Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Jan 16

9

Coyotes…stay or go…in Glendale?

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 9, 2016
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Gila River-Pima-Maricopa Indian Community • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

It has been 18 years and 23 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Over the holidays there wasn’t much news about the Coyotes. Now that we are in a new year on January 7, Paul Giblin had a story in the Arizona Republic citing the results of a recent poll on the subject of a Coyotes relocation. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2016/01/07/poll-arizona-coyotes-should-stay-gila-river-arena-glendale/78314406/ . He reported, “Approximately 54 percent of frequent voters in Maricopa County surveyed believe the Coyotes should remain at Gila River Arena in Glendale, according to the poll that was conducted Dec. 29 for Phoenix-based public-relations firms MBQF Consulting and Marson Media.”

The problem for any other governmental agency attempting to locate the Coyotes will be to garner enough public support to pay for yet another very expensive sports facility. Thirteen years ago, in 2002, the cost to build the Gila River Arena was about $180 million dollars. The cost today to build the same type of facility has exploded. It is expected that the cost would be in the $400 million dollar range. The sixty four dollar question is can enough public support be generated in some other Valley community to use precious and scarce taxpayer dollars?

Public support would probably be found if the economy was booming and world affairs were stable. That is not the case. The economy staggers along as the middle class continues its death spiral. The general public fears more ISIS inspired events on our soil as the Middle East explodes into further turmoil while China’s stock market takes a dive and North Korea’s bomb tests reminds us that we, as a nation, are vulnerable. This is not an environment that is conducive for public sentiment to use taxpayer dollars on yet another sports facility.

Anthony LeBlanc, one of the Coyotes’ owners and apparent Public Information Officer, has had to walk back some of his previous assertions about the Coyotes.  He has hired a sports consultancy firm to assist him in his quest for a new location. It seems likely that a location in any other Valley municipality will be very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. His only hope may be can he cut a deal for another new facility funded and built by the Gila River Pima Maricopa Indian Community? His refusal to bid for management of the Gila River Arena may come back to haunt him.

Which leads to another bit of recent news. The City of Glendale received 3 bids to manage its Gila River Arena submitted by AEG Facilities, Spectra by Comcast Spectacor and SMG. All three are “big guns” in the sports management business. All have the experience and knowledge required to successfully manage Glendale’s arena. Currently the bids are TOP SECRET. In the next few weeks Glendale’s senior management staff and city council will each receive separate briefings regarding the specifics of each proposed bid. This management deal is more complicated because the Coyotes will play in the arena for another season and it is expected the chosen management company contract would begin this July 1, 2016. That means that the preferred management company and the Coyotes would have to negotiate revenue streams for one year of Coyotes occupancy. There is always the remote possibility that a deal could be crafted comfortable enough for the Coyotes to create an incentive for them to stay at the Gila River Arena beyond their final year.

The city council may be ready to vote on an arena manager as early as February 9, 2016. If a vote is not taken around that date expect that one of the bids is in further negotiation before final acceptance. The public, as is the case with mushrooms, will be left in the dark and fed horse manure. There is no opportunity for public input in this process. While everyone understands the theory of representative government they also understand the theory of transparency. It seems that once again “father knows best” trumps the public’s right to know.

© 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 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 16

7

A tale of two parks

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 7, 2016
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale finances • West Branch Library  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 4 Comments

It has been 18 years and 21 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

In 1990 Glendale’s population was approximately 151,449. Two years later, in 1992, Glendale implemented a full council district system of representation with 6 council districts of approximately equal populations. At that time each district would have had about 30,000 residents. The geographical size of the districts varied to accommodate equal population distribution.

A little history is in order. In the late 1970’s to mid 1980’s the Hunt brothers, billionaires from Texas, had acquired most of the land we know today as Arrowhead. They intended to master plan and develop the entire area. In support of their plan Glendale built a water treatment plant to accommodate the anticipated population growth. Disaster struck. The Hunt brothers attempted to corner the precious metals market, especially silver. Paul Volker, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, brought their scheme to an end and by the late 1980’s the brothers were convicted of manipulating the market.

What was Glendale to do? It had invested a great deal of money in a water treatment plant now sitting idle. It took on the task of master planning the area and investing millions in developing the infrastructure of the area while ignoring the needs of the rest of the city. It also reserved a substantial parcel of land for what would become Foothills Park. It paid the Hunt brothers for the water treatment plant it had built. In essence Glendale paid twice for the very same plant.

