DOCSLIB.ORG

City of Phoenix, Arizona General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City of Phoenix, Arizona General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2017 NEW ISSUE — BOOK-ENTRY-ONLY RATINGS: Fitch: AA+ Moody’s: Aa1 S&P: AA+ reliminary PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED MAY 25, 2017 n in which such In the opinion of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Bond Counsel, assuming continuing compliance with certain tax covenants and the accuracy of certain representations of the City, under existing statutes, regulations, rulings and court decisions, interest on the Bonds will be excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. Interest on the Bonds will not be an item of tax preference for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals and corporations, however, interest on the Bonds will be taken into account in determining adjusted current earnings for purposes of computing the alternative minimum tax imposed on certain corporations. See “TAX EXEMPTION-General” herein for a description of certain other federal tax consequences of ownership of the Bonds. Bond Counsel is further of the opinion that the interest on the Bonds will be exempt from income taxation under the laws of the State of Arizona. See also “TAX EXEMPTION- Original Issue Discount and -Original Issue Premium” herein. $70,255,000* CITY OF PHOENIX, ARIZONA General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2017 Dated: Date of Delivery Due: July 1, as shown on the inside front cover Principal of, and premium, if any, on the General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2017 (the “Bonds”) of the City of Phoenix Arizona (the “City”) are payable at the designated office of U.S. Bank National Association, Phoenix, Arizona, as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent (the “Bond Registrar”). The Bonds are issued only as fully registered bonds without coupons, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof. The Bonds, when issued, will be registered in the name of The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”)or its nominee and will be available to purchasers initially only through the book-entry-only system maintained by DTC. So long as the book-entry-only system is maintained, no physical delivery of the Bonds will be made to the ultimate purchasers thereof and all payments of principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds will be made to such purchasers through DTC. Interest on the Bonds is payable semiannually on January 1 and July 1 of each year commencing January 1, 2018. The Bonds are not subject to optional redemption prior to maturity. At the option of the winning bidder, certain of the Bonds may be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption. See “THE BONDS — Redemption Provisions” herein. The Bonds are direct and general obligations of the City and are payable as to both principal and interest from ad valorem taxes which may be levied on all taxable property therein without limitation as to rate, but within the limitation as to amount prescribed by law. See “SECURITY AND SOURCES OF PAYMENT” herein. The proceeds of the Bonds, together with other legally available funds, will be used for refunding certain of the City’s general obligation indebtedness as more fully described herein. This cover page contains only a brief description of the Bonds and the security therefor. It is not intended to be a summary of material information with respect to the Bonds. Investors should read the entire Official Statement to obtain information necessary to making an informed investment decision with respect to the Bonds. The Bonds are offered when, as and if issued and received by the initial purchasers and subject to the approving opinion of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Phoenix, Arizona, Bond Counsel, as to validity and tax exemption. Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP has acted as disclosure counsel to the City in connection with the preparation of this Official Statement. It is expected that the Bonds will be available for delivery in book-entry- only form through the facilities of DTC on or about June 21, 2017.* See “APPENDIX I — Notice Inviting Proposals for the Purchase of the Bonds” Official Statement constituteoffer, an solicitation offer or to sale sell would be or unlawful the prior solicitation to registration of or an qualification offer pursuant to to the buy, securities nor laws shall of any there such be jurisdiction. any sale of these securities in any jurisdictio This Preliminary Official Statement and the information contained herein are subject* to completion or amendment. Under no Subject circumstances does this P to change. MATURITY SCHEDULE $70,255,000* City of Phoenix, Arizona General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2017 Maturity Principal Interest Price or July 1 Amount* Rate Yield CUSIP 2018 $18,230,000 2019 15,760,000 2020 13,045,000 2021 3,880,000 2022 4,090,000 2023 3,830,000 2024 4,045,000 2025 4,260,000 2026 1,520,000 2027 1,595,000 Term Bond