Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Apr 25

10

Senate bill 1229 will destroy your home values and is very, very good for developers

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 10, 2025
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • City of Phoenix • City of Tempe • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Ocotillo District • Phoenix Metro issues • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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.

This bill is passing through the Arizona State Legislature but there is still time for you to let your legislators know exactly how you feel about this bill. I recently read a very good guest Letter to the Editor in the InBuckeye news written by Kim Owens, a resident of Buckeye, Arizona. It sums up this bill quite nicely and so I am sharing with you her commentary:

“Residents of Buckeye should be aware of a threat to our community, as the Arizona legislature, under the protection of homebuilders with deep pockets, pushes forward a bill that will drastically change our city – and not for the better. The bill, Senate Bill 1229, will strip Arizona cities, meaning the voters, of the right to determine what their communities will become in the future. Buckeye is particularly vulnerable due to our abundance of open land.

In the name of providing ‘starter homes,’ this sleight of hand trick will take away local control, our method of protecting our investment, and expressing our voice on how we want our city to grow.

It is quite simply the big hand of government taking over our city, putting developers in complete control.

SB1229 is being forced upon us despite overwhelming public opposition from cities, towns, police, and fire departments, as well as voters. It epitomizes government overreach. The Buckeye general plan, approved by voters, serves as our roadmap for growth and development; however, it becomes irrelevant under SB 1229. This plan is crucial for maintaining the balance between residential, commercial, and open spaces in our city. Without it, Buckeye faces unplanned, chaotic development that disregards the needs and desires of its residents.

This bill will:

Require cities to allow high-density housing, with lot sizes as small as 3,000 square feet, in all new developments zoned as single-family residential,

Prohibit cities from requiring community parks, amenities or open space that is vital for quality of life,

Require cities allow remove any regulations stating a minimum square footage for a single-family home,

Forbid any maximum or minimum coverage requirements for a single-family home with no limit on the number or size of other structures on the lot,

Forbid regulations requiring the distance between property lines be more than 5 feet from the side lot lines and 10 feet from the front and rear lot lines,

Prohibit any design, architectural, or aesthetic requirements for a single-family home.

Essentially, build whatever the developer wants, as close as they want, out of whatever materials they want. This bill is designed to strip local cities and their citizens of the right to control the size and quality of growth in their communities, leading to second-class neighborhoods that are visually and structurally inferior.

Say hello to a future where the minimum standards for lot sizes and home dimensions can lead to overcrowded, blighted neighborhoods. Subdivisions could have as many as 12 to14 homes per acre built from any materials, such as cargo boxes.

Picture it – 3,000-square-foot lots, no fencing, five feet between each house, and free-for-all approach to architectural design. With no requirement that these “starter homes” be sold to working families or be owner-occupied, they will be little more than corporate, short-term housing money machines for developers that can be built anywhere, without regard for community input. Meanwhile, the property values in surrounding neighborhoods plummet, our streets become congested, police and fire are pushed to the limit, and schools are more crowded.

The threat posed by SB1229 to Buckeye is substantial and should not be overlooked. It compromises our ability to govern our community’s growth, protect our investment, and preserve our unique character. By mobilizing and taking action, we can safeguard our city’s future and ensure that development reflects the wishes and needs of its residents. It is essential to stand together and make our voices heard to prevent the irreversible changes that SB1229 threatens to impose.”

Although this commentary was written for Buckeye residents, make no mistake, this bill will affect all of us. residents must speak out against SB1229. So far, this bill has the votes to pass – it is time for us to make out voices heard! Here’s what you can do:

Voice your concerns to our State Representatives by email – tell them to VOTE NO ON SB1299:

Spread the Word: share this info with your neighbors, ask them to send an email.

Utilize Social Media: Provide information to wider networks – this affects every city in the state. Please contact your Arizona State legislators and make your voices heard. Here is a list of those legislators that represent Glendale:

