This report card names sitting Arizona legislators and evaluates their public record on HOA legislation. That is legitimate comment on public officials’ public conduct — and it only stays legitimate because we hold ourselves to a hard standard. Here it is, in the open.
On every legislator’s page, the money, the votes, and the record list only entries tied to a checkable source: an AZ Secretary of State “See The Money” record, an azleg.gov bill page or roll call, a public document, or a dated news report. Each entry shows its source. If we can’t source it, it doesn’t appear — the loaders literally refuse a money or vote row with no source.
We track campaign money from the HOA industry: home builders and developers, the law firms that represent associations (community-association / “CAI” firms), and the large HOA management companies. Source is the AZ Secretary of State portal. One honest limitation we state up front: the state doesn’t code donors by industry, so we identify HOA-industry money by matching donors to a defined list of those firms, PACs, and their principals. Arizona’s Clean Elections public financing also means some members show little itemized money — a small figure, or none, is itself part of the record. Taking the money is not, by itself, wrongdoing. It’s context for the votes.
We record each member’s votes and sponsorships on HOA legislation from azleg.gov, and tag the direction of their action on that bill as Pro-homeowner, Pro-industry, Mixed, or Unclear. “Pro-homeowner” means expanding homeowner rights, transparency, or protections against the association; “pro-industry” means the opposite — shielding boards, managers, builders, or their law firms at owners’ expense. The bill’s direction and the vote’s direction both matter; a health-sounding or “property-rights” title isn’t the same as a bill that actually helps owners.
Documented public reporting — a member who publicly championed a homeowner-protection bill, or who carried water for the industry — is recorded as a sourced entry (a dated news report) and weighed in the grade. We record what a source says; we don’t characterize an absence of coverage as anything.
Where there’s enough record, a legislator gets a letter grade — our answer to one question: did they work for Arizona homeowners, or for the HOA industry? The grade weighs:
- Votes & sponsorships — the core. A vote for a bill that expands homeowner rights or oversight helps the grade; a vote against one, or for a bill that shields the industry at owners’ expense, hurts it.
- The public record & media — did they lead, block, or stay silent on homeowner-protection measures.
- Money as context — HOA-industry money is shown alongside, not as the grade itself. Taking it isn’t automatically disqualifying; voting the industry’s way while taking it is what counts.
Roughly: A = a clear record of siding with homeowners; C = mixed, or largely absent; F = consistently sided with the HOA industry against owners. A member with too little record to judge is left ungraded rather than guessed at. A grade is our assessment of a public official’s public record — not an accusation of any illegal deal.
The grade and any written assessment are opinion and fair comment. They sit in a visually distinct block, on top of the sourced facts they draw from — never blended into the money or vote records. That’s the same line the law draws between protected comment on public conduct and an unsupported assertion of fact, and we keep it visible so you can tell which is which.
Member portraits are the official Arizona Legislature roster photos. If a figure is wrong or a source doesn’t support what we said, tell us and we’ll fix it and note the correction — accuracy is the entire value of a page like this. Send a correction →
A public-interest, noncommercial project. Nothing here is legal advice, and using the site creates no attorney–client relationship. See About.