Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Jun 15

22

How much risk?

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 22, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , | 22 Comments

It has been 17 years and 171 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

I have not only read Glendale’s motion but printed it out. Here is the link if you wish to read the motion: City of Glendale motion June 18 2015 . I have read and reread the motion several times. I suggest that you pay particular attention to the footnotes. In some aspects they are as revelatory as the emails provided in the brief.

Glendale could not have chosen a better attorney to represent its interests in its decision to cancel its contract with IceArizona and subsequent litigation. Here is a link to Cynthia Ricketts’ biography: http://sacksrickettscase.com/our-team/cynthia-a-ricketts/ . She is well respected by her peers and has extensive expertise in the area of litigation that the city requires.

If you noted in state statute A.R.S. § 38-511 it refers to any person “significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating of documents.” Many have focused on the word “negotiating” especially with reference to Julie Frisoni. Please go to Frisoni’s PR website (http://www.frisonipr.com/whoweare/). This is a direct quote from her site, “Crisis communications, including NHL Coyotes negotiations and the near bankruptcy of a city.” It appears that Ms. Frisoni can’t have it both ways. There seems to be a conflict (no pun intended) between her claim on her website citing experience in “NHL Coyotes negotiations” and her recent public denials that she was merely a Communications Director.

Based upon my personal experience as a councilmember from 2000 through 2012 Ms. Frisoni was a close confidant of Ed Beasley, former City Manager, and Craig Tindall, former City Attorney. I did not have a great deal of interaction with Ms. Frisoni for I lacked trust in her. While she may or may not have had a hand in direct, face-to-face negotiations of the currently cancelled contract it appears quite evident that she played an essential role in securing (and insuring) council approval of the contract.

Prior to the contract’s approval by city council, on June 26, 2013, she sent talking points in support of the contract to Councilmember Chavira. In fact, Councilmember Chavira, one of only 2 council votes (the other being Sherwood) that did not support the recent vote to cancel the contract, is using many of those same talking points in his current Glendale Today show on Glendale’s Channel 11. Frisoni also sent an email on June 30, 2013, to the four councilmembers in support of the contract with IceArizona: Councilmembers Sherwood, Chavira, Knaack and Martinez. She seems to have deliberately omitted those that did not support it. In that email she passes on Jeff Teetsel’s (Westgate manager) arguments supporting passage of the contract.

I am quite unhappy with the alleged actions of former city attorney Craig Tindall. When city council originally hired him I was quite pleased. He appeared to be competent and articulate. In 2011 I began to hear rumors that he was supportive of an outside group interested in buying the Coyotes. Back then no one could or would tell me who the group was. Reading the emails between him and Anthony LeBlanc, one of the current Coyotes owners, I was unaware of their obviously close relationship dating back to at least 2010.  Little did anyone know they were meeting at their “usual starbucks.” It is now very difficult to accept the current parsing of words in an effort to minimize Tindall’s involvement in negotiating the IceArizona contract. It appears he was involved up to his lips.

It made me recall an incident at the end of 2012. The city was in the process of negotiation with a Coyotes team purchaser, Greg Jamison. I called Mr. Tindall with some technical questions about the deal. Cryptically, at the end of our telephonic conversation he remarked that if the Jamison deal didn’t make there was another group waiting in the wings. When I asked who, he refused to respond. In hindsight it now makes perfect sense but it raises more questions for me. I remember Interim City Manager Horatio Skeete telling me that Tindall appeared to be stalling and would hold Jamison documents on his desk for days. Skeete would make repeated requests for them which eventually would be fulfilled. Did Tindall deliberately sabotage the Jamison deal in an attempt to make available the opportunity for LeBlanc, et. al.? I honestly don’t know. You will have to decide for yourselves.

Tindall’s seeming self dealing is quite disappointing. As far back as April of 2010 in an email exchange between Daryl Jones of Ice Edge (precursor to IceArizona) Jones says they enjoyed working with Tindall and Tindall responds with “Now that’s an offer.” Was that Tindall’s subtle signal that he was angling for a job with them? Who knows? You decide. Or what about Tindall’s March, 2011, email exchange with LeBlanc urging LeBlanc to take a look at investing in a local medical device company? That action would seem to reinforce the notion that they had a close relationship. Or how about LeBlanc’s asking Tindall in October of 2011 if it was time to have a “confidential chat with Ed” (Beasley) as well as an email exchange between Tindall and LeBlanc about LeBlanc’s May, 2010 meeting with Steve E(llman)? What were these all about? We now know that LeBlanc wanted to buy the Coyotes even before the Jamison offer. We now know through more emails of Tindall’s effort to break a roadblock on July 26, 2013 (after the contract is approved) regarding the city’s paying IceArizona’s lenders directly? He emailed the newly hired City Manager (now former City Manager) Brenda Fischer apparently asserting that it was a simple administrative matter and appears to be urging her to take action.

The email exchange between former Mayor Scruggs and former City Manager Beasley are revealing as well. It appears as if the mayor was determined to get LeBlanc’s Lakehead Yale Sports Holding LLC “Plan B” before the city council in March of 2012. Once again Tindall’s name comes up when she says, “I have checked with Craig Tindall and Mr. LeBlanc’s letter is eligible for discussion under the items as posted.” Tindall seemed to be advocating for any LeBlanc deal.

The emails provided in the city’s motion to modify the Temporary Restraining Order are troubling. They are facts. They are the words of the principals involved. They are damning and not easily explained away.