due July 1, , Yield % * Subject to change as provided in “APPENDIX I — Official Notice of Sale”. CITY OF PHOENIX, ARIZONA CITY COUNCIL Greg Stanton, Mayor Laura Pastor, Vice Mayor Sal DiCiccio, Member District 4 District 6 Kate Gallego, Member Michael Nowakowski, Member District 8 District 7 Debra Stark, Member Daniel Valenzuela, Member District 3 District 5 Jim Waring, Member Thelda Williams, Member District 2 District 1 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS Ed Zuercher City Manager Milton Dohoney, Jr. Assistant City Manager Denise M. Olson Brad Holm Cris Meyer Chief Financial Officer City Attorney City Clerk SPECIAL SERVICES GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP PUBLIC RESOURCES ADVISORY GROUP Phoenix, Arizona New York, New York Bond Counsel Financial Advisor SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Phoenix, Arizona Phoenix, Arizona Disclosure Counsel Bond Registrar and Paying Agent This Official Statement does not constitute an offering of any security other than the original offering of the Bonds of the City identified on the cover page hereof. No dealer, salesman or other person has been authorized to give any information or make any representation with respect to the Bonds other than those contained in this Official Statement, and if given or made, such other information or representation must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the City or the Financial Advisor. This Official Statement shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, and there shall be no sale of any of the Bonds, by any person in any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such offer, solicitation, or sale. The information and expressions of opinion herein are subject to change without notice, and neither the delivery of this Official Statement nor any sale hereunder shall, under any circumstances, create any implication that there has been no change in the affairs of the City described herein since the date hereof. There is no obligation on the part of the City to provide any continuing secondary market disclosure other than as described herein under the heading “CONTINUING DISCLOSURE” and in “APPENDIX G — FORM OF CONTINUING DISCLOSURE UNDERTAKING.” Upon issuance, the Bonds will not be registered by the City or the initial purchasers under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any state securities law, and will not be listed on any stock or other securities exchange. Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other federal, state or other governmental entity or agency will have passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this Official Statement or approved the Bonds for sale. IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFERING, THE INITIAL PURCHASERS MAY OVERALLOT OR EFFECT TRANSACTIONS WHICH STABILIZE OR MAINTAIN THE MARKET PRICE OF THE BONDS OFFERED THEREBY AT A LEVEL ABOVE THAT WHICH MIGHT OTHERWISE PREVAIL IN THE OPEN MARKET. SUCH STABILIZING, IF COMMENCED, MAY BE DISCONTINUED AT ANY TIME. The City currently maintains an investor relations website. However, unless specifically incorporated by reference herein, the information presented on the website is not part of this Official Statement and should not be relied upon in making an investment decision with respect to the Bonds. TABLE OF CONTENTS Heading Page INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... 1 THE BONDS .......................................................................... 1 Authorization and Purpose .............................................................. 1 Plan of Refunding ..................................................................... 1 General Description ................................................................... 4 Book-Entry-Only System ............................................................... 4 Redemption Provisions ................................................................. 7 Registration, Transfer and Exchange When Book-Entry-Only System Has Been Discontinued ........ 8 Sources and Applications of Funds ....................................................... 8 SECURITY AND SOURCE OF PAYMENT ................................................. 8 General ............................................................................. 8 Subsequent Refunding of the Bonds ....................................................... 9 PROPERTY TAX POLICY ............................................................... 9 PHOENIX STRATEGIC PLAN ........................................................... 10 Financial Excellence ................................................................... 11 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ................................................... 11 GENERAL FUND SUMMARY ........................................................... 12 COMBINED FINANCIAL SCHEDULES ..................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Youth Courts: Lawyers Helping Students Make Better Decisions
