TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden:

“Okay. So, let’s talk about STR 1020, legislative pay raises. The bill would automatically increase lawmakers salaries annually rather than having to ask voters for pay raises. How would you vote on this bill?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

That would be a big fat no for me. So, I just know that the way I want to put it is when, in fact, I have some young friends that just recently went through this. They go before, supervisors in their jobs and they have an annual review. That annual review determines whether they keep the job, whether they get a raise, maybe they get put in a different position. It’s an annual review. It’s a check and balance.

If legislators vote themselves a raise, that no matter what, every year cost of living you’re going to get this raise, into perpetuity becomes part of our constitution. I don’t see how that keeps us on par with the people we’re serving.

So, I would rather see if the people would like to raise the salary. So, for instance the legislature gets $24,000 a year. That’s the base pay. But the year, it’s considered a part-time job. The year is supposed to end at the end of April. It’s really a session. It’s not a year. However, as you mentioned before, we have people at the capital even yet, and we’re in mid June. It’s way past time.

And so, after the the 100 days, 120 days, the the the pay drops off and people are basically going to work for no money and they’re on their own dime. So, they sign up for it. You know what I’m saying? We sign up for it. So, I don’t see that as being a problem. But, if the public decided, you know what, we just need to pay more because we’re asking more. Things are harder. It’s taking longer to get things done. We have a hostile situation down there where we can’t get things accomplished and the people want to put a referendum to say, “Let’s raise that salary.” That’s us checking in with our supervisors, right?

See what they think. And if they want to, if they want to grant a pay raise, or fire people, or move people into another position, that is their prerogative. So, I say no.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

In 2023, Reps. Quang Nguyen and Selina Bliss directed $15.3 million in public funds (your tax dollars) to a private rodeo nonprofit — and a court ruled it unconstitutional.

On May 29, 2025 the court ruled the appropriation violated Arizona’s Gift Clause on **two separate constitutional counts** — not one. It had no clear public purpose. It required **no consideration whatsoever** from the private group in return. The law gave the rodeo $15.3 million of your money with essentially zero guardrails on how — or even whether — it had to be spent.

That is not a minor paperwork error, that is an action that would have bypassed the constitutional protections that exist precisely to stop politicians from playing favorites with taxpayer dollars.

The money sat in legal limbo. The rodeo grounds got nothing. You got to pay the bill for the resulting mess. And then Senator Mark Finchem had to step in and clean it up.

“I want to extend my thanks and recognition to Senator Finchem, along with the support of Representatives Nguyen and Bliss...”

— Mayor Phil Goode, City of Prescott official press release, July 10, 2025

The City’s own words put Finchem first and Nguyen & Bliss in the “support” role. Because that is exactly what happened.

They broke the rules. He fixed it. Now they want to share credit for the cleanup.

Why the Gift Clause exists — and why getting around it matters

Arizona’s Gift Clause is not some dusty technicality. It is a hard-earned guardrail against cronyism and waste. It says government cannot simply hand public (taxpayer) money to private groups or insiders as a free gift. There must be a real public purpose **and** the public must get something real in return.

When politicians route millions straight to a private nonprofit with no standards, no timelines, no accountability requirements, and no requirement that the group actually deliver anything, they are telling you the rules don’t apply when the cause is popular. That attitude is dangerous. It normalizes the idea that “good intentions” justify ignoring constitutional limits. It opens the door to bigger abuses later. And it treats your tax dollars like a slush fund.

That is exactly what Nguyen and Bliss did here. They didn’t structure the funding through the City of Prescott with proper contracts and oversight, they went the easy, sloppy route. With the Goldwater Institute participating, as a friend of the court, the court called it what it was -- unconstitutional. The Goldwater Institute is Arizona’s leading conservative, free-market legal watchdog.

Even popular local projects do not get to ignore the Constitution.

The Bottom Line — Painfully Clear

• Nguyen & Bliss created an unconstitutional giveaway of $15.3 million.

• The money became stuck in limbo. The rodeo got nothing while the legal fight played out.

• You paid the legal bills.

• Finchem had to engineer the fix that finally made the rodeo funds legally available by routing it through the City.

• As a result, the rodeo was saved and so were your tax dollars.

• The Prescott Mayor’s official statement credits Finchem first.

• Nguyen & Bliss have publicly accepted credit for solving the problem they caused without volunteering any clarification as to what the problem was.

