Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Jan 25

29

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 29, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Mattel Adventure Park • VAI Resort • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Worker Power is at it again. They keep trying to blow up VAI Resort, currently under construction and scheduled to open at the end of this year. VAI Resort is a billion dollar development expected to generate $32 million dollars a year in revenue to the City of Glendale. It promises to be the most impactful project in Glendale’s economic history. It will be the largest resort in the state and probably all of the Southwest. It includes nearly 1200 hotel rooms, an amphitheater that will feature live entertainment 100 times a year, a dozen restaurants, upscale retail, a water feature, a convention center and ample meeting space. Just to its south, as a companion piece, is Mattel Adventure Park. This is Mattel’s first Adventure Park in the country and will feature Barbie, Thomas the Train and other Mattel branded children’s figures.

Worker Power wants to unionize VAI Resort and if they cannot get what they want, it appears they are ready to kill the project all together. This is their third try. First, they obtained petition signatures to stop Glendale from using a GPLET (Government Property Lease Excise Tax) with VAI. That failed to go to an election when VIA and the city announced that there would be no GPLET used. That action erased the need for an election.

Their second salvo was to get enough petition signatures to force the question of mandating a minimum wage of $20 an hour for hospitality workers in Glendale exclusively. That question was defeated in the last general election by 56.6% of Glendale’s voters saying ‘no’.

Now they are at it again. They have successfully collected enough signatures to force a special election this May. City Council approved amending the VIA PAD (Planned Area Development) by including (as a formality) the use of 10 acres on the east side of 95th Avenue (across from the Resort’s hotels) for an office building and additional parking. It is important to note the building is nearly complete.

What is Worker Power’s compelling argument that drove them to force yet another election related to VAI Resort and their use of 10 acres for an office building and parking? Their spokesperson said, “We feel that the removal of landscaping may increase the urban heat island effect.” That’s it. An environmental crisis will occur if those 10 acres are not green space. Give me a break. That’s the best that they can do this time around to try to stop VIA Resort?

Adam Baugh is VAI’s zoning attorney. He is highly respected among his peers and those elected officials that have worked with him. I have worked with Adam on numerous projects in my district. I admire and respect him. His word is his bond. If he promised to work with his client to address issues that I felt needed attention on a development project, that is what he did. He was successful in getting many changes I sought on various projects.

Mr. Baugh said, “The project will not move forward”…”You need the 10 acres for the project to be successful still. If the referendum is successful … then the project doesn’t function the way it’s intended to.” (Arizona Republic) The nearly complete office building will support VAI’s management of the resort complex and offers parking for those employees as well as those who will be working on the resort site.

In essence, the project will grind to a halt which is exactly what Worker Power wants to occur.

It is important to note how Worker Power obtains its signatures for petitions. They go to apartment complexes to gather signatures. It is recognized that renters are typically transient and stay in an apartment complex for a few years and then move. They are not vested in the city in which the apartment complex is located.

Another source of signatures is low propensity (don’t often vote) registered voters, a significant portion of which do not use English as their primary language. It has been revealed by those who have been approached to sign what the petition gatherers say. It appears to be misrepresentation and misinformation of the facts. In other words, whatever it takes to get that signature.

Both of these groups often have no interest in city government and are not informed on the issues. When they are told by petition gatherers how bad the city and VAI are, they will sign. They typically don’t question and will believe what they are told.

Worker Power has a formula and has turned petition gathering into a fine art form. At what point will Glendale taxpayers get tired of paying for Worker Power initiated elections?

I urge Glendale voters to become informed about this issue. When they are they will realize what a frivolous election this is. Reject Worker Power’s latest attempt to go after the city and VAI Resort.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jan 25

28

Stipend is not a dirty word

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 28, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Former Councilmember Joyce Clark • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Heroes Park • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Recently Shawn Raymundo had an article in the Arizona Republic about the city council receiving stipends. Before I go into that issue, a word about Mr. Raymundo. He is a writer for the Arizona Republic which is part of the USA Today network. The Arizona Republic and USA Today are notoriously ‘progressive’ liberal news organizations. It follows that their reporters hold the same positions and most of them, not all, do. Both organizations have a few token conservative reporters.

