Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Jan 20

6

What’s great about Glendale? Part 1

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 6, 2020
Posted in Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • State Farm Stadium • Westgate • Yucca district • Zanjero  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , | 7 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.

Too often we read in the media about all the things that are wrong with Glendale (or any other city, for that matter) because community wrongs, weaknesses and failures – in other words, any form of sensationalism, sells. I can’t remember the last time the media reported good news about Glendale.

Most of us are not even aware of the improvements made in our city or may take them for granted. There is much to be proud of in Glendale. This city council has made many good policy decisions that have positively affected your quality of life. Over the next couple of blogs I want to share just some of the improvements that have become part of the fabric of life in Glendale.

The three years of my city council term, from January of 2017 to January of 2020,  have proven to be amazing for Glendale. Here are just some of the often unnoticed improvements affecting all residents. In this edition of my blog I have chosen transportation first because traveling through our community you will have likely encountered one or more of them.

HAWK at 65th Ave. and Bethany Home Rd.

A HAWK is an acronym for a High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk. It is a pedestrian activated traffic light that stops traffic at pedestrian critical crossing locations proven to be very dangerous for those attempting to cross a major street. Historically they are at locations that account for many pedestrian fatalities. To date four of them have been installed throughout the city at:
                    *  60th Avenue and Bethany Home Road
                    *  65th Avenue and Glendale Avenues
                    *  63rd Avenue and Beardsley Avenues
                    *  65th Avenue and Bethany Home Road

Flashing Yellow

Flashing Yellow Arrows have become more and more commonplace throughout our city. These blinking yellow traffic signal lights allow motorists to make a left turn during a green light period as long as there is no oncoming traffic. Their purpose is to relieve traffic congestion at major intersections. They have been installed at 16 different intersections throughout the city and more are to come:

  • 59th Avenue & Glendale Avenue
  • 59th Avenue & Olive Avenue (during nighttime and weekends)
  • 51st Avenue & Peoria Avenue
  • 59th Avenue & Union Hills Drive
  • 51st Avenue & Glendale Avenue
  • 67th Avenue & Deer Valley Road
  • Dysart Road & Glendale Avenue
  • 75th Avenue & Deer Valley Road
  • 99th Avenue & Cardinals Way
  • El Mirage Road & Glendale Avenue
  • 83rd Avenue & Bethany Home Road
  • 91st Avenue & Montebello Avenue
  • 95th Avenue & Camelback Road
  • 67thAvenue & Pinnacle Peak Road
  • 67th Avenue & Bell Road
  • 59th Avenue & Thunderbird Road

The city continues its pavement management program to rehab all 748 miles of city streets. Council directed that $5 million dollars a year for each of five years be used to rehab residential streets. Streets that have not been done yet can expect some treatment in the next two years. Unfortunately one of the contractors was found to have performed sub standard work and those streets will be remediated. In tandem with improving residential streets throughout our city there are major arterial streets over 20 and 30 years old that require reconstruction. These will be done as funding becomes available. In addition to these two strategies there are some instances where a new street needs to be constructed to spur further economic development. One such case is Ballpark Boulevard.

Ballpark Boulevard will connect the Camelback Ranch training facility with the Westgate area and is scheduled to open in February of 2020 to coincide with the start of the Spring Training season. This roadway extension closes a significant gap in the city’s transportation system and provides traffic options for getting between the two venues. The effect of constructing this road along the Maryland Avenue alignment is that it opens up a great deal of land for economic development. Knowing that this road is almost completed has caused the property owners along this new street to master plan their land concentrating on more job opportunities with commercial, retail and office space. There will be some residential but very little as the primary goal is to provide Glendale residents with more jobs.

The same objectives are being realized along 95th now that it is open and connects Glendale Avenue to Bethany Home Road. Many land parcels along this corridor are about to come forward for approval. The plans include a mix of apartments, office spaces, retail and entertainment venues.

The last piece of the immediate connectivity puzzle is the construction of Bethany Home Road (it will be called Cardinals Way) between 83rd Avenue and 91st Avenue. The construction of this road is the responsibility of the developers of the Stonehaven residential subdivision, Pulte Homes and the John F. Long Trust. Even though Stonehaven was approved in June of 2018 it is just now that the developers have finally begun any work on the road. At their current pace do not expect to see it completed until sometime in 2021.

Camelback Rd. looking west from 43rd Ave.

Major street reconstruction projects have begun with the reconstruction of Camelback Road starting on its east side from 43rd Avenue to 51st Avenue. I have lived in Glendale since 1968. That’s 51 years and in that time Camelback Road has never been reconstructed. Major arterial streets last usually have a lifespan of 20 to 30 years. This type of work carries a large price tag of anywhere from $2 million to $5 million dollars per mile dependent upon the condition of the street. In this case, the city is also replacing the waterline that runs under this street.

Northern Parkway

The city in conjunction with its partners, Maricopa County, Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), El Mirage and Peoria, continue its relentless move of the Northern Parkway Project starting from its western side, the Loop 303, to its eastern termination at Grand Avenue (US 60). Currently work is being done in the El Mirage Road area. The next segment will extend to the western side of the Loop 101.

There are bus routes and street lighting that have changed for the better. The bus route on 83rd Avenue used to run from Camelback Road to Northern Avenue. In conjunction with Peoria, this route has been expanded and now goes beyond Northern to P83 and Bell Road. In this budget cycle I will be asking for funding to improve many of the bus stops that have a sign planted in the dirt identified as a bus stop.

All street lights in Glendale have now been converted to LED lighting. This initiative was my “ask” in the budget cycle of 2017. As a result of the completion of this initiative Glendale saves about half a million dollars a year in the cost of operating and maintenance. In addition it has received an annual rebate from APS of about another half million dollars resulting in one million dollars of reduced street light costs.

There is certainly more to call out and to brag about with regard to the progress Glendale has made in transportation. It would take far too much space to share it all. I have tried to highlight some of them. The point is that this city council  has made major investments in transportation to improve everyone’s quality of life, to catch up on long overdue roadway maintenance, to provide greater interconnectivity that will spur new economic development, and to adopt new cost saving initiatives that save taxpayer dollars.

