Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Sep 22

7

Adventures with our medical system

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 7, 2022
Posted in City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

This blog may strike a chord with many of you if you have had to care or are caring for an elderly person. In my case, this is the second round of having to care for an elderly family member. The first experience was with a family member who had Alzheimer’s. The second and current experience is with a family member who had a stroke several years ago and recently spent two weeks in the hospital recovering from bacterial pneumonia and sepsis.

I was the primary caregiver of my family member with Alzheimer’s. That was in the early 2000’s and I must say the medical system was very good. When I needed help, I received it. Nurses and doctors were very good and very responsive. The experience was positive and although difficult, it was manageable.

My, how things have changed in the past 20 years. One would think medical service would only get better as time advanced. Sadly, that is not the case. The medical staff, nurses and doctors at the hospital provided excellent service and kept me informed. They care about each patient and it showed.

Administrative services have declined over time. It seems as if new staff with very compartmentalized duties have been created and it has led to more incompetence and less caring. Now, every hospital has case workers. At the hospital in question, case workers are assigned by floor and rotated on a weekly basis. A move from the 2nd floor to the 5th floor resulted in a new case worker. The following week, a new case worker for the 5th floor appeared.

Oft times there appears to be a lack of communication between case workers as well as with the medical staff when duties are rotated. Trying to get information from a case worker is nearly impossible. There appears to be a decided lack of compassion and empathy for families dealing with what may be the worst crisis in their lives. Incompetence becomes a problem when it takes a week to discover that the wrong billing codes have been entered. There is also a lack of communication between the hospital’s case workers and insurance providers. My insurance company has made repeated calls that go unanswered…crickets. I have yet to hear from the home health care company and I suspect that the case worker once again dropped the ball.

Your experience may have been different from mine and if so, I congratulate you. If there is another medical emergency in our future, I know I will not go to this institution again.

When the patient comes home a whole new set of issues emerge. It seems that every time there is a medical event with a senior, it leaves them weaker, more fragile and further deteriorates short term memory.

In my case, as a caregiver, I find that a great deal of time is consumed in making sure the senior eats properly, gets the necessary meds at the proscribed times, explaining why certain activities can no longer be done by the senior, making sure the walker is always used and answering the same questions repeatedly. It’s as if the person is a 4-year-old who will never learn new skills.

I’m not complaining but rather describing a situation that all of us may face as family members age. There is a support system if you can afford to drain your life’s savings. Many cannot. I write this because as our population ages, it becomes critical not just to have good medical care but also to have a good support system for all caregivers.

Some of you may have had or are experiencing similar circumstances. Please share by commenting and I will be sure to post your comments.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Aug 22

20

Glendale’s city hall…new or renovated?

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 20, 2022
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , | 1 Comment

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

At the August 9, 2022, apparently, I surprised the audience, comprised of about two dozen green shirted folk with ‘Save Murphy Park’ emblazoned across their chests. I asked our City Manager to investigate the idea of building a new city hall in some other part of our city and to report his findings back to council. I suggested the Westgate area where the city already owns land. How much would it cost, what would the project look like and what could the city realize from such an investment elsewhere?

We know that Goodyear recently spent $87 million to build its newly opened 7 acre Civic Square but that includes a parking garage, a two-story library and a 2 acre park. My best estimate, once the garage, library and park are eliminated, is the four-story city hall cost an estimated $50 million. What could Glendale save from the $70 million if it built new? $10million? $20 million?

This concept of building a new city hall is not a new idea. It has floated around city hall for at least the past five years. A majority of council never pursued the idea because, I suspect, they felt that such an investment would help to revive downtown Glendale. So, everyone marched to the downtown campus reinvestment initiative.

My suggestion was not born out of retaliation, as suggested by Vice Mayor Aldama. Rather it is an objective look as to where it is best to make a $70 million dollar investment. In other words, where does the city get the most ‘bang for its buck’ with such a major investment?

I have invested time and energy over the last twenty-five years to keep downtown Glendale moving forward. I was part of the “Miracle Mile” citizens’ group many years ago. It was the first citizens group to envision strategies to create a robust downtown. Over the years there have been several attempts strategizing to make downtown more viable. All have failed.

The reason for failure is downtown itself. A majority of downtown business owners have never been able to achieve cohesion and present their clear, unified goals on redevelopment. I contend twenty-four green shirted people, predominately Catlin Court business owners, do not represent the entirety of over 130+ downtown merchants. Their self-proclaimed validity comes from the fact that they are the only ones who are vocal.

They are aided and abetted by Robert Heidt, CEO of the Glendale Chamber of Commerce.

