Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

May 26

31

Who are Lupe Conchas puppet masters?

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 31, 2026
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • VAI Resort • Worker Power Super PAC  | 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.

Lupe Conchas was removed from Glendale City Council on May 28, 2026. For those readers who have not been following my blog, council found him in violation of the Glendale city charter. The charter disqualifies from a Glendale city council position anyone who holds a second public office for which compensation is received. Conchas is seated as a board member of the SRP agricultural improvement and water district, a public office for which compensation is received.

A recent SRP election saw a slate of climate advocates win control of the SRP power board. Conchas was one of two “clean energy” candidates who flipped board seats, helping to secure a single-seat majority for the climate team, in a surprise result. Conchas faces tremendous pressure to remain on the SRP board. He only offered to resign if city council retained him as a councilmember knowing that probably would not happen.

Granted Conchas is politically ambitious and may one day seek a congressional office, but he can’t do it without help…a lot of financial help.

The day Conchas was removed from city council he immediately filed a civil lawsuit (CV2026-022080) against the city seeking an emergency temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. According to an Arizona Republic story of May 29, 2026, “The complaint says Conchas suffers ‘irreparable harm’ because he is unable to serve his constituents and is being illegally denied his councilmember salary and benefits. The annual salary of a councilmember is $34,000.”

When Conchas says it’s not about the money, you can see in his filing it is about the money.

His attorney is Austin C. Yost, a partner of Coppersmith Brockelman, PLC. One of Yost’s specialties is political law. This lawsuit will not be cheap.

Conchas apparently does not have the money to pursue this action. This is where the puppet masters come in. Who are they? Unions. There are 137 unions in Arizona such as the Teamsters, United Food and Commercial Workers, and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Many of these unions contributed to Conchas’ political campaign for his council seat. The major supporter of Conchas has been and continues to be Worker Power.

Worker Power first appeared in Glendale with its attempt to unionize hotel workers, specifically at the VAI Resort. Having failed at that initiative several times, they turned their attention to Conchas, a radical, Socialist Democrat. Their victories include Conchas’ election to the Glendale city council and the SRP Agricultural Improvement and Water District Board. They are committed to keeping Conchas on both.

The Worker Power PAC is organized as an unaffiliated “super PAC” that is allowed to spend unlimited amounts of funds in support of candidates via independent expenditures. The PAC describes itself as “dedicated to delivering wins for progressive political candidates.” In 2020, the PAC focused its spending on Arizona elections. In 2022, the PAC “conducted a massive independent expenditure field canvass that provided the margin of victory for numerous progressive candidates…” The Worker Power PAC is closely affiliated with Unite Here Local 11, an Arizona-based local chapter of the national left-of-center hotel and hospitality employees PAC Unite Here.

Organizations that have funded the Worker Power PAC include the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the American Federation of Teachers, the Arizona AFL-CIO, and the United Food and Commercial Workers.

I happened upon an article by the Arizona Independent News Network that published an article about Conchas’ removal from the city council. You can read the full article by clicking on this link: https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2026/05/28/democrat-city-councilman-in-glendale-attempted-to-bribe-his-way-out-of-expulsion/

Here are a few excerpts from the article.

  • “Jose ‘Lupe’ Conchas, Jr. made a last-ditch effort to retain his seat on the Glendale City Council by laying down an offer he thought the council couldn’t refuse, per a source. ‘They were all stunned’, one city staffer told the Arizona Daily Independent on the condition of anonymity. ‘He basically said, ‘If you illegally keep me on, I promise to not run for mayor.’ Did he really think they would buy that? Did he really think any of them were as unethical as him?”
  • “Conchas is a political animal who wants to make a living being a politician, so he runs for everything to accumulate power. He makes others nervous because he’s slimy, but openly so, like he has no shame and thinks it’s the most natural thing in the world. So breaking the law and trying to hold more offices than the law allows is very Conchas,’ one political consultant told the Arizona Daily Independent. ‘Conchas is always running for something, he probably wants to be governor or in Congress someday, so he’s always climbing the political ladder trying to run for more offices and higher offices. It isn’t about service or issues, he’s just incredibly ambitious.”

Damning assessments from others but also accurate.

So now we wait to see the results of the Conchas‘ lawsuit.

© 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.

