The Payson Town Council met in regular session on September 9, 2026, beginning at 4:00 p.m. in the Town Hall Council Chambers, 303 North Beeline Highway, Payson, Arizona. The agenda and materials date the meeting to 2026; the transcript's opening recitation says '2025,' which appears to be a transcription error. The council handled consent items, heard extensive public comment, received a Main Street mixed-use presentation, conducted two public hearings, approved updated building codes and naming resolutions, and tabled a property proposal to the next meeting.
I call this regular meeting of the common council of the town of Payson to order September 9th, 2025. Lori Thompson, will you do the invocation? Dear Heavenly Father, we just thank you so much for all you've given us here in Payson for this wonderful community, this wonderful nature that you just allow us to be a part of. We ask that you bless this staff. Please bless our first responders and protect them. Please watch over the council as they serve this community. We just ask that you lead this meeting and just lead these decisions. Please help to heal the hearts of the town of Payson and bring this community together in Jesus' name. Amen. Public comments are limited to matters within the legal authority and jurisdiction of the town. Speakers shall state their name before speaking. Comments shall be addressed to the council as a whole. Comments shall be limited to three minutes per person at the conclusion of the call to public. Okay. Um want to move on to another subject. Uh when I first came to town 24 years ago, I started working with Cameron. Anybody remember Cameron, uh Park District? Uh we our subject was to get girls' softball here in the summertime uh tournaments. And uh we were quite successful, and that is still going on today. The beautiful thing about that is that when the girls come to town, the parents come to town, they spend the weekend, they stay in our hotels, they eat at our restaurants, and a Gebinet generates tax revenue. Now I'd make a suggestion. For uh a number of years, my wife and I uh uh can't RV down at McDowell Mountain RV park down in uh Fountain Hills, and all the all winter long, we would see RVs pulling in there and pop-ups going up, and kids running around in their bicycles, and they would have motocross. You know, that's bike racing without motors. And this would go on all winter long down there. But in the summer, it was deserted. So, where would those same people like to go in the summertime? I'd say let's build a motor track motocross track and let's do the same thing. Bring some more revenue to town through the hotels and the restaurants and taxes by attracting families, and it's families that are getting out and doing that. Um last subject I'd like to touch on is I have lived overseas 10 years, and I've lived uh in other countries, traveled the world, and I want to tell you you want to fix your traffic problem in Payson, get rid of the street lights. It's gonna happen, it's gonna happen one of those days. There's gonna be no more street lights, it's gonna be roundabouts. Leave it to A dot, they're overkill, but it can be done. Thank you. Thank you. Richard Wayon. I've been here for 24 years myself. Um I just I my big concern that we're having is that even though you have uh put on the table the this contract or renewal of a contract, my concern about um these surveillance cameras will be resurrected at some point again in the future. So uh I would just like to say that in regard to Flock, uh Garrett Langley, who's a CEO of Flock Safety, gives you the impression that the company is uh private entity, which it's not. It works with municipalities and private public uh partnerships and desires to flee the taxpayers of the land, hard-earned money to surveil the people. In other words, we're using our own money to have us being watched, and that goes against our constitution, uh the fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments. Um there is no such service to the community, but means for lawful private citizens to accept their guilt in the case of a matter in which they're charged without due process. There is no volition in the transaction between the purchaser of the services being uh the government and flock, where it hands over tax dollars to flock without input from lawful citizens. Uh this is nothing more than a government bailout to flock for the most part against the wishes of the people. It it is dubious to say that the majority consent to being surveilled and against the uh uh surveilled and and forced to pay ransom for the most part to conniving businessmen like uh Mr. Langley. Um I would just say that these guys look uh they're looking for more income without our consent as such. It is dubious to say that the majority consent to being surveilled and are forced to pay this. And I would say that if it were the marketplace, uh Flock would not be able to survive without that. The middleman is the government, and the government essentially is uh allowing uh or forcing us to pay for something that we honestly don't want. Uh by using a private company like Flock, uh, the government skirts around the Constitution.