Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Sep 15

14

Coyotes audit

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 14, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , | 4 Comments

It has been 17 years and 256 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

I spent some time reading the audit of the Coyotes released by the city on September 9, 2015. Here is the link: https://www.glendaleaz.com/auditor/documents/ArenaContractComplianceReview2015.pdf . The overall sense of the audit expresses the city’s deep frustration with IceArizona’s failure to provide all of the information required by the Professional Management Services and Arena Lease Agreement (PMSA).

Here are a few of the limitations utilized by IceArizona in responding to audit requests:

  • “City staff requested that the Arena Manager provide the City’s auditors and Consultant with a copy of the Team Owner’s financial statements. The Arena Manager denied this request.”
  • “The City’s auditors also requested an independent confirmation of the Team Owner’s 2013/2014 annual operating loss. The Arena Manager’s independent external auditors denied this request.”
  • “On March 13, 2015, the Team Owner issued a notice to the City of the Team Owner’s claimed operating loss for the ‘First Certification Period,’ as defined in the PMSA. The Team Owner provided no additional backup documentation, including Team Owner financial statements, for the city to verify the claimed operating loss.”

Much of the final audit findings are no longer applicable or relevant since the city council cancelled the original contract and negotiated an amended contract good for two years. The audit dealt with all of the revenue streams some of which are no longer applicable under the new temporary contract. However, there were quite a few potential non-compliance issues identified:

  • “Early Termination: The Team Owner’s June 30, 2014 financial statements were not provided to the City, prohibiting the City from verifying the Team Owner’s claimed operating loss. Additionally, the City’s estimate of the Team Owner’s 2013/2014 operating loss is greater than the Team Owner’s March 13, 2015 claimed operating loss based upon the information provided to the City and the Consultant by the Arena Manager. It appeared that the loss as reported to the City was not based upon the Team Owner’s financial results but was based upon the Partnership’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization from the consolidated audited financial statements.” The city had to subtract out the Arena Manager’s audited financial statements from the Partnership’s financial statements since they were not reported separately but all lumped together. The city calculated the Team Owner’s loss to be greater than what they reported to the city.
  • “Naming Rights: The City was not paid their full share of naming rights under the 2006 Jobing.com Naming Rights Agreement, resulting in a potential underpayment.” Under the agreement the city was to receive 20% or $1.2 M a year ($60,000 a month). Instead the city received $55,540 for the year. Unilaterally IceArizona said if Jobing.com pays us less, the city gets less. They also independently revised the definition of what components made up the naming rights and told the city that it was not entitled to some of those revenue components.
  • “Qualified Tickets: The number of paid admissions reported by the Team Owner to the NHL was higher than the number of paid admissions reported to the City, resulting in potential surcharge and supplemental surcharge fees still due to the City estimated at $39,640.” The number of paid admissions reported to the city was 533,856; the number reported to the NHL was 542,665 ( a difference of 8,809). The number of complimentary tickets reported to the city was 43,762; the number reported to the NHL was 34,953. The city should have received an additional $39,640.50 for the unreported 8,809 tickets.
  • “Supplemental Surcharge Fees: The Arena Manager did not establish a Supplemental Surcharge Escrow Account in 2014/2014 and deposit funds into the account as required by the PMSA. The Arena Manager wired the entire amount of supplemental surcharge fees that were collected throughout the year to the City on July 9, 2014.” Again, because of the discrepancy in reported ticket sales the city did not receive all supplemental revenue to which it was entitled.
  • “Annual Financial Reports: The City did not receive the Arena Manager’s audited financial statements, which were due September 30, 2014, until February 25, 2015. The Team Owner’s annual financial statements were not reported to the city. The Arena Manager’s independent external auditors were unable to confirm the Arena Manager’s and Team Owner’s 2013/2014 revenues and expenses to the City.
  • “Sales Tax: The Arena Manager and the City have not clarified responsibilities regarding the collection and remittance of sales tax, potentially resulting in unremitted sales taxes on certain Arena revenues.”
  • “Annual Budget: The Arena Manager submitted the 2013/2014 annual budget to the City late on March 25, 2014. The budget was due within 30 days of the closing date of the PMSA.

What does all of this government-speak mean in plain English? The city was frustrated because IceArizona was very late in submitting their audit and IceArizona played games with the report they submitted. The city was put in the position of finding the hidden pea under three cups. The city was conned. IceArizona’s game playing shouldn’t come as any surprise. After all, look at with whom they surrounded themselves…Craig Tindall, Julie Frisoni and Gary Sherwood…who appear to be three little peas in an ethically challenged peapod.

The city didn’t care about the profit and loss statements of the IceArizona partnership. It wanted and didn’t get, two, separately and independently verified audits of IceArizona as the arena manager and IceArizona as the team owner. The city suspects that the annual loss was greater than IceArizona reported but without those two audits the city can surmise but not verify their suspicion. The city was underpaid on ticket sales and the related surcharges that flowed from the ticket sales. The city was underpaid on naming rights because IceArizona unilaterally changed the rules of the game. Finally, the city may also have been underpaid on sales tax revenues generated within the arena.

After having seen the results of the audit is it any wonder that a majority of council cancelled the original agreement? It also lends credence to council’s decision to move forward with putting the arena management contract out for bids. IceArizona has demonstrated an unwillingness to share crucial information, financial or otherwise. They have flexed their muscles as the “big boys” and have shown considerable distain for the city and the taxpayers whose dollars keep them alive.