May 26

28

Conchas removed as Glendale City Councilmember

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 28, 2026
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale  | 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 morning I watched the special Glendale city council voting meeting. There was only one agenda item, consideration of the removal of Lupe Conchas as the Cactus district councilmember. It was a painful meeting but necessary. Frankly, it should have occurred after Conchas was sworn into his other public and compensated office on the SRP board in early May.

After the mayor opened the meeting and the resolution in its entirety was read, the mayor opened the floor for citizen comments. There were 27 speakers. The breakdown was a follows:

  • 8 speakers from the Cactus district (which is the district Conchas served)
  • 19 speakers from outside the Cactus district with 12 speakers from Phoenix, 2 from the Cholla district, 1 each from the Sahuaro and Barrel districts, 1 from Tempe and 1 from Peoria.
  • 18 speakers spoke on behalf of Conchas remaining
  • 9 speakers spoke opposed to Conchas remaining

The general themes of the speakers in support of Conchas were:

  • Conchas is of good character and was a good councilmember.
  • It was City Attorney Michael Bailey’s fault for not advising Conchas of the ramifications.
  • Conchas is not receiving compensation from Salt River Project.
  • Council does not have the right to ignore the will of Cactus district voters.
  • Former Councilmember Hugh was not a good councilmember.
  • Threats to remove all sitting councilmembers at their next elections.

The general themes of speakers opposed to Conchas remaining were:

  • It creates a conflict of interest between Salt River Project and the City of Glendale.
  • Conchas had been advised multiple times of the consequences of having two elected offices publicly compensated.
  • Conchas was willing to try his luck in the court of public opinion.
  • Conchas was not willing to follow the rule of law as expressed in the Glendale city charter.

After citizens’ comments closed the mayor called for a motion. Conchas immediately made the motion to table the resolution. It was seconded by Councilmember Turner. Conchas’ comments after he made his motion summarized were he urged all councilmembers to look at the full picture; he thanked all councilmembers; he did his due diligence; he offered to resign from SRP if retained as councilmember.

However, the most remarkable comment was that he offered to “abandon all political plans” if he were retained. We know he has declared to run for mayor of Glendale in 2028. His offer could be construed as an open political bribe.

Councilmember Turner opined that the resolution to remove was premature and may not be necessary as Conchas has not received any compensation thus far. His ultimate solution was that Conchas resign from the SRP board.

The motion to table failed on a 4 to 3 vote with Conchas, Baldenegro and Turner voting to table and Weiers, Malnar, Tolmachoff and Guzman voting to reject tabling.

Councilmember Tolmachoff made the motion to accept the resolution for removal.  Seconded by Vice Mayor Malnar.

All councilmembers commented on their votes with the exception of Mayor Weiers and Councilmember Baldenegro.

Conchas said that this action would silence Cactus district residents. He asked councilmembers to reconsider and said that if he were not expelled, he would resign from SRP.

Councilmembers Guzman and Tolmachoff stated that it was their duty as elected officials to follow the law and to uphold the city’s charter.

Vice Mayor Malnar said that this meeting was stressful for all and that action was taken only after receiving legal advice from outside counsel who had no interest to the city.

Councilmember Turner stated that there was no evidence that Conchas has received compensation to date. He suggested that if Conchas virtually attended SRP meetings, he would receive no compensation.

Councilmembers Conchas, Baldenegro and Turner voted to deny the motion.

The Mayor and Councilmembers Malnar, Tolmachoff and Guzman voted to approve the motion.

The motion passed on a 4 to 3 vote.

The most surprising vote was that of Councilmember Baldenegro. It is generally known that Baldenegro and Conchas were not buddies. So, why did Baldenegro vote to support Conchas? I’ll leave that for you, the reader, to figure out.

One interesting citizen speaker was Gary Hirsch of the Cactus district. Mr. Hirsch will be running for the Cactus council seat and is supported by Conchas.

The night before this council meeting Conchas posted the following on his Facebook page:

Arizona Legislative District 26 Democrats · May 27 9pm

Let’s support Lupe!

The Glendale City Council will vote Thursday on whether to expel member Lupe Conchas over his election to the Salt River Project power board last month.

Can you be there to support Lupe? Bring friends and pack the room. The meeting starts at 10am, but we ask you to be there early to fill out a comment card prior to the meeting.