Fudge Factor: 75%

Where the facts end:

It is true that the legislature funded the Prescott Frontier Days rodeo, and that the rodeo generates roughly $27 million annually in economic activity for the Prescott area. Those are documented facts. Where the fudging begins: Nguyen and Bliss directed $15.3 million in public funds to a private nonprofit in a way that a court — supported by the Goldwater Institute — found unconstitutional. Senator Finchem then engineered the legal fix that restructured the funding. The City of Prescott's own press release credits Finchem first, with Nguyen and Bliss listed as "support." Claiming equal or primary credit for a solution to a problem they created is where the needle climbs toward the red.

But they didn’t just make a paperwork mistake. They tried to get around the very guardrails designed to protect you from politicians treating your money as if it was theirs to hand out. That is why this matters — and why voters should remember it when they fill out their ballots.

Share

TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden:

“And that being said, you are challenging two pretty well-established lawmakers right now who are currently seatmates, obviously running on a ticket together. Why do you think that voters should select you to fill one of those spots?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“Well, I operate differently. I operate differently. So, one of the things if you would be, maybe kind of behind your question, maybe asking the question of how am I different? Why should people look at me?

Because I might be doing things a little differently. One of the things I’m doing differently and have been doing differently and will continue to do differently is to support our current sitting Senator. Both of the incumbents have had opportunities to work with him and have consistently turned him down because for whatever reason. And I know that that’s a frustration when you have three people that only three people there that are representing our entire county and wouldn’t it be lovely if all three of them could somehow find a way to work together?

And I’ve been working with Senator Fincham on things in the background for probably about three years and we see eye to eye, and we are firmly in this, in the same place on many, many things. So that’s one way I’m different.”

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #AZHouse2026 #Transparency #AccountabilityMatters

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com · Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden:

“But first up, what do you see as the biggest affordability affordability issue facing families in your district?

And what would you actually push for at the legislature to make life cheaper?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“Life has never been cheap and it’s certainly not cheaper and it doesn’t look like it’s going to be cheaper. I could give you for instance one of one of my my sons who lives in the county makes very good money. Single, no children, he works very hard and he’s frustrated along with others his age it it took till he was in his mid 30s to get into a home. And that was having no bills, no debt, no responsibilities financially other than he could just sock money away.

And on the other side of that, my youngest son actually had to leave Arizona because the pay and the housing were unaffordable to him. He’s doing great in Texas where he found a job in the same industry, making probably five times what he was making here. A house that costs less than half of houses that he didn’t even want to live in. And so, we really do need to address affordability for young people.

The other thing that is a concern for me is people who own their homes. They’ve worked hard. They’ve done the right things. They own their homes, but they’re at risk of losing their homes because of escalating property taxes. And then their income as fixed income and maybe they’ve done investments, but it’s still fixed, whatever it is. And we can be outpriced.

You know, the homeless population, there are seniors living in cars and the family doesn’t know. So, we are in a real pickle here, but I believe there are solutions. One of the things that I talked about with someone recently was, do you remember if you were to go through, say, an old town where they have the old main street and you would have the shops and stores and then above them you had living quarters.

So, what if we borrow a page from that and we take the existing buildings we have and then see about putting housing on top of that? Maybe it would be starter homes, maybe it would be apartment type things. I don’t have all of the details worked out, but it seems like we have real estate above rooftops that we’re not looking at.

Those are places where permits have already been pulled, the dirt works been done, the infrastructure’s been put in, water and electric. Things have already been put in place and of course they would need to have new permits and things done accordingly. But what if we what if we look at doing something like that to keep our young people here close to home if they would like to stay home and maybe seniors who can’t afford, you know, to stay in their home because property taxes are pushing them out.

Let’s look for some affordability options.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

Both parents. Equal time. Equal standing.

That was the simple principle behind Senate Bill 1720.

The bill would have directed Arizona courts to begin with a presumption of equal parenting time when both parents were fit, and the arrangement was safe for the child. Judges could still depart from equal parenting when documented safety concerns existed, but equal time would become the starting point rather than something one parent had to spend years and thousands of dollars fighting to obtain.

Supporters argued that the proposal reflected decades of research showing children generally benefit when both parents remain actively involved in their lives.

Under Arizona’s current system, equal parenting time is not guaranteed. It is often the subject of expensive litigation, competing evaluations, and prolonged court battles. SB1720 sought to change that by shifting the burden. Equal parenting would become the presumption unless a documented reason justified a different arrangement.

Senators Wendy Rogers and Shawnna Bolick sponsored the bill, and Sen. Mark Finchem supported it as part of a broader family court reform package.