I end with excepts from an email memo to the entire city council dated June 25, 2013 (a few weeks before council approval) from then Interim City Manager Dick Bowers:

  • “Contrary to what might appear in the papers I don’t see this as a ‘done deal’. Far from it. Discussions continued over the weekend and we have come only slightly closer to comfortable than before. Gary B(irnbaum) has helped to illustrate to the Renaissance group’s (eventually IceArizona) attorney the concerns we have. I suspect this has given them a degree of discomfort.”
  • “Glendale cannot afford a failure. The potential of failure exists as a dark shadow in the absence of the investors standing by their own numbers with confidence enough to simply take them for themselves and do the deal for 6.5.”
  • “While there are many ways to describe the Renaissance’s reluctance I keep coming back to that same discomfort of Glendale having all the risk in this deal. My concerns could mean nothing or they could represent an existential question that must be considered. Will this work for the benefit of the City of Glendale and what makes us firmly believe that it will?”

Mr. Bowers’ crystal ball was certainly working that day yet a few weeks later, 4 councilmembers, Yvonne Knaack, Manny Martinez, Gary Sherwood and Sammy Chavira voted in favor of the IceArizona lease management deal. I can understand Sherwood and Chavira’s approval votes. They appear to have been blindly joined at the hip with each other as well as IceArizona. The pro votes of Knaack and Martinez are not so easily understood. Each cited the well being of Westgate as a motivator for their decisions. It is troubling that they appear to have put the well being of Westgate over the well being of the City of Glendale. Why did they not heed the words of Interim City Manager Bowers?

No matter. What’s done is done. The discovery of Tindall’s and Frisoni’s actions provide the city with an opportunity to rectify one source of its annual bleeding…whether one uses $15M or $8.7M a year as the loss figure for the city. Many point to the annual debt payment for the Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility (CRSTF). They say why focus on the arena when CRSTF is just as much of a financial drain. It is. I suspect in due time that financial albatross will be addressed. Development that should have occurred surrounding this facility never materialized as a result of the national recession. Without any promise of current economic development it is an issue the city must address in light of the fact that this council continues to fail to rein in city expenditures.

The pity of it all is the devastation caused to the coaches and players of the Coyotes team. They have been through so much since Moyes declared bankruptcy in 2009. None of it was of their making. They have become undeserved collateral damage. I hope and pray that their futures will once again become whole and they can take pride in playing under the Coyotes banner.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Jun 15

13

Just think about it

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 13, 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: , , , , , , | 19 Comments

It has been 17 years and 162 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Unless you have been comatose by now you know that on June 10, 2015 the Glendale City Council voted 5 -2 to cancel its Lease Management Agreement with IceArizona for the city owned arena. Two days later, June 12, 2015 Ice Arizona successfully secured a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO).

Just think about it. The council vote was 5 -2 with Councilmember Jamie Aldama breaking ranks with Councilmembers Sherwood and Chavira. In his remarks he said that while he is pro business he felt compelled to uphold the integrity of the process.

Just think about it. The five councilmembers who voted to void the contract have divergent backgrounds in terms of educational levels, incomes, ethnicity, time served on city council yet collectively they found the facts available to them (and not to the public to date) compelling enough to move forward with voiding the contract.

Just think about it. This council has been characterized as being idiots, fools and all manner of the devil. They knew there would be an extraordinarily violent reaction yet they held fast and voted their consciences. Only senior management and the council know the facts relating to state statute § 38-511. They knew that IceArizona would sue; they knew there would be legal fees; they knew the fan base would come unglued; they knew the media, in its search for fresh red meat, would berate them. They knew…yet they still voted to cancel the contract. Didn’t any of these groups pause for just a nanosecond to consider that the city’s allegations could be quite legitimate?

Just think about it. The 5 members of city council that voted to cancel the contract must stay the course. They took an oath to uphold the law. They have a fiduciary responsibility to every Glendale taxpayer. If an opportunity for further dialogue with the Coyotes presents itself they should take advantage of that opportunity. If it brings no resolution then they must follow through on cancellation of the contract.

Just think about it. Many question why now? Quite frankly, it is irrelevant. The makeup of the city council changed with this past election. The original 4 councilmembers that approved the contract dwindled to 2 creating an environment that allowed the facts as known to the city to be considered and acted upon.

Just think about it. The greater question is what has happened to civil society?  America is great because one of its bedrock values is freedom of speech. Everyone, on either side of this issue, has the freedom to express an opinion but it should be tempered speech based on the facts. It is acknowledged that the Coyotes fans are stunned and angered by the recent city action. In their anger some have allowed emotion to override common decency.

Just think about it. One action that is stark in its viciousness was that of Ms. Rhonda Pierson on the night of the special voting meeting. Ms. Pierson expressed the beliefs of some Coyotes fans and she had the right to do so but the vindictiveness of her speech was out of bounds. Social media has turned her into a heroine of some sort despite the ugliness of her delivery. I didn’t catch it if she announced it but did she acknowledge that she was (or may still be) an employee of the Coyotes organization?

Just think about it. Then today, June 13, 2015, Mayor Weiers who had announced that he was willing to be tazed to raise money for the 100 Club (mission: support of law enforcement families) was tazed by Ms. Pierson. The event was intended to be a great gesture in support of law enforcement recently vilified nationwide. By choosing Ms. Pierson as the designated person to taze the mayor it turned into a distasteful event that made many people uncomfortable. It wasn’t done in the spirit in which it was originally intended but rather turned into a symbolic expression of vindictiveness for the city’s recent vote to void the contract. Those behind the choosing of Ms. Pierson to perform the act have sunk to a new low and are no better than those within the city they currently choose to hate. It was petty and mean spirited.

Just think about it. Social media is a platform that creates a herd mentality and its anoninimity emboldens some to exceed the bounds of common civility. It encourages an atmosphere that causes mass salivation of others’ perceived misfortunes or misdeeds and often reactions are based on raw emotion in the absence of any fact. The level of vituprativeness and ugliness of some folks’ speech has risen to an unprecented level not just locally but on issues throughout the country.

Just think about it. There are probably about 100 local fans that use social media on a regular basis. They have been whipped into frenzy, in part, by the comments made by Anthony LeBlanc as he recently made the media rounds. Did anyone bother to take note that he had to walk back some of his misstatements? Such as, they were never asked by the city to consider renegotiation or Tindall was the only former Glendale employee ever connected to the Coyotes.