If you wish to speak on a matter concerning Glendale city government that is not on the printed agenda, please fill out a Citizen Comments Card located in the back of the Council Chambers and give it to the City Clerk before the meeting starts.

Mari Alvarado

Tomorrow Thursday, at 10:00 a.m. please come early and fill out a card to support Council Member, Lupe Conchas at Glendale City Hall, 5750 W. GLENN DR. GLENDALE, AZ There is a vote scheduled to expel him. We need Indigenous Coalition Of Arizona LICA to show up.

8 people from the Cactus district showed up.

Final comment. No one is above the law especially of Glendale’s city charter. Conchas bet that the court of public opinion, rather than the law, would save him. He bet wrong.

© 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.

May 26

13

Conchas is now serving two masters

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 13, 2026
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | 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 Monday May 4, 2026, Glendale Councilmember Lupe Conchas took the oath of office as a Boardmember for District 4 of The Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District.

He is in violation of the Glendale City Charter, Article II, Section 5, Qualifications.

“The mayor shall be at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the date of his election or appointment; the mayor and council members shall be qualified electors of the city at the  time of election; shall hold no other public office for which they receive compensation except that of a notary public or member of the national guard or naval of military reserve; and shall have resided in said city for one (1) year next preceding the date of such election or appointment. If the mayor or any councilman shall cease to possess any of these qualifications or shall be convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, his office shall immediately become vacant.”

Lupe Conchas is now holding a second public office for which he receives compensation requiring his seat to be vacated immediately.

Legally, compensation is commonly associated with Workman’s Compensation. However, there is a second legal definition, “Compensation refers to all forms of payment or benefits that an employee receives for their work. This includes not only wages and salaries but also bonuses, health insurance, retirement plans, and other perks provided by the employer.”

In addition to receiving payment every time Conchas attends a meeting, he also receives insurance, which legally is compensation as stated in the Glendale City Charter.

He is in violation of the Glendale City Charter and should have been already removed.

We know there was an executive session council meeting on Friday, May 1st. It was not a public meeting and all discussions are confidential. I think we can assume it was a discussion involving Conchas.

I am aware that Conchas has legal representation and that a letter from his legal counsel was sent to the mayor and all councilmembers. I had submitted a Public Information Request for that letter and today I received the letter in question.

His attorney, Sambo Dui of Coppersmith Brockleman, PLC., contends that Conchas is not receiving compensation from Salt River Project and therefore is not in violation of our city charter. The very fact that Salt River Project publicly states that the office holder receives compensation per meeting plus health coverage was known to Conchas. His attorney made a lot of assertions that frankly have to be adjudicated in a court of law.

Remember legally, compensation is defined as payments or benefits. Conchas is receiving $60 for each meeting attended as well as the benefit of insurance coverage.

It appears that his attorney’s assertions are flawed. Conchas legally still receives his salary. His attorney leaves the legal door open with regard to defining ‘compensation’ by opining, “even assuming the City Charter’s reference to ‘compensation’ is broader than ‘salary,…”

His attorney states that Conchas will waive his salary. Whether Conchas accepts it or not is a moot point. Legally, this public office offers compensation, no matter who has the office. It is the fact that Conchas ran knowing this was a public office that was compensated. His intent was clear.

Now that he has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar, he thinks he can make it go away by saying he won’t take the money, but he continues to receive insurance coverage, which is also legal compensation.

It seems that a lot of pressure had been placed on Conchas to stay on the SRP board by radical democrats whose aim was to gain control of SRP. Now that the radical Democrats are the majority on this board expect to see rate increases as they push their “Green Agenda.” No wonder they want to keep Conchas on at all costs. It appears that they will cover any legal fees he may have.

In addition to receiving two salaries, there is also the question of a conflict of interest. The city does a lot of business with SRP. Having a sitting city councilmember on their board could affect that relationship.

What has been our city attorney’s or council’s response to date? Crickets…nada…nothing. It seems that our council is in dereliction of their duty to uphold Glendale’s city charter. It seems we have an ineffectual city council in fear of removing Conchas without getting some kind of legal cover to do so.

If I were still a sitting councilmember I would have already called for a public vote to remove Conchas. Let each councilmember go on record with regard to upholding our city charter. If Conchas were to sue the city it would require a court of law to settle the issue. It would be expensive for Conchas to sue but have no fear. I suspect that Worker Power would foot the bill.

