The Glendale City Council meeting of February 25, 2014 was contentious. Everything was truckin’ along until Item 19, the billboard issue. Whoa…not so fast! The council vote was tabled. It was widely assumed that Councilmember Sherwood had the votes to ram it through. It turns out that was not the case. Somewhere along the way he, Rose Law (applicant’s representative) and Becker (applicant) realized the votes were not there. Their fall back plan was to table, hopefully providing them more time to bring reluctant councilmembers into the fold. The vote to table and bring to a council workshop on March 18 and council meeting on March 25 was 5 to 2. Vice Mayor Knaack voted “No” and observed that this issue was “being pushed out until the answer changes.” Councilmember Martinez also voted “No” and said the move smacked of “desperate measures.” Weiers, Sherwood, Alvarez, Hugh and Chavira voted “Yes.”
There were at least a dozen or more citizens there to voice their opposition to the billboards. Sherwood, in the past, characterized the billboard opposition as “a minority.” Not so. It’s usually the case that every citizen that takes the time to get actively involved in an issue represents a large segment of silent citizens.
Most of the public stayed until the end of the council meeting to express their dismay with council’s non-action. Michele Tennyson from the Cholla district expressed their collective sentiment quite well. Ms. Tennyson had served on a city council in Mill Creek, Washington and after locating to Glendale, served on various Glendale boards and commissions. She obviously knows how political games are played. She said she was “ashamed” by council’s conduct and decision to table the issue. She related the timeline and history of actions taken. She made it quite clear that there was no reason to delay an up or down vote. Ann Berman, a Sahuaro district resident, said “Sherwood seems to have made a decision” and alluded to the fact that it is not in the public’s favor. Others pointed out that the next scheduled council vote would occur during Spring Break when many people take the opportunity to go out-of-town. Clearly the residents of the Sahuaro and Cholla districts, directly affected by the erection of these billboards, do not want them.
During the council comment period at the end of the meeting those who spoke offered hints regarding their positions on the issue. Councilmember Sherwood attempted to explain why it was necessary to table the billboard issue. Councilmember Alvarez told the citizens that they need “to make the council accountable.” Councilmember Martinez characterized council’s actions as “blatant” and “a slap in the face” to the decisions already made by the citizen Planning Commission and staff. Vice Mayor Knaack described it as “unforgiveable” to disregard the Planning Commission’s decision.
Others were silent about that issue but offered a wide range of comments on other topics. Sherwood, Chavira and Knaack voiced their opposition to SB 1062 (although Knaack cited the wrong bill number). Several thanked Executive Directors of Communication/Marketing and Transportation, Jerry McCoy and Jamsheed Mehta, for their service as they move to take positions with other cities. Mayor Weiers characterized it as a “brain drain.” That is exactly what it is. We continue to lose the best and brightest and their historical memory of previous city action. Jamsheed Mehta should have been appointed as an Assistant City Manager. Councilmember Chavira, always reluctant to take a position on anything unless cleared by his handlers, thanked everyone for everything. During the Public Comment period Arthur Thruston spoke of Ken Jones’ contribution to Glendale via his activism on issues and asked for special council recognition for him. Some of the councilmembers publicly thanked Ken Jones for his participation in Glendale’s civic life. Will he get a plaque for his activism? No. It would set a precedent and create untold controversy as to which citizens would merit such recognition. I have never agreed with Mr. Jones’ positions on any Glendale issue but he has earned my respect and thanks for his avid activism. There should be more Ken Jones in Glendale, not necessarily sharing his point of view but willing to speak and stand for those things in which they believe. Thank you, Mr. Jones.
© Joyce Clark, 2014
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The 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 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 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.
I think they had the votes to get it done but wanted more and saw this as they last chance to get it. I heard that they wanted to make an amendment to the application currently on file before the council voted on it because they did not want to ask for another change after it was approved. They do not want to appear to be pushing they luck (political influence) too far. Lol
I am just wondering how Sherwood feels about P&Z friends with their outright rejection of his request. Congrats to staff on the recommendation to reject the request and not bend to the political pressure. Jon Froke you and your staff may pay for that someday. Sorry.
On the other planning item on the agenda I was equally as disappointed in the give away by staff. Two electronic billboards on a site previously approved
for one; a single land use PAD- a violation of the code; an M1 use in the Sports and Entrainment District; 11-ft wide drive lanes on 99th Ave. to accommodate semi-trucks (a standard two lane residential street 30-ft) the minimum driving lane on a four or five lane street is 12-ft. Landscape plans for the site makes the Tanger site looks like an urban forest. Then the biggest joke of all the crack economic development team could not answer the basic question of how much of the company sales is internet base and not subject to sales taxes. When are we going to hold them accountable for some basic answers before we give away the farm? I noticed also they got all the credit for getting the done in “5-weeks” the big question is what exactly the Econ staff did in those five weeks. Come on Mr. Freidman that was an opportunity for you pass the credit on to the folks that did the work. You are losing creditable as you join this elite group of new leaders. Gone are the days when we give credit to the folks that earned it? Ops that was never the case in Glendale so keep on doing what works. Since you got all the credit for understanding the business need for “speed to market” your words how much of these ridicules compromise are you responsible for?
I am just wondering how Sherwood feels about his promise to the Glendale Star that it will be approved by council after being rejected by his friends on the P&Z. I am glad the staff stuck to the recommendation to reject the request and not bend to the political pressure. Watch your back Jon Froke you and your staff may pay for that someday remember Becker’s comments at the P&Z meeting.
I am so disappointed with the direction a number of our council members appear to be taking in shoving these billboards down the throats of Glendale residents as well as our neighbors in Peoria. I can’t get a straight answer from anyone as to the actual revenue the city will receive but I’m hearing it may be $3,500/year. Hardly a substantial amount to help bail out our budget shortfalls, so why would we scar our skies with obtrusive 85-foot tall billboards? What a HUGE step backward! As I understand the issue, the only revenue the city will receive directly is from a 2.9% sales tax levied on the fees paid by advertisers. I’ve also heard that if the advertiser is a national brand, they will be exempt from this tax which would further shrink this pathetic number. Supporters will argue that it will help promote Glendale-based businesses which will bring in indirect revenue but there is no way to guarantee who will advertise. It’s possible the advertisers could lure business to other cities, including Peoria or Phoenix or??? Of greater concern is that this decision would set a frightening precedent for other billboards to be placed in other PADs. That scares the heck out of me, and should scare anyone living in Glendale! I hope residents throughout the city, not just those who border the area in question, step forward and voice their concern. Then, we can only pray that our council member’s votes reflect the desires of their constituents and not Becker Boards and the Rose Law Group.
FYI, Joyce, I was a city council member, and Mayor Pro-Tem, in Mill Creek, Washington. I’m sure Wisconsin is equally beautiful but I’ve never lived there.
Michele, Thank you for your commentary. I hope your group succeeds in its efforts. Good luck. Thanks for correcting my error regarding your prior service. I guess what I heard got scrambled somehow and voila! the wrong state. I have corrected my error.