My next blog will concentrate on economic development within the city. As a preview I continue to say that Glendale is hot! Glendale is the preferred location in the West Valley for some extraordinary development projects. Stay tuned…

© Joyce Clark, 2020         

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.

Oct 19

16

Is it time? Follow up

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 16, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale November 2019 Special Election  | Tagged With: , , , , | 25 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.

In all of my years of blog writing I have probably written follow up blogs about half a dozen times. I felt it necessary this time because of all of the misinformation on this issue. Let’s look at the allegations being thrown around about this issue.

Secrecy of process

The first time the issue of council pay raises was mentioned was at the city council workshop meeting on May of 2019. Councilmember Ray Malnar introduced a Council Item of Special Interest (CIOSI) requesting that council and staff take up the issue of city council pay raises stating that it had been 13 years since the last increase. The Mayor and I supported Councilmember Malnar’s request. In June of 2019 at its workshop city council authorized a citizen Compensation Committee. The committee started meeting immediately and met for 5 or 6 work sessions prior to making their recommendation. In July of 2019 at a city council workshop direction was given to place the question of council raises on the Special Election ballot already approved for this November. Much has been said about this meeting. Yes, it was a special workshop called because of the time requirements that had to be met for the Special Election. Remember the Special Election was called to meet the state mandate to conform to its requirement that the Primary Election date be moved from the 3rd Tuesday in August to the 1st Tuesday in August. Adding the question of council pay raises to an authorized Special Election made sense in terms of cost avoidance.

 In attendance at that workshop meeting were Mayor Weiers, myself, Councilmembers Hugh and Malnar. Councilmember Tolmachoff was on vacation and had notified all that she would not be able to attend. Councilmembers Turner and Aldama simply did not show up. They could have attended but they chose not to.  It is safe to assume that they are opposed to city council pay raises. However, if they were so intensely opposed rather than being ‘no-shows’ it was incumbent upon them to articulate their opposition.  Can we assume that if this question passes, they will stand by their opposition and reject increases to their salaries?

All workshops are public meetings and televised. Their agendas are posted as are the subsequent minutes. There are also videos of the workshop meetings posted on the city’s website. This issue was never a secret. The council held at least 3 workshops in which this issue was discussed. Typically, the majority of issues are discussed and direction given in just one workshop…occasionally there might be two workshops on the same issue and the second workshop is usually a follow up to the initial discussion. Three workshops on the same issue are unusual. So, where is the secrecy? It was an open, public process that if a citizen wanted to follow could be done. By the way, the citizen Compensation Committee’s meetings are also required to be open to the public and were publicly noticed. Where were all of the current protestors? Did any make an effort to attend even one of their meetings to offer public comment and to learn of the committee’s work and deliberations?

Pay raise methods

Traditionally Glendale has created a citizen’s committee and taken the recommendation to the voters. That would continue to work well if there were a regular, periodic schedule when this process would occur. That is not the case. The last two citizen recommended pay increases have been 13 years apart. That explains the large increases recommended. If you had to wait 13 years until your next pay raise you would expect it to be substantial.

Cities nationwide are moving away from this system and many now have an annual or biennial review that no longer requires voter approval. It is automatic and is usually based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase or comparisons to other similarly populated cities. For example, Surprise which just increased council salaries by resolution also established a new policy in which the mayor and council salaries would be reviewed, and perhaps adjusted, every city election year, which is every other year. The Surprise council pay adjustments will be based on the average of the mayors and the average of council members in other Phoenix-area cities with populations of 100,000 to 300,000 as of Jan. 31 of the election year. Gilbert has had an automatic system based on the CPI in place for years. Glendale’s move to an automatic process is no longer an unusual practice.

Opposition’s motivations

A hit piece by a reporter who is identified as an “investigative reporter” has worked hard to make it appear that this is skull duggery and some kind of nefarious plot. That is the job of an investigative reporter. Keep in mind the goal is to stir the pot and create a fire where there is none.

Citizens who have voiced their opposition are free to do so and as you can see from the comments I do not reject or censor their thoughts. But they, too, have their motivations. Some are angry because the city has sold Glen Lakes Golf Course. Others dislike our Mayor or City Manager and some are displeased with other council decisions that have been made on issues such as the downtown events. It is understandable when viewed in the context of their displeasure on other issues for I note that nearly every comment begins with, ‘I believe city councilmembers deserve a raise but…’ Their objections are not to the question of the worthiness of a council pay raise.

Creation of a PAC

PACs are formed all the time in support of or in opposition to a ballot issue. My goodness, look at a recent Phoenix election on light rail. PACs were created all over the place both for and against the issue. A PAC called Best of the West was formed by some of the members of the citizen Compensation Committee. I haven’t talked to them but I assume they felt passionately enough about the issue to advocate for council raises. That is their right just as much as those who have publicly come out in opposition to this issue. Nothing they have done is illegal. It is not illegal to form a PAC on a ballot issue or to solicit contributions for a mailer supporting it.

As for allegations that somehow Councilmember Hugh is the mastermind behind it, I seriously doubt it. If the PAC asked him for advice or help he was free to provide it if he so chose. If I had been asked I would have helped as well. Each of us has made no secret of our support for council pay raises.

Lastly, there is a reason to support council pay raises that I did not speak to in my last blog because I chose to educate about the duties of a councilmember and that is “You get what you pay for.” At a salary of $34,000 you will get people who must have another job or seniors who are retired and can afford it. Yet it is recognized this is a full time job. I honestly don’t know how some councilmembers juggle two full time jobs. I know of one giving up a business to insure the necessary time can be given to this job. If you want to attract and to motivate younger, bright, capable individuals to this work then enough compensation is needed to create an opportunity for them to do so.

I continue to support council pay raises and it should be obvious to you, the reader, as to why. I urge you to vote “Yes” on authorizing the change of the Primary Election date and authorizing city council pay raises. Again, as I said previously, no matter your position, please, please, do vote. It is a right often ignored and taken for granted.

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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.

Oct 19

15

Is it time? Yes

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 15, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale November 2019 Special Election  | Tagged With: , , , | 10 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.

For those of you who vote by mail you have probably received your Glendale ballot. In fact you may have received two ballots thanks to Adrian Fontes, the current Mauicopa County Recorder. Once again, the County Recorder messed up. Instead of putting the school district issues and Glendale issues on one ballot, they printed two separate ballots for about 4,000 of Glendale’s voters. I am one of those. When you receive them vote on both ballots and mail back both ballots in their correct envelopes.

