Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Jan 25

29

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 29, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Mattel Adventure Park • VAI Resort • Worker Power Super PAC  | 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.

Worker Power is at it again. They keep trying to blow up VAI Resort, currently under construction and scheduled to open at the end of this year. VAI Resort is a billion dollar development expected to generate $32 million dollars a year in revenue to the City of Glendale. It promises to be the most impactful project in Glendale’s economic history. It will be the largest resort in the state and probably all of the Southwest. It includes nearly 1200 hotel rooms, an amphitheater that will feature live entertainment 100 times a year, a dozen restaurants, upscale retail, a water feature, a convention center and ample meeting space. Just to its south, as a companion piece, is Mattel Adventure Park. This is Mattel’s first Adventure Park in the country and will feature Barbie, Thomas the Train and other Mattel branded children’s figures.

Worker Power wants to unionize VAI Resort and if they cannot get what they want, it appears they are ready to kill the project all together. This is their third try. First, they obtained petition signatures to stop Glendale from using a GPLET (Government Property Lease Excise Tax) with VAI. That failed to go to an election when VIA and the city announced that there would be no GPLET used. That action erased the need for an election.

Their second salvo was to get enough petition signatures to force the question of mandating a minimum wage of $20 an hour for hospitality workers in Glendale exclusively. That question was defeated in the last general election by 56.6% of Glendale’s voters saying ‘no’.

Now they are at it again. They have successfully collected enough signatures to force a special election this May. City Council approved amending the VIA PAD (Planned Area Development) by including (as a formality) the use of 10 acres on the east side of 95th Avenue (across from the Resort’s hotels) for an office building and additional parking. It is important to note the building is nearly complete.

What is Worker Power’s compelling argument that drove them to force yet another election related to VAI Resort and their use of 10 acres for an office building and parking? Their spokesperson said, “We feel that the removal of landscaping may increase the urban heat island effect.” That’s it. An environmental crisis will occur if those 10 acres are not green space. Give me a break. That’s the best that they can do this time around to try to stop VIA Resort?

Adam Baugh is VAI’s zoning attorney. He is highly respected among his peers and those elected officials that have worked with him. I have worked with Adam on numerous projects in my district. I admire and respect him. His word is his bond. If he promised to work with his client to address issues that I felt needed attention on a development project, that is what he did. He was successful in getting many changes I sought on various projects.

Mr. Baugh said, “The project will not move forward”…”You need the 10 acres for the project to be successful still. If the referendum is successful … then the project doesn’t function the way it’s intended to.” (Arizona Republic) The nearly complete office building will support VAI’s management of the resort complex and offers parking for those employees as well as those who will be working on the resort site.

In essence, the project will grind to a halt which is exactly what Worker Power wants to occur.

It is important to note how Worker Power obtains its signatures for petitions. They go to apartment complexes to gather signatures. It is recognized that renters are typically transient and stay in an apartment complex for a few years and then move. They are not vested in the city in which the apartment complex is located.

Another source of signatures is low propensity (don’t often vote) registered voters, a significant portion of which do not use English as their primary language. It has been revealed by those who have been approached to sign what the petition gatherers say. It appears to be misrepresentation and misinformation of the facts. In other words, whatever it takes to get that signature.

Both of these groups often have no interest in city government and are not informed on the issues. When they are told by petition gatherers how bad the city and VAI are, they will sign. They typically don’t question and will believe what they are told.

Worker Power has a formula and has turned petition gathering into a fine art form. At what point will Glendale taxpayers get tired of paying for Worker Power initiated elections?

I urge Glendale voters to become informed about this issue. When they are they will realize what a frivolous election this is. Reject Worker Power’s latest attempt to go after the city and VAI Resort.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Jan 25

28

Stipend is not a dirty word

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 28, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Former Councilmember Joyce Clark • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Heroes Park • Yucca district  | 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.

Recently Shawn Raymundo had an article in the Arizona Republic about the city council receiving stipends. Before I go into that issue, a word about Mr. Raymundo. He is a writer for the Arizona Republic which is part of the USA Today network. The Arizona Republic and USA Today are notoriously ‘progressive’ liberal news organizations. It follows that their reporters hold the same positions and most of them, not all, do. Both organizations have a few token conservative reporters.