Senator Eva Diaz District 22                 Email:  eva.diaz@azleg.gov

Rep Elda Luna-Nájera District 22        Email:  eluna-najera@azleg.gov

Rep Lupe Contreas District 22             Email:   lcontreras@azleg.gov

Senator Analise Ortiz District 24         Email:  analise.ortiz@azleg.gov

Rep Lydia Hernandez District 24         Email:    lhernandez@azleg.gov

Rep Anna Abeytia District 24               Email:  aabeytia@azleg.org

Senator Tim Dunn District 25              Email:   tdunn@azleg.gov

Rep Michael Carbone District 25        Email:  mcarbone@azleg.gov

Rep Nick Kupper District 25                 Email:   nkupper@azleg.gov

Senator Flavio Bravo District 26          Email:   fbravo@azleg.gov

Rep Cesar Aguilar District 26               Email:  caguilar@azleg.gov

Rep Quanta Crews District 26              Email:  qcrews@azleg.gov

Senator Kevin Payne District 27          Email:  kpayne@azleg.gov

Rep Lisa Fink District 27                        Email:  lfink@azleg.gov

Rep Tony Rivero District 27                  Email:  trivero@azleg.gov

Senator Janae Shamp District 29        Email:   jshamp@azleg.gov

Rep Steve Montenegro District 29      Email:  smontenegro@azleg.gov

Rep James Taylor District 29                Email: jtaylor@azleg.gov

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Feb 25

9

Recall Councilmember Leandro Baldenegro….NO!

Posted by Joyce Clark on February 9, 2025
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Velma Teague Library  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 1 Comment

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.

This is a long post but certainly worth reading.

Several factions are mounting a petition drive for a recall election against Councilmember Leandro Baldenegro of the Ocotillo District. In the Spring of 2024, Councilmember Jamie Aldama resigned his Ocotillo seat in a failed attempt to run for mayor. He never made the ballot for mayor because many of his petition signatures were found to be fraudulent and therefore, he never acquired the number of signatures needed to be on the ballot.

In April 2024, city council accepted applications and conducted interviews for the Ocotillo seat. Leandro Baldenegro was interviewed and impressed council with his answers. He is smart, down-to-earth, understands how local government works and expressed a genuine desire to serve the people of the Ocotillo district.

Now, there are several interest groups that have coalesced around obtaining petition signatures to force a recall of Baldenegro because they do not like the way he handled the issue of the Velma Teague Library.

These interest groups include Councilmember Lupe Conchas’ (Cactus district) supporters, Councilmember Bart Turner’s (Barrel district) supporters, the downtown disaffected who dislike a majority of the sitting council as well as senior management and former Councilmember Jamie Aldama’s supporters.

Councilmembers Conchas and Turner have made naked attempts to take over the affairs of the Ocotillo district. It is not either of their districts. Some of their activities have occurred without notifying Councilmember Baldenegro. These actions are in violation of Council Guidelines which require councilmembers when conducting activities in another councilmember’s district to notify the councilmember as a courtesy.

Their agenda is simple. Get rid of Councilmember Baldenegro in a recall election and replace him with Roree Goree. Goree, a pro-Aldama supporter, for the past year has made it a point to speak during the public comment portion of council voting meetings in order to get televised face and airtime. This ploy is a strategy so that Goree will be better known when he runs for the Ocotillo seat.

Make no mistake. If these factions succeed there will be a new majority that will replace the current conservative councilmembers and mayor with a Woke, liberal, Democrat majority comprised of Councilmembers Conchas, Turner and Tolmachoff with a new 4th, majority member, Rory Goree. I do not think the majority of Glendale residents would be happy with such an outcome and could very well force the removal of one or more of this aspiring new majority in upcoming elections.

Did you know the next regularly scheduled election for the Cholla district, Barrel district and Ocotillo district council positions will be in 2026? In fact, candidates wishing to run for these seats will pull nominating packets this Fall/Winter.

If a Special Election is called it will probably occur in November 2025. The cost will be borne by Glendale taxpayers and is estimated to be about $250,000 for a Special Election. This is crazy. Why is a special election needed when there will be a regular election for the seat in 2026? It makes no sense and is wasteful of taxpayer dollars.

I urge the registered voters of the Ocotillo district when asked to sign the recall petition, to just say ‘no’. Do not buy into their propaganda attempting to convince you that Leandro Baldenegro needs to be replaced. It is wasteful and unnecessary.

Recently, Councilmember Baldenegro posted a thorough and thoughtful response to this recall effort. He answers recent questions with fact and forthrightness. I was impressed and decided to offer it to a wider audience.

Leandro Baldenegro .

February 2, 2025 

“SORT OF A LONG POST BUT EVERYONE IN GLENDALE OR FROM GLENDALE NEEDS TO PLEASE READ IT!!!

I thought I would set the record straight on a few things that I am dealing with in my City Councilman life. Please feel free to repost and share with as many people as you like…I don’t have anything to hide and everything that I will be sharing is fact based (not opinions) and can be completely verified by anyone at anytime (Freedom of Information Act). So….here we go.

  1. It has been posted online and spoken in public that I ignored “thousands” of people who reached out to me to oppose the moving of the Velma Teague Library.

