Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

MIDDLE OF THE ROADERS…#4 WEIERS AND #5 SHERWOOD

Weiers

Jerry Weiers

Sherwood

Gary Sherwood

There is no earth shaking surprise in either of these gentlemen’s budgetary expenditures. Certainly they have not adopted the philosophy or practice of giving your taxpayer dollars away as Chavira, Alvarez and Hugh have done. Mayor Weiers 6 months of expenditures comes in at $14,041.33 and Councilmember Sherwood is not far behind with expenditures of $11,516.37.

It’s common knowledge that they don’t like each other very much as each vies for the title of ultimate power broker in Glendale. They are discussed in unison because they share commonalities when it comes to spending. Both like to travel with each racking up substantial travel expenses and each spent about the same amount for the use of phones whether land line or cell.

money 3Mayor Weiers spent $4,729.15 (33% of his 6 months of expenditures) on travel for 3 trips. In March he and Councilmembers Sherwood and Chavira, staffed by Intergovernmental Director, Brent Stoddard, went to Washington, D.C. for the National League of Cities (NLC) Congressional City Conference. In April Weiers and Stoddard went to Washington, D.C. for the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC) Executive Mission. In May Weiers was back in D.C. with Stoddard. If Stoddard’s expenses to staff Weiers and others in D.C. are added those trips become pricier at $8,541.00.

money 5Sherwood spent $3,927.22 (34% of his 6 months of expenditures) on travel as well. If a quarter of Stoddard’s expenses (Stoddard staffed 3 elected officials on the March trip to D.C.) are added, Sherwood’s tab for travel cost the city $5,069.45 in direct and indirect costs. Stoddard typically pays for meals, especially dinners if the elected officials have not been invited by another party. He will pay cab fare and miscellaneous expenses on behalf of the elected officials.

Weiers’ phone bill comes in at $1,259.52 and Sherwood spent $449.10 for his cell and another $789.85 for his land line totaling $1,238.95. Their phone expenditures in 6 months are virtually the same. Is it appropriate to cover their phone expenses? That is a judgment call and something you must decide.The balance of their budgetary expenditures is ordinary and appropriate.

These trips were probably meaningful and were dedicated to lobbying for the city’s interests on issues such as the F-35 to be based at Luke and the casino issue. Everything in D.C. is pricey but we expect moderation. Their lodging and airfare are reasonable for a trip to D.C. but Stoddard’s expenditure of $1,284.52 for meals (dinners for 4) is on the high side.

In an era of frugality and tightened budgetary expenses in Glendale it is more important than ever before that our elected officials spend their travel dollars wisely. A reminder that these trips are funded with taxpayer dollars may encourage them to be more mindful.

copyright

NEXT UP AS BIG SPENDERS ARE #2 ALVAREZ AND #3 HUGH

Norma Alvarez

Norma Alvarez

Hugh photo

Ian Hugh

Councilmember Alvarez is number 2 on the list having spent $26,151.34 and Councilmember Hugh comes in at third at $19,771.12. Both share Chavira’s philosophy of giving away your taxpayer dollars.

 

money 2Here is the list of Alvarez’ donations made in the past 6 months totaling  $16,791.40 (60% of her total 6 month expenditures):

 

  • Glendale Arizona Historical Society……………$3,000.00
  • Community Action Program Holiday Event….$3,000.00
  • Football uniforms for Independence HS…….…$3,391.40
  • Hope for Hunger…………………………………$    500.00
  • Scholarships………………………………………..$   900.00

 

  • Jivemind performance at a Glen. ES*.……………$3,000.00
  • Arizona Melon Festival, LLC*…………………….$3,000.00

*Last two items are for-profit corporations.

Like Chavira, Alvarez donated to the Arizona Melon Festival, LLC money 9(AMF). AMF received a total of $11,000 from 2 councilmembers, Chavira and Alvarez.  Jeff Rose, SW Director of Jivemind, is also a managing member of AMF. Alvarez also donated to Jivemind despite the fact that the Jivemind lease of city property requires the company to offer at least 4 free public events yearly. Ummmm… Also of note Jivemind is renting 6,559 square feet of city property (formerly the Bead Museum) for approximately $2.69/SF. In checking the going rate for lease of downtown Glendale commercial property the lowest cost per square foot that is currently listed is $6.00/SF. Ummmm…

money 8Here is the list of Hugh’s donations made in the past 6 months totaling $9,984.98 (50% of his total 6 month expenditures):

 

  • Glendale Arizona Historical Society……………..$4,669.98
  • Jerseys for youth project………………….……….$1,040.00
  • Hope for Hunger…………………………………..$3,000.00
  • Packages from Home…………………….….….…$1,000.00
  • The Salvation Army………………………..…….$   275.00

Other expenditures of note in Hugh’s budget are 1. Yep, you guessed it. Hugh’s cell phone, just like Chavira’s, is covered at $75 a month and 2. On May 13, 2013 Hugh hosted an event at Shane’s Ribmoney 1 Shack for $1,750.45. That’s a lot of ribs! Was it for his constituents? No further information is provided to clarify this noteworthy expense. It’s ironic that a councilmember whose focus and roots are in downtown Glendale chose a restaurant away from downtown and in Westgate.

