Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 150 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

The Arizona Republic of June 1, 2015 has a front page story by Peter Corbett entitled Glendale staffer quits over altered arena audit. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2015/06/01/glendale-staffer-resigns-arena-audit/28289641/ . Corbett reports that Assistant City Auditor Andrea McDermott-Fields resigned as a result of a conflict with City Auditor Candace MacLeod over the Coyotes audit.

A little history is in order. Two years ago the city audited its Risk Management Trust Fund. The audit was performed by MacLeod. MacLeod was supported by and worked very closely with former City Attorney (now attorney for IceArizona) Craig Tindall. MacLeod was part of the Frisoni-Burdick group that lobbied me (and I assume, other councilmembers) to appoint Craig Tindall as Interim City Manager rather than Horatio Skeete. This is “inside baseball” stuff and wouldn’t be commonly known.

I, and I assume the other councilmembers, were not aware of the fact that MacLeod’s husband did contract work in broadcasting for the Coyotes until 2011. Just as in the case of former Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni and her husband’s work for Insight Technology (a company that recently received a contract renewal from the city) there is a perception of conflict of interest. Just as Frisoni should have signed a disclosure statement it would have been prudent for MacLeod to divulge her possible conflict in reviewing the Coyotes recently submitted audit. The perception, rightly or wrongly, is that MacLeod might have had a reason to insure that IceArizona, owner of the Coyotes, didn’t look too bad.

What makes this situation even more questionable is that IceArizona stalled on releasing its audit. It should have been submitted to the city no later than September (60 days after the end of the Fiscal Year which ends June 30th). The city didn’t receive it until recently. In anticipation of receiving the IceArizona audit in a timely fashion the city hired Tony Tavares (once part of a group interested in buying the Coyotes) to audit the IceArizona submission. Presumably Tavares’ audit was completed and turned over to the city for confirmation. That is where MacLeod enters the picture. MacLeod assigned the job to McDermott-Fields but would have reviewed and approved the final work product.

According to Corbett McDermott-Fields in her April 21 letter of resignation said, “The basis of my resignation is that you have changed my findings in a way that is not acceptable to me or in accordance with the information that I have gathered.” As a result of McDermott’s resignation and the reason for it Jim Brown, the city’s human resources director did an inquiry regarding McDermott-Fields’ resignation but did not include a review of any of MacLeod’s changes to McDermott-Fields’ audit findings. Corbett related that “MacLeod told Brown that some of McDermott-Fields’ ‘documentation was inaccurate, incomplete, unclear, in some cases inflammatory and at times based on (McDermott-Fields’) opinion, which had not been confirmed with the city attorney or others’.”

MacLeod’s statement to Brown raises so many red flags I’m not even sure where to begin. In the article McDermott-Fields stated, “She is certified as an accountant, internal auditor and fraud examiner, adding that she has more than 25 years of experience.” Add to that she appears to have no ties or relationships to anyone associated with IceArizona and the Coyotes. She probably has more experience than MacLeod. She appears to be a neutral party and called it as she saw it.

It seems as if MacLeod trashed McDermott-Fields’ work because she didn’t like the result. I am also intrigued by McDermott-Fields’ comment, “MacLeod seemed hostile to her when they met to discuss the audit findings and (MacLeod) ‘accused me of throwing her under the bus’.” That also raises red flags. What was MacLeod upset about in McDermott-Fields’ audit findings? Who is MacLeod trying to protect? The city, IceArizona or both? No, something stinks about the whole situation.  It appears to be another CYA move by Brown and Tom Duensing in an effort to avoid city embarrassment because an employee called the audit as she saw it and it might have shown that the city was being short changed by IceArizona in the revenues it received.

The shame of it all is that we will never know the results of the city’s audit. Why? Because former City Manager Brenda Fischer, in an apparent stunning lack of competence, signed a separate agreement with Anthony LeBlanc of the Coyotes, agreeing to keep the audit confidential. She didn’t have to do that. The management agreement between the city and IceArizona stipulated that the city has the right to audit and there was no requirement of confidentiality. If the agreement had been followed without the separate Fischer-LeBlanc amendment the audit would be publicly available. Then we would know who was right in her findings…MacLeod or McDermott-Fields. Somehow or another I’m betting McDermott-Fields was right on the money.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 147 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

We all know about the billions the NFL (as a non-profit organization) made from the Super Bowl. It is estimated that the city lost somewhere between $1 and $1.6 million dollars. It turns out it was lucrative for some city employees working overtime for these major events. A total of 305 city employees were credentialed for the Super Bowl. They did not have assigned seats but that would not have prevented them from being in attendance. Many of them worked. The guys and girls on the line – 36 firefighters and 92 police officers – worked hard that day. Some credentialed employees in attendance if truth be told didn’t work at all but certainly were in attendance.

Fire Department numbers and figures provided under a Public Record Request reflect combined Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl figures as the department did not track each of these events separately. However the Fire Department had 105 of its employees credentialed for the Super Bowl (Please note: The Public Records Request provided names of all credentialed employees. I chose not to use them):

  • Fire Chief -1
  • Deputy Chief -1
  • Deputy Fire Chief-1
  • Executive Assistant Fire Chief-1
  • Deputy Chief of Logistics-1
  • Assistant Chief of Operations-1
  • Assist Chief of Logistics & Personnel-1
  • Deputy Chief of EMS-1
  • Fire Marshall-1
  • Assistant Fire Marshall-1
  • Deputy Fire Marshall-3
  • Division Chief of Communications-1
  • Division Manager-1
  • Resource Manager-1
  • Inspector-1
  • Battalion Chief-2
  • Acting Captain EMS-1
  • MD-1
  • Administrative Support-5
  • Administrative Supervisor-1
  • Firefighter-36
  • Fire Engineer-11
  • Fire Captain-29
  • Cadet-2
  • Recruit-1

