Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Apr 24

24

Jose “Lupe” Conchas not the right fit for Glendale City Council

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 24, 2024
Posted in Cactus District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale election 2024  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

Glendale, with a current population of 253,000, is a conservative community, fiscally, culturally, and socially. Our residents want to raise their children in a safe environment. They expect to continue to receive the excellent service provided by its Public Safety Departments. They want the city to protect their property values. They recognize the value of services they receive such as water and sanitation. To this day, it is one of the very few Valley communities that provides once a month bulk trash pickup. They expect good roads and amenity-filled parks for their families to enjoy. Its City Council shares these values and works every day to make policy decisions that meet these expectations.

Jose “Lupe” Conchas is running as a candidate for the Cactus District City Council seat. He is not the right fit for the city council. Past performance is an indicator of future performance.

In July of 2019, the Party for Socialism and Labor (PSL) held a march in Phoenix to protest the treatment of illegal aliens by ICE. Lupe Conchas was one of 16 protesters arrested at that march. Here’s what the PSL stands for based upon information easily obtained from their website:

“The Party for Socialism and Liberation believes that the only solution to the deepening crisis of capitalism is the socialist transformation of society.”

“The Party for Socialism and Liberation exists to carry out the struggle for socialism inside the United States, the center of world capitalism and imperialism.”

“…revolution is a necessity and a right.”

Make no mistake. The PSL is a Socialist/Marxist organization and Lupe Conchas was an active participant in their organized march.

Here are just a few photos of the march taken by the Arizona Republic in a July 2019, story about the march. In this photo you can clearly see the PSL sign.

In this photo Lupe Conchas was front and center.

 

 

 

 

 

This is the only flag used by the group during the march. Not a single American flag in sight.

In the July 2019 Arizona Republic article, Conchas said, “…that he hopes to raise awareness that his arrest was nothing compared to the conditions at the U.S. southern border. Even though I might have slept very uncomfortably last night, it’s nothing compared to what children and families who are seeking legal asylum are facing at the border.”

Conchas has demonstrated through his actions that he is a Socialist/Marxist democrat, a member of the most radical faction of the Democrat party. His actions appear to demonstrate that he will be divisive within the community. His support for an open border policy will continue to allow the smuggling of drugs such as fentanyl resulting in countless deaths as well as more crime and violence. He shares a “defund the police” mentality.

His social media posts claim he is a “fresh” voice but his opponent, Vice Mayor Ian Hugh has a wealth of experience and knowledge and has successfully demonstrated his leadership within his district as well as city-wide. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”  It’s not a matter of age but rather a matter of mental acuity and the Vice Mayor is as mentally sharp as ever. Experience does matter.

Conchas also wants to start or expand the Head Start program in our district schools. This statement alone shows how much he doesn’t know about city government. The City Council has no authority over the policies, practices, and procedures of any school district within the community.

Lastly, he wants a program to improve our streets. Again, he appears unaware of the fact that the council instituted a Pavement Management Program that is resulting in the resurfacing or reconstructing of every street in Glendale over a multiple year program and it has invested millions of dollars in the program.

I ask that you reject Lupe Conchas and all that he represents. Please vote for Vice Mayor Ian Hugh as your Cactus councilmember.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

22

Aldama withdraws from Glendale mayoral race

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 22, 2024
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale election 2024  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

On  Monday, April 22nd, Jamie Aldama withdrew from the mayoral race. In effect, he conceded that he had not collected enough valid petition signatures to place him on the ballot. 

Some background: A Glendale mayoral candidate is required to have a minimum of 1,888 valid signatures on his/her nominating petitions. Aldama turned in 2,367 (487 signatures more than the minimum required). Typically, a candidate will try to turn in double the required number as a cushion, knowing that a certain percentage of signatures will always be invalid.

It was common knowledge that Aldama was chasing signatures up until the last minute and was purported to have had difficulty in meeting the minimum required. Aldama took a chance turning in far less than double the amount required.

