Table Of Content

Ma Ney, Tlbhesce w View President sul General Counsel doo rant Regent 20207, Ceatrat Avenue, Suite 250 Phaeaix, Arizona 85004 Rs Stowe of Arizona ered. Mark Rrnowich v Avizona Road of Regent Haowry 11,28 Dear Ms. Thibhensee I prite hecause an atomey employed by your curside connsel, Perkins Coin," bas publicly statod ha the Attorney Geacral's Office hes a eanflicr that preeluds it from seeking, judicial roviow of whether the Atizona Bostd of Regents (*ABOR") ean lawfully use its tas- ‘oxempl satus to take private developments of the property tue rolls. Fam sure (hat we beth share a common geal of getting aa answer fiom the counts shout watlcr this practiee ts Intl, and this (ler sSoul pu to next any ethical conflie| issues raved “The governing ethicn! rules und] Ariana euse law both muke if cleur thut the Attorney Goneral’s OfBiee is ol sated dhe sume av. private law fim lor purposes oCimputing couiets, tan thal wher che Auirney General hus tuluGory authasily er sue a tate agency ik may do s0 even ifthe state agency is otherwise a client ‘The Preamble to Rule 42 of the Rules ofthe Avizona Supreme Court (wiiere out efaical ales ate eodified) specifically provides that government lawyers such as those in ths Atomey Gencrat's Offies have unique shorty thal privaly eryers muy mol poses IhJawyest pader the supervision of hese officers the atlorney: weneral und the, ‘aale’s attorney in stale govormncent] anay he omborized te represent several government agencies in inlsagoverrmental legal controversies ih where m prisate luwger eoulil nol reprevent multiple private clients. "They also uy hase authority 10 represent the “public inteese” in vivoumstances where rive nwyer would no be uulborézed Go de su, ‘These ues de wot abeogate any ‘neh auhority Puethertue, the Asizouta Suprente Canvt has acknavlediged chac the relationship borween, the Attorney CGeweral and a client aeney is different frown dist a a peivato atvamoy anx! sli Even dlrizone Stare Land Devartuent y. McFate reooguized that when authotized by a specific statute, the Atterncy Gnctat's Office can sno a state ageney it represents. Haro, the Gifice Fmitisted the property la fewspit both pursuemn es the geo warrente statale, ARS, § 12-2011, sad Thy ststote providing dhl lhe Altorncy General “shall pragcoutein the narne of thiy aay al Thy sare toy appeal be alii i AS 8 mje! poles actions nevesury to onforee” the property ttre, ALLS. ¥ 42-LUOA(LE). ‘These starnies provide a solid ethical hanSs lar Ihe \torney Genccal fo file this Javeult. -Moreaver, as you know, this Oitiec hus not advised your client on any of the peopery (ransavtions that are the subject of this lawsuit, ATOR is slulorily exempeed from using this Offive as ite lawyer pursuant co A.R.S. § 41-192(DV4). Due (a This exemption, this Office has rot rovileé legel advice to ABOR on tatters cetating to ils property Ine-robled decisions. As a result, this Office possesses uo confidential elicnt information relevunl tt the mater, AMhough onc limited exception exists thie Office's representation of ABR. Ia che evintext oF rik, management covered malters derivalively Uaugh is xgprescutation of ADOA thal representation is done by attotaeys in a sepuraue Division housed in w separate balding. “That Division ts booa screened Sam this aul other Filigation malers concerning ABOR, ‘Uliinately. the somments being made nre problematic beoase Hhey suggcat thatthe handwarking goverment attorneys in tis Ollice have sernehow vorpromiged thei ethicat obligations, T would hops that if officials alitiatal with ABOR feel eommpedled to iso such allegations, they sald raize hem in cout, of no at all This Oflive seeks judicial clarity on whether AWOR has exceested its vonstiutional and ‘statutory authority in approving lh properly deals at issue and laaks larva toa robust disenssion on the merits in (he judicial forum where the matter was fled. Sinsepely, Hh Aaigels Paton es Counsel Office of the Arizama Alloney General