Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

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 past week I and the other Glendale city councilmembers have received identical, word for word emails from all who signed a petition circulated by the Worker Power Political Action Committee (PAC). I have not seen the petition but somewhere within it there had to be the petition signer’s permission to allow Worker Power to send emails on the signer’s behalf as well as revealing to the recipient (the city council) the email address of the signer. I bet that everyone who signed the petition didn’t know that. Below is Worker Power’s application for a Referendum petition:

Here is just one of the emails I received. They are all the same with the exact same verbiage. All of the emails come from everyactioncustom.com with the personal information of the petition signer provided at the bottom of the email. What is everyactioncustom.com?

This domain is used to send emails on behalf of the supporters (petition signers) of organizations that use the EveryAction advocacy tools. Each one of those emails represents a form submission by a real person (the petition signer) wanting to contact (did they want to contact or did they even know that their signature granted permission to contact using their personal information?) a custom advocacy target (in this case, the members of the Glendale city council) configured in the EveryAction system. In other words, Worker Power hired Bonterra, the company that runs EveryAction, to set up a system where every signer will automatically have an email sent on his or her behalf. Here is a sample of the form email we are receiving. I have personally redacted the name, address and email address of this sender:

“Dear Vice Mayor Joyce Clark,

I am aware that City Council has approved a 25-year property tax break to VAI Resorts known as a GPLET and I would like to express my concern with that decision. This is tax money that could be going to improve our infrastructure, schools, our parks, public safety, and more. There have been major transparency issues with this project. Despite announced changes to the size and scope of the resort, change in ownership, and changes to the GPLET, it took over a year to update the Development Agreement. For such a massive project that has been delayed for so long, there was very little opportunity for the public to comment given that it was added to the agenda the day before it was set to be heard. We also heard the Mayor express a need to consider the effect of new lighting, more noise, and additional traffic caused by changes to the project from the original approval, but we have yet to see these findings . Finally, the next vote involves a sale of public land to the developer to expand the project. At the last neighborhood meeting, multiple nearby residents expressed concerns about amending the zoning to turn this public land into a parking lot and a six-story office building that could overlook private backyards.

Sincerely,
Daniel ———–
—— W Blackhawk Dr  Glendale, AZ 85308-9638
————–@gmail.com”

What is Worker Power? It’s a super political action committee (Super PAC):

“The Worker Power PAC is a Democratic Party-aligned Super PAC founded in 2020 as the Working Arizona PAC that expanded to conduct activity in other competitive states in 2022 after changing its name. The PAC is closely aligned with organized labor and has received money from labor unions and other left-of-center advocacy groups including Unite HERE Local 11, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the American Federation of Teachers, and the Arizona AFL-CIO.

The PAC has conducted campaign activities in support of Democratic candidates in Arizona and Georgia as well on behalf of the presidential campaign of Joe Biden during the 2020 election. The group also created a separate PAC to funnel funds to support congressional and U.S. Senate Candidates in Georgia in 2020 and 2022 called the Worker Power PAC for Georgia. 

The Worker Power Pac was founded in 2020 as the Working Arizona PAC. The PAC is organized as an unaffiliated ‘super PAC’ that is allowed to spend unlimited amounts of funds in support of candidates via independent expenditures. The PAC describes itself as ‘dedicated to delivering wins for progressive political candidates.’  In 2020, the PAC focused its spending on Arizona-specific state and federal elections. In 2022, the PAC ‘conducted a massive independent expenditure field canvass that provided the margin of victory for numerous progressive candidates and delivered a decisive blow to a slate of extreme right-wing candidates at every ballot level.’

Candidates that the organization deployed paid canvassers to support in 2022 included those of Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs (D), Senator Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes (D), and Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes (D).” (Google search)

What should be interesting to note is that the city council approved the original agreement with ECL (ownership has changed to VAI)  nearly two years ago and that agreement included the original GPLET (Government Property Least Excise Tax). Where was Worker Power then? They didn’t care almost two years ago and now they do. They are opportunists.

What are they really up to? Part II of this blog to be published tomorrow, Saturday, should explain a great deal.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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.

Every year I write about fireworks and their abuse, not only in Glendale but all over the Valley.

Don’t get me wrong. I love fireworks shows hosted by cities and other major entities. The half hour displays, commemorating our Independence are spectacular and really symbolize “the bombs bursting in air.”

The first question to be asked is why is it necessary to shoot off July 4th fireworks over a ten-day period granted by the Arizona legislature? Since the legislature has preempted cities from reigning this time in, we are stuck. There is, to my mind, one person in the State Legislature responsible for the state’s unrealistic fireworks legislation and that is Tom Gowan. In addition to being a state legislator, Mr. Gowan also happens to work in the fireworks industry. Hmmm…

On social media there are scads of videos of drone flights over cities on the 4th showing a literal haze of smoke hovering over cities and flashes of light looking as if the city were being carpet bombed. Then there are the videos showing people lighting off aerial fireworks only to have a spark set off their entire cache causing people to run in fear of their very lives. These incidents often result in injuries, especially to children.

Gone are the days of the 1940s and 1950s, when neighborhood families would gather, and the children would run around with sparklers in hand. No aerials. I contend fireworks have become far more powerful over the years. When illegal aerials are set off, they truly sound like bombs.

I often hear the phrase from constituents that their neighborhood is like a “war zone.”

My greatest concern is not only the “war zone” atmosphere but the effect on pets and livestock. I live in an area of large, suburban lots. There are chickens, goats, and horses in my neighborhood. The effect on livestock is traumatic and I know many residents who take extra precautions to protect their livestock. I crate both of our dogs because of their reaction.

