Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Let’s start with the fun stuff. This Saturday, October 15, 2016 from 9 AM to 10:30 AM the City of Glendale will host the Grand Opening Ceremony for a brand new archery complex located at Heroes Park at  the northeast corner of 83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road.

It’s the first new amenity in the 88 acre, regional park to be constructed in 7 or 8 years. The last amenity being the ramadas. There will be archery demonstrations by local archers and the public will have the opportunity to meet Eric Bennet, U.S. Archery Paralympian, and Mel Nichols, the 2016 U. S. Olympic Archery Coach.

The major funding partners are The Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority and the Arizona Game and Fish Department. This was a project whose primary funding came from the private sector. All of the following companies contributed money, labor and/or materials:

·       Arizona Rock Products Association

·       CEMEX

·       DBA Construction, Inc.

·       GCON, Inc.

·       Hansen Aggregates of Arizona

·       Heritage Trucking, Inc.

·       Madison Granite Supplies, Inc.

·       Salt River Materials Group

·       Shade ‘n Net

Instead of sleeping in this Saturday, won’t you join us in thanking these organizations and private sector companies for their generosity? This is a family-friendly event. Please bring your children. Who knows? You might have a budding Olympic Archer in your family.

archery-range

I also want to alert Yucca district residents, most especially Rovey Farm Estates residents. Just north of Glendale Avenue, between 83rd Avenue and 91st Avenue sits Crosspoint Christian Church. It owns 23.4 acres currently zoned by the city as R1-10 (10,000 square foot lots yielding approximately 3 to 4 homes to the acre). The church wants the land rezoned to R1-7 PRD (7,000 square foot lots yielding 5 to 6 homes to the acre).

zoning-request-oct-12-2016

The greater the density per acre the more money the church gets for the land. It is the difference between putting 69 to 92 homes on that land versus putting 115 to 138 homes (nearly double the amount) on that land.

Rovey Farm Estates is directly north of this parcel. This subdivision is divided into sections and the section that is north of this parcel abutting it is zoned R1-10. A small portion of the northeast portion of this parcel has R1-7 homes abutting it. The majority of this land will directly impact the 10,000 square foot lots to the north.

What can you do? The zoning request will be heard and approved or denied by the city council on Tuesday, October 25, 2016 at its regular 6 PM city council meeting. You can go to council chambers at city hall located at the intersection of 59th Avenue and Glendale Avenue that evening and express your support for or opposition to the rezoning request. You can also send an email expressing your opinion to the mayor and councilmembers. Here are their email addresses: jweiers@glendaleaz.com, ihugh@glendaleaz.com, rmalnar@glendaleaz.com, bturner@glendaleaz.com, ltolmachoff@glendaleaz.com, jaldama@glendaleaz.com, and schavira@glendaleaz.com.

If you want to protect your quality of life and your home values it is up to you to act. Make your opinion known to the city council. Let them know whether you approve or oppose the proposed rezoning.

© 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.

On September 15, 2016 I received a Notice of Neighborhood Meeting for a Minor General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of a property located in the Yucca district from the law office of David Cisiewski  representing Los Olivos Office Partners, LLC., a Delaware corporation. This is slightly curious. Los Olivos Office Partners is a Delaware corporation that was registered with the Arizona Corporation Commission by yet another law firm who is their agent in Arizona. So who are the principals of Los Olivos? Local people? People out-of-state? A foreign firm?

 They are proposing a subdivision called “Orangewood Terrace.” The property’s location is south of Orangewood Avenue and just east of the West Glenn residential subdivision and just west of 79th Lane. Los Olivos is seeking: 1. a Minor General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan designation from Low Density Residential (LDR, 1-2.5 homes to the acre) to Medium Density Residential (MDR, 2.5 to 3.5 homes to the acre); 2. to rezone the property from R1-10 (10,000 square foot lots) to R1-8 (8,000 square foot lots); and 3. a Preliminary Plat for 55 single family homes.

What’s not to like? 8,000 square foot lots…great. Not so fast. In 2008 the city deliberately planned this property for 10,000 square foot lots with a definite purpose in mind. The property was to act as a buffer between West Glen Estates (a subdivision of 8,000 square foot lots, R1-8) located at the southeast corner of 83rd Avenue and Orangewood Avenue and 79th Lane on the south side of Orangewood Avenue which has about 30 large lot (17,000 square foot lot, SR-17) homes. All of the properties on the north side of Orangewood Avenue directly across from this proposed subdivision are SR-17 residences.

