Arizona School Voucher Reform Campaign Alleges Rival Group Spreading Misinformation

Tensions Escalate Between Competing School Voucher Reform Campaigns in Arizona

A campaign supporting school voucher reform in Arizona has accused its rival of employing questionable tactics to influence voters, potentially violating state law as both groups race to secure ballot positions for November.

Two separate organizations are currently gathering signatures to place their respective school voucher reform initiatives before Arizona voters. Protect Education Now, backed by the Arizona Education Association and Save Our Schools Arizona, aims to implement significant changes to the state’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) program. Their proposal would require private schools receiving voucher funds to meet similar standards as public schools and would impose a $150,000 income cap on participating families.

The competing campaign, Fortify AZ, is financially supported by the pro-voucher American Federation for Children. While both measures seek to establish new guardrails for the voucher program following investigative reporting by 12News that exposed non-educational purchases like jewelry, lingerie, and appliances with voucher funds, Fortify AZ’s proposal notably excludes the income cap and other reforms championed by Protect Education Now.

Each campaign must gather 256,000 valid voter signatures by the July 2 deadline to qualify for the November ballot. Protect Education Now recently announced it had collected 150,000 signatures, but the group now claims Fortify AZ is deliberately sabotaging their efforts.

In a cease-and-desist letter obtained by KJZZ, Protect Education Now alleges that Fortify AZ signature gatherers are physically obstructing their workers and spreading misinformation to confuse voters. Attorney Jim Barton, who represents Protect Education Now, detailed the allegations.

“We’re seeing amped up, physically moving between the signer and the petition gatherer, you know, sort of very loudly, trying to interrupt the things that are going on,” Barton said. He suggested these actions may violate Arizona law, which prohibits using coercion or threats to prevent people from signing petitions.

“We’re getting reports that are sounding like people who are sort of really kind of pushing right up against the border there — I mean, assault is illegal,” he added.

The letter documents instances where Fortify AZ signature gatherers allegedly misled voters by claiming both petitions “are the same.” Barton also accused the rival campaign of deliberately mimicking Protect Education Now’s petition language in their 200-word description to create confusion.

“They have basically a parody of our 200-word description as their 200-word description, so it looks casually like they’re similar, because its intention is to be a decoy measure,” Barton explained.

Fortify AZ dismissed these allegations in a statement provided by a spokesperson: “This complaint is ridiculous and a bad look for a failing campaign. Fortify AZ is committed to giving voters an opportunity to install guardrails on the ESA program to strengthen this very popular program for the families who depend on it every day.”

The conflict extends beyond petition practices to the companies hired to gather signatures. According to the cease-and-desist letter, AZ Petition Partners, contracted by Fortify AZ, has allegedly poached workers from Fieldworks, the company employed by Protect Education Now, by offering substantially higher wages.

In one instance, the letter claims “Petition Partners’ representatives offered a Protect Ed circulator a job on the spot at $45 per hour,” significantly more than the $22-$25 hourly rate offered by Fieldworks. The letter further alleges that Petition Partners offered “bonuses specifically calibrated to the recruitment of Fieldworks employees,” effectively paying bounties for each worker successfully poached from the competing campaign.

A spokesperson for Petition Partners declined to comment directly, referring inquiries to Fortify AZ, which stated: “Jealousy is never a good look. Fortify AZ is offering competitive wages and a union should appreciate workers being paid a fair wage for hard work.”

While competition for signature gatherers typically intensifies during election years, Barton noted that Fieldworks had established noncompete agreements with its workers prohibiting them from working for competing campaigns until after the July 2 deadline. He alleges Petition Partners knowingly encouraged workers to breach these contracts.

“When they’re trying to lure someone away, they’re trying to say to that person, ‘Hey, break your contract, violate your non-compete, and come work for us,'” Barton said.

Barton declined to specify whether Protect Education Now would pursue legal action if the alleged behaviors continue, saying only, “If there’s no response and there’s no change in the behavior, I suppose the campaign will have to make some decisions then.”

The high-stakes battle underscores the contentious nature of school voucher reform in Arizona, where education policy has long been a divisive political issue. As both campaigns press toward the signature deadline, the outcome could significantly impact the future of education funding in the state.