Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Sep 16

16

TGIF

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 16, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 6 Comments

A few thoughts after a very eventful week in which the Glendale city council unanimously accepted the Canvass of Votes thereby acknowledging Mayor Weiers, Vice Mayor Hugh, Councilmember Malnar and me as winners of the recent election. It’s over.

image2

Courtesy of Dawn Monaghan

The photo below is from the September 13, 2016 city council meeting. The gentleman kneeling is Bill Toops, publisher of the Glendale Star. After the Glendale Star did not endorse me or my rival I had a conversation with Mr. Toops. He stated that in the event that I won, he would publicly acknowledge my victory.

Every Friday I check out home sales in Glendale. There are about 350 sales a month and about 4500 sales a year. Some sales obviously reflect existent residents either moving up to a larger home or downsizing but the majority are new families moving into Glendale from someplace else. Is it any wonder that voter turnout is so low in Glendale? One of the reasons for voter apathy is the city’s failure to educate and to engage these new residents.

It came as no surprise that the contested election results were so close. Look at the Jones-Biggs contest in Congressional District 5. It appears to be a reflection of a national trend as general analysis suggests that the presidential contest will be close. Remember the hanging chad? Will there be another Florida-type situation this year? Electronic voting will be under tremendous scrutiny because of concerns about hacking into the national voting system. I’m not sure the country is prepared to deal with electronic voting and assuring the public that the results are tamper proof. Perhaps we would be best served to continue the use of paper ballots that at least leave a trail that can be verified.

Social media has grown up and is a legitimate and extremely useful in connecting to voters. With my shoe string campaign budget I know that my use of a blog, Facebook pages, blast emails and a campaign website were extremely important and may have tipped the scales in my favor.  Today any candidate who does not make full use of social media does so at his or her peril.

I will continue to blog about Glendale issues as I am not a formal member of the city council yet. The installation for mayor and councilmember is scheduled for December 13, 2016. After then I will continue to blog but I will make very clear that as a councilmember I am duty bound to support council decisions on issues but that will not preclude me from expressing my personal opinion. I will be sure to delineate those positions to readers.

Look for an announcement concerning an October victory celebration for Mayor Weiers, Vice Mayor Hugh, Councilmember Malnar and me. I will share the details of the event as they become available.

© Joyce Clark, 2016          

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

14

Sound and fury, signifying…nothing

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 14, 2016
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Glendale city council held its regular voting meeting on September 13, 2016. Sammy Chavira was absent again…gasp. He did participate telephonically. In a Hillary Clinton-esque move he claimed he has pneumonia. If he is ill, I wish him a speedy recovery. Yet, one can’t help but wonder. Pneumonia seems to be the current rage in illnesses since presidential candidate Clinton’s diagnosis.

All items but two were on the Consent Agenda and were voted upon in one motion, quickly. The next agenda item was a land planning issue and was also quickly dealt with. The last agenda item was the Canvass of Votes, a formality without legal standing which directs the City Clerk to record the results of the election, those results having already been approved by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (which does have legal standing).

The backdrop to this agenda item was Sammy’s request to the entire city council requesting that they vote to delay acceptance of the Canvass of Votes. In a September 13, 2016 story entitled Chavira asks council to delay canvass of votes by Darrell Jackson of the Glendale Star, he reported, “Yucca District Councilmember Samuel Chavira is attempting to get other councilmembers and the mayor to stop the canvass of votes at the Sept. 13 council meeting after losing his seat in the Aug. 30 primary. Chavira, who lost his seat on the council to former councilmember Joyce Clark by 46 votes, sent an email to fellow councilmembers obtained by The Glendale Star asking them to ‘delay official canvassing of the election results’.” Here is the link to Jackson’s story: http://www.glendalestar.com/news/article_55d713b0-79d5-11e6-8a39-5f815c2ea5eb.html .

Jackson goes on to say, “Chavira also may have violated Arizona State Statues on open meeting violations by sending the email as the statute states that councilmembers ‘may not send or verbally communicate with (any) councilmembers requesting their assent on a council meeting agenda action item’.”

The Arizona Attorney General’s Office in its handbook on the Open Meeting Law states the following:

“7.5.2 Circumventing the Open Meeting Law.  Discussions and deliberations (in person or otherwise) between less than a majority of the members of a governing body, violate the Open Meeting Law when used to circumvent the purposes of the Open Meeting Law.  See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. 75-8; Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974).  Public officials may not circumvent public discussion by splintering the quorum and having separate or serial discussions with a majority of the public body members.  Splintering the quorum can be done by meeting in person, by telephone, electronically, or through other means to discuss a topic that has been or later may be presented to the public body for a decision.  Public officials should refrain from any activities that may undermine public confidence in the public decision making process established in the Open Meeting Law, including actions that may appear to remove discussions and decisions from public view.   

For example, Board members cannot use email to circumvent the Open Meeting Law requirements.  See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. I05-004 at 2.  “[E]ven if communications on a particular subject between members of a public body do not take place at the same time or place, the communications can nonetheless constitute a ‘meeting.’”  See Del Papa v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. and Cmty. Coll. Sys. Of Nev., 114 Nev. 388, 393, 956 P.2d 770, 774 (1998) (rejecting the argument that a meeting did not occur because the board members were not together at the same time and place).  Additionally, “[w]hen members of the public body are parties to an exchange of e-mail communications that involve discussions, deliberations, or taking legal action by a quorum of the public body concerning a matter that may foreseeably come before the public body for action, the communications constitute a meeting through technical devices under the [Open Meeting Law].”  See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. I05-004 at 1.  This may be true even if none of the members of the public body respond to the email.  Id. at 2-3.  If the one-way communication proposes legal action, then it would violate the Open Meeting Law.  Id.  However, other one-way communications, with no further exchanges, are not per se violations, and further examination of the facts and circumstances would be necessary to determine if a violation occurred.  Id. at 3.” 

