Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

It appears Glendale City Manager Brenda Fischer has a vicious temper. Rumors have circulated since she came on board in Glendale but employees have been reluctant to go on record and to share specific incidents. All have been within City Hall – until last week.

A little background first. Robert Heidt is the Glendale Chamber’s new President and CEO. He had been approached by a Chamber member, John and Alice Roach, owners of the White Eyes Fresh Fry Bread Company. The Roachs are Glendale residents. Apparently they have applied for entry to numerous Glendale events only to be turned down repeatedly. Mr. Heidt had been dealing with Glendale’s Communications Department (which runs all City events) for several months in order to obtain clarification on vendor policy and to advocate for the Roachs’ participation.

Darrell Jackson of the Glendale Star has an article about a confrontation Glendale City Manager Brenda Fischer recently and publicly had with Mr. Heidt. Here is the link: http://www.glendalestar.com/news/article_314b5612-a265-11e4-b241-87a6efc2a085.html . Last week Mr. Heidt was having a pleasant working lunch at the Yard House at Westgate. Ms. Fischer was also there, a few tables away, having lunch with several Glendale employees. At some point Ms. Fischer approached Mr. Heidt’s table and proceeded to publicly berate him over the White Eyes Fresh Fry Bread Company complaint. She was loud enough to be overheard by patrons necessitating a Yard House Assistant Manager’s request “to take it outside.”

Fischer, when asked by Jackson, about the incident conveyed that she was defending “employee integrity and professionalism” which, she believed, had a “negative effect on employees’ morale.” Between you and I, that is so much BS.

If Fischer were really concerned about employee morale she wouldn’t, among other things: 1. Have her reputed, infamous temper tantrums at any time, in City Hall or outside of City Hall; 2. She wouldn’t allow City Manager staff, including herself, and City Attorneys to not be physically present at City Hall on Fridays. They are available by phone and email. I believe that’s called telecommuting. Isn’t that what the previous City Manager Ed Beasley allowed Human Resources Director Alma Carmichle to do? From Mississippi? Wasn’t that a ‘no-no’? No matter the location…it does affect employee morale; 3. She wouldn’t have appointed Julie Frisoni to an Assistant City Manager’s position when Frisoni did not meet the qualifications needed; 4. She would insure that all staff information is distributed to the entire council and not a selected few supporting a staff position and 5. She would resume hosting Quarterly City Staff meetings. Apparently since her hiring she has had one, just one, such meeting with the entire staff.

Mr. Heidt had obvious concerns as a result of that confrontation and sent an email to the Mayor and City Councilmembers, summarizing the incident. As a result, the council will have a special executive session meeting on Friday, January 23, 2015 at 3 PM to discuss Fischer’s confrontation with Mr. Heidt. Expect Councilmember Gary Sherwood (and his two clones, Councilmembers Chavira and Aldama) to defend Fischer’s actions. Councilmember Sherwood not only actively advocated for Fischer’s appointment but personally met with her prior to council’s decision. His exclusive meeting with a potential candidate still under consideration may not have been unlawful but the ethics are questionable. With three newbie councilmembers there will not be much in the way of historical memory with knowledge of other, past Fischer tantrums.

Whatever the results, you and I will never know them as executive session discussions and direction must remain private. The most we can hope for is some kind of reprimand inserted into her personnel file. The best outcome would be for a majority of council to call for her resignation but that is wishful thinking.

Since retiring from city council I have had the opportunity to talk to countless city employees, from a wide variety of departments, at different levels of authority within the organization. None are within Fischer’s “inner circle.” To a person they have conveyed that employee morale is worse than at the height of former City Manager Ed Beasley’s tenure. As they often put it, “It’s the same, only worse.” While Ms. Fischer may have put out some financial fires she has most certainly stoked the fire of the lowest employee morale in recent history.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

Before reviewing the Glendale City Council meeting of January 13, 2015 I wanted to share some information related to the events about to occur in Glendale. With the Direct TV Music Festival, the ProBowl and the Super Bowl fast approaching those residents who live in close proximity to the site of these events may have the need for further information about them or may need to lodge a complaint while the events are occurring.  Below are the Glendale numbers for your reference:

DirecTV Super Fan Festival Hotline

A special hotline has been established for the DirecTV Super Fan Festival.  The hotline number is 602-532-6250.