All of the non-profits listed above are worthy and deservedly so. They offer much needed services in our community. Some of these groups also receive dollars from Glendale’s From the Heart Program or CBDG funding. From the Heart is a program in which residents have the option to pay an additional dollar on their water/sewer/sanitation bill every month. That dollar goes to From the Heart which often also receives grant match funding from other organizations. The funds are distributed to non-profits on an annual basis. In addition, as Alvarez well knows as a former director of Glendale’s Community Action Program, that the city is a pass-through federal funds (called Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] funds). CDBG funds are distributed annually to non-profits that assist the low to moderate income population in Glendale. These are successful, long-term city mechanisms to distribute funding to the economically disadvantaged and disabled within our community.

Is it appropriate for councilmembers to divert funding from their “communications” and “infrastructure” budgets to non-profits? They are taxpayer dollars and the only judge of these monetary awards is the councilmember. There are dangers in cronyism and abuse. What if there are constituents that are philosophically opposed? These councilmember actions make it perfectly clear that they are not focused on district resident outreach and providing their constituents timely information or in making awards that can physically improve the blight in some of their district neighborhoods.

Yet when these budgets were initially created that was the distinct purpose and intent for the use of these funds in councilmember budgets. The need to fund communication to constituents was an identified primary need as was the ability to “fix” minor neighborhood infrastructure issues that arose and were not budgeted for in the city budget. None of the former councilmembers ever voiced the intent to give the money away to their favorite charities. Yet Alvarez made monetary awards totaling 60% of her entire 6 month expenditures (January 1 to June 30, 2013) and Hugh made awards totaling 50%. It’s time to take a look at councilmember budgets and examine what are to be considered as appropriate expenditures.

money 5These very three councilmembers, Chavira ($27,000), Alvarez ($26,000) and Hugh ($19,000) are big spenders who have no problem in giving your taxpayer dollars to their favorite organizations. Their inability to reign in their individual council budgets demonstrates a philosophy loathe to reign in the city’s budget and to reduce spending. The city must reduce its spending by $23 million by FY 2017 when the increased sales tax sunsets. Yet these councilmembers continue to rack up new expenses that were unbudgeted such as $100,000+ for the Beacon bid process the results of which were ignored; or the $500,000 for an audit which will do no more than place blame on some city middle managers long gone from the organization. If they cannot practice frugality with their own council budgets why should we expect them to cut city expenses, something so desperately needed, that continue to outpace its revenues?

copyright

Note: I said that I was taking a hiatus for about a week but this blog begged to be written before my hiatus. It is timely now. See you back here after July 15th.)

Norma Alvarez

Norma Alvarez

There are two words that apparently are not in Councilmember Alvarez’ dictionary — grace and dignity. On July 3, 2013 the Glendale Star published a story entitled Alvarez sets deadline for departure by its Editor, Carolyn Dryer. Here is the link: http://www.glendalestar.com/news/headlines/article_d7f30530-e413-11e2-8882-0019bb2963f4.html.

Norma publicly exploded after the affirmative vote by a majority of council for the RSE arena management deal. She laid the blame for the lease management’s acceptance at the feet of the entire council by saying,“It’s our fault, letting them (Coyotes prospective owners) do what they want to do.”

The city paid approximately $500,000 for an external audit. In the minds of some councilmembers such as Alvarez, it’s purpose is to fix blame. In the story Alvarez claims the audit will reveal all kinds of dastardly deeds performed by ??? and she says, “I’m waiting for the audit. You’re going to be surprised.” She also hinted that she will resign after the results of the audit are made public and said further, “It’s going public. So, I’m going to wait for that.” She claimed that she told the auditors an ear-full and she probably did but how much was hearsay and how much had a factual basis? You can be sure the audit will be fact based and may not include all of Norma’s titillating tales. If that is the case, you may see a second eruption from Mount Norma.

