Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

It has been 18 years and 99 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

At the Glendale city council meeting of March 22, 2016 during Council Comments Sammy stated that he will request a review by council of its travel policy. And so the story of his questionable travel expenses lives on. If he thought announcing that he was requesting a review of the policy would put him on the right side of the issue he was wrong. Once someone in the public eye has committed a transgression it lives in the public eye forever. Sammy’s travel expenses are an election issue. They go to the character of the man and to his ability to make sound, ethical judgments.

Paul Giblin of the Arizona Republic has another story on Sammy’s travel out today, March 25, 2016. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2016/03/24/glendale-councilman-sammy-chavira-seeks-review-travel-policy/82181492/ .

In Giblin’s story there are quotes from a recent Chavira email and City Attorney Michael Bailey’s email response on the issue. Chavira emailed City Attorney Michael Bailey and City Manager Kevin Phelps saying, “I would appreciate if you confirm that I followed all the rules and regulations regarding my travel expenditures. Additionally I would appreciate it if you would confirm that I submitted all my receipts and appropriate paperwork.” Note Sammy’s choice in wording. He used the word “confirm.” Hmm…it’s pretty obvious that Sammy is seeking someone, anyone to provide cover for his ethically challenged travel expenditures.

Mr. Giblin received Public Information Requests not only for Sammy’s email but for City Attorney Michael Bailey’s response. Now it gets interesting.  Bailey noted that the council’s travel policy is lax as no prior approval is required by anyone and the councilmember has the responsibility to decide if an expense is reasonable. What appears reasonable to Sammy may not be reasonable to you or others.

Giblin quotes from Bailey’s email, “Noting the foregoing (council’s lax policy and the absence of any standard for reasonableness) and based upon the information I have been provided regarding travel expenditures, the information does not conclusively establish any unlawful expenditures or any expenditures in violation of council policy.” How is that for making sure Bailey has wiggle room? You have to especially like the use of the word “conclusively.”

Then there is the issue of lost receipts raised by Councilmember Turner. Council has no policy regarding how to handle them appropriately or to establish a cap on reimbursements made with no paperwork to confirm the amount being requested. Apparently Sammy was reimbursed for lost receipts as well.

It gets even better. Giblin asked former Fire Chief Mark Burdick, now a mayoral candidate, about the situation. Burdick’s answer? He thought Sammy used his personal credit card and had no idea that Sammy used the city’s credit card to pay for the infamous $420 dinner. Where is Burdick’s announcement that under those circumstances, he too, will reimburse the city personally? Where is Burdick’s statement on the propriety of a dinner that included one of his subordinate fire fighters, Glendale fire fighter Danny Valenzuela?  According to Giblin, Burdick goes on to request a citizen’s ethics commission to oversee councilmembers’ expenses. That idea may be a bit of overkill as a remedy but hey, Burdick’s got to distinguish himself from the incumbent mayor somehow. This is as good a way as any.

In Giblin’s online Arizona Republic story there are graphs and charts comparing the travel expenditures of all of the councilmembers. Note that the two highest spenders are Sammy and recalled Councilmember Gary Sherwood. It appears that both fancied themselves as high rollers. They were buddies. They often went on the same trips. They voted together on many high profile city issues. Many citizens believe that they might have traded votes. The most notable being Sherwood’s flip-flop on the casino issue voting in favor and Sammy’s flip-flop on the $15 million a year arena management contract to IceArizona voting in favor. Each of these men voted in direct opposition to their campaign promises to their voters.

The ethical action for Sammy would be to reimburse the city for his problematical travel expenditures. He can’t do that although he should. If he were to reimburse the city that is tantamount to an admission of wrong doing. Sammy has no choice but to continue his mantra of I did nothing wrong. We’ve all heard many politicians say the same only to have them end up in jail.

The problem for Sammy is twofold. This issue is not going to go away before the Primary Election on August 30, 2016 and it forever defines his ethics and character for the voters of the Yucca district. They are angry and disgusted to learn Sammy wasted nearly $25,000 of their hard earned tax dollars.

Sammy has never addressed the primary purpose of his trips. To all appearances his primary purpose was to have fun in Washington, D. C. on your money. His perceived secondary purpose was to throw in some sort of brief meeting on a city related topic to provide him with just enough cover to be considered legal. The primary purpose and secondary purpose of a trip on taxpayer money is the distinction that many are missing. If the primary purpose is conclusively for city business that is legitimate. Perhaps secondary, unrelated to city business, portions of trips should be paid by the individual.

The voters of the Yucca district are angry. Glendale city councilmembers should be angry as well. They made appropriate and ethical decisions regarding the primary purpose of their travel. Unfortunately the ethically-tainted brush being used on Sammy will be used on them. Sammy’s apparent unethical decisions have now called into question their decisions.

Sammy’s questionable ethics is a story that is not going to go away although he may on Primary Election Day.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.