If you believe, as I do, that Sammy has clearly violated the Arizona Open Meeting Law, you may go to the State Attorney General’s website and file a complaint. Any citizen can do so. Here is the link to the site which contains the Complaint Form: https://www.azag.gov/sgo  .

The Canvass of Votes was approved unanimously by the city council but it was not without comment. In the same Darrell Jackson article cited above, he reported that Councilmember Bart Turner prior to the council meeting said, “I have concerns about several irregularities about the election and I feel that by canvassing the votes, we are just accepting the numbers presented by the county and not confirming them,” Turner said by phone. “By canvassing and passing the vote, that, then opens the door for any candidate to challenge the procedure. Our duty is to be sure that to the best of our ability, the election was fully fair and respects the manner of all voters,” Turner said. “If I were to challenge the canvass, it wouldn’t be for one candidate of the other, but on policy and procedures that may not have been completely followed. As far as challenging results, that is the responsibility of the candidates.” His rhetoric was virtually parroted word for word by Councilmembers Tolmachoff and Aldama.

The “irregularities” to which Turner referred were: 1. Delayed opening of the voting location at Glendale High School and 2. The “missing” voter data discovered at Mensendick Elementary School. In his illegal email letter to all councilmembers Chavira asked the County Recorder to provide evidence that the voter data was not tampered with. Here is the response from the County Recorder’s Office regarding both issues that was sent per the Glendale City Clerk’s request and distributed to all councilmembers the day before their evening voting meeting. The first incident did not occur at a Yucca district polling site:

“Subject: Timeline of events at Glendale High School poll site on Primary election day 8/30/2016

 Primary election day 8/30/2016

 Sometime after 6:30am I was sent to 51 avenue and Maryland to pick up the equipment of a troubleshooter who was rear ended in a car accident. While moving supplies/equipment from the troubleshooter to my truck, I received a call at 6:51am directing me to go the Glendale High School poll site ( one of the rear ended troubleshooters polling places) and assist the inspector who was by himself, in a wheelchair with limited mobility to open the poll site.

 Upon arrival, I saw his wife, whom he called, putting out the vote here sign. Myself and another troubleshooter who arrived just after myself, assisted in putting the rest of the signage. I saw no voters waiting around, just kids and parents dropping the kids off.

 Around 7:30am a gentleman in a walker came in, signed the e-poll book and voted a ballot. 7:58am call send me to another poll site to swap out equipment.”

“Primary Election August 30, 2016 – Affidavit re: Precinct 0513

Polling Location:               Don Mensendick School – 67th Ave & Missouri

Election Night – MPS Site reported no black bag no memory pack received

The first call made was to the Inspector Pat Burgett. She let me know that all materials were taken to the MPS truck by John Bowen, the Inspector for the co-located precinct 0045 Bethany Park

I then called John Bowen at approximately 1030pm.

He advised that he along with another board member, turned in all of the materials for both precincts and that he had a receipts. In our conversation I asked specifically about the memory packs to which he advised that both packs were sealed in their designated pink bubble bag and then those were sealed inside their individual black bags for each precinct.

We then waited for the MPS truck to arrive at MCTEC.

I did not know that the MPS site did not have the black bag for precinct 0513 until they arrived and we unloaded the truck.

After searching the truck and finding that the black bag was not in house, I volunteered to go first thing on Wed morning to the school.

I first called John Bowen at approx. 715am on Wed to let him know that we did not receive the black back with the memory pack and advised for him to please check his vehicle. He checked and called me back to let me know it was not in the vehicle. But he did have the receipts from the MPS site. I advised to bring them to the school to meet me so that we could retrieve the bag.

We agreed to meet at the school at 8am to gain access to the room where the equipment/supplies remained. (band room)

John arrived a few minutes before me, he had a school representative escort him to unlock the room and retrieved the bag as I was walking up to the room. He called me as I was approaching the school to advise that the bag was indeed in the room and that it was completely intact and that the seal was not broken.

John had his receipts. I confirmed that the receipt for 0513 did not have the top 2 items checked off (black bag & memory pack) All other items were marked. I wrote in Green ink pen on the receipt for 0513, the number to the seal that was on the black bag. I broke the seal with John there to verify that the pink memory pack bag was inside the black bag.

I then picked up a coworker (Jaime Sumner) at 8:35am from her home (approximately 2 blocks across the street from the school) and we drove together to the office with the black bag/memory pack.

We arrived with the black bag at approximately 9:15am.”

As Councilmember Ray Malnar said at the council meeting, the people who work the polls are volunteers and human. He felt that while some mistakes had occurred, none had risen to the level of voter fraud or vote tampering. I concur with his assessment. Originally I expressed concern regarding the “missing” votes at Mensendick School but after reading the above Affidavit I am satisfied that there was no vote tampering.

Apparently these answers from the County Recorder’s Office are not good enough for Chavira, Turner, Tolmachoff and Aldama. Yet they accepted the County Recorder’s and Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Official Canvass of Votes. If they were really concerned about Glendale’s election results, why did they vote to accept those very same results? Turner made one interesting remark when he said, “As far as challenging results, that is the responsibility of the candidates.” The only one who can contest the results is Sammy.

In another Glendale Star story also posted on September 13, 2016 by Darrell Jackson entitled Weiers wins, Clark reclaims Yucca seat, Chavira’s campaign manager, Ben Scheel, said, “At this point, we are following very closely and we will keep all our options open,” Scheel said. “We have spoken to an attorney, but are not calling for anything at this point. We just want to make sure all the votes are counted and after the final votes are posted, we will examine everything closely and make our decision.” Here is the link to this story: http://www.glendalestar.com/news/article_36fc4d94-79c0-11e6-92fd-7f16a95eaf36.html .

Mayor Weiers stated in response to the possibility of a challenge, “Challenge what? The fact is the machine was still sealed and verified and based on any other voting machine, there was no discrepancy. I believe it is fruitless (to challenge) and there is a point where you have to understand that it is time to do what is right for the city.”

