Citizen members of RTA committees threatened with dismissal

Four members of the Regional Transportation Authority’s citizen committees have been sent notices of their potential dismissal for making “reckless claims” after expressing concerns about RTA operations.

All four volunteer members represent the city of Tucson in committees charged with developing a new 20-year transportation plan and overseeing the current $2.1 billion RTA plan voters approved a half-cent sales tax to fund in 2006.

Members of the citizens’ committees have expressed frustration with the ongoing process of deciding what an RTA Next will look like, citing difficulty placing items on agendas, inconvenient midday meeting times working members have difficulty attending and a harsh interpretation of Open Meeting Law they say stymies discussions.

The four letters of potential dismissal include the same warning from RTA Executive Director Farhad Moghimi: if the committee member persists with the alleged violations, he wrote, “I will request that the RTA Board remove you from the (citizens’ committee).”

The notices Moghimi sent on Dec. 1 and Dec. 5 all cite “making reckless claims” or “allegations” that violate the code of conduct as a basis for potential dismissal, but do not explain why said claims lack merit.

“(Citizens’ committee) members are sort of a conduit between the public and this process,” said Abby Okrent, a recipient of one of the notices who’s also an assistant public defender at the Pima County Public Defender’s office, and has used her legal knowledge to push back against RTA staff’s claims. “If we’re being cut off, I don’t think that speaks well for how the broader public is going to have any input into this plan.”

Moghimi, on the other hand, said, “some PAG employees, including me, are being harassed and intimidated for performing our contractual and fiduciary responsibilities and for holding a few members accountable for violation of law or PAG’s code of conduct.” PAG, the Pima Association of Governments, is the metropolitan planning organization that oversees the various RTA-related committees.

The PAG Regional Council, a nine-member board of Pima County’s jurisdictions and the Arizona State Transportation Board, met for three hours on Nov. 3 and for two hours on Dec. 8 to discuss “complaints by PAG staff regarding harassment and retaliation,” but never announced legal action. Since the conversations are “confidential or privileged matters,” Moghimi said, he couldn’t clarify if the letters were the result of discussions that took place behind closed doors or if they spell out the totality of the harassment concerns.

All four recipients of the notices said they did not receive a clear warning that their conduct could amount to a potential dismissal before receiving the notices, and many of the actions cited in the letters involve concerns expressed or emails sent out months ago.

The issues surrounding the RTA’s committees come at a critical time as the citizens’ committee is helping to develop another $2 billion plan to bring before voters while the RTA grapples with funding the remaining projects promised to voters — most of which are in the city limits.

At the City Council’s Dec. 6 meeting, Tucson Mayor Regina Romero said she was limited in what she could say as part of the board that discussed harassment allegations in executive session, but said the concerns brought up by citizens’ committee members are “just more barriers to the city of Tucson to be able to continue forward.”

Letters of potential dismissal

Rachel Wilson has been trying to get on the citizens’ committee since 2018. After suffering retinal damage, she’s no longer able to drive and experiences difficulty performing simple tasks such as picking up a prescription, going grocery shopping or meeting up with friends without the ability to drive.

Wilson got on a spot on the citizens’ committee in 2022 as a new member from Tucson with hopes “to make mobility in Tucson better.” The citizens’ committee is tasked with prioritizing which projects will go into the next RTA that could go before voters as soon as 2024.

“The ability to go places is at the heart of freedom, and when you can’t go places because you can’t drive, you are kind of imprisoned,” Wilson said. “That’s why I’m so desperate to try to make things better.”

Tucson’s new citizens’ committee members resulted from a concession the city made at the beginning of the year when Tucson vowed to leave the RTA by Feb. 1 unless it had more of a say in the board’s decision-making processes. The city agreed to a compromise that involved increasing city-designated members on key RTA committees and decided to stay at the table.

But Wilson and other citizens’ committee members said they haven’t been able to fully discuss issues that matter to them most, like transit capacity and pedestrian safety. Instead, the committee is sorting through road corridor projects submitted by each jurisdiction using a project evaluation tool.

Moghimi said per RTA statutes, “the new plan has to identify corridors by name and then propose improvements” and “Once the named projects are identified the (citizens’ committee) chair will be ready to move on to the other elements of the draft plan.”

Wilson said keeping up with committee tasks has become like a “part-time job” in addition to her career as an immigration lawyer. Lately, those tasks have included pushing back against RTA staff for what she called “roadblock after roadblock,” the latest being a notice that her conduct could cause her to be removed from the committee.

Members have said they’re discouraged from speaking outside of meetings, and when trying to relay information for future discussions, are told Open Meeting Law prevents them from doing so. Some committee members have pointed to indications that Moghimi and RTA Board members aren’t following PAG’s own interpretation of the law — an allegation that spurred some of the letters threatening committee members’ removal.

Download PDF

The letters of dismissal also accuse citizen members of breaking PAG’s code of conduct. The list of rules committee members must abide by notes: “It is not possible to list all the forms of behavior that are considered unacceptable while participating on PAG committees,” but provides examples such as “Making false accusations or filing false report of wrongdoing” and “Disrespectful conduct.”

Wilson emailed the RTA Board on Oct. 7 after she received a records request that showed a memo Marana Mayor Ed Honea sent the citizens’ committee echoed similar language Moghimi had emailed Honea weeks before.