I am sharing the Chamber’s mission and vision taken directly from their website, “Mission – The Glendale Chamber serves the business community as the voice of commerce, provides programs and services to improve the economic environment for its members and supplies leadership for improving the quality of life. For area residents and newcomers, the Glendale Chamber is a reliable source for community information and a dependable resource for business referrals. Vision – For Glendale to have a prosperous business community.” Mr. Heidt seems to have strayed from his organization’s mission and vision. I think it’s fair to ask, is Mr. Heidt taking his organization in a direction that no longer benefits its membership?

Mayor Weiers said during council’s discussion about downtown that, “Our downtown, in case people haven’t noticed, is hanging by a thread, and has been for quite some time.” The Mayor, sadly, is correct. Despite the millions of dollars the city has invested in downtown over the years, the sales tax revenue downtown generates declines year after year and is now less than 1% of the city’s total sales tax revenue.

Glendale’s Economic Department gave this assessment which can be found on its website, in part, regarding the downtown, “High vacancy rates, prohibitive zoning, and aged infrastructure are some of the challenges that plague this district. Traditional retail will not support the future sustainability of this area, rather a mix of uses that increase consistent density in this area is needed.”

Steve Stockmar of the Glendale Independent interviewed Valerie Burner of Bears & More, a Catlin Court shop owner who said in response to the Mayor’s comment,  “I’m not sure where he gets his information. To be honest, I’ve only ever had a very minimal conversation with the mayor. So I don’t know where he gets his information.” This is not exactly a roaring denial of the Mayor’s view, is it? Since when is Catlin Court the voice of the interests of all downtown business owners?

The city council and senior leadership of the city are charged with being fiscally responsible and good stewards of taxpayer money. So, dear reader, I ask you. Would you continue to invest in downtown Glendale by renovating the city hall campus or would you say it’s time to move city hall?

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 22

20

Beware as the push for affordable, high-density housing intensifies

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 20, 2022
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale zoning issues • National issues  | Tagged With: , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

The current administration is not going to give up on increasing our misery index. In addition to rampant inflation and a possible recession, it is hell bent on removing local zoning protection.

Cases in point. Here are some recent examples. Lawmakers in Arlington County, Virginia, a northern suburb adjacent to Washington, D.C., may do away with single-family zoning across the county of 240,000. It is a product of a years-long study that considered the role these medium-density homes can play in expanding the housing supply in an increasingly expensive metropolitan area.

Yet another example is happening in Atlanta, Georgia under Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms. What her administration’s “housing plan” proposes to do, as found starting on page 43 of the 88 page document called ‘Atlanta City Design Housing’ is to:

  • End single-family zoning, allowing any property owner by right to build an additional dwelling unit (called an “Accessory Dwelling Unit”, or ADU) on any lot now zoned for one family residence (p57).
  • Some accessory dwelling units could be built with modular technology, assembled offsite and transported to a final location.
  • Allow the property owner by right to then subdivide the lot and sell the ADU separately on its own “flag lot” (p67), then presumably build another and repeat the process, completely overbuilding the property
  • “Loosen” the building requirements, such as size and height, for ADU’s (p69), making them cheaper, and likely less attractive in the neighborhood
  • Reduce minimum lot sizes, and minimum set-backs from the street and adjacent properties (p82), in order to get more buildings onto every property
  • End minimum residential parking requirements citywide (p74), so that new apartment and condominium buildings would not have to provide parking for their residents, but can rather require them to park on neighborhood streets

The New York Times in a recent article said, “Single-family zoning is practically gospel in America, embraced by homeowners and local governments to protect neighborhoods of tidy houses from denser development nearby. But a number of officials across the country are starting to make seemingly heretical moves. The Oregon legislature this month will consider a law that would end zoning exclusively for single-family homes in most of the state. California lawmakers have drafted a bill that would effectively do the same. In December Minneapolis City Council voted to end single-family zoning citywide.”

Biden says that he wants to “eliminate local and state housing regulations that perpetuate discrimination.” Biden then identifies “exclusionary zoning” as the kind of housing regulation he wants to “eliminate.” “Exclusionary zoning” is Biden’s term for what is more commonly called “single-family zoning.”

Add that President Biden has promised that he will eliminate “exclusionary zoning” with the HOME Act of 2019, co-sponsored by Senator Cory Booker and House majority whip James Clyburn. The HOME Act of 2019 requires any municipality receiving Community Development Block Grants from HUD or benefiting from federal Surface Transportation Grants for highway construction and repair, to submit a plan to “reduce barriers” to high-density low-income housing. The plan must choose from a menu of items, most of which in some way limit or eliminate single-family zoning.

In a July 18, 2022, Phoenix Business Journal article, using a report from a Washington, D.C. think tank called Up for Growth, says Arizona’s housing deficit has increased 1,377% since 2012 — representing 122,683 homes. In the same article, Steven Hensley, advisory manager for the Zonda housing market research firm, said the approval and permitting process at the municipal level is delaying projects, which results in less development. He went on to say that local municipalities must address these issues and allow more building and more density to improve housing costs.