The property in question should remain as a 10,000 SF lot subdivision in order to preserve and to maintain the property values of the residents of West Glen Estates and the residents of 79th Lane. The only conceivable reason to reduce the size of the lots to 8,000 SF is to maximize the profit to be derived by Los Olivos Office Partners. That is not the city’s mission or purpose. Its purpose is to protect the interests of its residents, not developers.

I encourage the residents on the north side of Orangewood Avenue as well as the residents of West Glen Estates and 79th Lane to attend the Neighborhood Meeting:

October 3, 2016

6:00 PM

Hampton Inn & Suite Glendale-Westgate

6630 N. 95th Avenue

Glendale, AZ 85305

Now, chickens…

The next scheduled city meetings are: November 1, 2016 – Second City Council Workshop on the proposed Zoning Text Amendment and November 22, 2016 – City Council Public Hearing on the proposed Zoning Text Amendment.

The Zoning Text Amendment being considered would allow the keeping of contained hen chickens (only) in single family-zoned areas with a zoning district of A-1, RR-90, RR-45, SR-30, SR-17, SR-12, R1-10, R1-8, R1-6 and R1-4. However, per city code chickens are already allowed in these residential zoning districts: A-1, RR-90 (90,000 SF lots), RR-45 (45,000 SF lots), SR-30 (30,000 SF lots), SR-17 (17,000 SF lots) and SR-12 (12,000 SF lots). The text amendment would allow these 4 additional residential districts to have chickens: R1-10 (10,000 SF lots), R1-8 (8,000 SF lots), R1-6 (6,000 SF lots) and R1-4 (4,000 SF lots).

Chicken proponents have cited that other Valley cities allow them. Yes, they do but nearly all cities have restrictions.  Let’s look at Phoenix, the big dog in the Valley. In Chapter 8-7 it states, (a) Except as otherwise provided in this article, it is hereby declared to be a nuisance and it shall be unlawful for any person to keep rodents or poultry within the City. No poultry or rodents shall be kept in an enclosure within eighty feet of any residence within the City. Poultry may be kept within eighty feet of a residence if written permission consenting to the keeping of poultry less than eighty feet from a residence is first obtained from each lawful occupant and each lawful owner of such residence. Poultry shall not be kept in the front yard area of any lot or parcel within the City. Poultry and rodents shall be kept in an enclosure so constructed as to prevent such poultry and rodents from wandering upon property belonging to others.

(b)    No more than twenty head of poultry nor more than twenty-five head of rodents nor more than twenty-five head comprising a combination of rodents and poultry shall be kept upon the first one-half acre or less. An additional one-half acre shall be required for each additional twenty head of poultry or for each additional twenty-five head of rodents or for each additional twenty-five head comprising a combination of poultry and rodents. For areas larger than two and one-half acres the number of poultry or rodents shall not be limited.” Their code goes on to say in Section 8-10, “(a)    Except as otherwise provided in this section, it is hereby declared to be a nuisance and it shall be unlawful for any person to keep any animal, as defined in section 8-1 of this chapter, within the City on any lot or parcel of land consisting of less than ten thousand square feet in area.

(b)    Poultry may be kept on a lot or parcel of land within the City consisting of an area less than ten thousand square feet if written permission consenting to the keeping of poultry on such lot or parcel is first obtained from all of the lawful occupants and the lawful owners of adjoining lots or parcels of land, as defined in section 8-1, which are located in the immediate vicinity of the property whereon the poultry is kept. In summary, the restrictions are that a resident may have up to 25 chickens, 80 feet away from any residence and if the homeowner’s lot is less than 10,000 SF permission must be obtained from all adjacent property owners.

Let’s look at Mesa. In Mesa, a resident can have 10 chickens on the first one-half acre or less provided any enclosure is at least 40 feet from any neighboring residence, any coop is at least 75 feet from any other residence.” Tempe allows, “5 hens and if the enclosure or coop is 200 sq ft or less AND 8′ or less tall, it must meet building code separation requirements (safety issues) and cannot be in the front yard setback; if either more than 200 sq ft OR 8′ height, it must meet all setbacks for the district.” Similar to Tempe, Gilbert will allow up to 5 chickens on the smallest lots size of 6,000 SF. Chandler and Scottsdale do not allow chickens on small, residential lots.