This blog is devoted to the question of city council pay raises. Let me start at the beginning. The State of Arizona delivered another mandate to cities requiring all Primary Elections to be moved from the third Tuesday of the month to the first Tuesday of the month. It required all charter cities (Glendale is one) to be in compliance prior to the first Tuesday of August, 2020.

City Council made the decision to hold a Special Election to bring the city into conformance as soon as possible. The first date a city election could be held was November 5th of this year. Council decided that as long as a Special Election was to be held for one issue, it might as well add the question of city council raises, if that was the citizen Council Compensation Committee’s recommendation.

The citizen Council Compensation Committee made their recommendation to raise council salaries and place it on the ballot. Council agreed and added the question to that of the question of changing the Primary Election date to come into conformance with the state mandate.

Not all Metropolitan Phoenix cities allow voters to approve council salary increases. In Surprise, for instance, their Council approves pay increases by resolution. Recently they did just that and increased their salaries by resolution. Their salaries will be reviewed and adjusted in every city election year—in other words, every other year.

I believe I have earned a raise and I make no apology for stating such. In 1992, my first year as a councilmember, Glendale had a population of about 158,000, about 1200 employees and a total budget of about $500 million dollars. In 2019, Glendale has a population of about 250,000, about 2000 employees and a total budget of about $750 million dollars.

The first council raise I received was in 2006 after 10 years of service for me (I had a 4 year hiatus). It was in actuality, 14 years before councilmember salaries were raised from $12,000 to $34,000 a year upon recommendation of a citizen Council Compensation Committee and subsequent voter approval. It was an increase of $22,000 over 14 years or $1571 per year.

If the voters approve the current recommended salary increase it will have been another 10 years of service for me (I had a second 4 year hiatus). It will have actually been another 14 years if councilmember salaries are raised from $34,000 to $52,000. It would be an increase of $18,000 over 14 years or $1285 per year.

I said I earn it and I will try to convey why. I don’t think that unless you’ve been a local elected official that one can appreciate the requirements of the job. I think that everyone assumes that we vote at a council meeting every other Tuesday and that’s all there is to it. Not so. Hours and days are highly irregular and can include every day of the week (including Sunday) from an early morning breakfast event at 7 or 7:30 am to a regional dinner or banquet that ends at 10 or 11 pm. Because of the irregular hours and days, there are days that are 12 hour days and other days (not as often) that can be 4 or 5 hour work days.

Add other activities, meetings and events.  I chair the Council Business Committee and the Council Government Services Committee. I also serve on the Council Code Review Committee and the Arizona League of Cities Budget and Finance Committee. Add preparation time and travel time for those meetings.

Speaking of travel time, I still drive a 2004 model car. I am certainly not living high on the hog. After taxes, I take home about $25,000. The major annual mileage (80%) on the car is strictly for city business. I pay for all gas and maintenance. The city does not reimburse me and if it did, I would not put in for it. My cell phone is my personal cell and I pay the monthly bill. Again the majority of use (90%) is city related for I still have a landline at home that is used for friends and family. The city does not reimburse me and if it did, I would not put in for it. Or how about the use of my personal computer and tablet and related costs for an internet connection and for paper and toner?  I often print material so that I have something on which to make notes as I study the issue. I pay personally for all of those items.

Speaking of paying for work related items, I consider some civic memberships to be essential as an elected official but I pay for those memberships personally. One, for example, is the Glendale Chamber of Commerce. When I have a working lunch that does not include city topics exclusively, I pay for the attendees (sometimes accepted, sometimes not) or at least my own tab from my personal funds. If it is strictly city related, such as meeting high school principals for breakfast, I will use my city credit card. It’s a fine, ethical line and I tend to err on the side of caution. I’m sure I’ve forgotten some expenses but you get the idea.

Then there are meetings, seemingly endless meetings…with staff on issues from streets and traffic light issues to Police and Fire Promotion Ceremonies. There are also monthly one-on-one meetings with our City Attorney, City Manager and Council Office Manager on current or upcoming issues. There are texts, emails and one-on-one meetings with my Council Assistant. Then there are one-on-one constituent or HOA meetings that can last from an hour to several hours.

Now add a sprinkling of City Events from Caesar Chavez or Martin Luther King Day to Glendale Glitters to Tractor Days at Sahuaro Ranch. Everyone assumes that we get lots of freebie events such as concerts at the city owned Gila River Arena.  I have never gone to a concert that I have not personally paid for. The city does have a suite at the arena and when asked by the City’s Economic Development department to attend I go because it is my job. I barely pay attention to the event because we are asked to attend to make connections with economic development prospects in attendance. The city has no suite in the football stadium and I have never attended a Super Bowl game hosted by Glendale. There was one time that I was offered the opportunity to buy 2 Super Bowl tickets at the face value of $600 each. I passed. I couldn’t afford it. The 2 times I attended a Super Bowl it was out-of-town when the city was preparing to host it’s first ever Super Bowl and those were big time learning curve trips.  If I attend anything at the stadium I have paid, just like you, to be there. The city does have a suite at Camelback Ranch and I have only been in it as part of my job, for events such as Opening Day or for the closing ceremonies of a Youth Baseball League.

I’m not done yet. A major part of my job as a councilmember is solving constituent problems. The majority of the time I am successful but not always. In some instances the city has no law or code to address an issue. I am readily accessible by cell phone, 602-320-3422, and have received calls at 10 pm at night regarding football game day parking in a neighborhood to a 6 am call advising me that the Grand Canal Park’s sprinklers were flooding an area. Sometimes I can’t answer because I am at an event or in a meeting but I do try to return them at my earliest opportunity.  I attend neighborhood meetings, HOA meetings and one-on-one meetings with constituents. Each typically lasts from one to several evening hours. I host district-wide meetings twice a year and mail out a district-wide newsletter twice a year as well. I offer an online E News letter once a week. I use social media and have a Facebook page devoted to city news and events. I can’t write this blog as frequently as I would like to. Here it is, nearly 11 o’clock this evening and I may finish writing and editing by 1 am. It’s quiet now and I can think about this issue yet I know I will pay for it tomorrow as my first city commitment is at 9:30 am.