Developers began building homes in the area. With the mayor of Glendale residing in the Arrowhead area it didn’t take long for resources to flow into development of Foothills Park and within 8 years the area also had its branch library, the Foothills Library. In 1998 the Foothills Aquatic & Recreation Center and the Western Area Regional Park had been placed on the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

Southwest Heroes Park

Southwest Heroes Park

By 1998 the city has made a commitment to a Recreation & Aquatic Center in Foothills Park and the development of the Western Area Regional Park (known today at Heroes Park) with a branch library, its very own Recreation & Aquatic Center, baseball fields, an urban fishing lake, a dog park, ramadas, basketball courts and a skate area. By 2007 Foothills Park had its Recreation & Aquatic Center. What did the Western Area Regional Park have? It had $6 million dollars diverted from building its branch library to building the Public Safety Center. It had some basketball courts and a

Northeast Heroes Park

Northeast Heroes Park

zero splash pad. The skate area and ramadas were built after 2007. The skate area sits idle…vacant…growing tumbleweeds. The ramadas were built because they generate rental income. They are used heavily. Since its arrival in 1998 on the city’s CIP there is no branch library, no Recreation & Aquatic Center, no baseball fields, no urban fishing lake, and no dog park. Only 20 acres of the total park acreage of 88 acres has been developed.

Skate Court at Heroes Park

Skate Court at Heroes Park

Splash pad

Splash Pad at Heroes Park

Make no mistake…I am as mad as hell. Over the past 18 years there has been a deliberate and concerted agenda by previous city councils to ignore the development of this park. Today with the exception of Mayor Weiers and Councilmember Turner it remains ignored and neglected. Through Mayor Weiers effort to call attention to this park this year 83rd Avenue north of Bethany Home Road (the western boundary of the park) will see road improvements in the form of curb, gutter and sidewalk. A bone to be sure but it is something. At some point a modular building will be erected, one tenth the size of the planned branch library, to serve as this area’s library. Another bone to be sure.

Senior staff is also responsible. This park is not part of their agenda either. When the city very recently decided to buy the Pendergast land for $22 million dollars not surprisingly Tom Duensing, Interim

Ramadas at Heroes Park

Ramadas at Heroes Park

Assistant City Manager and Director of Finance, found the debt capacity to accomplish this purchase. When it comes to this park’s development he wrings his hands and says there is no money and no debt capacity. I call on him to be financially creative and to find a way to increase the city’s debt capacity to cause further development of this park. I call on this city council to make meaningful development of this park a priority. One sixth of the city’s population remains ill served without any of the amenities that can be found throughout the rest of the city. To this day only 20

In the shadow of the University of Phoenix Stadium at Heroes Park

In the shadow of the University of Phoenix Stadium at Heroes Park

acres of the total park acreage of 88 acres has been developed. It is a travesty, shameful and embarrassing that the city has a major, regional park three quarters of which grows tumbleweeds.

 

 

 

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Nov 15

19

Glendale hires new city manager

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 19, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , | 3 Comments

It has been 17 years and 322 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Tomorrow, November 20, 2015 the city will issue a press release reporting that Kevin Phelps has accepted employment with the City of Glendale as its new city manager. Currently he has been Deputy Pierce County Executive. Prior to that from April, 1991 to August, 2007 he was Managing Partner of the Landmark Convention Center, the largest privately held convention center and catering operation in Washington State. He was also a city councilmember with the City of Tacoma from 1998-2005. He graduated from Washington State University in 1976 and the Western Governors University in 2013.

The Glendale Star of November 5, 2015 quoted Phelps saying, “Phelps believes his best attribute is to serve the council, staff and community.

‘First, I possess significant experience and acumen in the area of financial management. I am experienced in process and systems improvement using tools like Six Sigma Lean, Kaizen and balanced scorecard,’ Phelps said. ‘Second, I have a successful track record of building and developing outstanding leadership teams at all levels within the organization. Thirdly, my leadership style is built on trust and transparency. You cannot govern efficiently without trust. Finally, my resume is uniquely balanced between the public and private sectors.’

He also points out that he has had great success in running businesses, meeting payrolls and dealing with employees and the public.

‘My resume includes a successful career for over 30 years, owning and operating a number of successful businesses in the Seattle – Tacoma area. I know the pressures of meeting a payroll, paying taxes and working with financial institutions. I also have over 18-plus years in the public sector, including serving two terms on the Tacoma City Council, where I learned the importance of developing effective public policy to achieve the goals of the community,’ Phelps said. ‘I worked at the state level with the Washington State Auditor’s Office, where, as Deputy State Auditor, I focused on using performance audits to improve the performance of government agencies. Finally, for the past seven years I have helped lead the second largest county in Washington State. Pierce County has over 820,000 citizens, has 3,000 employees and a $930 million annual budget.’

Phelps also adds that the Coyotes are integral to the city and he would work on improving the relationship between the two.

