Minutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 9/4/2012 *PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at the
Workshops,Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council.
'411
GLENDfl
MINUTES OF THE
GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP SESSION
Council Chambers—Workshop Room
5850 West Glendale Avenue
September 4,2012
1:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Steven E. Frate and
Councilmembers Norma S. Alvarez, Joyce V. Clark, Yvonne J. Knaack,
H. Phillip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez,
ALSO PRESENT: Horatio Skeete, Acting City Manager; Craig Tindall, City Attorney; and
Pamela Hanna, City Clerk
1. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: UTAH COMPACT/ARIZONA ACCORD
Presented by: Brent Stoddard, Intergovernmental Programs Director
Acting City Manager Horatio Skeete introduced the item adding that all of the items presented
today were brought to staff by less than a majority of the Councilmembers for research and
consideration. The presentations reflect the research that staff was able to uncover during this
period. After the presentation, if Councilmembers are interested in having more research done
by staff in order to take some Council action, they will put together some recommendations for
the Council. Today's presentation is the Staff Report and to see if there is a consensus to expend
additional time to prepare a recommendation.
Mr. Stoddard provided the Council with a little background.
In September of last year, Councilmember Norma Alvarez requested information about the Utah
Compact on immigration as a Council Item of Special Interest. In January of this year the
Council asked staff to return and provide additional information on what actions other cities have
taken with the Compact and any action from the State.
Just as a review, The Utah Compact was a declaration of five principles that was designed to
guide the immigration discussion in the State of Utah. The Compact was developed by business,
non-profit, law-enforcement, religious and community leaders from that State who signed the
compact in November of 2011.
1
Shortly after the passage of the Utah Compact, a group in Arizona called the East Valley Patriots
started advocating for a similar compact to be adopted by Arizona cities and other organizations
in the State. Mr. Stoddard met with representative last year.
Also around this time a group called the Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform, held a
series of five public forums on immigration solutions around the State. As a result of the
feedback received at those conferences, the various organizations involved determined that
instead of going out and encouraging cities and groups to develop their own unique individual
Compacts, the stakeholders should develop a single document for Arizona that organizations
could endorse.
In January of 2012 that document was introduced at a signing ceremony and is known as the
Arizona Accord. A copy of the Accord and a list of the entities that have endorsed it are in the
Council packets.
On the Arizona Accord website, the authors of the accord state the following three points as the
purpose of the accord
• Provide a broad set of guiding principles to serve as guard rails and help frame the
drafting, debate and passage of state and federal legislation related to immigration.
• Establish a tone for all immigration discussions that is based on respect and the deeply
held values and characteristics that make Arizona a strong community.
• Create a simple document that does not advocate for specific legislative solutions but
calls upon government bodies to seek a proper balance between the principles of a free-
market economy, the enforcement of the law and the strength of families in our
communities.
Mr. Stoddard pointed out that the East Valley Patriots group's approach in these other
communities has been to introduce the Accord through a city's respective Human Relations
Commissions which plays an advisory role to their City Councils. The City of Glendale does not
have a similar commission, so this is the first time the Arizona Accord is coming before a public
body in this City.
To date there have been six cities involved in some capacity with the Compact or Accord.
Two City Councils (Tolleson and Tucson) have endorsed the Arizona Accord or the original
Utah Compact.
The Human Relations Commissions of three cities (Mesa, Phoenix, and Tempe), have reviewed
and endorsed the Accord or the original Utah Compact, and have recommended it to their
respective Councils for adoption. To date, none of these three Councils have considered or acted
on their Commissions' recommendations.
2
The City of Scottsdale's Human Relations Commission did not take a position on the Accord,
instead they voted to forward the Accord to the Council for consideration. To date, the Scottsdale
City Council has not considered or taken any action on this issue.
In regards to the actions on the state level, in January of this year, at the beginning of this last
legislative session, Representative Catherine Miranda and Representative Macario Saldate
introduced HCR 2015 (SUPPORT; REASONABLE IMMIGRATION REFORM), which
mirrored the language in the Arizona Accord. The Resolution did not receive a committee
hearing during the legislative session.
