state agencies | Arizona Capitol Times
Your Inside Source for Arizona Government, Politics and Business
Wed, 09 Sep 2026 21:44:30 +0000
en-US
hourly
1
/files/2023/05/az17.jpg
state agencies | Arizona Capitol Times
32
32
43761567
Big agency requests meet Arizona’s stagnant revenue picture
/news/2026/09/09/big-agency-requests-meet-arizonas-stagnant-revenue-picture/
Wed, 09 Sep 2026 21:44:30 +0000
/?p=500009
Arizona’s state agencies are shooting for the moon with funding requests for next year’s state budget, but a stagnant revenue picture may dash those dreams.
The post Big agency requests meet Arizona’s stagnant revenue picture first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Key Points State agency budget requests focus on salary increases, tech upgrades and clawbacks of previous losses The state’s revenue collections remain sluggish after a budget season made complicated by...
Get 24/7 political news coverage and access to events honoring top political professionals
Subscribe
Already a subscriber?
Login
The post Big agency requests meet Arizona’s stagnant revenue picture first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
500009
Tom Buschatzke: Keeping Arizona’s faucets functioning
/news/2026/03/01/tom-buschatzke-keeping-arizonas-faucets-functioning-2/
Sun, 01 Mar 2026 16:00:38 +0000
/?p=497605
Editor’s Note: This Q&A originally published in the Nov. 22, 2024, print edition of the Arizona Capitol Times. It is republished here in light of Tom Buschatzke’s role in the […]
The post Tom Buschatzke: Keeping Arizona’s faucets functioning first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Editor’s Note: This Q&A originally published in the Nov. 22, 2024, print edition of the Arizona Capitol Times. It is republished here in light of Tom Buschatzke’s role in the ongoing Colorado River negotiations.
Tom Buschatzke is Arizona’s chief negotiator for the Colorado River negotiations and has been the arbiter of the state’s water supply for over 10 years as director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources. In a career spanning decades and beginning with an internship at the very department he now leads, Buschatzke said there’s never been a dull day.
The questions and answers have been edited lightly for style and clarity.
What initially got you interested in water and water policy?
When I was an undergraduate student, I decided to become a geology major because I liked the opportunity to potentially work outdoors, especially when you’re younger in that field. I went to undergraduate school in upstate New York, where there were lots of rivers, streams, etc. So the three pathways with that degree were probably mining, oil or water. And I just got more interested in water, but more from a technical standpoint. I had aspired to work for the United States Geological Survey, and actually had a job offer from them, a job that would have started on October 1, the first day of the federal fiscal year. Shortly before that job started, their funding got cut. My job was no longer there, so I didn’t pursue that pathway … Then I decided to come here to go to graduate school. And in school, I saw … an internship advertisement on a billboard at ASU and said, “I kind of need some money, so I’ll go take this internship.” And once I got here, I started thinking, “Well, this is kind of interesting.”
What is it like to be the director of a department you were once an intern at?
If in 1982 someone said, “Tom, someday you’re going to be the head of this department,” I’d have told them they were out of their minds. There are a lot of really positive benefits that flow from it. First, having kind of worked my way up the chain, I recognize what it’s like to be at that level, at the intern level first, and then at the entry level and understand the challenges. I understand, because I’ve done it. But I also understand, having been an intern and worked my way up, how we viewed leadership at the time and how we would have loved to have had more of an opportunity to get input into leadership in a meaningful way. When I’m in the room with my staff, if they don’t tell me, I call on them and say, “What do you think?” They don’t get away with just sitting there because I value what they have to say. I know when I was younger, I had stuff to say probably that could have been valuable that I had a lot less opportunity to say. In that regard, the work world has changed. There is more value assigned to less-experienced employees in general in the work world than there was back when I was younger. I think that’s a very positive step forward.
What has kept you involved in water policy for the past few decades?
I think there’s several factors there. One, the policy side is really very interesting. It is hugely challenging, but it has so many different pieces that most days, I come into my job — and it’s been this way for a long time — I learn something new. After 42 years plus, you wouldn’t think that would be the case, but it definitely is. And I just think that for the future of Arizona, what I do is really important, and probably that drives me as much as anything, and has always driven me. When I was in Phoenix, it was for the future of Phoenix, but also in the context of the state and the region. Now, it’s the state and the region as well. So, I actually, crazily maybe, enjoy the interaction at the federal government level with the Department of Interior, other agencies that I’ve interacted with over the years, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, EPA, etc. I think those are also really interesting connections to doing water policy, just the breadth of it is sometimes daunting, but also what keeps you motivated, because there’s rarely a dull day. I always say part of what’s motivating me now is my two grandchildren who live here and who probably will live here for a very long time, if not their entire lives … I’m doing this for the future, the future good for the state.