Timothy Schwartz, represented by Tim LaSota, filed the complaint after having identified 677 signatures as invalid. Many of the invalid signatures appeared to have the signature column with signed names in block letters in the same handwriting leading some to believe that an alleged fraud was committed. The County Attorney General’s office has announced that it is investigating all such cases. Whether Aldama’s signatures will be investigated for alleged fraud by the County Attorney General is unknown at this time.

Over the weekend the County Recorder’s office reviewed the petitions of all candidates being challenged. In the review of Aldama’ petitions the County Recorder found 498 invalid signatures. Based upon this factual information, Aldama was short of the minimum requirement by 19 signatures.

He may have withdrawn to preserve his right to run for mayor again in 2028. If the County Attorney’s office pursues the issue of fraud of Aldama’s petition signatures, that may become a future barrier to his attempt to run for any office in 2028. If the County Attorney finds that there was fraud, a person is barred from running for office for 5 years.

One question will be to see what Aldama does with the balance of $59,000 plus he reported in his last Candidate Committee Financial Report of April 15, 2024.

There are several takeaways from Aldama’s tenure as Councilmember. One which many have noticed was his proclivity to thank everyone for everything. Another was his purported failure to meet with his constituents. People complained that he would often cancel meetings at the last minute with a promise to reschedule that usually never happened. It appeared that unless you were someone who could further his future agenda a meeting was not rescheduled. Then there had always been lingering questions about his residency. Many to this day believe that he did not live in a rental in the Ocotillo district but rather lived in a house in the Yucca district that he owned until December of 2016. In 2016, he Quit Claimed that house to his wife. It’s hard for many to accept at face value that Aldama and his wife lived in a rental in the Ocotillo district when they had a perfectly good home in the Yucca district. Lastly, it had been rumored that Aldama and the Mayor had a conversation in which Aldama indicated that he was not running for mayor this year. Several weeks later, Aldama announced his run for mayor. If that did indeed occur, it would appear that Aldama’s word was not his bond.

I would anticipate that some of Aldama’s supporters will say that challenging petition signatures is a dirty trick. Not so. This occurs every election cycle. A very recent case was that of Representative Austin Smith. He recently withdrew from his reelection campaign after accusations of petition signature fraud presumably resulting in failing to file the required minimum number of valid signatures. Candidates have often been knocked off a ballot after a challenge and discovery of insufficient valid petition signatures. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

18

Second filing of Candidate Committee Financial Reports

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 18, 2024
Posted in Cactus District • Candidate campaign committee financial reports • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale election 2024 • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

 I am really pleased to see the number of Glendale candidates that filed clean Candidate Committee Financial Reports. Their current reports do not show any major expenditures.

I don’t expect to see large contributions or expenditures until the 3rd or 4th reports filed later this election cycle. That is except for Mayor Weiers who had reported a massive amount of campaign contributions in his first filing.

Here are the candidates that filed appropriately and the cash they have on hand as of April 1, 2024:  

                           Honor Roll for this reporting Period                                                                                                                         

  • Mayor Jerry Weiers                                            $219,409.79
  • Vice Mayor Ian Hugh, Cactus district                   $  29,278.60
  • Lupe Conchas, Cactus candidate                         $  11,481.90
  • Councilmember Ray Malnar, Sahuaro district        $    2,131.47
  • Dianna Guzman, Yucca candidate                        $    6,572.49

I have not included mayoral candidate Jamie Aldama or Yucca candidate Encinas for both had errors in this period’s filing. I also did not include mayoral candidate Paul Boyer’s filing for he failed to turn in nominating petitions and is no longer a candidate for mayor.

At the bottom of the first page are the Summary Figures. Here it what it looks like.

 (a) is a simple entry. You take the balance you had from the last reporting period and enter it here. (b) asks for the total amount of money collected during this reporting period. That goes in the first column. In the second column you add all the money you received prior to this reporting period plus the money received during this reporting period. (c) asks for the total amount of money spent during this reporting period. That goes in the first column. In the second column you add all the money you spent prior to this reporting period plus the money spent during this reporting period.(d) asks for the balance by subtracting what was spent this reporting period from what was received during this reporting period.