The City Council will need to determine if they would like to move forward in further
consideration of this item, and if so, in what capacity.
Councilmember Clark wanted to review the action of the state and cities again. She reiterated
there was a bill introduced in the state legislature, but it did not make it to committee. Mr.
Stoddard explained when legislation is introduced; it first gets a number and then was assigned
by the speaker of the house to a committee. It is up to the discretion of the chairman of that
committee whether they want to hold a hearing on that legislation. This bill did not receive a
hearing in the committee.
Councilmember Clark asked if there were only two cities that passed the Utah Compact or the
Arizona Accord. Mr. Stoddard advised the cities of Tolleson and Tucson were the cities.
Tolleson endorsed the Utah Compact when it first was introduced. Tucson just recently endorsed
the Arizona Accord. Councilmember Clark then asked if it went to other cities' human rights
commissions and then stalled after that. Mr. Stoddard stated that this is the process how this
issue has come forward to other city council. It started in a human relations commission and
made a recommendation to their respective councils to consider it. To date, Mesa, Phoenix and
Tempe have not taken action.
Councilmember Alvarez said she brought this up when she spoke with Antonio Bracamonte.
She was very interested, and said that neither the Utah nor Arizona Accord puts Glendale into
any kind of jeopardy. She said it states we provide respect, believe in diversity and it doesn't put
the city in any jeopardy. That is why she brought it to this council. It is important that the
council lets the public know. She is in favor of this and is for diversity.
Councilmember Martinez stated none of the cities that have reviewed this have done anything
with it, except for Tolleson and Tucson. Councilmember Martinez does not have a problem with
the Arizona Accord, although he doesn't really see what it would do. He does not think this is
needed, however, if the Council is willing to go ahead with it, he does not have a problem with it.
Mayor Scruggs asked if anyone else wished to comment.
Councilmember Clark stated the agreement said local law enforcement resources should focus on
criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code. Councilmember Clark believes that all
3
laws should be enforced equally, whether they are criminal or civil. This accord makes a
distinction between the two categories. She is not willing to support this accord based on that
language.
Councilmember Alvarez said Mr. Bracamonte and some of the other members are at the meeting
today and they could explain better than she could. She said at the workshops, not everyone
speaks, but they have had members that do come and speak. She said Glendale has done projects
and things that other cities don't do and they still go ahead and do them. She does not see this as
a threat, even the law enforcement language. Councilmember Alvarez believes law enforcement
is taking care of the criminal activity. She thinks Glendale could be the third city to accept this.
Councilmember Lieberman said he believes there is so much good in the five suggestions, but he
does have trouble with the law enforcement. He does not have trouble with any of the rest of it.
He believes in the wording of the accord. He believes in a free society. He believes four out of
the five are correct, except for the law enforcement. He doesn't question civil violations, but
questions any suggestion that weakens laws being enforced. Councilmember Lieberman stated
he fully supports the other four. He doesn't know why the law enforcement language was put in
the document and would be interested in knowing who wrote it and why it is in the document. It
weakens the position of the police, whether it is state, federal or county, and Councilmember
Lieberman cannot agree with that. The other four articles of the declaration all have excellent
merit.
Councilmember Knaack said she believes we all support the ideals set forth. The accord is
expressing our ideals. Councilmember Knaack does not believe the accord is a necessity. She
feels it is kind of like our code of conduct or code of ethics, either you will follow it or you will
not. Councilmember Knaack philosophically agrees with these ideals, but they are ideals and she
doesn't know if she would support a compact or an accord.
Vice Mayor Frate commented he would like to see this brought up at the state level again. It was
brought to the state and it wasn't heard, but might be brought back again. Glendale is very
diverse and we do respect all our citizens, especially public safety people. Vice Mayor Frate
would like to see this as a united effort and be done at the state level. He agrees with the
principals, but believes the police are doing what they are supposed to. He does not want to
move forward on this.
