Payson's Controversial $70M Bond: Residents Cry Foul Over Alleged Constitutional Violations

In a move that has sparked outrage among Payson residents, the town council has approved a $70 million bond resolution, drawing the ire of a local resident who claims the decision was made without proper voter input. The Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank, has announced its intention to assist the resident in taking legal action against the town, arguing that officials used a "loophole" to circumvent the constitutional rights of citizens.

Payson Residents Cry Foul Over Alleged Constitutional Violations

Payson Approves $70M Bond Resolution, Sparking Controversy

The town of Payson, Arizona, has recently approved a $70 million bond resolution, a move that has drawn significant criticism from a local resident. Deborah Rose, a Payson resident, has announced plans to sue the town, alleging that officials used an "emergency clause" to bypass the constitutional right of citizens to challenge the measure through a voter referendum.According to the lawsuit, the town council passed the resolution last month to authorize the sale of $70 million in bonds, citing the "emergency clause" as the justification. This clause, which is permitted under Arizona law, can be used "for the immediate preservation of the peace, health or safety of the city or town." However, the lawsuit claims that Payson officials provided no information explaining why the emergency clause was necessary, aside from the prospect of obtaining more "favorable interest rates."

Goldwater Institute Joins the Fight, Seeks Preliminary Injunction

The Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank, has announced that it will be assisting Deborah Rose in her legal action against the town of Payson. The institute argues that the town officials used a "loophole" to violate the constitutional rights of its citizens by not allowing them the opportunity to challenge the measure through a voter referendum.The Goldwater Institute is now asking the courts to issue a preliminary injunction to stop the measure, as well as order Payson to not pass any future measures without giving local voters the chance to organize a referendum and vote on it. This move is seen as a direct challenge to the town's decision-making process and a defense of the constitutional rights of Payson residents.

Payson's Justification: Favorable Interest Rates and Facility Upgrades

According to the lawsuit, Payson officials claimed that the use of the "emergency clause" was justified by the prospect of obtaining more "favorable interest rates" on the bond sale. Town documents indicate that Payson officials were interested in issuing the bonds sooner rather than later, as they believed they could "benefit from issuing in early September to get ahead of the expected increased supply and competing sales."The bond money is expected to finance the upgrading of the town's facilities and the construction of a possible community center, as reported by the Payson Roundup. However, the lawsuit argues that this justification is not sufficient to warrant the use of the emergency clause, as it does not meet the legal criteria of "immediate preservation of the peace, health or safety of the city or town."

Residents Demand Transparency and Accountability

The controversy surrounding the $70 million bond resolution has sparked outrage among Payson residents, who feel that the town council has acted in a manner that undermines their constitutional rights. The Goldwater Institute's involvement in the legal action has further amplified the calls for transparency and accountability from the town's leadership.Residents are demanding that Payson officials provide a clear and compelling explanation for the use of the emergency clause, beyond the mere prospect of obtaining favorable interest rates. They argue that the town's decision-making process should be subject to the scrutiny of the public, and that citizens should have the opportunity to challenge such measures through a voter referendum.The outcome of this legal battle will have significant implications for the town of Payson, as it will set a precedent for how local governments can utilize bond financing and the extent to which they must involve the public in their decision-making processes. The case has also drawn national attention, with the Goldwater Institute's involvement highlighting the broader debate over the balance between government authority and citizen rights.