Simple? No? Well, not for some candidates. Lupe Encinas, Yucca candidate got nearly all of it wrong.

  • Her starting balance is $1,650.38 and this is accurate.
  • The second line is wrong according to her report. She said she received $688.07 this reporting period with just two contributions of $236.07 and $100 plus a personal loan of $350.00 (which, by the way, totals $686.07, not $688.07). Instead she filled in $3, 286.17. Where did this number even come from? The second column on that line is blank and should have reflected the money she received from the first reporting period plus money received from the current report reporting period.
  • The third line is wrong as well. According to her report she spent $300 and $565.76 for a total of $915.76 not the $1,883.45 she reports in column 1. The second column which is blank should show what she had spent previously plus what she spent this reporting period.
  • The third line is wrong also. Because her previous lines had the wrong information, this line results in the wrong balance.

Her current cash on hand for this current reporting period is $1,215.97. When and if her numbers are corrected this will prove to be wrong as well.

What’s even more unsettling is that she has a campaign treasurer, Jo Ellen Serey and between both reviewing the figures, both got it wrong. This is not rocket science. It’s a simple matter of paying attention to the details. How will Encinas perform during the council’s budget season discussions, usually lasting 3 months with intensive, detailed homework required? The last thing we all want to see is a repeat of her comment regarding my review of her first filing when she said she thought her report was “amazing.”

Aldama is a different matter. He has run before and has filed over 30 of these reports. On his second report of this cycle filed by the due date of April 15th, his Summary Figures were wrong. The following day he submitted an Amended Report and corrected those numbers. However, he still failed to include information on Schedule A(1), Monetary Contributions from Campaign Committees. On his first report of this cycle, he reported that his Council candidate committee (now terminated) had given his mayoral committee $16,197.12. He failed to include that on his current filing on Schedule A(1) under the column “Cumulative Amount this Election Cycle.”

He also failed to include information in his current filing on Schedule A(1)(a), Monetary Contributions from Political Action Committees. Again, on his first report of this campaign cycle, he reported that the UFCW PAC had donated $5,000, which was moved to his mayoral campaign committee. It, too, should have been carried forward on his latest campaign filing. These items would change “Election Cycle to Date” numbers on his currently submitted Financial Summary sheet.

His current cash on hand is $64,692.69.

I would suggest that these candidates consider hiring a professional to complete these reports so that accurate public information is provided.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

16

Breaking Now! mayoral candidate Jamie Aldama’s petition signatures challenged

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 16, 2024
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale election 2024  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

Yesterday, April 15, 2024, Timothy Schwartz, a Glendale resident represented by Timothy LaSota filed a complaint naming the following defendants: Stephen Richer, Maricopa County Recorder, all members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, Scott Jarrett, Maricopa County Elections Director, and Julie Bower, Glendale City Clerk asking that Jamie Aldama be removed from the ballot as a Glendale Mayoral candidate.

The allegations for removal are as follows:

  1. Signers not registered to vote
  2. Signers not qualified because of residency outside of Glendale
  3. Signers signed more than once
  4. Inauthentic signatures

Seven circulators are named as having allegedly circulated petitions with invalid signatures.

The required number of valid signatures for the mayoral race is 1,888. Aldama submitted 2,367 signatures. Plaintiff has identified an alleged 670 signatures as invalid, and the allegation is that Aldama only has a total of 1,697 valid signatures making him short of valid signatures by 191.

Plaintiff is asking that Aldama be removed from the ballot, and an award of taxable costs.

There is a pre-trial hearing before the court scheduled for Friday, April 19th at 10 AM and the court case is scheduled for this coming Tuesday, April 23rd at 10 AM.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

15

Lupe Conchas…at it again

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 15, 2024
Posted in Cactus District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Mattel Adventure Park • VAI Resort • Westgate  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

Some candidates can’t help but run a negative bashing campaign and it looks like this Lupe is one of them. Recently he posted a video attacking his opponent, Incumbent Councilmember, and current Vice Mayor Ian Hugh.

