Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

The Glendale Fire Department has issued its 2016 Performance Report. Here is the link to the report: https://www.glendaleaz.com/fire/documents/2016AnnualReport.pdf . Glendale has 9 fire stations. Two of them are now quite old – Station 152 located at 6850 W. Bethany Home Road was built in 1979 and Station 153 at 14061 N. 59th Avenue was built in 1974. Over the years these stations have received remedial patches but at some point, they will have to be replaced.

The services offered by the department fall into 5 major categories: Fire Suppression, Emergency Medical Service (EMS), Special Operations and Technical Rescue; Special Operations and Hazmat and Crisis Response. In their list of 5 major categories there is no mention of the categories of Fire Prevention or Public Education. Yet Glendale’s Fire Marshall’s Office performed a total of 4,216 inspections last year and fire department staff and volunteers offered 543 educational presentations and events.

I found the report lacking in the kind of information I, as a councilmember, and you, a resident of Glendale, would have found useful. I have asked the department for further information just recently and I am sure they will provide responses shortly.

Since approximately 90% of fire department responses are EMS (35,247), where are the stats on the number of Advanced Life Support (ALS) calls and the number of Basic Life Support (BLS) calls? The remaining 10% (3,447) are fire calls. What is the department’s current response time? I assume it is still within national fire standards but there is no information provided.

As I and many Glendale residents have stated over the years, sending a huge fire truck to answer medical calls is a waste of resources. I am pleased to see that the department now has two “Low Acuity Units” to respond to BLS calls. These are smaller vehicles with appropriate personnel that respond to non-life threatening medical calls. It was a pilot project that immediately proved its value as has been demonstrated by Mesa who has used this system for years. I am disappointed that the implementation of more Low Acuity Units has not been accelerated. There should be one of these units at every fire station in Glendale, not just at two of them. This program deserves to be a priority of the department. Now it is time to implement a sister program that addresses ALS calls. When this system of medical response is fully implemented the department will become more flexible and agile while delivering the best service possible at the least cost to Glendale taxpayers.

I also noted that, “fifty-three fire personnel were deployed to 32 separate wildfires across the nation.” What was the total cost to our taxpayers to do so? Including transportation, meals, lodging and any special or overtime pay?

No information is provided on the effects of Automatic Aid to our City. Why were no numbers provided on the number of calls the City responds to outside of our City? What cities? And the total number of calls outside the City provided to each jurisdiction? Why were no numbers provided on the number of calls provided by outside agencies to our City? Which cities? And in what numbers?

I suspect that as in previous years there is still an imbalance between the number of times the city’s department answers calls outside of Glendale and the number of times other cities respond to calls within Glendale. Historically Glendale answers far more calls outside of its city limits than others cities’ responses within Glendale. It costs the taxpayer to subsidize services to other cities.

I still believe that while the concept of Automatic Aid is sound, the lack of equitable implementation remains unfair to the participants. Glendale and other cities that answer far more calls outside their city limits should be reimbursed by those cities receiving the additional aid. There is a regional Automatic Aid Agreement that is reviewed and approved every year. All Fire Chiefs have an opportunity to review and amend. I know there are fire chiefs that are familiar with this issue but to date they have been reluctant to address it.

There is good news within this year’s report. One of those is the Crisis Response Unit. It has 3 paid staff but it is primarily a volunteer unit with volunteers donating over 13,000 hours while responding to 1,156 calls for service. Volunteers are also the backbone of the department’s public education program donating 787 volunteer hours. Another good news item is the full implementation of the Electronic Patient Care Reporting (ePCR) system. It is a tablet based patient charting system that replaces paper reports. It saves time and money and now the records can follow a patient electronically.

The report was good but it could have been better if it included some of the items discussed above. In order to be fully transparent the current department response time and effects of Automatic Aid should have been included. In addition, some information about the department’s plans for the two 40 year old fire stations would have been helpful.

