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 all of my years of blog writing I have probably written follow up blogs about half a dozen times. I felt it necessary this time because of all of the misinformation on this issue. Let’s look at the allegations being thrown around about this issue.
Secrecy of process
The first time the issue of council pay raises was mentioned was at the city council workshop meeting on May of 2019. Councilmember Ray Malnar introduced a Council Item of Special Interest (CIOSI) requesting that council and staff take up the issue of city council pay raises stating that it had been 13 years since the last increase. The Mayor and I supported Councilmember Malnar’s request. In June of 2019 at its workshop city council authorized a citizen Compensation Committee. The committee started meeting immediately and met for 5 or 6 work sessions prior to making their recommendation. In July of 2019 at a city council workshop direction was given to place the question of council raises on the Special Election ballot already approved for this November. Much has been said about this meeting. Yes, it was a special workshop called because of the time requirements that had to be met for the Special Election. Remember the Special Election was called to meet the state mandate to conform to its requirement that the Primary Election date be moved from the 3rd Tuesday in August to the 1st Tuesday in August. Adding the question of council pay raises to an authorized Special Election made sense in terms of cost avoidance.
In attendance at that workshop meeting were Mayor Weiers, myself, Councilmembers Hugh and Malnar. Councilmember Tolmachoff was on vacation and had notified all that she would not be able to attend. Councilmembers Turner and Aldama simply did not show up. They could have attended but they chose not to. It is safe to assume that they are opposed to city council pay raises. However, if they were so intensely opposed rather than being ‘no-shows’ it was incumbent upon them to articulate their opposition. Can we assume that if this question passes, they will stand by their opposition and reject increases to their salaries?
All workshops are public meetings and televised. Their agendas are posted as are the subsequent minutes. There are also videos of the workshop meetings posted on the city’s website. This issue was never a secret. The council held at least 3 workshops in which this issue was discussed. Typically, the majority of issues are discussed and direction given in just one workshop…occasionally there might be two workshops on the same issue and the second workshop is usually a follow up to the initial discussion. Three workshops on the same issue are unusual. So, where is the secrecy? It was an open, public process that if a citizen wanted to follow could be done. By the way, the citizen Compensation Committee’s meetings are also required to be open to the public and were publicly noticed. Where were all of the current protestors? Did any make an effort to attend even one of their meetings to offer public comment and to learn of the committee’s work and deliberations?
Pay raise methods
Traditionally Glendale has created a citizen’s committee and taken the recommendation to the voters. That would continue to work well if there were a regular, periodic schedule when this process would occur. That is not the case. The last two citizen recommended pay increases have been 13 years apart. That explains the large increases recommended. If you had to wait 13 years until your next pay raise you would expect it to be substantial.
Cities nationwide are moving away from this system and many now have an annual or biennial review that no longer requires voter approval. It is automatic and is usually based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase or comparisons to other similarly populated cities. For example, Surprise which just increased council salaries by resolution also established a new policy in which the mayor and council salaries would be reviewed, and perhaps adjusted, every city election year, which is every other year. The Surprise council pay adjustments will be based on the average of the mayors and the average of council members in other Phoenix-area cities with populations of 100,000 to 300,000 as of Jan. 31 of the election year. Gilbert has had an automatic system based on the CPI in place for years. Glendale’s move to an automatic process is no longer an unusual practice.
Opposition’s motivations
A hit piece by a reporter who is identified as an “investigative reporter” has worked hard to make it appear that this is skull duggery and some kind of nefarious plot. That is the job of an investigative reporter. Keep in mind the goal is to stir the pot and create a fire where there is none.
Citizens who have voiced their opposition are free to do so and as you can see from the comments I do not reject or censor their thoughts. But they, too, have their motivations. Some are angry because the city has sold Glen Lakes Golf Course. Others dislike our Mayor or City Manager and some are displeased with other council decisions that have been made on issues such as the downtown events. It is understandable when viewed in the context of their displeasure on other issues for I note that nearly every comment begins with, ‘I believe city councilmembers deserve a raise but…’ Their objections are not to the question of the worthiness of a council pay raise.
Creation of a PAC
PACs are formed all the time in support of or in opposition to a ballot issue. My goodness, look at a recent Phoenix election on light rail. PACs were created all over the place both for and against the issue. A PAC called Best of the West was formed by some of the members of the citizen Compensation Committee. I haven’t talked to them but I assume they felt passionately enough about the issue to advocate for council raises. That is their right just as much as those who have publicly come out in opposition to this issue. Nothing they have done is illegal. It is not illegal to form a PAC on a ballot issue or to solicit contributions for a mailer supporting it.
