Prescott Lawmakers at Center of Arizona Governor’s Veto on Legislator Allowance Hike

Gov. Doug Ducey vetoed a bill that would have raised living allowances for Arizona lawmakers, leaving rural legislators from Prescott and other out-county areas scrambling for a new strategy. The veto landed Friday, and lawmakers from Prescott are already planning their next move.

The Veto That Split the Legislature

The vetoed bill would have pegged the daily allowance for out-county lawmakers at $185, matching the U.S. General Services Administration rate for travel to Phoenix. It also would have kept the current practice of paying allowances seven days a week, even when the Legislature was not in session.

The bill also included a half allowance of $92.50 a day for lawmakers living in Maricopa County. Ducey could not veto just part of the measure, so he rejected the entire plan.

"There’s some of our members that were really counting on that to help them get through the cost of serving," said Senate President Karen Fann, R-Prescott.

Fann said expenses for temporary housing have become unmanageable for lawmakers commuting to Phoenix for the legislative session and for hearings held throughout the year.

"Expenses have just gotten so ridiculously high just trying to find a place to live temporarily," she said.

Rural Lawmakers Say Compensation Has Not Kept Pace

Rep. Noel Campbell, R-Prescott, sponsored the House version of the allowance increase. He said the current daily allowance of $60 for rural lawmakers and $35 for Maricopa County legislators has not been adjusted since 1984.

"We have members that are living in motor homes in not-very-nice locations. And it’s all because of inflation," Campbell said.

Campbell said the issue is not about lawmakers enriching themselves. He said the lack of proper compensation signals that voters do not value the work of elected officials.

"It just shows us they don’t think much about us, they don’t consider the needs that we have," Campbell said. "And, the truth of it is, nobody’s looking out for us except ourselves."

Ducey’s Objection Was Not About Rural Lawmakers

Ducey did not object to increasing allowances for out-county legislators. He acknowledged there is "a strong case to be made" for recognizing the costs rural lawmakers face when serving at the state Capitol.

His problem was the inclusion of Maricopa County lawmakers in the same bill. He also expressed concern that the increase would take effect immediately, benefiting the lawmakers who voted for it.

Rep. Randy Friese, D-Tucson, suggested a delayed effective date might make the measure more palatable to the governor. He said an increase that does not take effect until 2021 could avoid the appearance of lawmakers voting themselves a raise.

The Political Math Works Against Rural Lawmakers

Any new attempt to raise allowances faces a structural hurdle. There are 53 lawmakers who live in Maricopa County and 27 who come from the other 14 counties. Rural lawmakers need votes from their Maricopa County colleagues to pass any measure.

Campbell pushed back on the idea of abandoning Maricopa County lawmakers to secure the governor’s signature.

"I don’t like the divide-and-conquer thing," Campbell said. "That’s not good politics."

Fann said she is not ready to commit to a bill that excludes urban lawmakers. She said the form of the next attempt remains under debate.

"Next year, we’ll try something different," Fann said.

Broader Pay Debate Looms

The allowance fight exists alongside a larger question about legislator salaries. Arizona lawmakers are paid $24,000 a year, a figure set by a special commission and subject to voter approval. Their last pay raise came in 1998.

Rep. Jay Lawrence, R-Scottsdale, said the salary should be $36,000. Voters have previously rejected that figure and a scaled-back proposal of $30,000.

Rep. Charlene Fernandez, D-Yuma, said voters are unlikely to approve a higher salary as long as lawmakers continue to act in ways that erode public trust. She pointed to days during the recent session where the Republican majority failed to vote on matters because they were missing key members.

Both Fann and Campbell said they will return to the allowance issue when the Legislature reconvenes in January.

"We want to make another run at the issue," Campbell said.

The form of that run remains undecided. The political arithmetic and the governor’s veto message mean any new bill must navigate the divide between rural and urban lawmakers while convincing Ducey to sign.