‘In concert with the council, I would work to establish a relationship that is beneficial to both the city and to the Coyotes. Recently, I was involved at the highest level with the planning and execution of the 2015 USGA U.S. Open Golf Championship, which was held at a golf course (Chambers Bay) that we own,’ Phelps said. ‘I inherited a contract for the event that was crafted before my arrival, which frankly, had some issues that were problematic for both the county and the USGA. I worked closely with the senior leadership team at the USGA to address these issues. In the end, we were able to achieve an appropriate balance within the agreements that met both the needs of the USGA and Pierce County. The Championship was incredibly successful, creating more than $200 million (projected) in economic impact for our region – and the county made money on the event.  Just recently, we have started the process to secure future dates for the U.S. Open.’

‘The relationship with the Coyotes is very important to the city. I am confident I can help establish a positive relationship with the Coyotes that will endure for years to come’.”

Perhaps the greatest vote of confidence is that of Interim City Manager Dick Bowers who reportedly related that he felt very comfortable in leaving the reins of Glendale’s management to Phelps.

Let’s all welcome Mr. Phelps and congratulate him on his new position. May it be a long and mutually beneficial relationship.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Nov 15

11

Welcome to Glendale’s newest Councilmember Ray Malnar

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 11, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , | 3 Comments

It has been 17 years and 314 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Tonight, November 10, 2015 Ray Malnar was sworn in as Glendale’s newest councilmember representing the Sahuaro district. Gary Sherwood is definitely gone and to be forgotten. Councilmember Malnar, in his acceptance speech, set just the right tone. It was positive and hopeful as he suggested that Glendale can have better days ahead.

Many people have said that there are apparently two more sleazebag councilmembers that need to hit the brick road…Councilmembers Chavira and Aldama. Councilmember Chavira is up for reelection in 2016 and Councilmember Aldama faces reelection in 2018. We’ll see what the future holds for both.

I wanted to share an Arizona Republic news story by Chris Coppola. In it Coppola reports that Chandler is starting its search over again for a new city manager. Here is the link:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/chandler/2015/11/06/chandler-city-manager-search-starts-over/75235616/ .

Kevin Phelps, under consideration as one of two finalists for Glendale’s position of city manager, was one of the five finalists for city manager in Chandler ultimately rejected by their city council.

Let’s hope Glendale has the strength of fortitude exhibited by its sister city, Chandler, and rejects its two finalists and starts over. Glendale’s consultant, Slavin, did a poor job of securing candidates for the city. If Chandler can start over, so can Glendale. Glendale deserves better.

For the better part of an hour Glendale’s city council rubber stamped every agenda item. Not one agenda item was pulled for further questioning. Yet we know that while some of the items may have been “of a routine nature or discussed in workshop,” that was not the case with every agenda item. They appeared to show very little interest in the items they approved and on several occasions Mayor Weiers seemed to practically plead for some council input on anything. It was disappointing and literally painful to watch. Has this council slipped back into the modus operandi of previous councils?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Nov 15

6

I’ve got a bridge to sell

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 6, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 1 Comment

It has been 17 years and 309 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

PLEASE NOTE: SINCE THE INCEPTION OF MY BLOG I HAVE REACHED ANOTHER MILESTONE. AS OF NOVEMBER 4, 2015 THERE HAVE BEEN OVER 300,000 READS OF MY BLOGS. MY THANKS GOES OUT TO ALL WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE THEM ON A REGULAR BASIS AND A SPECIAL THANKS TO ALL WHO HATE MY COMMENTARY BUT KEEP COMING BACK TO FIND OUT WHAT I AM SHARING ABOUT GLENDALE AND ITS PLAYERS.

On October 20, 2015 at city council workshop council was presented with a menu of city properties that could be sold. Amazingly, not one…let me repeat that, not one property was put on the block.

Cushman & Wakefield, the city’s consultant, proposed the possible sale of nine city owned facilities:

  • Water services lot at the northeast corner of 99th Avenue and Bethany Home Road for $7.5 million
  • Glen Lakes Golf Course at 54th Avenue and Northern Avenue for $5.2 million
  • Desert Mirage Golf Course at 87th Avenue and Maryland Avenue for $450,000
  • St. Vincent de Paul Thrift store in downtown Glendale for $300,000
  • Thunderbird Lounge and adjoining properties in downtown Glendale for $545,000 to $727,000
  • Bead Museum in downtown Glendale for $400,000 to $500,000
  • City Court site in downtown Glendale for $3 to $5 million
  • Bank of America building in downtown Glendale for $7.35 million

The only properties that can legitimately be taken off the sales block are the two golf courses. Desert Mirage Golf Course has long term contractual obligations that could prove problematical and Glen Lakes Golf Course land would be used for residential development that would violate a long standing commitment to every home owner surrounding the property. In addition, these two properties offer a genuine amenity to every Glendale resident.

So, why won’t council sell off any of the downtown properties? Well, we might use them sometime in the future…the very distant future. Or we can’t sell them because the sale price is less than the city paid originally. Reality…since the Great Recession, many properties nationally and regionally have sold for less than their purchase price.

