Senate set to vote Thursday on $17.6 billion Arizona spending plan

Senate President Warren Petersen said Wednesday the breakthrough came when the Senate agreed to add some spending priorities of House Republicans to the package.

He said that won’t affect the financial bottom line. The Senate plan already had set aside $90 million for House “asks,” he said.

But Petersen said some changes in state law that were proposed in the House’s competing plan will not be part of the final package. These include:

— Hobbling Attorney General Kris Mayes’ authority to bring criminal charges in some political cases;

— A bill to lower tuition at state universities but not make up the difference with state dollars;

— And a move to freeze the salaries of Family Court judges because some GOP lawmakers are unhappy with some of their decisions in child custody cases.

Petersen said the only policy changes in the Senate plan are those that met with approval from Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs. The Senate is scheduled to vote Thursday on the deal.

The competing budget approved last week by House Republicans — Democrats boycotted the vote — would spend about $300 million less.

Even that is too much for some Republicans, with Rep. Justin Olson, R-Mesa, trying to convince colleagues to cut the plan by another $108 million.

But Rep. David Livingston, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, which came up with the original House plan, said he believes there are the votes for the more expensive Senate plan as long as the items sought by House members are included.

Completing the budget, however, won’t end the legislative session. Lawmakers also have to address several key issues.

One is whether they will agree to a plan to allow state and local sales tax revenues to be diverted to make improvements to Chase Field where the Arizona Diamondbacks play.

The team has said the stadium, owned by Maricopa County, is in desperate need of repairs. But the debate has been who should pay for them.

Also still pending is whether lawmakers will ask voters whether to extend Proposition 123. Approved in 2025, it provides an extra more than $300 million a year for K-12 schools by taking money from a special state land trust.

But it expires this year. And while there is general agreement to extend it, the issue has been tied up amid demands by some that any extension should put a provision in the Arizona Constitution to guarantee parents’ rights to get vouchers of taxpayer money to send their children to private or parochial schools or for home schooling.

And then there is a debate about legislation to allow developers to buy up water rights from farmers to meet their legal requirements to show there is a sufficient supply for the homes they want to build.

It is the budget, however, that is the most pressing. That’s because failure to approve a plan by the end of the month — just 11 days away — would leave the state without authority to spend money, potentially shutting down a host of non-emergency services.

Sen. John Kavanagh, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the decision was made early on by GOP leadership to craft a spending plan with the Democratic governor. The Fountain Hills Republican said while members of his party control both chambers, they don’t have the necessary two-thirds margin to override a gubernatorial veto.

Something else also forced cooperation. Kavanagh said negotiations on a spending plan did not begin until relatively recently, meaning both sides were less inclined to posture and more inclined to deal in earnest.

House Republicans, however, went their own way with a more conservative spending plan.

On Wednesday, though, Livingston said his GOP members are satisfied with the Senate package — to the point where he said it may pick up support of 31 of the chamber’s 33 members.

“We have a lot of good things in there for members,’’ Livingston said.

“We’ve got a bipartisan budget with top priorities for Arizona: public safety, education, transportation, protecting businesses, not raising taxes, keeping a balanced budget,’’ Petersen said.

Still, there are likely to be some who oppose the plan. And they’re not all Republicans.

Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales has specific objections to including $24.7 million for the Gang and Immigration Intelligence Team Enforcement Mission, a multi-agency task force.

“GITEM has a documented history of racial profiling, overreach, and community harm,’’ the Tucson Democrat said. She said it “operates without transparency, and actively targets immigrant, Latino, and Indigenous communities.’’

Gonzales had a message for her Democratic colleagues.

“If you vote for this budget, you are voting against the very people who elected you,’’ she said.

Other Democrats have expressed concern there is no new money included for affordable housing programs and argued there should also be more money for K-12 education.