Sherwood

Gary Sherwood

She then went on to trash her fellow councilmembers. She claimed discrimination by her peers because “I have never been included in this council from the first day I’ve been in. I’m not ‘one of the boys.’” She accused Councilmember Sherwood of usurping the Mayor’s role during the month-long Coyotes negotiation process with, “I’m tired of this person walking around and talking like he’s the mayor. Jerry (Mayor Jerry Weiers) has been courteous to him.” Sherwood did take the lead on the Coyotes negotiation and his rubbing elbows with the likes of NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, Assistant NHL Commissioner Bill Daley, RSE’s Anthony LeBlanc and Daryl Jones and attorneys Grant Woods and Nick Wood (no relation) had to have made Sherwood feel warm and fuzzy all over. I’m sure his ego was stoked as all of these principals whispered sweet nothings.  She also accused Sherwood of inserting himself into the search for the City Manager process by “When Sherwood got the applications, he called her (new city manager hired Tuesday, Brenda Fischer),” Alvarez said. “We didn’t call anybody; that’s why we have HR. He (Sherwood) came back and told us this is the best person.” While not illegal, as far as I know, it is a highly unusual action by a councilmember.

Chavira photo

Sammy Chavira

There were no kind words for Councilmember Chavira either. A little past history is in order. When Sammy ran in 2012 Norma stood “toe to toe” with Sammy’s bid. She funneled money and workers to his campaign and did everything in her power to assure his election.  With regard to Sammy’s positive vote for the Coyotes’ deal she said, “But he’s a disappointment to the people of Glendale. I know people in Glendale who say they are going to make sure he never wins again.” (More about Sammy’s vote in a future blog.) I would think Norma feels betrayed by the very person she was instrumental in getting elected. If nothing else Norma has a long memory and the resources to make good on her promise about Sammy’s future.

There’s more but you will have to read the article for yourself to capture the full flavor of the outrage Norma expresses. Every councilmember, in any community, has at one time or another, experienced back stabbing, betrayal and countless other unpleasant actions from their peers. It’s not usually aired in public because most have a sense of grace and dignity and realize that it’s part of politics. Alas, they are not words in Norma’s vocabulary.

copyright

A disclaimer: I have not made a decision on the Renaissance Sports and Entertainment bid to manage the city’s arena. It is not possible until I have read the document. To date it is not available to the public.

I don’t usually post 3 blogs in one day but this appears to be one of those days that demands it.

On June 25, 2013, Paul Giblin, a reporter for the Arizona Republic issued the following story online, Glendale still unsure about Phoenix Coyotes deal. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20130625glendale-unsure-phoenix-coyotes-deal.html . Several aspects of his story are troubling. One issue is that a vote is still scheduled for hidden agendaTuesday, July 2, 2013. It is my understanding that the council has requested another Executive Session for Thursday, June 27, 2013. The city had better made sure that notice of another Esession on June 27th is properly posted 24 hours in advance. Which means that the meeting notice has to be posted on Wednesday, June 26th…today. However, even more worrisome is that with an Esession scheduled for June 27 the very earliest the deal points could be posted publicly would be on Friday, June 28th or even as late as on Monday, July 1st. Could the city post as late as 24 hours before a scheduled vote? Yes, they could but would they? I hope not as suspicions will shoot through the roof if the public is given one day to review and understand any deal between Renaissance Sports and Entertainment (RSE) and the city.

city hall 2

Glendale City Hall Complex

Now, about that second $25M the NHL has offered (at the 11th hour) to take payments on of $5M over each of the next 5 years. Great…too little, too late and it doesn’t solve the city’s problems. The $30M leaseback of City Hall was designed to replenish the city’s Enterprise Funds, Vehicle Replacement Fund and Technology Replacement Fund.  Glendale staff crafted a brilliant strategy. Now that strategy has been tabled by council until after the scheduled Coyotes vote on July 2nd… Hmmmm…The $20M the city has held in an escrow account for the NHL payment simply isn’t enough to cover all of the city’s needs. It will pay back some of the loans leaving $5M still outstanding.  While a generous offer on the part of the NHL, it could have been done a long time ago and in fact, I and several former councilmembers called for just such an arrangement. Why now? I suspect it is in reaction to what they perceive as a very negative story about the city planning to enter a leaseback of City Hall to pay back loans directly related to the $50M partially paid and partially still owed to the NHL.

To discover that councilmembers are not on top of the revenues derived from either the Westgate area (remember those revenues are already being used to pay off the original construction debt on the arena and are NOT new found money) or the arena is disturbing to say the least. At least one of them has touted himself as an expert on the entire RSE deal.