Just think about it. There are about 239,000 residents of Glendale. The arena holds slightly north of 17,000. If everyone of the 17,000 was a Glendale resident that would be one twelfth of Glendale right now. In a survey done by one of the TV stations it was reported that 59% of the Glendale residents surveyed supported the cancelling of the IceArizona contract.

Just think about it. If some wish to boycott Glendale’s businesses in protest, that is their right. If some wish to mount recall petitions against every Glendale councilmember, that is their right but ugly expressions of anger directed to the city are not right if one respects the bounds of common decency.

Just think about it. The media has reported that in the next few days IceArizona and city personnel will meet. Let us hope that a long and costly court battle can be avoided. Let us hope that they can work out their differences regarding the contract. I really would like to see the Coyotes stay in Glendale but not at the current rate of taxpayer subsidization.

Just think about it. If nothing comes of their meeting I wish the Coyotes well, perhaps playing in Phoenix. The only nagging question that comes to mind is who is going to pay the Coyotes $15 million a year to play in their facility? The City of Phoenix? Or Robert Sarver?

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Jun 15

10

Coyotes contract cancelled tonight

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 10, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , | 30 Comments

On  June 10, the Glendale city council voted 5-2 to cancel the current lease management agreement with Ice Arizona. This was the agenda item:

“DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO CANCEL THE PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND ARENA LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GLENDALE AND ICEARIZONA MANAGER CO., LLC AND ICEARIZONA HOCKEY CO., LLC, PURSUANT TO ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES § 38-511, AND TO PURSUE ANY AND ALL OTHER LEGAL ACTIONS AND REMEDIES NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE CANCELLATION OR TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT.”

Here is the text of Arizona Revised Statutes §38-511:

38-511. Cancellation of political subdivision and state contracts; definition

  1. The state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either may, within three years after its execution, cancel any contract, without penalty or further obligation, made by the state, its political subdivisions, or any of the departments or agencies of either if any person significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on behalf of the state, its political subdivisions or any of the departments or agencies of either is, at any time while the contract or any extension of the contract is in effect, an employee or agent of any other party to the contract in any capacity or a consultant to any other party of the contract with respect to the subject matter of the contract.
  2. Leases of state trust land for terms longer than ten years cancelled under this section shall respect those rights given to mortgagees of the lessee by section 37-289 and other lawful provisions of the lease.
  3. The cancellation under this section by the state or its political subdivisions shall be effective when written notice from the governor or the chief executive officer or governing body of the political subdivision is received by all other parties to the contract unless the notice specifies a later time.
  4. The cancellation under this section by any department or agency of the state or its political subdivisions shall be effective when written notice from such party is received by all other parties to the contract unless the notice specifies a later time.
  5. In addition to the right to cancel a contract as provided in subsection A of this section, the state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either may recoup any fee or commission paid or due to any person significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on behalf of the state, its political subdivisions or any department or agency of either from any other party to the contract arising as the result of the contract.
  6. Notice of this section shall be included in every contract to which the state, its political subdivisions, or any of the departments or agencies of either is a party.
  7. For purposes of this section, “political subdivisions” do not include entities formed or operating under title 48, chapter 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19 or 22.

The special voting meeting was preceded on Tuesday, June 9, 2015 by a special workshop session when council immediately voted to go into executive session and then there was a regular workshop meeting. Did the executive session lead to council’s decision to hold the special June 10, 2015 vote about the IceArizona contract? We will never know for executive session cannot be discussed per state statute.

Interestingly Anthony LeBlanc revealed some executive session information when he was on the radio last week. Gary Hirsch, a Glendale resident, raised a question about LeBlanc’s radio comments during the public comment period of council’s regular meeting on June 9, 2015. He asked if anyone representing the city had filed a complaint. No one on council responded but that is not unusual as a statement is made at the outset that council is there to receive public comment but not to respond.

OK, so there is a state statute that allows a political subdivision to cancel a contract. So what? There is one more piece of information that is essential to this surprising action. Most of you do not have a copy of the IceArizona/Glendale Lease Management Agreement. I do and A.R.S. § 38-511 is cited in that contract on Page 84 (in an old contract, page 96 of newer version). I quote:

“24.13 Conflicts of Interest

24.13.3 (in newer contract this is 23.13.2) The Parties acknowledge that the provisions of A.R.S. §38-511, which are hereby incorporated in this Agreement by this reference, may create a situation in which the City might have a right to cancel this Agreement pursuant to A.R. S. §38-511.”

Who made sure this clause was included the Lease Management Agreement? And why? Was city council aware of this provision when they approved the contract? I doubt it. The Jamison contract written by Tindall is the framework for the Ice Arizona contract. There were modifications to specifically address the IceArizona deal. The first thought when reading 24.13.3 is Craig Tindall. How does Tindall fit into all of this? Here’s a quick timeline:

  • April 1, 2013 Tindall resigns as Glendale City Attorney but continues employment with city for 6 months
  • June, 2013 Tindall emails prior to approval of agreement demonstrate his extensive involvement in crafting the final language (please refer to my previous blog on Tindall. Here is the link: Former Glendale City Attorney Craig Tindall…Act 2 http://wp.me/p3aHul-xb )
  • July 3, 2013 Glendale IceArizona Lease Management Agreement approved by city council
  • August 20, 2013 IceArizona hires Tindall as its General Counsel
  • October 1, Tindall’s employment with the city officially ends

State statute says quite clearly that a political subdivision within 3 years after a contract’s execution may cancel the contract if any person is significantly involved in negotiating, crafting or drafting the contract on behalf of the political subdivision and is an employee or agent of any other party. Why did IceArizona accept this provision? Did Sherwood read this contract? If so, why did he not object to provision 24.13.3 within the contract? Why did Tindall and Nick Wood (another Coyotes attorney) allow this clause to remain within the contract? Was it deliberately placed within the contract to offer either side a way out without invoking the 5 year out clause? If it was deliberately left in and invoked by the city then the city wears the “black hat” – not IceArizona for invoking the hated 5 year out clause. Hmmm…

Councilmember Sherwood did not attend tonight’s meeting. Apparently he was in Salt Lake City.  I don’t know but one would think that such a critical vote would demand that he cancel his trip.  He did find time that afternoon to be interviewed on NBC Sports Radio 1060AM by Roc and Manuch.

