Arizona Center For Law In The Public Interest

THE ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS A NON-PROFIT LAW FIRM DEDICATED TO ENSURING GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY AND PROTECTING THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF ARIZONANS.

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 2021, 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, 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 ARIZONA'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THIS CASE IS ACTUALLY A FOLLOW UP CASE TO ONE THAT THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED MORE THAN 25 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 DISTRICT'S 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 ARIZONA'S 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. 20,291 IN EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENTS FOR THIS CASE WERE SOUGHT AND RECOVERED IN 2021. 2. THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED A CASE AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA ON BEHALF OF ALL OF ARIZONA'S 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 ARIZONA'S 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 NINTH 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. 500,000 IN ATTORNEY FEES FOR THIS CASE WERE SOUGHT AND RECOVERED IN 2021. 3. IN 2021, THE CENTER CONTINUED ITS WORK APPEALING RULINGS PERTAINING TO THE STATE OF ARIZONA'S REFUSAL TO HOLD IN TRUST THE LAND THAT WAS UNDER ARIZONA'S 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 STATE'S ATTEMPTS IN THIS REGARD SEVERAL TIMES IN ARIZONA'S 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 KNOWN 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. NO FEES FOR THIS CASE WERE SOUGHT OR RECOVERED IN 2021. 4. IN 2021, THE CENTER CONTINUED LITIGATING A CITIZEN SUIT AGAINST THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ("EPA") IN U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA CAPTIONED SIERRA CLUB V. WHEELER. THE CASE AROSE OUT OF THE EPA'S FAILURE TO TAKE LEGALLY REQUIRED ACTIONS TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM DANGEROUSLY HIGH LEVELS OF PARTICLE AIR POLLUTION IN WESTERN PINAL COUNTY, ARIZONA. PARTICLE POLLUTION OR "PARTICULATE MATTER" REFERS TO A MIX OF TINY AIRBORNE PARTICLES, MANY OF WHICH ARE SO SMALL YOU CANNOT SEE THEM EXCEPT WHEN LEVELS ARE HIGH ENOUGH TO FORM A "BROWN CLOUD." POLLUTION FROM PARTICLES MEASURING LESS THAN 10 MICRONS IN DIAMETER - OR "PM10" - IS PARTICULARLY HAZARDOUS. (FOR COMPARISON, THE DIAMETER OF A HUMAN HAIR IS APPROXIMATELY 70 MICRONS.) PM10 PARTICLES CAN GET TRAPPED IN THE LUNGS AND CAUSE BREATHING DIFFICULTIES, LUNG TISSUE DAMAGE, CANCER, AND EVEN PREMATURE DEATH. WEST PINAL COUNTY DOES NOT MEET FEDERAL AIR QUALITY FOR PM10 AND IS THEREFORE A "NONATTAINMENT AREA." THE CLEAN AIR ACT ("ACT") REQUIRES STATES TO SUBMIT "STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS" ("SIPS") THAT DEMONSTRATE HOW IT WILL ACHIEVE ATTAINMENT OF A FEDERAL AIR QUALITY STANDARD. AFTER A SIP IS SUBMITTED AND IS FOUND TO BE COMPLETE, EPA HAS 12 MONTHS TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE SIP. HERE, EPA WAS REQUIRED TO TAKE FINAL ACTION ON THE WEST PINAL COUNTY PLAN BY JUNE 21, 2017, BUT IT FAILED TO MEET THIS DEADLINE. EPA ALSO MISSED ITS DEADLINE TO DETERMINE WHETHER WEST PINAL COUNTY ATTAINED THE PM10 STANDARD BY THE ATTAINMENT DATE OF JUNE 30, 2019. AFTER THE CENTER SENT A NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE LETTER, BUT BEFORE FILING THE COMPLAINT, EPA PROPOSED TO FIND THAT WEST PINAL COUNTY DID NOT ATTAIN THE PM10 STANDARD BY THE ATTAINMENT DATE. IT SUBSEQUENTLY FINALIZED THAT FINDING. THE PARTIES NEGOTIATED A CONSENT DECREE THAT DIRECTED TO EPA TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE SIP FOR WEST PINAL VALLEY BY THE SUMMER OF 2021, WHICH EPA COMPLIED WITH. THIS CASE FURTHERS THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THAT IT WILL FORCE THE STATE AND PINAL COUNTY TO DO MORE TO REDUCE A HARMFUL AND EVEN DEADLY TYPE OF AIR POLLUTION. CONSENT DECREE 3/2/2021. 11,495 IN ATTONEY FEES FOR THIS CASE WERE SOUGHT AND RECOVERED IN 2021. 5. IN 2021, THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED A CASE THAT CHALLENGED MANY BUDGET RECONCILIATION BILLS PASSED BY THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURE THAT ILLEGALLY INCLUDED SUBSTANTIVE LEGISLATION IN WHAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE APPROPRIATION BILLS. THE CASE RESULTED IN AN ARIZONA SUPREME COURT OPINION THAT DECLARED THE LAWS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. AS A RESULT, THE CENTER PRESERVED THE RIGHT OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS, ARIZONA'S UNIVERSITIES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO IMPLEMENT COVID MITIGATION MEASURES, AND DOZENS OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS WERE STRUCK DOWN. THE ACTION SERVED THE PUBLIC INTEREST BY ENFORCING THE CONSTITUTION'S PROHIBITION ON JAMMING MANY UNRELATED PIECES OF LEGISLATION INTO A SINGLE BILL. IT SERVED THE PUBLIC HEALTH AS WELL AS ESTABLISHING VITAL PRECEDENT. NO ATTORNEY FEES FOR THIS CASE WERE SOUGHT OR RECOVERED IN 2021. 6. IN 2021, THE CENTER CONTINUED LITIGATING A PETITION FOR REVIEW IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT CHALLENGING A FINAL ACTION TAKEN BY EPA DETERMINING THAT THE PHOENIX-MESA AREA ("PHOENIX") ATTAINED THE 2008 NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD FOR OZONE ("OZONE STANDARD") BY THE DEADLINE OF JULY 20, 2018, AND WAS EXEMPT FROM HAVING TO ADOPT LEGALLY REQUIRED CONTROL MEASURES ON OZONE CALLED "CONTINGENCY MEASURES." THE CASE IS CAPTIONED BAHR V. WHEELER. OZONE IS A COLORLESS GAS THAT FORMS WHEN CERTAIN CHEMICALS (NITROUS OXIDE AND VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS) REACT WITH EACH OTHER IN THE PRESENCE OF SUNLIGHT. GROUND-LEVEL OZONE IS A HARMFUL AIR POLLUTANT WITH PROFOUND EFFECTS ON HUMAN HEALTH. STRONG EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT BREATHING OZONE INCREASES THE RISK OF PREMATURE DEATH FROM HEART OR LUNG DISEASE. MORE IMMEDIATE HEALTH EFFECTS OF OZONE INCLUDE SHORTNESS OF BREATH, WHEEZING, COUGHING, ASTHMA ATTACKS, INCREASED RISK OF RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS, CARDIOVASCULAR EFFECTS, AND INCREASED NEED FOR PEOPLE WITH LUNG DISEASES TO RECEIVE MEDICAL TREATMENT AND GO TO THE HOSPITAL. CHILDREN ARE ESPECIALLY AT RISK