It time Glendale citizens asked their councilmembers to act. If you would like to send any or all an email expressing your opinion, here are their email addresses:

Why is Lupe Conchas still serving as a Glendale city councilmember?

© 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.

Apr 26

27

Glendale councilmember Lupe Conchas…A whole lot of foot dragging going on

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 27, 2026
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | 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.

It seems that Glendale councilmember Lupe Conchas is in violation of the Glendale City Charter and Arizona Revised Statute 38-296.

He filed for nomination to the Salt River District Board of Directors (District 4) on or prior to Friday, February 6, 2026 (deadline for filing), in the second year of his term (not the last year of his term as councilmember as required by Arizona law). He had 10 days to resign as councilmember and if he failed to do so, he lost his council seat within 10 days automatically. He allegedly has violated Arizona’s Resign-to-Run law.

He is also allegedly in violation of Glendale’s City Charter by running for a public office that receives compensation. According to the city charter, his office shall immediately become vacant.

So, why is he still on Glendale City Council? Why hasn’t the council immediately removed him from office? Why is the city still paying him a salary paid for by your tax dollars? Foot dragging?

It’s time for a deeper dive into this whole mess.

Jose “Lupe” Conchas, Jr., ran as a candidate for “Boardmember for District 4 of The Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District.” Note that he ran for the Agricultural Improvement and Power District, not the Water District. This is important because the Agricultural Improvement district is a public entity and the Water District is not.

SRP is a governmental-owned or public body under Arizona Law, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (the “District”): This is the electricity provider and is formally a political subdivision of the State of Arizona (an agricultural improvement district formed in 1937). As a government-owned corporation or public body under Arizona law:

  • It can issue tax-exempt municipal bonds
  • Its board is elected (by landowners in the service area, with voting often tied to land ownership
  • It is generally not regulated by the Arizona Corporation Commission for rates and investments in the same way as private utilities. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) does not regulate Salt River Project (SRP) for rates, rules, service standards, or day-to-day operations because SRP is structured as a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, not a private or investor-owned “public service corporation” under the ACC’s jurisdiction.
  • It is subject to Arizona’s Public Records Law as a public body and is often described as a public power utility or governmental entity

A lawsuit was filed on April 17, 2026, requesting an expedited hearing to occur on or before April 28, 2026. Ten days later, April 27, 2026, and no court date has been assigned. Foot dragging??

Gabrielle E. Schifferer, Trustee of the Jelle Trust,

A Qualified Elector and Landowner in the Salt River Project Agricultural

Improvement and Power District,

Plaintiff/Contestant,

Vs.

Jose “Lupe” Conchas, Ir., District 4 Boardmember-elect for District 4 of

The Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District,

and John M. Feley, in his official capacity as Corporate Secretary of The Salt River Project

Agricultural Improvement and Power District,

Defendants/Contestee( s ).

Case No.: CV 2026-01 6 0 4 0

Why is Conchas still on Glendale’s city council?

Lots of scuttlebutt swirling. One is the mayor and several councilmembers are waiting for the result of the aforementioned lawsuit. To provide cover for any action? The city charter is clear. The minute Conchas was elected to another public body with compensation on April 7, 2026, according to the city charter he is removed immediately. Not taking any action to date could be publicly perceived as dereliction of duty. Dereliction of duty is defined as “a person’s purposeful or accidental failure to perform an obligation without a valid excuse, especially an obligation attached to their job.” This is considered to be crime.

Another piece of scuttlebutt is that Conchas may resign his position with SRP. I suppose he thinks this will save his councilmember seat. That does not appear to be a correct interpretation.  It appears the very minute he was elected to the SRP board he was in violation of the city charter. That seems to be when he violated the city charter and resigning after the fact will not save him. Conchas may also have to face another charge, that of unjust enrichment by holding two publicly compensated offices.

Yet another scuttlebutt is that the mayor and vice mayor will be meeting with Conchas this week to tell him to resign or he will be voted out of office by city council.

Lastly, what have been the actions or inactions of our City Attorney, Michael Bailey? He is the council’s and city’s attorney. He knows the law. There is a body of law that confirms that SRP’s agricultural district is a public body. What did he advise this council to do? And when?

It’s way past time for Lupe Conchas to vacate his seat as the Glendale councilmember representing the Cactus district.

