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.

Code enforcement in Glendale and I dare say, every other Valley city, is the most vexing issue for residents who want their neighborhoods clean and neat. Code enforcement is critical if for no other reason than a clean and well-kept neighborhood that maintains property values for everyone.

“The department’s recent budget was $4.1 million, up over half a million since the 2023-2024 fiscal year.” (Arizona Republic). No matter how much money is thrown at the code department, there never seems to be any improvement in its performance.

Here is an example. There is a vehicle parked in a front side yard on my street that has been there for so long now grass is growing as high as its tires. Yet, according to a recent Arizona Republic article, “St. John (Assistant City Manager) said the inspectors try to check the 45,644 parcels in Glendale as many times a year as they can. Jefferson (Code Department) said the teams aims to check every parcel at least once a year, ideally more. At the first public discussion about the topic in October, St. John told the City Council that it took about four to five months to inspect every property, so almost three times a year.” How can that be true when this vehicle has been sitting there for months? Forget three times a year. The vehicle hasn’t been checked once in months, much less a citation.

45,644 total parcels divided by 19 code inspectors equals 2,402 parcels per inspector. For twenty days a month (representing one month), an inspector would have to check 120 homes a day. Over a period of 40 days (representing two months) an inspector would have to check 60 homes a day. Over a period of 60 days (representing three months) an inspector would have to check 30 homes a day. Not every home inspected will have a violation and others might have multiple violations.

Don’t let anyone fool you. This amount of work is doable. Vice Mayor Malnar and I went out one morning a couple of years ago and checked all of Granada Estates for code violations. There were at least 60 homes, and we did it in one morning. We identified over 100 violations. Again, not every home had a violation and there were homes with multiple violations.

There was a shining moment when the code department actually worked. While I was on city council, back in the 1990’s, Dan Gunn became the Code Director. He made code inspection work. He had fewer inspectors than we have now. I can’t remember the exact number of inspectors, but it seems as if he had about 12 inspectors. He initiated a grid system that actually worked but I think the real secret to his success was immediate and timely reinspection. After the 30 days required to allow the homeowner to correct the violation, inspectors revisited immediately. If not corrected, inspectors issued another repeat violation. Repeat violators were identified and monitored. Multiple citations at the same address combined with a court violation often cured the issue, permanently.

Just as in our society as a whole, about 2% of the population is responsible for a majority of our crime. It is the same for code enforcement. A small number of repeat offenders are responsible for the majority of our code violations.

There are two adjacent issues that Assistant City Manager Rick St. John identified. One is the court system. Code citations do not seem to be a priority for our court. The process these days takes way too long, creating frustration and dissatisfaction for inspectors, violators and residents who see the violation persist. It is time for the court to prioritize code violations and to implement a fast-track system that is meaningful and effective. How about it, Glendale City Court Chief Judge Nicholas Di Piazza?

The other issue is that inspectors do not have a case management system that works for them. I agree. However, I had heard that song for at least 3 years prior to my retirement in 2025. Fine, if there is not a viable case management system available in the marketplace, then perhaps the city should do what I asked for years ago and that is hire a programmer to write/create a unique and tailored program that does work. If it is effective, it could be program that the city can sell to other cities. This is an issue that requires a solution now, not another two years from now.

Finally, the issue of how many violations can be turned in during a certain period within a certain geographic area is ongoing. This is an issue created by a tiny portion of our population. They are intense activists. They became that way probably because they see the same perceived violations every day in their neighborhoods and it’s driving them crazy. They see no action to correct these perceived violations. It’s like rubbing salt in a wound, that remains painful and never heals.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Perhaps it’s time the city became creative rather than adversarial. Why not establish volunteer code inspectors? They would not have the authority to issue citations because of liability issues. Why not train them on code intensively? For as long as it takes…a week or two or three? Then have them ride along with a code inspector for a specified time period. Then assign a specific, limited grid area to inspect turning in the list generated to the department for follow-up action? This may not be the ideal scenario but it’s something to consider and implement.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2026}   

^{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.}