Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Apr 25

10

Senate bill 1229 will destroy your home values and is very, very good for developers

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 10, 2025
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • City of Phoenix • City of Tempe • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Ocotillo District • Phoenix Metro issues • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

This bill is passing through the Arizona State Legislature but there is still time for you to let your legislators know exactly how you feel about this bill. I recently read a very good guest Letter to the Editor in the InBuckeye news written by Kim Owens, a resident of Buckeye, Arizona. It sums up this bill quite nicely and so I am sharing with you her commentary:

“Residents of Buckeye should be aware of a threat to our community, as the Arizona legislature, under the protection of homebuilders with deep pockets, pushes forward a bill that will drastically change our city – and not for the better. The bill, Senate Bill 1229, will strip Arizona cities, meaning the voters, of the right to determine what their communities will become in the future. Buckeye is particularly vulnerable due to our abundance of open land.

In the name of providing ‘starter homes,’ this sleight of hand trick will take away local control, our method of protecting our investment, and expressing our voice on how we want our city to grow.

It is quite simply the big hand of government taking over our city, putting developers in complete control.

SB1229 is being forced upon us despite overwhelming public opposition from cities, towns, police, and fire departments, as well as voters. It epitomizes government overreach. The Buckeye general plan, approved by voters, serves as our roadmap for growth and development; however, it becomes irrelevant under SB 1229. This plan is crucial for maintaining the balance between residential, commercial, and open spaces in our city. Without it, Buckeye faces unplanned, chaotic development that disregards the needs and desires of its residents.

This bill will:

Require cities to allow high-density housing, with lot sizes as small as 3,000 square feet, in all new developments zoned as single-family residential,

Prohibit cities from requiring community parks, amenities or open space that is vital for quality of life,

Require cities allow remove any regulations stating a minimum square footage for a single-family home,

Forbid any maximum or minimum coverage requirements for a single-family home with no limit on the number or size of other structures on the lot,

Forbid regulations requiring the distance between property lines be more than 5 feet from the side lot lines and 10 feet from the front and rear lot lines,

Prohibit any design, architectural, or aesthetic requirements for a single-family home.

Essentially, build whatever the developer wants, as close as they want, out of whatever materials they want. This bill is designed to strip local cities and their citizens of the right to control the size and quality of growth in their communities, leading to second-class neighborhoods that are visually and structurally inferior.

Say hello to a future where the minimum standards for lot sizes and home dimensions can lead to overcrowded, blighted neighborhoods. Subdivisions could have as many as 12 to14 homes per acre built from any materials, such as cargo boxes.

Picture it – 3,000-square-foot lots, no fencing, five feet between each house, and free-for-all approach to architectural design. With no requirement that these “starter homes” be sold to working families or be owner-occupied, they will be little more than corporate, short-term housing money machines for developers that can be built anywhere, without regard for community input. Meanwhile, the property values in surrounding neighborhoods plummet, our streets become congested, police and fire are pushed to the limit, and schools are more crowded.

The threat posed by SB1229 to Buckeye is substantial and should not be overlooked. It compromises our ability to govern our community’s growth, protect our investment, and preserve our unique character. By mobilizing and taking action, we can safeguard our city’s future and ensure that development reflects the wishes and needs of its residents. It is essential to stand together and make our voices heard to prevent the irreversible changes that SB1229 threatens to impose.”

Although this commentary was written for Buckeye residents, make no mistake, this bill will affect all of us. residents must speak out against SB1229. So far, this bill has the votes to pass – it is time for us to make out voices heard! Here’s what you can do:

Voice your concerns to our State Representatives by email – tell them to VOTE NO ON SB1299:

Spread the Word: share this info with your neighbors, ask them to send an email.