It has been 18 years and 97 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

The Glendale city council meeting of Tuesday, March 22, 2016 was completed in a little over an hour despite an agenda of 41 items, 36 of which were consent agenda or consent resolutions. The only curious item of note was Item 12, Position reclassifications presented by HR Director Jim Brown. There was only one position reclassification requested and that was for the City Attorney’s Office. The request was to create a new title, Senior Assistant City Prosecutor. The reason given for the request was to “realign to better meet department needs.”  Hmmm…it seems a bit strange to bring forward only one position in the organization for reclassification.

The more interesting events of the evening were not formal agenda items. During the public comment portion Bill Dempsky of the Sahuaro district, a regular citizen public speaker, railed about Councilmember Sammy Chavira’s excessive and questionable travel expenses. He cited specific facts about those expenses and commented that Sammy wasted $3,000 of your taxpayer dollars with his constant habit and practice of changing flights.

Sammy has become very nervous about his recent negative press coverage and so, lo and behold, he spoke. At the end of the council meeting during council comments, he pulled his written comments before him and began to read. His comments were carefully worded and it was obvious that Sammy did not write them for he does not speak that well.

He said he always followed the travel policy of the city. He failed to mention that in relation to elected officials whatever policy does exist is non-existent or very weak. We would not expect him to acknowledge that he gamed the system. He can claim he did nothing wrong but the Yucca district voters no longer believe him. One man told me, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. He went on to say appearances are everything and it appears to him that Sammy is using his power and privilege to his advantage, not that of the people.

Chavira had two “fun” trips on his agenda – one to see the Pope in Washington, D.C. on a large screen TV and the other to see his friend and mentor, Ruben Gallego, be installed as a U.S. Congressman. But Sammy had a problem. For you see, he had to make these trips “legitimate.” What to do? Simple, claim some sort of meeting related to city business—with someone, anyone, willing to back up his claim that a city issue was discussed. For all we know the so-called meeting could (and probably was) 5 minutes long but it would have been enough to CYA.

Sammy’s bosses, including the Phoenix Fire Chief, have tacitly acknowledged the impropriety of Sammy’s paying $420 for their seafood and steak dinners by returning their portions of the check (5 Phoenix officials have done so to date) to the City of Glendale. Not only that, but they repaid with personal funds. Has it ever occurred to Sammy that it’s time he repaid the city as well? Probably not.

Sammy went on to say that he supports review of the city’s travel policy and at the April 5, 2016 city council workshop he, personally, would request such a review as an action item for a future city council workshop.

Sammy is definitely scared. He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and is desperately looking for a way to keep his hand intact. This time it’s not going to work. What Sammy doesn’t realize…yet…is there are a lot of angry voters out there. They were already angry about his lack of accessibility and responsiveness to his constituents; his canceling of scheduled meetings with them; his absences from council meetings; and his lack of communication with the people he was elected to serve. Sammy’s performance as their councilmember has been less than sterling. Now with these new revelations about his use of taxpayer money, they have had enough.

To a majority of Yucca district voters Sammy has exhibited the worst characteristics of an elected politician, with his cronyism, his advocacy of issues in support of his large campaign contributors, his advocacy of more money exclusively for the fire department and his abuse of power. They are disgusted and have had enough. They believe he epitomizes the worst of establishment politicians and they will not vote for him again. They think he represents the cliché of smoked-filled rooms and back deals. They realize that Sammy is not working for them. Rather Sammy is working for Sammy.

All of these reasons…and more…persuaded me to run for the Yucca district council seat: to restore dignity and honor to the position; to research and to question staff thoroughly regarding their policy recommendations; to restore accessibility and communication to the people of the district; and to become an instrument of giving the people of the district their voice back. I ask the people of the Yucca district for their support. I ask for their vote in the August 30, 2016 Primary Election.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.

It has been 18 years and 94 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On March 19, 2016, Paul Giblin’s article is entitled Glendale expenses get more scrutiny. It is not online as of this date so no link to the story is provided. In his article Giblin solicits reaction to Chavira’s questionable travel expenses from his peers…the Glendale city councilmembers. Giblin reports, “Sammy Chavira’s colleagues on the Glendale City Council said this week they want to strengthen the city’s travel policy following reporting by the Arizona Republic on Chavira’s travel expenses.”

Mayor Weiers said, “‘We’re going to have to do something. Weiers said one option to tighten the travel policy would be to require councilmembers to use personal credit cards, rather than city-issued cards, for all city-related travel. If you want to be reimbursed, then you have to provide us with all the information – who, what, when, why, where. If you don’t provide that, then you’re not going to get reimbursed,’ he said.”

A majority of councilmembers have said this is a future public city council workshop topic of discussion. Silent on the issue were Councilmember Chavira and Councilmember Aldama. “Vice Mayor Ian Hugh and City Council members Lauren Tolmachoff and Bart Turner told The Republic they expect a formal discussion at a public meeting about improving the city’s travel policy for elected officials.”