IceArizona, just like any other entity, is free to submit a bid but based upon their past performance. They will have to clean up their act considerably to be considered seriously.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘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 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 15

11

Malfeasance?? revisited

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 11, 2015
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

It has been 17 years and 253 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

As a former Glendale city councilmember I take no joy in writing about the seemingly endless misdeeds of sitting Glendale Councilmember Gary Sherwood. It reinforces the average citizen’s belief that all elected officials are corrupt or are not responsive to the electorate once they take office. Just as in other professions there are a few bad apples that can sully a profession’s reputation.

There are many people upset to learn about Sherwood’s situation and they are justified in their anger. They want to march down to City Hall and demand action. More about this later in this blog.

It appears in addition to the alleged license suspension for 8 days from 8/12/2014 to 8/20/2014, Sherwood’s license was also allegedly suspended from 6/26/2012 to 9/3/2013.

This is troubling on many levels. I attended at least two meetings during that time period, once at a restaurant in north Glendale and another time out at the Glendale Airport, and Sherwood was at both. He drove himself to those meetings…if the public records are correct… on a  suspended license.

The restaurant incident sticks in my mind to this day because after the meeting participants were out in the parking lot getting ready to leave, one of the comments made by Sherwood was that he had a “cop card.” I’ve never forgotten that and assumed that he was alleging that he had a card he could use if stopped for a traffic violation. Apparently it didn’t work very well. I have tried to verify that such a “cop card” exists and no one, especially in the local law enforcement community, has ever conceded they have heard of such a thing. It doesn’t seem to exist. Sherwood was probably bragging in an effort to enhance his reputation as “somebody” as his ego may be his biggest personal failing.

The point is that during that 15 month period it seems that Sherwood was driving on a suspended license. In addition, in the Sahuaro district’s portion of Follow Your Money, Sherwood submitted for mileage reimbursement on 3/1/13 for $64.41. This occurred during the 15 month alleged suspension. An elected official submits for mileage reimbursement when using one’s personal vehicle for city business. The very fact that he submitted for reimbursement seems to verify that Sherwood acknowledged he drove during the 15 month period in question.

During his campaign it seems he attended many campaign events and drove himself to them. There are probably many people who can confirm that. Sherwood was elected to office in November of 2012 and was seated as councilmember in January of 2013. He jumped right into office. He was at city hall nearly every day and probably drove himself there…on a suspended license.  He participated in many city events as well as regional events and probably drove himself there…on a suspended license.

There is nothing to be done about his alleged driving while suspended during that time period. One cannot go back retroactively and affect an arrest. It’s done…it’s finished…but this situation is concerning because the situation demonstrates Sherwood’s apparent habit and pattern for disregard for the law. If the alleged driving on a suspended license shows Sherwood’s propensity to disrespect the law, what other laws may he have disregarded?

I have it on good authority that Sherwood’s active warrant for Failure to Appear has been satisfied…very, very recently.  Apparently in the last day or two he paid the $1,500 bond.  It’s disconcerting that it took public revelation of the situation in my blog of September 8, 2015, to make him do what he should have done months ago.

The information about this issue remains interesting. Failure to Appear in Arizona Revised Statutes says under A.R.S. §13-2506, “A. A person commits failure to appear in the second degree if, having been required by law to appear in connection with any misdemeanor or petty offense, such person knowingly fails to appear as required, regardless of the disposition of the charge requiring the appearance.  1. Failure to appear in the second degree is a class 1 misdemeanor.”

I discovered that in Arizona misdemeanors are divided into 3 categories: Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3. Class 1 misdemeanors are the most serious. The maximum penalties are:

  • Class 1 misdemeanor: up to $2,500.00 fine and six months in jail;
  • Class 2 misdemeanor: up to $750.00 fine and four months in jail;
  • Class 3 misdemeanor: up to $500.00 fine and 30 days in jail.

Many citizens contacted me asking what could be done (this was before it was learned that the bond had been paid recently). The disturbing answer is absolutely nothing. Many wanted to put pressure on the city council to take some sort of action. According to the City Council Guidelines the most severe penalty available for a councilmember is, “(council will) determine what sanction is most appropriate; customarily, sanctions are limited to a letter of reprimand or censure.” Here is the link to City Council Guidelines: http://www.glendaleaz.com/CityCouncil/documents/C-Guidelinesamended2-24-2015CLEAN.pdf . There are no teeth within the City Council Guidelines and a legal issue could not be addressed by the city council.

I would suggest that it is time for city council to look at this issue. One cannot forget that at one time, 4 councilmembers were under indictment for backdating documents. The charges were eventually dismissed due to a technicality. As a result of council’s inability to address that issue, they remained seated during the legal process and even voted in the affirmative to make sure their legal fees were paid by the city. Perhaps the solution is to place the councilmember(s) on leave until the legal process resolves itself.

However, there is also the matter of the City Attorney. The City Attorney should be concerned about Sherwood’s use of a city ProCard to rent and park a vehicle during his St.Paul/Minneapolis trip on 8/13/2014 during another alleged license suspension. What if there had been an accident? The city surely would have been liable because of the use of its ProCard. It’s the stuff of which City Attorney nightmares are made. At the very least the City Attorney should require immediate reimbursement of the vehicle rental and parking fees. More importantly, perhaps this event warrants removing Sherwood’s ProCard use. Then there is the issue of Sherwood’s reimbursement for mileage during suspension. I would think that might be a legal can of worms as well. Again, at the very least it should require reimbursement to the city.

