Jan 25

25

Turner and Conchas Gunning for Baldenegro

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 25, 2025
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Code Department • Downtown Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Velma Teague Library | Tagged With: City of Glendale, Councilmember Conchas, Councilmember Leanandro Baldenegro, Councilmember Turner, Ocotillo District, recall election threatened, Rory Goree, Warren Wilfong | 1 Comment

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.

As the Yucca District Councilmember, I worked with Leandro Baldenegro, appointed to represent the Ocotillo District, for 8 months until I retired. During that time, we did not agree on every issue but neither of us harbored ill will toward the other. We had mutual respect for one another, and it remains to this day.

When Jamie Aldama resigned, according to the city charter, it became council’s responsibility to appoint a person to fill that seat until the next regular election in the Spring of 2026. There were many applicants that applied for the appointment. The council narrowed the long list down to five applicants. Each of them was interviewed and the majority chose Mr. Baldenegro. He was very impressive and innately understood the role of a councilmember. It was noticed that some councilmembers did not support his appointment because they had others in mind, presumably more sympathetic to their agendas and whom, they counted on to support those agendas.

Councilmember Baldenegro has since proven to be a hard-working and dedicated councilmember. He is smart and well-grounded. He is humble and caring. He believes in faith, family, friends and the people of his district. He has lived in the district his entire life and loves it. He genuinely wants to lift the people of his district up. He knows the district and he knows those who live there. He is not a typical politician pushing his own agenda.

He is committed to reaching out to the people of the district and soliciting their opinions on the issues that matter to them. In fact, he has a regular meeting for his constituents before every council workshop on alternate Tuesdays.. He truly listens to his constituents and is not afraid to change his stance when presented with sound, well-reasoned arguments, as seen with the Velma Teague Library decision. He had originally supported the move of the library because he believed a new library would offer more content and events to children and their families. It would also have offered the opportunity to become a high-tech library that would provide the tech tools of the 21^st Century. He listened to his constituents. They are the ones who convinced him that the best option would be to keep the library in its present location. It is rare for an elected official to be willing to publicly change a position once declared. Councilmember Baldenegro was not afraid to do so.

Turner appears to be targeting Baldenegro not out of personal dislike but to create a new majority on the council. Turner already enjoys support from Councilmembers Tolmachoff and Conchas. Those three are desperately seeking to gain a fourth member of their coalition to become the new majority on council. If they should succeed, Glendale’s city council will become ‘woke’, similar to the disaster that California has become. God help us all.

Make no mistake. Turner and Conchas appear to be behind the recall movement targeting Councilmember Baldenegro. This recall effort against Baldenegro seems driven by political motives rather than genuine concern for the district. How dare Baldenegro have an opinion on the library and how dare he change his opinion. They will use this and other disinformation to try to defeat Baldenegro. It promises to get ugly.

They are courting the disaffected downtown crowd and the pro-Aldama crowd. Two members of the pro-Aldama faction to watch are Warren Wilfong and Rory Goree. I have always been friends with Warren Wilfong but he has an Achilles Heel. That is the poor performance of the Code Department. He is obsessed with that issue. If you do not share his view on this issue, he has no use for you. I’m sure he would love to run for the Ocotillo seat.

However, he has competition that appears to have the inside track with Turner and Conchas, Rory Goree. If you watch council voting meetings, Goree makes it a point to speak at every one. Why? Public comments are televised and Goree gets face time and greater recognition. Unfortunately, only about 11 people actually watch city council meetings. Oh well.

Conchas announced in his last week’s digital newsletter a press conference in support of the library issue and guess who is hosting it? If you said Rory Goree, you would be correct. I would not be surprised if Goree announced his support for the recall of Baldenegro and his candidacy for the Ocotillo district at this press conference. It is required that when a recall petition is circulated, an opposing candidate must be identified on the petition.

I urge Ocotillo residents to continue supporting Councilmember Baldenegro, who has demonstrated honesty and integrity. If the Turner-Conchas- pro Aldama- downtown disaffected factions desire change, they know full well that the next regularly scheduled election for the Ocotillo district councilmember will occur in the Spring of 2026, a year from now. Anyone interested in running will be able to pull a candidate packet this Winter. A recall election before the regular 2026 election is costly for all of Glendale’s taxpayers.

Ocotillo residents can stop this by simply not signing the recall petition. If the leaders of this insurrection do not obtain enough signatures, there will be no election until the regular one in the Spring of 2026 and Councilmember Baldenegro will continue to represent the Ocotillo district residents until then.

Shame on those pushing this costly and untimely recall for their political agendas over the interests of Glendale residents.

^{© 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.}

Nov 23

9

Heroes Park sports fields coming

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 9, 2023
Posted in Cactus District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Heroes Lake • Heroes Park • Ocotillo District • West Branch Library • Yucca district | Tagged With: Cactus District, children's play area, City of Glendale, dog park, Heroes Park, Ocotillo District, pickleball courts, Recreation/Aquatic Center, soccer fields, sports fields complex, Yucca district | 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 am so pleased and excited to give you an update on the Heroes Park sports fields. I expect construction to begin early next year (2024) and to be completed by December 2024. However, an additional hurdle will be to gain council approval for additional funding for the project. Due to continued inflation price increases for all components, it will require council approval for the additional cost increase. Council approval will be sought later this month (November).

I have included the final conceptual, but it may be hard to read so I will offer some of the more prominent elements for you. The sports fields complex’s location is to the northeast of the existent library and directly north of the existing ramadas. The main components are 3 soccer fields. There are 8 pickle ball courts with shade sails and 3 adjoining ramadas. A centralized, large ramada and restroom is just south of the soccer fields.

In between the 2 large open lawns is a children’s play area. South of the pickle ball courts is a shaded picnic area. South of the picnic area is a food truck court designed specifically to encourage food trucks to come to the park. Southeast of the picnic area and food court area is a 1.6-acre dog park.

North of the sports fields is a pollinator garden and a fitness loop with fitness nodes. There is a generous amount of landscape buffering between the sports fields and the homes to the north and east of the park. A generous and shaded pathway is provided between the library and the sports fields area as well as a raised intersection and crosswalk from the existing ramadas to the sports fields. Included are 390 parking spaces located to the east and west of the sports fields.

You know, this park was approved by the city in 1998, 25 years ago. During my years in office, I have consistently advocated for its completion. I have been successful in getting a library that can expand, a fishing lake and now the sports fields complex.