Rates of pay differed for the top five earners encompassing all 3 major events (Fiesta Bowl, Pro Bowl and Super Bowl)  and each earned (again names were provided and I chose not to use them):

  • Fire Captain at 148.75 hours for $11,339.21 (Overtime at $76.23 per hour)
  • Fire Captain at 138.50 hours for $10,939.73(Overtime at $78.98 per hour)
  • Fire Captain at 98 hours for $7,235.34 (Overtime at $73.83 per hour)
  • Fire Engineer at 152 hours for $7,081.68 (Overtime at $46.13 per hour)
  • Division Manager at 19 hours for $4,180.00 (Overtime at $220 per hour)

Police Department numbers and figures provided under a Public Record Request do reflect the Super Bowl figures alone. The Police Department had 190 of its employees credentialed for the Super Bowl (Please note: the Public Records Request provided names of all employees. I chose not to use them):

  • Police Chief-1
  • Assistant Chief-2
  • Lieutenant-9
  • Commander-6
  • Detective-1
  • Sergeant-18
  • SWAT Sergeant-3
  • Sergeant EOD-1
  • EOD Officer-4
  • Sergeant K9-1
  • PIO Lieutenant-1
  • PIO Sergeant-1
  • PIO Officer-3
  • Detention Manager-1
  • Detention Officer-2
  • OIT Officer-1
  • Check In-5
  • Dispatcher-3
  • Communications-6
  • SWAT Officer-24
  • Officer-92
  • K9 Officer-5

The rate of pay for these Sergeants was $45.22 per hour (Again I chose not to use names):

  • Sergeant for 123 hours at $5,561.25
  • SWAT Sergeant for 70 hours at $3,165.27
  • SWAT Sergeant for 66 hours at $2,984.40
  • Sergeant for 60 hours at $2,713.09
  • SWAT Sergeant for 55 hours at $2,486.99

Of the total of 305 City of Glendale employees credentialed for the Super Bowl 10 were not Public Safety employees. Some of the more notable non Public Safety credentialed employees were:

  • Former City Manager Brenda Fischer
  • Former Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni
  • Current Assistant City Manager Jennifer Campbell
  • Intergovernmental Director Brent Stoddard
  • Former Communications Director Julie Watters
  • Development Services Director Sam McAllen
  • Program Administrator of Economic Development Jean Moreno

When asked under a Public Records Request to verify those employees who actually used their credentials this was the city response, “The city does not have any records to produce that would be responsive to this request. The credentials provided did require the user to scan in and out upon entering the hard perimeter of the stadium; however, the scanning equipment used did not belong to the city, nor was the city provided with any reports or other information about city employee scans.” How about that? The city doesn’t know but presumably the NFL does.

The city’s designated 22 member Operational Planning Team for the Super Bowl was comprised of the following employees:

  • Richard Bradshaw – Police
  • Cathy Colbath – Public Works
  • Justine Cornelius – Building Safety
  • Chris DeChant – Fire
  • Trevor Ebersole – Traffic
  • Walter Fix – Airport
  • Patty Frey – Fire
  • Jon Froke – Planning
  • Julie Frisoni – Communications/Asst. City Manager
  • Anthony Gavalyas – Fire
  • Joe Hengemuehler – Communications
  • Tamara Hicks – Licensing
  • Charles Jenkins – Fire
  • Matt Lively – Police
  • Sam McAllen – Code Enforcement
  • Jean Moreno – Economic Development
  • Tabitha Perry – Planning
  • Lorraine Pino- Convention Bureau
  • Claire Smith – Management Aide
  • Kristen Stephenson – Economic Development
  • Brent Stoddard – Intergovernmental Relations
  • Julie Watters – Communications

Quite a few of the members of this committee are department heads and even directors of departments. In city hierarchy their time was very valuable in terms of pay. Yet the city never tracked their hours of planning nor counted their hours of meeting as an identified cost incurred by the city for the Super Bowl. The same can be said of the 16 member Public Information Officers group comprised of the following:

  • Tracy Breeden – Police
  • Jackie Cole – Police
  • Ronald Hart – Fire
  • Joe Hengemuehler – Communications
  • Tamra Ingersoll – Communications
  • Sam McAllen – Code Enforcement
  • Jean Moreno – Economic Development
  • Jay O’Neil – Police
  • Robin Phillips – Communications
  • Laurie Sapp – Media Center
  • Daniel Senese – Fire
  • Rochelle Thomas – Police
  • Daniel Valenzuela – Fire
  • David Vidaure – Police
  • Julie Watters – Communications
  • Michael Young – Fire

Jean Moreno, Sam McAllen, Joe Hengemuehler and Julie Watters worked within both groups. These 2 groups were made up of 34 employees some of whom are high salaried employees. What remains troubling is that no accounting of their time and talent is tracked by the city yet they are expenses that the city incurred to host the Super Bowl.

Whatever figure the city claims as its cost to host the Super Bowl is bogus as long as all costs are not tracked. Employee time and wages are one component of the cost. What about equipment used? Police and fire vehicles, sanitation trucks, transportation equipment, etc. the city used? What about O&M costs for these vehicles? What about other equipment or personnel I wasn’t wise enough to ask for in attributing costs? Although my Public Record Requests were as specific and detailed as I could make them there were sure to be items I never thought of including. As we all know if you don’t specifically ask, you won’t get it. The city is not going to volunteer to give up information.