Some people would have you believe that Valley cities allow chickens carte blanche. That is not the case. I would urge all councilmembers to do their homework and to study exactly what other cities allow and do not allow. It is a no-brainer to realize that allowing chickens, if that is the majority position, must occur with restrictions. Let’s see what kind of restrictions city staff comes up on November 1, 2016 when it makes another presentation before city council. Will they have done their homework?

This remains a divisive issue. I am posting one of my informal polls to the left of this column to give my readers a chance to weigh in on the issue. Blog readers on both sides of this issue have offered reasoned comments. I urge you to take a moment to read them as you make up your mind on this issue.

© 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.

No contest of the formally accepted final election results has been filed by either of the losing candidates within the 5 day time limit as stipulated by state law. Now, let’s see some loose ends cleaned up. Sammy still has campaign signs up, well past the proscribed 15 day limit. Sammy, take your campaign signs down. You are not above the law.

In August of 2016, Mark Burdick, former Glendale mayoral candidate, sent out a campaign mailer without the disclaimer, “Paid for by …” as is required by state law. Arizona State Statute 16-912 says, “A political committee that makes an expenditure for campaign literature or advertisements that expressly advocate the election or defeat of any candidate or that make any solicitation of contributions to any political committee shall include on the literature or advertisement the words ‘paid for by,’ followed by the name of the committee that appears on its statement of organization, or five hundred dollar exemption statement.” Burdick publicly admitted the omission of this required disclaimer.

In mid-August, City Clerk Julie Bower notified City Attorney Michael Bailey of a violation of ARS 16-912(A.) Bailey had said that he received the City Clerk’s notice and had taken action by shipping the complaint to an outside counsel, namely the Scottsdale City Attorney.

This is a cut and dried situation. Burdick sent out a campaign mailer without the legally required disclaimer. Burdick admitted that it had occurred. So, what’s the problem? Why the delay? It has been over a month. We should have been made publicly aware of the fine imposed upon Burdick and that it has been paid. Instead…silence.

On or about August 17th the City Clerk requested that Burdick provide the cost of producing and mailing the piece. The fine is 3 times the amount spent for production (includes the consultant’s time for designing the piece) and mailing. Since it was mailed to voters within all of Glendale the cost would be substantial. To mail a piece in my district (with perhaps one of the lowest active voter totals) is about $3,000. Multiply that times six districts and a conservative figure would be somewhere in the $15,000 to $18,000 range. Three times that cost puts Burdick’s fine in the neighborhood of $45,000 to $54,000.

Has the fine been assessed? Has Burdick paid the fine? Either the City Clerk or the City Attorney has the responsibility of public notification…for an action that should have been completed by now. It’s the city’s loose end and merits being tied up.

On another note city council met in workshop this afternoon. Councilmembers Jaime Aldama and Sammy Chavira were absent although Sammy did participate, sort of, telephonically. There were only 2 agenda items: 1. Costs associated with workmen’s’ compensation claims and 2. Proposed regulations for donation drop off boxes and permissible flagpole heights.

The presentation on item #1 generated no council comments or questions…not one. Item #2 generated a great deal of comment and questioning by councilmembers present. It holds true that councilmembers tend to spend more time and energy on issues that directly affect residents than on big picture issues. After nearly an hour of discussion council gave consensus to bring both items back with the request for further information related to how other Valley cities handle both issues. Upon advice of the City Attorney Bailey other “clean up” code/zoning items staff had been prepared to present to council were tabled due to insufficient notice to the public.

© 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.

PLEASE CHECK OUT OUR NEW VIDEO TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN ABOUT CHAVIRA’S MOMENT WITH ANTHONY LEBLANC, OWNER OF ICEARIZONA BEFORE VOTING APPROVAL OF THEIR $15 MILLION A YEAR MANAGEMENT CONTRACT.

Several friends received Sammy’s first campaign mailing and gave me copies. As I forewarned this mailer was paid for by Truth and Leadership, a Political Action Committee (PAC).  Its Chairman is Bill Scheel, of Javalina, a consulting firm. He managed Chavira’s last campaign in 2012. It is registered as an Independent Expenditure Committee.

An independent expenditure committee, by law, may not consult, share information or its plan of action in support of a candidate, with the candidate. That means no personal contact with a candidate.