Will Sammy contest the results? At this point, I simply don’t care what he does. Mathematically, any action by him will not change the final outcome – quite simply, I won. The margin of my win could change incrementally but the outcome remains the same. Sammy has a steep financial hill to climb in filing a contest to the election. He has to pay for an attorney and he has to pay for any recount should such an action be approved by a judge. The only two grounds, by state statute, that would allow for a recount are voter fraud and vote tampering. He has no proof of either and the burden of proof rests with him. His court adversaries would not be me but the attorneys representing the County Recorder’s Office. That office has clearly and unequivocally stated that all seals on the bags containing the voter data were intact.

It’s time for Burdick and Chavira to publicly concede. Their sound and fury signify nothing but sour grapes and at this point we are seeing not only sour grapes but grapes that have become moldy and rotten. While we are at it…Sammy take your campaign signs down. All signs belonging to losing primary candidates need to be down 15 days after the polls close. That’s Wednesday, September 14, 2016…today.

© Joyce Clark, 2016        

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

13

Sammy, the sore loser

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 13, 2016
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Some facts:

  1. Sammy Chavira lost his council seat in the current August 30, 2016 Primary Election.
  2. I am Councilmember Elect of the Yucca district in Glendale.
  3. Yesterday, September 12, 2016 the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to approve and accept the Maricopa County Recorder’s Canvass of Votes.
  4. The Board of Supervisor’s vote is a mandatory legally recognized action taken as required by Arizona State Statutes. Here are the relevant statutes:

“16-646. Statement, contents and mailing of official canvass

  1. The board of supervisors shall deliver a copy of the official canvass for all offices and ballot measures in the primary and general elections to the secretary of state in a uniform electronic computer media format that shall be agreed upon between the secretary of state and all county election officials.
  2. The certified permanent copy of the official canvass for all offices and ballot measures in a city or town election shall be filed with the appropriate city or town clerk, or in a special district election with the clerk of the board of supervisors, who shall maintain and preserve them as a permanent public record.

16-647. Declaration of election to office; delivery of certificate of election

The board of supervisors shall declare elected the person receiving the highest number of votes cast for each office to be filled by the electors of the county or a subdivision thereof, and the clerk of the board shall, unless enjoined from so doing by an order of the court, deliver to each such person, upon compliance with the provisions imposed by law upon candidates for office as conditions precedent to the issuance of such certificates, a certificate of election, signed by the clerk and authenticated with the seal of office of the board of supervisors.”

  1. The Canvass of Votes Resolution is the last item on tonight’s, September 13, Glendale City Council meeting agenda:
16-392 1 28. 2016 Primary Election Canvass of Vote Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 5154 NEW SERIES A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, DECLARING THE OFFICIAL CANVASS OF VOTES CAST IN THE CITY OF GLENDALE PRIMARY ELECTION HELD AUGUST 30, 2016; DECLARING THE ELECTION OF THE MAYOR AND THREE COUNCILMEMBERS; AND ORDERING THAT A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION BE RECORDED. Staff Contact: Julie K. Bower, City Clerk
  1. This City Council action, whether it is approved or rejected or tabled, has no legal effect on the Canvass of Votes.  There is no state statute that requires a local jurisdiction to approve or reject the Canvass of Votes. The Glendale City Council vote is no more than a formality and ministerial. If necessary, I expect the Glendale City Attorney to verify this fact at tonight’s council meeting. Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if each jurisdiction could reject the Canvass of Votes and overturn the voters’ decision? Only the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, by state statute, can vote to accept or reject the Canvass of Votes. By state statute, the Board of Supervisors vote regarding the County Recorder’s Canvass of Votes is a legal and binding action.
  2. Yesterday, September 12, 2016, Sammy sent the following letter to all Glendale City Councilmembers:

“Fellow Glendale Councilmembers,

I am greatly concerned by the election process that took place on August 30th. As my opponent, Joyce Clark, has already pointed out in previous correspondence, Glendale voters need reassurance that every single vote has been counted. (More about this statement further down in this blog.)

The loss of custody of a memory card containing voter completed ballots from the Don Mensendick polling location for over 12 hours brings into question the integrity (sic), and assurance are necessary to remove any shadow of doubt.

I am requesting the Maricopa County Recorder provide evidence to the City of Glendale and its residents that while the memory card was out of custody, it was not tampered with (sic). I am also currently working with the County Recorder to endure Glendale has not had ballots being dismissed due to signature irregularities or other reason (sic) without proper cause and procedure, as is being alleged in other parts of the county.

Until the County Recorder is able to provide this evidence I urge the Glendale Council to delay official canvassing of the election results with respect to Mrs. Clark, myself and Glendale residents.

Regards,

Councilmember Samuel U. Chavira”

  1. Sammy Chavira is in violation of State Statutes regarding the Open Meeting Law.  A councilmember may not send or verbally communicate with all councilmembers(or even another councilmember) requesting their assent on a council meeting agenda action item. The Canvass of Votes is an agenda action item scheduled for tonight, September 13, 2016. His letter to all councilmembers is the clearest and starkest example of an Open Meeting Law violation I have ever witnessed. I had no concern, as Sammy stated, as to whether every vote was counted. Rather in my communication to the County Recorder’s Office I suggested the very opposite.
  2. I sent the following email to the City Clerk when I learned of the situation at Mensendick School:

“8/31/2016 12:18:50 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time

Hello Ms. Bower,

Thank you for providing information.

However, I am concerned as I suspect all other affected candidates are, about the integrity of these ‘missing’ ballots. Would you please forward this email on to Helen Purcell, the County Recorder, with the following question:

Ms. Purcell,

I understand the ballots from one Yucca district were ‘missing’ and have been discovered. I also understand they were ‘locked up’ overnight.

Please provide me with some proof of the integrity of these ballots. I don’t see how they can be legitimately counted when they were under no one’s supervision or care for an estimated 12 hours or better.