    For more information about the Journal of Law & Social Change, this issue, and the annual Edward V. Sparer Symposium, Coming of Age Against the Odds: Advocating for At-Risk Youth, please visit our website: jlasc.org Published by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository, 2012 VOLZ, TREVASKIS & MILLER YOUTH COURTS: LAWYERS HELPING STUDENTS MAKE BETTER DECISIONS GREGORY VOLZ* DAVID KELLER TREVASKIS* RACHEL MILLER* “Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.” – Thomas Paine1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 200! I.! ! DISCONNECTED YOUTH.............................................................................................. 202! II.! ! ZERO-TOLERANCE SCHOOL DISCIPLINARY POLICIES ....................................... 204! III.! ! RESPONSES TO THE SCHOOL-TO-PRISON PIPELINE ............................................ 205! A.! Youth Courts and Racial Justice................................................................................ 205! B.! Kids for Cash and the Interbranch Report ................................................................. 207! C.! A Response from the Pennsylvania Bar Association ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Public Information Office
    PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE Sally Ellertson Public Information Officer 141 West Renfro March 13, 2013 Burleson, Texas 76028-4261 817-426-9622 F: 817-426-9390 [email protected] www.burlesontx.com Sunshine Review, a national nonprofit organization dedicated to government transparency, announced that the City of Burleson’s website was one of the winners of the fourth annual Sunny Awards. The City of Burleson earned a Sunny for the third consecutive year. The award, which honors the most transparent government websites in the nation, went to 250 government entities. Other Texas winners include the McKinney Independent School District, City of Houston, City of Huntsville, City of Keller, City of Laredo and City of New Braunfels. Burleson earned an A- for the 2013 Sunny. The minus was for not disclosing if the City engaged in lobbying activities or if it is a member of a government lobbying association. The total cost of lobbying activities or membership dues was also not available. The City of Burleson is a member of the Texas Municipal League, which is considered a lobbying association. The dues for TML administrative services are $3,931, which is based on the City’s population. The City’s 2012 population was 38,130 residents. “The City of Burleson knows the importance of promoting transparency in everything we do,” City Manager Dale Cheatham said. “We are honored to receive a Sunny Award and will continue to empower citizens by providing the necessary information to keep them informed on the actions their government is taking on their behalf.” For the 2013 awards, Editors at Sunshine Review analyzed more than 1,000 qualifying government websites and graded each on a 10-point transparency checklist.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices to Illinois Reform Commission 100-Day Report
    Appendices to Illinois Reform Commission 100-Day Report April 28, 2009 Table of Contents Page A. Listing of Materials Provided to Commissioners.......................................... A-1 1. Campaign Finance .............................................................................. A-1 2. Procurement ........................................................................................ A-7 3. Enforcement ...................................................................................... A-12 4. Government Structure ...................................................................... A-14 5. Transparency..................................................................................... A-18 6. Inspiring Better Government ........................................................... A-23 7. Additional Materials Considered...................................................... A-28 B. Meeting Minutes............................................................................................ B-1 1. Minutes for Meeting of the Illinois Reform Commission — Thursday, January 22, 2009............................................................... B-1 2. Minutes for Meeting of the Illinois Reform Commission — Thursday, February 5, 2009 ............................................................... B-9 3. Minutes for Meeting of the Illinois Reform Commission — Thursday, February 23, 2009 ........................................................... B-19 4. Minutes for Meeting of the Illinois Reform Commission — Thursday, March 5, 2009
    [Show full text]
  • Transparency in State Budgets a Search for Best Practices