This area of Glendale warrants the park’s completion, including finally, the design and construction of the long-awaited Recreation/Aquatic Center. With all the new residential construction of single-family homes as well as 15 apartment complexes, the population of the Yucca district has exploded from 41,000 to an estimated 55,000 people. The tremendous population growth that has occurred is now seeking recreational opportunities.

It isn’t just the people of the Yucca district that will benefit from a Recreation/Aquatic Center at Heroes Park, but the residents of the Ocotillo and Cactus districts will benefit as well. Did you know that nearly 70% percent of all the city’s recreational programming occurs at Foothills Recreation/Aquatic Center? For all who live in south Glendale it’s a 10-mile trip, one way, to Foothills. That’s a long haul for many families. A Recreation/Aquatic Center at Heroes Park will redress this imbalance and provide programming for many families and children in south Glendale. It’s time…

I want to thank the councilmembers who have remained steadfast in the city’s pledge to finish this park. It simply would not have occurred without their support.

It would be wonderful if you would take the time to thank them as well and ask for their support in completing Heroes Park by approving the funding for the design and construction of the last element – the Recreation/Aquatic Center by emailing them at:

^{© Joyce Clark, 2023}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Jan 22

15

Tidbits in a New Year

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 15, 2022
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • Blogs • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale and the NFL Super Bowl • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale finances • Heroes Park • Ocotillo District • Westgate • Yucca district | Tagged With: Capital Improvement Program, City Hall Complex, City of Glendale, Coyotes, Crystal Island Lagoon Resort, Gila River Arena, Heroes Park lake, inflation, Loop 303 area, Ocotillo District, redistricting boundaries, sanitation rate increase, Westgate, Yucca district | 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 haven’t written for awhile simply because being a Glendale City councilmember is more complicated and busier than ever. It takes a minimum of 3 hours and often days to write, edit and publish one blog. I miss writing and I need to make a concerted effort to carve out the time to do so. Be that as it may, there are many events of which to make note. Most are not enough for a full blog on their own but should be recognized.

Arguably, the most important recent event is the Grand Opening of Heroes Regional Park Lake. While the celebration was occurring, people were already catching fish. About 100 residents came to the ceremony and many expressed their gratitude to see this wonderful addition to the park. Next up will be to get some sports fields constructed followed by the biggest, most expensive ticket item, the Recreation & Aquatics Center.

Inflation is killing all of us, including cities. Yesterday I filled up my car to the tune of $56. Before Biden that same tank of gas cost me about $25 or $30. My weekly grocery bill has increased by about 40%. Then there are supply chain issues. My local Safeway has had bare shelves, especially in the pasta and chicken sections. They haven’t had any chicken for the past 10 days.

This situation is rough on people on a fixed income, like me and obviously on the poor. From what we all hear it will continue throughout 2022 and we can expect prices to go even higher. The same holds true for cities. For instance, Glendale uses a lot of chemicals to treat its water supply. Those same chemical prices have risen about 30%. This same scenario goes for everything from copy paper, cleaning supplies to vehicle parts and maintenance. While Glendale is earning more revenue than ever before it is paying higher prices than ever before.

Development in the Loop 303 area continues to boom. Several new projects have been announced and there continues to be more in the pipeline. The industry has recognized that Glendale’s “New Frontier” is an established job corridor in the Valley.

Westgate continues to thrive with new development as well. After some internal delays on the part of the developer, Tiger Woods’ Pop Stoke will begin construction any day and is slated to be completed this fall. To the east of the AMC theater, a pickle ball complex complete with a restaurant and bar and rental facilities, ala Top Golf, is slated to start construction in the near future and is expected to be open prior to the Super Bowl. The Thirsty Lion, a 2-story restaurant and bar, situated between the arena and the Renaissance Hotel, is about to start construction as well. A new concept restaurant, exclusively serving some of the most decadent desserts you can possibly imagine, will take the place of the Saddle Ranch Chop House.

Let’s not forget the Crystal Lagoon Island Resort development. I continue to believe it is the most significant development ever to occur within Glendale. It is a mini-Disneyland without the $100+ a day charge per person to enter. Expect about 12 million visitors a year. It will contribute nearly $10M a year in sales tax revenue to Glendale. I expect it to draw visitors not just from the state or the southwest but nationally and even internationally. It’s a Saturday and I just checked their live camera. Earth moving equipment is busy today and the large crane was in use. If you would like to check it out, use this site: https://app.truelook.cloud/dashboard/553/923/live?code=15hm7ev0xey9jmgpfyf2jd9e0&fbclid=IwAR2VhkoN56nBnnmqMouCzAWFM9BHxtvSmNlj83REtd_D2fuA3g9vdeZ-SAY

One of the city services most loved by residents is sanitation. Recently our City Manager related that 44% of the sanitation drivers were out with Covid. Sanitation division managers and employees from other departments stepped up to fill the void resulting in no disruption in your service. Your trash was collected as usual and I bet you had no idea that Covid was crippling the department’s ability to service you. Yet I recently read that the same kind of situation occurred in Tempe resulting in a disruption of pick-up service for about a week. Two cities, two different ways to handle the problem.

At our next council voting meeting I will vote to approve a rate increase in sanitation. Sanitation is run by Michelle Woytenko, Director of Field Operations. Ms. Woytenko is one of the best Directors in the city of Glendale. She is no nonsense and provides excellent information and service to every resident. Our office has contacted her to report a citizen’s trash pick-up being missed and Ms. Woytenko will have someone picking it up the same day. Her explanation for a rate increase was logical and persuasive.

Speaking of money, in February the city council begins its annual budget oversight and preparation for the next fiscal year. We will begin with the Capital Improvement Program. This is the portion of the budget that lays out what infrastructure the city will build, rehabilitate, improve, or maintain for the next 5 years. It is one of the most important segments of the city budgetary process.

The city has completed its redistricting process and submitted its plan to the state and the feds for final approval. As of now, unless something dramatic occurs, the new city council boundaries are set not only for the next election in November of 2022 but for the next ten years until the next census.

