PAC says Supreme Court is next

By Bob Hembree
Posted 7/17/24

The Page Action Committee’s (PAC) referendum was rejected by Coconino County Superior Court and again by the Appellate Court. Judges sided with the City of Page. PAC chairperson Debra …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

PAC says Supreme Court is next

Posted

The Page Action Committee’s (PAC) referendum was rejected by Coconino County Superior Court and again by the Appellate Court. Judges sided with the City of Page. PAC chairperson Debra Roundtree, speaking in the “Hear from the citizens” part of the July 10 Page City Council meeting, said the PAC filed a request for the Arizona Supreme Court to review the case.

Roundtree accused the City of Page and its attorneys of submitting misleading legal briefs to the Appellate Court. “Many have concerns about the legal brief submitted by the City of Page, which is believed to have contained misrepresentations that misled the judges,” said Roundtree.

At the July 10 City Council meeting, Mayor Bill Diak asked City Attorney Josh Smith about the new development.

“There's not a whole lot to present at this time,” said Smith. “As you know, we got a decision last week from the Appellate Court which upheld the Superior Court which ruled in the city's favor. There has been a request to the Supreme Court to review that Appellate Court decision. The Supreme Court does not have to review it. We don't have any scheduling orders or anything right now. I don't know what the schedule looks like, whether it'll be expedited or not expedited. The county will not publish it on the ballot this year in November either way because we've missed their deadlines.”

If the PAC’s claims convince the Arizona Supreme Court to review the case, the City of Page and its taxpayers are in for more legal expenses. “Since she [Roundtree] started this stuff, we have spent well over a hundred thousand dollars in defending ourselves,” said Mayor Diak. “For what? For doing the right thing. And people don't see that or they don't care. I don't know. You know, everything that she's been saying is her truth; it's not necessarily the truth. It's seen through her eyes. And obviously, that's not holding up in a court of law because two occasions now that has been refuted, not [by] us, but two judges, two courts.”