    Transparency in State Budgets A Search for Best Practices For a Budget Transparency Profile for each individual state, visit http://igpa.uillinois.edu/FiscalFutures September 2011 Richard F. Dye Nancy W. Hudspeth David F. Merriman The Institute of Government and Public Affairs (IGPA) is a public policy research organization based in all three University of Illinois campus cities. IGPA‟s mission is to improve public policy and government performance by: producing and distributing cutting-edge research and analysis, engaging the public in dialogue and education, and providing practical assistance in decision making to government and policymakers. The institute‟s work not only advances knowledge, but also provides real solutions for the state‟s most difficult challenges. IGPA plays an important role in assisting government to better serve the public good. IGPA provides access to top-quality University of Illinois research to improve decision-making at every level of government. To learn more, visit igpa.uillinois.edu © 2011 The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. Edited and designed by Kelsey McCoy, IGPA Communications and Marketing Specialist. ii Executive Summary Complicated, hidden, and inconsistent budget practices are not desirable, and greater transparency would facilitate more informed policy making. How does one go about measuring budget transparency? State budgets are often massive, complicated the findings and scores for each state in detailed documents that use idiosyncratic and sometimes tables. inconsistent accounting conventions. Moreover, budget information is not always presented in a timely Finally, we develop four original indicators of fiscal manner or an easily accessible form. Worse, transparency: the share of total spending that comes confusion follows transactions that can flow through from special—as opposed to General—funds; year-to- multiple funds or accounting treatments that change year variation in that share; the magnitude of net from one year to the next.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Spending Transparency 2.0: Online Tools for Better Government
    Pennsylvania Spending Transparency 2.0: Online Tools for Better Government Pennsylvania Spending Transparency 2.0: Online Tools for Better Government Fall 2010 Kari Wohlschlegel and Elizabeth Ridlington, Frontier Group Megan DeSmedt, PennPIRG Education Fund Phineas Baxandall, Ph.D., U.S. PIRG Education Fund Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Steve Herzenberg, Executive Director of the Keystone Research Center for his review of this report. Phineas Baxandall of U.S. PIRG Educa- tion Fund shared his expertise and advice at numerous points during the development and writing of this report. Clair Embry provided valuable research assistance. Thanks to Tony Dutzik and Travis Madsen of Frontier Group for editorial assistance. This report is made possible with funding from the Ford Foundation. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided editorial review. Any factual errors are strictly the responsibility of the authors. © 2010 PennPIRG Education Fund With public debate around important issues often dominated by special interests pursuing their own narrow agendas, PennPIRG Education Fund offers an indepen- dent voice that works on behalf of the public interest. PennPIRG Education Fund, a 501(c)(3) organization, works to protect consumers and promote good government. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public, and offer Pennsylva- nians meaningful opportunities for civic participation. Frontier Group conducts independent research and policy analysis to support a clean- er, healthier and more democratic society. Our mission is to inject accurate informa- tion and compelling ideas into public policy debates at the local, state and federal lev- els.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Our Apps Today (Or Simply Surf to Mackinac.Org on Your Mobile Device)
    THE Check the MIballot2012M.orgIflap!ballot2012.org ROAD MIballot2012.org The Magazine of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2013 SHOW Mackinac Center analysis of ballot proposals reaches beyond Michigan Center analysts gave no fewer than 100 talks in Michigan about the recently defeated ballot proposals, logging thousands of miles from Alpena to Kalamazoo. The Mackinac Center’s overall strategy was to educate voters with ballot proposal studies, commentaries, Overall, Mackinac Op-Eds, videos, Web Center analysts gave Right-to-woRk chats, TV appearances some 150 interviews, and a popular Web page drew national media It’s not a war on workers. It’s a fight for more and better jobs MIballot2012.org. attention from coast — Helping Make Michigan Home again. Story on page 10 to coast, and The New A large-scale advertising York Times followed campaign generated up on Proposal 2 4,000 ads from October after the election, FOIA: Protecting the to early November callings its defeat “an Right to Report in Detroit, Lansing, Page 13 embarrassment” for Saginaw, Grand Rapids organized labor in the and northern Lower cradle of unionism. tax v. PRofit Peninsula markets. The Morality of Exchange Page 15 Celebrating in 2013! see other side KEEP TRACK OF THESE AND OTHER MACKINAC CENTER ACTIVITIES ON OUR WEBSITE! Ballot Proposal Roundup: The Analysts’ Perspectives Page 7 Experience the Mackinac Center ANYTIME, ANYWHERE iPhone, Android and More Getting analysis and stories from the Center has never been simpler or more elegant. Download our apps today (or simply surf to mackinac.org on your mobile device).