Each of these properties, vacant or developed, have annual operating & maintenance (O&M) costs. What is the total annual O&M cost to the city for each of these properties? If they were sold the city would no longer have to pay the O&M costs in addition to receiving the purchase price.

The sale of these properties accomplishes several goals. It takes the annual O&M costs off the books permanently. It earns the city an estimated $20 million plus. These funds should go directly into the city’s Contingency Fund (Unappropriated Fund Balance).  That, in turn, would take pressure off of putting every available nickel in the General Fund into Contingency. It would create the opportunity to utilize General Funds for needs long ignored since the Great Recession.

The sale of these properties also creates a major benefit for downtown Glendale. How many Task Forces, over the years, have made recommendations for the revitalization of downtown Glendale? Too many, going all the way back to the Miracle Mile Citizen Task Force. What has been achieved as a result? Nothing. In one fell swoop, with the sale of these properties the city has the opportunity to kick start downtown’s revitalization. No one is going to buy a downtown property without plans to develop. That’s illogical. An investor in a downtown property expects a return on that investment and that can only occur with the development of the investment. The beneficial and productive use of these properties immediately will do more to revitalize downtown Glendale than the unanswered recommendations of another dozen Task Force groups.

It’s time for the city council to let go of these properties. There are genuine benefits to be achieved with their sale. In the meantime, as long as the council digs in its feet and refuses to sell anything, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell…interested?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Nov 15

3

Is Glendale keeping its promise?

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 3, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • West Branch Library  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

It has been 17 years and 306 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

PLEASE NOTE: Today, November 3, 2015 the voters of the Sahuaro district will decide to retain or recall current Councilmember Gary Sherwood. They have already submitted their Early Ballots. If for some reason you still have your Early Ballot you can drop off your completed ballot at any Sahuaro polling location today. Sahuaro district voters do have a choice. They can keep the same representative or opt for change by voting for Ray Malnar. Mr. Malnar is a man of honesty and character whose agenda is to serve the residents of his district in a fiscally conservative and meaningful manner. If the poll to the left of this column is any indication tonight when the votes are tallied the people of the Sahuaro district will have a new councilmember. It may be premature but congratulations to our newest councilmember, Ray Malnar.

How come the city has the capacity to use General Obligation (GO) bond funding (paid by sales tax dollars that flow into the city’s General Fund) to cover $22.3 million dollars to buy 99 acres from the Pendergast family to be used, in part, to satisfy the Bidwill’s and Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority’s requirement for parking for football games yet has no money to construct a West Branch Library? According to Erik Strunk, Director of Parks, Recreation and Library Services, “There are currently no general fund monies available for enhanced library services in this area. Again, the only money we know of that’s available right now is the $2.5 million in development impacts fee money.”

Isn’t it amazing? The city has the opportunity to buy land and voila! There’s money to pay off those GO bonds but to build a library, there’s no money…that is a lot of b_ll s__t. Remember in 2006 a majority of city council stole $6 million earmarked for construction of the West Branch Library and diverted it to construction of the Public Safety Training Facility.

This is but one example of the city playing games with money slated for construction of the West Branch library.

  • Fact:  Glendale voters approved $9.7 million in March of 1987. There is still $1.7 million in library capacity from that approval.
  • Fact: Glendale voters approved $411 million in November of 1999. There is still $7.47 million in library capacity from that approval.
  • Fact: Glendale voters approved $270 million in May of 2007. There is still $12.37 million in library capacity from that approval.
  • Fact: Right now, this very minute, there is over $20 million in bond capacity to build a West Branch Library.

At the September 16, 2008 city council workshop meeting the scheduled completion of the library was 2009 and staff said, “by 2010 the West Branch Library will serve a population of approximately 50,000 in the western area of Glendale, and it is anticipated that more than 1,000 people per day will utilize the services of this branch.”

Residents of west Glendale need to thank Mayor Weiers for asking staff to “refocus” on the promises made regarding what is now called Heroes Park at the northeast corner of Bethany Home Road and 83rd Avenue. We residents appreciate his concern but after waiting 17 years to see this park developed the only action that will suffice is to see dollars being spent.

So they throw us a bone and think that will keep us quiet. Their sop is to install a prefab building, a glorified trailer of about 7,500 square feet in Heroes Park. It will be smaller than Velma Teague Library and smaller than Foothills Library. Gee, aren’t we lucky? Now we will be required to be appropriately grateful.

In the 1975 film classic Network the news anchor Howard Beale stridently bellowed, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.”

17 years is a long time to wait for this city make good on its promises. The residents of west Glendale are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. If the mayor and certain councilmembers want our votes they are going to have to deliver.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 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.