As for the Glendale Police Department’s arrest of Sherwood it becomes a moot point as he satisfied the bond associated with the warrant for his arrest since the publication of my recent blog.

Even if Sherwood has secured an attorney to deal with these allegations and they are adjucated, that does not mitigate his seeming disregard for the law. It speaks to his character…or lack thereof.

The voters of the Sahuaro district are the only ones who have the power in this situation as there is a Recall Election looming on November 3, 2015. Character is just one of the elements to consider in casting one’s vote. They have the power to decide if Sherwood’s character merits his removal as their councilmember. They do have a choice. Mr. Ray Malnar is running against Sherwood and I suspect his character is not in question.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘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 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 15

4

Sherwood recall election soon

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 4, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • Casino • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

It has been 17 years and 246 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

In political terms the Sherwood recall election is coming very soon…November 3, 2015. On the ballot you will see no rebuttal statement by Sherwood because he filed his statement after the mandated deadline. His failure to interpret the fine print is a typical Sherwood failing. He has often had to amend his campaign filings for the very same reason and he has been fined by the City Clerk for filing required documents late.

Sherwood created the mess that he is in. He reneged on his campaign platform almost immediately. He appears to have cut a deal with Councilmember Chavira and so he voted for the casino and in turn, Chavira voted for the Coyotes. His public announcement of his private interview with former City Manager Brenda Fischer immediately raised eyebrows. Once Fischer was on board he aligned himself with her, Frisoni and Burdick. There were reports of his having lunch with them individually on a regular basis.

The office of councilmember beguiled Sherwood. Now he was somebody. He reveled in associating with the big dogs…Anthony LeBlanc, Michael Bidwill, Ned Norris, Jr. and Mark Becker. He not only advocated for their projects he was their biggest champion and constantly referred to his private conversations with them. He dropped names and made sure everyone knew he was their buddy.

After only a few weeks in office he began gunning for Mayor Weiers and brought topics to council workshop that he hoped would embarrass the mayor all the while proclaiming on city hall’s 4th floor that he was the “real” mayor of Glendale. Sherwood quickly became full of himself. He refused to listen to his constituency on issues such as Becker billboards and the library. When they spoke publicly he often denigrated and demeaned them. He failed to communicate on a regular basis with the people in his district. He failed to advise his constituents of important meeting dates on hot topics…such as the possible closure of the Foothills Library.

Sherwood dug his own hole with his seeming arrogance, cronyism and lust for power. If my unscientific poll on this blog is any indication, Mr. Ray Malnar, has an excellent chance of taking the Sahuaro district council seat. Right now there are 151 votes (74%) against Sherwood and only 54 (26%) for Sherwood. I suspect these results will be mirrored in the Recall Election on November 3, 2015.

Who is Ray Malnar, Sherwood’s opponent? I had an opportunity to sit down with Mr. Malnar over a cup of coffee (in my case, tea). He is a breath of fresh air and couldn’t be more different from Sherwood. Mr. Malnar is a man grounded by family, friends and his faith. He is a small business owner of All Stone Tile & Wood Restoration, a licensed and bonded company in business since 1995.

Mr. Malnar has not served on a Glendale Board or Commission but so what…neither did I when I ran for my council seat. Serving on a board or commission signals that a candidate may have been co-opted by the city and may have developed sympathies for city positions on issues. He has been involved in the life of our community in other, equally impressive ways. He currently serves as a Court Mediator and Court Hearing Officer for the Maricopa County Justice Court. He is a current board member of Choice Academies and the West-Mec School District. He was a Boy Scout leader for 15 years and has been involved in various church activities.

He is a graduate of the University of Utah and has a BS in finance, a BA in speech and communications and an MBA. His intellectual strengths are in finance, accounting, information systems, general business management and governmental affairs. He is not self-effacing but is quietly confident. He is eager to build relationships that foster trust and believes in empowering others. He is a gentleman and shows respect for all. He genuinely listens to those who wish to share their concerns or different points of view with him.

The voters of the Sahuaro district do have a choice on November 3, 2015. They can choose Sherwood and receive the same lack of representation, the same arrogance and the same distain for views he does not share. Or they can choose Ray Malnar, a man who has committed to representing his future constituents, who respects others and a man who has business and finance experience. Nationally we hear every day that the electorate is seeking change. Voters of the Sahuaro district have a rare opportunity to do the same by voting for Ray Malnar.

If you think it is time for a change in Sahuaro district representation please share this blog with family, friends and neighbors. Let them know they have a choice in November. Let them know they can vote for a good, solid candidate, Ray Malnar, who will do what Gary Sherwood failed to do…represent them.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘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 go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Aug 15

22

Glendale’s perfect city manager

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 22, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 7 Comments

It has been 17 years and 233 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

Slavin Management Consultants, the firm hired for the city manager search, should be presenting its list of finalists to the city council at any time. What should the Glendale city council consider in choosing finalists?

During my 16 years on city council I worked with various interim and permanent city managers, Dr. Martin Vanacour, Ed Beasley, Horatio Skeete and Dick Bowers. I never worked with Brenda Fischer which was probably a good thing. I think we would have butted heads from day one and I quickly would have been at the top of her *hit list.

What qualities did these city managers possess that served them, the city council and the people of Glendale well? One major quality was that of responsiveness to anyone and everyone. Under Dr. Vanacour it didn’t matter if a citizen was a ditch digger or stock broker. If a citizen called his office, without fear or favor, every issue received a quick and efficient response. Sometimes an issue was resolved to the citizen’s satisfaction…sometimes not but every issue got an answer…not in weeks but in days. The same occurred with councilmember questions and requests.