Glendale has raised the fine for the first-time offense of using illegal fireworks to $1500. Are you willing to play Russian Roulette and take the chance that you will not be caught nor fined?

Some of the illegal fireworks are:

  • Firecrackers
  • Skyrockets
  • Bottle rockets
  • Missile rockets
  • Torpedoes

Per Arizona State law, people are not allowed to light fireworks on public property including parks, streets, and sidewalks. To report the illegal use of fireworks, please call Glendale Police Department’s non-emergency number 623-930-3000. It may turn out to be an exercise in futility, but it is still worth the effort. The police department is inundated with calls that night. In addition, the officer must see the illegal activity. An almost impossible standard to meet. Still, every year I call in the hope that this will be the year an officer catches the offender in the act.

Please do not use illegal aerial fireworks. Go to a sanctioned event and watch their spectacular display instead.

Happy 4th of July. Take a moment to remember the real reason for celebration – our country’s independence.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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.

On Tuesday, June 13th at the regular Glendale City Council voting meeting, a majority of 5 voted to approve the proposed budget for FY 24-25. The 5 members voting for its passage were Mayor Weiers, Councilmembers Aldama, Clark, Hugh and Malnar with Councilmembers Tolmachoff and Turner voting no.

Is any city budget ever perfect? Will it please everyone? Obviously, the answer is no. Out of the hundreds and hundreds of items within the budget, Councilmember Tolmachoff objected to expenditures regarding 4 items: the Downtown Campus Renovation Project, Heroes Park Sports fields, the Veteran’s Community Project, and covered parking for our city attorneys.

She has every right to disagree and to voice her concerns and to make arguments in support of her positions. Every councilmember has that right and exercises it freely. Councilmember Tolmachoff advocated for her positions during the 3 months of intense council budget review as well as during council workshop discussions of the proposed budget. Her arguments were not enough to create a majority of council in support her positions. The fact that her arguments on these 4 items did not prevail should not have been so compelling as to cause her to vote no on the entire budget.

Councilmember Tolmachoff chose to ignore the countless positive elements of the budget. Items such as $12 million dollars for new fire trucks or funding to improve every right of way within the city or our continued commitment to treat every street and to renovate our city parks.

Councilmember Tolmachoff’s objections were on the use of the city’s unassigned fund balance for downtown renovation, Heroes Park sports fields, the veteran’s community project and covered parking for city attorneys.

The city’s fund balance has grown over the past few years due to all the construction sales tax generated by development in the Loop 303 area. She wants a lion’s share of those funds to stay in the unassigned fund balance (think of it as a rainy-day fund to be used in emergencies).

In a very recent workshop finance staff stated that the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends a budgetary fund balance in a city’s general fund of no less than two months of regular general fund operating revenues or regular general fund operating expenditures. Staff went on to recommend changing the current policy of a minimum unassigned fund balance in the general fund to 25% of budgeted ongoing expenditures. A majority of city council concurred because it is a prudent strategy.  Every Valley city has a similar policy with the percentage of fund balance retained ranging from 1% (Phoenix) to 35% (Avondale and Peoria). Keep in mind that our bond agency ratings are excellent. If we were doing something unwise, believe me, the bond agencies would downgrade us immediately.

Consequently, the city has excess funds that can be used for one-time projects. A one-time project is usually, although not always, a construction project. The 4 projects that Councilmember Tolmachoff opposes are all one-time projects. Please note that there is some hypocrisy on the part of Tolmachoff. She does not mind using fund balance for transportation projects which are her priority. Hmmm…

She opposes the cost of renovating the city hall, Murphy Park, the amphitheater and council chambers. This is a long needed and great project. It is the one project that may do more to revitalize downtown Glendale than anything else. As a result of the council’s decision, CivicGroup, LLC. Is planning to build a 120 room hotel adjacent to the Civic Center. A new pub is hosting its opening this week and our Economic Development Department has received numerous calls from developers seeking to invest in our downtown. It seems that our downtown campus renovation project will be the catalyst to bring new life and new businesses to our downtown. It will also help to recruit and retain employees by providing workspaces of today, not 40 years ago when city hall was built.

She opposes the Heroes Park sports fields construction despite a 25-year promise by the city to complete this park. Heroes Park was designed and intended to bring amenities, such as sports fields for our children, enjoyed by other parts of the city to south and west Glendale.

She opposes the Veteran’s Community Project. This project will provide interim housing to veterans as they work their way through various systems to obtain counseling, health services, a permanent job and housing. It is a pilot project that has already drawn interest from other Valley cities that may replicate Glendale’s effort in this area. A majority of council considers this a very worthwhile project that assists a long-neglected segment of our society.

She opposes a covered parking structure for our city attorneys even though it is recognized that it is a retention tool for our current staff. For years the city attorney’s office was in city hall and its staff parked in the city parking garage. With their recent move, they no longer have access to covered parking.

She doesn’t want any of these projects but it’s OK to use the funds for her priority, transportation projects. In a recent article she said, “My plea to the mayor and council to fully fund the transportation plan this fiscal year with cash on hand (fund balance) was met with a resounding no from the majority.” The majority instead identified other projects, long ignored, that warranted funding intended to improve the quality of life for every resident.

City Council adopted a ten year plan to treat all streets. As needed, Council’s plan has been modified and instead of spending $10 million dollars a year, the minimum amount per year has risen to $17 million dollars a year reflecting a total of $450,781,427 million dollars over the next 10 years. This total amount is dependent upon voter approval this Fall of the Transportation Bond authority. However, the planned total for transportation can hardly be considered as underfunded.