Why cancel the contract now? The time limitation under state statute is 3 years.  This July 3, 2015, 2 years will have passed. If council’s move to cancel the contract did not occur now it would have happened sometime in the next 12 months. Why this exact moment? I don’t know.

Since the approval of the contract City council has changed dramatically with the departure of former Councilmembers Martinez, Knaack and Alvarez.  Martinez and Knaack supported the deal while Alvarez did not. The majority that approved the contract at the time of its approval was Martinez, Knaack, Sherwood and Chavira. With new councilmembers taking office in December of 2014 a seismic shift occurred. No longer did the deal appear to enjoy a 4 councilmember majority.

The city issued a press release on the morning of June 10, 2015 stating, “The City Council has scheduled a discussion and possible vote regarding Glendale’s contract with the Arizona Coyotes. Discussions and negotiations regarding the contract have been ongoing for months. Specifically, the City is open to a resolution but it must be one that provides certainty and fairness to both parties, especially the taxpayers. The Council has agreed to stand for transparency and the highest standards of ethics for any future agreement with the Coyotes.” Was the city’s press release forced by IceArizona’s threat to sue the city? Translating the government speak, the city appears to have taken the position that it wants the Coyotes to stay as the anchor tenant in its arena but it can no longer sustain the annual loss of revenue. Clearly it is sending the signal that it wants to renegotiate the annual management fee from $15 million a year to ??? Tom Duensing, Interim Assistant City Manager, has pegged this year’s loss to the city to be in the $8.7 million dollar range. To date IceArizona’s position is that they refuse to renegotiate the contract and they reiterated that statement when Barroway and LeBlanc met with Mayor Weiers and Vice Mayor Hugh. And why would they entertain a renegotiation? They are in the catbird’s seat and they retain that pesky 5 year out clause.

Some of the comments made by various individuals during the course of the meeting:

  • City Attorney Bailey – his office sought numerous outside opinions; the contract is the opposite of the goal of public-private partnership; management fee paid by the city not to be used to retire ownership debt; the purpose of the statute is to protect taxpayers from any employee having a dual relationship
  • Nick Wood (Attorney for the Coyotes) – city has no claim; said NHL and Coyotes will sue; claimed Tindall was a ‘former employee’; questioned timing of council action; predicted terrible things will happen to Westgate
  • Anthony LeBlanc (Coyotes minority owner) – the city’s action has had a significant financial impact on the Coyotes already; called council action ‘political grandstanding’; claims meeting on Monday with Mayor Weiers was the first time city had asked to renegotiate
  • Many citizens spoke for over an hour – majority were Coyotes fans; included Jeff Teesel, Manager of Westgate; however there were a few brave Glendale citizens who asked council to weigh the needs of the community vs. the needs of professional sports.

At the start of the meeting Councilmember Aldama made a motion to table for 2 weeks. Chavira seconded. The majority voted no on the motion. The vote on cancelling the contract was 5-2 with Aldama, Tolmachoff, Turner, Hugh and Weiers voting to cancel and Sherwood and Chavira voting to keep the contract. Mayor Weiers commented prior to his vote with the cryptic statement, “if you are breaking the law there is no exception.” He went on to say as time progressed more information would be available so that the public would understand why council voted as it had.

There’s more to say but I will save it for my next blog. I will offer one comment now. The meeting was ugly and the air was filled with threats, intimidation and breathless anger. If there are any typos or poor English please accept my apology. It was due to a rush to get this blog out. My only hope is that LeBlanc and crew reach out immediately to the city, willing to renegotiate the deal and living up to their promise to keep the Coyotes in Glendale.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

 

Jun 15

9

Special council meeting on June 10, 2015

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 9, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 23 Comments

It has been 17 years and 158 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

At 6 PM on Wednesday, June 10, 2015 the Glendale city council will meet to consider and vote upon an action to cancel the current Lease Management Agreement with IceArizona. Here is the only item on the agenda:

“DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO CANCEL THE PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND ARENA LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GLENDALE AND ICEARIZONA MANAGER CO., LLC AND ICEARIZONA HOCKEY CO., LLC, PURSUANT TO ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES § 38-511, AND TO PURSUE ANY AND ALL OTHER LEGAL ACTIONS AND REMEDIES NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE CANCELLATION OR TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT.”

There are rumors flying furiously on Twitter, Facebook, etc. speculating on the reason for the possible cancellation. That’s all they are…rumors. I can affirm that the reason has nothing to do with the infamous audit or the brough ha ha over naming rights. I have agreed to not say anything further until after the council meeting.

Don’t expect Councilmember Sherwood to be at this meeting or call in. Apparently he will be in Salt Lake City tomorrow. How convenient especially if the deal he brokered blows up. His pals (Chavira and Aldama), or as all three call themselves, the “Tres Amigos” (I like Three Stooges better), will have to vote without their “jefe” to keep them in line. Oh oh…

Bring your seat cushions for tomorrow night’s meeting folks. Expect it to be a long one with every possible Coyote fan in attendance reiterating over and over again how stupid this council is. Has it occurred to anyone that they couldn’t be that stupid if they have discovered a way out of the current contract?

