Why Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs ordered flags to be flown at half-staff May 4-5
Governor Katie Hobbs has ordered flags at all state buildings to be flown at half-staff Sunday, May 4, in observance of National Firefighters Memorial Day, and again Monday, May 5, in honor of Arizona Peace Officers Memorial Day.
In a press release statement, Hobbs said the lowering is to honor and remember firefighters and peace officers who have died in the line of duty.
'We honor their courageous and selfless service on behalf of all Arizonans,' said Hobbs. 'We mourn the heroes we've lost in Arizona and across the nation. Their legacy will not be forgotten.'
Nearly 300 police officers have lost their lives in the line of duty in Arizona, according to the Officer Down Memorial Page. Since 1902, 167 firefighters and paramedics in Arizona have died in the line of duty. Among the most recent losses are firefighters, paramedics, forest service personnel, and others, according to the Arizona Fallen Firefighter Memorial.
Individuals, businesses and other organizations are also encouraged to lower their flags to half-staff.
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Why flags are being flown at half-staff across Arizona
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Arizona Democrats fear infighting will hurt them in midterms
Democratic frustrations are growing in Arizona amid a feud within the state party, triggering concerns about the ramifications for 2026 and beyond. Only months into his tenure as Arizona Democratic Party chair, members of the party have voiced exasperation with Robert E. Branscomb II for various actions, including airing grievances with Democratic elected officials publicly, his handling of the party budget and fundraising, and for suspending another party official. While Branscomb has urged Arizona Democrats to have patience and said his job has a steep learning curve, it's done little to quell discontent within the party: Dozens of Arizona Democratic Party state committee members have signed onto a petition calling for a special meeting to consider removing Branscomb. Members are already bracing for a chaotic state committee meeting on Saturday, and some are concerned the party's fundraising and coordinated campaign could be impacted ahead of the 2026 elections if the dispute doesn't resolve itself soon. 'We run out of money, then what do we do?' said one state committee member, who — like others interviewed in this piece — requested anonymity to speak candidly. 'Who's going to run … the party if there's no money?' Patience is wearing thin among Arizona Democrats since Branscomb was elected chair in January. Months into his term, he roiled the party after accusing the state's two Democratic senators of intimidating him following his selection of a new executive director for the party, prompting both senators, in addition to Gov. Katie Hobbs (D), state Attorney General Kris Mayes (D) and state Secretary of State Adrian Fontes (D) to issue a statement refuting Branscomb's letter to state committee members and saying Branscomb had lost their trust. More recently, he suspended First Vice Chair Kim Khoury, with an investigation being launched 'into potential violations of the ADP Code of Conduct and governing procedures,' according to the Arizona Republic, which obtained a copy of the letter. Democrats have also voiced concern over the state party's fundraising after its treasurer recently estimated that, at the current rate, the party would run out of money by the end of the year. One longtime state committee person believed there would be money coming into the state for elections and congressional races, but they noted 'it's not going to be through the state party at this point as long as he's involved.' In an interview with the Arizona Republic last month, the state party chair said Democrats needed to give him some time to get adjusted to the role and that they needed to have patience. While he's acknowledged there are things he could have done differently as chair, he's suggested the circumstances he entered into when he took over as chair didn't place him in a strong position to lead the party. The Hill contacted Branscomb on Thursday, and he indicated he was not immediately available for an interview. He did not respond to additional requests for comment. While some members of the party are sympathetic to the fact helming a state party can be challenging, they also say Branscomb did himself no favors publishing his letter invoking the two senators. 'I wouldn't disagree with that,' the longtime state committee member said when asked about Branscomb's comments to the Arizona Republic, 'because I know it's a hard job, and I know there's a learning curve, and I know he's new to the job.' 