It’s election season in Prescott—know how you can tell? The firehose of disinformation and creepy candidate caricatures are flowing freely. This year we have some new players lurking behind the curtain. Or—maybe not so new.
AZFPI originally wrote “Behind the Curtain” in early 2024 to identify the players behind the scene of the failed Mayoral recall attempt.(1) Now as the rhetoric heats up for the August 5 primary election, some of those same players are together again—albeit behind different curtains.
First up is “Eye on Prescott,”(2) the brainchild of Tony Hamer and Chadwick (Chad) Devries.(3) Both were soundly defeated in their run for city council seats in 2023.(4) Following their loss, the duo began hosting a podcast and radio show now broadcast on Prescott Station KYCA 1490. Hamer and DeVries also operate the courthouse square “Prescott Live” webcam atop the Bradford building.
Photo: Eye On Prescott candidate debate
Eye on Prescott recently hosted the self-titled “Prescott’s Ultimate Candidate Debate.” Their marketing flyer featured images of candidates and boxing gloves. This, along with a litany of unabashed pejoratives towards some, convinced several candidates to bow out of the so-called “debate.”(5) Eye on Prescott also posts regularly on social media(6) using unflattering cartoons to make fun of candidates they, or the Political Action Committee (PAC) newcomer, “Prescott United” do not support.
Keeping it all in the family, Michele Hamer is the Treasurer of Prescott United (PU).(7) Like her husband Tony, Michele Hamer also failed in her 2022 election bid to secure a Prescott school board seat.(8) PU/Eye on Prescott collaborate to produce a Substack newsletter (Prescott Pulse) advocating for unrestricted growth by using Prescott’s “alleged” unlimited water supply.(9) Here’s a look at some of their key positions in a bit more detail.
PU opposes Proposition 484 which is on the August 5 ballot. This citizen-driven, city council-referred initiative provides permanent protection of open space ALREADY paid for, maintained, and owned by Prescott taxpayers.(10) Instead, PU maintains open space must remain accessible for a quick sale to developers if the city gets in a financial pinch. PU also argues open space should be readily available for building homes, just in case we run out of housing for future residents.(11) Clearly, if these guys get their way, our city-owned open space properties could be sold upon the decision of only four city council members (two of whom could be PU-supported candidates Henry Ebarb II and Gregory Lazzell).(12)
In June, PU began hawking a new message with a series of articles claiming Prescott has PLENTY of water—especially, they emphasize, if we build the Big Chino pipeline. PU stunningly argues, since the subject of water scarcity only comes up every two years when the city holds elections, it’s not really a concern and shouldn’t even be a campaign issue.(13)
Oh, if only it were true. Unfortunately for PU (and candidates Ebarb II and Lazzell), ongoing research shows they are woefully mistaken. It is well known the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) declared the Prescott AMA to be out of safe yield as far back as 1999 (meaning groundwater withdrawals exceed recharge).(14) Moreover, the most recently published data, compiled over the past 20 years, shows the Prescott AMA basin continues to lose water storage.(15) This depletion rate is significant given groundwater supplies 80%- 90% of our water needs.(16) To suggest otherwise, as PU does—especially without citing any sources—is disingenuous to say the least. And the amount of water available from the Big Chino pipeline remains an open debate, even if current taxpayers could afford the estimated minimum $261.6 million cost to build the pipeline.(17)
Given political PACs such as PU and Save the Dells are among those endorsing candidates, it is helpful to understand the players behind the scenes. City campaign finance reports show local developer and business owner Michael Fann was PU’s largest first-quarter donor, contributing $10,000 of the $25,000 total. His sister, Karen Fann, a participant in the 2024 failed mayoral recall effort, donated $1,000.(18) As already noted, PU supports council candidates Henry Ebarb II and Gregory Lazzell.(19) Save the Dells, a statewide PAC known for advocacy of open space protection, smart growth and careful water resource management,(20) endorses Jim Garing and Mary Fredrickson for city council seats.(21) (Council candidate Jay Ruby did not seek any PAC endorsements).
