No, he did not (although I have no evidence on that one way or the other). However, according to this article in the Daily Star Dicey Ducey does still want his own personal police force (aka inspector general).
Ducey said Monday that he hasn’t yet decided whether he can act on his own to have his own investigative agency within state government without getting legislative approval. He said he is still reviewing what lawmakers did do before adjourning early Friday.
But Ducey remained adamant that some greater oversight is needed, beyond what is being done, now even as he sidestepped questions of who is to blame for the defeat of legislation he sought creating the position.
On Friday, press aide Daniel Scarpinato blamed "special interests and lobbyists doing shady business with the state" for derailing the governor’s proposal.
Scarpinato said at the time that he wasn’t ready to name names just yet. On Monday, Ducey provided no more insight into who he thinks are the special interests who don’t want an inspector general.
"You’d have to talk to them," he said, without identifying who "them" is.
All this is eerily similar to the rise of dictatorships in Europe prior to WWII. You have a bogeyman (Now : "them" :: Then : Jews, communists, homosexuals). You have a police force answerable only to the single executive (Now : inspector general with subpoena powers :: Then : Gestapo). And you have an elected ruler who considers himself above the law (Now : Dicey Ducey :: Then : Hitler, Mussolini). To extend the analogy we could figure out the slot filled by Scarpinato.
For those who think Scriber is over-reacting, read the Star's report and then employ powers of analogical reasoning to prove me wrong.