Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Several days ago, Mattel, Inc. and Epic Resort Destinations, LLC. announced more plans for their Mattel Adventure Park slated to open in Glendale next to the VAI Resort. This is a pilot project for Mattel and their very first adventure park. Glen Bilbo was a principal in the original Crystal Lagoons project. His focus at that time and now, still remains on the Mattel aspect of the entire project. While Tommy Fisher and his son, Grant, are principals of the VAI portion of the project.

Hot Wheels and Thomas the Train

The entire complex is located at the southwest corner of 95th Avenue and Cardinals Way, just south of the football stadium. They announced that the Mattel Amusement Park’s plan is to be open in the first quarter of 2023. Previously they had announced initial attractions of Thomas and Friends and Hot Wheels.

Now add to that line up Barbie, Masters of the Universe, and Mattel Games. “The new additions include a Barbie Beach House, which comprises an immersive Barbie flying theater that takes riders through deep underwater and outer space; a Dream Closet Experience with a hologram Barbie to curate a wardrobe; and a Barbie Rooftop, where guests can choose from a selection of signature pink beverages, sweet and savory snacks and experience panoramic views.” (Phoenix Business Journal, May 26, 2022).

Add a 9-hole miniature golf course that is a life-sized Pictionary game board and a climbing structure where you jump on oversized UNO cards to get to the top.  They will also have a Masters of the Universe’s Castle Grayskull featuring a laser tag arena.

Mattel Amusement Park

“We are extremely excited to add Barbie, Masters of the Universe and Mattel Games themed attractions and rides to an already outstanding offering in development at the first-ever Mattel Adventure Park. We have spared no expense to bring these iconic brands to life in ways that will delight visitors of all ages for years to come.” said Mark Cornell, president, Epic Resort Destinations, in a statement. (Phoenix Business Journal, May 26,2022).

This concept is full-throated, offering something for every age group, both boys and girls. It makes use of the latest in digital electronics to offer immersive experiences.

Just imagine, children can be water babies while using the lake and then spend time at the Mattel Amusement Park. What a special day for them.

I’m saving up now. While my Grandchildren are too old, my Great Grandchildren are just the right age for such a day.

© 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.

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.

Is there a part of your neighborhood that could use a make-over or a little sprucing up? Councilmember Joyce Clark wants to help you turn that eyesore into something beautiful.

Perhaps you have a retention basin that needs to be beautified with landscaping and a few benches or your neighborhood entry sign needs repair, or a community wall could use a new coat of paint? Do the rights-of-way need more gravel or plants/trees? Maybe you need a large dumpster or two to hold a neighborhood cleanup? Perhaps some art would help spruce up your neighborhood. Think outside the box. What would make your neighborhood look and feel better?

Councilmember Clark has created a $15,000 grant fund to be used in 2022. One-time project submissions can range from $100 up to $5,000.

City funding CANNOT be used on private property. Improving a single home(s) cannot be funded through this grant program. Your project must benefit your neighborhood. Projects not eligible for funding are those that: • Conflict with existing city policy • Benefit a single individual.

The grant can be used to pay for materials and supplies directly related to the implementation of the project. Examples of materials and supplies are plants, paint, mulch, lumber, garden supplies, planters, trash receptacles, benches, and city dumpsters.

A small portion of the grant will be used to pay for a permanent plaque to commemorate the project and acknowledge Councilmember Clark’s Grant and the participants. The grant can be used to rent equipment needed to complete the project. The grant can be used to purchase hand tools for the implementation of the project. All non-disposable tools purchased with grant funding will be the property of the City of Glendale.

Sweat equity from the neighborhood is required in the form of volunteer hours to implement and complete the project. The more support you can get from your neighbors, the better the chances of receiving a one-time grant award.

You may apply for a grant until 4:00 p.m., Thursday, June 30, 2022. Award notifications will be made by no later than July 8, 2022, and projects must be completed by October 31, 2022. All grants must be accepted by the lead applicant within 15 days of grant award notification. Extensions may be granted if supplies purchased are delayed or weather conditions affect the project.

Here are the rules:

  • Deadline to apply is Thursday, June 30,
  • Grant funding may be used for such items as landscaping projects, neighborhood markers, tree plantings, murals, benches, flower planters, signs, trash receptacles, gardens. This list is not all inclusive. You may create a project that is not included in this list.
  • You must submit on your application the costs, including but not limited to, supplies, landscaping materials (trees, plants, containers), benches, monument signage or any other cost associated with the proposed one-time beautification
  • An estimate of the volunteer hours from the neighbors to accomplish the
  • A proposed schedule for the project and the deadline of October 31, 2022, for completion.
  • Your neighborhood must be within the boundaries of the Yucca district

Here is the application as a pdf file. Once completed you may snail mail or return via an email to Sbeck@glendaleaz.com. Yucca Beautification Application FINAL

Good luck! I can’t wait to see your applications!