The mailing clearly says, “Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s campaign committee.”

One has to wonder if Bill Scheel, chairman of the Truth and Leadership PAC, and Ben Scheel of Bright Consulting (paid $1500 on 5/13/2016 by Sammy for campaign consulting) are relatives.

The mailer was also paid by “major funding provided by United Food & Commercial Workers Union of AZ Local 99 PAC” (Stan Chavira works for the UFCW). Is this yet another relative? The major funding for the mailer from the UFCW is in addition to another $6250.00 it already contributed to Sammy’s campaign. It’s eerie…Bill and Ben Scheel and Sammy and Stan Chavira. It makes you wonder.

Are we to assume that Sammy Chavira has never discussed funding for or the content of this mailer with his relative Stan Chavira and are we also to assume that Bill Scheel and Ben Scheel (are they also relatives?) never discussed this mailer either? Ben Scheel is Sammy’s current campaign manager. So how would that work? If these actions occurred – and we don’t know if they did – that would be collusion and a direct violation of the Truth and Leadership PAC’s requirement to be a truly independent expenditure committee.

Let’s give Mr. Bill Scheel of the Truth and Leadership PAC an “A” for creative writing in fiction. Mr. Scheel describes Sammy as an “independent voice.” Pure fiction easily seen if you ever watched Sammy in action (or non-action) at the council meetings he did attend. Sammy and former recalled councilmember Gary Sherwood were in lock step on many issues including Sammy’s deciding vote to approve the $15 million dollar a year arena management contract with IceArizona. So much for any voice from Sammy as he has become legendarily known for not offering anything meaningful at council meetings other than to thank everybody for any and every thing. So much for an “independent voice.”

Mr. Scheel, in bold text, offers you, the voter, two tag lines: “Yes to stopping special interests” and “No to cutting public safety and quality of life.” It sounds wonderful, doesn’t it? Saving Glendale — all by himself. Sammy has looked out for the interests of every major contributor to his campaigns, from this campaign as well as his 2012 campaign. Sammy didn’t stop IceArizona, a special interest group, did he? Perhaps it was because he’s a full time Phoenix fire fighter and doesn’t have time to listen to his constituents.

We wouldn’t expect Sammy to ever say no to cutting public safety because his interest and agenda, as a fire fighter, is to other fire fighters including those in Glendale. But if it’s for the citizens of his district he settles for crumbs. His action to approve a 7,500 square foot trailer as the West Branch Library has certainly been devastating to the quality of life for all Yucca district residents. He settled… for less than any other Glendale resident enjoys with the Foothills Branch Library ( 4 times the size of the trailer library west Glendale residents will get…eventually) and Velma Teague Branch Library (twice the size of the trailer library) .

His approval of the John F. Long application for the residential project known as Stonehaven with 46% of the lots being only 5,500 square feet has a real impact on Yucca district residents’ quality of life as they see their property values lessen. He didn’t protect the district’s quality of life with his yes vote for Stonehaven. He settled.

Bill Scheel, chairperson of the Truth and Leadership PAC, Patrick Barrett (another campaign consultant being paid handsomely by Chavira in the amount of $4,000 to date) and Ben Scheel ($1,500 to date) are masters at using smoke and mirrors to divert the voters’ attention away from Chavira’s transgressions and failings.

They deliberately use buzz phrases like “led the charge” or “stood up to special interests.” They have no choice but to paint Sammy as a hero to divert voters’ attention away from his misdeeds. They don’t want you to remember about his nearly $25,000 thousand dollars worth of unethical travel on the taxpayers’ dime. Yes, you read that correctly. He used your tax dollars as his own personal check book to take trips and to entertain his Phoenix fire bosses with an extravagant dinner ($420) – all of these actions are wholly unrelated to his responsibilities to Glendale.

They don’t want you to remember his speeding ticket and failure to appear in court or his subsequent driver’s license suspension and hundreds of dollars in fines. They don’t want you to remember that he called it “a minor glitch.” They don’t want you to remember that he paid his fines only after being questioned by the media.

They don’t want you to remember that he held only one district meeting during his term in office, or that he has been absent from a dozen council meetings, the equivalent of 6 months of absent time for which he continued to be paid; or that he doesn’t return constituent calls. Because if you remember these things you will not vote for him.