Councilmember Tolmachoff literally “threw the baby out with the bath water” because her advocacy for 4 items was not accepted by a majority of the council. The fact that her arguments on these 4 items did not prevail should not have caused her to vote no on the entire budget. It reminds me of the saying, “my way or the highway.”

Councilmember Tolmachoff did not show responsible leadership. A true leader would not attempt to encourage other councilmembers to defeat the city’s entire budget and throw the city into chaos 17 days before the start of the city’s new fiscal year. The results would have been like Congress’s failure to pass a budget before their deadline. A leader recognizes and accepts defeat and works to achieve consensus with colleagues to achieve future wins.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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’m going to begin by relating facts. Facts do not lie although they can be manipulated to prove either side of an issue. Here are some of those stubborn facts:

  • Glendale’s population is between 253,000 and 256,000, depending on which site is used to obtain information.
  • The number of active voters in Glendale is 118,846 or 46% of the total population.
  • In the 2020 election (mayoral contest with higher voter totals), 37,761 people voted or 32% of all active voters in the city.
  • In the Ocotillo district there are about 12,000 registered voters.
  • Aldama captured a little over 1,200 votes or 15% of all the registered voters in the district.
  • The Cholla, Sahuaro and Barrell districts (generally north Glendale) account for 60% of the total votes cast and Cactus, Ocotillo and Yucca districts produce 40% of the votes cast.
  • A majority of voters (over 55%) are age 50 or older.
  • A voter turnout of 32% is slightly lower than many other valley cities. Less than 40% of all registered voters (or less than 20% of the total population) will decide who becomes the next mayor.

Glendale is not an anomaly and is typical of many cities. Less than half of Glendale’s residents vote. That is not surprising considering that many people are focused on making a living and paying the bills. If it’s not a NIMBY (not in my backyard) issue, they generally do not care about or focus on who is running the city. I remember polling done during one of my many election races when people were asked to identify the mayor from a list of names, only 3% could identify who was the Mayor of Glendale.

What do these facts signify? Aldama is going to have a very difficult race. It’s been demonstrated that he is not wildly popular in his own district, Ocotillo. It will be difficult for him to gather a majority of votes in the three northern districts.

In Aldama’s recent announcement, the Arizona Republic said, “Aldama then pointed out that in 2018, when he ran for reelection, Weiers endorsed his opponent, Emmanuel Allen.” That was 5 years ago. Is Aldama’s internal motive for running payback for Weiers’ previous endorsement of someone else? Does Aldama feel disrespected by Mayor Weiers?

Also, the Arizona Republic said that Aldama wants to find consensus among the city council and to unify the city. Let’s look at these public goals. He wants to become the great unifier. I defy anyone to find a city council where all 7 members agree. That is how democracy works. What Aldama does not say, as part of a minority on council, is that he wants his side to become the majority.

As for unification of the city, that’s just meaningless rhetoric. What does that really mean? Unification along racial, ethnic or income standards? All of these identifiers produce people who have had different experiences and knowledge which may not lend themselves to unification. Ask Aldama how he’s going to create unity between someone living in a million dollar home in north Glendale with someone living in a $250,000 home in south Glendale.

The Republic reported that, “Aldama also said he plans on holding one of the largest meetings with Glendale constituents…asking them for input…” If this were to happen, I suspect the attendees to be the usual, small group, current activist portion of the community each representing a specific issue.

As a representative form of government, councilmembers are elected by their district constituents to represent them…to lead. That’s what Aldama was elected to do. Sometimes council decisions are difficult. That’s when I turn to my constituents asking for their point of view on the issue. Perhaps his time would be better spent reaching out to his district constituents and asking them for their input so that he can truly represent them.

Lastly Aldama is quoted as saying, “…we’re going to start the healing and we’re going to bring respect back to the dais and we’re going to start to unite the community…” I ask what healing? Aldama’s hurt feelings? I ask what respect? Does Aldama feel disrespected? I certainly don’t and I suspect that is shared by most of the councilmembers. I ask what unity? On what basis? A majority of this council is unified and their decisions have brought about many positive results for Glendale.

Having sat on the dais with Councilmember Aldama for years and having observed his actions and listened to his rhetoric, Aldama will not be my choice for Mayor of Glendale.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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, May 16, 2023, Jamie Aldama announced his run for mayor of Glendale. He joins incumbent Mayor Jerry Weiers and another wanna-be, Paul Boyer making it a three-way contest.

I am not running again for the Yucca district council seat. More on who I will endorse later. When I complete this term in 2024, I will have served twenty-four years as a Glendale councilmember, off and on since 1992. I served from 1992-1996; then from 2000 -2012; and then again from 2016 to the present. Not running again allows me to speak my mind (more than I usually do!) about current Glendale politics and issues.

I will be blogging a lot about this upcoming election but for today, let’s review some history about Aldama’s previous runs for office. He was first elected in 2014, 9 years ago. In that election he literally squeaked by the incumbent, Councilmember Norma Alvarez.  He collected 1,221 votes and Alvarez had 1202 votes. Aldama won by 19 votes.

Aldama ran for his second term in 2018, against Emmanuel Allen and garnered 1,299 votes against Allen’s 784.  He increased his vote total by 78 votes in four years. His third run in 2022 was uncontested and Aldama picked up 1,788 votes. However, Bart Turner ran uncontested in the Barrell district and earned 5,152 votes and Lauren Tolmachoff ran uncontested in the Cholla district and garnered 8,380 votes.