You will see the agenda item makes specific reference to Arizona Revised Statutes § 38-511. I suggest anyone that is interested in this issue take the time to read it.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Jun 15

5

Friday wrap up…

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 5, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale finances • University of Phoenix Stadium  | Tagged With: , , , | 1 Comment

It has been 17 years and 154 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Last night , June 4, 2015, the Glendale citizens’ Planning & Zoning (P&Z) Commission met to approve or deny the second round of Becker Billboards’ application to plant billboards at Loop 101 and Bell Road.  The first round occurred on February 26, 2014 with a recommendation of denial by P&Z followed by the March 25, 2014 denial by the city council. Let’s hope that city council also denies this request.

The staff presenter was Senior Planner Thomas Ritz. In summary the Planning & Zoning Department was recommending denial of the application because:

  • It does not serve the best long term interests of the city
  • It is inconsistent with the city’s General Plan
  • The specifics filed by the applicant do not match Glendale’s Northwest Plan specifics
  • It is precedent setting for the entire city

Mark Becker of Becker Billboards spoke on his own behalf as the applicant. Mr. Becker’s arguments were focused on:

  • The city has approved digital billboards similar to his request in Westgate
  • The city of Peoria has a plan to erect billboards on its side of the Loop 101 once his application is denied
  • The applicant’s billboard proposal is consistent with the surrounding commercial activity on Bell Road

After nearly an hour and a half of public comment the P&Z Commission voted unanimously to pass it on to city council with a recommendation of denial. The first hurdle is cleared. It will now be heard by the city council on June 23, 2015.

A troubling aspect of Becker’s attempt to gain approval for his digital billboards was his use of veterans and the American Legion. Apparently vets were bused in from a group home in Phoenix to speak on the issue but had to leave prior to speaking to get back to the home on time. Since Becker had used his billboards to advertise on behalf of the American Legion he asked that they speak in support of his application. It was a calculated move designed to elicit sympathy for his application.

In a rare meeting of the minds on June 3, 2015 the Arizona Republic published an editorial entitled Glendale looks too dirty to clean up its auditing mess. Stunningly their editorial calls for an independent third party to assess Glendale’s audit. In a previous blog I had raised questions about the audit after the Assistant City Auditor McDermott-Fields resigned because her findings were changed by City Auditor MacLeod. I also raised the question of the close ties between MacLeod and former City Attorney Craig Tindall, now an attorney for IceArizona.

The Republic made a good call but a better one would be for the city to release the audit findings. There is a stipulation in the management agreement prohibiting the release of actual figures as proprietary information to IceArizona. Fine — but that does not preclude the city from releasing information that either stipulates that the figures supplied by IceArizona are correct or deficient. The fact that the public cannot see the numbers does a disservice to every Glendale resident and taxpayer whose tax dollars subsidize IceArizona. So much for transparency — a pledge that every currently sitting councilmember ran upon.

At the June 2, 2015 city council workshop meeting a presentation was made by Tom Sadler, President & CEO of the Arizona Organizing Committee for the college football playoff National Championship to be held at the University of Phoenix Stadium on January 11, 2016. This event is part of a new collegiate football system to determine which college wins the annual title of National Football Champion.

It is modeled after the Fiesta Bowl for which the city receives a partial reimbursement for public safety and transportation costs. Of course, staff time in preparation and other departments’ costs are not tracked. It is a reasonable assumption that the cost to the city will be an estimated $500,000. Senior staff has budgeted $408,080.00 for the event. Even though that is the city’s current budget (sure to increase) don’t assume that the city will be reimbursed that amount for it will not. Yes, once again, the taxpayers of Glendale will be asked to subsidize yet another sporting event for which the entire Metro area of Phoenix will profit. Aren’t you tired of it yet??

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

May 15

27

The Glendale fire department will have to wait

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 27, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale's Fire Union  | Tagged With: , , , , | 5 Comments

It has been 17 years and 146 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

I salute the men and women of the Glendale Fire Department. You, time after time, demonstrate your compassion, professionalism and integrity every time you answer an emergency call. Your genuine care for the people you serve is evident…especially the children, the little ones. Thank you for your service. I and every Glendale citizen appreciate what you do.

You work hard but you are paid well for your knowledge and expertise. You probably think that it is not enough and perhaps it isn’t. Due to your schedule of one day on and two days off many of you have second jobs or are business owners. It is something that nearly every other employee working a traditional 5 day a week job does not have the luxury of doing.

As a former councilmember and now private citizen of Glendale whatever concerns I have had or do have about the policies of fire service delivery have never been about you but they have been about the union that represents you and some of the goals and the tactics the union uses.

 I go nuts when in reviewing fire’s pay for major events such as this past Super Bowl and I see some fire department employees earning $220 an hour in overtime pay. I’m sorry but I think that is outrageous. There are many other professions in which their members earn far less than $220 an hour in overtime pay. It breeds a lack of sympathy among the general public.

The Glendale fire union’s latest stunt was averted by councilmembers who realized the fragility of Glendale’s current budget situation at their city council meeting of May 26, 2015. Sherwood and Chavira pressed to use reserve funds but they did not prevail. Sherwood is supportive because he needs all the help he can get in facing his recall election. Chavira is a Phoenix firefighter and has an obligation to support anything the fire union wants.

When Glendale residents picked up the Glendale Republic of May 23, 2015 the headline screamed Fire department understaffing stirs concerns in an article by Matthew Casey. It reflected a deliberate strategy by Joe Hester, President of the Glendale chapter of the fire union, (who really runs the department) to use scare tactics to get additional revenue now…immediately…to expand the fire department. Hester said, “It seems pretty obvious there is a crisis by any way you measure it. Our folks are extremely disappointed in the budget process.” Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2015/05/22/glendale-fire-department-understaffed/27713737/ .