Oct 15

20

Glendale’s Super Bowl Analysis

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 20, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale and the NFL Super Bowl • Glendale and the Super Bowl • Glendale finances • NFL • University of Phoenix Stadium  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

It has been 17 years and 292 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On October 8, 2015 Glendale released its analysis of the expenses incurred in hosting the Super Bowl. Here is the link to the full report: SuperBowlXLIXPostEventAnalysisFinal2015_10_08 . I don’t know why this report is not on the city’s website. It should be available to every Glendale resident. The report is comprehensive and offers, “The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive overview of the city’s obligations and how they were met, a summary of the ancillary events and activities that took place, an analysis of specific city services provided, an assessment of stakeholder impacts, and a comprehensive financial analysis (page 2, executive summary).” I do take issue with some elements of Glendale’s final report, namely, cost avoidance and the lack of tracking employee time.

As I have suggested innumerable times, the only way hosting the Super Bowl works for Glendale is if a reimbursement mechanism is created by the State Legislature or the Host Committee. Whether the loss is a half million dollars or two million dollars, it is not a cost the taxpayers of Glendale should bear to enrich the state or other Valley communities. Glendale noted, “Other communities around the country that host Super Bowl have established a state-level funding mechanism to cover costs to local communities, or in some cases, Host Committees reimburse cities for associated costs. As an example, the city of Santa Clara, California (host of the upcoming 2016 Super Bowl) entered into an agreement with their stadium and Host Committee wherein the Host Committee is responsible for reimbursing the city’s direct costs (actual costs incurred) for all planning and execution activities associated with providing governmental services inclusive of public safety, traffic management, planning, building inspection, and public right-of-way clean-up (page 2, executive summary).” Until such time as a reimbursement mechanism is created Glendale should not participate in hosting another Super Bowl.

The report emphasizes the issue of cost avoidance. What is cost avoidance? According to the report, “At the onset of planning, staff was tasked with identifying service delivery alternatives or creative innovations that could be implemented to reduce costs or engage community partnerships in support of the city’s planning and execution efforts associated with Super Bowl XLIX. As a result of the combined efforts of the city’s planning team, Glendale realized cost avoidance of approximately $672,781…(Page 15).” Cost avoidance is only legitimate when it absorbs costs to provide necessary services to plan or execute the Super Bowl event. There were 2 items that could be classified as true cost avoidance: Light towers provided by the Department of Homeland Security at a cost of $12,000; and the city’s successful negotiation to eliminate a shuttle obligation at a cost of $200,000. These 2 items totaled $212,000.

An item that should not be considered cost avoidance ($415,625) is Valley fire and police agencies contributing staff time at their own expense. It is generally understood and accepted by all that any host city (anywhere) is not capable of providing the total police and fire services required. Other agencies understand that they will provide staff time at no cost to the host city. This action occurs at all Super Bowls, not just here. Calling this item cost avoidance is no more than ginning up the cost avoidance numbers. Other items listed as cost avoidance such as the Visiting Public Safety Officials Program ($16,656) were not required or necessary to plan or execute the Super Bowl. True cost avoidance totaled $212,000, not the $672,781 touted by Glendale.

Another problematic area of the report deals with Glendale’s reluctance to and lack of tracking of employee time spent in preparation and execution of the Super Bowl. Glendale says, “Preparations and planning for Super Bowl XLIX began in August 2013 with the assignment of two project managers and a team of approximately 20 employees representing multiple disciplines over 12 departments. All participating members of the planning team took on the responsibility in addition to their regular duties. Planning activities included participation in the following activities: internal core team meetings/communications, budget development, regional public safety planning, Host Committee briefings, stakeholder engagement, transportation planning, NFL production team, vendor engagement and media interviews (Page 12).” This team consisted of primarily salaried employees (paid an annual wage and benefits no matter the number of hours worked) and included:
• Economic Development Officer Jean Moreno
• Development Services Director Sam McAllen
• Police Commander Richard Bradshaw
• Interim Public Works Director Cathy Colbath
• Building Safety Manager Justine Cornelius
• Assistant Fire Chief Chris DeChant
• Transportation Systems Manager Trevor Ebersole,
• Airport Administrator Walter Fix
• Planning Director Jon Froke
• Fire Inspector II Anthony Gavalyas
• Senior Marketing & Communications Manager Joe Hengenmuehler
• Licensing & Taxpayer Analyst Tammy Hicks
• Fire Marshall Charles Jenkins
• Assistant Police Chief Matt Lively
• Assistant Planning Director Tabitha Perry
• CVB Manager Lorraine Pino
• Economic Development Administrator Kristen Stephenson
• Intergovernmental Programs Director Brent Stoddard
• Communications Director Julie Watters

I can see it now. When one of these people had to meet regarding the Super Bowl, they designated an associate to be in charge of their regular duties. Their responsibilities transferred to someone else who had to pick up the slack. These are valuable employees whose time was taken away from administering their departments and providing service to every Glendale resident. How much time was diverted from providing service to you, me, all of us? 1,000 hours, 2,000 hours? Glendale may consider it inconsequential to track their time but we, the taxpayers of Glendale, would like to know how many hours and the value of their time was diverted as a result of the Super Bowl. It is a true cost that must be accounted for.