Respectfully,

Joyce Clark”

  1. Yesterday, September 12, 2016 I viewed the County Board of Supervisor’s meeting. Here is the link: http://maricopa.siretechnologies.com/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=3072&doctype=AGENDA . Steve Gallardo (a buddy of Sammy’s), District 5 Supervisor, asked about the “Mensendick school situation.” The County Recorder’s Office explicitly stated that the bags holding the voter data had their seals unbroken and intact. I am reassured and satisfied by their explanation of events. I accept the County Recorder’s explanation as true and valid. It seems Supervisor Gallardo accepted their explanation as well and was also satisfied as he seconded the motion to approve the Canvass of Votes. The motion was approved unanimously. There was no follow up questioning by Supervisor Gallardo nor did he make a motion to reject the Canvass of Votes.
  2. Yesterday afternoon the County Recorder’s Office sent to all councilmembers via the City Clerk its assurance and verification that the Mensendick ballots were not tampered with. Each councilmember has the evidence that Sammy requested from the County Recorder.
  3. The only way that Sammy can contest my win is to seek court action. Sammy has already been advised by an attorney that he has no case and will not win in court. It is his burden to prove that the Mensendick ballots were tampered with and that he cannot do.

Why did Sammy get his buddy, Supervisor Gallardo, to ask about the Mensendick situation only to have Gallardo approve the Canvass of Votes? Why did Sammy violate the Open Meeting Law with his request of all councilmembers to table their acceptance of the Canvass of Votes when council’s action has no legal effect? Why is Sammy so willing to deny the will and choice of Yucca district voters?

Sammy is embarrassed that he lost. Sammy is angry after he and his special interests flushed so much money down the toilet. Sammy is unwilling to accept the Yucca district voter’s decision.

Sammy is willing to use any means, foul or futile, to overturn the voice of the people. Sammy is unwilling to accept the voters’ rejection of his record: his abuse of taxpayer money; his failure to attend city council meetings; his failure to hold district meetings; his disdain for the law regarding a simple traffic ticket; and worst of all, his failure to return his constituents’ calls and to represent them. He lost because he didn’t do his job. He thought he was entitled. He was arrogant and exhibited a lack of respect for the very people he was supposed to serve.

Sammy is a loser. He lost the election. He needs to get over it and there is no expectation that he will do so gracefully or honorably. And while he’s at it…Sammy, it is way past time to take down your campaign signs. By law they are to be removed within 10 days. It’s now 13 days and counting. But then again, the law, whether it is the Open Meeting Law or Canvass of Votes, doesn’t seem to mean much to him.

© Joyce Clark, 2016        

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

12

Who really wins in an election?

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 12, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • National issues  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

A friend sent me an October, 2016 Atlantic Monthly article written by Molly Boll entitled “Scared rich candidate.” Here is the link:  http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/10/theres-nothing-better-than-a-scared-rich-candidate/497522/ . While the thrust of the article pertains to national, presidential candidates the premises she offers could be applied to local candidates as well.

The article states, “These are boom times for political consultants—by one rough estimate, more than $6 billion will go to or through consulting firms during this year’s elections…” On the Glendale level, each mayoral candidate raised at least $100,000. In addition, Independent Political Action Committees (PACs) spent in opposition to or for a particular mayoral candidate at least an estimated $50,000 more. We will have a better picture of the numbers after the next campaign finance reports are filed at the end of September. It is not unreasonable to say that an estimated $250,000 was poured into the Glendale mayoral race. That kind of money is not limited to Glendale’s mayoral race. Sammy Chavira, my opponent in the Yucca district council race, spent an estimated $40,000 and Independent PACs easily spent another $40,000 in opposition to me. That’s not chump change. Imagine, $80,000 or more spent to try to defeat a challenger in a small, local district race.

The article goes on to say, “Despite all the money pouring into political consulting, a palpable sense of unease looms over the profession. The consultants may be getting rich, but recent events suggest they don’t have any idea what they’re doing.” Ms. Boll cites statistics on various campaign strategies, TV advertising, campaign mailers, robo calls and campaign signs, with the conclusion that most of these strategies are not as effective as commonly assumed. The implication being that a candidate, upon advice of a consultant, may be just throwing money away. She also reveals that many consultants either have relationships with or have created companies that provide the very materials the consultants urge a candidate to use. It is often the case that a consultant will receive a fee for consultancy and also receive payment through a consultant’s own company for campaign material.  An analogy might be that you go to a referral website to buy a product only to discover that the site gets paid for not only every referral it generates but has a company that makes the product and receives profit every time the product is sold.

Ms. Boll goes on to say, “Many political scientists believe election outcomes are largely the result of factors over which candidates and their campaigns have little control.” Some political scientists, having studied this issue believe “there are few ‘game changing’ moments in a campaign.” They believe “the vast majority of presidential elections…can be forecast based on the state of the nation’s economy and the approval rating of the sitting president.” It is safe to assume the same of local contests as well. In Glendale, most of its citizens don’t follow its politics and don’t vote. Often the percentage of active voters hovers around 10%. There are 6 political districts in Glendale: Cholla, Sahuaro, Barrel, Cactus, Ocotillo and Yucca. Each has roughly 20,000 voters. Yet voter participation in each district ranges roughly from 3,000 to 6,000 active voters. The northern districts of Cholla, Sahuaro and Barrel, historically have more active voters than the southern districts of Cactus, Ocotillo and Yucca. Unless there is a distinct and widely publicized and divisive crisis within the city, these voters tend to return an incumbent to office. With Glendale’s economic status stabilized and improving there was no impetus on the part of the voter to change the status quo with the exception of one factor – the candidate’s character.

Others tend to agree and think “consultants’ main influence is at the macro level, in shaping a campaign’s overall message and coaching the candidate. ‘It’s the consultants’ job to take who the person is—their fixed characteristics—and leverage it’.” This premise held true in the current Glendale election cycle. Mayoral candidate Mark Burdick publicly admitted that upon the advice of his campaign consultants (you can include former Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni) their winning strategy was to sling as much mud as possible at sitting Mayor Jerry Weiers in the hope that some of it would stick and discredit him enough to create a win for Burdick. Sammy Chavira’s political consultants created the same type of campaign in the Yucca district but they wanted to divert the voters’ attention away from Sammy’s record of taxpayer abuse and failure to do his job.