The reactions from various councilmembers are varied. “Hugh said he is opposed to granting council members authority to approve or disapprove of each other’s trips.” Frankly I agree with his assessment. In towns and cities there are councilmembers who don’t like each other, don’t get along with each other and may downright hate each other. In most cases, the public is never aware of councilmembers’ animosity toward one another because publicly they remain polite to one another. Political animosity (or even revenge) would be a constant threat if councilmembers’ had the power to approve or disapprove of one another’s expenses.

“‘Council members should be held to at least the same standard as rank-and-file city employees,’ Tolmachoff said.” Councilmember Tolmachoff almost got it. Councilmembers should not be held to the same standards as other city employees. They should be held to the highest standard. They should be a model for all employees to follow. Councilmembers are in a unique position. There are only 7 of them elected by the people of Glendale. There is no comparable position in Glendale. That makes them unique. Their major responsibility is to develop all policy for the city. It is an enormous task requiring their best efforts and a commitment to impartiality. It is their responsibility to strive to be above reproach at all times and in all instances.

Councilmember Ray Malnar thinks that a periodic audit of councilmembers’ use of their expense accounts is in order. “Periodic audits of council members’ expenses would help keep members attuned to existing guidelines, Malnar said. ‘There’s always the ability, no matter what kind of controls you have in place, for abuse. And a lot of it is a matter of trust and follow-up.’ he said.” It is a solid suggestion. It bears serious consideration and has the appeal of having a councilmember’s expenses related to his or her budgets scrutinized on a regular basis.

Councilmember Turner, surprisingly, offered very little concern about councilmembers’ travel expenses and instead focused on lost receipts. “Turner said he’s interested in reviewing the city’s policy for lost receipts and perhaps capping the amount allowable for reimbursement using lost-receipt forms.There’s no transparency around a lost receipt, and I think we owe it to our taxpayers to be as transparent as possible,’ Turner said.”

From the councilmembers’ comments two viable themes emerged. Councilmember Malnar suggested audits. If such audits are not publicly posted prominently and instead are buried in the bowels of city hall paperwork, what good is an audit? Councilmember Turner made reference to transparency. However, currently there is no transparency related to any expense incurred by a councilmember. Why tailor transparency narrowly to a lost-receipt? It’s illogical. Transparency only serves the public interest when it brings to light a practice formerly buried and generalized in the city’s annual budget book.

Perhaps audits and transparency should be used in tandem. City councilmembers should consider revising their policy to include an annual audit performed by Glendale’s Audit Office of both their communications/professional development budget and their infrastructure improvements budget to be completed by October 1 of every year. I can hear the City Auditor now saying that it is an onerous burden upon her department. It is not unreasonable. Each councilmember’s two budgets total approximately $35,000 a year. They are simplistic and not as complicated as one would find in auditing an entire city department comprised of millions of dollars. They could be completed quickly and would not require an inordinate amount of audit staff’s time.

These audits should be posted in each councilmember’s Friday e-newsletter no later than the end of each October. If a councilmember had to publicly announce what expenditures he or she made during the course of a year it would constantly reinforce the concept that each and every dollar is a taxpayer dollar and not “theirs.” This is a reasonable policy. It would create an unmatched level of transparency for Glendale’s citizens. Glendale would be the first city in the state to adopt such a model and it is expected it would cause other cities to follow suit. It would have the effect of helping the public to determine if a councilmember was making effective and ethical use of their taxpayer dollars. It would certainly be a breath of political fresh air.

In the meantime, Giblin reported, “While Glendale officials talked about Chavira’s expenditures, Phoenix officials acted on them. Phoenix officials submitted five checks to Glendale on March 9 to reimburse the city for their portions of the seafood dinner, said Glendale spokeswoman Sue Breding.” Obviously these Phoenix officials, such as the Phoenix Fire Chief, by reimbursing the city, are tacitly acknowledging that Chavira’s payment for their dinners was inappropriate. That cannot be good for Chavira who keeps repeating that he did nothing wrong. Perhaps he’s hoping if he repeats it often enough people will believe him…Hmmm, I think not. I wonder if former Glendale Fire Chief Mark Burdick or Phoenix Councilmember Danny Valenzuela (who happens to be a Glendale fire fighter) reimbursed Glendale. There’s no way to know as that information is not forthcoming.

Come on, Glendale councilmembers, think outside the box. Develop a policy that sheds light on the issue for all of Glendale’s taxpayers. After all, it’s not about you. It’s about the citizens and city that you are elected to serve.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.