Mr. Raymundo has become Councilmember Turner’s lapdog. All that Turner has to do is to call Raymundo and plant something designed to embarrass either the City of Glendale, the city manager, the mayor or city council. It appears that Turner’s other ‘go-to-reporter’ is Richard Smith of the Glendale Independent. Both of these gentlemen harbor a liberal bias seemingly evident in their reporting, especially when covering a council that is, in the majority, conservative.

Some history is in order. When I was first elected as the Yucca district councilmember in 1992, my salary was $24,000 a year. After tax deductions, I probably took home about $19,000 a year. This was my salary for over half of the 24 years I served as a councilmember. It wasn’t ever about the money then or now. It was about having the opportunity to serve the people of Glendale. I was and am still proud of having done so.

In the last portion of my time in office, the voters of Glendale approved a councilmember salary of $34,000 a year. That averages $16.35 an hour, about $1.65 more an hour than Arizona’s required state-wide minimum wage of $14.70 an hour. After tax deductions I earned about $28,000 a year.

What is a stipend? The dictionary defines it as “a fixed sum of money paid periodically for services or to defray expenses.” When I first came to the council the stipends offered to defray expenses were for monthly cell phone usage and car mileage. Receipts had to be submitted for a request for reimbursement (stipend). I chose at that time to not request reimbursement.

I paid for my home office computer, my cell phone and monthly bill, a printer, a scanner and all necessary supplies like printer paper and ink out of my personal funds. I paid for my car’s gas and maintenance personally. Also, I often paid my share or the entire bill for a working lunch in my capacity as a councilmember personally. I paid for my yearly dues to the Glendale Chamber of Commerce from personal funds.

I also paid for things that I never talked about until now. I’ll give you one example. A constituent of mine, in crisis, needed to gravel the front yard immediately. I explored having the city pay but city policy was and is, that no city funds can be expended to enrich a private citizen or that citizen’s property. So, I paid out of my personal funds to have the front yard graveled. That is not the only time over the years that I used personal funds to help a person in crisis. I know for a fact, that former Vice Mayor Ian Hugh has done the same.

Several years ago, when monthly stipends were offered, this time I chose to take them. Everything is far more expensive than when I started, and I found that I needed help to defray costs.

Councilmembers have always had two council budgets. One is for professional development that can include travel, hotels and meals. Rather than travel, I used my funds to send out two district-wide newsletters to every home in the district twice a year. I also used those funds for hosting district-wide meetings as well as numerous incidental items to reach out to constituents. I occasionally made donations for causes such as backpacks filled with school supplies for Glendale’s disadvantaged children or Christmas gifts for families in need.

The second council budget account is for infrastructure improvements within one’s district. Annually, I directed those funds to be used for park improvements not covered in the Parks and Recreation Department’s annual budget. Those funds were used for such things as repainting park ramadas or replacing park infrastructure such as benches. For example, the digital sign at Heroes Park was paid from my infrastructure budget.

Never once did I abuse either account or use those funds for personal expense or gain.

I believe the current stipend policy is warranted. Here’s why. Now that I have retired, my cell phone informs me that my daily usage of about five hours a day has dropped to less than an hour a day. That tells me that my cell phone was used, almost entirely, for city business. I used to fill up my gas tank once a week at about $45 to $50 a pop. In retirement, I can fill my car up once a month. My use of printer paper has dropped from two reams a month to one ream for several months. Laser toner, very expensive by the way, was replaced twice a year. Now it lasts the entire year. These items, among others, had 90% of their usage attributed to city business. Monthly expenses for meals, tickets, donations and events have dropped to zero.

I am typical of most councilmembers. These stipends have helped to defray the expenses I incurred. I am grateful as your councilmember that they were made available in the last few years.

As for Turner, he’s up to his usual tricks. If he doesn’t understand the use of stipends shame on him. If he chooses not to take them, that is his prerogative. Painting the rest of council as somehow underhanded for using them is a typical Turner move.

