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.

On December 10, 2025, Councilmember Lupe Conchas gave a TV interview on ABC with Adam Mintzer regarding his opposition to councilmember stipends. Here are some quotes from that TV story.

In 2022 an administrative policy was initiated giving councilmembers $900 per month for incidental costs and $450 monthly for car allowances. The allowances are intended to cover personal incidental expenses, including home-office costs, internet, technology, office supplies, incidental meals, mileage and repairs. 

 In August of 2025, Councilmember Lupe Conchas brought the issue to a council workshop and called the policy “a slush fund.” Yet at one time he had no objection to it and accepted the stipend for the first 6 months of his term. Then someone whispered in his ear that this might make for a good campaign issue.

His mentor, Councilmember Bart Turner, supports Conchas’ position. He characterizes the policy as a potential conflict with existing city expense systems. “There is no data to back this policy up,” Turner said. “Feels to me like it would be double dipping to take this…and for the record, I never have.” He may not have double-dipped, but he appears to have been very cavalier in his use of taxpayer dollars for his many trips.

A majority, four of the other six councilmembers and the mayor expressed support for maintaining the current policy during that August meeting.

Councilmember Ray Malnar defended the allowances, saying he spends significant money on home-office expenses. “We are being reimbursed for legitimate business expenses,” Malnar said. “I spend a lot of money on printers. I print a lot of things at home.”

Mayor Jerry Weiers said the numbers are justified for active councilmembers. “If you work for it. If you put in time. Your mileage…I find it entirely justifiable,” Weiers said.

Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff disagreed with characterizing the policy negatively. “I don’t think our residents expect us to behave like martyrs,” Tolmachoff said.

The City of Tempe has a $12,000 stipend for councilmembers’ cars and other expenses that don’t require them to submit receipts. So, Glendale is not the only city with such a policy.

A week later, December 17, 2025, the Phoenix New Times reported that the very same Councilmember, Lupe Conchas, directly asked the public in October 2025, to send him money through ApplePay and Zelle for his personal home repairs. He says he received $650 but he expects us to take his word for it.

People who give money directly to a politician, with no transparency as to who gave how much creates an appearance problem. It could also evade campaign finance requirements. Conchas admits that he did not think about a perception problem. He appears to be either very stupid or very arrogant. In essence, he used his official position to obtain money for personal use.

He did not consult with the City Attorney. Why? Perhaps because he knew that if he had the City Attorney would have advised against it whether it was legal to do so or not.

Then there is Councilmember Turner’s support of Conchas on this issue. I wrote a series of 4 blog posts on Turner’s fast and loose use of his City ProCard (city credit card). Turner talks about the need for data but often, after repeated staff requests, never supplied the requisite information or receipts to back up expenditures incurred on his many trips using city funds. Many of his trips to the same events attended by other councilmembers cost more than that of any other councilmember. He even asked the city to cover his Renaissance Weekend trips which were purely personal enrichment events.

Clearly, neither of these two councilmembers can legitimately question stipends when they appear to have financially sinned. Conchas deliberately used his elected position to solicit money from the public for personal expenses and Turner has a very questionable history with his use of the city ProCard.

A majority, five councilmembers, support and defend this policy, as do I. For 20 years of my 24 years of service as a councilmember, I paid personally for the very items the stipend covers. In my last 4 years of service, I was grateful that there was a stipend to cover the very expenses I had personally incurred and paid for over many years.

Why did these two men bring this forward? This is an election year. Conchas is supporting Rory Goree who is running against the incumbent, Councilmember Leandro Baldenegro. Turner, who has decided not to run again (perhaps because of his questionable use of the ProCard) has endorsed Lisa Baker. They need to help their chosen candidates and what better way than ginning this up an election issue. Just watch, both of these candidates will use stipends as a campaign issue. After all, if they were to run on their merit, both candidates lose.

© 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.

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.

Recently Shawn Raymundo had an article in the Arizona Republic about the city council receiving stipends. Before I go into that issue, a word about Mr. Raymundo. He is a writer for the Arizona Republic which is part of the USA Today network. The Arizona Republic and USA Today are notoriously ‘progressive’ liberal news organizations. It follows that their reporters hold the same positions and most of them, not all, do. Both organizations have a few token conservative reporters.