Another quality that stood Dr. Vanacour, and now Dick Bowers, in good stead there was, and is, no favoritism shown toward any councilmember. All were, and are, treated equally and with respect. Information provided to one councilmember was also provided to the rest of the council. Neither had or has a reporting system where employees are required to report every interaction with a councilmember to the city manager’s office.

Council requires a city manager that shares information willingly and openly and in a timely manner with city council and citizens. Many of council’s previous decisions during the tenure of Ed Beasley were made in either a vacuum or with ginned up information designed to get council to approve a specific outcome. Dr. Vanacour practiced sharing complete information and Dick Bowers is doing the same. If Dick Bowers were willing, Glendale could not do better than to hire Dick Bowers on a permanent basis. However, Mr. Bowers is retired. He graciously agreed to serve short term in Glendale’s hour of need. He wants to be retired once again and to spend time with his family and friends. He’s earned it.

The next city manager must show that he or she truly respects and values all employees within the Glendale governmental family. For too long Glendale’s employees have experienced a work atmosphere based upon fear and favoritism. The city manager must show no bias toward any specific department and make financial resource decisions and recommendations to council based upon the most effective use of taxpayer dollars.

The city manager’s fiscal philosophy should be a conservative one. He or she should believe, as a core principle, that a government’s fiscal decisions are not based on tax increases or growing the size of government. Glendale has learned the hard way that it’s not the size of government that determines the quality of service to its citizens. It learned that the same superior service delivery can be accomplished despite the reduction in the number of employees delivering the service. It’s an individual’s commitment to excellence that counts…not the number of employees on the payroll.

Council should look for a city manager with extended experience, intelligence and adaptability. The last thing the city needs is someone who has been a department head or assistant somewhere. The city needs a city manager with city manager experience and knowledge. The candidate has to have the requisite knowledge and flexibility to hit the ground running.

Lastly, the new city manager must learn to love Glendale. Dr. Vanacour did and still does to this day. Mr. Bowers, retired city manager of Scottsdale, has always exhibited a love for and genuine concern for Glendale. That is obvious in his commitment to serve as its Interim City Manager. Glendale owes Dick Bowers a great deal.

I would strongly suggest that the citizens of Glendale are offered the public opportunity to “meet and greet” all of them before the final selection. This is so important for Glendale and gaining public support at the outset will help smooth the transition to a new city manager. A “meet and greet” not just for stakeholders such as Chamber of Commerce folk or college presidents but for ordinary citizens who take an active interest in and participate in their local government.

In summary, it is my hope that city council will weigh and measure these qualities of the city manager candidates very carefully:

  • Responsiveness to all
  • Respect for all
  • Practices open government
  • Respects and values all employees
  • Conservative fiscal philosophy
  • Previous city manager experience
  • Intelligence and adaptability
  • Willingness to embrace the entire community

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Aug 15

20

Glendale First! backs down

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 20, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , | 2 Comments

It has been 17 years and 230 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

NOTE: Many have taken the opportunity to email me and berate me because my blogs have not been as frequent as usual. Personal matters have had me traveling out of state on a regular basis and have not allowed me the opportunity to write about Glendale issues on my usual schedule. Hopefully the end of August will provide some relief and I will be able to resume my normal schedule of blogs.

On August 14, 2015, Glendale First! issued a press release saying in part, “Today Glendale First has officially abandoned and withdrawn our sponsorship of recall efforts against Glendale, AZ Councilmembers Hugh, Turner and Tomalchoff.

We are satisfied the city has endorsed a new short term relationship with the Arizona Coyotes that is currently in the best interest of all involved. We’re hoping sincere efforts result in a long term agreement being reached between the City and the Arizona Coyotes in the near future.

These recall efforts shined a bright light on actions by councilmembers that negatively impacted public safety budgets and that put at risk the City of Glendale’s relationship with the Arizona Coyotes. We applaud the unanimous action taken by City Council on July 24th. We thank both the Coyotes and the City for striking a suitable arrangement.

We hope the pledge of the City Council to examine the needs and deficiencies in the two public safely departments bears fruit in the form of reduced response times.”

I contend, as I did originally, that Glendale First! used a public safety issue as a smoke screen for their primary anger over the action taken by a majority of Glendale’s city council canceling the original lease agreement with the Coyotes’ ownership. If they were really concerned about public safety issues they would have continued their recall effort. In this press release their angst over public safety is almost an after thought, easily dismissed now that the Coyotes are staying for the next two years.

We can assume that the Coyotes’ ownership counseled Glendale First! to cut it out and to quit its puny attempt to unseat the existing councilmembers as ownership seeks to mend fences with the Glendale city council as it enters a period of renegotiation of a new, more permanent lease agreement.

The Glendale citizens who have contacted me via email, to a person, want the city to issue an RFP for the arena’s management. They believe the city may get a better deal. While they want the Coyotes as arena tenants in the light of past history, they are not convinced it is in the best interests of the city to use the Coyotes’ ownership group for the arena’s management. They want city council as President Reagan once said, “trust but verify.”

