An ending to the ‘complaint game’ in Fountain Hills

Some say eliminating Fountain Hills’ broken ethics policy is the end of democracy. But let’s be honest — this discredited process had stopped being about actual ethics a long time ago.

Once designed to promote integrity, the policy became a lawfare weapon — a moral bludgeon for the perpetually offended. Out of the gate, the new mayor was accused of wrongdoing for taking credit for “budget savings.” Really? The complaint called it demonstrably false. I’d call the complaint demonstrably nonsensical. It wasn’t an ethics violation, it was a thesaurus dispute.

Here’s the unfortunate truth: the policy’s language was so vague that anyone with a personal grudge and a Wi-Fi connection could file a complaint. It wasn’t a code of conduct, it was a weaponized suggestion box pretending to uphold integrity while quietly eroding it.

That said, some complaints were valid; or at least deserved a fair, competent hearing. But even that low bar proved elusive. Because the real kicker wasn’t just the flood of grievances, it was how the outside review process was handled. The town outsourced its ethics adjudication to a real estate attorney — someone whose expertise was more in zoning maps than in ethical deliberation.

In a complaint concerning Councilmember Kalivianakis, the adjudicator issued a blanket “no violations,” delivered without detailed reasoning. At least one major charge was inexplicably left unaddressed. Judicial reviews can’t simply skip a charge! Other points were reframed so loosely they lost all meaning.

It wasn’t a serious analysis, but rather a formality dressed up as fairness. Such questionable outcomes further eroded the ethics process.

Given this dysfunctionality, repeal was inevitable. When it finally occurred, it wasn’t about shielding misconduct. It was about ending a process that turned every interpersonal squabble into a tribunal of moral outrage.

Council didn’t kill ethics — they killed the complaint game.

Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.