Norma Alvarez

Norma Alvarez

Lastly, good old Councilmember Alvarez and her statements have got to have you snapping your heads in double-take mode. Alvarez said, “I called them knuckleheads, because they don’t get it. They don’t get it. They don’t get it. They’re going to continue discussions. Discussions of what? We’re selling City Hall because of paying $50 million. C’mon. C’mon.” Factually she is incorrect. The city is proposing a leaseback arrangement not an outright sale of City Hall with visions of employees moving out after a sale. As for continuing discussions, they should continue but they don’t have to result in acceptance of the deal…not if RSE cannot or will not guarantee “enhanced revenue streams” for the city.

copyright

agenda 1June 11, 2013 will be a regular Glendale City Council meeting. The agenda, however, is anything but regular. There are four items of special note. All but one item is under Consent Resolutions. Consent Resolutions means that unless an item is pulled by a councilmember for further discussion that item will be passed or rejected along with the 13 other consent resolutions and there will be no discussion – nary a peep out of anyone. The usual disclaimer prior to introduction of the consent resolutions is to say, “They are of a routine nature or have been previously discussed by council in a workshop session.”  Let me assure you two of the consent resolutions are not of a routine nature and have never been discussed publicly by this council. They are consent resolutions #13 and #14. Here is the link to council’s meeting agenda of June 11, 2013:  http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Meetings/Agendas/061113.pdf .

Both of these consent resolutions require doing business with the Tohono O’odham Nation. Item 13 is a grant request from the TO on behalf of the Aguila Youth Leadership Institute (http://www.aguilayouth.org/) in the amount of $112,100. The second item, item 14 is another grant request from the TO on behalf of Heart for the City in the amount of $100,000.

In the Staff Report, staff’s apparent rationale for doing business with the Tohono O’odham is that we have submitted for the same type of grants from the Gila River Indian Community.  So, if we could take grant money from the Gila River Indian Community then by golly, we should be able to take grant money from the Tohono O’odham. Between August, 2010 and June, 2011 the city received grants totaling $290,188 from the Gila River Indian Community. The funds were used by From the Heart, Boys & Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Phoenix and the Glendale Parks, Recreation and Library Department. The Gila River Indian Community have been one of our staunchest allies in the legal warfare with the Tohono O’odham since the issue of a casino IN Glendale (not near Glendale –darn it – but IN it) arose.

Is something missing? Have all legal issues between the City of Glendale and the Tohono O’odham been resolved? Are we suddenly buddies? Receiving grant money from a legal ally is far different than receiving grant money, no matter how well intentioned, from your legal enemy. It is the height of hypocrisy on Glendale’s part. I am ashamed that staff has brought these items forward. If I were on council and could take action at the meeting I would pull both items off of the Consent Resolution Agenda and speak directly to them and vote a resounding “no” on both – no matter how well intentioned they are. If council approves these two consent resolutions, where are this council’s principles?

Glendale City Council

Glendale City Council

Another Consent Resolution is more amusing in context. Item 8 calls for adoption of council’s Key Priorities for Fiscal Year 2013-2014. This one is a hoot! Council’s very first priority is, “Transparency internally and externally to assure the community that the decisions made for the well-being of Glendale are discussed openly with input invited.” Followed by their second priority, “Arena management, debt service, hockey agreement and enhanced revenues will play a large role in policy formation and financial strategy. The above noted transparency will be vital to gaining community support for decisions necessary to optimize the arena value to the Glendale community” (Italics mine). It appears that we all have missed something in council’s translation of transparency.  It looks like council’s definition of transparency is not what the general public assumes it to be. We certainly haven’t seen much transparency when it comes to the Beacon RFP process or Renaissance Sports and Entertainment Group’s discussions with city personnel or council.

greed 1Which brings up our last target of incredulity, Item 21, Fiscal Year Budget Amendments, as an Ordinance to be adopted. I love numbers. While most people won’t go to the numbers pages and really read them. I always do with gusto because they are so revealing. These amendments are transfers from one hand in the budget into a different hand in the budget. The transfer is from Contingency (you know, the “rainy day” account the city is trying to rebuild) to the City Manager’s Office.  In this case, did you know that this council is paying $500,000 for the Council Special Audit? Can you imagine it? Half a million dollars on a special audit – an audit whose primary purpose is to fix blame on somebody. Let’s hope they find a half million dollars worth of blame because they certainly are not going to find a half million dollar pot of gold at City Hall.

The council is also spending another $100,000 on the Arena RFP Process run by their hired consultant, Beacon Sports.  We all thought Councilmember Alvarez wanted to “get rid” of all the consultants? Not so. They must be OK if they are consultants that serve her purposes. Remember, this RFP process is the same one that NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman characterized as “silly.” All of this comes from a council which, when 4 of them were running for office, ran around wringing their hands, complaining about the previous council’s fiscal irresponsibility and vowing it would never occur again because their mission was to be fiscally accountable and transparent about it all. Looks like the joke is on you, Glendale voters.

copyright

blog symbol 1A lot of people are reading my blog. The count as of June 10, 2013 is nearly 40,000. The reason I bring this up is that on March 7, 2013 I posted a blog entitled “Twistn n Turnin.” In it I raised some serious questions about the proposed Cardinals training camp to be located on Glendale’s youth sports fields and the costs associated with using the Bidwell’s company, Rojo Management. Councilmembers may have given some thought to the concerns I raised and now may share them.

