Petersen Hits Mayes in AZ AG Debate Over Hobbs ‘Sham’ Probe and No-Bid Consultant Deal

Republican Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen challenged Attorney General Kris Mayes over her handling of the investigation involving Gov. Katie Hobbs and her office’s no-bid contract with campaign consultant Stacey Champion during their Sept. 23 debate.

The exchanges brought renewed attention to Mayes’ decision to decline prosecution in the Sunshine Residential Homes investigation and payments to Champion previously covered by the California Globe. Mayes defended the work of career prosecutors and questioned financial support benefiting Petersen from a company her office had sued.

During the debate hosted by the Citizens Clean Elections Commission and Arizona Media Association, Mayes was asked under what circumstances she would investigate someone from her own political party. She pointed to her office’s prosecution of a Democratic county attorney.

“I don’t care whether you have an R or a D behind your name, but I am dead serious about prosecutorial ethics,” Mayes said.

Addressing the Sunshine investigation, Mayes said career prosecutors and investigators “found that there was no prosecutable crime.” She also called for legislation preventing contractors from making campaign contributions.

Petersen called the inquiry a “sham investigation” and said lawmakers had twice sent Hobbs legislation addressing pay-to-play concerns that she vetoed. He accused Mayes of failing to support those efforts.

The dispute follows Mayes’ Aug. 21 announcement declining prosecution after an investigation into whether Sunshine received increased Department of Child Safety reimbursement rates in exchange for political contributions to Hobbs.

According to Mayes’ office, investigators spent two years conducting interviews and reviewing campaign-finance records, procurement documents, banking information and state communications. The examination encompassed more than 100,000 documents.

Mayes said investigators found no evidence of the quid pro quo necessary to support a bribery charge. Her announcement also urged lawmakers and Hobbs to pursue legislation increasing transparency surrounding political donations from state contractors.

During the debate, Petersen argued that Mayes should have recused herself and criticized the absence of an interview with Hobbs.

“She should have recused herself. She didn’t. She kept the case and then she dismissed it,” Petersen said. “She didn’t even interview Katie Hobbs.”

As the Globe previously reported, Hobbs submitted written statements through her attorneys rather than sitting for an in-person interview. Those statements denied that she discussed contract rates with Sunshine representatives or directed anyone to do so on her behalf.

Mayes reiterated during her rebuttal that career prosecutors and investigators handled the case and found no prosecutable crime.

Petersen also raised the Champion contract during the exchange, accusing Mayes of wasting taxpayer money.

“She’s wasting taxpayer dollars,” he said.

The Globe reported Sept. 3 that Champion received nearly $248,000 under an earlier agreement with the Attorney General’s Office, citing records described by the Arizona Daily Independent.

That reporting identified an initial monthly payment of $10,000 for at least 80 hours of work. Extensions increased the compensation to $15,000 for at least 120 hours. Champion also separately received payments from Mayes’ political committee.

A Sept. 28 Arizona Republic report, republished by the Arizona Daily Star, identified $297,000 in total state payments to Champion from 2023 through February 2026, citing Arizona’s financial transparency portal.

Tonight I said it plainly: we need to get rid of government corruption, and we need to start by getting rid of Kris Mayes.

Case in point: Mayes handed a $250,000 no-bid contract, funded by Arizona taxpayers, to a close friend who was also getting paid by her campaign. Arizonans… pic.twitter.com/nJJSu7Jqq6

— Warren Petersen (@votewarren) September 24, 2026

The Republic also identified a Jan. 3, 2023, procurement determination stating that “time constraints do not allow for further competition for this procurement.” Champion’s firm began its contract the following month.

The newspaper described a separate $15,000 agreement signed in December 2025 for environmental research and advisory services. Mayes’ office said that agreement fell below the threshold requiring competitive bidding.

Mayes spokesperson Richie Taylor told the Republic that Champion supported work involving utility rates, tenants’ rights, research, communications and recruitment. He said her contracts complied with applicable procurement requirements. Champion also defended her work and said she preferred serving as a consultant.

Mayes countered during the debate by questioning support benefiting Petersen from BoaVida, a mobile-home operator her office had sued.

Early in the debate, she described $615,000 as going into Petersen’s campaign. Later, she described more than $600,000 as going “into an IE that supported you,” referring to independent expenditures.

The Arizona Mirror reported that BoaVida contributed more than $600,000 to a political action committee that ran advertisements supporting Petersen.

Petersen disputed that he had accepted the money.

“It went to an independent expenditure that I have no control over,” he said.

Republican calls for further examination of the Sunshine matter have continued since Mayes announced her decision. As the Globe reported Aug. 24, state Rep. John Gillette (R-Kingman) disclosed that he had previously referred the matter to federal authorities and sought an examination of whether federal funding was involved. That report did not establish that federal authorities had opened an investigation.