Utilize Social Media: Provide information to wider networks – this affects every city in the state. Please contact your Arizona State legislators and make your voices heard. Here is a list of those legislators that represent Glendale:

Senator Eva Diaz District 22                 Email:  eva.diaz@azleg.gov

Rep Elda Luna-Nájera District 22        Email:  eluna-najera@azleg.gov

Rep Lupe Contreas District 22             Email:   lcontreras@azleg.gov

Senator Analise Ortiz District 24         Email:  analise.ortiz@azleg.gov

Rep Lydia Hernandez District 24         Email:    lhernandez@azleg.gov

Rep Anna Abeytia District 24               Email:  aabeytia@azleg.org

Senator Tim Dunn District 25              Email:   tdunn@azleg.gov

Rep Michael Carbone District 25        Email:  mcarbone@azleg.gov

Rep Nick Kupper District 25                 Email:   nkupper@azleg.gov

Senator Flavio Bravo District 26          Email:   fbravo@azleg.gov

Rep Cesar Aguilar District 26               Email:  caguilar@azleg.gov

Rep Quanta Crews District 26              Email:  qcrews@azleg.gov

Senator Kevin Payne District 27          Email:  kpayne@azleg.gov

Rep Lisa Fink District 27                        Email:  lfink@azleg.gov

Rep Tony Rivero District 27                  Email:  trivero@azleg.gov

Senator Janae Shamp District 29        Email:   jshamp@azleg.gov

Rep Steve Montenegro District 29      Email:  smontenegro@azleg.gov

Rep James Taylor District 29                Email: jtaylor@azleg.gov

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Feb 25

5

They took it to the streets

Posted by Joyce Clark on February 5, 2025
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • City of Phoenix • Phoenix Metro issues  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

For those of you who do not follow the news closely, on January 31st at a press conference, Hakeem Jeffries, House Minority Leader, D-N.Y., pledged Democrats would fight President Donald Trump’s (immigration) agenda with, “We’re going to fight it in the streets.” Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-MA., called for agitation “in the streets.”

A few days later there were coordinated protests of thousands of Mexicans nationalists throughout the country waving the Mexican flag, and burning the American flag, in the streets.

On Sunday, February 2nd that is exactly what happened in Glendale/Phoenix. At the intersection of 67th Avenue and Camelback, approximately 1,000 people gathered about 5 pm to protest the new immigration policies. South of Camelback is Phoenix and north of Camelback is Glendale. So, both police departments responded. A helicopter flew overhead using loudspeakers to advise the crowd that it was an illegal assembly. They ignored it.

The protest remained peaceful until about 8 pm. Then it got ugly. The crowd threw fireworks, large rocks, chunks of concrete and glass bottles at officers who were simply trying to maintain the peace. Cars began doing burnouts and donuts in the intersection. This caused police to close off the intersection for public safety reasons.

Further escalation ensued with the damage of 5 police vehicles, all kinds of things being thrown at police officers and damage to nearby businesses. Employees at neighboring businesses had to shelter in place. Many employees’ vehicles had extensive damage as well as some of the businesses.

At 10:30 p.m., Phoenix and Glendale police officers in riot gear began approaching the intersection. Police used flash bangs, tear gas, and pepper balls after multiple commands to leave were ignored.

Protesters lit fireworks and threw bottles and rocks at officers. In addition, a fire was set to a large storage container near one of the business complexes. It was definitely not a safe situation.

Why would these protestors, shutting down the Camelback and 67th Avenue intersection, burn the flag of the country in which they are demanding to remain while waving the flag of the nation to which they apparently have no desire to return? Blocking traffic while waving foreign flags to get people to oppose deportations makes no sense.

You may know that I am a law enforcement Mom. My son was a police officer for many years. I back the Blue. What I am about to say is not to disparage the Glendale or Phoenix police departments. However, they announced there were no arrests. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt assuming they were terribly outnumbered and at the moment it might have been too dangerous to do so.

The major TV stations have videos of the damage caused by recognizable individuals. I hope at a later date, these departments will view all the footage, identify people and announce arrests in conjunction with this illegal assembly. I also assume that they will work with ICE to deport those who are here illegally.

In 2019, there was a protest in downtown Phoenix against ICE and there were immediate arrests. In fact, one arrestee was none other than Glendale’s latest councilmember, Lupe Conchas. The charges against all who were arrested were later dismissed.

This morning, I learned that there was another protest at 93rd Avenue and Glendale Avenue. Protesters should stop taking it to the streets. They are not making any friends by disrupting commuter traffic and destroying private and public property.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jan 25

21

Fireworks…boom for a few or a bust for many?