There has been minimal accommodation for the tremendous growth occurring in the Yucca district. Instead of creating all districts with a population of about 41,000 the Yucca district will start with a population of 39,000. However, I contended that the accommodation is insufficient. I anticipate an additional 14,000 moving into the Yucca district in the next few years. I anticipate a population in the Yucca district of about 55,000. The Yucca district is the ‘gorilla’ of Glendale’s districts. It is the largest geographically; it accounts for about 80% of all recent and current economic development within the city; and will soon have the greatest population of all the districts. Much of the new population can be attributed to Stonehaven, a residential development between Camelback and Bethany, 83^rd to 91^st Avenues. At build-out it will contain 1,365 new homes. Another factor is the multitude of apartment complexes in the Westgate area. Westgate needs a mass of people living there to support all its retail and restaurants.

The eastern boundary between the Yucca and Ocotillo districts has changed. From Northern Avenue to Orangewood Avenue the boundary is 75^th Avenue. The east side of 75^th is in the Ocotillo District and the west side is in the Yucca district. At Orangewood Ave to Glendale Avenue the boundary is 71^st Avenue. From Glendale Avenue to Bethany Home Road the boundary is 75^th Avenue. Note that Independence Heights subdivision is now in the Ocotillo district. From Bethany Home Road to Camelback Road the boundary is 67^th Avenue. Here is a map that shows the dividing lines between the Yucca district and the Ocotillo district:

Council is moving forward on remodeling the City Hall complex. It demonstrates our commitment to downtown Glendale. The exterior look of the buildings will be updated. The parking garage, long in need of major repairs, will be rehabilitated. The concept of offering free, live entertainment year round at the city amphitheater will continue in a newly reconfigured and updated area. Murphy Park will receive an update as well.

You may have noticed that I am the only councilmember to consistently vote ‘no’ on the city’s awarding of 5-year contracts to vendors of services and supplies. I do so for several reasons. A 5-year contract is longer than a city council term of office which is 4 years. That results in no continuity of oversight by the council. If a new councilmember comes in there is no knowledge of the existing contract or its terms or pricing. In addition, the contracts are often for ordinary goods or services and 5-year contracts for those items do not create a competitive atmosphere. Some say a 5-year contract is good because it locks in prices for 5 years even during inflationary periods such as now. Not so, quite a few contracts have come before us lately as amended seeking our approval for an increase. In all cases, the vendors are asking for increases to cover inflationary costs. So a 5-year contract does not lock in prices during the term of the contract. In addition, the same vendor who asked for a price increase, if prices decline, never, ever, comes back to offer the city an adjusted lower cost to reflect that decline. It’s all one way and always higher. I believe contracts should be no longer than 3 years and then put out for bid again.

Lastly, a few thoughts about the city owned Gila River Arena and the Coyotes. The city was not bluffing or positioning itself for a better lease deal with the Coyotes when it terminated the lease agreement. The city council has approved a contract with HKO to rehabilitate the arena. Deliberately moving from a sports venue to an entertainment venue requires a venue that is comfortable and welcoming to its attendees. After years of flaky ownership – Ellman, Moyes, LeBlanc, Barroway, etc., a consistently losing team and financial difficulties, it’s fair to say enough is enough. We wish the Coyotes well and harbor no ill will. It’s up to the Tempe city council to decide if they can do better. I would simply ask them to consider these questions: Does each member of the council believe there is a bond of trust between themselves and the current ownership group? Has Tempe’s staff done its due diligence, and can it demonstrate that the ownership group has the finances to invest into such a project? Will the ownership want financial contributions from the city of Tempe and does the city have the bond capacity for such a project? In an election year how will Tempe residents react to any deal that requires the city to spend taxpayer dollars for another sports arena in the Valley?

This new year will be interesting to say the least. Glendale is in the strongest financial position it has had for years. We will weather this inflationary period and come out on the other side, stronger and more resilient. We have the funds to expend on one-time projects that will benefit our citizens and create a better, more vibrant Glendale.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Sep 21

8

It’s time to redistrict Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 8, 2021
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Phoenix Metro issues • Sahuaro District • Yucca district | Tagged With: Barrel district, Cactus District, Census 2020, Cholla district, City of Glendale, Ocotillo District, redistricting, Sahuaro district, Yucca district | 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.

Every ten years, Glendale is required to redraw its City Council districts based on data from the U.S. Census. The process is called redistricting and the goal is to make sure each Council district has approximately equal population.

Let’s begin with the Census data for 2020 provided to the city. On July of 2019 the Census Bureau’s estimated population for Glendale was 252,387. It’s final, official count of Glendale is 248,325.

Everyone in the State believes the Bureau’s count is wrong and the population was undercounted. Experts said they expected to see even higher rates of growth. William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., who specializes in census data and urban populations, said he expected to see a higher growth rate in Arizona. Cities with council districts redraw those boundaries every 10 years after each U.S. census.

Four cities looking to redistrict by the next election in November include:

Mesa
Glendale
Peoria
Buckeye

Other Valley cities, such as Chandler, Scottsdale and Goodyear, don’t use a district system, instead electing council members on a citywide basis.

Look at this chart for Glendale.

City-data.com got its numbers from the Maricopa County estimates. I have no idea how the County arrived at these figures.

Please note, according to Census data, that every council district but the Yucca district added from 2,000+ in population to 6,000+ in population. Yet the Yucca district supposedly lost 315. Can anyone in their right mind believe this? The Yucca district has exploded over the last 10 years with new residential subdivisions (Copper Cove, Bethany Ranch and Positano to name just a few) as well as new apartment complexes. Yet, in the past ten years the Yucca district lost 315 people? Ridiculous. It’s nuts. The data makes no sense. The city should be requesting a recount of the Yucca district data. Someone, somewhere screwed up. If you put garbage in, garbage comes out. I suspect that the Yucca district, in fact, gained about 10,000 in population over the last decade.

Not only that, but the Census Bureau has also been late in releasing census block data (will do so this month, September) on population counts, the very data needed to redraw districts. As a result, Glendale has until December 15, 2021, about 3 months, to submit their new council districts to the State.

Here are the guidelines, city council adopted, that shall be used to redraw the districts:

Each district shall respect communities of interest as much as possible;
District borders shall follow visible natural and man-made geographical and topographical features as much as possible;
District borders shall be drawn to avoid locating more than one current Councilmember in any one district as much as possible;
Each new district shall preserve the corresponding existing district’s population and territory as much as possible;
Districts known to be areas of higher-than-average population growth in the two to five years following redistricting, based on development projects that have received final plat approval from the City, may be under populated within the population deviation amounts allowed by law;
To the extent possible, consistent with constitutional law and the requirements of federal and state statutes, each district shall contain a substantially equal number of electors.