There you have it. Based on the information provided by the city I did my best to calculate expenses and revenues for hosting the Super Bowl. After all is said and done, Interim Assistant City Manager Tom Duensing’s figure of $2.2 million is incorrect. Add another million to two million dollars and you would be in the ball park. Perhaps the city will take note and if there should ever be another Super Bowl in Glendale city administrators will make every effort to track ALL costs not just the most visible – Public Safety. The city loses money owning the spring training ball park and the arena. Should it consciously continue to lose money hosting the Super Bowl and other major events? Perhaps it’s time to revisit any and all contracts associated with these major events as a means of city loss prevention. We love hosting them but the taxpayers of Glendale should not have to pay for them. It is incumbent upon the city to insure that all event promoters pay their fair share to alleviate the burden of loss the city continues to experience.

By the way, the city in its city council meeting of May 26, 2015 refunded $3 million dollars to AZSTA (Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority) in sales tax. That sales tax would have gone a long way to covering the loss sustained by the city. What’s wrong with this picture?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 139 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

The cost to host the Super Bowl is estimated at $3.4 million to $4.1 million dollars. Let’s take a look at the revenue earned by the city. The oft touted public mentioning of Glendale as the host city will not be considered. It is an intangible that cannot be quantified. It has been my experience as a councilmember when the city hosted its first Super Bowl in 2008 that whatever publicity there was did not attract any new business to Glendale. Public safety will not be considered. The costs and reimbursements to and for public safety have been related in a previous blog. Instead we will focus on any revenue earned by any Glendale department.

My Public Records Request generated the following information related to revenue earned by the city:

  • The Glendale Media Center provided figures that reflect both the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl. It seems reasonable to attribute 40% to the Pro Bowl and 60% to the Super Bowl. Total revenue earned less expenses was $8,480.57. Attributing 40% of the revenue earned to the Pro Bowl revenue was $3,392.23. Attributing 60% of the revenue earned to the Super Bowl was $5,088.34.
  • Planning Review (all departments) submitted a figure of $23,297.94 as revenue earned.
  • Permits earned $36,129.39 in revenue to the city.
  • Total Airport earned revenue for the Super Bowl was $12,686.00.

Super Bowl revenue earned as reported by the city for the above areas totaled $77,201.67.

That leaves the burning question of sales tax revenues earned by the city. City provided sales tax figures for January, February and March of 2014 and 2015 are:

City Sales Tax Revenue

Category January 2014 February 2014 March 2014
Retail sales $9,972,625.07 $5,637,641.32 $6,051,941.00
Contracting 745,079.38 518,696.33 616,690.00
Rentals 1,288,183.21 1,231,427.59 1,198,958.00
Utilities 601,681.64 583,784.06 530,215.00
Telecom/cable TV 405,525.87 416,381.31 448,315.00
Restaurant/Bar 1,495,519.46 1,323,988.20 1,308,653.00
Amusement 273,379.62 164,735.96 **
Other 558,426.02 445,446.71 1,116,070.00
TOTAL $15,335,417.00 $9,905,713.90 $11,271,212.00
  January 2015 February 2015 March 2015
Retail sales $9,372,364.50 $5,907,360.87 $6,747,767.00
Contracting 875,261.45 364,980.35 313,977.00
Rentals 1,491,967.04 1,202,529.74 1,324,516.00
Utilities 550,498.45 652,889.28 533,143.00
Telecom/cable TV 413,887.84 399,566.79 378,533.00
Restaurant/Bar 1,672,493.84 1,470,676.34 1,795,488.00
Amusement 313,548.98 110,242.04 **
Other 626,308.30 648,248.08 3,702,783.00
TOTAL $15,316,326.00 $10.756,493.00 $14,796,226.00

Total revenues for 3 months (Jan. – Feb. – Mar.)

Year 2014 Year 2015
$36,512,342.90 $40,869,045.00

** You will note that the city supplied no figures for the Amusement category for March of 2014 and 2015. I requested the March 2014 and 2015 seperately and received the following with the figures provided: “The requested information is included below with the exception that the category of Amusements has been combined into the category labeled Other.  Due to laws regarding taxpayer confidentiality, the information on Amusements had to be aggregated.  Therefore, the Other category includes Amusements, Hotel/Motel, Use Tax,  Printing, Publishing, Advertising, Jet Fuel, and other small dollar categories.” When I asked for a further explanation of this new practice the explanation offered by Ms. Vicki Rios, Glendale’s Acting Finance Director (now that Tom Duensing has been named as Interim Assistant City Manager replacing Julie Frisoni) was: “Mrs. Clark, 

“Section 21.1-450 (a) of the Glendale City Code states in part, “Except as specifically provided, it shall be unlawful for any official or employee of the City to make known information obtained pursuant to this Chapter concerning the business financial affairs or operations of any person.” 

“We take our obligation to protect taxpayer information very seriously.  During the month of March 2015, the mix and volume of taxpayer transactions in the Amusement category was such that if we were to disclose that category separately it would compromise the confidentiality of one or more taxpayers.  Therefore, we had to aggregate the category with other items for that month.  Because the taxpayer base and volume of transactions changes monthly, we evaluate each request independently.  Therefore, we were able to provide that information in the prior months.” The Amusement category would include sales tax receipts related to the Pro Bowl and Super Bowl.

January sales tax reflects December; February sales tax reflects January; and March reflects February. That is because sales tax is reported and paid in the month following the actual sales.

At first blush, when looking at the total sales tax reported for Jan. – Feb. – Mar. in 2014 and 2015 the first inclination is to say the $4,356,702.10 increase year over year is due to the Super Bowl.

Not so fast. There are mitigating factors to be considered. Tom Duensing, in his May 19, 2015 presentation to the city council on sales tax, stated that much of the increase is due to growth within the city. He indicated that new businesses have located in Glendale and they contributed to the sales tax revenue increase. In fact, Tanger Outlets grew substantially. Since Glendale does not publicly further refine its sales tax receipts the assumption is that an estimated $500,000 of that sales tax increase can be attributed to Tanger Outlet growth. If $500,000 is subtracted from the $4,356,702.10 year over year increase the figure is now $3,856,702.100 in sales tax revenue that can be attributed to all 3 major events: the Fiesta Bowl, the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl.

