Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest

Advocate for the rights of the general Public in areas of environmental protection, healthcare, consumer protection, education reform and government accountability. the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest only litigates cases that serve the Public Interest. in 2023, our cases all served the broad Public Interest. in all of the Center's cases, we do not charge our clients attorneys' fees. Arizona does recognize the private attorney general doctrine. Under this doctrine, or if there is a specific statute providing for an award of fees for the successful party, if the Center is successful, the Center will seek attorneys' fees from the adverse party (the state of Arizona). 1. the Center is litigating a case against the state of Arizona for its failure to adequately fund the capital needs of arizonas Public schools. This case is actually a follow up case to one that the Center successfully litigated 30 years ago. As a result of that case, funds were provided to bring all dilapidated schools up to standard, and money was to be provided to keep all schools in good shape. the legislature subsequently de-funded most of the programs that were established as part of the resolution of the old case, and Arizona is once again in a system under which a school districts ability to meet its capital needs depends to a very large extent on the amount of property wealth in the district. If the Center is successful, then the state will be forced to implement a system that complies with the general and uniform clause in the Arizona constitution. This case will help the approximately 900,000 to 1,000,000 children in arizonas Public schools. the case is captioned, glendale elementary school district v. state of Arizona. the named plaintiffs are four Arizona school districts as well as the Arizona school boards association, the Arizona school administrators association, the Arizona education association, and an individual taxpayer. 2. the Center successfully litigated a case against the state of Arizona on behalf of all of arizonas foster children. This case is a class action, where in addition to the general class of all foster children there are subclasses that pertain to subsets of children (e.g., those who receive medicaid services, and those who are placed in non-kinship settings). the basis of the case was that the state fails to provide reasonable and appropriate services to arizonas foster children. the state fails to assure that foster children receive appropriate medical, dental, and behavioral health care. the state unreasonably places children in congregate care settings (which are bad for children), unreasonably separates siblings, fails to timely and adequately investigate allegations of abuse of children while in care, and many other deficient practices. the state vigorously contested whether this case may proceed as a class action. the Center (and co-counsel) have achieved victories on this question in the united states district court for the district of Arizona, and that ruling was largely affirmed on appeal in the 9th circuit court of appeals. the case is known as b.k. V. mckay and the state of Arizona. the case seeks broad relief on behalf of all current and future foster children, and obviously serves a broad Public Interest. the parties entered into a settlement agreement that was approved by the district court in early 2021. the Center will continue to be involved in monitoring compliance with the settlement agreement. Monitoring is ongoing. Attorney fees for monitoring received 11/15/23 - 75,000. 3. in 2023, the Center continued its work appealing rulings pertaining to the state of arizonas refusal to hold in trust the land that was under arizonas navigable rivers at the time that Arizona became a state. Arizona has attempted numerous times to claim that its rivers were not navigable at statehood, which would mean that Arizona could essentially give that land away to private landowners. the Center has contended on behalf of its clients that Arizona must hold that land in trust for the benefit of all arizonans in perpetuity. the Center has been successful in blocking the states attempts in this regard several times in arizonas court system over the past approximately 20 years. As a result of those cases, Arizona convened an adjudication commission, which ruled that various rivers were not navigable. the Center is appealing those rulings in a case knows as defenders of wildlife, donald steuter, jerry van gasse, and jim vaaler v. Arizona navigable stream adjudication commission. the case serves a broad Public Interest in that it seeks to preserve these precious Public resources and to force the state to hold them in trust for the Public now and in the future. (note: in 2023 the Center received a ruling on this case. No fees were awarded. the appellate court ruling denied most relief sought, but granted partial relief.) We continue to monitor the conduct of the state following the court of appeals' ruling. 4. in 2023, the Center represented multiple intervenors in three utility rate cases before the Arizona corporation commission. Utilities that seek rate increases are required to apply for approval from the Arizona corporation commission. Several weeks of hearings were held for proposed increases by tucson electric power ("tep"), Arizona Public service company ("aps"), and uns electric ("uns") throughout spring and autumn 2023. Among the issues that the Center provided representation for were rooftop and community solar, energy efficiency, promotion of renewable energy generally, protections for low-income consumers in utility billing, and environmental justice for coal-impacted communities on and near tribal lands in northeastern Arizona. While tep and uns have final adjudications on the increases, challenges to a solar-specific "grid access charge" are still pending in the aps matter. 5. in late 2023, the Center began representation of patagonia area resource alliance ("para") in the challenge of an aquifer protection permit ("app") issued by Arizona department of environmental quality to the south32 hermosa project, a large mine in southeastern Arizona that produces, among other minerals, lead, silver, copper, and manganese. the app relies on the quality of the water discharged from the mine's new water treatment plant and fails to require actual monitoring of the aquifer. At the time the Center joined, para had already appeared through private counsel at the administrative and superior court levels, and the Center assisted in the appellate process. the case remains in the court of appeals. 6. Proposition 211 filed 12/15/22 (mostly started in 2023). the Center began its pro bono representation of a group called voters right to know, which successfully placed an initiative measure on the ballot to force disclosure of those who spend significant amounts of money on elections- related activities to identify their original donors. Thus, a group could not use a potentially deceptive name to shield the identities of certain classes of donors. Several lawsuits have been filed by opponents of the ballot measure, which won overwhelming support in the 2022 election. the Center is acting as local counsel with co-counsel from the campaign legal Center to defend the voters right to know act. As described in other matters above, defending the rights of the people to legislate through direct democracy initiatives is a core mission of the Center. It serves the Public Interest by vindicating the publics constitutional right to put legislation on the ballot. These cases are presently on appeal and remain very active. Our role continues to be as local counsel. 7. the Center is representing several citizens groups, poder latinx, chicanos por la causa, and chicanos por la causa action fund in litigation filed 8/25/22. the Center is acting as co-counsel with attorneys from the fair elections Center and others. the suit seeks to invalidate two laws passed by the Arizona legislature, which require certain types of proof of residency and citizenship in order to be eligible to vote. the laws are written in a way that violates both federal Law and the united states constitution. They are likely to discriminate against various protected classes of individuals, perhaps most notably people who have become naturalized citizens. Protecting against unlawful discrimination and protecting the right of citizens to vote are core missions of the Center and obviously serve the Public Interest. These cases continue to work their way through the appellate court. in fact, an issue was brought all the way to the us supreme court, and is presently in the 9th circuit court of appeals. 8. Sierra club v. srp filed 6/2/22. the Center represents the sierra club in a suit seeking to force salt river project (a large utility) to comply with arizonas Public records act. Arizona has a strong Public policy to make the records of Public entities accessible to the Public. Srp