Mr. Raymundo has become Councilmember Turner’s lapdog. All that Turner has to do is to call Raymundo and plant something designed to embarrass either the City of Glendale, the city manager, the mayor or city council. It appears that Turner’s other ‘go-to-reporter’ is Richard Smith of the Glendale Independent. Both of these gentlemen harbor a liberal bias seemingly evident in their reporting, especially when covering a council that is, in the majority, conservative.

Some history is in order. When I was first elected as the Yucca district councilmember in 1992, my salary was $24,000 a year. After tax deductions, I probably took home about $19,000 a year. This was my salary for over half of the 24 years I served as a councilmember. It wasn’t ever about the money then or now. It was about having the opportunity to serve the people of Glendale. I was and am still proud of having done so.

In the last portion of my time in office, the voters of Glendale approved a councilmember salary of $34,000 a year. That averages $16.35 an hour, about $1.65 more an hour than Arizona’s required state-wide minimum wage of $14.70 an hour. After tax deductions I earned about $28,000 a year.

What is a stipend? The dictionary defines it as “a fixed sum of money paid periodically for services or to defray expenses.” When I first came to the council the stipends offered to defray expenses were for monthly cell phone usage and car mileage. Receipts had to be submitted for a request for reimbursement (stipend). I chose at that time to not request reimbursement.

I paid for my home office computer, my cell phone and monthly bill, a printer, a scanner and all necessary supplies like printer paper and ink out of my personal funds. I paid for my car’s gas and maintenance personally. Also, I often paid my share or the entire bill for a working lunch in my capacity as a councilmember personally. I paid for my yearly dues to the Glendale Chamber of Commerce from personal funds.

I also paid for things that I never talked about until now. I’ll give you one example. A constituent of mine, in crisis, needed to gravel the front yard immediately. I explored having the city pay but city policy was and is, that no city funds can be expended to enrich a private citizen or that citizen’s property. So, I paid out of my personal funds to have the front yard graveled. That is not the only time over the years that I used personal funds to help a person in crisis. I know for a fact, that former Vice Mayor Ian Hugh has done the same.

Several years ago, when monthly stipends were offered, this time I chose to take them. Everything is far more expensive than when I started, and I found that I needed help to defray costs.

Councilmembers have always had two council budgets. One is for professional development that can include travel, hotels and meals. Rather than travel, I used my funds to send out two district-wide newsletters to every home in the district twice a year. I also used those funds for hosting district-wide meetings as well as numerous incidental items to reach out to constituents. I occasionally made donations for causes such as backpacks filled with school supplies for Glendale’s disadvantaged children or Christmas gifts for families in need.

The second council budget account is for infrastructure improvements within one’s district. Annually, I directed those funds to be used for park improvements not covered in the Parks and Recreation Department’s annual budget. Those funds were used for such things as repainting park ramadas or replacing park infrastructure such as benches. For example, the digital sign at Heroes Park was paid from my infrastructure budget.

Never once did I abuse either account or use those funds for personal expense or gain.

I believe the current stipend policy is warranted. Here’s why. Now that I have retired, my cell phone informs me that my daily usage of about five hours a day has dropped to less than an hour a day. That tells me that my cell phone was used, almost entirely, for city business. I used to fill up my gas tank once a week at about $45 to $50 a pop. In retirement, I can fill my car up once a month. My use of printer paper has dropped from two reams a month to one ream for several months. Laser toner, very expensive by the way, was replaced twice a year. Now it lasts the entire year. These items, among others, had 90% of their usage attributed to city business. Monthly expenses for meals, tickets, donations and events have dropped to zero.

I am typical of most councilmembers. These stipends have helped to defray the expenses I incurred. I am grateful as your councilmember that they were made available in the last few years.

As for Turner, he’s up to his usual tricks. If he doesn’t understand the use of stipends shame on him. If he chooses not to take them, that is his prerogative. Painting the rest of council as somehow underhanded for using them is a typical Turner move.

The nonuse of a stipend by Councilmember Turner does not make him an angel. It appears that he is far, far from that. The use of a stipend by the rest of the councilmembers, just because Turner and his cohort, Raymundo, write about it does not make us devils.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Jan 25

25

Turner and Conchas Gunning for Baldenegro

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 25, 2025
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Code Department • Downtown Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Velma Teague Library  | 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.

As the Yucca District Councilmember, I worked with Leandro Baldenegro, appointed to represent the Ocotillo District, for 8 months until I retired. During that time, we did not agree on every issue but neither of us harbored ill will toward the other. We had mutual respect for one another, and it remains to this day.