Interestingly, PU does not endorse a candidate for Mayor while Save the Dells endorses former city council member, Cathey Rusing. Both Rusing and her opponent, Brandon Montoya, have recent records voters can evaluate. Both have strong supporters and detractors. But if a candidate’s integrity is a tiebreaker for you, consider this: The Mayor and each city council member take an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States, Arizona, and the City of Prescott. In 2024, the city council directed the city attorney to conduct three confidential investigations into events surrounding the termination of the airport director and the city manager’s employment. Soon after the investigations concluded, someone leaked those reports to various media outlets, and ultimately the public. So why was Brandon Montoya the only council member to consult outside legal counsel and (subsequently) refuse to sign an affidavit simply swearing he did not disclose these confidential reports? According to the Prescott City Attorney, the affidavit protected both the city’s Attorney-Client Privilege and potential liability over the illegal release of these reports.(22)
We suggest this mayoral election may not be decided solely on issues but rather will include voters’ perceptions about candidate integrity. And that is something where past performance in elected office is instructive.
ENDNOTES
(1) https://azfpi.org/growth/misuse-of-the-prescott-mayor-recall-process-whos-behind-the-curtain/ AZFPI wrote about the “Misuse of the Prescott Mayor Recall Process: Who’s Behind the Curtain?” in early 2024. And surprisingly, the players in the room included this odd alliance; those who wanted the city to make social justice issues a priority, and long-time commercial and residential developers, politicians, car dealers, and real estate attorneys whose priorities were, and are, land development.
(2) The Arizona Corporation Commission shows “Eye on Prescott” was formed December 2, 2023. The statutory agent is Michele Hamer, spouse of board member Tony Hamer. Michele Hamer is also the Treasurer of the Prescott United Political Action Committee, formed in January, 2025 (see City of Prescott Statement of Organization). “Eye on Prescott” incorporated as an educational services entity. As a private LLC, “Eye on Prescott” is not required to disclose its finances.
(3) https://azfpi.org/ethics/take-a-close-look-at-prescott-city-council-candidate-chad-devries/
(4) https://www.yavapaivotes.gov/Elections/Election-Results
(5) May 5, 2025, Prescott Pulse Substack, “Let’s Get Ready to Debate, Montoya v. Rusing” flyer. https://substack.com/home/post/p-162934908
(6) In addition to posting distorted cartoons on social media and in flyers, Eye on Prescott and PU have used proprietary logos on social media of organizations they oppose without permission. This tactic has prompted several organizations to issue cease and desist requests to PU.
(7) According to their written materials, Prescott United is registered as a City of Prescott PAC and was originally formed to oppose the city’s proposed 2025 General Plan and Ballot Proposition 484 – Charter Protection for City-Owned Open Space. Public comments have made it obvious the 2025 General Plan is disliked (albeit for many different reasons). Therefore, this is hardly a bell-weather issue for voters. PU, and its newsletter “Prescott Pulse” recently began advocating for no limits on growth and water use, with little if any documentation substantiating their claims about the plentiful water supply. As of this writing, the “Prescott Pulse” had 301 subscribers. See April 23, 2025, Prescott Pulse Substack, “Open Space Forever, Prescott Weighs a Lasting Decision in August.” https://prescottpulse.substack.com/p/open-space-forever-prescott-weighs?utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fprescott%2520pulse&utm_medium=reader2
May 13, 2025, Prescott Pulse Substack, “Prescott’s 2025 Plan: A Bureaucratic HOA in Disguise.
https://prescottpulse.substack.com/p/prescotts-2025-plan-a-bureaucratic
Beginning on June 11, 2025, five-part series: “Whiskey’s for Drinkin’, Water’s for Fightin’.”
https://substack.com/@prescottpulse/p-165863223
Candidate Lazzell’s website also references “Whiskey’s for Drinkin’, Water’s for Fightin’” and the need to discuss the Big Chino. https://www.lazzell4prescott.com/priorities
Candidate Ebarb II’s website references sustainable water management practices, but offers no specifics. https://www.ebarbforprescott.com/
(8) See endnote 4.
(9) See endnote 7.
(10) Currently Acker Park and portions of Watson and Willow Lakes are protected in perpetuity by the City Charter. Thumb Butte is protected by a Conservation Easement. On February 25, 2025, the Prescott City Council approved resolution 2025-1914 authorizing the question of open space protection to appear on the August 5 primary election ballot by a vote of five in favor, with two dissenting. Council Member Cathey Rusing made the motion in favor, which was seconded by Council Member Eric Moore. Mayor Phil Goode and Council Member Ted Gambogi were the two dissenting votes. On March 25, 2025 the City Council approved the actual ballot language. Proposition 484 provides charter protection to over 2,750 existing acres of city-owned open space, including 24 properties and 95 parcels (see Prescott City Council Voting Meeting Minutes dated February 25, 2025). This includes protection for properties such as the Granite Dells, Goldwater Lake, Little Thumb Butte, Peavine Trail, Constellation Trail, Centennial Trail, and many others. Proposition 484 does not preclude the city from selling open space in the future. It simply requires voter approval. Candidate Lazzell does not mention open space protection on his website’s list of priorities. https://www.lazzell4prescott.com/priorities
(11) See endnote 7.
