04/07/2025
Mayor Armstrong,
I want to respond clearly and respectfully to your recent post — especially your suggestion that I was "sponsored" by the Duncan Area Economic Development Foundation (DAEDF). That is simply not true.
My campaign was not funded by DAEDF. I was supported by individual citizens — hardworking people of Duncan, including small business owners, retirees, and neighbors who believe in transparency, accountability, and better communication from local government. Some may have agreed with my position on the DAEDF lawsuit and supported me because of it — but that was their choice, not part of any coordinated sponsorship or influence. To suggest otherwise is misleading, and frankly, it’s disappointing to see that kind of false narrative continue even after the election.
From the beginning of my campaign, I made my position on the DAEDF lawsuit clear — and I stand by it:
“I know many in our community are concerned about the ongoing legal dispute between the City of Duncan and the Duncan Area Economic Development Foundation (DAEDF). It’s an issue that goes beyond legal filings — it touches on trust, responsible use of taxpayer dollars, and the future of economic development in our town.
From what I’ve learned, this dispute is about more than property ownership. It’s about who controls the tax dollars that were collected and designated for economic development, and how those funds — and the assets purchased with them — should be overseen.
I understand both sides:
• The City wants accountability for how public money is used and believes oversight is essential.
• The DAEDF believes it has followed its mission and used those funds responsibly to build opportunities for Duncan.
Here’s what I believe:
We need to stop spending more taxpayer dollars fighting over control. Instead, we need to focus on building trust, creating clear guidelines for collaboration, and ensuring that both the City and the DAEDF are working together — not against one another — for the future of Duncan.”
I’ve never heard or noticed legitimate concerns raised about DAEDF’s performance in economic development — and if there are concerns with either DAEDF or the City’s handling of it, they must still be separated from the facts. The voters were led to believe their vote was simply about the future use of funds, but it led to a lawsuit that corrected the legality of how those funds were being handled. The City then appealed that legal ruling — a fact you left out of your post, making it appear as though DAEDF acted unprovoked. That’s simply not accurate. If we are truly committed to transparency, then let’s start by telling the full story.
I believe in fiscal responsibility, but I also believe in fairness, truth, and due process. If you truly believe in transparency, then be open about that appeal. From the public’s perspective, this increasingly looks like a “money grab” — not from DAEDF, but from the City itself, attempting to redirect resources away from a nonprofit with a long, proven record of service to Duncan.
And if transparency is really your goal, I have to ask — why hasn’t the City of Duncan provided regular financial updates alongside its annual budgets? While yearly budgets are technically published, the kind of detailed, monthly or quarterly financial reporting that is standard in many neighboring cities is simply not happening here. Citizens deserve to see not just the plan for how funds will be used — but also how those funds are actually being spent. A budget without ongoing accountability is not transparency — it’s just optics.
I also congratulate Mr. Leonard again on his win and remain hopeful we can move forward with open dialogue and shared respect for all who care about Duncan’s future. I’m proud to have earned 45% of the vote as someone who’s only lived here a few years — running against a lifelong resident with your public endorsement and alignment. That says a lot about where the community stands.
That said, I sincerely hope his role on council doesn’t simply become an extension of your own vote. I was present at the most recent rezoning meeting where Mr. Leonard stood and voiced his opposition — and immediately after, you abstained from voting on that item, despite casting votes on other rezonings that same night where he did not speak. The optics were clear.
Unfortunately, we can’t even go back and review that footage — because the City stopped recording council meetings as of March 2022, right around the time this conflict with DAEDF escalated. This is just another example of public access being limited at a time when transparency is most needed.
Transparency should not disappear when leadership fears scrutiny. We’re all human, and we all make mistakes — but it’s how we acknowledge and correct those mistakes that defines real leadership. I haven’t seen that from you, sir — and I hope you can do better.
- Austin Peters