THE TRUTH IS when I went back and searched every email with the subject line having anything written about “saving the library” or something related to that sort of wording, I found 9 emails total. 9…not thousands….but only 9 and received maybe as many voicemails. So I can say that roughly 20 people (I added a few more for this conversation) reached out to me. I spoke face to face with about 20 or so people (both residents and business owners) and they were completely satisfied with the original plan to move the library for the reasons given in the presentation.

  1. It has been posted online and spoken in public that I have every intention to still move forward with moving the library to a different location and tearing down the current library building. The picture that is being painted is that I “pressed pause” for now and will carry out the previous plan.

THE TRUTH IS I have contacted city officials to see if the building DOES or DOES NOT qualify to be designated as a historic building. I was told it doesn’t, but I had a citizen that is under the impression that it does. That same citizen also told me that I need to look into seeing if the park itself would qualify as a “historic area” and by extension the building would be labeled “historic” as well and would then qualify for federal grants. Those two ideas were thrown around a lot by people online from what I was told. I am making sure and double checking to see if any of these ideas have merit. EVEN IF THEY DON’T, I will be working with a team of citizens, business owners, parents, teachers, students and library employees to hopefully come up with a few ideas for a new/updated/better library regardless of how that is defined.

  1. It has been posted online and spoken in public that I have made irresponsible decisions on my own without asking the community for any feedback about removing some exercise equipment from one of the parks here in my district.

THE TRUTH IS THAT the only time I have ever been involved with removing anything from any city park was when I attended a meeting with a group of veterans at a park and one of the attendees asked if a certain exercise apparatus could be removed because it was an eyesore and that citizen had never seen anyone ever use it. It was shortly after that meeting that I had another meeting with the director of Parks and Recreation through a Council Item Of Special Interest (CIOSI) request to see what we needed to do moving forward. That particular CIOSI had a few items in it including installing a flagpole (that was already purchased by a citizen), installing a plaque (that was already purchased by the city after a citizen submitted all the required paperwork on her own) and possibly having a military mural painted on the block walls of the park. There is a meeting tentatively scheduled for Saturday February 22nd at Veteranos Park on the southeast corner of 54th Ave and Ocotillo to gather more information from the community.

  1. It has been posted online and spoken in public that I lied about the story of a kind woman who told me on at least 4 occasions that she was mad and upset at my decision to move the library but that she still loved me and hoped that I would change my mind.

THE TRUTH IS that women in question is Martha Dennis. She is a retired teacher. She was my 86-year-old mother’s first friend when my mother arrived here from Mexico. As my mother has told all of my family over the years, my mother was picked on by the other Mexican girls in her school for being friends with a white girl and Martha was picked on by the other white girls for being friends with a Mexican girl. My mother has told my family this story for at least the last 40 years. I believe it to be true…why would my mother ever lie about something like that. Marth and her family have been friends with my mom and our family for many years. Martha was not at the meeting when I explained why it was her that helped me change my vote and do what I felt was necessary to reverse my prior decision. From what I was told, she received a few phone calls letting her know what I did and how she was mentioned. She did leave me a nice voice mail thanking me…and telling me that she loved me.

YOU can verify all of this information by contacting the city clerk’s office and asking for the emails pertaining to all of these issues. I believe you can request a transcript for the workshops and meetings as well. The Freedom of Information Act is in place so you can do this.

I can counter all of their irresponsible claims with VERIFIABLE PROOF. I don’t know if they will ever provide YOU any proof of their claims…but you certainly have the right to ask them to.

Certain individuals have submitted a petition to RECALL me and force the city to spend about $250,000 (that is what I was told it costs to run an election) to force a recall election. They could just wait until next year and run against me in the general election which the city would already be paying to conduct. I just want everyone to ask this very simple question…what has Councilmember Baldenegro done that was so traumatic and so scandalous that it requires him to be removed by a recall election?

In an upcoming post, I will list in detail all of the things that I have been doing since I was sworn in last April. I will gladly show you my body of work that my team (city employees) and I have worked on. I will list what I have planned for the future. I will describe what my life consists of now compared to before I was on the city council. I have been and will continue to be transparent. I have been and will continue to support and promote Ocotillo District and specifically Downtown Glendale. In spite of having purchased some more formal attire, I have been and will continue to be A REGULAR GUY doing a job with a politician’s title.

I look forward to sticking around for a long time as the proud councilmember of the Ocotillo District in the City of Glendale.

THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR SUPPORT!!!!!!!”

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

 

Jul 24

24

One last look at the two Lupes

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 24, 2024
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Primary Election August 2024 • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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 primary election is in one week, July 30th. Please do vote. It’s now too late to mail your Early Ballot but you can drop it off at the Glendale City Clerk’s office at the Civic Center Annex in downtown Glendale or you can drop it off on Election Day at a polling location.