The video had 3 themes. The first was that Vice Mayor Hugh is too old and out of touch. Let’s take a deeper dive into this allegation. The Vice Mayor is 70 years old. I am 82 years old. The last time I ran I was 78 years old. Age is not the determining factor. It’s mental competency. Vice Mayor Hugh is mentally sharp, and he is in very good physical condition. At 82 I am as sharp mentally as ever but physically, my legs are failing me.

Keep in mind that the majority on City Council comprised of Mayor Weiers, Councilmember Hugh, Councilmember Malnar and me, despite the constant opposition of wanna-be mayor Aldama and Councilmembers Tolmachoff and Turner, have moved Glendale forward in many positive ways. We have a Pavement Management Program designed to keep every road in Glendale in good condition on a rotating schedule. We have started a years long program to upgrade every park in Glendale. We have also instituted a multi-year program to improve the landscaping in every right-of way.

We have embarked on a 3-year program to renovate City Hall, Council Chambers, the Amphitheater and Murphy Park. This city investment in downtown Glendale has spurred developers to invest in downtown. Soon you will see a Hilton Hotel under construction in downtown to name but one major, private investment.

Look at Westgate with a nearly one billion dollar investment in the VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park. The city owned arena, Desert Diamond, is earning higher revenues than ever before. Bell Road corridor is thriving and continues to reinvent itself to remain relevant and successful. The “New Frontier,” the  Loop 303, is still exploding with new growth. Witness the latest company to invest in the area, Amazon. We have grown nearly 24,000 jobs in the area.

Age is simply not a factor. Mental acuity is. To borrow a quote from the late President Reagan who was 74 in 1984 when he ran for President, “I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

At the bidding of Worker Power, who has real heartburn about the VAI Resort, Conchas threw in the proposed city-owned parking garage at Westgate as his second theme. He and Worker Power contend the public parking garage is not needed. Not so. There is not much land left in the Westgate area and as surface parking continues to disappear as new buildings are constructed, the need for public parking becomes greater. If we want Westgate to continue to thrive and grow, thereby earning more sales tax dollars for Glendale to be used for the benefit of you, the residents of Glendale it becomes more and more critical to have adequate parking in the area.

Conchas’ last theme in his video was to accuse the Vice Mayor of allowing schools in Glendale to close. What planet is Conchas on? Obviously, he doesn’t know that the Glendale City Council has no authority over school districts and their school boards. Nada. None.  This demonstrates how ill informed he is about what a councilmember does.

There is nothing the Vice Mayor can do about the school districts’ policies regarding school closures or anything else school related. Yet Conchas has said, he is “focused on addressing the basic needs of students.” He wants to, “increase school funding at the State Legislature, support teachers, advocate for pay increases, reduce class sizes, and educate the whole child.” That’s fine. He’s also running for the Alhambra School Board. That seems to be his priority. If you agree with him, then you will vote for him for that position…not Glendale City Council.

It’s time for Conchas to stop playing in the mud. Let’s hear what his priorities are as a city council candidate. Haven’t seen or heard anything? That’s because he hasn’t offered anything.

But that’s what you can expect from a Progressive Democrat, Marxist candidate.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

13

Coyotes moving

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 13, 2024
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City of Glendale • City of Phoenix • City of Tempe • Desert Diamond Arena • Phoenix Metro issues • VAI Resort • Westgate • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | 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.

Yesterday, April 12, the Arizona Republic reported (“Arizona Coyotes Relocating to Salt Lake City, reports say”) that it appears that the Coyotes will be moving to Salt Lake City, Utah. The General Manager, Bill Armstrong, advised players of the impending move on Friday night.

I am sharing my thoughts on the news. The move was inevitable, but I thought Houston would be the team’s new home. I was wrong.