'The problem is that email basically makes it almost impossible to recover from.' State party feuding is not new, of course. Former Arizona GOP Chair Jeff DeWit left his position early last year following a leaked conversation between him and Kari Lake, in which DeWit sought to dissuade the former local news anchor from running for Arizona Senate. In Nevada in 2023, Democrats ousted their chair, Judith Whitmer, whose election prompted a number of officials to exit the state party. And while some members see intraparty conflict as unhelpful and an annoyance, they argue that their candidates, including all three Democratic statewide elected officials, will have the resources needed to be successful and competitive next year. Multiple avenues would be available to them, particularly county parties, to help with fundraising. 'I do think it will be more of a temporary annoyance than something that is actually going to have any sort of electoral impact,' one party insider said, noting that the conflict itself doesn't resolve around an ideological split. But other Arizona Democrats — even those who voted for Branscomb in January — are concerned that the dragged-out rift could negatively impact the party's fundraising and organizational efforts. 'I don't think we'll have an effective coordinated campaign,' said Steven Jackson, the Legislative District 8 chair who has led circulation of the petition calling for the special meeting to consider removing Branscomb. Jackson supported Branscomb during the January chair election. 'I think it would affect the [Arizona Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee], which will affect legislative races. You know, we've got an attorney general who [won] by 250 votes last time, and a governor's race that's going to be tough,' Jackson added, referring to Mayes's race against Rep. Abe Hamadeh (R-Ariz.) in 2022, which she won by 280 votes. Despite members' frustrations with Branscomb, removing him as chair is still a tall task: Two-thirds of the entire state committee need to vote for his removal in order for it to move forward. Some members question whether there's enough frustrated Democrats to meet that threshold. 'It's hard to gauge because it is a high threshold, right?' the first state committee member said. 'But the more he stays on, the more he loses trust and confidence.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
This governor vetoed a bill that would ban China from purchasing land. Here's why
Arizona Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs is facing criticism for vetoing a bill that would have prevented China from buying land in the state. In her veto letter, dated June 2, Hobbs said she considered protecting infrastructure important. 'However, this legislation is ineffective at counter-espionage and does not directly protect our military assets,' she said in the letter. 'Additionally, it lacks clear implementation criteria and opens the door to arbitrary enforcement.' Foreign entities own about 40 million acres, or 3%, of U.S. farmland as of 2021. Out of this, China owns 1%, much lower in comparison to Canada, which owns 33%, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This may seem like a small percentage, but it carries sizable national security implications, whether it's over concerns of who is controlling U.S. assets or whether the land could be used to conduct espionage. The bill in Arizona set out to address these concerns. In Arizona's Maricopa and Pinal counties, more than 294,000 acres of agricultural land is owned by Chinese corporations, as per the USDA Farm Services Agency. When Hobbs announced her decision to veto the bipartisan bill, she faced pushback. Arizona state Senate Majority Leader Janae Shamp claimed the veto was 'politically motivated' and 'utterly insane.' Shamp introduced the bill to protect the 'state's military, commercial and agricultural assets from foreign espionage and sabotage,' per the text of the legislation. She claims China attempted to lease land next to Luke Air Force Base, where the military trains fighter pilots. Michael Lucci, the CEO and founder of State Armor Action, a nonprofit organization that is pushing 70 bills targeting China in states across the country, said Hobbs hung an ''Open for the CCP' sign on Arizona's front door,' and made critical assets like Luke Air Force Base, Palo Verde nuclear power plant and Taiwan Semiconductor factory more vulnerable. 'Allowing Communist China to buy up land near our critical assets is a national security risk, plain and simple,' Lucci told Fox News. 'Gov. Hobbs is substantively and completely wrong when she says that SB 1109 'is ineffective at counter-espionage and does not directly protect our military assets.'' The White House attempted to ban China from buying U.S. land. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins confirmed this move earlier in February. 