As for allegations that somehow Councilmember Hugh is the mastermind behind it, I seriously doubt it. If the PAC asked him for advice or help he was free to provide it if he so chose. If I had been asked I would have helped as well. Each of us has made no secret of our support for council pay raises.
Lastly, there is a reason to support council pay raises that I did not speak to in my last blog because I chose to educate about the duties of a councilmember and that is “You get what you pay for.” At a salary of $34,000 you will get people who must have another job or seniors who are retired and can afford it. Yet it is recognized this is a full time job. I honestly don’t know how some councilmembers juggle two full time jobs. I know of one giving up a business to insure the necessary time can be given to this job. If you want to attract and to motivate younger, bright, capable individuals to this work then enough compensation is needed to create an opportunity for them to do so.
I continue to support council pay raises and it should be obvious to you, the reader, as to why. I urge you to vote “Yes” on authorizing the change of the Primary Election date and authorizing city council pay raises. Again, as I said previously, no matter your position, please, please, do vote. It is a right often ignored and taken for granted.
© Joyce Clark, 2019
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.
I voted “yes” because it is the right result for the reasons you have stated here and in your prior article.
I would encourage the Council and City, however, to find a way to communicate with the citizens better about decisions that are being made and large changes that are being considered. If the public perception is that things are being done behind closed doors, then that perception needs to be addressed, whether or not it is true. Of course, we elect representatives because it would be terribly inefficient if every citizen was involved in every decision being made, and in every part of the process. So there needs to be some trust. Right now, however, there appears to be a widespread perception and feeling that things are not being done in the open. This next session, I hope that the City works on a way to find that balance between handling what needs to be handled without asking every single citizen for their input and getting input earlier and more easily where appropriate. Once that trust is rebuilt, I think it will be a lot easier to accomplish change. On the citizen side, I would encourage citizens to make themselves involved where possible – come to the workshops and meetings, watch the videos, check the city website, give input when requested, volunteer on a Board or Commission, or run for office. While the city needs to do its part, the citizens need to also do the work to be well informed and not merely read a few headlines and form an opinion.
Well said Lynda. I will endeavor to do my part.
Linda, I think your statement is well said and I agree completely with the lack of trust and the fact it is desperately needed. I could list so many reasons.. but let’s cut to the chase. Based on the facts as I perceive them to be, they rushed this through, they called for a special election for this single purpose (I am pretty darn sure this “state requirement” was not brought up in the public city council meetings) and now we learn the “special salary commission” is the BIG MONEY behind this ballot initiative, well, that just looks a little too sneaky to me. And I detest the idea of taking the voters out of the process for the future, that definitely feels like a major conflict of interest.. And so I say, Just Say No! Rewrite the language and try again… next year.
Cheryl, state requirement most definitely publicly discussed in workshop.
Thank you Vice Mayor for that update. I stand corrected on that point….
Linda, you’re “pretty darn sure the state requirement was not brought up in the public city council meetings”. What do you base this on? Rumor and innuendo? Do you make all your important decisions without having any facts? (Clearly you were wrong about this)
If so, then you are actually letting others make your decisions for you.
Mark, I think you meant to direct this to Cheryl.
You’re right. A thousand apologies to all.
Widgets and Council Members
When I graduated from school in the mid-70s I interviewed with a company making Widgets. The mysterious little things made famous in college text books for the study of economics.
I was offered and agreed to a Part Time position of Widget Maker first class, for >20< hours a week at a fixed salary of $$xxxx.
The second week I was there my manager approach me and stated they were having problems in the shipping department and asked me if I would drop off some Widgets on my way home. The following week I was told of some problems in the receiving department and was asked to pick up some supplies on my way into work to make more Widgets.
I found myself spending 2 hours a day picking stuff up in the morning, 4 hours a day making Widgets and 2 hours after my shift delivering the little things. A few weeks later on Friday afternoon I was summoned to the manager’s office and was informed that all of the staff of the Sales and Marketing departments had fallen ill. I was asked if I could help-out and attend a planned weekend trade show to give away samples of the Widgets. Two months and several shows later I found myself working quite a lot more than the agreed too and compensated for 20 hour work week. I met with my supervisor and asked for an increase in my base pay because of my added hours and responsibilities. The reply was that this was an “insane idea” and any more requests would result in a company Board of Directors meeting being called for, and discussions started about termination of employment.