There are about 12,000 registered voters in the Ocotillo district. Approximately 15% of the district’s registered voters voted for Aldama.  Turner came in with 25% of the approximately 20,000 registered voters in his district. Lauren Tolmachoff earned 33% of the approximately 25,000 voters in the Cholla district. Aldama doesn’t seem to have an impressive track record when one is ambitious enough to run for Mayor of all of Glendale.

In the Glendale Independent newspaper, Aldama is quoted as saying, “He says he has had his sights set on running for mayor for a while. ‘The plan to run for mayor has been in place since the inception of running (for councilmember in 2014) but really took hold about three years ago,’ he said. ‘It really took hold after my 2018 election where the division among the council was at its worst.’

It’s certainly no surprise to me. I always assumed that he would run for mayor. What is surprising is that he reneged on his pledge to Mayor Weiers that he would not be running against him.

Aldama has always impressed me as being calculating because of his mayoral ambitions and it has been demonstrated time and time again in his votes and the issues for which he chooses to advocate. They seem to be calculated to curry favor.

In his Glendale Independent announcement, he also stated that he was running “on a platform of uniting a leadership team on city council he calls ‘divided.’” The characterization of this city council may be perceived as correct but he fails to acknowledge that he along with 2 other councilmembers have created that division. Four of us, Mayor Weiers, Councilmembers Hugh, Malnar and I, as a majority, have voted time and time again to create a strong, healthy and vibrant community while Aldama, Turner and Tolmachoff have shown varying degrees of support.

There will be more to share in upcoming blogs on all kinds of political doings including those I mention in this blog. So, stay tuned. More is coming…a lot more…

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

 

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.

When I post a blog on a topic, I often get readers who send me material related to the blog topic. Most of it cannot be verified. Rarely, if ever, can it be publicly used. But every once in a while, I do receive useable information. One particularly interesting piece of information came via email because of my recent Chamber blog.

In 2020 when COVID struck, Robert Heidt, CEO and President of the Glendale Chamber, posted a Facebook video on the internet. In it, he advocated for the strictest of measures, including the implementation of mask mandates everywhere as well as the closure of all but essential businesses/services. He chided then Governor Doug Ducey and the Glendale City Council for not doing so.

I bet you don’t know that Mr. Heidt, in June of 2020, applied for and was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of $95,404. A reader sent me the result of a Google search on PPP loans. I am not about to discuss whether PPP loans were good or bad. That is not the issue. Just to be sure, I confirmed there are several sites that list the Chamber of Commerce PPP Loan Number 3905188007. Here are the links to just one site:

https://www.pppdetective.com/loans/AZ/glendale/14

https://www.pppdetective.com/ppp/az/glendale/glendale_chamber_of_commerce

What’s ironic is that Mr. Heidt advocated for mandated business closures and berated the Governor and the Glendale City Council for not doing so while the Chamber applied for and received a PPP loan to cover the salaries of employees to ensure that the Chamber stayed open. Oh, and by the way, the loan was forgiven in the amount of $96, 152 which included any accrued interest.

The reason this may be of interest is because it raises the question, have there been other instances, as the voice of the Chamber, that Mr. Heidt publicly espoused one position only to have done or said the opposite?

I can’t help but surmise that there will be other revelations about Mr. Heidt and his leadership of the Glendale Chamber.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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 many years I have been a member of the Glendale Chamber of Commerce. For 22 years I believed in the mission and goals of the organization and to demonstrate that, I paid my dues from personal funds and not my City Council funds. I attended countless Chamber Ribbon Cuttings, Ground Breakings and events and have been supportive of the Chamber’s efforts.

My position changed dramatically last Fall when Mr. Heidt publicly solicited a candidate to run against Mayor Weiers. I support Mayor Weiers. I believe he and this council have done an outstanding job in managing the city and “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I immediately resigned my membership and have not participated in Chamber activities since then.

It seems Mr. Heidt’s appeal for someone to run against Mayor Weiers was successful and former State Legislator Paul Boyer has answered Mr. Heidt’s call. Heidt is doing all that he can to support Paul Boyer by dragging him along to city events and trying to make him more visible by introducing him to every Chamber member possible. Paul Boyer is not good for the City of Glendale but more about that later. Make no mistake, Robert Height seems to be on a personal vendetta to get the Mayor out of office. Keep an eye on this situation.

Most of us assume that the Chamber is a 501C3 organization, but it is not. Rather it is a 501C6 organization. The distinction is that a 501C3 may have members that belong to all kinds of membership groups. But with a 501C6, it is strictly a membership organization where its members pay annual dues to belong. Both categories are non-profit. One of the differences between the two is in their ability to get politically involved. In a 501C3 there is an absolute prohibition from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, a political campaign (or opposing) any candidate for political office. With a C6 organization, lobbying is allowed as long as it discloses to its membership the % of their annual dues that is for lobbying as well as reporting it on its annual tax filing. While the Chamber may permissibly lobby for a political candidate or position if it has the common interests of its members, that lobbying must reflect the position of a majority of its members. Makes one wonder if a majority of all 1400 (publicly claimed) members want to get rid of the current Mayor and replace him with Boyer? I think not.

