Arizona Commissioners Take Action Against Anna Tovar Over Alleged Misconduct

PHOENIX — In a significant ethics decision, the Arizona Corporation Commission voted on Tuesday to censure Commissioner Anna Tovar for alleged misconduct. The disciplinary action, propelled by a two-hour private meeting, reflects deep divisions within the five-member board.

Commission Chair Jim O’Connor initiated the censure motion, asserting that Tovar’s actions breached state laws concerning the confidentiality of executive sessions. He emphasized in his announcement that the allegations were substantiated by “clear and convincing evidence.”

Tovar gained attention earlier this month when she publicly opposed a $20,000 bonus for Executive Director Doug Clark, labeling it unprecedented and unjustifiable. Her November 18 letter also referenced a civil lawsuit alleging mismanagement by the agency’s former Senior Counsel, Robin Mitchell.

The uproar prompted O’Connor to direct an investigation into Tovar’s conduct, particularly focusing on violations related to executive session confidentiality and potential harassment of an employee.

Tovar has dismissed these actions as a politically motivated attack, claiming the Commission failed to adhere to proper procedures. She robustly defended her comments regarding accountability in public service, insisting that bonuses and raises should be justified with clear criteria.

During the meeting, three commissioners—O’Connor, Kevin Thompson, and Nick Myers—supported the censure, while Commissioner Lea Marquez Peterson was absent. Tovar chose not to participate, further deepening the controversy surrounding the decision.

Her attorney, Jim Barton, criticized the investigation’s management, citing a conflict of interest due to the same lawyer overseeing both the advisory and investigatory roles. Barton underlined the public significance of the discussed bonus and criticized the Commission for attempting to stifle dissent on important issues.

As the only Democrat on the board, Tovar argued that she is being unfairly targeted and stressed the necessity for transparency and adherence to ethical standards within the Commission. The referral to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has been interpreted by Tovar’s legal team as evidence of partisan intentions.

Barton asserted that the motivations behind the censure and investigation were politically charged and called for accountability regarding the public’s right to scrutinize agency leadership decisions.

This story continues to develop as stakeholders await further updates.