I voted NO on prop 424
Not because I agree or disagree with the request for a raise (that is an entirely different discussion)
BUT
Because of the unconventional and clouded way this proposition made it onto the ballet.
You can put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig. This is simply just spin as you have found yourself on the wrong side of this issue.
A really well thought out and cogent argument Frank.
My arguments, on your first blog, remain the same. Any time the a special meeting is called last minute, I’m leery and it screams lack of transparency. In your second post you attempt to explain it away (spin, in my opinion). I get it, we aren’t going to agree on this. I still have serious concerns on this topic, my vote will remain no, though I suspect you knew you wouldn’t get me to change my mind, as I know you won’t change yours.
As a side note, IF “The committee started meeting immediately and met for 5 or 6 work sessions prior to making their recommendation.” It is odd I can not find any information about those extra meetings. In “meeting minutes” found the June 27, 2019, and then they met on July 8, 2019 to approve the 6-27-19 meeting minutes. Then it seems like discussions occurred, but I cant even find approval of the July 8th meeting minutes. And… I can find no other meetings… Just saying, I am not sure where 5 or 6 meetings occurred..
No Pay Raise
Not today nor tomorrow
Joyce, your blog has allowed many of us a forum where we have been able to state our views without being censored. I join others who say the Council does need a raise at a future date, but not now. You are one of the Council who is always well prepared on issues having done the homework and I continue to admire your abilities and strong work ethic. At council meetings we know that we can rely on you to be engaged and to ask the questions that clarify the issues. Keep up the good work.
Joyce, I have a couple questions and comments. Are the Compensation “work sessions” open to the public? There are only two ( 2 ) Compensation “meetings” listed, June 27th where they elected a Chairperson and July 8th where they made their recommendation. How was the Committee formed and by who?? Wasn’t the Council “Special Workshop” during council recess in July? That would explain why your fellow council members did not attend. Your comments about them was rather condescending. This process didn’t need to be rushed through to get on the November ballot. It could have been handled a little slower with more deliberation and placed on the next ballot for elections. When you say that there was no citizen objection or attendance on this issue, let me give you my opinion on that. If its a significant issue, I would expect my representatives to put out information to their constituency that this is an important issue being discussed. We elect council members to be our voice but they need to reach out to their constituency to find out what their concerns are on issues like this. This is a very unpopular issue, raises for elected public officials and needs to be sold to the citizens. That is why these kind of proposals fail at the ballot box all the time, they are not marketed properly. In regards to tying salaries to the CPI for elected officials, I totally disagree with that.Putting your salary increases in the hands of any city manager just wreaks. Does anyone think council wouldn’t get a raise under this method? You evaluate and agree to his/her compensation so naturally he/she is going to ensure you get your raises. Taking this decision away from the voters is just is not going to fly. Just because a few other cities do it doesn’t not make it right. Council and Mayor are elected officials and I agree allot of hours are involved, it does not mean you are full time employees or workers. Also, just because someone doesn’t like council decisions on other issues, Glen Lakes, downtown building being sold at a substantial loss, does not mean their opinion on this issue means they have an agenda. Every issue is different and to lump everyone that disagrees into a disenchanted group is wrong. Your comment about the PAC nonsensical. To compare a PAC for council raises to the light rail issue is like apples and oranges. The only people who benefit from the Council Raise PAC are the council and mayor. The light rail involved billions of current and future dollars, disruption and possible closing of businesses. In regards to people seeking future political office, I have never heard anyone say they do it for the money. They do it for their commitment to civic duty. If the workload is too much, then council and mayor need to sit down and discuss how things can be reduced in workload. I would heartily suggest that the mayor, council and city have a study session on marketing and image control, not just on salary increases but city operations. Just my opinion.
John, Although we sometimes disagree I always appreciate your comments. There is one correction I need to make. I stated that the committee met 5 or 6 times. That was from my recollection and I did not check to confirm. I don’t know how many times they met but it was certainly more than 2 times.
Thanks Joyce. You know I always support you and so much appreciate your blog.
Thanks Joyce. You know I always support you and so much appreciate your blog. There are only 2 notices on the committee, 1st when they met on June 27th and elected chairman, then on the 8th july when discussions held and recommendations made.
I’m voting no on the pay raise only because there isn’t a “hell no” option.
I think councilmembers should work full time as councilmembers, and they should be paid accordingly. Their pay should be increased, but along with that we need to establish a job description and/or limits on other employment while serving. Joyce and some others are obviously dedicated, but some haven’t been. Chavira is one recent example. I don’t want a councilmember receiving full-time pay for the role while working another job.