When Jamie Aldama resigned, according to the city charter, it became council’s responsibility to appoint a person to fill that seat until the next regular election in the Spring of 2026. There were many applicants that applied for the appointment. The council narrowed the long list down to five applicants. Each of them was interviewed and the majority chose Mr. Baldenegro. He was very impressive and innately understood the role of a councilmember. It was noticed that some councilmembers did not support his appointment because they had others in mind, presumably more sympathetic to their agendas and whom, they counted on to support those agendas.

Councilmember Baldenegro has since proven to be a hard-working and dedicated councilmember. He is smart and well-grounded. He is humble and caring. He believes in faith, family, friends and the people of his district. He has lived in the district his entire life and loves it. He genuinely wants to lift the people of his district up. He knows the district and he knows those who live there. He is not a typical politician pushing his own agenda.

He is committed to reaching out to the people of the district and soliciting their opinions on the issues that matter to them. In fact, he has a regular meeting for his constituents before every council workshop on alternate Tuesdays.. He truly listens to his constituents and is not afraid to change his stance when presented with sound, well-reasoned arguments, as seen with the Velma Teague Library decision. He had originally supported the move of the library because he believed a new library would offer more content and events to children and their families. It would also have offered the opportunity to become a high-tech library that would provide the tech tools of the 21st Century. He listened to his constituents. They are the ones who convinced him that the best option would be to keep the library in its present location. It is rare for an elected official to be willing to publicly change a position once declared. Councilmember Baldenegro was not afraid to do so.

Turner appears to be targeting Baldenegro not out of personal dislike but to create a new majority on the council. Turner already enjoys support from Councilmembers Tolmachoff and Conchas. Those three are desperately seeking to gain a fourth member of their coalition to become the new majority on council. If they should succeed, Glendale’s city council will become ‘woke’, similar to the disaster that California has become. God help us all.

Make no mistake. Turner and Conchas appear to be behind the recall movement targeting Councilmember Baldenegro. This recall effort against Baldenegro seems driven by political motives rather than genuine concern for the district. How dare Baldenegro have an opinion on the library and how dare he change his opinion. They will use this and other disinformation to try to defeat Baldenegro. It promises to get ugly.

They are courting the disaffected downtown crowd and the pro-Aldama crowd. Two members of the pro-Aldama faction to watch are Warren Wilfong and Rory Goree. I have always been friends with Warren Wilfong but he has an Achilles Heel. That is the poor performance of the Code Department. He is obsessed with that issue. If you do not share his view on this issue, he has no use for you. I’m sure he would love to run for the Ocotillo seat.

However, he has competition that appears to have the inside track with Turner and Conchas, Rory Goree. If you watch council voting meetings, Goree makes it a point to speak at every one. Why? Public comments are televised and Goree gets face time and greater recognition. Unfortunately, only about 11 people actually watch city council meetings. Oh well.

Conchas announced in his last week’s digital newsletter a press conference in support of the library issue and guess who is hosting it? If you said Rory Goree, you would be correct. I would not be surprised if Goree announced his support for the recall of Baldenegro and his candidacy for the Ocotillo district at this press conference. It is required that when a recall petition is circulated, an opposing candidate must be identified on the petition.

I urge Ocotillo residents to continue supporting Councilmember Baldenegro, who has demonstrated honesty and integrity. If the Turner-Conchas- pro Aldama- downtown disaffected factions desire change, they know full well that the next regularly scheduled election for the Ocotillo district councilmember will occur in the Spring of 2026, a year from now. Anyone interested in running will be able to pull a candidate packet this Winter. A recall election before the regular 2026 election is costly for all of Glendale’s taxpayers.

Ocotillo residents can stop this by simply not signing the recall petition. If the leaders of this insurrection do not obtain enough signatures, there will be no election until the regular one in the Spring of 2026 and Councilmember Baldenegro will continue to represent the Ocotillo district residents until then.

Shame on those pushing this costly and untimely recall for their political agendas over the interests of Glendale residents.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Jan 25

15

And the winner is…

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 15, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | 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.

Yesterday, January 14, 2025, city council held its regular workshop meeting. One of the agenda items was that of moving city council assistants from the City Manager’s office to the City Clerk’s office. The item was requested by Councilmembers Tolmachoff, Turner and Conchas.