Mayor Scruggs said the comments of Councilmember Clark and Vice Mayor Frate reflect her
position also. Regarding the law enforcement aspect, it was copied directly from the Utah
Compact. Over the weekend, she sent an email to the Chief of Police because the last time this
was discussed by the Council; they were presented with a Glendale Police Department General
Order 24.500 that has to do directly with the arrest of illegal aliens. She was following up to see
if this was still in effect. The last reference that she could find to it was an email set out by Cathy
Gorham when she worked for the city that was sent to a resident in response to some questions in
2007. At that time, it was still in effect, however, Chief Black has responded. Chief Black is
here saying that has been superseded now by an order from 2010, a Chiefs Directive from 2010,
from Chief Conrad. But, the General Order that has always been in place at the Glendale Police
4
Department basically reflects every single one of these policies and provisions in the Arizona
Accord/Utah Compact.
The City of Glendale has not been disrespecting anybody or violating anybody's rights. That has
been by general order. Now, what Chief Black has explained is everything that has to do with
law enforcement comes down from AZPOST to all the cities. It is exactly the same and she
wrote about all of the court activity related to SB 1070. The legal advisors on AZPOST
recommend the policy not be updated until all aspects of the appeal had been decided. So, as a
few of you have said, introducing something new presents a new topic of discussion, something
that could be misunderstood, misrepresented or could be found, there could be thoughts that
Council was violating something when really she did not accept that there was any disrespect of
diversity in this city. The city has been a model of diversity. Glendale has been recognized
valley wide and state wide for the efforts in diversity. Glendale has a diversity coordinator, many
programs that stress that. So, rather than cause confusion and misunderstanding which she read
past council's decisions as to why not go forward, and that is a big reason, she supports leaving
things the way they are.
Councilmember Alvarez was looking at the businesses and organizations that support the
Arizona Accord and it is quite a list. She said Glendale is afraid to make the first move. The
police are not violating any rights and that is why this is so easy to accept because Glendale
believes in diversity, because Glendale was not racist, because Glendale has the diversity
coordinator. Councilmember Alvarez thought this was just an expression and resolution to do
exactly what we are doing. She can see where Scottsdale would not support the accord.
Glendale is more and more diverse and needs to think about this.
Mayor Scruggs asked if anybody had any follow up comments. There was no response.
2. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: ROADSIDE MEMORIALS
Presented by: Erik Strunk, Executive Director, Parks, Recreation and Library Services
At the January 17, 2012 Council Workshop, staff was asked to develop a draft ordinance to
address roadside memorials in Rights-of-Way (ROW), in Glendale. In doing so, staff was asked
to balance the need to maintain public safety while being sensitive to the family members of the
individual(s)memorialized in city ROW.
Roadside memorials are usually constructed to commemorate a site where a person passed away
suddenly and unexpectedly. They are intermittent and most often created by family members or
friends of the deceased to assist with their grieving process. There are several types of memorials
consisting of flowers, balloons, wreathes, candles, hand written messages, personal mementos
and on occasion, a memorial cross. They are most commonly developed at the location of a fatal
traffic accident and are seen throughout the United States. The City of Glendale currently has
approximately 46 roadside memorials.
5
Council previously requested staff to draft key concepts that could be drafted into an ordinance to
address roadside memorials in Rights-of-Ways in Glendale. In doing so, staff was asked to
balance the need to maintain public safety while being sensitive to the family members of the
individual(s) memorialized in City right-of-way.
Councilmember Clark brought this forward and her concern was safety. She complimented Mr.
Strunk for his thorough research. Councilmember Clark mentioned the various ways states are
handling this issue. She asked about the voluntary registration department and if it would create
a database that would be accessible to all departments. Mr. Strunk said it would create the
database. Mr. Strunk also advised in the database, departments would have access to contact
information for someone should there be an issue with the memorial. Councilmember Clark
stated by having a registration process and a database, the Streets Department can look up online
and contact family members to let them know their memorial is being taken down for road work.