Neighborhood Protection (barricades)

The Neighborhood protection program is being enacted for the DirecTV Super Fan Festival, Fiesta Bowl, Pro Bowl and Super Bowl.

Electronic Link to Glendale’s Got Game Webpage

The information listed above and specific links are available through the City’s Glendale’s Got Game webpage: http://www.visitglendale.com/ZoneA/index.html

The January 13, 2015 Glendale city council meeting was typical of many council meetings. A proclamation recognizing Dr. Martin F. King Day and then an item packed Consent Agenda. The only interesting segment of the meeting was the choice of a Vice Mayor for this year.

Councilmember Bart Turner nominated and Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff seconded the nomination of Councilmember Ian Hugh. A second nomination of Councilmember Gary Sherwood was offered by Councilmember Sammy Chavira and seconded by Councilmember Jamie Aldama. No surprises there. That left Mayor Weiers as the deciding vote. It was well played by Mayor Weiers. The Mayor offered Councilmember Hugh for a vote first, as it should have been, since Hugh’s nomination was offered first.

Votes were cast on the newest toy, the nearly $50,000 voting system and flashed on the large screen behind them. There were four votes (a majority) in favor of Hugh’s nomination: Mayor Weiers, Councilmembers Hugh, Turner and Tolmachoff. Since Councilmember Hugh’s nomination captured the majority of council votes there was no need to vote on the nomination of Councilmember Sherwood. Congratulations go to the newly elected Vice Mayor of Glendale, Ian Hugh.

We have seen the first vote of the new council majority of Weiers, Hugh, Turner and Tolmachoff. We’ll see how well Councilmember Sherwood plays in the sandbox now that his coalition is no longer in the majority.

A word that seems to aptly describe both Councilmembers Chavira’s and Aldama’s usual commentary during the course of council workshops and meetings is saccharin. According to Webster’s Dictionary saccharin is defined as “sweet or sentimental in a way that does not seem sincere or genuine.” If ever two people fit that bill it appears to be these two. Their greatest claim to fame is certainly not the offering of insightful comment but rather a litany of thank yous to everyone they can possibly think of. Perhaps the voters of their districts will thank them profusely as they wander out the door of Glendale politics.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

It seems that Glendale’s City Clerk, Pam Hanna, is stressed this holiday season. Today, December 19, 2014 was the day of submission of recall petitions for Glendale Councilmember Gary Sherwood by the Recall Councilman Gary Sherwood Committee.

In her usual fashion Ms. Hanna made yet another election mistake. She formally notified everyone that the requisite number of petition signatures required was 3,851. Oops…wrong. The actual number of signatures required is 2,752. Apparently basic math is not her strong suit. Ms. Hanna made the rounds of visiting every councilmember in person with her mea culpa. She also sent out an SOS to all city departments asking for help to process the signatures. Here is her plea for help: GLendaleCityClerk&AlvarezOMCLetters-2pages_Page_1 How many signatures were turned in? The recall committee prior to their submittal counted 404 petition sheets. At 15 signatures per sheet the maximum total could be as high as 6,030 signatures. The City Clerk’s office counted 398 sheets x 15 signatures per sheet for a possible high total of 5,970. There’s that pesky math again. No matter. Whether it’s a possible 6,030 or 5,970 signatures turned in that is far more than the 2,752 signatures required.

In Sherwood’s run for council in 2012 he captured 1,615 votes. The total number of votes for all Sahuaro city council candidates totaled 4,005.  No matter what the final signature tally is it is clear that twice the number of registered voters signed the recall petition than voted for Sherwood in 2012 and they will be valid signatures. There is no doubt that the City of Glendale will be scheduling a recall election in 2015.