'One of the very, very top of the list perhaps is the Chinese purchase of our farmland. A lot of that land is around some of our military outposts,' Rollins told Breitbart News. Many states, especially the ones led by Republicans, are taking note. As of March 17, 27 states are considering 84 bills that restrict foreign property ownership in some way, according to Committee of 100, a nonprofit that advocates for Chinese Americans. Twenty-two states passed nearly 40 bills that restrict foreign property ownership, 17 of which became law last year. The idea of curbing investments from foreign adversaries into the U.S. for national security reasons isn't new. The U.S. restricted Chinese-based telecommunication company Huawei from doing business with American companies. Beijing-based social media app TikTok has so far survived a ban passed by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court, thanks to President Donald Trump, who extended the deadline for its Chinese parent company ByteDance to divest the app's assets in the U.S. It's possible Trump will extend the deadline a third time ahead of June 19, considering the app has 170 million users in the U.S. Still, the idea of restricting certain foreign investments isn't as popular in the Western U.S. as it is in the Midwest and the South. Only Idaho and Utah have laws on the books against international property buyers. Meanwhile, Nevada, California, Arizona, Oregon, Colorado and New Mexico do not. In the Beehive State, foreign-owned land is less than 40,000 acres. But it ranks in the top five in the country for the amount of acreage at risk due to the number of key military installations it hosts, including Hill Air Force Base, the Utah Test and Training Range and Dugway Proving Ground, as the Deseret News previously reported. Utah's foreign investment restriction laws attempt to nip the problem in the bud instead of letting it fester. Last year, the GOP-held state Legislature passed HB516, which prevents some countries — North Korea, China, Iran and Russia — from buying land in Utah. As the Deseret News previously reported, this bill sought to address national security concerns. The Utah Department of Public Safety is tasked with documenting these land holdings and compiling a database to reverse foreign investments. Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, originally cosponsored a bill that would address this issue on the national level. In 2023, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox signed another bill, the Restrictions on Foreign Acquisitions of Land Act, that prohibits or restricts foreign investments and landholdings in Utah. In 2023, the Idaho Legislature codified a law that would restrict foreign governments or foreign-government owned businesses from buying farmland in the state or holding claims to any mineral or water. The Legislature fell short of enacting any enforcement for this law but remedied this two years later. In April, Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed a law that authorized the state's attorney general to enforce the foreign ownership law.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk and Trump need a breakup lesson from Phoenix's Devin Booker
Did you hear about Book and Kendall breaking up, again? No? I mean, yeah, I know, I almost missed the news myself because there was all that other stuff about Elon and Donald, and their whole grody in-your-face split. Seriously, you're not getting that kind of drama llama from Devin Booker and Kendall Jenner. They're not going all 'Grey's Anatomy' in public or making a big public display or, you know, trashing one another online. Am I right? I mean, he's like a legit basketball star with the Phoenix Suns and she is this total, you know, supermodel, and come on, those kind of celebs know a little something about being classy or whatever. Donald Trump and Elon Musk, though? Woof. I mean, there was Elon saying on X that Donald's 'big beautiful bill' is an 'abomination,' which I think means, like, really terribad awful. Then Donald coming back and saying that 'Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave … .' And Elon saying, 'Such an obvious lie. So sad.' And all that online, for reals, in a way that you'd never get from Book or Kendall because they're both brainiacs when it comes to keeping stuff on the down low, not sharing their business. So, we get the scizzle on the Book/Kendall situationship from the mags or TV or some obsessed googlebanger. Donald and Elon, though? Totally out there. Opinion: Elon Musk needs a new target: Arizona congressmen Like when Elon says online, 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' And we're all, you know, gobsmacked. And then they ask Donald if he's talking to Elon and he says, 'You mean the man who has lost his mind?' And then he says, 'I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem, the poor guy's got a problem.' No wonder some of you didn't hear about Book and Kendall. All that noise! And him and her are not out there acting like a couple of nerd bombers throwing shade at each other all day and night, filling up the hatebook. You know? Book and Kendall could school Donald and Elon on how to be. They could drop some jewels on 'em about showmance. A master class in fameology. Because, you know, unlike the richest man in the world and the president of the United States, the ballplayer and the supermodel — they got class. Reach Montini at Like this column? Get more opinions in your email inbox by signing up for our free opinions newsletter, which publishes Monday through Friday. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Elon Musk and Trump need a remedial lesson in showmance | Opinion
