabilities may request reasonable accommodations such as interpreters, alternative formats, or
assistance with physical accessibility. If you require accommodations, please contact the Chief Clerk's Office at
(602) 926-3032 or through Arizona Relay Service 7-1-1.

Page 4 of 4

Information Registered on the Request to Speak System

House Commerce (2/15/2022)

HB2103, trademarks; service marks; trade names

Support:
Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Ezra Grace, representing self

HB2120, injury reports: medical treatment

Support:
Spencer Kamps, HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL AZ; Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE; Courtney Coolidge, AZ CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Ezra Grace, representing self; Wark Kendall,

COPPERPOINT INSURANCE COMPANY

HB2121, workers' compensation; medical-only loss

Support:
Spencer Kamps, HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL AZ; Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE; Courtney Coolidge, AZ CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Ezra Grace, representing self; Mark Kendall,

COPPERPOINT INSURANCE COMPANY

HB2200, technical correction; municipal platting

Testified in support:
Ryan O'Daniel, MATCH GROUP

Testified as opposed:
Steven Greenhut, R STREET INSTITUTE; Erik Neuenschwander, representing self; Jennifer Huddleston, NETCHOICE;

Mike Foulkes, representing self

Support:
Diane £. Brown, AZ PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP (AZ PIRG); Vignesh Ganapathy, MATCH GROUP; Kelsey

Lundy, MATCH GROUP

Neutral:
Thea Chalow, representing self

Attachment 2.
Oppose:

Vanessa Goldberg, representing self; Ellen Bodow, representing self; kathleen mayer, representing self; Dave Long,
representing self; Steve Ramos, representing self; Mary Pradelt, representing self; Denise Link, PhD, WHNP,
representing self; Oris Friesen, representing self; Kathleen Noble, representing self; Janet Larkin, representing self;
Steven Linder, representing self; Rebecca Smith Gross, representing self; marilyn duerbeck, representing self;
Henne Queisser, representing self; Maria Salvucci, representing self; Kevin Brown, representing self; Judith Keagy,
representing self; Eve Shapiro, representing self; Mary Ann Graffagnino, representing self; Beatriz Urrea,
representing self; Paul Benz, representing self; DOUG ARNOLD, representing self; Claudia Bloom, representing self;
Karen Syversen, representing self; Sallie Kladnik, representing self; Elizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo, representing self;
Cynthia Couture, representing self; Sherrilynn James, representing self; Kathleen Pettycrew, representing self;
Jenise Porter, representing self; Donita Ramos, representing self; Ruthanna Battilana, representing self; Margaret
Baca, representing self; Bryna Koch, representing self; Mary Grove, representing self; Catherine Sigmon,
representing self; SUSAN ARNOLD, representing self; Margrit McIntosh, representing self; Cathleen Bohniein,
representing self; Elizabeth Kelchner, representing self; Katherine Doman Sheydayi, representing self; Elizabeth
Schauer, representing self; Gail Kamaras, representing self; Charlie Silver, representing self; Barbara Kain,
representing self; Ruth Lambert, representing self; Barbara Oliver, representing self; Barbara Hutchinson,
representing self; Christine Whitley, representing self; Marylynne Shroyer, representing self; Susan Morris,
representing self; Brent Gibbs, representing self; Alexei Sheydayl, representing self; Robin LaVoie, representing
self; Rebecca Olsen McHood, representing self; Susan Engelhard, representing self; Julie Golding, representing self;
Kristin Roberts, representing self; Christine Keitges, representing self; Jackie Rich, representing self; Sarah Fanning,
representing self; Lawrence Peters, representing self; Suzanne Berger, representing self; Linda Reichert,
representing self; Linda Edwards, representing self; Kathy Fraser, representing self; Kimberlee McClure,
representing self; Judy Greene, representing self; Jeri Dow, representing self; Angela J. Miller, representing self;
Mary Martiniak, representing self; Andrew Flach, representing self; Rachel Rulmyr, representing self; Ellen M.
Ferreira, representing self; Nelson Morgan, representing self; Margaret Winchell, representing self; Kathleen
Woessner, representing self; Ann Strine, representing self; Linda Cooke, representing self; Steve Gorman-
Hackstadt, representing self; Susan Phelps, representing self; David Patchen, representing self; Nancy Hancock,
representing self; Glenda Wood, representing self; Barbara Hollway, representing self; Sharon Ehrlich, representing
self; Sheila Green, representing self; Toby Friedman, representing self; Lisa Maczura, representing self; Kathleen
Dubbs, representing self; Robert Larson, representing self; Barbara Larson, representing self; Marilyn Coyle,
representing self; Nancy Santori, representing self; Edna Weigel, representing self; George Ehrlich, representing
self; Jacqueline deSa, representing self; Jeannine Reno, representing self; Margaret Adams , representing self;
Linda Julson, representing self; Teresa Akrish, representing self; Francis Copple, representing self; Linda Guarino,
representing self; John Gleason, representing self; Penny Boone, representing self; Mariette Francis, representing
self; Jo Ann Caruthers, representing self; Christine McLachlan-Comer, representing self; Karolyn Switzer,
representing self; Kirstin Woodburne, representing self; Mary Ellen Beaurain, representing self; Susan Ordway,
representing self; Anne Rohweder, representing self; Stephen Coyle, representing self; Dan Schwartzstein,
representing self; Janell Alewyn, representing self; William S. James, representing self; Virginia Kovatch,
representing self; Jean Meconi, representing self; CAROL R BLACKMAN, representing self; Dorothy Reed-inman,
representing self; Rebecca Haynes, representing self; Amy Gaiennie, representing self; Emily Norton, representing
self; Jutian Donahue, representing self; Diane Nevill, representing self; Kathleen Butler, representing self; Margaret
Lacey, representing self; Jan Perozeni Corbus, representing self; Kerrie Green, representing self; Jane Atkins,
representing self; Mary-Jeanne Fincher, representing self; Jeffrey Fortney, representing self; Mary Fortney,
representing self; Jessie Spalding, representing self; Frederick James, representing self; Amy Etzkorn, representing
self; Carly Mahimeister, representing self; Jennifer Chastain , representing self; DEBRA GORDON, representing self;
Jerrold Borchardt, representing self; Kim Hoover, representing self; Francine Saccio, representing self; Kathleen
Sauer, representing self; Cassandra Morano, representing self; Erin McCamish, representing self; Claudia Oreck-
Teplitsky, representing self; Bailey Spears, representing self; Linda Block, representing self; Claire Bickel,
representing self; Joan Murphy, representing self; Charles Turner, representing self; Dana Nicolson, representing
self; Karen Peterson, representing self; Jessica Kitterman, representing self; Denise San Angelo, representing self;
Diane Lings, representing self; Charlotte Lis, representing self; Lori Taniguchi, representing self; Julia Olson,
representing self; Marcia Tingley, representing self; Diane Leischow, representing self; Marilyn Murov,
representing self; Elizabeth Brauer, representing self; Anne Leota Hart, representing self; Pamela Thompson,
representing self; Paula Van Derven, representing self; Lisa Koenig, representing self; lrene Arango, representing
self; Gary Ezzell, representing self; Carol Garnett, representing self; Martha O'Connor, representing self; Jennifer
Dawson, representing self; Abby Brill, representing self; Leda DeVlieger, representing self; Allison Jackson,
representing self; Nancy Scharff, representing self; Amy Pedotto, representing self; Kathleen Martin, representing
self; Diane Klock, representing self; Brandy Reese, representing self; Caroline Anderson, representing self; Kathleen
Schanus-Gohl, representing self; Heather Schlemmer, representing self; Janet Johnson, representing self; Paula
Feely, representing self; James Stein, representing self; Margaret Owen, representing self; Kathfeen Collins,
representing self; Barbara Jones, representing self; Linda Ekstrum, representing self; Gayle Meredith, representing
self; Ralph Meredith, representing self; RITA DEPUYDT, representing self: Karen Huttenmeyer, representing self;
Alicia Vaughan, representing self; Sandy Coffey, representing self; Kelly Colvard-Waliter, representing self; Victoria
Wilson, representing self; John Babicz, representing self; Gary Townsend, representing self; Aaron Essif,
representing self; Vickey Finger, representing self; Paisley Rossetti, representing self; Karen Robbins, representing
self; Janet Senf, representing self; Julia Wills, representing self; Theresa Ryan, representing self; Loretta O'Connor,
representing self; Barbara Lynn Carpenter, representing self; Iris Adler, representing self; Paula Kaper, representing
self; Sue Thorne, representing self; David Williams, representing self; Kathleen O'Neill, representing self; Mary
Ganapol, representing self; Gail Prestera, representing self; Eileen Hollowell, representing self; William Yohey,
representing self; J Nicholas Prestera, representing self; GARY LEW OLIVER, representing self; Jill Anderson,
representing self; Sally Dooley, representing self; Teri Hollingsworth, representing self; Ann Sawyer, representing
self; Melissa Galarza, representing self; Catherine Hopkins, representing self; LaMista Schultz, representing self;
Gail Bird, representing self; Cynthia Wagner, representing self; Elizabeth Lyons, representing self; Teresa Neiberg,
representing self; Patricia Edelen, representing self; Greer Warren, representing self; Jacqueline Bauer,
representing self; Sherri Johnson, representing self; Elaine Downing, representing self; Courtney Coolidge, AZ
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Joseph Bihms, representing self; Nataly Reed, representing self; Susan Shapiro,
representing self; Sally Caruso, representing self; Karen DeLay, representing self; Kim Buckley, representing self;
Janie Smieszek, representing self; Patricia Brunner, representing self; Laura Libman, representing self; David Myers,
representing self; Genise Tomko, representing self; John Propster, representing self; Gabe Leadley, representing
self; Tina Kilcullen, representing self; Dieter Knecht, representing self; Carol Campbell, representing self; Sarah
Montgomery, representing self; Margaret Knecht, representing self; Dylan Hoffman, representing self; Susan
Collopy, representing self; JOHN FIENE, representing self; Patrick Hedger, representing self; Lisa Calderon,
representing self; Caleb Williamson, representing self; Sarah Richard, representing self; Montana Williams,

representing self

All Comments:
Vanessa Goldberg, Self: This flies in the face of internet security and will likely end up in court at great taxpayer

expense if passed.; Ellen Bodow, Self: | oppose this revised bill; Jennifer Huddleston, NETCHOICE: In opposition to
the Strike Everything Amendment regarding digital application distribution platforms; Mike Foulkes, Self: On behalf
of Apple; kathleen mayer, Self: opposed to the striker; Steve Ramos, Self: oppose striker; Mary Pradelt, Self:
Striker; Denise Link, PhD, WHNP, Self: Striker- don’t remove features that prevent hacking apps; Oris Friesen, Self: |
oppose using this as a striker for lessening the security provision of Apple apps.; Kathleen Noble, Self: As a long-
time Apple user with nary a security break, NOI .; Steven Linder, Self: oppose striker; Rebecca Smith Gross, Self: |
am against the striker.; marilyn duerbeck, Self: | oppose the striker; Judith Keagy, Self: Assuming a striker bill, |
oppose. Could cost the state lots of money settling lawsuits.; Eve Shapiro, Self: oppose the striker; Mary Ann
Graffagnino, Self: Consumer privacy and security are a necessary and needed. Apple and Google deserve this
protection for their downloads and apps. They have worked hard to prevent HACKS.; Beatriz Urrea, Self: Subjet to
a striker now, this bill would likely end up in court and at a great cost to taxpayers. And it trades consumer privacy
and security for putting more money in the pockets of large developers.; Paul Benz, Self: Regulating Big Tech-
Apple and Google is beyond the scope of the state's authority. Paul Benz LD15; Claudia Bloom, Self: no striker;
Karen Syversen, Self: Google and Apple should be able to continue requiring the downloading of apps in their
proprietary stores. They invented the app, so why not? We do not need this striker bill!; Cynthia Couture, Self:
This only helps the lawyers. {t is not the purview of our legislators. | have CHOSEN Apple because it is so hard to
hack. My husband was on the other platform and spent hundreds on security.; Donita Ramos, Self: | oppose the
striker.; Bryna Koch, Self: Vote no on the striker to this bill. In addition to phasing a likely expensive lawsuit, this bill
doesn't actually help small app developers, just harms privacy and security to help other big tech companies.;
Mary Grove, Self: oppose the striker.; Catherine Sigmon, Self: | oppose the striker; SUSAN ARNOLD, Self: | oppose
the striker bill; Gail Kamaras, Self: | oppose this STRIKER which seeks to regulate technology in interstate
commerce.; Barbara Kain, Self: Please oppose the striker that would block tech companies from restricting the
purchase and download of apps to only their proprietary stores. This likely will go to court, costing AZ taxpayers
unnecessarily.; Ruth Lambert, Self: No to the striker; Barbara Oliver, Self: We don't need this bill and especially we
don't need the striker attached.; Susan Morris, Self: | oppose ALL striker bills. They shouldn't be part of legislative
process.; Robin LaVoie, Self: Oppose the striker language related to app regulations.; Rebecca Olsen McHood, Self:
No on striker; Jackie Rich, Self: re: striker would end up in court at taxpayer expense.; Sarah Fanning, Self: i oppose
the striker. 85248; Lawrence Peters, Self: Gross overstepping of AZ lawmakers’ jurisdiction. What group lobbied for
this; where is the transparency. A waste of precious legislative time. WHERE IS THE LASER FOCUS ON AZ’s WATER
NEEDS?: Linda Reichert, Self: | oppose the striker.; Linda Edwards, Self: Headed for court?? = SSS; Kathy Fraser,
Self: No striker.; Jeri Dow, Self: Update to mention opposition to the striker; Angela J. Miller, Self: This
compromises consumer privacy and security by breaking the security safeguards that make Apple software hard to
hack.; Rachel Rulmyr, Self: | oppose the striker; Nelson Morgan, Self: | oppose the striker that would hurt Apple
security and privacy safeguards.; Margaret Winchell, Self: Against the striker; Linda Cooke, Self: Oppose the
striker; Lisa Maczura, Self: Opposing the striker. Expensive, and a bad idea.; Kathleen Dubbs, Self: The taxpayers
will have to pay when this ends up in the courts. Stop it now!; Marilyn Coyle, Self: Striker; Edna Weigel, Self:
OPPOSE STRIKER; Jacqueline deSa, Self: subject to a STRIKER from Steve Kaiser. This will end up in court at great
taxpayer expense if passed.; Jeannine Reno, Self: No striker! Who wants this? Not taxpayers! Supporting public
education, protecting the environment, and building a sustainable economy for all is what voters want. Creating
new problems by micromanaging what you don’t like is a waste of of taxpayer S$; Margaret Adams , Self: | DO NOT
SUPPORT THE STRIKER; Teresa Akrish, Self: Oppose the striker.; Linda Guarino, Self: Oppose the striker.; John
Gleason, Self: VOTE NO!!! 1. And stop playing games and hiding things with the "striker games", 2. This billis a
very EXPENSIVE LAWSUIT if passed. VOTE NO. This is not a bill - this Is striker bull. VOTE NO; Penny Boone, Self:
This striker bill is not useful & a nonOstarter. It will end up in court at great Az taxpayer expense. | oppose.; Jo Ann
Caruthers, Self: No on striker.; Christine McLachtan-Comer, Self: Stricker; Karolyn Switzer, Self: I'm replying to the
striker replacement text. It makes no sense to reduce consumer privacy and security.; Kirstin Woodburne, Self: |
oppose the striker that attempts to block Google and Apple from restricting apps and would end costing taxpayer
money in court.; Stephen Coyle, Self: striker; Dan Schwartzstein, Self: | oppose the striker.; CAROL R BLACKMAN,
Self: NO STRIKER AMENDMENT.; Rebecca Haynes, Self: The bill simply trades consumer privacy and security for
putting more money in the pockets of other large developers. Striker.; Amy Gaiennie, Self: | oppose this striker.
The issue will probably end up in court at great expense to the taxpayer--that's MEI No wayl!; Julian Donahue, Self:
This "striker" would defeat the security safeguards of apps purchased or downloaded from the proprietary stores
of companies like Google and Apple.; Diane Nevill, Self: This bill may become a striker which would break the
security safeguards that make Apple software so hard to hack.; Jan Perozeni Corbus, Self: No striker, please.; Mary-
Jeanne Fincher, Self: The striker is bad for consumers and for internet security.; Jeffrey Fortney, Self: 85331; Mary
Fortney, Self: zip 85331; Amy Etzkorn, Self: oppose the striker; Carly MahImeister, Self: | oppose the striker.;
DEBRA GORDON, Self: Opposed to the striker. The legislature should not allow strikers, which are misleading (at
best). This one is particularly devious with the label "technical correction...."; Kim Hoover, Self: and no to a striker
attempt; Erin McCamish, Self: | oppose the striker. This is likely against the law and would cost voters money for
lawsuits.; Linda Block, Self; This is a striker legislation. This bill will likely end up in court at great taxpayer
expense.; Charles Turner, Self: Opposed to the striker.; Jessica Kitterman, Self: This will likely end up in court at
great taxpayer expense if passed.; Charlotte Lis, Self: | oppose this striker; Marcia Tingley, Self: Striker breaks
security safeguards that make Apple software so hard to hack.; Marilyn Murov, Self: With hacks so prevalent these
days, | am happy to work on a Mac that is secure. If this bill passes, there will be more hacks and the state could be
sued. { don't want my tax $ paying for this suit.; Elizabeth Brauer, Self: | oppose the striker. This bill would weaken
security and be a windfall for large developers.; Anne Leota Hart, Self: Another waste of our taxpayer money;
Pamela Thompson, Self: | oppose the striker: it would trade consumer privacy and security for more money in the
pockets of big game developers.; Lisa Koenig, Self: NO on striker from Steve Kaiser. This ill-informed striker will put
consumer privacy and security at greater risk. Vote NO.; Gary Ezzell, Self: Opposing the striker; Carol Garnett, Self:
Should be a federal issue and the state should not be involved. As a taxpayer, | do not want to see an expensive
court case which the state would lose.; Jennifer Dawson, Self: NO STRIKERII; Allison Jackson, Self: | oppose the
striker.; Kathleen Martin, Self: if approved, this one is headed for court!; Brandy Reese, Self: oppose the striker;
Kathleen Schanus-Gohl, Self: | oppose the striker.; Heather Schlemmer, Self: | am opposed to Rep. Kaiser's striker
restricting purchase/download of apps through proprietary stores such as Google and Apple.; Paula Feely, Self: |
am opposed to the striker.; Margaret Owen, Self: 1 oppose the striker, which would negatively impact the security
& privacy safeguards | benefit from on my devices when | use the proprietary apps/stores belonging to specific
tech platforms, like Apple & Google.; Kathleen Collins, Self: Oppose striker.; Barbara Jones, Self: | oppose this
striker.; Sandy Coffey, Self: | oppose the striker; Gary Townsend, Self: Would cost AZ taxpayers through iengthy
court battles, Better admenistered at federal level.; Aaron Essif, Self: This is a Striker bill and doesn't solve
anything; Vickey Finger, Self: Oppose Striker bill; Paisley Rossetti, Self: | do NOT approve of strikers!; Janet Senf,
Self: | do not support this striker.; Julia Wills, Self: | am opposing the Striker version of this bill.; Loretta O'Connor,
Self: No to striker; Barbara Lynn Carpenter, Self: No on striker; Iris Adler, Self: This is a Striker bill: words added to
bill which was defeated.; Paula Kaper, Self: | oppose the striker; Sue Thorne, Self: STOP THIS STRIKER! Rep
Kaiser:Your battle has already been fought and lost in court. Why fight a losing battle? This bill will wind up in court
again if passed, it would harm consumer privacy & security for profit of other large developers. VOTE NO!; David
Williams, Self: this is regarding the striker; Kathleen O'Neill, Self: possible striker; Mary Ganapol, Self: | oppose the
STRIKER bill.; Gail Prestera, Self: This bill is a government overreach proposed by someone who has no idea how
technology works. Stay out of the private section Sir. This is not your area of expertise.; Eileen Hollowell, Self: The
striker is bad policy and likely will end up in expensive litigation; J Nicholas Prestera, Self: |am opposed to the
striker; Jill Anderson, Self: | do not agree with the striker; Sally Dooley, Self: | trust google more than game
developers to look out for consumers; Ann Sawyer, Self: The striker proposal is ill advised from a number of
standpoints including its questionable legality.; Catherine Hopkins, Self: Large companies have the right to keep
their software and hardware proprietary. Taking this away allowing anyone to benefit from their creation is wrong.
Govt stay out of business proprietary decisions.; LaMista Schultz, Self: | oppose the striker because this action
would undermine the security of Apple products.; Cynthia Wagner, Self: Oppose striker; Teresa Neiberg, Self: lam
opposed to this striker. This striker would break the security safeguards that make Apple software difficult to hack
and would likely end up in court at the expense of the taxpayers.; Patricia Edelen, Self: This striker bill would
threaten the security safeguards that make Apple and other large tech companies so hard to hack.; Greer Warren,
Self: opposed to striker; Jacqueline Bauer, Self: opposed to the striker on this bill; Courtney Coolidge, AZ CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE: Opposed to the strike everything amendment.; Joseph Bihms, Self: the bill simply trades
consumer privacy and security for putting more money in the pockets of other large developers such as Epic
Games, which sued and lost over being kicked off both the App Store and the Google Play Store after attempting to
bypass; Susan Shapiro, Self: Any striker language should be brought up in a new bill and be made available for
public review.; Karen DeLay, Self: Oppose the bill and Steve Kaiser's striker.; Janie Smieszek, Self: This could
eventually cost the taxpayers money for court cases; John Propster, Self: Poorly constructed bill that will waste
taxpayer time and money even discussing it. Unenforceable! Vote Nol; Dieter Knecht, Self: Please oppose with
striker.; Margaret Knecht, Self: This bill invades the privacy of a transgender student. We are all allowed to keep
our body private. Who is going to look at student bodies to determine if they meet this bill's strictures?Why
violate the US Constitution and Title IX?; Dylan Hoffman, Self: _; JOHN FIENE, Self: Subject to striker, this bill
sacrifices safety and security for lining the pockets of other large providers.; Patrick Hedger, Self: The Taxpayers
Protection Alliance, a nonprofit, nonpartisan nationwide taxpayer and consumer advocacy organization opposes
this bill related to app store payment processing due to significant, unresolved cybersecurity concerns for
consumers.; Lisa Calderon, Self: | oppose the Stricker; Caleb Williamson, Self: This amendment harms small app
developers by placing the security of the platform at risk.; Montana Williams, Self: iam representing the Chamber

of Progress.

HB2202, industrial commission; fee schedule; notice

Support:
Stuart Goodman, INJURED WORKERS PHARMACY; Barry M. Aarons, AZ ASSN OF LAWYERS FOR INJURED WORKERS,

INJURED WORKERS PHARMACY; Mark Kendall, COPPERPOINT INSURANCE COMPANY; Thomas Stillwell, Attorney,
representing self; Brian Clymer, representing self; Ezra Grace, representing self

Neutral:
Emily Rice, AZ SELF-INSURERS ASSOC

All Comments:
Barry M. Aarons, AZ ASSN OF LAWYERS FOR INJURED WORKERS, INJURED WORKERS PHARMACY: .; Thomas

Stillwell, Self: | have been actively involved in Industrial Commission matters for 34 years, and | welcome the
changes that this bill brings. It will benefit all parties by bringing clarity to the Fee Schedule process in particular,
and it will improve transparency.; Brian Clymer, Self: HB 2202 brings necessary transparency to the ICA by
requiring stakeholder meetings and giving adequate time for the posting of notices for any proposed changes to
the ICA fee schedule. Please vote yes on this important legislation.; Emily Rice, AZ SELF-INSURERS ASSOC: ASIA is
neutral on HB2202. We appreciate both the ICA’s ongoing efforts to improve relationships with stakeholders and
the requested need for clarity related to the fee schedule process.

HB2203, technical correction; cosmetology schools; contracts

Neutral:
Stephen Briggs, AZ DEPT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
HB2204, technical correction; wage board; powers

Support:

David Seligson, representing self

Neutral:
Bill Ritz, AZ DEPT OF REVENUE

Oppose:
joan Murphy, representing self; Lisa Calderon, representing self; kathleen mayer, representing self; Dave Long,

representing self; Rivko Knox, representing self; Pat VanMaanen, representing self; Steve Ramos, representing self;
Mary Pradelt, representing self; Oris Friesen, representing self; Kathleen Noble, representing self; Janet Larkin,
representing self; Steven Linder, representing self; Rebecca Smith Gross, representing self; marilyn duerbeck,
representing self; Henne Queisser, representing self; Maria Salvucci, representing self; Kevin Brown, representing
self; Blake Sacha, representing self; Judith Keagy, representing self; Eve Shapiro, representing self; Mary Ann
Graffagnino, representing self; Beatriz Urrea, representing self; Paul Benz, representing self; DOUG ARNOLD,
representing self; Karen Syversen, representing self; Sallie Kladnik, representing self; Christina Mollica,
representing self; Elizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo, representing self; Cynthia Couture, representing self; Sherrilynn
James, representing self; Kathleen Pettycrew, representing self; Jenise Porter, representing self; Donita Ramos,
representing self; Ruthanna Battilana, representing self; Margaret Baca, representing self; Bryna Koch,
representing self; Mary Grove, representing self; Catherine Sigmon, representing self; SUSAN ARNOLD,
representing self; Margrit McIntosh, representing self; Cathleen Bohnlein, representing self; Elizabeth Kelchner,
representing self; Katherine Doman Sheydayi, representing self; Elizabeth Schauer, representing self; Elizabeth
Goff, representing self; Gail Kamaras, representing self; Charlie Silver, representing self; Barbara Kain, representing
self; Ruth Lambert, representing self; Barbara Oliver, representing self; Cynthia Hans, representing self; Barbara
Hutchinson, representing self; Marylynne Shroyer, representing self; Becky Sayler, representing self; Susan Morris,
representing self; Brent Gibbs, representing self; Alexei Sheydayl, representing self; Robin LaVoie, representing
self; Rebecca Olsen McHood, representing self; Susan Engelhard, representing self; Julie Golding, representing self;
Jillian Jones, representing self; Kristin Roberts, representing self; Christine Keitges, representing self; Jackie Rich,
representing self; Sarah Fanning, representing self; Lawrence Peters, representing self; Suzanne Berger,
representing self; Linda Reichert, representing self; Linda Edwards, representing self; Kathy Fraser, representing
self; Kimberlee McClure, representing self; Judy Greene, representing self; Jeri Dow, representing self; Sarah
Seaver, representing self; Angela J. Miller, representing self; Mary Martiniak, representing self; Andrew Flach,
representing self; Rachel Ruimyr, representing self; Ryan Anderson, representing self; Ellen M. Ferreira,
representing self; Nelson Morgan, representing self; Margaret Winchell, representing self; Kathleen Woessner,
representing self; Ann Strine, representing self; Linda Cooke, representing self; Steve Gorman-Hackstadt,
representing self; Susan Phelps, representing self; David Patchen, representing self; Nancy Hancock, representing
self; Glenda Wood, representing self; Barbara Hollway, representing self; Susan Cook, representing self; Sharon
Ehrlich, representing self; Sheila Green, representing self; Toby Friedman, representing self; Lisa Maczura,
representing self; Kathleen Dubbs, representing self; Robert Larson, representing self; Barbara Larson,
representing self; Marilyn Coyle, representing self; Nancy Santori, representing self; Edna Weigei, representing
self; George Ehrlich, representing self; Jacqueline deSa, representing self; Jeannine Reno, representing self;
Margaret Adams , representing self; Linda Julson, representing self; Teresa Akrish, representing self; Francis
Copple, representing self; Linda Guarino, representing self; John Gleason, representing self; Penny Boone,
representing self; Mariette Francis, representing self; Jo Ann Caruthers, representing self; Christine McLachlan-
Comer, representing self; Karolyn Switzer, representing self; Kirstin Woodburne, representing self; Mary Ellen
Beaurain, representing self; Susan Ordway, representing self; Anne Rohweder, representing self; Stephen Coyle,
representing self; Dan Schwartzstein, representing self; Janell Alewyn, representing self; William S. James,
representing self; Virginia Kovatch, representing self; Jean Meconi, representing self; CAROL R BLACKMAN,
representing self; Dorothy Reed-inman, representing self; Rebecca Haynes, representing self; Emily Norton,
representing self; Julian Donahue, representing self; Diane Nevill, representing self; Kathleen Butler, representing
self; Margaret Lacey, representing self; Jan Perozeni Corbus, representing self; Kerrie Green, representing self;
Jane Atkins, representing self; Mary-Jeanne Fincher, representing self; Jeffrey Fortney, representing self; Mary
Fortney, representing self; Jessie Spalding, representing self; Frederick James, representing self; Amy Etzkorn,
representing self; Carly Mahimeister, representing self; Jennifer Chastain , representing self; Jerrold Borchardt,
representing self; DEBRA GORDON, representing self; Kim Hoover, representing self; Kathleen Sauer, representing
self; Roy Verdery, representing self; Cassandra Morano, representing self; Erin McCamish, representing self;
Claudia Oreck-Teplitsky, representing self; Bailey Spears, representing self; Linda Block, representing self; Claire
Bickel, representing self; Charles Turner, representing self; Dana Nicolson, representing self; Karen Peterson,
representing self; Jessica Kitterman, representing self; Denise San Angelo, representing self; Mary Marcus,
representing self; Diane Lings, representing self; Lori Taniguchi, representing self; Charlotte Lis, representing self;
Julia Olson, representing self; Marcia Tingley, representing self; Diane Leischow, representing self; Marilyn Murov,
representing self; Elizabeth Brauer, representing self; Anne Leota Hart, representing self; Pamela Thompson,
representing self; Thea Chalow, representing self; Paula Van Derven, representing self; Lisa Koenig, representing
self; Ariana Flores, representing self; irene Arango, representing self; Gary Ezzell, representing self; Carol Garnett,
representing self; Rosemary Dixon, representing self; Martha O'Connor, representing self; Jennifer Dawson,
representing self; Abby Brill, representing self; Leda DeVlieger, representing self; Allison Jackson, representing self;
Nancy Scharff, representing self; Amy Pedotto, representing self; Kathleen Martin, representing self; Diane Klock,
representing self; Caroline Anderson, representing self; Kathleen Schanus-Gohl, representing self; Heather
Schlemmer, representing self; Janet Johnson, representing self; Paula Feely, representing self; James Stein,
representing self; Margaret Owen, representing self; Kathleen Collins, representing self; Linda Ekstrum,
representing self; Karen Huttenmeyer, representing self; Alicia Vaughan, representing self; Sandy Coffey,
representing self; Kelly Colvard-Walter, representing self; Victoria Wilson, representing self; John Babicz,
representing self; Vickey Finger, representing self; Paisley Rossetti, representing self; Karen Robbins, representing
self; Janet Senf, representing self; Gary Townsend, representing self; Julia Wills, representing self; Patricia Dow,
representing self; Brendan O'Connor, representing self; Theresa Ryan, representing self; Loretta O'Connor,
representing self; Barbara Lynn Carpenter, representing self; Iris Adler, representing self; Paula Kaper, representing
self; Sue Thorne, representing self; David Williams, representing self; Kathleen O'Neill, representing self; Mary
Ganapol, representing self; Gail Prestera, representing self; Eileen Hollowell, representing self; J Nicholas Prestera,
representing self; GARY LEW OLIVER, representing self; Joan Thomas, representing self; Jill Anderson, representing
self; Sally Dooley, representing self; Teri Hollingsworth, representing self; Melissa Galarza, representing self;
Catherine Hopkins, representing self; Saher Afzal, representing self; LaMista Schultz, representing self; Gail Bird,
representing self; Cynthia Wagner, representing self; Elizabeth Lyons, representing self; Bruce Flocken,
representing self; Teresa Neiberg, representing self; Patricia Edelen, representing self; Greer Warren, representing
self; Jacqueline Bauer, representing self; Sherri Johnson, representing self; Elaine Downing, representing self;
Heather Borman, representing self; Joseph Bihms, representing self; Ellen Bodow, representing self; Nataly Reed,
representing self; Nicole Fordey, representing self; Susan Shapiro, representing self; Sally Caruso, representing self;
Karen DeLay, representing self; Kim Buckley, representing self; Devon Sloan, representing self; Francine Saccio,
representing self; Janie Smieszek, representing self; Patricia Brunner, representing self; Laura Libman, representing
self; David Myers, representing self; Brandy Reese, representing self; Theresa Prichard, representing self; Vanessa
Goldberg, representing self; Genise Tomko, representing self; John Propster, representing self; Barbara Jones,
representing self; Gabe Leadley, representing self; Tina Kilcullen, representing self; Dieter Knecht, representing
self; Carol Campbell, representing self; Sarah Montgomery, representing self; Susan Collopy, representing self; Ann
Sawyer, representing self; JOHN FIENE, representing self; Cynthia Paster, representing self