© 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.

Apr 26

21

Is Lupe Conchas still a Glendale councilmember??

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 21, 2026
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | 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.

Perhaps not. Let me share the Arizona’s Revised Statute on its resign-to- run law, Chapter 38-296. Limitation on filing for election by incumbent of elective office.

  • “A. Except during the final year of the term being served, no incumbent of a salaried elective office, whether holding by election or appointment, may offer himself for nomination or election to any salaried local, state or federal office.”
  • “C. The resignation of the incumbent elective officer duly filed in writing with the officer, board or commission having jurisdiction of the office, if not accepted within ten days, shall be deemed to have become effective as of the date of filing.”

Let me also share our Glendale City Charter, Article II, Section 5, Qualifications.

“The mayor shall be at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the date of his election or appointment; the mayor and council members shall be qualified electors of the city at the time of election; shall hold no other public office for which they receive compensation except that of a notary public or member of the national guard or naval of military reserve; and shall have resided in said city for one (1) year next preceding the date of such election or appointment. If the mayor or any councilman shall cease to possess any of these qualifications or shall be convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, his office shall immediately become vacant.”

Lupe Conchas was an elected Glendale city councilmember whose term did not expire until 2028. He filed for nomination to the Salt River District Board of Directors (District 4) on or prior to Friday, February 6, 2026 (deadline), in the second year of his term (not the last year of his term as councilmember as required by law) in violation of A.R.S. 38-296, A.

Mr. Conchas receives compensation for every SRP meeting and additional compensation for any committee meeting.  He also receives health and insurance coverage. Lupe Conchas is in violation of the Glendale City Charter as he receives compensation from SRP.

He was elected to the SRP District Board of Directors on April 7,2026 and the canvass of votes (verifying his election) occurred on April 13, 2026.

Whether it’s 10 days or immediately, the Cactus city council seat became vacant between February 6, 2026, and  April 7, 2026.

Who knew about this situation? I am guessing but here is a list of possibles:

  • Lupe Conchas. He cannot plead ignorance as ignorance is no defense in the eyes of the law.
  • City Attorney Michael Bailey. He may not have known but as Glendale’s City Attorney it would be incumbent upon him to be aware of the City’s Charter requirements as well as ARS 38-296. If he did not know he is failing his duties as Glendale’s City Attorney. If he did know, did he advise the City Manager and the mayor and councilmembers? He would have been compelled to ask for Conchas’ resignation certainly by April 7, 2026.
  • City Manager Banger. The question hanging out there is, did the City Attorney advise him?
  • Mayor Weiers. He is a very astute politician and it seems plausible that he may have known.
  • Some may have known and others not. I suspect there is at least one councilmember that did know.

If any or all of these people knew, why did no one take any action?

The bottom line is this. Lupe Conchas appears to have violated Arizona Revised Statutes as well as Glendale’s City Charter. It also calls into question any votes he made as a councilmember.

The media needs to investigate and I suspect lawsuits, if not filed, will be.

Follow up: The law is clear that at the time Conchas filed, not his election or taking office, is the relevant issue.

© 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.

Dec 25

20

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones

Posted by Joyce Clark on December 20, 2025
Posted in 2026 general election • Barrell District • Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | 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 December 10, 2025, Councilmember Lupe Conchas gave a TV interview on ABC with Adam Mintzer regarding his opposition to councilmember stipends. Here are some quotes from that TV story.

In 2022 an administrative policy was initiated giving councilmembers $900 per month for incidental costs and $450 monthly for car allowances. The allowances are intended to cover personal incidental expenses, including home-office costs, internet, technology, office supplies, incidental meals, mileage and repairs. 

 In August of 2025, Councilmember Lupe Conchas brought the issue to a council workshop and called the policy “a slush fund.” Yet at one time he had no objection to it and accepted the stipend for the first 6 months of his term. Then someone whispered in his ear that this might make for a good campaign issue.

His mentor, Councilmember Bart Turner, supports Conchas’ position. He characterizes the policy as a potential conflict with existing city expense systems. “There is no data to back this policy up,” Turner said. “Feels to me like it would be double dipping to take this…and for the record, I never have.” He may not have double-dipped, but he appears to have been very cavalier in his use of taxpayer dollars for his many trips.

A majority, four of the other six councilmembers and the mayor expressed support for maintaining the current policy during that August meeting.