This recall effort is only one of the problems Sherwood faces. He ended his campaign with a balance of $1,330.51 on hand. In terms of running a recall campaign that amount will hardly do. It should also be noted of the $19,000 from his last campaign he loaned his campaign $8600 or nearly half of the money he raised. He may find it very difficult to obtain campaign funding this time around. It should also be noted that on 8/29/2014 his campaign paid $380 as a fine for his not signing the campaign finance report he submitted on 6/302014.

He still remains under investigation by the Arizona Attorney General’s office for alleged allegations of Open Meeting Law violations. His track record of following through on his campaign pledges has alienated him from his constituents.  He ran in opposition to the proposed casino and then was the swing vote to support it. He opposed making the temporary sales tax permanent and then supported it as a councilmember. Perhaps the issue that angered his constituency the most was his ardent advocacy of the Becker billboard proposal. He attempted to push it through not once but twice.

It is time for Mr. Sherwood to cut his losses and resign while his reputation is still fairly intact.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

Former councilmember Norma Alvarez is certainly not leaving Glendale City Hall with a whimper. On November 20, 2014 she sent a letter off to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office with yet another allegation of an Open Meeting Law violation. I have heard that this complaint has legs.

In it she alleges that someone on Glendale city council after having received in executive session the infamous legal analysis of Glendale employee financial mismanagement then leaked the information to Paul Giblin of the Arizona Republic. Giblin and the Arizona Republic would not divulge the name of the leaker on city council. That is not surprising as the media routinely and rightly will not name their sources.

She goes on to contend that the City Manager, City Attorney and/or other Glendale city employees know the name of the leaker and to date they have failed to disclose the name in an effort to protect all who may have been involved. She makes the specific request of the AG’s office to investigate and to secure the name of the leaker because she has been accused of this violation. She does not name any of the councilmembers as the leaker. Ask yourselves which of the current crop has the reputation of being a media hound? Ask yourselves which of the councilmembers is already under investigation for other alleged Open Meeting Law violations?  Ask yourselves which of the councilmembers has Alvarez locked horns with on nearly every issue? Here is her letter: GLendaleCityClerk&AlvarezOMCLetters-2pages_Page_2 Ever since the new councilmembers, Sherwood, Chavira and Hugh were elected in November of 2012 there have been a string of allegations regarding alleged violations of the Open Meeting Law with one side or the other making complaints to the AG’s office.  These allegations have arisen because they are probably true. Remember the old adage, where there’s smoke there’s fire. But they have also arisen as a sign of the deep divisiveness on the council for the past two years. Council divisions erupted over major issues such as the casino, the sales tax increase becoming permanent and the Coyotes deal. The prevalent ethic among them seems to be if you can’t win the issue then there should be pay back. It has not been a comfortable place in which to work and the council made no bones about airing their dirty laundry publicly.

Will anything come of these AG investigations? Who knows? Many people hope so and think that this council attitude of take no prisoner has to stop. Will this new council of Weiers, Hugh, Sherwood, Chavira, Tolmachoff, Turner and Aldama rise above the current pettiness? Many think not and point to the lining up of two new camps with Sherwood, Chavira and Aldama on one side; and Hugh, Tolmachoff and Turner on the other; and the Mayor as the deciding vote on many issues.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

A little of this…

Randy Miller, a former Barrel district Glendale City Council candidate, made complaints to the city regarding a political action committee (PAC) called Revitalize Arizona. Revitalize Arizona is the pipefitters union creation made for one only express purpose…to participate in the Glendale City Council district elections on behalf of specific candidates, one of whom was Bart Turner, the newly elected representative of the Barrel district.

Former candidate Miller viewed the City Clerk’s site to check Revitalize Arizona’s registration as a political action committee (PAC). There was nothing. In addition he discovered Revitalize Arizona did not identify itself on the signs with the acknowledgement “Paid for by…” In accordance with the rules of the electoral process and so he filed complaints with the City Clerk’s office.

To this day Revitalize Arizona has still not filed its expenditures with the city. What were Mr. Miller’s complaints worth to the city? His complaints produced $300 in fines.  It’s a mere slap on the wrist and certainly not a deterrent to future bad acts.