The city has created a dedicated web site allowing all Glendale residents not only information about the redistricting process but on or about September 16^th the public can see the population data by census block and draw their own redistricting maps. Here is the link to the web site:

https://glendaleaz.com/your_government/connect/departments/city_clerk/redistricting/current_district_map

You can learn more and get involved by attending one of three public Glendale workshops. By the time of these city hosted workshops occur the appropriate data should be available on the city website to any citizen who wants it. Here are the workshop dates:

Monday, September 20	2:00 p.m.	Glendale City Council Chambers 5850 W. Glendale Avenue
Wednesday, September 22	10:00 a.m.	Glendale Main Library Auditorium 5959 W. Brown Street
Monday, September 27	6:30 p.m.	Foothills Recreation & Aquatics Center Coyote Room 5600 W. Union Hills Drive

Why should we focus on redistricting whether it be on a local, state or national level? We all vote for those representatives that most closely align with our values and goals. With redrawn districts you may find that now you are in a district that has a representative with whose values and goals with which you disagree. By involving yourselves in the redistricting process your input will contribute toward making sure that your representative actually represents you.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2021}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Feb 21

27

Glendale Elementary School District meeting

Posted by Joyce Clark on February 27, 2021
Posted in City of Glendale | Tagged With: Cactus District, City of Glendale, Feb 25 Board meeting, Glendale Elementary School District, Ocotillo District, proposal to close 5 schools, Yucca district | 4 Comments

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 Thursday, February 25, 2021, the Glendale Elementary School District (GESD) held a meeting to take comments from the public regarding its plan to close 5 elementary schools within its district boundaries. I am providing information about this meeting to keep my Yucca district residents informed. Here is the link to the video of the meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehx1KVJCOik

There is one misconception I would like to clear up. The western boundary of GESD is 83^rd Avenue. Some speakers asked what would happen because of the development of Stonehaven, between 83^rd and 91^st Avenues, Bethany Home Road to Camelback Road. Those 1,365 homes reside in the Pendergast Elementary School District (PESD) and those children will not be attending any schools in the GESD.

One of the speakers was Martin Nowakowski, a Yucca district resident, and my appointee on the Glendale Planning Commission. He spoke from 1:38:50 to 1:43:32. He made several particularly good points that, in my opinion, deserve further exploration and answers from the GESD Board.

He stated that the process has been flawed. The proposal to close schools during the COVID pandemic is ill advised. The pandemic has been an impediment to allow full participation by the community and has resulted in little to no parent involvement.
He called for a forensic audit of GESD’s budget and contended that community perception is there is a pattern of “top heavy” spending.
He questioned what costs for transportation would be incurred because of a realignment of pupil attendance boundaries.
He said that the district uses the rationale for closures because of declining student enrollment and asked how many students are learning online.
He expressed concern about the possibility of increasing class sizes. He questioned will there continue to be class sizes of less than 30 students per class and if that number increases, how does it affect the quality of education for struggling students?
Lastly, he characterized the school board’s actions as discriminatory by focusing on closing schools in more disadvantaged neighborhoods and catering to wealthier neighborhoods by keeping those schools intact. He referred to Isaac Imes as being known as the “Mexican school.”

It appears that the community is genuinely concerned and to date has expressed nothing but opposition to the GESD proposal. Perhaps the Board would be advised to slow its proposal down until it has made a full explanation to its community as to why their actions are necessary. There may be good reasons and then again, there may not be but until the community understands why the Board has chosen this path it will be met with distrust and anger. Just think about all those parents who have no idea what is about to happen to their children…and there will be many.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2021}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Oct 18

18

St. Vincent de Paul building: package-in-a-bow deal or down at the heel deal?

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 18, 2018
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Downtown Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues | Tagged With: C Plus D Industry, City of Glendale, Facility Management Group analysis, Lisa Amos Real Estate Program Manager, Ocotillo District, St. Vincent de Pauil building | 11 Comments

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.

Since city council sold the St. Vincent de Paul building in downtown Glendale to C Plus D Industry in September questions have arisen about the deal. In 2008 the city purchased the building and a nearby parking lot for $735,000 with the goal of future redevelopment. For ten years it sat vacant, slowly continuing to deteriorate. At the time of purchase, no one on city council expected to recoup the purchase price and innately acknowledged that the city would have to incentivize any resale of the building.

Councilmember Ray Malnar and I submitted an Op Ed to the Glendale Star on this subject. Here is the link: https://www.glendalestar.com/glendale-star/st-vincent-de-paul-building-package-bow-deal-or-down-heel-deal .

In a recent news story Cheryl Kappes, owner of the Country Maiden, said she would have bought the building. Another downtown property owner, Richard Vangelisti, expressed the same sentiment. Keep in mind the true cost of the building is not just the $25,000. It is the sales price plus the cost of the renovation and a commitment to do so promptly. In the ten years, from 2008 to 2018, anyone could have approached the city and made an offer on the property. No one did. They may have thought about it but they never took that first major step of contacting the city with a written offer. Such an offer to purchase the property would have included a commitment toward making a significant investment to renovate the building resulting in a tax revenue producing business downtown. C Plus D Industry took that chance by making an offer that could have been rejected. They were the first to try. Now that it has been sold, suddenly there are cries of a lack of “transparency.”

What exactly did the city sell for $25,000? It sold a 60 year old building requiring total restoration with no dedicated parking. According to a Facility Management Group analysis submitted to the city in October of 2017, “It is a building that requires complete restoration. Everything but the roof structure, exterior walls and floor slab will need to be replaced.”

The Facility Management Group analysis offers an estimate of $1,225,000 to renovate the 7,000 square foot building. It goes on to report that an estimated $1,750,000 would be required to tear the building down and build a new 7,000 square foot building.

In a report prepared by Lisa Amos, Glendale’s Real Estate Program Manager, dated June 15, 2018, “If this building were in good condition and had parking, @ $40/sq ft, it could list for $280,000.” But it’s not in good condition, is 60 years old, requires a complete renovation and has no parking.

It is unrealistic to expect a retail or office developer to purchase a building with no parking spaces. Ms. Amos, in her report, states that, “Demolition was estimated at $5.00/sq ft = $35,000.” Her conclusions were, “City contribution to improvement of building condition, including new build, will not yield return at sale” or “Demolish and sell land or accept nominal sale price if Buyer accepts ‘as is’ including no parking.”