Why the sudden and intractable need for more affordable housing? The American birth rate fell for the sixth consecutive year in 2020, with the lowest number of babies born since 1979. About 3.6 million babies were born in the US in 2020 – marking a 4% decline from the year before. It’s not that the U.S. population is increasing.

So, what is creating the need for large amounts of affordable housing? Can you say ‘open borders’? Can you say that nearly 2 million illegal immigrants have arrived since the start of the Biden administration? Where are they going to live?

This new desire for affordable housing, requires that you to give up the American Dream of a single-family home.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 22

17

There is no pleasing some…

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 17, 2022
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

I want to preface my comments in the blog. Many are aware that this is my last term in office as the councilmember representing the Yucca district. My term will expire in 2 ½ years in December of 2024. This circumstance allows me the luxury of speaking my mind.  Although if you know me at all, I usually don’t hold back and I do speak my mind often. At this point in my political career, it is a privilege that is held by no other councilmember. As elected officials we often hold our tongues so as not to offend. Now, I speak my truth and if the emperor has no clothes, I will tell you so.

This past Friday the city announced its selection for its new position of Downtown Manager. Daniel Sabillion, owner of a downtown Glendale coffee shop has been selected. Mr. Sabillion and the city have established conflict of interest requirements in recognition of his downtown business ownership, but you can be sure accusations of a conflict of interest will soon be flying about.

This Sunday afternoon a diatribe was emailed to the entire city council and attached was the city’s announcement of its selection of Mr. Sabillion. I suspect that this announcement prompted the current vitriol we received. Whose fingerprints are all over this crazy email? There are so many choices…let’s play a guessing game. It might be one or it might be all, or it might be none.

How about the Hysterical Downtown Merchants Association let by the Zomoks and Cheryl Knappes? Could it be instead of welcoming another entity that adds to building and promoting downtown Glendale, might they perceive Mr. Sabillion as a threat? Or how about Yvonne Knaack, former councilmember, and Vice Mayor? For years she lived in Glendale and had a successful, downtown business. She sold her business (although she remains a downtown property owner) and moved out of Glendale. Might this be pay back for being uninvited to speak at the downtown café lighting ceremony? She is still heavily involved with the Glendale Chamber of Commerce. What about Richard Vangalisti? He owns multiple downtown properties most of which remain vacant. He and the city have knocked heads often over the condition of his properties. Might he be offering sour grapes because of his relationship with the city? Add to the list of suspects, might it be the Glendale Chamber of Commerce and its CEO, Robert Heidt? The Chamber’s lucrative contract to supply a downtown manager terminated recently. Could it be retribution for the loss of the contract valued at over $100,000? I really don’t know, and you’re guess is as good as mine, but all these players have an axe to grind.

So, what did this infamous email say? Well, it accused the mayor, council, and city manager of: *corruption *backdoor deals *conflict of interest *bullying * being dirty *fear and intimidation *on a spending spree * wanting to get rid of Councilmembers Aldama, Tolmachoff and Turner *handpicking the city’s Chief Judge *killing the trees in Murphy Park and *destroying Catlin Court. I don’t think I missed anything. It’s quite a potpourri of accusations with not one shred of fact involved. I could say the sky is purple but without any fact to corroborate it, no one will believe it. It’s the same with this ridiculous email.

As long as I am on a roll, let me say this. For years downtown has been divided into two camps: those who are not pleased no matter what this council and city manager do and those (always silent) who quietly work to see their business succeed. Quite frankly, I am tired of the nay-sayers’ antics and their continual refusal to work cooperatively to make downtown the best that it can become. No matter what is offered, it is refused and bad-mouthed. If they spent half as much time growing their businesses and making them relevant in the 21st Century as they do nay-saying and putting up obstacles, they would be wildly successful.

This council is committed to revitalizing downtown. In fact, I, personally, go all the way back to participating in the “Miracle Mile” visioning sessions twenty years ago. Everyone would acknowledge that Glendale Glitters was a signature event, but it only brought people downtown for 6 weeks of the year. The rest of the time, downtown looked like a deserted movie set. Council welcomed the concept of Glendale Live! because it would bring people downtown for many, many nights of live entertainment in its Amphitheater. Instead of creating cross promotions, discounts, and special sales in conjunction with the live entertainment nights what did the merchants do? Zip. Nada. Sat on their hands waiting for customers without offering a single incentive. Instead, they used their energy to bad mouth the entire concept.

Now the council has approved the remodeling of city hall, council chambers, the parking garage, the amphitheater, and Murphy Park. Instead of offering constructive suggestions, all the nay-sayers can focus on is that the city council is determined to kill the trees in Murphy Park. How absurd. This council values Murphy Park and its ambience and is not going to deliberately destroy it.