Councilmember Ray Malnar defended the allowances, saying he spends significant money on home-office expenses. “We are being reimbursed for legitimate business expenses,” Malnar said. “I spend a lot of money on printers. I print a lot of things at home.”

Mayor Jerry Weiers said the numbers are justified for active councilmembers. “If you work for it. If you put in time. Your mileage…I find it entirely justifiable,” Weiers said.

Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff disagreed with characterizing the policy negatively. “I don’t think our residents expect us to behave like martyrs,” Tolmachoff said.

The City of Tempe has a $12,000 stipend for councilmembers’ cars and other expenses that don’t require them to submit receipts. So, Glendale is not the only city with such a policy.

A week later, December 17, 2025, the Phoenix New Times reported that the very same Councilmember, Lupe Conchas, directly asked the public in October 2025, to send him money through ApplePay and Zelle for his personal home repairs. He says he received $650 but he expects us to take his word for it.

People who give money directly to a politician, with no transparency as to who gave how much creates an appearance problem. It could also evade campaign finance requirements. Conchas admits that he did not think about a perception problem. He appears to be either very stupid or very arrogant. In essence, he used his official position to obtain money for personal use.

He did not consult with the City Attorney. Why? Perhaps because he knew that if he had the City Attorney would have advised against it whether it was legal to do so or not.

Then there is Councilmember Turner’s support of Conchas on this issue. I wrote a series of 4 blog posts on Turner’s fast and loose use of his City ProCard (city credit card). Turner talks about the need for data but often, after repeated staff requests, never supplied the requisite information or receipts to back up expenditures incurred on his many trips using city funds. Many of his trips to the same events attended by other councilmembers cost more than that of any other councilmember. He even asked the city to cover his Renaissance Weekend trips which were purely personal enrichment events.

Clearly, neither of these two councilmembers can legitimately question stipends when they appear to have financially sinned. Conchas deliberately used his elected position to solicit money from the public for personal expenses and Turner has a very questionable history with his use of the city ProCard.

A majority, five councilmembers, support and defend this policy, as do I. For 20 years of my 24 years of service as a councilmember, I paid personally for the very items the stipend covers. In my last 4 years of service, I was grateful that there was a stipend to cover the very expenses I had personally incurred and paid for over many years.

Why did these two men bring this forward? This is an election year. Conchas is supporting Rory Goree who is running against the incumbent, Councilmember Leandro Baldenegro. Turner, who has decided not to run again (perhaps because of his questionable use of the ProCard) has endorsed Lisa Baker. They need to help their chosen candidates and what better way than ginning this up an election issue. Just watch, both of these candidates will use stipends as a campaign issue. After all, if they were to run on their merit, both candidates lose.

© 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.

Apr 25

17

An answer to Worker Power’s open space in the upcoming May election

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 17, 2025
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Mattel Adventure Park • Ocotillo District • Sahuaro District • VAI Resort • Worker Power Super PAC • 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 is a blog that just had to be written after I read some social media comments. As many of you know, I am now retired but I was the Yucca district councilmember for 24 years beginning in 1992. The open space Worker Power refers to is in my district so I am very familiar with its history.

A little background is necessary. The land that VAI Resort sits on was purchased from a farmer by Michael Bidwill. He planned it as a massive commercial development with many, many apartments. He called it “Organic 101.” When the recession back in 2007 occurred, Bidwill let the parcel go into bankruptcy. It was picked up by a bank with the intention of selling the property for commercial development. The land was eventually sold to IKEA. It would have been the second such IKEA in the Phoenix Metro Area. However, IKEA decided to change its business model and become more of an online retailer and so, they never developed the land. For years it sat vacant and was rented by a local farmer to farm, mostly cotton.

Along came the Crystal Lagoon Company and Mattel and they subsequently bought the property. Crystal Lagoon morphed over time as Tommy Fisher acquired total interest and removed Crystal Lagoon interests. That is how we are fortunate enough to have VAI Resort.

Now, the second part of the history. For many years I protected and advocated for the interests and needs of the Pendergast neighborhood, adjacent to VAI. They were and are, to this day, a county island. At one time they were eager to become annexed into Glendale. Former Mayor Scruggs threw up enough roadblocks to scare them off. Pendergast Neighborhood is like my neighborhood. People live on a minimum of one acre. They have no curbs, gutters, sidewalks or streetlights. They are still on septic tanks. They love their lifestyle and have worked hard to preserve it.