Here is another task to add to this ever growing list and that is research and preparation for council workshops and voting meetings. Forget having a free weekend. Typically we receive the council workshop agenda on a Wednesday before the Tuesday meeting and the council voting meeting agenda on the Friday before the Tuesday meeting. Since there isn’t much free time during the week, I like most of the other councilmembers, end up using either our Saturday or Sunday afternoons doing our “homework.” It often entails a flurry of emails to staff members to get further information or to ask questions on an agenda topic. It easily consumes all afternoon. Follow up often takes additional time on Monday mornings.

Once again, I know there are probably other activities that I have forgotten to include as I write this. I think you get the idea. It is a job that requires flexibility; intelligence; curiosity; and patience.

In some instances it can be a thankless job for never, ever, is everyone pleased with a decision made or a vote cast. I rarely receive a ‘thank you’ nor do I expect it. I will often hear from some citizens when they think my decision or vote was not what they wanted or expected. Despite all of that I love my job. Why? Because of the variety of the job. No two days are ever alike. There is always something new to learn.

 I think I am good at my job. I’m accessible and committed. I love Glendale and I love my district, the Yucca district. My district is hot. It’s where the majority of new economic development and new residential development is occurring. It keeps me busy meeting with potential economic developers.

In 1992, when I first became the Yucca district councilmember it was a part time job. Today, it is a full time job. City issues are far more complex. The city’s population increase means there are more constituents in each district and hence more constituent demands on a councilmember’s time. The use of the internet and social media has added a whole new dimension to the job. Have I earned a raise? I believe so and I hope after reading this you believe so too. No matter how you vote on the two Glendale issues please remember to vote and to exercise a freedom not found in many countries in our world. I already voted. Did you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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.

 

Sep 19

12

Media gins up “much ado about nothing”

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 12, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 6 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.

Prior to the September 10th city council workshop meeting, reporters representing a local TV station descended upon us and incessantly questioned the mayor and councilmembers regarding the hiring of former Glendale Police Chief Rick St. John as the city’s first Public Safety Director. Not surprisingly Councilmembers Aldama and Turner offered sound bites intimating that the council had authority over this City of Glendale employee hire.

It’s time to set the record straight.

It states explicitly in the city’s charter with regard to the city council, “Sec. 19. – Interference in administrative service. “Except as otherwise provided in this charter, neither the council nor any of its members shall interfere with the execution by the city manager of his powers and duties, or order, directly or indirectly, the appointment by the city manager of any person to an office or employment or his removal therefrom.”

The charter then goes on to specifically authorize as a power of the city manager,”Sec. 3. – City manager; powers and duties. “The city manager shall be chief executive officer and head of the administrative branch of the city government. He shall be responsible for the proper administration of all affairs of the city and to that end, subject to the provisions of this charter, he shall have the power and shall be required to:

        “(3) Appoint, and when deemed necessary for the good of the service, lay-off, suspend, 

               transfer, demote or remove all department heads, officers and employees of the city,

               subject to such merit system regulations as the council may adopt;”

The city council, by charter, has no power to hire, fire, suspend or in any way affect the position of any city employee. The only direct hires of the city council are the city manager, the city attorney, the city clerk and the city’s chief judge. That’s it. The council has no authority regarding any other employee position. The city manager could have hired the Easter Bunny for that position and council has no say…no authority with regard to his choice.

The only way the city council has any power over employees is during the budget cycle. Council can approve or deny new employee positions or can increase or decrease the number of full time employees (FTEs) within any city department’s budget appropriation. In June of 2019, council approved the creation of several new city positions by authorizing the funding of those positions. Among them was a Public Safety Director and a Council Assistant. I mention these two positions specifically to demonstrate what occurred after those positions were approved by city council at its budget process.

Here is a case in point. Council approved the addition of one FTE who would be destined to become my new Council Assistant. In July the position of Council Assistant was posted. It is my understanding that there were nearly a 100 applicants. The Human Resources Department went through every application and determined which of the applicants met the qualifications for the job. I asked and was told the process reduced the list to about 60 applicants. Those applicants were then reviewed by an appropriate staff member based upon specific criteria for the council assistant job requirements. Those finalists were interviewed by a panel of city employees resulting in a final list of three applicants. Since I was the councilmember who would be using this new hire, I was invited to meet the three finalists. Please note it was not within my authority to demand or even to ask to interview the finalists. I was asked for my opinion and offered it knowing full well that I had no authority in choosing the person who would be my council assistant. Fortunately for me, the person I felt would do the best job was the choice of senior management. That position was filled in early August.

In the case of the Public Safety Director, city council authorized the position’s funding with its approval of the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget. On August 27, 2019 city council approved an agreement with Interim Public Management LLC (IPM) to secure candidates for the position. As was stated by Jim Brown, Human Resources Director, the applicants for the position were narrowed down to three finalists. I do not know who or when or how many staff was involved in the interview process but Mr. Brown stated that the selection was made after interviews were conducted. The decision was strictly within the authority of the city manager. It was not city council’s decision to make and the city charter does not grant the council any authority over the process or the selection.

Occasionally, and not in every instance, council has been invited to attend a reception for the finalists for a position such as Assistant City Manager. It is a reception open to many employees not just councilmembers. Sometimes a few of the city councilmembers will attend. Rarely, if ever, are our opinions solicited and even if they had been, they have no bearing on the final selection.

Why the intense media scrutiny? Is it to gin up their ratings? Does it reflect anti-police sentiment expressed by some of the general public? Perhaps because they haven’t done their homework as to how the selection process works? Or does it have to do with the intense media attention given to “use of force” policy by the Glendale Police Department?

I would just remind everyone that government employees are terminated all the time and knowing government as we all do, it’s got to be something pretty serious to get fired or to resign in lieu of termination. Yet I don’t see the media hounding any local governmental leaders if an employee other than a police officer or fire fighter is terminated. This statement in no way diminishes employee bad conduct for public safety employees are held to a higher standard since their mission is to protect the public. All leadership within Glendale does not condone or support bad acts committed by any employee within the City of Glendale. It doesn’t matter if it’s within the finance department, the water department or the police department.