Do any of the nay-sayers realize the result of the city’s announcement to invest $70 million in downtown? Since that announcement we have received numerous calls from developers wanting to explore buying the city’s excess properties in downtown and investing millions of dollars in redeveloping them. That is exactly what is needed, new life blood and new investment in creating a vibrant downtown. That means nothing to them. For you see, the nay-sayers have created the urban legend that council is going to kill all the trees in Murphy Park. I’m not making this up. This is how ridiculous it has gotten.

It’s time for the nay-sayers to give it up. Instead of accusing us of killing trees, why don’t you offer your concept of what a revitalized Murphy Park should look like? Instead of working to undermine Mr. Sabillion, why don’t you give him a chance? Don’t assume he is a puppet of a nefarious city council and city manager. If you don’t like what he is doing, tell him, enter a dialogue to make the relationship better.

This may be the last chance to rescue downtown Glendale. Don’t blow it. If I had had my way, the city would be building a new city hall for $70 million out at Westgate on city property and leave downtown to become that deserted movie set.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 22

12

We all need a good news story once in awhile

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 12, 2022
Posted in City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , | 2 Comments

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

This afternoon Jeff Turney stopped by to pick up some items. After sitting down and visiting with him for awhile I knew I had to write this blog…now. Jeff Turney is a retired Glendale Police Sergeant with more than 20 years of service. When most of us retire we travel, visit grandchildren or take up a new hobby.

Not so with Jeff for he has a new passion and a new career. Well, perhaps not a totally new career, you see, because Jeff had been helping people on his days off. Jeff has become an angel. At least that’s what recipients of his new career believe. Jeff is part of a non-profit organization called Operation Enduring Gratitude. Their website is oegaz.org . Operation Enduring Gratitude (OEG) was founded in 2014 and its original projects involved building wheelchair ramps for disabled veterans. Then it grew because there is just so much need. Their mission states, “The Veteran Community continues to grow larger, older and more in need.  We want to fill the gap left by other services. With the help of good people, we make a difference in the lives of the Veterans around us.”  I’ve provided a link to two of the stories I found on their site about them: Community helps Marine veteran restore house at  https://www.oegaz.org/community-helps-marine-veteran-restore-house/ and another is Operation Enduring Gratitude seeks to rebuild homes, lives for veterans at https://www.oegaz.org/operation-enduring-gratitude-seeks-to-rebuild-homes-lives-for-veterans/ .

If you would like to help Enduring Gratitude, they can always use the time and talent of volunteers or a donation to go toward another vet’s time of need. Check out their site. You can also check out Jeff Turney’s Facebook page.

But I digress. Back to Jeff. A veteran’s home had been destroyed by fire and he called the Mayor’s office seeking help. The Mayor reached out to Jeff. Jeff and Enduring Gratitude took on the job and rebuilt the vet’s home in 7 months. At certain times, there would be over 100 volunteers on site. This project had lots and lots of partners including companies who donated supplies or offered volunteers. This project fortified Jeff’s desire to help veterans and their families.

Jeff’s and the organization’s latest project will be revealed tomorrow morning, July 13th at 9:30 AM at “Miss Gean’s” newly rebuilt home at 7608 N 59th Ln, Glendale, AZ 85301. This widow of a veteran had become a hoader. It was to the point that the city was getting ready to condemn her childhood home built in 1957. There is a back story to this rebuild but if you really want to find out you will have to watch CBS news On the Road with Steve Hartman this coming Sunday morning (check your local listings for the time).

Jeff is about to take a page out of Steve Hartman’s book and is planning a road trip across ‘Murica with his son. Jeff bought a bus which he retrofitted and repainted. They plan to visit and interview veterans across the country and then post the interviews. He also said he has several books that he plans to write about his time as a law enforcement officer as well as his new passion.

There still really are some innately good people and Jeff is one of them. He, like many others, live by Jesus’ teachings including, “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”

 

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 22

5

Fireworks revisited

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 5, 2022
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Phoenix Metro issues  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

It seems that every year after the 4th of July we look at the fireworks issue. This year, per usual, it sounded like a war zone in my neighborhood…all due to 3 homes, habitual violators. In our neighborhood we all know who they are. The problem continues to be, even after the police are called, they must see the act. That’s a very difficult regulation for all…neighbors and police.

I live in an area of Glendale that is zoned suburban and has large lots. There is a lot of livestock in this area from sheep, goats, chickens to horses. In addition, so many of us have pets, usually cats or dogs. These animals whether domestic or livestock react, often negatively, to the use of aerial fireworks.

The State of Arizona has taken away cities’ and county’s abilities to regulate fireworks. The state has decided which fireworks are legal and time of the year when they may be used.

The state says these are permissible: Ground and handheld sparkling devices.