It has been 18 years and 90 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.
On March 15, 2016 the Glendale city council held a Budget Workshop meeting to discuss the Fiscal Year 2016-17 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). As an aside, Councilmember Chavira arrived at 9:30 AM, a half hour late and offered not one original thought other than to thank staff for their presentations.
This can be a complicated issue but let’s try to break it down. The CIP is Glendale’s plan for future, major infrastructure projects. These are projects that cost more than $50,000 and have a useful life span of at least 5 years. Just a few examples are: fire and police stations, libraries, roads, flood control and the purchase of sanitation trucks to fire engines. It is a ten year plan but only the first five years of the plan have any money attached to the proposed projects because the funding for them has been identified. The last five years of the plan are a wish list and have no money earmarked to support them.
It is a very, very important component of Glendale’s budget and at times projects within it serve political interests. Each councilmember has the opportunity to advocate for a project that will be located within his or her district.
How are CIP projects paid for? Here are the sources to repay bonds issued for CIP project: 

  • Enterprise Funds are the largest component at 66% and this is because many CIP project are big ticket items related to water, sewer or sanitation;
  • next are General Obligation Bonds (GO) at 15% and are repaid through secondary property taxes that flow into the city’s General Fund;
  • Highway User Revenue Funds or HURF make up 5%. These funds are state shared revenue and come from the tax you pay on a gallon of gasoline;
  • then there is the Transportation Fund of 5%. This fund was born in 2002 when the voters of Glendale approved a small sales tax increase to set aside strictly for transportation related projects;
  • Grant funds make up 4%;
  • Occasionally the city will pay cash for a project and this makes up 2% as a CIP funding source;
  • Lastly are Development Impact Fees (DIF) at 3%. Not going into the weeds too deeply on this, these are assessments that are paid by new construction of homes and commercial buildings. It is highly regulated by the state as to the amount that can be collected and what projects can be funded.

To further complicate the issue the state has divided General Obligation bonds (GO) into two categories: 6% and 20%. 6% GO bonds can be used for economic development, a cultural facility, a government facility and libraries. 20% GO bonds are used for flood control, open space & trails, parks, public safety, streets & parking and water and sewer projects.
Now that you are thoroughly confused, what’s in Glendale’s CIP for Fiscal Year 2016-17, the upcoming fiscal year that starts on July 1, 2016? The big ticket items are Parking Lot P-1 in the amount of $6 million and Parking Lot P-2 in the amount of $10.5 million. These 2 projects will be funded with GO bonds repaid through the city’s General Fund. What are these parking lots? If you recall, the city paid $22 million for land adjacent to the University of Phoenix Stadium to be used for parking necessary to meet the obligations of an agreement between the Arizona Sports & Tourism Authority (AZSTA),the Cardinals and the city. Parking Lot P-1 for $6 million will definitely move forward immediately. Parking Lot P-2 for $10.5 million will only be built if senior staff finds it necessary to completely meet the mandatory number of parking spaces to which the city is obligated to provide.

 

The two other big ticket CIP projects for FY 2016-17 are the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant improvements for $15.2 million and the Arrowhead Water Reclamation Facility improvements for $25.4 million. These will be funded through Enterprise Fund revenue bonds. Lastly $7 million will be spent for street improvements funded through the Transportation Fund.
To review these are the projects in the Fiscal Year budget of 2016-17 that begins on July 1, 2016:
• Bond Construction Funds will cover $7 million to improve the city’s streets.
• DIF Funds will partially fund the temporary West Branch library in the amount of $600,000+.
• Enterprise Revenue Bonds will pay $15.2 million and $25.4 for water improvements
• GO Bonds will pay for two parking lots, in the amount of $6 million and $10.5 million. That’s it. These are the major infrastructure projects slated for FY 2016-17. There are lesser amounts for the scalloped street program and infill street light program as examples.
Criteria for determining whether a project is eligible for the CIP are extensive. However, there are 3 criteria worthy of mention:
• “Does a project support the city’s goal of ensuring all geographic areas of the city have comparable quality in the types of services that are defined in the Public Facilities section of the General Plan”
• “Does a project prevent the deterioration of the city’s existing infrastructure?”
• “Does a project encourage and sustain quality economic development?”
These criteria are noteworthy in terms of 2 ongoing issues: the Western Area Branch Library and O’Neil pool. In the proposed FY 2016-17 CIP funds are earmarked for a temporary branch library of 7,500 SF to serve south and west Glendale. It is a travesty. Northern Glendale has the Foothills Branch Library ( 34,000 SF) and central Glendale has the Main Library (64,000 SF). Downtown Glendale has the 15,000 SF Velma Teague Branch Library built in 1971, forty four years ago. A 7,500 SF modular building as a temporary library branch serving south and west Glendale does not even come close to meeting, “Does a project support the city’s goal of ensuring all geographic areas of the city have comparable quality…” What a joke. Nor does this temporary building meet “Does a project encourage and sustain quality economic development?”
Currently the area of major, economic development is the Westgate area in west Glendale. Exactly how does a temporary 7,500 SF modular library building (½ the size of Velma Teague, which is SMALL; ¼ the size of Foothills Branch Library; and 1/10 the size of the Main Library) enhance “comparable quality” and “economic development?” Not to mention Heroes Park in west Glendale. It is 88 acres in size with approximately 20 developed acres. The rest of the park is a barren, dirt and weed filled wasteland. How does this park meet those criteria? Have you seen the parks the City of Peoria has recently built? Not only are they numerous they are gorgeous and put Glendale to shame.
Another issue that surfaced was that of O’Neil Pool located at 6500 W. Missouri Avenue. The surrounding square mile is known as the O’Neil Ranch Area. Its population is one of, if not, the densest in the city. There are 2,000 children in that square mile attending William C. Jack Elementary School and Mensendick Middle School. Up until 5 years ago these kids had O’Neil pool as a major recreational opportunity. The pool developed some cracks and leaks and was closed. A Parks & Recreation study was then done to measure the attendance but by that time kids had to be bused to the Rose Lane Pool. Obviously, the recorded attendance was low and was used to justify a staff recommendation that the pool not be repaired and the area be repurposed. Another joke. O’Neil must be repaired and reopened to service those kids. This is not an affluent area of town and has often been ignored. An overwhelming majority of the over 1,300 homes and 7 apartment complexes in the adjacent area do not have swimming pools. The ratio of residential swimming pools is one of the lowest in the city. As city criteria states, “Does the project prevent the deterioration of the city’s existing infrastructure?”
There is one more piece of bad news associated with the CIP. It is not until 2022, 8 more years, that there is GO bond debt capacity for new projects. Yet Tom Duensing, the Assistant City Manager, recently found GO bond debt capacity in the amount of $32 million to buy land and building a parking lot to satisfy the Arizona Cardinals and AZSTA. It’s time he turned to the needs of our residents and found GO bond debt capacity for these much needed projects.
It is incumbent upon the current city council, Mayor Jerry Weiers, Vice Mayor Ian Hugh, and Councilmembers Turner, Tolmachoff, Malnar, Aldama and Chavira to insure that a comparable quality of amenities exist in all parts of our city, including south and west Glendale by building a permanent Western Area Branch Library (overdue for 18+ years), completing the development of Heroes Park (also overdue for 18+ years) and repairing and reopening O’Neil Pool (overdue for 5+ years).
© Joyce Clark, 2016
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.