(12) Arizona Revised Statutes (16-925) requires candidates to disclose who pays for their campaign advertising such as signs. Numerous 4’ x 4’ joint campaign signs for Ebarb II and Lazzell show they are paid for by “Prescott United.” A formal campaign complaint was filed against Brandon Montoya for failing to disclose who is paying for his signs. Montoya’s signs have since been corrected noting they are paid for by the “Brandon Montoya for City Council Campaign Committee.” Why is it that Brandon Montoya is not complying with Arizona Revised Statutes section 16-905 (B)? This statute states “a candidate for election or retention SHALL register as a candidate committee if the candidate receives contributions or makes expenditures, in any combination, of at least five hundred dollars in connection with that candidacy.” Simply put, now that Montoya is running for a new office (Mayor of Prescott), why is he still using an old campaign committee (city council)?
(13) See endnote 7. To substantiate their claims, Prescott Pulse’s first article on water cites the opinion of a retired, former, untitled and “nameless” employee with the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR). This “retired employee’s” supposed opinions contradict current information on ADWR’s website and the most recent scientific studies (see endnotes 14 and 15).
(14) https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/gw/fs/00-13_pama_fs.pdf
(15) Abdelmohsen, K, Famiglietti, F. et.al. (May 2025) Declining Freshwater Availability in the Colorado River Basin Threatens Sustainability of Its Critical Groundwater Supplies, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 52 Issue 10, Figure 3. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025GL115593
The City of Prescott also maintains a webpage devoted to water supply data, water policy, and water issues, debunking PU’s claim that water issues only surface during elections. https://prescott-az.gov/water-resource-mgmt/current-supplies/
(16) See endnote 15.
(17) In order to build the Big Chino pipeline to provide water for new growth, construction costs would fall on current rate payers in the city’s water system. Repayment would occur over many years via impact fees, as new development is built. This essentially means all Prescott water rate payers and the few who are outside the city receiving Prescott water will “front” the costs for constructing the pipeline with soaring water rates. In addition, there are impacts to the Verde River Flow. Big Chino Pipeline costs have been estimated at a minimum of $261.6 million and potentially as high as $340 million. The City of Prescott has already spent $37 million on feasibility studies. Any forward movement is expected to take at least eight years when the cost to build a pipeline could be much higher. Environmental groups including the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity, as well as the Salt River Project (SRP) may be motivated to sue over potential damage to the Verde River’s flow, delaying the project further and increasing potential costs. https://www.dcourier.com/news/big-chino-water-ranch-updated-cost-estimate-up-for-prescott-council-review-tuesday/article_43c7bdfa-feac-11ee-b488-7f2f6a608d5b.html
https://cwagaz.org/our-water-supply/solutions/big-chino-pipeline
(18) First quarter Campaign Finance Reports from candidates and groups can be found by searching the City of Prescott’s Public Records Portal, Elections Section. The first quarter Campaign Finance Report for Prescott United lists donor contributions. Second quarter financial reports and pre-election financial reports are not due until after ballots are sent out on July 9 (reports are due July 21 and July 26 respectively). By the time these reports are posted by the city, many residents will have already voted. Ironically, Terry Sapio, Chair of the General Plan Committee since November 2023, is listed as a first quarter donor to Prescott United’s effort to stop the General Plan according to PU’s first quarter financial report. AZFPI wrote about Karen Fann’s role as a member of the Mayoral recall committee here: https://azfpi.org/growth/misuse-of-the-prescott-mayor-recall-process-whos-behind-the-curtain/
(19) This article is focused on candidate endorsements for the upcoming election by Political Action Committees (PACs). Candidate websites, radio commercials and other advertising materials may (and do) include endorsements by individuals and other groups in addition to PACs Save the Dells or Prescott United. It is not our intention to imply that candidates may only be endorsed by one of these two groups, or not at all.
(20) Save the Dells is a standing political PAC registered with the State of Arizona. Their financial reports with donors are made to the state and not the City of Prescott. Save the Dells’ Treasurer, Rod Moyer, also serves as the treasurer for Cathey Rusing’s two previous city council races and current mayoral race.