  • Cylindrical fountains.
  • Cone fountains.
  • Illuminating torches.
  • Ground spinners.
  • Flitter sparklers.
  • Toy smoke devices.
  • Wire sparklers or dipped sticks.
  • Multiple tube ground and handheld sparkling devices, cylindrical fountains, cone fountains and illuminating torches manufactured in accordance with section 3.5 of the APA 87 1.
  • Includes, in a county with a population of more than five hundred thousand persons, adult snappers. For the purposes of this subdivision, “adult snapper” means a device that consists of a paper wrapped or plastic tube that does not contain a fuse and produces a single report and meets all applicable requirements for fuseless firecrackers as defined by the consumer product safety commission and the American fireworks safety laboratory.
  • The sale and use of novelties known as snappers (pop-its), party poppers, glow worms, snakes, toy smoke devices and sparklers are permitted at all times.

Anything that is designed or intended to rise into the air and explode or to detonate in the air or to fly above the ground, including firework items defined by the APA 87 1 and known as firecrackers, bottle rockets, sky rockets, missile-type rockets, helicopters, aerial spinners, torpedoes, roman candles, mine devices, shell devices and aerial shell kits or reloadable tubes are not legal.

The state also determines when fireworks can be used:

  • May 4 – May 6 which is a period of 2 days celebrating Cinco de Mayo
  • June 24 – July 6 which is a period of 13 days celebrating the 4th of July
  • December 24 — January 3 which is a period of 11 days celebrating New Year’s Day

There is no rhyme or reason to the length of permissible number of days for each celebration. Why 2 days for Cinco de Mayo, 13 days for the 4th of July and 11 days for New Year’s Eve? It makes no sense and is confusing to the general public.

 I am going to offer a Council Item of Special Interest (CIOSI) asking city council to approve moving forward with offering state legislation limiting the number of days for fireworks use to 2 days for each event period, the day before and the day of, the holiday. I know this does not address the central issue which is the use of illegal, aerial fireworks but it is yet another attempt to rein in the use of fireworks.

Last year I introduced a CIOSI which city council approved, to limit the hours during which fireworks can be used during the event periods. I am pleased to report that prohibited hours were approved by the state legislature and signed by Governor Ducey. The law goes into effect statewide in August and allows cities and counties to adopt these hours of prohibition. In August I will also introduce a CIOSI asking city council to adopt the state approved hours of prohibition. It allows cities and counties to prohibit the use of fireworks during all allowable event periods between the hours of 11 PM and 8 AM but on July 4th Eve and New Year’s Eve, fireworks can be used until 1 AM. So, on those two Eves fireworks are prohibited from 1 AM to 8 AM.

Even with these measures aerial fireworks will never go away. Every society has thoughtless individuals. There will always be those who break any law, even on the use of fireworks. I, personally, don’t want to see all fireworks banned. Frankly, their use to celebrate important events in the life of our country is a part of our culture. I remember using sparklers to celebrate the 4th of July and then going with my family to see the town fireworks display when I was a kid. It’s a part of who we are. It’s a ritual that recognizes important milestones in our country’s history. Goodness knows, we need to celebrate and to save those milestones.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 22

3

Cannabis is not your friend

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 3, 2022
Posted in City of Glendale • Local schools • National issues  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

It’s no secret that I have never supported cannabis (marijuana in all forms). I am disappointed that Arizona has legalized marijuana. It, along with CRT being pushed in our schools, the effort to demonize religion and the proliferation of the LGBTQ lifestyle, signal a moral decay within our country. I believe I represent the silent majority of Americans that abhor these initiatives.

Today I ran across an article written by a UK journalist in support of my position. I know that after reading this, there will be some pro-cannabis enthusiasts that will then cite articles demonstrating that cannabis is safe. We are all entitled to our own opinions on the subject.

Here is the link to the article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10976437/How-Californias-legal-cannabis-dream-public-health-nightmare.html . It’s entitled “How California’s legal cannabis dream became a public health nightmare.”

In California and elsewhere the use of this substance has become glamorized, trendy and often billed as a health supplement. That’s not what is being heard from ERs throughout the country. One doctor stated, ‘We’ve been seeing the problems for a while now: depressive breakdowns, psychosis, suicidal thoughts, all related to cannabis. The patients are regular people, not down-and-outs.” It has led to a new syndrome called ‘scomiting’ when patients are admitted to the ER screaming and vomiting simultaneously. Not a pretty thought, is it?

It turns out that frequent use is not worth the risks. “Studies have shown that frequent ingestion of cannabis can increase the risk of serious mental illness like psychosis and schizophrenia, as well as insomnia, social anxiety disorder and suicidal thoughts.” The article states, “In California, hospital admissions for cannabis-related complications have shot up – from 1,400 in 2005 to 16,000 by 2019. In California, and the other 18 states that have legalised (sic) cannabis, rates of addiction are nearly 40 per cent higher than states without legal cannabis, according to research by Columbia University.”