The most telling statistic in the article was provided by Glendale Fire Chief Mark Burdick. He offered Glendale Fire Department response times for 90 percent of calls by year:

  • 2010 8 minutes 11 seconds
  • 2011 8 minutes 10 seconds
  • 2012 8 minutes 6 seconds
  • 2013 8 minutes 12 seconds
  • 2014 8 minutes 12 seconds

So where is the crisis? Today’s response time is the same response time as in the previous 5 years. Another fact often ignored is that Glendale is one of ten cities in the state accredited by the non-profit organization, The Center for Public Safety Excellence. Glendale would not have received its accreditation if its response times were not acceptable. This agency is responsible for accrediting individuals and agencies internationally. It is a much coveted accreditation and Glendale is proud to have measured up to its criteria. Do you really think Glendale would have received its accreditation if its response times were not acceptable?

The statistic Chief Burdick provided is telling for another reason. Now that he is soon-to-be retired as Fire Chief he has begun to tell it like it is. As a councilmember 5 or 6 years ago Chief Burdick and I had a conversation about the union and its influence within the department. There was much he wanted to say but he was obviously reluctant to speak freely about the union and its influence and he refrained. I could sense that he was embarrassed that he could not speak freely.

The purpose of this article released just before the council meeting was to pressure the city council to change its budget strategy and to use general fund contingency or unappropriated fund balance to purchase more equipment and to hire more personnel immediately.  Let’s look at some facts not clearly addressed in the article:

  • Fact #1 – Glendale is experiencing an increased call volume. Why? Glendale’s population has barely increased and in fact, Glendale is anticipated to lose state shared revenue because its population growth is low compared to other Valley cities. Much of its increased call volume are responses due to Automatic Aid.
  • Fact #2 – Glendale is a member of the Valley-wide automatic aid system. If the closest fire station is busy and Glendale is the next closest, Glendale is dispatched to handle the call out of its city. The Republic article acknowledged that “Glendale responded about 3,300 more times to calls in Phoenix and Peoria than those cities responded to Glendale combined.“
  • Fact #3 – Glendale uses overtime to make up for its increased call volume. It is insane to send a large truck with 4 personnel to medical calls when 80% to 90% of its calls are medical. There are other strategies such as 2 person ambulances being employed right now, this very minute, to respond to emergency medical calls. It’s time for Glendale to adopt one of them.

Shame on the fire union for attempting to scare people into giving them the financial resources they want right now.  Shame on the fire union for attempting to expand its empire rather than looking at other strategies for response to medical calls.

No one asked the question: The fire department’s budget comes from the city’s general fund. It has been acknowledged that they want an additional $2 to $3 million and that does not include the additional monies needed to pay the salaries and benefits for more personnel annually. What department in the general fund do they want to cut by $2 to $3 million? What other city service are they willing to sacrifice to meet their needs right now?

In response over the next few months the council will take a measured look at the entire issue of adequate resources for public safety and that includes the police department. Five of the councilmembers did not rush to judgment as Sherwood and Chavira pressed them to do.  They realize that there is a problem but they were not ready to sacrifice other city services to give the fire union what it demanded. They also realize that there is no quick fix. It will take several years to implement a viable solution. The men and women of the Glendale fire department want what is best for their city. Too bad their union is not listening to them.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

May 15

21

Is Councilmember Sherwood getting desperate?

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 21, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 21 Comments

It has been 17 years and 140 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

For the first time ever at the May 26, 2015 city council meeting the council will vote to set a recall election date of November 3, 2015. Councilmember Sherwood has got to be desperate. From the number of Sahuaro district registered voters willing and eager to sign a petition calling for his recall is a pretty clear indicator that he cannot win.

Instead of realizing his ambition to become Glendale’s next mayor he faces the humiliating prospect of a recall against him. Desperate people do desperate things. I am convinced that he, and most likely his strongest supporter, the Glendale Fire Union, will attempt some last ditch, legal maneuver to delay the election.  I wouldn’t put it past them. A legal effort to delay the election may cause some Sahuaro district voters to not participate if they know the regular election for that seat occurs in November of 2016. Sherwood hints of this prospect,“if there is this supposed ground swell of dissatisfaction with me, I’m up for reelection next nine months later in August ’16.”

Here is the link to the May 19, 2015 edition of the Glendale Star:  http://www.glendalestar.com/news/article_b6d4fd24-fe45-11e4-86a1-6f00d1c2d6ea.html

In an article written by Darrel Jackson entitled Sherwood faces recall, Sherwood states, “I’m very proud of my record and I have extended an inordinate amount of energy hoping to cover for the lack of leadership that has existed with my fellow policy makers these nearly past two and a half past years.” If I were the mayor or his fellow councilmembers I would be quite angry with Sherwood’s trashing of their performance. This is one seemingly arrogant fellow believing that he is Superman saving Glendale from 6 Jesters.

Sherwood in the Jackson article goes on to say , “he helped negotiate an agreement with the tribe (Tohono O’odham) worth more than $26 million for Glendale over 20 years.” He shouldn’t be quite so proud of that fact. That very same land had it not become a reservation and had been privately developed as offices, would have generated an estimated $4 to $5 million a year in various taxes. Since when is a little over a million dollars a year better than 4 or 5 million dollars a year?

Sherwood’s commentary in the Jackson article demonstrates that when Sherwood is backed into a corner, it seems he can be quite vicious as he blames the current council for the resignation of former City Manager Brenda Fischer (his buddy) and Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni (another buddy). The current rumor is that Sherwood has hired Julie Frisoni’s new consulting firm as his campaign consultant. That shouldn’t surprise anyone as it appears that Sherwood met often with Frisoni on city business that met his agenda. We can add Frisoni to the list of supporters that appear to include the Glendale Fire Union, Mark Becker of Becker Billboards and Jason Rose of the Rose Law Group.

Look for Sherwood and his supporters to file something to delay the election before the council May 26th meeting and vote. How creative can they be? I expect we’ll find out shortly.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

May 15

13

Sherwood “stands on his record”

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 13, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River-Pima-Maricopa Indian Community • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

It has been 17 years and 132 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

According to the Maricopa County Elections Department the Stop Councilman Sherwood Committee (www.stopsherwood.com) has successfully submitted enough valid petition signatures to force a recall election of Councilmember Gary Sherwood of Glendale’s Sahuaro district. Look for the recall election to occur on or about November 3, 2015.