The best way to verify what is a fair market price for Glendale’s arena management is to solicit bids. If the Coyotes’ ownership wants to continue to manage the arena they can respond to the RFP just as any other company. Competition is good for a city’s soul and competition for securing an arena management company is a win proposition for the city and its taxpaying citizens.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Aug 15

11

Glendale city council meeting of August 11, 2015

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 11, 2015
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , | 1 Comment

It has been 17 years and 222 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

The Glendale city council’s summer break is over and they will be meeting again regularly. In this first nighttime voting meeting there are 29 agenda items. All but one, a final land plat application, is on the consent agenda. Expect it to be a speedy meeting, over before you realize it. Even though nearly everything will be voted upon in one motion, there are 3 items of interest. Will council pull these items off the consent agenda and ask questions about them? I doubt it.

One agenda item of interest is the final approval of 2 fire trucks. Remember the controversy they generated? One of the bidders complained basically that the fix was in and the company’s proposal was never considered fairly.  Each fire truck will cost the city $459,894.08 with vehicle taxes of $76,343.40 for a total of $996,143,56.00.  This figure represents the original, council approved price for the 2 vehicles. Not so fast. The two $996, 143, 56.00 vehicles now cost $1,027,344.78. Why, you ask? The fire department requested additional equipment of Blitzfire Monitors and Intake Adapters. These items were not included in the original bid price. Each truck, instead of costing $459 thousand now costs $513 thousand. Are these items essential? Oh well, it’s only taxpayer money.

Another agenda item of interest is the city’s contract with Westgate to rent Parking Lot 1, with 259 spaces, just northeast of the AMC Theater for $40,170.50. The rental of these parking lot spaces is to satisfy the city’s parking space commitment to the Cardinals for their 2 pre-season games and 8 home games.

The last agenda item of interest is a city contract with Citygate Associates, LLC., to “determine how best to staff the departments (police and fire) in order to meet their mission.” It promises to be a six month study and analysis of both departments with a “not to exceed” price of $161,152.00. Well, that “not to exceed” price doesn’t includes reimbursable costs of mileage, airfare, lodging and any associated travel expenses. In the future, expect a request to come before council with additional expenses.

This a California firm having done a great deal of work there and some work in Arizona – namely Surprise, the City of Maricopa and Goodyear. Their project team is heavy on Fire Chiefs and includes a Police Chief, a Human Resources Director and a Finance Director. They are heavy on the use of technology and the collection of data. I would hope that council would direct that there be interim reports issued prior to the final report submission.

Let’s tune in at 6 PM today and see what happens.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Aug 15

3

The Grand Compromise

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 3, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

It has been 17 years and 214 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

On July 24, 2015 at a special voting meeting the Glendale City Council unanimously passed Ordinance 2949 and the First Amendment to AMULA Final. With these actions the city and Ice Arizona agreed to dismiss all lawsuits and also settled the issue of the million dollars sitting around in a special escrow account as a result of the 2009 bankruptcy filing.

Before the Kumbaya vote Anthony LeBlanc, spokesperson for the ownership group said, “We’re not going to renegotiate…never, never, never.” Oops. The afternoon of the fateful vote in a radio interview with Roc & Manuch, LeBlanc was heard to say, “We haven’t been open with them (the city).”And, “We haven’t been good communicators.” And, “They’ve done well for the taxpayers. They’ve got a win.” When asked if Ice Arizona would consider buying the city’s arena, LeBlanc said about arena ownership, “That’s not the business we’re in.” Should we believe him in light of his long history of “erroneous” statements?

Councilmember Gary Sherwood, IceArizona’s staunch advocate, in an earlier, same day radio interview (July 24, 2015) with Roc & Manuch, said that he had publicly staked out a position that “he was not going to vote.” We can assume his action was to be a public display of disapproval for council’s treatment of his good friends, the IceArizona owners. In his traditional flip-flop fashion, he reversed himself with a little help from his friends. He revealed that the night before the vote “he had discussions with ownership” (presumably Anthony LeBlanc). His remark is interesting in and of itself for the only meeting council had prior to the vote was an executive session on July 20, 2015.  Did he share the conversations and results of that executive session with his good friend LeBlanc? Sherwood went on to say that “ownership wanted a 7-0 vote in support of the new deal.” Always willing to oblige his friends, Sherwood did a 180 and not only voted but voted in favor and made sure his pal, Councilmember Sammy Chavira did as well.

There has been considerable opining in the news media and on social media as to whether this is a good deal…for anybody. I contend that it is a good deal for Glendale if for no other reason than a $197 million dollar liability is gone…poof! That action should warm the hearts of the bond rating agencies. That figure represents the annual lease payments for the balance of the original lease management agreement.

The city gained in reducing the management fee to $6.5M from the original $15M annually. The actual language is: “10.1. Management Fee. Commencing on the Amendment Effective Date, and during the remainder of the Term, in consideration of the Arena Manager’s agreement to perform the management and other services set forth in this Agreement to pay all operating and maintenance costs associated with the Arena Facility (other than capital costs as provided herein), provided there is no breach by the Team Owner of the obligations under the Non-Relocation Agreement or a material breach by the Arena Manager of its obligations under this Agreement, the City shall pay to the Arena Manager, by wire transfer of immediately available funds to an account specified by the Arena Manager, the annual Management Fee in the amount of Six Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($6, 500,000), paid in quarterly (on a three calendar month basis) installments in arrears on or before each October 1st, January 1st, April 1st and July 1st during the Term.” The city was losing an estimated $8+M a year under the original lease agreement even with the shared revenue it received. This management fee is budgeted within the city budget for Fiscal Year 2015-16.

