Tempe broke the law during Coyotes arena talks, attorney general says

Editor's note: An earlier version of this story misstated the approval process for the contract with Strategy Forty-Eight. It was approved by the Tempe city manager at the time, not the city council.


In November and December 2022, while Tempe explored a possible arena development to woo the Arizona Coyotes to town, the city council held three closed-door meetings. During these meetings, Mayor Corey Woods and councilmembers received reports from Strategy Forty-Eight, a consulting group the council had hired to monitor social media opposition to the arena plan.

By excluding the public, the meetings were illegal, according to the office of Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes. In a letter received by the Tempe city attorney on Oct. 12, Mayes’ office said the three sessions with Strategy Forty-Eight violated Arizona’s open meetings law.

As a result of the ruling, councilmembers must “receive training on the Open Meeting Law” by Dec. 9, according to the letter. The training materials have to be approved by the attorney general. Tempe also must “prominently display” the letter about the violation on its website for six months.

Tempe cannot appeal the decision, said Richie Taylor, communications director for the attorney general’s office.

The city hired the consulting group on Oct. 15, 2022. According to its contract, Strategy Forty-Eight was paid to “identify social media pages and groups that could provide a platform for project opposition to publicize their concerns” and “analyze digital media stories and posts to better understand potential opposition messaging strategy.”

The contract with Strategy Forty-Eight was signed by the city manager at the time and fell under the dollar threshold that required council approval. In a separate letter sent last week, the attorney general’s office ruled that the city did nothing improper by signing the contract.

However, the council then held three more executive session meetings with Strategy Forty-Eight — on Nov. 3, Nov. 22 and Dec. 15, 2022 — to receive reports on the firm’s work. Those meetings did violate the law and should have been held publicly, the attorney general’s office said.

The city council ultimately terminated the contract with the consulting firm on Dec. 23, 2022, but not before paying it $32,000 to surveil the internet for anti-arena posts. Tempe voters ultimately rejected the Coyotes arena plan in a May 2023 referendum after a major organizing effort against the plan from organizations such as Tempe 1st.

Earlier this year, after playing a season at the 5,000-seat Mullett Arena in Tempe, the Coyotes officially moved to Salt Lake City.

“The state Attorney General's office issued a correct opinion,” said Tempe 1st founder Ron Tapscott in a written statement to Phoenix New Times. “But it appears Mayor Corey Woods and Council would rather deflect the issue. Rather than accepting responsibility for this misadvised adventure. They would rather hide behind public relations and marketing.”

Prominently displayed?

It does appear Tempe isn’t quite abiding by the attorney general’s requirements. As of Tuesday afternoon, the city website's homepage featured a press release referencing the first letter from the attorney general’s office. “No violations found by Arizona Attorney General's Office regarding Arizona Coyotes referendum election,” it pronounced.

The letter about the open meetings violations, which the city was required to “prominently display,” is more difficult to find. Early Tuesday afternoon, Tempe City Attorney Eric Anderson told New Times where it was: relegated to the very bottom of the city clerk’s webpage.

When asked if he thought the letter was prominently displayed, Anderson replied, “It is, in my opinion, yeah.”

Within two hours of Anderson’s conversation with New Times, the city added another press release to its website. It featured a noticeably neutral title: “Arizona Attorney General's Office makes determination on Strategy 48 contract and reports.”

That release, dated three days before its posting, does not flatly say the city violated the open meeting law. The opening sentence, which references the first letter from Mayes’ office about the contract with Strategy Forty-Eight, gives the opposite impression. Later, the release notes that “some reports given by Strategy 48 during Executive Sessions were not permissible topics” for the three meetings.

“Tempe City Council had no reason to consider that the Strategy 48 updates were not in compliance with Open Meeting Law,” the release added.

As for the required training on open meeting law, Tempe spokesperson Kris Baxter-Ging told said the city attorney “provided Open Meeting Law training” to the council at a retreat in June.

“The city attorney will provide those training materials to the AG and discuss any additional training that might be necessary,” Baxter-Ging said.