“Adam Sheingate, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins University, argues that the consulting industry has ballooned not because its services are particularly effective, but because all the money in politics—which has skyrocketed in the past decade due to campaign-finance deregulation—has to go somewhere.” Ms. Boll quotes Mr. Sheingate as saying, “The consultant is selling something to the candidate…The confidence game is that the candidate is always a little afraid. They’re always a little scared they can lose, and that’s what the consultant exploits. In the words of a consultant,”there’s ‘nothing better than a scared, rich candidate’.” With the amount of money available to candidates in Glendale, there were scared, rich candidates. They were ripe to buy what their consultants were selling and they had the money to do it. In the end, it may have been the content of the candidates’ character, not inordinate amounts of cash that counted to voters the most.

© Joyce Clark, 2016        

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

7

The dust is settling

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 7, 2016
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Now that the election is over and the County Recorder has published the results, I am eager and excited to begin my work. The County Recorder’s Canvass of Votes may be approved by city council at a voting meeting as early as September13, 2016. That will be the final step. The swearing in ceremony for Mayor Weiers, Vice Mayor Hugh, Councilmember Malnar and me, Councilmember Elect Joyce Clark, is scheduled for December 13, 2016 at 6 PM in City Council Chambers.

I am pleased to become a member of a city council that has made great strides in mitigating some of the city’s previous issues. Each of the current councilmembers brings positive attributes to the table. Mayor Weiers has a quiet confidence shown in his willingness to listen and to respect the points of view of all councilmembers. Vice Mayor Hugh exhibits the strength and perspective of historical Glendale. Councilmember Ray Malnar adds to the mix with his focus on fiscal accountability. Councilmembers Lauren Tolmachoff and Bart Turner have demonstrated their ability to ask questions of staff that often go to the heart of an issue.

These are good people who take their responsibilities very seriously. All are honest and ethical. Each has shown that their decisions are based upon what they believe to be the best for the citizens of Glendale. They may approach their decisions from different points of view but they are able to achieve consensus while respecting each other. I am excited to work with each and every one of them. I have no “axe to grind” with any of them and I would hope that it is mutual. Our slates are clean and yet to be written as we all work in mutual harmony to build productive working relationships while continuing to move Glendale forward.  

My first opportunity to interact with this council will be this Friday, September 9, 2016 at the Renaissance Hotel at 9 AM. The City Manager has put together a special morning council workshop meeting to introduce the concept of building strategic initiatives and leadership. As councilmember elect I will attend as an observer rather than a participant. I look forward to a fruitful and productive session and will share my observations in a future blog.

I take this opportunity to once again thank the voters of the Yucca district for their faith in me. I will work not only for them but with them to move the Yucca district forward by developing more jobs, working to make sure their neighborhoods are safe and secure, and enhancing their quality of life by securing more recreational opportunities.

© Joyce Clark, 2016          

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

3

Glendale, post campaign

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 3, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 7 Comments

I’m going to take one moment to brag. In 2000 I ran for councilmember of the Yucca district as a write-in candidate and beat my opponent, the incumbent Martin Samaniego. No other candidate in the State of Arizona has done that. Sixteen years later, I ran for councilmember of the Yucca district and beat my opponent, the incumbent Sammy Chavira. No other candidate in the State of Arizona has defeated two incumbents for the same position.

The results are now final and both Mayor Weiers and I have won our contests. They were close elections. I garnered 1591 votes and Sammy had 1545, a margin of 46 votes. Mayor Weiers received 13,172 votes and Burdick had 12,767, a margin of 405 votes. Again, every vote counts.

Why were both races so close? I am not a political analyst but I think it comes down to 3 factors.

The first factor is money. Chavira raised $79,435.74 and spent to date $57,905.98. I raised $13,081.80 and spent $8050.53 to date. Chavira’s campaign outspent me 7 times to date. Burdick raised $108,376.00 and spent to date $98,779.15. Weiers raised $130,226.95 and spent $85,423.66 to date. I suspect the final figures will be greater once we see the Post Primary Campaign Finance Reports due to the City Clerk by September 29, 2016.

The amount of money spent on these two Glendale races is incredible…$250,159.32…a quarter of a million dollars just by the candidates’ campaign committees. Now add in the Independent Expenditures by Political Action Committees (PACs). The Truth and Leadership PAC appears to have spent $45,000 in opposition to Mayor Weiers and myself. The Fire Fighters Interested in Registration and Education spent $13,000 in opposition to Weiers and me. I have not been able to find the figures on what the Revitalize Arizona and Residents for Accountability PACs spent but I would estimate at least $50,000. Now the figure combining candidate expenditures and independent expenditures balloons to an estimated $350,000. That is stunning for local races.

With that kind of money both Chavira and Burdick send out scads of campaign mailers touting their credentials with fire…one as a Phoenix fire fighter and one as a retired fire chief. For many voters who don’t really pay attention to elections and just show up at the polls, what’s not to like? Fire fighters are heroes who save us. Both Chavira and Burdick banked that this alone would cause the uninformed voter to vote for them.

The second factor is involvement. Sammy is a strong case in point. Although I did not raise the kind of money that he did, I possessed something far more powerful…the interest, support and commitment of so many Yucca district residents that invested themselves in my campaign. Sammy, just as he had performed his job as a councilmember, was AWOL. He paid a company to get his petition signatures. He paid the same company to distribute his campaign material within the district and…are you ready for this? He paid each poll worker (and there were many) $120 plus lunch and dinner, to work each voting location. I had volunteers, citizens who did all of these things willingly and fervently.