Leaving Glendale was the beginning of the end. Alex Meruelo sent this team down this path with his arrogance and stubbornness. He could have and should have been more reasonable and negotiated a deal in Glendale that was mutually beneficial to the city and to the team.

Guess what? Sometimes it’s better to stay with the person that brought you to the dance.

 For all the naysayers about Glendale as a viable location, there were several factors overlooked. When the Coyotes put a winning team on the ice, the arena was packed. Witness their one and only play-off season. It’s not where you play but the quality of the team that determines attendance. When a team is winning, fans will come from everywhere. With the completion of Route 202, travel time from the East Valley was substantially reduced. The Coyotes were successfully building a fan base in the West Valley. The Westgate area with 15 new apartment complexes and the construction of the VAI Resort and Mattel Adventure Park adds a whole new dynamic that would have helped to grow the fan base.

Personally, I’m glad that the Coyotes left the Glendale arena. Since their departure revenues to the city from events have skyrocketed. With the addition of the Rattlers football team, the revenue picture for Glendale looks even brighter.

When the Coyotes were unable to relocate to Tempe and instead ended up playing in the 5,000 seat Mullett Arena, many sensed that a move was going to happen sooner or later. Muerelo had to be bleeding money. Many of his costs were fixed and the revenue from 5,000 seats could not possibly cover those fixed costs, no matter the price point of the tickets. Add to that dynamic, the head of the players union’s demands to know where the players would be long-term.

As for the bid on state land in north Phoenix, who advertises what they are willing to bid? I suspect there are other types of developers out there that would have outbid the Coyotes. That scheme was certainly not a done deal. When Mayor Ortega of Scottsdale publicly voiced Scottsdale’s objections, sentiment about yet another location not making surfaced quickly. Realistically, had the Coyotes been successful, the hurdles they were about to face guaranteed that it would be years before a hockey arena could be built at that location.

I feel sorry for the fans. They have been steadfastly loyal to this team and have proven it many times. They are sad, angry, and upset. Rightfully so. For the fans and the players to learn of the relocation through social media shows how little respect Muerelo and management has for the fans and their players.

After all the assurances that they committed to stay in the Valley, it appears that the reported $1 billion that Meruelo is asking for the team, outweighed any promises of staying. It’s all about the money, baby.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

8

Who is Lupe Conchas?

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 8, 2024
Posted in Cactus District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024  | Tagged With: , , , | 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.

Lupe Conchas is running for the Alhambra School Board and the Cactus City Council seat. He was residing in the Ocotillo District for a few years and then in 2020 moved to an apartment in the Cactus District around 45th Avenue and Ocotillo Road. He owns no real property according to the Financial Disclosure Statement he recently filed with the Glendale City Clerk. He is 31 years old.

He lists his employment as Regional Organizer Manager for One Campaign and Regional Organizer for Bread for the World. He also lists himself as a Volunteer Coordinator for both non-profit organizations which are based in Washington, D.C.

In October of 2023 he started a business called Mobilizing Strategies, LLC. To date, after researching, the only client he has had is Analise Ortiz, a Democrat candidate for the Arizona Legislature. Her campaign committee paid him $2,500 for consulting services in December of 2023.

In 2019 he was the Arizona Democratic Party Affirmative Action Moderator. In 2023 he became the Vice Chair of the Executive Board of the Arizona Democratic Party. He proudly calls himself a Progressive Democrat.

When asked in an interview while running for the Alhambra School Board, who were his role models? He said, two union organizers Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta. In the same interview he said, “We need to review our discipline policies, safety protocols, and curriculum with a racial equity lens and protect our BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) students from discrimination, racism, and police violence. We have an opportunity to implement ethnic studies and cultural studies in our classrooms.”

As Vice Chair of the Arizona Democrat Party he said in another interview, “Arizona Democrats have resoundingly rejected the politics of Senator Sinema and are united in our determination to replace her in 2024,” explained Lupe Conchas, a vice chair of the Arizona party. “She turned her back on Arizona and today we turned our back on her. She does not represent us. It’s time for us to put our time and effort behind a candidate that puts working-class people first—not Wall Street hedge fund managers.” 