Here are a couple of recent observations that have come to my attention. Lupe Encinas in a recent mailer used this photo:

I have learned that a complaint has been filed for its use of Glendale’s employees, namely police officers with no disclaimer or permission. A candidate cannot use Glendale’s employees in campaign literature. She will probably plead ignorance and that she didn’t know it was a violation. If she is found to have violated election law I suspect she will be fined.

At the candidate forum held by the Glendale Women’s Club, only the Lupe twins appeared. The Vice Mayor had a previous commitment and Dianna Guzman had had emergency surgery. During the forum, Conchas said at one point, “When I’m knocking on doors I hear a lot about speed enforcement and speed safety… I have been talking to residents about solutions and that includes more motorcycle police and giving out a few more speeding tickets.” This is the height of irony considering that Conchas has two traffic citations in his background and a Failure to Appear at one of those court hearings. Yet now he’s concerned about traffic safety and speeding. Check out these:

A recent anti-Vice Mayor Hugh was mailed out recently. It was paid for by the political action committee, Moving Glendale Forward, ID# 24-02. It was created specifically to do one action – print and mail a hit piece on Councilmember Hugh. The contributors to this PAC are 3 people, no one else, Art Othon of Othon Consulting, donated $500; Andy Konasek of Arizona Strategies, donated $500; and surprise! Bart Turner, Glendale City Councilmember representing Glendale’s Barrell district, $2,325.09. The printing and mailing cost $3,325.09. Bart Turner paid for 70% of the mailer. It appears that Turner despises Hugh and not just Hugh, but me, Mayor Weiers and Councilmember Malnar. In other words, the majority on Glendale’s city council.

He is financially supporting the two Lupes, Conchas and Encinas, both Democrats. There are more skeletons in Turner’s closet, but they are for another day in his future.

Turner appears to be a RINO Republican. When Democrat Mark Kelly was running for office Turner endorsed him and was subsequently censored by Republican Legislative District 24.

Several observers from that night at the Women’s Club shared their comments with me. One said Encinas is really “dumb” and another said she has “no grasp of the issues.” The last observer to reach out to me said both candidates had a golden opportunity to share specific solutions and to identify specific issues. Instead, they used platitudes and spoke in generalities. They both showed that they had no real understanding of Glendale’s policies or issues.

I’m sure you’ve heard the expression, “Me thinks thou doth protest too much.” It’s from Shakespeare’s Hamlet. The continual protests coming from the Encinas camp about connections with the radical Conchas should raise eyebrows. They had more than one Meet n Greet together. It certainly wasn’t a one-off.

The last thing Glendale needs right now are radicalized Democrats who espouse Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), defunding the police, higher taxes, gender transformation of children and open borders…the Democrat Pary platform.

Glendale is in a good position, economically and socially. Let’s keep it on a path of prosperity and safety for all of Glendale. Please vote for Ian Hugh and Dianna Guzman.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

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.

Jan 24

21

City Council Candidate Committee Reports of January 2024

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 21, 2024
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Primary Election August 2024 • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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.

City Council candidates never seem very interesting to the public as a Mayoral candidate or a Congressional candidate. I don’t know why because your city councilmember is the closest form of leadership to you, the public. These are the people who determine what your water bill is. When you have a problem with the city, these are the people you call. They determine city policies on virtually every aspect of your daily life and represent your city on a myriad of regional, state, and national committees.

Your choice of a city councilmember should be guided by someone who shares your values and who is responsive to your comments, questions, and concerns. If they can’t be bothered doing that as a candidate, I can assure you that they will not be responsive when elected.

Let’s look at the very first Candidate Financial Reports for those running and who is no longer running for council seats in Glendale. In general, none of the candidates have raised a lot of funding yet. Their campaigns start off slow as they hustle for signatures from registered voters for their nominating petitions. Once those petitions are turned in this March, they will be in full candidate mode as they start to raise money in earnest, order their campaign material and go to any groups’ meeting that they are invited to.

Patty Ortega expressed an interest in running for the Yucca Council seat last spring. Since then, she has changed her mind and is no longer interested.

The only uncontested city council race is that of incumbent Councilmember Ray Malnar, representing the Sahuaro District. It’s easy to see why. He’s doing a good job. He is sensitive to and responsive to his district residents. He is also even-handed in his policy discussions and decisions. Here’s what his financial report states. He started with $1,830.37 from his last campaign for Sahuaro district and loaned his committee $250.00. He has received $853.70 in campaign contributions. His expenses to date have been $954.21 leaving him with a balance of $1,729.86. His campaign contributors to date are:

  • Connie Kaiser
  • David Mitchell
  • Marion Malnar
  • Ron Kolb

He has received no Political Action Committee (PAC) contributions.