The third factor is indefensible records and lies. Burdick and Chavira had records of previous service that they simply could not defend. Burdick never stood up to the fire union as chief and ceded his authority to it. Burdick admitted publicly that he lied about Weiers’ record upon advisement of his campaign consultants. Chavira used the same rhetoric against me that he used in his last campaign. They were lies then and they were lies this time. It’s like the boy who cried wolf. He couldn’t sell his lies a second time around. Sammy’s lack of service as a councilmember angered many Yucca district voters. Burdick’s and Chavira’s lies and exaggerations were deliberately used as smoke screens, to divert the voters’ attention away from their own poor records.

I will have two more blogs on this campaign’s analysis upcoming. One will be on the politics of the actors/supporters of this election and the other will be on the performance of the County Recorder’s Office. Once they have been posted we can all return to the issues facing Glendale. My blog will continue for those who have expressed concern that once I was elected, I would cease to write. I appreciate your continued readership during this campaign season. I bet you are glad Glendale’s races are over. I know that I am.

© Joyce Clark, 2016

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

2

Your vote counts

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 2, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

PLEASE NOTE: I AM LEAVING “DONATE TO MY CAMPAIGN” UP FOR NOW. I DO HAVE CAMPAIGN DEBT. I DON’T KNOW THE FINAL FIGURES YET AS INVOICES CONTINUE TO ARRIVE.

I WILL LEAVE THE CHAVIRA VIDEOS UP THROUGHOUT THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE NOT YET VIEWED THEM.

We’ve all heard the expression, “Every vote counts.” Two of the current Glendale races as well as some state races demonstrate exactly how important your vote is.

In the US Representative race for Congressional District 1 the lion’s share of votes come from Pinal County but a few votes, and I mean a few, come from Maricopa County. Paul Babeu has 2 Maricopa County votes and Wendy Rodgers has 5 votes. Every vote counts.

In Congressional District 5 Christine Jones and Andy Biggs are separated by 733 votes out of a total of 77, 126 votes. Every vote counts.

In the County Recorder’s race Helen Purcell leads Aaron Flannery by 374 out of 283,552 votes. Every vote counts.

In Glendale Mayor Jerry Weiers leads challenger Mark Burdick by 339 votes out of a total of 24,367 votes. Every vote counts.

In my race I lead Sammy Chavira by 34 votes out of 2,886 votes. Every vote counts.

It appears that with the results of September 1st, Glendale’s votes have been counted. There may be a very few stragglers left to count but they will not affect the fact that Mayor Weiers and I have led our races throughout the count and have won our contests. I suspect our leads may increase by a few, very few, more votes.

That is not the case in the county. There are still 88,000 votes uncounted. In the tight races listed above these final votes will most certainly impact those races.

What many potential voters fail to appreciate is that Primary races are just as important as General races. Often Primary races are 2 person contests. In those races, you are electing your representative at the Primary, not the General. Yet voter non-participation is traditionally higher for Primaries. Primary participation is usually about 9% to 10% of total voter registration. That’s crazy. 10% of the voters decide the outcome for everyone.

It’s especially true in local, city races. Often there are just two candidates for an office. Whomever wins the Primary, wins the race and is elected. The race is done. It’s over. There is no need for the contest to appear on the General Election ballot.

You and I know the Presidential race between Trump and Clinton is tightening up every day. It may well turn out to be the closest Presidential contest in U.S. history…and you think your vote doesn’t count? Believe me, it will.

© Joyce Clark, 2016          

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

28

My campaign: Last thoughts before Election Day

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 28, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Primary Election is this Tuesday, August 30, 2016. For Glendale candidates the election will be over with the day’s results. Councilmember Ray Malnar and Vice Mayor Ian Hugh are running unopposed and will continue to serve in their capacities.

Mayor Jerry Weiers is facing former Fire Chief Mark Burdick and I am running against the incumbent, Sammy Chavira. Since there are only 2 candidates in each of these races, they will be decided in the Primary. A candidate must receive 50% of the vote plus 1 vote. Historically, there has been only one time in the state when neither primary candidate received 50% plus 1 and had to continue on to the General Election. It’s a rare occurrence.

As I sit writing I immediately think about all of the people who had enough faith and trust in me to become part of this campaign…there are too many to list but know this…I am in your debt.

Several people deserve special mention. Former Councilmember Norma Alvarez of the Ocotillo district insisted that I give running serious consideration and made a good case for my consideration. Norma, thank you for setting me on a path that provides me an opportunity to serve my community once again.

The other is my long time friend and confidant, Dawn Monaghan. She, as always, is a sounding board, editor and someone who keeps me on track when I tend to stray. Thank you Dawn.

Lastly, but certainly by no means least, is my family. It was they whom I asked about the idea of running again. They were immediately enthusiastic and urged me to do so. They walked with me, they hung signs and in true familial fashion, got angry about the lies my opponent spewed about me.

Based upon the feedback I have received from hundreds of former constituents, I feel very confident. A phone survey is no more than a snap shot in time and we had enough money to do just one. The results were that I was leading Sammy two-to-one. I guess we will find out if the phone survey was accurate very shortly.

I will be with my supporters on Election night. Mayor Weiers is hosting a viewing party for election results and I and my people will attend. If, and when I win, I will host a thank you party for my supporters and contributors at a later date.

Now is the time when all candidates get nervous. No one is ever certain whether they will win or lose. You hope you’ve done everything you could do to persuade and to educate voters and now it’s their turn to judge you with their votes. In a peek into the review I and my campaign staff made, here’s what we did:

  • Put up 80 campaign road signs 4’X4’
  • Put out 250 yard signs 18”X24”
  • Called an estimated 5,000 voters
  • Sent out weekly blast emails
  • Sent out 5 campaign mailings
  • Personally walked and called voters
  • Made automated calls to voters
  • Produced mini videos posted on my internet sites
  • Went to meet n greet events
  • Participated in the Glendale Women’s Club forum
  • Placed an ad in the Glendale Star
  • Responded to media requests for biography and answered their specific issue questions
  • Distributed 7,000 flyers within the district
  • Handed out campaign material at voting locations
  • Established a campaign website, www.joyceclark.com
  • Wrote numerous posts on www.joycelclarkunfiltered.com , on Facebook/Clark for Council and Facebook/joyceclark
  • Had many, many late night phone conversations tossing ideas back and forth and sometimes just musing over observations re: the campaign. Thank heaven I’m a night owl.