Mr. Raymundo has become Councilmember Turner’s lapdog. All that Turner has to do is to call Raymundo and plant something designed to embarrass either the City of Glendale, the city manager, the mayor or city council. It appears that Turner’s other ‘go-to-reporter’ is Richard Smith of the Glendale Independent. Both of these gentlemen harbor a liberal bias seemingly evident in their reporting, especially when covering a council that is, in the majority, conservative.

Some history is in order. When I was first elected as the Yucca district councilmember in 1992, my salary was $24,000 a year. After tax deductions, I probably took home about $19,000 a year. This was my salary for over half of the 24 years I served as a councilmember. It wasn’t ever about the money then or now. It was about having the opportunity to serve the people of Glendale. I was and am still proud of having done so.

In the last portion of my time in office, the voters of Glendale approved a councilmember salary of $34,000 a year. That averages $16.35 an hour, about $1.65 more an hour than Arizona’s required state-wide minimum wage of $14.70 an hour. After tax deductions I earned about $28,000 a year.

What is a stipend? The dictionary defines it as “a fixed sum of money paid periodically for services or to defray expenses.” When I first came to the council the stipends offered to defray expenses were for monthly cell phone usage and car mileage. Receipts had to be submitted for a request for reimbursement (stipend). I chose at that time to not request reimbursement.

I paid for my home office computer, my cell phone and monthly bill, a printer, a scanner and all necessary supplies like printer paper and ink out of my personal funds. I paid for my car’s gas and maintenance personally. Also, I often paid my share or the entire bill for a working lunch in my capacity as a councilmember personally. I paid for my yearly dues to the Glendale Chamber of Commerce from personal funds.

I also paid for things that I never talked about until now. I’ll give you one example. A constituent of mine, in crisis, needed to gravel the front yard immediately. I explored having the city pay but city policy was and is, that no city funds can be expended to enrich a private citizen or that citizen’s property. So, I paid out of my personal funds to have the front yard graveled. That is not the only time over the years that I used personal funds to help a person in crisis. I know for a fact, that former Vice Mayor Ian Hugh has done the same.

Several years ago, when monthly stipends were offered, this time I chose to take them. Everything is far more expensive than when I started, and I found that I needed help to defray costs.

Councilmembers have always had two council budgets. One is for professional development that can include travel, hotels and meals. Rather than travel, I used my funds to send out two district-wide newsletters to every home in the district twice a year. I also used those funds for hosting district-wide meetings as well as numerous incidental items to reach out to constituents. I occasionally made donations for causes such as backpacks filled with school supplies for Glendale’s disadvantaged children or Christmas gifts for families in need.

The second council budget account is for infrastructure improvements within one’s district. Annually, I directed those funds to be used for park improvements not covered in the Parks and Recreation Department’s annual budget. Those funds were used for such things as repainting park ramadas or replacing park infrastructure such as benches. For example, the digital sign at Heroes Park was paid from my infrastructure budget.

Never once did I abuse either account or use those funds for personal expense or gain.

I believe the current stipend policy is warranted. Here’s why. Now that I have retired, my cell phone informs me that my daily usage of about five hours a day has dropped to less than an hour a day. That tells me that my cell phone was used, almost entirely, for city business. I used to fill up my gas tank once a week at about $45 to $50 a pop. In retirement, I can fill my car up once a month. My use of printer paper has dropped from two reams a month to one ream for several months. Laser toner, very expensive by the way, was replaced twice a year. Now it lasts the entire year. These items, among others, had 90% of their usage attributed to city business. Monthly expenses for meals, tickets, donations and events have dropped to zero.

I am typical of most councilmembers. These stipends have helped to defray the expenses I incurred. I am grateful as your councilmember that they were made available in the last few years.

As for Turner, he’s up to his usual tricks. If he doesn’t understand the use of stipends shame on him. If he chooses not to take them, that is his prerogative. Painting the rest of council as somehow underhanded for using them is a typical Turner move.

The nonuse of a stipend by Councilmember Turner does not make him an angel. It appears that he is far, far from that. The use of a stipend by the rest of the councilmembers, just because Turner and his cohort, Raymundo, write about it does not make us devils.

© 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.