What did the city accomplish with this sale? It avoided renovation at a price of $1.2M; it avoided tearing down the building and constructing new at a cost of $1.7M; and it avoided demolition costs of $35,000.

What does the city get for selling the building for $25,000? Keep in mind, C Plus D Industry came to the city and offered to buy the building ‘as is’ while committing to renovate the building to code at a substantial cost to them, not the city. They will maintain a small showroom expecting a minimal amount of local foot traffic and will sell on site but their primary focus is on the manufacture and sale of high end furniture nationally.

An added benefit is that the city has collected zero taxes on this property for many years. Current city estimates are that C Plus D will increase taxes collected from just this one project in downtown Glendale by 10%.

C Plus D are not professional investors. As part of their commitment to the city, they must renovate within 6 months bringing it up to code. The sale is not final until they receive a Certificate of Occupancy. The city estimate to renovate is over one million dollars. That’s at city cost. C Plus D expects the renovation to cost them between $350,000 and $500,000. They won’t be paying city prices to renovate and they will also contribute sweat equity.

Keep in mind the city is not selling its parking lot which was part of the original 2008 $735,000 purchase price. Lastly, according to Ms. Amos in the above cited report, the assumption is that once the building is renovated and if it had parking, it could be listed for $280,000. Without dedicated parking, the sale price would obviously be lower than that figure.

Senior management and city council concluded that this was a good deal for Glendale’s taxpayers. There was no special treatment for the buyer. The property was sold for what it was worth. It was simply a business opportunity brought to the city that senior management and city council concluded was a good deal for Glendale’s taxpayers.

As for transparency, city land sales are rightly, according to the state’s Open Meeting Law, a subject for discussion in city council executive sessions. In a recent news story Councilmember Turner said, “It’s not always just about getting the highest dollar. But we can have a process that is open, transparent and still accomplishes our vision.” In the same story Councilmember Aldama said, “The city should be transparent in everything it does and everything it does should benefit the citizens. In hindsight, I don’t feel this sale benefits the citizens.” Their comments are disingenuous and provocative. Both of these gentlemen know that land transactions are subjects for executive session to protect the city’s position.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2018}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Sep 18

7

Aldama, democracy or dictatorship?

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 7, 2018
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2018 • O'Neil Pool • Ocotillo district election 2018 | Tagged With: City of Glendale, Councilmember Aldama, O'Neil pool, Ocotillo District | 8 Comments

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 this week’s Glendale Star there is a story on all three of Glendale’s incumbent councilmembers winning reelection. Let’s share some of the conspiracy theories Aldama claims in the article. Let’s begin with:

“As I have said before, to each his own (in their support) but when there are five current councilmembers supporting a new candidate, it says to me that there is a will to remove democracy and add a dictatorship, and that is not how we function.”
“I don’t see any reason why five would want me out, but I don’t answer to the five. I answer to my constituents in my district.”
“…And to those who opposed me, I am sorry that I fell short if that is what they feel, but I hope I can work with them to build a better relationship and work together to continue to improve the city.”
“The four councilmembers who endorsed my opponent was an attempt to curry favor with the Mayor,”
“The attempt by Mayor Jerry Weiers to unseat me and Councilman Turner was a purely political attempt to create a ‘dictatorship.’ His desire was to have a ‘yes’ council that would remove any objections to his political goals and aspirations.”

Once I was able to pick myself up off the floor after having laughed so hard that I slipped out of my chair, I decided that among other things, Aldama thinks an awful lot of himself. Does he really believe we are obsessed with him? OMG!

Poor Jamie, he’s really angry and can’t seem to figure out what happened to him and why. If he’s such a nice guy why would 5 out of 7 other councilmembers endorse his opponent? In a bout of apparent paranoia (or perhaps he’s been listening to Councilmember Turner too much) Aldama has convinced himself that Mayor Weiers is destroying democracy and had ordered the rest of us to endorse Aldama’s opponent. Sorry Jamie. There’s no “will to remove democracy and add a a dictatorship.” I’m still grinning over that one.

For those who don’t know me very well I have a reputation of taking orders from no one. I have never been a ‘yes person’. I have never felt the need to “curry favor” with the Mayor or any other member of this council. I never had a conversation with the Mayor or any Councilmember before I made my decision to endorse Emmanuel Allen or Ray Strahl. Both endorsements occurred after in-depth interviews with each and were published in my previous blogs.

Aldama can’t “see any reason why five would want me out.” It’s really quite a simple explanation. He never expressed opposition to council’s collective decisions when he had abundant opportunity to do so. Yet he would turn around and publicly oppose those very same decisions without alerting council or staff of his intentions. Aldama has lost the trust of this council. That is something very difficult to regain and occurs with action, not with words of platitude.

Several councilmembers were dismayed by Aldama’s abusive treatment of council staff leading to three council assistant resignations over time. One assistant was brought to tears. Since council assistants serve two councilmembers the situations often resulted in the leaving of a council assistant valued by the other councilmember. For a period of time the council office included a set of revolving doors. His actions created a decidely unstable atmosphere.

In his four years of service, what tangible results has Aldama produced for the people of the Ocotillo district? None. Nada. Zip. In his four years of service did you see him really push for action with regard to O’Neil Pool? When I came back into service a year and a half ago, I started to advocate not only for the completion of Heroes Park but for action regarding O’Neil Pool, abandoned in 2011. The O’Neil area was part of my council district for many years until the last city council redistricting which occurred in 2011 and the area remains important to me as I lived there for 30 years.

I resumed my council service in 2016 and as a result of my efforts, council will shortly take up the issue of the abandoned pool and allocate CDBG funds to remove it. I am not happy with staff’s proposal that provides only passive recreation on the former pool site and will continue to press for active recreational opportunities such as a splash pad where the pool once stood. Jamie had four years to make O’Neil pool a priority and failed to do so.

I noted at the Womens’ Club Candidate Forum Aldama spent almost all of his introductory speaking time thanking everyone for everything – a penchant of his at nearly every public speaking opportunity – conveniently leaving very little, if any, time to speak to the issues.

He often takes credit for successful council decisions and actions whether he supported them or not. Code enforcement is perhaps one of the most critical issues for the Ocotillo district yet it is Councilmember Malnar that has taken up the challenge of code, not Aldama. Another critical issue for Aldama’s Ocotillo district is advocacy for small businesses yet I successfully won approval from council to initiate a council business subcommittee, not Aldama. Yet Aldama has the hutzpah to say, “he is ready to continue improving the district…” How exactly Jamie? And please be specific.