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 21, 2025
Posted in City of Glendale • Phoenix Metro issues  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

Fireworks are like rubbing salt in a wound for many residents of the Valley from Scottsdale to Buckeye, Cave Creek to Queen Creek. The major reason for the intense dislike is the misuse of them. Fireworks that shoot into the sky are illegal, yet many revelers persist in using them. They are noisy and a fire hazard. Add to that the extremely long periods when it is legal to shoot them off. It makes for a combination that many Valley residents are fed up with.

Here is the law as it exists:

“36-1606. Consumer fireworks regulation; state preemption; further regulation of fireworks by local jurisdiction

  1. The sale and use of permissible consumer fireworks are of statewide concern. The regulation of permissible consumer fireworks pursuant to this article and their sale or use is not subject to further regulation by a governing body, except as follows:
  2. In a county with a population of more than five hundred thousand persons (This applies to Maricopa County), a city or town within its corporate limits or the county within the unincorporated areas of the county may do all of the following:

(a) Regulate, consistent with the standards set forth in NFPA 1124, the sale of permissible consumer fireworks within its corporate limits.

(b) Prohibit the sale of permissible consumer fireworks on days other than April 25 through May 6, May 20 through July 6 and December 10 through January 3 of each year and two days before the first day of Diwali through the third day of Diwali each year.

(c) Prohibit the use of permissible consumer fireworks on days other than May 4 through May 6, June 24 through July 6 and December 26 through January 4 of each year and the second and third days of Diwali of each year.

(d) Prohibit on all days the use of permissible consumer fireworks within a one-mile radius of the border of preservation lands owned by a city or town that has purchased more than fifteen thousand acres of land for preservation purposes.

(e) Prohibit on all days during a stage one or higher fire restriction the use of permissible consumer fireworks within a one-mile radius of the border of any municipal or county mountain preserve, desert park, regional park, designated conservation area, national forest or wilderness area.

(f) Prohibit on all days the use of permissible consumer fireworks between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., except:

(i) Between the hours of 11:00 p.m. on December 31 of each year through 1:00 a.m. on January 1 of each year.

(ii) Between the hours of 11:00 p.m. on July 4 of each year through 1:00 a.m. on July 5 of each year.

  1. In a county with a population of less than five hundred thousand persons, a city or town within its corporate limits or the county within the unincorporated areas of the county may do all of the following: ( I have deleted this portion as it does not apply to Maricopa County.)
  1. A governing body that chooses to regulate, consistent with the requirements set forth in NFPA 1124 and subsection A of this section, the sale or use of permissible consumer fireworks may not require any additional signage requirements for the sale or use of permissible consumer fireworks other than those signage requirements stipulated in NFPA 1124, except that additional signage that is eight and one-half inches by eleven inches in size, that is on cardstock paper in landscape orientation, that lists the days of that year that are described in subsection A, paragraph 1 of this section relating to the time frame surrounding Diwali and that contains the following language on a contrasting background may be posted by the retail sales display of permissible consumer fireworks:

State of Arizona Consumer Fireworks Regulations Arizona Revised Statutes section 36-1601, et al. The use of permissible consumer fireworks as defined under state law is allowed:                                                                                                                                                          May 4 – May 6, June 24 — July 6 and December 26 — January 4 

                                              The sale of permissible consumer fireworks as defined under state law is allowed:   

             April 25 – May 6, May 20 — July 6 and December 10 — January 3 

                                        All other fireworks are prohibited, except as authorized by local fire department permit.

The sale and use of novelties known as snappers (pop-its), party poppers, glow worms, snakes, toy smoke devices and sparklers are permitted at all times. Permissible consumer fireworks may not be sold to persons under sixteen years of age. Check with your local fire department for additional regulations and dates before using.

  1. This article does not prohibit the imposition by ordinance of further regulations and prohibitions by a governing body on the sale, use and possession of fireworks other than permissible consumer fireworks. A governing body may not allow or authorize the sale, use or possession of any fireworks in violation of this article.”

There are three major problems with this law. The first is, in Maricopa County, it is permissible to use fireworks for 22 days a year. That’s nearly a month. Is this necessary? No. I don’t know about you but growing up we celebrated the 4th of July and New Year’s Eve only. We didn’t celebrate for weeks at time. Why does the state legislature allow the sale and use of fireworks for weeks? It appears that some state legislators have interests within the fireworks manufacturing and sales communities. They apparently have had enough influence to ram through extended sales and use periods to increase profit margins in that industry. In other words, all for a buck.