Using the 40%/60% assumption, 40% can be attributed to the Fiesta Bowl and the Pro Bowl arriving at a figure of $1,542,680.80 in sales tax revenue. The Super Bowl sales tax figure at 60% is assumed to be $2,314,021.20. Add to this figure $77,201.67 in direct revenue the city received for the Super Bowl and the assumed figure for revenue earned by the city for the Super Bowl is $2,391,222.87.

Mr. Duensing budgeted $2.2 million dollars for the Super Bowl. Under his scenario the city only lost $191, 222.87 to host the Super Bowl. However the assumption is that the Super Bowl costs ranged from a low of an estimated $3.4 million to $4.1 million dollars. Based upon the figures used in this and the previous Super Bowl blogs the estimated loss to the city to host the 2015 Super Bowl ranges from a low of $1,008,777.13 to a high of $1,608,777.13.

The city admittedly had no mechanism to track all costs associated with hosting the Super Bowl and while it may have the figures of sales tax directly attributable to the Super Bowl it does not publicly divulge them. It should be of concern to all Glendale taxpayers that the city does not track each and every Super Bowl related expense. Based upon available expense and revenue figures the city was able to provide an estimated loss of $1 million to $1.6 million dollars is a reasonably accurate estimate. If you accept that the city only lost an estimated $191,000 I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.

The last Super Bowl blog will share some interesting information on Super Bowl credentialed Glendale employees and how much some Glendale employees made in overtime or time and a half working these 3 major events. Some of the figures will astound you.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

mothers 4

It has been 17 years and 129 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

When it comes to determining the actual cost of hosting the Super Bowl it is almost impossible using the city’s current financial tracking system. As the city responded to my Public Information Request it noted for Pro Bowl and Super Bowl expenses, “It was not announced that the Pro Bowl would be held in Glendale until budget development already took place so there were not separate accounts created for Pro Bowl expenses. Everything was charged to fund 1010 National Events.” In terms of Public Safety costs the city also responded with, “There was not a separate reporting code for Pro Bowl. Pro Bowl public safety costs were subject to the provisions of the city’s contract with Global Spectrum for public safety services at the stadium and the city will receive a partial reimbursement for those expenses.”

I requested a list of all departments that contributed, by event, in any way. The city’s response was, “A list as requested does not exist, but the documents provided somewhat address the request. There were obviously other departments involved as issues arose that affected their service areas, but a list was not created for tracking purposes.”

Based upon city provided figures I arrived at police Pro Bowl figures of 5,486 hours and wages of $309,387.54 and fire Pro Bowl figures of 1,400 hours and wages of $90,000. The city received partial reimbursement from Global Spectrum and I have established an estimated reimbursement figure of approximately $70,000 for police and $45,000 for fire services. Obviously this does not include other departments’ employee time and materials. Based upon figures available it is estimated that the city spent a minimum of $300,000 for public safety in support of the Pro Bowl. Other department costs are estimated to be in the range of $200,000. The city spent an estimated range of $500,000 in non-reimbursable hosting costs for the Pro Bowl.

Based upon city provided figures I arrived at police Super Bowl figures of 7,321.89 hours and wages of $527,527.08 and fire Super Bowl figures of 2,900 hours and wages of $241,000. The city’s costs for public safety alone are approximately $768,000. Add the city identified travel expenses for the 2014 Super Bowl of $19,000, Building Safety costs of $40,000 and Transportation Department costs of $787,000. These city identified costs total $1.61 million.

Add the untracked, unidentified costs such as the Super Bowl Operations Planning Team, the Code Compliance Enforcement Teams and the PIO team. Now add the untracked, unidentified costs of many departments: Sanitation, Marketing, Streets, Parks & Recreation, Planning & Zoning, etc. These costs are easily estimated to total $1 million to $1.5 million. It is fair to estimate the city’s true cost for hosting the 2015 Super Bowl between $2.6 to $3.1 million dollars.

What have you, the taxpayer, paid to be identified as a Sports Mecca in 2015?

  • Fiesta Bowl non-reimbursable cost of an estimated $300,000 to $500,000.
  • Pro Bowl non-reimbursable cost of an estimated $500,000
  • Super Bowl non-reimbursable cost of an estimated $2.6 million to $3.1 million
  • Total cost an estimated $3.4 million to $4.1 million dollars.

Ka-ching…

Next up…some interesting factoids discovered and did the city earn any money while hosting these events?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 119 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Before we delve into the world of finances used to host the Super Bowl remember that the city actually hosted 3 major events at the stadium in 2015: the Fiesta Bowl, the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl.

We’ll look at the murky finances of hosting the Fiesta Bowl. It is the only one of the three major events for which there is any mechanism of even partial financial reimbursement. When the University of Phoenix stadium opened on August 1, 2006 the city entered into an agreement not with the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority (AZSTA) but with the management company, Global Spectrum, which AZSTA hired to manage the stadium. The Fiesta Bowl Committee rents the stadium and contracts with Global Spectrum to manage the event. The agreement between Global Spectrum and the city requires police and fire service partial reimbursement. Global Spectrum reimburses the city for only these two services.

The two latest agreements between the parties are dated October 22, 2013 for fire services and April 10, 2014 for police services. In the 2013 agreement Global pays an hourly rate of $40.00 for fire services. In the 2014 agreement Global pays an hourly rate of $51.10 for police services with provision for an annual increase of 3%.