They have shown utter contempt and disrespect for the voters of the Yucca district. They assume you are ignorant or perhaps stupid. They assume if they put in writing that Sammy is a hero and you receive a slick campaign mailing saying so, since it’s in print, you will believe it.

They don’t know how smart Yucca voters are and they certainly have not gauged the level of anger people feel about Sammy’s misbehaviour.  It looks as if Sammy is just another sleazy politician who believes he can charm you enough so that you will ignore his unethical actions.

It’s up to you, with your vote, to show Sammy and his paid, hired gun consultants and the fire PACs that will pour thousands of dollars into Sammy’s campaign, that you will no longer vote for Sammy as a councilmember. We simply cannot afford his outrageous spending of taxpayers’ money or his lack of ethics any longer.

© 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 tohttp://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.

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE LATEST CHAVIRA VIDEO TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN ABOUT HIS RECORD AS A COUNCILMEMBER

I have shared Sammy’s record with you based upon facts reported publicly or from city council meeting minutes: his failure to fulfill his duties as a councilmember and to be accessible and to represent his constituency; his speeding ticket and subsequent actions; and of course his abuse of taxpayer money with his lavish trips. He has abused the trust voters placed in him and has shown himself to be ethically bankrupt.

What do I stand for? Why vote for me?

  • Completion of Heroes Park with a permanent West Branch library
  • Location of a grocery store within the district
  • New business attraction with quality jobs
  • Creation of a business incubator
  • Streamlined city business codes and regulations
  • Adoption of zero-based budgeting
  • Equitable use of all city resources and redress for areas long neglected
  • Continued emphasis on street repair and reconstruction
  • Continued fiscal emphasis on our core city services
  • Adoption of technology that keeps city government lean and effective
  • Refocus on code compliance
  • Accessibility to constituents in-person, by phone, email or other social media
  • Regular posting online of every cent of taxpayer money I spend with who, what, where and why
  • Restoration of integrity and ethics to the position of Yucca district councilmember
  • Will “do my homework” on all issues coming before council and consistently and regularly attend all council meetings
  • Will represent you and “get your voice back”

Here are a few previous accomplishments

  • Hosted a tour for senior management of the Yucca district sparking the creation of the Neighborhood Partnership Program
  • Successfully gained council approval for the first 50,000 Christmas lights in Murphy Park now known as Glendale Glitters
  • Loan program for E-readers
  • Adoption of Care Program providing discount prescription drugs for people and their pets
  • Piloted street identification signage for motorists later adopted throughout the city
  • Successfully gained basketball courts, water play feature for children, tot lot, X-Court and ramadas for Heroes Park
  • Insured that new residential development  such as Rovey Farm Estates, Missouri Ranch and Missouri Estates, incorporated large lots designed to raise property values in our area

© 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.

Strike up the band ! 1195436089266192967johnny_automatic_marching_band_1.svg.hiHold a parade!celebrate_newoptimistclub I am hosting a Yucca district meeting !! bTynXyXTLSave the date!  Tell your friends and neighbors!hug-club-clip-art-335

THURSDAY, JULY 21, 2012

6 PM

WEST VALLEY FAMILY CHURCH

6115 N. 91ST AVENUE

GLENDALE, AZ 85305

(East side of 91st Avenue, directly across from the Cardinals football stadium)

It is not appropriate as a candidate for the Yucca district city council seat to have city personnel at this meeting. That will have to wait. Be assured, if I am elected, I will host another meeting immediately upon taking office with city personnel present. I am giving the Pastor of the Church an opportunity to greet everyone. I have also invited Mayor Jerry Weiers to make a presentation and to answer any questions you may have. I, too, will speak briefly and then open the meeting to all of you.

This is a great opportunity to tell me your thoughts on a wide variety of issues that are important to you. Tell me about the code enforcement service you have received, or not…how about the police response in your neighborhood? Share your thoughts about light rail in Glendale or any other issue. I will listen. I will take notes. I will act.

For those of you who are new to the district or have never met me, you will have an opportunity to ask questions of me and to find out why I am running to represent you.

It is also an opportunity to meet other Yucca district residents…your neighbors. There has not been a Yucca district meeting since May of 2013. You have been disenfranchised by your councilman. Now, finally, you will “get your voice back!”

Please share the news of the Yucca district meeting with your friends and neighbors. Please help me to get the word out. I’d love to see 100+ district residents in support of resuming district meetings.

It will be great to see you all again!