According to a story in the Arizona Republic by Peter Corbett (here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2015/05/12/glendale-councilman-sherwood-face-recall-election/27216077/ ) Sherwood said, “This is being funded by Gila River. This is a casino thing but they threw some other issues in there to try to make it legitimate.” Who do you think will be throwing money Sherwood’s way as he tries to beat back this recall effort? Just look at his campaign filings (here is the link: http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/2014PoliticalCommitteeCampaignFinanceReports.cfm . Scroll down this page to “Friends of Gary Sherwood.” You can view all of his submitted campaign finance reports.)

Don’t be surprised to see the Tohono O’odham, Mark Becker of Becker Billboards and the Rose Law Group (Becker’s attorney of record) contributing to his campaign or making independent expenditures. Expect the Glendale Fire Union to call on their brother chapters to contribute money, time and manpower to prop Sherwood up. Remember, theoretically the local Glendale union must not be involved because of the Federal Hatch Act…wink, wink.

Sherwood misreads his constituency if he truly believes that it is simply the Gila River tribe’s attempt to get rid of him. People in his district are not very happy with him these days. He appears to them as arrogant and dismissive of not just their concerns but their positions on issues that are important to them. He has been publicly derisive of their comments at city council meetings. He continues to advocate for Becker billboards and has even tried a few billboard issue maneuvers at council meetings. Apparently his constituents’ opposition to the billboards may not be as important to him as pushing for the billboards. His motive may be payback for previous financial campaign support and anticipated support this time around.

He failed to inform his constituency of the possible sale of the Foothills Library. The perception was that he purposely dragged his feet on publicizing the issue because he supported the idea of a sale. After the library issue died he proudly announced that he was having a luncheon meeting with Midwestern University President Kathleen Goeppinger to offer Glendale’s support of other possible MU initiatives.

Then there’s the casino issue. Sherwood ran on a platform of opposition to the casino and then at the eleventh hour, flip-flopped and became its most ardent supporter. Many people, to this day, believe that Sherwood became pro-casino in return for Councilmember Chavira’s support for the Coyote deal with IceArizona. Each man was the deciding vote to create majority support for each issue.

Sherwood originally claimed that the reason he changed his position was that Councilmember Chavira brought new information to his attention but he has never said what that “new information” was. Now he says the reason he changed his position is, “he changed his mind about it once it was clear that Glendale could not stop the Tohono O’odham Nation project.”  Which is it, Mr. Sherwood? New information from Chavira or you were powerless to stop the TO? If Sherwood had adhered to his campaign promise and stayed the course with Councilmembers Martinez, Knaack and Mayor Weiers, those four would have constituted a majority keeping an anti-casino position.

Then there is Sherwood’s position on the temporary sales tax increase…excuse me…make that a permanent increase. With a proverbial wringing of hands, Sherwood supported making the temporary sales tax permanent while agreeing that it would be revisited in future council budget workshops with the intent to gradually reduce the tax.  During this council budget workshop cycle did you hear Sherwood fighting to gradually reduce the tax?

Sherwood has two options. He can as he puts it “stand by his record and intend to run in the election (2015).” That sets up an interesting scenario. He would have to defend himself this November in a recall election and then turn around and do the whole thing all over again in November of 2016 when his seat comes up for its regular, every four year council district election. Or he could resign and run for mayor against Weiers in the November election of 2016. By resigning he would instantly remove a lot of the current negativity from voters in his district. For now, the issue of his recall is relatively isolated within his district. Hmmm….

As an FYI: Mayor Weiers may face yet another challenge for his seat in 2016. Rumors are floating that even though Councilmember Jamie Aldama is a newbie he wants to run for mayor in 2016. Aldama and his supporters seem to think that the Hispanic vote can win the election for him. Sadly they fail to recognize that the Hispanic vote is concentrated in south Glendale (Ocotillo, Cactus and Yucca districts) and that historically north Glendale (Cholla, Sahuaro and Barrel districts) outvote south Glendale at a nearly 2 to 1 ratio. While Aldama feels that he may prevail in south Glendale his visibility and support in north Glendale is practically nil.

It may become a contest to see who has the greater chutzpah in vying for Mayor Weiers’ seat…Councilmember Sherwood or Councilmember Aldama. It will be interesting to see who wins this match up…Sherwood or Aldama.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Apr 15

28

Pro casino supporters heat it up

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 28, 2015
Posted in Casino • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale zoning issues • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

It has been 17 years and 117 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On Monday, April 27, 2015 in the Opinion section of the Arizona Republic pro and con casino op-ed pieces were published.  Mayor Jim Lane of Scottsdale presented the current anti casino position. In it he supports the position taken by Governor Doug Ducey and the state Gaming Director. The state’s position is that the Tohono O’odham (TO) should not benefit from the fraud they committed against the voters of Arizona and they will not issue a gaming permit to the TO. That is the state’s right. If the TO do not agree with the state’s decision they can and most probably will take the state to court.

Councilmember Ian Hugh (Cactus district) presented the pro casino position. He offered two arguments. His first was that this issue is a matter of local control. Oh really? What about the federal Department of the Interior granting the TO reservation status on land within Glendale, technically a county island, that they purchased with a straw company and held secret for 7 years? What about the Bureau of Indian Affairs that has yet to approve TO gaming on their reservation parcel? What about the State of Arizona’s ability to grant or deny a gaming license for this new temporary gaming facility per the 2002 voter approved state gaming compact with all of the tribes’ (including Ned Norris Jr. representing the TO) publicly pledging to build no more casinos in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area?

Glendale has been in the middle of a maelstrom not of its making since the TO made its announcement in 2009. By the way, there was no courtesy head’s up to Glendale. No introductory meeting expressing the sentiment that they would like to locate within Glendale and asking what needs to be accomplished on their side to make it happen. No, the TO rode rough shod over the city basically sending the signal that it didn’t matter what Glendale thought about their plans. There has never been local control. Asking for recognition to represent that this council is representing “the interests of the Arizonans we represent” is ludicrous.