The second issue is the inclusion of more holidays than necessary. Cinco de Mayo? Diwali? When people come to America for a better and more prosperous life they should assimilate. They are becoming American and need to embrace American culture. That, in and of itself, is a whole separate issue. Again, inclusion of other holidays, not part of our American culture, does not encourage immigrants to assimilate.

I am of Polish descent. When my Polish grandparents came to America, they did not presume to establish Polish holidays in this country. They became Americans and fully embraced what it was to be an American. The only two times fireworks should be permissible are New Year’s Eve and the 4th of July from the hours of 7 PM to midnight. That’s it. No exceptions.

The third issue is the types of fireworks being used. When we were kids and celebrated these two holidays, we ran around with sparklers and the adults used ground-based firecrackers. No one used aerial fireworks. The current law stipulates that aerial fireworks are prohibited in Arizona for sale or use. Yet people use them extensively. Since they cannot obtain them in Arizona, they go to Mexico or other states where it is legal to purchase them. For instance, the residents behind our home use aerials. The problem is that when the police are called, they have to see the offence in order to cite. By the time officers arrive the illegal act has long stopped. No police department has the resources to deal with illegal fireworks. That is just a fact of life. So everyone throws their hands up in utter frustration.

In addition, aerial fireworks can be dangerous and a fire safety hazard. We all have either heard or read about someone’s house or patio that caught fire because of the embers of aerials ending up on a roof. Add to that, loud aerials scare pets. Most of us who do have dogs put them inside during fireworks periods. During these periods more dogs run away than any other time of year.

What can be done? The people must rise up to speak and to push the Arizona legislature to change the law. How? A group of people should lead this charge by drafting changes in the law and then circulating those changes in the form of an initiative petition to bring this issue and the proposed changes to a vote of the people. It’s not easy and requires a lot of work and organization but others have done it successfully on other issues. There are a lot of people fed up with the use of illegal fireworks and the excessive time periods when they can be used.

We saw in our last national election that when enough people band together, they can effect change.

© Joyce Clark, 2025   

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

 

Oct 24

10

Glendale it’s time to vote

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 10, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

Today I received my General Election Early Ballot. If you are an Early Ballot voter and you have not yet received your Early Ballot, you will in the next few days. Some of you will fill out and return your ballot immediately. Others will wait a few days or will decide just before the deadline to mail it in.

I published a 5-part blog series on Worker Power and its initiative that is now known as Proposition 499. Please take the time to read my blog series if you would like more information or have any questions about Proposition 499.

I am not above attributable plagiarism. The Glendale Chamber of Commerce recently put out a video about Proposition 499 and I am using their idea and advice.

Proposition 499 is on Page 1 of 2 front side. This is what it looks like:

Proposition 499 is for Glendale voters only. It was not initiated by the City of Glendale. This is a Worker Power initiative that uses the idea and the language from an identical proposition in California.

I urge you to vote. It is a duty and right not to be ignored. Many over the years have paid their blood, sweat and tears to ensure this right. I’m sure you have heard this before, but it is true. This is the most consequential election of our lifetime.

I am voting ‘NO” on Proposition 499 and I hope you will as well.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Oct 24

3

Lies and more lies

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 3, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here’s the back of the Worker Power flyer:

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

 

Sep 24

23

Worker Power initiative – will cost you more money

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 23, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

I’ve done a series of blogs on the facts about the Worker Power initiative now known as Proposition 499 on your November 5th General Election ballot.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NO ON PROPOSITION 499

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Sep 24

20

Worker Power Initiative Part 5…A disaster for Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 20, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Glendale finances • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

In preceding blogs you’ve learned about the Worker Power Super PAC, what facilities would be affected, the proposed minimum wage and the requirement to create a new Glendale governmental department.

The consequences for the City of Glendale and affected workers are quite consequential. Kamryn Brunner authored the following September 2024 report for the Common Sense Institute Arizona. It is entitled, The fiscal implications of Glendale’s Hotel and Event Center Minimum Wage Protection Act. Here is the link to the entire study: CSI_AZ_REPORT_GLENDALE_MIN_WAGE_SEPT_9_2024_FINAL (1)

Their conclusion is, “Common Sense Institute estimates the Wage Act would reduce Glendale’s economy by between $120 million and $1.9 billion. Associated job losses would be between 1,700 and 32,000; up to 47% of this is a dynamic effect on businesses indirectly supported by the city’s tourism sector.”