All Comments:
Joan Murphy, Self: Sounds like a ploy to enrich the rich]; Lisa Calderon, Self: Chandler resident who opposes the

stricker.; kathleen mayer, Self: oppose the striker; Rivko Knox, Self: | oppose the Weninger striker; AZ does NOT
need more tax exemptions, especially for activities that draw the very wealthy! !; Pat VanMaanen, Self: Against
striker.; Steve Ramos, Self: oppose striker; Oris Friesen, Self: fam opposed to using this as a striker for avoiding
income tac for NFTs and virtual currency.; Kathleen Noble, Self: No striker.; Steven Linder, Self: oppose striker;
Rebecca Smith Gross, Self: 1 am against the striker.; Kevin Brown, Self: Why would you want to do this? Don't;
Judith Keagy, Self: Assuming this ends up as a striker...I'm strongly opposed to exempting virtual currrency from
income taxes. vote NO; Mary Ann Graffagnino, Self: It does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars.;
Beatriz Urrea, Self: Now subject to a striker, this bill doesn't deserve expenditure of our tax dollars and is designed
for the mega-rich. Let's not waste time or energy on this. Eliminate it, please.; Paul Benz, Self: This bill is a waste of
taxpayer time and money to consider Paul Benz LD15; Karen Syversen, Self: We do not need a striker bill that
exempts virtual currency, NFT's and trading fees from income tax.; Christina Mollica, Self: lam a registered voter in
LD21; Elizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo, Self: This striker treats the general fund like a slush fund to privilege the rich. Use
the general fund for public schools.; Cynthia Couture, Self: ALL income should be taxed. This only helps the rich; if
you want to exempt, exempt from tax payments those who are barely surviving.; Donita Ramos, Self: | oppose the
striker.; Bryna Koch, Self: Vote no on the striker to this bill.; Mary Grove, Self: i oppose this striker; Catherine
Sigmon, Self: | am baffled why these expressions of wealth would be exempt from income tax.; SUSAN ARNOLD,
Self: | oppose the striker; Elizabeth Schauer, Self: I'm opposed to the striker.; Gail Kamaras, Self: | oppose this
STRIKER which seeks to steal more money from state revenues through special exemptions.; Barbara Kain, Self:
Please oppose the striker to this bill that would exempt crypto, NFTs and trading fees from income tax. This
provides no tangible benefit to most Arizonans, and just put the expense on those of us who do not participate in
these schemes.; Ruth Lambert, Self: NO to the striker; Barbara Oliver, Self: This bill does not deserve out State $5,
and we really don't need the strikerl; Cynthia Hans, Self: Striker unnecessary.; Susan Morris, Self: NO ONE ELSE
should be exempt from income tax, especially when rich folks get richer.; Brent Gibbs, Self: Opposed to the striker;
Robin LaVoie, Self: Oppose the striker that exempts virtual currency et al from income tax.; Rebecca Olsen McHood,
Self: No on the striker; Jackie Rich, Self: Re striker: Don't exempt alternate currencies from income taxes.; Sarah
Fanning, Self: | oppose the striker. 85248; Lawrence Peters, Self: Stinky striker. What group fobbied for this;
where’s the transparency. Boon for the wealthy. Lawmakers should ensure financial health of general fund to
cover infrastructure, public education, etc. Robs the average Arizonan & gives to the rich; Linda Reichert, Self: |
oppose the striker exempting virtual currency from income tax.; Kathy Fraser, Self: No striker.; Sarah Seaver, Self:
The striker that would exempt NFTs from income tax seems so counter-intuitive--why give tax breaks to people
who can well afford to pay their fair share. And why encourage a speculative bubble.; Angela J. Miller, Self: Please,
no more tax breaks that will be largely used by the wealthy.; Rachel Rulmyr, Self: | oppose the striker; Ryan
Anderson, Self: | oppose the striker.; Nelson Morgan, Self: | oppose the striker.; Linda Cooke, Self: Oppose the
striker; Susan Cook, Self: Another tax exemtion loop hole for the wealthy - OPPOSEH; Toby Friedman, Self: Don't
help the mega-rich please.,; Lisa Maczura, Self: Opposing the striker. Fiscally irresponsible. C'mon peoplel;
Kathleen Dubbs, Self: | oppose the striker; Marilyn Coyle, Self: Striker!; Edna Weigel, Self: OPPOSE STRIKER;
Jacqueline deSa, Self: subject to a STRIKER from Jeff Weninger. It does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax
dollars.; Jeannine Reno, Self: No striker! Who wants this? Not taxpayers! Supporting public education, protecting
the environment, and building a sustainable economy for all is what voters want. Creating new problems by
micromanaging what you don’t like is a waste of of taxpayer $; Margaret Adams, Self: | DO NOT SUPPORT THE
STRIKER; Teresa Akrish, Self: Oppose the striker.; Linda Guarino, Self: Oppose the striker. This only helps the rich.
You should think about the little guys instead.; John Gleason, Self: Vote NOI! 1. please stop the "striker baloney" 2.
this is a tax give away to niche special interests. 3. VOTE NO! Il; Penny Boone, Self: This stuff is a bubble that is
going to pop, like the dotcom craze. It is a playground for the mega-rich who need to pay income tax like everyone
else. | oppose.; Jo Ann Caruthers, Self: No on striker.; Christine McLachian-Comer, Self: Stricker; Karolyn Switzer,
Self: I'm responding to the striker replacement text. These income categories are largely limited to the super-rich,
and tend to regulate themselves. It makes no sense to exempt this kind of income.; Stephen Coyle, Self: Striker;
Dan Schwartzstein, Seif: | oppose the striker; Janell Alewyn, Self: Hmmm... no taxes on NFTs? Melania Trump will
love this one to go national.; Virginia Kovatch, Self: | understand that this is a striker.; Jean Meconi, Self: Currency is
currency and should not be exempt from taxes, trading fees, etc.; CAROL R BLACKMAN, Self: NO STRIKER
AMENDMENT; Rebecca Haynes, Self: Does not deserve an expenditure of our state dollars. Striker.; Diane Nevill,
Self: This bill may become a striker which would exempt virtual currency, NFTS and trading fees from income
tax.Like a bubble waiting to pop, it does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars.; Jan Perozeni Corbus,
Self: No striker, please. NO exception of virtual currency, NFTs and trading fees from income tax.; Jane Atkins, Self:
virtual currency is not reliable.; Mary-Jeanne Fincher, Self: The striker Is yet another tax giveaway. How about
using state funds to better the lives of the majority of Arizonans instead?; Jeffrey Fortney, Self: 85331 - STRIKER
oppose; Mary Fortney, Self: oppose striker zip 85331; Amy Etzkorn, Self: oppose the striker; Carly Mahlmeister,
Self: | oppose the striker. This is a very shady deal for someone running for state treasurer.; Jerrold Borchardt, Self:
| oppose the STRIKER! No need to make rich people even richer. They should pay Arizona taxesl; DEBRA GORDON,
Self: Opposed to the striker. Cyptocurrency is a high-risk "investment" mainly for those with disposable incomes
and is not deserving of tax protection - especially when hard-working wage earners are bearing such a tax burden.;
Kim Hoover, Self: and no to striker attempts. This bill only benefits wealthy people trying to evade paying taxes.;
Roy Verdery, Self: | oppose the striker exempting cryptocurrency and associated items from income tax. Things
which are bought and sold for a profit are income. Period.; Erin McCamish, Self: Don't waste our money on
something that benefits the wealthy.; Linda Block, Self: This bill doesn't deserve an expenditure of our state tax
dollars. It is subject to a striker.; Charles Turner, Self: Opposed to the striker.; Jessica Kitterman, Self: This is a
bubble poised to pop, like the dotcom craze or Beanie Babies, and a playground for the mega-rich. It does not
deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars.; Charlotte Lis, Self: Oppose striker; Marcia Tingley, Self: Striker
exempts cryptocurrency, NFTs, etc from income tax. Doesn't deserve expenditure of our tax dollars; Marilyn
Muroyv, Self: These earnings and fees should not be exempt from income tax. They are still income.; Elizabeth
Brauer, Self: | oppose the striker. This is a poor use of taxpayer money, giving a tax break to the wealthy. How
about funding public education instead?; Anne Leota Hart, Self: This is another waste of our tax payer money.;
Pamela Thompson, Self: | oppose the striker exempting virtual currencies, NFTs and trading fees from Income tax
because it's a waste of tax payers' money.; Thea Chalow, Self: To learn what will happen with virtual currency,
NET's, etc, do a google search for “tulip mania." No reason for state government to promoted this craze.; Lisa
Koenig, Self: | oppose the ridiculous striker by Weninger. | do not want my tax dollars used this way. Vote NO.;
Carol Garnett, Self: NO, we need our tax dollars. if people can afford to play with these, they can pay the taxes.;
Jennifer Dawson, Self: NO STRIKERII; Kathleen Martin, Self: Our state tax dollars should not be spent for this
purpose.; Kathleen Schanus-Gohl, Self: | oppose the striker.; Heather Schlemmer, Self: | am opposed to Rep.
Weninger's striker exempting virtual currency, NFTs, and trading fees from income tax.; Paula Feely, Self: lam
opposed to the striker.; James Stein, Self: It does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars.; Margaret
Owen, Self: | oppose the striker on this bill that would exempt virtual currentcy, NFTs & trading fees from income
tax.; Kathleen Collins, Self: Oppose striker.; Sandy Coffey, Self: | oppose the striker.; Kelly Colvard-Walter, Self:
Subject to striker, this would exempt virtual currency, NFTs and trading fees from income tax. This is poised to pop
and is a playground for the mega-rich. It does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars.; John Babicz,
Self: stop striker; Vickey Finger, Self: Oppose Striker bill; Paisley Rossetti, Self: | HATE strikersl; Janet Senf, Self: |
oppose the striker.; Gary Townsend, Self: Striker! No exemptions for these tools of the rich and wealthy,.; Julia Wills,
Self: | oppose the Striker version of this bill.; Patricia Dow, Self: Now subject to a striker from Jeff Weninger;
Brendan O'Connor, Self: | oppose the striker that would exempt virtual currencies, NFTs, etc. from income tax.;
Barbara Lynn Carpenter, Self: No on striker; Iris Adler, Self: This is a striker bill; words added after defeat of original
bill.; Paula Kaper, Self: | oppose the striker; Sue Thorne, Self: STOP THIS STRIKERIE This bill exempts the super-rich
from paying their fair share of income taxes on virtual currency, trading fees, and NFTs. This is just another way
millionaires including dark money legislators try to avoid paying their taxes,NOI; David Williams, Self: this opinion
is on the striker; Kathleen O'Neill, Self: possible striker; Mary Ganapol, Self: | oppose the STRIKER bill; Gail Prestera,
Self: NO! This bill is not appropriate and will only benefit the rich.; Eileen Hollowell, Self: | am opposed to striker
that exempts virtual currencies from tax. Why?; J Nicholas Prestera, Self: | am opposed to the striker; Jill Anderson,
Self: | do not support the striker; Sally Dooley, Self: Let's stay out of the speculative markets.; Catherine Hopkins,
Self: This bubble will eventually pop just like the dot com phase and beante babies. | have lived through both. Am
in strong opposition to tax dollars being used to sponsor this in any way or means. Stay out of crazes.; Saher Afzal,
Self: I strongly oppose this striker.; LaMista Schultz, Self: | oppose the striker.; Cynthia Wagner, Self: Oppose striker.
does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars; Bruce Flocken, Self: Please oppose this bill's striker.
Crypto currency and NFT markets are doing just fine without the help of Arizona tax break dollars to support them
more. Arizonan's have much more pressing needs.; Teresa Neiberg, Self: This striker does not deserve an
expenditure of our state tax dollars.; Patricia Edelen, Self: A striker bill that is based on a craze ready to plunge -
don't waste our state tax dollars.; Greer Warren, Self: opposed to striker. Stop tax giveaways; Jacqueline Bauer,
Self: opposed to the striker; Heather Borman, Self: STRIKER bill; Joseph Bihms, Self: This bill would exempt virtual
currency, NFTs and trading fees from income tax. It does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars. Stop
defunding the government.; Ellen Bodow, Self: | oppose the striker revisions; Nicole Fordey, Self: virtual currency,
NFTs, and trading fees SHOULD be subject to income tax - it is incomel; Susan Shapiro, Self: Any striker language
should be brought up in a new bill and be made available for public review.; Karen DeLay, Self: | oppose the
original bili and striker.; Francine Saccio, Self: Error; Janie Smieszek, Self: This is a striker to exempt virtual currency
from income tax. Money that could be used the many needs of the state.; Brandy Reese, Self: oppose the striker;
Theresa Prichard, Self: we should be giving tax breaks to crypto currency, nft's from being taxed.; Vanessa
Goldberg, Self: Catering to this bubble does not deserve an expenditure of our state tax dollars; John Propster,
Self: Fantasy bill based on a temporary fad. Useless bill. Vote No!; Barbara Jones, Self: | oppose this striker.; Dieter
Knecht, Self: Oppose striker. Does not deserve expenditure of our state tax dollars.; Sarah Montgomery, Self: Don't
use taxpayer dollars to subsidize the virtual currency and NFT fad.; Ann Sawyer, Self: The proposed striker appears
to pose expense for Arizona.; JOHN FIENE, Self: Subject to a striker, this bill is just another giveaway of taxpayer
money.; Cynthia Paster, Self: subject to a striker, this bill by passes security of apps and coild become very costly

HB2234, vacation rentals; short-term rentals: enforcement.

Testified in support:
Don Isaacson, AMERICAN RESORT DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIAITON; Jonathan Paton, AIRBNB, INC; Sara Alper,

representing self; Linda Curry, representing self; John Hildebrand, representing self; Joshua Hill, representing self;
Sam Friedberg, representing self; Christopher deVries, representing self; Charity Hakes, representing self; Jennifer
Muniz, representing self; Maria Vlahos, representing self

Testified as opposed:
Susan Edwards, representing self; William Hunter, representing self; Sandra Scanlan, representing self; david

mason, representing self
Support:

Jeff Sandquist, EXPEDIA INC; Barbara Meaney, SONDER; Cole Libera, AZ PLANNING ASSOCIATION; Marie Isaacson,
AMERICAN RESORT DEVELOPMENT ASSN; Alexis Apodaca, CHANDLER, CITY OF; Kiarash Kavosi, representing self;
Naghmeh Fard, representing self; Bill Diak, representing self; Jill Dunican, representing self; Ezra Grace,
representing self; Barry M. Aarons, SCOTTSDALE, CITY OF; Rich Hoffecker, representing self

Neutral:
Bill Ritz , AZ DEPT OF REVENUE; Roxanna Pitones, LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES & TOWNS

Oppose:

Kate Bauer, representing self; David Kahn, REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS OF ARIZONA; Charles Schinke,
representing self; Ann Bommersbach, representing self; Bill Brown, representing self; DEBRA SCHINKE,
representing self; Bert Farmer, representing self; bruce emmons, representing self; Richard Ferguson, representing
self; Sandra Beck, representing self; Patricia Brunner, representing self; Carol Kurimsky, representing self

All Comments:
Linda Curry, Self: This bill will eliminate the bad players in the industry.; John Hildebrand, Self: SSTR / AZRT; Sam

Friedberg, Self: This bill strikes a good balance between discouraging and shutting down “party houses” and
protecting responsible hosts who aim to act as good neighbors.; Susan Edwards, Self: As it is, this bill is
unenforceable. How do you suspend licenses that don't exist? Over 90% of STRs in AZ are unlicensed now. How will
this change anything, especially when it confuses owners and operators. It SHOULD require verified listings.;
William Hunter, Self: | support the intentions of this bill, but the actual language has fatal flaws that make it
unworkable and unenforceable - change the language and framework and this will be a good bill; Sandra Scanian,
Self: This bill will not provide help to Arizona residents.; david mason, Self: This Bill does too little. Amend to strike
"cannot regulate ... "use or occupancy" and “demonstrates ... protecting the public's health and safety", allow local
licensing, trust localities, allow density rules, ignore Airbnb "ban fear" mongering.; Ann Bommersbach, Self: This is
poorly written, confusing, and appears to be unenforceable. The TPT license should be required of the property,
and fines should accrue to both the property owner and the property.; Bill Brown, Self: This is an infringement on
property rights. There are already existing laws to address problematic short-term rentals: enforce those.; Bert
Farmer, Self: This bill is flawed. Doesn't help Arizona residents.; Sandra Beck, Self: As written, this bill is
unenforceable, and therefore does nothing to alleviate the problem.; Patricia Brunner, Self: This bill does nothing
to help neighborhoods control or resolve bad actors. The bill has bigger fines and a couple of good provisions - but
it is built on a bad framework - the language makes it unenforceable.; Carol Kurimsky, Self: Law as written can not

be enforced. Please rewrite

HB2391, technical correction: bingo license; transfer

Support:
Rodney Short, YUMA, CITY OF

HB2484, forcible entry; detainer; filing fee

Testified in support:
Pamela Bridge, representing self; Maxine Becker, representing self
Support:
Joan Serviss, Executive Director, ARIZONA HOUSING COALITION; Pat VanMaanen, representing self; Brenda

Thomas, representing self; Maria G Solis, representing self; Steven Eddy, UNS ENERGY CORPORATION; James
MePherson, representing self; Connie Phillips, representing self; Diane E. Brown, AZ PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH
GROUP (AZ PIRG); Bryna Koch, representing self; will humble, ARIZONA PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION; alan
stephens, representing self; Geoff Esposito, WILDFIRE; Ryan Lee, GLENDALE, CITY OF; Brendon Blake, AARP; Joanna
Carr, representing self; Andrew Sugrue, THE ARIZONA CENTER FOR ECONOMIC PROGRESS; Wendy Valenzuela, AZ

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY (APS); Ron Brinkman, representing self

All Comments:
Maxine Becker, Self: On Behalf of Wildfire: Igniting Community Action to End Poverty in Arizona; Brenda Thomas,

Self: Removes the answer fee or the requirement to file a fee deferral/waiver, which removes barriers for tenants
and reduces work for the court.; James McPherson, Self: The goal of this bill is to remove barriers for tenants and
reduce the workload for our courts. There is almost no economic impact to the removal of these fees.

HB2485, eviction dismissal: sealed records

Testified in support:
Pamela Bridge, representing self; Drew Schaffer, WM E MORRIS INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE; Maxine Becker,

representing self

Testified as opposed:
Jake Hinman, AZ MULTIHOUSING ASSOCIATION

Support:

Brenda Thomas, representing self; Maria G Solis, representing self; Bahney Dedolph, Arizona Council Of Human
Service Providers; Steven Eddy, UNS ENERGY CORPORATION; James McPherson, representing self; Connie Phillips,
representing self; Diane E. Brown, AZ PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP {AZ PIRG); Kristina Sabetta,
representing self; Bryna Koch, representing self; will humble, ARIZONA PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION; alan
stephens, representing self; Geoff Esposito, WILDFIRE; Ryan Lee, GLENDALE, CITY OF; Brendon Blake, AARP;
Andrew Sugrue, THE ARIZONA CENTER FOR ECONOMIC PROGRESS; Candy Blakeslee, representing self; Wendy
Valenzuela, AZ PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY {APS}; Ron Brinkman, representing self; Ezra Grace, representing self

All Comments:

Drew Schaffer, WM E MORRIS INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: The William £. Morris Institute for Justice supports this bill
as a step to improve fairness in eviction cases, helping Arizonans avoid the harmful effects of case records that
inhibit future life opportunities when they win or secure dismissals.; Maxine Becker, Self: On behalf of Wildfire:
igniting Community Action to End Poverty in Arizona; Brenda Thomas, Self: Will seal the eviction records for
tenants whose cases are dismissed before an entry of judgment, or if a judgment is entered in favor of the tenant.
This will help tenants to find housing.; James McPherson, Self: The goal of this bill is to seal the eviction records for
tenants whose cases are dismissed before an entry of judgment, or if a judgment is entered in favor of the tenant.
Nice to see major stakeholders come to a consensus on this bill.; Jake Hinman, AZ MULTIHOUSING ASSOCIATION:

AMA will move to Neutral with the Commerce amendment.
HB2509, racing; boxing; transfer; gaming commission.

Testified in support:
Mike Williams, Arizona Coyotes Hockey Club; Andrew Diss, ARIZONA COYOTES

Testified as opposed:
Jaime Molera, AZ INDIAN GAMING ASSN; Mike Bielecki, NAVAJO NATION GAMING ENTERPRISE

Support:
Brian Murray, J&J EQUINE ENTERPRISES

Neutral:
Kevin DeMenna, RILLITO RACING, INC.; Kelsey Lundy, TURF PARADISE

Oppose:
Tom Farley, COLORADO RIVER INDIAN TRIBES; Meghaen Dell'Artino, GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY; John

MacDonald, HUALAPAI TRIBE; Vince Lujan, SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE

All Comments:
Mike Bielecki, NAVAJO NATION GAMING ENTERPRISE: This bill will degrade the regulatory structure in Arizona.;
Kevin DeMenna, RILLITO RACING, INC.: We are neutral on the bill with the Weninger amendment.; Kelsey Lundy,

TURE PARADISE: Neutral with the amendment offered by Representative Weninger.

HB2579, residential zoning: park model trailers

Neutral:
Jacob Emnett, COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSN OF AZ; Roxanna Pitones, LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES & TOWNS

All Comments:
Roxanna Pitones, LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES & TOWNS: Neutral with committee amendment

HB2599., administrative hearings; GRRC

Testified in support:
Marc Osborn, Arizona Chamber Of Commerce And Industry

Support:
Chad Heinrich, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS; Steve Trussell, Arizona Mining Association, AZ

ROCK PRODUCTS ASSN; Aimee Yentes, AZ FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB; Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE; Courtney Coolidge, AZ CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Ezra Grace, representing self; Henry Darwin,

GALLAGHER & KENNEDY, P.A.
HB2612, occupational regulation

Support:

James Norton, Cicero Action

All Comments:
James Norton, Cicero Action : To speak

HB2656, certain affiliations; banks; prohibition

Testified as opposed:
Jay Kaprosy, AZ BANKERS ASSOCIATION

Support:

Buffalo Rick Galeener, representing self; Sandi Bartlett, representing self; Rose Sperry, representing self; Susan
Hicks, representing self; Lisa Fink, representing self; Bill Blewster, representing self; Christine Maceri Genge,
representing self; Jennifer Wellsman, representing self; Nancy Hawkins, representing self; Mark Logan,
representing self; M. Petersen, representing self; Johanna Haver, representing self; richard sperry, representing
self; Dave Ross, representing self; Teddi Thompson, representing self; Theresa Logan, representing self; Charles
McCain, representing self; Stephen Harris, representing self; Ed Sangalli, representing self; Corinne Haynes,
representing self; Steve Hetsler, representing self; Margie Heffnieder, representing self; Nikki Colletti,
representing self; Dianna Gates, representing self; Linda Wix, representing self; Gary Saxhaug, representing self;
Charles Bell, representing self; James McFadzean, representing self; Lynn Ludwig, representing self; Carol Wyatt,
representing self; David Wyatt, representing self; Jamie Alford, representing self; Tamara Holley, representing self;
Mary Grace Werner, representing self; Vicki Smith, representing self; Kevin vanderjack, representing self; Marcia
Weiss, representing self; Roy Morales, representing self; Carrie Heikkala, representing self; Diane Elrod,
representing self; Crystal Smith, representing self; Demitra Manjoros, representing self; Ezra Grace, representing
self; JL Simpson, representing self; Michael Marcus, representing self; Garrett Bowers, representing self; David
Seligson, representing self; Paul Thompson, representing self; Al Field, representing self; Lisa Gentry, representing

self; Marlene Leatherwood, representing self

Neutral:
Michelle Sullivan, representing self

Oppose:

kathleen mayer, representing self; Dave Long, representing self; Rivko Knox, representing self; Pat VanMaanen,
representing self; Steve Ramos, representing self; Austin De Bey, MOUNTAIN WEST CREDIT UNION ASSOCIATION;
Mary Pradelt, representing self; Denise Link, PhD, WHNP, representing self; Shirley Muney, representing self; Oris
Friesen, representing self; Kathleen Noble, representing self; Janet Larkin, representing self; Steven Linder,
representing self; Rebecca Smith Gross, representing self; marilyn duerbeck, representing self; Henne Queisser,
representing self; Maria Salvucci, representing self; Kevin Brown, representing self; Blake Sacha, representing self;
Judith Keagy, representing self; Eve Shapiro, representing self; Mary Ann Graffagnino, representing self; Beatriz
Urrea, representing self; Paul Benz, representing self; DOUG ARNOLD, representing self; Claudia Bloom,
representing self; Karen Syversen, representing self; Sallie Kladnik, representing self; Christina Mollica,
representing self; margaret gallagher, representing self; Sharon Lee, representing self; Kathleen Pettycrew,
representing self; Margaret Winchell, representing self; Elizabeth Goff, representing self; Kimberlee McClure,
representing self; Susan Phelps, representing self; Steve Gorman-Hackstadt, representing self; David Patchen,
representing self; Robin LaVoie, representing self; Kathy Fraser, representing self; Katherine Doman Sheydayi,
representing self; Karen Harris, representing self; Cynthia Couture, representing self; Linda Edwards, representing
self; Toby Friedman, representing self; Amy Bonnett, representing self; Kathleen Dubbs, representing self; Barbara
Larson, representing self; Marie Thearle, representing self; Marilyn Coyle, representing self; Nancy Santori,
representing self; Edna Weigel, representing self; Alexei Sheydayl, representing self; Sherrilynn James,
representing self; Elizabeth Schauer, representing self; Brent Gibbs, representing self; Margaret Adams,
representing self; Teresa Akrish, representing self; Linda Guarino, representing self; Penny Boone, representing
self; Mariette Francis, representing self; Jo Ann Caruthers, representing self; Mary Ellen Beaurain, representing
self; Mary Martiniak, representing self; Stephen Coyle, representing self; Margrit McIntosh, representing self;
Janell Alewyn, representing self; Jean Meconi, representing self; Julie Golding, representing self; CAROL R
BLACKMAN, representing self; Dorothy Reed-Inman, representing self; Rebecca Haynes, representing self; Amy
Gaiennie, representing self; Emily Norton, representing self; Cathleen Bohnlein, representing self; Diane Nevill,
representing self; Margaret Lacey, representing self; Kirstin Woodburne, representing self; Mary-Jeanne Fincher,
representing self; Jeffrey Fortney, representing self; Mary Fortney, representing self; Jessie Spalding, representing
self; William S. James, representing self; Amy Etzkorn, representing self; Carly Mahimeister, representing self;
Jennifer Chastain , representing self; Susan Engelhard, representing self; Cassandra Morano, representing self; Roy
Verdery, representing self; Erin McCamish, representing self; Claudia Oreck-Teplitsky, representing self; Linda
Block, representing self; Ryan Anderson, representing self; Andrew Flach, representing self; Joan Murphy,
representing self; Dana Nicolson, representing self; Karen Peterson, representing self; Denise San Angelo,
representing self; Jessica Kitterman, representing self; Kristin Roberts, representing self; Diane Lings, representing
self; Elizabeth Keichner, representing self; Emmie Cardella, representing self; Charlotte Lis, representing self; Diane
Leischow, representing self; Elizabeth Brauer, representing self; Carol Fiore, representing self; Anne Leota Hart,
representing self; Pamela Thompson, representing self; Thea Chalow, representing self; Paula Van Derven,
representing self; Lisa Koenig, representing self; Irene Arango, representing self; Ariana Flores, representing self;
Ellen M. Ferreira, representing self; Gail Kamaras, representing self; Martha O'Connor, representing self; Abby Brill,
representing self; Leda DeVlieger, representing self; Nancy Scharff, representing self; Allison Jackson, representing
self; Amy Pedotto, representing self; Rebecca Olsen McHood, representing self; Kathleen Martin, representing self;
Christine Whitley, representing self; Catherine Sigmon, representing self; Rachel Rulmyr, representing self;
Margaret Baca, representing self; Caroline Anderson, representing self; Barbara Hutchinson, representing self;
Heather Schlemmer, representing self; Ruth Lambert, representing self; Becky Sayler, representing self; Jackie Rich,
representing self; Janet Johnson, representing self; Donita Ramos, representing self; Bryna Koch, representing self;
James Stein, representing self; Kathleen Collins, representing self; Linda Ekstrum, representing self; Christine
Keitges, representing self; Gayle Meredith, representing self; Ralph Meredith, representing self; Angela J. Miller,
representing self; Lawrence Peters, representing self; Kelly Colvard-Walter, representing self; John Babicz,
representing self; Vickey Finger, representing self; Stefanie Richardson, representing self; Jenise Porter,
representing self; Paisley Rossetti, representing self; Janet Senf, representing self; Julia Wills, representing self;
Patricia Dow, representing self; Barbara Kain, representing self; Elizabeth McClure, representing self; Loretta
O'Connor, representing self; Barbara Lynn Carpenter, representing self; Iris Adler, representing self; Suzanne
Berger, representing self; Marylynne Shroyer, representing self; Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE; Ruthanna Battilana, representing self; Linda Reichert, representing self; David Williams, representing
self; Kathleen O'Neill, representing self; Mary Ganapol, representing self; Gail Prestera, representing self; Sue
Thorne, representing self; Eileen Hollowell, representing self; Barbara Oliver, representing self; GARY LEW OLIVER,
representing self; Joan Thomas, representing self; Teri Hollingsworth, representing self; Sarah Seaver, representing
self; Susan Morris, representing self; Saher Afzal, representing self; Mary Grove, representing self; LaMista Schultz,
representing self; Gail Bird, representing self; William Yohey, representing self; Elizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo,
representing self; Elizabeth Lyons, representing self: Teresa Neiberg, representing self; Nancy Branham,
representing self; Bruce Flocken, representing self; Patricia Edelen, representing self; Jeri Dow, representing self;
Greer Warren, representing self; Charlie Silver, representing self; Sarah Fanning, representing self; Kerry L. Hayden,
UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSN (USAA); SUSAN ARNOLD, representing self; Judy Greene, representing self;
Nelson Morgan, representing self; Kathleen Woessner, representing self; Joseph Bihms, representing self; Ann
Strine, representing self; Ellen Bodow, representing self; Linda Cooke, representing self; Nancy Hancock,
representing self; Glenda Wood, representing self; Barbara Hollway, representing self; Sharon Ehrlich, representing
self; Sheila Green, representing self; Nataly Reed, representing self; Lisa Maczura, representing self; Robert Larson,
representing self; George Ehrlich, representing self; Jacqueline deSa, representing self; Susan Shapiro, representing
self; Jeannine Reno, representing self; Sally Caruso, representing self; Linda Julson, representing self; Francis
Copple, representing self; Karen DeLay, representing self; John Gleason, representing self; Christine McLachlan-
Comer, representing self; Karolyn Switzer, representing self; Susan Ordway, representing self; Anne Rohweder,
representing self; Dan Schwartzstein, representing self; Virginia Kovatch, representing self; Kim Buckley,
representing self; Julian Donahue, representing self; Jan Perozeni Corbus, representing self; Jane Atkins,
representing self; Kerrie Green, representing self; Frederick James, representing self; Jerrold Borchardt,
representing self; DEBRA GORDON, representing self; Kim Hoover, representing self; Francine Saccio, representing
self; Kathleen Sauer, representing self; Claire Bickel, representing self; Charles Turner, representing self; Lori
Taniguchi, representing self; Patricia Brunner, representing self; Julia Olson, representing self; Marcia Tingley,
representing self; Laura Libman, representing self; Marilyn Murov, representing self; Gary Ezzell, representing self;
Brandy Reese, representing self; Kathteen Schanus-Gohl, representing self; Theresa Prichard, representing self;
Vanessa Goldberg, representing self; Genise Tomko, representing self; Jordan Ripley, representing self; Angela
Dzikoski, representing self; John Propster, representing self; Barbara Jones, representing self; Gabe Leadley,
representing self; RITA DEPUYOT, representing self; Karen Huttenmeyer, representing self; Alicia Vaughan,
representing self; Sandy Coffey, representing self; Victoria Wilson, representing self; Tina Kilcullen, representing
self; Aaron Essif, representing self; Karina Sampson, representing self; Micheal Slattery, representing self; Karen
Robbins, representing self; Jillian Ballard, representing self; Cheryl Stafford, representing self; Brendan O'Connor,
representing self; Theresa Ryan, representing self; Carol Campbell, representing self; Sarah Montgomery,
representing self; Gary Townsend, representing self; Patricia Ellsworth, representing self; J Nicholas Prestera,
representing self; Margaret Knecht, representing self; Jill Anderson, representing self; Melissa Galarza,
representing self; Susan Collopy, representing self; Ann Sawyer, representing self; Courtney Coolidge, AZ
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Catherine Hopkins, representing self; JOHN FIENE, representing self; Cynthia Wagner,
representing self; Douglas Cain, representing self; Cynthia Paster, representing self; Jacqueline Bauer, representing
self; Sherri Johnson, representing self; Elaine Downing, representing self

