Hobbs appointee caught between federal law & GOP opposition to diversity programs

The far-right Republican senator who
already blocked several of Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs’ picks to lead
state agencies has accused another nominee of lying and violating the
Arizona Constitution. 

The nominee’s transgression? Adhering
to grant requirements that were already baked into Arizona’s federally
required state workforce plans by Hobbs’ Republican predecessor.
Ignoring those federal requirements would put the grant money at risk. 

But that didn’t stop Sen. Jake
Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, from grilling Carlos Contreras, Hobbs’ nominee
to head up the Office of Economic Opportunity, during a May 28 Director
Nominations Committee hearing. When Contreras answered that he was
following the rules stipulating the use of the federal grant money,
Hoffman said that was not good enough. 

“Hoffman is just trying to find
excuses to villainize these highly qualified public servants,” Sen.
Analise Ortiz, a Phoenix Democrat and member of the committee, told the
Arizona Mirror. “And, in this case, he was just flatly wrong, spewing
misinformation and thinking that anything he says goes, when that is
just not the case.”

Hoffman, who leads the far-right
Arizona Freedom Caucus, is the chairman of the Arizona Senate’s Director
Nominations Committee, which was created in 2023
specifically to scrutinize Hobbs’ director nominees. It has held
numerous contentious and combative nomination hearings since then, and
its Republican members refused to confirm several of the governor’s
nominees. Some of the nominees backed out prior to a confirmation
committee hearing that they knew wasn’t going to go their way. 

State law requires the state Senate
confirm a governor’s agency directors, but before Hobbs took office in
2023, confirmations occurred with little fanfare following brief
interviews with relevant legislative committees. 

After Hobbs struggled to get committee approval for many of her director nominees in 2023, she attempted to bypass the Senate
by leaving director posts vacant and instead appointing deputy
directors who essentially served as directors. Agency directors are
subject to Senate approval, but deputy directors are not. 

But Senate Republicans sued and a judge ruled that the move violated state law, so Hobbs agreed to once again submit her director nominees for committee approval. 

Contreras, who spent 25 years working
for Intel, including as its U.S. education manager, has headed the
Office of Economic Opportunity since 2023. Part of the office’s mission
is to coordinate the state’s workforce development strategy. 

During Contreras’ May 28 Director
Nominations Committee hearing, Hoffman repeatedly questioned the nominee
about the scoring system used to award grants via the BuilditAZ
apprenticeship program. The program helps to fund earn-while-you-learn
apprenticeships in construction, an area with an increasing need for
skilled workers. 

“Why is your agency awarding higher scores for programs based on race, sex, or identity of their participants?” Hoffman asked. 

Led by President Donald Trump,
Republicans both nationally and locally have been on a crusade to rid
diversity, equity and inclusion requirements from government, education
and the private sector. 

“You don’t have statutory authority
to select based on race, sex or English language learner status, yet you
did it anyway,” Hoffman said, accusing Contreras of violating the
Arizona Constitution and state statute. 

Contreras initially answered that his
office was following U.S. Department of Labor grant requirements, but
Hoffman dismissed that explanation, arguing that the OEO doesn’t have to
participate in a grant program with what he called discriminatory
requirements. 

Ortiz called the suggestion that the
state forgo federal grants that have requirements that Hoffman disagrees
with “ridiculous.” 

“We are in a situation as a state
where we need to look for opportunities for funding anywhere that we
can,” she said. “The purpose of these federal grant programs is to
provide that additional support for states in order to strengthen our
economies, strengthen our workforce.”

As Hoffman became increasingly
hostile, Contreras struggled to answer the chairman’s numerous versions
of the same question about the grant scoring process, saying that the
office did not select grant winners based solely on race. 

“You’re gonna struggle if you keep up
obfuscating like this. OK?” Hoffman said. “Your own documents say that
you award greater points for those characteristics.”

The scoring system for BuilditAZ grant proposals
does give priority to “certain demographic groups to ensure equitable
access to workforce development programs and services.” But that’s not
an idea that Contreras came up with on his own: It’s a requirement of
the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, which funded the grants. 

One of the main goals of the WIOA is
to help groups who face barriers to employment obtain high-quality jobs.
The first several times Hoffman asked Contreras about the points
system, the senator only mentioned the categories of race, sex and
English language learners, but the list is much more extensive than
that. 

It includes people with low incomes, those with disabilities, young people, displaced workers and military veterans. 

Hoffman’s focus on race, sex and English proficiency, while leaving out so many other groups, was telling, Ortiz said. 

“I think it makes it very clear that
Chairman Hoffman believes that certain jobs should only be for certain
people,” she said. “And that is a racist and sexist viewpoint that does
not make our workforce stronger. If we’re leaving out crucial
demographic groups and we are leaving out different perspectives, then
we are going to be at a disadvantage as a state.” 

All of the groups mentioned in the
BuilditAZ grant scoring rubric were outlined as priority groups in
Arizona’s Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act state plan for 2020-2023, which was created under the direction of then-Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican. 

Ortiz told the Mirror that the usage
of the same language in plans created by a GOP governor showed that the
criticism was not actually based on the grant language, but was just a
way to go after the Democratic governor. 

“That is just further evidence of
this process being politicized in a way that it should not be,” Ortiz
said. “And who is paying for that? It is our hardworking public
servants.”

As Hoffman repeatedly told Contreras
that his office had violated anti-discrimination laws in both the
Arizona Constitution and state statute, Ortiz interjected to request
input from one of the Senate’s nonpartisan attorneys. 

Hoffman quickly cut her off, saying that she should have asked more hard-hitting questions when it was her turn. 

Ortiz told the Mirror that, as an
elected Senator, she should have the same authority to call points of
order and to request clarification as anyone else on the committee, but
that has not been the case. 

“(Hoffman) has been so patronizing
and has treated every member of that committee like we are children that
I have to sit there and bite my tongue and not call points of orders
when I know that he’s wrong,” Ortiz said. 

Hoffman was adamant that federal law
doesn’t supersede state law in this case, and that it was not acceptable
that the grant scoring rubric “directly conflicts with provisions of
the Arizona Constitution.” 

The Arizona Constitution states that
the state “shall not grant preferential treatment to or discriminate
against any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color,
ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment,
public education or public contracting.”

However, just two lines down in the
same section, the constitution stipulates that those rules do not
“Prohibit action that must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility
for any federal program, if ineligibility would result in a loss of
federal monies to this state.”

The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution says that, when they conflict, federal law generally supersedes state law. 

At the request of Sen. John Kavanagh,
a Fountain Hills Republican and the vice chairman of the committee,
Hoffman agreed to adjourn the meeting without making any recommendation
on the nomination to give time for Contreras and members of the
committee to consult with attorneys about the legality of the grant
scoring system and what to do if state and federal law pertaining to it
conflict. 

Legislative Council, the
legislature’s in-house division of attorneys, did not respond to the
Mirror’s request for clarification of the state and federal laws and how
they intersect. 

Ortiz said that it was unfortunate that Hoffman “unnecessarily” delayed Contreras’ confirmation. 

“I hope that Chairman Hoffman comes
more prepared (to the next committee hearing), understanding the
Supremacy Clause and understanding our state constitution before
dragging all of us through this dog and pony show,” she said, “because
not only is it a waste of our time, it is a waste of precious state
resources.”

Hoffman suggested that all interested
parties reach out to the U.S. Department of Labor for updated guidance
on grant requirements since they have likely changed since Trump took
office in January.