2023-10-16T17:35:15-05:00 2022-12-31 341884125 CBIZ MHM LLC 4722 N 24TH ST STE 300 PHOENIX AZ 85016 990 2022-01-01 860597661 BARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH BARR 6024625000 500 EAST CORONADO ROAD PHOENIX AZ 85004 VICTOR RICHES PRESIDENT/CEO 6024625000 2023-10-16 1 VICTOR RICHES 999009999 1 AMY A O'LOUGHLIN P00869687 6022646835 2023-10-16 2 AAL1 IAL1 2022 2023-04-26 12:10:37Z GOLDWATER INSTITUTE VICTOR RICHES 500 EAST CORONADO ROAD PHOENIX AZ 85004 9558002 0 X WWW.GOLDWATERINSTITUTE.ORG X 1988 AZ DRIVING RESULTS BY WORKING DAILY IN COURTS, LEGISLATURES, AND COMMUNITIES TO DEFEND AND STRENGTHEN THE FREEDOM GUARANTEED TO ALL AMERICANS IN THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES AND ALL FIFTY STATES. 7 7 41 22 0 0 5796880 6430311 251009 0 57767 1104769 67752 308152 6173408 7843232 126000 0 0 0 2837044 3351605 65265 66540 681792 1619250 2088667 4647559 5506812 1525849 2336420 12275387 13772798 1118250 638717 11157137 13134081 X THROUGH RESEARCH, INVESTIGATIONS, STRATEGIC LITIGATION, TESTIMONY, ADVOCACY, AND EDUCATION, THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE ADVANCES PUBLIC POLICY AND A RULE OF LAW UNDER WHICH INDIVIDUALS CAN SHAPE THEIR OWN DESTINIES AS FREE MEN AND WOMEN. WE HELP CITIZENS UNDERSTAND AND...ADOPT POLICIES THAT SUSTAIN AND RESTORE ECONOMIC LIBERTY, EDUCATIONAL FREEDOM, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, AND CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ON GOVERNMENT POWER CONSISTENT WITH THE FOUNDING PRINCIPLES OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. WHEN GOVERNMENT OVERSTEPS ITS PROPER BOUNDS, THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE USES PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION TO ENFORCE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND CONSTRAINTS ON GOVERNMENT POWER GUARANTEED BY OUR STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS. 0 0 1497197 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE LITIGATES CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES OF CONCERN TO THE PUBLIC, PARTICULARLY UNDER THE STATE CONSTITUTIONS, ON BEHALF OF AMERICANS WHO WOULD NOT BE IN A POSITION TO DEFEND AGAINST THE HEAVY HAND OF GOVERNMENT WITHOUT ASSISTANCE OR EXPERTISE. WE DEFEND TAXPAYER AND PROPERTY RIGHTS, FREE SPEECH AND FREE ENTERPRISE, AND EDUCATIONAL CHOICE. WE ENFORCE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ON GOVERNMENT POWER. OUR CASES SEEK TO SET BROAD LEGAL PRECEDENTS TO PROTECT THE FREEDOMS OF OUR CLIENTS AND ALL AMERICANS. THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE ALSO MANAGES A SUCCESSFUL "LITIGATION BY LETTERHEAD" EFFORT, WHERE WE INDUCE GOVERNMENT TO CEASE UNLAWFUL ACTIONS BY PROVIDING THEM WITH INFORMATION BY LETTER, WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO COURT. IN 2022, THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE WON 23 VICTORIES THROUGH DIRECT LITIGATION AND AMICUS WORK. OUR ACTIVE CASELOAD AVERAGED 30, AND WE ADVANCED CUTTING-EDGE LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP IN THE COURTS BY FILING 16 AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS. 2098878 POLICY ANALYSIS, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, EXTERNAL AFFAIRS: THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE CONDUCTS SCHOLARLY RESEARCH AND IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF STATE-LEVEL PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AND COMMUNICATES THAT RESEARCH TO THE PUBLIC. OUR PRIMARY AREAS OF RESEARCH INCLUDE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, EDUCATION REFORM, AND HEALTHCARE POLICY. IN 2022, WE DELIVERED 71 PUBLIC SPEECHES, DISTRIBUTED 5 POLICY REPORTS, AND TESTIFIED REGULARLY BEFORE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEES. IN 2022, WE HAD 31 POLICY AND LITIGATION VICTORIES IN COURTS AND LEGISLATURES NATIONWIDE. TO DATE, 22 STATES HAVE ADOPTED GOLDWATER'S UNIVERSAL RECOGNITION LAW, ALLOWING WORKERS LICENSED IN ONE STATE TO CONTINUE WORKING WHEN THEY MOVE TO A NEW STATE WITHOUT HAVING TO SPEND TIME AND MONEY GETTING ANOTHER. OTHER VICTORIES INCLUDE STATE LAWS THAT: EMPOWER FAMILIES WITH GREATER EDUCATIONAL OPTIONS THAT FIT THEIR CHILDREN'S UNIQUE NEEDS (16 STATES HAVE APPROVED PROGRAMS BASED ON GOLDWATER'S EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNTS); PROTECT PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO OPERATE AN UNOBTRUSIVE HOME-BASED BUSINESS WITHOUT BEING UNFAIRLY TARGETED BY ONEROUS AND UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS; AND SAFEGUARD PATIENTS' RIGHT TO TRY CUTTING-EDGE, INDIVIDUALIZED TREATMENTS. THIS WORK WAS SUPPORTED IN PART THROUGH OUR RONALD REAGAN FELLOWS PROGRAM, WHICH DEVELOPS YOUNG TALENT BY TEACHING AND EMPLOYING 14 INTERNS AND LAW CLERKS. 