All Comments:
Christine Maceri Genge, Self: There needs to be a stiff penalty for failure to complyl; M. Petersen, Self: Please pass

this bill with no derogatory additions or deletions.; Stephen Harris, Self: Needs a penalty for failure to comply; Ed
Sangalli, Self: Great, as far as it goes. It does not state any penalty for failure to comply. The penalty should be
steep to discourage this type of discrimination.; Corinne Haynes, Self: Is there a penalty for failure to comply?;
Nikki Colletti, Self: It does not state any penalty for failure to comply and it should state the penalties; Gary
Saxhaug, Self: But doesn't have a penalty for non-compliance.; Charles Bell, Self: it may not discriminate against
any person based on either: a political affiliation other social credit etc; Lynn Ludwig, Self: where is the penalty for
noncompliance; Tamara Holley, Self: Good start, but needs to be updated with consequences for failure to
comply.; Mary Grace Werner, Self: What Is the penalty if they do not comply?; Vicki Smith, Self: We need to add
penalties for failure to comply.; Marcia Weiss, Self: So much for civil laws passed for the sake of ‘equality’... private
companies discriminating should be kicked out of the state....; Carrie Heikkala, Self: Another unfortunately
necessary bill. There should be some penalty for failure to comply.; Diane Elrod, Self: Banks should not be able to
discriminate based on political affifiation. This is so important}; Crystal Smith, Self: ABSOLUTELY YES! there is a
difference between “no shirt, no shoes, no service" and discrimination based on political and other ideas... THANK
YOU for this}; JL Simpson, Self: Need to add penalty for noncompliance; Michael Marcus, Self: Please include
minimum penalty for failure to comply, with larger amounts subject to litigation and court determination of
damages.; Garrett Bowers, Self: PC Captain Garrett Bowers - Discrimination is WRONG regardless of the reason.
BUT - This bill needs teeth; i.e. penalties for non-compliance.; kathleen mayer, Self: | thought "corporations are
people too". if so they have 1st amendment rights to speech and association which they do w/ their S. therefore,
this is unconstitutional and more partisan hackery.; Rivko Knox, Self: Allows the state to discriminate against some
business on the basis of ‘values’ while at the same time the Leg is working on bills that prohibit the people from
doing that!|; Pat VanMaanen, Self: This is absurd; unlike race, religion or gender, a would-be client's areas of
operation aren’t encompassed by fair lending statutes.; Denise Link, PhD, WHNP, Self: Financial institutions should
be able to make ethics based decisions in the best interests of their investors. I'm ok with refusing lending my
money to pollutors and gun manufacturers; Judith Keagy, Self: No...on this license to discriminate bill.; Mary Ann
Graffagnino, Self: Unfortunately & significantly the bill comes in the wake of an Arizona Supreme Court ruling that
a constitutional right exists to refuse to provide custom wedding invitations for same-sex couples, which
opponents called a “license to discriminate."; Beatriz Urrea, Self: This is absurd, and is designed to give carte
blanche to polluters and gun makers to get equal access to financial services. It is a travesty and must be
eliminated.; Paul Benz, Self: Lending institutions should be free to discriminate based upon a clients political or
social positions. Paul Benz LD15; Claudia Bloom, Self: Mr. fake elector doesn't want traitors to be "discriminated"
against.; Karen Syversen, Self: We don’t need polluters and gun makers having equal access to financial services.;
Christina Mollica, Seif: am a registered voter in LD21; Margaret Winchell, Self: A would-be client’s areas of
operation aren’t encompassed by fair lending statutes; Karen Harris, Self: | oppose this bill.; Cynthia Couture, Self:
Which way do you want the law? You allow a right to refuse to provide service to same sex couples. Now, you
want to take away the right of financial institutions to choose who they will provide service to. You ca n't have it
both ways.; Kathleen Dubbs, Self: Businesses have aright to decide who to do business with, as the Arizona
Supreme Court has decided; Penny Boone, Self: This bill is a push to ensure that polluters and gun makers get
equal access to financial services. This is absurd. Unlike race, religion or gender, a would-be client’s areas of
operation aren’t encompassed by fair lending statutes. | oppose; Rebecca Haynes, Self: This is absurd; untike race,
religion or gender, a would-be client’s areas of operation aren’t encompassed by fair lending statutes.; Amy
Gaiennie, Self: | oppose this bill. Are you kidding? But it's constitutional to refuse to provide custom wedding
invitations for same sex couples?; Jeffrey Fortney, Self: 85331; Mary Fortney, Self: zip 85331; Roy Verdery, Self: As
an investor in socially responsible mutual funds, | think it is important to be able to withhold financial support for
companies which make products or provide services | think are dangerous, unhealthy, or immoral.; Erin McCamish,
Self: Political values are not protected statuses. Financial institutions shouldn't have to do business with gun
companies.; Jessica Kitterman, Seif: This is absurd; unlike race, religion or gender, a would-be client’s areas of
operation aren’t encompassed by fair lending statutes.; Elizabeth Brauer, Self: We don't need to make it easier for
polluters and gun manufacturers easier to operate.; Anne Leota Hart, Self: Race, religion or gender are protected
against discrimination. Banking practices is not.; Gail Kamaras, Self: This is an illegal attempt to interfere with free
enterprise.; Bryna Koch, Self: Vote no on this bill.; James Stein, Self: license to discriminate.; Angela J. Miller, Self:
SCOTUS has held it's lawful for businesses to refuse a client based on their values. AZ should not try to stop other
businesses (financial institutions) from doing the same, It sounds like discrimination to me, and we'll open AZ up to
lawsuits.; Lawrence Peters, Self: Two-faced, Its ok for to refuse to provide custom wedding invites for same-sex
couples but not ok to "discriminate" against someone based on political affiliation or social or environmental
values.; Sue Thorne, Self: if the AZ Supreme Court can rule that a constitutional right exists to refuse to provide

|
custom wedding invitations for a gay couple, then (ergo) financial institutions have a constitutional right to refuse
loans to polluters and gun makers! Vote NO}; Eileen Hollowell, Self: Legislature should not insert itself into lending
decisions. Leave the private sector alone; Barbara Oliver, Self: This deplorable bill is a license to descriminatel;
Sarah Seaver, Self: Hmmm, “certain affiliations" but not others??? biased and hypocritical.; Susan Morris, Self:
Financial institutions have the right to consider their moral compass.; Efizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo, Self: stop
protecting the weapons industry.; Bruce Flocken, Self: Please oppose this bill. Financial institutions and their
contractors should have the freedom to provide or deny services as they see fit for their business The AZ Supreme
Court decided this with businesses and same-sex couples.; Patricia Edelen, Self: This does not make sense as
political affiliation/social/environmental values are not and should not be encompassed in fair lending practice
related to discrimination against your race, religion and gender; Sarah Fanning, Self: 85248; Joseph Bihms, Self: The
people do not support polluters and gun makers getting equal access to financial services. This is absurd; unlike
race, religion or gender, a would-be client's areas of operation aren’t encompassed by fair lending statutes.; Lisa
Maczura, Self: Regulating banks who try to make responsible business decisions? [| don't think so.; Jeannine Reno,
Self: Who wants this? Not taxpayers! Supporting public education, protecting the environment, and building a
sustainable economy for all is what voters want. Creating new problems by micromanaging what you don’t like is a
waste of of taxpayer $; John Gleason, Self: Vote NO! We don’t need special rights for special interests. Vote NO for
special interests.; Karolyn Switzer, Self: If there's a constitutional right to refuse to make a wedding cake for a
same-sex couple, why shouldn't there also be a right to object to funding some enterprises? We don't need to
look ridiculous any more than we already do.; Jan Perozeni Corbus, Self: A veiled attempt to continue Trump era
politics under the guise of “discrimination”.; Kathleen Sauer, Self: Political affiliation and social/environmental
values are not protected classes. This is an effort to dictate to private business who they have to have as
customers (as long as they are not members of the LGBT community}.; Marilyn Murov, Self: If the AZ Supreme
Court allows wedding invitation services to refuse same-sex couples, why can't lenders refuse to invest in entities
whose values they disagree with?; Theresa Prichard, Self: giving protections that are normally reserved for race,
religion and gender to political affiliation is beyond fair lending practice rules.; Vanessa Goldberg, Self: This bill
ensure that polluters and gun makers are put in the same category as race or religion. This is an ABUSE of the term
"discrimination", and you know itl; John Propster, Self: Hypocritical and already been shown to be illegal. Vote
NOI; Aaron Essif, Self: a would-be client's areas of operation aren't encompassed by fair lending statues.; Michelle
Sullivan, Self: Must include a financial penalty payable to the injured party. Include the term ESG scores as used by
the WEF.; Cheryl Stafford, Self: Unlike race, religion or gender, a would-be client’s areas of operation aren’t
encompassed by fair lending statutes. This bill would conflict with AZ Supreme Court ruling that a constitutional
right exists to refuse to provide services for same sex..; Gary Townsend, Self: Unconstitutional; Patricia Ellsworth,
Self: Characteristics such as religion, race, gender fall under fair lending protections. A polluting industry or gun
manufacturer do not.; Margaret Knecht, Self: Why ban a lender from not lending to a company for reasons
unrelated to the fair tending statutes, e.g., a bank doesn't want to lend to a big polluter or to a company that
makes guns. Isn't this overreaching control of lending companies?; Ann Sawyer, Self: Recent legal decisions
support the freedom of businesses to exclude clients who engage in activities those businesses oppose.; Catherine
Hopkins, Self: AZ Supreme Court has already ruled business can discriminate based on their values. This bill will
cost taxpayers money as many will bring suit against the state.; JOHN FIENE, Self: Polluters and gun makers do not

deserves equal treatment regarding financial issues.

HB2657, forced labor; manufactured goods

Support:
Ezra Grace, representing self; David Seligson, representing self
HB2678, state broadband office

Support:

Barbara Meaney, VERIZON; Don Isaacson, T-MOBILE USA INC; John Kelly, Principal, INTEL CORPORATION,
MICROSOFT CORPORATION; Jason Barraza, Associate Director, AT&T INC; Dianne McCallister, Arizona Technology
Council; Eric Emmert, Arizona Association For Economic Development ; Tom Dorn, STRIDE/K12, INC. ; Michelle
Bolton, COX COMMUNICATIONS ARIZONA, LLC, COXCOM INC; Oris Friesen, representing self; Susan Bitter Smith,
representing self; Cole Libera, City Of Kingman; Robin Hillyard, COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSN OF AZ; Jen Springman,
GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Christopher Vinyard, CARE 1ST HEALTH PLANS ARIZONA AND ITS
AFFILIATES; Marie Isaacson, T-MOBILE USA INC; Anthony Casselman, AZ DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION; Courtney
Coolidge, AZ CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Jeff Mirasola, Lumen Technologies; Michael DiMaria, NPG LLC; Ardie
Lauxman, representing self; Mark Alan Goldstein, representing self; Steve Peters, representing self; Janet Major
Durckel, representing self; Brett Galley, Arizona Commerce Authority; Jeff Sobotka, representing self

Oppose:

David Genge, representing self; Ezra Grace, representing self

All Comments:
Oris Friesen, Self: This is a good idea. It recognizes the fundamental importance of broadband to all the citizens of

Arizona. {t will facilitate the introduction of broadband technology in rural and tribal locations in the state.; Susan
Bitter Smith, Self: On behalf of the Southwest Cable Communications Association; Mark Alan Goldstein, Self: As
someone Iong involved in Arizona broadband initiatives | see the strong need to form and support a State
Broadband Office at the ACA to best leverage the enormous federal $ flowing and coordinate/support Arizona
broadband stakeholders.; Steve Peters, Self: Please support HB2678 establishing the State Broadband Office. The
Office will be a great asset in providing leadership, coordination, attracting funding, helping unserved and
underserved communities develop plans and secure funding. Long time need!; Janet Major Durckel, Self: This bill is
critical for broadband to remain a priority in AZ. All residents, including those who live in remote corners, need
more robust broadband infrastructure for healthcare, education and commerce. We need the expertise to

continue The Plan.

HB2679, employment discrimination; sexual harassment; definition

Support:
Rebekah Browder, representing self; Edith Lefevre, AZ ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE

All Comments:
Rebekah Browder, Self: From the Arizona Attorney General's Office

HB2685, artificial intelligence; requirements

Support:

Ezra Grace, representing self
Oppose:
Dylan Hoffman, representing self; Dianne McCallister, Arizona Technology Council; Stan Barnes, Arizonans For
Affordable Health Coverage; Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Courtney Coolidge, AZ

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

HB2690, cybersecurity risk; insurance

Support:
Elizabeth Bartholomew, AZ DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION; Ezra Grace, representing self

HB2694, department of real estate; fees

Support:
Spencer Kamps, HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL AZ; James Knupp, AZ DEPT OF REAL ESTATE

HB2698, insurance: assignment of benefits

Testified in support:
Kevin Earle, representing self

Support:
randolph snyder, representing self; William Brian Powley, DDS, representing self; Crystal Bill, representing self;
Tina Ptacek, representing self; Jesstca Robertson, representing self; Jennifer Enos, representing self; John

MacDonald, AZ DENTAL ASSN

Oppose:

Stan Barnes, Arizonans For Affordable Health Coverage

All Comments:
Kevin Earle, Self: Representing AZ Dental Association; randolph snyder, Self: | vote in support of the Bill; William

Brian Powley, DDS, Self: insurance companies skirting the intent of fast year's bill addressing this same issue -
patients assigning benefits to be paid directly to the provider. Thank you for your consideration. Brian

HB82700, condominiums: planned communities; anendments

Support:
Dennis J Legere, ARIZONA HOMEOWNERS COALITION, Self; Stacy Davies, representing self; Alexis Glascock,

COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS INSTITUTE; Sean Baguley, representing self; Julia Wills, representing self; Pierre
Desombre, representing self; Ezra Grace, representing self; Mark LaPalm, representing self
Oppose:
Jason Barraza, Associate Director, ROBSON COMMUNITIES; Paul Fitch, representing self; Karen Cwiak, representing

self

All Comments:
Dennis J Legere, ARIZONA HOMEOWNERS COALITION, Self: The strike everything is a good initial first step to

establish greater flexibility to amend declarations while still protecting fundamental contract and property rights.
More has to be done with planned community statutes.; Alexis Glascock, COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS INSTITUTE:
Support pending a floor amendment; Julia Wills, Self: My neighborhood has been overrun with short term rentals.
There are just a few of us that still know each other. There aren't any long term rentals left, for people who move
here for work. | have lived in Sedona for 37 years.; Pierre Desombre, Self: Though not perfect, it is improved.; Mark
LaPalm, Self: With Rep Carter's strike everything change, | now support this bill.; Paul Fitch, Self: Good for
homeowners; Karen Cwiak, Self: Condo owner. Just over half of owners should not be allowed to vote on any
amendmeni(s) to any Declaration(s). No board(s) should ever have the right to vote on any amendment(s) to the

Declaration.

HB2714, office of tourism; continuation

Support:

Candace Strauss, representing self; Barbara Meaney, Arizona Wine Growers Association; Nick Simonetta, Cactus
League Baseball Association; Marcus Dell’Artino, Tucson Metro Chamber Of Commerce; Eric Emmert, Arizona
Association For Economic Development , East Valley Chambers Of Commerce Alliance ; Tom Dorn, GROSSMAN
COMPANY PROPERTIES; Dan Bogert, AZ RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION; Lauren King, ARIZONA WINE GROWERS
ASSOCIATION (AWGA); Cynthia Carr, representing self; Laura Magnus, EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE, VISIT MESA;
Mayor Cal Sheehy , representing self; Ezra Grace, representing self; Barry M. Aarons, VISIT PHOENIX; Debbie
Johnson, Arizona Office Of Tourism; Bridget Binsbacher, representing self; Kristy Pothier, representing self; Alix

Skelpsa Ridgway, representing self

Oppose:
David Kahn, REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS OF ARIZONA; Charles Schinke, representing self; Bill Brown,
representing self; DEBRA SCHINKE, representing self; Jean Ferguson, representing self; bruce emmons,

representing self

All Comments:
Mayor Cal Sheehy , Self: Lake Havasu City supports the continuation of Arizona Office of Tourism. Their efforts

continue to support all 15 Arizona counties generating positive economic impacts across the state.; Kristy Pothier,
Self: The Arizona Office of Tourism is important connective tissue between the world and the beauty of Arizona.
We all must support the continuation of AOT, an Arizona without them is unimaginablel; Bill Brown, Self: This is
cronyism at Its worst: a program that ostensibly pays for itself but actually doesn't and ends up subsidizing

corporations.
HB2724, assisted living; distance requirements; prohibition

Suppoit:

Rick Murray, Arizona Assisted Living Homes Association ; Ezra Grace, representing self
Oppose:

Roxanna Pitones, LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES & TOWNS; Miranda DeWitt, MESA, CITY OF; Alexis Apodaca,
CHANDLER, CITY OF; Ginna Carico, GOODYEAR, CITY OF

HB2731, requlatory sandbox; expansion

Testified in support:
Stephen Shadegg, Americans For Prosperity Arizona

Support:

Dianne McCallister, Arizona Technology Council; James Norton, Cicero Action ; Josh Kredit, AZ ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE; Jared Meyer, representing self; Jared Gorshe, AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY AZ, Self; David
Morris, representing self; Martha Petersen, representing self; Andrew Petersen, representing self; Erik Petersen,
representing self; Chanda Petersen, representing self; Emma Petersen, representing self; Russell Melland,
representing self; Niels Petersen, representing self; Ashley White, representing self; Joren Andersen, representing
self; Ryne Bolick, representing self; Joshua Geenen, representing self; Shabad Bharara, representing self;
Devarshan Patel, representing self; Jason Porter, representing self; Leif Nelson-Melby, representing self; Chris Bell,

representing self; Izzie Beeks, representing self

Oppose:

Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club - Grand Canyon Chapter; Jeanne Devine, representing self; Nancy Pfafflin, representing
self; Rivko Knox, representing self; Pat VanMaanen, representing self; Thomas Krepitch, representing self; Kelly
Griffith, SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR ECONOMIC INTEGRITY; Rebecca Smith Gross, representing self; Peggie Jo
Vincent, representing self; Beverly Janowitz-Price, representing self; Eve Shapiro, representing self; Kenneth
Bierman, representing self; Alisa McMahon, representing self; Michael Fiflis, representing self; Sandy Whitley,
representing self; Molly McGovern, UNITED FOOD & COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL 99; Karen Cusano,
representing self; Daniella Smith, Arizona Coalition For Working Families; Barbara Hutchinson, representing self;
Becky Sayler, representing self; Jackie Rich, representing self; Kathy Fraser, representing self; Linda Bentley,
representing self; Kathryn Pensinger, representing self; Don Bentley, representing self; Jim Moran, representing
self; Nancy Santort, representing self; Dorothy Reed-Inman, representing self; Diane Hermann, representing self;
Tom Hermann, representing self; Margaret Bruns, representing self; Robert Fisher, representing self; Sherry
Massie, representing self; Theresa Paszkiewicz, representing self; Cynthia Wagner, representing self; Barbara
Hollway, representing self; Karen Muir, representing self; Francis Copple, representing self; Peter Bengston,
representing self; Birgit Loewenstein, representing self; Pat Jayson, representing self

All Comments:

Jared Meyer, Self: Representing Cicero Action; Jeanne Devine, Self: Why should sandbox programs be exempted
from permits?; Rivko Knox, Self: Bad idea to expand the programs that already allows entities to operate without
permits!{; Pat VanMaanen, Self: Expands regulatory sandbox program that allows entities to operate without
permits, not a good idea.; Alisa McMahon, Self: What about liability coverage for injured parties?; Sandy Whitley,
Self: | think it is always a good idea for the state to know what an new entity with a new something is doing in our
state. Permitting allows the state to know that.; Jackie Rich, Self: This would allow entities to operate without
permits.; Peter Bengston, Self: This program allows entities to operate without permits.; Birgit Loewenstein, Self:

No entity should be allowed to operate without permits

1HB2747, wholesale real estate buyers; disclosure

Testified in support:
Tom Farley, Arizona Association Of Realtors; Chris Palomino, representing self

Support:

Ezra Grace, representing self

HB2822, personal property; additional depreciation

Testified in support:
Chad Heinrich, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS; Timothy Lawless, COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

EXECUTIVES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT "CREED"

Support:
Dianne McCallister, Arizona Technology Council; Patrick Bray , ARIZONA FARM AND RANCH GROUP; Eric Emmert,
East Valley Chambers Of Commerce Alliance ; Ezra Grace, representing self; Courtney Coolidge, AZ CHAMBER OF

COMMERCE

Oppose:

Sharon Lee, representing self; Christine McLachlan-Comer, representing self
All Comments:

Timothy Lawless, COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE EXECUTIVES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT "CREED": This bill will
improve Arizona's competitiveness in job creation

HCR2031, employee benefits; compensation; state preemption

Support:

Dan Bogert, AZ RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION; Don Isaacson, Arizona Licensed Beverage Association; Trish Hart, AZ
FOOD MARKETING ALLIANCE; Chad Heinrich, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS; Marcus
Dell’Artino, Tucson Metro Chamber Of Commerce; Eric Emmert, East Valley Chambers Of Commerce Alliance ;
Michelle AhImer, AZ RETAILERS ASSN; Jen Springman, GREATER PHOENIX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE; Marie

Isaacson, AZ LICENSED BEVERAGE ASSN; Nicole LaSlavic, AZLTA

Oppose:
Vanessa Goldberg, representing self; kathleen mayer, representing self; Dave Long, representing self; Rivko Knox,
representing self; Pat VanMaanen, representing self; Steve Ramos, representing self; Mary Pradelt, representing
self; Denise Link, PhD, WHNP, representing self; Oris Friesen, representing self; Kathleen Noble, representing self;
Janet Larkin, representing self; Steven Linder, representing self; Rebecca Smith Gross, representing self; marilyn
duerbeck, representing self; Henne Queisser, representing self; Maria Salvucci, representing self; Craig McDermott,
representing self; Kevin Brown, representing self; Judith Keagy, representing self; Eve Shapiro, representing self;
Mary Ann Graffagnino, representing self; Beatriz Urrea, representing self; Paul Benz, representing self; DOUG
ARNOLD, representing self; Claudia Bloom, representing self; Karen Syversen, representing self; Sallie Kladnik,
representing self; margaret gallagher, representing self; Elizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo, representing self; Cynthia
Couture, representing self; Sherrilynn James, representing self; Donita Ramos, representing self; Ruthanna
Battilana, representing self; Margaret Baca, representing self; Daniella Smith, Arizona Coalition For Working
Families; Bryna Koch, representing self; Mary Grove, representing self; Catherine Sigmon, representing self;
Margrit Mcintosh, representing self; Cathleen Bohnlein, representing self; Elizabeth Kelchner, representing self;
Katherine Doman Sheydayi, representing self; Elizabeth Schauer, representing self; Elizabeth Goff, representing
self: Charlie Silver, representing self; Barbara Kain, representing self; Ruth Lambert, representing self; Barbara
Oliver, representing self; Cynthia Hans, representing self; Barbara Hutchinson, representing self; Christine Whitley,
representing self; Marylynne Shroyer, representing self; Becky Sayler, representing self; Susan Morris, representing
self; Brent Gibbs, representing self; Stefanie Richardson, representing self; Alexei Sheydayl, representing self;
Robin LaVoie, representing self; Rebecca Olsen McHood, representing self; Susan Engelhard, representing self;
Julie Golding, representing self; Kristin Roberts, representing self; Christine Keitges, representing self; Jackie Rich,
representing self; Sarah Fanning, representing self; Lawrence Peters, representing self; Suzanne Berger,
representing self; Linda Edwards, representing self; Kathy Fraser, representing self; Kimberlee McClure,
representing self; Judy Greene, representing self; Jeri Dow, representing self; Nelson Morgan, representing self;
Margaret Winchell, representing self; Ann Strine, representing self; Susan Phelps, representing self; Steve Gorman-
Hackstadt, representing self; David Patchen, representing self; Linda Cooke, representing self; Nancy Hancock,
representing self; Glenda Wood, representing self; Karen Harris, representing self; Toby Friedman, representing
self; Amy Bonnett, representing self; Robert Larson, representing self; Barbara Larson, representing self; Kathleen
Dubbs, representing self; Marilyn Coyle, representing self; Nancy Santori, representing self; Edna Weigel,
representing self; Jacqueline deSa, representing self; Margaret Adams , representing self; Linda Julson,
representing self; rene Hunting, representing self; Teresa Akrish, representing self; Francis Copple, representing
self; Barbara Hollway, representing self; Linda Guarino, representing self; Penny Boone, representing self; Mariette
Francis, representing self; Jo Ann Caruthers, representing self; John Gleason, representing self; Christine
McLachlan-Comer, representing self; Karolyn Switzer, representing self; Mary Martiniak, representing self; Stephen
Coyle, representing self; Mary Ellen Beaurain, representing self; Dan Schwartzstein, representing self; Virginia
Kovatch, representing self; Janell Alewyn, representing self; Jean Meconi, representing self; Dorothy Reed-Inman,
representing self; CAROL R BLACKMAN, representing self; Jason Backman, representing self; Rebecca Haynes,
representing self; Emily Norton, representing self; Marte Thearle, representing self; Amy Gaiennie, representing
self; Julian Donahue, representing self; Diane Nevill, representing self; Margaret Lacey, representing self; Kathleen
Butler, representing self; Kirstin Woodburne, representing self; Jane Atkins, representing self; Kerrie Green,
representing self; Jan Perozeni Corbus, representing self; Mary-Jeanne Fincher, representing self; Jeffrey Fortney,
representing self; Mary Fortney, representing self; Jessie Spalding, representing self; Frederick James, representing
self; William S. James, representing self; Amy Etzkorn, representing self; Carly Mahlmeister, representing self;
Jennifer Chastain , representing self; Jerrold Borchardt, representing self; DEBRA GORDON, representing self; Kim
Hoover, representing self; Cassandra Morano, representing self; Claudia Oreck-Teplitsky, representing self; Erin
McCamish, representing self; Roy Verdery, representing self; Claire Bickel, representing self; Ryan Anderson,
representing self; Andrew Flach, representing self; Linda Block, representing self; Joan Murphy, representing self;
Karen Peterson, representing self; Dana Nicolson, representing self; Jessica Kitterman, representing self; Diane
Lings, representing self; Emmie Cardella, representing self; Julia Olson, representing self; Charlotte Lis,
representing self; Marcia Tingley, representing self; Diane Leischow, representing self; Marilyn Murov,
representing self; Elizabeth Brauer, representing self; Carol Fiore, representing self; Pamela Thompson,
representing self; Thea Chalow, representing self; Paula Van Derven, representing self; Lisa Koenig, representing
self; Irene Arango, representing self; Ariana Flores, representing self; Gary Ezzell, representing self; Carol Garnett,
representing self; Ellen M. Ferreira, representing self; Martha O'Connor, representing self; Abby Brill, representing
self; Anne Leota Hart, representing self; Leda DeVlieger, representing self; Allison Jackson, representing self; Amy
Pedotto, representing self; Kathleen Martin, representing self; Rachel Rulmyr, representing self; Kathleen Schanus-
Gohl, representing self; Heather Schlemmer, representing self; Janet Johnson, representing self; James Stein,
representing self; Margaret Owen, representing self; Kathleen Collins, representing self; Linda Ekstrum,
representing self; Gayle Meredith, representing self; Ralph Meredith, representing self; RITA DEPUYDT,
representing self; Karen Huttenmeyer, representing self; Alicia Vaughan, representing self; Sandy Coffey,
representing self; Angela J. Miller, representing self; Victoria Wilson, representing self; John Babicz, representing
self; Kelly Colvard-Walter, representing self; Karina Sampson, representing self; Vickey Finger, representing self;
Micheal Slattery, representing self; Paisley Rossetti, representing self; Janet Senf, representing self; Julia Wills,
representing self; Patricia Dow, representing self; Brendan O'Connor, representing self; Elizabeth McClure,
representing self; Theresa Ryan, representing self; Barbara Lynn Carpenter, representing self; Loretta o'connor,
representing self; David Williams, representing self; Gary Townsend, representing self; Kathleen O'Neill,
representing self; Mary Ganapol, representing self; Gail Prestera, representing self; Eileen Hollowell, representing
self; Sue Thorne, representing self; J Nicholas Prestera, representing self; GARY LEW OLIVER, representing self;
Joan Thomas, representing self; Teri Hollingsworth, representing self; Sally Dooley, representing self, Jill Anderson,
representing self; Melissa Galarza, representing self; Sarah Seaver, representing self; Saher Afzal, representing self;
Catherine Hopkins, representing self; LaMista Schultz, representing self; Gail Bird, representing self; William Yohey,
representing self; Cynthia Wagner, representing self; Elizabeth Lyons, representing self; Teresa Neiberg,
representing self; Nancy Branham, representing self; Bruce Flocken, representing self; Robert Maier, representing
self; Patricia Edelen, representing self; Greer Warren, representing self; Jacqueline Bauer, representing self; Elaine
Downing, representing self; Geoff Esposito, LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA; Kathleen Woessner,
representing self; Joseph Bihms, representing self; Ellen Bodow, representing self; Sharon Ehrlich, representing
self; Sheila Green, representing self; Nataly Reed, representing self; Lisa Maczura, representing self; Nicole Fordey,
representing self; George Ehrlich, representing self; Susan Shapiro, representing self; Sally Caruso, representing
self; Jeannine Reno, representing self; Karen DeLay, representing self; Susan Ordway, representing self; Anne
Rohweder, representing self; Kim Buckley, representing self; Devon Sloan, representing self; Francine Saccio,
representing self; Kathleen Sauer, representing self; Janie Smieszek, representing self; Bailey Spears, representing
self: Patricia Ellsworth, representing self; Carol Kurimsky, representing self; Patricia Brunner, representing self;
Laura Libman, representing self; Brandy Reese, representing self; Genise Tomko, representing self; Theresa
Prichard, representing self; Jordan Ripley, representing self; Angela Dzikoski, representing self; John Propster,
representing self; Barbara Jones, representing self; Gabe Leadley, representing self; Tina Kilcullen, representing
self; Aaron Essif, representing self; Jillian Ballard, representing self; Cheryl Stafford, representing self; Linda
Reichert, representing self; Carol Campbell, representing self; Sarah Montgomery, representing self; Margaret
Knecht, representing self; Douglas Cain, representing self; Susan Coliopy, representing self; Ann Sawyer,
representing self; Kay Davis, representing self; JOHN FIENE, representing self; Cynthia Paster, representing self;