    [Show full text]
  • ILLINOIS Report 2012
    The ILLINOIS Report 2012 Foreword At the University of Illinois, we share the same dream as every citizen across our great state: a future of prosperity and progress, security and success, health and happiness. For nearly 150 years, the university has partnered with the state to build a better tomorrow for the people of Illinois, through world-class academic and research programs that produce both new generations of leaders and new waves of innovation. And for nearly half of our storied history, our Institute of Government and Public Affairs (IGPA) has helped lead the way. IGPA is a jewel of our university and our state, created by the Illinois General Assembly in 1947 as a place where decision-makers can turn for real solutions to the state’s most critical problems. Its offices in our campus cities of Urbana-Champaign, Chicago, and Springfield are home to top public- policy researchers, known nationally for their groundbreaking scholarship in fields ranging from public finance and ethics to health and social policy. Each year, our IGPA experts take a fresh look at the state’s biggest challenges in The Illinois Report . This sixth edition examines a host of issues that are crucial to our future, including the state’s budget deficit, its changing demographics, and its educational needs. The report has a singular goal—providing nonpartisan, evidence-based analysis to help guide decision-makers and steer Illinois toward a new era of economic and social growth that will make it a model for the nation. The University of Illinois deeply values the key role that our academic and research programs play in shaping the state’s future, and the crucial support that we receive from Illinois and its citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • Council of Mayors Executivecommittee
    Jeffery Schielke, Chairman Mayor, City of Batavia Kane/Kendall Council Council of Mayors Executive Committee Leon Rockingham, Jr., 1st Vice Chair November 19, 2013 Mayor, City of North Chicago Lake Council 9:30 a.m. Eugene Williams, 2nd Vice Chair CMAP Offices – Cook County Conference Room Mayor, Village of Lynwood South Council George Van Dusen 1.0 Call to Order and Introductions – Mayor Schielke Mayor, Village of Skokie North Shore Council Sandy Frum 2.0 Agenda Changes and Announcements President, Village of Northbrook North Shore Council Al Larson 3.0 Approval of Minutes – September 10, 2013 President, Village of Schaumburg Northwest Council ACTION REQUESTED: Approval Karen Darch President, Village of Barrington 4.0 Transportation Programming Updates/Action Items Northwest Council 4.1 Roads Update/ STP Expenditure Report (Chad Riddle) Jeffrey Sherwin Mayor, City of Northlake The IDOT Bureau of Local Roads & Streets status sheets will be North Central Council distributed at the meeting. The STP expenditure report is available in Joseph Tamburino Mayor, Village of Hillside the committee packet. North Central Council ACTION REQUESTED: Information James Discipio President, Village of LaGrange Park Central Council 4.2 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program Update William Rodeghier President, Village of Western (Kama Dobbs) Springs Central Council The most current CMAQ Obligation Report is attached. An update on Dave Brady the Program will be provided. President, Village of Bedford Park Southwest Council ACTION REQUESTED: Information John Mahoney Mayor, Village of Palos Park Southwest Council 4.3 Transportation Alternatives Program (Doug Ferguson) Michael Einhorn It is anticipated that the Transportation Committee will release the President, Village of Crete South Council draft Transportation Alternatives Program for public comment from Rodney Craig November 15, 2013 to December 16, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Sending the Wrong Message: Technology, Sunshine Law, and the Public Record in Florida
    File: Cooper.392.GALLEY(e).doc Created on: 6/14/2010 10:38:00 AM Last Printed: 6/14/2010 1:11:00 PM SENDING THE WRONG MESSAGE: TECHNOLOGY, SUNSHINE LAW, AND THE PUBLIC RECORD IN FLORIDA Cheryl Cooper∗ Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.1 I. INTRODUCTION There is nothing like a sex scandal to grab people’s attention. In January 2008, the Detroit Free Press published sexually graphic text messages exchanged by Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and his then chief of staff Christine Beatty, both of whom had vehemently denied that they were having an extra- marital affair.2 The published messages revealed that Kilpatrick and Beatty lied under oath in a whistleblowers’ lawsuit3 and that Kilpatrick agreed to settle the suit for $8.4 million to keep the affair quiet.4 These revelations led to criminal charges that forced ∗ © 2010, Cheryl Cooper. All rights reserved. Marketing Editor, Stetson Law Review. B.S., University of South Florida, cum laude, 2007; J.D. candidate, Stetson University College of Law, 2010. 1. James Madison, Speech, Virginia Convention on the Ratification of the Constitu- tion (Richmond, Va., June 6, 1788) (available at http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_va_05 .htm). 2. Jim Schaefer & M. L. Erick, Freep.com, Kilpatrick, Chief of Staff Lied under Oath, Text Messages Show, http://www.freep.com/article/20080124/NEWS05/801240414/ Kilpatrick++chief+of+staff+lied+under+oath++text+messages+show (Jan.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Disclosure Requirements.Indd