PLEASE DONATE TO MY CAMPAIGN BY CLICKING ON THE PAY PAL BUTTON TO THE LEFT.

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE CHAVIRA VIDEOS TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN.

It has been 18 years and 200 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On June 27, 2016 I sent a letter and an email to Sammy inviting him to a debate. Here is a copy of the letter I sent (email was identical).

Debate invitation June 27 2016

Debate invitation to Chavira June 27, 2016

I secured a site for July 14, 2016 at a local church and Robert Heidt, CEO of the Glendale Chamber agreed to moderate. I asked Sammy to respond by close of business on July 5, 2016.

Surely it is not difficult to make such a decision within a week.  I clearly stated in my letter that if  I did not receive a response by July 5th that meant that he was declining my invitation and I would cancel the arrangements I had made. As of posting this blog I have received no letter of acceptance or rejection; no email of acceptance or rejection; and no phone call of acceptance or rejection.  I have cancelled the debate arrangements. Sammy does not have the common courtesy to respond to a debate invitation and to confirm or refuse that invitation. He should not be surprised if he turns up at the church on July 14th to find that no one is there.

It is July 6, 2016 and Sammy has not responded, period. Not an, “I’m sorry. I have another commitment on that date.” Nothing. Just silence. That seems to be his habit and practice. He has been contacted by the media on numerous occasions to explain his lavish travel on taxpayer dollars. Once again, nothing. Just silence. Does he really believe that ignoring a situation will make it disappear?

In the July 7, 2016 edition of the Glendale Star, Sammy was asked by Darrell Jackson, the reporter, if he would take part in the debate to which I had invited Sammy and had scheduled for July 14, 2016. Chavira’s response? “Let’s just say my record speaks for itself.” It certainly does. His record consists of abuse of taxpayer money on lavish trips, a dozen absences from council workshops and meetings, one district meeting held during his entire term and failure to appear in court with a subsequent driver’s license suspension. That is a record that certainly speaks for itself.

Is Sammy afraid to debate? One could assume that is the case. After all, he and I would have been asked questions without the benefit of knowing them beforehand. Sammy would not have had time to ask others to help him to prepare his answers. If you have ever watched Sammy at council workshops or meetings, he is heavy on thanking everyone for everything but light on offering a substantive response on anything. He doesn’t appear to be very articulate on any subject and seems to have trouble responding without prepared notes (crafted by someone other than Sammy).

So, Sammy will remain, for the time being, as the Yucca district’s invisible councilmember. Sammy, has repeatedly shown how little he respects the voters of the Yucca district and has not earned your vote.

© 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.

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE CHAVIRA VIDEOS TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN.              PLEASE MAKE A DONATION TO MY CAMPAIGN!!

It has been 18 years and 174 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.                                                                                                               Recently the Arizona Republic had a story about cities and their park rankings. Here is the link:http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2016/06/03/report-phoenix-area-cities-lag-park-funding-access/84931948/ . Glendale ranked in the middle of the pack nationally at number 55. It was disappointing to read that Glendale spends the least on their park system at $39 per resident. The national median was $82 per resident. Glendale spends less than half the national median. This is a truly unacceptable statistic. Scottsdale spends the most in the state at $115 per capita and even Phoenix spends $88 per resident.

The leadership of Glendale, city council and senior management, want Glendale to grow. An admirable goal to be sure but how does a city attract new growth? Two components are essential. One is first class amenities such as parks and plenty of them. Residents want clean, safe parks close to their neighborhoods as do employees of prospective employers deciding to locate in Glendale. Peoria and Surprise are well on their way to meeting this goal. Just look at Glendale’s Grant Canal Linear Park. It is heavily used daily as is Glendale’s Thunderbird Paseo Linear Park. They demonstrate just how important parks are to residents.

Glendale is woefully lagging its neighbors. We still see an unfinished Heroes Park. Two other major parks in west Glendale also remain unfinished. Forget about new parks when Glendale can’t even find the will or funds to finish what it has started. Where are the funds to reopen O’Neil Pool? Putting in a West Branch Library as a modular building is an affront to current and future residents.If Glendale is serious about growth these are issues that must be addressed.