Lastly, I would remind the reader that several weeks ago at a Glendale Chamber breakfast, Aldama stood before God and the breakfast attendees and accused the council of “corruption.” That wasn’t a smart move designed to ‘win friends and influence people’. It’s time Aldama came forward with facts to support his allegation or to apologize to this council. As of this writing he has not done so.

I feel sorry for Aldama for all of his decisions and actions appear to be politically motivated. If it’s good for him politically he’ll support the issue or action. He seems to have failed to learn that his job is really about representation and giving voice to the people he represents. When residents disagree it’s time to listen rather than devise payback. Goodness know the people of the Ocotillo district can use a lot of help. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that Aldama can provide it.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2018}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Aug 18

25

Glendale Primary Election Day information

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 25, 2018
Posted in Barrel district election 2018 • Cholla district election • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale election 2018 • Ocotillo district election 2018 | Tagged With: August 28, Barrel district, Bart Turner, Cholla district, City of Glendale, Emmanuel Allen, Jamie Aldama, Ocotillo District, Primary Election, Ray Strahl, Vice Mayor Lauren Tolmachoff | 7 Comments

[poll id=”31″][poll id=”30″]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 coming Tuesday, August 28^th, is Primary Election Day in Arizona. You, the voter, will select party candidates to run in the November General Election. Those candidates range from the Governor’s office down to your local Justice of the Peace. Perhaps the most important is your local city council representative. Glendale’s councilmembers have a major and direct impact on your daily life from deciding city sales tax rates to the creation of new parks in Glendale. Your district council representative will be decided in the Primary Election on Tuesday. Since Glendale’s races are non-partisan and there are only two candidates each for the Barrel and Ocotillo Districts, whoever receives the most votes will be your councilmember. They will not continue on to the General Election in November. The Cholla District has but one candidate, Vice Mayor Tolmachoff. She will automatically continue to be the Cholla Councilmember no matter what the vote total.

If you remain undecided I urge you to call the candidates directly and ask them questions about their positions on issues of importance to you. Here are their phone numbers:

Emmanuel Allen 602-488-0147
Bart Turner 623-487-3808
Ray Strahl 623-341-7614
Jamie Aldama 623-930-2249 (I could only find the main city council office number)

Below I have listed the polling locations for the Barrel and Ocotillo Districts. If you still have your Early Ballot, please fill it out and drop it off at your polling location. Voting is from 6 AM to 7 PM at all polling locations. Voting at the polls on Primary Election day is usually light. You should be able to get in, vote and get out quickly.

On Primary Election Day these are the voting locations for the voters in the Barrel District:

BUTLER APOLLO HIGH SCHOOL AUDITORIUM
8045 N 47TH AVE
GLENDALE, AZ 85302
COPPERWOOD WEST VALLEY UNITARIAN SANCTUARY
UNIVERSALIST CHURCH
5904 W CHOLLA ST
GLENDALE, AZ 85304
GEMINI FOSTERING HOPE TBD
5609 W CACTUS RD
GLENDALE, AZ 85304
GLENCROFT APOLLO HIGH SCHOOL AUDITORIUM
8045 N 47TH AVE
GLENDALE, AZ 85302
RIVIERA WEST VALLEY UNITARIAN SANCTUARY
UNIVERSALIST CHURCH
5904 W CHOLLA ST
GLENDALE, AZ 85304
SAHUARO RANCH WEST VALLEY UNITARIAN SANCTUARY
UNIVERSALIST CHURCH
5904 W CHOLLA ST
GLENDALE, AZ 85304
BERYL GLENDALE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FELLOWSHIP HALL
9661 N. 59TH AVE
GLENDALE, AZ. 85302
CARON GLENDALE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FELLOWSHIP HALL
9661 N. 59TH AVE
GLENDALE, AZ. 85302

If you are in the Barrel district here is a precinct map that may help you in figuring out which precinct is yours. There are blue tick marks in each Barrel precinct.Once you know the precinct you know your polling location.

Barrel District Precincts

On Election Day these are the voting locations for the voters in the Ocotillo District:

BETHANY PARK DON MENSENDICK SCHOOL BAND ROOM/SPECIAL ED
5535 N 67TH AVE
GLENDALE, AZ 85301
BONSALL PARK ST ANDREWS EPISCOPAL CHURCH PARISH HALL
6300 W CAMELBACK RD
GLENDALE, AZ 85301
CHALLENGER DESERT GARDEN SCHOOL LIBRARY
7020 W. OCOTILLO ROAD
GLENDALE, AZ 85303
MONTEBELLO ST ANDREWS EPISCOPAL CHURCH PARISH HALL
6300 W CAMELBACK RD,
GLENDALE, AZ 85301
MANISTEE ST ANDREWS EPISCOPAL CHURCH NARTHEX (LOBBY)
7205 N 51ST AVE
GLENDALE, AZ 85301
PECK FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH/GLENDALE FELLOWSHIP HALL
6242 N 59TH AVE,
GLENDALE, AZ 85301
TUCKEY HAROLD W SMITH SCHOOL #40 LIBRARY
6534 N 63RD AVE,
GLENDALE, AZ 85301

If you are in the Ocotillo district here is a precinct map that may help you in figuring out which precinct is yours. There are blue tick marks in each Ocotillo precinct. Once you know the precinct you know your polling location.

Ocotillo District Precincts

If you still can’t figure out where to go to vote please go to the Maricopa County Recorder site: https://recorder.maricopa.gov/elections/ . Here is their complete contact information:

Recorder and Elections Dept.
Main Downtown Office
111 S. Third Ave.
Phoenix AZ 85003
Hours: 8:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M. Monday – Friday
Phone: 602-506-3535
T.D.D. 602-506-2348

I hope you will cast your vote for Emmanuel Allen as your Ocotillo District councilmember and Ray Strahl as your Barrel District councilmember. No matter your choice please remember to vote this Tuesday, August 28^th from 6 AM to 7 PM.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2018}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Jul 18

17

First candidate campaign reports of 2018: Aldama and Allen

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 17, 2018
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale election 2018 • Ocotillo district election 2018 | Tagged With: 1st quarter 2018 campaign finance report, 4th quarter 2017 campaign finance report, City of Glendale, Emmanuel Allen, Jamie Aldama, Ocotillo District | 4 Comments

[poll id=”31″][poll id=”30″]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.