The nonuse of a stipend by Councilmember Turner does not make him an angel. It appears that he is far, far from that. The use of a stipend by the rest of the councilmembers, just because Turner and his cohort, Raymundo, write about it does not make us devils.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jan 25

15

And the winner is…

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 15, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Yesterday, January 14, 2025, city council held its regular workshop meeting. One of the agenda items was that of moving city council assistants from the City Manager’s office to the City Clerk’s office. The item was requested by Councilmembers Tolmachoff, Turner and Conchas.

The Mayor brought up an interesting point. Apparently, these councilmembers requested that there be no discussion of the issue but rather it be on the voting agenda that night for an up or down vote. It appears that these 3 councilmembers wanted no discussion of the item and had not requested that it also be a workshop agenda item. It was the Mayor who requested that this item be brought to the workshop for a full discussion before it was to be voted on.

For Tolmachoff and Turner, who have repeatedly thrown around the word ‘transparency’, it was revealing. Apparently, they want transparency when it is an agenda item that they oppose. Then they want a full and robust workshop discussion. When it is their item, the heck with discussion. They wanted to ram it through with no discussion. It is a telling moment.

Their argument for proposing that council assistants move to the city clerk’s office centered around the notion that it was a better alignment. Their argument was that the city clerk’s office deals with citizens more extensively as council assistants do. Thereby making the two entities a good fit.

Councilmember Dianna Guzman was apparently the only councilmember to ask the council assistants directly for their feedback on the proposed move. To a person, the sentiment was that they preferred to stay under the direction of the city manager’s office. In essence, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Turner and Tolmachoff, both without council assistants, hurled a lot of innuendo. Turner called it, “chaotic at best” and felt there was “disparate treatment of councilmembers.” Tolmachoff, said, “it was not a level playing field” and she felt there were “occasions where some can hand pick” selections for council assistant. Conchas said moving them to the city clerk “keeps the city manager’s office accountable.” There was a lot of squeezing of sour grapes.

The first question that arises is, why don’t Turner and Tolmachoff have council assistants? Everyone in city hall knows why. Suffice it to say, their offices have revolving doors, and each has gone through many, many council assistants. It is common knowledge that their council assistants left because of the treatment they received.

Case in point, during my last two terms as councilmember, I had 3 council assistants, all of whom I loved and with whom I had an excellent working relationship. They were all fantastic and did excellent work. Shelly and Shannon left when they had opportunities to advance their professional careers within the city in other departments. Council assistants have no opportunity for advancement. My last one, Riley, remains a council assistant for newly elected Yucca councilmember Guzman. There was no revolving door.

However, Turner and Tolmachoff each had numerous council assistants. Far more than I or councilmembers Malnar or Hugh. Again, the question is why.

Another startling moment came when the Mayor asked for consensus to move this item forward for a voting meeting. Councilmember Conchas softly said ‘no’ to moving this item forward. Councilmember Turner was surprised, to say the least. After all, Conchas was supposed to be on his side after his endorsement and the hefty campaign contributions he gave to Conchas. To have Conchas betray him on the very first contentious issue where Turner counted on his support must have been quite a shock to Turner.

A majority of council, Mayor Weiers and Councilmembers Malnar, Baldenegro, Guzman and surprisingly, Conchas did not give affirmative consensus to move this item to a voting meeting. Once again, Tolmachoff and Turner remain on their little island of dissent.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jan 25

14

Lupe Conchas…renegade or representative?

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 14, 2025
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

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

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

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

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

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

 (These unions endorsed him:

UNITE HERE Local 11

Worker Power

International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union

United Food and Commercial Workers Union

International Painters and Allied Trades Union

Ironworkers Union Local 75

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jan 25

13

Now the fun begins

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 13, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Today, just before the deadline of 24 hours before a posted council meeting, a new item was added to the city council workshop agenda. It was called for by Councilmembers Tolmachoff, Turner and Conchas. It is a tactic not used before. Probably because there was a strong majority of 4 councilmembers who would not have supported an item presented by the minority.

These three councilmembers want to discuss how council assistants are selected. There has been a push of late by some on council to hire council assistants by a councilmember’s sole discretion. On the face of it, it sounds great. Why shouldn’t a councilmember be free to select any one they want for the position, whether qualified or not. The concern with that position is that the selection can become a political appointment rather than one chosen by merit. This is a slippery slope indeed. I have seen a case where that occurred. After some time, that person left the position.