The other component for growth is quality residential development. Glendale’s vacant parcels should not be destined for high density, single family residential. These precious, vacant parcels are an opportunity to raise the bar of residential development. When Glendale allows a Stonehaven residential development with 43% of the lots only 5,500 square feet in size, it is not raising the bar for quality development. Some make the argument that a 5,500 square foot lot with a small home can still be a quality product. Generally it has been found that this type of house product is an entry level home and those that can qualify for purchase of this product cannot afford to upgrade options offered. So you see laminate kitchen counter tops instead of granite, standard bathroom fixtures and standard flooring…no upgrades. You find small bedrooms with just enough room for a bed and not much more. Stonehaven at approximately 300 acres of prime residential development is an opportunity squandered away by Glendale.

Glendale, it’s way past time to set the bar higher. Use the residential land left to attract other than entry level home products and for goodness sakes, finish our parks and add more parks, please.

© 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.

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE LATEST CHAVIRA VIDEOWhat’s Sammy Been Doing, HIGHLIGHTING HIS CONSTITUENT ENGAGEMENT. IT IS TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN.

It has been 18 years and 158 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

This evening, May 24, 2016, city council will vote on the issue of light rail. The meeting begins at 6 PM in Council Chambers at City Hall. Please park in the parking garage at 59th Avenue and Glendale Avenue. Walk east to council chambers. Make your opinion known. As I have stated in previous blogs, light rail may be one of the most divisive issues to ever surface in Glendale. Your voice counts.

On May 15, 2016 I filed a Public Information Request with the Glendale City Clerk’s office asking for the following information:

“Councilmember Sam Chavira and Councilmember Jamie Aldama each made a $2,500 donation on or about April 28, 2016 in support of the 2016 Cinco De Mayo Festival held on April 29, 2016 to May 1, 2016. The event was cosponsored by the City of Glendale and Barrio Breakthru Productions. I request the following public information:

  1. What was the $5,000 donated by Councilmembers Aldama and Chavira used for with regard to this event?
  2. A list of services, equipment, supplies and personnel supplied by the City of Glendale to support, produce, operate and clean up of the event, in-king or otherwise.
  3. The monetary value of all requested items listed in #2.
  4. Any and all reports, summaries, etc., submitted to the City of Glendale by or for Barrio Breakthru Productions that reflects the expenses required to produce the event and any and all revenues earned as a result of the event.”

My request was promptly fulfilled by the city by May 20, 2016. Questions #2 and #3 were thoroughly answered with the following information:

  1. “Off duty Police officers were hired through Pro-Force (a third party provider) not directly through the city. Sanitation roll-off delivery, rental, pickup and charges for tonnage at landfill. Audio and lighting services were provided by a third party not through the city. Transportation review of Traffic Control Plan (TCP) for event from the barricade company. This generated charges for lane use and TCP review fees.”
  2. “Sanitation roll-off charges: Delivery fee of $46.11; Haul fee of $175.00 and Landfill charges of $22.60. Transportation charges: TCP Review fee of $44.76; and Lane use fees of $335.76.”

My answers to questions #1 and #2 were not fulfilled. It seems that Councilmembers Aldama and Chavira’s total donation of $5,000 is in some black hole of non-information. There appears to be no accountability on the part of these councilmembers. Otherwise they could have provided information to fulfill that portion of my Public Information Request. As far as can be determined, neither asked Barrio Breakthru Productions for any information about the use of $5,000 of taxpayer money.  Apparently they just gave Barrio Breakthru Productions your money. Did the money cover costs of producing the festival? If so, what for?

Based on the information the city requested of the event producer its sole interest seems to be in logistics of holding the event. In the material the city provided there is no request for licenses of any kind or proof of insurance. It would seem these would be important for the city to have on file. Yet the city file supplied makes no mention of either item. One would think that these items would be important especially in light of the criminal damage that occurred at city hall during the event.

We still do not know if Barrio Breakthru Productions or the Breakthru Community Church was ultimately considered the event producer and was responsible for producing a certificate of adequate insurance. If it was the church that was the producer of record with the city then there is still the pesky issue of separation of church and state.

This incident demonstrates a lack of competence and clarity by city staff.  There were requirements for insurance in City Ordinance 2975. Why were the Ordinance requirements not followed? If the requirements were followed why was that information not supplied with all of the extraneous information I received about city requirements for the event? What is city policy these days? If elements of Ordinance 2975 are being waived upon whose authority is it being done?