One of the most emotional moments during testimony came from ’S’, who appeared before Sen. Finchem’s committee during Father’s Day weekend with his children seated behind him.

According to his testimony, court actions had severely restricted his relationship with his children. He told lawmakers that he was fortunate to be with them that day only because Father’s Day weekend made the visit possible. He described a system in which he believed his parental rights had effectively been terminated and recounted events involving his son that he said demonstrated the power family courts exercise over families.

Supporters argued that no parent should have to depend on a holiday to spend meaningful time with their children.

For them, SB1720 represented a cultural shift. Equal parenting would no longer be treated as a prize awarded after years of litigation. It would become the default starting point whenever both parents were fit and the child’s safety was protected.

But SB1720 never received a hearing.

On March 19, 2026, Chairman Quang Nguyen “killed” SB1720 without a hearing, without a vote, and without a public explanation. That day the bill died alongside twelve other family court reform measures that had been presented to lawmakers after more than forty hours of testimony from Arizona families.

Sen. Finchem later stated:

“I cannot explain the reasoning behind why such an important topic was ignored.”

For supporters, SB1720 became symbolic of a larger debate over the future of Arizona family court. They argued that the issue was not partisan. It was about whether children benefit from meaningful relationships with both parents whenever circumstances safely allow it.

SB1720 was the final bill in a package of thirteen family court reform proposals.

Thirteen bills.

More than forty hours of testimony.

Families who traveled to the Capitol to tell their stories.

And on March 19, 2026, all thirteen bills were held without hearings and died without votes.

Supporters continue to argue that equal parenting time should be the starting point for fit parents and that family court policy should prioritize children’s relationships with both parents whenever doing so is safe and appropriate.

Read the full text of SB1720:

https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/summary/H.SB1720_031926_JUD.DOCX.htm

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1720 #EqualParenting #AZHouse2026 #DefendLife #DefendFreedom #July21

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden:

“Republicans have called for ending mail-in voting in moving to single day hand counted paper ballots. Yes. But most Arizona most Republican voters in Arizona vote by mail. So, would you end would you vote to end mail in voting? And what do you say to the Republican voters who depend on it?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“Well, if we look at our constitution, right, the US Constitution, voting is one day. And I’ll be absolutely transparent. I have never mailed a ballot in. I believe that that it’s a fail safe for people who for whatever reason it’s an emergency situation. Of course, we have our military and people that just, it’s really the only option. Uh I remember and still enjoy the pride and joy of standing in line and chatting with other patriotic Americans that are there for the day to vote. Now I do understand about 80% of Arizonans prefer the mail-in. We have a lot of retired people in my community. People travel and it’s a convenient option. However, I think we have to make a decision as a state. Is it more important to us to have a convenience or is it more important to us to have the integrity of the election preserved? So, the longer the vote sits somewhere, the longer the chances are something could maybe not be quite what we thought would should be. So, I would I would be interested in in helping people to understand the value of moving back to that one day.

I like President Trump’s idea of making it a holiday, so you have the day off work. I come from a long, long line of veterans. We go. My family served in the military all the way back to the first continental line in the American Revolution and great, great prices were paid not just by my family but many, many families. Right. This is something they fought for and died for and were maimed for and suffered for uh to be able to have our voice to determine who has say over us. And if we’re not willing to protect that, I have to question what our real values are. I’m not judging. I understand life is busy. Things happen.

You’ve got people in hospitals and people there are things that go on. But if we could begin to migrate back towards that day where we have one day, we meet our neighbors down at the polls and we maybe still talking about what we’re what we’re going to vote for and how we would like to see things different. It’s a great place to foster communication with those close to us. We might not ever have met those people. Maybe we just made a new best friend, right? So, I’d like to see that happen.

The integrity of our election deserves the full effort that we can bring to it so that we can all be confirmed that our vote went the way we meant it to go and we get the representation we have chosen.”

Nicole Ludden:

“Gotcha. So, it sounds like you would support banning ‘no excuse’ early voting?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“Well, I don’t know that I want to say ‘banning’, because the voters did put this, as it was a referendum, and this is something the voters wanted and it could once again become a referendum to turn it back. And it may be something that people want to do a little bit at a time. Now, as a representative, I totally support what they want to do. It was a referendum. They voted. They got what they wanted. I’m just saying from a practical place, should we just take a look at how well that’s actually working? And is that early voting in the very best interest of election integrity? It’s a question we need to ask and answer each of us for ourselves and then and collectively too.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

A Retired Air Force Master Sergeant Brought Documented Abuse Findings to Court. Arizona Family Court Ignored Them.