From the March 20, 2012 city council budget workshop minutes we learned the following, “Councilmember Lieberman asked if the city paid the salary of all the officers from other municipalities that come to help them in trafficking for events such as the Fiesta Bowl. Assistant Chief Greg Dominguez, explained the city does have an account that was budgeted for the staffing that was specific to the Fiesta Bowl. Therefore, the city does cover salaries for those events.”

In response to my Public Information Request I received the following information from the city for police costs for the Fiesta Bowl:

  • Police billable hours are 1,152.38 and billable wages are $53,671.63
  • Police non-billable hours are 1,287.89 and non-billable wages are $70,765.20
  • Total police hours are 2,440.27 and total wages are $126,436.83

Yet another city document I received entitled 2015 YTD (Year to date) Budget Control Report Details listed police expenses for the Fiesta Bowl of:

  • Temporary pay of $36,640.00
  • Overtime pay of $43,999.07
  • Emergency Service pay of $880.00
  • Fire & Liability insurance of $727.51
  • Professional and Contractual to Airwest Aviation Academy of $1,174.50
  • Line Supplies (Insight, Zoro tools, Best Buy and Motorola) of $3,926.97
  • Total of these line items is $87,347.06

With no further clarification from the city I have to assume that $87,347.06 is in addition to the total wages reported of $126,436.83. These two city generated reports total $213,783.89 for which the city received reimbursement for billable hours and wages of $53,671.63. These reports confirm that city paid at least $160,112.26 from its General Fund to host the Fiesta Bowl. I suspect that this figure is low because in the city’s FY 2015-16 budget $245,975 is the figure used.

Fire costs for the Fiesta Bowl are:

  • Hours of 425.25 and wages of $26,953.18
  • There is no distinction between billable and non billable hours and wages

In its 2015 YTD Budget Control Report Details fire expenses are listed as:

  • Overtime pay of $19,330.61
  • Emergency Service pay of $2,200.00
  • Fire & Liability insurance of $296.24
  • Line supplies (Insight, Lowes, Salsa Blanca, Shane’s Rib Shack, Home Depot, AGP Propane, Segway of Scottsdale, RV Storage, Roadrunner Oxygen, Cabela’s, Office Depot) of $6,999.14
  • Total of these line items is $28,826.99

The two city generated reports total $55,780.17. This tracks with the FY 2015-26 budget of $58,816.00 for fire. Note that fire does not make any budgetary distinction between billable and non-billable hours and wages. Since it tracks so closely to the budgeted amount it may be safe to assume that this cost reflects non-billable hours and wages.

In yet another city generated 2015 YTD Budget Control Report for Transportation we see:

  • Overtime pay of $74.88
  • Fire & Liability insurance of $191.25
  • Professional & Contractual for shuttle services of $26,049.40
  • Line supplies (Culver’s) of $60.74
  • Total of these line items is $26,376.27

After reimbursement for some public safety costs the best estimate of total non-reimbursable costs for the Fiesta Bowl paid by the city’s General Fund is $301,783.99. But this figure is only attributable to police, fire and shuttle services.   Remember there are other costs not tracked by the city. Items not tracked are salaries, straight time and overtime in transportation, sanitation, marketing, building safety plus the use of city equipment. How much did they use in time, equipment and material? We don’t know and guess what; neither does the city because it doesn’t track any of these additional costs. That makes my assumption as to Fiesta Bowl costs as reasonable as theirs.

The figure to host the Fiesta Bowl is $300,000 on the low end and about $500,000 on the high end. It is reasonable to assume that it is closer to $500,000 when the hidden, untracked, unreimbursed expenses are identified.

Why doesn’t the city track all costs for these major events? Pick your reason. It could be laziness or sheer incompetence. Conspiracy theorists will say that the city doesn’t want its citizens to know. They believe, and they may be right, that Glendale residents would be outraged to learn exactly how much the city’s role as a sports mecca costs. Residents may realize that sports hosting costs remove available revenue to upgrade or to construct amenities that enhance a city’s quality of life…and that is a bigger deal than a football game.

Next up the cost of the Super Bowl (and Pro Bowl).

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 115 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

This series of blogs is an in depth look at the true costs to the City of Glendale to host the Fiesta Bowl, the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl in 2015. This has been difficult to write. Not because the subject matter is difficult but because the city’s response was complex, in some cases non-resposive and much of the material they provided required extensive untangling. The city is to be commended on supplying the answers to my request in a very timely fashion. There is a disclaimer. Despite my desire to obtain complete information from the city, the city did not create a mechanism to capture all of the costs that could be attributed to any of these events. More about this later.

It has been widely reported that Tom Duensing, Glendale’s Finance Director, claimed the cost of hosting the 2015 Super Bowl at $2.2 million dollars. Yet the cost to host the 2008 Super Bowl to the city was $2.8 million dollars. How could hosting in 2015 cost the city less? The answer is…it didn’t.

Inflation alone would have made all costs for services and equipment rise. The average inflation rate per year from 2008 to 2014 was 1.97% or 13.4% for seven years (the amount of time between the two hostings). See this link: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/ . Just to account for inflation added to the 2008 cost of $2.8M would drive up the 2015 cost to $3.7M. How does Mr. Duensing, with a straight face, claim a 2015 Super Bowl cost of only $2.2M? It’s quite simple…don’t count everything.