I guess I will file one more Public Information Request asking Councilmembers Aldama and Chavira to obtain information from Barrio Breakthru about expenses covered by their donation of $5,000 of taxpayer money. I will also ask for any and all licenses and proof of insurance on file for this event provided to the city by Barrio Breakthru. Will let you know what response I obtain.

© 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.

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE VIDEO ABOUT COUNCILMEMBER SAMMY CHAVIRA’S TRAVEL ON THE TAXPAYER DIME. IT IS TO THE LEFT OF THIS COLUMN.

It has been 18 years and 150 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Last week I posted a blog entitled Historic memory lost. The gist of the blog was the preservation of a historic neighborhood, Historic Thunderbird Estates. In response one of my readers, Shelly, posted the following comment:

Shelly said, “’This becomes more and more difficult as historic memory of what Glendale was and who contributed to shaping Glendale is forgotten by a younger generation.’ (quote from my blog)

“I am of this younger generation and while I respect what once was, I believe that everyone needs to respect what will be, things can’t stay the way they have been for generations, if people don’t start changing there may not be much of a future. I take exception to your phrase as you made it seem like Glendale is doomed if the younger generation is allowed to live and make decisions in and for the city of Glendale. You have to remember that the youth/mid age (30-50 yo) are our future and we should be doing everything to support them and their decisions.

“People get stuck in the old ways or this is the way that we’ve always done it. There needs to be a point where progress is allowed and steps taken to allow progress to happen. This may not be a popular decision, however, I don’t believe it will be the nightmare that people think it will be.

“I’ve driven by this property multiple times throughout the day and I have yet to see a disturbance of any residence. The property is located on the corner of 59th Avenue, customer’s don’t even need to go any further than his property as he is literally right on the corner. There is ample space in front of his home to for customer parking.

“Don is a nice person, he is not a mean or vindictive soul, he is trying to help families live sustainable lifestyles by giving them the opportunity to purchase tropical trees to grow on their own property. He is out there for the greater good of many communities throughout the valley.

“Many families want to live a sustainable lifestyle and enjoy growing their own fruits and veggies (with no chemicals). We are not hippies we just want to know where our food is coming from and hopefully that is our own backyards.”

Shelly hit on several important topics. She said, “Don is a nice person…” I’m sure he’s a very nice man but in this case he made a mistake, either deliberately or inadvertently. If he was aware of the CC&Rs (Codes Covenants and Restrictions) and purchased the property with that knowledge then it was deliberate. If he was unaware of the CC&Rs then he made a mistake by failing to do due diligence.

She went on to say, “Many families want to live a sustainable lifestyle…” There is respect for people’s choice to live life as they see fit…as long as they are not harming others by their actions. Those who choose to grow their own food as much as possible are to be commended. The reader perceives Don as helping them to live this lifestyle but this is not a reason to reward him for his failure to abide by the subdivision’s CC&Rs.

She said, “…I have yet to see a disturbance of any residence.” Her perception of the business activity generated on or near the property is not a relevant argument to allow this gentleman to continue to conduct a retail, commercial use on his property. Granting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a business to operate on this property is precedent setting for every property subject to these CC&Rs and in fact, would make the CC&Rs null and void. If one property owner can circumvent them, you can be absolutely sure others will follow. The purchasers of property in Historic Thunderbird Estates bought with the legal expectation that only residential uses would be permitted.

Perhaps the most interesting comment she made highlights the age old tension between respect and value for tradition (the “old”) and the excitement of change (the “new”). She says, I take exception to your phrase as you made it seem like Glendale is doomed if the younger generation is allowed to live and make decisions in and for the city of Glendale. You have to remember that the youth/mid age (30-50 yo) are our future and we should be doing everything to support them and their decisions.” There is most certainly a recognition and acceptance that the younger generation must lead. There’s an old adage paraphrased that those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. There is a place for historical memory and the preservation of the values it embodies.

In other words, there is rationale for both the old and the new to coexist in harmony. The younger generation as it leads must always be mindful and respectful of the traditions that created their freedom to effect change they are seeking. She raised some interesting and debatable issues. However, she has not made the case for allowing this gentleman to ignore the legal requirements of this subdivision’s CC&Rs.

I thank her for her thoughtful commentary. It was important enough to become the basis for this blog. Comments to my blogs are reader optional and may not be read by all. By using her comment in a blog many more people will see it. I suspect more readers’ comments will be forthcoming. Thank you Shelly.

© 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.