Within any organization, public or private, there are employees who are terminated or should be. Why, I bet there are one or two at your place of work that you’ve wondered why they haven’t already been fired. That does not mean that aberrant, out-of-the norm behavior is condoned by the organization’s leadership. It does signify that there is a long process, often expensive and often painful for both sides, designed to protect the rights of both sides and sometimes the outcome satisfies no one.

Glendale is deserving of criticism when criticism is due but in this case I suspect the media didn’t do all of their homework on this one or perhaps they are in a vendetta mood. Who knows? It may be both.

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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.

Sep 19

3

Councilmembers question downtown recommendations

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 3, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 3 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.

On Tuesday, August 28, 2019, the Glendale City Council held a workshop session. Mayor Weiers was an excused absence as was Councilmember Malnar, although Councilmember Malnar could listen to the deliberations telephonically and could text periodically. One of the agenda items was a recommendation from senior management based upon the downtown Strategic Leadership Group’s (SLG) advisory recommendations regarding special events. The SLG suggested that it was time to rethink how Glendale offers special events downtown. Rather than one major weekend event they suggested offering 4 April weekends of music as a way of generating more foot traffic over a longer period of time. They characterized it as an experiment designed to collect data on the change to compare to the data generated in past years from one major weekend event.

The SLG started meeting this past spring and did not finalize nor present its recommendations to senior management until June and by the time senior management received their recommendations the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget had already been approved as part of the city’s balanced budget. The amount of dollars allocated for special events downtown was already established. Senior management would have to reallocate dollars within the $186,015 special events budget to accommodate the group’s advisory recommendations.

Council’s mandate for that workshop was to come to some sort of consensus on the advisory recommendations that the SLG offered to Glendale’s senior management for presentation to the city council at a workshop session. The recommendations finalized by senior management were:

  • Allocating $56,805 for 3 weekend Friday and Saturday nights in December
  • Adding $4,210 to Glitter and Glow event
  • Allocating $90,000 for 4 weekends of music in April
  • Adding $15,000 to other special events
  • Allocating $20,000 to Arrowhead Towne Center and Westgate for special events

The original budgeted amount for special events of $186,015 would remain the same. The recommendation included the removal of hosting the Chocolate Affaire for one weekend in February and those funds would be reprogrammed as shown above. That was council’s charge at the workshop: to accept, amend or reject these recommendations. Several councilmembers questioned SLG’s origins, its method of operation and its advisory recommendations. Here’s a sampling of their comments and questions:

  • Councilmember Aldama, “So 16 individuals on that leadership committee would be guiding those decisions being brought to the city manager, bringing to us for decision. Any idea that would occur downtown would have been made up by this group here?”
  • Councilmember Tolmachoff, “I have a question about leadership group. Is every person on this list able to vote or is it just the business owners that’s able to vote? There’s a city employee on here and there’s two Chamber people. Do they vote? Or is it just the business owners?”
  • Councilmember Turner, “Who appointed this Strategic Leadership Group? or elected? or how was this created?”

The origins of this group were that the Glendale Chamber decided to advance this idea by inviting those identified downtown merchants and leaders who, while representing diverse points of view, were committed to achieve consensus on the advisories it would present to the city. Their mission is to positively advance the downtown interests.

What is amazing is that never in the long, one hundred years plus history of downtown Glendale has such a group ever coalesced. Over the years, there have been many think tank sessions that made suggestions. I go all the way back to the 1990’s “Miracle Mile” group’s discussions and all of the iterations that followed. All resulted in…nothing.

There remains a small group of downtown merchants who abhor the SLG’s efforts and prefer to reject change and want things to remain exactly the same. Hence, former Vice Mayor Knaack’s comment to Councilmember Tolmachoff’s recitation of the definition of insanity, repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. This small, dissident group resents the activities of the SLG. If the SLG were to say the sky is blue, they would dispute that notion. They sat in the back of the council chamber holding up already prepared signs impugning the comments of the SLG.

So, instead of discussing the proposed recommendations council spent the first hour of discussion about the Strategic Leadership Group. Once it got past that discussion, the next issue to arise was the fate of the Chocolate Affaire in February. The proposed recommendation was to take the funds from that event and reallocate it with the bulk of the funding to go to four musical weekends in April. Here is a sampling of councilmember’s thoughts on the elimination of the Chocolate Affaire:

  • Councilmember Turner, “But we’re being asked to eliminate the Chocolate Affaire which to me is an event that has very positive, um, connection to the city of Glendale plus to one of our major tourist attractions here in the downtown area.”
  • Councilmember Tolmachoff, “But moving on to the Chocolate Affaire, um, was there any discussion? Because the Chocolate Affaire is something that is widely recognized all across the Phoenix area and it’s a recognizable Glendale event.”
  • Councilmember Aldama, “…I vehemently…completely think it’s absurd to end the Chocolate Affaire. It is absurd to suggest that we do that.

These councilmembers, as is their right, expressed real concern about eliminating the Chocolate Affaire. After they expressed their points of view the discussions began to take on a more positive tone as councilmembers struggled with a way of preserving the Chocolate Affaire:

  • Councilmember Malnar texted that he supported the work of the merchants’ SLG group.
  • Councilmember Tolmachoff, “But try the Chocolate Affaire if we can do it in the Civic Center this year. We can try it this year and let’s see if we can do it.”
  • Councilmember Turner, “If that’s where we’re at with the Chocolate Affaire then let’s look at it. I like the idea of doing something in the Civic Center.”
  • Councilmember Aldama, “I don’t want to end the Chocolate Affaire but I want you to recreate it. If that’s what this consensus is, recreating but not eliminating it, then I can give my consensus.”
  • Councilmember Hugh, “Let’s try it in the Civic Center and I bet it’s a huge success.”
  • Vice Mayor Clark, as Chair of the meeting, agreed with the council’s final recommendations.

Two contentious hours later, consensus had finally been achieved. Allocating $56,805 for 3 weekend Friday and Saturday nights in December; adding $4,210 to Glitter and Glow event; and allocating $90,000 for 4 weekends of music in April were accepted as presented. Adding $15,000 to other special events and allocating $20,000 to Arrowhead Towne Center and Westgate special events for a total of $35,000 were reprogrammed by city council  to be using for hosting the Chocolate Affaire in Glendale’s Civic Center this coming February.

