The Arizona Attorney General's Office sued the City of Tolleson on Tuesday over a policy that demands a flat $15,000 from new firefighters who leave their jobs within three years, arguing the fee is an illegal penalty that traps underpaid first responders in place. Tolleson Fire Department operates out of a single station with 33 members, and the state says the fee has nothing to do with what it actually costs to train a recruit.
Attorney General Kris Mayes filed the lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court alongside a motion asking a judge to immediately block Tolleson from enforcing the policy while the case plays out, according to KTAR News. Mayes argues the fee keeps underpaid firefighters from taking better-paying jobs at other Valley departments, and the state's filing, detailed by the Arizona Attorney General's Office, seeks the preliminary injunction as an emergency remedy before the lawsuit reaches a final verdict.
At the center of the case is Sean Krienke, a former Tolleson firefighter who left for the Goodyear Fire Department in August 2025. Although the agreement demanded a flat $15,000, Tolleson withheld $2,473.15 directly from his final paycheck — including unused vacation pay — before invoicing him for the remaining $8,776.85, according to court records cited by KJZZ. Krienke told prosecutors the fee appeared arbitrary and that the city never responded when he asked for an itemized breakdown of his calculated training costs, per the same account from KJZZ.
A Verbal Promise, a Written Warning
Krienke has said Tolleson's fire chief told firefighters in 2024 that the city would no longer enforce the repayment policy. But a 2025 letter included in state court filings shows Tolleson's Director of Public Safety, Rudy Mendoza, warning Krienke that the city would continue to consistently enforce the policy and pursue collections if necessary, per court records reported by KJZZ. Tolleson's attorney has said, in a June letter, that the fire chief denies ever telling firefighters the policy would not be enforced, and that courts have upheld similar training repayment programs.
Tolleson has defended the fee publicly, saying it recovers the city's costs to recruit, train and equip new firefighters. But the state's lawsuit points to a stark gap in those numbers: the 13-week regional fire academy run by the City of Glendale, where Tolleson recruits actually train, charges participating West Valley departments no more than $4,500 per recruit and offers tuition credits to agencies that send their own training officers to help instruct, according to the Arizona Attorney General's Office. That leaves roughly $10,500 of Tolleson's $15,000 charge unaccounted for by the academy's own tuition rate.
No Fire-Department Equivalent to Police Rules
Arizona's Police Reimbursement Law Tolleson has said it would drop its repayment program if state lawmakers passed a law requiring hiring departments to cover the training costs of firefighters they poach from other cities. Arizona already has an inter-agency reimbursement system for police: under Arizona Revised Statutes § 41-1828.02, a hiring law enforcement agency — not the individual officer — must reimburse an officer's former department for training costs on a prorated scale over three years, according to the Arizona State Legislature.
Even as it fights to keep junior staff from leaving, Tolleson has turned to hefty incentives to bring in experienced hires — offering qualified lateral firefighters an $8,000 bonus with a three-year service commitment, per the same job-listing platform.
Part of a Wider Crackdown on Exit Fees
Mayes has said firefighters should not be trapped in a job by a $15,000 bill that has little to do with their actual training costs.
The Tolleson case lands amid a broader national reckoning over so-called Training Repayment Agreement Provisions, or TRAPs. Law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom notes increased state attorney general enforcement and legislative activity concerning TRAPs, as well as possible federal enforcement. Its discussion covers health care and other industries, where stay-or-pay clauses raise questions about worker mobility. The case now heads to Maricopa County Superior Court, where a judge will weigh the state's request to immediately halt the policy while Tolleson's formal response and the broader lawsuit proceed.