One of the reasons pushed for legalization was that it would dry up black market sales. Well, that proved to be wrong as well. Why? Because black market charges less than regulated markets. After all, they have no overhead and can sell for much less. It is estimated that the black market is raking in twice the dollars of regulated shops. Oops…that didn’t work out as planned.

It was also touted that with legalization police would be free to enforce more serious crime prevention. Again, wrong assumption.  It has led to a proliferation of burglaries, break-ins, car thefts, etc. The list has become endless.

What has legalization created? Regulated shops that glamourize much stronger products than ever before, in order to sell as much as possible. People who regularly and frequently use are more likely to end up in an ER with any one of a variety of mental illnesses. Addiction rates soaring in the 18 states that have legalized marijuana. Instead of eliminating illegal sales, business for them is booming and crime related to its use have skyrocketed. Its use is contributing to the social and moral decay of our country.

Is this what we want? Those who voted for its legalization in Arizona were sold a bill of goods, none of which materialized. At what point will we realize that this social experiment failed? It’s time to consider repeal of its legalization.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

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.

Jun 22

18

Glendale’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 18, 2022
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Heroes Park  | Tagged With: , , , , | 2 Comments

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

For the second year in a row Glendale’s budget has topped a billion dollars. It reflects the current economic status of many other Valley cities such as Chandler, Tempe and Peoria, all showing a total budget of at least a billion dollars.

The city’s budget is based on several council-identified priorities. The first is Sustainability. We continue to invest in infrastructure. Just as we focused on our streets after years of inattention, we are employing the same philosophy to our parks as we make major investments in our parks to replace and maintain equipment in or serving our park system. Perhaps the most important focus in terms of infrastructure is maintaining our water capabilities and redundancy of systems. As we move into a Stage 1 drought declaration Glendale is in very good shape. No Valley City can exclusively rely upon Central Arizona Project (CAP) water which comes from Lake Mead and the Colorado River. Our portfolio includes Salt River Project water and SRP’s water reservoirs are about 77% full. But that is not all, the city has a portfolio of wells and it will be refurbishing 3 wells over the next 2 years. It also has been banking water underground. The city’s water doesn’t come from just one source. It is a blend of CAP, SRP, wells and ground water storage. We have also entered into Intergovernmental Agreements with Phoenix and Peoria and are now building interconnects so that should there be a water emergency among any one of the three cities, the other two will now be able to share water.

A second priority is Public Safety. Over half (61% or $158 million) of the city’s General Fund budget (total of $255 million) goes to Police and Fire. This city council is a strong advocate for Public Safety and is adding 10 new positions in Public Safety.

A third area is Economic Development. Continued growth of the city’s economic portfolio is essential as it provides funding for many of the amenities our citizens want and enjoy. One of the city’s trademarks has been its provision of “speed to market” for many developers. As our explosion of economic growth continues the city finds it must add new building inspectors, an architect, engineers, and project managers. The council continues to demonstrate its commitment to downtown Glendale by authorizing a $70 million investment in the renovation of City Hall, Council Chambers, the city hall parking structure, Murphy Park and the Amphitheater. As the city embarks on this project it is experiencing renewed interest by developers who are taking a second look at downtown and exploring development possibilities. Over the next few years expect to see the development of vacant parcels as well as new users of vacant buildings. All happening as a result of our investment in the downtown city hall campus.

The last, but certainly not least, priority is Neighborhoods. Sustaining and improving the quality of life for all residents. Projects that have begun or will begin after July 1, 2022 include improvements at the Main Library, replacement of playground equipment, irrigation and lighting at multiple parks, the addition of 8 splash pads and continued pavement management. There are 2 projects slated for Heroes Park. One is an expansion of the community meeting space at Heroes Library from accommodating 30 people to 75 persons. The other is building the ballfields in the northeast corner of Heroes Park.

Just as inflation is killing the family budget as the price of everything continues to increase relentlessly, so, too, is the city’s operating budget experiencing the same inflationary pressures. Everything is costing more from contract prices for all kinds of services, utilities, supplies and fuel. The city has been proactive in anticipating increased costs except for fuel. The prices rise dramatically week over week with no ceiling predicted. This will be one of the issues which council will have to address.

Another issue is the difficulty all Valley cities are facing in filling employee positions. In an attempt to attract well qualified employees, the city will give a 5% Cost of Living Increase (COLA) beginning July 1st. Currently the city is looking to fill 59 new positions, in every field from Public Safety to Parks personnel to Code Inspectors to Sanitation and Technology workers. We need you. If you want a good paying job with generous benefits you should be applying for a job with the City of Glendale.

Keep in mind that this is the single most important responsibility of the city council.  There are always competing needs between city staff and city council as well as between city councilmembers. Some needs are more compelling despite our advocacy for a specific project. For example, I did not get funding for the rehabilitation of 83rd Avenue between Northern and Glendale Avenues. However, staff is prepared to submit the project for federal funding should it become available.