One of their paramount requests was to have Maryland Avenue dead end at 95th Avenue. They recognized that if Maryland Avenue punched through to Loop 101, their lifestyle would disappear. Over time, working with the support of Glendale’s senior management team, I was able to get a dead end for Maryland Avenue.

But in doing so it created a remnant parcel owned by SRP. SRP used that strip of land to protect its adjacent irrigation ditch (open). The ditch served all of the water users in the area. Eventually SRP tiled the ditch (put it in a pipe underground). The remnant parcel was no longer of use to it and the city purchased the remnant parcel.

Glendale did what all Valley cities do. When it acquired the parcel, it had to put a zoning designation on it. Glendale, like other cities, uses the Open Space designation as a place holder. We knew it would never be Open Space because it was adjacent to a large commercially zoned parcel. Typically, what happens is a developer will buy the land, come in with a plan and seek rezoning. That is exactly what VAI did. If VAI had not purchased it, some other commercial developer would have. No one had plans to use it as Open Space. It was too valuable.

Worker Power is using the “hook” that it must be preserved as Open Space even though that was never the intention.

Another social media comment I read, and I have also heard residents say this, is along the lines that when I bought my home there were farm fields around me. Here’s some reality. Glendale became a full-fledged suburban community back in the 1970’s and 1980’s when Arrowhead was developed. In a suburban community, vacant land, especially large farm acreage, becomes increasingly more valuable as the years go by. Eventually, the purchase price of farmland becomes too enticing for a farmer and he sells. In an urban/suburban community expecting farmland to remain farmland is just not realistic.

Here’s an example. Our neighborhood of 30 homes is 1 acre parcels (and in some cases, 1+ acre). We have no curb, gutter, sidewalks or streetlights and are on septic. Some people have horses, sheep, goats and chickens. We love it. It’s a mini oasis even though we are a mile from Westgate. Years ago, the parcel immediately to our north of approximately 50 acres was farmland. We loved that too. We also knew it was inevitable that it wouldn’t remain farmland forever. About a dozen years ago a developer purchased that land. Rather than fighting the developer we worked with him and as a result, won concessions. The lot sizes are 8,000 square feet and there is an 8-foot wall between the development and our one acre properties. Those actions helped to save our lifestyle and recently one of the homes on our street sold for slightly less than a million dollars.

Expecting farmland near or around a home in a suburban area is not a realistic assumption. Expecting a remnant parcel adjacent to large commercial acreage to retain a place holder designation of open space is also not realistic.

Yet Worker Power in a desperate attempt to hurt VAI Resort (since their attempts to unionize VAI’s workers has failed to date) is trying to convince the Glendale voters that was always the intention. It was not and it never was.

Many on social media have commented on the aggressiveness of Worker Power people coming to their doors as they work the neighborhoods trying to convince people to support them. Please don’t accept their rhetoric. They are like Pinocchio and you may see their noses grow before your very eyes.

Many perceive Worker Power as a radical, socialist organization. It is based in California and is trying to bring California’s style of governance to Arizona. It claims that it is responsible for knocking out football legend Herschel Walker and electing Democrat Raphael Warnock as US Senator from Georgia. Whatever…

Worker Power is bad news not just for Glendale but for the State of Arizona. It’s time to deliver the knockout punch to them by voting ‘yes’ on Propositions 401 and 402 in Glendale’s special May 20 election. Send the message that Arizona is not California nor do we aspire to be. This election is costing you, the taxpayer, about $250,000 thanks to Worker Power.

Since this May election will be done exclusively by mail-in ballot it is important that when you receive your ballot, you vote ‘yes’ right away and mail it back quickly. About a third of the electorate do exactly that. Another third will think about it and mail it back before the deadline. The last third of the electorate never bother to mail back their ballots. Please don’t be in that last third. Please make an effort to vote ‘yes’ and get it back in the mail as soon as possible.

VAI Resort is good for Glendale and I, for one, am pleased that they chose Glendale as their home.

© 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.

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.

 

Jan 25

14

Lupe Conchas…renegade or representative?

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 14, 2025
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | 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.