Add the cost of non-salaried employees (paid wages and benefits for a 40 hour work week) who were tasked with carrying out the plans of this committee. It constitutes a direct transference of service time belonging to Glendale residents and diverted to support the Super Bowl.

Glendale’s rationale for its failure to track employee time and consequently the value of that time as a direct cost occurrence is, “In conclusion, the determination was made that the task of serving as the host city for the Super Bowl was a service being provided as a result of Council direction (Page 13).” On the face of it, that is one of the most illogical statements ever. Glendale goes on to say, “More importantly, requiring employees to track time would not be an effective or efficient use of scarce resources and there was no monetary gain that could be accomplished by doing so (Page 13).” Really? True, no monetary gain would be achieved but thousands of employee hours at real cost as well as service delivery avoidance to Glendale residents should be accounted for. It is a true cost to the taxpayers of Glendale that to date has remained hidden.

Glendale goes on to say, “Setting aside cost avoidance, after accounting for Glendale’s direct costs and direct fee-based revenue, the result was a negative net financial impact of $578,965. It is important to note that this does not account for any costs associated with pre-planning activities (Page 2, executive summary).” If the costs of employee time were recognized in this report it is expected that the true cost, rather than the $578,965 acknowledged would double to over a million dollars.

It is to be expected that Glendale would put as much positive spin on its hosting costs as possible and goes to great lengths to point out that Glendale does not have enough hotel rooms or venues to gain financially as well as offset it costs to host a Super Bowl. The overarching issue remains that Glendale experiences a financial loss in hosting the Super Bowl. Until that is remedied Glendale should not be in the Super Bowl hosting business.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 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.

Oct 15

12

How to avoid building a $50M parking garage

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 12, 2015
Posted in Arizona Cardinals • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • University of Phoenix Stadium  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 13 Comments

It has been 17 years and 283 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Two new items have been added to the city council agenda for Tuesday, October 13, 2015. They were added just before the close of business on Friday, October 9, 2015. They are agenda items 58 and 59. Both items are related to one another and call for city council approval the purchase of  99 acres at 91st Avenue and Bethany Home Road for $15,526,542.00 from the Pendergast family. The Pendergast family deserves the city’s thanks. They have lived in Glendale for generations and have roots here as well as a genuine love for the city. They have been involved in the life of Glendale for many years and have contributed their time, talent and money for the benefit of the city. I, for one, thank them.

I congratulate Interim City Manager Dick Bowers and the city council for this action. In this instance, the city has been proactive in solving a long standing problem, namely that of being required to build a city parking garage at Westgate for the benefit of the Bidwill family. The city is required to provide 6,000 parking spaces for football games as well as major events that occur at the University of Phoenix stadium. As land was consumed at Westgate for new development the proscription to provide those spaces became more and more difficult forcing council discussion to consider building the facility. With purchase of the Pendergast land there will now be more than enough land to satisfy that requirement without the need to build a garage.

That garage would have cost the city far north of the $50M acknowledged as the construction cost. Paying $15M for the land plus the cost of constructing a parking area on a portion of the land is far less costly than at least $50M for the garage. Voila! Suddenly there will be no need to build a Taj Mahal of a parking garage. The parking spaces will not consume the entire 99 acres. It is not known as of this date how much land would be required.

The balance of the undeveloped land provides the city an exciting opportunity to control a portion of its own destiny. With regard to the development of the portion unused for parking, the city might consider partnering with a Class A private developer. There are many advantages to doing so. Among others, it could mandate final approval for any development that might be proposed. If it is developed commercially I would suggest that with over 2,500 existent apartment units (with another 4,000 approved) and over 4,000 homes close by, the city should use its best efforts to create a neighborhood shopping district with a grocery store and dry cleaners. There is no grocery store in west Glendale and those sales tax dollars go to Phoenix and Peoria. The closest dry cleaners is minimally 4 miles away in other West Valley cities.

No matter what the future holds for this land, kudos to all those involved with a special and most warm thank you to the Pendergast family.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 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.