It has been 18 years and 75 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On February 26, 2016 Arizona Sports ran a story on Anthony LeBlanc’s reaction to Mayor Jerry Weiers’ remarks at his State of the City address. Here is the link:  http://arizonasports.com/story/566510/arizona-coyotes-ceo-glendale-may-want-us-to-stay-but-not-being-realistic/ .

In his prepared remarks with reference to the Coyotes the Mayor said, “I need to be clear about this. I want the Coyotes to stay in Glendale. The city wants the Coyotes to remain in Glendale. We have, since day-one, invited them to remain engaged in this process.”  In his recent remarks Mr. LeBlanc said this about the Coyotes’ refusal to engage in the bid process to manage Glendale’s arena, “…the team did not submit a bid to manage the arena because it refused to participate in a ‘flawed process’.” LeBlanc did not elaborate on his characterization of a “flawed process.”

Mr. LeBlanc went on to say, “I think they do want us to stay, but I don’t think they’re looking through a realistic lens of what that means.” Translate this statement to read that in his view “a realistic lens of what that means” is the Coyotes would only stay if Glendale continues to subsidize a portion of their annual loss. LeBlanc, et. al., may have retired their Fortress loan by adding additional owners but don’t forget they still owe a boat load of money to the NHL for another loan that covered buying the team.

What governmental entity is not only going to build a new hockey arena but also subsidize the Coyotes’ annual loss? It’s Glendale all over again. Tempe? Scottsdale? Probably not. Phoenix? Perhaps it can bury its subsidization of the Coyotes within possible plans to build a new facility for joint use by the Suns and the Coyotes.

The Coyotes want to manage their own facility. Then they collect all of the revenue generated by non-hockey events and they can claim a management fee that not only covers their cost to manage but off-sets their annual loss.

LeBlanc praised a recently approved deal between Broward County, Florida and the NHL Florida Panthers. The deal allows the Panthers to get nearly all of the arena revenue and reduces any profit-sharing between the Panthers and the county. Since the Panthers first season in 1993-94 the Broward county’s public subsidy of the team has been $342 million (an estimated $14 million a year). It should be noted that the Panthers lost $36 million last year and another $27 million the previous year. Of course LeBlanc would think that’s a wonderful deal. Reality is that the majority of NHL teams can’t survive without public financial support. That has been the model for years but many governmental entities are under financial pressure and can no longer afford this type of model. It is a model destined to die in the future as the public clamors for sports franchises to pay their own way.

LeBlanc said three options are still being discussed. They are a shared arena with the Phoenix Suns in downtown, a partnership with Arizona State University or an arena in Scottsdale’s Loop 101 corridor. Hey, if the City of Phoenix wants to pony up and pay the Coyotes to play downtown, congratulations to all. Previously the Suns and the Coyotes shared an arena downtown and it was the fans who suffered with terrible sight lines while watching the games.