The Mayor brought up an interesting point. Apparently, these councilmembers requested that there be no discussion of the issue but rather it be on the voting agenda that night for an up or down vote. It appears that these 3 councilmembers wanted no discussion of the item and had not requested that it also be a workshop agenda item. It was the Mayor who requested that this item be brought to the workshop for a full discussion before it was to be voted on.

For Tolmachoff and Turner, who have repeatedly thrown around the word ‘transparency’, it was revealing. Apparently, they want transparency when it is an agenda item that they oppose. Then they want a full and robust workshop discussion. When it is their item, the heck with discussion. They wanted to ram it through with no discussion. It is a telling moment.

Their argument for proposing that council assistants move to the city clerk’s office centered around the notion that it was a better alignment. Their argument was that the city clerk’s office deals with citizens more extensively as council assistants do. Thereby making the two entities a good fit.

Councilmember Dianna Guzman was apparently the only councilmember to ask the council assistants directly for their feedback on the proposed move. To a person, the sentiment was that they preferred to stay under the direction of the city manager’s office. In essence, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Turner and Tolmachoff, both without council assistants, hurled a lot of innuendo. Turner called it, “chaotic at best” and felt there was “disparate treatment of councilmembers.” Tolmachoff, said, “it was not a level playing field” and she felt there were “occasions where some can hand pick” selections for council assistant. Conchas said moving them to the city clerk “keeps the city manager’s office accountable.” There was a lot of squeezing of sour grapes.

The first question that arises is, why don’t Turner and Tolmachoff have council assistants? Everyone in city hall knows why. Suffice it to say, their offices have revolving doors, and each has gone through many, many council assistants. It is common knowledge that their council assistants left because of the treatment they received.

Case in point, during my last two terms as councilmember, I had 3 council assistants, all of whom I loved and with whom I had an excellent working relationship. They were all fantastic and did excellent work. Shelly and Shannon left when they had opportunities to advance their professional careers within the city in other departments. Council assistants have no opportunity for advancement. My last one, Riley, remains a council assistant for newly elected Yucca councilmember Guzman. There was no revolving door.

However, Turner and Tolmachoff each had numerous council assistants. Far more than I or councilmembers Malnar or Hugh. Again, the question is why.

Another startling moment came when the Mayor asked for consensus to move this item forward for a voting meeting. Councilmember Conchas softly said ‘no’ to moving this item forward. Councilmember Turner was surprised, to say the least. After all, Conchas was supposed to be on his side after his endorsement and the hefty campaign contributions he gave to Conchas. To have Conchas betray him on the very first contentious issue where Turner counted on his support must have been quite a shock to Turner.

A majority of council, Mayor Weiers and Councilmembers Malnar, Baldenegro, Guzman and surprisingly, Conchas did not give affirmative consensus to move this item to a voting meeting. Once again, Tolmachoff and Turner remain on their little island of dissent.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Jan 25

14

Lupe Conchas…renegade or representative?

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 14, 2025
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • 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.

About a month ago, on Tuesday, December 11, 2024, Glendale held its Installation Ceremony for re-elected Mayor Jerry Weiers, re-elected Councilmember Ray Malnar and Councilmembers-Elect Dianna Guzman and Lupe Conchas. Malnar, Guzman and Conchas were asked to keep their remarks brief, to three or four minutes. Malnar and Guzman did so but not Conchas. It appeared that he deliberately chose to ignore that request and he rambled on and on and on for at least ten minutes. It appeared to be no more than a campaign speech.

Conchas’ speech is too long for inclusion, but I did note some rather interesting remarks (his in italics and mine in parentheses and bold) that I bring to your attention.

He said, “I started my career as a community organizer.”

(He still is. He is Regional Organizing Manager for ONE Campaign based in Washington, D.C. Was Regional Organizer for Bread for the World, Washington, D.C. from 2019-2023.)

Then he remarked, “The unions who (unintelligible), to Worker Power, to Unite Here, to the teacher’s union, to the iron workers, to IBEW, to UFCW, to SMART, and to America Labor Federation, your belief in me kept me going and you stood by me every step of the way. And I will not forget that.”

 (These unions endorsed him:

UNITE HERE Local 11

Worker Power

International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union

United Food and Commercial Workers Union

International Painters and Allied Trades Union

Ironworkers Union Local 75

He publicly declared that he will support their agendas. That includes Worker Power which has mounted several lawsuits and initiatives against the city and VIA Resort. I smell a conflict of interest.)