What Revitalize Arizona actions did Michael Bailey, Glendale’s City Attorney, opine to be worth only a $300 fine? He said in a letter to the Torres law firm representing Revitalize Arizona, “Reasonable cause exists that Revitalize Arizona was not a registered political committee in Glendale as required by A.R.S. §16-902.01(E) and A.R.S. §16-912(A) when it had posted campaign signs in the City of Glendale” and “Reasonable cause exists that Revitalize Arizona failed to include requisite statutory disclaimer information on the campaign signs in violation of A. R. S. §16-912(B) and A.R.S §16-912(D).” Bailey went on to conclude, “A.R.S. §16-912(E) provides that ‘(a)person who violates this section is subject to a civil penalty of up to three times the cost of producing and distributing the literature or advertisement’.” Bailey fined them $300. The penalty was supposed to be a triple cost fine for the signs but Bailey valued the signs at $100. What a joke.

Having been a candidate I can tell you campaign signs are not cheap and those signs easily cost in excess of $1700. The fine should have been $5,000. A fine of that magnitude might have made the bad actors in Revitalize Arizona sit up and take notice and cause them to clean up their act in the future.

The Revitalize Arizona attorneys couldn’t respond quickly enough. Whoa…pay a $300 fine and get the heck out of Dodge. They dodged a bullet, high fiving all the way.

Just as in real life, in the City of Glendale, it’s a matter of who you are and who you know.

A little of that…

Have you seen the recently released photo of the new Glendale City Council? I’d be asking for a retake. The City Council is always told to wear dark or black clothing. This time the  instruction produced a group of undertakers. See if you can match the queries below with the right elected official: new council 2015

  • Which one looks like a member of the mafia?
  • Which one needs a new suit that fits?
  • Which one looks like a prissy preacher?
  • Which one looks like Icabod Crane?
  • Which one didn’t follow instructions and wear a dark color?
  • Which one didn’t follow instructions and fold hands in front?
  • Which one is smiling as if there’s a secret to be known?

Glendale certainly got a little of this and a little of that. Let’s see what the recipe produces.

I stand corrected…

I received a phone call from a “Mr. Sims” claiming to be a fire fighter in another jurisdiction. It was obvious he was calling on behalf of City Manager Brenda Fischer. He made the point that Brenda Fischer was not the City Manager when now Assistant City Manager Julie Frisoni sent her emails regarding the pending Coyotes deal to selected councilmembers. He was correct. Dick Bowers was Acting City Manager and Brenda Fischer was hired right after Frisoni sent those emails.

Those emails have since been submitted to the Attorney General’s Office and are part of an investigation into allegations of Open Meeting Law violations by current councilmembers Sherwood and Chavira and former councilmembers Knaack and Martinez.

Ms. Fischer may not have been aware of the emails when she first assumed her position but she most certainly is aware of them now. The question raised remains valid, what will she do to root out “off the reservation” actions by her staff, especially those of Frisoni?

       

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

During my 16 years of service to Glendale as a councilmember I would often ask questions of staff members. I suspect that I became infamous among staff for my “curious questions.”

No matter how consequential or inconsequential my question(s), it and the answers were routinely copied to the mayor and all councilmembers. I was told repeatedly that all councilmembers should have the same information and that staff was obligated to treat and inform all councilmembers equally. This was habit and practice for years before I became a councilmember and up until January of 2013.

I was quite surprised to recently receive some emails “over the transom” that violated this long standing policy. These emails make it evident that with the advent of City Manager Brenda Fischer and her handpicked crew this policy is no longer being followed.  The emails I received predated the council approval of the IceArizona arena lease agreement. It is clear from the senders and recipients that the policy of distribution to the mayor and all councilmembers was deliberately ignored in an effort to provide information to supporters of the deal and to deny the very same information to those councilmembers recognized as opposed to the deal.