Twelve citizens deciding your child custody case instead of one judge.

The Founders thought that was a good idea.

Arizona family court still doesn’t.

That is the question at the heart of Senate Bill 1658.

SB1658 would have expanded the right to a jury trial in major child custody disputes, required domestic violence and abuse evidence to receive priority consideration, and created a legal presumption against joint custody when a parent is proven to have made false abuse allegations.

Supporters argued the bill would have added something family court often lacks: accountability.

The testimony presented before Sen. Finchem’s committee could not be ignored.

One of the witnesses was ’S____’, a retired United States Air Force Master Sergeant who served her country for 21 years.

She testified that military investigations substantiated child abuse in her case. Those findings were later upheld through formal legal review in Kansas in March 2025.

Yet according to her testimony, Arizona family court ignored those findings.

Her former husband was granted final decision-making authority over their children despite living in another state.

She told lawmakers that every interaction with the court system carried the same warning.

“Every single time I talk to the courts or their appointees, I am threatened,” she testified.

Supporters of SB1658 argued that custody decisions involving abuse allegations should not rest solely in the hands of a single judge when substantial evidence exists.

They argued that twelve citizens reviewing the evidence would create a level of transparency and accountability that does not currently exist.

The bill also sought to address another recurring complaint raised during testimony: false allegations used as litigation tactics.

Under SB1658, a parent proven to have made false abuse accusations would face a presumption against joint custody.

The principle was simple: truth should matter in both directions.

Supporters believed legitimate abuse evidence should receive greater weight, while knowingly false accusations should carry meaningful consequences.

But SB1658 never received a hearing.

On March 18, 2026, the day before the family court reform bills were scheduled to be heard, a text message was reportedly sent stating:

“All his bills are dead.”

The following day, March 19, 2026, SB1658 was held without a hearing and died without a vote.

For supporters, the issue was larger than one bill.

It was about whether Arizona families deserve more than one judge’s opinion when life-changing decisions about children are being made.

Advocates argue that major custody decisions should be subject to greater public accountability, greater scrutiny of abuse evidence, and stronger safeguards against false allegations.

SB1658 never received the opportunity to be debated.

📋 Read the full text of SB1658:
https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1658S.htm

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1658 #JuryRights #AZHouse2026

Volunteer One post left. If this series has moved you — if you believe Yavapai County deserves a representative who fights for families — help us get there. Knock a door. Make a call. Show up. WildmanInTheHouse.com.

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1658 #JuryRights #AZHouse2026

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

Qualifications of a Representative

I want to address something important that comes up in every race:

What makes someone qualified to serve as a Representative?

In Arizona, serving in the House is designed for citizen legislators. There’s no requirement to be a career politician—what matters is the ability to understand issues, make sound decisions, and represent your community effectively. And I believe qualification comes from real life.

From decades of small business ownership... I have worked directly with clients across Yavapai County... managing operations, budgets, and solving real problems. From long-term community involvement... volunteer leadership... and building trust. From raising and educating a family—understanding firsthand the challenges families face.

When you put all of that together, it creates something important: An understanding of how decisions made in Phoenix affect everyday people right here at home.

And many voters recognize that combination—practical experience, community connection, and real responsibility—which is exactly what public service is supposed to look like.

It’s about serving others

Because qualification isn’t just about titles—

it’s about experience, judgment, and the ability to serve people well.

Like many of you, I didn’t come to Yavapai County for politics. I came for freedom... for beauty...and for a better way of life.

Share

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026 #DefendFreedom

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee

WildmanInTheHouse.com

Defend Life — Defend Freedom — Yavapai County First

TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden:

“But first up, what do you see as the biggest affordability affordability issue facing families in your district?

And what would you actually push for at the legislature to make life cheaper?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“Life has never been cheap and it’s certainly not cheaper and it doesn’t look like it’s going to be cheaper. I could give you for instance one of one of my my sons who lives in the county makes very good money. Single, no children, he works very hard and he’s frustrated along with others his age it it took till he was in his mid 30s to get into a home. And that was having no bills, no debt, no responsibilities financially other than he could just sock money away.

And on the other side of that, my youngest son actually had to leave Arizona because the pay and the housing were unaffordable to him. He’s doing great in Texas where he found a job in the same industry, making probably five times what he was making here. A house that costs less than half of houses that he didn’t even want to live in. And so, we really do need to address affordability for young people.