Being detail oriented here are a few funding facts. My campaign donations came from:

  • 21 contributions of $100 or more were from Glendale/Yucca district residents.
  • 10 contributions of $100 or more were from outside of Glendale. They were from friends, former colleagues and retired Glendale employees.
  • 22 contributions of $50 or less were from Glendale/Yucca district residents.
  • 5 contributions of $50 or less were from outside of Glendale. Again, they were from friends, former colleagues and retired Glendale employees.
  • I did receive 3 unsolicited PAC contributions totaling $1200 from 3 police associations that came with the endorsements I received from the Arizona Police Association and the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police.
  • No special interest money or PAC money was sought.

This campaign was funded by people, just like you. Unlike my opponent, I am beholden to no one except the people of the Yucca district and greater Glendale. I serve you, not special interests. For as you see, my campaign was funded primarily by Glendale and Yucca district residents. I can’t thank them enough.

Sammy and his big money, special interests have tried to divert the voters’ attention away from his shameful record. He violated his campaign promises almost immediately and the most disturbing was the use of taxpayer dollars as his personal checkbook for travel. Here is a link to the original Arizona Republic story by Paul Giblin: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2016/03/04/glendale-councilman-sammy-chavira-charges-24k-trips-3-years-taxpayers/78857734/ .

Sammy receives two paychecks. One is from the Phoenix Fire Department and is estimated to be approximately $100,000. The other is his $35,000 paycheck as a councilmember. Yet he still used nearly $25,000 of taxpayer money for personal trips to DC, for example. He has missed a dozen council meetings, has been late and has participated telephonically in others. He hasn’t done the job of a full-time councilmember yet he wishes to be reelected. He is a man with a broken moral compass and a man whose only priority is that of the special interests that bankroll his campaign.

Over my 16 years as councilmember I had an excellent record of service. I introduced innovations such as a Care Card program that provided discounts on prescriptions. I was fully accessible by phone, in person and by email. I helped so many of you with code issues or other issues with the city. I sent district newsletters to every household twice a year and held regular district meetings. I did not abuse the taxpayers’ trust and did not charge mileage or my monthly cell phone bill to the city, as some councilmember’s did. I challenged city personnel to defend their financial and policy recommendations to city council. I was honest, ethical and tried to make decisions that served the best interests of the people of my district and the city as a whole.

I have done the best I could and am at peace with my efforts. I sincerely thank those who have believed in me and worked so hard to elect me and I thank my family as well. I look forward with hope to writing a thank you to those who voted for and elected me.

© Joyce Clark, 2016        

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

27

Latest campaign finance reports: Clark and Chavira

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 27, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale's Fire Union  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

There is no doubt that Sammy raised a ton of money for his campaign. Upon review of his campaign finance report filed on August 26, 2016, 99.9% of his money does not come from Yucca district residents or even Glendale residents for that matter. Here is the link to his campaign finance report: http://glendaleaz.com/Clerk/documents/PrePrimary-ChaviraforGlendale.pdf .

Where did Sammy get his money? Can you say special interests? Here are a few that should be of interest. Jacob Long gave $750 and his family attorney, Jim Miller, another $500. They benefitted recently with the approval of Stonehaven (between 83rd and 91st avenues; Camelback to Bethany Home Road). Stonehaven is a planned residential subdivision of over 1,200 homes with 46% of the lots being 5,500 SF (less than Glendale R1-6 standard of 6,000 SF lots). Sammy approved Long’s development with gushing words of praise. Gee, I  wonder why?

There were 3 Glendale residents who contributed: John Phebus, an attorney with offices in north Glendale gave $1000 (I wonder who he represents?); Tom Schmitt with no occupation or employer listed (it is a requirement per Arizona campaign law) gave $200; and Reginald Martinez gave $50. That’s it. No other Glendale or Yucca district resident thought enough of him to contribute.

But guess who did? Why, the fire fighters, course. Three individual fire fighters, from Mesa, Phoenix and California contributed a total of $500.  The big money ( a total of $11,300) comes from Fire Political Action Committees (PACs):

  • International Association of Fire Fighters          $6250 (the maximum allowed)
  • Avondale Fire Fighters                                           $ 500
  • Casa Grande Fire Fighters                                      $ 500
  • Gilbert Fire Fighters                                               $ 500
  • Glendale Fire Fighters                                           $2000 (violation of federal Hatch Act?)
  • Los Angeles, CA  Fire Fighters                                 $ 500
  • Prescott Fire Fighters                                             $ 250
  • Sedona-Verde Valley Fire Fighters                           $ 250
  • Surprise Fire Fighters                                            $1000
  • Tempe Fire Fighters                                              $1000
  • Mesa Fire Fighters                                                  $ 750
  • Peoria Fire Fighters                                                $ 500

I decided to run a grassroots campaign. If district residents and Glendale residents wanted me back they would support me. Here is the link to my campaign finance report: http://glendaleaz.com/Clerk/documents/PrePrimary-ClarkforCouncil.pdf . My campaign donations came from:

  • 21 contributions of $100 or more were from Glendale/Yucca district residents.
  • 10 contributions of $100 or more were from outside of Glendale. They were from friends, former colleagues and retired Glendale employees.
  • 22 contributions of $50 or less were from Glendale/Yucca district residents.
  • 5 contributions of $50 or less were from outside of Glendale. Again, they were from friends, former colleagues and retired Glendale employees.
  • I did receive 3 unsolicited PAC contributions totaling $1200 from 3 police associations that came with the endorsements I received from the Arizona Police Association and the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police.
  • No special interest money or PAC money was sought.

In terms of Sammy’s campaign expenditures, they paint a picture. He paid Ben Scheel of Bright Consulting another $5,570.85. Sammy did not plan or participate in his own campaign. He paid someone else to do it. He paid the LA Machine $7324.00 for field operations. Sammy did not walk his district. He paid someone else to do it.