The men and women of the Glendale Fire Department give their all to serve us in our hour of greatest need. I appreciate their commitment to our community. However, senior management has the responsibility to provide us a full and complete picture of their operations, including the good, the bad and the ugly.

© Joyce Clark, 2017               

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such material. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

An interesting story drew my attention in the wake of the Stonehaven decision by a majority of Glendale’s city council (5 to 2 vote in favor). Apparently these members of the city council, Mayor Jerry Weiers, Vice Mayor Ian Hugh and Councilmembers Lauren Tolmachoff, Jaime Aldama and Bart Turner saw no issue with granting the developers, John F. Long Trust and Pulte Homes, the right to plant about 600 small lots (4,000 SF and 4,500 SF) on 130+ acres in the development known as Stonehaven.

The developers have also been granted greater lot coverage of 55%. Typically, Glendale has used 40% to 45% lot coverage. That means the home can use 40% to 45% of the lot. The rest is a front yard, side yards and a back yard. In the approved Stonehaven plan front yards will be 10 to 15 feet in depth and back yards will be 10 to 15 feet in depth. My back patio is 12 feet in depth and I try to envision having a rear yard block wall abutting my patio. It is absurd. Just for kicks measure 10 feet or 15 feet from your back door and imagine having a block wall at that distance.

Then I read an article by Home & Design and republished by AZBigMedia. Here is the link: http://roselawgroupreporter.com/2017/08/homebuyers-willing-sacrifice-square-footage-bigger-yard/?utm_source=Rose+Law+Group+Reporter+Newsletter&utm_campaign=305ef20b62-8-18-2017+Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0fa483909f-305ef20b62-17921525 .

The most startling results of a Wakefield Research survey commissioned by Taylor Morrison (national homebuilder) said, “Outdoor living is becoming just as important as the indoors. According to a consumer survey conducted by Wakefield Research on behalf of Taylor Morrison, a leading national homebuilder and developer, recent and prospective homebuyers are craving green space. More than half (56 percent) of homebuyers surveyed would be willing to sacrifice a larger house to obtain a bigger yard.

The survey also found the most important exterior feature of a home is distance from neighboring homes. Both millennials (48 percent) and non-millennials (53 percent) believe this breathing room is key, beating other curb appeal elements such as siding, driveway styles, exterior paint color and roofing finishes.”

Well, doesn’t this fly in the face of the pro-Stonehaven rhetoric touting “that millennials and seniors would prefer the least amount of yard possible?” Their rationale was that new home buyers didn’t want to maintain the backyard grass. Many back yards are graveled and xeroscaped these days. Whether it’s grass or patio space, upkeep and work to keep it looking good is required. What they said was illogical and this Taylor Morrison study proves the point.

No, I suspect it was all about the almighty dollar. They demanded greater density because it translates into greater profitability. Since when must a city accommodate a private entity’s demand for greater profitability at the expense of the adjacent neighborhoods (all of whom opposed Stonehaven’s amended plan)?

Think about it. Have you ever seen a millionaire buy a large home on a 4,000 SF lot? Of course not. They buy large homes on large lots to insure their privacy (among other reasons). Privacy in the form of large lot space (or even adequate lot space) is a commodity that today’s developers have decided that the masses of home buyers no longer merit. They decide what you should have, always keeping their bottom lines primary, and then sell the concept to you as the latest and greatest that you must have. So, we buy the bells and whistles while ignoring basic amenities such as sufficient space to breathe and grow families.

I’m thankful I grew up in a different era. Perhaps I’m too old-fashioned but if so, I don’t care. I’m glad I grew up with room to breathe. To this day I value the privacy my property provides. It’s hard to imagine that even millennials don’t want the same and that privacy is no longer important.

© Joyce Clark, 2017               

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such material. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

WordPress › Error

There has been a critical error on this website.

Learn more about troubleshooting WordPress.