    Local Government Disclosure Requirements: Weighing Redundancy/ Emphasizing Effi ciency By Natalie Davila, Mike Klemens and Kara Moretto KDM Consulting, Inc. March 15, 2016 About the Authors Michael D. Klemens Manufacturing Center as well as the Director KDM Consulting President of Economic Research for the City of Chicago’s Department of Planning and Development. She Mike worked in the Director’s Offi ce at the is currently an adjunct faculty member at DePaul Illinois Department of Revenue for 20 years in an University. Natalie holds a Bachelor’s degree from assortment of tax policy related roles, re ring in Queen’s University in Belfast, Northern Ireland, a 2012 as Manager of Policy and Communica ons Master’s degree in Applied Economics from the where he oversaw the development of the University of Michigan, and a Ph.D. in Public Policy department’s web presence. Analysis from the University of Illinois in Chicago. In 2012 Mike established KDM Consul ng, which Kara Moretto works extensively with the Taxpayers’ Federa on of KDM Consulting Associate Illinois. His areas of tax exper se include property tax, property and sales tax exemp ons and taxes Kara has over 23 years of progressive tax that the state administers for local governments, administra on experience including a s nt as head together with a broad general knowledge of the of the Offi ce of Local Government Services. She 75+ taxes and programs administered by the has exper se in Illinois specifi c legisla ve research department. Mike holds a Bachelor’s degree from and extensive knowledge of the Illinois property Dartmouth College and a Master’s degree from tax system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Transparency Effect
    The Transparency Effect Citizens can keep an eye on government with easy-to-use websites, but are there downsides to transparency? BY PAM GREENBERG tion. By 2000, every state legislature also was online. mericans want to know what government State websites added more kinds of infor- is up to, and they want it to be easy to mation over the years, many evolving from find. a “Web 1.0” model of website development, Ninety percent of respondents to a characterized by static documents and one-way 2008A poll by Harris Interactive believed they communication, to “Web 2.0,” or “Gov 2.0,” were entitled to know how the government gen- which focuses on more interactive exchanges erates and spends its money. But few Americans between citizens and government and collabora- believe government is meeting those expecta- tion through user-friendly sites and social media tions, another survey conducted that same year tools. found. Another landmark bill, passed in 2006, trig- A new movement that uses technology to gered a new push for budget transparency. The combine information and make it available in federal Funding Accountability and Transpar- innovative ways may promote the accountability ency Act requires federal financial assistance this group of engaged citizens is seeking. Some and expenditures to be available through a sin- are concerned, however, that creating unprec- gle, searchable website. The federal legislation, edented access to government data could have along with an active advocacy campaign pro- unforeseen consequences. moting transparency, set off a domino effect that Advocacy groups now pushing for greater resulted in many states creating one centralized access to information from all levels of gov- website with detailed information about govern- ernment expect data to be easily accessible and ment spending.
    [Show full text]
  • Leon County Wins Sunny Award for Website Transparency Only 214 Awarded out of 6,000 Government Websites Nationwide
    Leon County Board of County Commissioners 301 South Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (850) 606-5302 www.leoncountyfl.gov NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 13, 2012 CONTACT: Jon D. Brown, Director Community and Media Relations (850) 606-5300 Leon County Wins Sunny Award for Website Transparency Only 214 awarded out of 6,000 government websites nationwide Leon County Government has received a national honor for maintaining open government. The County’s website was awarded the Sunny Award, presented by editors of the Sunshine Review to honor the most transparent government websites. Leon County’s website was one of only 214 throughout the nation to receive the award out of more than 6,000 government websites analyzed by Sunshine Review – a national nonprofit organization dedicated to government transparency. Leon County’s newest accomplishment was recently announced by Sunshine Review to launch “Sunshine Week” – a period from March 11 to 17 that is nationally recognized by the media and civic organizations to celebrate the efforts of activists and the strides taken towards open government. “Leon County knows the importance of promoting transparency in everything we do,” said Leon County Commission Chairman Akin Akinyemi. “We are honored to receive a Sunny Award and will continue to empower citizens by providing the necessary information to keep them informed on the actions their government is taking on their behalf.” For the 2012 awards, editors at Sunshine Review analyzed more than 6,000 government websites and graded each on a 10-point transparency checklist. Editors looked at content available on the websites against what should be provided.
    [Show full text]