The other thing that is a concern for me is people who own their homes. They’ve worked hard. They’ve done the right things. They own their homes, but they’re at risk of losing their homes because of escalating property taxes. And then their income as fixed income and maybe they’ve done investments, but it’s still fixed, whatever it is. And we can be outpriced.

You know, the homeless population, there are seniors living in cars and the family doesn’t know. So, we are in a real pickle here, but I believe there are solutions. One of the things that I talked about with someone recently was, do you remember if you were to go through, say, an old town where they have the old main street and you would have the shops and stores and then above them you had living quarters.

So, what if we borrow a page from that and we take the existing buildings we have and then see about putting housing on top of that? Maybe it would be starter homes, maybe it would be apartment type things. I don’t have all of the details worked out, but it seems like we have real estate above rooftops that we’re not looking at.

Those are places where permits have already been pulled, the dirt works been done, the infrastructure’s been put in, water and electric. Things have already been put in place and of course they would need to have new permits and things done accordingly. But what if we what if we look at doing something like that to keep our young people here close to home if they would like to stay home and maybe seniors who can’t afford, you know, to stay in their home because property taxes are pushing them out.

Let’s look for some affordability options.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

One Parent Lost $400,000. Another Lost $1 Million. How Much Should It Cost to Love Your Children?

Arizona family court has no limit on attorney fees.

No ceiling. No cap. No point where the financial bleeding must stop.

A case can last a year. It can last a decade. As long as the case continues, the billing continues.

The result is a system where the parent with the deepest pockets often gains a powerful advantage—not because they are the better parent, not because the evidence is stronger, but because they can afford to keep fighting after the other parent runs out of money.

That is what Senate Bill 1657 was written to address.

SB1657 would have capped attorney fees in family court at 15% of disposable income or $8,000, whichever was lower. It would not have eliminated attorney fees. It would have established a boundary—a point where financial warfare must stop.

The testimony supporting the bill was difficult to ignore.

One parent testified that family court litigation cost more than $1 million over nine years, another one over $2 million and SEVERAL $500,000.

Another witness, E_____, testified before Sen. Finchem’s committee. She is a former Navy pilot, a Naval Academy graduate, and an electrical engineer who spent 13 years serving our country.

She told lawmakers she has not seen her children since February 7, 2024.

Not because she was found unfit.

Not because she harmed them.

Not because she refused to comply with court orders.

She testified that she followed every requirement placed before her. She completed therapy, participated in evaluations, submitted more than 1,000 pages of documentation, and complied with court directives.

She also testified that she spent approximately $400,000 trying to remain involved in her children’s lives.

Meanwhile, she told lawmakers, the litigation continued.

“Please fix it,” she asked the committee. “Please fix it.”

SB1657 was designed to address a question many Arizona families now ask:

Should the right to parent your child depend on how much money remains in your bank account?

Supporters argued the answer should be no.

The bill would have created a legal ceiling on attorney fees and reduced the ability of prolonged litigation to become a weapon of financial exhaustion.

Chairman Quang Nguyen held SB1657 on March 19, 2026, the day it was scheduled to be heard. No hearing was conducted. It never received a hearing, none of the committee members had an opportunity to amend. No testimony was taken. No vote occurred.

As a result, the bill died.

For the families who testified, the issue was never about politics.

It was about whether Arizona’s family court system should allow unlimited legal expenses to determine who gets to keep fighting for their children.

Supporters of SB1657 argued that parenting rights should not belong only to those who can afford them.

The bill never received the chance to be debated.

📋 Read the full text of SB1657:

https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1657S.htm

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

Share

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1657 #AttorneyFees #AZHouse2026

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden:

“Could you describe a time in the last two years when you changed your mind on something political and what changed it?”

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“So, we’ve been through things, right? As Americans, we’ve been through things and the political landscape has seemed to be moving under our feet faster than what we could keep up with. So, it became more important than ever to find our moorings and to just stick with what we know is right. And so, I’m I’ve always believed that the Constitution is our guiding star. It has value from the beginning. It’s still valuable today.

And I’m even more convinced now than ever before that we need our constitution. And so, I don’t know that that’s changed for me as much as I have just become even more determined that that needs to be front and center when we are electing someone.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

by Shawn Dell Wildman

In Arizona, a court-appointed psychologist can ruin your family — and you cannot sue them. No matter what they do.

What SB1329 would have done: Court-appointed professionals who act unethically, make false findings, or harm families through misconduct could be held legally accountable. The near-total immunity currently shielding court-appointed psychologists, evaluators, and interventionists would have had limits.