Margaret Cordalis, representing self

All Comments:
Vanessa Goldberg, Self: Total LEGISLATIVE OVERREACH! What happened to the principle of “small government” ?;

kathleen mayer, Self: pls leave citizens alone to manage their own affairs via their local governments. talk about
govt overreach.; Rivko Knox, Self: ‘Payback’ to the cities that have raises wages and benefits. Curtails the rights of
local voters to elect leaders to institute policies they support! Violates the concept of ‘charter cities'.; Pat
VanMaanen, Self: Local governments know what their community needs and should be able to implement it.
Benefits and Wages are regional not a statewide issue.; Denise Link, PhD, WHNP, Self: Matt 20: 1 - 16 "Am I not
allowed to do what | want with my money? Or are you envious because | am generous?"; Kevin Brown, Self:
Enough preemption; Judith Keagy, Self: This is better left to local governments to determine. Stay in your lane,
legislators.; Mary Ann Graffagnino, Self: Cities and towns should have the regulate employee benefits and wages.;
Beatriz Urrea, Self: Cities and towns must continue to have the right to regulate employee benefits. This is a rightl;
Paul Benz, Self: city and county minimum wage issues should be up to them only and the state should butt the hell
out of their business. Pull this one Regina Cobb Paul Benz LD15; Karen Syversen, Seif: The Arizona Constitution
does not need amending to ban cities and towns from regulating their own wages, benefits, etc. A judge blocked
the fine against Flagstaff. Learn from this|; Elizabeth Putnam-Hidalgo, Self: Disappointing that "home rule” only
applies to fegislatures when they are talking against federal rule, but not to where most people call home.; Cynthia
Couture, Self: This is tegislative over reach. Let cities and towns deal with their own intrinsic problems and needs.
Do YOUR job instead. Fund education.; Bryna Koch, Self: Vote no on this bill. This is an affront to local control and
it seems like the legislature continues to waste time on a years old settled issue regarding minimum wage
increases in cities in Arizona.; Cathleen Bohnlein, Self: Local government entities know more about local needs
than state government; Barbara Kain, Seif: City and town leaders should be able to determine the pay and benefits
that will allow them to attract and retain the employees they need. Please vote no.; Ruth Lambert, Self: | thought
you promoted competition? Let local jurisdictions make their own decisions and stop increasing state
government's role.; Barbara Oliver, Self: This bill wants to punish Flagstaff and other cities from raising the
minimum wage higher than the state mandated one. Shame, shame, shamel!; Cynthia Hans, Self: This interferes
with cities self regulation. Overreach.; Susan Morris, Self: Why should cities and towns lose the right to regulate
employee benefits? This makes no sense.; Jackie Rich, Self: Don't interfere with local governments’ ability to do
their jobs.; Sarah Fanning, Self: 85248; Lawrence Peters, Self: Stay in your lane and out of local govt management.
Don’t make voters to do your dirty work of trying to penalize Flagstaff for its minimum wage. The party that says it
is pro-life should be in full support of fair wages.; Margaret Winchell, Self: No words.; Toby Friedman, Self: Think
of how many workers in Flagstaff have a better life with their increased minimum wage. Let's not hurt the
citizens!; Edna Weigel, Self: LET CITIES DO THE RIGHT THING EVEN IF THE STATE WON'TI; Linda Guarino, Self: Local
controll; Penny Boone, Self: NO! This bill tries to place local control with the Az Legislature which is partisan,
extremist, & smells fascistic to me. | oppose.; Jo Ann Caruthers, Self: Keep out of local decisions.; John Gleason,
Self: VOTE NO on legislative overreach and micromanagement! Town, cities, and counties all have elected officials
and boards and the State legislature doesn't need to be meddling in local issues. Vote NOI!I; Karolyn Switzer, Self:
it seems like local rule is valued only when it happens to agree with certain people's wishes. Cities and towns are
not all alike, so the state should not be trying to force them to be.; Janell Alewyn, Self: Seriously? Change the
Arizona Constitution to prevent cities from paying a living wage with good benefits? NO!; Rebecca Haynes, Self:
The legislature appears to be jealous of progressive cities. How about raising your own standards instead?; Amy
Gaiennie, Self: | oppose this bill. What are you--the Federal government? You hate when the Feds do this to you--a
state, so why should you do what you hate to AZ cities and towns? Think it through]; Diane Nevill, Self: Employee
wages and benefits should not be a statewide regulation. Different parts of Arizona have different cost of living
requirements.; Jan Perozeni Corbus, Self: Do not amend the Arizona Constitution for this matter. Each city and
town need to be able to make their own decision on employee benefits, wages, etc.; Mary-Jeanne Fincher, Self:
The legislature should not be micro-managing cities and towns.; jeffrey Fortney, Self: 85331; Mary Fortney, Self:
zip 85331; Erin McCamish, Self: Flagstaff should be able to make rules for Flagstaff.; Roy Verdery, Self: Employee
compensation should be regulated locally, not at a State level. Only local governments can understand local
economic conditions and it is they who have to deal with the local consequences of unemployment and poverty.;
Joan Murphy, Self: Take cities rights away? The legislature should serve instead of attempting to ruin our
democracy; Jessica Kitterman, Self: Legislators have been trying to penalize the city of Flagstaff for years for
setting a higher minimum wage than the state-mandated one. All cities are not the same as far as cost of living and
should be able to make their own minimum wage.; Marilyn Murov, Self: This does not merit a constitutional
amendment. A judge has already blocked a state fine on Flagstaff due to their voter approved higher than state
mandated minimum wage. | voted against Flagstaff's minimum wage but disagree with 2031.; Elizabeth Brauer,
Self: Cities and counties should be allowed to set their own minimum wage if they think the state level is too low.
The Legislature complains about unnecessary federal regulation of the state, then hypocritically imposes rules on
local entities.; Carol Garnett, Self: Do not take away focal control where local people decide what is best for the
workers in their communities. They don't need state legislative controls.; Anne Leota Hart, Self: Amending the AZ
constitution to penalize cities for local control is not what we in AZ want. We want more local control and not
have that usurped by the state. This is an end around to punish my city of Flagstaff for putting in place a livable
wage.; Kathleen Martin, Self: Leave the decision at the local level.; Janet Johnson, Self: Respectfully, why introduce
legislation that will harm Arizonans. instead please work on a minimum wage that allows people to make a decent
living by working just one job, not multiple jobs.; Margaret Owen, Self: Total over-reach. Amend the constitution
for this?? Let local communities do what they feel is best for them. In other words, focal control.; Angela J. Miller,
Self: There are good reasons why a city may need to have a different min. wage or benefits, and state should
respect that.A city might need to do that to attract employees for tourism, for example.Or the cost of living may
be higher there.; Elizabeth McClure, Self: | believe cities should be allowed to manage themselves as their
residents and mayors and councils see fit. Stick to true statewide issues, especially those that require state funds.;
Gary Townsend, Self: Overreach! Cities and towns must retain the ability to regulate employee benefits.; Gail
Prestera, Self: Stay out of city government. The environment and cost of living vary by city. Members of city
government and the general public know what is best for their city.; Eileen Hollowell, Seif: Leave cities and towns
to make their own decisions about minimum wages and benefits. Big state government is no better than Big
federal government. Actually much worse.; Sue Thorne, Self: Rep Cobb-this bill is control-freak stuff. If Flagstaff or
any other town in AZ wants to raise pay, they have a good reason. Maybe living is more expensive there. Miser
Business Owners of Maricopa County: Happy Employees are the best employees! NO; Sally Dooley, Self: Another
example of the state trying to take power away from local municipalities; Sarah Seaver, Self: Cities and
municipalities need the ability and flexibility to regulate their own employee benefits.; Catherine Hopkins, Self:
Cities have the right to control their city. Would the author like if the Feds controlled Az legislature? NO. Why does
legislature want to control a city and their decisions. One size DOES NOT fit all; Bruce Flocken, Self: Please oppose
this bill. The state gov't always cries foul when the federal gov't imposes requirements the state disagrees with,
yet this bill has the state imposing requirements on local/city gov'ts. Leave the local gov'ts benefits local.; Robert
Maier, Self: Removing authority from the cities to the state in such a sweeping manner is surprising and troubling.;
Patricia Edelen, Self: Blatant attempt to punish cities from setting their own minimum wage. Stop taking local
control away from cities in AZ.; Greer Warren, Self: Quit this Vengeance Quest against Flagstaff. Let the charter
cities have their home rule.; Jacqueline Bauer, Self: Stop interfering with city governance.; Joseph Bihms, Self:
What happened to valuing “local government"? It makes no sense to restrict a local city or town from setting their
own regulations such as minimum wage.; Lisa Maczura, Self: More regulation?! Not a good look. Will discourage
businesses from moving to AZ.; Nicole Fordey, Self: cities/towns SHOULD be able to set their own minimum wage,
esp. when the state won't raise it; Susan Shapiro, Self: I'm proud that my city of Flagstaff has set a higher minimum
wage than the state mandates.; Jeannine Reno, Self: Who wants this? Not Arizonans! Supporting public education,
protecting the environment, and building a sustainable economy for all is what voters want. Creating new
problems by micromanaging what you don’t like is a waste of of taxpayer S; Kathleen Sauer, Self: Why is the
legislature afraid of higher wages? Doesn't this make a bigger middle class, better citizens, more secure, healthier
children? Why should the government have to subsidize the too low wages we already have?; Bailey Spears, Self:
Cities, towns, and their residents deserve the right to control the local issues that directly affect them. State
politicians need to stop the power grab.; Patricia Ellsworth, Self: Please STOP trying to run the cities and counties
of Arizona. That is not what you were elected to do. Cities & counties know their own situations and must be
allowed to make their own decisions.; Laura Libman, Self: Another retaliation bill, this one because you were not
able to punish Flagstaff for raising the minimum wage. The judge blocked you.; Theresa Prichard, Self: Local
communities should be allowed to regulate benefits and wages. this is an overreach of state authority.; John
Propster, Self: Another pathetic attempt to punish uppity cities for exercising local control. Overreach by a power
hungry legislature. Vote NOI; Tina Kilcullen, Self: Increase minimum wage to a truly livable amount and this would
not even be an issue would it?; Aaron Essif, Self: Too much State control over cities and towns.; Cheryl Stafford,
Self: There should only be a statewide regulation of employee benefits, including wages, a statewide issue if they
fall below a set amount NOT if those benefits are greater than a set amount, Let cities and towns decide If they
want to increase benefits.; Sarah Montgomery, Self: Cities can set a higher minimum wage if they want to.;
Margaret Knecht, Self: Why so much emphasis on taking away freedoms from cities and towns? | thought AZ was
a state that liked to enhance freedom. Is it only certain freedoms for some but not freedom for cities and towns
to enact their own employee pay/benefit rules?; Ann Sawyer, Self: A minimum wage is just that; a minimum. Let
local towns and cities decide what's appropriate for their own communities. Amending the constitution seems
drastic and capricious; Kay Davis, Self: | do not support the state regulating employee benefits, including salaries.;
JOHN FIENE, Self: Once again, this is an attack on Home Rule, and is not the State's business.; Margaret Cordalis,
Self: The state should NOT be able to preempt city decisions on wages and benefits.
PLEASE. COMPLETE ‘THIS FORM. FOR THE: PUBLIC. ‘RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly
Committee on (; OM Hs Bill Number VE
Date _ / / J, S- 2-4 Li Support Oppose . O Neutral
Name iy Jt th ol ] Dv / k €/ — NeedtoSpeak? SYes ONo
Representing Ay? (e- Are you a registered lobbyist? AP

Complete Address ‘/ 4 gp. We a UL ) Ta os

a

E-mail Address Pou | le oy o ‘agp Cp 4 Phone Number VOX- Wee LG) L C4
fo

Comments:

PT VE-MINUTE SPEAKING LIMIT***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on Lipp. Bill Number LRP ?—
bate pL LS BR [4’support [ Oppose [1 Neutral
Name Dh ke. YL ettO Need to Speak? a Yes [J No
Representing za Po Are you a registered lobbyist?

Complete Address _ b ( E Col jeep jag Phe “ica Mb. GOL, b,
Email Address wike cilesde Peet taped ean bod-2 DEOL Vif

Comments:

***® Sneaking limit determined by Chair ***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on ( A Hal Bill Number 2 Pict {
CSO ~ :
Date (¢ ely toga Mi Support [Oppose  L Neutral

Name en Drv Stayt Need to Speak? A Yes LI No

—C
Representing (C ely o(. ‘tw Vo, Are you a registered lobbyist? (c 5
Complete Address g) he ae 2 (4 Lh aves Ad
Email Address Rofroy Sh Muse Phone Number @ Ao 343-627 0 |

Comments:

*** Sneaking limit determined by Chair ***

| PLEASE, COMPLETE T THIS FORM | FOR THE: poptic RECORD .

‘HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Please PRINT Clearly
Committeeon COMMERCE Bil! Number _H© Z574
Date  O2/19 / 2027, Ci Support O Oppose . Arent
Name Sacor, Seng — Need to Speak? y¥es No

Representing ( COON TY Q nee ROIS OLL ASS you a registered lobbyist? VES
Complete Address | QO O S U- (WASHINGTON

E-mail Address GSACOWS econ rye aUpione 2 ‘SEL

Comments:

#2] VE-MINUTE SPEAKING LIMIT***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on LommMe{ce Bill Number 126 [2

wok a
Date O2-|5-2L /7C\ Support 1 Oppose LL] Neutral
Name_J i Nostow Need to Speak? A ves [C1 No
Representing Circe {O Ne fron Are you a registered lobbyist? VA
Complete Address
Email Address Phone Number GOL-G44 498
Comments:

+** Speaking limit determined by Chair ***
PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on Commerce Bill Number Ub2e4
Date v} \Sfaz C1) support pWoppose C] Neutral
"Name [20x anna Vilones Need to Speak? Ww Yes [J No

Representing (éadve of Keown Cikies 4 pre you a registered lobbyist?) ¥ <$
Complete Address \sto Ww. Washi, to fiaeewas AZESO ot

Email Address Tiloaes (w) ar leatut .Ov¥ — phoneNumber Yo2-T10- b 03%
Comments: _b Mosed bol Wor bing uf SPorso be OddeesS Common .

*** Sneaking limit determined by Chair ***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on Cownwrerce. Bill Number _‘Z.leS &
Va aN
Date 2/i16/zozz. C] support (© Oppose WF Neutral /
se a7
Name Gelbe, Grande. Need to Speak? MW Yes 1 No

Representing Wreauwtlanacd Tustilube, Are you a registered lobbyist? W/A.
Complete Address SABA N. Wile RAS Av lingo Heiohts iL
ra) r)

Email Address barande®heortlond -O*4 Phone Number 461+ 368-14NSl

Comments: we. core a none wot oraani cot wD
rr

*** Speaking limit determined by Chair ***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on (ow. were Bill Number Le AIC 6b
Date 2115 (D2. [1] Support oppose 1 Neutral
Name Dyin. Sina. Need to Speak? [M yes C1 No
Representing l ed Ne im Are you a registered lobbyist?

Complete Address

Email Address Vhe Sinan techyer OM fron Number

Comments:

*** Speaking limit determined by Chair

EE SBE

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

Committee on won HOUSC, COMMECCO _ Bill Number_$t 2.040

Date 2. | (5 12.2. DX support [1 Oppose [] Neutral
Name f= TY. abern Bas + t 0) Lowen) Need to Speak? x Yes LI No
Representing a Dd ae Are you a registered lobbyist? y eS

Complete Address 00 N. lam AVC: Phoeniy, AZ $500)

Email Address eElizab¢th. bACtrolanun) Phone Number (902 54) ' T!l4
WAZ doa. Gav

Comments:

_ *** Speaking limit determined by Chair ***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly

committee on Lo bfl2ey ew CE. Bill Number tf és 3d 2 OCD
Date dis av F Qu Don [1 Oppose [I Neutral
tone, iat | _Need to Speak? LA” Yes L} No

Representing 7S A A be Leg lf ene © ALES Cea hi ie lobbyist?
Complete Address __2 8? FO al ther Le lveté sf Gah > h Jo. AR
ete A Mak ech 2. wad® Sphone Nimber © 4 ‘

Comments:

*** Speaking limit determined by Chair ***

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Please PRINT Clearly
Committee on Cope pner O Bill Number % 7 o®
Date * [as s [2 C yas Support [1] Oppose [1 Neutral
Name Sta bey. Da vrs Need to Speak? Al yes L] No

Are you a registered lobbyist? J J om

Representing

Complete Address

Phone Number

Email Address

Comments:

*** Speaking limit determined by Chair ***

ee ee a MO
PLRASE COMPLETE THIS FORM FOR: THE PUBLIC RECORD
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Please PRINT Clearly
Committee on _ Compedr} Bul Number | BQH 7
Date 2-|8- 22 = (Support OOppose (i Neutral
Name ~\@-AC AY GSTLO Need to Speak? . Dyes C1 No
NTO Agscciat oA . ;
Representing - Ave G ern Of Are you a registered lobbyist? N
PEE S lo NES LACdEIELO PAOFS

Complete Address requ, up- Cae abe € pee 3 C)
E-mail Address NCO O) Eddy Cus sth! Prone Number 622, -&® uU~5e Uk

Comments:

#FTVE-MINUTE SPEAKING LIMIT#**

ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE RECORD

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE
CHAIRMAN: Jeff Weninger VICE-CHAIRMAN: Joseph Chaplik
DATE 02/15/22 /22 /22 122 /22
CONVENED 2..225m m m m m
RECESSED
RECONVENED
ADJOURNED VS Spin
MEMBERS
Carter uw
Chavez /
Cook a
Espinoza / |
Kaiser /
Liguori iL“
Meza Va
Wilmeth VA
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman 4
Weninger, Chairman va

V Present --- Absent exc Excused

Attachment 3

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2694: department of real estate; fees
Sponsor: Representative Toma, LD 22
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Eliminates the minimum fee amounts relating to real estate licensure.

History
Arizona Department of Real Estate (ADRE) was established in 1921 and administers real estate

laws for the purpose of protecting the public interest through licensure and regulation of the real
estate profession in Arizona. The Department regulates and Issues licenses for real estate and
membership camping brokers and salespersons and cemeteries. The Department oversees the
activities of licensees, investigates complaints against licensees and land developers, participates
in administrative hearings and administers the Homeowners Association Dispute Process. ADRE
is directed by the Real Estate Commissioner, who is appointed by the Governor (Title 31, Chapter

2, A.R.S.).

Statute outlines licensure fees which ADRE charges as follows:
1) broker's examination application fee of $35-$125;
2) broker's examination fee of $35-$100;
3) broker's license fee of $75-$250;
4) broker's renewal fee of $100-$400;
5) salesperson's examination application fee of $15-$75;
6) salesperson's examination fee of $15-$50;
7) salesperson's license fee of $35-$125;
8) salesperson's renewal fee of $60-$200;
9) branch office broker's license fee or renewal fee of $60-$200;
10) change of name and address of licensee fee of not more than $20;
11) duplicate license fee of $5;
12) reinstatement of license fee of $5;
13) certificate of correctness of copy of records fee of $1, plus the cost of reproduction;
14) temporary broker's license fee of $15-$50;
15) temporary cemetery salesperson's license fee of $15-$50; and
16) membership camping salesperson certificate of convenience fee of $15-$50

All monies collected from these fees are deposited in the state General Fund (A.R.S. §§ 32-2103:
32-2132).

Provisions
1. Removes the fee minimums for fees charged by ADRE relating to licensure. (Sec. 1)

2, Makes technical changes. (Sec. 1)

U Prop 105 (45 votes) 0D Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

NM/PB HB 2694
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 4

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON

Commerce

BILL NO. HB 2694

DATE February 15, 2022

MOTION: ~DP

PASS

>
wa
m

NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

SAIQS ISIS GN

APPROVED:

NW 7a

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

—

or)

iS ld LA) WH

COMMITTEE SECRETA

ATTACHMENT. S

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2724: assisted living; distance requirements; prohibition
Sponsor: Representative Toma, LD 22
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Prevents cities, towns and counties (local governments) from restricting the placement of assisted

living homes.

History
An assisted living home is an assisted living facility that provides resident rooms to ten or fewer

residents. An assisted living facility is a residential care institution, including an adult foster care
home, that provides or contracts to provide supervisory care services, personal care services or
directed care services on a continuous basis (A.R.S. § 36-401).

Provisions

1. Prohibits a local government from restricting, with a land use regulation or a general or specific
plan, the distance between an existing assisted living home and a new assisted living home
if all other standards and requirements have been met. (Sec. 1, 2)

0 Prop 105 (45 votes) {1 Prop 108 (40 votes) 0 Emergency (40 votes) J Fiscal Note

HB 2724
Initials Page 1 Commerce

—— Attachment b .
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __ HB 2724

>
DATE February 15, 2022 motion: DP

PASS NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

1 | O 0
C Sragullea’ enh —

KW 7 COMMITTEE SECRETARY,
ave <

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ZINSIXY AISVSINGR

ATTACHMENT__f

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2599: administrative hearings; GRRC
Sponsor: Representative Grantham, LD 12
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Makes various revisions relating to reviewing agency rules and appealable agency actions.

Establishes a dispute resolution process for disputes involving an interim agency action.

History
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1033, a person may petition an agency to either make, amend or repeal

or final rule or to review an existing agency practice to consider revising, repealing or making into
a rule, The agency, within 60 days after submission, must either: 1) reject the petition; 2) initiate
rulemaking proceedings; or 3) make a rule.

A person may petition the Governor's Regulatory Review Council (GRRC) to request a review of
an agency's final rule, an existing agency practice, a regulatory licensing requirement or an appeal
of an agency's rejection of a person's petition to review a rule or agency practice.

GRRC reviews Arizona regulations to ensure that they are necessary and to avoid duplication
and adverse impact on the public. GRRC also assesses whether Arizona regulations are
beneficial, clear, consistent with legislative intent, legal, and within the agency's statutory
authority. If an Arizona regulation does not meet these criteria, GRRC may return it to the agency
for further consideration. GRRC also reviews reports on existing Arizona regulations.

Provisions
Agency Rulemaking Review

1. Includes the standard of being consistent with the statute and reasonably necessary to carry
out the purpose of the statute regarding agency rule validity. (Sec. 3)

2. Expands petitions to GRRC to include allegations that the rule or practice exceeds the
agency's statutory authority. (Sec. 5)

3. Limits petitions to GRRC to five double-spaced pages. (Sec. 5)

4. Lowers, from four to three, the number of GRRC members that may request a hearing on an
appeal. (Sec. 5)

5. Limits agency statements to GRRC address certain allegation to five double-spaced pages.
(Sec. 5)

6. Directs GRRC to provide the petitioner and the agency equal amount of time for oral
comments and to provide time for comments by public members. (Sec. 5)

7. Clarifies that, on the determination by GRRC, a regulatory licensing requirement that exceeds
the agency's statutory authority nor is authorized by statute is void. (Sec. 5)

( Prop 105 (45 votes) C Prop 108 (40 votes) Emergency (40 votes) TD) Fiscal Note

HB 2599

Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 3

10.

11.

12,
13.

14.

Requires GRRC, rather than allows, to modify, revise or declare an agency practice, final rule
or licensing requirement void. (Sec. 5)

Specifies an agency may only pursue a practice or licensing requirement that has been
declared void or altered by GRRC pursuant to a new rulemaking. (Sec. 5)

Asserts GRRC decisions must be made by a majority of members who are present and voting
on the issue. (Sec. 5)

Specifies GRRC may not base any decision concerning compliance with rule validity
requirements in issuing a final rule or policy statement on whether any party or person

commented on the rulemaking or policy statement. (Sec. 5)
Appealable Agency Action
Outlines the minimum contents of a notice of appealable agency action. (Sec.7)

Permits an agency to require a bond of up to $50,000 from the party filing the appeal to cover
the agency's reasonable costs should the party lose the appeal. (Sec. 7)

Creates a rebuttable presumption that the agency-issued license is protecting public health,
welfare and the environment if the license substantially complied with licensing requirements.
(Sec. 8)

15. Allows an adversely affect party to present evidence that the license violated a specifically

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24,

25.

26.

initials

applicable state or federal requirement. (Sec. 8)

Permits the licensee or agency director to present additional evidence supporting the issuing
of the license. (Sec. 8)

Directs the administrative law judge to provide a copy of the final decision to all parties, rather
than just the agency. (Sec. 9)

Specifies a license is not stayed unless the affected party applies to the court for a stay order
pending final disposition. (Sec. 9)

Allows a licensee to accept the administrative law judge's decision as the final decision. (Sec.
9)

Outlines a process for determining a final decision if the licensee does not accept the
administrative law judge's decision as the final decision. (Sec. 9)

Dispute Resolution
Establishes an informal dispute resolution process for disputes involving an interim agency
action. (Sec. 10)

Allows a license who is not satisfied with the agency's response to submit a written request
for a final interim agency action decision from the agency's director. (Sec. 10)

Permits a license to submit a written request for dispute resolution before a qualified
professional. (Sec. 10)

Allows a party to submit a written request for dispute resolution before a qualified professional.
(Sec. 10)

Requires the requesting party to pay the full cost of the qualified professional's services. (Sec.
10)

Directs payment for services be deposited into an appeals program fund. (Sec. 10)

HB 2599
Page 2 Commerce

27

28.
29.

30.

31,

32.

33.

34,

35,

36.

37.
38.
39,

40
At

42.

43.

44,
45.

46.

47.

Init

. Requires an agency to establish and administer an appeals program fund for paying qualified
professionals. (Sec. 10)

Exempts the appeals program fund from lapsing of appropriations. (Sec. 10)

Specifies the agency may require a bond of up to $25,000 to cover the agency's costs should
the party lose the appeal. (Sec. 10)

Directs the agency to maintain a list of at least eight qualified professionals to conduct dispute
resolutions in which the parties mutually select. (Sec. 10)

Specifies the inclusion of a qualified professional to the agency's list does not equate to
employment. (Sec. 10)

Allows for the mutual selection of a qualified professional not on the agency's list but who is
otherwise qualified. (Sec. 10)

Directs the person who requested dispute resolution and the agency to submit specified
information to the qualified professional. (Sec. 10)

Creates a rebuttable presumption that the agency-issued license is protecting public health,
welfare and the environment and meets state and federal requirements if the license
substantially complied with licensing requirements. (Sec. 10)

Allows an adversely affect party to present evidence that the license violated a specifically
applicable state or federal requirement. (Sec. 10)

Permits the licensee and agency director to present additional evidence supporting the issuing
of the license. (Sec. 10)

Provides duties for the qualified professional in recommending a dispute resolution. (Sec. 10)
Requires the agency director to issue a final written resolution. (Sec. 10)

Specifies the time is tolled for compliance with any investigation or other requirement that is
associated with the subject of the dispute resolution unless superseded by a judicial order.

(Sec. 10)
. Provides for a judicial review of an agency's final written resolution. (Sec. 10)

. Specifies dispute resolution before a qualified professional do not apply to contested cases or
appealable agency actions. (Sec. 10)

Miscellaneous

Entitles a licensee who prevails in an appeal of an agency's final decision to recover
reasonable attorney fees and incurred costs. (Sec. 1)

Instructs an agency inspector, after conducting an inspection, to review the findings of the
inspection and possible agency actions. (Sec. 2)

Clarifies the deficiencies identified in an inspection report are alleged. (Sec. 2)

Revises the conditions under which the agency will not provide the inspected person the
opportunity to correct the alleged deficiencies. (Sec. 2)

Applies agency inspection reporting requirements and modifies the information contained in
the report regarding the Department of Environmental Quality. (Sec. 2)

Specifies the governance of administrative proceedings regarding federally delegated
programs and nonfederally delegated programs. (Sec. 11)

HB 2599
ials Page 3 Commerce

48. Defines pertinent terms. (Sec. 6, 10)
49. Repeal enacted laws deemed unconstitutional. (Sec. 4)

_ HB 2599
Initials Page 4 Commerce

Oo Oo nt DH OT BP WW MH #

BR BR DR BR MR ROR tp po
ao fF WO NM KF OD OBO ODO NN HD OT B&B WH DH KF OO

Fifty-fifth Legislature Commerce
Second Regular Session H.B. 2599

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2599
(Reference to printed bill)

Page 4, between lines 7 and 8, insert:

"Sec. 2. Section 32-4302, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:

32-4302. Qut-of-state applicants: residents: military spouses:

licensure: certification: exceptions: notice

A. Notwithstanding any other law, an occupational or professional
license or certificate shall be issued, in the discipline applied for and
at the same practice level as determined by the regulating entity, pursuant
to this title to a person who establishes residence in this state or
without an examination to a person who is married to an active duty member
of the armed forces of the United States and who is accompanying the member
to an official permanent change of station to a military installation
located in this state if all of the following apply:

1. The person is currently licensed or certified in at least one
other state in the discipline applied for and at the same practice level as
determined by the regulating entity and the license or certification is in
good standing in all states in which the person holds a license or
certification,

2. The person has been licensed or certified by another state for at
least one year.

3. When the person was licensed or certified by another state there
were minimum education requirements and, if applicable, work experience and
clinical supervision requirements in effect and the other state verifies
that the person met those requirements in order to be licensed or certified

in that state.

Failed Withdrawn.

Not Offered Analysts Initials
Attachment_{_ o

Oo On DO Be W PH EF

CO Ww Me MO MY WF MH TF MW PM MT PH RH wt rw ee Re ee pope op
Rp oO WN DTN FF WDM FP OO OM DOH FR WH BP oO

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

4, The person previously passed an examination required for the
license or certification if required by the other state.

5. The person has not had a license or certificate revoked and has
not voluntarily surrendered a license or certificate in any other state or
country while under investigation for unprofessional conduct.

6. The person has not had discipline imposed by any other regulating
entity. If another jurisdiction has taken disciplinary action against the
person, the regulating entity shall determine if the cause for the action
was corrected and the matter resolved. If the matter has not been resolved
by that jurisdiction, the regulating entity may not issue or deny a license
until the matter is resolved,

7, The person does not have a complaint, allegation or investigation
pending before another regulating entity in another state or country that
relates to unprofessional conduct. If an applicant has any complaints,
allegations or investigations pending, the regulating entity in this state
shall suspend the application process and may not issue or deny a license
to the applicant until the complaint, allegation or investigation jis
resolved.

8. The person pays al] applicable fees.

9. The person does not have a disqualifying criminal history as
determined by the regulating entity pursuant to section 41-1093.04,

B. This section does not prevent a regulating entity under this
title from entering into a reciprocity agreement with another state or
jurisdiction for persons married to active duty members of the armed forces
of the United States, except that the agreement may not allow out-of-state
licensees or certificate holders to obtain a license or certificate by
reciprocity in this state if the applicant has not met standards that are
substantially equivalent to or greater than the standards required in this
state as determined by the regulating entity on a case-by-case basis.

C. Except as provided in subsection A of this section, a regulating

entity that administers an examination on laws of this state as part of its

Oo Oo ss DT fF HY Mw

Oo WwW he ~~ BW YW YW WY WY MT KR HB ee ee em Be me Pp Ee
no Re Oo OD ON DO F WO YF Oo DOD On DO DH BRB WH) DH FEF OC

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

license or certificate application requirement may require an applicant to
take and pass an examination specific to the laws of this state.

D. A person who is licensed pursuant to this title is subject to the
laws regulating the person's practice in this state and ts subject to the
regulating entity's jurisdiction.

E. This section does not apply to:

l. A license or registration certificate that is issued pursuant to
chapter 24 or 26 of this title.

2. Requirements for a fingerprint clearance card issued pursuant to
title 41, chapter 12, article 3.1. ;

3. Criteria for a license, permit or certificate of eligibility that
is established by an interstate compact.

4, The ability of a regulating entity under this title to require an
applicant to submit fingerprints in order to access state and federal
criminal records information for noncriminal justice purposes.

F. A license or certificate issued pursuant to this section is valid
only in this state and does not make the person eligible to be part of an
interstate compact. A regulating entity under this title may determine
eligibility for an applicant to be licensed or certified under this section
if the applicant is not part of an interstate compact.

G. A regulating entity under this title shall prominently print the
following notice on all license and certificate applications and regulating
entity websites:

Pursuant to section 32-4302, Arizona Revised Statutes, a person shal]
be granted an occupational or professional license or certificate if the
person has been licensed or certified in another state for at least twelve
months, the license or certificate is in the same discipline and at the
same practice level as the license or certificate for which the person is
applying in this state and the person meets other conditions prescribed by
section 32-4302, Arizona Revised Statutes.

H. BEFORE ANY REGULATING ENTITY TAKES ANY OFFICIAL ACTION TO DENY A
PROFESSIONAL OR OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE THAT A PERSON APPLIES FOR PURSUANT TO

-3-
mo Oo tN OO OO Fe WO DY fF

Oo WO WW DM DW MR PO TR MW MR PRM DR eR mw eR ete
nyo RF OD Oo ON DM FP WO YM KF DO YY wDWON DH BP WH MY F&F |

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

THIS SECTION, THE REGULATING ENTITY SHALL SUBMIT THE APPLICATION AND THE
REASON FOR DENIAL TO THE GOVERNOR FOR REVIEW. THE REGULATING ENTITY SHALL
NOTIFY THE GOVERNOR OF ANY REQUIRED TIME FRAMES FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF

THE LICENSE APPLICATION BY THE REGULATING ENTITY.
I, BEGINNING JULY 1, 2022, ALL REGULATING ENTITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED

TO ISSUE OCCUPATIONAL OR PROFESSIONAL LICENSES PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION.

SHALL TRACK INFORMATION ABOUT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED IN THE FORMAT TO BE
DETERMINED BY THE GOVERNOR AND ANNUALLY REPORT THAT INFORMATION TO THE
GOVERNOR,

J. FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBSECTIONS H AND I OF THIS SECTION,
"REGULATING ENTITY":

1. MEANS ALL EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES .AND OFFICES AND ALL
STATE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

2. DOES NOT INCLUDE:

(a) A STATE AGENCY THAT IS HEADED BY A SINGLE ELECTED STATE
OFFICIAL.

(b) THE CORPORATION COMMISSION.

(c) ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION ESTABLISHED BY BALLOT MEASURE AT OR
AFTER THE NOVEMBER 1998 GENERAL ELECTION.

Sec. 3. Title 32, chapter 43, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes,
is amended by adding section 32-4304, to read:

32-4304. Occupational and professional licenses: websites:

reporting: definition

A. A REGULATING ENTITY THAT ISSUES OCCUPATIONAL OR PROFESSIONAL
LICENSES SHALL:

1. PROMINENTLY POST ON ITS WEBSITE HOME PAGE ALL CURRENT STATE
POLICIES THAT EASE LICENSING BURDENS AND THE EXACT STEPS APPLICANTS MUST
COMPLETE TO RECEIVE THEIR LICENSE USING SUCH POLICIES. POLICIES THAT EASE
LICENSING BURDENS INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:

(a) UNIVERSAL RECOGNITION OF OUT-OF-STATE LICENSES.

(b) AVAILABILITY OF TEMPORARY LICENSES.

(c) FEE WAIVERS.

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

1 (d) EXAMINATION EXEMPTIONS.

2 (e) ALLOWING AN APPLICANT TO SUBSTITUTE MILITARY EDUCATION OR
3 EXPERIENCE FOR LICENSING REQUIREMENTS.

4 2. HAVE A DESIGNATED AREA ON ITS WEBSITE HOME PAGE THAT INCLUDES
5 LICENSING INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY FOR MILITARY SPOUSES, ACTIVE DUTY
6 SERVICE MEMBERS AND VETERANS AND ALL POLICIES THAT MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE
7 APPLICANT GROUPS TO RECEIVE A LICENSE.

8 3. DISPLAY ALL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 2 OF THIS
9 SUBSECTION IN A LOCATION THAT IS EASY TO LOCATE AND SHALL USE LANGUAGE THAT
10 IS CLEAR AND CONCISE. A WEBSITE HOME PAGE FEATURE MAY LINK TO AN INTERNAL
11 WEBPAGE WITH MORE INFORMATION IF A REGULATING ENTITY DEEMS IT NECESSARY.

12 4, BEGINNING JULY 1, 2022, TRACK WHETHER EACH APPLICANT IS A VETERAN
13 OR MILITARY SPOUSE AND SHALL ANNUALLY REPORT THE INFORMATION GATHERED
14 PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH TO THE GOVERNOR.

15 B, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, “REGULATING ENTITY":

16 1. MEANS ALL EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND OFFICES AND ALL
17 STATE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

18 2. DOES NOT INCLUDE:

19 (a) A STATE AGENCY THAT IS HEADED BY A SINGLE ELECTED STATE
20 OFFICIAL.
21 (b) THE CORPORATION COMMISSION.

22 (c) ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION ESTABLISHED BY BALLOT MEASURE AT OR
23 AFTER THE NOVEMBER 1998 GENERAL ELECTION."

24 Renumber to conform

25 Page 5, Tine 18, after the first comma insert “OFFER TO"; strike "ON-SITE"

26 Line 19, strike "POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE"

27 Page 6, line 38, strike "THE SAME" insert “EVIDENCE OF A PATTERN OF NONCOMPLIANCE
28 AS DEMONSTRATED BY"

29 Line 39, after “same” strike remainder of line

30 Line 40, strike "LAST TWO YEARS" insert "premises"

31 Line 41, strike "IMPACT" insert "RISK"
House Amendments to H.B. 2599

Page 7, strike lines 30 through 37, insert:
"K. For agencies with authority under title 49, if, as a result of
an inspection or any other investigation, an agency alleges that a

regulated person is not in compliance with licensure or other applicable

1
2
3
4
5 regulatory requirements, the agency shail provide written notice of that
6 allegation to the regulated person. The notice shall contain the following
7 information:"

8 Page 8, line 2, strike "KNOWN AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION"

9 Line 5, after “agency” insert a period strike the remainder of line

10 Strike lines 6 and 7

11 Line 13, strike “a-trotite AN INSPECTION REPORT" insert "a notice"

12 Page 13, between lines 19 and 20, insert:

13 "Sec. 8. Title 41, chapter 6, article 3, Arizona Revised Statutes,
14 is amended by adding section 41-1039, to read:

15 41-1039. State agency rulemaking: governor approval;

16 submission: definition

17 A. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A STATE AGENCY MAY NOT CONDUCT ANY
18 RULEMAKING, INCLUDING REGULAR, EXPEDITED, INFORMAL, FORMAL, EMERGENCY OR
19 EXEMPT RULEMAKING, WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNOR. IN
20 SEEKING APPROVAL, A STATE AGENCY SHALL ADDRESS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AS
21 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RULEMAKING:

22 1, FULFILLING AN OBJECTIVE RELATED TO JOB CREATION, ECONOMIC
23 DEVELOPMENT OR ECONOMIC EXPANSION IN THIS STATE.