What do you wish people knew more about when it comes to water in Arizona?
So, I think maybe the single biggest issue is people don’t understand that the community they live in matters in terms of the reliability of their water supply. There are communities that are very reliable, and there are communities that are less so, and when the Rio Verde Foothills thing blew up, I doubt those people knew the risk that they were under before it blew up. I have a younger daughter who was a club soccer player. [The parents] would say, “What do you do, Tom?” and I tell them, and they’re like, “Well, how’s my water situation?” And I’d say, “Where do you live?” And they’d be like, “Well, why does that matter?” I’m like, it does because [of] the way water rights and supplies have developed over the years, this whole first come, first serve, prior appropriation and other things. I would really be a lot happier if people were more aware. I don’t want this to sound negative, because I think this is a two-sided coin. What I have helped do, what I’ve helped create, is a level of reliability for people that perhaps is taken for granted. There is no one who goes like this with their faucet and nothing comes out, right? That’s because of stuff that I and many, many, many people have done over many decades. And I think that is somewhat of a unique situation in the world. The number of people, or the number of areas, that have refined water, 24/7, that’s clean and healthy is a very small percentage of the population of the world. I think it would be good if people recognize how good they have it. The last thing, and this gets into really difficult issues, people want their services to be as low cost as possible, yet to address what we’ve already created and to address what we need to do in the future is going to take more money. When Flint, Michigan, had their issue with their water quality, it was about a couple of million dollars they didn’t want to spend because their constituents were saying, “We don’t want to have to pay those rates.” I think that’s something that people have to start thinking about. If they want to continue that reliability, the cost is going to go up, probably higher than the cost of inflation.
What do you recommend for people who want to learn more about their water?
We live in an information overload world, but through your individual water provider, whether that’s a city or a water company, the universities, this department, there is so much information that’s at your fingertips on the internet. It just takes a lot of time to slog through it, and it’s very down in the weeds, if you really want to understand it. One of the most difficult things for me, certainly, is when I get interviewed on television, and they want to be able to tell the story in 20 seconds. You can’t tell the complete story in 20 seconds. You can’t tell enough of the story on X. We live in a sound bite world, and these issues are pretty hard to describe in a sound bite world. So that’s a challenge for us, and it’s a challenge for people who are trying to get information, to make the commitment to really get down into the weeds so they can really understand the benefits and the risks that are facing them and us.
You’ve been at ADWR for nearly 10 years, do you plan on sticking around?
I have no plans to leave anytime soon. I do think when I leave, when I finally decide to retire – which I’m way past eligible – I think it’s going to be retirement. Lots of people do consulting or try to keep their hand in it. One of the things my water policy adviser mentor always told me is, “Tom, when you do the water policy, if you’re not down in the weeds and at every level, all day, every day, it’s not something you do part time.” Because you lose the connections, and you lose your ability to be effective. When he retired, he was like,, “Tom, I’m going to disappear.” And since he retired 22 years ago, I think I’ve seen him four or five times. He doesn’t follow the water stuff anymore. The couple times I’ve seen him, [one] was when I accepted being the director, and he called me like, “Let’s go to lunch, explain to me why you did this.” So I think I’m gonna probably go down that same path.
What legacy do you hope to leave on ADWR and the state of Arizona?
That I left the state in a place where there’s a road map to addressing the water challenges that are facing us. I don’t expect to solve them all, but I want to make sure that there’s a pathway to doing it so that the next whomevers, director, staff, etc, have a solid foothold on solving those issues. Also, I am a huge proponent, as you can imagine, of this department hiring interns. When I was an intern here, there were about a dozen or so interns, most of them went on to really impactful things in the world of water. One went to the EPA. One went to the New York State EPA equivalent. Two of them, one was as the head water person for SRP for years. The other was the second or third in command at SRP on the water side for many years. So I fully embrace and recognize the value of internships in terms of launching people’s careers, and the value that not only it gives to the state, but the value that it gives to the water community.
Is there anything else you think people should know?