The city also won two important concessions. It now has its own “out” clause with this agreement which ends in two years, in 2017 with recognition that “19. Termination Date means June 30, 2017.”  It now has the freedom to choose its own arena manager in a year’s time as stated, “46. Change of Manager. Notwithstanding what may otherwise be proved in this Agreement or in this Amendment, the City shall have the option to replace the Arena Manager at any time after June 30, 2016…” Everyone hopes the city will craft an RFP immediately and put it out on the street in a time frame appropriate to exercising that option.

The city achieved what can be considered as payback. IceArizona will no longer use former City Attorney Craig Tindall or former Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni in any capacity including as a consultant. It is in #4 of the Settlement Agreement which states, “No Other City Employee Involved with Arena Agreement. The Parties represent and warrant that, as of the Effective Date, to the best of their individual and collective knowledge, information, and belief, no other former employees of the City, other than Craig Tindall or Julie Frisoni, have become consultants to or employees of IceArizona, in any capacity, since July 8, 2013. Ice Arizona represents and warrants that neither Tindall nor Frisoni has, in any way and to any extent, no matter how substantial or insubstantial, been involved in initiating, negotiating, creating, drafting, or securing the First Amendment. In reliance on these representations and warranties and those in Section 6, the City, City Council, City Manager, and City Attorney, collectively and individually, represent and warrant that they will never in the future seek to cancel or void the Arena Agreement of the First Amendment based o the involvement of Tindall or Frisoni, no matter how substantial or insubstantial, in initiating, negotiating, crating, drafting, or securing the Arena Agreement or the First Amendment on behalf of Glendale, so long as Tindall and Frisoni are not employed or retained as a consultant by IceArizona or any of its affiliates, divisions, parent entities, or subsidiaries.” The language is quite specific. That is just plain Karma for Tindall and Frisoni.

Did IceArizona get anything out of the deal? It stopped a lawsuit in which ultimately the city would have prevailed. Note that the new deal contains a lot of verbiage enjoining the city from suing IceArizona, ever, for any reason, regarding Tindall and Frisoni. The major gain was that it bought IceArizona time…time to decide its future. If the owners cannot put a decent team on the ice this year their future is bleak and they know it. It’s not a matter of distance that fans must travel to a game. That rationale has been over used. When teams win people will eagerly travel long distances to watch the winner. A team that is a contender also fills seats in suites and attracts more expensive advertising dollars…the lifeblood of any team. Each extra playoff game earns in the neighborhood of a million dollars and can spell the difference between a bottom line in the black and a bottom line in the red.

Another important issue finally resolved is that of distribution of the bankruptcy Operating Reserve Account as follows: “10. The Parties acknowledge and understand that in the Bankruptcy Settlement, subject to approval by the Court, the Bankruptcy Lawsuit (the “Bankruptcy Court”), the Operating Reserve Account shall be distributed as follows: $350,000 to the City, $10,000 to the David Reaves, Chapter 7 Trustee of the Arena Management Group, L.L.C., and $640,000 to Ice Arizona.”

In the same radio interviews, Sherwood stated that he wants “to see a new contract (with IceArizona) in 6 to 9 months, by April of 2016.”  LeBlanc stated IceArizona “wants a contract extension immediately” to bring “certainty.” Obviously it is an option both parties will need to pursue. Let us hope they can be successful in crafting a lease extension that is not build on the backs of Glendale’s taxpayers. No one can object to a lease agreement that is fair and equitable.

Be advised it doesn’t matter what the action or situation is, municipal governments do not move quickly. While an immediate contract extension is IceArizona’s goal, the caution is to not become frustrated if the action is not completed quickly. I learned this lesson the hard way. When I first joined city council I had ideas for projects in my district. I mistakenly thought they could be accomplished instantly. Not so. I became satisfied if a project could be completed within a year. It’s the very nature of government. All action is slow, overly deliberate, and far more complicated than it often needs to be.

Everyone appears to be relieved the issue is resolved for now. Let’s hope this positive action leads to further positive outcomes for both parties.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 15

22

Chavira and ethics seem to be strangers

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 22, 2015
Posted in City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

It has been 17 years and 201 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

A July 8, 2015 article in the Glendale Star by Darrell Jackson highlights “coincidences” between Councilmember Chavira’s actions and decisions as an elected official and campaign contributions he recently received. Here is the link:  http://www.glendalestar.com/news/article_85b74584-25a1-11e5-95e3-6f2610f801ba.html .

Before reviewing his recent bout of troubling “coincidences” it’s time for another history lesson. I admit to bias. In 2012 Chavira defeated me in the election for the Yucca district seat. He had a lot of support from the Maricopa County Democratic Party #1049 which donated $10,000 to his campaign. He had former Glendale Councilmember Norma Alvarez as well as that of Danny Valenzuela, a Glendale firefighter currently serving on the Phoenix City Council, to thank for the Dems support. Although I am sure Alvarez regrets her support of Chavira when he broke from her and voted against her positions on issues. As a Phoenix firefighter he received thousands of dollars from firefighter union chapters as well benefitting from their independent expenditures on mailers, flyers, signs and manpower. He also received tremendous support from the Hispanic community and used “dreamers” almost exclusively as his foot soldiers. He outspent me in the order of $5 to $1.

During that election cycle some elements of his questionable past actions became public. Just prior to the 2012 election Sammy and Danny were members of the National Association of Hispanic Firefighters (NAHF). Sammy was removed as a Vice President and both men resigned because they allegedly bore responsibility for loss of funds from an NAHF fund raising event. The event may have made money but not for the NAHF. All it received were the bills.