As a Progressive, not even a moderate Democrat, he supports a radical, progressive agenda that includes defunding the police, not holding criminals accountable for their crimes, and an open border agenda along with all the violent crime we see every day across the country. He supports the climate change agenda as well. As a Democrat, his agenda includes support for LGBTQIA and gender transitioning for young children.

In this photo you can see he is wearing a T Shirt with the Black Lives Matter symbol.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here’s a very short history on the origin of the raised fist. It began as a Russian and Communist Party symbol. In the past few years, the Black Lives Matter organization adopted it. Obviously, it is a very polarizing symbol that Mr. Conchas has no problem associating with.

It went from this

 

 

 

to this

 

 

 

to this

 

 

 

 

If you are a Progressive Democrat, you will have no problem in voting for Mr. Conchas. Glendale, historically, traditionally, and culturally is a conservative community that still looks upon the American flag with respect. A majority of its residents still believe in faith, family, and community. They respect law enforcement and support it. They believe when someone commits a criminal act, he/she should be held accountable. They want their children to be children and they abhor the excessive violent crime created by an open border policy.

Here are the values of our City Council today, including the Cactus incumbent, Vice Mayor Ian Hugh. We have a great City Council that took Glendale from the brink of bankruptcy to earning the highest financial ratings from Fitch and other rating agencies. We have created nearly 24,000 new jobs in the Loop 303 area and that does not include all the new businesses in greater Glendale. We support our Police and Fire. We remain fiscally and culturally conservative and are focused on raising the quality of life for every Glendale resident.

Mr. Conchas has every right to run for the Cactus council seat, but he would be polarizing and he embodies the very values that a majority of Glendale’s residents and especially Cactus district residents do not hold. He would move Glendale in a direction that a majority of our residents do not want or accept. Would he organize demonstrations about policies adopted by a majority of city council that he did not agree with? After all, his major job is as an organizer and he has participated in many demonstrations. 

I urge the voters of the Cactus District to vote for Vice Mayor Ian Hugh for he is the true embodiment of Glendale’s values.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Apr 24

6

Desperation

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 6, 2024
Posted in Cactus District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Sahuaro District • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

As of April 1, 2024, we know the final slate of candidates running in Glendale’s Primary Election this July. This is the final slate of candidates:

MAYOR                                Incumbent Mayor Jerry Weiers vs. Jamie Aldama

CACTUS DISTRICT              Incumbent Vice Mayor Ian Hugh vs. Lupe Conchas

YUCCA DISTRICT                Dianna Guzman vs. Lupe Encinas (to fill my seat as Councilmember)

SAHUARO DISTRICT           Incumbent Councilmember Ray Malnar unopposed

Now is when desperation begins to set in for some candidates. Two cases in point.

Dianna Guzman’s campaign manager is a person by the name of Darius Diggs. I have met Darius. He is a fine, young man with a bright political future. It has been said that Dianna’s opponent, Lupe Encinas, has passed around a social media assertion from a person claiming to have been assaulted by Darius. It is defamatory, untrue, and pure, unadulterated dirt. In fact, Darius filed charges of assault against this person. Recently in court, the judge ruled in favor of Darius and found against the person who had been circulating his unfounded claim. Hopefully, this will put this episode to rest but I think we all know it will continue to be used to smear Darius and by association, Dianna Guzman.

Another case in point is the other Lupe, Lupe Conchas, and his recent actions. Recently Vice Mayor Ian Hugh hosted his twice yearly Cactus District meeting/BBQ. I attended as did the Mayor and Councilmember Malnar. All of council is invited. Some attend and some have other commitments. Also in attendance was the Vice Mayor’s opponent, Lupe Conchas. He appeared to be actively campaigning to those citizens in attendance. Not only that, but he stood on the street at the entrance to the event, waving his campaign sign. Was it illegal? No. Was it classless and tasteless. Yes.