I would just hope people understand that this department makes decisions in view of what’s good for the entire state of Arizona. That’s our charge. So, sometimes when you do that, individual groups are aggrieved. But I hope people understand that that’s what we have to do. The other thing I want them to understand, in relation to the Colorado River, is that this state was the first to really embrace meaningful roles for tribes. Now, there are other processes in other states, but we were really the ones who started bringing them into the fold, probably around 2016 or 2017. It goes to what I say publicly all the time, we need everyone to participate if we’re going to address the challenges of that river. One of the other big things we hear is like, “We want to be in the room.” Well, it’s hard to negotiate something with 100 people in a room. We’ve tried to create layers of participation, but that frustrates a lot of people [who say], “I have a stake, I should be in the room.” I think we have, relatively successfully, figured out a way, through having different layers, almost like an inverted pyramid, to get people to have the opportunity to really weigh in with us. Also, this department was devastated by the Great Recession. It went from 240 or 245 people to 90. When I became the director in 2015, we were probably about 122. We’re twice that now, and that occurred with the support of the stakeholders in this state. They wanted this department to grow back again, because even though they are aggrieved sometimes by some of the decisions, they understand. I think that is part and parcel of demonstrating they recognize the larger benefit that this department creates. I’m very thankful that we have that support.The post Tom Buschatzke: Keeping Arizona’s faucets functioning first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
497605
Hobbs heads into fourth legislative session with unconfirmed state agency directors
/news/2026/01/06/hobbs-heads-into-fourth-legislative-session-with-unconfirmed-state-agency-directors/
Tue, 06 Jan 2026 23:04:08 +0000
/?p=496948
Key Points: Gov. Katie Hobbs will send eight director nominations to the Senate in 2026 Her nominations have been held up by the Senate Director Nominations Committee since 2023 Sen. […]
The post Hobbs heads into fourth legislative session with unconfirmed state agency directors first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Key Points:
Gov. Katie Hobbs will send eight director nominations to the Senate in 2026
Her nominations have been held up by the Senate Director Nominations Committee since 2023
Sen. Jake Hoffman and Senate Republicans have forced Hobbs to choose new appointees
Gov. Katie Hobbs will enter her fourth and final legislative session of her first term in office without Senate-confirmed directors at eight state agencies, setting up another round of confirmation battles that have become a fixture in an era of divided state government.
Eight nominees are expected to face the Senate Director Nominations Committee during the 2026 legislative session, seven of whom are the governor’s second choice for their respective positions. The nomination has dragged into 2026 due to strategic maneuvering by Republicans, Hobbs’ decision to pull her nominations in 2023 and an ensuing court battle that ended in 2024 with a promise to restart hearings in 2025.
Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, has served as chairman of the committee and arbiter of Hobbs’ nominations since the committee was created specifically for the governor after her election in 2022. He is known for raking nominees over the coals, questioning them over anything from years-old social media posts criticizing President Donald Trump to memberships of professional organizations that promote diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.
The committee, known as DINO, also features Republican heavyweight Sens. T.J. Shope and John Kavanagh. The two occasionally vote with Democratic Sens. Analise Ortiz and Flavio Bravo to advance Hobbs’ nominees, even if Hoffman disapproves.
Hoffman did not respond to an interview request for this story, and he has traditionally preferred to keep his plans for DINO close to his chest. He has also long argued that Hobbs has picked unqualified political allies as nominees to lead her state agencies, while Hobbs insists Hoffman is an obstructionist using his position to kneecap her initiatives.
Hobbs has also said Hoffman’s hostility has made it difficult for her office to find replacements for directors who are forced out or rejected. But one political consultant, speaking on the condition of anonymity, noted that Hobbs’ staff has not always shown unwavering support for nominees facing contentious confirmation hearings.
“When (Dr. Theresa Cullen) got eviscerated at DINO, she walked to her car alone,” the consultant said. “… This woman just got f***ing torched, wrongly or rightly, she got torched and there was no one there to go, ‘Hey, you did fine, these people are just a**holes,’ whatever you say to someone who just got torched.”
Other consultants say Hoffman’s antics, which are often characterized as a move to stunt the governor’s chances of reelection, won’t break through to the average voter in November. Others believe it could be an asset for Hobbs, if she plays her cards right.
“She should be making a case about that with a wider (audience),” said Chuck Coughlin, the CEO of consulting firm HighGround. “I would expect her to talk about it in the state of the state. That would be a good thing to talk about state of state, ‘I’m going into my last year in office, and I still don’t have any confirmation of a director for this department.’”
The uphill battles
Of the eight nominees awaiting confirmation, only one has already received a hearing and a recommendation to the full Senate: Karen Peters at the Department of Environmental Quality.