Ocotillo District Jamie Aldama: Mr. Aldama continues to be challenged in filing timely campaign reports. Apparently he did not file a 3^rd quarter report for 2017 because his 4^th quarter filing contains a cover page written by the City Clerk stating, “Per the City Clerk, Julie Bower, this reports contains contributions and expenses from a prior time in 2017 (June – September) period not already filed with the City Clerk.” Mr. Aldama’s 4^th quarter report of 2017 shows a cumulative total of $15,216.53 (all funds raised prior to October 1, 2017). He had expenses of $6,923.30. He begins the 1st quarter report with $8,293.23. The following reflect his 4^th quarter report of 2017:

Contributions of $25:

David Moreno, Hugo Tinoco, David Sandoval, Janice Nichols, Cecilia Moreno ($30), Ervin Cutwright

Contributions of $50:

Lorenzo Sierra, Maria Brunner, Patricia DiRoss Coughlin, Jim Malicki, Martin Quezada, Otoniel Navarrate, Ray Watkins, Wendi Sorensen, Richard Andrade, Jim Walsh, Frank Hernandez, Debra Stark ($49), Sally Orozco, Teddy Castro, Jerry Cipriano ($49), Ben Barcon ($49), Teresa Ramirez Lopez

Contributions of $51 to $100:

Monica Pimentel, $75; Philip Carli, $100; Greg Aldama, $100; Tom Nerini, $100; Manuel Cisneros, $100; Tio Tachias, $100; Reginald Martinez, $99; Martin Samaniego, $100

Contributions of $101 to $500:

Janice Garza, $300; Ron Ober, $250; Dennis Burke, $250; Jason Morris, $500; Francisco Gutierrez, $200; Mark Burdick, $200; Luis De La Cruz, $500; John Dick, $500; Stephen Earl, $500; Rye Semro, $250; James Miller, $500; Stephen Anderson, $200; Gregory Vogel, $500;

Contributions of $501 and over:

Shelly & Chris Thompson, $600; Mark Becker, $1,000; Daniel Ochoa, $2,500; Faris Suukar, $1,000; Jacob Long , $1,000

The Committee to Elect Ray Martinez contributed $70

Political Action Committees (PACs):

Salt River Project Political Involvement Committee, $500; United Phx Firefighters Chandler Chapter, $500; United Phx Firefighters Peoria Chapter, $500; Phoenix Firefighters Local 493, $1,000

In-Kind contributions:

Teresa Ramirez Lopez, $45.53; Christy Fritz, $400; Jack Nylund, $60

Expenses:

Aldama’s expenses are interesting. Stone Strategic Management was paid $2,469.20 to define critical issues, and to identify and to develop best strategies. Negotiation Dynamics was paid $1,389.58. This company is his campaign manager’s, Chuck Foy. The Saban Group was paid $154 to do opposition research and Christy Fritz was paid $600 for design services. Another $2,310.52 was paid out in customary services such a volunteer food, bank charges, etc.

Aldama began the first quarter of 2018 with $8,293.23. He had contributions of $9,600 and expenses of $4,029.60. He ends the first quarter of 2018 with $13,863.63.

For the first quarter of 2018 here is the breakdown:

Contributions of $100 to $500:

Tony Sawyer, $200; Paul Rovey, $250; Jason Rovey, $500; Ronald Rovey, $250; Israel Torres, $100; Rodney Jarvis, $200; Yvonne Knaack, $100; Taylor Earl, $150; Mario Diaz, $100; John Geurs, $300; Jessica Koory, $100; Edwin Bull, $250; Rhonda Cagle, $100

Contributions of $1,000 or more:

Kevin Kelly, $1,000; Stephen Earl, $1,000 (total to date, $1,500); Tohono O’Odham Nation, $2,000

Political Action Committees (PACs):

Arizona Pipe Trade 469, $2,500

Expenses:

Aldama’s expenses show Stone Strategic Management receiving another $1,740. His campaign manager, Chuck Foy, of Negotiation Dynamics was paid $424. Primary Consultants was paid $1,450 for a political mailing. $250 was paid to the Arizona Democrat Party for voter walking/mailing lists. The balance of the expense report shows usual and customary expenses. The total expenses in the first quarter of 2018 were $4,029.60.

We’ve barely gotten started and Aldama has already racked up expenses of nearly $11,000 and half of that was paid to consultants. Aldama begins his second quarter report of 2018 with $13,863.63

Ocotillo District Emmanuel Allen: Allen formed a political committee late in the 4^th quarter of 2017. To get himself started and to register his campaign committee he loaned the campaign $100. He had one contribution of $125 from Nick Simonetta resulting in a total of $225 for the 4^th quarter. Allen has a starting balance of $55.06 for his first quarterly 2018 report.

In-Kind Contributions:

Consulting services of $400 from Constatin Querard.

Expenses:

$169.94 for web hosting and establishing a campaign bank account.

Allen’s 1^st quarter report of 2018 reflects the infancy of campaign fund raising by a “newbie” who has not run for political office before. In Allen’s first quarter report of 2018 he had contributions of $1,333.35.

Contributions of $50 to $100:

Tim Cole, $100; Skye Steele, $100; Nicole Davis, $100; Geraldine Gage, $100; Lawrence Davis, $50; Keith Davis, $100; Axel Sippach, $100; Vanessa Cordova, $50; Kenneth Turner, $100; Shelby Frederick, $50; Mariana Hunter, $100; Ned Altizer, $100

Contributions of $101 to $200:

Trina Salgado, $200

In-Kind Contributions:

$600 in consulting services from Constatin Querard

Expenses:

$409.24 for food, canvassing, web site hosting, printing and bank fees.

Mr. Allen retains a balance of $914.37 to begin his second quarter of 2018 report.

My next blogs will take a look at the candidates and their positions on city issues, old and new.