His major expenses are:

  • GoDaddy, $46.34 for a domain site
  • Wix, $267.87 for a web site

There are no rumors or speculation to report.

Incumbent Councilmember Ian Hugh also has a good record with his constituency. His policy decisions have been good for the city. He is one of the best and most responsive councilmembers. He is caring and will help his constituents out personally whenever possible. Here is his financial report. He starts with $23,753.74 from his last campaign for the Cactus District. He has raised $6,800.00 and has spent $843.14 to date leaving him with a balance of $29,710.60. He has received one maximum contribution of $6,550:

  • Louis Sands, owner of Sands Chevrolet

His other contribution:

  • Ron Kolb, Glendale business owner

He has received no PAC contributions. His expenses to date have been:

  • Costco, $650.57 for election announcement refreshments
  • Staples, $68.97 for petition copies and walking maps
  • Mail and More, $51.60 for petition copies and walking maps

There are no rumors or speculation to date.

A recent contender has surfaced to oppose Councilmember Hugh, Guadalupe “Lupe” Gonzalez, Jr. He pulled a packet and filed a Statement of Organization last week. Consequently, there is no Candidate Financial report available. According to his filing he is the Organizing Manager for a non-profit organization, ONE Campaign, devoted to fighting poverty and disease throughout the world. He is also running for the Alhambra Elementary School Board.

Diana Guzman is a candidate for the Yucca Council seat. She has raised $5,304.84 with $1.602.71 coming from a state legislative senate campaign committee. She has loaned her committee $3,102.13. She spent $1,602.64 leaving her with a balance of $3,702.20.

She has no contributors who have given the maximum amount of $6,550.00. She has received no PAC contributions. Here are her contributors:

  • Ernie Guzman, relative
  • Jane Breakiron, Behavioral Health

Her expenses to date include:

  • Vista Print, $98.27 for business cards
  • Office Max, $64.73 for petition copies
  • Hondo’s Screen Printing, $390.20 for ?
  • Next Day Flyers, $171.11 for pull up sign
  • Phoenix Print Shop, $651.60 for flyers
  • Hondo’s Screen Printing, $168.00 for shirts
  • Plotters Doctors, $52.13 for laminate map

Rumor and/or speculation to date is that I am supporting Diana. This is true. I encouraged her to run and am endorsing her wholeheartedly. She is smart, compassionate and shares our values and goals for the Yucca District and the City of Glendale.

Guadalupe “Lupe” Encinas is also running for the Yucca District Council seat. She has raised $2,618.07and has loaned her committee $1,270.70. She spent $967.69 leaving her with a balance of $1,650.36.

She has no contributors who have given the maximum amount of $6,550.00. She has received no PAC contributions. Here are her contributors:

  • Lauren Tolmachoff, occupation not listed, incumbent Glendale Councilmember, Cholla District
  • Luiz Guzman, occupation not listed
  • Craig Jennings, occupation not listed
  • Grant and Dana Hickman, occupation not listed
  • Glenn and Audry Hickman, occupation not listed
  • Yvonne Knaack, occupation not listed, former Glendale Councilmember
  • Bart Turner, occupation not listed, incumbent Glendale Councilmember, Barrell District
  • Natalie Stahl, occupation not listed, Chair of Encinas Campaign Committee
  • David Serey, occupation not listed, husband of Treasurer of Encinas Campaign Committee

Her expenses to date have been:

  • GoDaddy, $78.49 for email
  • La Art Printing, $889.90 for shirts, flyers and yard signs

Rumor and/or speculation include Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff encouraged her to run and is or will be, endorsing her. Watch Encinas’ level of missing information in her reports. She fails to enter information that is required. Some of the contributors’ addresses and ALL job titles and employers are missing. These are glaring omissions of fact that are reporting requirements. If she can’t follow the state law for reporting requirements what else will she fail to report?

As you can see, these initial reports don’t contain a great deal of information and the next set of reports due March 2, 2024 won’t have much new information. Once these people have turned in their nominating petitions later in March, more information will be available.

In my next blog I will be discussing the current atmosphere of politics in Glendale. Watch for it. There will be some interesting dynamics to share.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

Mar 22

23

More Good News in Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on March 23, 2022
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility • Cholla District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale and the NFL Super Bowl • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Luke Air Force Base • Ocotillo District • Sahuaro District • State Farm Stadium • Westgate • Yucca district • Zanjero  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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 good news for Glendale just keeps coming and I wanted to share the news with you. On Friday, March 18th, the Mayor, I and city councilmembers welcomed Senator Mark Kelly to our Oasis Water Treatment Plant to recognize and thank him for his successes in acquiring federal funding for Glendale-specific projects. He lobbied and secured $2 million in federal funding for the city’s water interconnect project which will provide water from Peoria and Phoenix should there be an emergency and we have to shut down the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant.

Senator Kelly was also successful in securing $710,000 in federal funding to replace Glendale’s 20+ years old, public safety mobile command center. Thank you, Senator Kelly. Each of these is a critical project for Glendale and we are pleased that each of these projects can now be realized.

Two more blockbuster developments are coming to Glendale’s “New Frontier” in the area of the Loop 303. On March 9th, Nestle announced that it would invest $675 million to build a manufacturing facility expected to open in 2024. It will create over 350 jobs, primarily for Glendale residents, with salaries that begin at $60,000 using professional staff, production and manufacturing leaders, technical staff, engineers and more.

Today, March 23rd, Williams-Sonoma, the world’s largest digital-first, design-led and sustainable home furnishings retailer announced it has leased 1.25 million SF facility to be developed as manufacturing at The Cubes in Glendale. This facility is also in the “New Frontier.” It is expected to open in the fall of 2022 and will create over 2,400 jobs by 2027 at an average salary of $50,000.

All of this once again, signals Glendale’s tremendous growth and showcases our ideal location for national and international businesses. Think about some of the facilities that are already in Glendale with Red Bull, White Claw and Rausch in the “New Frontier.” Add the soon-to-be-open Crystal Lagoon Island Resort, Pop Stroke and Chicken ‘n’ Pickle joining the Gila River Arena, State Farm Stadium and Camelback Ranch in the Westgate/Zanjero area. Next year Glendale will host the Super Bowl followed by the NCAA Final Four. Then add national companies, such as Humana and Bechtel to our lineup. The recent locates of several luxury car dealerships, such as BMW and the Tesla Service Center are part of Glendale’s line up. Last, but certainly not the least, Glendale is the proud home of Luke Air Force base, a training center for the F-35 fighter jet.

Nearly 4,000 residential units, both single family and multifamily, will be completed this year or next adding over 13,000 new residents in the Yucca district alone. All of Glendale’s districts – Cholla, Sahuaro, Barrell, Cactus and Ocotillo – are welcoming new developments as well.

If you are not impressed, you should be. Glendale has come of age with the impressive Bell Road Corridor of retail as well as the equally impressive Westgate/Zanjero entertainment and retail district and the explosion of manufacturing and distribution development in the “New Frontier” at the Loop 303. Cities, to remain healthy, must grow or they die. Glendale has no intention of dying.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

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.

 

Nov 21

11

Glendale redistricting remains problematical

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 11, 2021
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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.

After the Federal Census was performed in the Spring of 2020 a mandate to redraw political district lines applies. In Arizona that is for congressional districts, state legislative districts and local districts.

Glendale began this process this summer after the hiring of a consultant to assist with the technical aspects of the process. Glendale’s new map with council districts must be submitted to the state no later than December 15, 2021.

The city council has had a series of workshops on the issue and there has been a period of public comment. Below is the public comment that has been received to date and presented to city council at its most recent workshop on November 9, 2020.

Please note that one citizen comment was made requesting that the Copperwood community not be divided. This citizen request was accommodated by the consultant and the city council. Three citizens asked that the Independence Heights community remain within the Yucca district. Neither the consultant nor the city council accommodated these citizens’ request as can be seen by the preferred city council map, Draft A, presented by the consultants. See Map A here:

The traditional redistricting guidelines for consideration in drawing districts includes three items of particular importance. One is to preserve communities of interest another is to accommodate planned future growth and the third is to have a “nearly equal number of inhabitants” (Arizona Statute 9—473.B). Here are the guidelines, federal, state and traditional:

In my opinion, some of these guidelines have been not been satisfied. Lets take a look at future growth within the districts. Please refer to this map:

You will see numbers for each district. Upon receiving clarification from the consultant, these numbers refer to the number of residential units already approved or in the pipeline and anticipated to be approved. The nationally recognized multiplier of occupants per residential unit is 2.3.

  • Cholla 533 units       X 2.3       increased population expected of 1,225.9
  • Sahuaro 944 units    X 2.3       increased population expected of 2,171.2
  • Barrel 859 units       X 2.3       increased population expected of 1,975.7
  • Cactus 342 units      X 2.3       increased population expected of 786.6
  • Ocotillo 410 units     X 2.3       increased population expected of 943
  • Yucca 7848 units      X 2.3       increased population expected of 18,050.4

Also consider this:

                                 Current population Map A          Future planned population by district

  • Cholla      39,793             +1,225.9                                     40,018.9
  • Sahuaro   42,051             +2,171.2                                     44,222.2
  • Barrel      41,210             +1,975.7                                     43,185.7
  • Cactus     43,132               +786.6                                      43,918.6
  • Ocotillo    42,409               + 943                                        43,352.0
  • Yucca       39,820           +18.050.4                                     57,870.04

The startling fact that should be immediately apparent is that the Yucca district is expected to see an increase in population of nearly 20,000 new residents in the next few years. It will have a population of 13,000 more residents than Sahuaro district projected to have a population of 44,222.2.

Legal guidelines do permit accommodation for future growth. However, there is one caveat to that guideline. The Supreme Court has granted safe harbor for population plan deviations up to 10%. Map A offers a deviation of total population of 8.06%. However, that deviation is occurring in Sahuaro, Cactus and Ocotillo districts. I’m not convinced that adding another percentage point in total population deviation would make any substantial difference.

However, while accommodating the Copperwood community, Map A offers no accommodation for the Independence Heights neighborhood’s request to remain in the Yucca district. This is a distinct community of interest between Ocotillo Road and Maryland Avenue, 71st Avenue to 75th Avenue. I am convinced that the consultants could have accommodated their request with minimal disruption to other council district boundaries.

I found it astonishing that Councilmember Aldama, representing the Ocotillo district, into which Independence Heights would go, paraphrasing made the following comment, If I am losing the Sands neighborhood, it should be compensated for by including Independence Heights in the Ocotillo district.  His comment virtually makes Independence Heights a pawn or consolation prize for losing the Sands neighborhood. I didn’t know that’s the way districts were to be drawn.

I am surprised that the only Councilmember that recognized the issues and supported keeping the Independence Heights neighborhood in the Yucca district was Councilmember Turner and for that, I thank him. To support their interests and their boundaries the rest of the council was willing to sacrifice the interests of the Yucca district.

Here’s two maps that I created. Obviously, they are not perfect. They were not vetted by the consultants and even though the population deviations are lower than the consultant’s Map A, they recognize that at some point council district boundaries are going to have to change dramatically to accommodate the growth occurring in the Yucca district. That is what occurs in my proposed draft maps. The Ocotillo boundary has to shift west at some point and that will create a domino effect in all of the other districts with their common boundaries moving further south. In fact, it should happen this time but it won’t.

 

A powerhouse in Glendale has not only been created but perpetuated for the next ten years until the 2030 census. The Yucca district is the largest geographically. The Yucca district will be the most populated of all 6 districts. The Yucca district is the epicenter of not only residential development but economic development as well.

If anything makes the case for the completion of Heroes Park, after 23 years of waiting for sports fields, a recreation and aquatics center, expansion of the smallest library in the city system and a dog park, this is it.

© Joyce Clark, 2021       

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.

Sep 21

8

It’s time to redistrict Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 8, 2021
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Phoenix Metro issues • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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.

Every ten years, Glendale is required to redraw its City Council districts based on data from the U.S. Census. The process is called redistricting and the goal is to make sure each Council district has approximately equal population.

Let’s begin with the Census data for 2020 provided to the city.  On July of 2019 the Census Bureau’s estimated population for Glendale was 252,387. It’s final, official count of Glendale is 248,325.

Everyone in the State believes the Bureau’s count is wrong and the population was undercounted. Experts said they expected to see even higher rates of growth. William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., who specializes in census data and urban populations, said he expected to see a higher growth rate in Arizona. Cities with council districts redraw those boundaries every 10 years after each U.S. census.

Four cities looking to redistrict by the next election in November include: 

  • Mesa
  • Glendale
  • Peoria
  • Buckeye

Other Valley cities, such as Chandler, Scottsdale and Goodyear, don’t use a district system,      instead electing council members on a citywide basis.

Look at this chart for Glendale.

City-data.com got its numbers from the Maricopa County estimates. I have no idea how the County arrived at these figures.

Please note, according to Census data, that every council district but the Yucca district added from 2,000+ in population to 6,000+ in population. Yet the Yucca district supposedly lost 315. Can anyone in their right mind believe this? The Yucca district has exploded over the last 10 years with new residential subdivisions (Copper Cove, Bethany Ranch and Positano to name just a few) as well as new apartment complexes. Yet, in the past ten years the Yucca district lost 315 people? Ridiculous. It’s nuts. The data makes no sense. The city should be requesting a recount of the Yucca district data. Someone, somewhere screwed up. If you put garbage in, garbage comes out. I suspect that the Yucca district, in fact, gained about 10,000 in population over the last decade.