Hugh’s second argument is just as silly. He refers to “the tremendous public support for the casino resort.” This has been the most divisive issue in Glendale’s history. There is just as much “tremendous public support” against the casino. Just ask the residents most impacted by this casino project – those who live closest to the proposed casino.  They are the ones who will deal with increased and obstructive traffic 24/7. They are the ones who will have to deal with increased crimes of opportunity in their neighborhoods, especially burglary and theft. The following links are articles related to increased crime as a result of a casino courtesy of one of my blog readers, Bill Eikost:

http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/rural-indian-casinos-bring-traffic-crime-as-well-as-jobs/article_6c033a00-73b0-11e0-b43d-001cc4c002e0.html  http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/09/25/as-native-american-casinos-proliferate-the-social-costs-of-the-gambling-boom-are-ignored/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/10/30/studies-casinos-bring-jobs-but-also-crime-bankruptcy-and-even-suicide/

Ask the residents of Glendale, the rate payers for water services who, at sometime in their futures, can expect their water bills to go up to pay for the fixes and upgrades to the water and sanitation systems that will be needed to provide service for the intense development on the TO site.

To add fuel to the fire, for the past few days the pro casino side has been shilling a Congressional Budget Report and claiming that it would definitively and absolutely cost US taxpayers a billion dollars to deny this casino to the TO. Not true. It’s a scare tactic designed to frighten or anger people.  One can read the real story about this billion dollar claim in an article published today, April 28, 2015 by Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services. Here is the link: http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2015/04/28/report-legislation-blocking-west-valley-casino-could-cost-taxpayers-1-billion/ . Here is the link to the Congressional Budget Report courtesy of one of my blog readers, Legend: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/50136 .

As further signs of pro casino desperation the TO with a little help from their buddies, the companies currently constructing the temporary casino, ran a full page ad in the Arizona Republic today designed to go after Senators McCain and Flake and Representatives Franks and Gosar and their legislation, H.R. 308 and S. 152, the Keep the Promise Act of 2015. Their dire headline is that these legislators want to put 1,300 Arizonans out of work. First, not all of the construction workers on the site are Arizonans, much less live in Glendale or the west Valley.  Secondly, these are temporary jobs. When the construction is completed or stopped these jobs vanish.  And of course, they had to throw in that the mean old, Indian tribes that have established casinos want to protect their market share and are willing to kill babies to protect it…some exaggeration here…but not much.

Add to all of this exaggeration and hyperbole two resolutions on tonight’s Glendale city council meeting agenda: a police mutual aid and a fire mutual aid agreement between the city and the TO up for approval or disapproval. Of particular interest is a stipulation within the agreement protecting the TO’s sovereign immunity. If the TO’s hired personnel screw up in delivering police or fire service to a Glendale resident, there is no means of suing the tribe due to their preservation of their claim of sovereign immunity.  Does that then preserve the onus of liability on Glendale? The training of officers and fire personnel on a reservation may not be of the same caliber as that of municipal employees.

These agreements may not even be legal. It could be that an agreement between a US municipality and a sovereign nation (the TO is a sovereign nation and is not subject to federal, state, county or municipal laws) may not be worth the paper upon which it is written. It probably has the same amount of validity as if the municipality of El Paso, Texas, entered into a mutual aid agreement with the country of Mexico. It’s more for show and is a direct salvo to the state’s declaration that it will not issue a gaming license to the TO. If someone sues we’d find out how valid these agreements really are.

All of this signals desperation and anger on the part of the Tohono O’odham. The realization that the state will not grant them a gaming license has them attempting to convince the public to pressure the state. It will not work. Their plan to open their temporary casino later this year has evaporated and if the Congressional legislation passes it is dead.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Apr 15

20

Casino…untenable position

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 20, 2015
Posted in Casino • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

It has been 17 years and 109 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

In the Arizona Republic of April 17, 2015 Peter Corbett has reported in a story entitled State vows to block casino in W. Valley, the state is prepared to block the Tohono O’odham casino from opening in Glendale this fall. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2015/04/16/arizona-gaming-agency-will-block-valley-casino-opening/25915541/ .

Arizona’s Department of Gaming director, Daniel Bergin, recently sent a letter to the Tohono O’odham (TO) in which he claimed “fraud perpetrated by (the tribe) upon the state, Arizona gaming tribes and the state’s voters.” On that basis he could not allow the casino to open.  He went on to say, “…the (gaming agency) would exceed its authority if it were to proceed with certification…” The agency’s position is supported by Governor Doug Ducey. Ducey in a letter to the agency directed it to deny a gaming license and said that the TO was forcing the issue by construction of the temporary casino now.

I, and many, many Glendale residents, especially those within the Yucca district, site of the temporary casino, applaud the actions of the state Gaming Director and the Governor. The only reasons Glendale succumbed to the siren song of the TO, is that Councilmember Gary Sherwood flip flopped on his anti casino election stance and then 4 members of council took the TO’s thirty pieces of silver. A majority of this council changed the course of an entire city. It’s fair to expect that the TO will challenge the state’s action in court in a process guaranteed to go on for months if not another year. That is sure to guarantee that the temporary casino cannot and will not open this fall. Chairman of the TO, Ned Norris Jr., as expected declared his outrage at what he called the state’s “untenable position.”

Don’t forget that more action waits in the wings. The Keep the Promise Act of 2015 introduced by Senators McCain and Flake will see a vote up or down this year. The general assumption is the legislation will pass through Congress and stop the casino for once and for all.

It’s time to shut the doors on a Tohono O’odham casino, temporary or otherwise, in Glendale. It is ironic that a tribe that promotes gambling, itself gambled. It looks like the house will win and they will lose.

© 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 material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

« Previous Page — Next Page »