Here is the agenda item:

Subject

**DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CITY COUNCIL ASSISTANT POSITIONS                        Presented by: Councilmember Turner, Vice Mayor Tolmachoff and Councilmember Conchas

Purpose and Recommended Action

This is a council-requested item by Councilmember Turner, Vice Mayor Tolmachoff and Councilmember Conchas to discuss the council assistant positions.

Background

The mayor may, or at the request of three (3) members of the council shall, by giving notice thereof to all members of the council then in the city, call a special meeting of the council for a time not earlier than three (3) hours nor later than forty-eight (48) hours after the notice is given. Special meetings of the council may also be held at any time by the common consent of all the members of the council.  This request was made in accordance with the above-referenced Glendale City Charter provision.

Here’s a little inside baseball. Tolmachoff and Turner use every instance they can to make the City Manager, and the Mayor look bad. They appear to purposefully look for council discussion items that provide them the opportunity to say something nasty about either. They seem to harbor an intense dislike for both gentlemen. This discussion item will give them another opportunity to publicly emphasize their feelings.

There is more to this discussion, however. The minority has a coalition of three councilmembers with the addition of Conchas. Keep in mind, Conchas is beholden to Turner. Turner not only endorsed Conchas enthusiastically, but he also donated 90% of the funding for Conchas’ last hit-piece, a campaign mailer portraying Vice Mayor Ian Hugh as a racist.

At one point in his installation speech Conchas said, “…your belief in me kept me going and you stood by me every step of the way. And I will not forget that.” He was referencing the unions and others, like Turner, who had endorsed him and contributed to his campaign.

That is why Conchas will always follow Turner’s lead and agenda.

It is common knowledge around city hall that both Tolmachoff and Turner have consistently treated their council assistants badly. Each has gone through quite a few council assistants. Each believes that they are good bosses but with a slew of council assistants leaving each of them, the facts prove otherwise.

If you have the time and inclination this might be a good council workshop to view. I know that I certainly will watch.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Dec 24

28

Velma Teague Library…elegant or eye sore?

Posted by Joyce Clark on December 28, 2024
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

As a preface to this blog, I am pleased to tell you that I now have the luxury of time to write again. I started this blog in 2013 and over the years I have written many pieces. For the last two years, taking care of my husband of 89 years and fulfilling my council responsibilities left no time to write. I retired from my council position this December. That action has provided me with time to do one of the things that I love and that is to write again. Look for more consistent and frequent pieces about Glendale.

Many years ago, for at least 40 years ago, my children and I used Velma Teague all the time. It was the only library us south and west Glendale residents had. As the children grew, they soon had access to other libraries and Velma Teague faded as our resource.

What is Velma Teague today? It is small and outdated. It has no room to expand or to accommodate another generation of readers who rely on computers and phones.

Suddenly and unexpectedly, the city’s Promenade space became available. Did you know that the Promenade features a unique history walk featuring 59 images relating to the history of Glendale imbedded in the sidewalk? Each vibrant mosaic offers insight into the evolution of Glendale. 

The majority of council sees this as an opportunity to move the library out of its old, cramped space into a larger space that can bring it into the 21st Century while meeting the needs of economically disadvantaged children. It is an opportunity to provide them with the tools they need to succeed in an ever-advancing digital economy. The city council views this proposal as an opportunity to provide our children with learning to meet the demands of the highly technical world we live in today.

Not only that but the new larger space can accommodate and encourage more programming of classes and learning experiences for our children. It seemed to be a win-win for all.

Not so fast. Remember the group that sported green T-shirts emblazoned with “Save Murphy Park”? They were opposed to the city hall remodel project, convinced that it would destroy the park. This very same group, against anything the city council proposes, is at it again. This time, it’s save the library. One would think from some of their rhetoric that city council was banning books!

Their two major arguments against removing the Velma Teague building are first, its enormous sentimental value. I ask to whom? 99% of Glendale’s residents don’t know it exists and have never used it. It is not a historical building as there have been several iterations of this library over the years. Its sentimental value is limited to the small group of activists desperately searching for any reason to override the direction of the city council.