I suspect the small group of downtown merchants opposed to any change will not be happy with the amended recommendations consented to by city council. There was another, more subtle consensus achieved that day and that was that council publicly acknowledged that change is needed in downtown Glendale and they seem hopeful that the Strategic Leadership Group will be the catalyst to finally make it happen.

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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.

Aug 19

14

Glendale’s Cemetery

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 14, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , | 18 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.

Yesterday, August 13, 2019, the city council’s workshop was devoted exclusively to a potential sale of Glendale’s cemetery. I wanted to wait to write about the issue but waited until I had all of the information I required, including the staff presentation and my own research.

Let’s begin with some history. The Glendale Cemetery Association, comprised of 3 local churches, established the Glendale Memorial Park Cemetery in 1900. By 1962 the Association realized it was struggling financially and asked the City of Glendale to assume ownership of the cemetery. The city agreed and received all land owned by the Association to be used exclusively as a cemetery as well as $12,831.21 in cash and $40,005.00 in stock investments.

Within that agreement there was no restriction placed on the city preventing it from selling the cemetery or its assets. For the past 57 years the city has faithfully owned and managed the property. Sometimes it did it well, sometimes (during recessions), it did not.  For nearly 60 years the city has supported the operation and maintenance of the cemetery from the city’s General Fund (taxpayer funds) while putting the proceeds from burial plot sales into a Perpetual Card Fund. Staff researched old records and could establish that the city subsidizes the cemetery at an estimated $30,000 to $50,000 a year. It also provides indirect support (personnel and equipment) from the Landfill, Solid Waste and Transportation departments. The Perpetual Card Fund is now about $5.8 million dollars and the city can document that an estimated $3.2 million dollars has come directly out of the city’s General Fund to pay for annual operations and maintenance. If a sale occurs, the city would retain about $2 million as reimbursement to its General Fund to offset what had been spent over the years for operations and maintenance. The buyer would retain about $3 million that would stay in the Perpetual Care Fund.

If you wish to see the workshop discussion you can go to the city’s website or the city’s Facebook page. The city is now live streaming all city council workshops and voting meetings. In my remarks from yesterday I delivered the following thoughts. The city council is not part of a nefarious plot (this was a pun…note the word ‘plot’ in reference to our discussion of the cemetery. Only the city manager got it…oh well). City council’s (and mine) decision will be based on a great deal of research and deliberation. We have a fiduciary responsibility to be wise stewards of your taxpayer dollars and that responsibility is taken very seriously.

It appears there are 3 options:

  • The city can continue to operate the cemetery as is. It would continue to subsidize the operations and maintenance from the General Fund. The city would use capital only to make repairs that were absolutely necessary and would continue to only allow services Tuesday through Thursday. It would continue to do little to no marketing. There is no guarantee under this model as to what future city councils may decide to do.
  • The city can enhance the cemetery operations and maintenance and make further capital investments. There are some things cities are good at doing and some things cities are not so good at doing. Running a cemetery is one of those things cities are not so good doing. It can hire a professional to run the operation and it can invest taxpayer funds to build infrastructure for cremation niches (which the city does not provide at this time). I estimate the additional cost to implement this model at an estimated $150,000 to $200,000 a year in addition to capital for infrastructure improvements. Again, there are no guarantees as to what future councils may decide to do.
  • The city can sell to a professional within the industry with a proven track record of successful management. The proposed buyer and the industry are heavily regulated. It seems the state legislature takes death and burial very, very seriously.

One of the emails I received implied that the proposed buyer may not have the financial credentials necessary. So I did some research by going to Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 32, Chapter 20, Article 6 which contains all of the regulations with regard to cemeteries. I won’t cite all but I do want to highlight several regulations that should put Glendale residents’ concerns at ease.

  • 32-2194.19. Investigation of applicant before granting of certificate of authority where needed. “Upon receipt of an application for a certificate of authority to operate a cemetery, the commissioner shall cause an investigation to be made of the physical status, plans, specifications and financing of the proposed cemetery, the character of the applicant, including its officers, directors, shareholders or members, and any other qualifications required of the applicant under this article.”
  • 32-2194.24. Trust fund to be established before certificate of authority granted. “No certificate of authority shall issue to a corporation or limited liability company organized for the purpose of maintaining and operating a cemetery unless the articles of incorporation or organization certify to the establishment of an irrevocable trust for maintenance and operation in accordance with the provisions of this article…”
  • 27. Restrictive use of income from endowed-care fund; obligation. “There shall be designated a trustee for the endowed-care fund that is a financial institution authorized to do business in this state…The principal of the trust fund shall remain permanently intact, and only the income …shall be expended…the fund shall be used solely for the care of the plots or other burial spaces sold to third persons with a provision for perpetual or endowed care…The fund or its income shall never be used for the development, improvement or embellishment of unsold portions of the cemetery…”
  • 32-2194.30. Restriction on the use of endowed-care funds. “Endowed-care funds shall not be used for any purpose other than to provide for the care of burial spaces…”

State regulations require a thorough background check, including financial,  of the potential buyer and associates and also require the Perpetual Care Fund to remain intact and only the interest earned on the Fund may be used for specific, regulated purposes. There are so many state safe guards to prevent fiduciary abuse and that should ease concerns of anyone who is frightened about a proposed sale.

There are positives to a sale. A professional would keep the cemetery open seven days a week. The proposed buyer has promised to keep the name of the cemetery as is and would still recognize preferences to Glendale residents. There are only 1.000 burial plots left. At an average of 100 plots purchased per year this model only has a life span of another 10 years. The buyer has indicated that his model will emphasize cremation niches and has plans to develop the infrastructure for such.

How will I vote? I don’t know. I am leaning toward a sale but council has requested further information that will result in a second workshop on the issue. Once I believe that I have all the information I need, I will make my final decision.

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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.

 

Aug 19

1

Further marijuana dispensary restrictions coming to Glendale?

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 1, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues  | Tagged With: , , , , | 4 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.

At a recent city council workshop further medical marijuana dispensary restrictions were considered. Councilmember Ray Malnar, as a Council Item of Special Interest (CIOSI), asked for a more explicit definition of “schools.” It will be brought back to council again in the near future because Mayor Weiers and Councilmember Tolmachoff said that the proposed definition of schools was too restrictive. Here is an article from Your Valley Net: https://yourvalley.net/yourvalley/government/glendale-council-to-decide-if-pot-dispensaries-must-separate-from-more-than-just-schools/ .

