TO: CITY COUNCIL

CC: MAYOR ELECT SAFFORD

COMMISSIONER ELECT COLL
CHIEF TYLER MCINTOSH
ASSISTANT CHIEF ERIC WARFIELD
FROM: MAYOR RON KIM
DATE: DECEMBER 18, 2023

I. INTRODUCTION
This memo will document the Office of the Mayor (“Mayor”) and City Attorney’s
interactions with the New York State Attorney General’s Office (“NYSAG”) from late
2021 to 12/31/2023, during the course and within the scope of my employment as
Mayor of the City of Saratoga Springs. I am providing this information to the next City
Council and the public to maintain full transparency and to ensure continuity with the
incoming City Council.
None of the information disclosed below has been identified as being “confidential”
or “privileged” by the NYSAG or the City Attorney’s office. The information being
shared are facts or reasonable assumptions/inferences from these facts.
II. BACKGROUND
On or about November 10, 2021, then Mayor Meg Kelly, Commissioner of Public
Safety Robin Dalton and members of the Saratoga Springs City Police Department
received a wide-ranging request for information for all documents including emails,
phone records, text messages and other relevant information regarding several police
actions and arrests during the period from 2020 to 2021. See attached Exhibit 1.
Prior to initially taking office, in December 2021, I was informed in a private meeting
with the former City Attorney that the City had responded to these subpoenas in full and
I therefore took no additional action on this matter during my first year in office.
III. ATTORNEY GENERAL’S INVESTIGATION
The Mayor’s Office and City Attorneys met via telephone conference with the
NYSAG several times to discuss its investigation. I attended all of these conferences,
with at least one representative of the City Attorney’s office, Anthony Izzo or Michael
Phillips. Deputy Mayor Rella was involved in almost all of the meetings.
On or about October 17, 2022, I learned that there was an unknown number of
documents and digital hard drives which were potentially responsive to the NYSAG’s
requests that were in the custody and control of John Aspland, a private attorney with
an office in Glens Falls. This information was apparently sent to Aspland sometime in
the fall of 2021 and had remained there. It was my understanding that Aspland did not
formally represent the City in this investigation but had apparently been asked by the
City’s insurance company to retain these documents. See Exhibit 2.

Page 1 of 4
 As a result of this discovery, we had our first meeting with NYSAG on November 4,
2022, almost a full year after I was told that the City had fully complied with all its
document requests. This was my first direct contact with NYSAG and as a result of this
telephone conversation I immediately dispatched the City Attorney to retrieve all
documents retained by Aspland. After certifying that there was no information protected
by the attorney client privilege, this information was turned over to NYSAG. Also, as a
result of this conference call with NYSAG, I asked City Attorney Izzo to ensure that all
responsive information had been produced by double-checking with all relevant
departments in City Hall.
We had several follow-up conference calls with NYSAG during the first half of 2023
to check the status of its information requests. During these discussions NYSAG
discussed additional informational needs they had in light of its ongoing investigation
and specified information that they believed was still outstanding. During these
meetings we detailed the steps we had taken to fully provide all requested information.
I also mentioned to them that in terms of digital data, we could not guarantee, nor even
describe what “preservation” methods were used prior to 2022 because the IT Manager
had retired several months prior and the current IT staff was entirely new. Accordingly,
I could not guarantee if information had been lost, not retained, or even destroyed prior
to 2022. I also mentioned to them that under the “Commission Form” of government,
neither the Mayor’s office nor the City Attorney’s office had the authority to order the
production of documents or information from the separate and independent
departments that comprise City Hall and thus advised NYSAG to consider issuing
subpoenas if there were additional requests for information needs.
After these meetings, NYSAG issued several additional subpoenas to the City, and
they also asked the City Attorney’s office to obtain “certifications” from all the separate
City Hall Departments that it had been fully responsive to its subpoenas. The new
subpoenas were issued as follows:
• November 4, 2022- See Exhibit 3
• February 7, 2023, Subpoena—See Exhibit 4
• May 4, 2023, Subpoena—See Exhibit 5
• July 21, 2023, Subpoena-See Exhibit 6
The City Attorney’s office worked with each department of City Hall to respond to
each of these new subpoenas, and per NYSAG’s request we obtained certifications
from each Department.
On August 31, 2023, NYSAG contacted us and explained that while they had
received additional information as a result of the new subpoenas, there were a number
of gaps and omissions. NYSAG explained that their examination of the information that
had been produced revealed that there were definitely missing documents, emails, texts
and other information. One specific concern NYSAG pointed out was the inability for
the City to automatically and seamlessly capture text messages, voicemails and phone