Last year I started to clean out our home after 50 years of “stuff” had accumulated. Some of it had sentimental value but if I had saved it all we would still be drowning in an overabundance of “stuff.” Sometimes you just have to get rid of things, if for no other reason than to make room for the new. It’s so nice to use uncluttered rooms with space to accommodate new looks and new gadgets. Velma Teague is exactly the same. Sometimes you get rid of the old with perceived, limited sentimental value to make room for the new and often more useful items that can enrich your life. A new Velma Teague holds the promise of enriching the lives of a new generation of children.

The second reason our merry band of nay sayers say they don’t want to see Velma Teague removed is that city council has a nefarious plan to enlarge the amphitheater. Here are a few facts that they deliberately prefer to ignore. The plans for the remodeling of city hall, the amphitheater and council chamber have been approved and are final. The budget is set. The only changes in the budget that have come forward are an increase in the cost of building materials or unexpected glitches that have been found in the old building that required an unbudgeted remedy.

Have you seen or heard senior management come forward with a plan to increase the size of the amphitheater and an accompanying request for more funding to cover that expansion? The answer is ‘no’. It hasn’t happened and it isn’t going to happen.

Just for a minute, can you imagine Murphy Park, wide open and newly landscaped without that intrusive old building? Imagine Murphy Park, enlarged for an even more spectacular Glendale Glitters when it returns to that location? Without that building there is suddenly more room for people and the events that attract them to downtown Glendale. As I said previously, it’s a win-win for the children and a win-win for the downtown merchants.

What will happen? Now I will use my crystal ball. The dozen activists will win this round, and Velma Teague will stay as the proud, old lady in her tattered finest. We know that Councilmembers Tomalchoff and Turner oppose any plan to remove Velma Teague. Add newbie Councilmember Conchas to the pro Velma Teague faction. All these councilmembers have to do is turn one more councilmember to gain the majority. My guess is that they are gunning for Ocotillo Councilmember Baldenegro. He is a smart, common sense, compassionate guy with the genuine best interests of his constituency at the forefront. Whisperings have started that if he doesn’t support keeping Velma Teague where it is, he can look forward to a recall in his future.

I think that would be enough to get him to change his position. A recall filled with lies, smears and innuendos comparing one to Hitler or Al Capone, no matter how untrue, is something no one wants to face.

So, after all the political sound and fury, I suspect Velma Teague will stay where it is and the children of the Ocotillo district will be the losers, having gained nothing for their future well-being. It will be a sad ending to a project that could have provided these children with enhanced opportunities to move into the digital age.

Suffer the children.

 

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 24

7

Hockey Memorabilia

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 7, 2024
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City of Glendale • Desert Diamond Arena • Glendale elected officials • Jobing.com arena  | Tagged With: , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

I have been on the Glendale City Council since 1992. During that time many momentous events have occurred in Glendale. One of the most memorable was the opening of the city’s arena with the first season of hockey played there. That was back in 2002, twenty-four years ago and I still remember the excitement.

I am now in my 80’s and we are downsizing our life style. Tucked away in a dark, cool closet I found my hockey memorabilia. In 2003, there was the Grand Opening of the city-owned arena and the first season of play by what was called at that time, the Phoenix Coyotes.

All of the councilmembers received special commerative gifts to celebrate the Grand Opening and the start of hockey at the arena. Each councilmember received a hockey stick signed by the team at that time as well as a hockey shirt, also signed by the team. To my knowledge there are only 7 sticks and 7 shirts. I do not know what the other councilmembers did with their gifts. I tucked mine away in a cool, dark closet and there they have been until I decided to clean out the closet.

The reason I am sharing this info is because I have decided to sell the stick and the shirt. If nothing else, they are historical and reflect a time of hope and excitement.

If you would like to purchase either or both of these items, please email me at clarkjv@aol.com and make an offer. The highest offer will become the owner of these wonderful items.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Mar 24

4

Political pandering is an art form

Posted by Joyce Clark on March 4, 2024
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Glendale finances • Ocotillo District • Primary Election August 2024  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

As you may be aware, Councilmember Jamie Aldama is running for mayor against the incumbent, Mayor Jerry Weiers and former state legislator, Paul Boyer. If and when Aldama turns in his nominating petitions he will be required to resign from his Ocotillo District council seat. The drop-dead date for turning in nominating petitions is April 1, 2024.