One email from Julie Frisoni dated Wednesday, June 26, 2013 9:09 AM was sent to Councilmembers Martinez, Knaack and Sherwood. In it Ms. Frisoni forwarded a response from Tom Hocking on an arena operating cost question. It was not sent to Mayor Weiers or Councilmembers Hugh, Alvarez or Chavira. Apparently it was information Ms. Frisoni felt would assist those in support of the deal and was withheld from those in opposition.Frisoni 1

Yet another email from Frisoni dated Sunday, June 30, 2013 10:34 PM was sent to Councilmembers Sherwood, Chavira, Knaack and Martinez. In it Ms. Frisoni forwarded talking points on the benefits of an anchor tenant at the arena prepared by Jeff Teetsel, Credit Suisse’s Manager of Westgate. Once again the information would assist only those in favor of the deal. It was not sent to Mayor Weiers or Councilmembers Hugh or Alvarez.Frisoni 2

Ms. Frisoni is not the only current or former staff member to violate this policy. Craig Tindall, IceArizona’s Counsel and Glendale’s former City Attorney, sent an email to Councilmembers Sherwood, Knaack and Martinez dated Friday, June 28, 2013 8:04 AM which explained why the deal would no longer be a management agreement but would be a lease agreement. You would think that the city’s former Attorney would know better.Tindall 1

You can be sure there are far more emails floating through city hall that offer information to selected councilmembers in support of an issue and denied to others perceived as being in opposition. These emails are illustrative of an attitude prevalent beginning with City Manager Fischer and working down through the entire organization. It is a cancer causing distrust and divisiveness not only among elected officials but throughout the organization.  It creates  classes of “haves” and “have nots.” If there is a pattern of violating this ethic, it leads one to ask what other situational ethical tenets are being ignored?

Tenet #5 of the International City Managers Association (ICMA) states, Submit policy proposals to elected officials; provide them with facts and advice on matters of policy as a basis for making decisions and setting community goals; and uphold and implement local government policies adopted by elected officials.” It does not say to submit policy proposals to selected elected members. It does not say that all councilmembers are not equal and some deserve more information than others. There is an atmosphere of corrosiveness eating away at Glendale City Hall that City Manager Fischer has a responsibility to eradicate for she is ultimately responsible as the top manager of Glendale’s government.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

Final official election tallies for the Glendale Ocotillo district seat show Jamie Aldama winning by 18 votes. This district proves the old adage that every vote counts. It seems fitting as Alvarez won her seat four years ago by a similar slim margin.

Ocotillo district has a majority Hispanic population and the two final candidates were Hispanic. The split in support among Hispanics for the two candidates should send a strong signal to Aldama that he will have to work hard to retain his seat four years from now. Make no mistake, in many ways Aldama is merely a slicker, more polished version of Alvarez. The striking difference is that Aldama blows with the wind. His performance on the Planning Commission showed that he will wait until the last minute to see which side of an issue seems to be prevailing and then vote in that direction. He is not a man of strong convictions.

There remains concern among some Ocotillo voters about his manipulation of his residency requirements. The house he owns is in the Yucca district and is apparently being rented although it appears he has not registered the house as a rental with the City of Glendale. He is currently renting the house in which he now living in the Ocotillo district. The perception is that his action smacks of political expediency. It may be perfectly legal but it creates a sense of impropriety.

Norma, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Even as a loser Alvarez possesses no sense of grace or dignity. Darrel Jackson’s story in the November 20, 2014 edition of the Glendale Star ably describes Alvarez’ reaction to the loss of her council seat. Her whining never ceases to amaze. She never got it. Alvarez seemed to believe that she was the only advocate in the city for truth, justice and the American way. She pointed fingers at everyone and everything on her way out. Her negativism and lack of positive contributions to the city and her district tipped the balance in favor of Aldama. Alvarez indiscriminately hurled accusations of City Hall corruption but her favorite theme during her four years was her perception of disrespect by anybody and everybody. She forgot that when she was first elected both former Councilmember Phil Lieberman and I befriended her. In fact, there were instances when I delivered her council book to her, went to her home to bring her up to speed on issues and even chauffeured her to and from council sessions. When she and I disagreed on what was a minor issue, she declared I was no longer a “friend.” Frankly her pronouncement was a relief. I moved forward and never regretted her action.