I also don’t want council pay tied to the median of city employee pay. I don’t care what other cities are doing. Our charter requires pay increases to be approved by the citizens, and I think it should remain that way.
Council handled this whole thing very poorly. “Good ole boys” were appointed to make recommendations about the pay raise. Then, the vote on the hefty raise was held while opponents were away on vacation. Now, the “good ole boys,” likely in cahoots with one or more councilmembers, have formed a PAC and have spent money mailing out a flyer promoting the raise. Every single statement on that flyer is either a stretch of the truth or an outright lie. Who is funding the PAC? Or if not funding outright, what favors are expected in return? This whole chain of events appears to citizens as being very shady because it is.
This has rightfully resulted in what seems to be a great deal of public opposition to the pay raise. Due to the sour taste, many have said they are voting no on everything. Throughout all of this, the other proposition on the ballot, the main one and the reason for the special election, is often ignored. I’m afraid that the underhandedness, or at least the appearance thereof, in regard to the pay raise may end up being the poison pill for changing our primary election date to match the state’s.
If council had instead been forthright and simply explained the situation, and perhaps also entertained (and actually listened to) a period of public comments, a measure could have been placed on the 2020 ballot that the public would endorse.
A correction to my comment:
I wrote, “Every single statement on that flyer is either a stretch of the truth or an outright lie.”
Actually, two of the statements are correct. Glendale has an estimated 2019 population of over 250,000. And, this would be the first pay increase since 2005.
The remainder of the flyer is incorrect, particularly the part about pay in relation to other cities. Arizona Republic article about that is here: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2019/10/10/glendale-voters-decide-whether-give-mayor-council-raises/3903683002/
——————
If voters approve the increases, the pay for Glendale’s elected officials would go from middle of the pack, compared to other large Valley cities, to near the top of the list.
Out of the 10 largest Valley cities, only Phoenix and Mesa’s mayors are paid more than Weiers would be, at $88,000 and $73,545, respectively.
The pay for council members would be second among those cities. Phoenix’s council members are paid $61,600.
——————-
So, mayor pay would become third highest. Council pay would become second highest.
My favorite line in the flyer is “Because it only changes 7 positions it will have no effect on the city budget or your tax bill.”
$234,562 annually has no effect on the budget? Interesting, especially since this pay raise isn’t even in the current fiscal year budget. Some time ago, the mayor said that if this passes we can “pass the collection plate around later.” Cute.
I voted Yes because I believe in the future of Glendale. We need people with a vision to come on board and give Glendale a needed jump start for the 21st century. Money talks and just maybe we can get people with ideas that will get us out of the trickle down economic ideas that Glendale espouses. We have so many empty store fronts, not only Downtown, also Arrowhead, in the strip malls across Glendale. How are we doing with climate change? Are we the greenest city in the valley? Have we said no to plastic? How is water being managed? We said no to light rail, have we said yes to electric buses, more pedestrian walkways, more trees? How about traffic flow? Have you waited for a train lately on Glendale Avenue, with all the cars emitting carbon. Glendale can be the model city in the valley. I say Yes to better pay and wait for the next generation to take the lead.
I for one am not against the pay raise, I actually find it quite low and honestly suprised that any person would stay around with the exception of those that love what they do, or unfortuanntly those that cannot do better. I beleive that you Joyce fall into the first category.
I do have some concerns on a flier I found recently in my mail that was very much poised against the pay raises.
This flyer poinetd to a couple of concerns that I had not heard about and one I knew of alreasy.
1st – A purchaase of a city property that was at one time valued over 700k was sold for just 25k, and noted to a “neighbor” of the City Manager.
2nd – Was that the same city manager was offered a lifetime contract?
3rd – The deeply regretable exspense of the Google err…. Glendale logo.
I did not have any luck finding any information on the topics of 1 or 2 online, can you eleaborate on this for me and provide some detail of these events?
By the way, I have no intrest in anyone running a smear campaign, and realize that it is basic politics to attack oponents and defend from them. I sumply wanted to know more of the subject matter.
Thank you for your work.
Jay, I am writing a blog as we speak on your very questions. It should be posted tomorrow. Have to make dinner, do some city work and finish it up and edit it tonight when things settle down.
I searched “st. vincent depaul building sale” and found info for item 1. Personally, I was shocked to find this sale was to the City Manager’s neighbor. And I would really like to know, did Council Members approve the sale knowing all the time it was being sold to his neighbor? https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2018/10/08/glendale-sold-key-piece-downtown-property-cheap-goldwater-institute-proposals-redevelopment/1416325002/