I checked the 2019 filing of the Chamber (the latest available online) and the Chamber declared no lobbying in 2019. What was more interesting was its 2019 declaration of salaries with the declaration of just one, Mr. Heidt’s of $144,992. Others have worked for the Chamber for quite some time but I could find no filing for their salaries. Hmmm…

Mr. Heidt’s war began when Covid hit. Mr. Heidt, in his position of President and CEO publicly berated Governor Ducey and the City for not adopting his position regarding mask mandates and the closure of local businesses by producing a video that he posed to Facebook. While Mr. Heidt was advocating for radically doing so, our Mayor and Council took a more measured position refusing to close local businesses. This was the first publicly open rift between the city and Mr. Heidt created by Mr. Heidt but it was not to be the last. Over time, in hindsight, not closing local businesses turned out to be the right course of action for our city.

In August of 2022 the Chamber’s Military and Veterans Affairs Committee (MVAC) had requested an audit of finances raised for the benefit of veteran’s causes which it was holding in a reserved account. At that time, the Mayor was an Ex-Officio board member of the Chamber and Co-Chairperson of the Chamber’s MVAC. Mr. Heidt balked but eventually produced an “accounting”, not an audit, at the follow up meeting in September. This accounting omitted several key fundraising efforts led by the Mayor for his two personal events, the Mayor’s Big Dog Run and the Annual Military Induction Ceremony. It also omitted key items that are seen in normal audits such as specific expenditures and where funds/monies came from, such as donations and sponsorships. A committee member motioned to have these funds moved from MVAC to the VFW Post 1433. This was rejected by Mr. Heidt as he stated the money belonged to the Chamber exclusively, even though two of those events were started by and belonged to the Mayor and were outside the purview of the Chamber. It should be noted that in the past, motions were made, seconded, and approved within the MVAC on financial issues many times before, but now Mr. Heidt claimed they must go to the Chamber Board to be approved. After the September meeting, the Mayor along with several key members who had supported this vote were removed from the committee by Mr. Heidt by not being invited back to any future meetings. Keep in mind the Mayor was the Co-Chairperson along with Mr. Heidt of this committee when this occurred.  Both meetings were recorded. Add another salvo in Mr. Heidt’s war.

Other signs of Mr. Heidt’s ongoing war with the city were not publicized by the city but I will mention one in very general terms. Both the City Manager and the Mayor served as members of the Board of Directors. Recently, when one of the usual monthly board meetings was scheduled, the day before the meeting, both gentlemen received an email saying the meeting was canceled. Only to learn in the ensuing days it had not been canceled. This action seemed to be a deliberate attempt to make sure that neither gentleman attended while specific city issues were being discussed.

There is also an incident that occurred at the city’s suite in the arena when Mr. Heidt appeared to have had too much to drink and acted inappropriately. As a matter of prudence, he was not invited to attend functions at the city suite for quite some time. That is all that I will reveal about the incident but note, it has never been publicly brought up, especially not to embarrass Mr. Heidt…until now.

The latest salvo, caused by Mr. Heidt, has been his support of a small group of downtown merchants expressing their displeasure over the city’s plans to renovate the city hall complex. Some of you may remember when the city installed the café lighting on Glendale Avenue, Mr. Heidt and a few downtown people showed up in “Save Murphy Park” shirts and when the Mayor spoke, they made a point of vigorously waving their signs with the same message.

Or what about the time last August at a council workshop when Mr. Heidt appeared with a few downtown people once again sporting their “Save Murphy Park” shirts. Mr. Heidt disappeared for a while apparently to talk to the press. Subsequently Mr. Heidt sent an email to the city council claiming one of the media characterized our city council as dysfunctional. Staff attempted to clarify Mr. Heidt’s assertion and the following day sent this email.

“Mayor and Councilmembers,

In an email you received yesterday from Robert Heidt, he said, ‘even the reporters said to us outside what a dysfunctional group of elected officials we have.’

We wanted to let you know that immediately after the email was sent, one of the reporters cc’d on the email proactively contacted our media relations team to deny having made any such remarks. They did not want the Council, who may have seen them at the meeting, to infer or attribute that comment to them.

Subsequently, this morning, all the other reporters in attendance who were not cc’d on the email but have now seen it communicated to our media relations team that they did not call the Council dysfunctional. Each of them reiterated their desire to report objectively on the issue and wanted you to know they did not and would not make such remarks.

We agreed to pass along their comments to you.”

Mr. Heidt lied. What else has he lied to you, the public, or to city council or even to his membership about?

In the past few days, David Mitchell, the same gentleman who spoke at the March 14th council meeting, on his Facebook page, posted an article recently in the media related to the Peoria and Glendale Chambers’ relationships with their respective Chambers. Heidt just couldn’t let it pass and the following exchange ensued:

Mitchell:

“This article doesn’t take sides but it gives the public information of the current situation between the Cities and the Business Centric Chamber of Commerce Organizations.

Glendale, Peoria battel local chambers”

Heidt:

“The reality is, Dave’s remarks pertaining to Glendale furthers how out of touch he is, and his lack of knowledge regarding everything, very disappointing to witness Dave adding to this nonsense rather than rise above, be a person who unites and a peacemaker of the very organizations which helped him to build his business.”

Mitchell:

“To Robert Heidt: First of all I thank the Lord for his many blessings to our 42+ years of business. Through the years our business has come thru many sources, one being the leadership of the Leadership Mayor Weiers, the people of Glendale, surrounding cities, including the Glendale Chamber, where we’ve been a member since 1994. We plan to renew our membership again with the Glendale Chamber of Commerce and will continue to support the Glendale Community. My comments and post is simply to uplift the Mayor who’s done a fantastic job. The article is public knowledge and we simply are being informative – where everyone has their right to their own opinion. We’ve proved over many years that Ideal Insurance Agency is a peacemaker and we continue to help our customers with their insurance needs.”

Heidt:

“Again, you certainly can uplift whomever you wish, however when it comes to the nature of these situations related to the Chambers, you are not informed and just because someone does something nice does at times does not mean they don’t do things harmful or bad. You really shouldn’t’ let yourself be a pawn in the mayors nonsense. But then again, you are free to do what you wish, very unfortunate if you ask me!”

Heidt then personally attacks his long standing, 30-year Chamber member by calling him “out of touch, lacking knowledge regarding everything, not informed, and a pawn.” Is this taking the high road as a leader of a major organization by publicly calling a member names? You be the judge.

Note that this has been Mr. Heidt’s war. In some instances, he has acted publicly to make known his personal and social grievances. Not so with the city. Some references I made to certain events have never been made public by the city…till now and only in very general terms. Over the many years of the relationship between the two entities, there have been occasional differences. But never has such a public display of animosity been made.

The Mayor and City Council made the decision to withdraw from the Chamber. It was generally felt that Mr. Heidt’s public comments and actions were not in the best interest of the city. It is ironic. When you look at the Chamber’s federal tax returns, under line 14, Activity Description, the response is “Promote the City of Glendale.”

In today’s economic climate, it would seem that the primary goal of Mr. Heidt would be the promotion of the interests of small, Glendale businesses, some of whom continue to struggle in this volatile economic environment. Rather, Mr. Heidt’s agenda seems to be focused on social issues which is fine in a healthy economy when your membership can afford to take stances that could alienate some of their consumers. It is never permissible as the visible leader of a large organization to air grievances in public especially those of a personal nature. It is simply not professional.

I have transcribed Mr. Heidt’s remarks made at the City Council voting meeting of March 14, 2023. Here they are in their entirety:

Robert Heidt transcript from regular council mtg of March 14, 2023\

35:53: “Good evening. Robert Height, President and CEO of the Glendale Chamber of Commerce. While heated discourse between the Glendale Chamber and the City of Glendale has sometimes occurred, this is the very process that has led to some of the most productive outcomes for both business and community.

“Most recently, it has become abundantly clear that Mayor Weiers has moved well beyond discourse. Instead he has intentionally engaged in tactics and behavior designed to damage me personally and to bring financial harm to the Glendale Chamber of Commerce Mayor Weiers has used his position and his perception of power to both craft and lodge a crusade of destruction. While his attempts to contact and negatively influence chamber members, investors, key partners, community members has (sic) largely failed.

“We will weather this storm. His intentional actions has (sic) impacted the good work of a nearly 100 year old institution. An institution that ultimately drives sales tax revenue for the businesses of our community…your budget.

“You may ask, how we know this. Quite simply, several of our members have reached out to me, our board of directors and other (unintelligible) partners after his attempts at sabotage. Furthermore, past attempts by Mayor Weiers to interfere with my personal employment contract have resulted in failure.

“As President and CEO of the Glendale Chamber of Commerce and as a representative of the business community there are times when opinions may differ. However, the Mayor’s underhanded maneuvers to jeopardize the stability of the organization I represent and my personal welfare are nothing more that the tactics of a bully. I would like to remind you of similar bullying situations where a parking attendant lost his job due to mayoral tactics The same attendant that later sued and prevailed. “After consultation with other professionals including those in the legal field, defamatory behavior such as this may jeopardize you personally, Mr. Mayor, or the city if we must take legal action. It is my desire and that of the Chamber Board of Directors, that bringing this situation to light, that further slanderous behavior will cease and desist. In closing, it is my hope that the safety and security of both me and the organization I represent remain top of mind of all of you here tonight. I remain optimistic. At the end, we are stronger together. And you know the saddest part, Mr. Mayor? I actually once believed in you. I no longer do.”

I should note that the parking attendant which Mr. Heidt referenced has been extremely nasty to me as well. When I attempted to get assistance to find a handicapped parking space, he refused to assist and made disparaging remarks. Others using the parking garage during his time of service have related similar instances to me. This person had no business working in such a publicly oriented position. So, it came as no surprise that the Mayor stood up to this bully. I would also clarify that Mr. Heidt left the impression that the city was sued. That is not true. Once again, he lied by omission. The parking attendant’s employer was sued, not the city.

Mr. Heidt’s remarks were highly personal and inflammatory. No specific facts were offered. Rather there is a lot of mudslinging and innuendo as well as threats of legal action.

Yet the same evening, other speakers came forward in a highly professional manner. Yvonne Knaack, former Glendale Councilmember and Vice Mayor, who has been with the Chamber for many years did direct her remarks to the city’s leaving the Chamber. She took the high road and cited the mutual benefits of both organizations working together and suggested that the city reconsider its position.  David Mitchell, a Glendale resident, and another respected, long-time member of the Chamber commended the city and Mayor Weiers, for past actions and long-standing participation in the Chamber. Both spoke without accusations or the use of inflammatory rhetoric. They are to be commended for their comments.

The worst part was Mr. Heidt’s closing. He claimed optimism and unity and then undermined that sentiment by rejecting the Mayor and any attempt to rebuild the relationship. It appears that Mr. Heidt joins the Mayor only when it aligns with Mr. Heidt’s personal agenda. It is not appropriate for such a publicly visible leader to use the organization to foster his personal, social agenda.

He has so alienated some Glendale business leaders as well as some former employees that they have simply left the organization. He has moved the goals and mission of the organization to one of a social and political agenda no longer in the best interests of his membership or the city he professes to promote. It makes one wonder, is he still the right person for this job?