In my March 7 blog I pointed out that, “There are lots of questions about this staff presentation that were not asked by councilmembers. Without context it’s like comparing apples to oranges.  Global Spectrum’s contract calls for managing and renting out the sports fields all year long for $216,000. We must assume that Rojo’s contract would call for the same yet their management fee is $69,000 higher.  Why? Do they need more people to do the same job that Global does?  Do they pay higher salaries to their personnel than Global does?

“There are many youth sports leagues that rely upon the use of and rent these fields all year long – from soccer to football leagues. There is a major discrepancy between both contracts relative to utility costs. The $40K figure that Rojo cites, by assumption, does not seem to reflect the fields’ usage all year long. Is it their intent to only reflect utility costs incurred during training camp? Or was it a low-ball figure designed to make Rojo’s bid more attractive? I don’t know but these are questions that should have been asked. Rojo, by the way, is a Bidwell subsidiary.

“Another question not asked is, what was the revenue generated by Global Spectrum last fiscal year? The city receives 50% of it from Global. Should we not know what that figure is? Rojo is proposing revenue share of only 20% and that is after the first $150,000 is generated. I am sure staff in preparation for this presentation should have been able to supply an estimate of revenue it expected to receive under the Rojo contract. Council should have asked about revenue projections or staff should have provided this information to council.”

Sherwood

Gary Sherwood

Councilmember Sherwood’s comments in a Craig Morgan FoxSportsAZ article of June 10, 2013 (here is the link: http://www.foxsportsarizona.com/nfl/arizona-cardinals/story/Cardinals-Glendale-still-at-impasse-over?blockID=910423&feedID=11331 entitled Cardinals, Glendale still at impasse over camp has Sherwood saying, “It’s a worse deal than the one we have right now. We lose money. I have no idea why we would agree to it.” or “They still want to make money off of us, and we can’t do that.” One hopes that this is a majority sentiment of council.

copyright

Glendale City Council

Glendale City Council

Today, June 4, 2013 Glendale council will conduct a workshop meeting. Here is the link to the agenda:  http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Workshops/Agendas/060413.pdf

Workshops are not like regular evening meetings. They are intended as a means of staff bringing forward subjects they believe are important or staff is responding to a councilmember’s request for further study on a subject. Unlike night meetings there is no opportunity for public comment.

The public agenda is short. There are only two items: an update on Glendale’s airport and council selection of its members for the two standing subcommittees, Government Services and Sustainability as well as selection of Vice Mayor. The airport issue is one that Councilmember Sherwood brought forward. For years the airport has been vexing as it has never reached its full development potential. That is a topic for another posting. We could see some interesting dynamics play out in the self selection of councilmembers to serve on the two standing subcommittees.

The more troubling aspect of the agenda is the Executive Session agenda. Executive Sessions are designed to allow council and staff to discuss, in a non-public setting, contracts, personnel and property leases/purchases. Its interpretation is often overly broad by a city’s legal department. There are 8 items on the Executive Session agenda. It is 4 times as long as the open session! Some of topics placed on the Esession agenda are questionable and were not decided in favor of the public.

One of the topics is the city’s external audit requested by this council. There have been several Esessions that included a secret discussion of this item. One would think that since this has been visited in Esession several times previously that a public update would be provided. Tsk…tsk, council. So much for transparency.

Another item that was previously discussed in workshop is the Cardinals training camp proposal. See this link to get more information from council’s March 5, 2013 workshop:  http://www.glendaleaz.com/Clerk/agendasandminutes/Workshops/Agendas/030513.pdf . The original proposal wasn’t so hot for the city. Since it was discussed in open session previously it probably would have been a good idea to bring this item forward publicly once again. So much for transparency.

jobing.com arena

Jobing.com arena

There are two more items that certainly deserve public scrutiny. Both relate to Jobing.com arena and the Coyotes ownership. The drop dead date for submissions to Beacon Sports, the city’s consultant, for arena management was May 31, 2013. Of course, at city discretion, it can accept bids after that date because of the disclaimer clause in the RFP. One Esession item deals with “potential agreements related to the management of the arena” and the other Esession item is to provide “instruction in connection with potential agreements related to the Hockey Team…”

Yet Mike Sunnicks in his story of June 3, 2013 in the Phoenix Business Journal quoting Glendale spokesperson Julie Watters, says, “Initial responses to the RFP have been received by Beacon Sports. The submissions are currently being reviewed by Beacon to determine completeness and if they qualify for further consideration,” Watters said. “We will follow up tomorrow (Tuesday) with Beacon to determine the status.” Sunnicks provides the reader with a rehash of old information — nothing new. This is the link to his story: http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/morning_call/2013/06/glendale-awaits-qualified-bids-for.html?ana=twt

Yet this is one of the secret items to be discussed by council at its workshop today (Tuesday). Methinks the council has been given a report by Beacon with those who have made bids (to date) to manage the arena. How else could council discuss this very topic?  So much for transparency.