I guess another background narrative is in order. In the state-wide November 2, 2010 election voters weighed in on Proposition 203, approving the use of medical marijuana by 50.13%. That’s a slim margin but it is all that was needed to permit the use of medical marijuana throughout the state. In order to implement this new mandate, the Arizona Department of Health Services (DHS) created approximately 126 Community Health Analysis Areas (CHAA). One dispensary is allowed per CHAA. Here is a map of all of the CHAAs in the state.

CHAA map

I said something during the city council discussion I had read somewhere and it resonated with me. That was, “It is one thing to permit marijuana but it is another to promote it.  I am not interested in doing anything to promote marijuana.” I think it is a good concept to adopt and so I have.

 Cities have no choice. Voters have approved it use and the state mandates that cities may not prohibit a dispensary in any CHAA. Cities can, however, use their zoning authority to regulate the location of dispensaries…but that’s about all the authority a city has.

Federal research on the effects of marijuana is in its infancy despite its use (legal or illicit) for many years.  As more states have authorized its use, medically and now recreationally, the federal government is pursuing greater research on its use and the effects of such use.

Preliminary results suggest that marijuana is not a gateway drug. It appears if one is predisposed to use marijuana the disposition to graduate to harder drugs is already there. That preliminary conclusion is at least comforting. Other preliminary data is not so comforting.

It appears that marijuana can have negative effects on the brains of adolescents. These effects can include and are not limited to:

  • Changes to the brain’s structure (including size and how areas are connected)
  • Lower quality of brain connections
  • Less blood flow to parts of the brain

Preliminary research has demonstrated it’s possible that marijuana use can hurt brain functions in teens. Marijuana use in teens has been shown to lower IQ scores and create poor memory and attention. These findings are important because young people’s brains are building the connections to improve executive functioning ( self-control, creative thinking, and decision-making skills). Do we really want to encourage a generation of “dumb-downed” teens?

In consideration of these preliminary research findings I am not inclined to promote the use of marijuana. By broadening the definition of schools we, as a city, will discourage the location of an “attractive nuisance” close to all types of schools.

Why bother? Well, not everyone who patronizes a marijuana dispensary may be a pillar of the community and an upstanding citizen. It has been reported previously that there is a growing industry of “pot doctors” who locate nearby dispensaries and are prone to facilitate the approval of medical marijuana cards to those who ordinarily would not qualify for such a card.

I also think it’s not OK to trivialize the use of marijuana in order to make it so acceptable within our society. As our society changes rapidly not all that comes with change is in and of itself good. Are we becoming a society that promotes individual indulgence no matter the consequences?

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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 19

12

The most powerful person in city government?

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 12, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | 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.

 Many people assume the most powerful person in local government is the Mayor. Unless it’s a ‘strong mayor’ form of government, that isn’t so. I contend the city manager is the most powerful person in local government. This debate has existed as long as local government has existed. Over the years many U.S. cities have done 360s reversing their government structures to a strong mayor form of government and then back to a manager/council form. Neither satisfies completely.

What are the powers and responsibilities of a city manager? Generally, he or she coordinates and oversees the activities of all city departments, provides direct staff assistance to city council members, including the mayor, and council committees. His/her staff leads the financial and budget management process for a city and directs its planning and economic development efforts. His/her staff also conducts research, develops policies, and evaluates potential public programs.  He/she deals with all personnel issues exclusively including the hiring and firing of personnel.  More often than not, councils accept and act on his/her recommendations. What he/she and staff do behind the scenes has a very real impact on the policies and direction of a city.

In Glendale the city charter states in Section 2-53 (a), “Pursuant to article III, section 3 of the Glendale City Charter, the city manager is the chief executive officer of the city and shall have all authority and powers, not inconsistent with the city Charter, to manage and administer the affairs of the city. The city manager, as he or she deems appropriate, may delegate and assign duties and responsibilities to the administrative officials, department heads and employees of the city.”

Under Section 3 of the city charter, the city manager’s role is more specifically defined, “The city manager shall be chief executive officer and head of the administrative branch of the city government. He shall be responsible for the proper administration of all affairs of the city and to that end, subject to the provisions of this charter, he shall have the power (bold is mine) and shall be required to:

(1)

Devote his entire time to the discharge of his official duties, attend all meetings of the council unless excused there from by the council or the mayor;

(2)

See that all ordinances are enforced and that the provisions of all franchises, leases, contracts, permits and privileges granted by the city are observed;

(3)

Appoint, and when deemed necessary for the good of the service, lay-off, suspend, transfer, demote or remove all department heads, officers and employees of the city, subject to such merit system regulations as the council may adopt;

(4)

Prepare the annual budget estimates and submit them to the council and be responsible for the administration of the budget after adoption;

(5)

Keep the council advised at all times of the affairs and needs of the city, and make reports annually, or more frequently if requested by the council, of all the affairs of the city;

(6)

Repealed (3-16-76);

(7)

Have such other powers, duties and functions as this charter may prescribe, and such powers, duties and functions consistent with this charter as the council may prescribe.”

As can be noted, the city charter goes into rather specific detail about a city manager’s role and responsibilities. That is not the case for the city council. The charter broadly states in Article II, Section I, “All powers of the city, not in conflict with the constitution and subject to the limitations of this charter, shall be vested in the council, who shall enact appropriate legislation and do and perform any and all acts and things which may be necessary and proper to carry out these powers or any of the provisions of this charter.”Generally, a city council oversees local policy decisions, reviews and approves the city budgets and appoints a professional city manager (as well as the City Attorney and City Clerk) to handle administrative tasks on a day-to-day basis.

In Glendale as with all other cities money is power. In other words, a city’s budget is where the power resides. Based upon that premise is the City Manager the most powerful person in a city? I say ‘yes’. The City Manager reviews and approves all budget items that are presented to a city council. He/she reviews and recommends to city council any increase in the number of employees and where those new employees will work. He/she reviews and recommends all departmental supplemental requests for additional funding that are presented to a city council.  A city council does not see any supplemental requests until after they are reviewed and approved by the City Manager. He/she, by virtue of departmental line item recommendations to a city council, determines the direction and the priorities of the city for the upcoming Fiscal Year.