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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.

Lately I have been receiving a lot of email regarding the proposed development of the property located at the southwest corner of 75th Avenue and Bethany Home Road. Let’s review what surrounds it. Across Bethany on the northwest corner is a residential subdivision. On the northeast corner Beezer Homes is currently building a residential subdivision. On the southeast corner sits a CVS Pharmacy. Immediately to the west of the site is a Glendale Elementary School building. The district closed it as a school and has turned it into a community resource center for those in need of social services. To the immediate south of the site is the dearly beloved and iconic Tolmachoff Farm. It is a treasure and loved by all. Who hasn’t purchased fresh produce there or visited during the Halloween season?

The 3.7-acre site is currently zoned for Commercial Office and has been for many years. I would note that for many years the CVS site was also zoned for Commercial Office and its zoning was changed to C-1 to allow for the pharmacy.

Residents in the area are upset because the site has been sold to a developer who wishes to construct up to 4 retail uses on the site. Let’s dig a little deeper into the situation. The land was owned for many, many years by members of the Tolmachoff clan. Did the Tolmachoff farm owners reach out to the Tolmachoff property owners and make an offer to buy the parcel? Were they unable to come to terms? Who knows? I don’t but I would think that it existed as an option. For whatever reason, that didn’t happen.

So, the parcel was sold as is, current zoning as a Commercial Office site. Think about it, it is certainly not an ideal location for an insurance office or a doctor’s office. These kinds of offices rely in part on foot traffic generated on a commercially zoned retail site. It is logical that the developer would ask for a retail zoning designation.

The community fear is, will this be the nail in the coffin for Tolmachoff Farm? I hope not and I think not. It remains a very popular and viable operation. I have had no recent conversations with Tolmachoff Farm but I suspect they are feeling the pressure of urban encroachment.

Would they sell? I would think ‘yes’ at some point but here’s their dilemma. Right now their land is zoned Agriculture. If they were to sell it would be contingent upon a buyer getting approved rezoning. What’s the most expensive land to sell? Land for multi-family. I suspect if the Tolmachoff farm is ever sold it will be contingent upon the buyer getting the land rezoned for multi-family. The community would be up in arms and fight such a request tooth and nail. If the Farm ever leaves, the only option is to build a residential subdivision on that land. There is no other option.

© Joyce Clark, 2023     

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.

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 wanted to write this blog since I hosted my Yucca district meeting on December 1st. Do you ever have times when other demands take priority? Well, that’s been the case for the past two weeks.

First, I must apologize to the residents of my district. Every year I send out Spring/Summer and Fall/Winter editions of my newsletter to every homeowner in the district. I planned for its mailing on November 15th because it announced the date, location and agenda for my Dec. 1st district meeting. Everything conspired against my plan. The printing company’s equipment went down and the mailing company had a lot employees out with Covid. Instead of mailing out my newsletter by November 15th, it was mailed on December 1st, the day of my district meeting. To say that I was upset would be an understatement. Suffice to say, I will be using a new printer and mailing company.

I still had excellent attendance of about 50 people as I had announced the meeting on social media. Nevertheless, I have heard from many that they wished they had known and were disappointed in not being able to attend.

I want to publicly acknowledge and thank Dale Adams, Manger of the Desert Diamond Arena (formerly Gila River Arena) and Nicole Jensen, Special Events Director for their generosity in providing the Dos Equis Lounge and the wonderful food. Even though it was outdoors on a frosty December evening, the lounge was warm and inviting with heaters throughout the area. The food was very, very good. Everyone was so pleased with the venue that I plan to use it again for my Spring District Meeting.

There is something you can do to make sure you don’t miss out on district or city-wide events. Subscribe to my weekly E Newsletter that comes out every Thursday. For three weeks prior to the district meeting, information about the meeting was offered in the E Newsletter. It’s ridiculously easy to subscribe. Take your phone and take a photo of the QR code below. It will take you directly to the subscribe page for my weekly digital newsletter. Fill out the form and submit. That’s it. It will take you less than 3 minutes to become a subscriber.

QR code for digital E Newsletter

Here’s a recap of what was discussed at the district meeting. City Manager Kevin Phelps presented information on the growth in the Westgate Zanjero area and the New Frontier area.

 1.The Westgate/Zanjero area is very complex so it is divided into 4 quadrants. The first  quadrant is north of Glendale Avenue from 91st Avenue to the Loop 101. All of the projects have either been recently completed or have been approved and will be complete by the end of 2023. It has 6 apartment complexes: Zanjero II, Zanjero III, Bungalows at Westgate, Mera at Westgate, Zanjero Assisted Living and Capistrano. There are 2 commerical areas: En Fuego which already has Raising Cane’s, Starbucks and Red Robin with more to come; and Northern Crossing with unidentified tenants to date. This area also has 2 new hotels, Cambria and Marriot.

2. The second quadrant is south of Glendale Avenue between 91st Avenue and the Loop 101. There are 6 apartment complexes: Glen 91, the District at Westgate, Broadstone at Westgate, Copper Falls, Acero, Urban 95 and Cardinals 95. There are 12 commercial projects: Bruster’s, Chicken N Pickle, Popstroke Golf, Eegees Salad and Go, Texas Roadhouse, MGM Sports Book at Sportsmans Park, Heritage at Sportsmans Park, Sunrise PreSchool, 91st Center at Camelback, Popeye’s, VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park.