Cardinals training camp proposal…external audit…management of city owned arena…the hockey team’s very survival in Glendale…all topics of extreme interest to the people of Glendale. Yet the only discussion to be had will be secret. So much for transparency.

copyright

Norma Alvarez

Norma Alvarez

At the May 7, 2013 City Council workshop during Council Comments and Suggestions, Councilmember Alvarez stepped up to the political plate once again. Her first suggestion was regarding the recruitment of a new City Attorney. She feels council should not recruit for a City Attorney but rather promote from within. She doesn’t want to spend the money. She remarked that Acting City Attorney Nick DiPiazza was doing “a good job” and that the City “should use him.” Now it appears that the city’s Human Resources department will take the lead on this search. Not a good idea. Agendas are rife within the city and will seep into the search parameters. I’ve seen it before. It’s also a bit like asking the fox to guard the hen house. This city needs a set of fresh eyes just as is needed for the City Manager’s position. Her initial thought seemed to spend all of her energy and she drifted off briefly – but wait! She wasn’t quite finished.

PMG 1In one final burst she opened the barn door for the Phoenix Monarch Group (PMG) horse. She has promoted PMG as willingly as her promotion of the Tohono O’odham. If you recall, she brokered a meeting in June, 2012 between this group and former Mayor Scruggs and former Councilmember Lieberman. At that meeting PMG made a pitch to manage Jobing.com for $7M a year while promising to bring 25 events (tractor pulls??). This time she wants council to look at outsourcing special events, marketing and the Civic Center. Obviously the criteria used in selection of a marketing and special events company will determine the Phoenix Monarch Group’s fate. It has been no secret that Alvarez thinks the money spent by the Marketing and Communications Department is wasteful and unnecessary. If there would be one department slated for oblivion it would be this one. After struggling to release her thoughts she mercifully slumped back into somnolence.

copyright

cit mtg 2Congratulations are in order to city staff. At the City Council workshop of April 16, 2013 working in an atmosphere where the current city council is loathe to make any budget cuts that are associated with layoffs and in fact wants to add additional police and fire positions is difficult, to say the very least. The cuts that this council will not accept remain necessary even as they collectively stick their heads in the sand.

Staff, knowing that cuts to the budget will not be accepted, took the obverse approach and has offered this council revenue enhancement. It seems that raising property taxes and collecting additional revenue from the Enterprise Funds for services provided by the General Fund may be the answer. This is not the final solution, however. As Ms. Schurhammer stated today, budget cuts, albeit more modest ones, are still needed and the sooner the better. As she and the rest of staff have said repeatedly the city’s budget has a structural deficit. In other words, more is spent than is taken in.

Knaack

Yvonne Knaack

It was noted that Vice Mayor Knaack, a member in good standing for many years, of the “gang of four” (voting bloc of the former mayor), now repudiates the former mayor’s imperative to keep the city’s property tax rate low. She actually had the temerity to say that she never supported the former mayor’s desire to keep property taxes artificially low. Too bad she never spoke out publicly or demonstrated her beliefs in a vote.

Chavira photo

Sam Chavira

Councilmember Chavira once again, embarrassingly and obviously, carried fire’s water bucket in an attempt to get this council to support granting the 15 fire fighter positions (at a cost of $1.5M every year) coveted by the fire department. If one didn’t know his agenda all one had to do was watch his performance in feeding positive questions to the Fire Chief to immediately figure it out. Every once in a while he would throw the police department a bone by including them in the discussion but his sole objective was to advance the cause of his brother firefighters. Mr. Bowers, Interim City Manager, made it very clear that the staff recommendation is to deny any supplemental requests this year including those of fire and police. His reasoning was straight forward and quite clear, “The city simply does not have the money.” This time, at least for now, council listened and it appears that these supplementals will not be granted. This council is not quite done with this subject. I suspect they will look for other means to grant, at the very least, fire’s supplemental.