He went on to say, “I’ve spoken to the City Manager here tonight. I’m excited to announce now that the City of Glendale has secured a $6.7 million-dollar federal grant for pedestrian safety improvements here in Glendale… This grant is a testament to what happens when we listen to our community, and we fight for change…”

(There is not even one, tiny Conchas fingerprint on the securing of this grant. The application was submitted months ago, long before he became Councilmember-Elect. He did not fight for change as he implies.)

He also said, “…a motivating factor in my decision was the quality of our early childhood education programs and my goal to increase literacy in our community. By investing in Pre-K and after school programs…”

(Glendale’s public policy mandate does not include education. That is the responsibility of our multiple school district’s Boards of Education. Glendale city council has no say and does not fund the education of your children. That is done through your property taxes and the line item tax allocations to various educational districts.)

Then he said, “I admire the bravery of our police officers who are standing in the back. A big round of applause for our fire and police officers.”

(This is the same guy who demonstrated against ICE in 2019. His position is one of distrust of and disrespect for law enforcement.)

Lastly, he remarked, “Now, some of you may know that Proposition 314 has been approved by the voters. It’s a new immigration enforcement bill… And let me be 100% clear, my focus is on preserving the civil rights of our residents…”

(He is a participating member of Promise Arizona, which advocates for Democrat party immigration reform. You can assume that he will work to preserve the status of the illegal immigrants who have flooded this country.)

Keep this fact in mind. Lupe Conchas won the election by 69 votes. That is not an overwhelming mandate by the voters in the Cactus district. He did what any good organizer does. He went to apartment complexes and trailer parks to register folks who had never voted and then made sure they did vote…for him. Even using that tactic, he still won by only 69 votes.

Did you know that he moved to Glendale in 2017 to the Ocotillo district?  At that time Jamie Aldama was its Councilmember. I think it’s fair to assume that he knew he couldn’t beat Aldama, and little did he know that Aldama would resign his seat to run for Mayor in mid-2024. In 2023, he moved to the Cactus district with the idea that he might have a better chance of knocking out incumbent Vice Mayor Ian Hugh and it worked.

If you go to the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund website, you will discover that Conchas publicly acknowledges that he is a cisgender male and gay. I don’t care one way or another, but I bet there are many Hispanic voters who are faithful Catholics. Conchas’ lifestyle is a slap in the face of one of their staunchest beliefs. He acknowledges that organization’s endorsement as simply the Victory Fund, not the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund. How many votes would he have garnered from the Hispanic community if they had known this fact?

Many view him as a one-term councilmember. They think he is merely using this council seat as a steppingstone and that his next move will be to run for the Arizona state legislature and eventually on to a congressional seat.

How he performs on Glendale’s city council will determine his future political aspirations. Will he support a majority of this council’s agenda which becomes city policy, or will he assume his traditional role as an activist and disruptor?

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

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.

Jan 25

13

Now the fun begins

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 13, 2025
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • 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.

Today, just before the deadline of 24 hours before a posted council meeting, a new item was added to the city council workshop agenda. It was called for by Councilmembers Tolmachoff, Turner and Conchas. It is a tactic not used before. Probably because there was a strong majority of 4 councilmembers who would not have supported an item presented by the minority.

These three councilmembers want to discuss how council assistants are selected. There has been a push of late by some on council to hire council assistants by a councilmember’s sole discretion. On the face of it, it sounds great. Why shouldn’t a councilmember be free to select any one they want for the position, whether qualified or not. The concern with that position is that the selection can become a political appointment rather than one chosen by merit. This is a slippery slope indeed. I have seen a case where that occurred. After some time, that person left the position.

Here is the agenda item:

Subject

**DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CITY COUNCIL ASSISTANT POSITIONS                        Presented by: Councilmember Turner, Vice Mayor Tolmachoff and Councilmember Conchas

Purpose and Recommended Action

This is a council-requested item by Councilmember Turner, Vice Mayor Tolmachoff and Councilmember Conchas to discuss the council assistant positions.

Background

The mayor may, or at the request of three (3) members of the council shall, by giving notice thereof to all members of the council then in the city, call a special meeting of the council for a time not earlier than three (3) hours nor later than forty-eight (48) hours after the notice is given. Special meetings of the council may also be held at any time by the common consent of all the members of the council.  This request was made in accordance with the above-referenced Glendale City Charter provision.