That specific NAHF event was produced by the Phoenix Monarch Group (PMG): Art Jimenez and Tony Herrera. Herrera, a firefighter, has his own business, One Consulting, and also had a  business relationship with Chavira’s wife (and Chavira). Sammy and Danny advocated for hiring them to run the event. Apparently a lot of “funny stuff” happened with scenes (ala the Mafia) of Sammy apparently riding around in a golf cart with Herrera collecting money from the vendors…money never seen again or accounted for to the NAHF.

The Phoenix Monarch Group’s history has a lot of its own question marks. Prior to IceArizona’s successful acquisition of the Arizona Coyotes PMG appears to have had former Mayor Scruggs and former Councilmember Alvarez as advocates as they attempted to secure a contract to manage Glendale’s arena. All of the relationships mentioned are entangled like a giant ball of snakes. It seems as if Sammy’s previous ethical “coincidences” turned out to be precursors’ of his current ethical “coincidences.”

Sammy received a contribution of $500 on February 2, 2015 from Nicholas Wood.  Wood is also one of IceArizona’s stable of legal counsels. On June 10, 2015 the city council voted 5-2 to cancel the IceArizona management contract for the arena. Sammy just happened to be one of two votes against cancellation. Hmmm…

Then on March 23, 2015 Michael Curley (recently deceased) who represented the Bidwills on many of their projects in Glendale, including Sportsmen’s Park East and West, donated $500 to Chavira. A day later, on March 24, 2015, the city council workshop included a discussion of the infamous, Taj Mahal Westgate parking garage. Chavira seemed to have no problem with sticking the cost of this over priced garage to Glendale taxpayers. Hmmm…

Here’s one to watch. Jacob Long, son of deceased John F. Long, is nearly ready to make application for rezoning of a large parcel of land south of the Grand Canal to Camelback Road, 83rd Avenue to 91st Avenue. Unless, there are some changes to the zoning plan by Long, neighbors will not be happy and can be expected to protest this one. On February 23, 2015, Long made an yet another contribution to Chavira of $500 bringing his cumulative total to date to $930. Hmmm…

Yet another example of a Chavira’s “coincidence” is recent contributions from firefighter unions. At the April 21, 2015 city council workshop Chavira read a prepared stump speech in support of the Glendale firefighter union request for more funding. A few days later, on April 23, 2015, Phoenix Fire Fighters Local 493 (Fire PAC) gave Sammy $1,000 followed by April 27, 2015, donations of $1,000 from the Peoria chapter and $1,000 from the Tempe chapter. You would think he bears a conflict of interest. Hmmm…

Does it seem that Sammy is ethically challenged? Does it seem to you that his relationships seem questionable? Does it seem that if you have enough money to play he will advocate for you? Does it seem that Sammy is not making decisions in the best interest of Glendale but rather in the best interest of his campaign contributors…Becker billboards…a flip-flop from his campaign platform of denial to approval of the IceArizona contract…no vote on IceArizona contract cancellation…advocacy for more money for firefighters with the use of scare tactics…making the temporary sales tax permanent? Hmmm…

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 15

15

Glendale says, “no”

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 15, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances  | Tagged With: , , , , | 5 Comments

On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 Darrell Jackson, for the Glendale Star, posted a story online in which he reported two sources (not councilmembers but apparently city administrative staff) have confirmed my speculation that the Monday, July 13, 2015 city council executive session was to discuss an offer made by the Arizona Coyotes. Not a bad guess for a former councilmember.

It raises more questions other than answering only one — what was the subject of the e session? If Jackson’s sources are correct the Arizona Coyotes had offered to drop their management fee to $8M for the next 3 years.

Without knowing any more details of the purported offer, the first thought is, don’t the owners of the Coyotes realize they are virtually confirming they plan to exercise the opt-out clause in 3 years? The second thought is city council is absolutely convinced they have a solid legal case against the Coyotes. You can be sure we have not seen all of the city’s cards when it comes to the 2 former city employees, Craig Tindall and Julie Frisoni. I suspect we will not find out how much more there is to know until the discovery phase of the trial — which seems more certain to occur than ever.

Offering to pay a lesser management fee while keeping the opt-out clause does not sound like much of a win-win deal. The city pays the team $8M a year to play in its arena for the next 3 years and then the team leaves? Again, who is going to pay the Coyotes $15M or $8M a year to play in their venue? You can be sure the City of Phoenix and Talking Stick won’t. They have management companies. No, the only thing they will expect is a hefty rental payment from the Coyotes. It seems as if the handwriting is on the wall. No one, other than gullible Glendale has been willing to pay them to play and now, even Glendale has decided that it’s not such a great idea.

If the Coyotes owners are as committed to staying as they claim they are, the first concession they should have made to the city was to remove the opt-out clause but they didn’t offer that carrot. Why? Because they plan on exercising the provision in 3 years. For all those die-hard Coyotes fans out there, what will it take to make you believe that it is quite possible that the Coyotes are not here for the long haul, despite what the sometimes dubious truth teller Anthony LeBlanc has been saying? You know which Anthony LeBlanc I’m referring to. It’s the one who denied Andrew Barroway’s purchase of 51% of the team only to retract his denial. Yes, I realize Barroway is no longer the majority owner but he was for a brief time and LeBlanc originally denied it when it was first reported.

Jackson reported that several administrative staff would like to see arena management separate from the team. At this point in time, that seems to be an idea worth embracing. Hang on folks. This is a new chapter of Coyotes history, barely written and I suspect there is much, much more to come before this chapter is completed.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jul 15

12

The case of the disappearing money

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 12, 2015
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale's Fire Union  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

It has been 17 years and 191 days since the city’s pledge to build the West Branch Library.