My Public Information Request to the city included:

  • The cost attributable to each event of planning for, preparation for, game day hosting and after actions.
  • A list of all departments that contributed, by event, in any way, including but not limited to Public Safety as well as any and all departments involved from the Attorney’s Office to Zoning (A to Z).
  • The number of employees used for each event from all departments you list, including but not limited to consultants, contract employees or regular (salaried and at will) employees.
  • The number of hours attributable to each event, by department, including but not limited to planning, preparing, action upon and after action review of each of these 3 major events.
  • The total dollar figure for employee costs attributable to each event, including but not limited to straight time pay, overtime pay, special pay, time and a half pay. List of all employees by job title and department, dollar amount for each of those employees who received overtime pay, special pay, assignment pay, time and a half pay, bonuses, Police & Fire to include sworn and non-sworn administrative staff from those departments. Separate list for each of those three events.
  • The total dollar figure attributable to each event for use of all equipment by department or rented from other sources from but not limited to vehicles to trash cans whether a city asset or rented.
  • Total revenues earned by the City of Glendale directly attributable to each of the three events, including but not limited to sales taxes, fees, in-kind contributions and reimbursed costs.

Now that is a very, very specific and detailed Public Information Request. Here’s a secret. If ever you have occasion to request information from this city or from any other governmental agency for that matter, you must be very specific and very precise in your wording. Governmental agencies don’t want you, the public, to have information. Information in today’s world is power. They don’t want to cede their power. If you were to be made aware of the information, you just might question how and why monies were spent.

Let’s begin with my first question: “The cost attributable to each event of planning for, preparation for, game day hosting and after actions.” What do we learn from the city’s response to this question? First, that it did not provide a complete answer. The city’s convention bureau paid the Super Bowl Host Committee $72,000 in support of the Super Bowl. These were not city funds. At the city council meeting of December 10, 2013 council passed Resolution 4758 authorizing the use of funds received from the Arizona Office of Tourism under Maricopa County Proposition 302 to be paid to the Host Committee. The city was merely a pass-through. It received the $72,000 grant, gave it to the CVB, who then gave it to the Host Committee in two payments: one in 2014 and one in 2015.

In November of 2014 the city formed a Super Bowl Operational Planning Team consisting of 22 employees. Those employees came from the Fire Department, Police Department, Code Enforcement, Planning Department, Intergovernmental Relations, Marketing & Communications, etc.  What we don’t get is information on how many times they met, for how long, what direction they gave to other departments. Did they meet for an hour, two hours? Once a week? Once a month? What about meetings outside of city hall, with the Host Committee or NFL agents?

Why wasn’t a special finance code number assigned so their hours could be tracked? This is over a year before the actual Super Bowl. The Finance Department had the time to set up a financial tracking system that would account for hours and salaries but they didn’t do it. The city then formed a separate Public Information Officer Distribution List comprised of 18 employees. A few were from the Operational Planning Team but a majority was not. This distribution list was to insure that all PIOs within the city received the same talking points if queried, about the Super Bowl. Again, we don’t know how much time these 18 PIOs spent on Super Bowl activities.

The city sent 7 employees to the 2014 Super Bowl in New Jersey. Four were from the Police Department and three were from the Fire Department. I would consider this trip as essential. Those 7 employees had direct responsibilities related to Glendale’s hosting of the Super Bowl. They learned current and valuable information. The cost of their travel was $18,639.10.

The city’s Code Compliance division created Clean Zone Enforcement Teams that operated from Saturday, January 24, 2015 through Sunday, February 1, 2015. This encompasses the period in which the Pro Bowl and Super Bowl took place. For 7 days out of that 9 day period teams of 2 code compliance officers were dedicated to the area of these events from 8 AM to 4 PM. On 2 Sundays during this period they worked from 8 AM to Noon. 8 full time employees (FTEs) were used for a total of 128 hours. There was no information provided relating to FTE costs associated with this effort.

What is learned from the city’s answers to this first question? The city and especially Mr. Duensing was very sloppy in tracking the costs of all three events distinctly incurred by other departments that were not attributable to Public Safety. Mr. Duensing was probably correct in using a figure of $2.2M for the Super Bowl but that figure appears related only to Public Safety costs and ignores the costs incurred by other departments.

For example, the Attorney’s Office spent time and personnel reviewing contracts associated with these events. The Building Safety division spent time and personnel inspecting temporary structures. The Sanitation Department made extra runs to pick up trash. The Streets division sent out street sweepers. The Transportation Department manned their transportation center to monitor traffic and hired a helicopter for their use to monitor traffic. They used man hours and FTEs making sure the traffic lights were synched properly. The Planning Department reviewed and approved plans for temporary structures. The Media & Communications Department and the Intergovernmental Relations Department also had duties related to these events. How many FTEs were used and how much time did they consume? How much of their salaries can we attribute? We don’t know because the city failed to track that information.

The hours and FTEs used for these events were enormous and placed a strain on the delivery of regular service to Glendale residents. Yet, unbelievably, the city created no mechanism to track the costs incurred by the many city departments tasked with contributing man power and time.

We know the city created an Operational Planning Team, a PIO team and a Code Compliance team but it can provide no costs associated with any of them. These were committees created a year before the actual events. There was time to create a method of tracking the time expended and costs associated but it was not done.

The only costs acknowledged by the city in answer to question #1 were the $72,000 grant passed on to the Host Committee (not city funds); and the $18,639.10 the city paid for public safety employees to attend the Super Bowl in New Jersey in 2014.

Next up…a look at Public Safety costs for each of the three events, the Fiesta Bowl, the Pro Bowl and the Super Bowl.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 110 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On April 9, 2015 we learned that the state Attorney General’s Office has declined to file charges on the allegations of Open Meeting Law violations facing Councilmembers Gary Sherwood and Sammy Chavira and former Councilmembers Manny Martinez and Yvonne Knaack. It comes as no surprise considering the fact that the attorney general’s office primarily relied on depositions provided by the four current and previous councilmembers. You can be sure each of them had an attorney at their elbow as they responded to the AG’s questions.