Oct 15

10

Just when you think there cannot be any more…

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 10, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , | 1 Comment

It has been 17 years and 282 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Just when you think there is no more to the Sherwood saga, up pop new revelations and actions. The Glendale Star reported on October 8, 2015 that once again it is alleged Sherwood violated open meeting law by sharing confidential city council executive session information. Here is the link:

http://www.glendalestar.com/news/article_ad8a15fa-6dfe-11e5-bf3a-c3b5b770ad8c.html . Gary Hirsch, a long time Glendale activist, supported Sherwood in his first run for the Sahuaro city council seat because of Sherwood’s opposition to the casino, among other things. They became friends and met often, usually over breakfast. When Sherwood did his dramatic flip-flop on the casino issue, flipping from anti-casino to pro-casino, Sherwood and Hirsch had several conversations about the issue. In the email below (I have the full version of the email. However, I am only publishing the relevant part) Hirsch has, once again, asked Sherwood to explain why he changed his position. Sherwood then sent Hirsch yet another explanation for his abrupt about face on the casino issue. See below:

From: Gary Sherwood                                                                                                          Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 5:21 PM                                                                           To: ‘GARY HIRSCH’                                                                                                          Subject: RE: TO                                                                                                           Sensitivity: Confidential

Please, please, please, keep this confidential between ourselves – not that I have to tell you that but I need to state it.

Gary –

“Michael Bailey asked the council in an e-session on September 10th for a confirmation that we continue the direction from the previous council – there was a lot of discussion but in the end, a majority of head nodding  (4-3) didn’t want to undo what had been previously been accomplished and this was at the recommendation of Mr. Bailey. This was needed because of recent rulings putting the one issue back to the 9th circuit court. When Michael’s letter came out on the 11th – it was by far stronger than what was discussed the day previous.”

Best, Gary

The first item that has got to grab your attention is the email is marked confidential and Sherwood requests that confidentiality be maintained (which Hirsch had done for 2 years). Why the need for confidentiality if everything Sherwood is saying is legally permissible? Perhaps because Sherwood knew it wasn’t and that he was violating executive session?? Haven’t we seen Sherwood do this before when he sent another email allegedly violating executive session with the admonition to former Councilmember Manny Martinez to delete the email after reading it? As Yogi Berra said, “déjà vu all over again.”

In the body of the email as Sherwood, in an effort to explain away his newly adopted pro-casino stance, reveals Michael Bailey’s (Glendale City Attorney) actions that occurred during that executive session. 

Sherwood knew better but it is just another example of his habit and pattern of ignoring the law. Don’t forget we saw this same behavior regarding his driver’s license suspensions and his Failure to Appear statewide warrant. If Sherwood has played fast and loose with executive session material and has ignored orders of the court, what other “omissions” of the law has he committed?

Aristotle once said, “At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst.” Sherwood seems to proven this adage over and over again for he appears to have been at his worst since his election to office.

Add to this latest revelation of yet another Sherwood allegation of wrong doing the fact that the city council called for an executive session at 11 AM on Friday, October 09, 2015. Here is the link:

https://glendale-az.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=437640&GUID=5D630A2D-EE64-406C-BE23-10B067AE2DC0&Options=info&Search= . One of the agenda items is:

  1. PERSONNEL MATTERS
  2. In accordance with the City of Glendale City Council Guidelines, adopted February 24, 2015, the City Council will meet to review and discuss an alleged violation of the Guidelines by Councilmember Sherwood. (A.R.S. § 38-431.03 (A)(1)) .

What will come of this extraordinary agenda item? Will the council, as a body, finally be the ones to hold Sherwood accountable for his actions by censuring him? That is the worst punishment they can apply under the Council Guidelines. Do they have the will and backbone to do so? Can Sherwood weigh in on his own censure? I don’t know the answer to this question as it has never occurred before. What if Sherwood is prohibited from participating and the balance of council is split 3-3? In case of a tie it is considered defeated. We will have to wait and to see if it appears as an agenda item on an upcoming city council voting meeting. Don’t hold your breath on this one. I do not expect that enough of the councilmembers will actually have the intestinal fortitude to censure one of their own. From past experience it can be expected that Chavira and Aldama will support Sherwood. Which of the other 4 councilmembers will balk and refuse to censure him? Weiers? Hugh? Tolmachoff? Turner?

It appears everyone has had enough of the Sherwood “drama,” especially the Sahuaro district voters. It’s time to cut Sherwood loose and to send him back to the private sector where he can wreak his own apparent brand of havoc there. The prevalent sentiment of Sahuaro voters is that Sherwood, instead of representing their interests, has blatantly represented his own.

Stay tuned. Just when you think there can’t be any more…there is.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Sep 15

14

Coyotes audit

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 14, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , | 4 Comments

It has been 17 years and 256 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

I spent some time reading the audit of the Coyotes released by the city on September 9, 2015. Here is the link: https://www.glendaleaz.com/auditor/documents/ArenaContractComplianceReview2015.pdf . The overall sense of the audit expresses the city’s deep frustration with IceArizona’s failure to provide all of the information required by the Professional Management Services and Arena Lease Agreement (PMSA).