These kinds of actions by candidates speak to their desperation. Let’s hope they will talk about issues. What are their platforms? What are the most important initiatives they seek to champion? What are their qualifications to serve?

Rest assured, as we go through the next several months before the Primary Election, I will be sharing answers to just such questions. Let’s hope the candidates have publicized their answers!

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Mar 24

4

Political pandering is an art form

Posted by Joyce Clark on March 4, 2024
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Glendale finances • Ocotillo District • Primary Election August 2024  | Tagged With: , , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

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

As you may be aware, Councilmember Jamie Aldama is running for mayor against the incumbent, Mayor Jerry Weiers and former state legislator, Paul Boyer. If and when Aldama turns in his nominating petitions he will be required to resign from his Ocotillo District council seat. The drop-dead date for turning in nominating petitions is April 1, 2024.

This could mean that Aldama is attending his last few city council meetings. As a mayoral candidate opposing the incumbent, Mayor Weiers, Aldama is desperate to position himself in opposition to the Mayor on every issue he can dig up.

It was evident that is exactly what he was doing at the February 27, 2024, City Council voting meeting. The last item on the agenda was seeking council approval for a garage construction agreement between the city and Fisher Industries, developer of VIA Resort, to build a city-owned, public parking garage.

Here is the verbatim transcript of Aldama’s remarks before voting ‘no’ on the agreement:

Starting at the 44 minute, 33 seconds mark: “Mayor, explain my vote. Yeah, I, uh, this is a data driven organization I, uh, and I have not yet to see any data that demonstrates a need for a parking garage for the VIA Resort. Absent the VIA Resort, Glendale does not require a parking garage. Uh, our City Manager shared with us awhile back that there was some area footage taken of Westgate and the, uh, stadium area and there was tons of parking left over. There ya go. We don’t need a parking garage. Um, our resident spoke very clearly, very concise about some of the issues I wanted to, uh, talk about. Uh, there’s no competitive process. There was no selection process. We spend more time on RFPs for lower dollar amounts than the $72 and a half million dollars. And I asked the question, was that a legal way of doing business and the answer is yes. Well, I don’t believe that it is. Um, and it should be a practice that the City of Glendale hold on the RFP process or any type of procurement process. Um, this has, in my opinion, have favor written all over it and, ah, I am not in favor of building a parking garage for the VIA Resort. We don’t need a parking garage absent the VIA Resort. I vote nay.”

Let’s take apart what he said. “I have not yet to see any data that demonstrates a need for a parking garage for the VIA Resort.” That’s because the parking garage is to be a public, city owned garage for anyone visiting the Westgate area. Yes, it will also serve VIA and the Mattel Amusement Park. With a projection of $32 million dollars annually in revenue earned by the city from these two projects, it is anticipated that the garage will be in constant use with the city earning a portion of the parking fees.

It is also important to point out that as Westgate develops the last vacant parcels it will result in no or very little on-site parking. That makes the need for a public parking garage all the more essential to keep the area thriving.

Another factor Aldama refuses to acknowledge is that VIA will have at least 2,500 parking spaces on site, either underground or above ground.

Aldama goes on to say, “Uh, there’s no competitive process. There was no selection process.”

Here is a portion of the packet of information relating to this agreement that was in every councilmember’s voting meeting  agenda packet:

“The City published a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), for design-build services of a parking garage at the City-owned Black Lot, in the Arizona Republic Newspaper on December 20 and December 27, 2023. The City held a mandatory pre-submittal conference on, Thursday, January 4, 2024, at 9:00am at the City of Glendale’s Adult Center. Twenty-four (24) firms attended the mandatory pre-submittal conference. Of those twenty-four firms, four (4) firms submitted statements of qualification for the RFQ.
A selection committee was formed, and each panel member reviewed the four submittals to score each firm according to the scoring criteria provided in the RFQ. The panel scored Fisher the highest scoring firm and agreed that Fisher demonstrated the capabilities to deliver this project according to the schedule and budget outlined in the RFQ.”

