PHOENIX – A Chandler legislator and a Scottsdale insurance agent are at the center of an ethics case at the state Capitol over allegations made during a legislative hearing that involved the governor, Mesa’s mayor, Republican Maricopa County and state officials, judges and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Rep. Liz Harris, R-Chandler, defended herself against an ethics complaint last week, swearing she was not aware ahead of time that a Scottsdale insurance agent, Jacqueline Breger, planned to present what was later called "unsubstantiated and defamatory allegations'' at the February legislative hearing.

But her statements that she didn’t know what Breger was going to say appeared to be contradicted by a series of text messages the Ethics Committee released.

Those texts show Harris and Breger messaging back and forth two days before the Feb. 23 hearing called by Republicans to question Arizona’s election administration. They discussed the headline for her presentation on a committee agenda to avoid giving hints about its contents.

Harris also appeared to work to avoid providing electronic copies of what Breger intended to present to House Speaker Ben Toma, R-Peoria, and Senate Majority Leader Sonny Borrelli, R-Lake Havasu City, in advance by advising Breger to only bring printed copies of her presentation. That could have given Toma and Borrelli a chance to block Breger's testimony at the joint Senate and house committee hearing.

Harris, a freshman Republican lawmaker who believes the factless allegation that the state’s election system is rife with fraud and led to defeats of Republican candidates, repeatedly said under questioning Thursday that she didn’t know Breger's presentation would devolve into a series of allegations.

They included that Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, several Republican Maricopa County supervisors, 12 Maricopa County Superior Court judges and Mesa Mayor John Giles all had taken bribes that came in the form of money laundered through a scam involving real estate deeds.

Breger also presented documents to the committee that listed others - including Toma - as guilty of corruption. She also listed the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as being involved. Many lawmakers are members of the church.

That testimony at the February hearing - and Harris’ apparent hand gesture cutting off Breger when state Sen. Ken Bennett, R-Prescott, asked who had invited her - triggered the ethics complaint by Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton, D-Tucson.

Stahl Hamilton's complaint accused Harris of violating state defamation laws and bringing “disrepute and embarrassment” to the House of Representatives by inviting Breger and allowing her to testify.

The formal charge the committee is considering - Thursday’s hearing ended with the five-member panel issuing no decision - was on the specific charge of "disorderly behavior'' under House rules. The panel can dismiss the complaint, censure Harris or ask the whole House to expel her.

Republican Rep. Travis Grantham asked Harris repeatedly about the text messages. But Harris repeatedly swore that she did not know what Breger planned to present before her testimony, which was scheduled for 20 minutes but went more than twice as long.

"I'll ask you right now, did you know that Miss Breger was going to come in here and present the information she presented that day in the special elections hearing?'' Grantham asked.

"Representative Grantham, absolutely, positively 100%, no,'' Harris responded.

Harris presented a defense that included repeated references to the state constitution and her belief that lawmakers are obliged to allow citizens to come and present information to the legislature.

"The people have the right to speak freely, petition the government and hold their government officials accountable,'' Harris said in her rebuttal to the allegations. "We must ensure that these rights are protected and that the people are empowered to exercise them.''

No date has been set for the committee to reconvene.

We’d like to invite our readers to submit their civil comments, pro or con, on this issue. Email AZOpinions@iniusa.org.