Right now, in Arizona, court-appointed professionals operate with sweeping immunity. They can dismiss medical evidence, ignore documented abuse, make recommendations that serve their own financial interests — and families have almost no legal recourse.

SB1329 did not expose good-faith professionals to frivolous lawsuits. It created accountability where none currently exists: if you are appointed by the state to make decisions about children, you answer for what you do. That is not a radical idea. It is the same standard we hold every other licensed professional to in every other field.

A Testimony

C___ is a nurse practitioner with over 20 years of medical experience. After leaving a violently abusive marriage, she testified before Sen. Finchem's committee that the court-appointed forensic psychologist dismissed her documented domestic violence records, and recommended her children be reunified with their father.

The psychologist drained $60,000 from her account — including charges billed on Christmas and New Year's Day. She sold her house. She sold her car. She and her children survived on food boxes for three months. She did everything right. He faced no consequences.

SB1329 would have changed that. One accountability standard. The same one every other licensed professional already meets.

On March 19, 2026, Chairman Nguyen killed SB1329.

“It is my job to be the freaking Chairman to kill that bill.” — Nguyen, Luthman podcast, live on air.

Rep. Quang Nguyen blocked SB1329. No hearing on SB1329. No vote on SB1329. No explanation for why he killed SB1329 on March 19, 2026, when the room was full of hearers expecting SB1329 to be heard and passed.

Shawn Dell Wildman believes that power without accountability is leaves Arizona families vulnerable.

📋 Read the full text of SB1329: https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1329P.htm

Share She did everything right. She had the documentation, the training, the evidence. And the person who harmed her family faced zero accountability.

Vote — July 21.

Vote in person at your polling place — that’s the most secure way to make your voice count. If you’re using an early ballot, don’t mail it because chain of custody is lost. Drop it at your Yavapai County drop box to ensure your vote gets counted. Either way — make sure you vote.

Share

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1329 #Accountability #AZHouse2026

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

by Shawn Dell Wildman

You raised them. You know them. And yet a judge can strip your right to make basic decisions about your own child’s life. What SB1328 would have done: Protected parents’ fundamental right to make decisions for their own children in family court — including medical, educational, and everyday choices. Established equal access to both parents as an explicit matter of Arizona state policy.

The right to parent your child is supposed to be one of the most protected rights in American law. But Arizona families who enter family court find that those rights can be stripped, limited, or conditioned on compliance with a judge’s preferences — with very little legal protection.

SB1328 would have codified those parental rights in the family court context. It would have made equal parenting access the stated policy of the state — not a favor granted by a judge, but a right protected by law.

Senator Finchem brought this bill after hearing testimony from parents who had lost the ability to choose their child’s school, say no to a medication they didn’t consent to, or simply spend equal time with their own children.

A Testimony

She lost the right to choose her own child's school. She lost the right to say no to a drug her child refused to take. One judge took all of it. Arizona Senate Bill 1328 would have protected parents' fundamental right to make decisions for their own children in family court and established equal access to both parents as a matter of Arizona state policy.

K. — a Yavapai County mother — testified before the Senator Mark Finchem committee that a judge had ordered her ex-husband the right to visually inspect her property wherever she lived before allowing their daughter's visits.

The ex-husband took this opportunity to criminally stalk & intimidate her and keep the daughter from seeing her mother. Her daughter, now 16½, can only see her mother secretly — at restaurants, away from the house — because of what a single judge decided.

SB1328 was written for K___. For every parent who went to court to protect their child and left with less than they started with.

The day after he killed the bills, in a post he ‘deleted’ days later, Nguyen said,

“Yes, it is 100% correct that I blocked “Stupid Bills”. That is my job as the Chairman.”

Chairman Nguyen held SB1328 and 12 other Family Court bills without a hearing on March 19, 2026, the day this bill was calendared to be heard.

Shawn Dell Wildman believes the right to raise your own children is not negotiable. She will fight for Arizona families.

Vote — July 21

K____ lives in Yavapai County. Her story is a Yavapai County story. On July 21st, vote in person at your polling place — the most secure way to make your voice count. Early ballot? Drop it at your Yavapai County drop box. Don't put it in the mail.

📋 Read the full text of SB1328: https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1328S.htm

Share Every parent in Yavapai County should know these rights exist — and that they were this close to being protected. Share this post with a parent, a grandparent, a neighbor. This is their fight too.

