The evening, after the Town Council meeting on April 9th, I sent a public records request to the Town Clerk, Kandace French, for copies of the 91 emails that were mentioned at the meeting. The A.R.S code states that the requests will be handled promptly. After 11 days, and not hearing anything about my request, on April 20th, I asked for the status. Kandace French said, it was “in processing”.
Shortly after sending this email, I learned that there were District Court and US Supreme Court decisions. Petitions shall be released upon request. On April 30th, I informed Kandace French of these court decisions and emailed Denis Fitzgibbons, the town attorney, informing him of the same court decisions. At 7:52 PM Mr. Fitzgibbons emailed me saying documents should be provided to me “tomorrow” which was May 1. That did not happen. On May 3rd I again emailed Mr. Fitzgibbons.
When I finally received these documents, and reviewed them, I found that Planning and Zoning Vice Chairperson, Mary Roberts, had submitted one of the 91 petitions sent to Gary Neiss. I did not locate Ms. Roberts’ petition until the 13th. When learned of this I contacted the town attorney and asked Mr. Fitzgibbons if there was a conflict of interest in a commissioner sending a petition against the GP’s changes, before hearing the debate on the subject, at the scheduled P&Z meeting. I did not hear back from him.
At the meeting I made my comments that I felt Ms. Roberts should recuse herself from a vote. Mr. Cook, representing the town attorney, said there was no conflict of interest. So, of course, Ms. Roberts voted against the SPA change in the GP.
Why did Kandace French delay release of these documents? Why did Ms. Roberts vote on the GP? I have made my decision; I will let the reader make theirs.
July is the election for 3 council seats. Vote wisely. (2 of 2)
John Mattes
Carefree