 A city council is never presented a raw budget that offers options for the direction of placement of new revenue. Quite frankly, there is continual pressure by city councils to get more of the raw data from which budgetary decisions are made. It’s the silent, often unrecognized by the public, power struggle that occurs every year prior to a city’s formal Fiscal Year budget adoption.

What some City Managers and senior staff rely upon is the lack of a committed majority of opinion on any city council. Without a clear majority of council, that council cannot give direction to a City Manager. Sometimes it is easy to pick off councilmembers by doing what are commonly called “walk-arounds.” That is a practice where city staff talks individually to councilmembers making the case for or against an issue. Obviously, you can see how this practice could be used to work in favor of senior staff. They can make an argument for or against any issue or initiative virtually guaranteeing the outcome they desire.

In addition, many councilmembers have not been educated on the scope of their authority. Many city councilmembers do not realize that there is, indeed, power in numbers and that they have the absolute authority to shape policy and therefore the priorities and direction of the city requiring that funding be used to accomplish those identified priorities. City Councils are the 400 lb. gorilla in the room but often they don’t know it or they remain divided with the inability to create the majority needed to craft direction for the City Manager or senior staff. The only ones to blame for a City Manager’s absolute power are city councils themselves. So until city councilmembers unite the most powerful person in a city will continue to be the City Manager.

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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.

May 19

11

A story 20 years in the making

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 11, 2019
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Heroes Park • West Branch Library • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , | 7 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.

On Saturday, May 18, 2019 at 9 A.M. the City of Glendale will host the Grand Opening celebration of its newest library branch at Heroes Regional Park located at the northeast corner of 83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road.

In all honesty, I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry. Why? You’re asking. It should be a day of celebration and it most certainly is. But there is so much more to this happy ending. Let me tell you about it.

Way back in Fiscal Year 1998-99 two projects simultaneously appeared in the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). One was the West Branch Library allocating funds for its design in FY 2001-2002 and its construction was slated to begin in FY 2004. The other was the Multi-Generational Center North allocating funding for FY 2000-2001. The branch library and the multi-gen center were slated to begin in FY 2001-2002.

 In FY 2001-2002 a new major project is added, the Recreation/Aquatics Center North appears. That same Fiscal Year the slippage of just one project, the library, begins. The design of the library is still in FY 2001-2002 but actual construction is moved to FY 2004-2005.

These projects remain constant until Fiscal Year 2003-2004. In 2003-2004 the city experienced some economic difficulties, yet that year, both north projects, the Multi-Gen Center North and the Recreation/Aquatic Center North are approved and merged into one major project for $13,896,012 with a Groundbreaking in April of 2005. The west branch library construction is moved once again…now to Fiscal Year 2005-2006 with an opening in 2007.

Then what do you know? In Fiscal Year 2005-2006 the year that library construction is to begin, a majority of city council moved $6 million in funding for the library to the Glendale Regional Public Safety Training Center construction. Library construction is moved back once again to FY 2008-2009 with an opening in FY 2010. In 2009 the national recession began and I stopped keeping track knowing the city had no money.

To sum it all up, in 8 years the Recreation/Aquatics Center North was open and another 12 years later we are finally opening a branch library in West Glendale. Why? It wasn’t just “economic difficulties.” It was far more than that. The former mayor and I often butted heads on many issues. I was certainly not one of her council “mushrooms.” (Mushrooms are kept in the dark and fed ca-ca.) She and her mushrooms were not about to give “evil” (her nickname for me) a win in my district. As far as I am concerned, it was spiteful retribution. Rest assured she will deny and offer plausible sounding reasons as to why the library was never constructed during her tenure. Consider the source and the motivation.

That is why I could cry. It has taken so bloody long to get this long needed and awaited amenity for the people of West Glendale. An entire generation has grown up without the benefit of a nearby library. That is just not right.

I laugh because the next generation will benefit. Reading must not become a forgotten art. Libraries teach young ones the love of reading and for many it becomes a lifelong habit. For 20 years the Yucca district has been without a public facility in which to hold meetings. Finally the library will have a Community Meeting Room that can be reserved for neighborhood meetings, etc.

Admittedly, the library is tiny at 7,500 square feet but it is not what was first proposed, that of a modular building ( which I considered to be an insult implying that West Glendale residents were not even worthy of a permanent structure) and it is constructed to be expanded. Velma Teague and Foothills are approximately 25,000 to 35,000 square feet and the Main Library is 65,000 square feet. I suspect the pressure of use on this new branch will be so great that expansion will have to occur in a couple of years.

In the meantime there is so much more to be completed at Heroes Regional Park. Projects still to be done include a water feature, a dog park, a Recreation/Aquatics Center West and sports fields – all part of this Park’s Master Plan. I am pleased that there is funding allocated in the upcoming FY 2019-2020 CIP for the water feature. It is the next element of the park that will be constructed.

I guess it’s better to look forward than back but it’s easier to do once one vents and my venting is done. Now I celebrate our new library, soon to be much loved and over used. No longer will we have to wait 15 or 20 minutes at the train tracks just to make a simple trip to the library.

Please join me on May 18th to celebrate. Please bring the kids. Heroes from the Arizona Avengers and Justice League of Arizona will be available for photos. There will be face painting, a balloon artist and a scavenger hunt with prizes for the kids. Adults can check out the new 3D printer, get a library card, use the computers for public use and learn about the Discovery and Exploration Backpack Program. Find out how this library can fit into your family’s fabric of life.

There is also a Heroes Park Brick Walkway Campaign under way. For $100 (individual) to $250 (corporate) one can purchase a brick to be engraved with 4 lines of text. I am placing my order for one this Monday. From the rendering I have seen, it looks like the opportunities to get a commemorative brick in the front entry walkway are limited. I would suggest that you place your order as soon as possible. I don’t know if orders can be placed online but I will find out and update this blog when I do.

So, I will laugh and be joyful. We have a library. Tiny though it might be, it will be mighty in changing the character of the community it serves. For me, it is symbolic of more to come and the completion of Heroes Regional Park after so many years.

© Joyce Clark, 2019         

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 »