Sherwood

Gary Sherwood

Councilmember Sherwood once again raised the question as to whether a figure of $6M was adequate for the arena costs. He became a little confused in attempting to get the figure of annual revenue the arena generated (not all of Westgate…and the western world…thank you) out. Well, we, dear readers, already know what that figure is from a previous blog where I conveyed the average numbers reported by the NHL as the manager of the arena. Ta Da! That revenue figure averages $6 to $7 million annually. No one else on council seemed interested in a workshop on arena costs and revenues so it died as a future topic.

musicCouncilmember Alvarez appears to have only two songs in her repertoire. One is the siren song to support the Tohono O’odham in its quest to plant a casino in Glendale less than a quarter mile away from Westgate. Again she called for a public forum (read free favorable publicity for the Tohono O’odham) before council. Again, she was rejected by a majority of the council. Does she not understand that the city is a party to state and Tribal interest litigation against the casino?

Norma Alvarez

Norma Alvarez

Her other one-note song is blaming others for her belief in the city’s continual waste of money. Please note it is a waste of money to her if it is not being spent to increase the salaries of its low wage employees. Her public definition of low wage employees is anyone making under $130,000. My goodness…reminds me of Obama’s definition of the rich ($250K annually, for tax purposes)!  Today’s rant on city waste was twofold: the absolute waste of the city’s involvement in Camelback Ranch and the car dealership coming finally to Bell Road with the city’s incentive to forgive a portion of sales tax for a specified amount of time. She refuses to understand that the dollar a year rental of Camelback Ranch for the teams is in exchange for their picking up the tab for operating and maintaining the facility year round (saving the city a cost of easily a million dollars a year). Instead of taking the time to truly understand the issue we hear her accusations of the city being too busy thinking of the glory of sports and not realizing that sports bring the city nothing. What she fails to realize that as part of this new council she bears the same baggage as the rest of them. On her watch the dealership will come in. Therefore on her watch the dealership will receive the sales tax incentive.

copyright

convention 2Wow! It’s difficult to summarize the 2 1/2 hour, April 2, 2013, Glendale city council workshop into about 1,500 words – but here goes. First up was the city’s Intergovernmental Director, Brent Stoddard, reporting on HB 2657 before the state legislature.  In a nutshell, cities can support 7 provisions of the bill but 3 provisions are in dispute with the state.  The legislature wants the state Department of Revenue (DOR) to collect all sales taxes from all cities in the state. Currently Glendale and 17 others collect their sales taxes, report and remit the state’s portion to the state. Guess the state doesn’t trust those cities. The cities have countered with a proposal to offer a one-stop portal through a third party that would be managed by the DOR. I guess the state doesn’t trust cities to audit businesses either and want to take over that function exclusively as well. The cities have proposed the creation of uniform auditing standards; and the ability to request of and notify the DOR so that a city could still perform the audit. Lastly, the issue of dreaded construction sales tax issue was discussed. It appears that both sides, the state and the cities, are miles apart on this one. No resolution to be had as of this date. Stay tuned for the next chapter on this issue.

Chavira photo

Sam Chavira

Next up was the Police department presentation by Interim Chief Black. Our fearless leader of and advocate for all things Public Safety Councilmember Chavira asked, if the department was adequately staffed to protect residents and keep officers safe. After winnowing through all of the rhetoric, Chief Black reluctantly said, yes by saying, “we are meeting the needs of the community as best we can with the allocated funding.” How’s that for threading the needle?

Chief Black and her department are to be commended for their innovation and creativity. As a result of their reorganization efforts patrol staffing will go from 166 to 182 officers, increasing an officer’s pro-active patrol time from a low of 11 minutes to about 16 minutes per hour. That is phenomenal considering Glendale’s current financial position.  Their adoption of a new CAD system this fall will include an automated vehicle locator on all patrol cars enabling the dispatcher to send the closest available unit. This new system will create fuel cost savings and reduce response times.

Norma Alvarez

Norma Alvarez

Naturally, Councilmember Alvarez admitted that she didn’t understand all the numbers and “stuff.” Based upon her Ouija board, she KNOWS that the city’s residents are not well protected, especially in south Glendale, the area in which she lives and which she represents. The heck with the entire city. She went on to say that she didn’t want Chief Black to be a good employee and to work within the city’s fiscal constraints. Alvarez also said “we have to put more officers out there” and we can take dollars from programs that are a luxury. It will be interesting to see what she defines as a luxury.

There was a lot of discussion about the 8 police zones into which the city is currently configured. It seems no one on council could wrap their heads around this concept. What was not communicated is that all zones are not created equally, at least in size. Their dimensions are based on the number of calls for service as well as what makes sense geographically for patrol and response times. The more calls for service in an area, the smaller the zone gets.