24 2, REDUCING OR AMELIORATING A REGULATORY BURDEN ON THE PUBLIC, WHILE
25 ACHIEVING THE SAME REGULATORY OBJECTIVE.

26 3. PREVENTING A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, PEACE OR
27 SAFETY.

28 4, AVOIDING VIOLATING A COURT ORDER OR FEDERAL LAW THAT WOULD RESULT
29 IN SANCTIONS BY A FEDERAL COURT FOR FAILURE TO CONDUCT THE RULEMAKING
30 ACTION.

Oo Os DBD oT SP WO DY

Oo Ww MO WW MR MW MR MH PP MR DOR MR ry EO et
we Oo DOW PN DO FP WD YY KF CO HO DO NN DD OHO FP WH WH + |

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

5. COMPLYING WITH A NEW STATE STATUTORY OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENT IF
THE COMPLIANCE IS RELATED TO A CONDITION FOR THE RECEIVING FEDERAL MONIES
OR PARTICIPATING IN ANY FEDERAL PROGRAM.

6. COMPLYING WITH A NEW STATE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT.

7. FULFILLING AN OBLIGATION RELATED TO FEES OR ANY OTHER ACTION
NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE STATE BUDGET THAT IS CERTIFIED BY THE GOVERNOR'S
OFFICE OF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND BUDGETING.

8. ADOPTING A RULE OR OTHER ITEM THAT IS EXEMPT FROM THIS CHAPTER.

9, MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE CONTROL, MITIGATION OR ERADICATION OF
WASTE, FRAUD OR ABUSE WITHIN A STATE AGENCY OR WASTEFUL, FRAUDULENT OR
ABUSIVE ACTIVITIES PERPETRATED AGAINST A STATE AGENCY.

10. ELIMINATING RULES THAT ARE ANTIQUATED, REDUNDANT OR OTHERWISE NO
LONGER NECESSARY FOR THE OPERATION OF STATE GOVERNMENT.

B. AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND THE CLOSE OF THE RULEMAKING
RECORD, A STATE AGENCY MAY NOT SUBMIT THE PROPOSED RULES TO THE COUNCIL
WITHOUT A WRITTEN FINAL APPROVAL FROM THE GOVERNOR. BEFORE CONSIDERING
RULES SUBMITTED BY A STATE AGENCY, THE COUNCIL MUST OBTAIN FROM THE STATE
AGENCY THE INITIAL APPROVAL PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THE SECTION AND THE
FINAL APPROVAL REQUIRED BY THIS SUBSECTION.

C. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A STATE AGENCY THAT SUBMITS A
RULEMAKING REQUEST SHALL RECOMMEND FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE GOVERNOR AT
LEAST THREE EXISTING RULES TO ELIMINATE FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL RULE REQUESTED
BY THE STATE AGENCY.

D. A STATE AGENCY MAY NOT PUBLICIZE ANY DIRECTIVES, POLICY
STATEMENTS, DOCUMENTS OR FORMS ON ITS WEBSITE UNLESS THE DIRECTIVE, POLICY
STATEMENT, DOCUMENT OR FORM IS EXPLICITLY AUTHORIZED BY STATUTE OR RULE. A
STATE AGENCY SHALL REMOVE MATERIAL NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY STATUTE
OR RULE FROM ITS WEBSITE ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION.

E. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "STATE AGENCY":

1. INCLUDES ALL EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND OFFICES AND ALL
STATE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

1 2. DOES NOT INCLUDE:

2 (a) A STATE AGENCY THAT IS HEADED BY A SINGLE ELECTED STATE
3 OFFICIAL.

4 (b) THE CORPORATION COMMISSION.

5 (c) ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION ESTABLISHED BY BALLOT MEASURE AT OR
6 AFTER THE NOVEMBER 1998 GENERAL ELECTION.”

7 Renumber to conform

8 Page 16, line 10, after "F" insert a period strike remainder of line

9 Strike lines 11 through 14 ,

10 Page 20, line 27, after the comma insert "AND EXCEPT FOR A LICENSING DECISION
li WHERE THE AGENCY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD OR COMMISSION HAS DETERMINED
12 THAT THE LICENSEE POSES A THREAT OF GRAVE HARM OR DANGER TO THE PUBLIC OR
13 HAS ACTED WITH COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR THE WELL-BEING OF THE PUBLIC IN
14 ENGAGING OR IN BEING ALLOWED TO ENGAGE IN THE LICENSEE'S REGULATED BUSINESS
15 ACTIVITY,"

16 Page 21, strike lines 3 through 44
17 Strike pages 22 through 25, insert:

18 "Sec. 13. Section 41-1092.12, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended
19 to read:

20 41-1092.12. Private right of action: recovery of costs and

21 fees: definitions

22 A. If an agency takes an action against a party that is arbitrary,
23 capricious or not in accordance with law, the action is an appealable
24 agency action if all of the following apply:

25 1. Within ten days after RECEIVING NOTIFICATION OF the action that
26 is arbitrary, capricious or not in accordance with law, the party notifies
27 the director of the agency in writing of the party's intent to file a claim
28 pursuant to this section, This notice shall include a description of the
29 action the party claims to be arbitrary, capricious or not in accordance
30 with law and reasons why the action is arbitrary, capricious or not in
31 accordance with law.

Oo Oo 4 A oO SP WO MH

YPN DM TS YW YW YW WH LT PT RH FB BRB wR He we Ee pS ES
oo 0oU ON OO FF WY MSD FE DO DO ON DH BR WH HD FF OO

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

2. The agency continues the action that is arbitrary, capricious or
not in accordance with law more than ten days after the agency receives the
notice.

3. The action is not excluded from the definition of appealable
agency action as defined in section 41-1092.

B. This section only applies if an administrative remedy or an
administrative or a judicial appeal of final agency action is not otherwise
provided by Taw. |

C. If the party prevails, the agency shall pay reasonable costs and
fees to the party from any monies appropriated to the agency and available
for that purpose or from other operating monies of the agency. If the
agency fails or refuses to pay the award within fifteen days after the
demand, and if no further review or appeal of the award is pending, the
prevailing party may file a claim with the department of
administration. The department of administration shall pay the claim
within thirty days in the same manner as an uninsured property loss under
trtte—4t;> chapter 3.1, article 1 OF THIS TITLE, except that the agency is
responsible for the total amount awarded and shall pay it from its
operating monies. If the agency had appropriated monies available for
paying the award at the time it failed or refused to pay, the legislature
shail reduce the agency's operating appropriation for the following fiscal
year by the amount of the award and shall appropriate that amount to the
department of administration as reimbursement for the loss.

D. If the administrative law judge determines that the appealable
agency action is frivolous, the administrative law judge may require the
party to pay reasonable costs and fees to the agency in responding to the
appeal filed before the office of administrative hearings.

E. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A LICENSEE MAY FORGO AN
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL AND SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AN AGENCY'S GRANT,
DENTAL, MODIFICATION OR REVOCATION OF A PERMIT ISSUED PURSUANT TO TITLE 49.

mo Os DBD TO FSF WW DH ft

> eel sac oe ee
oS i<~) [ee] ~~ foo>) om a we ine e Oo

House Amendments to H.B. 2599

ty F,. For the purposes of this section:

1. “Action against the party" means any of the following that
results in the expenditure of costs and fees:

(a) A decision.

(b) An inspection.

(c) An investigation.

(d) The entry of private property.

(e) A NOTICE OF VIOLATION

2. “Agency" means the department of environmental quality
established pursuant to title 49, chapter 1, article 1.

3. “Costs and fees" means reasonable attorney and professional fees.

4, “NOTICE OF VIOLATION’ MEANS A WRITTEN NOTICE ISSUED AFTER AN
INSPECTION OR INVESTIGATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 41-1009 THAT DOCUMENTS AND
COMMUNICATES AN ALLEGED DEFICIENCY MEETING ONE OR MORE OF THE CRITERIA
LISTED IN SECTION 41-1009, SUBSECTION E.

4-5. "Party" means an individual, partnership, corporation,
association and public or private organization at whom the action was
directed and who has expended costs and fees as a result of the action
against the party."

Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

Z2599WENINGER. docx
02/11/2022

04:05 PM

C: AH

-~16-

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE
COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2599
DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: <DPA\
PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter v4
Chavez L”
Cook 4 a ™
Espinoza L
Kaiser 4
Liguori _~
Meza VY
Wilmeth Leo
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman —
Weninger, Chairman a
10 ) O oO
Cheol cat Dont nat—
APPROVED: COMMITTEE seme

Whine

“JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT ©

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2656: certain affiliations; banks; prohibition
Sponsor: Representative Hoffman, LD 12
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Prohibits banks from discriminating against people based on certain affiliations or values. Allows

banks to offer investments and services which include subjective standards.

History
A financial institution is defined as a: 1) bank; 2) trust company; 3) savings and loan association;

4) credit union; 5) consumer lender; 6) international banking facility; or 7) financial institution
holding company under the jurisdiction of the Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions

(A.R.S. § 6-101).

Under the federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act it is unlawful for creditors to deny credit to credit
applicants on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status or age.

Provisions
1. Prohibits financial institutions doing business in Arizona from discriminating against persons

based on political affiliation and other social credit, environmental, social, governance or
similar values-based or impact criteria. (Sec. 1)

2. Stipulates a financial institution may offer investments or services that include subjective
standards if the standards are explained and disclosed before a person enters into a contract
for the services. (Sec. 1)

3. Clarifies a financial institution may still discontinue or refuse to conduct business with a person
when the action is necessary for the physical safety of the financial institution's employees.
(Sec. 1)

4. Asserts that the Legislature declares:

a) the practice of discrimination against persons or entities by using their social credit or
environmental, social justice and governmental score is a matter of statewide concern;

and
b) that discrimination based on such scores not only threatens the rights and proper
privileges of Arizona's inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free

democratic state. (Sec. 1)

(© Prop 105 (45 votes) (Prop 108 (40 votes) ) Emergency (40 votes) 0 Fiscal Note

HB 2656
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment ( |
10

il

12

13

14

15

16

1?

18

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session H.B. 2656

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2656
(Reference to printed bill)

Page 1, after line 28, insert:

"Sec, 2. Title 35, chapter 2, article 2, Arizona Revised Statutes,

is amended by adding section 35-320, to read:

35-320. State investments: investment managers; list: posting:

voting shares

A. THE STATE TREASURER SHALL POST A CURRENT LIST OF STATE
INVESTMENTS BY NAME ON THE STATE TREASURER'S PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE WEBSITE.
THE STATE TREASURER SHALL UPDATE ANY CHANGES TO THE LIST WITHIN A
REASONABLE TIME.

B. ANY INVESTMENT MANAGER SHALL ATTEST IN WRITING ON A_ FORM
PRESCRIBED BY THE STATE TREASURER THAT THE INVESTMENT MANAGER DOES NOT HOLD
ANY ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL OR GOVERNANCE-RELATED INVESTMENTS. THE STATE
TREASURER SHALL POST A CURRENT LIST OF INVESTMENT MANAGERS OF STATE
INVESTMENTS AND SHALL CERTIFY THAT THE INVESTMENT MANAGERS DO NOT HOLD
INVESTMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL OR GOVERNANCE-RELATED PRODUCTS. THE
STATE TREASURER SHALL POST THE CURRENT LIST OF INVESTMENT MANAGERS ON THE

STATE TREASURER'S PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE WEBSITE AND SHALL UPDATE ANY CHANGES

TO THE LIST WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME.

fo

Adopted # of Verbals _

Failed

: Not Offered
Attachment Jo.

9

10

ll

House Amendments to H.B. 2656

C. ALL STATE INVESTMENTS SHALL BE MADE IN THE SOLE INTEREST OF THE
BENEFICIARY TAXPAYER. THE STATE TREASURER'S EVALUATION OF AN INVESTMENT
MUST BE BASED ON PECUNIARY FACTORS, AND THE STATE TREASURER MAY NOT TAKE
UNNECESSARY INVESTMENT RISKS OR PROMOTE NONPECUNIARY BENEFITS OR OTHER
NONPECUNIARY SOCIAL GOALS.

D. UNLESS EMPLOYED BY AND SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE STATE
TREASURER, A PERSON OR ENTITY MAY NOT VOTE THE SHARES, OR OTHER INDICIA OF
OWNERSHIP, OF ANY COMPANY, PARTNERSHIP, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY OR OTHER

ENTITY PURCHASED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, WITH FUNDS FROM A PLAN OR GROUP

OF PLANS."

Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

Z2656WENINGERS
02/14/2022
09:46 AM

H: PRB/ra

2ESCHENTHGERS
O2ALTHAAGEE
STSS-Pit

Orr Sk

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE
COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __ HB 2656
DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DP A
PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter WA

Chavez ~

Cook ww |e

Espinoza ud eo

Kaiser i .

Liguori we

Meza \-

Wilmeth ae

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman we

Weninger, Chairman ae

o | 4 O

Sh suet Lib Ll, —

APPROVED: CONMITTEE SECRET

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT!

wt

THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE
FREEDOM RISING

February 15, 2022 Bette Grande - The Heartland Institute
bgrande@heartland.org

State of Arizona
Arizona State Legislature HB 2656 - Neutral
House Commerce Committee

Re: House Bill 2656 — Supplemental Testimony
Chairman Weninger and Members of the Committee:

In my testimony on House Bill 2656 I referenced the alliance of large financial institutions and
the federal government to advance the ESG movement and the Net-Zero 2050 initiative. This is
not a conspiracy theory as some claim, it is in fact well out in the open and I would like to
provide some context, as well as additional and supplemental resources in support of my
testimony.

In my testimony before your Committee, I said that collusion between government and large
businesses is a direct threat to your constituents and local businesses and there is far too much
evidence available to ignore the threat this poses to the citizens of Arizona and your private
business sector. I have testified to the impact of the ESG movement on the coal industry in my
home state of North Dakota with rising insurance premiums and restrictions to insurance
coverage and the information here will support that testimony.

An article in Bloomberg that was linked in my testimony provides important context and refutes
claims of a conspiracy theory - in their own words. This article discusses the Net Zero Insurance
Alliance, a group of the largest insurance companies in the world who have jointly pledged to
eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from their book of business, adopting Net-Zero 2050. This
group considered a proposal to “include a commitment to exit coal insurance” in the terms of
membership of aligned companies, but this proposal was scrapped on advice from legal counsel
saying this level of alliance could trigger anti-trust violations.

The information in this article alone refutes any claim of conspiracy theory since potential anti-
trust violations on their face imply collusion. But it gets worse. The article then addresses the
role of government in the ESG movement. The Net Zero Insurance Alliance is part of a larger
group, the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, a group of 450 companies with combined
assets exceeding $130 trillion, according to the article. Further, Butch Bacani, program leader of
the UN’s “Environment Programme’s Principles for Sustainable Insurance Initiative” is labeled a
“key architect of the alliance”.

Tellingly, the response of the Alliance, the U.N., the European Union, and the U.K. to anti-trust
concerns is simply to rewrite anti-trust laws to carve out “collective action towards net-zero

Attachment | Y

emissions”. After all, the article concludes: “Taking a position on fossil fuels, especially coal, is
critical to reaching net zero as the burning of thermal coal is the single largest contributor to the
increase in global temperatures.” ‘

Clearly governments around the world support the de-carbonization of our economy and are
enlisting large banks, financial firms, and insurance companies to enforce measures that cannot
be passed through the legislative process. Attached is a small sample of policies the private
sector is embracing in partnership with government. The threat and impact to your constituents
and local businesses cannot be ignored.

Regardless of what you believe about climate change, the playing field is clearly not level.
Private companies are free to set their missions and beliefs, but when the largest companies in
the world align with one voice - the freedom, liberty, and choices your constituents will be
restricted. Consumers we be left with fewer choices and higher prices.

Finally, much of the focus of the ESG is on the future of legacy energy production, coal, oil,
natural gas. But a review of the resources below shows that your agricultural sector, your lumber
sector, land use, and other important pieces to your economy will face the same threats. And the
citizens of your state will face the erosion of important freedoms - if states are unwilling to take a
stand,

Comments from Heartland colleague Justin Haskins, co-author of the best-selling book The
Great Reset:

* Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores are essentially a social credit system
Jor companies, similar to social credit schemes now in place in China.

* Some banks have started applying ESG scores to individual investment accounts, including
Jor accounts with relatively small investment amounts. It's not hard to see how ESG scores jor
companies could soon be imposed on individuals as well.

* ESG systems have already been adopted by the vast majority of big businesses in America.
According to a report by KPMG, thousands of companies, located in more than 50 countries,
already have ESG systems in place, including 82 percent of large companies in the United
States.

* Two of the primary reasons businesses and banks support ESG scores is because they are a
Sorm of regulatory capture and because they plan to make massive amounts of money from new
"green" government spending programs, vast amounts of money-printing from central banks,
and other, similar schemes.

* ESG systems are a form of cronyism designed to restrict freedom by doing an end-run around
state and federal laws. By coercing companies to control behavior, governments and central
banks have the ability to alter society without passing sweeping new laws.

Additional Resources:

Large Money Center Banks, Financial Institutions, Insurance Companies and the Federal

Government with one yoice - In their own words:

Bank of America Environmental and Social Risk Policy Framework
https://about.bankofamerica.com/content/dam/about/pdfs/environmental-and-social-risk-
policy-framework-report.pdf

BlackRock ESG Integration Statement
hitps://www.blackrock.com/corporate/literature/publication/blk-esg-investment-statement-

web.pdf

Lloyd’s of London (one of the largest insurance entities in the world) ESG Strategy and
Responsible Business Approach
https://www.lloyds.com/about-lloyds/responsible-business-esg-strategy

BMO (formerly Bank of Montreal) Responsible Funds Transition to Low-Carbon Global

Economy
http://www2.bmogam.com/1/123372/2017-05-12/7fb6yn

https://capitalmarkets.bmo.com/en/news-insights/news-releases/sustainable-finance/bmo-
declares-climate-ambition/

Wells Fargo Advancing Environmental Sustainability
hitps://www.wellsfargo.com/about/corporate-responsibility/environment/

Business Round Table Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation
https://www.businessroundtable.org/business-roundtable-redefines-the-purpose-of-a-
corporation-to-promote-an-economy-that-serves-all-americans

President Biden Executive Order 14008 on Whole of Government Approach to Tackle Climate
Change
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/27/executive-order-

on-tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad/

President Biden Executive Order 14057 Executive Order on Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries
and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/13/2021-27114/catalyzing-clean-energy-
industries-and-jobs-through-federal-sustainability#print

Treasury Sec, Yellin to Appoint Climate Czar at Treasury
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-yellen-climate/vyellen-says-would-appoint-
senior-climate-official-at-treasury-ldUSKBN2902B3

U.S. Department of Labor Proposes New Investment Duties Rule to Allow for ESG Investing
https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/ebsa/ebsa20200623

National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) Strategic Plan Calls for Credit Unions to Include

Climate Related Risk When Making Agricultural Loans (pg. 14)
https://www.ncua.gov/files/agenda-items/AG20211118ltem2b.pdf

How Wall Street Sees ESG Investing

ESG Investing — The Great Wall Street Money Heist
https://www.theepochtimes.com/esg-investing-the-great-wall-street-money-
heist _4247881.html

States Fighting Back to Protect their Citizens and Local Businesses

Texas Passes Statute Targeting ESG Movement
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-15/texas-targets-wall-street-in-fight-over-

sustainable-investing

West Virginia Dumps BlackRock Fund over Anti-Energy Stance
https://www.foxbusiness.com/ markets/west-virginia-dumps-blackrock-fund-over-anti-energy-

stance

Alaska Governor, Mike Dunleavy, Calls on States to Unite Over the ESG Movement
https:// lifepowered.org/watch-how-anti-energy-extremism-has-taken-over-the-corporate-

boardroom/

Bette Grande, The Heartland Institute. First They came for Alaska
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/first_ they came for alaska.html

Forget Peak Oil, Peak Capital Will Cost Consumers Dearly
https://redstate.com/heartlandinstitute/2021/01/13/forget-peak-oil-peak-capital-will-cost-

consumers-dearly-n309263

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2657: forced labor; manufactured goods
Sponsor: Representative Hoffman, LD 12
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Prohibits businesses operating in Arizona from selling goods that were made with forced labor or

slave labor.

Provisions
1, Prohibits a business entity from selling goods in Arizona or to Arizonans through electronic

means if the goods were manufactured using forced labor or slave labor. (Sec. 1)

2. Requires a corporate officer to annually sign and file an attestation under the penalty of perjury
with the Attorney General by the end of each January stating that the goods to be sold are not
the result of forced labor or slave labor. (Sec. 1)

3. Limits the extension of the attestation filing period to 30 days. (Sec. 1)
4. Directs the Attorney General to investigate violations. (Sec. 1)

(J Prop 105 (45 votes) C Prop 108 (40 votes) Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2657
Initials Page 4 Commerce

Attachment _|S_

Fifty-fifth Legislature Commerce
H.B. 2657

Second Regular Session
PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2657
(Reference to printed bill)

Page 1, line 4, after “entity:;” insert "third-party vendor;"; strike “civil”

1

2 Line 5, strike "penalty" insert “applicability "

3 Line 6, after "ENTITY" insert “OR THE BUSINESS ENTITY'S THIRD-PARTY VENDOR"

4 Line 7, strike “THROUGH ELECTRONIC MEANS”

5 Strike lines 15 and 16, insert:

6 “C. THIS SECTION APPLIES TO A BUSINESS ENTITY AND A’ BUSINESS
7 ENTITY'S THIRD-PARTY VENDOR THAT SELL PRODUCTS ONLINE OR AT A PHYSICAL
8 LOCATION AND THAT:

9 1. HAVE GROSS RECEIPTS OF AT LEAST $25,000,000.

10 2, IMPORT PRODUCTS OR PARTS OF PRODUCTS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES OR
11 ENTER INTO LABOR CONTRACTS OR EMPLOY PERSONS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES,"

12 Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

2657WENINGER2
02/14/2022
08:32 AM

H: PRB/1Ts

Attachment lb Not Offered____ Analysts Initial
ttachment_-

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __ HB 2657

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: PPA

NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>
x
m

PASS

Carter

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

SAIS

Kaiser

Liguori VA

Meza VA
Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

Ke O 10

( Jocgudliro Me
APPROVED: COMMITTEE SECRETARY
Wi ee \
JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT f

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2509: racing; boxing; transfer; gaming commission.
Sponsor: Representative Biasiucci, LD 5
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Establishes the Arizona Gaming Commission (Commission) and absorbs the powers and duties

of the Arizona Racing Commission, Arizona State Boxing & Mixed Martial Arts Commission and
the Arizona Department of Gaming (ADG).

History
ADG regulates tribal gaming activities as authorized by the Arizona Tribal-State Gaming

Compacts and is responsible for certifying casino employees and vendors working with casinos.
ADG regulates non-tribal gaming activities including event wagering and fantasy sports contests,
racing and pari-mutual/simulcast wagering and unarmed combat sports.

The ADG Division of Racing works with the Arizona Racing Commission to regulate horse racing
and the ADG Boxing & MMA Division works with the Arizona Boxing & Mixed Martial Arts
Commission to regulate unarmed combat sport events (A.R.S. §§ 5-101.01 and 5-224),

Provisions
Arizona Gaming Commission

Membership
1. Establishes the Commission.
a. Outlines the membership.
b. Provides for the terms of the members.
c. Requires the members to take the oath of office. (Sec. 3)
2. Instructs the Governor to appoint, and the Senate to confirm, the Director of the Commission.
(Sec. 3)

3. Allows the Governor to remove a member of the Commission with cause. (Sec. 3)

4. Specifies a member may be removed without cause by a majority vote of the Commission
membership. (Sec. 3)

5. Allows the members of the Commission to receive compensation and reimbursement for
certain expenses, (Sec. 3)

6, Prohibits individuals who have a financial interest in gaming, hold an elected office or are an
officer of a political party or convention from qualifying for Commission membership,
appointment or employment. (Sec. 3)

7. Specifies Commission meetings are at the discretion of the Commission and a majority of
members constitute a quorum. (Sec. 3)

8. Specifies the Commission must have an office in Phoenix and may have an office in Tucson.
(Sec. 3)

Ci Prop 105 (45 votes) UO Prop 108 (40 votes) 0 Emergency (40 votes) 0 Fiscal Note

HB 2509
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment
9. Stipulates an agency, on the request of the Commission, must provide services, equipment,
documents, personnel and facilities to the Commission without cost. (Sec. 3)

Responsibilities

10. Directs the Commission fo:

a.

aon

e.

Assume all the powers and duties of the Arizona Racing Commission, the Arizona State
Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts Commission and the Department of Gaming;
Enforce all Rules adopted relating to gaming;

Ensure the continued growth and success of gaming;
Regulate the location, practice, association and activities relating to the operation of

licensed gaming establishments and the manufacture or sale of gaming devices and

equipment; and
License all establishments where gaming is conducted and where gaming devices are

operated. (Sec. 3, 10)

11. Defines gaming as all racing, boxing, kickboxing, mixed martial arts, gambling on Indian
reservations, fantasy sports contests and event wagering. (Sec. 3)

Miscellaneous

12. Sunsets the Commission on July 1, 2032. (Sec. 8)
13. Repeals certain laws relating to gambling on Indian reservations. (Sec. 4)

14. Repeals the Arizona Racing Commission, the Arizona State Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts
Commission and the Department of Gaming. (Sec. 7)

15. Contains a purpose statement. (Sec. 9)

16. Directs Legislative Council to prepare conforming legislation. (Sec. 11)
17. Contains a delayed effective date of July 1, 2023. (Sec. 12)

18. Make clarifying and technical changes. (Sec. 1, 2, 5, 6)

Initials

HB 2509
Page 2 Commerce

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2509

Second Regular Session

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2509
(Reference to printed bill)

1 Page 12, strike lines 3 through 5
2 Renumber to conform

3 Strike line 20

4 Renumber to conform

5 Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

2509WENINGER
02/14/2022
11:31 AM

H: PRB/Ts

Loos

Adopted _/

Failed |

Not Offered Anal

Attachment \
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2509

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DPA

PASS NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza LL

\ TIAI\IR

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

NAKA

Weninger, Chairman

| CQ
N | oul a onl) ao

APPROVED: COMMITTEE SECRET.
Wii

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

OS

ATTACHMENT. ae
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2822: personal property; additional depreciation
Sponsor: Representative Weninger, LD 17
Committee on Commerce

Overview .
Sets the valuation factor, for property tax purposes, to 2.5% for specific class one, class two (P)

and class six personal property classified beginning January 1, 2022.

History

Arizona taxes all property based on its use unless it is constitutionally exempted (Article _9.
Sections 2, 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3) and has two types of property taxes that are levied:

1) Primary, which is for maintenance and operation of a taxing jurisdiction.
2) Secondary, which is for bonded indebtedness, voter-approved budget overrides and special

taxing districts.
Property is listed as either real (land, buildings and improvements to land) or personal (office
furniture, business equipment and tools used for business purposes) and divided into nine legal
classes. The valuation of property is divided between the Department of Revenue, which values
centrally assessed properties, and county assessors, who value all other properties.

Current law sets the valuation factor for the first tax year of assessment at 25% for specific
personal property in class one, class two (P) and class six. (A.R.S. § 42-13054)

Provisions
1. Sets the valuation factor at 2.5% for specific personal property in class one, class two (P) and
class six that is initially classified beginning on or after tax year 2022. (Sec. 1)

C1 Prop 105 (45 votes) 2 Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2822
Initials PB/VP Page 1 Commerce

Attachment e., |
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

COMMITTEE ON

Commerce

ROLL CALL VOTE

BILL NO.

DATE February 15, 2022

HB 2822

MOTION: _ <D?’

>
~<

PASS

NAY

m

PRESENT

ABSENT

Carter

a

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

“ISSSLANS SA

ca

8)

O
N pout xs Goal KAD

COMMITTEE SECRETAR

ATTACHMENT".

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2204: technical correction; wage board; powers
Sponsor: Representative Weninger, LD 17
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Allows a person to subtract gas fees paid for virtual currency from their gross income, and permits

virtual currency and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) received by airdrop to be considered a gift for tax
purposes.

History
The Federal Internal Revenue Code (IRC) allows a person to exclude, as a taxable gift, the first

$10,000 made to any person during the taxable calendar year. For gifts made after 1998, the
amount may be increased by a cost-of-living adjustment.

Provisions
4. Allows the value of any virtual currency and NFTs which a person receives by airdrop to be

subtracted from that individual's gross income. (Sec. 2)
2. Limits the airdrop income subtraction to the threshold amount prescribed in the IRC. (Sec. 2)

3. Permits a person to subtract gas fees from their gross income if, in calculating the gain or loss
of virtual currency sales, that person did not include, in the basis of the virtual currency, any

gas fees for the virtual currency. (Sec. 3)

4. Outlines an optional itemized deduction from an individual's gross income for casualty
deductions relating to medical expenses and the personal casualty loss of virtual currency

and NFTs. (Sec. 4)

5. Defines airdrop as the receipt of virtual currency through a means of distribution of virtual
currency to the distributed ledger addresses of multiple taxpayers. (Sec. 2)

6. Defines foreign currency, gas fee and virtual currency. (Sec. 3)
7. Makes conforming changes. (Sec. 1, 4)

0 Prop 105 (45 votes) Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) O Fiscal Note

HB 2204

NM/PB
Page 1 Commerce

Initials

Attachment 23

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2204

Second Regular Session

Oo Oo nN DD OT Se WO MR

Me RM PR BR RO RRR RR Re OR
—
BOOMs FF ob ON aah onpepo

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2204
(Reference to printed bill)

Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert:

"Section 1. Section 43-1001, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:

43-1001. Definitions

In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
1. “Arizona adjusted gross income” of a resident individual means

the individual's Arizona gross income subject to modifications specified in

sections 43-1021, amd 43-1022 AND 43-1028.
2. “Arizona gross income" of a resident individual means the

individual's federal adjusted gross income for the taxable year, computed

pursuant to the internal revenue code.
3. "Dependent" has the same meaning prescribed by section 152 of the

internal revenue code.

4, “Federal adjusted gross income" of a resident individual means
the individual's adjusted gross income computed pursuant to the internal
revenue code.

5. “Head of household" has the same meaning prescribed by sections
2(b) and 2(c) of the internal revenue code. Head of household includes an
individual who meets the qualifications of a surviving spouse under section
2(a) of the internal revenue code.

6. "Married person” means a married person on the last day of the
taxable year subject to the rules in section 43-1002.

7. "Net income" means taxable income.

8. "Person" means an individual.

Adopted a # of Verbal

Failed Withdrawn

Attachment pas

Not Offered Analysts initial
Oo Oo YY DD TO FSF WY MH fF

Ww WH |W MPD PO RM PM PP PR PM FS DY TH &
no)

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

9. “Single person" means any person who is not married or who was
legally separated on the last day of the person's taxable year.

10. "Spouse" means the wife or husband of the taxpayer.

11. "Taxable income" of a resident individual means Arizona adjusted
gross income less the deductions allowed in article 4 of this chapter.

12. "Taxpayer" means any person who is subject to a tax imposed by

this chapter.
Sec. 2. Section 43-1022, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:
43-1022. Subtractions from Arizona gross income

In computing Arizona adjusted gross income, the following amounts
shall be subtracted from Arizona gross income:

1. The amount of exemptions allowed by section 43-1023.

2, Benefits, annuities and pensions in an amount totaling not more
than $2,500 received from one or more of the following:

(a) The United States government service retirement and disability
fund, the United States foreign service retirement and disability system
and any other retirement system or plan established by federal law, except
retired or retainer pay of the uniformed services of the United States that
qualifies for a subtraction under paragraph 26 of this section.

(b) The Arizona state retirement system, the corrections officer
retirement plan, the public safety personnel retirement system, the elected
officials’ retirement plan, an optional retirement program established by
the Arizona board of regents under section 15-1628, an optional retirement
program established by a community college district board under section
15-1451 or a retirement plan established for employees of a county, city or
town in this state.

3. A beneficiary's share of the fiduciary adjustment to the extent
that the amount determined by section 43-1333 decreases the beneficiary's
Arizona gross income.

4. Interest income received on obligations of the United States,

minus any interest on indebtedness, or other related expenses, and deducted

-~?2-
Co OM A OT fF WHY &

oO WW Mm RH YH WH HB MH HK NW PL
Ny ee
Ss=@ © SF oN aask © N 2 6 COUT BE BEBO RTS

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

in arriving at Arizona gross income, that were incurred or continued to

purchase or carry such obligations.
5. The excess of a partner's share of income required to be included

under section 702(a)(8) of the internal revenue code over the income
required to be included under chapter 14, article 2 of this title.

6. The excess of a partner's share of partnership losses determined
pursuant to chapter 14, article 2 of this title over the losses allowable
under section 702(a)(8) of the internal revenue code.

7, The amount allowed by section 43-1025 for contributions during
the taxable year of agricultural crops to charitable organizations.

8. The portion of any wages or salaries paid or incurred by the
taxpayer for the taxable year that is equal to the amount of the federal
work opportunity credit, the empowerment zone employment credit, the credit
for employer paid social security taxes on employee cash tips and the
Indian employment credit that the taxpayer received under sections 45A,
45B, 51(a) and 1396 of the internal revenue code.

9, The amount of exploration expenses that is determined pursuant to
section 617 of the internal revenue code, that has been deferred in a
taxable year ending before January 1, 1990 and for which a subtraction has
not previously been made. The subtraction shail be made on a ratable basis
as the units of produced ores or minerals discovered or explored as a
result of this exploration are sold.

10. The amount included in federal adjusted gross income pursuant to
section 86 of the internal revenue code, relating to taxation of social
security and railroad retirement benefits.

11, To the extent not already excluded from Arizona gross income
under the internal revenue code, compensation received for active service
as a member of the reserves, the national guard or the armed forces of the
United States, including compensation for service in a combat zone 4s
determined under section 112 of the interna) revenue code.

12. The amount of unreimbursed medical and hospital costs, adoption

counseling, legal and agency fees and other nonrecurring costs of adoption

-3-
Oo Oo NN Dm oO F&F WO MY

Ww Ww WW PR MP MH MT MO FTF MH TH TO HO F&F &
a

House Amendments to H.8. 2204

not to exceed $3,000. In the case of a husband and wife who file separate
returns, the subtraction may be taken by either taxpayer or may be divided
between them, but the total subtractions allowed both husband and wife may
not exceed $3,000. The subtraction under this paragraph may be taken for
the costs that are described in this paragraph and that are incurred in
prior years, but the subtraction may be taken only in the year during which
the final adoption order is granted.

13. The amount authorized by section 43-1027 for the taxable year
relating to qualified wood stoves, wood fireplaces or gas fired fireplaces.

14. The amount by which a net operating loss carryover or capital
loss carryover allowable pursuant to section 43-1029, subsection F exceeds
the net operating loss carryover or capital loss carryover allowable
pursuant to section 1341(b)(5) of the internal revenue code.

15. Any amount of qualified educational expenses that is distributed
from a qualified state tuition program determined pursuant to section 529
of the internal revenue code and that is included in income in computing
federal adjusted gross income.

16. Any item of income resulting from an installment sale that has
been properly subjected to income tax in another state in a previous
taxable year and that is included in Arizona gross income in the current
taxable year.

17. For property placed in service:

(a) In taxable years beginning before December 31, 2012, an amount
equal to the depreciation allowable pursuant to section 167(a) of the
internal revenue code for the taxable year computed as if the election
described in section 168(k) of the internal revenue code had been made for
each applicable class of property in the year the property was placed in
service.

(b) In taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2012
through December 31, 2013, an amount determined in the year the asset was
placed in service based on the calculation in subdivision (a) of this

paragraph. In the first taxable year beginning from and after December 31,

-4-
yo Oo SY DD oO Se WY LF

Oo W WO DM WH MB WH TH WH TS YK PS
ey

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

2013, the taxpayer may elect to subtract the amount necessary to make the
depreciation claimed to date for the purposes of this title the same as it
would have been if subdivision (c) of this paragraph had applied for the
entire time the asset was in service. Subdivision (c) of this paragraph
applies for the remainder of the asset's life. If the taxpayer does not
make the election under this subdivision, subdivision (a) of this paragraph
applies for the remainder of the asset's life.

(c) In taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2013
through December 31, 2015, an amount equal to the depreciation allowable
pursuant to section 167(a) of the internal revenue code for the taxable
year as computed as if the additional allowance for depreciation had been
ten percent of the amount allowed pursuant to section 168(k) of the
internal revenue code.

(d) In taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2015
through December 31, 2016, an amount equal to the depreciation allowable
pursuant to section 167(a) of the internal revenue code for the taxable
year as computed as if the additional allowance for depreciation had been
fifty-five percent of the amount allowed pursuant to section 168(k) of the
internal revenue code.

(e) In taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2016, an
amount equal to the depreciation allowable pursuant to section 167(a) of
the internal revenue code for the taxable year as computed as if the
additional allowance for depreciation had been the full amount allowed
pursuant to section 168(k) of the internal revenue code.

18. With respect to property that is sold or otherwise disposed of
during the taxable year by a taxpayer that complied with section 43-1021,
paragraph 11 with respect to that property, the amount of depreciation that
has been allowed pursuant to section 167(a) of the internal revenue code to
the extent that the amount has not already reduced Arizona taxable income
in the current or prior taxable years.

19. The amount contributed during the taxable year to college

savings plans established pursuant to section 529 of the internal revenue

-5-
eo On DTD Oo SF WS MH FE

Oo W WW MH MH MH MH WH MY LY PL PL
OE oe ey
Pe Oo 6FGaeO NA aR ONRD eH OKO ON TKRaEKRORDUSG

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

code on behalf of the designated beneficiary to the extent that the
contributions were not deducted in computing federal adjusted gross income.

The amount subtracted may not exceed:
(a) $2,000 per beneficiary for a single individual or a head of

household.

(b) $4,000 per beneficiary for a married couple filing a joint
return. In the case of a husband and wife who file separate returns, the
subtraction may be taken by either taxpayer or may be divided between them,
but the total subtractions allowed both husband and wife may not exceed
$4,000 per beneficiary.

20. The portion of the net operating loss carryforward that would
have been allowed as a deduction in the current year pursuant to section
172 of the internal revenue code if the election described in section
172(b)(1)(H) of the internal revenue code had not been made in the year of
the loss that exceeds the actual net operating loss carryforward that was
deducted in arriving at federal adjusted gross income. This subtraction
only applies to taxpayers who made an election under section 172(b)(1)(H)
of the internal revenue code as amended by section 1211 of the American
recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (P.L. 411-5) or as amended by section
13 of the worker, homeownership, and business assistance act of 2009 (P.L.
111-92).

21. For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2013,
the amount of any net capital gain included in federal adjusted gross
income for the taxable year derived from investment in a qualified small
business as determined by the Arizona commerce authority pursuant to
section 41-1518.

22, An amount of any net long-term capital gain included in federal
adjusted gross income for the taxable year that is derived from an
investment in an asset acquired after December 31, 2011, as follows:

(a) For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2012

through December 31, 2013, ten percent of the net long-term capital gain

included in federal adjusted gross income.

-6-
oOo Oo nN FD OO FPF WO HH Fe

Oo wor DMD YW BY DH HY WH WYN FB
a
eGo eoOntawrrkt onenoeoe una rkre ones

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

(b) For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2013
through December 31, 2014, twenty percent of the net long-term capital gain
included in federal adjusted gross income.

(c) For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2014,
twenty-five percent of the net long-term capital gain included in federal
adjusted gross income. For the purposes of this paragraph, a transferee
that receives an asset by gift or at the death of a transferor is
considered to have acquired the asset when the asset was acquired by the
transferor. If the date an asset is acquired cannot be verified, a
subtraction under this paragraph is not allowed.

23. If an individual is not claiming itemized deductions pursuant to
section 43-1042, the amount of premium costs for long-term care insurance,
as defined in section 20-1691.

24, The amount of eligible access expenditures paid or incurred
during the taxable year to comply with the requirements of the Americans
with disabilities act of 1990 (P.L. 101-336) or title 41, chapter 9,
article 8 as provided by section 43-1024.

25. For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2017,
the amount of any net capital gain included in Arizona gross income for the
taxable year that is derived from the exchange of one kind of legal tender
for another kind of legal tender. For the purposes of this paragraph:

(a) “Legal tender" means a medium of exchange, including specie,
that is authorized by the United States Constitution or Congress to pay
debts, public charges, taxes and dues.

(b) "Specie" means coins having precious metal content.

26. Benefits, annuities and pensions received as retired or retainer
pay of the uniformed services of the United States in amounts as follows:

(a) For taxable years through December 31, 2018, an amount totaling
not more than $2,500.

(b) For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2018

through December 31, 2020, an amount totaling not more than $3,500.
wo on HD OO Be WW KT

Wo Mm DRO TO WS MT TH DMP TF MH CO KF
i

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

(c) For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2020,
the full amount received.

27. For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2020,
the amount contributed during the taxable year to an achieving a better
life experience account established pursuant to section 529A of the
internal revenue code on behalf of the designated beneficiary to the extent
that the contributions were not deducted in computing federal adjusted
gross income, The amount subtracted may not exceed:

(a) $2,000 per beneficiary for a single individual or a head of
household.

(b) $4,000 per beneficiary for a married couple filing a joint
return. In the case of a husband and wife who file separate returns, the
subtraction may be taken by either taxpayer or may be divided between them,
but the total subtractions allowed both husband and wife may not exceed
$4,000 per beneficiary.

28. For taxable years beginning from and after December 31, 2020,
Arizona smal] business adjusted gross income, but only if an individual
taxpayer has elected to separately report and pay tax on the taxpayer's
Arizona small business adjusted gross income on the Arizona small business
income tax return.

29. TO THE EXTENT NOT ALREADY EXCLUDED FROM ARIZONA GROSS INCOME
UNDER SECTION 2503 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, THE AMOUNT OF THE VALUE OF
VIRTUAL CURRENCY AND NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENS THE TAXPAYER RECEIVED PURSUANT TO
AN AIRDROP AT THE TIME OF THE AIRDROP UP TO THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THRESHOLD
PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 2503 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AND AS LONG AS THE
TAXPAYER HAS NOT ALREADY MET THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THRESHOLD PRESCRIBED IN
SECTION 2503 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS
PARAGRAPH, “AIRDROP™ MEANS THE RECEIPT OF VIRTUAL CURRENCY THROUGH A MEANS
OF DISTRIBUTION OF VIRTUAL CURRENCY TO THE DISTRIBUTED LEDGER ADDRESSES OF

MULTIPLE TAXPAYERS.
wo On OD OH SB WH DH KF

WO W WwW MH MH MH MH KH WH TH WB LH PD
ll
8S £ SS 8SseXvtigscaRrgRgange® 8S Gatiaant ants

House Amendments to H.B. 2204

Sec. 3. Title 43, chapter 10, article 3, Arizona Revised Statutes,

is amended by adding section 43-1028, to read:
43-1028. Sale of virtual currency: calculation of gain or

loss: gas fees: subtraction; definitions
A. IF A TAXPAYER HAS INCLUDED IN ARIZONA GROSS INCOME A GAIN OR LOSS
ON THE SALE OF VIRTUAL CURRENCY AND IN CALCULATING THE GAIN OR LOSS THE
TAXPAYER DID NOT INCLUDE IN THE BASIS OF THE VIRTUAL CURRENCY ANY GAS FEES
PAID ON THE PURCHASE OF THE VIRTUAL CURRENCY OR DID NOT OTHERWISE DEDUCT
THESE GAS FEES IN DETERMINING ARIZONA GROSS INCOME, THE TAXPAYER MAY
SUBTRACT THE AMOUNT OF THE GAS FEES FROM ARIZONA GROSS INCOME.

B. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION:
1. “FOREIGN CURRENCY" MEANS THE COIN AND PAPER MONEY OF A COUNTRY

OTHER THAN THE UNITED STATES THAT 1S DESIGNATED AS LEGAL TENDER, CIRCULATES
AND IS CUSTOMARILY USED AND ACCEPTED AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE IN THE COUNTRY

OF ISSUANCE.
2, "GAS FEE" MEANS A FEE PAID TO THE OPERATOR OF A VIRTUAL NETWORK

FOR THE USE OF THE NETWORK TO FACILITATE THE PURCHASE OR SALE OF VIRTUAL

CURRENCY.
3, “VIRTUAL CURRENCY" MEANS A DIGITAL REPRESENTATION OF VALUE THAT

FUNCTIONS AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE, A UNIT OF ACCOUNT AND A STORE OF VALUE
OTHER THAN A REPRESENTATION OF THE UNITED STATES DOLLAR OR A FOREIGN

CURRENCY.
Sec, 4. Section 43-1042, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:
43-1042. Itemized deductions
A. Except as provided by subsections B, and C AND E of this section,

at the election of the taxpayer, and in lieu of the standard deduction
allowed by section 43-1041, in computing taxable income the taxpayer may
take the amount of itemized deductions allowable for the taxable year
pursuant to subtitle A, chapter 1, subchapter B, parts VI and VII, but
subject to the limitations prescribed by sections 67, 68 and 274 of the

internal revenue code.
oe Oo 4 DOD OT Fe WD MP

1  socell noel pen ce oe ce we
Co CO DCD VN DD oO Be WW MT * ©

21

House

Amendments to H.B. 2204

B. In lieu of the amount of the federal itemized deduction for
expenses paid for medical care allowed under section 213 of the internal
revenue code, the taxpayer may deduct the full amount of such expenses.

C. A taxpayer shall not claim both a deduction provided by this
section and a credit allowed by this title with respect to the same
charitable contributions. This subsection applies to any contribution for
which a credit is allowed by this title even if the contribution is treated
as a payment of state income tax.

D. The taxpayer may add any interest expense paid by the taxpayer
for the taxable year that is equal to the amount of federal credit for

interest on certain home mortgages allowed by section 25 of the internal

revenue code.
E. IN LIEU OF THE AMOUNT OF THE FEDERAL ITEMIZED DEDUCTION FOR

PERSONAL CASUALTY LOSSES ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 165 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE

CODE, THE TAXPAYER MAY:
1. DEDUCT THE AMOUNT ALLOWED BY SECTION 213 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE

CODE FOR PERSONAL CASUALTY LOSSES WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF THE LIMITATIONS

PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 165(h)(5) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.
2. DEDUCT THE AMOUNT OF PERSONAL CASUALTY LOSSES RELATED TO VIRTUAL

CURRENCY AND NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENS TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE NOT DEDUCTED
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 1 OF THIS SUBSECTION."

22 Amend title to conform

2204WE
02/11/
12:56
C: KCB

JEFF WENINGER

NINGER
2022
PM

-10-
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE
COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __HB 2204
= Val —

DATE February 15, 2022 motion: DPA {SG

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter ~~
Chavez uw
Cook Va
Espinoza al
Kaiser /
Liguori / VY
Meza /
Wilmeth a
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman ~
Weninger, Chairman V4

4 | ) 0

APPROVED:

(een —

VEPF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

So eau oo On da

COMMITTEE SECRETAR

)

—_

ATTACHMENT.__‘2-S
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2203: technical correction; cosmetology schools; contracts
S/E: special purpose banks; comparable; rights
Sponsor: Representative Weninger, LD 17
Committee on Commerce

Summary of the Strike-Everything Amendment to HB 2203

Overview
Grants special purpose depository institutions the same rights and immunities as comparable in-

state banks.

History
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 6-330, out-of-state banks with banking offices in Arizona are granted ail the

rights, powers and privileges and are entitled to the same exemptions and immunities as
comparable in-state financial institutions.

Statue states depository institution has the same meaning prescribed in the federal law as
any bank or savings association (42 United States Code Section 1813) and includes credit unions

(A.R.S. § 6-991).

Provisions

1. Clarifies an out-of-state bank doing business, rather than having a banking office, in Arizona
has all of the rights, powers and privileges and the same exemptions and immunities as a
comparable in-state financial institution. (Sec. 1)

2. Affords special purpose depository institutions that are chartered as a bank the same rights,
powers, privileges and entitlements as a comparable in-state financial institution. (Sec. 1)

HB 2203
Initials PB/TH Page 1 Commerce

ne Attachment Lis

mo ON DD TO SB WH HD &

en a)
eo Fr @&

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2203

Second Regular Session

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2203
(Reference to printed bill)

Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert:
"Section 1. Section 6-330, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:
6-330. Rights, powers and privileges of out-of-state banks

Except as prohibited by federal law, an out-of-state bank that~thas—@
trarking—offtce DOING BUSINESS in this state, INCLUDING ANY SPECIAL PURPOSE
DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION THAT IS CHARTERED AS A BANK, has all of the rights,
powers and privileges and is entitled to the same exemptions and immunities
as a comparable in-state financial institution that holds a permit under
this title and is subject to all of the provisions of this title to the

same extent aS a comparable in-state financial institution."

Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

2203WENINGER
02/08/2022
10:56 AM

C: SK

Adopted a # of Ver

Failed Withdrawn

Not Offered. Analysts initial

Aten rh rmaant ger
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2203

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DPA Is€

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter ws
Chavez 4
Cook -~
Espinoza WA
Kaiser ~
Liguori L?’
Meza V4
Wilmeth wi
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman Va
Weninger, Chairman /

iO | O 0 O

APPROVED: COMMITTEE ma »)

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT__<-
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2690: cybersecurity risk; insurance
Sponsor: Representative Weninger, LD 17
Committee on Commerce

Overview
- Directs the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) to obtain insurance for security system

and data breaches. Establishes the Cyber Risk Insurance Fund (Fund).

History
ADOA is required to, the extent it is deemed necessary, provide insurance on the following:

4) All State-owned buildings;

2) Contents in any building owned, leased or rented to or by the state;

3) This state and its departments, agencies, boards and commissions and all officers of these
entities as well as provide insurance for actions and omissions by these entities when
acting in authorized governmental actions;

4) All personal property reported to ADOA that is under the clear responsibility of this state
because of written leases or other written agreements;

5) This state and its departments, agencies, boards and commissions against casualty, use
and occupancy and liability losses;

6) Workers’ compensation and employers' liability insurance;

7) Design and construction of buildings, roads, environmental remediations and other
construction projects; and

8) Other exposures to loss where insurance may be required to protect this state and its
departments, agencies, boards and commissions and for all officers, agents and
employees acting in the course and scope of employment or authorization (A.R.S. § 41-
621).

ADOA may also determine that self-insurance is necessary or desirable and, if it is decided to be,
ADOA will provide for the state self-insurance for losses arising out of state property, liability or
workers’ compensation claims. The Director of ADOA may impose on state departments,
agencies, boards and commissions a deductible for each loss that arises out of a property, liability
or workers' compensation loss (A.R.S. § 41-621). Each year ADOA is required to provide a report
to the Legislature on actuarial needs due to liability losses, workers compensation liability losses
and property losses by September 1 (A.R.S. § 41-622).

Provisions
1. Requires ADOA to obtain insurance, or self-insure, on losses caused by data breaches,

security system breaches and security incidents for select boards, agencies and
commissions. (Sec. 1)

2. Allows ADOA, if self-insured, to apply a deductible for losses due to actual or suspected data
breaches, security system breaches or security incidents. (Sec. 1)

3. Establishes the Fund within ADOA. (Sec. 2)

[] Prop 105 (45 votes) © Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) CO Fiscal Note

HB 2690

Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 2.
4. Requires ADOA to include the actuarial needs for replenishment of the Fund in the agency's
annual budget request. (Sec. 2)

5. Specifies interest on any judgment against the state paid out for the Fund accrues at the
average yield offered by U.S. Treasury bills. (Sec. 2)

6. Specifies the Fund monies are exempt from lapsing of appropriation and are continuously
appropriated. (Sec. 2)

7. Defines pertinent terms. (Sec. 1)
8. Makes technical and conforming changes. (Sec. 1, 2)

HB 2690

Initials Page 2 . Commerce

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

BILL NO. __ HB 2690

MOTION: Df

COMMITTEE ON Commerce

DATE February 15, 2022

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter
Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

PASSA

Weninger, Chairman

QO [0

Oo

LL Qu, UR —<—>
APPROVED: COWMITTEE SECRET.
AVE

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT 2©
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2202: industrial commission; fee schedule; notice
Sponsor: Representative Weninger, LD 17
Committee on Commerce

Overview
An emergency measure that provides duties the Industrial Commission of Arizona (ICA) must

undertake prior to adopting the schedule of fees for physicians and prescription medicines.

History
The ICA establishes a schedule of fees to be charged by physicians, physical therapists or

occupational therapists attending to injured employees and for prescription medicines required to
treat an injured employee. The ICA is required to annually review the fees (A.R.S. 23-908).

Provisions
1. Requires the ICA, prior to taking final action on the schedule of fees relating to attending

injured employees and prescription medicines required for treatment, to:

a) prominently post on its publicly accessible website the proposed schedule of fees at least
90 days before conducting a public hearing on that proposed schedule of fees;

b) hold at least one meeting that all interested parties may jointly attend after posting the
proposed schedule of fees, but before conducting the hearing on the proposed schedule
of fees; and

c) at least 14 business days before, prominently post on its website, the final proposed
schedule of fees. (Sec. 1)

2. Makes technical changes. (Sec. 1)
3. Contains an emergency clause. (Sec. 2)

Oi Prop 105 (45 votes) [4 Prop 108 (40 votes) Emergency (40 votes) Fiscal Note

HB 2202

PB
Page 1 Commerce

Initials

Attachment S |

ao & WO NH Fe

COMMERCE

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2202

Second Regular Session
PROPOSED

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2202
(Reference to printed bill)

Page 1, line 44, after the comma insert “EXCEPT DURING A PUBLIC HEALTH

EMERGENCY,“
Page 2, line 2, strike "NINETY" insert "THIRTY"

Line 8, strike “FOURTEEN” insert "SEVEN"

Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

2202WENINGER
01/27/2022
03:49 PM

C: SK

Adopted a

Failed

Attachment 3 r=
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2202

moTION: DPA

DATE February 15, 2022

NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>
ts
iT

PASS

Carter

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

WVNNASISIS

Weninger, Chairman

O | O Q

CG

Jyun Qual
AERO pwn ane ree

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

4

+:
ATTACHMENT 33
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2678: state broadband office
Sponsor: Representative Cobb, LD 5
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Establishes the State Broadband Office (Office).

History
The Arizona Commerce Authority (ACA) promotes workforce development by providing private

sector leadership in growing and diversifying Arizona's economy and creating high quality
employment through the expansion, attraction and retention of businesses (A.R.S. § 41-1502).

Provisions

1. Establishes the Office within the ACA. (Sec. 1)

2. Specifies the Office consists of the State Broadband Director, who serves at the pleasure of
the ACA's chief executive officer. (Sec. 1)

3. Permits the chief executive office to employ Office staff to:
a) coordinate the implementation of local, state and federal broadband programs;

b) coordinate and execute federal broadband grant applications;
ce) provide guidance in navigating regulatory and permitting processes for broadband

infrastructure projects;
d) provide guidance on broadband policies and practices,
e) solicit feedback from stakeholders to develop long-term broadband policy priorities; and
f) work with partners, agencies and telecommunication providers to develop plans to

improve internet connectivity and resiliency. (Sec. 1)

4. Requires the Office to publish and maintain a state broadband plan that elaborates Arizona's
broadband goals. (Sec. 1)

5. Permits the Office to develop rules and guidelines to implement its duties. (Sec. 4)

D Prop 106 (45 votes) C1 Prop 108 (40 votes) 1 Emergency (40 votes) O Fiscal Note

HB 2678
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 24

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2678
DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DP

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter wA ~
Chavez — al
Cook Vv
Espinoza A
Kaiser wa
Liguori eo
Meza Va
Wilmeth ~
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman “ va
Weninger, Chairman ~*~

, x
 hewull Ap Orit f
APPROVED: CQMMITTEE SECRETARY
OL —..

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT ~3S_
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HCR2031: employee benefits; compensation; state preemption
Sponsor: Representative Cobb, LD 5
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Subject to voter approval, constitutionally declares the regulation of employee benefits is of

statewide concern and preempts local government regulations.

History
Article XVIII of the Arizona State Constitution provides for an eight-hour workday, outlines

employer and employee liability, provides rules for workmen's compensation and otherwise
governs labor within Arizona.

Cities within Arizona have broad power to create ordinances to govern matters of local concern
but the authority of political subdivisions over a matter may be preempted if that matter is
considered to be of statewide concern (A.R.S. Title 9, Chapter 4).

Provisions
{. Asserts, subject to voter approval, the regulation of employee benefits is of statewide concern

and is preempted by state and federal law. (Sec. 1)

2. Requires the Secretary of State to submit the proposition to the voters at the next general
election. (Sec. 2)

CO Prop 105 (45 votes) CF Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) O Fiscal Note

HCR 2031

Initials PB/JL Page 4 Commerce

oe Attachment 26
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE
COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HCR 2031
DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: _-DP
PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter va
Chavez WA ~~
Cook vo
Espinoza \~ _%
Kaiser a
Liguori V4
Meza Ve
Wilmeth 4
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman aa
Weninger, Chairman V
be Y © ©
“pool on Dede aa
APPROVED: COMMITTEE SECRETA
Whldegea ————

“7 BEF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT 37

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2234: vacation rentals; short-term rentals; enforcement.
Sponsor: Representative Kaiser, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Outlines further regulations of vacation or short-term rentals and restructures the civil penalties

for verified violations.

History
A city, town or county (local government) may not restrict the use of or regulate vacation or short-

term rentals based on their classification, use or occupancy, except to: 1) protect the public's
health and safety; 2) adopt and enforce residential use and zoning ordinances; and 3) limit or

prohibit the use of a rental for specified purposes.

Local governments are statutorily required to, within 30 days after a verified violation, notify the
Department of Revenue (DOR) and the vacation or short-term rental owner of the violation and
whether a civil penalty has been imposed. A verified violation is a finding of guilt or civil
responsibility for violating any state law or local ordinance that has been finally adjudicated

(A.R.S. §§ 9-500.39 and 11-269.17).

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 42-1125.02, DOR may impose civil penalties for an online lodging or a
vacation or short-term rental owner that receives a verified violation. If the local government did
not impose a civil penalty, the owner or operator must pay: 1) $500 for the first verified violation;
2) $1,000 for a second verified violation within a 12-month period; or 3) the greater of $1,500 or
50% of the gross monthly revenues for the month the violation occurs, for a third or subsequent
violation within a 12-month period. If the local government imposed a civil penalty, the owner or
operator must pay the difference between the statutory amount and the amount of the civil penalty
the local government imposed.

Provisions
1. Caps the civil penalties a local government may impose on a vacation or short-term rental

owner within the same 12-month period as follows:
a) the greater of $500 or one-night's rent, as advertised on an online lodging marketplace,

for the first verified violation;

b) the greater of $1,000 or two-night's rent, as advertised on an online lodging marketplace,
for the second verified violation on the same property; and

c) the greater of $3,500 or three-night's rent, as advertised on an online lodging marketplace,
for the third and any subsequent verified violation on the same property. (Sec. 1, 2)

2. Allows a local government to require a vacation or short-term rental owner to:
a) maintain liability insurance appropriate to cover the rental in the aggregate of at least

$500,000; or
b) advertise and offer each rental through a hosting platform that provides equal or greater

coverage. (Sec. 1, 2)

(J Prop 105 (45 votes) CO Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) © Fiscal Note
HB 2234
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 3%

3. Permits DOR, after proper notice and hearing, to suspend for one year the TPT license of a
vacation or short-term rental owner that has three verified violations within the same 12-month

period. (Sec. 1, 2, 4)

4. Authorizes a local government to impose a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for every 30 days a
vacation or short-term rental owner's failure to provide required contact information. (Sec. 1,

2)

5. Directs a local government to provide a vacation or short-term rental owner 30 days’ notice
prior to imposing an initial penalty for failure to provide required contact information. (Sec. 1,
2)

6. Removes language relating the requirement for notifying DOR and the vacation or short-term
rental owner of verified violations. (Sec. 1, 2)

7. Restates multiple verified violations that arise out of the same incident are considered one
verified violation when assessing civil penalties or suspending a TPT license. (Sec. 1, 2)

8. Repeals laws relating to civil penalties imposed by DOR. (Sec. 3)

9. Removes the limitations on the types of ordinances that a local government may adopt and
enforce. (Sec. 1, 2)

10. Provides a definition for online lodging marketplace. (Sec. 1, 2)
11. Removes timeshare from the definition of vacation rental or short-term rental. (Sec.1, 2)

12. Prescribes civil penalties for online lodging operators who fail to comply with certain
advertisement requirements. (Sec. 4)

HB 2234
initials Page 2 Commerce

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

Commerce BILL NO. HB 2234

MOTION: _ «DP

COMMITTEE ON

DATE February 15, 2022

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter
Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

Sa IVITITIUYGY SS

0 © 9

Hn . saaae =

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT. 34

Protecting the residential integrity of Arizona’s neighborhoods.

FUNDAMENTAL FLAWS and MANIFEST ERRORS OF HB 2234

1, Right now 90%+ of STRs are unlicensed and illegal. HB2234 provides incentives for
* The “30-day notice” period before fines apply for failing to register an STR basically
tells STR operators “Don’t bother to register until after you get caught”
* The $250 fine for failing to obtain a TPT Tax license is less than one night’s “bed tax”
for many STRs. Again, the “parking ticket” fine says “Don’t bother getting a license
until after you get caught.”

2. There are no teeth to this bill. All fines and penalties proposed by HB 2234 can be easily and
legally evaded by Owners and Operators that are structured as LLCs or similar entities.

3. Effective fines require recourse to natural born persons or full bonding for “entity owners”.

4, Effective penaities require licensing for the property, not the operator. Suspending the TPT for
an operator has no effect since a replacement operator can be hired or created (LLC)
immediately at minimal cost. Unless properties can be prohibited from operating as STRs the
nuisance operations can continue unabated under new owners or operators.

5. Sections 9-500.39 D and 42-5042 both refer to suspending the Owner’s TPT after three
verified violations. Owners are not required to obtain a TPT. Only operators are required to
obtain a TPT. As written, these penalties are wholly unenforceable.

Even the worst of the worst owners or operators would never have to pay a fine or skip a
single day of operating as an STR under SB 1168 as written.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON HB 2234

(Please see additional markup)

9-500.39 SECTION B 4 ~ Regarding STR Owner’s failure to register with city or town

Problem - Providing a 30-day notice (a “cure”) period is basically instructing Owners not to bother
registering until after they are caught because there will be no consequences. This will perpetuate the
ineffective “catch me if you can” situation that is extremely burdensome on cities and towns that has
resulted in compliance rates of only 20 to 25%.

Solutions ~ Delete 30-day notice period. Require platforms to verify properties are properly licensed
and registered prior to posting online. (Platforms are already set up for this.)

Attachment O_

Page 2 of 3

9-500.39 SECTION C — Regarding fines to the Owner for verified violations

Problem — As written, fines only apply to violations that “Owner receives”

Solution - Change language so any verified violations that occur at the specified property incur fines,
not just violations “owner receives”.

Problem - The fine schedule is easily evaded by Owners that are LLCs or similar entities.

Solutions — Owners must be natural born persons, provide recourse to natural born persons or
“entity” owners must be fully bonded.

9-500.39 SECTION D — Regarding TPT suspension for Owner

Manifest Error —- Suspending an Owner's TPT is meaningless since Owners are not required to obtain a
TPT.

Solution ~ Specify that the property at which the violations occurred cannot be used as an STR for a 12-
month period.

11-269.17 COUNTY PROVISIONS — Same as for cities and towns, above.

42-5042 SECTION A — Regarding Operators obtaining and displaying TPT license and information —
Operating without a license

Problems:

1. Enforcement would still rely on the current ineffective, burdensome “catch me if you can”
situation as AZDOR, cities and towns will still need to track down the 90%+ of operators that
are unlicensed.

2. When STRs can rent for thousands of dollars per night, a $250 penalty for a first offense is
barely a slap on the wrist

3. There is no distinction between “IMiom & Pop” operators and full time, professional third-party
operators.

4, There is no distinction between operating without a license and operating with a suspended
license.

Solutions:
1. Require platforms to verify all listings are licensed and registered as a condition of posting
online. This easily and effectively addresses the bulk of non-compliance and “catch me if you
can” issues.

2. Once verified listings are in place, operating without a license would be a willful violation that
should be addressed with higher penalties, especially for professional operators.
Page 3 of 3

3. For “Mom & Pop” operators renting their bona fide primary residence penalties for
operating without a license should be $1000 for a first offense and $2500 thereafter.

4, For third party operators the penalty should be $5000 and twice the revenues
collected while operating without a license.

5. For operating with a suspended license an additional fine of $25,000 or criminal
penalties should be imposed

42-5042 SECTION B ~ Suspending TPT license
Manifest Error — This section would suspend the TPT of “the online lodging owner” if the online
lodging operator receives three verified violations in a 12-month period. Online lodging owner is nota

defined term and owners are not required to obtain a TPT.

Solution ~ Stipulate that the specified property cannot operate as an STR for a 12-month period.

ITEMS NOT ADDRESSED IN HB 2234

OCCUPANCY LIMITS — “Party Houses” are essentially an occupancy limit problem. Without occupancy
limits that conform to single family areas the STR problem will continue.

“VERIFIED VIOLATION” PROCESS IS DYSFUNCTIONAL
1. Licensing compliance is the essential first step in any enforcement framework, otherwise
enforcement officers can’t even know if a violation is attributable to an STR or not.
2. 90% of STRs.in Arizona are:currently unlicensed .and operating illegally
Operators clearly have no regard for the law or fear of consequences
4. Even: with tens of thousands, of daily violations by unlicensed operators there has been zero
en forcement by. Az DOR.
5. Requiring platforms to verify properties are properly licensed and registered as a condition of
posting a listing online will quickly and effectively address the bulk of the compliance issue.
6. The “ultimate punishment” under the verified violation process is suspension (not even
revocation) of an operator’s TPT license. This is wholly ineffective since:
o Areplacement operator can easily and immediately be hired or created (LLC) so the
owner will never need to cease operations as an STR
o There are no consequences for operating without a license

»

AZ DOR INEFFECTIVE — The Arizona en n
the role of enforcing. any STR regulatory framework. AZD
management business.

PROPERTY TAXES ~ STRs place substantial additional burdens on civic services and should be taxed at
commercial property tax rates unless they are the bona fide primary residence of the operator.

CONCENTRATION ~ A concentration of STRs in any area or community substantially degrades the
residential character of the community. Limits must be allowed.

Rev, 220215

Exclusive 9 Unit Condo Complex w/Private
Pool+More

About this rental
° Apartment
o 1sq. ft
e 12 bedrooms
o 20 beds
o Sleeps 24

e 9bathrooms
o 9 full baths
e Family spaces
o Kitchen
o 6Living Room
o Porch/Veranda

In the heart of central Phoenix, just 7 minutes from the Biltmore Fashion Park, 10 minutes from
Downtown Phoenix, 15 minutes from Old Town Scottsdale, plus minutes away from dozens of other
attractions! Nearby freeway access to any part of town.

Things to know:

High-speed WiFi

Central AC in each unit

Single level / step-free access

Heated pool is available November through March.

Take over your own personal condo complex! Whether you are hosting a retreat, traveling with your
whole family or planning a friends getaway, this stylish, completely redone, desert theme hideaway is
perfect for your trip. Nomad is complete with 9 units, a total of 12 bedrooms, plus a private courtyard,

private heated pool and additional common space for your use.

Each unit’s open space design flows from living room with flatscreen TV to comfortable bar seating into
a fully stocked kitchen with stainless steel appliances. Each unit even comes with its own in-unit laundry.
You won’t be lacking any comfort here!

Like a slow start to your morning? Take a moment to enjoy coffee in your unit’s private kitchen, some
units event have a private patio to enjoy on. Want to enjoy that AZ sunshine a bit? Relax by the sparkling
pool, BBQ on the grill or maybe enjoy delivery on the picnic tables, and then play some lawn games in
the courtyard.

With easy your own parking lot and secure access in and out of the complex, Nomad is the ideal set up for
staying in or venturing out (in your rental car, rental bus or ride-shares).

Additional information about rental rates

Cleaning Fee
$1,000

Rooms & beds

Bedrooms: 12(Sleeps: 24)

Bedroom 1
sleep sofa /futon (8) - Queen (12)

+43
Bathrooms: 9
Family spaces

e Kitchen
e Living Room
e Porch/Veranda

Amenities

Parking

@ Internet

¢ Swimming pool
Washer & Dryer
TV

Air Conditioning
Pets Welcome
Heater

o © © © © © 6 8
o © @¢ ©
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2698: insurance; assignment of benefits
Sponsor: Representative Martinez, LD 11
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Allows insurers acting as an insurer or performing administrative services to receive payment for

benefits as an assignee to an assignment of benefits.

History
An assignment of benefits is a document signed by a policyholder that allows a third party, the

assignee, to receive payments for services directly from the policyholder's insurance company.

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 20-464, if an insured person assigns payment for benefits under the health
care insurance contract to a heath care provider that performed the services covered by the
contract the insurer may provide payment directly to the provider. Statute prohibits payment for
services to a person other than the one to whom payment has been assigned.

Provisions
1. Applies statutory provisions relating to assignment of benefits to an insurer whether acting as

an insurer or performing administrative services. (Sec. 1)

C} Prop 105 (45 votes) O Prop 108 (40 votes) [ Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2698

initials Page 1 Commerce

—- Attachment. U |

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE
COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2698
DATE February 15, 2022 motion: __DP
PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter L- wa Eo
Chavez wz
Cook Va
Espinoza \~%
Kaiser ~~ ,
Liguori VV
Meza Vo ;
Wilmeth a
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman Va :
Weninger, Chairman WA
10 0 0 6

APPROVED: _ COMMITTEE SECRET. ,

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

aTTacHMenT__ 2—
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2612: occupational regulation
Sponsor: Representative Burges, LD 1
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Deletes statutory references relating to a person's virtues with respect to occupational regulation.

History
Laws 2021, Chapter 269 (HB 2787) modified certain criteria for determining whether a person's

criminal record disqualifies the person from occupational licensure or certifications. Additionally,
the enacted legislation directed Legislative Council Staff to prepare proposed legislation
conforming statute to the provisions of the enacted legislation.

HB 2612 is the proposed legislation as required by Laws 2021, Chapter 269.

Provisions
1, Removes statutory references, with respect to occupational regulation, pertaining to

character, good, honesty, integrity, moral and trustworthy. (various sections)
2. Makes technical and conforming changes. (various sections)

© Prop 105 (45 votes) 1 Prop 108 (40 votes) [ Emergency (40 votes) © Fiscal Note

HB 2612

Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 43

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILLNO. __HB 2612

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: _.DP

NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>
x
m

PASS
Carter ae

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

oSAAINNAASINA

(0) 0 16)

—

( hrocurl ai Dend ene (_

tye fr COMMITTEE SECRETARY

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT. 4Y
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2391: technical correction; bingo license; transfer
S/E: video service providers; enforcement; jurisdiction
Sponsor: Representative Dunn, LD 13
Committee on Commerce

Summary of the Strike-Everything Amendment to HB 2391

Overview
Specifies original jurisdiction over all matters regarding video service laws vests with the Office of

Administrative Hearings (OAH).

History

All complaints by a city, town or county against a video service provider or by a video service
provider against a city, town or county must be filed with OAH. A hearing must be held for
complaint resolution and the decision of the administrative law judge is deemed as the final
administrative decision; however such decisions may be appealed in Superior Court (A.R.S. §§
9-1454 and 11-1951).

Provisions
1. Asserts OAH has original! jurisdiction over all matters regarding video service laws. (Sec. 1,

2)
2. Makes technical changes. (Sec. 1, 2)

0 Prop 105 (45 votes) C Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2391
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment US

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H,B. 2391

Second Regular Session

CoC oO ™ DBD TO B&B W MH &

BR BM BR MD mh i
On Ff oO GOO nNDXD AOE ODED

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2391
(Reference to printed bill)

Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert:

"Section 1. Section 9-1451, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:
9-1451. Enforcement: office of administrative hearings: fees:

fund
A. A local government may file a written complaint against a video

service provider and a video service provider may file a written complaint
against a local government alleging a violation of this chapter or the
uniform video service license agreement. THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS HAS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER ALL MATTERS UNDER THIS CHAPTER.
Unless otherwise provided in section 9-1445, subsections F, G and H or this

section:
1, All complaints mast SHALL be filed with the office of

administrative hearings.

2, The complainant must serve a copy of the complaint on the party
that is the subject of the complaint by personal delivery or certified
mail, return receipt requested, or by any other method reasonably
calculated to effect actual notice to the local government's last address
of record for the party that is the subject of the complaint.

3. The party that is the subject of the complaint may file a
response to the complaint with the office of administrative hearings within
twenty days after service pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection.

Responses shall be served pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection.

Adopted Hol Verba

Failed Withdrawn

Attachment 4& _—._ Not Offered_ Analysts Initials.
mo oOo 4 DD oO Se LW NY

wo Ww woe we HY DH WH Ww HM WH MY ND FF
te

House Amendments to H.B. 2391

B. Before filing a complaint pursuant to this section both of the
following apply:

1. The complainant must provide notice of the alleged violation of
this chapter to the party that is the subject of the complaint.

2, The party that is the subject of the complaint must have a period
of not less than twenty days after the date it receives the notice to
resolve the alleged violation.

C. Subsection B of this section does not apply to a complaint made
in a written demand pursuant to section 9-1445, subsection G.

D. A hearing before the office of administrative hearings shall be
held if a complaint that complies with this section is filed with the
office of administrative hearings. Unless other deadlines are established
for a particular complaint, all of the following apply:

1. The hearing shall be held within two months after the date that
the complaint is filed and service is completed pursuant to subsection A of
this section.

2. The date scheduled for the hearing may be advanced or delayed on
the agreement of the parties or on a showing of good cause.

—. The office of administrative hearings shall prepare and serve a
notice of hearing on all parties at least one month before the hearing that
states the time and place of the hearing.

F, A prehearing conference may be held pursuant to section
41-1092.05.

G. Unless it conflicts with the requirements of this section, the
hearing shall be conducted pursuant to section 41-1092.07.

H. The complainant has the burden of persuasion at a hearing under
this section,

I. The decision of the administrative law judge is the final
administrative decision with respect to the complaint. The office of
administrative hearings shall serve a copy of the administrative law

judge's decision on all parties. The final administrative decision may be
oOo Pm nN HD oO F&F WO MH

WO W WwW DM MH TH HH WH WH MH WH PY PL
nn an)

House Amendments to H.B. 2391

appealed to the superior court pursuant to title 12, chapter 7, article 6.
The superior court proceeding shall be a trial de novo.

J. A party may move for rehearing pursuant to section 41-1092.09 and
the office of administrative hearings shall rule on the motion. Moving for
rehearing or review is not necessary for the party to seek judicial review
of the decision of the administrative law judge under subsection I of this
section.

K, Service is complete on personal service or five days after the
date that the office of administrative hearings mails the final
administrative decision to each party's last known address of record with
the local government.

L. The office of administrative hearings shall adopt rules pursuant
to title 41, chapter 6 to administer hearings under this chapter and title
11, chapter 14. The rules shall apply uniformly to hearings involving
local governments and counties.

M. The office of administrative hearings shall establish, administer
and collect fees in an amount to be determined by the director of the
office of administrative hearings. The director shall deposit, pursuant to
sections 35-146 and 35-147, all monies in the video service provider
complaint fund established by subsection N of this section.

N. The video service provider complaint fund is established
consisting of monies collected pursuant to subsection M of this section and
section 11-1951, subsection M. The office of administrative hearings shall
administer the fund. Monies in the fund are continuously appropriated.
The office of administrative hearings shall use the monies in the fund for
the purpose of administering the duties specified in this article and title

11, chapter 14, article 5.
Sec. 2. Section 11-1951, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to

read:
11-1951. Enforcement: office of administrative hearings: fees

A. A county may file a written complaint against a video service

provider and a video service provider may file a written complaint against

-3-
wo Oo 4 DB oO FP WH DM Ff

Ww Ww PRO PR MR MD MPM PM PT MT PT DH F&F
ano

House Amendments to H.B. 2391

a county alleging a violation of this chapter or the uniform video service
license agreement. THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS HAS ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION OVER ALL MATTERS UNDER THIS CHAPTER. Unless otherwise
provided in section 11-1945, subsections F, G and H or this section:

1. All complaints mest SHALL be filed with the office of
administrative hearings.

2. The complainant must serve a copy of the complaint on the party
that is the subject of the complaint by personal delivery or certified
mail, return receipt requested, or by any other method reasonably
calculated to effect actual notice to the county's last address of record
for the party that is the subject of the complaint.

3. The party that is the subject of the complaint may file a
response to the complaint with the office of administrative hearings within
twenty days after service pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection.
Responses shall be served pursuant to paragraph 2 of this subsection.

B. Before filing a complaint pursuant to this section both of the
following apply:

1. The complainant must provide notice of the alleged violation of
this chapter to the party that is the subject of the complaint.

2. The party that is the subject of the complaint must have a period
of not less than twenty days after the date it receives the notice to
resolve the alleged violation.

C. Subsection B of this section does not apply to a complaint made
in a written demand pursuant to section 11-1945, subsection G.

D. A hearing before the office of administrative hearings shall be
held if a complaint that complies with this section is filed with the
office of administrative hearings. Unless other deadlines are established
for a particular complaint, a1] of the following apply:

1. The hearing shall be held within two months after the date that

the complaint is filed and service is completed pursuant to subsection A of

this section.
Oo Oo NN DH OH SB WH BR

DO WwW WW BM RN BPO MR MR RM PO MP PT PO Kiet

House Amendments to H.B. 2391

2, The date scheduled for the hearing may be advanced or delayed on
the agreement of the parties or on a showing of good cause.

E, The office of administrative hearings shall prepare and serve a
notice of hearing on all parties at least one month before the hearing that

states the time and place of the hearing.
F. A prehearing conference may be held pursuant to section

41-1092.05.

G. Unless it conflicts with the requirements of this section, the
hearing shall be conducted pursuant to section 41-1092.07,

H, The complainant has the burden of persuasion at a hearing under
this section.

I. The decision of the administrative law judge is the final
administrative decision with respect to the complaint. The office of
administrative hearings shall serve a copy of the administrative law
judge's decision on all parties. The final administrative decision may be
appealed to the superior court pursuant to title 12, chapter 7, article 6.
The superior court proceeding shall be a trial de novo.

J. A party may move for rehearing pursuant to section 41-1092.09,
and the office of administrative hearings shal] rule on the motion. Moving
for rehearing or review is not necessary for the party to seek judicial
review of the decision of the administrative law judge under subsection I
of this section.

K. Service is complete on personal service or five days after the
date that the office of administrative hearings mails the final
administrative decision to each party's last known address of record with
the county.

L. The office of administrative hearings shall adopt rules pursuant
to title 41, chapter 6 to administer hearings under this chapter and title
9, chapter 13. The rules shall apply uniformly to hearings involving local
governments as defined in section 9-1401 and counties.

M. The office of administrative hearings shall establish, administer

and collect fees in an amount to be determined by the director of the

-5-

> WwW Mm HF

House Amendments to H.B. 2391

office of administrative hearings. The director shal] deposit, pursuant to
sections 35-146 and 35-147, al] monies in the video service provider
complaint fund established by section 9-1451, subsection N."

Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

2391 WENINGER
02/08/2022
06:20 PM

C: LAT

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce

DATE February 15, 2022 motion: PPA [Sé"

BILL NO. __ HB 2391

NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>
é9)
ep)
>
x
m

Carter ten

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

NIA A

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wiimeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

CISA AA

0 | O 0

—_

L hequill re QenGs. D>

APPROVED: COMMITTEE meme

WCGn —~

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT. U T
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2103: trademarks; service marks; trade names
Sponsor: Representative Griffin, LD 14
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Includes additional requirements for applicants registering a trademark or trade name.

History
Any person who adopts and uses a trademark or service mark may file an application with the

Secretary of State to register the mark. Statute outlines the minimum information that an
application must contain, including: 1) the name and email and business address of the person
applying for the registration; 2) the goods or services the mark is used for, how the mark is used
and the class in which the goods or services fall; 3) the date when the mark was first used; and
4) a statement that the applicant is the owner and sole user of the mark (A.R.S. § 44-1443).

Any person, association, or corporation doing business in Arizona may register a trade name, title
or designation with the Secretary of State. Statute outlines the minimum information that must be
provided for registration, including: 1) the name, email and business address of the applicant; 2)
the name, title or designation being registered; 3) the general nature of the business; and 4) the
length of time during which the name, title or designation has been used by the applicant (A.R.S.
§ 44-1460).

Provisions

1. Requires a trademark registration form to include a statement that the applicant has

conducted a search and found that the trademark or service mark:

a) is not likely to cause confusion or to deceive; and
b) does not consist of a mark that resembles an Arizona registered mark or one previously

used in Arizona by another and not abandoned. (Sec. 1)

2. Requires a trademark registration form to include a statement whether the applicant has
previously sought to register the mark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and if

denied, the reasons for denial. (Sec. 1)

3. Requires a trade name registration form to include a statement that the applicant has
conducted a search and found that the trade name is distinguishable from:
a) any other previous name on record with the Secretary of State; and
b) an existing corporation name or reserved name. (Sec. 2)

4. Makes technical changes. (Sec. 1, 2)

(1 Prop 105 (45 votes) [3 Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2103
Initials Page 1 Commerce

a Attachment Y g

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __HB 2103

DATE February 15, 2022 motion: DP.

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wiimeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

SSSISVVASISISIS

0 2) 0

Ormn Oude ~
Wie COMMITTEE SECREXARY

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT__4
Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B, 2579

Second Regular Session
PROPOSED

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2579
(Reference to printed bill)

1 Page 1, strike lines 2 through 30

2 Renumber to conform
3 Line 39, after "OTHER" insert “STANDARDS REGARDING"

4 Amend title to conform

DAVID L. COOK

2579CO0K
02/10/2022
11:57 AM
C: LAT

_ Adopted vo

Failed

‘attachment ©
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legisiature
Second Regular Session

HB 2579: residential zoning; park model trailers
Sponsor: Representative Cook, LD 8
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Prohibits cities, towns and counties (local governments) from restricting the use of a park model

trailer as a single-family residence.

History
Mobile homes are defined as structures designed to be used as a dwelling, or approved by the

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as such, and explicitly excludes park model
trailers from the definition. Recreational vehicles includes portable camping trailers, travel trailers,
motor homes and park model trailers. Mobile home parks are any parce! of land that contains four
or more mobile home spaces and two or more recreational vehicle spaces (A.R.S. § 33-2102).

Provisions
1. Specifies that a local government may neither prohibit nor restrict, provided that lot coverage

and setback requirements have been met, the use of a park model trailer on a residential lot
as a primary single-family residence. (Sec. 1, 2)

2. Specifies that a local government may neither prohibit nor restrict, provided that lot coverage
and setback requirements have been met, the use of a park model trailer as a single-family
residence accessory dwelling unit. (Sec, 1, 2)

3. Defines accessory dwelling unit as an independent dwelling unit that includes a kitchen and
that is located on the same lot as a single-family housing unit, duplex, triplex, townhome or
other housing unit. (Sec. 1, 2)

4. Defines park model trailer as a trailer that: 1) is a structure built on a single chassis, mounted

on wheels and designed to be connected to the utilitles necessary for operating installed
fixtures and; 2) has a gross interior area of between 320 to 400 square feet. (Sec. 1, 2)

[J Prop 105 (45 votes) C1 Prop 108 (40 votes) Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2579

NM/PB
Page 1 Commerce

Initials

Attachment |

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2579
DATE February 15, 2022 motion: DPA
PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT
Carter ~~
Chavez \ /_
Cook L~
Espinoza Va
Kaiser a
Liguori Va
Meza wae
Wilmeth Va
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman eo
Weninger, Chairman Va
16 0 0 Q

APPROVED:

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

Choour li One

COMMITTEE “—\

ATTACHMENT S C.

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2747: wholesale real estate buyers; disclosure
Sponsor: Representative Espinoza, LD 19
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Requires wholesale buyers to disclose to sellers that they are wholesalers prior to entering into

binding real estate sales agreements.

Provisions
1. Requires a wholesale buyer, before entering into a binding agreement with a seller, to provide

a disclosure in writing that the buyer is a wholesaler to the seller. (Sec. 1)

2. States if a wholesale buyer violates this disclosure requirement, the seller may cancel the
contract for sale without penalty and may retain any earnest money paid by the wholesale

buyer. (Sec. 14)
3. Defines residential real property as meaning real property with fewer than five dwelling units.
(Sec. 1)

4. Defines wholesale buyer as meaning a person or entity that enters into a purchase contract
for residential real property and assigns that same contract to another person or entity for a

profit. (Sec. 1)

0 Prop 105 (45 votes) © Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2747

Initials Page 14 Commerce

Attachment $3

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2747

Second Regular Session
PROPOSED

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2747
(Reference to printed bill)

N

1 Page 1, line 12, after the period insert “NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISIONS

2 CONTAINED IN THE CONTRACT FOR SALE,”
3 Line 13, after “SALE” insert “AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF
4 ESCROW”

5 Amend title to conform

JEFF WENINGER

27 47WENINGER
02/10/2022
03:55 PM

H: PRB/1s

Adopted “~ _ # of Vi

Failed Withdrawn

. — ; Not Offered Analysts |
Attachment cs) a Te y
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __HB2747

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DPA

PASS YE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

SA AVAAINSS\

0 0 Q

oO

( heal aes orl. fo

APPROVED: : COMMITTEE SECRETA
Veh 4z

{
JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT S 5
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2685: artificial intelligence; requirements
Sponsor: Representative Carroll, LD 22
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Outlines requirements for algorithms enabling artificial intelligence.

History .
The National Conference of State Legislatures defines artificial intelligence as the development

of computer systems to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as learning

and decision making (Legislation Related to Artificial Intelligence).

Provisions
4. Provides requirements for algorithms that enable artificial intelligence to learn and implement
decisions without human intervention which include:
a) must support human agency and fundamental rights;
b) comply with all federal and state laws;
c) fulfill ethical principles that ensure no unintended human harm occurs; and

d) provide transparency and traceability of data logs and decision-making. (Sec. 1)
2. Asserts artificial intelligence may not infringe on a human being's constitutional rights. (Sec.

1)

3. Contains a legislative intent clause. (Sec. 2)

HB 2685
Initials PB/TH Page 1 Commerce

Attachment Slo

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON

Commerce BILL NO. HB 2685

DATE February 15, 2022

PASS

NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>
<
m

Carter

Chavez

Cook

wa

Espinoza

Kaiser

SINT

Liguori

Meza

VL
Va

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

VA Ga Dn 7

JEFF WENINGER, i
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

JKC IS

“Ll “il ¢ ¢ rr —

COMMITTEE =~

rade &
ATTACHMENT. 5]

EUROPEAN
== COMMISSION

Brussels, 8.4.2019
COM(2019) 168 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Building Trust in Human-Centric Artificial Intelligence

EN EN

Attachment2>. ¥
1, INTRODUCTION — THE EUROPEAN AI STRATEGY

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform our world for the better: it can
improve healthcare, reduce energy consumption, make cars safer, and enable farmers to use
water and natural resources more efficiently. AI can be used to predict environmental and
climate change, improve financial risk management and provides the tools to manufacture,
with less waste, products tailored to our needs. AI can also help to detect fraud and
cybersecurity threats, and enables law enforcement agencies to fight crime more efficiently.

AI can benefit the whole of society and the economy. It is a strategic technology that is now
being developed and used at a rapid pace across the world. Nevertheless, AI also brings with
it new challenges for the future of work, and raises legal and ethical questions.

To address these challenges and make the most of the opportunities which AI offers, the
Commission published a European strategy’ in April 2018. The strategy places people at
the centre of the development of AI — human-centric AI. It is a three-pronged approach to
boost the EU’s technological and industrial capacity and AI uptake across the economy,
prepare for socio-economic changes, and ensure an appropriate ethical and legal framework.

To deliver on the AI strategy, the Commission developed together with Member States a
coordinated plan on AI’, which it presented in December 2018, to create synergies, pool
data — the raw material for many AI applications — and increase joint investments. The aim
is to foster cross-border cooperation and mobilise all players to increase public and private
investments to at least EUR 20 billion annually over the next decade’. The Commission
doubled its investments in AI in Horizon 2020 and plans to invest EUR 1 billion annually
from Horizon Europe and the Digital Europe Programme, in support notably of common data
spaces in health, transport and manufacturing, and large experimentation facilities such as
smart hospitals and infrastructures for automated vehicles and a strategic research agenda.

To implement such a common strategic research, innovation and deployment agenda the
Commission has intensified its dialogue with all relevant stakeholders from industry,
research institutes and public authorities. The new Digital Europe programme will also be
crucial in helping to make AI available to small and medium-size enterprises across all
Member States through digital innovation hubs, strengthened testing and experimentation
facilities, data spaces and training programmes.

Building on its reputation for safe and high-quality products, Europe’s ethical approach to AI
strengthens citizens’ trust in the digital development and aims at building a competitive
advantage for European AI companies. The purpose of this Communication is to launch a
comprehensive piloting phase involving stakeholders on the widest scale in order to test the
practical implementation of ethical guidance for AI development and use.

2, BUILDING TRUST IN HUMAN-CENTRIC AI .
The European AI strategy and the coordinated plan make clear that trust is a prerequisite to

ensure a human-centric approach to AI: Al is not an end in itself, but a tool that has to
serve people with the ultimate aim of increasing human well-being. To achieve this, the

'  COM(2018) 237.

2 COM(2018) 795.

3 To help reach this goal, the Commission proposed, under the next programming period 2021-2027, that
the Union allocates at least EUR 1 billion per year in funding from the Horizon Europe and Digital Europe
programmes to invest in Al :

trustworthiness of AI should be ensured. The values on which our societies are based need
to be fully integrated in the way AI develops.

The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy,
equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons
belonging to minorities’. These values are common to the societies of all Member States in
which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality prevail. In
addition, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights brings together — in a single text — the
personal, civic, political, economic and social rights enjoyed by people within the EU.

The EU has a strong regulatory framework that will set the global standard for human-
centric AI, The General Data Protection Regulation ensures a high standard of protection of
personal data, and requires the implementation of measures to ensure data protection by
design and by default*. The Free Flow of Non-Personal Data Regulation removes barriers to
the free movement of non-personal data and ensures the processing of all categories of data
anywhere in Europe. The recently adopted Cybersecuri ity Act will help to strengthen trust in
the online world, and the proposed ePrivacy Regulation® also aims at this goal.

Nevertheless, AI brings new challenges because it enables machines to “learn” and to take
and implement decisions without human intervention. Before long, this kind of functionality
will become standard in many types of goods and services, from smart phones to automated
cars, robots and online applications. Yet, decisions taken by algorithms could result from data
that is incomplete and therefore not reliable, they may be tampered with by cyber-attackers, or
they may be biased or simply mistaken. Unreflectively applying the technology as it develops
would therefore lead to problematic outcomes as well as reluctance by citizens to accept or
use it,

Instead, AI technology should be developed in a way that puts people at its centre and is thus
worthy of the public’s trust. This implies that AI applications should not only be consistent
with the law, but also adhere to ethical principles and ensure that their implementations avoid
unintended harm. Diversity in terms of gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief,
disability and age should be ensured at every stage of AI development. AI applications should
empower citizens and respect their fundamental rights. They should aim to enhance people’s
abilities, not replace them, and also enable access by people with disabilities.

Therefore, there is a need for ethics guidelines that build on the existing regulatory
framework and that should be applied by developers, suppliers and users of AI in the internal
market, establishing an ethical level playing field across all Member States. This is why the
Commission has set up a high-level expert group on Al’ representing a wide range of
stakeholders and has tasked it with drafting AI ethics guidelines as well as preparing a set of
recommendations for broader AI policy. At the same time, the European AI Alliance’, an
open multi-stakeholder platform with over 2700 members, was set up to provide broader input
for the work of the AI high-level expert group.

‘ In addition, the EU is a party to the UN Convention on the Rights of persons with disabilities,

> Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) guarantees the free flow of
personal data within the Union. It contains provisions on decision-making based solely on automated
processing, including profiling. The individuals concerned have the right to be informed about the
existence of automated-decision making and to receive meaningful information about the logic involved in
the automated decision-making and about the significance and envisaged consequences of the processing
for them. They also have the right in such cases to obtain human intervention, to express their point of
view and to contest the decision.

8 COM(2017) 10,

https: “Hlec. europa. acwdi gital- single-mar ‘kev/en/european-ai-alliance

2
The AI high-level expert group published a first draft of the ethics guidelines in December
2018. Following a stakeholder consultation’ and meetings with representatives from
Member States'®, the AI expert group has delivered a revised document to the Commission
in March 2019. In their feedback so far, stakeholders overall have welcomed the practical
nature of the guidelines and the concrete guidance they offer to developers, suppliers and
users of AI on how to ensure trustworthiness.

2.1. Guidelines for trustworthy AI drafted by the AI high-level expert group

The guidelines drafted by the AI high-level expert group, to which this Communication
refers’, build in particular on the work done by the European Group on Ethics in Science and
New Technologies and the Fundamental Rights Agency.

The guidelines postulate that in order to achieve ‘trustworthy AI’, three components are
necessary: (1) it should comply with the law, (2) it should fulfil ethical principles and (3) it
should be robust.

Based on these three components and the European values set out in section 2, the guidelines
identify seven key requirements that AI applications should respect to be considered
trustworthy. The guidelines also include an assessment list to help check whether these
requirements are fulfilled.

The seven key requirements are:
¢ Human agency and oversight
¢ Technical robustness and safety
e Privacy and data governance
e Transparency
° Diversity, non-discrimination and fairness
® Societal and environmental well-being
e Accountability

While these requirements are intended to apply to ali AI systems in different settings and
industries, the specific context in which they are applied should be taken into account for their
concrete and proportionate implementation, taking an impact-based approach. For illustration,
Al application suggesting an unsuitable book to read is much less perilous than misdiagnosing
a cancer and could therefore be subject to less stringent supervision.

The guidelines drafted by the AI high-level expert group are non-binding and ds such do not
create any new legal obligations. However, many existing (and often use- or domain-specific)

° This consultation resulted in comments from 511 organisations, associations, companies, research

institutes, individuals and others. A summary of the feedback received is available at:
https://ec.curopa.ew futuriunV/en/system/files/ged/consultation feedback on draft_ai_ethics guidelines 4.
pdf

The work of the expert group was positively received by Member States, with the Council conclusions
adopted on 18 February 2019 inter alia taking note of the forthcoming publication of the ethics guidelines
and supporting the Commission's effort to bring an EU ethical approach to the global stage:
https://data.consiltum.europa.cu/doe/documenv/ST-6177-2019-INIT/en/pdf

hitps://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/ai-alliance-consultation/guidelines# Top

di

provisions of Union law of course already reflect one or several of these key requirements, for
example safety, personal data protection, privacy or environmental protection rules.

The Commission welcomes the work of the AI high-level expert group and considers it
valuable input for its policy-making.

2.2. Key requirements for trustworthy AI

The Commission supports the following key requirements for trustworthy AI, which are
based on European values. It encourages stakeholders to apply the requirements and to test the
assessment list that operationalises them in order to create the right environment of trust for
the successful development and use of AI. The Commission welcomes feedback from
stakeholders to evaluate whether this assessment list provided in the guidelines requires
further adjustment.

I. Human agency and oversight

AI systems should support individuals in making better, more informed choices in
accordance with their goals. They should act as enablers to a flourishing and equitable
society by supporting human agency and fundamental rights, and not decrease, limit or
misguide human autonomy. The overall wellbeing of the user should be central to the
system's functionality.

Human oversight helps ensuring that an AI system does not undermine human autonomy
or causes other adverse effects. Depending on the specific Al-based system and its
application area, the appropriate degrees of control measures, including the adaptability,
accuracy and explainability of Al-based systems, should be ensured!”, Oversight may be
achieved through governance mechanisms such as ensuring a human-in-the-loop, human-
on-the-loop, or human-in-command approach. It must be ensured that public authorities
have the ability to exercise their oversight powers in line with their mandates. All other
things being equal, the less oversight a human can exercise over an AI system, the more
extensive testing and stricter governance is required.

Il. Technical robustness and safety

Trustworthy AI requires algorithms to be secure, reliable and robust enough to deal with
errors or inconsistencies during all life cycle phases of the AI system, and to adequately
cope with erroneous outcomes. AI systems need to be reliable, secure enough to be

12 The General Data Protection Regulation gives individuals the right not to be subject to a decision based

solely on automated processing when this produces legal effects on users or similarly significantly affects
them (Article 22 GDPR).

8 Human-in- the-loop (HITL) refers to the human intervention in every decision cycle of the system, which in
many cases is neither possible nor desirable. Human-on-the-loop (HOTL) refers to the capability for human
intervention during the design cycle of the system and monitoring the system’s operation. Human-in-
command (HIC) refers to the capability to oversee the overall activity of the Al system (including its
broader economic, societal, legal and ethical impact) and the ability to decide when and how to use the
system in any particular situation, This can include the decision not fo use an AI system in a particular
situation, to establish levels of human discretion during the use of the system, or to ensure the ability to
override a decision made by the system.
resilient against both overt attacks and more subtle attempts to manipulate data or
algorithms themselves, and they must ensure a fall-back plan in case of problems. Their
decisions must be accurate, or at least correctly reflect their level of accuracy, and their
outcomes should be reproducible.

In addition, AI systems should integrate safety and security-by-design mechanisms to
ensure that they are verifiably safe at every step, taking at heart the physical and mental
safety of all concerned. This includes the minimisation and where possible the
reversibility of unintended consequences or errors in the system’s operation. Processes to
clarify and assess potential risks associated with the use of AI systems, across various
application areas, should be put in place.

Ul. Privacy and Data Governance

Privacy and data protection must be guaranteed at all stages of the AI system’s life
cycle. Digital records of human behaviour may allow AI systems to infer not only
individuals’ preferences, age and gender but also their sexual orientation, religious or
political views. To allow individuals to trust the data processing, it must be ensured that
they have full control over their own data, and that data concerning them will not be used
to harm or discriminate against them.

In addition to safeguarding privacy and personal data, requirements must be fulfilled to
ensure high quality AI systems. The quality of the data sets used is paramount to the
performance of AI systems. When data is gathered, it may reflect socially constructed
biases, or contain inaccuracies, errors and mistakes. This needs to be addressed prior to
training an AI system with any given data set. In addition, the integrity of the data must
be ensured. Processes and data sets used must be tested and documented at each step such
as planning, training, testing and deployment. This should also apply to AI systems that
were not developed in-house but acquired elsewhere. Finally, the access to data must be
adequately governed and controlled.

IV. Transparency

The traceability of AI systems should be ensured; it is important to log and document
both the decisions made by the systems, as well as the entire process (including a
description of data gathering and labelling, and a description of the algorithm used) that
yielded the decisions. Linked to this, explainability of the algorithmic decision-making
process, adapted to the persons involved, should be provided to the extent possible.
Ongoing research to develop explainability mechanisms should be pursued. In addition,
explanations of the degree to which an AI system influences and shapes the organisational
decision-making process, design choices of the system, as well as the rationale for
deploying it, should be available (hence ensuring not just data and system transparency,
but also business model transparency).