I have cited some excerpts from their study:

  • “An analysis of data from hotels.com and Expedia, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, VisitGlendale.com, and other public information sources, CSI estimates that 19% of Maricopa County’s events and accommodation industry can be found in Glendale alone.” 
  • “While Glendale has only 3.4% of the state’s population and 3.3% of state personal income, but approximately 15% of the state’s entire sports and tourism sector is found in Glendale.”
  • “CSI estimates that there are up to 4,954 employees in the City of Glendale who may be directly impacted by this proposal.”
  • “This initiative specifically targets the niche industry into which Glendale has heavily invested and is today heavily concentrated. Because of the significant costs the initiative could impose on targeted businesses, and the relative ease with which affected activity could move to other nearby jurisdictions while staying close to sports and event hubs, the potential negative impacts for Glendale are likely to be more significant than if this were either a more isolated community or a statewide initiative.”
  • “For Arizona to pass a $20 minimum wage for hotel and event center workers in Glendale, it could cost employers up to $10,756 per affected worker -through a combination of either direct increased wage costs or efficiency losses as employers mitigate the impacts by reducing staff, cutting hours, or moving business activity. Much of this cost will likely be passed onto consumers in the form of higher prices and increased fees (as has been the case in California). This may further incentivize both customers and operators to seek alternatives outside the city.”
  • “Ultimately, if enacted, the Act would have dramatic implications for the city of Glendale and its economy. Those implications would likely play out over a period of time, rather than immediately.”                                                                                             “There will be some combination of:
  • Employment losses and reductions in work hours among hotel and event staff.
  • Hotel and event cost increases in Glendale, including price increases.
  • The movement of hotel and event activity outside of Glendale and to nearby cities, particularly over time as part of normal business maintenance and expansion cycle.
  • An increase in the rate of unionization among Glendale accommodation and event staff.”

“Under all outcomes, the nominal wage increase implied by the Act for existing workers never occurs.”

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Sep 24

18

Worker Power Initiative, Part 4

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 18, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

In previous blogs I presented who and what the Worker Power Super PAC is, what facilities this proposed ordinance would impact, and the minimum wage provisions. In this blog I will share what new regulations are imposed on Glendale.

The Worker Power initiative mandates that the City of Glendale, effective June 1, 2025, will create a Department of Labor Standards as well as an online and a paper method for individuals to file complaints. It further mandates that there be a Director of Labor Standards and investigators. This new department will publish all labor regulations and is empowered to make labor rules that comply with this proposed ordinance.

The proposed ordinance also requires this Labor Department’s access to all records, and it can impose a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars ($100) per day to be paid to the hotel or event center worker. The maximum violation per employer can be up to one thousand dollars ($1,000) per day. Statutory damages can be awarded. The party that loses a court case must pay the opponent’s attorney’s fees and any court costs. There is a 3-year statute of limitations during which any harmed individual can sue.

At our last city council workshop, I asked what the estimated cost of creating this new department would be. The estimated cost is one million dollars. That’s just for a bare bones, new department. I ask you this. Have you ever seen a governmental department go away or shrink? Never happens. One million dollars is just the starting point.

Where will the money come from? That’s for the city council to decide but every other department is fair game to lose money. It could be parks and libraries, transportation, public safety. That will be decided next year, if this initiative passes.

In my next blog I will share how this initiative will impact Glendale and you.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Sep 24

17

Worker Power Initiative, Part 3

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 17, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale election 2024 • Glendale finances • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

In previous blogs the Worker Power Super PAC was explained and the types of venues that could be covered by this proposed initiative. Some aspects of this proposed initiative are vague and leave room for expensive interpretation, probably by a judge at some point, if it passes.

