Arizona Supreme Court Orders Phoenix To Release Union Negotiation Records

Arizona Supreme Court Orders Phoenix To Release Union Negotiation Records

By Staff Reporter |

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the city of Phoenix must release records of their closed-door labor union negotiations.

The ruling came from a challenge initiated in 2022 by the Goldwater Institute regarding the refusal of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association’s (PLEA), the police union, to publicize its draft contract proposals for public comment prior to negotiations with the city. 

The PLEA proposal concerned its 2023-2024 memorandum of understanding (MOU) which contained expenditure terms for tens of millions of taxpayer dollars as well as the employment terms for law enforcement.

Rather than submitting drafts of the MOU for public review and comment by early December as required by city code, PLEA submitted letters of intent mentioning its aim to negotiate wages and benefits. The Phoenix City Council chose to accept those letters of intent as sufficient for the public to comment on without seeing draft MOUs. 

Goldwater Institute requested those draft MOUs. The city refused, claiming these documents were exempt from public records requests under state law allowing exemptions based on the “best interests of the state” because disclosure “could create a chilling effect” on negotiations. 

Only after the city and PLEA reached a final agreement did they publicize a draft MOU for public comment in April 2023. The city ratified the MOU about two weeks later, in early May 2023. 

That MOU has since expired, having lasted only through June 2024. 

The trial court had ruled that the city had sufficiently established “potential material harm” that could occur from disclosing draft MOU materials.

“While significant, the general concerns about transparency, advocacy, and accountability identified by [Goldwater] are different, however, from the particularized interest in preserving the ability to negotiate labor agreements free of political pressure, collusion, and unnecessary delay due to impasse,” said the trial court. “The City provided testimony from individuals directly involved in the collective bargaining process and with experience in labor negotiations with and for the City of Phoenix.”

However, the Arizona Supreme Court in its ruling said that speculative claims of harm were insufficient alone. 

The court determined that the city would have to release some or all of the MOU records that it had withheld. In order to determine the nature of such a release, the court ordered the lower court to review the withheld documents.

The court ruled that it was the city’s burden to prove the likelihood of specific, material harm that would occur from the disclosure of contested public records, as well as the causal connection between the disclosure and that harm that could occur. 

The Goldwater Institute said in a press release that the high court ruling affirmed citizens’ rights of public disclosure and an ability to provide input. 

“City residents and taxpayers deserve to know what the union was demanding and what city leaders were offering during that process. But all of that was kept hidden from the public,” stated the Goldwater Institute. “Citizens have a right to know what their government is up to and should have an opportunity to provide feedback about labor negotiations and other public activities. As today’s decision affirms, that’s the whole point of our public records laws.”

AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.

Arizona Supreme Court Holds Hearing To Decide If Phoenix Can Hide Public Records

Arizona Supreme Court Holds Hearing To Decide If Phoenix Can Hide Public Records

By Staff Reporter |

The Arizona Supreme Court held a hearing on Monday to decide whether the city of Phoenix can hide certain public records.

The city is being sued by the Goldwater Institute, a Phoenix-based public policy and litigation organization, over its hiding of records concerning union negotiations.

In Goldwater v. Phoenix, the Goldwater Institute argued the city of Phoenix has a duty to disclose those records in order to allow the public to have an informed decision, and because they serve as the entity negotiating on behalf of the public.

The organization filed their lawsuit in March of 2023 after the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association (PLEA) declined to provide a draft memoranda of understanding (MOU) for public input at the end of 2022. PLEA had provided its MOU drafts in preceding years. 

Per the city’s “Meet and Confer” ordinance, unions must submit MOUs by Dec. 1 in the year before the expiration of an operative agreement so that the public may provide input prior to negotiations between the union and city. 

Despite not having a draft MOU available for the public to review, the Phoenix City Council moved forward with a meeting to collect public comment on an unsubmitted draft. 

The city then began negotiations in January 2023. 

The city of Phoenix refused to give PLEA’s draft MOU to the Goldwater Institute upon request, claiming the records were exempt from public records disclosure because public scrutiny would burden negotiations. 

The city claimed they were protected under the state’s public records law exemption allowing the withholding of records should they prove detrimental to a government’s best interest.

“Releasing those types of materials would create a chilling effect on the parties’ willingness to candidly engage with each other and it would hinder the negotiations process,” said the city in their denial message. 

The city also expressed concerns that public access to MOUs would politicize union negotiations. 

Parker Jackson, Goldwater Institute staff attorney, disagreed that these records were covered by the best interests exemption. 

“With few exceptions, public records must be made available to the public,” said Jackson in a press release. “When there’s a need to protect things like personal privacy or public safety, the government must be able to show that specific and significant harm is likely to result from public disclosure. It cannot simply withhold information based on self-interested speculation that some minimal inconvenience ‘might’ occur.” 

In January, the Arizona Court of Appeals remanded the case to the Arizona Superior Court so that court could privately review unredacted and redacted versions of the contested MOU documents, and determine whether the documents deserved exemption from public disclosure according to the best interests of the state. 