Here’s a little inside baseball. Tolmachoff and Turner use every instance they can to make the City Manager, and the Mayor look bad. They appear to purposefully look for council discussion items that provide them the opportunity to say something nasty about either. They seem to harbor an intense dislike for both gentlemen. This discussion item will give them another opportunity to publicly emphasize their feelings.

There is more to this discussion, however. The minority has a coalition of three councilmembers with the addition of Conchas. Keep in mind, Conchas is beholden to Turner. Turner not only endorsed Conchas enthusiastically, but he also donated 90% of the funding for Conchas’ last hit-piece, a campaign mailer portraying Vice Mayor Ian Hugh as a racist.

At one point in his installation speech Conchas said, “…your belief in me kept me going and you stood by me every step of the way. And I will not forget that.” He was referencing the unions and others, like Turner, who had endorsed him and contributed to his campaign.

That is why Conchas will always follow Turner’s lead and agenda.

It is common knowledge around city hall that both Tolmachoff and Turner have consistently treated their council assistants badly. Each has gone through quite a few council assistants. Each believes that they are good bosses but with a slew of council assistants leaving each of them, the facts prove otherwise.

If you have the time and inclination this might be a good council workshop to view. I know that I certainly will watch.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Jan 25

12

It’s a matter of free speech

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 12, 2025
Posted in City of Glendale • Former Councilmember Joyce Clark • 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 applied for the city’s Planning Commission. I would have been appointed by a majority of 4 of the councilmembers with 3 dissenting. I would have been a good commissioner as my goal was to preserve existent residential developments from new development. With my 24 years on city council I believe that my expertise would have served Glendale’s residents well.

A funny thing happened along the way. Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff has decided that if I report on any of certain councilmember’s antics (she characterizes them as attacks) I will be violating some Code of Conduct that reminds one to say nice things about everybody all the time. She is concerned about topics of future blogs.

I don’t believe she is correct. I believe it is a matter of free speech, and it is preserved whether I am a sitting councilmember or commissioner on a board or commission. During my 24 years on city council I have reported on various actions and positions that councilmembers have taken. Some of the councimembers have been furious and tried to muzzle me in the past. It did not work then, and it would not work now.

I would have prevailed in this dispute, but I have chosen not to argue the matter. Consequently, I have withdrawn my name as an appointee to the Planning Commission.

I intend to write a great deal this year and sometimes it will be, among other things, about certain councilmember’s actions or lack thereof.

This issue is a matter of free speech and threats and intimidation posed by Councilmember Tolmachoff or other minority members of council will not deter me. You will see what I mean in my next blog.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

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.

Dec 24

28

Velma Teague Library…elegant or eye sore?

Posted by Joyce Clark on December 28, 2024
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District  | 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.

As a preface to this blog, I am pleased to tell you that I now have the luxury of time to write again. I started this blog in 2013 and over the years I have written many pieces. For the last two years, taking care of my husband of 89 years and fulfilling my council responsibilities left no time to write. I retired from my council position this December. That action has provided me with time to do one of the things that I love and that is to write again. Look for more consistent and frequent pieces about Glendale.

Many years ago, for at least 40 years ago, my children and I used Velma Teague all the time. It was the only library us south and west Glendale residents had. As the children grew, they soon had access to other libraries and Velma Teague faded as our resource.

What is Velma Teague today? It is small and outdated. It has no room to expand or to accommodate another generation of readers who rely on computers and phones.

Suddenly and unexpectedly, the city’s Promenade space became available. Did you know that the Promenade features a unique history walk featuring 59 images relating to the history of Glendale imbedded in the sidewalk? Each vibrant mosaic offers insight into the evolution of Glendale. 

The majority of council sees this as an opportunity to move the library out of its old, cramped space into a larger space that can bring it into the 21st Century while meeting the needs of economically disadvantaged children. It is an opportunity to provide them with the tools they need to succeed in an ever-advancing digital economy. The city council views this proposal as an opportunity to provide our children with learning to meet the demands of the highly technical world we live in today.

Not only that but the new larger space can accommodate and encourage more programming of classes and learning experiences for our children. It seemed to be a win-win for all.

Not so fast. Remember the group that sported green T-shirts emblazoned with “Save Murphy Park”? They were opposed to the city hall remodel project, convinced that it would destroy the park. This very same group, against anything the city council proposes, is at it again. This time, it’s save the library. One would think from some of their rhetoric that city council was banning books!