855414 COMMUNICATIONS: IN 2022, THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE CONTINUED TO CAPTURE NATIONAL MEDIA ATTENTION WITH INTERVIEWS AND NEWS REPORTS ABOUT OUR SUCCESSFUL EFFORTS TO DEFEND INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES.THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE'S MEDIA RELATIONS EFFORTS ARE BUILT ON A MULTI-LEVEL STRATEGIC APPROACH THAT HARNESSES THE POWER OF ITS IN-HOUSE DIGITAL PLATFORMS, THE REACH OF TRADITIONAL MEDIA, AND THE VIRALITY OF SOCIAL MEDIA TO REACH AUDIENCES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. THE RESULTS ARE SEEN BY COUNTLESS AMERICANS ON THE PAGES OF THE NATION'S MOST NOTABLE NEWSPAPERS AND MOST-WATCHED NEWS NETWORKS. GOLDWATER INSTITUTE EXPERTS AND CLIENTS PUBLISHED 55 OP-EDS AND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR IN 2022, IN OUTLETS THAT INCLUDED THE DAILY CALLER, WASHINGTON EXAMINER, THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, THE HILL, THE DISPATCH, REASON, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, NATIONAL REVIEW, TOWNHALL, AND THE DAILY JOURNAL, WHOSE COMBINED DAILY ONLINE CIRCULATION EXCEEDS 3 MILLION READERS. OUR EXPERTS WERE ALSO A REGULAR PRESENCE ON NATIONAL CABLE TV NEWS NETWORKS, NATIONALLY SYNDICATED RADIO SHOWS, AND LOCAL BROADCAST TV AND RADIO, HELPING TO SHARE GOLDWATER'S WORK WITH AN EVEN WIDER AUDIENCE. ALL TOLD, GOLDWATER HAD 13 APPEARANCES ON NATIONAL CABLE TELEVISION, MORE THAN 100 LOCAL AND NATIONAL RADIO AND PODCAST APPEARANCES, AND MORE THAN 4,800 MENTIONS IN TRADITIONAL (PRINT, RADIO, TELEVISION, AND ONLINE) AND SOCIAL MEDIA OUTLETS. THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE DOES NOT JUST RELY ON OUTSIDE MEDIA OUTLETS TO DISSEMINATE ITS MESSAGE. LAST YEAR, THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE LAUNCHED A REDESIGNED WEBSITE AT GOLDWATERINSTITUTE.ORG, WHERE IT PUBLISHES ORIGINAL ARTICLES, BLOG POSTS, COMMENTARY, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS, LEGAL AND POLICY RESEARCH, AND ORIGINAL VIDEOS. IN 2022, GOLDWATERINSTITUTE.ORG WELCOMED NEARLY 200,000 VISITORS WHO CAME TO THE SITE NEARLY 400,000 TIMES. THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE ALSO CONTINUED TO HARNESS THE POWER OF SOCIAL MEDIA TO BOLSTER ITS INFLUENCE. GOLDWATER'S FACEBOOK POSTS REACHED MORE THAN 109,000 PEOPLE, AND ITS CONTENT RECEIVED MORE THAN 1,300,000 IMPRESSIONS ON TWITTER. ADDITIONALLY, GOLDWATER'S VIDEOS RECEIVED 40,600 VIEWS ON YOUTUBE, AN INCREASE OF 224% OVER 2021. 4451489 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18 0 1 41 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 7 7 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 AL AK AR CA CO CT FL GA HI IL KS KY MD MA MI MN MS MT NH NJ NM NY NC OH OK OR PA RI SC TN UT VT VA WV WI X X ROGER ZETAH 6024625000 500 E CORONADO ROAD PHOENIX AZ 850041543 ERIC CROWN CHAIRMAN 5.00 X X 0 0 0 BARRY GOLDWATER JR DIRECTOR 4.00 X 0 0 0 RANDY P KENDRICK DIRECTOR 0.50 X 0 0 0 JOHN COTTON DIRECTOR 3.00 X 0 0 0 CHRISTOPHER GLEASON VICE CHAIRMAN 1.00 X X 0 0 0 GROVER NORQUIST DIRECTOR 0.50 X 0 0 0 CHARLES LAWRENCE TREASURER 0.50 X X 0 0 0 LEO BEUS DIRECTOR 0.50 X 0 0 0 JIM CHAMBERLAIN VICE CHAIRMAN 0.50 X X 0 0 0 VICTOR RICHES PRESIDENT/CEO 40.00 X 274676 0 8526 ROGER ZETAH CFO/CORP SECRETARY 40.00 X 101069 0 15723 CHRISTINA SANDEFUR EVP 40.00 X 158411 0 13224 TIMOTHY SANDEFUR VP FOR LITIGATION 40.00 X 198027 0 14526 JONATHAN RICHES VP FOR LITIGATION & GENERAL COUNSEL 40.00 X 151978 0 4977 NAOMI LOPEZ VP HEALTHCARE POLICY 40.00 X 154890 0 11691 MICHAEL BROWNFIELD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS 40.00 X 139927 0 12645 HEATHER CURRY DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC ENGAGEMENT 40.00 X 134364 0 12445 1313342 0 93757 8 0 1 0 0 16250 6414061 468174 6430311 111902 111902 1491633 1175306 1504914 169158 -13281 1006148 992867 992867 332682 16250 40411 292271 292271 260 287 -27 -27 OTHER INCOME 541900 15908 15908 15908 7843232 -27 0 1412948 571629 485792 30906 54931 2362388 2012065 123757 226566 41743 35275 2810 3658 173765 141981 14071 17713 202080 172172 10710 19198 155096 151253 3843 44214 44214 359479 359479 66540 66540 9558 9558 126831 30988 46375 49468 313701 303658 10043 166988 151194 2286 13508 61145 58438 847 1860 100872 84758 5042 11072 104004 78385 340 25279 24561 23724 837 16687 16687 106945 89860 5346 11739 38712 38712 EVENTS 150791 21689 129102 LITIGATION CENTER COST 116725 116725 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 94333 62808 15300 16225 MISCELLANEOUS 80178 71245 273 8660 17847 2454 15393 5506812 4451489 373531 681792 534778 437320 3409701 3043261 267998 118167 65388 40732 4117176 2716613 1515198 1400563 6351104 8610868 131220 121887 12275387 13772798 532362 608886 550021 35867 29831 1118250 638717 X 8719874 11202241 2437263 1931840 11157137 13134081 12275387 13772798 2336420 -359476 0 X 0 1 X 1 0 X 5131175 5504863 5948844 5796880 6430311 28812073 5131175 5504863 5948844 5796880 6430311 28812073 1804528 27007545 107127 99229 55008 57767 111902 431033 134 694 35361 31152 15908 83249 29326355 1031940 0.92090 0.92450 X SCHEDULE A, PART II, LINE 10, EXPLANATION OF OTHER INCOME: OTHER INCOME - 2018 AMOUNT: $ 134. 