The Arizona Supreme Court is considering two issues in this case:

  1. Did the Court of Appeals err by not requiring the City, after it invoked the “best interests of the state” exception, to establish a probability that specific, material harm will result from disclosure, as Mitchell v. Superior Court requires? 
  2. Did the Court of Appeals err by not applying the Carlson v. Pima County balancing test de novo to independently determine whether the City’s purported interests in nondisclosure outweigh the presumption in favor of disclosure?

The public may watch the archived video of Goldwater v. Phoenix here.

AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.

A DOJ Takeover Of The Phoenix Police Department Would Be Catastrophic

A DOJ Takeover Of The Phoenix Police Department Would Be Catastrophic

By Joseph Yang |

In whatever field you work for, can you imagine doing your job with one hand tied behind your back? What about both hands tied behind your back? Well, for the Phoenix Police Department this is no longer an “imagination,” this is their reality.

For the past 2 years, the Department of Justice has been investigating the Phoenix PD on the basis of allegations against the department regarding use of force, retaliation to protestors, and mistreating the homeless. For 2 years the Phoenix PD has been fully compliant with their investigation as stated by the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association in an open letter to Mayor Kate Gallego; “Because the city and it’s police department have nothing to hide, you have cooperated with every aspect of the DOJ’s investigation thus far – rightly so, and with our full support.”

However, the Phoenix PD, in that same open letter, conveyed their dismay to Mayor Gallego; “I write to you today on behalf of PLEA, United Phoenix Firefighters Local 493, AFSCME 2384, AFSCME 2960, ASPTEA and neighborhood groups Operation Blue Ribbon, Violence Impact Coalition, and Phoenix Mid-Century Modern Neighborhood Association to express our concerns about the direction of the DOJ investigation and its implications for the future of the City of Phoenix.” The Department of Justice, after concluding their “investigation,” has recommended—as they always seem to do—a consent decree go in effect for the Phoenix PD.

Now, why is this such a bad thing? Why are people against this? Here are a few of the reasons.

At What Cost

Let’s start with the most obvious reason taxpayers and residents of Phoenix oppose this. The financial burden on the City of Phoenix would be astronomical, costing the city $10 million alone for the court ordered monitor required by the consent decree. The rest of the cost widely depends on the length a consent decree is in effect for, but the Seattle PD, which has a consent decree, has spent $100 million so far. And that number continues to climb as the consent decree remains in place. I am sure you can see why taxpayers would be against this.

“I’m From the Government, and I’m Here to Help”

If the cost alone isn’t enough to sway you, then let’s look back on Ronald Reagan’s famous quote that the “nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’” This is exactly what is going on in Phoenix. There really is no reason that someone from another state or the federal government should be dictating or instructing officers within the Phoenix PD. This takes away our state and local sovereignty. While the Phoenix PD is not perfect, they have taken actions and steps to improve and make policy and training changes when necessary. For the DOJ to come in and overreach in such a way, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, is grossly inappropriate.

The CRIME, Need More Be Said?

If you look at cities that have a consent decree in place, violent crime has skyrocketed! In a statement, about a survey of officers within the Phoenix PD, the President of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association said, “In [the survey], we asked what the members felt would happen to crime if a consent decree was implemented. 93.73% said crime would rise either somewhat or substantially. That is in line with what we have seen across the country.” In that same survey, officers were asked how likely they would be to retire if a consent decree were to go in effect for Phoenix PD. The President of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association shared the results, saying, “Here in Phoenix, we are approximately 600 short of the max staffing of 3,125. In a recent survey, PLEA asked members how likely they would be to retire or resign if a consent decree was implemented in Phoenix. 12.57% responded that they would definitely retire or resign, while another 30.26% said they would strongly consider retiring or resigning. 42.87% is a concerning number!” Phoenix already has rising crime rates. We cannot afford to lose more officers. We need to gain more!

This Affects Us ALL

If you don’t live in Phoenix, why should you care? Phoenix is the 5th largest police department in the U.S. If the DOJ can do this to Phoenix, what will stop them from coming to Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Scottsdale, or other cities in the valley? Not only that, but if crime rates soar in Phoenix, that will certainly flow into neighboring cities. As the residency rates rise in Arizona, crime is bound to rise too, but so far Arizona has remained a decently safe state to live. However, if this consent decree goes in effect, there’s no telling how bad it could get.

Speed, Speed, Speed

After a slow and drawn-out investigation, speed seems to be the name of the game for the DOJ all of a sudden. After the DOJ concluded its two-year investigation, it brought its recommendation to the city council and for a decision within 48 hours. Many council members were frustrated and curious as to why an outside entity came into their city and demanded action in 48 hours when they themselves got 2 years to do their investigation. As Phoenix Councilwoman Ann O’Brien said, “Phoenix has been transparent and collaborative, now it’s time for the DOJ to do the same.”

This Is Nonpartisan

This is a non-partisan issue that affects all Arizonans, and we need you in this fight. Even the Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone, a Democrat, has announced his resignation because of the lack of ability to run his office due to this consent decree. That’s why I encourage everyone in our state to go to community forums hosted by the Phoenix PD and voice your concerns. The future of our state may depend on it.

Joseph Yang is a young community leader and grassroots activist. He currently runs a community organization and serves on the Chandler Police Review Panel. Joseph is the Founder of the East Valley Young Republicans and current assistant state advisor for the TeenAge Republicans. He hosts a show called “The Conservative Seoul Show” that you can find here.