Again, this information was provided to Aldama in his council agenda packet. Saying that there was no process does not make it so just because he said it publicly.

Aldama accuses senior management and city council of favoritism by saying, “Um, this has, in my opinion, have favor written all over it…” That is a serious accusation that is unfounded. As The information above provided to council shows that a selection process did occur.

Lastly, Aldama says, “And I asked the question, was that a legal way of doing business and the answer is yes. Well, I don’t believe that it is.” Aldama’s belief is not fact.

Aldama’s statement should cause you to ask several questions. Did he read the material in his council agenda packet? If not, he did not do his duty to become fully informed on the issues that he was to vote upon that evening. If he did read the material, why did he reject the staff report stating that the procurement process was followed?

The answer is simple. This is election season and Aldama wishes to become the mayor of Glendale. He picks any topic that he thinks will draw a contrast between himself and Mayor Weiers. This wasn’t the issue to use this tactic.

Was there political pandering on the part of Aldama? You bet there was.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Jan 24

22

Encinas responds to Council Campaign Financial Reports

Posted by Joyce Clark on January 22, 2024
Posted in Candidate campaign committee financial reports • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale election 2024 • Yucca district  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 2 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 Sunday, January 21, I posted a blog about the first Glendale City Council Campaign Committee Financial Reports filed with the City Clerk on January 16th.

Today, Monday, January 22nd, Ms. Encinas emailed our neighbors copying my entire blog. Thank you, Ms. Encinas. The more people that get to read it, the more informed our community is. One of the blocks of information I provided was a review of Ms. Encinas’ Candidate Committee Financial Reports. Here is a copy of one of the report’s pages regarding contributions to her campaign.

Encinas

I made the following observation:

“Watch Encinas’ level of missing information in her reports. She fails to enter information that is required. Some of the contributors’ addresses and ALL job titles and employers are missing. These are glaring omissions of fact that are reporting requirements. If she can’t follow the state law for reporting requirements what else will she fail to report?”

Here is her response to our neighbors:

“Here is my response, I will bring unity not violence or hate ,but solutions and change for our yucca residents!  It was my first time filing and I think I did an amazing job, the titles will be updated but nothing was missing from my reporting. We have so much to do, here in Glendale ,and I can wait to speak with each one of you!”-Lupe Encinas 

I don’t think it was an “amazing job” and neither should you. The State crafted these reporting forms to make sure every candidate is as transparent as possible. It requires the job title and employer of every donation over $50 so that the public can learn what communities of interest are supporting a candidate. It requires cumulative totals of an individual’s campaign contributions as well as the Candidate ID Number. All of which are missing.

It’s not rocket science to fill out the reporting forms completely. When I ran for the office if a contributor had not supplied all the information required, I would call and ask for it.

This reporting form is required of every candidate running for public office in the State. There are many first-time filers who manage to do it right the first time.

Attention to detail is important, not just for reporting purposes. In one’s job as a Councilmember details are important. Especially when City Councilmembers are reviewing the annual city budget or reviewing the City Council workshop or voting agendas. By reviewing these items in detail, it provides a Councilmember the opportunity to reach out to appropriate staff if there are any questions about an item. 

Also please note that in Ms. Encinas’ report, she fails to put the Committee ID Number on any of her pages.  This is another necessary state requirement so that if the physical pages ever became comingled with another report, the correct pages could be easily identified and reassembled. She also fails to fill in the two right hand columns which ask for cumulative totals.

Again, more detail that was omitted from her campaign financial report.

Here is a page from incumbent Mayor Jerry Weiers’ report. It is done correctly and provides contrast to that which Ms. Encinas submitted.

Details do matter. Filing out forms correctly demonstrates a level of respect for the process of running for office. It can also forecast how a candidate will approach the job.

© Joyce Clark, 2024    

FAIR USE NOTICE

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

Next Page »