This could mean that Aldama is attending his last few city council meetings. As a mayoral candidate opposing the incumbent, Mayor Weiers, Aldama is desperate to position himself in opposition to the Mayor on every issue he can dig up.

It was evident that is exactly what he was doing at the February 27, 2024, City Council voting meeting. The last item on the agenda was seeking council approval for a garage construction agreement between the city and Fisher Industries, developer of VIA Resort, to build a city-owned, public parking garage.

Here is the verbatim transcript of Aldama’s remarks before voting ‘no’ on the agreement:

Starting at the 44 minute, 33 seconds mark: “Mayor, explain my vote. Yeah, I, uh, this is a data driven organization I, uh, and I have not yet to see any data that demonstrates a need for a parking garage for the VIA Resort. Absent the VIA Resort, Glendale does not require a parking garage. Uh, our City Manager shared with us awhile back that there was some area footage taken of Westgate and the, uh, stadium area and there was tons of parking left over. There ya go. We don’t need a parking garage. Um, our resident spoke very clearly, very concise about some of the issues I wanted to, uh, talk about. Uh, there’s no competitive process. There was no selection process. We spend more time on RFPs for lower dollar amounts than the $72 and a half million dollars. And I asked the question, was that a legal way of doing business and the answer is yes. Well, I don’t believe that it is. Um, and it should be a practice that the City of Glendale hold on the RFP process or any type of procurement process. Um, this has, in my opinion, have favor written all over it and, ah, I am not in favor of building a parking garage for the VIA Resort. We don’t need a parking garage absent the VIA Resort. I vote nay.”

Let’s take apart what he said. “I have not yet to see any data that demonstrates a need for a parking garage for the VIA Resort.” That’s because the parking garage is to be a public, city owned garage for anyone visiting the Westgate area. Yes, it will also serve VIA and the Mattel Amusement Park. With a projection of $32 million dollars annually in revenue earned by the city from these two projects, it is anticipated that the garage will be in constant use with the city earning a portion of the parking fees.

It is also important to point out that as Westgate develops the last vacant parcels it will result in no or very little on-site parking. That makes the need for a public parking garage all the more essential to keep the area thriving.

Another factor Aldama refuses to acknowledge is that VIA will have at least 2,500 parking spaces on site, either underground or above ground.

Aldama goes on to say, “Uh, there’s no competitive process. There was no selection process.”

Here is a portion of the packet of information relating to this agreement that was in every councilmember’s voting meeting  agenda packet:

“The City published a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), for design-build services of a parking garage at the City-owned Black Lot, in the Arizona Republic Newspaper on December 20 and December 27, 2023. The City held a mandatory pre-submittal conference on, Thursday, January 4, 2024, at 9:00am at the City of Glendale’s Adult Center. Twenty-four (24) firms attended the mandatory pre-submittal conference. Of those twenty-four firms, four (4) firms submitted statements of qualification for the RFQ.
A selection committee was formed, and each panel member reviewed the four submittals to score each firm according to the scoring criteria provided in the RFQ. The panel scored Fisher the highest scoring firm and agreed that Fisher demonstrated the capabilities to deliver this project according to the schedule and budget outlined in the RFQ.”

Again, this information was provided to Aldama in his council agenda packet. Saying that there was no process does not make it so just because he said it publicly.

Aldama accuses senior management and city council of favoritism by saying, “Um, this has, in my opinion, have favor written all over it…” That is a serious accusation that is unfounded. As The information above provided to council shows that a selection process did occur.

Lastly, Aldama says, “And I asked the question, was that a legal way of doing business and the answer is yes. Well, I don’t believe that it is.” Aldama’s belief is not fact.

Aldama’s statement should cause you to ask several questions. Did he read the material in his council agenda packet? If not, he did not do his duty to become fully informed on the issues that he was to vote upon that evening. If he did read the material, why did he reject the staff report stating that the procurement process was followed?