I hope you have gained some insight with regard to the Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget which begins on July 1, 2022, and ends on June 30, 2023. If there are aspects that you think were missed or were not addressed, please take the time to offer a comment to this blog. It is a budget that council reviewed and amended for over 4 months. Discussions were detailed and council posed many questions.

It is a budget forged out of consensus.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

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.

Jun 22

6

Glendale hosts a downtown merchants meeting

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 6, 2022
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, City Manager Kevin Phelps and Vice Mayor Aldama hosted a downtown merchants meeting. The City Manager wanted to offer in detail City Council’s decision to bring an internal city employee on board as Downtown Manager within the Economic Development Department and the city’s plan to renovate the city hall complex.

This new person will have the responsibility of branding and marketing downtown to a greater extent than is done now. In addition, this person will have the responsibility of working with property owners to fill store vacancies as well as encouraging new downtown investment.

He then explained the council’s $70 million dollar investment in renovating City Hall, Council Chambers, the parking garage and Murphy Park. All renderings used in the presentation were strictly conceptual for council is expected to approve contracts for design prior to its July break.

It seemed as if the merchant attendees failed to appreciate or acknowledge the importance of this major investment in downtown Glendale.

I make no secret or apology for the fact that I was one of the councilmembers who preferred moving city hall to the Westgate area. My motivation for such a decision was that it would have signaled a city council and senior management, forward looking and confident in Glendale’s robust future and that Glendale has moved into the 21st century.

I am frustrated by downtown merchants who spend most of their energy continually asking the city to do more and to invest more. I firmly believe that until such time as a broad swath of downtown merchants (not just the historic area) coalesce into a legitimate, 501-C3 downtown merchants association with ‘skin in the game’ in the form of dues downtown Glendale will remain adrift and rudderless. It’s way past time for these fractious merchants to come together and to forge a vision for their future the old-fashioned way, through consensus. It’s way past time for the downtown merchants, through internal debate, to create self-crafted goals and strategies that will benefit all.

However, majority still rules and a majority of council felt that $70 million investment in our city hall complex would signal to all that we still believe in the importance of a robust and successful downtown. I eventually did and still do support council’s hope that this will help downtown Glendale but after the merchants meeting my initial reaction was how ungrateful they are and the city can never do enough to satisfy them.

There were some very thoughtful questions offered at the meeting. I was impressed with those individuals. However, some topics raised offered an insight into just how fractured downtown merchants are. Some wanted the city to rid downtown of the homeless while others wanted to open public restrooms. Public restrooms are a magnet for the homeless. Witness the city’s closure of the Velma Teague library public restrooms. They were closed because they attracted the homeless who used them to the point that the restrooms became a public health and safety issue. And yes, the city promised to find out from other Valley cities if they have public restrooms in their downtowns and what do they do to ensure that they are safe, clean and healthy? Frankly I don’t think other downtowns have public restrooms. This will be interesting data collection. So, downtown merchants which is it? Do you prefer to reduce the homeless downtown or do you want to encourage them to come downtown by offering public restrooms?

Mr. Phelps explained the term, “experiential retail” using examples of venues that combine food and beverage with recreational experiences. One of the attendees felt that the $70 million for the city hall complex renovation rather should have been used in developing experiential retail for downtown merchants. Ah, no. While the city in the past has offered grants to improve the exterior of existent or new downtown buildings it cannot and should not use public tax dollars to enhance the business model of any individual’s business.

Another query centered around the use of food trucks at Glendale’s LIVE event at Murphy Park. Some prefer removal of the food trucks as they compete with downtown’s restaurants while others wanted to see a process that allowed them to compete for space.

Just to put my comments in perspective, I have owned two businesses in the Valley. In my first, to become a tenant of the retail complex, I had to join the merchant’s association, pay dues and commit to being opened a minimum number of hours every day of the week. In my second business there was no merchant’s association as I was in a stand-alone building but I put in long hours and was open every day of the week from 9am to 9pm.

I had my own “experiential retail” before it became a ‘thing’ by having people like Ted DeGrazia, Hugh Downs and Irma Bombeck visit and meet my customers. Successful entrepreneurship is made of equal parts of long hours, passion for what you are doing and always trying something new to attract customers. I didn’t rely on a city to attract customers to make me successful. Why are these merchants always expecting the city to market downtown or create new events for them to attract customers? There are small businesses all over this city that have never made such an ‘ask’. They struggle just as some of the downtown merchants but yet they persevere reliant upon their own talents and resources.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

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.

Jun 22

4

Coyotes’ fans…don’t count those chickens just yet

Posted by Joyce Clark on June 4, 2022
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

I would remind Coyotes fans that in 2010 and 2011 the City of Glendale paid the NHL $25 million a year to keep the Coyotes in Arizona. I guess no one remembers that if Glendale had not paid the NHL the team would have been sold and probably relocated at that time.