Not only that, but the Census Bureau has also been late in releasing census block data (will do so this month, September) on population counts, the very data needed to redraw districts.  As a result, Glendale has until December 15, 2021, about 3 months, to submit their new council districts to the State.

Here are the guidelines, city council adopted, that shall be used to redraw the districts:

  • Each district shall respect communities of interest as much as possible;
  • District borders shall follow visible natural and man-made geographical and topographical features as much as possible;
  • District borders shall be drawn to avoid locating more than one current Councilmember in any one district as much as possible;
  • Each new district shall preserve the corresponding existing district’s population and territory as much as possible;
  • Districts known to be areas of higher-than-average population growth in the two to five years following redistricting, based on development projects that have received final plat approval from the City, may be under populated within the population deviation amounts allowed by law;
  • To the extent possible, consistent with constitutional law and the requirements of federal and state statutes, each district shall contain a substantially equal number of electors.

 

 

 

The city has created a dedicated web site allowing all Glendale residents not only information about the redistricting process but on or about September 16th the public can see the population data by census block and draw their own redistricting maps. Here is the link to the web site:

https://glendaleaz.com/your_government/connect/departments/city_clerk/redistricting/current_district_map

You can learn more and get involved by attending one of three public Glendale workshops. By the time of these city hosted workshops occur the appropriate data should be available on the city website to any citizen who wants it. Here are the workshop dates:

 Monday, September 20  2:00 p.m. Glendale City Council Chambers
5850 W. Glendale Avenue
 Wednesday, September 22  10:00 a.m. Glendale Main Library Auditorium
5959 W. Brown Street
 Monday, September 27  6:30 p.m. Foothills Recreation & Aquatics Center
Coyote Room
5600 W. Union Hills Drive

Why should we focus on redistricting whether it be on a local, state or national level? We all vote for those representatives that most closely align with our values and goals. With redrawn districts you may find that now you are in a district that has a representative with whose values and goals with which you disagree. By involving yourselves in the redistricting process your input will contribute toward making sure that your representative actually represents you.

© Joyce Clark, 2021       

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.

Jul 21

25

Why redistricting matters to Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 25, 2021
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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.

On Saturday, July 24, 2021, the Arizona Redistricting Commission held a public hearing at Glendale’s Civic Center to obtain public comment on their mission to create new legislative districts within the State of Arizona. Their prime directive is to preserve “communities of interest.”

Unfortunately, the last Commission failed miserably to do so in Glendale and divided Glendale into 5 legislative districts, more than any other Valley city. So much for preserving or even recognizing Glendale as a whole as a “community of interest.” I have prepared some illustrations. The data I used came from www.city-data.com .See the graphic below:

Current state legislative districts

The problem with 5 legislative districts is that each contains only a small portion of Glendale’s voters. These legislative districts are very large and with 5 districts in Glendale, our voter base in each of these districts is very diluted. In other words, Glendale voters in each of these legislative districts are such a small percentage of each district’s total voter base, there is no imperative by each of these legislators to represent our interests (our “community of interest”).

I would ask the Commission to consider this suggestion for a legislative district map for Glendale:

Proposed state legislative districts

On another note, legislative districts are not the only districts that have to be redrawn after the census. So, too, do Glendale’s council districts. Since the last census in 2010, the council districts are no longer equal in population. Take a look at this graphic:

Council districts by population

As you can see, the Yucca district with a population of 72,077 is double the population of the Ocotillo and Cholla districts and nearly double that of the Sahuaro and Barrell districts. Cactus district will surprise most as its population has grown to 65,620 people.

The city council will consider and most likely, approve the hiring of a consultant to redraw Glendale’s council district boundaries. I would expect some radical changes to the current boundaries to get as close to ensuring that all districts have as close to equal population as possible.

The greatest shift may well be seeing the Yucca district’s eastern boundary move westward. How much is anyone’s guess but another imperative is to leave enough population allowance to accommodate future population growth. That is expected to be in the Yucca district as more residential units are developed west of the Loop 101 along Ballpark Boulevard.  It is possible that its eastern boundary will move further westward than expected to allow for future population increase over the next 10 years.

These redistricting efforts, statewide and in Glendale, will impact voters and candidates. Candidates would be wise to wait until the new district boundaries are approved before collecting nominating petition signatures. If they start now, they may end up with petition signatures from voters who are no longer in their newly configured districts.

As these new districts are approved be sure to check your (possible) new voting precinct and where you will be voting in the 2022 elections next year.

© Joyce Clark, 2021       

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.

« Previous Page