A political committee, registered in Glendale, Glendale First! is sponsoring the recall of up to 4 June30-GlendaleFirst-Amendedcurrent Glendale city councilmembers: Vice Mayor Hugh, Councilmember Turner and Councilmember Tolmachoff (they have yet to pull a recall packet on Councilmember Aldama). These 4 councilmembers, along with Mayor Jerry Weiers, voted to cancel the Glendale arena’s lease management agreement with IceArizona.

On their website they say, “It is the opinion of Glendale First! that the recent actions of the Glendale City Council regarding their vote to cancel the arena management agreement with IceArizona (the Arizona Coyotes) was hasty, ill-conceived, politically motivated, and fiscally irresponsible.” They are angry about council’s action and for them it’s payback time. Revenge is a heck of a reason to mount recall elections. This is reason #1 and it is the major reason.

Obviously reason #1 for the recalls will not play well with Glendale’s residents and so, reason #2 is Glendale First’s accusation that these councilmembers did not support public safety. By public safety, don’t be confused – Glendale First! is referring exclusively to the Glendale Fire Department and more specifically the Glendale chapter of the fire union.

The Glendale police unions made it clear that they did not share Glendale First’s allegation. Justin Harris, president of the Glendale Law Enforcement Association, spoke at a recent city council meeting and recognized and thanked the city council for its continuing support of public safety. Then the Glendale Law Enforcement Association and the Glendale Fraternal Order of Police ran an ad publicly supporting the councilmembers under threat of Glendale First’s recall effort. As an aside, another ad was taken out by all of the opponents who ran against the sitting councilmembers in the last election. Their ad also supported these members of the city council and their vote to cancel the contract. Obviously the men and women of the Glendale Police Department did not support the allegations of Glendale First! – but the Glendale Fire Union did.

Make no mistake, the fire union wants more money and appears to have partnered with Glendale First! to try to make that happen. Their argument for more money rests on their claim of deteriorating fire department response times. Yet the former Glendale Fire Chief publicly stated the department’s response times have remained constant over the past five years. The fire department is accredited and their response time is one of the major criterions for successfully acquiring that accreditation.

The recent history of the fire department demonstrates the fire union’s tremenous influence within the department. During former Mayor Scruggs’ tenure she allied herself with John Holland, former president of the local fire union chapter. Because of her support of Holland and his union Glendale’s fire chiefs were reluctant to oppose the union’s desires and demands. The union grew in power and strength until today it virtually runs the fire department. It will be extremely difficult if not downright impossible for any Fire Chief, including Interim Fire Chief DeChant, to put the fire union genie back in the bottle. Yet that is what must be done to get the fire department back on track placing the needs of its citizens first.

So reason #2 of non support by council of public safety didn’t fly either. That led to reason #3 and their newest allegation, “ Glendale First! feels the City Council acted inappropriately when it reclassified the inter-fund advances used to fund payments to the NHL, essentially removing that nearly $40M liability from the City balance sheet with the stroke of a pen and a vote for the budget. In effect, what had been a loan from several enterprise funds was made to disappear with no requirement for repayment.”

Has that money and the promise to repay the Enterprise Funds disappeared as Glendale First! contends? No, it has not. Here is the real story as Paul Harvey would say. In 2011 and 2012 in an effort to keep the Coyotes in Glendale, city council agreed to the NHL demand of a payment of $25 million a year. Funds to make the NHL payments were borrowed from the Enterprise Funds and were recorded on Glendale’s ledger as long-term borrowing and became new debt owed to: Water & Sewer, Landfill and Sanitation. It added even more debt to Glendale’s bottom line and was recognized as such by the bond rating companies. They considered this debt as another long term liability for the city.

The action city council took was to approve renaming this debt from the term “inter-fund advance” to “inter–fund transfer.” It’s no more than an accounting trick. By renaming this debt it had the accounting effect of removing it as a debt (even though it still exists as a debt) which in turn, satisfied the bond rating companies and provided them with a rationale to raise Glendale’s bond rating profile. They did not dismiss their obligation to pay this debt.

Is the debt still there and is it being paid off? You bet it is. At a recent April, 2015 workshop Councilmember Tolmachoff asked to bring forward a resolution to make the General Fund FY 2015-16 Inter fund transfer July 11, 2015inter-fund transfers to the Enterprise Funds part of the budget process each year. It resulted in a City council approved Resolution 4943 New Series on May 26, 2015 making the inter-fund transfers to the Enterprise Funds permanent. Each year the city council will decide what the monetary amount of the inter-fund transfer to the Enterprise Funds will be. This Fiscal Year, 2015-16, the amount of the inter-fund transfer to the Enterprise Funds approved by the city council located on page iv within this year’s budget is in the amount of $600,000.

Glendale First’s reason #3 against these councilmembers which was that they had made the loan from the Enterprise Funds vanish is simply not accurate. The money did not disappear nor did the city’s commitment to repay the Enterprise Funds. It appears as if Glendale First! will have to get creative and come up with a new reason for recall of the councilmembers.

We can strike Glendale First’s reason #2 of council’s non support of public safety.

We can strike Glendale First’s reason #3 of council’s action to make money disappear.

That leaves Glendale First! with only publicly stated reason #1 left – the council cancelled the Coyotes contract.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

« Previous Page — Next Page »