What is the minimum wage proposed? The initiative says, “Beginning thirty days (30) after the effective date of this ordinance, a hotel employer or an event center employer shall pay its hotel workers or event center workers, as applicable, a wage of no less than $20 per hour, not including tips, gratuities, service charge distributions, and bonuses.” There is more, “Beginning January 1, 2025, and annually thereafter, the minimum wage will increase annually to reflect increases in the cost of living. The cost-of-living increase shall be the greater of (1) three percent (3%) or (2) the percentage increase as of September 30, 2024, and as of September 30 in any subsequent year for further annual adjustments, over the level as of September 30 of the preceding year.”

In English, that sets the minimum wage for hospitality workers at $20 per hour with a cost of living increase every year. That $20 an hour does not include tips, gratuities, service charge distributions or bonuses. Currently, Arizona’s statewide minimum wage is $14.35 per hour. In January 2025, it will become $14.70 per hour. This initiative requires $5.30 per hour more than the minimum wage of any other Arizona city.

Wait, there’s more. If a hotel has less than 60 rooms, the room attendant who cleans more than 4,000 square feet in an 8-hour day gets a double pay rate of $40 an hour for the entire 8 plus hours. For example, the worker who cleans 3,999 square feet in an 8-hour day gets $160 ($20/hour). But if the worker cleans 4,100 square feet in 9 hours, that worker gets $360 for a 9-hour day ($40/hour). If a hotel is larger than 60 rooms (and nearly everyone is) anything over 3,500 square feet in an 8-hour day gets double pay.

All service charges are split between the event center and the hospitality worker but there is no specific proportion as to who gets what.

This proposed ordinance applies only to hospitality workers, not managerial, supervisory staff, bartenders, bellhops, valets, custodians, etc. It doesn’t apply to maintenance staff. You know, the people that keep the lights on, the A/C working and the plumbing from backing up…just hospitality workers. Is that fair? I think not.

In the next blog we will learn what requirements are imposed on Glendale if this initiative passes.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Sep 24

16

Worker Power Initiative, Part 2

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 16, 2024
Posted in 2024 General Election • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale election 2024 • Phoenix Metro issues • Worker Power Super PAC  | Tagged With: , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

In my last blog I laid out some background on who and what the group running this initiative, the Worker Power Super PAC is. This blog starts to explain what their proposed initiative includes. I have offered a link so that you can refer to the entire initiative as submitted.  Initiative

The initiative applies to all event centers within the City of Glendale and is defined in the initiative as, “An event center means a publicly or privately owned structure in the city of more than 20,000 square feet that is used for public performances, sporting events, business meetings, or similar events. An event center includes, but is not limited to concert halls, stadiums, sports arenas, racetracks, coliseums, and convention centers.”

Please note that “similar events” is pretty broad and covers just about anything. Hotels are not referred to in this section but are in section 21-187 and is as follows, “A hotel means an establishment in the city that provides temporary lodging for payment in the form of overnight accommodation in guest rooms to transient patrons for periods of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days or less. This definition includes hotels, motor lodges, motels apartment hotels, transient residential structures, private residential clubs, tourist courts, hostels and private guest rooms that may be reserved, meeting the hotel definition.”

Let’s break this down. First, it applies to all public and private facilities. Here are some examples: Midwestern University, Glendale Community College, all high schools and elementary schools (public or charter) that have a football field and/or basketball court or any other large meeting area. It includes government facilities like the Civic Center, the arena, the main library and the Glendale Public Training Facility. It includes private facilities that rent space for meetings or weddings or your favorite performing arts theater or movie theater. It would also include places like the pickleball venue in Westgate and the under construction Mario Andretti cart racing venue. Of course, the football stadium and the arena, both in Westgate, are included.

In other words, any location, public or private where people gather in large groups. Many mistakenly believe that this proposed initiative only applies to hotel workers but as you can see, that is not the case.  That is why they have purposefully referred to “hospitality workers.” It’s smoke and mirrors to make you think one thing when it is actually more broadly written.

Keep in mind that this proposed initiative only applies to the City of Glendale. IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO ANY OTHER CITY IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA! Mind you, should Worker Power be successful in getting this initiative passed on November 5th, at the General Election you can be sure they will take it to other cities in Arizona. The only voters that can deny or pass this proposed initiative are Glendale voters since it currently applies only to Glendale.

Coming in my next blog, how much is the proposed hourly wage and are there any other wage provisions?

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Next Page »