Her actions did not contribute to her public persona as a councilmember. She never once stood up for the pledge of allegiance at city council meetings. She could have. She wasn’t so disabled that she was unable to stand for the pledge. Her deliberate decisions to refuse to attend city events based upon personal feelings was noted and caused ill will among many. Alvarez might have been a stronger voice had she done her homework and used more fact and less emotional rhetoric.

In three weeks new councilmembers will be seated. We wish them well. Make no mistake. They will be under a microscope and their views and votes will be the subject of much blog discussion.

There are coalitions forming that will become more evident as the Glendale mayor’s race shapes up in two years, 2016. Watch out for Councilmember Ian Hugh. While he has been very close to Mayor Jerry Weiers he has also been working quietly to form his own coalition. During this last council race rumor has it that he met with Lauren Tolmachoff and Bart Turner, quietly supporting their council races. Look for a majority voting coalition of Hugh, Tolmachoff, Turner and Aldama. All share the same positions on issues such as the casino and the arena management agreement. Hugh, as Glendale’s downtown homeboy, shares aspirations to become the next mayor as does Councilmember Gary Sherwood. Sherwood has major obstacles to overcome. He is still facing the results of an investigation by the Attorney Generals’ office for alleged violations of the state Open Meeting Law as well as a recall election that should materialize next year. Vice Mayor Knaack is about to retire as councilmember and a year away from that job may be just the ticket to persuade her to run for mayor. We may find that Yvonne Knaack, Jerry Weiers, Ian Hugh and Gary Sherwood all make a run for Glendale’s mayorship in 2016.

Lastly, as Councilmembers Yvonne Knaack and Manny Martinez retire, they deserve our thanks and gratitude for what is often a thankless job. While you may not have agreed with all of their decisions and their votes it is right that you acknowledge that they demonstrated their love of Glendale and made their decisions in what they believed was in the best interest of Glendale. Their dedication to Glendale has been evident in countless ways and it has been recognized by many. So, to Yvonne and Manny…thank you.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

Today, November 11, 2014 I checked the Maricopa County elections website to see if there were final results for the Glendale Ocotillo district race for councilmember.

The results are Jamie Aldama received 929 votes and current Councilmember Norma Alvarez received 924 votes. If this isn’t proof that every vote counts I don’t know what is. Aldama prevailed by a margin of 5 votes.

It’s ironic and poetic justice. In  her run for the Ocotillo council seat in 2010 Alvarez won by 9 votes. Will there be a recount? Probably. So it may not be over yet. Stay tuned.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

Relief has set in…at least for a little while. We have a short respite before the presidential election cycle in 2016.  No more daily dozen of political robo calls asking for your money, your vote and virtually your first born child. Politics, as has been said many times, is a rough sport. One has to admire and congratulate all candidates for putting themselves before voters for judgment and eventual approval or rejection.

The old cliché is that every vote counts. There are two stark examples. Nationally, the congressional senate race in Virginia between Mark Warner and Ed Gillespie is still too close to call a winner. 2,132,824 people voted. Warner has 1,072,487 and Gillespie has 1,060,337, a 12,150 vote difference between the two.

In Glendale the Ocotillo race has virtually the same scenario in a tight race between Jamie Aldama and Norma Alvarez. In Ocotillo 1,910 people voted. Of those votes Aldama has 960 votes and Alvarez has 950 votes…a difference of 10 votes. This scenario is not new to Alvarez. In her first election she won by 9 votes. No winner has been declared yet.

What is most disturbing of all is voter apathy. We see it in every election, especially in Glendale. Look at the vote totals by district. In Cholla district 7,080 people voted. In the Barrel district 4,860 people voted and in Ocotillo district 1, 910 people voted.

The last time Glendale reconfigured its districts its goal was to maintain approximately 40,000 people in each district. Slightly over 7,000 people decided who would represent the Cholla district. In Barrel and Ocotillo districts it’s even worse. Nearly 5,000 people decided the fate of the 40,000 residents in the Barrel district and nearly 2,000 people decided the fate of the 40,000 residents of the Ocotillo district.