© 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.

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 publish a weekly ENews letter every Thursday. It contains a lot of great information. Learn about upcoming events in Glendale or find out which streets in the Yucca district are scheduled for pavement management. Each week there is something new.

Click on this link to subscribe or copy and paste into your browser. It will show up in your email every Thursday.

https://visitor.r20.constantcontact.com/manage/optin?v=001wG1kY_25URFBkAQ8LSkL7psk_erhO_R-D1UJwhnb6-BHtjPUw_KVOrNgEN96W5zlliIkh053HT4NBV1oPmPMNuX0_bY80Vz3Yt7vl1Kt-M2nk341epSLp34GKVxg3ov_7aX9z4p8NR9Lc35XK8O_Z9UpohiRouh4pZZooHUjZt0%3D&id=preview

Here are some samples from this past Thursday’s ENews:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are great things happening in Glendale and my Enews is a great way to learn about them. Once you subscribe you will receive my weekly bulleting chock full of information. For example, every week I post which streets in the district are scheduled for pavement management.

Give it a try. If you don’t like it you can always opt out.

© 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.

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.

As of this date Planning Staff has not informed me about the future plans of Mr. Froke’s project for 70 town houses on 5 acres zoned for Low Density Residential on the west side of 83rd Avenue. That is because there have been meetings between Mr. Froke and the Planning Department but no finalization of any plan. As you may recall, it was tabled by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) on April 28, 2002, with the applicant to decide when it will be reheard by the P&Z.

Recently I received an email from an old friend. This person lived in Glendale for 40 years and was extremely active in the community, having also served on many boards and commissions. This person read my previous blog on the Planning Commission meeting of April 28, 2022. The comments in the email really highlight one of the prime directives of the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z): “I have just skimmed over the report you made of the planning commission’s meeting to address the 83rd Avenue proposal.  I completely agree with you that this is totally out of bounds.  While I didn’t read the whole transcript, I did enough to know that the commission members seem to have had no training on what their duties are. They are to uphold the general plan.  The people have voted on the general plan, and no one or two people are competent enough or have the authority to overturn the public’s desires.  The property owner cannot do whatever he/she wants with their property; they must be held to the zoning regulations and the general plan.”

What is a General Plan? The city states, “A General Plan provides vision and policies that determine how a city will grow and develop in the future. The City of Glendale’s General Plan is a long-range comprehensive plan that guides development in the City by addressing various elements such as land use, housing, growth areas, urban design, military and aviation, open space, circulation, fiscal public health, environmental planning, energy, etc.”

Arizona State Statues requires municipalities to adopt, update, and readopt their General Plans every ten years. The Glendale City Council adopted an updated General Plan on April 26, 2016 and it was approved by Glendale voters on August 30, 2016. It is called Envision Glendale 2040.

Envision Glendale 2040 states, “The General Plan is designed as a policy and reference document to guide future development, projects, and programs.  It is used to determine how and where growth should occur, ways to wisely invest capital improvements, and techniques for enhancing and sustaining Glendale’s quality of life. Using a holistic approach, this plan looks to achieve a citizens’ directive for moderate, well‐managed growth.”  It also states, “Locational placements for private and/or public development investment are coordinated on the Land Use Map.  It is not a zoning map, but it does reflect the types and intensities of current land uses as well as intended development massing with which future zoning decisions are expected to be consistent.”

The Plan offers guidance on General Plan Amendments, and I found this provision very interesting: A Major General Plan Amendment can be applicable for less than 20 acres when,

“The Planning Director may determine an amendment as “major” if it is less than the minimum areas (20 acres) in the above table but: 1) the infrastructure demands are not offset by private investment or privately‐constructed extensions or expansions to publicly‐provided systems: and/or 2) the change has a substantial impact on the neighborhood or on furthering the goals of the General Plan.”

When you look at item 2, “the change has a substantial impact on the neighborhood…” It seems that going from 1 to 2.5 units to an acre to 20 units to an acre within a specific area general planned as low density residential, would certainly have a substantial impact on the neighborhood and should have been considered a Major General Plan Amendment.

Major General Plan Amendments are more complicated and can only be considered by the city at two specific times per year. However, I wonder why this request was not considered by the city as a Major General Plan Amendment?

Perhaps the P&Z Commissioners need a refresher course on their duties and responsibilities. They should be reminded that it is their responsibility to uphold the General Plan…you know, that document approved by Glendale’s voters. Any request for a change must be made by the applicant showing that it offers no “substantial impact on the neighborhood.” Mr. Froke took every opportunity to avoid the issue of density and never made the case.

© 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.