Share

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1328 #ParentsRights #AZHouse2026

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. That’s how this message travels.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

TRANSCRIPT

Nicole Ludden

“First up, outside of raising your family, what’s something you’ve built, started, or led that you’re proud of? And what did it teach you?”

Shawn Dell Wildman

“There are two things off the top. Outside of my family of course. My husband and I bought a publishing business. We built it to do 2 publications that ran concurrently in Yavapai County. We covered most of Yavapai County. We worked together, stayed married and had a good time doing it.

The other thing is I was an AWANA leader, eventually became an AWANA director. That’s a ministry reaching out to children ages 3 through even post high school where we had a leadership in training opportunity. So, I helped with that. I worked with that ministry across the state of Arizona, and took children — well, they were high schoolers — took them for a competition on a national and international scene. And it was just an absolute joy and a real blessing to be able to pour into the lives of young people.

And with our paper, we got to inform the community of things going on and things that are important. I’d like to put quotes from founding fathers in there and I’d like to put things that would help families and people who would like to think. “Let’s just think for a minute before we go off into one direction or another.” So, I’d like to encourage people to do their best and be their best and to serve others.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

by Shawn Dell Wildman

In Arizona family court, your child can go through the whole proceeding with no one in the room whose only job is to protect them. What SB1234 would have done Children in Arizona family court would have had the right to their own attorney — someone whose only duty is to represent the child’s best interests. Not the mother’s attorney. Not the father’s. The child’s.

When adults divorce, both sides hire lawyers. The child gets a judge. Sometimes a “best interests” attorney is appointed — but that person answers to the court, not the child. SB1234 would have changed that by giving children independent legal representation. The principle is simple: if the proceeding is about the child’s life, the child deserves someone in the room fighting for them — not for either parent, not for the court, not for billable hours. Just for the child. Rep. Werner sponsored this bill. Sen. Finchem supported it. It was a straightforward protection with broad appeal across party lines.

Chairman Nguyen never gave it a hearing. His own words:

“It is 100% correct that I blocked ‘Stupid Bills.’ That is my job as the Chairman.” — Facebook post, April 19, 2026 (deleted).

Shawn Dell Wildman believes every Arizona child deserves a voice in the proceeding that determines their future.

📋 Read the full text of SB1234: https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2r/bills/sb1234s.htm

Read & Share The full text of SB1234 is linked above — it’s two pages and plain enough to read in five minutes. Share this post with one who had no idea this protection existed and was killed before it could pass.

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1234 #ChildrensRights #AZHouse2026

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

The person deciding your child’s future may have no verified training. Arizona law doesn't require it. What SB1656 would have done – Established minimum training standards and qualifications for all professionals working in Arizona family court. Required that sessions with court-appointed experts be recorded. Removed qualified immunity from court professionals who cause demonstrable harm through misconduct.

We require minimum training for teachers, doctors, nurses, social workers, and childcare providers — virtually everyone who works with children in a professional capacity. The family court system is the exception. Evaluators and interventionists who make recommendations shaping children's lives can hold ambiguous credentials with no required verification. Their sessions happen behind closed doors with no recordings. And they operate with near-total immunity.

SB1656 would have changed all three at once: minimum standards, required recordings, and real accountability for misconduct. Not a revolution — a baseline that every other profession serving children already meets.

Chairman Nguyen held SB1656 without a hearing, in effect killing it on March 19, 2026.

"All of these bills were held by Chairman Nguyen without explanation, nothing but silence." –Sen. Finchem

Shawn Dell Wildman believes anyone making decisions about Arizona's children must be qualified and accountable. She will fight protect children.

📋 Read the full text of SB1656: https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1656S.htm

We have Volunteer opportunities! We're in the final stretch before July 21st. If you believe Yavapai County deserves better representation, we need people knocking doors and making calls.

Find out how to help at WildmanInTheHouse.com.

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#FamilyCourtReform #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1656 #Accountability #AZHouse2026

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

This interview was conducted on June 11, 2026.

TRANSCRIPT:

Nicole Ludden:

“Tell us why you’re running. “

Shawn Dell Wildman:

“Thank you, Nicole. Thank you to Clean Elections for the opportunity to run as a Clean Elections candidate. I’m thankful I’m one of those people that would not have been able to run. With Clean Elections Commission didn’t make the opportunity available so I’m thankful.

So, I’m asking people as I’m going around if you would rather believe a beautiful lie or know an ugly truth, if you would rather be managed or represented. I’m running for LD 1 because I believe that we, here, would rather have ugly truths because with ugly truths we can turn things around and make sense of what we have to work with.