Congratulations to the winners. You put yourselves before the voters and they approved. It is now your responsibility to represent their interests. Be wary of the temptations to decide that you know what is best or to believe that you have an obligation to pay back the special interests that contributed mightily to your campaigns. Remain humble and respectful of all and their points of view. Above all, listen. Game over…for now.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.

 

On Tuesday, October 21, 2014 the Glendale city council held a workshop meeting. There were two agenda items: a review of the 4th quarter budget results (more about that later in another blog); and discussion of rescinding a March 2014 city council rejection of Becker billboards at Bell Road and the Loop 101.

You have to be a died-in-the-wool political junkie to appreciate the nuances of council discussion of the second item regarding Becker Billboards. When the issue was first rejected by city council it was on a vote of 5 to 2 with Sherwood and Alvarez being the only affirmative votes.  Keep in mind that Sherwood received over $1700 in political campaign donations from the Becker family and Alvarez received $2500 from Becker. Does that kind of money in a local, seemingly podunk, Glendale election buy not only access to these councilmembers but their advocacy?

When the request for rescinding of the original Becker billboard decision was made on Tuesday, October 7, 2014 Sherwood claimed to be making the request on behalf of Councilmember Chavira. Yet it was Sherwood who penned the letter on October 8, 2014 to the City Manager asking for council discussion and consideration. Apparently Sammy was doing his pal a favor by making the original request even though he was absent for the meeting and Sherwood read Sammy’s request. Everyone recognized that Sammy was trying to give Sherwood some cover. Didn’t work. Many acknowledge that it was Sherwood who rammed through the selection of Fischer as City Manager and that she owes him. No wonder it was on a workshop agenda two weeks later. Typically, staff does not move that fast and normally this would be a workshop agenda item a month or two after the request had been made.

Discussion of rescinding the original Becker billboard decision was extensive. Some councilmember comments stood out. Councilmember Martinez said, “some things will not go away” and the issue has “taken on a life of its own.” Councilmember Chavira tried to use the same rationale that Sherwood had used in the past when trying to explain his flip flop on his casino position.  Chavira claimed to not be fully informed when he originally voted to defeat the billboards and went on to say, “he likes to think he’s well informed about every decision he makes.” What a hoot – it seems pretty evident that Chavira takes his marching orders from Sherwood. Councilmember Alvarez chanted her usual mantra that north Glendale has all of the power in the city and gets all while south Glendale gets nothing. Same song, same verse. She was as much as saying that she was all too happy to stick it to north Glendale residents.

The argument that eventually prevailed was that of precedent. If council were to move forward and rescind their original denial of Becker billboards it would be the opening of Pandora’s box. It would put every council vote up to the possibility of rescission. It could even put past council votes on the arena management deal and the casino issue up for future reversal. It is that very thought that defeated Sherwood’s attempt to reverse council’s prior decision on billboards with Mayor Weiers, Vice Mayor Knaack and Councilmembers Martinez and Hugh indicating through consensus that they did not want to move forward and vote on a rescission. Sherwood failed but he was not finished.

City Attorney Bailey had opened another door during his disjointed remarks explaining procedure for such a rescission vote. He said that 3 councilmembers had the right to call for a special council meeting. Sherwood asked several specific questions about that procedure. Make no mistake – expect Sherwood, Chavira and Alvarez to request such a special meeting.

Why the desperation to get a revote on this issue? Sherwood faces two adverse actions that could impact his seat as a councilmember. One is the ongoing Attorney General’s investigation into allegations of open meeting law violations and the other is the current effort to recall him. Add to that Alvarez is standing for reelection on November 4, 2014 and she may, or may not, survive. With the outcomes of these two events in question it seems imperative that they make another run at the billboard issue before November 4th. It doesn’t leave them much time which makes their request for a special council meeting very attractive. The saga continues and will not conclude as long as Sherwood refuses to take a majority council ‘no’ as an answer.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

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.