Moghimi has since clarified his email that listed suggested changes to the citizen committee’s guiding principles — which included getting rid of the phrase “mitigate for environmental impacts” and removing “equity” as a consideration for RTA Next projects — was reiterating a conversation the executive director previously had with Honea and were not his suggestions.

Wilson cited the similarities between Moghimi’s email and Honea’s memo in her email: “RTA staff has actively cried “Open Meeting Law violation!” at us every time we ask for more open communication, and it appears that Mr. Moghimi’s secret conversations with members of the (Technical Management Committee) might actually be (Open Meeting Law) violations,” she wrote.

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

That email constituted a “reckless claim,” according to Moghimi’s notice to Wilson of her potential dismissal.

Both Tucson City Attorney Mike Rankin and Daniel Barr, an attorney with nearly 40 years of experience in media and political law, have questioned PAG’s Open Meeting Law policies, which include prohibiting committee members from emailing each other or meeting in person outside of committee meetings to discuss items that may come up in official discussions.

Rankin told Tucson’s mayor and council at a Nov. 14 meeting that if PAG’s interpretation of the Open Meeting Law was “in fact how the Open Meeting Law applied to members of a public body, the members of the public body could not responsibly carry out their functions.”

Barr said the Open Meeting Law “does not prohibit people less than a quorum of the public body discussing issues.” A potential violation could arise if a quorum is established outside committee meetings — which would take 17 members of the 33-member citizens’ committee.

Moghimi argues at least two members could form a quorum based on the varying memberships of the three subcommittees that some committee members participate in. PAG’s attorney Thomas Benavidez also weighed in on the matter, writing in a memo, “The law must be interpreted to apply broadly to prevent inadvertent violation.”

Download PDF

While Wilson’s potential dismissal was partially based on “reckless claims” of suggesting Honea and Moghimi violated Open Meeting Law, Abby Okrent’s warning included an allegation that she broke the law when she emailed the entire citizens’ committee.

Paki Rico, PAG’s community affairs administrator, emailed citizens’ committee members clarifying a point of confusion discussed at a previous meeting: that transit is a component of the RTA plan, and should not be considered a priority. Okrent replied to the entire committee — an action PAG’s attorneys consider an Open Meeting Law violation — disagreeing with the interpretation.

Okrent, an attorney, said, “I do not concede that sending emails to the list with informational items such as news articles, or the literal statute guiding our work, is a violation of the open meetings laws. I found the (notice of dismissal) to be a little bit incoherent. But the message is very clear. The message is meant to silence any sort of dissent, or sharing of what’s happening with the public or with our elected officials,” she said.

Ruth Reiman, a Tucson resident and member of the RTA’s CART Committee that monitors delivery of current RTA projects, received a notice of her potential dismissal for accusing “the CART chair, Charline Robinson, of derelictions of her duties on multiple occasions,” Moghimi wrote.

Download PDF

The warning, Reiman said, is likely the result of her frequent emails to Robinson in unsuccessful attempts to place items on the agenda.

“I have been rather aggressive in my approach, but I started off nice,” Reiman said. “It’s (Robinson’s) responsibility to see that the committee fulfills its mission, and by avoiding these topics, she’s not fulfilling the mission of the committee. If that’s accusing her of dereliction of duty, I guess that’s what I did. But whether it’s grounds for dismissal is kind of ridiculous.”

Amanda Maass, another Tucson member of the citizens’ committee, was told she accused “the RTA Board members, and staff, of interfering with RTA plan development process or violating the RTA’s rules,” Moghimi wrote. “PAG staff have reported your inappropriate conduct, and the CAC Chair has discussed these concerns with you previously.”

Moghimi attached a July email to the warning letter from the citizens’ committee chair, Tom McGovern, who told Moghimi he communicated to Maass at an in-person meeting “that some staffers are feeling harassed by her” and “she acknowledged these complaints and expressed that she in no way has intended to harass anyone.”

According to Maass, the conversation went much differently than McGovern’s email portrays. While the chair did bring up staff’s concerns, she said, he didn’t provide any specific details of how her actions amounted to harassment.

Download PDF

“I was aware that staff were unhappy with people emailing them, but I was told by (McGovern) that he didn’t see any bad behavior from me that would raise concern,” Maass said. “I will categorically deny that that email accurately summarizes the communication … I was never sent a summary of it acknowledging that I agreed with it.”

Moghimi said the committee members “were first counseled by the Chair, then the entire committee received a reminder memo from the attorney reminding them of the open meeting law and compliance with our rules and then another memo from the chair asking them to comply with the code of conduct before finally individuals received a notice of potential dismissal.”

But none of the four recipients say they were alerted their actions could lead to dismissal from their respective committees prior to receiving Moghimi’s letters.

Okrent said she “never construed any of the general admonishment emails about those things to be directed at my behavior.” None of the committee members report one-on-one meetings with the chairs of their committees that specifically outlined any wrongdoing.

Moghimi was unable to provide definitions for what PAG considers a “reckless claim,” “retaliation” or “harassment,” and instead said, “concerns are reviewed on a case-by-case basis.”

Mayor Regina Romero has taken a different tone on the matter, and suggested at the city council’s Dec. 6 meeting that a third-party attorney weigh in on the issue.

“We’re trying to do everything we possibly can to work with other jurisdictions and the executive director, but it just seems as though there’s roadblock after roadblock put in front of us, and not by my colleague jurisdictions,” Romero said.