The answer is simple. This is election season and Aldama wishes to become the mayor of Glendale. He picks any topic that he thinks will draw a contrast between himself and Mayor Weiers. This wasn’t the issue to use this tactic.

Was there political pandering on the part of Aldama? You bet there was.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Nov 23

28

VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park most impactful projects ever

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 28, 2023
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Mattel Adventure Park • Mattel Amusement Park • VAI Resort • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

On November 21, 2023, at city council workshop, the long-awaited revised Economic Impact Study for VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park was released. The numbers are just astounding and are shared here.

The project has grown considerably since it was first envisioned and presented to the city. The Applied Economics Study presented this project description:

“The development includes 10 mixed-use buildings. Buildings 5 and 8 will open at the end of 2024 and the remainder of the development will open in summer 2025.

  • VAI Resort Hotel

    Building 1 will include a 299-room luxury hotel with 17,000 square feet of restaurants, 18,000 square feet of retail shops and 130 underground parking spaces.

  • Building 2 will include 29,500 square feet of retail and restaurants, a 9,000 square foot spa, a 155-room hotel and 230 underground parking spaces.
  • Building 3 is a parking structure with 3,900 spaces.
  • Building 4 will include 47,000 square feet of restaurants and themed retail, an aerophile balloon, a 3,000-seat theater, an 8,000 square foot Barbie theater and a 19,000 square foot Barbie Dream House attraction.
  • Building 5 will include a 9-acre Mattel Adventure Park with 250,000 square feet of indoor and outdoor rides and amusements and 8,000 square feet of themed restaurants.
  • Building 6 will include a 311-roon hotel, 28,000 square feet of retail and restaurants, an 8,500 square foot kid’s club and 150 underground parking spaces.
  • Building 7 will include 70,000 square feet of meeting and convention space, a 20,000 square foot night club, a 10,000 square foot fitness center and a 10,000 square foot swim up bar.
  • Building 8 will include 318 hotel rooms, including the Amphitheater Tower with 27,000 square feet of sky boxes overlooking the 90,000 square foot concert venue. This area also includes 37,000 square feet of restaurant space, a 4,500 square foot retail/café area and 390 underground parking spaces.
  • Building 9 represents Konos Island in the middle of the swimming area with 40,000 square feet of island beach amenities, 10,000 square feet of restaurant space, and the elevated Aerobar attraction.
  • Building 10 includes 55,000 square feet of corporate office space occupied by the developer/owner.
  • Other Amenities include the beach and pool decks, service areas, and 1,060 surface parking spaces.”

In summary and please note that my numbers are estimated based on available information, there will be on the site including both VAI and Mattel Adventure Park:

  • 1,013 hotel rooms available in a 5-building complex
  • 5,860 parking spaces on site including 900 underground; 3,900 in a parking garage; and 1,060 surface parking spaces.
  • 100,500 square feet of restaurants
  • 108,500 square feet of retail space
  • 387,500 square feet of attractions

It should be noted that that estimates of development costs and revenues earned are conservative as can be shown by a conservative estimate of 4 of the hotels’ occupancy rate of 42% to 46% and one hotel at an occupancy rate of 66%. Please note in the Westgate area, hotels are averaging a 70% occupancy rate.

In total, there will be 2,346,523 square feet of development at a cost of over $900,000,000 (nearly $1 billion dollars). The magnitude and complexity of this development should not be underestimated. It is not like building a one-themed development such as a single, large manufacturing facility or a hotel or a retail center. Rather, it is building all these combined and more at once.

The project site is forecast to earn $2.2 billion dollars in new sales, property and bed tax revenues to the city, schools, county and state over the next 25 years. How is Glendale incentivizing this $1 billion dollar project? It will waive permit and plan fee waivers of up to $1 million dollars and enter a Government Property Lease Excise Tax (GPLET) agreement on the entertainment, recreation, and concession portions of the development. In total, all fee waivers and the GPLET is $107.4 million dollars over 25 years in return for a 25 year income of $2.2 billion dollars.

How does the 25-year revenue break down? Starting in the year 2025 Glendale is estimated to receive annual tax revenue of $29,318,615 and to receive $40, 289,165 by year 2049. That means each year Glendale will receive $29 plus million dollars escalating to $40 million dollars a year by 2049. That is more revenue than that earned by the city from the Arrowhead/Bell Road corridor per year. These revenues go a long way in making up for the state-imposed loss of approximately an annual $14 million in rental tax that cities can no longer collect.