Page 2 of 4
records from City land and cellphone lines. Furthermore, they indicated that their final
report would most likely provide a fuller picture of what was missing and make specific
recommendations as to steps the City would need to take to improve its data retention
policy. During this conversation, I explained to NYSAG that the Mayor’s office had
already identified digital software that it was planning to acquire that would enhance our
ability to capture this information. See Exhibit 7- Purchase Contract for Software by
Mayor’s Office.
During this period NYSAG conducted a series of oral examinations of former city
officials and members of the SSPD. We insisted that the City be allowed to attend and
one of the City attorneys attended each for the City.
Also, during this period, the City began to receive Freedom of Information Law
(“FOIL”) requests from a variety of parties seeking information relative to the NYSAG’s
investigation. During our meetings with the NYSAG we discussed these requests and
from these discussions it became clear to us that while FOIL had a general exception to
disclosure when a governmental agency investigation was pending, it did not completely
bar all requests for information. Accordingly, the City Attorney’s Office did determine,
after discussions with NYSAG, that some requests for information must be responded
to, and in fact the City did disclose some texts, emails and documents that were also
produced in connection with the NYSAG investigation. attached Exhibit 4.
On November 20, 2023, I was told during a conference call with NYSAG, that the
investigation was concluded, and a “final report” was imminent. At this time, NYSAG,
explained that it was likely to seek a “consent agreement” with the City to change
several City and SSPD policies and procedures and establish a periodic monitoring
procedure, assuming the City agreed to the measures. NYSAG’s representatives,
outlined several specific measures that I interpreted to be potentially part of the
“consent” agreement:
• Prohibit any elected City official from demanding that an individual be arrested;
• Prohibit the arrest of any member of the public attending a City Council meeting
for speech protected by the First Amendment;
• Improve SSPD’s response to protests and other First Amendment gatherings with
specific prohibitions and trainings;
• Improve SSPD’s internal affairs and discipline protocols;
• Require the City enhance its records retention policies for all departments,
including the automatic retention of email, text and other digital communications;
• Require the City’s Civilian Review Board to promote citizen participation;
• Require that all arrests during a protest be reported to NYSAG’s office;
• Require the City to report twice a year on its compliance with the consent order.
During this conversation and a subsequent phone call on November 21, 2023, I
encouraged NYSAG to contact us when it was ready to move forward, and also outlined
possible methods by which we could engage the City Council, the SSPD and its

Page 3 of 4
officers, and the public at large to ensure that there was a full dialogue between all
interested parties. I specifically pointed out that the current City Council had only two
more regularly scheduled City Council meetings (December 5 and 19, 2023) to respond
to any final report. Thereafter, in 2024, NYSAG would be addressing this matter with a
new City Council. To date, other than a December 6, 2023, email from NYSAG stating
no report had been issued, neither the Mayor’s office nor the City Attorney have had any
further communication from NYSAG.

IV. COSTS OF INVESTIGATION

At several points during the past two years, I have reported to the City Council and
the public the total “out of pocket costs” of NYSAG’s investigation, as it is NOT covered
by insurance, nor was it budgeted in the 2022 or 2023 budgets as a separate line item.
Currently, the City Council has approved a total of $70,880 for outside counsel to
represent a number of former officials and other employees. Here is a full breakdown of
what has been approved by the City Council, based on requests by the attorneys for
former officials and other employees:
• Former Mayor Meg Kelly $26,430.00
• Former Commissioner Robin Dalton $29,000.00
• Former Deputy Mayor Lisa Shields $ 8,625.00
• Former Deputy Commissioner Eileen Finneran $ 9,000.00
• Current members of the SSPD $11,226.00
TOTAL TO DATE $70,880.00

Page 4 of 4