That doesn’t mean Peters can expect to be confirmed, however. Her nomination, which is set to expire in February, did not make it to a vote before the 2025 session ended in late June, with Hoffman telling the Arizona Capitol Times in July that it was unclear whether or not Peters had the votes to be confirmed.
Hoffman was the lone no vote on Peters’ nomination during her confirmation hearing and credited “industry lobbyists” for swaying other members of the Republican caucus in her favor.
Virginia “Ginny” Rountree is Hobbs’ second pick to lead the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, after Carmen Heredia resigned when Hoffman accused her of mishandling the aftermath of the sober living homes scandal. Over $2 billion in state Medicaid funds were distributed to fraudulent providers, and Hobbs’ administration has been accused of overcorrecting and cracking down on legitimate providers.
Rountree was nominated to her position in September 2025 and has already appeared before lawmakers in committee to discuss the sober living homes scandal. While not at AHCCCS during the fraud, Rountree previously worked at the agency between 2014 and 2019 and also held a leadership position at the Department of Economic Security.
Another nominee likely to face scrutiny is Ruby Dhillon-Williams at the Department of Housing. Her predecessor and former boss, Joan Serviss, was rejected by both DINO and the full Senate after Republicans accused her of plagiarism in her former roles.
ADOH is also under scrutiny after its most recent sunset audit, which found the department inadvertently wired $2 million to fraudsters claiming to be affordable housing developers. ADOH’s statutory life was only extended by one year, giving the Legislature more oversight of its operations.
The newbies
Debbie Johnston at the Department of Health Services is Hobbs’ newest director nominee, having been tapped for the job in November 2025. Johnston is the former executive vice president of the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association and is Hobbs’ third pick to lead ADHS.
Hobbs’ previous ADHS nominees, Dr. Theresa Cullen and Jennie Cunico, were rejected by Hoffman and Senate Republicans for their views on and actions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Will Humble, the director of ADHS under former Govs. Jan Brewer and Doug Ducey, said he doesn’t foresee Johnston facing the same scrutiny.
“I think she’s actually quite confirmable, with her personality, her track record, where she is in her career, her lack of social media presence,” Humble said. “And she’s not a hot head. She does her homework.”
John Conley, Hobbs’ nominee for the adjutant general and director of the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, is also expected to do well before the DINO committee. He was appointed in June to replace former Adjutant General Kerry Muehlenbeck, who left the job to return to teaching at Mesa Community College.
Conley, who previously served as director of administrative services at DEMA before being promoted, has been welcomed to his role by Arizona Republicans like U.S. Reps. Juan Ciscomani and Abe Hamadeh. Hobbs told reporters after his appointment that she believes Conley is a bipartisan pick.
Hobbs’ nominee for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Mary Foote, was also recently selected for her role to replace an outgoing director. Carlos Contreras, the governor’s first choice, saw his nomination expire in August 2025 after it was rejected by DINO.
Foote joined OEO in February 2024, serving as the director of the Greater Arizona Development Authority before moving into the director position.
The question marks
The Office of Tourism has been led by Alix Skelpsa Ridgway since Hobbs’ original nominee, Lisa Urias, resigned from the position in late 2024 following accusations of a conflict of interest in a contract for a new state logo. Skelpsa Ridgway’s nomination was not transmitted to the Senate until June 2025, near the end of the legislative session, and she has not yet faced the DINO committee.
Republicans lambasted Hobbs and Urias over the new state logo, which cost $700,000 and was designed by the brother of the CEO of a communications firm founded by Urias. The logo is likely to come up in Skelpsa Ridgway’s confirmation hearing, as she was serving as deputy director of the Tourism Office at the time.
Maria Ailor is serving as the interim director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions after DINO and the full Senate rejected Barbara Richardson during the 2025 session. Ailor moved into the director position after serving as assistant director of DIFI’s market regulation and consumer services division.
It is unclear whether Ailor will be Hobbs’ official nominee for the role, as many interim directors appointed in 2025 returned to their previous agency roles after the governor tapped a permanent nominee.The post Hobbs heads into fourth legislative session with unconfirmed state agency directors first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
496948
Arizona agencies request pay hikes for employees
/news/2025/09/19/arizona-agencies-request-pay-hikes-for-employees/
Fri, 19 Sep 2025 15:52:49 +0000
/?p=495758
Key Points: State agencies request salary increases for staff in their fiscal year 2027 budget requests Gov. Katie Hobbs’ proposal for a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees […]
The post Arizona agencies request pay hikes for employees first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Key Points:
State agencies request salary increases for staff in their fiscal year 2027 budget requests
Gov. Katie Hobbs’ proposal for a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees was rejected earlier this year
Agencies say years of rejected raise requests are leading to high turnover rates and low employee morale
Several state agencies are requesting salary increases for their staff after a proposal for a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees fell through earlier this year.
