By Arizonans for Promoting Integrity
Prescott is no longer a small town. Our once sleepy Daily Courier used to report about stolen bicycles. Lately, the paper’s journalistic integrity rivals that of the National Enquirer reporting on space aliens.
Tim Wiederaenders and the Daily Courier have been fixated on the City of Prescott’s three personnel—not criminal—investigations since last year. Initially they clamored to obtain confidential documents under the premise of needing to know about the former City Manager’s severance package. Once that information was released1, the drumbeat continued.
In February, the Courier reported that, “three documents were leaked by an anonymous source to local media.” Since then, one front page story after another has championed the paper’s quest to force the city to release the investigation reports2. As we understand the latest Courier article3, copies of the investigations have been uploaded to a share file site based in Turkey (yes, the country). The Courier claims that hundreds of people have now read these documents, which they allege are freely available at local businesses around town. There doesn’t seem to be any journalistic purpose at this point for the Courier’s ongoing public records campaign since they readily acknowledge everyone already has access to the documents.
The Courier uses words like “integrity,” “right to know,” “unconscionable,” and “responsibility to the community” in their singular focus to gain access to the investigations. Except the paper’s been off-target since the get-go. Consider this: we have an executive session meeting of seven city council members, the city attorney and possibly one or two other members of city staff where the documents were distributed. Someone in that room betrayed the public trust and broke the law. That person copied and distributed confidential and attorney-client privileged information. The Courier showed an utter lack of journalistic integrity in that they never once considered this important enough to cover—for even a single article4.
Even if we don’t like it, governments can’t function properly without the ability to maintain confidentiality about sensitive matters. The implication when there is a lack of accountability for theft of confidential materials is significant.
Did the Courier ever consider whether first responders would be confident that their complaints or investigations will remain confidential? What about the employees who courageously came forward and participated in these recent investigations who are losing the promise of confidentiality? Do you think it might impact any employee’s willingness to file future complaints, or participate in future investigations, knowing that whatever they say has a good chance of being leaked, or worse, left in a local restaurant or uploaded to a share file site in a foreign country?
We can’t ignore the city’s exposure to potential litigation from the former employees named in the investigations who now routinely appear in internet searches for all prospective employers to see5. And, as we are continually reminded by the Courier, these documents serve as fodder for a dubious recall effort. The fallout is considerable.
What the Courier fails to realize is that someone attending the executive session decided it was more important to substitute THEIR moral authority over a decision made by a seven-member elected city council. The Courier’s job was to call for the city to conduct a full and fair investigation into how and who leaked these investigations. Instead, readers received the paper’s complete abdication of journalistic principles4. City leaders must have the confidence that when they conduct sensitive business there is a respect for the rule of law. Hopefully, the culprit can be identified and held accountable.
Parting shot to whoever was entrusted with confidential city property that day: Your personal sense of morality does not entitle you to break the law.
NOTES:
1“Prescott releases settlement agreement with former city manager.” Cindy Barks, February 15, 2024, The Daily Courier. This article is not behind the Courier’s paywall. You do not have to be a subscriber to read the article.
2 These articles are not behind the Courier’s paywall. You do not have to be a subscriber to read the article.
- “Prescott Docu-gate: questions continue over Prescott mayor’s authority in wake of document leak. Cindy Barks, February 13, 2024, The Daily Courier.
- “Prescott Docu-gate: Effort to recall Prescott mayor continues in midst of leaked document controversy. Cindy Barks, February 10, 2024, The Daily Courier.
- “Prescott Docu-gate: Leaked investigation memos have yet to be officially released by City of Prescott.” Cindy Barks, February 8, 2024, The Daily Courier.
- “Prescott Docu-gate: Confidential settlement agreement with Prescott city manager violated law, says media attorney.” Cindy Barks, February 6, 2024, The Daily Courier.
- “Prescott Docu-gate: Leaked City of Prescott documents continue to circulate in community.” Cindy Barks, Feburary 3, 2024 The Daily Courier.
- “Prescott City Manager Gregory resigns.” Cindy Barks, December 19, 2023, The Daily Courier.
3“Prescott’s leaked investigative reports are now posted online. The City continues to claim attorney-client privilege; refuses to make reports public.” Cindy Barks, March 10, 2024, The Daily Courier. Editorial: Concept of ‘attorney-client privilege’ is gone.” The Daily Courier, March 9, 2024. Note: The Courier has removed provided free access to both of these articles, so non-Courier subscribers can read them.
4 This is in direct contrast to a 2021 Courier column in which Tim Wiederaenders chastised the city for an alleged executive session leak about a potential contract with former City of Prescott Attorney, Jon Paladini’s new law firm.4 “Wiederaenders: City of Prescott, you have a leak.” Tim Wiederaenders, July 26, 2021, The Daily Courier. Wiederaenders describes information he received from citizens about the selection of a new city attorney and concludes the following: “Seems I have been hearing a lot from ‘concerned readers’ for the past several weeks about the city thinking about hiring Paladini’s new firm—even details of what it might cost the city….While I dislike council members doing business—even talking about it—behind closed doors, the concerned readers had too many details. The topics have not been before the City Council proper in public, yet. A call to a council member confirmed my suspicions; what came together in my mind, after double-checking Prescott City Council agendas too, is that the City Council has a leak. Someone attending or listening to those executive sessions, from which no one is legally allowed to share information, has been talking with their friends.”
5None of the Daily Courier articles regarding the investigations are behind their paywall. This means that anyone, not just subscribers, can read the articles. This includes prospective employers of any employees named in the articles. See above footnotes.