Just as Sammy has been invisible as a councilmember and unresponsive to the people of his district who he is supposed to serve, he has been invisible as a candidate. He paid to have someone run his campaign and he paid someone to walk his district. In his three campaign reports now filed, he has not received a single donation from a Yucca district resident.

Sammy is about big money from special interests. That is who he will vote for and represent. Not you, not the people of the Yucca district.

© Joyce Clark, 2016        

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 16

26

To the voters of Glendale: Weiers vs. Burdick

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 26, 2016
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale's Fire Union  | Tagged With: , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE LATEST CHAVIRA VIDEO. IT WAS INDEPENDENTLY PRODUCED AND NOT PAID FOR OR AUTHORIZED BY CLARK FOR COUNCIL. IT IS TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN.

Glendale’s local election this year, just as the national one, is one of the strangest I have ever seen. Mark Burdick, candidate for mayor, has been running TV ads for well over the past month, most of which have been against Mayor Jerry Weiers, also a candidate. His TV ads are based on one tiny snippet of information with liberally applies doses of innuendo and outright lies.

The kind of money needed to run TV ads for 2 months is very, very large and that money comes from special interests. The most notable special interest by far is the fire union. They desperately want Burdick to win. Think of the power they would have with the 5th largest city in this state having sway over its mayor and agenda.

Recently when interviewed by the Glendale Star Burdick admitted to lying about Weiers and also admitted the advice came from his campaign consultants because that was the only path to winning. Here is what he said to the Star editorial board on June 28, 2016, “As a ‘city insider’ by his own admission, Burdick has publicly stated his willingness to use deceptive claims and misleading statements to garner votes his political advisors assure they will render.”

His campaign consultants are the likes of Julie Frisoni, former City of Glendale employee and apparently at one time in former City Manager Ed Beasley’s inner circle; she is also allegedly responsible for aiding and abetting IceArizona while it was in contract negotiations with the City of Glendale.

Mark Burdick, when he was the city’s Fire Chief, never stood up to the fire union. Consequently, the union virtually ran the City of Glendale’s Fire Department. Burdick was also unable to control his department’s budget and in nearly every fiscal year had asked for more money to cover overtime.

Burdick’s inability to draw a line between the best interests of the city and the fire union’s agenda is demonstrated by his past performance as Fire Chief.  Burdick’s position as a former Fire Chief doesn’t qualify him to be mayor. The two positions are drastically different. If that is what you want, go no further. Vote for Burdick.

But I ask you to consider this. There are many Glendale residents who want city infrastructure, including our streets repaired and maintained; they want to see not only restoration of but more recreational opportunities for their families; they want to see a permanent West Glendale branch library and Heroes Park completed as designed; and they want to see library hours restored.  They have many pent up needs unmet because of the national recession.

None of these citizen wants will be realized if Burdick becomes mayor. Burdick has made a large part of his election rhetoric making sure “public safety” receives more money.  Burdick will insure that all available money will go to “public safety” – but not all public safety — just the fire department. Look for new fire stations, more personnel and enhanced salaries and benefits for fire personnel…and of course, more overtime at time and a half pay. If your choice is to use all available city money for public safety rather than distributing it in an equitable manner, insuring that there will be money for needs other than public safety, read no further. Vote for Burdick.

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

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

  • 2010   8 minutes 11 seconds
  • 2011   8 minutes 10 seconds
  • 2012   8 minutes 6 seconds
  • 2013   8 minutes 12 seconds (Jerry Weiers becomes Mayor)
  • 2014   8 minutes 12 seconds

Burdick said publicly that fire response times had not deteriorated and in fact, had remained constant for 5 years. What he said last year is in complete contradiction to his campaign rhetoric of today. Will you believe what Burdick said last year when he was not running for office or the hype he has offered now that he is running?

There are many factors that impact fire response times. Two of them are major determinants: the city’s transportation system and Automatic Aid. The city’s rigid grid system of streets often impacts response times. Glendale’s congested major arterial streets often make it difficult for fire to respond quickly. Fire’s Automatic Aid system is valley wide. All city signators to Automatic Aid are required to answer neighboring cities’ calls if there is no close unit within the affected city. Did you know that Glendale answers more calls into Phoenix than Phoenix answers calls in Glendale? That is not the only imbalance between Glendale and its neighboring cities. It is imbalances like these that require units farther away from an incident to respond. It is not uncommon for Glendale to receive an emergency call only to find the closest unit is answering a call in a nearby city.

Those who are assisting Burdick’s effort to become mayor have their own agenda and that is to regain the power and influence they lost when Jerry Weiers became Glendale’s mayor.

Burdick’s only “economic plan” is to ensure that the fire union’s demands are met. At what cost? Forget your libraries, forget your parks, forget more recreational opportunities for your children, and forget improved sanitation or water services.

Voters in Glendale, you have a choice and as you make your choice I ask you to consider the following. Mayor Jerry Weiers is a good and decent man and during his first term he has silently and without any fan fare, done much to benefit the city we all love. Jerry Weiers lead the city’s economic turn around and has begun the city’s trek toward restoration of financial stability. The city’s bond rating has been upgraded in the process. Few people know that Weiers was able to obtain 18 free (no cost to the city) police cars. He also started the city’s Christmas parade, sure to become a tradition like Glendale Glitters. He convinced Westgate to restore the city’s 4th of July. He is fully involved with many charity groups and his major focus is always on our veterans. He has lead a council not as unified as people would believe. He has restored Glendale’s credibility with other Valley cities.

Glendale voters, the choice is clear between a man whose first and apparently only priority is to use all available city resources for the fire department and a man who realizes that Glendale has many needs and the distribution of city resources must be prioritized and used as equitably as possible; a man who continues to hold as priority #1 the continued financial health of the city. That man, a man I believe who has earned your vote, is Jerry Weiers.

© Joyce Clark, 2016        

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘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 »