During that time fans heaped praise on Glendale and there was no lamenting of traffic difficulties in getting to a game in Glendale. My, how times have changed. The most often heard refrain today has been that it is too difficult to get to Glendale. That seems to be the owners and fans rationale for moving out of Glendale.

The fans have traded $25 dollar tickets and traffic inconvenience for $500 tickets and equally vexing traffic inconvenience. They will trade traffic at the Loop 101 for traffic at the Loop 202.

There are three major issues that it is believed will have to be satisfied if the Coyotes hope to locate in Tempe.

The first is the Coyotes’ proposal that Tempe pay $200 million to clean up the site. They propose a Tempe Community Facilities District. In essence, Tempe bonds for the $200 million which would be repaid by using the sales tax generated on the site for approximately 20 years or until the bonds are paid. In essence, Tempe taxpayers see no new revenue from this development until the bonds are paid and are not benefitting from the sales tax generated by the proposed project.

I would also historically point out that Steve Ellman when seeking City of Glendale financing to build the Gila River Arena represented development of over 1.2 million square feet that would generate enough sales tax to satisfy the annual debt payment. After 5 years there was only about 1/5th of the proposed economic development and that did not generate enough sales tax to pay the annual debt payment. The same scenario could be repeated forcing Tempe to use General Fund dollars to cover the short fall in the annual debt payment.

There has been talk that if the Tempe Council approves the development there will be citizen referendum petitions. If that occurs and enough signatures are acquired, it will put the project on the ballot and the voters of Tempe would decide whether the project moves forward. If this were to occur, add another year of uncertainty.

A second issue is the Coyotes’ proposal to construct 1,600 residential apartment units on the site. These residential units would be directly under Sky Harbor’s flight path. Recently four former Phoenix mayors offered an OpEd on this issue. Here is the link: https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2022/06/01/tempe-plan-arizona-coyotes-spells-trouble-sky-harbor-airport/9996700002/ . A little background is in order. In 1994, Phoenix and Tempe entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). The purpose of the IGA was to stop residential development under Sky Harbor’s flight path. The concern was and is, that these new residents would complain about the noise generated by takeoffs and landings (at roughly one every minute). Residential complaints would most certainly have an impact on Sky Harbor’s continued and future development.

The four former mayors said, “For more than 25 years, Sky Harbor’s growth, expansion and development plans have been made with the IGA and adherence to its prescribed eastbound departure path in mind.

Tempe even appointed its own aviation commission to ensure that the terms of the agreement remain viable and enforced. All of this to protect Tempe neighborhoods from the life-altering experience of having a flight path directly over their homes.” They go on to say, “These residential units are proposed to be built directly under the very flight paths that were created by the intergovernmental agreement to protect Tempe residents.

As previously communicated by the Federal Aviation Administration, the Air Line Pilots Association, the airlines themselves and by the professional management of Sky Harbor, no residential development can be permitted in this area – less than 10,000 feet from the end of the two south runways – without compromising those flight paths and significantly threatening the airport’s continued operation and future growth.

As community leaders who embrace cooperation and compatible growth, it is essential, if the entertainment district proposal moves forward, that all residential development be removed from consideration.”

When you think about it, it won’t just be the 1,600 residences that will be impacted by the noise but really, everything on the site will experience the noise…people working in offices on the site and the fans while attending a game. Without the residential units, projected to earn income, is it still a viable investment?

The last and perhaps the most important issue to be considered is money. At the Tempe City Council’s June 2, 2022, meeting when approval was granted 5 to 2 to continue to negotiate with the Coyotes, one of the Tempe councilmembers publicly offered a slide depicting Dun & Bradstreet’s financial rating of the Coyotes, Alex Meruelo and associated affiliates. Here is that slide:

It’s not pretty. Tempe staffers circulated a Memo to the Tempe city council revealing staff’s rating of the proposed project. Here is the link: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2022/06/01/tempe-memo-gives-coyotes-proposal-low-marks-financial-strength/9973803002/ . In the Arizona Republic’s article about the memo it states, “On the financial front, a city memo released ahead of the June 2 City Council vote gave the team’s plan a 40% score for “financial strength/ability,” the lowest mark on the six-category evaluation completed by city staffers.”

To be successful and move forward the Coyotes will have to give up its ‘ask’ of $200 million from Tempe and its taxpayers, remove the 1,600 residential units to ensure continued viability of Sky Harbor Airport and ensure that a team that has lost millions of dollars year over year has the necessary guaranteed financial stability to successfully undertake a nearly $2 billion development. As Tempe has stated it will be months before the final decision is made and satisfactory answers to these three issues should be the basis for their decision.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

« Previous Page — Next Page »