3. The third quadrant is north of Glendale Avenue and west of the Loop 101. There are 4 apartment complexes: Springs at Westgate, Ariva Villa and Flats, Prose and Ridgehouse. There are 8 commercial projects: Northern Parkway Self Storage, Maplewood Cabinets, Rainbow Ryders, Westgate Medical Office Building, Desert River Mixed Use Planned Area Development, 99th Avenue Mixed Use Planned Area Development, Quik Trip and Cobblestone Carwash.

4. The fourth quadrant is south of Glendale Avenue and west of the Loop 101. There are 6 commercial areas: Vision 2 – a mixed use Planned Area Development that includes Ferge Ball Park Apartments, Main Street – a mixed use Planned Area Development that includes an unnamed apartment complex, Andrade Indoor Karting, Holiday Inn, Camelback Self Storage and Cornerstone at Camelback – a mixed use Planned Area Development.

Lastly, Mr. Phelps spoke of the New Frontier area. It includes projects such as Williams-Sonoma, Nestle, Red Bull, White Claw, Walmart and Amazon. These are just a few out of the two dozen projects in the area. To date there is 11+ million square feet either built, under construction, approved and in design review creating over 6,600 new jobs. Another 11+ million square feet is specutively under construction with no identified tenants to date promising thousands more new jobs. With the prospect of approximately ten to twelve thousand new jobs, the Loop 303 corridor has become an employment powerhouse in the Valley.

Not included in the presentation are at least 6 residential subdivisions under construction or in design review in the district. The largest of these subdivisions is called “Legacy” (450 homes) and will redevelop the Rovey cattle farm on Northern Avenue and 75th Avenue. Soon, the smells wafting from the cattle will be a distant memory.

After Mr. Phelps’ presentation, I presented several other topics. The first was the Beautify Yucca District Grant Program. Applications for 2023 will be available in January of 2023 and information will be available in my weekly digital E Newsletter. The winners of the 2022 Beautify Yucca District Grant Program are: Mike Zaremba’s project to do a make over of a dead end street in his subdivision; Edgar Hernandez’ 2 new benches in the Grand Canal Linear Park and Tom Traw’s monument sign construction for his subdivision. Below are photos of the projects. For more information, please contact Sbeck@glendaleaz.com .

Edgar Hernandez and his wife with one of the two new benches

Mike Zaremba’s new dead end

Tom Traw’s subdivision entry monument signage

 

 

 

 

 

 

I announced that construction of the sports fields will begin in 2023. This past Tuesday, city council approved an additional allocation of $4 million toward the project bringing the total cost of Phase I of the sports fields at over $11 million. Just some of the elements include: 8 lighted pickleball courts, 3 lighted soccer fields, a multi-use turf area, and walking paths.

I have revisited with staff the concept of expansion of a 75 person meeting space expansion at the library at a cost of  $1.7 million. I have decided that there is a better way to approach the lack of meeting space. I am asking that a portion of the $1.7 million be used to fund the design of the Recreation and Aquatics Center. Once the design is complete it will be easier to get the funding to begin construction. I will be asking that the balance remaining of the $1.7 million be used for the sports fields to add additional elements that would not be included in Phase I of its construction.

Constituents continually ask the status of 83rd Avenue between Glendale Avenue and Northern Avenue that I refer to as “Alligator Alley.” Here is the status. There are 16 property owners with right of way along both sides of 83rd Avenue. To date, 11 of them have agreed to cede right of way. There are 5 hold outs with which the city continues to negotiate. If the city is not successful then those rights of way will go through condemnation. Once all of the rights of way have been acquired, the city can do the final design of the street. Once that is done, funding will have to be allocated. This is a project with over a $2 million price tag and it may require being part of the bonding authority that the city will be asking residents to approve.

I have highlighted the significant portions of our presentations. Of course, there was more, but I don’t think you want to read a book!

The next time I promise my mailed district newsletter will be received by you with an announcement for my next district meeting and will be received in time so that you can plan to attend. It was a good meeting packed with information.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

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.

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.

There is so much being offered at my next district wide meeting on December 1, 2022, at 6 pm that I felt it would be helpful to put all of the information in a blog.

Let’s start with parking. Here is a map that shows you where to park:

Everyone enters at Gate 3 of the arena. Please park in the red parking lot marked WEST VIP. Should that parking lot fill up, please park in the SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WESTGATE LOT 5.    These lots are free. Most of the other lots and the Renaissance parking garage charge a fee for parking.

As for any arena or stadium event, there is a bag policy. Bags should be 4 ½ X 6 ½ inches. Items will be searched. Prohibited items are firearms, knives, alcohol, drugs or paraphernalia.

The meeting site is the Dos Equis Lounge on the second floor of the arena. It is an outside lounge. There will be heaters, but I suggest you dress warmly.

Refreshments are courtesy of Desert Diamond Arena. I want to personally thank Dale Adams, Arena Manager and Jenae Nelson, Director of Special Events for their assistance and generosity. Here is the menu. So save your appetite:

We have a jam packed agenda featuring Glendale’s City Manager, Kevin Phelps. Mr. Phelps will share information on the Downtown City Hall Campus Redevelopment Project and the renovation of this very arena.

I have invited the 3 recipients of the first Yucca District Beautification Award Grant Program to share their experiences and to show you the results of their efforts.

There is so much development occurring in the district that I have prepared graphics to show you what and where and will walk you through the projects. The highlighted areas of development will be the Westgate/Zanjero/Ballpark Blvd. area and the Loop 303 area.

Please save the date. Everyone is welcome. We always reserve time for residents’ questions.

I’m looking forward to seeing everyone again.

© Joyce Clark, 2022      

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.