Finally, it is important to adequately communicate the AI system’s capabilities and
limitations to the different stakeholders involved in a manner appropriate to the use case at
hand. Moreover, AI systems should be identifiable as such, ensuring that users know they
are interacting with an AI system and which persons are responsible for it.

V. Diversity, non-discrimination and fairness

Data sets used by AI systems (both for training and operation) may suffer from the
inclusion of inadvertent historic bias, incompleteness and bad governance models, The
continuation of such biases could lead to (in)direct discrimination. Harm can also result
from the intentional exploitation of (consumer) biases or by engaging in unfair
competition. Moreover, the way in which AI systems are developed (e.g. the way in which
the programming code of an algorithm is written) may also suffer from bias. Such
concerns should be tackled from the beginning of the system’ development.

Establishing diverse design teams and setting up mechanisms ensuring participation, in
particular of citizens, in AI development can also help to address these concerns. It is
advisable to consult stakeholders who may directly or indirectly be affected by the system
throughout its life cycle. AI systems should consider the whole range of human abilities,
skills and requirements, and ensure accessibility through a universal design approach to
strive to achieve equal access for persons with disabilities.

VI. Societal and environmental well-being

For AI to be trustworthy, its impact on the environment and other sentient beings
should be taken into account. Ideally, all humans, including future generations, should
benefit from biodiversity and a habitable environment. Sustainability and ecological
responsibility of AI systems should hence be encouraged. The same applies to Al
solutions addressing areas of global concern, such as for instance the UN Sustainable
Development Goals.

Furthermore, the impact of AI systems should be considered not only from an individual
perspective, but also from the perspective of society as a whole. The use of Al systems
should be given careful consideration particularly in situations relating to the democratic
process, including opinion-formation, political decision-making or electoral contexts.
Moreover, Al’s social impact should be considered, While AI systems can be used to
enhance social skills, they can equally contribute to their deterioration.

VIL. Accountability

Mechanisms should be put in place to ensure responsibility and accountability for Al
systems and their outcomes, both before and after their implementation. Auditability of
AI systems is key in this regard, as the assessment of AI systems by internal and external
auditors, and the availability of such evaluation reports, strongly contributes to the
trustworthiness of the technology. External auditability should especially be ensured in
applications affecting fundamental rights, including safety-critical applications.

Potential negative impacts of AI systems should be identified, assessed, documented and
minimised. The use of impact assessments facilitates this process. These assessments
should be proportionate to the extent of the risks that the AI systems pose. Trade-offs
between the requirements — which are often unavoidable — should be addressed in a
rational and methodological manner, and should be accounted for, Finally, when unjust
adverse impact occurs, accessible mechanisms should be foreseen that ensure adequate
redress.

2.3. Next steps: a piloting phase involving stakeholders on the widest scale
Reaching consensus on these key requirements for AI systems is a first important milestone
towards guidelines for ethical AI. As a next step, the Commission will ensure that this
guidance can be tested and implemented in practice.

To this end, the Commission will now launch a targeted piloting phase designed to obtain
structured feedback from stakeholders. This exercise will focus in particular on the
assessment list which the high-level expert group has drawn up for each of the key
requirements,

This work will have two strands: (i) a piloting phase for the guidelines involving stakeholders
who develop or use AJ, including public administrations, and (ii) a continued stakeholder
consultation and awareness-raising process across Member States and different groups of
stakeholders, including industry and service sectors:

(i) Starting in June 2019, all stakeholders and individuals will be invited to test the
assessment list and provide feedback on how to improve it. In addition, the AI high-
level expert group will set up an in-depth review with stakeholders from the private
and the public sector to gather more detailed feedback on how the guidelines can be
implemented in a wide range of application domains. All feedback on the guidelines’
workability and feasibility will be evaluated by the end of 2019.

(ii) In parallel, the Commission will organise further outreach activities, giving
representatives of the AI high-level expert group the opportunity to present the
guidelines to relevant stakeholders in the Member States, including industry and
service sectors, and providing these stakeholders with an additional opportunity to
comment on and contribute to the AI guidelines.

The Commission will take into account the work of the group of experts on ethics for
connected and automated driving’* and work with EU-funded research projects on AI and
with relevant public-private partnerships on implementing the key requirements!>, For
example, the Commission will support, in coordination with Member States, the development
of a common database of health images initially dedicated to the most common forms of
cancer, so that algorithms can be trained to diagnose symptoms with very high accuracy.
Similarly, the cooperation of the Commission and Member States enables an increasing
number of cross-border corridors for testing connected and automated vehicles. The
guidelines should be applied in these projects and tested, and the results will feed into the
evaluation process.

The piloting phase and the stakeholder consultation will benefit from the contribution of the
European AI Alliance and AI4EU, the AI on-demand platform. The AI4EU project!®,
launched in January 2019, brings together algorithms, tools, datasets and services to help
organisations, in particular small and medium-size enterprises, to implement AI solutions.
The European AI Alliance, together with AI4EU, will continue to mobilise the AI ecosystem
across Europe, also in view of piloting the Al ethics guidelines and promoting the respect for
human-centric AI.

At the beginning of 2020, building on the evaluation of feedback received during the piloting
phase, the AI high-level expert group will review and update the guidelines. Based on the

“ See the Commission’s Communication on connected and automated mobility, COM(2018) 283.

** In the Framework of the European Defence Fund, the Commission will also develop specific ethical

guidance for the evaluation of project proposals in the area of AI for defence,
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/artificial-intelligence-aideu-
2019

16

roject-launches-1|-january-

review and on the experience acquired, the Commission will evaluate the outcome and
propose any next steps.

Ethical AI is a win-win proposition. Guaranteeing the respect for fundamental values and
rights is not only essential in itself, it also facilitates acceptance by the public and increases
the competitive advantage of European AI companies by establishing a brand of human-
centric, trustworthy Al known for ethical and secure products. This builds more generally on
the strong reputation of European companies for providing safe and secure products of high
quality. The pilot phase will help to ensure that AI products fulfil this promise.

2.4. Towards international AI ethics guidelines

International discussions on AI ethics have intensified after Japan’s G7 Presidency put the
topic high on the agenda in 2016. Given the international interlinkages of AI development in
terms of data circulation, algorithmic development and research investments, the
Commission will continue its efforts to bring the Union’s approach to the global stage
and build a consensus on a human-centric AI’,

The work done by the AI high-level expert group, and more specifically the list of
requirements and the engagement process with stakeholders, provides the Commission with
additional valuable input for contributing to the international discussions. The European
Union can have a leadership role in developing international AI guidelines and, if possible, a
related assessment mechanism.

Therefore, the Commission will:
Strengthen cooperation with like-minded partners:

e exploring the extent to which convergence can be achieved with third countries’ draft
ethics guidelines (e.g. Japan, Canada, Singapore) and, building on this group of like-
minded countries, to prepare for a broader discussion, supported by actions
implementing the Partnership Instrument for cooperation with Third Countries’; and

e exploring how companies from non-EU countries and international organisations can
contribute to the ‘pilot phase’ of the guidelines through testing and validation.

Continue to play an active role in international discussions and initiatives:
e contributing to multilateral fora such as the G7 and G20;

e engaging in dialogues with non-EU countries and organising bilateral and multilateral
meetings to build a consensus on human-centric AJ;

‘7 The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy will, with the support of the

Commission, build on consultations in the United Nations, the Global Tech Panel, and other multilateral
fora, and in particular coordinate proposals for addressing the complex security challenges involved,

8 Regulation (EU) No 234/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014
establishing a Partnership Instrument for cooperation with third countries (OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 77). For
instance the planned project on ‘An international alliance for a human-centric approach to artificial
intelligence’ will facilitate joint initiatives with like-minded partners, in order to promote ethical
guidelines and to adopt common principles and operational conclusions. It will enable the EU and like-
minded countries to discuss operational conclusions resulting from the ethical guidelines on AI proposed
by the expert group in order to reach a common approach. Moreover, it will provide for monitoring the
uptake of AI technology globally. Finally, the project plans to organise public diplomacy activities
accompanying international events e.g. by the G7, G20 and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation
and Development.
° contributing to relevant standardisation activities in international standards development
organisations to promote this vision; and

° strengthening the collection and diffusion of insights on public policies, working jointly
with relevant international organisations.

3. CONCLUSIONS

The EU is founded on a set of fundamental values and has constructed a strong and balanced
regulatory framework on these foundations. Building on this existing regulatory framework,
there is a need for ethics guidelines for the development and use of AI due to its novelty and
the specific challenges this technology brings. Only if AI is developed and used in a way that
respects widely-shared ethical values, it can be considered trustworthy.

With a view to this objective, the Commission welcomes the input prepared by the AI high-
level expert group. Based on the key requirements for AI to be considered trustworthy, the
Commission will now launch a targeted piloting phase to ensure that the resulting ethical
guidelines for AI development and use can be implemented in practice. The Commission will
also work to forge a broad societal consensus on human-centric Al, including with all
involved stakeholders and our international partners.

The ethical dimension of AI is not a luxury feature or an add-on: it needs to be an integral part
of AI development. By striving towards human-centric AI based on trust, we safeguard the
respect for our core societal values and carve out a distinctive trademark for Europe and its
industry as a leader in cutting-edge AI that can be trusted throughout the world.

To ensure the ethical development of AI in Europe in its wider context, the Commission is
pursuing a comprehensive approach including in particular the following lines of action to be
implemented by the third quarter of 2019:

e It will start launching a set of networks of AI research excellence centres through
Horizon 2020. It will select up to four networks, focusing on scientific or technological
major challenges such as explainability and advanced human-machine interaction,
which are key ingredients for trustworthy AI.

¢ It will begin setting up networks of digital innovation ‘hubs?’ focussing on AI in
manufacturing and on big data.

° Together with Member States and stakeholders, the Commission will start preparatory
discussions to develop and implement a model for data sharing and making best use
of common data spaces, with a focus notably on transport, healthcare and industrial
manufacturing.”°

In addition, the Commission is working on a report on the challenges posed by AI to the
safety and liability frameworks and a guidance document on the implementation of the
Product Liability Directive?’, At the same time, the European High-Performance Computing
Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC)” will develop the next generation of supercomputers because

1 http://s3ptatform.jrc.ec.curopa.eu/digitat-innovation-hubs

*° ‘The necessary resources will be mobilised from Horizon 2020 (under which close to 1.5 billion EUR are
dedicated to AI for the period 2018-2020) and its planned successor Horizon Europe, the Digital part of
the Connecting Europe Facility and especially the future Digital Europe Programme. Projects will also
draw on resources from the private sector and Member State programmes,

2 See the Commission’s Communication Artificial Intelligence for Europe, COM (2018) 237.

22 https://eurohpe-ju.europa.cu

computing capacity is essential for processing data and training AI and Europe needs to
master the full digital value chain. The ongoing partnership with Member States and industry
on microelectronic components and systems (ECSEL)” as well as the European Processor
Initiative"? will contribute to the development of low-power processor technology for
trustworthy and secure high-performance and edge computing.

Just like the work on ethical guidelines for AI, all these initiatives build on close cooperation
of all concerned stakeholders, Member States, industry, societal actors and citizens. Overall,
Europe’s approach to Artificial Intelligence shows how economic competitiveness and
societal trust must start from the same fundamental values and mutually reinforce each other.

2 www.ccsel.cu

www. curopean-processor-initiative.eu
10

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2200: technical correction; municipal platting
S/E: digital application distribution platforms; prohibitions
Sponsor: Representative Kaiser, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Summary of the Strike-Everything Amendment to HB 2200

Overview
Restricts the ability of certain digital application distribution platforms to require the use of a

specific in-application payment system.

History

Currently, there is no law addressing this subject. As a result, many digital application distribution
platforms, which distribute software and other applications to mobile phones, tablets and personal
computers via the internet, operate under their own terms and conditions.

Provisions

1.

Prohibits a digital application distribution platform provider whose cumulative downloads from

Arizona users in a calendar year exceed 1,000,000 from:

a) Requiring an Arizona-domiciled developer or Arizona user to use a specific in-application
payment system as the sole method of accepting payments for either a software download
or a digital or physical product; or

b) Retaliating against an Arizona-domiciled developer for offering or Arizona user for using
an in-application payment system or digital application distribution platform not associated
with the provider. (Sec. 1)

2. Exempts from the prohibitions special-purpose digital application distribution platforms. (Sec.
1)

3. Permits the Attorney General to receive complaints, investigate and bring an action on behalf
of aggrieved parties to seek legal or equitable relief. (Sec. 1)

4. Permits an aggrieved party to bring a civil action to seek legal or equitable relief on their own
behaif if the Attorney General does not bring an action within 60 days after receiving notice
from the aggrieved party. (Sec. 1)

5. Defines Arizona user, developer, digital application distribution platform, domiciled in this
State, in-application payment system, provider and special-purpose digital application
distribution platform. (Sec. 1)

C] Prop 108 (45 votes) CD Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note
HB 2200
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment

24

—=————+

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2200

Second Regular Session

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2200
(Reference to printed bill)

1 Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert:

2 "Section 1. Title 18, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding

3 chapter 7, to read:

4 CHAPTER 7

5 DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORMS

6 ARTICLE 1, GENERAL PROVISIONS

7 18-701. Digital application distribution platforms:

8 prohibitions: exception: attorney general:

9 efinitions

10 A. A PROVIDER OF A DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM FOR
11 WHICH CUMULATIVE DOWNLOADS OF SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS FROM THE DIGITAL
12 APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM TO ARIZONA USERS EXCEED ONE MILLION
13 DOWNLOADS IN THE PREVIOUS OR CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR MAY NOT DO ANY OF THE
14 FOLLOWING:
15 1. REQUIRE A DEVELOPER THAT IS DOMICILED IN THIS STATE TO USE
16 IN-APPLICATION PAYMENT SYSTEMS THAT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY THE DIGITAL
17 APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM AS THE EXCLUSIVE MODE OF ACCEPTING
is PAYMENTS FROM A USER TO DOWNLOAD A SOFTWARE APPLICATION OR PURCHASE A
19 DIGITAL OR PHYSICAL PRODUCT OR SERVICE THROUGH A SOFTWARE APPLICATION.
20 2. REQUIRE EXCLUSIVE USE OF IN-APPLICATION PAYMENT SYSTEMS THAT ARE
21 OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY THE DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM FOR
22 ACCEPTING PAYMENTS FROM ARIZONA USERS TO DOWNLOAD A SOFTWARE APPLICATION OR
23 PURCHASE A DIGITAL OR PHYSICAL PRODUCT OR SERVICE THROUGH A SOFTWARE
24 APPLICATION.

25 3. RETALIATE AGAINST A DEVELOPER THAT IS DOMICILED IN THIS STATE FOR
26 OFFERING OR AN ARIZONA USER FOR USING AN IN-APPLICATION PAYMENT SYSTEM THAT
27 IS NOT OWNED BY, OPERATED BY OR AFFILIATED WITH THE PROVIDER OR RETALIATE

an _
_ Adopted YZ # of Verb:

Failed Withdrawn

, - : Not Offe itials
. Attachment ls a) ered... Analysts Initials
Oo Oo “SN DB OT Se WH MDH F&F

WO W PM RO MRF MR BF MH NM PF MT KH KH HE te

House Amendments to H.B. 2200

AGAINST A DEVELOPER FOR OFFERING AN IN-APPLICATION PAYMENT SYSTEM THAT IS
NOT OWNED BY, OPERATED BY OR AFFILIATED WITH THE PROVIDER TO ACCEPT
PAYMENTS FROM ARIZONA USERS. SUCH PROHIBITED ACTS INCLUDE DEMOTING THE
SEARCH RANKINGS OF THE DEVELOPER, SHIFTING FEES TOWARD THE DEVELOPER OR
SLOWING DOWN THE APPLICATION REVIEW AND APPROVAL TIMELINES.

B. THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY WITH RESPECT TO SPECIAL- PURPOSE
DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORMS.

C. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY RECEIVE COMPLAINTS AND INVESTIGATE
VIOLATIONS OF THIS SECTION AND MAY BRING AN ACTION IN ANY COURT OF
COMPETENT JURISDICTION TO OBTAIN LEGAL OR EQUITABLE RELIEF ON BEHALF OF A
PERSON AGGRIEVED BY THE VIOLATION.

D. ANY PERSON AGGRIEVED BY A VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION MAY COMMENCE
A CIVIL ACTION ON THE PERSON'S OWN BEHALF IN ANY COURT OF COMPETENT
JURISDICTION TO OBTAIN LEGAL OR EQUITABLE RELIEF, INCLUDING REASONABLE
ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS.

E. AN ACTION MAY NOT BE COMMENCED UNDER SUBSECTION D OF THIS SECTION
UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER THE PLAINTIFF HAS GIVEN NOTICE OF THE ALLEGED
VIOLATION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. AN ACTION MAY NOT BE COMMENCED UNDER
SUBSECTION D OF THIS SECTION IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS COMMENCED AND IS
DILIGENTLY PROSECUTING AN ACTION IN COURT ARISING FROM THE SAME ALLEGED
VIOLATION.

F, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION:
1. “ARIZONA USER” MEANS A USER WHOSE MOST RECENT ADDRESS SHOWN IN

THE RECORDS OF A PROVIDER IS LOCATED WITHIN THIS STATE.

2. “DEVELOPER” MEANS A CREATOR OF SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS THAT ARE
MADE AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD BY USERS THROUGH A DIGITAL APPLICATION
DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM OR OTHER DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM.

3. "DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM":

(a) MEANS A DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM FOR APPLICATIONS AND
SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED TO USERS ON MOBILE PHONES, SMARTPHONES OR OTHER
MOBILE COMPUTING DEVICES AND THE DEVICES RUN A MOBILE OPERATING SYSTEM THAT

Oo oO 4 HD OF FSF | M—T

DODO sh et
r Oo ODO DON HD OH PB WHY KF OC

22

House Amendments to H.B, 2200

IS OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY THE PROVIDER OF THE DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION
PLATFORM.

(b) INCLUDES A DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM THAT IS PROVIDED OR
USED FOR ONLY CERTAIN TYPES OF DEVICES, SUCH AS CERTAIN GRADES OF COMPUTING
DEVICES, DEVICES THAT ARE MADE BY ONLY A PARTICULAR MANUFACTURER OR DEVICES
THAT RUN A PARTICULAR OPERATING SYSTEM,

4. “DOMICILED IN THIS STATE" MEANS A PERSON THAT CONDUCTS IN THIS
STATE THE SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF WORK TO CREATE OR TO MAINTAIN DIGITAL

APPLICATIONS.
5. “IN-APPLICATION PAYMENT SYSTEM" MEANS AN APPLICATION, SERVICE OR

USER INTERFACE THAT IS USED TO PROCESS PAYMENTS FROM USERS TO DEVELOPERS
FOR SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS AND DIGITAL AND PHYSICAL PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
DISTRIBUTED THROUGH SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS.

6. “PROVIDER" MEANS A PERSON THAT OWNS, OPERATES, IMPLEMENTS OR
MAINTAINS A DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM OR AN IN-APPLICATION
PAYMENT SYSTEM.

7, “SPECIAL-PURPOSE DIGITAL APPLICATION DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM" MEANS
A DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION PLATFORM ESTABLISHED PRIMARILY FOR USE BY PUBLIC
SAFETY AGENCIES OR FOR SINGLE OR SPECIALIZED CATEGORIES OF APPLICATIONS,
SOFTWARE AND SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED TO USERS ON HARDWARE INTENDED
PRIMARILY FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES, INCLUDING GAMING CONSOLES, MUSIC PLAYERS
AND OTHER SPECIAL-PURPOSE DEVICES THAT ARE CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET."

23 Amend title to conform

STEVE KAISER

2200KAISER. docx
02/10/2022
05:10 PM

C: AH

COMMITTEE ON

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

Commerce BILL NO. HB 2200

motion: DPA [SE

DATE February 15, 2022
PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter \4

Chavez vA

Cook ~ wa

Espinoza Va \~

Kaiser ~~

Liguori V4

Meza “

Wilmeth vw

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman Ve

Weninger, Chairman Va

S | 3 2. C-

APPROVED: ieee

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ow. rouel We Out ae =

CQMMITTEE aS

ATTACHMENT___“@t

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2714: office of tourism; continuation
Sponsor: Representative Kaiser, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Continues the Arizona Office of Tourism (AOT) for eight years.

History
Arizona Office of Tourism

Established by Laws 1978, Chapter 180, AOT is responsible for promoting and developing
tourism in Arizona, AOT is statutorily required to stimulate and encourage ail local, state, regional
and federal governmental agencies and ail private persons and enterprises to participate and
cooperate in the promotion of tourism and tourism development. AOT is led by a governor-
appointed director who is tasked with promoting and developing tourism business, conducting a
marketing campaign on the attractions of Arizona and promoting such information through state,
national and international media.

The director is assisted by a 15-member Tourism Advisory Council which advises the director in
preparing the budget and in establishing policies and programs that promote and develop tourism
in Arizona (A.R.S. Title 41, Chapter 19).
Sunset Review Process

The sunset review process provides a system for the Legislature to evaluate the need to continue
the existence of state agencies which are reviewed by a legislative committee of reference (COR),
The COR is required to hold a public hearing, receive testimony from agency officials and the
public and consider certain sunset factors in determining whether to recommend continuing,
consolidating or terminating the agency (A.R.S § 41-2954),

On January 11, 2021, the House Commerce COR held a public hearing and recommended that
the Legislature continue AOT for eight years. AOT terminates on July 1, 2022, unless continued
by the Legislature (A.R.S. § 41-3022. 13).

Provisions
1. Continues, retroactive to July 1, 2022, AOT until July 1, 2030. (Sec. 1, 2, 4)

2. Repeals AOT on January 1, 2031. (Sec. 2)
3. Contains a purpose statement. (Sec. 3)

CI Prop 105 (45 votes) Prop 108 (40 votes) 0 Emergency (40 votes) O Fiscal Note

HB 2714
Initials PB/JL Page 1 Commerce

Attachment bZ.

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __ HB 2714

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DP

PASS YE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>

Carter a i

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman Lo

Weninger, Chairman

oc) KOA NAS

0 0

equal at lad. —>

APPROVED: COMMITTEE SECRET,
_
WM prs — \

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT 03
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2120: injury reports; medical treatment
Sponsor: Representative Kaiser, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Limits the injuries that are reported by employers and physicians to those requiring medical

treatment.

History
Workers! Compensation is a "no fault" system in which injured workers receive medical and

indemnity benefits related to an industrial illness or injury regardless of cause. If an illness or injury
is determined to be job-related, the injured worker may be entitled to medical treatment, temporary
compensation for time lost from work, permanent compensation benefits and vocational

rehabilitation.

In the event an employee is involved in an accident, the employee must report the accident and
any injury resulting from the accident to the empfoyer. The employer, within 10 days of receiving
notice of an accident, must inform the insurance carrier and the Industrial Commission of Arizona
(ICA). Statute requires employers, and physicians who attend to an injured employee of that
employer, to file, from time to time, a report of every known work-related injury that results in loss
of life or injury to both the ICA and the employer's insurance carrier (A.R.S. 23-908),

Provisions

1. Stipulates the injury report filed by an employer and physician is related to injuries that require

medical treatment. (Sec. 1)
2. Specifies medical treatment does not include any onetime, short-term treatment by

nonmedical staff that requires little technology or training to administer, including treatment of
minor scratches, cuts, burns and splinters and other issues that ordinarily do not require

medical care. (Sec. 1)
3. Makes technical changes. (Sec.1)

Ui Prop 105 (45 votes) O Prop 108 (40 votes) O Emergency (40 votes) Oj Fiscal Note

HB 2120
Initials JL Page 4 Commerce

Attachment GY

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION:

BILL NO.

DP

HB 2120

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT

ABSENT

WY

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

SAS AL SSNS

O 6

|

hewliai Oenlr LO >

APPROVED:

VA ane

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

CONMITTEE SECRETA

ATTACHMENT. lb S

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2121: workers' compensation; medical-only loss
Sponsor: Representative Kaiser, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Specifies, for claims involving medical-only loss, any experience rating adjustment will be applied
as a reduction to the employer's experience modification calculation.

History
Employers are statutorily required to secure workers' compensation to their employees by either:

1) obtaining workers’ compensation insurance by an insurance carrier; or 2) showing proof of
financial ability to pay the compensation directly (self-insured) or through a workers’ compensation
pool (A.R.S. § 23-961).

Employers are required to inform their insurance carrier of any accident resulting in an employee
injury. Additionally, every employer must file, from time to time, a full and complete report of every
known work-related injury that results in loss of life or injury to both the Industrial Commission of
Arizona and the employer's insurance carrier (A.R.S. 23-908).

Provisions
1. Requires any experience rating adjustment, for claims involving medical-only loss, be applied
to reduce the impact of the loss in the employer's experience modification calculation. (Sec.

1)
2. Defines medicat-only loss as loss that has no indemnity value reflecting lost wages. (Sec. 1)
3. Makes technical changes. (Sec. 1)

CJ Prop 105 (45 votes) 0 Prop 108 (40 votes) © Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2121
initials JL Page 1 Commerce

Attachment ols

Fifty-fifth Legislature Commerce
H.B. 2121

Second Regular Session
PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2121
(Reference to printed bill)

1 Page 1, line 4, after “coverage” insert "; medical-only loss”
2 Line 36, strike "SUBSECTION D OF THIS SECTION" insert "ANY OTHER LAW"

3 Amend title to conform

STEVE KAISER

2121KAISER
01/27/2022
05:07 PM
C: SK

= Adopted i

Failed

fa Not Offered
Attachment b } ot Offere Analysts Ini
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILLNO. __HB 2121

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: _« PA

PASS AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter
Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

\SAINA

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

AINA

O | 0
APPROVED: . legals Dal — —

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT. b 3
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2731: regulatory sandbox; expansion
Sponsor: Representative Kaiser, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Broadens the regulatory sandbox program by permitting innovations which are not financial

products or services to qualify.

History
Arizona's regulatory sandbox is a program established under Arizona law which enables a

business to obtain limited access to the Arizona market to test innovative financial products or
services without first needing to obtain licensure. The Arizona Attorney General’s Office is
responsible for administering the Sandbox (A.R.S. § Title 41, Chapter 55).

Provisions
1. Expands the regulatory sandbox program to include innovations which are not financial

products or services. (Sec. 2, 3, 4, 5)

2. Modifies the definition of innovation by removing the specification of providing’ a financial
product or service. (Sec. 1)

3. Makes technical changes. (Sec. 3, 4, 5)

0 Prop 105 (45 votes) Oi Prop 108 (40 votes) £) Emergency (40 votes) Fiscal Note

PB/NM HB 2731
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment &9
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce

BILL NO.

DATE February 15, 2022

HB 2731

MOTION: i YP

PASS

YE NAY

>

PRESENT

ABSENT

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza Veo

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

‘JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

| SACIG NU QC IS

0

0.

house Dull

COMMITTEE aN ?

ATTACHMENT. tO

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2679: employment discrimination; sexual harassment; definition
Sponsor: Representative Wilmeth, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Modifies the definition of employer as it relates to employment discrimination.

History
Employer, as defined within the discrimination in employment statutes, means:

1) a person who has 15 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar
weeks in the current or preceding calendar year; and

2) to the extent that the person is alleged to have committee any act of sexual harassment, a
person who has one mor more employees in the current or preceding calendar year (A.R.S. § 41-
1461).

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1464, it is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to
discriminate against an employee who has opposed any unlawful employment practice or has
made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding

or hearing arising from employment discrimination.

Provisions
1. Modifies the definition of employer to include a person who has one more empioyees, in the

current or preceding calendar year, to the extent that the person is alleged to have
discriminated against anyone for opposing sexual harassment or making a charge, testifying,
assisting or participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing arising from

sexual harassment. (Sec. 1)

0) Prop 105 (45 votes) (1 Prop 108 (40 votes) Emergency (40 votes) 1 Fiscal Note

HB 2679

Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 4 |

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. __HB 2679

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DP

YE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>

PASS

Carter

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

SINAAI\AARS 8

9 | 0 0

( ecules dul bo

CQMMITTEE SECRETARY

APPROVED:

WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT sia
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2484: forcible entry; detainer; filing fee
Sponsor: Representative Wilmeth, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Removes the forcible entry and detainer filing fee for a defendant.

History
Civil action fees are fees given to Justices of the Peace for certain civil actions. Justices of the

Peace must transmit monies collected from civil action fees to the county treasurer for distribution
into specified funds. No monies are deposited into the state General Fund. The Supreme Court
may raise the fees by an amount not greater than the average percent change of the U.S.
Consumer Price Index between the amount in the latest calendar year and the calendar year in
which the last fee increase occurred. There is currently a base amount of $18 for a forcibie entry
and detainer filing fee for a defendant (A.R.S. 22-281).

Provisions
1. Removes the forcible entry and detainer filing fee for a defendant from the list of established

civil action fees. (Sec.1)
2. Makes technical changes. (Sec. 1)

(3 Prop 105 (45 votes) © Prop 108 (40 votes) 0 Emergency (40 votes) OU) Fiscal Note

HB 2484
Initials Page 1 Commerce

Attachment 4 3

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON Commerce BILL NO. HB 2484

DATE February 15, 2022 MOTION: DP?

YE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

>

PASS

Carter

Chavez
Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza
Wilmeth
Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

A\AKINGG GSC

Weninger, Chairman

O|N

0 0 | 9
ls Oud, ZS

ITTEE SECRETARY

—

APPROWED,
Q —
JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

ATTACHMENT. THY
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature
Second Regular Session

HB 2486: eviction dismissal; sealed records
Sponsor: Representative Wilmeth, LD 15
Committee on Commerce

Overview
Requires eviction case records to be sealed in cases where the case is dismissed or ruled in favor

of the tenant.

History ‘
if a tenant is in material noncompliance with their rental agreement, a landlord may deliver a

written notice to the tenant stating the actions that constituted a breach of the contract and the
contract will terminate in ten days if the breach is not remedied. In the case of a removal due to
health and safety, the contract terminates five days after notice if not remedied (A.R.S. § 33-

1368).

Provisions
4. Requires the court to order records relating to eviction case be sealed in cases where the

action for eviction is dismissed or the case is ruled in favor of the tenant. (Sec. 1)
2. Permits the court to order the sealing of an eviction case on:
a) the filing of a written stipulation by the landlord and the tenant setting aside the eviction

order; or
b) amotion by the tenant and decision by the court, if the court finds the eviction should be

set aside according to rule. (Sec. 1)
3. Requires the tenant's sealed case records be available to:

a) The person whose records are sealed and certain attorneys, or
b) The court or clerk of the court, except that sealed case may not be sold or released a third

party. (Sec. 1)
4. Specifies the sealed records requirements apply to all records maintained by the court relating
to: 1) an action for summary eviction; 2) a forcible entry and detainer action; or 3) a special
detainer action. (Sec. 1)

5. Applies prospectively from the effective date of this act. (Sec. 2)

C Prop 105 (45 votes) 1 Prop 108 (40 votes) [ Emergency (40 votes) [1 Fiscal Note

HB 2485

Initials PB/JL Page 4 Commerce

Attachment. 7.9.

Co Oo SN HD TO S DC MR

| aa poe ool
wm FF ©

Commerce

Fifty-fifth Legislature
H.B. 2485

Second Regular Session

PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H.B. 2485
(Reference to printed bill)

Page 1, line 7, after “EVICTION” insert “PRIOR TO ENTRY OF A JUDGMENT”
Line 10, strike "MAY" insert "SHALL"

Line 12, after "FILE" insert a period strike remainder of line

Strike lines 13 through 15

Line 16, strike "TENANT'S CASE"; after "RECORDS" insert “IN AN EVICTION CASE
COURT FILE"

Line 17, after "SHALL" insert "ONLY"

Line 18, after "ANY" insert "PARTY OR ANY"

Line 19, strike "FILED A NOTICE OF" insert "MADE AN"; strike “ON BEHALF OF THE
PERSON WHOSE" insert "IN THE CASE WHERE”

Lines 21 and 25, after "SEALED" insert “EVICTION”

Amend title to conform

JUSTIN WILMETH

2485WILMETH
02/11/2022
12:06 PM
H: LG/ra

_ Adopted _Y # of Verb:

Failed 2 Withdraw,

Not Offered Analysts Ini
cetiie ysts-initia
Attachment 7 &
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON

Commerce

BILL NO.

DATE February 15, 2022

MOTION: DPA

HB 2485

PASS

NAY

>
x
m

PRESENT

ABSENT

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

wv

Weninger, Chairman

APPROVED:

Wi

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

9) IU NSINAIS| S

|

0

O

X hou l Dent

COMMITTEE SECRETAR

ATTACHMENT.

>»

ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-fifth Legislature - Second Regular Session

ROLL CALL VOTE

COMMITTEE ON

Commerce

BILL NO. HB 2700

DATE February 15, 2022

motion: HE

PASS

AYE NAY PRESENT | ABSENT

Carter

Chavez

Cook

Espinoza

Kaiser

Liguori

Meza

Wilmeth

Chaplik, Vice-Chairman

Weninger, Chairman

APPROVED:

JEFF WENINGER, Chairman
JOSEPH CHAPLIK, Vice-Chairman

U Jeaguall rd rn

COMMITTEE ane

ATTACHMENT 1.6

File and source

File

2022-02-15_commerce-minutes.pdf

Size

8,762,849 bytes

SHA-256

528cec1c7df63e0d7db9c6b2dace776886f35945914681a3b5cfa335e08511db

Our copy

2022-02-15_commerce-minutes.pdf

Original

www.azleg.gov