(21) See endnote 19.
(22) AZFPI received copies of a public records request that included letters from Montoya’s attorney and the response from the Prescott City Attorney.
Excerpt – Letter dated March 6, 2024 from Montoya’s Attorney:
“Please be advised that our office has been retained to represent Brandon Montoya regarding the Affidavit of Non-Disclosure which has been presented to him to sign and a request that he undergo a polygraph test. We understand that similar requests have been made to the other members of the Prescott City Council and to the Mayor of Prescott. It is our opinion that it would not be appropriate for Council Member Montoya to execute an Affidavit pertaining to matters which were the subject of his official duties as a council member, which occurred in Executive Session. Frankly, we are not aware of a similar request having been made by any municipality to its council members.”
Excerpt – Letter dated March 7, 2024 from Prescott City Attorney:
“I have received your letter dated March 6, 2024 regarding your client Brandon Montoya. In your letter you state that you have advised Mr. Montoya regarding the Affidavit of Non-Disclosure relating to certain documents released from City custody, and a polygraph examination. I appreciate your letter, but I feel I must clarify a few items.
…As to the Affidavit of Non-Disclosure, council has directed me to continue making all efforts to maintain the attorney-client privilege with relation to the released documents. Case law is clear that even when a document is leaked or stolen, it can maintain its attorney-client privilege as long as certain steps are taken. One of those steps is to limit distribution, and to then obtain such affidavits from those within that limited distribution.”
7 thoughts on “Behind the Curtain Part II: Prescott’s Election – Deborah Thalasitis, Mary Beth Hrin, Toni Denis”
In the immortal words of the late Senator Alan K. Simpson from Wyoming:
“If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don’t have integrity, nothing else matters.”
Great article! It should be expanded, or at least reprinted, once ballots go out so it’s fresh in voters minds.
Living in Prescott Valley for 22 years, I have followed local politics and especially our lack of annual water supplies. In the last 25-30 years our new water from Mother Nature has dropped 20%. Yet, our population has more than doubled in our Water District. Ranchers and developers are GREEDY and choose to ignore and/or distort the truth about water. This article points out the facts and concerns of electing the right people to protect current residents into the future. Cut and paste this article and send to all your friends and neighbors! Your home value and quality of life are at stake in this Prescott Election. Read and vote!
Hello, I came across this article. Thank you for the very informative article.
If we do not elect the right folks who care about water issues and wholesale development, Prescott area will have water issues in 10-15 years.
Praful
Thank you for revealing what’s behind the curtain. You probably won’t be shocked to learn that Michael Fann knows no limits on the grotesque abuse of his position as the “Board” of the Granite Dells Property Owners Association to serve his profit and political agenda. During the recall election campaign, like all the members of the Association, I received an unsolicited email from his
“community manager” that was highly critical of of Mayor Goode. Despite the fact this had nothing to do with the purposes of the Association, he strongly urged all members sign the recall petition and vote YES in the election. Undeterred by that spectacular failure, it seems he just can’t keep his hands off the members’ contact information for his personal use. Now, he’s trying to manipulate the members to oppose Prop. 484. Not surprisingly, after reading this article and learning about his close association with PU, he’s pushing the members to attend a “nonpartisan information session focused on Prop 482 and 484” conveniently located at the Association clubhouse. If you think Fann is capable of being “nonpartisan” about anything that threatens his business interests, I’ve got a bridge in Lake Havasu to sell you.
Thank you for publishing this article, which confirms what some of us in Prescott have known for some time. Ebarb and Lazzell did not even bother to participate in CWAG’s recent candidates forum and with his previous behavior, Montoya has proven he is not trustworthy to be Prescott’s next mayor. Water depletion is our biggest problem and the local development cabal continues to bury their heads in the sand.
Thank you for your informative article. Everyone in Prescott should be aware with water shortages across the state. Katie Hobbs and other AZ water Agencies are pushing toilet to tap water here just like California. If you haven’t already, you’ll be seeing pop up booths with the toilet to tap water bottled for all to try. Why, they’ll even have swag at these events, so you’ll remember how great it was. They will of course insure this water is completely safe because it goes through one additional filtration process. Be sure to ask if their “recycled” water is filtered for medications or other impurities. Just make sure you don’t refer to it as toilet to tap, which is what it is.
Comments are closed.