Scottsdale council denies Old Town marketing contract after debate over budget split and redactions

ScottsdaleCity Council on Dec. 2 denied a resolution to award a $1.3 million Old Town advertising, marketing and public relations contract to The James Agency after extended public comment and a contentious council debate.

City economic development staff presented the selection process and explained that the James Agency won an RFP informed by a KEANE engagement study of Old Town merchants. Rachel Smetana, economic development, said the contract would start with an audit, stakeholder meetings and a public dashboard of performance metrics. "We folded [the KEANE] recommendations into the RFP," she said, describing an emphasis on local business engagement and measurable KPIs.

Merchants and residents who testified at the meeting praised the idea of a new vendor but raised sharp concerns about the contract packet. French Thompson, who said he represents the Arts District, said past vendors had shown "no transparency" and asked for more of the budget to be spent on actual advertising rather than agency overhead. Bob Pejman, an Old Town business owner, said he was pleased to see the RFP but troubled by extensive redactions in the materials provided to the public, saying the redactions made it hard for residents to evaluate the proposal.

Several council members pressed staff on how the $1.3 million budget would be allocated. The presentation noted roughly 40 percent of the FY25–26 allocation would go to advertising placements (about $520,000), with the remainder covering creative work, stakeholder engagement and account management. Council members including DeBoskis and Littlefield questioned whether that split delivered sufficient ad buy dollars to merchants and whether the proposal could be renegotiated or better explained to the public. "I think we have an obligation to our merchants to deliver as much advertising as possible," Councilwoman DeBoskis said.

Council members also raised procurement and conflict‑of‑interest questions. Several members asked about the selection panel and noted Experience Scottsdale staff participated in evaluating proposals; staff said participation by outside marketing professionals on the panel was appropriate and that conflict‑of‑interest disclosures were collected.

After the public testimony and dais discussion, Councilwoman DeBoskis moved to deny the resolution authorizing the contract (resolution 13562). The motion, which followed a lengthy back‑and‑forth about redactions and the division between media buys and agency staffing costs, carried on a council voice vote.

The council majority said the denial reflected a need for clearer allocation of the funds and full access to unredacted procurement materials for the public and the council before an award is made. Staff noted the city had previously used a cooperative agreement and that the new vendor selection reflects merchants' requests for different service and more transparency; staff said they would report back with next steps.

What happens next: Council directed staff to review the procurement file and provide additional information; the denial means the James Agency will not receive authority under the resolution as presented. Staff said the prior cooperative agreement provided interim coverage into next year but that the council desired clearer public documentation before awarding a new multi‑year vendor.