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Jul 18

12

The gorilla has spoken

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 12, 2018
Posted in Barrel district election 2018 • Cholla district election • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2018 • Ocotillo district election 2018 • Referrals and Recommendations | Tagged With: Barrel district, Challenger Allen, Challenger Strahl, Cholla district, City of Glendale, Glendale Chamber of Commerce, Glendale election 2018, Incumbent Aldama, Incumbent Turner, Ocotillo District, Public Policy Council, Vice Mayor Tolmachoff | No Comments yet, please leave one

[poll id=”29″]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 July 5, 2018 the Glendale Chamber of Commerce announced its endorsements for the three city council seats to be voted upon in Glendale’s next election. The endorsements were for all three incumbents: Vice Mayor Tolmachoff from the Cholla district; Councilmember Bart Turner of the Barrel district; and Councilmember Jamie Aldama of the Ocotillo district. All candidates were interviewed and their written responses reviewed by the Chamber’s Public Policy Council. Those recommendations were then forwarded to the Board of Directors for approval. Here are the members of the Glendale Chamber’s Public Policy Council:

Bill Toops, Glendale Star, Chairperson (also serves on Board of Directors)
Steve Adams, AlphaGraphics, (also serves on Board of Directors)
Rachel Aja, Cox Communications
Kathi Beranek, Blue Cross Blue Shield (company also represented on Board of Directors)
Judy Butler, Butler Creative & Consulting
Ron Castro, BNC National Bank, (company also represented on Board of Directors)
Michael Cavaiola, Redflex Traffic Solutions
Stephanie Colbert, Chance Mikos Farmer’s Insurance
Donna Davis, Expect More Arizona
Patricia DiRoss, Salt River Project, (company also represented on Board of Directors)
Yvonne Knaack, State Farm Insurance
Matt Ligouri, Southwest Gas
Bobbi Magdaleno, Arizona State University, (also serves on Board of Directors)
Dave Mitchell, Ideal Insurance Agency
Liz Recchia, WeMar
Brent Stoddard, Director of Public Affairs, City of Glendale
Lyndia Vescio, Vescio Law Firm, (also serves on Board of Directors)
Robert Heidt, CEO Glendale Chamber of Commerce, (also serves on Board of Directors)

Here are the members of the Chamber’s Board of Directors;

Maria Brunner, Chair of the Board, OneAZ Credit Union
Lily DeBileux, Chair-Elect, Pendergast Elementary School District
Steve Adams, Treasurer, Alphgraphics
Scott Spillman, Vice Treasurer, BNC National Bank
Jean Higginbotham, Past Chair, Blue Cross Blue Shield,
Robert Heidt, CEO, Glendale Chamber
Victoria Coley, Humana
Ariana Deerman, Wells Fargo Bank
Stephanie Klingener, VitalFit Training
Kate Kochenderfer, Salt River Project
Wayne Lawson, Signarama on 51^st Avenue
Patrick McDermott, Arizona Public Service
Bobbi Magdaleno, Arizona State University
Kevin Phelps, City Manager, City of Glendale
Mary Pritchard, Pritchard Insurance Group
Richard Sherry, Dignity Health Arizona
Bill Toops, Glendale Star
Jeffrey Turney, Military & Veterans Affairs
Lynda Vescio, Vescio Law Firm
Judy Walter, Dignity Memorial
Mayor Jerry Weiers, City of Glendale

Of the 18 members of the Public Policy Council, 8 members (44%) also serve on the Board of Directors or have another person from their company serving on the Board of Directors. Once the Public Policy Council has made a recommendation for endorsement it is very probable that the Board of Directors will ratify the recommendations. After the 8 members have made a decision those same 8 companies can ratify the recommendations made to the Board of Directors needing only one more person to constitute a majority of the Board.

It is also worth noting that seven (38%) of the 18 members of the Public Policy Council members represent large companies (Cox Communications, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNC National Bank, Redflex Traffic Solutions, Salt River Project, Southwest Gas, Arizona State University). All have a Valley-wide presence. Should Valley-wide, major companies be empowered to make recommendations about local candidates for office?

What criteria were used to make their recommendations for endorsement?

“Candidates were selected who have distinguished themselves as knowledgeable and supportive (emphasis mine) of issues positively affecting the business community in the city of Glendale.”
Bill Toops, Chair of the Chamber’s Public Policy Council said, “The Glendale Chamber Board of Directors is pleased to endorse candidates who have demonstrated accessibility and collaboration (emphasis mine) in support of promoting interests most important to our local businesses.”
Robert Heidt, the Chamber’s CEO, said, “Throughout this process we heard from those running for office and have endorsed candidates who has the clearest understanding of the challenges facing the business community and those whose policies align with our initiatives (emphasis mine) to foster a pro-business environment focused on the creation of quality jobs, along with business retention and expansion.”

These criteria seem to favor incumbents. Their positions as elected officials provide many opportunities to “distinguish themselves as knowledgeable and supportive,” to have “demonstrated accessibility and collaboration,” and to have advocated for “policies that align” with the Chamber’s initiatives.

Incumbents have the decided advantage as they have the opportunity to interact with the Chamber in a variety of ways in their official capacities as well as the opportunity to approve/disapprove actions that benefit the Chamber’s interests. It’s not a level playing field. Often those running in opposition to the incumbents have no experience or knowledge of specific city initiatives or actions, especially any that could benefit the Chamber. It’s not their fault. They haven’t been playing ‘inside baseball’ for the previous four years (term of an incumbent). They simply do not have any experience serving as an elected and therefore are at a disadvantage. It takes any newly elected official time to learn how the city works, to become familiar with its policy positions and to establish relationships with various stakeholder groups within the city.

Perhaps the better criterion to be used would not to be rely upon experience (that is weighted always toward the incumbent) but rather to review candidates’ positions on the issues and which policies would be supported. If two candidates for the same office shared the same views perhaps using incumbency to tip the scales should not be the option for recommendation. Perhaps in some cases there should be no recommendation or a recommendation to support either candidate.

I remain troubled with the process used by the Chamber to select endorsements in a local campaign. It will be another two years before the Chamber issues its next set of endorsements for local office. That time might be well spent in developing a process that recognizes an incumbent’s advantage and levels the playing field for those who have never held office.

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

For "the rest of the story"

Categories

Archives

Recent comments from readers

Recent Posts

Archives

Spam Blocked

Jan 25

25

Share this:

Like this:

Nov 23

9

Share this:

Like this:

Jan 22

15

Share this:

Like this:

Sep 21

8

Share this:

Like this:

Feb 21

27

Share this:

Like this:

Oct 18

18

Share this:

Like this:

Sep 18

7

Share this:

Like this:

Aug 18

25

Share this:

Like this:

Jul 18

17

Share this:

Like this:

Jul 18

12

Share this:

Like this: