By Howard Fischer
Capitol Media Services
PHOENIX -- A judge will hear arguments on May 10 whether to dissolve a court order that keeps an Arizona Capitol Times reporter away from the three homes of Republican state Sen. Wendy Rogers.
The hearing will be the first opportunity for the attorney for Camryn Sanchez to question Rogers about her allegations that the reporter had harassed her by going to houses that the senator admitted she owns in Maricopa County to check where she actually is living.
Rogers claims a mobile home in Flagstaff, in her legislative district.
But at an April 19 court hearing, Rogers testified under oath she has had "the home that we've had in Tempe near the Capitol for the nearly past 20-some years.'' And the senator said there is "a home we are purchasing and moving to to have near the Capitol in Chandler.''
Amy Criddle, a Flagstaff city magistrate who also serves as a pro-tem justice of the peace, issued an "injunction against harassment.'' That was based solely on Rogers' testimony about Sanchez going to the two Maricopa homes and comments by Rogers about being approached by Sanchez in February on the Senate floor.
That order was issued without an opportunity for Sanchez to respond.
On May 10, however, it will be Howard Grodman, the justice of the peace for that district, who will hear evidence by both sides and decide whether to keep the injunction in place.
Rogers did not respond Thursday to an inquiry about whether she will attend. And Kim Quintero, a spokeswoman for the Senate Republican majority, said she does not know whether taxpayers will pick up the cost of any attorney hired to help Rogers keep the harassment order in place.
The case has garnered interest because it goes to the question of to what extent courts will impose limits on the ability of reporters to approach elected officials.
According to the newspaper, Sanchez had uncovered a public record showing that Rogers and her husband bought a home in Chandler in January. There also was a trust document she signed saying that she lived in Tempe.
Neither are within her legislative district.
The paper reported that Sanchez had gone to the residences in an attempt to speak with neighbors to find out whether Rogers lived at either address and to ask Rogers why the document she signed listed her as being a resident of Tempe.
Rogers subsequently posted photos of Sanchez online from her doorbell camera at at least one of the two properties.
The senator claimed in her petition presented to the court that Sanchez, in showing up at her homes, had violated an order by Senate Republican leadership that the reporter not approach her in the Senate. But Quintero said that directive covered only what Sanchez could do within the confines of the Senate building.
Rogers also said -- and Senate President Warren Petersen confirmed -- that he had suggested her to seek the injunction. Quintero said, however, that Petersen did not limit any of her other activities in covering the Senate or revoke the privileges that reporters now possess to be on the Senate floor when lawmakers are in session.
An audio recording of the April 19 hearing shows the senator, in explaining to Criddle why she wanted an injunction, specifically mentioned that incident in February where Sanchez approached her on the Senate floor.
"I tried to ignore her, but she persisted,'' Rogers testified. "I told her, 'You are dismissed.' ''
But the judge refused to tell Sanchez she had to stay away from Rogers at all locations, particularly because she had no opportunity to hear from the reporter.
"One of the things a court has to determine in granting the request for an injunction is that there's a series of events that would be considered by a reasonable person to be harassing, annoying, that have no legitimate purpose,'' Criddle said. "The piece I'm having some trouble with specifically is the interrogation of you in February.''
The judge said she understands that Rogers had instructed Sanchez, through Senate staffers, to stay away from her. But that, Criddle said, did not make the reporter's actions improper -- and legally restrainable.
"I can't be sure that her purpose in trying to have communication with you was beyond what would be considered a legitimate purpose,'' the judge said.
What the judge said did concern her is that Sanchez was showing up at the Tempe home where Rogers lived and the Chandler home which she and her husband had bought and were renovating.
"Is that a standard practice for reporters to track senators at their residences?'' Criddle asked Rogers. "Do you know if that's normal?''
"To my knowledge, it is not normal,'' Rogers responded.
The senator said she actually was in Flagstaff the day that Sanchez approached the two homes. It was only the doorbell photos sent to her by her husband, asking who is this person, that Rogers said resulted in her recognizing Sanchez.
It was at that point, Rogers testified, that she called Petersen and he advised her to get an injunction against harassment.
Petersen subsequently issued a statement confirming that advice and defending it.
"Everyone deserves privacy in their personal residences without worrying about reporters repeatedly showing up unannounced,'' he said.
Neither of the two Maricopa County homes is within Legislative District 7. The sprawling district runs from Williams through part of Flagstaff, east to Snowflake and then south through Payson, Miami, Apache Junction all the way to San Manuel.
In general, the possession of multiple residences is neither a violation of state election laws nor a legal finding that a legislator does not live where stated. Instead, courts routinely rely on statements from lawmakers of what is their "intention.''
Rogers, in filing her nomination papers, said last year she had been a resident of the district where her mobile home is located for six years. And a state constitutional provision says elected officials must be registered voters in the political division they represent.
Legal residence aside, the question of where a lawmaker actually resides has financial implications.
Under state law, lawmakers who live in Maricopa County are entitled to $35 a day for every day the Legislature is in session. That includes weekends and holidays.
But those from the other 14 counties get an allowance equal to what the federal General Services Administration lists as travel expenses for federal employees visiting Maricopa County. That is currently $151 a day for lodging with an additional $69 daily for meals and incidentals.
According to the Capitol Times, Rogers has been seeking reimbursement at the out-of-county rate.
—-
On Twitter: @azcapmedia