Their two major arguments against removing the Velma Teague building are first, its enormous sentimental value. I ask to whom? 99% of Glendale’s residents don’t know it exists and have never used it. It is not a historical building as there have been several iterations of this library over the years. Its sentimental value is limited to the small group of activists desperately searching for any reason to override the direction of the city council.

Last year I started to clean out our home after 50 years of “stuff” had accumulated. Some of it had sentimental value but if I had saved it all we would still be drowning in an overabundance of “stuff.” Sometimes you just have to get rid of things, if for no other reason than to make room for the new. It’s so nice to use uncluttered rooms with space to accommodate new looks and new gadgets. Velma Teague is exactly the same. Sometimes you get rid of the old with perceived, limited sentimental value to make room for the new and often more useful items that can enrich your life. A new Velma Teague holds the promise of enriching the lives of a new generation of children.

The second reason our merry band of nay sayers say they don’t want to see Velma Teague removed is that city council has a nefarious plan to enlarge the amphitheater. Here are a few facts that they deliberately prefer to ignore. The plans for the remodeling of city hall, the amphitheater and council chamber have been approved and are final. The budget is set. The only changes in the budget that have come forward are an increase in the cost of building materials or unexpected glitches that have been found in the old building that required an unbudgeted remedy.

Have you seen or heard senior management come forward with a plan to increase the size of the amphitheater and an accompanying request for more funding to cover that expansion? The answer is ‘no’. It hasn’t happened and it isn’t going to happen.

Just for a minute, can you imagine Murphy Park, wide open and newly landscaped without that intrusive old building? Imagine Murphy Park, enlarged for an even more spectacular Glendale Glitters when it returns to that location? Without that building there is suddenly more room for people and the events that attract them to downtown Glendale. As I said previously, it’s a win-win for the children and a win-win for the downtown merchants.

What will happen? Now I will use my crystal ball. The dozen activists will win this round, and Velma Teague will stay as the proud, old lady in her tattered finest. We know that Councilmembers Tomalchoff and Turner oppose any plan to remove Velma Teague. Add newbie Councilmember Conchas to the pro Velma Teague faction. All these councilmembers have to do is turn one more councilmember to gain the majority. My guess is that they are gunning for Ocotillo Councilmember Baldenegro. He is a smart, common sense, compassionate guy with the genuine best interests of his constituency at the forefront. Whisperings have started that if he doesn’t support keeping Velma Teague where it is, he can look forward to a recall in his future.

I think that would be enough to get him to change his position. A recall filled with lies, smears and innuendos comparing one to Hitler or Al Capone, no matter how untrue, is something no one wants to face.

So, after all the political sound and fury, I suspect Velma Teague will stay where it is and the children of the Ocotillo district will be the losers, having gained nothing for their future well-being. It will be a sad ending to a project that could have provided these children with enhanced opportunities to move into the digital age.

Suffer the children.

 

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

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.

Oct 24

3

Lies and more lies

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 3, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | 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.

Before I begin this post there is a question that should be asked. What is Councilmember-Elect Lupe Conchas’ position on Proposition 499. He was endorsed by Worker Power and received contributions from various unions. Which master will he serve? Worker Power and their Proposition 499 or the residents of the City of Glendale? It will be interesting to find out.

The Worker Power PAC, initiators of Proposition 499, to be voted on by Glendale voters on the November 5th General Election ballot is at it again. Who is paying for this flyer? Three groups. The Worker Power PAC is one. In a previous blog, Worker Power Part 1, I provided information about Worker Power. The second funding source is Unite Here PAC. It represents…wait for it…hospitality workers. The third funding source, Workers Vote, is the most interesting. This year they received $250,000 from George Soros’ Super PAC. Proposition 499 is supported by George Soros.

Worker Power is passing out a flyer in support of their initiated Proposition 499. Here is the front of the flyer:

 

LIE #1: The only worker on the front of the flyer that Prop 499 applies to is the cleaning person. It does not cover the chef/cook or the two fast food workers depicted.

The front of the flyer is all warm and fuzzy and without knowing the facts one assumes this Proposition applies to all of the workers depicted. It does not. They want you to think that it covers all Glendale workers. It does not.

Let’s begin with some basic definitions regarding the hospitality industry and exactly who is a hospitality worker. The definition of hospitality industry work is services that support people traveling or visiting certain places for pleasure. The industry includes businesses classified as performing hospitality work, such as hotels, sporting event venues, restaurants, cruises and other tourism-related businesses.