Is the Arizona State Legislature delusional? It has budget problems. Will it allow a portion of its allocation of state public money to be used to pay for a new hockey arena instead of educational purposes? It seems doubtful that Scottsdale will wish to pay the Coyotes to play in their town. It would be déjà vu as they refused to do so in 2001.

LeBlanc said if a new arena is built it will take at least three years. He went on to say they would “rather not move twice in five years.” Here is where the situation becomes problematical. Glendale and IceArizona currently have a two year agreement that allows IceArizona to manage the arena for $6 million per year. The first year of that agreement is nearly up leaving only one more year of IceArizona’s management. After that it is assumed AEG, the presumed new arena manager, and IceArizona will have to negotiate short-term tenancy for two more years. Will they be able to craft a mutually satisfactory tenancy arrangement? Then the question becomes if IceArizona can live with the deal for two years, why can’t it live with the deal permanently? Can LeBlanc and company afford to rebuild its fan base in another part of the Valley while it continues to rebuild the team?

No matter what the outcome I continue to have greatest respect and admiration for the players. They have endured a great deal since Jerry Moyes put the team into bankruptcy in 2009. They are a great group of men who certainly deserve more stability than they have had. They deserve better. Let’s see if cooler heads can prevail and a deal that benefits all entities can be achieved permanently. Isn’t it time?

© Joyce Clark, 2016

 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.

It has been 18 years and 71 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

The City of Glendale is hosting a meeting on Saturday, February 27, 2016 to receive citizen input on two proposals for a branch library serving west and south Glendale. Here is the link to the information about the meeting: http://www.glendaleaz.com/Library/WesternAreaBranchStudy.cfm . It will be an Open House at Desert Mirage Elementary School, 8500 W. Maryland Avenue, Glendale, AZ between 10 AM and Noon.

I am attending and I am telling them not just “no” but “hell no.” Why? For 18 years we, in west and south Glendale, have been promised not a make-shift facility but a full-fledged branch library. Senior staff and the city council would be off the hook by throwing us a bone– a make-shift facility. That removes the pressure on all of them to fulfill a long standing 18 year promise. What are we? Chopped liver? Is it only other areas of Glendale that receive the financial resources to provide high quality amenities for its citizens? By the way, have you checked out the ramadas at Heroes Park lately? They are really dirty and in need of major maintenance. But again…it’s west and south Glendale…not Arrowhead.

The most dismaying concern is that Assistant City Manager Tom Duensing was able to find General Fund debt capacity to cover a $32 million dollar bill for land and to develop parking adjacent to the University of Phoenix Stadium but he is reluctant (or stubborn?) to find General Fund debt capacity to fund the building of a west branch library promised over 18 years ago.

People are offended and angry. Some will say but this is better than nothing and we have had nothing for a very long time. What they do not realize is this token removes the pressure from staff and from council to ever build a permanent branch library. The next time a request is made for such a facility their rationalization will be but you do have a branch library. It’s not as if the need is pressing. There are other needs that take precedence.

I encourage people from the Yucca and Ocotillo districts to attend Saturday’s Open House and to tell staff that neither a token, symbolic library branch in the Media Center nor a small, modular building in Heroes Park fulfill Glendale’s promise to its residents. Let them know it’s time to fund the branch library promised over 18 years ago.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.

It has been 18 years and 68 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

City council held its first budget workshop on February 16, 2016. Here is the schedule of future budget workshops:

  • March 15, 2016             9 AM
  • April 5, 2016                 9 AM
  • April 19, 2016               9 AM
  • April 21, 2016               9 AM

This first budget workshop was a review of all budget components as of December 31, 2015 or the first two quarters of Fiscal Year 2016. The only item which required council consensus for direction was the issue of raising the Secondary Property Tax rate to the maximum of 2% as allowed by state law. Council consensus was…nothing. They gave no direction to staff. Look for the vote on acceptance of a property tax rate in June when council must publicly vote on the issue.

Senior staff’s presentation on the budget’s performance was pure “government speak.” Here’s a good example, “(General Fund) Revenues are $11.2 million or 11% higher than revenues at the same time last year.” Boy, that sounds really, really good. Wait a minute. Staff then said, “Out of the $11.2 million increase in revenues, $8.3 million is due to consolidation of the general fund sub-funds into the General Fund.”

In plain English what that statement means is this. General fund sub-funds are the Arena, Camelback Ranch, Zanjero, Civic Center and Stadium events. This is not a complete list but you get the idea. Prior to this Fiscal Year, 2015-16, the sub-funds stood separately. Staff had to report on the revenues received and expenditures of all sub-funds. This Fiscal year they were rolled into the General Fund for “accounting purposes.” No longer is there a separate accounting of the sub-funds’ performance. Hmmm.

Staff went on to say, “General Fund City Sales Tax collections are $48 million which is an increase of $7.3 million or 18% over the same time last year. Approximately $6.0 million of the increase is attributable to the consolidation the sub-funds into the general fund. Without including the sub-fund revenues, city sales tax increased by $1.3 million or 3%.” This 3% figure is in line with the federal GDP.