Some additional comments about the proposed library dispenser are in order. It’s remoteness and decidedly dark location is problematical. Additional lighting would have to be added driving up the cost of the project. There are limitations, depending on the type of book dispenser purchased, on the size of the book that can be placed in the machine…ummm. Three years ago this was a very popular pilot project especially in remote locations in California. Feedback indicates that over time, fewer and fewer books were retrieved from their dispensers as patrons turned to e-books. Perhaps the money would be better spent on expanding the number of e-book licenses purchased by the Glendale system.

At their last workshop session the Glendale city council approved the concept of naming streets (and perhaps Glendale public property) after prominent public figures. The first two personages mentioned were Martin Luther King Jr. and Caesar Chavez…let’s add George Washington and Abraham Lincoln to that list. What about Thomas Edison or Albert Enistein? Or Max Klass, Anthony Holly and Pat Campbell? Do you see where this is going? The list of worthy people is endless and that’s when the fight starts. That is why previous councils, wisely, never went down this path.

Have you taken a look at the city’s website lately? Don’t bother. It hasn’t been updated since God created dirt. Funny, the city hired a person to manage and to update the site. Guess it’s yet another “Where’s Waldo” situation. If anyone finds this person, please ask him/her to get to work.

The Recall Councilman Sherwood Committee remains on track to collect more than the required number of signatures to mandate a recall election. If you are interested in signing the petition and live in the Sahuaro district please go to www.stopsherwood.com .

After three months Councilmember Jamie Aldama remains AWOL for one neighborhood in particular as they wrestle with code issues.

Are there any outstanding Glendale issues that you would like to see covered? If so, please email clarkjv@aol.com with your suggestions.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 107 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

USA Today photo

Andrew Barroway, Anthony LeBlanc Courtesy USA Today

On December 31, 2014 we were greeted with an announcement released by Coyotes Co-Owner, President and CEO Anthony LeBlanc, “Today is an exciting day for the Arizona Coyotes and our great fans. The addition of Andrew Barroway to our ownership group further solidifies the Coyotes long-term future in the Valley. Our entire ownership group is excited about this opportunity to work with Andrew in taking this franchise to the next level. It’s a great day for hockey in Arizona!” Here is the link: http://heatwaved.com/2014/12/31/andrew-barroway-approved-buy-arizona-coyotes/ .

We were told that Andrew Barroway’s purchase made him majority owner of the team holding 51%. The deal was praised as a means of creating financial stability for the team and some of the money would be used to raise payroll. Barroway said, “he and the nine minority owners were committed to infusing $30 million back into the team, with up to $9 million going directly to upgrading the on-ice product through trades and free agency.” As majority owner, Barroway would be the team governor, current governor George Gosbee would be alternate governor, and Anthony LeBlanc would remain as chief executive officer.

Two days later, on January 2, 2015 Craig Morgan of Fox Sports News interviewed Barroway. Here is the link: http://www.foxsports.com/arizona/story/q-a-with-coyotes-majority-owner-andrew-barroway-010215 . Morgan asked Barroway how active he would be as the new owner. Barroway indicated that he planned to be an active owner and would take part in all major decisions regarding the team. Morgan also asked if there would be any major changes and Barroway responded that he didn’t expect any.

th6FIKDB1J

Where’s Waldo?

That was 4 months ago. So where’s Waldo? Er, Andrew Barroway? Sources inside Glendale City Hall indicate that Barroway, as the  majority owner of the team, has not signed the lease management contract. At the very least, that should have occurred after the Board of Governors approved the sale to Barroway on December 31, 2014. Does Barroway’s absence from the team scene and Gila River Arena plus a lease management contract without Barroway’s signature signal trouble with the deal? At the last game of the season the Coyotes distributed their annual book replete with statistics, photos and bios of everyone (except God) including the owners minus any mention or photo of Andrew Barroway. It makes you scratch your head and ask what’s going on.

thDYDNS84PThere’s another Where’s Waldo moment…the failure of the Coyotes to submit a certified financial team audit to the City of Glendale as stipulated in the lease management agreement. It was due September 30, 2014…7 months ago. In anticipation of receiving the audit the city hired Tony Tavares in December of 2014 to perform the city’s audit.

Peter Corbett of the Arizona Republic in an April 17, 2015 article offered some very interesting comments from principals involved. Here is the link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2015/04/17/glendale-arizona-coyotes-first-season-audit-drags/25922095/ . He reported that:

  • “Coyotes officials said the reports were late because it was the organization’s first year of operations under the new deal and more complications surfaced when a new majority owner acquired the team at the end of last year.”
  • “The financial-reporting delay has created tensions with Glendale officials who are frustrated that the team has not closed the books on its first season even as the second season wrapped up April 11 on the ice at Gila River Arena.”
  • “Ian Hugh, Glendale vice mayor, said the Coyotes must be held accountable for the money the team is taking from taxpayers. ‘I expect both sides to live up to our agreement,’ he said. ‘Our auditor is still trying to get information from the Coyotes’.”
  • “Jeff Shumway, Coyotes CEO from 2006-09, said that during his tenure the team typically completed its audits by November. The audit reports were public documents that were available to anyone who made a records request to Glendale, he said.”
  • “The current Coyotes arena-management agreement includes language that requires the city to protect the team’s proprietary information.”

What’s so “proprietary” about an audited financial statement of profit and loss submitted to the City of Glendale that shouldn’t be a public record? After all, Glendale’s taxpayers are paying $15 million dollars a year. You would think we would be entitled.

The team’s financial audit wasn’t “proprietary” when Steve Ellman and/or Jerry Moyes owned the team. Did LeBlanc fudge in his public statements about the team’s losses? Who knows? Apparently we, the public, the taxpayers of Glendale and the fans supporting the team with ticket sales, will never know the truth. Former President Ronald Reagan said, “Trust but verify.” LeBlanc and company want all of us to trust but at the same time they don’t seem to want us to verify.

