Shooter: Contracts may be tied to removal

He threatened Ducey’s office with subpoenas

On Nov. 2, former state Rep. Don Shooter threatened the Governor’s Office with subpoenas seeking information on state technology contracts that he found questionable.

Five days later, he was publicly accused of sexual harassment, and soon was stripped of his top position on the House Appropriations Committee and his authority to issue such subpoenas.

Now, he is out of office — expelled by his colleagues after an investigation into a pattern of workplace sexual harassment.

As he exited, Shooter said alleged rivals were politically motivated to see him gone because of what he claims were “suspicious” state contracts awarded out of favoritism to companies that have ties to Gov. Doug Ducey or other state officials.

He said he brought up his concerns about state procurement with Ducey’s administration more than 20 times during meetings and phone calls.

The dispute dates back to at least 2016, when Ducey vetoed one of Shooter’s bills on the topic.

In a parting missive to lawmakers and the public, Shooter distributed a dossier about his claims. The information includes a letter explaining his theory, a timeline of meetings and phone calls about his “procurement concerns,” and state vendor documents.

Shooter, who was elected to represent Yuma, provides no direct proof of the alleged improprieties, but his memorandum shows he indeed had a longrunning dispute with the Governor’s Office and had raised questions about state contracts worth millions of dollars.

He also included a law-enforcement report confirming he was followed by a private investigator,which he said happened shortly after he raised concerns with the governor’s chief of staff.

Shooter’s claims about the motivation to remove him ignore the underlying sexual-harassment issue.

The investigative report into sexualharassment allegations at the Capitol graphically details lewd language and actions by Shooter, concluding, “His repeated pervasive conduct has created a hostile working environment for his colleagues and those with business before the Legislature.”

Ducey spokesman Daniel Scarpinato confirmed that Shooter threatened to issue subpoenas over the contracts, but said Shooter was blaming others for his misdeeds.

“Not only are these accusations completely false, but the person who is leveling them is absent even one kernel of credibility or integrity,” Scarpinato

wrote in a statement to The Arizona Republic.

Shooter has asked others to investigate the matter. A spokesman for the Arizona Attorney General’s Office confirmed that Shooter met with agents from the office on Dec. 12.

“I can’t comment on all the specifics,” said spokesman Ryan Anderson. “But I can confirm that Shooter did, in fact, meet with agents from our office regarding a number of allegations,” including procurement activities.

Shooter’s position as House Appropriations Committee chairman gave him an entree to people and information that others might not have had.

He said his dispute with the Governor’s Office started two years ago, when he sponsored a bill, Senate Bill 1434, that would have required the state Department of Administration to find opportunities to save on technology costs.

That bill also required the state to solicit at least two bids on those contracts.

“The theory being that such budgetary oversight would encourage competition and make it harder to play games,” Shooter wrote in his dossier, which was given to the media after his removal.

The bill passed both chambers easily, but Ducey vetoed it.

“This bill appears to add extra layers of bureaucracy that are unnecessary and will stall needed advancements in technology,” Ducey wrote in his veto letter.

Scarpinato said there were other problems with the bill not listed in the governor’s veto letter.

Ten months after the veto, the state entered a no-bid contract for tech services.

Records show a $2.5 million contract with Amazon Web Services was initiated on Feb. 6, 2017, for the company to provide cloud services for the state. It was not competitively bid.

Scarpinato said the contract was awarded without bids because the state was cutting out a vendor that was essentially reselling Amazon’s services. He said when the contract expires in March, it will receive a competitive bid.

The state’s primary justification for determining the contract was “competition impracticable” — or not to be competitively bid — was cost savings.

But Shooter said that because various companies can provide such services, it should have been put to bid.

He wrote ADOA Director Craig Brown an Aug. 1 letter on the matter.

“The ‘competition impracticable’ determination is improper, incorrect and potentially damaging to Governor Ducey as it is obviously favoritism,” Shooter’s letter said.

The Republic was unable to reach Brown, who resigned last month from Ducey’s administration.

Scarpinato said Shooter had a habit of inserting himself into state purchasing issues and that it has been a point of contention.

“Over the last year, many state agencies have experienced difficult, inappropriate and potentially illegal interactions with the former legislator,” Scarpinato said.

Shooter said the contract also is concerning because Aaron Sandeen, the state’s previous chief information officer, left the state in 2015 and formed a consultancy called Zuggand Inc. that could benefit from his ties to Amazon.

Zuggand partners with Amazon Web Services and helps businesses and organizations migrate to the Amazon cloud service.