With the GPLET the County and Schools will receive $7,833,554 in year 2025 annually escalating to $18,972,199 by 2025. The State is estimated to receive $45,768,687 in year 2025 annually escalating to $50,980,151. The current and potential revenues to school and county districts are:

  • Pendergast Elementary School District currently receives $55,452 in tax revenue. Even with a GPLET it will receive $2,906,600 annually.
  • Tolleson Union School District currently receives $51,883 in tax revenue and with the GPLET will receive $2,719,506 annually.
  • WESTMEC currently receives $1,765 in tax revenue and with the GPLET will receive $92,498 annually.
  • Community Colleges currently receive $11,121 in tax revenue and with the GPLET will receive $582,938 annually.
  • All other taxing districts (county) currently receive $32,997 in tax revenue and with the GPLET will receive $1,734,838 annually.

These statistics should give you a sense of the magnitude of this development. This development will solidify Glendale as THE Entertainment and Sports destination not only in the state but nationally.

I am so pleased and excited about this development that I have arranged to do a half hour “Beyond the Headlines” on each component, VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park. Taping of the videos will occur in January 2024. Expect them to be on air toward the end of February 2024.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Nov 23

9

Heroes Park sports fields coming

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 9, 2023
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Heroes Lake • Heroes Park • Ocotillo District • West Branch Library • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

I am so pleased and excited to give you an update on the Heroes Park sports fields. I expect construction to begin early next year (2024) and to be completed by December 2024. However, an additional hurdle will be to gain council approval for additional funding for the project. Due to continued inflation price increases for all components, it will require council approval for the additional cost increase. Council approval will be sought later this month (November).

I have included the final conceptual, but it may be hard to read so I will offer some of the more prominent elements for you. The sports fields complex’s location is to the northeast of the existent library and directly north of the existing ramadas. The main components are 3 soccer fields. There are 8 pickle ball courts with shade sails and 3 adjoining ramadas. A centralized, large ramada and restroom is just south of the soccer fields.

In between the 2 large open lawns is a children’s play area. South of the pickle ball courts is a shaded picnic area. South of the picnic area is a food truck court designed specifically to encourage food trucks to come to the park. Southeast of the picnic area and food court area is a 1.6-acre dog park.

North of the sports fields is a pollinator garden and a fitness loop with fitness nodes. There is a generous amount of landscape buffering between the sports fields and the homes to the north and east of the park. A generous and shaded pathway is provided between the library and the sports fields area as well as a raised intersection and crosswalk from the existing ramadas to the sports fields. Included are 390 parking spaces located to the east and west of the sports fields.

You know, this park was approved by the city in 1998, 25 years ago. During my years in office, I have consistently advocated for its completion. I have been successful in getting a library that can expand, a fishing lake and now the sports fields complex.

This area of Glendale warrants the park’s completion, including finally, the design and construction of the long-awaited Recreation/Aquatic Center. With all the new residential construction of single-family homes as well as 15 apartment complexes, the population of the Yucca district has exploded from 41,000 to an estimated 55,000 people. The tremendous population growth that has occurred is now seeking recreational opportunities.

It isn’t just the people of the Yucca district that will benefit from a Recreation/Aquatic Center at Heroes Park, but the residents of the Ocotillo and Cactus districts will benefit as well. Did you know that nearly 70% percent of all the city’s recreational programming occurs at Foothills Recreation/Aquatic Center? For all who live in south Glendale it’s a 10-mile trip, one way, to Foothills. That’s a long haul for many families. A Recreation/Aquatic Center at Heroes Park will redress this imbalance and provide programming for many families and children in south Glendale. It’s time…

I want to thank the councilmembers who have remained steadfast in the city’s pledge to finish this park. It simply would not have occurred without their support.

It would be wonderful if you would take the time to thank them as well and ask for their support in completing Heroes Park by approving the funding for the design and construction of the last element – the Recreation/Aquatic Center by emailing them at:

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

« Previous Page — Next Page »