Here are a few of the limitations utilized by IceArizona in responding to audit requests:

  • “City staff requested that the Arena Manager provide the City’s auditors and Consultant with a copy of the Team Owner’s financial statements. The Arena Manager denied this request.”
  • “The City’s auditors also requested an independent confirmation of the Team Owner’s 2013/2014 annual operating loss. The Arena Manager’s independent external auditors denied this request.”
  • “On March 13, 2015, the Team Owner issued a notice to the City of the Team Owner’s claimed operating loss for the ‘First Certification Period,’ as defined in the PMSA. The Team Owner provided no additional backup documentation, including Team Owner financial statements, for the city to verify the claimed operating loss.”

Much of the final audit findings are no longer applicable or relevant since the city council cancelled the original contract and negotiated an amended contract good for two years. The audit dealt with all of the revenue streams some of which are no longer applicable under the new temporary contract. However, there were quite a few potential non-compliance issues identified:

  • “Early Termination: The Team Owner’s June 30, 2014 financial statements were not provided to the City, prohibiting the City from verifying the Team Owner’s claimed operating loss. Additionally, the City’s estimate of the Team Owner’s 2013/2014 operating loss is greater than the Team Owner’s March 13, 2015 claimed operating loss based upon the information provided to the City and the Consultant by the Arena Manager. It appeared that the loss as reported to the City was not based upon the Team Owner’s financial results but was based upon the Partnership’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization from the consolidated audited financial statements.” The city had to subtract out the Arena Manager’s audited financial statements from the Partnership’s financial statements since they were not reported separately but all lumped together. The city calculated the Team Owner’s loss to be greater than what they reported to the city.
  • “Naming Rights: The City was not paid their full share of naming rights under the 2006 Jobing.com Naming Rights Agreement, resulting in a potential underpayment.” Under the agreement the city was to receive 20% or $1.2 M a year ($60,000 a month). Instead the city received $55,540 for the year. Unilaterally IceArizona said if Jobing.com pays us less, the city gets less. They also independently revised the definition of what components made up the naming rights and told the city that it was not entitled to some of those revenue components.
  • “Qualified Tickets: The number of paid admissions reported by the Team Owner to the NHL was higher than the number of paid admissions reported to the City, resulting in potential surcharge and supplemental surcharge fees still due to the City estimated at $39,640.” The number of paid admissions reported to the city was 533,856; the number reported to the NHL was 542,665 ( a difference of 8,809). The number of complimentary tickets reported to the city was 43,762; the number reported to the NHL was 34,953. The city should have received an additional $39,640.50 for the unreported 8,809 tickets.
  • “Supplemental Surcharge Fees: The Arena Manager did not establish a Supplemental Surcharge Escrow Account in 2014/2014 and deposit funds into the account as required by the PMSA. The Arena Manager wired the entire amount of supplemental surcharge fees that were collected throughout the year to the City on July 9, 2014.” Again, because of the discrepancy in reported ticket sales the city did not receive all supplemental revenue to which it was entitled.
  • “Annual Financial Reports: The City did not receive the Arena Manager’s audited financial statements, which were due September 30, 2014, until February 25, 2015. The Team Owner’s annual financial statements were not reported to the city. The Arena Manager’s independent external auditors were unable to confirm the Arena Manager’s and Team Owner’s 2013/2014 revenues and expenses to the City.
  • “Sales Tax: The Arena Manager and the City have not clarified responsibilities regarding the collection and remittance of sales tax, potentially resulting in unremitted sales taxes on certain Arena revenues.”
  • “Annual Budget: The Arena Manager submitted the 2013/2014 annual budget to the City late on March 25, 2014. The budget was due within 30 days of the closing date of the PMSA.

What does all of this government-speak mean in plain English? The city was frustrated because IceArizona was very late in submitting their audit and IceArizona played games with the report they submitted. The city was put in the position of finding the hidden pea under three cups. The city was conned. IceArizona’s game playing shouldn’t come as any surprise. After all, look at with whom they surrounded themselves…Craig Tindall, Julie Frisoni and Gary Sherwood…who appear to be three little peas in an ethically challenged peapod.

The city didn’t care about the profit and loss statements of the IceArizona partnership. It wanted and didn’t get, two, separately and independently verified audits of IceArizona as the arena manager and IceArizona as the team owner. The city suspects that the annual loss was greater than IceArizona reported but without those two audits the city can surmise but not verify their suspicion. The city was underpaid on ticket sales and the related surcharges that flowed from the ticket sales. The city was underpaid on naming rights because IceArizona unilaterally changed the rules of the game. Finally, the city may also have been underpaid on sales tax revenues generated within the arena.

After having seen the results of the audit is it any wonder that a majority of council cancelled the original agreement? It also lends credence to council’s decision to move forward with putting the arena management contract out for bids. IceArizona has demonstrated an unwillingness to share crucial information, financial or otherwise. They have flexed their muscles as the “big boys” and have shown considerable distain for the city and the taxpayers whose dollars keep them alive.

IceArizona, just like any other entity, is free to submit a bid but based upon their past performance. They will have to clean up their act considerably to be considered seriously.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

« Previous Page — Next Page »