A Maricopa County Superior Court judge allowed additional emails to be added to the record and ordered a rerun of the briefing in the litigation over whether a $15.3 million legislative infusion for the Prescott Frontier Days Rodeo in fiscal year 2024 violates the Arizona Constitution’s Gift Clause. In a brief filed Thursday, the plaintiffs, represented by attorneys with the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, pointed to previously sealed internal Treasury emails showing the development of an information request process for recipients of promotional funds to ensure “legal protection” after the lawsuit was filed. The emails, the plaintiffs said, also contradicted the defendants’ position that the Treasury has the legal authority not only to distribute but also to manage funds and can do so to make appropriations sound and consistent with the state constitution’s Gift Clause. Attorney Nicholas Ansel reported an exchange of letters in which former Deputy Treasurer Mark Swenson wrote to current Deputy Treasurer Jeff Kros, saying he was “not a fan of the term ‘administration’ since we were only tasked with distribution… but hey, that’s your and Jackie’s problem since I’m out of here soon! LOL.” In a statement sent to our reporter, Kros noted the Treasurer’s Office “must ensure that funds appropriated by the Legislature are distributed in accordance with the requirements of all applicable laws to properly implement the intent of the Legislature, particularly when the language in an appropriations bill is vague or unclear. The processes we follow in these cases are required by state law and are conducted transparently.” He said the RFI process was conducted as part of a similar legislative appropriation in 2022. Regarding the emails cited, Kros said, “statements from the Treasurer’s staff were mixed in with the various appropriations in the Legislature’s main spending bill and were made before it was determined that the grant authorization process was necessary to effect the appropriations.” He further clarified that the Treasurer’s office did not conduct an RFI process or distribute funds to the rodeo, but has the “legal mechanisms in place to ensure the grant is awarded to an eligible organization as the Legislature intended” and “looks forward to the Court’s guidance on this important matter.” The parties were initially scheduled to argue their respective motions for summary judgment on Monday, but on Friday Judge Scott Blaney, a Ducey appointee, rescheduled the hearing to consider the motion to amend the record instead. Danny Adelman, attorney for the plaintiffs, said in court today that while the claim that the legislature violated the Gift Clause is not based on recent evidence and is legally sound on its own, the recent emails undermine the Treasury and state defenses. Treasury attorney Brett Johnson and state attorney Kara Karlson asserted that the emails included in the file are “undoubtedly protected by attorney-client privilege” because “each communication constitutes a request for legal advice or was for the purpose of gathering information for legal advice and therefore cannot be introduced as supplemental evidence,” and denied the motion to supplement the file in an answer brief. In a hearing today, state attorney Kathryn Bouton noted that she did not object to supplementing the file with non-privileged documents and requested a “parallel opportunity to respond” but opposed the inclusion of privileged documents in the file. Still, lawyers for both the treasurer and the state said there was nothing improper about the communications, “particularly when those communications resulted in nothing other than the treasurer seeking legal advice and proceeding with the grant application process, which again is a legal process,” attorney Ryan Regula said. “Had the treasurer made distributions and done what was requested in those emails, that would be a very different issue than the one before this court.” After hearing from the parties, Blaney, a Ducey-appointed judge, said he ordered the treasurer’s office, the state and Prescott Frontier Days, as well as the plaintiffs, Arizona residents represented by the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, to file revised motions for summary judgment, answers and rejoinders. Blaney temporarily sealed three exhibits pending the parties’ reliance on them.
Further disputes in the rodeo gift clause trial in Prescott