In terms of General Fund expenditures staff reported, “The actual (General Fund) expenditures increased by $15.4 million over the same time last year. This increase is primarily due to the consolidation of the general fund sub-funds into the General Fund ($9.7 million) and reclassification of Technology and Technology Projects ($5.0 million)…” Once again most of the expenditures are attributable to rolling the sub-funds into the General Fund.

The bottom line is this. Half way through Fiscal Year 2015-16 the General Fund has an excess of $8.3 million. It can be assumed that this excess is due in great measure to the $9.0 million reduction (from the previous figure of $15 million) in the arena management fee paid to IceArizona.

Tonight, February 23, 2016 city council will host its regular voting meeting. Guess who will be AWOL? Yep, Councilmember Sammy Chavira…once again. Be reassured. He will participate telephonically.

Three agenda items are worth following: Item 20 is Resolution 5071. It is an acceptance of a $49,000 grant from the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority to be used to help develop an archery range at Heroes Park; Item 21 is acceptance of Ordinance 2975 reflecting rezoning request ZON15-10. This action will allow for development of the Westgate Healthcare Campus PAD at the northwest corner of 99th Avenue and Glendale Avenue. This is a very welcome project and provides a fantastic compliment to Dignity’s Westgate Hospital Campus just north of this proposed project; and lastly Item 22. Council will vote on the adoption of the Loop 101 Scenic Corridor in north Glendale. This is another very welcome development that warrants expansion of this designation all along the Loop 101 within Glendale with the only exception being a narrowly tailored Westgate area.

Stay tuned for more reports on Glendale’s budget as council meets in March and April of 2016.

Don’t forget…it’s budget season in Glendale.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.

It has been 18 years and 63 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Please Note: I have added a Contact form to my blog page. So far about a dozen readers have used the form. My apology to those of you who have used it. I am not deliberately ignoring you. I am taking it down until I get the bugs worked out. However, I am having problems with the app. It is not sending me your contact info or your message.

Councilmember Chavira when he first took office seemed bright-eyed and bushy tailed. How has his attendance at workshops, executive sessions and voting meetings been? I reviewed all of the city’s meeting minutes and it is possible that I could have missed some of his absences. Based upon a cursory review here are his absences since he took office:

2013

  • 4/9/2013       Special workshop followed by an executive session
  • 9/24/2013     Voting meeting
  • 9/24/2013     Special workshop followed by an executive session
  • 12/10/2013   Voting meeting

2014

  • 10/7/2014      Workshop followed by an executive session

2015

  • 2/24/2015      Voting meeting
  • 4/14/2015      Budget workshop followed by an executive session
  • 4/14/2015      Voting meeting
  • 7/20/2015      Special workshop followed by an executive session
  • 8/11/2015      Voting meeting
  • 8/13/2015      Special workshop followed by an executive session

2016

  • 1/28/2015     Special workshop followed by an executive session
  • 2/16/2016     Arrived late at 9:43 AM for a 9 AM meeting

There have been additional meetings, both workshop and voting, at which Sammy participated telephonically and was not physically present for the meeting. There is no way to determine an accurate count of his telephonic presence at meetings. These are more difficult to research by going through old council minutes.

Virtually every workshop is followed by an executive session. So not only has he missed workshops but at least 7 executive session meetings. Executive sessions provide information on contracts, land issues and personnel issues not available to the public. Keep in mind that a councilmember cannot and never participates in an executive session telephonically.

Over the course of the 3 years and 2 months of his term to date he has missed over a dozen meetings. In 16 years of service I probably missed less than a half dozen meetings. The councilmembers with whom I served also took their service very seriously and rarely, if ever, missed a meeting.

Every councilmember knows that it is critical to reserve every Tuesday for council business knowing that there will be a workshop meeting usually followed by an executive session or a voting meeting.

Is Sammy’s job conflicting with his ability to carry out his one major responsibility…his attendance at council meetings? Forget about participation and meaningful conversation. He is known widely for his habit of thanking people and not saying much else. If that is the case then he is doing a disservice to his constituency as well as all of the people of Glendale.

Sammy ran on a bogus platform of promises to the voters of his district…education, for which he had no policy making authority; his support of an out-of-state corporation’s successful bid to manage the city’s arena for $15 million dollars a year; his lack of representation of the people of his district and his failure to meaningfully reach out to his constituents; and his broken promise to not enter into sweetheart deals…unless it happens to be a quid pro quo with a fellow councilmember.

Sammy’s record of service as the Yucca district councilmember is a testament to his invisibility…at council workshop, executive sessions and voting meetings and in interacting with and representing the people of our district. The question is a valid one…Sammy, where are you?

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.

It has been 18 years and 49 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

The City of Glendale received 3 bids to manage its arena. The bids were from AEG Facilities, Comcast Spectacor and SMG. All are extremely reputable, large national companies, experienced in operating venues throughout the country. After senior management reviewed all 3 bids it recommended AEG to the city council. All of the discussion with council was done in executive session and the public is not privy to those discussions. On January 2, 2016 in its executive session council approved AEG and directed staff to negotiate a final contract over the next 60 days.

