That is likely not true; Payson does not have nuclear launch codes. But it must be something. On March 7th, we requested documents under a request for records (RFR), commonly called a FOIA request. We have reviewed some that should be in the production. If they are not, we will know the production is incomplete.
After a few months of delays and vague follow-ups, a complaint was filed with the Arizona Ombudsman’s Office. They got involved in early August. Even with the Ombudsman’s office involvement, we have gotten nowhere fast. The Ombudsman office has requested information from the Town of Payson on the process and delay. At one point, the Town of Payson requested that we modify the original RFR/FOIA request from March 7th. That would have reset the request’s calendar. We would then start a new clock and not be at the current 237 days and counting.
Recently, the Town Attorney agreed to produce some documents and provide others as they could. That has not occurred. This also refutes prior statements made by the Town Clerk. The statements?
- On April 30th, the Town stated, “We are still working on your records request.”
- On May 31st, the Town stated: “Staff is still working on your records request.”
- On June 17th, the Town stated, “Your records request is currently in legal review for necessary or required redactions.”
- On July 31st, the Town advised, “The documents for your request are still being reviewed.”
- On September 9th, the Town of Payson requests a limitation on the RFR/FOIA request.
Those prior statements suggested progress was being made on the records request. We guess not.
As we “had the ear” of the Ombudsman Office, we thought it might be a good time to ask for more clarification on open meetings. Once the Ombudsman’s office understood the timeline, a secondary investigation was opened on potential open meeting law violations. We don’t know the status of that investigation.
Here was the question on the meetings:
On the open meeting issue, the bond proposal took from early 2023 to August 2024 to work out. The bond issuer, Stifel, was present at Capital Improvement Project Citizen Advisory Committee (CIPCAC) meetings. Those meetings were not “Council Meetings.” Two of them had quorum notices. Fair enough. They were “presentations” for a workshop; none had votes. The full agenda(s) can be found here.
The Town is claiming “professional services,” so they never put it to bid. Stifel is expected at $560,000.00 plus. The bond placement includes fees beyond just “professional services.” Rating agencies, etc. About $300,000.00. All in, $900,000.00 or so. Great, we can label it all professional services.
At some point, the Council had to agree to the terms of the issuance with Stifel. Why 25 years, why not 20? Why not 30? Duration of bond and various other decisions had to be made. When did that occur? If made by the Council, it seems there should be some trail of it. It is not in any meeting or executive session we can find. If made by other than the Council, who? It far exceeds the Town Manager’s authority on the dollar implications.
This is all curious as the Town of Payson has a stated mission.
Town of Payson Mission: The Town of Payson is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life of our citizens by working hard to provide a superior level of service in the most effective and efficient manner while exercising fiscal responsibility.
We… Value open communication Encourage citizen participation Operate honestly and fairly Conduct ourselves through unity and teamwork Respect our differences Treasure our natural resources and unique environment
As the Town Manager recently stated, words matter. The prevarications of the Town Clerk do not appear to reconcile with the Town’s mission. The mission statement words above matter very little.
Records requests of Payson under an RFR/FOIA that may reflect poorly on the Town of Payson? That appears to be mission impossible.
Enjoy the music written and composed by Argentine composer Lalo Schifrin in 1967.