2019 AMOUNT: $ 694. 2020 AMOUNT: $ 361. 2021 AMOUNT: $ 1,152. 2022 AMOUNT: $ 15,908. NON REFUNDABLE DEPOSIT - 2020 AMOUNT: $ 35,000. 2021 AMOUNT: $ 30,000. RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED 1729 357750 359479 5147333 5506812 425341 106335 0 0 387087 351584 382378 425341 1546390 2319585 7563 20055 25731 359479 412828 96772 87896 95595 106335 386598 579897 422 467 2236 1729 4854 1518481 -213605 1304876 1267127 251354 1518481 1169892 97235 1267127 965180 50830 193882 40000 1169892 929888 35292 965180 0.70000 0.30000 0 0 189322 189322 2482001 1355595 1126406 1445853 1361018 84835 1400563 SPLIT INTEREST AGREEMENT 29831 29831 X 8825035 -359476 1341279 981803 7843232 0 7843232 6848091 1341279 1341279 5506812 0 5506812 PART V, LINE 4: THE ENDOWMENT FUNDS ARE USED TO SUPPORT THE DOROTHY D. AND JOSEPH A. MOLLER CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT WHICH STUDIES A VARIETY OF ISSUES INCLUDING PROPERTY RIGHTS, CAMPAIGN FINANCE REGULATION, REGULATORY BODIES, LEGISLATIVE TERMS, BALANCE OF POWER AMONG LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, PROCESSES OF JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT AND STATE SOVEREIGNTY. THE FUNDS ALSO SUPPORT TWO FELLOWSHIPS THAT GIVE EXCEPTIONAL STUDENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEND A SEMESTER WORKING ON ECONOMIC POLICY AND LAW AT THE INSTITUTE AND TO BE GROOMED FOR A LEADERSHIP ROLE IN THE ONGOING QUEST FOR FREEDOM. PART X, LINE 2: THE INSTITUTE QUALIFIES AS A TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATION UNDER SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AND, ACCORDINGLY , THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES. INCOME DETERMINED TO BE UNRELATED BUSINESS TAXABLE BUSINESS WOULD BE TAXABLE. THE INSTITUTE EVALUATES THEIR UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS, IF ANY, ON A CONTINUAL BASIS THROUGH REVIEW OF THEIR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, REVIEW OF THEIR REGULAR TAX FILINGS, AND DISCUSSIONS WITH OUTSIDE EXPERTS. AT DECEMBER 31, 2022 AND 2021, MANAGEMENT BELIEVES THE INSTITUTE DOES NOT HAVE ANY UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS. THE INSTITUTE'S FEDERAL RETURNS OF ORGANIZATION EXEMPT FROM INCOME TAX (FORM 990) FOR 2019, 2020, 2021 ARE SUBJECT TO EXAMINATION BY THE IRS, GENERALLY FOR THE THREE YEARS AFTER THEY WERE FILED. THE RETURN FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2022 HAS NOT YET BEEN FILED AS OF THE DATE OF THIS REPORT. X X X X X X 1 AMERICAN PHILANTHROPIC LLC 119 N HIGH ST WEST CHESTER PA 19380 MESSAGING ADVICE 0 369146 66540 302606 369146 66540 302606 AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY DC ANNUAL DINNER 305450 16250 289200 40411 EDUCATION SUMMIT 43000 43000 1 482 482 348932 16250 332682 40411 40411 292271 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 VICTOR RICHES PRESIDENT/CEO 249676 0 25000 0 0 0 0 0 8526 0 283202 0 0 0 TIMOTHY SANDEFUR VP FOR LITIGATION 198027 0 0 0 0 0 6000 0 8526 0 212553 0 0 0 CHRISTINA SANDEFUR EVP 158411 0 0 0 0 0 4812 0 8412 0 171635 0 0 0 NAOMI LOPEZ VP HEALTHCARE POLICY 149890 0 5000 0 0 0 0 0 11691 0 166581 0 0 0 JONATHAN RICHES VP FOR LITIGATION & GENERAL COUNSEL 151978 0 0 0 0 0 4581 0 396 0 156955 0 0 0 MICHAEL BROWNFIELD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS 132427 0 7500 0 0 0 4257 0 8388 0 152572 0 0 0 PART I, LINE 7 THE ORGANIZATION PROVIDED BONUS PAYMENTS BASED ON MEETING ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS AND WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. X 11 468174 FAIR MARKET VALUE 0 1 1 PART I, LINE 32B: THE INSTITUTE PROCESSES DONATED REAL ESTATE THROUGH GOLDWATER INSTITUTE HOLDING COMPANY, LLC, IN WHICH THE INSTITUTE IS THE SOLE MEMBER. FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4A: CASE UPDATE BATES V. STATE OF OREGON WE REPRESENT THE OWNER OF AN OREGON VAPE-SHOP WHOSE FREE SPEECH RIGHTS ARE VIOLATED BY STRINGENT LABELING REQUIREMENTS ON VAPING LIQUIDS THAT PROHIBIT SELLERS FROM ACCURATELY LABELING THE FLAVORED LIQUIDS THEY SELL WITH WORDS SUCH AS "STRAWBERRY OR "FRUIT-FLAVORED, OR FROM INCLUDING PICTURES OF STRAWBERRIES OR FRUIT. WE CONTEND THAT THIS VIOLATES BOTH THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE STATE CONSTITUTION. THE TRIAL COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF THE STATE. THE CASE IS CURRENTLY ON APPEAL TO THE OREGON COURT OF APPEALS. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. BORGELT V. CITY OF AUSTIN PROPERTY TAXPAYERS IN AUSTIN, TEXAS CHALLENGE THE PRACTICE OF RELEASE TIME BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE AUSTIN FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION UNDER THE ANTI-SUBSIDY PROVISIONS OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. UNDER THE PRACTICE OF RELEASE TIME, ASSOCIATION MEMBERS IN AUSTIN ARE "RELEASED" FROM THEIR JOBS TO EXCLUSIVELY WORK FOR THE UNION. IN THIS CASE, TAXPAYERS ASSERT THAT THIS PRACTICE IS AN UNLAWFUL SUBSIDY TO A PRIVATE ENTITY. THE TRIAL COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF THE CITY AND THE UNION AND AWARDED THE AFA $115,250 IN ATTORNEY FEES. THE APPEAL COURT UPHELD THE TRIAL COURT'S RULING. A PETITION FOR REVIEW AND CROSS-PETITION FOR REVIEW ARE CURRENTLY PENDING AT THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. BOUDREAUX V. LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSN. THIS CASE CHALLENGES A LOUISIANA LAW THAT REQUIRES ALL ATTORNEYS WHO PRACTICE IN THE STATE TO BE MEMBERS OF AND PAY DUES TO THE LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION. THE LSBA USES MEMBERS' MANDATORY DUES TO LOBBY FOR VARIOUS POLICIES, MANY OF WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRACTICE OF LAW, IN VIOLATION OF MEMBERS' FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. THE LSBA ALSO LACKS SAFEGUARDS REQUIRED BY EXISTING SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT TO ENSURE THAT MEMBER DUES ARE ONLY USED FOR ACTIVITIES GERMANE TO IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LEGAL SERVICES AND REGULATING THE PRACTICE OF LAW. THE CASE IS PENDING IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. CENTER FOR ARIZONA POLICY, INC. V. STATE OF ARIZONA THIS CASE CHALLENGES THE VOTERS' RIGHT TO KNOW ACT (PROP 211) WHICH IMPOSES NEW DONOR DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS ON ORGANIZATIONS THAT ENGAGE IN ISSUE ADVOCACY IN ARIZONA AND DESTROYS THE CONFIDENTIALITY MANY ORGANIZATIONS AND DONORS HAVE TOWARD THESE DONATIONS. PROP 211 CHILLS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED SPEECH, WITHOUT ANY GUARANTEE THAT DONOR DISCLOSURE WILL ACTUALLY LEAD TO A MORE INFORMED ELECTORATE. PLAINTIFFS ARE TWO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AND TWO ANONYOMOUS DONORS WHO WISH TO PROTECT DONOR PRIVACY. THE CASE IS PENDING IN THE TRIAL COURT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. CROWE V. OREGON STATE BAR THIS CASE CHALLENGES AN OREGON LAW THAT REQUIRES ALL ATTORNEYS WHO PRACTICE IN THE STATE TO BE MEMBERS OF AND PAY DUES TO THE OREGON STATE BAR. THE BAR USES THESE DUES TO ENGAGE IN POLITICAL ADVOCACY AND TO PUBLISH A MAGAZINE THAT MAKES POLITICAL STATEMENTS WITH WHICH MEMBERS DO NOT NECESSARILY AGREE. THE CASE RAISES FIRST AMENDMENT FREE SPEECH AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION ISSUES. THE TRIAL COURT FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE OREGON STATE BAR. IT IS ON APPEAL TO THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. FANN V. ARIZONA ARIZONA VOTERS ADOPTED PROPOSITION 208, IMPOSING A PUNITIVE NEW TAX ON ARIZONANS AND SMALL BUSINESSES AND DIRECTING THAT THE REVENUES BE SPENT ON PUBLIC SCHOOLS, IN VIOLATION OF THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION'S LIMITATIONS ON GOVERNMENT SPENDING. REPRESENTING TAXPAYERS AND LEGISLATORS, THE INSTITUTE AND PRIVATE ATTORNEYS FILED SUIT CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE INITIATIVE. THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS. THE TRIAL COURT LATER RULED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS ON REMAND. PLAINTIFFS WERE AWARDED ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS. FLAGSTAFF PROPOSITION 208 CLAIMS ON BEHALF OF NUMEROUS FLAGSTAFF PROPERTY OWNERS, WE FILED CLAIMS FOR JUST COMPENSATION UNDER ARIZONA'S PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION ACT AFTER THAT CITY ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE SEVERELY RESTRICTING THE RIGHT TO USE PROPERTY IN THE CITY. MANY OF THESE CLAIMS HAVE RESULTED IN FAVORABLE SETTLEMENT. OTHERS REMAIN PENDING. NO LITIGAITON HAS BEEN FILED. GREGG V. DEA WE REPRESENT QUINTANA GREGG IN CHALLENGING THE LEGALITY OF THE FORFEITRE OF HER 2019 DODGE CHALLENGER, WHICH HER ESTRANGED EX-BOYFRIEND WAS DRIVING WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED ON DRUG CHARGES. FEDERAL OFFICIALS HAVE NOT BROUGHT CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST GREGG, WHO WAS UNAWARE OF AND UNINVOLVED WITH ANY CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. THE CLAIMS WERE SETTLED AND NO FEES WERE AWARDED. HALSTEAD BEAD V. RICHARD WE REPRESENT A BUSINESS OWNER IN LOUISIANA IN CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THAT STATE'S BURDENSOME AND CONFUSING PARISH-BY-PARISH SALES TAX LAW. WE CONTEND THAT THE RECORD-KEEPING AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT IS SO COMPLICATED THAT IT BURDENS INTERSTATE COMMERCE IN VIOLATION OF EXISTING SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT. THE TRIAL COURT GRANTED THE GOVERNMENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS. THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AFFIRMED. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. GILMORE V. GALLEGO THIS CASE IS A CHALLENGE TO RELEASE TIME IN A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF PHOENIX AND A LABOR UNION UNDER THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION'S FREE EXPRESSION, ASSOCIATION, AND RIGHT TO WORK PROVISIONS, AND THE STATE CONSTITUTION'S GIFT CLAUSE. UNDER RELEASE TIME, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ARE "RELEASED" FROM THE JOBS THEY WERE HIRED TO PERFORM TO WORK EXCLUSIVELY FOR GOVERNMENT UNIONS - WHILE RECEIVING TAXPAYER-FUNDED SALARIES AND BENEFITS. WHILE ON RELEASE TIME, GOVERNMENT WORKERS ARE PAID TO INCREASE UNION MEMBERSHIP, ENGAGE IN POLITICAL ACTIVITIES, LOBBY THE GOVERNMENT, FILE GRIEVANCES AGAINST THEIR EMPLOYER, AND NEGOTIATE FOR HIGHER WAGES AND BENEFITS, AMONG OTHER THINGS. RELEASE TIME IS "PART OF TOTAL COMPENSATION" TO ALL EMPLOYEES, WHETHER THEY BELONG TO THE UNION OR NOT. AS SUCH, NON-UNION MEMBERS MUST PROVIDE AFFIRMATIVE CONSENT BEFORE ANY PORTION OF THEIR WAGES ARE DIRECTED TO RELEASE TIME. IN THIS CASE, WE ARE REPRESENTING TWO CITY EMPLOYEES AND NON-UNION MEMBERS WHO OBJECT TO HAVING THEIR WAGES GO TO SUPPORT THIS PRACTICE. THE TRIAL COURT ENTERED SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS AND AWARDED DEFENDANTS' ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS. THE JUDGMENT AND ATTORNEY FEE AWARD WERE APPEALED. THE APPEAL COURT AFFIRMED THE GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS BUT VACATED THE FEE AWARD. PLAINTIFFS HAVE FILED A PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT, AND DEFENDANTS HAVE FILED A CROSS-PETITION. HOBBS V. PACIFIC GROVE PACIFIC GROVE, A SMALL COASTAL CITY IN MONTEREY COUNTY WHERE HOME-SHARING - RENTING A ROOM OR A PRIVATE HOME FROM A HOMEOWNER IS ESPECIALLY POPULAR, DECIDED TO RAFFLE OFF THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF ITS RESIDENTS VIA A LOTTERY. WINNERS - ONLY 15 PERCENT OF PACIFIC GROVE PROPERTIES PER ZONE - GET TO KEEP CONDUCTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS. BUT DOZENS OF OTHER HOMEOWNERS SUDDENLY AND UNFAIRLY LOST THE RIGHT TO RENT THEIR HOMES TO GENERATE INCOME. AND BECAUSE THE LOTTERY WAS RANDOM, OWNERS WHO HAD PRIOR COMPLAINTS AGAINST THEM WERE ALLOWED TO KEEP THEIR PERMITS, WHILE RESPONSIBLE HOMEOWNERS WERE NOT. WE CHALLENGED THE CITY'S ACTIONS UNDER THE STATE'S COASTAL ACT AND THE CONSTITUTION'S DUE PROCESS PROVISIONS. THE TRIAL COURT RULED IN OUR FAVOR ON THE COASTAL ACT CLAIM AND ORDERED TRIAL ON THE REMAINING CLAIMS. THE APPEAL COURT UPHELD THE TRIAL COURT AND ORDERED DISMISSAL. PLAINTIFFS DID NOT REQUEST REVIEW BY THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. INVEST IN ARIZONA V. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE IN THIS CASE, INVEST IN ARIZONA SUED TO CHALLENGE THE LEGALITY OF TAX LEGISLATION ADOPTED IN RESPONSE TO PROPOSITION 208, CONTENDING THAT THE LAW WAS IN CONFLICT WITH PROPOSITION 208 AND THEREFORE VIOLATED THE STATE CONSTITUTION. WE REPRESENTED THE ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB AND MOVED TO INTERVENE IN THE CASE. THE MATTER WAS STAYED, HOWEVER, PENDING OUTCOME OF THE FANN V. ARIZONA CASE (SEE ABOVE). WHEN THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS IN THAT CASE, AND FOUND PROPOSITION 208 UNCONSTITUTIONAL, THE CASE BECAME MOOT. INVEST IN ARIZONA VOLUNTARILY DISMISSED THE CASE. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. MARSZALEK V. ILLINOIS STATE POLICE THIS CASE CHALLENGES THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF ILLINOIS' DILATORY AND COMPLICATED APPLICATION REQUIREMENT FOR POSSESSING A FIREARM. IN VIOLATION OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND STATE LAW, THE STATE HAS DELAYED PROCESSING AND APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR FIREARMS POSSESSION TO SUCH A DEGREE AS TO EFFECTIVELY DENY PEOPLE THEIR RIGHT TO POSSESS A GUN. THE STATE CORRECTED THE PROBLEMS WITH THE APPLICATION PROCESS AND THE CASE WAS DISMISSED. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4A: CASE UPDATE (CONTINUED) MENDEZ V. CHICAGO THE CITY OF CHICAGO IMPOSED A RULE WHERE A NEW 58-PAGE ORDINANCE LEVIES A $10,000 LICENSING FEE ON RENTAL PLATFORMS LIKE AIRBNB AND REQUIRES HOME SHARERS TO OPEN THEIR HOMES TO CITY INSPECTORS "AT ANY TIME AND IN ANY MANNER." ANOTHER PROVISION REQUIRES PROPERTY OWNERS TO HAND OVER ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION THE CITY CONSIDERS "REASONABLY REQUIRE[D]" TO ISSUE A RENTAL LICENSE. STILL ANOTHER PROVISION REQUIRES HOMEOWNERS TO COMPLY WITH SANITATION STANDARDS LIKE THOSE IMPOSED ON COMMERCIAL KITCHENS, EVEN THOUGH HOME-SHARERS DON'T PREPARE MEALS FOR GUESTS. THE CITY CHANGED ITS ANTI-PRIVACY RULES, AND THE INSTITUTE REPRESENTED RENTERS TO ARE CHALLENGE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE REMAINDER OF THE ORDINANCE ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. THE ILLINOIS COURT OF APPEALS AFFIRMED JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANTS. THE CASE IS CURRENTLY PENDING IN THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. MARKETWISE INVESTMENTS AND NICHOLS V. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH MIAMI BEACH IS HOME TO SOME OF THE MOST EXCESSIVE HOME-SHARING RULES IN THE COUNTRY. THE CITY IMPOSES FINES OF UP TO $100,000 PER VIOLATION ON HOME-SHARERS WHO RENT OUTSIDE OF A NARROW ZONE WHERE RENTALS ARE ALLOWED. THE INSTITUTE REPRESENTED PROPERTY OWNERS WHO FILED SUIT ARGUING THAT THIS VIOLATES THE STATE CONSTITUTION'S PROHIBITION ON EXCESSIVE FINES. THE COURT OF APPEALS REMANDED TO THE TRIAL COURT, AND THE CASE IS PENDING. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION-RI V. SOLAS WE REPRESENT NICOLE SOLAS, A MOTHER IN RHODE ISLAND WHO SOUGHT INFORMATION VIA THAT STATE'S PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS, ABOUT WHAT WAS BEING TAUGHT TO HER CHILD IN PUBLIC SCHOOL CLASSROOMS AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION. AFTER FILING PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS, THE STATE'S TEACHER UNION SUED HER, ARGUING THAT THE RELEASE OF THE INFORMATION WOULD VIOLATE THE RIGHTS OF ITS MEMBERS. WE ASSERT THAT STATE LAW DOES NOT ALLOW THE UNION TO FILE SUCH A LAWSUIT. THE CASE IS STILL PENDING IN TRIAL COURT ON AN ANTI-SLAPP MOTION. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. NEPTUNE SWIMMING FOUNDATION V. SCOTTSDALE THIS CASE CHALLENGES THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE'S DECISION TO LEASE SWIMMING LANES AT A PUBLIC FACILITY TO AN ORGANIZATION THAT SUBMITTED A LOWER BID IN RESPONSE TO A PUBLIC PROCUREMENT FOR USE OF THE POOLS. REPRESENTING NEPTUNE, WE ASSERT THAT THE CITY'S DECISION TO LEASE THIS PUBLICLY OWNED PROPERTY AT BELOW MARKET RATES VIOLATES THE GIFT CLAUSE OF THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION, WHICH FORBIDS THE CITY FROM GIVING AWAY PUBLIC RESOURES TO PRIVATE PARTIES, AS WELL AS VARIOUS PROCUREMENT RULES. THE TRIAL COURT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE CITY. THE APPEAL COURT AFFIRMED. THE CASE IS PENDING IN THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. PARHAM V. ARIZONA WE REPRESENTED MARIA PARHAM IN CHALLENGING THE FORFEITURE OF HER PROPERTY BY THE STATE IN A MATTER INVOLVING HER HUSBAND'S ALLEGED CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES. THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WAS SEPARATE PROPERTY, NOT MARITAL PROPERTY, AND SHE HAD NEVER BEEN CHARGED WITH WRONGDOING. WE ARGUED THAT THE SEIZURE OF HER PERSONAL PROPERTY WAS ILLEGAL, AND THE CASE ENDED IN A STIPULATED JUDGMENT IN HER FAVOR. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. POMEROY V. UTAH STATE BAR THIS CASE CHALLENES THE MANDATORY BAR ASSOCIATION IN UTAH. WE REPRESENT AN ATTORNEY IN CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THAT STATE'S MANDATORY BAR ASSOCIATION AND THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THE CASE IS PENDING IN TRIAL COURT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. RIO GRANDE FOUNDATION V. CITY OF SANTA FE THIS LAWSUIT CHALLENGED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A SANTA FE, NM, ORDINANCE WHICH REQUIRES DISCLOSURE TO THE CITY OF PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT DONORS IF SPENDING MORE THAN $250 TO OPPOSE A MUNICIPAL BALLOT PROPOSITION. WE ARGUED THAT IT VIOLATES THE FREE SPEECH RIGHTS OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT WISH TO SPEAK OUT ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC DEBATE WITHOUT BEING FORCED TO TURN OVER THE PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OF THEIR SUPPORTERS TO THE GOVERNMENT. THE COURT OF APPEALS DISMISSED THE CASE, AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT DENIED REVIEW. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. RODGERS V. HUCKELBERRY PIMA COUNTY DEVOTED $15 MILLION OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO FUND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BALLOON LAUNCH PAD AND COMPANY HEADQUARTERS FOR THE PRIVATE BENEFIT OF WORLD VIEW ENTERPRISES, INC. THE COUNTY BUILT THE PROJECT USING ITS PRE-CHOSEN CONTRACTORS RATHER THAN BIDDING OUT THE WORK AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. BECAUSE THIS AGREEMENT SERVES NO PUBLIC PURPOSE AND FAILS TO PROVIDE THE COUNTY WITH AN ADEQUATE RETURN ON ITS INVESTMENT, IT VIOLATES THE GIFT CLAUSE OF THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION, WHICH PROHIBITS GOVERNMENT LOANS AND SUBSIDIES TO PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. THE ARZONA COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED THE TRIAL COURT AND ISSUED A DECISION IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS. THE COUNTY DID NOT FILE A PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT. A STIPULATED JUDGMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE COURT AWARDING FEES TO PLAINTIFFS. THE FINAL JUDGMENT HAS NOT YET ISSUED. SANDERS V. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA WE REPRESENT JERMAINE SANDERS IN CHALLENGING THE LEGALITY OF THE CITY OF MOORESVILLE'S SEIZURE OF HIS CAR. ALTHOUGH A STATE COURT RULED THAT THE CITY VIOLATED THE LAW WHEN IT SEIZED THE CAR, AND ORDERED THEM TO RETURN IT, THE CITY VIOLATED THAT ORDER AND TRANSFERRED THE CAR TO THE POSSESSION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, INSTEAD. THE CASE IS PROCEEDING IN BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL COURT SIMULTANEOUSLY. THE NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT DENIED SANDERS' PETITION AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THE FEDERAL CASE IS PENDING IN THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. SARRA L. ADV. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY WE REPRESENT SARRA L IN CHALLENGING THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY'S PLACEMENT OF HER ON THE CENTRAL REGISTRY. SARRA WAS CHARGED WITH 2 COUNTS OF CONTRIBUTING TO THE DELINQUENCY OF A MINOR AFTER LEAVING HER 7-YEAR-OLD SON AND HIS 5 YEAR OLD FRIEND AT A NEARBY NEIGHBORHOOD PARK WHILE SHE WENT TO THE GROCERY STORE DURING THE PANEDEMIC. THE CRIMINAL CHARGES WERE DISMISSED AFTER SHE COMPLETED A PARENTING CLASS. DCS OPENED ITS OWN INVESTIGATION. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE CHILDREN WERE AT RISK, NOR WERE THEY HARMED. HOWEVER, DCS FOUND PROBALE CAUSE TO BELIEVE AN OFFENSE WAS COMMITED AND PLACED HER NAME ON THE CENTRAL REGISTRY. THE TRIAL COURT DISMISSED THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND SARRA'S NAME WAS REMOVED FROM THE CENTRAL REGISTRY. WE HAVE A PENDING MOTION FOR AWARD OF FEES AND COSTS. SCHELL V. GURICH THIS CASE CHALLENGES OKLAHOMA LAWS THAT REQUIRE LAWYERS TO JOIN AND PAY DUES TO THE STATE'S BAR ASSOCIATION. THE OBA USES THIS MONEY TO LOBBY THE GOVERNMENT AND TAKE POLITICAL POSITIONS ON MATTERS WITH WHICH MEMBERS DO NOT NECESSARILY AGREE. THE OBA DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE ADEQUATE PROCEDURES TO ENSURE THAT MEMBER DUES ARE NOT USED FOR NON-GERMANE POLITICAL SPEECH. WE FILED SUIT ARGUING THAT THIS VIOLATES THE FIRST AMENDMENT FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND OF ASSOCIATION. THE TRIAL COURT DISMISSED PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS. THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED TO THE TRIAL COURT. THE CASE IS STILL PENDING. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. SHARPE V. STATE OF TEXAS IN THIS ASSET FORFEITURE CASE, WE REPRESENTED DURELLE SHARPE AFTER POLICE SEIZED HIS FORD MUSTANG. HIS SON USED THE CAR WITHOUT PERMISSION TO ENGAGE IN STREET RACING AND WAS ARRESTED. POLICE SOUGHT TO CONFISCATE THE CAR, BUT WE CHALLENGED THE LEGALITY OF THAT SEIZURE. THE CASE ENDED IN A FAVORABLE STIPULATED JUDGMENT. NO FEES WERE AWARDED.SMITH V. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WE REPRESENT PARENTS WHO HAVE BEEN DENIED EMPOWERMENT SCHOLARSHIP FUNDING ON THE GROUND THAT THEIR CHILDREN ARE PURSUING VOCATION EDUCATION IN A CHARTER SCHOOL WHICH ADE CLAIMS IS PROHIBITED BECAUSE THE STATUTE ONLY PERMITS FUNDING VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOR SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN. AFTER WE BECAME INVOLVED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL, ADE APPROVED THE EXPENSE AND THE AGENCY ACTION WAS DISMISSED. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. SOLAS V. SOUTH KINGSTOWN SCHOOL DEPARTMENT ON BEHALF OF RHODE ISLAND PARENT NICOLE SOLAS, WE REQUESTED AN OFFICIAL ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION REGARDING WHETHER STATE OFFICIALS VIOLATED THE STATE'S OPEN MEETING LAWS WHEN IT CONVENED MEETINGS OF A COMMITTEE THAT HAS AUTHORITY RELATING TO VARIOUS SCHOOL POLICIES BUT EXCLUDED THE PUBLIC FROM THOSE MEETINGS. THE MATTER WAS FILED WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHICH ISSUED AN OPINION FINDING THAT THE COMMITTEE WAS NOT SUBJECT TO THE OMA. A LAWSUIT WAS INITIATED AND IS PENDING IN TRIAL COURT. NO FEES HAVE BEEN AWARDED. FORM 990, PART III, LINE 4A: CASE UPDATE (CONTINUED) VANGILDER V. PINAL COUNTY IN NOVEMBER 2017, PINAL COUNTY ADOPTED A "TRANSPORTATION EXCISE TAX" TO PAY FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. BUT THE TAX APPLIED ONLY TO RETAIL SALES OF ITEMS BELOW $10,000. ARIZONA LAW SPECIFIES WHAT MUST BE TAXED AND IN WHAT AMOUNTS WHEN A COUNTY CREATES A TRANSPORTATION EXCISE TAX; THUS, THIS TAX IS UNLAWFUL. THE COUNTY LATER ASKED STATE TAX OFFICIALS TO FOLLOW, NOT THE LANGUAGE IN THE ACTUAL BALLOT, BUT THE LANGUAGE IN THE BALLOT PAMPHLET, WHICH APPLIED THE TAX TO THINGS OTHER THAN RETAIL SALES (ALTHOUGH IT STILL INCLUDED THE $10,000 CARVE OUT). THE INSTITUTE REPRESENTED TAXPAYERS IN A SUIT CHALLENGING THE LEGALITY OF THE TAX ON THESE GROUNDS AND ALSO ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE TAX VIOLATES THE STATE CONSTITUTION'S REQUIREMENT OF UNIFORMITY AND ITS PROHIBITION ON SPECIAL LAWS. PLAINTIFFS WON IN THE TRIAL COURT BUT LOST IN THE COURT OF APPEALS. THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. WARD V. CITY OF STOCKTON WE REPRESENT VERA WARD IN CHALLENGING THE CITY OF STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA'S SEIZURE OF CASH THAT THEY WERE USING TO PURCHASE PURE-BRED DOGS FOR THEIR DOG-BREEDING BUSINESS. THE POLICE NEVER BROUGHT CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST WARD. THE CITY RETURNED THE MONEY. THE MATTER WAS DISMISSED. NO FEES WERE AWARDED. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION A, LINE 2 PRESIDENT/CEO, VICTOR RICHES AND DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL LITIGATION AND GENERAL COUNSEL, JONATHAN RICHES HAVE A FAMILY RELATIONSHIP. KEY EMPLOYEE, TIMOTHY SANDEFUR AND EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CHRISTINA SANDEFUR HAVE A FAMILY RELATIONSHIP. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION A, LINE 6 THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF THE CORPORATION. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION A, LINE 7A NEW DIRECTORS ARE ELECTED BY THE REMAINING BOARD OF DIRECTORS. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11B AN OUTSIDE ACCOUNTING FIRM PREPARES THE FORM 990 AND IT IS REVIEWED BY THE CEO, CFO, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, AND GENERAL COUNSEL PRIOR TO SUBMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR REVIEW. THE MANAGEMENT TEAM ADDRESSES ANY ISSUES RAISED BY THE BOARD BEFORE THE RETURN IS FILED WITH THE IRS. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12C IN CONNECTION WITH ANY ACTUAL OR POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AN INTERESTED PERSON MUST DISCLOSE THE EXISTENCE OF THE FINANCIAL INTEREST AND BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCLOSE ALL MATERIAL FACTS TO THE DIRECTORS AND MEMBERS OF COMMITTEES WITH GOVERNING BOARD DELEGATED POWERS CONSIDERING THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT. ANY DIRECTOR, PRINCIPAL OFFICER, OR MEMBER OF A COMMITTEE WITH GOVERNING BOARD DELEGATED POWERS, WHO HAS A DIRECT OR INDIRECT FINANCIAL INTEREST IS AN INTERESTED PERSON. AFTER DISCLOSURE OF THE FINANCIAL INTEREST AND ALL MATERIAL FACTS, AND AFTER ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE INTERESTED PERSON, HE/SHE SHALL LEAVE THE GOVERNING BOARD OR COMMITTEE MEETING WHILE THE DETERMINATION OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS DISCUSSED AND VOTED UPON. THE REMAINING BOARD OR COMMITTEE MEMBERS SHALL DISCUSS IF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS. THE ORGANIZATION'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY REQUIRES ANNUAL DISCLOSURE FROM ALL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS. A STATEMENT IS FILED BY EACH BOARD MEMBER REQUIRING THE DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS AND TO STATE THE RESOLUTION OF THAT CONFLICT, IF ANY. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 15 THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REVIEWED COMPENSATION FOR OFFICERS AND KEY EMPLOYEES BASED ON A REVIEW OF SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS (USING FORM 990). ALL COMPENSATION DECISIONS ARE DOCUMENTED CONTEMPORANEOUSLY IN THE MINUTES. FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19 THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE INSTITUTE'S WEBSITE. THE ORGANIZATION'S ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, BY-LAWS, AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. GOLDWATER INSTITUTE HOLDING COMPANY LLC 500 E CORONADO RD PHOENIX AZ 85004 861023067 REAL ESTATE AZ 0 1400563 N/A