About a month ago, on Tuesday, December 11, 2024, Glendale held its Installation Ceremony for re-elected Mayor Jerry Weiers, re-elected Councilmember Ray Malnar and Councilmembers-Elect Dianna Guzman and Lupe Conchas. Malnar, Guzman and Conchas were asked to keep their remarks brief, to three or four minutes. Malnar and Guzman did so but not Conchas. It appeared that he deliberately chose to ignore that request and he rambled on and on and on for at least ten minutes. It appeared to be no more than a campaign speech.

Conchas’ speech is too long for inclusion, but I did note some rather interesting remarks (his in italics and mine in parentheses and bold) that I bring to your attention.

He said, “I started my career as a community organizer.”

(He still is. He is Regional Organizing Manager for ONE Campaign based in Washington, D.C. Was Regional Organizer for Bread for the World, Washington, D.C. from 2019-2023.)

Then he remarked, “The unions who (unintelligible), to Worker Power, to Unite Here, to the teacher’s union, to the iron workers, to IBEW, to UFCW, to SMART, and to America Labor Federation, your belief in me kept me going and you stood by me every step of the way. And I will not forget that.”

 (These unions endorsed him:

UNITE HERE Local 11

Worker Power

International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union

United Food and Commercial Workers Union

International Painters and Allied Trades Union

Ironworkers Union Local 75

He publicly declared that he will support their agendas. That includes Worker Power which has mounted several lawsuits and initiatives against the city and VIA Resort. I smell a conflict of interest.)

He went on to say, “I’ve spoken to the City Manager here tonight. I’m excited to announce now that the City of Glendale has secured a $6.7 million-dollar federal grant for pedestrian safety improvements here in Glendale… This grant is a testament to what happens when we listen to our community, and we fight for change…”

(There is not even one, tiny Conchas fingerprint on the securing of this grant. The application was submitted months ago, long before he became Councilmember-Elect. He did not fight for change as he implies.)

He also said, “…a motivating factor in my decision was the quality of our early childhood education programs and my goal to increase literacy in our community. By investing in Pre-K and after school programs…”

(Glendale’s public policy mandate does not include education. That is the responsibility of our multiple school district’s Boards of Education. Glendale city council has no say and does not fund the education of your children. That is done through your property taxes and the line item tax allocations to various educational districts.)

Then he said, “I admire the bravery of our police officers who are standing in the back. A big round of applause for our fire and police officers.”

(This is the same guy who demonstrated against ICE in 2019. His position is one of distrust of and disrespect for law enforcement.)

Lastly, he remarked, “Now, some of you may know that Proposition 314 has been approved by the voters. It’s a new immigration enforcement bill… And let me be 100% clear, my focus is on preserving the civil rights of our residents…”

(He is a participating member of Promise Arizona, which advocates for Democrat party immigration reform. You can assume that he will work to preserve the status of the illegal immigrants who have flooded this country.)

Keep this fact in mind. Lupe Conchas won the election by 69 votes. That is not an overwhelming mandate by the voters in the Cactus district. He did what any good organizer does. He went to apartment complexes and trailer parks to register folks who had never voted and then made sure they did vote…for him. Even using that tactic, he still won by only 69 votes.

Did you know that he moved to Glendale in 2017 to the Ocotillo district?  At that time Jamie Aldama was its Councilmember. I think it’s fair to assume that he knew he couldn’t beat Aldama, and little did he know that Aldama would resign his seat to run for Mayor in mid-2024. In 2023, he moved to the Cactus district with the idea that he might have a better chance of knocking out incumbent Vice Mayor Ian Hugh and it worked.

If you go to the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund website, you will discover that Conchas publicly acknowledges that he is a cisgender male and gay. I don’t care one way or another, but I bet there are many Hispanic voters who are faithful Catholics. Conchas’ lifestyle is a slap in the face of one of their staunchest beliefs. He acknowledges that organization’s endorsement as simply the Victory Fund, not the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund. How many votes would he have garnered from the Hispanic community if they had known this fact?

Many view him as a one-term councilmember. They think he is merely using this council seat as a steppingstone and that his next move will be to run for the Arizona state legislature and eventually on to a congressional seat.

How he performs on Glendale’s city council will determine his future political aspirations. Will he support a majority of this council’s agenda which becomes city policy, or will he assume his traditional role as an activist and disruptor?

© 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.

Next Page »