Knaack

Yvonne Knaack

Vice Mayor Knaack then said the level of police staffing was “unacceptable.” By whose or what definition?  I guess the fact that our police department in July, 2012, was re-accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement (CALEA) once again and for the first time was awarded the Gold Standard doesn’t mean anything and can be ignored. Really? When pressed by Knaack, Chief Black indicated it would be nice to be at fully authorized strength by adding another 31 officers. Bingo. Yet the police department has $7M as contingency in their public safety sales tax fund. I, like Vice Mayor Knaack, remember distinctly that one of the purposes of this public safety sales tax was to hire more officers.

Fire Chief Burdick’s presentation was interesting for what he said but also for what he did not say. The fire department still holds to a 4 person staffing model on all of its engine and ladder trucks and one is a firefighter/paramedic on each truck. Four men on a truck to answer fire calls is necessary to meet OSHA’s 2-in-2-out law. That mandate makes sense. That means for a working fire, while 2 firefighters are in a building, there are 2 on the outside to make rescue if necessary. Perfectly logical for working fire service calls. True, the number of working fires has increased by 26% due to automatic aid. Are all of those working fires in Glendale? Probably not.

The vast majority of calls are medical (estimate is that they are at least 80% of all calls for service) requiring either advanced life support or basic life support. Why doesn’t the city have smaller vehicles staffed with paramedics?  When a fire unit is dispatched it is told what kind of call to which it is going to respond. Smaller vehicles used for medical calls would be more fuel efficient and cost less to operate and maintain and would not require 4 man units. Or perhaps a medical transport vehicle with 2 Glendale paramedics on board should be sent. There has to be a better, more cost efficient way to respond to medical calls than sending a very big and very expensive fire truck.

Weiers

Jerry Weiers

Mayor Weiers did ask about automatic aid and what was the ratio of calls between Phoenix and Glendale and Peoria and Glendale.  Bravo. Not surprisingly, Chief Burdick didn’t have that information and said he would provide it. This is typical of staff when there is a question that they would rather not answer publicly.  Usually it’s because the answer doesn’t advance their cause. Weiers did bring up another suggestion, the use of an LPN in answering medical calls. The LPN could write prescriptions and make a determination if medical transport was needed.  That idea met with a great deal of resistance by Chief Burdick despite his admission that it is a model being used in Mesa. It could very well be an idea whose time has come. Using a truck that gets 5 miles to the gallon with 4 firefighters/paramedic is no longer cost effective at a time when the majority of calls for service are medical.

Chief Burdick, after this annoying interruption with questions of fact, was then asked by Councilmember Chavira if the department was adequately staffed and if firefighters were safe. Once again, cutting through the rhetoric, his answer was, yes today, quickly followed by a need to address excessive call volume. Whose? Those of Glendale residents? Phoenix residents? Peoria residents? We don’t know because that information was not provided.

Vice Mayor Knaack cut to chase and asked what he needed. Immediately the chief responded with another 15 firefighters and another truck ($650,000 price tag but would pay $65K a year in a lease back). Bingo.

greed 1The councilmembers’ questions certainly fed both departments’ agendas of “gimme more.” And why wouldn’t they? Look at some facts. In the last election cycle both unions, police and fire, supported Weiers, Sherwood, Hugh and Chavira. Vice Mayor Knaack and Councilmember Martinez received the same healthy union support in their last reelection bid in 2010. The police union was a minor player in both elections not having the same political war chest or available personnel as the fire union. The fire union, on the other hand, made sure there were cash contributions by individual, non-Glendale, firefighters to their campaigns, paid for printing and mailing campaign literature and paid for and put up campaign signs for these very same people now deciding to beef up these departments-because staffing levels are “unacceptable.” There is nothing illegal about any of these actions. It’s Politics 101 but it doesn’t serve, you, the taxpayer very well. Perhaps the parks and recreation people or the finance people need a union to level the playing field.

Sherwood

Gary Sherwood

Under Council Items of Special Interest, Councilmember Sherwood called for starting a search for a permanent City Attorney. What was truly mind-boggling was Councilmember Alvarez’ request that the City submit grant applications to the Tohono O’odham tribe for Public Safety dollars. What about we are still in litigation with the TO doesn’t she understand? When one is in a legally adversarial position with another, one does not ask for handouts from his adversary. She also thinks the city is mean and nasty because it owns the web page for the West Valley Resort and the TO has to pay the city annually for the right to use it. It is true. Congratulations to the city for pulling such a wonderfully, snarky yet brilliant move.

Council then adjourned into Executive session. Topics up for discussion: external audit, arena RFP, compensation for departing City Attorney and compensation for the new Interim City Manager. I suspect we will find out the results in a day or two.

copyright