Attorney Slams House Speaker in Battle Against State Funding for Prescott Rodeo

In a legal battle surrounding $15.3 million in state funds earmarked for the Prescott Rodeo, attorney Nicholas Ansel is openly challenging House Speaker Ben Toma’s arguments justifying the spending’s legality.

Ansel claims that Toma’s reasoning—that the funds were appropriated to state Treasurer Kimberly Yee, rather than Prescott Frontier Days directly—fails to hold up under scrutiny. During a recent court session, Ansel expressed his skepticism, asserting that this interpretation circumvents constitutional limitations on budget appropriations.

He posited a hypothetical scenario to illustrate his point: if lawmakers allocated funds directly to a specific McDonald’s in Phoenix, such an act would conflict with Arizona’s constitutional provisions, which restrict budget allocations to state agencies alone.

Ansel characterized Toma’s strategy as a “workaround,” arguing that simply designating the funds for the treasurer to distribute does not alter their original intent.

“The court should reject this nonsensical position,” Ansel stated. “Arizona law is clear: The Legislature cannot achieve indirectly what it cannot accomplish directly.”

Representing the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, Ansel highlighted another legal barrier: the “gift clause,” which prohibits lawmakers from granting funds to private organizations without receiving something in return.

This dispute is rooted in the budget passed by the Legislature in 2023. Flush with surplus funds, lawmakers provided individual allocations ranging from $20 million to $30 million for various projects, including $15.3 million for a nonprofit running a rodeo at the Yavapai County fairgrounds.

While not explicitly stated in the legislation, the expectation was that these funds would support a $40.7 million renovation plan for the rodeo facility, leased by Prescott Frontier Days from the city. This appropriation drew scrutiny from Prescott residents Howard Mechanic and Ralph Hess, who filed a lawsuit in June 2023 claiming the allocation constitutes an unconstitutional gift.

Ansel stressed the necessity of evaluating whether placing this funding into the budget violated legal standards. He noted that lawmakers had deliberately structured the funding to flow through the treasurer, asserting that they recognized potential legal obstacles.

The planned disbursement, set for July 1, 2023, was interrupted by the lawsuit, raising questions about the appropriateness of the original budgetary structure.

Ansel argued that Toma’s rationale equated the rodeo funding to standard allocations for state agencies, a misreading of the budgetary laws.

Though Ansel acknowledged the Legislature’s authority to allocate funds to non-governmental entities, he maintained that these appropriations must occur in a separate legislative bill. Without clear legislative intent and public benefit, he asserted, the funding remains unlawful.

The state defended the plan by framing it not as a gift, but rather as a grant that could impose conditions. Ansel refuted this, stating that the current legislation offers no guidelines or stipulations for the allocation.

He contended that lawmakers are currently attempting to retroactively justify previously made decisions following the lawsuit, suggesting an unplanned rush to modify the legal framework surrounding the funding.

No hearing date for the case has yet been established, leaving the future of the $15.3 million in limbo.