According to agency budget requests submitted to the Governor’s Office for fiscal year 2027 — which starts July 1, 2026 — several state entities are requesting employee salary increases ranging anywhere from 4% to 10%.
All of the agencies asking for salary increases cited high turnover rates and low employee morale, with some requests noting that employees are actively seeking employment elsewhere or working two jobs to meet basic needs. Smaller agencies, like the Board of Dental Examiners and the Arizona Historical Society, are particularly struggling with low salaries.
“The (Board of Dental Examiners) staff are currently disappointed due to the lack of pay increases, the increasing workload, and reading the news about other state agency salary increases that rely on (the board’s) shared 15% to the general fund,” the board’s request states. “While staff members continue to work overtime, when available, this has not alleviated the issues. They are tired and frustrated by the lack of resources.”
Gov. Katie Hobbs proposed enacting a 2% to 3% raise for all state employees in her executive budget proposal, but the raise was not included in the budget she ultimately signed for fiscal year 2026. Hobbs told the Arizona Capitol Times that it is too early to speak of specific budget plans for next year, but state employee pay is something she is always looking to increase.
“This is a huge challenge and one of the things that keeps me up at night,” Hobbs said. “My message to state employees is that I appreciate the work you do on behalf of Arizonans every day. I know it is not easy, and we’re doing what we can to make sure that you’re compensated for what you do.”
Many of the agencies asking for salary increases for their employees are fee-funded and would use the revenue from those fees to fund pay bumps, avoiding any costs to taxpayers. Requests for a 5% increase at the Board of Dental Examiners and 10% increases at the Board of Pharmacy and the Board of Chiropractic Examiners would not dip into the state’s general fund, which is supported by income and sales taxes.
However, excess revenue generated by the boards goes into the general fund, meaning any increase funded by fees would take money away from the revenue lawmakers and the governor use to fund new initiatives or cover costs at other agencies. And Hobbs is already warning that there will not be much general fund money to go around next year with federal spending cuts and the dwindling of Covid recovery funds.
That isn’t stopping agencies from asking for pay raises financed by the state’s general fund though.
The Arizona Historical Society’s request for a 10% increase would cost around $310,500 annually from the general fund. But AHS says raises are necessary because it estimates one quarter of its staff will resign without them.
“Many of the agency’s staff have been forced into secondary employment to meet their basic needs,” AHS’s request states.
Other, larger agencies are also asking for general fund money to support staff salary increases. The Department of Juvenile Corrections and the Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry are asking for 4% raises, while the Attorney General’s Office and the Administrative Office of the Courts are asking for 5% and 10% raises respectively.
ADCRR submitted the largest general fund request for salary increases at $26 million. The Administrative Office of the Courts, which encompasses the Superior Court, Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, asked for one of the largest pay bumps at a cost of $5.8 million to the general fund.
The AOC said in its budget request that many of its staff are currently underpaid.
“Our latest review found that Judicial Branch employees are paid 19% below the comparable court job market, making it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain a skilled workforce,” the AOC request noted.
Almost all of the agencies asking for salary increases attribute low employee pay to a combination of inflation, the Covid pandemic and other economic factors. But some agencies noted that their requests for pay increases have been ignored for years, allowing the cost of living to outpace salaries.
The last statewide salary increase of 10% was enacted in fiscal year 2023. State troopers and firefighters saw a 5% and 10% pay raise respectively in the current fiscal year.
The requests for state employee salary increases also come after lawmakers discussed raising their own pay during the 2025 session. Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, championed a measure that would have asked voters to approve raising lawmaker salaries from $24,000 to $48,000, while other lawmakers also offered proposals for increasing their pay.
But most proposals for pay increases for lawmakers have also gone ignored for years, making it unlikely that either elected officials or state employees can expect a raise anytime soon. The post Arizona agencies request pay hikes for employees first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
495758
Governor warns of ‘tough budget year’ ahead for state agencies
/news/2025/09/05/governor-warns-of-tough-budget-year-ahead-for-state-agencies/
Fri, 05 Sep 2025 17:05:22 +0000