So rather than having things covered and putting us in further danger, I am taking the position of a watchman who is on the on the look to be vigilantly observing and faithfully reporting, sounding a clear alarm in danger, courageously speaking truth and serving my community rather than managing it.”

Share

What do you think? Drop your thoughts in the comments below or reply to this email with any questions you’d like me to address next.

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #CitizenLegislator #NotAPolitician #AZHouse2026

A simple civic idea. Let Arizonans choose between jury duty and serving as election workers. SB1655 didn’t make it to a vote either.

What this bill would have done – Arizonans summoned for jury duty would have been able to fulfill that civic duty by serving as election workers instead of jury duty. This would have given citizens a practical alternative while supporting both the courts and the election process.

This bill is different from the others in one important way: it was blocked earlier in the legislative process and never reached the House Judiciary Committee. I want to be transparent about that distinction; however, it belongs in this conversation because it is part of the same pattern. Thirteen bills. One legislative session. A Capitol culture where ideas get stopped before they can be debated, alternatives go unconsidered, and the people’s business may not get a vote.

SB1655 was practical, nonpartisan, and straightforward. It asked nothing controversial. It gave Arizonans more flexibility in how they serve their community. SB1655 didn’t make it through.

Shawn Dell Wildman will vote on behalf of We the People.

📋 Read the full text of SB1655: https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1655S.htm

Share this with anyone who believes their representative should show up and vote — on the record, every time. That’s not a high bar. It should be the floor.

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #SB1655 #CivicDuty #AZHouse2026 #AccountableRepresentation

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

One parent earns $47,000 a year. The court orders $40,000 in attorney fees against him. Not because he lost a criminal case. Not because he committed fraud. Because he was fighting for time with his children.

K___ testified before Senator Finchem's committee that he now represents himself because he can no longer afford an attorney. He told lawmakers he has not seen his daughter in nearly two years. His story was one of many that inspired SB1653. The bill would have required courts to use actual income rather than imputed income when calculating support obligations, created safeguards against unfair fee awards, and placed limits on using legal costs as a weapon in custody disputes.

Supporters argued that family court should determine outcomes based on facts and children's best interests—not on which parent can afford to keep filing motions until the other runs out of money.

SB1653 was scheduled to be heard as part of the Family Court Reform package. The day before the hearing, a text message was delivered to Senator Finchem and a lobbyist stating, "All his bills are dead." The next day, March 19, 2026, SB1653 was not heard.

Shawn Dell Wildman agrees that the courthouse should not be a place where money determines who gets to be a parent. Read the bill for yourself and decide:

https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/bills/SB1653S.htm

Share this with anyone who has watched a parent lose a custody fight not because they were wrong, but because they ran out of money.

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#FamilyCourtReform #SB1653 #WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #AZHouse2026 #FairCourtFees

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com ·

Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.

Would you rather be managed or represented?

I’m Shawn Dell Wildman, running for State House LD 1, and I believe we have been handed fistfuls of beautiful lies covering ugly truths that have put us in harm’s way.

God commands the Watchmen to observe and report truth, sound a clear alarm in danger and courageously speak truth to protect our community.

We do not manage the people we serve; we represent them.

To illustrate I’ll tell you about the hat my veteran dad wore which so much pride, it said “These colors don’t run.” He used this to teach me about servant leadership.

Apply the test of goals. The servant’s goal is to strive to guard and accomplish the mission he has been given by exercising personal integrity and guiding principles to get the job done.

This is courage in action. This is my goal should you choose to allow me to serve you.

The manager’s goal is marked by compromise and selfish personal agenda that lead him away from the mission. He asks “what’s in it for me? Can I get away with it?”

This is cowardice in action, and I’ve had a belly full.

You too?

I’m running to strengthen what remains, to restore what has been taken, and because you are worth it.

I’m the only Wildman on the ballot and will be honored to have earned your vote.

To see the truth for yourself, please visit wildmaninthehouse.com.

Because these colors don’t run!

Thank you.

Share

Subscribe for free and share this page so you don’t miss a post. Then share this with one person — a parent, a neighbor, anyone who deserves to know what happened and what’s on the ballot July 21st. That’s how this message travels.

#WildmanLD1 #YavapaiCountyFirst #AZHouse2026 #SupportOurVeterans

Thanks for reading The Yavapai Record’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Paid for by Wildman For State House District 1 Committee · WildmanInTheHouse.com · Defend Life. Defend Freedom. Yavapai County First.