It is a very positive development. AEG can add another premier venue to its portfolio that is sure to benefit Glendale when AEG negotiates packages of venues with performers. It had previous experience operating the Gila River Arena from 2006 – 2009 and during that period it acquired some major performers: one that comes to mind is Bruce Springstein. It manages over 120 facilities worldwide and the majority is located in the United States.

What does that mean for the Coyotes? I, and many others, remain hopeful that AEG and IceArizona can negotiate a deal that benefits both. That still is the best option for all parties: the city, IceArizona and AEG. Anthony LeBlanc, an owner of IceArizona and its spokesperson, continues to play poker when discussing the situation with such recent comments as, “The good news is that all of the discussions we have had have been pretty open as have other organizations — be it the city of Phoenix or Tempe or Arizona State. Everybody has been pretty open that we have had discussions with and they have all been positive (www.arizonasports.com, Rodney Haas).” If this is his attempt to raise the ante with Glendale or AEG it doesn’t seem to be working. One has only to look back upon his previous history of blustery statements that were found to be less than forthcoming.

If the Coyotes are serious about moving there are still major hurdles to overcome. A new facility would not be available for at least 3 years. No matter whether is it Phoenix, Tempe or Timbuktu, pesky voters will have to be swayed to support the construction of yet another sports venue. Voters are becoming more discerning and will question the value of diverting precious tax revenue away from community needs and to another subsidized sports facility. In today’s day and age, it is not an easy sell as it once was.

Then there is the issue of location…location…location. Larry Feiner, a Coyotes fan, recently tweeted the results of an informal poll he did about the difficulty of the commute. His responses were split right down the middle, 50/50. Those fans who live in the east valley consider the commute to Glendale a hassle. Those fans who live in the west valley consider the commute to the east valley a hassle. The question for the Coyotes is will the ticket holders they pick up from the east valley offset the losses of west valley fans? All of the good will created among west valley fans could be lost. That is a question only the Coyotes will be able to answer. For the past 10 years the Coyotes have had a home in the west valley and it has served them and their fans well. It is a wonderful facility build exclusively for hockey. It is not to be dismissed lightly in a pique of anger because the city is no longer subsidizing losses to the tune of $15 million dollars a year.

I remain positive and believe that a successful accommodation can be achieved between all parties. Can the Coyotes?

©Joyce Clark,2016  

  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.

It has been 18 years and 32 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Valley Metro has released its recommended route for light rail for West Phoenix/Central Glendale. It will be hosting two public information meetings this week. On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 from 6 PM to 8 PM there will be a meeting at the Washington Activity Center Multipurpose Room at 2240 W. Citrus Way, Phoenix and on Wednesday, January 20, 2016 there will be another meeting 6 PM to 8 PM at the Glendale Women’s Club, 7032 N. 56th Avenue, Glendale.

Here is their recommendation: West along Camelback Road from 19th Avenue to 43rd Avenue; North on 43rd Avenue to Glendale Avenue; West on Glendale Avenue; somewhere in the vicinity of 51st Avenue it will go north to Glenn Drive; West on Glenn Drive to 59th Avenue. There is no mention of whether the route would be light rail, express bus service or street car.

Recommended route

Recommended route

Funding would be:

  • Federal ………………………………………………………………………………. 50%
  • Regional sales taxes (Proposition 400) ……………………………..10-15%
  • Local sales taxes (Glendale GO transportation tax
  • and Phoenix Transportation 2050) ……………………………..35-40%

Should light rail or some form of express transportation come to Glendale? Without more information about its effects on Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa it’s difficult to make a decision. There are some factors that would seem to indicate that it’s time may have come. Glendale is the gateway to the rest of the West Valley. If Peoria and Surprise ever hope to have light rail in their communities it is only logical that it would have to route through Glendale. Westgate with the stadium and arena would most certainly benefit from light rail. Glendale is the 6th largest city in the state with 70-80% of its population commuting to work outside of Glendale.

Factors that work against it are its cost and the routing. Today the cost per mile is pegged at $70 million dollars. Federal funding would be about $35 million per mile. Regional sales tax would cover $7-$10.5 million per mile. Glendale through its Go Transportation Tax would have to pay $24.5-$28 million per mile. Since going northward on 43rd Avenue, a boundary street shared by Glendale and Phoenix, it is assumed that the two north 43rd miles would be a shared cost between the two cities. Glendale’s exclusive portion for which it would have to provide funding would be the two miles from 43rd Avenue west to 59th Avenue. That funding would presumably be funded by Glendale’s GO Transportation Tax.

In addition to sharing information about a possible route and the form of mass transportation it is incumbent upon the Glendale City Council to hold a workshop on exactly where the revenue would come from to support this project. Will it come to Glendale? Right now there is no definitive answer.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

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.