Hospitality Worker means any individual who works for a Hospitality Employer and who performs a service for which a Hospitality Employer imposes a Service Charge. “Hospitality Worker” does not include a managerial employee.

Proposition 499 targets hotels and events but not exclusively. Events included in the definition of the hospitality industry include sporting events, concerts, conventions and fundraisers. Venues catering to personal special occasions also fall into this sector, such as businesses that handle weddings, birthday or anniversary parties and family reunions.

However, the principal target of Prop 499 is lodging (hotels, especially VIA Resort). Places where people sleep when away from home fall under the umbrella of the hospitality industry’s lodging segment. These establishments may be anything from small bed and breakfasts and Airbnb rentals to midsize motels and corporate hotels.

Here’s the back of the Worker Power flyer:

 

LIE #2: “Glendale needs a raise!” They want you to think all Glendale governmental employees or the City of Glendale initiated this Proposition and support it. This is not true. This proposition was not started by the City of Glendale.

Glendale governmental employees get an annual cost of living increase as well as merit pay. They did not propose this.

General, non-governmental employees did not propose this either. This proposition by Worker Power is targeted toward VIA Resort, which will have about 1200 rooms. In Worker Power’s eyes, that is a juicy target.

LIE #3: “Prop 499 will boost our local economy.” No, it won’t. It will put Glendale at an economic disadvantage with every city in the state because none of them have such a law. The Common Sense Institute reports that Proposition 499 will reduce Glendale’s economy by between $120 million and $1.9 billion. Associated job losses will be between 1,700 and 32,000.

LIE #4: Ensure local hospitality workers are compensated fairly. How fairly, you ask?  For hospitality workers it would be $20 an hour and $40 an hour overtime. The minimum wage for all workers in the state is $14.35 an hour and in January, 2025, goes to $14.75 an hour. Increasing one segment of workers to $20 an hour hardly seems fair to all workers.

LIE #5: Keep Glendale dollars in Glendale pockets. Only if they are allowed to be pick pockets. Not all of Glendale’s workers live in Glendale. In fact, about 70% of Glendale’s workers come from other Valley cities and that is where they spend their money.

This proposition is smoke and mirrors. They are trying to sell you, the Glendale voter, on something that is not wanted nor needed.

This proposition was not Glendale’s idea. Please vote ‘no’ on Proposition 499, a California union’s scheme. Don’t California Glendale!

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

 

Sep 24

23

Worker Power initiative – will cost you more money

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 23, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | 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’ve done a series of blogs on the facts about the Worker Power initiative now known as Proposition 499 on your November 5th General Election ballot.

Here are some final thoughts. This initiative did NOT come from the City of Glendale. It is NOT sponsored by the City of Glendale. It came from the Worker Power Super PAC, a radical group with California ambitions. Various cities in California have adopted higher minimum wages, especially for fast food workers. It is destroying that industry in California.

Legally, all that the city is allowed to do is explain what is in Proposition 499. It legally, cannot support or oppose it.

As a citizen and registered voter in Glendale, I can oppose it and I do. It is bad for Glendale. It will have the effect of raising the prices for all kinds of entertainment and that cost will be passed on to you, the consumer. It will cause workers to be laid off or to face a reduction in their work hours, as has occurred in California.

It will cause you, the taxpayer, to pay a million dollars a year for the creation of a new Labor Department to monitor all the rules and regulations that are part of this initiative. That’s just a minimum estimate. If it is created, it will grow over time. In this year’s budget, each department’s expenses range from $1.2 million (city clerk) to $122 million (police).

The unintended consequences of such a draconian law will hurt Glendale. It puts Glendale at a disadvantage with every city in the state. What businesses will want to locate in Glendale knowing that its minimum wage is higher than every other city in the state? No one.

California has some of the most breathtaking scenery. I used to love to go over there and spend time by the ocean. No more. Homeless people, drug addicts and trash everywhere. Prices are sky high. Have you ever purchased gas over there?

Now I call it “the land of fruits and nuts.” Statistically, more people are leaving California than moving into it. Let’s not turn Glendale into another California.

This is a bad idea and deserves a “no” vote at the November 5th’s General Election. I urge you to vote by Early Ballot or in person on election day. Tell Worker Power that their California-style initiative is not good for Glendale.

NO ON PROPOSITION 499

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

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 »