Questions remain unanswered…Where is Waldo? Where is Andrew Barroway and where is the certified team financial audit? There are answers but we are not getting them.

Post Script: Today is the NHL Draft Lottery. Coyotes placed third in lottery line up. Anthony LeBlanc tweeting a good face on the situation…but Where’s Waldo?

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

It has been 17 years and 100 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

shopping cart 2Broken windows remain a problem in so many Glendale neighborhoods, especially in south Glendale. There are many “Broken Window Neighborhoods” (BWN) in Glendale but they are especially prevalent in the Ocotillo, Cactus and Yucca council districts.

The Broken Window Theory (BTW) is a result of a 1982 article by criminologists James Q. Wilson and George Kelling. The Broken Window Theory states that signs of disorder, like graffiti, dirty streets, overgrown weeds, abandoned shopping carts, illegal dumping in vacant lots, etc., leads to social disorder…not just petty crimes but eventually more serious crimes such as robbery, burglary and murder. The authors of BTW offered that one unrepaired broken window is a signal that no one cares and ignoring little problems creates a sense of irreversible decline that leads people to abandon the community (neighborhood) or to stay away.

A case in point is a Broken Window Neighborhood in the Ocotillo district in the area of 70th Avenue and Sierra Vista Avenue. The people who care in that neighborhood are frustrated and angry beyond belief. Over 6 months ago they contacted their council representative, Jamie Aldama. His response was to send them thank you notes for their concern and a promise that he would take action.graffitti Since then the neighbors contend that he has been AWOL. Their contention to Aldama, in part, remains to this day, Not only are things still not resolved, (some of them you claimed to already be working on prior to meeting with us), and some situations have become worse.  I have spoken with many City employees regarding the outreach you claimed to have been involved in to solve several of these issues.  No one has reported any interactions from you and/or representatives of your office.”

They feel it is almost a full time job for them to fight the City to take care of these issues. They recognize that city silence and its consequent inaction is acquiescence and they believe that is the root of the problems they have in their neighborhood.

This is an age old problem but perhaps it is time for this city council to take a fresh look at a cancer that can consume a neighborhood almost overnight.  Here are some initiatives that have been suggested over the years by neighborhood leaders fighting this persistent issue:

  • The action to save a neighborhood must involve all city departments, from the city attorney’s office to zoning. All departments must play a part in a concerted and targeted effort to revitalize a neighborhood.
  • For purposes of code compliance and action, legal or otherwise, a special zoning designation of “Broken Window Neighborhood” (BWN) must be created.
  • Within the BWN specific, targeted code enforcement and legal action will be allowed.
  • Any businesses within a BWN should be audited to make sure that they have a business license and are paying the required sales tax.
  • Multi-family within a BWN would be required to have its management take the city’s Crime Free program that targets apartment complexes.
  • Code compliance often falls back on rhetoric that they do not have the legal authority to enforce certain actions. It’s time they were tasked with creating innovative actions that would not only allow them to do so but would actively require such action.
  • City attorneys often do not take code infractions to court claiming that the case is not strong enough and therefore not winnable. It’s time that these attorneys worried less about their win-loss records in court and realized that making a bad actor go to court to defend irresponsible actions are in and of itself a deterrent to future bad actions.
  • Some specific codes will need review and reform. One that comes to mind is window coverage of a business. Have you ever seen a convenience store where nearly every inch of front window space is covered with ads? Not only is it a safety issue but it is one that contributes to visual blight. What about a business that puts 20 or 30 items out in front of its store? An example is a tire repair store with racks of tires in front of the business. More visual blight.
  • Codes relating to residences also need review but more importantly code compliance needs to be aggressively enforcing existent codes. If they achieve compliance without going to court, that is wonderful. But if the resident does not comply, the situation should not be allowed to fester for months and months.
  • While code compliance is working within the BWN, it requires the public works department to repair broken sidewalks, make sure all existent street lights are functioning properly, adding further lighting where necessary and applying resurfacing of streets where applicable. The fire department should be checking all fire hydrants in the BWN neighborhood and offering fire hazard education and smoke detectors. Even the police department has a role to play by intense patrolling of the BWN and enforcing even the most minor violation. Streets and transportation can check to see if there are streets that are more prone to speeding and following up with actions to decrease the activity. The water department can outreach neighbors whose yards are less than spectacular and work with them to install an irrigation system or to desert landscape. Sanitation can educate about the appropriate time to place trash receptacles on the street and can enforce existent law when some put out loose trash the day after it has been collected for the month. How about putting out a dumpster to encourage neighbors to clean up their properties and remove visual blight? What about using the Community Action Program to assist low income or seniors to get a house painted or a yard desert landscaped? When you start to think about it, there is so much that could be done that is not being done.
  • Other departments, such as media and communications need to join in the effort by preparing and distributing media that alert and educate a neighborhood to the action about to begin. The councilmember should hold a district meeting in the designated neighborhood to offer contact information and to educate. Even parks and recreation has a part to play by creating neighborhood activities for children that brings families together, introduces neighbor to neighbor and also becomes another catalyst for action and education. The point is, every city department has a role to play, working together to attack one BWN at a time.
  • All of the above should be applicable only within a specific, newly created zoning designation of Broken Window Neighborhood.

shopping cartThe first BWN should be small as a pilot project to see what works and what doesn’t work. Make no mistake, so many of these neighborhoods have been ignored for years. Attacking a long festering problem is like guerilla warfare. It’s tough, brutal and takes no prisoners but many of these neighborhoods need the city’s attention with new and innovative strategies. They need city departments that say “I can” rather than “I can’t because…”.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Glendale created a model program that is emulated by other cities? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Glendale generated positive publicity about itself rather than having the world focus exclusively on its financial stresses? You bet it would.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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