Councilmember Clark mentioned the idea of encouraging adoption of a street or park in lieu of a
roadside memorial. Mr. Strunk advised the tree memorial is a good example of honoring a
deceased person and is a viable option. Councilmember Clark mentioned the various aspects of
the city codes which reference these memorials are scattered throughout the code book, and
creating an ordinance might bring all these under one umbrella. Councilmember Clark
commented that she was primarily concerned with the safety issues these roadside memorials
create. She thinks creating a database and putting all the codes relating to this issue together
makes sense.
Councilmember Martinez asked if this would mean more work for the department, keeping up
the database. Councilmember Martinez mentioned that Mr. Strunk said what is in place on this
issue is working and if it is not broken, it doesn't need to be fixed. Mr. Strunk said putting
something in place for the roadside memorials would involve defining a process and requesting
of those that want to pursue the memorials to fill out some type of application and submit it. Mr.
Strunk suggested these duties would fall to the GIS person. He said the locations of the
memorials are known, but not a contact person. Creating a process would take staff time to do
this. Councilmember Martinez recommends that the process stays in place as is.
Mayor Scruggs asked to go next because she wanted to follow up that Councilmember Martinez
brought out having to do with costs, but there are other things. She stated that she did not believe
this was an issue in the city to begin with. Maybe these things look messy to people, but there
was a very, very detailed process in place right now. She would assume if the city wanted to get
in touch with somebody, they could contact the family of the person, who died at that location,
but the registration process is bureaucratic, it goes beyond bureaucratic. That's probably the least
strong word she could use, very bureaucratic. It is unrealistic to have only an immediate family
member or the consent of the family member be able to register since so many of these accidents
involve youth, teenagers, and it is their friends that run out, that need to express themselves.
They don't know that they have to go fill out a form, get registered, and get a permit and all this
other stuff. It is bureaucratic and seems very disrespectful at the time. She also feels in some of
the literature that was provided, that talks about the aspect that these can also be very helpful to
people as a reminder. She would imagine especially for younger folks. Oh yes, that's where her
6
classmate from history had their accident. They can be very helpful in reminding people, much
as we use the flashing speed things, slow down, and drive more safely. But, on the cost, she was
kind of struck, to tell you the truth, by the item that she thought is the last one we will be dealing
with today, the residential lock program, that would be offering a service to those in the public
who want the service, is estimated to cost twenty thousand dollars a year because of labor. But
this one has no cost. She continued Councilmember Martinez stressed that he didn't believe that
this could have no cost whatsoever, so she would not support changing from what the city was
doing now, because she thought what was being done now is complete. As she read it, it
addresses every aspect; it takes care of those memorials that are a safety issue. It does not
introduce bureaucratic process at an emotional time and it does not subject staff to additional
costs.
Councilmember Lieberman said he has a memorial at the southeast corner of 45th and Glendale
that is so shabby that it couldn't honor its original purpose and he wished there was some way to
do away with it. It has been there since February and it looks terrible because no one is taking
care of it.
Councilmember Knaack did not see why the city would do an ordinance on this. She suggested
that a lot of the people killed in these car accidents aren't even from Glendale and no one knows
when they are put up. Councilmember Knaack thought it would be impossible to do a database
and charge. She also mentioned other family members have the right to object and how that
might be a problem if the city got involved in the middle of that. Councilmember Knaack said
all this issue is, is good common sense and she would like to leave the policy as it stands.
Mayor Scruggs said regarding the memorial Councilmember Lieberman talked about, in reading
the background part of the staff report, the parks maintenance and rights of way division will
work with the site organizer to ensure all public safety and operation concerns are mitigated,
includes memorials that have become broken, worn or abandoned. So, as Councilmember
Knaack said, she would assume that this hasn't happened because of the sensitivity of the case
involving the disappearance of Jesshye Shockley. But, perhaps, it is time to talk to the members
of the family that are here and who may want to resurrect, revitalize or refresh the site if it
becomes something that is disrespectful, and then they should know that too. But, the process
does address those types of situations. She thought it was just too sensitive and so people leave it
alone. She did not believe there was interest in moving forward with an ordinance and just asked
that staff look at the policy and especially the situations and figure out how to address it.
3. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: SECOND FLOOR OF ADULT CENTER
Presented by: Erik Strunk, Executive Director, Parks, Recreation and Library
Services
Councilmember Lieberman requested specific information as to potential use and development of
the second floor of the Adult Center. This area is currently vacant and consists of approximately
17,209 square feet of unfinished interior floor space and cannot be currently used for
programming.
7
Information on this item was requested by Councilmember Lieberman at the March 1, 2011 City
Council Workshop. On March 18, 2011, a memo on this same subject was distributed to the
Council as part of the Council Items of Special Interest agenda item for that workshop.
Councilmember Lieberman said many members at the meetings he attends have asked him when
the Adult Center is going to be completed.
Councilmember Knaack said it is the best Adult Center anywhere and what is offered is
tremendous. The second floor is a wonderful idea for the future, but it is way off in the future.
Councilmember Knaack's suggestion would be to try and rent or lease that second floor space
out. Rental would bring revenue, the renter could do the build out and it wouldn't cost the city
anything.
Councilmember Martinez asked what would happen if a teenager went to the Adult Center and
tried to use the facilities, would they be prevented from doing so. Mr. Strunk advised you would
have to be accompanied by an adult and to use the facilities, you do have to be eighteen years of
age or older.
Mayor Scruggs said she thought that the numbers speak for themselves, the forty percent usage.
It is a multi-generational site, which she knew Councilmember Martinez wanted. The many,
many sites for the youth are not multi-generational because there is nothing there for the adults,
so it is not a two way street. She thought Councilmember Knaack had an interesting idea that
had been brought up before, and she hoped that as the next council works through the budget
process, that is given some consideration for usage, especially with the new tenant doing the
build out improvements. Beyond that, she hoped the next time there is three million around to
spend, it is spent to build the courthouse, because that is something that every test, every study,
every aspect, anything you want to do, shows that courthouse is overused, crowded and really
does not meet judicial needs and expectations. She hoped that would come next and that would
be her answer to people that ask about the second floor of the Adult Center.
4. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: NAMING PUBLIC FACILITIES AFTER
PERSONS
Presented by: Jon M. Froke, AICP, Planning Director
At the January 17, 2012 Council Workshop, staff presented materials associated with how other
Arizona cities and towns address the naming of public facilities after persons. This item was
requested by Councilmember Clark at the September 6, 2011 Workshop.
At that time, Council reviewed ordinances from other cities and towns. In doing so, staff was
asked to determine the next steps associated with involving the Historic Preservation
Commission and the Commissions on Neighborhoods into this process. Council suggested that
the Glendale Historical Society also be included in future discussions. This report contains
information on the proposed process on including these two Commissions and the Glendale
Historical Society on the potential to honor persons by naming public facilities after them.
8
Mayor Scruggs said she would only comment that what was being suggested as the direction is
exactly the direction Council gave in January. This is the most peculiar thing. She didn't care
one way or the other, but Councilmember Clark brought it up January 17`h. The council said go
out and meet with the two commissions and the Historical Society, and now staff was coming
back to Council saying the same recommendation. Councilmember Clark, it was your issue.
Councilmember Clark said it was decided earlier to go out into the community to get feedback.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Froke what happened. Mr. Froke said it was a reaffirmation of
some of the items that have been discussed in front of the council before. Councilmember Clark
suggested moving forward and finding out what the community's interest is on the issue.
Councilmember Knaack asked if Mr. Froke had talked with any of the entities about the issue.
Mr. Froke advised he had spoken with Mr. McAllen who is the liaison to the commission on
neighborhoods. They are looking at some dates to engage that commission. Mr. Froke advised
the next available Historic Preservation Commission meeting is later this month. He will
introduce the item to them and look at ways to engage them in their January meeting.
Councilmember Knaack stated that some of the delay has been a timing issue for the meetings.
Mr. Froke agreed. Councilmember Knaack said she is still opposed to naming buildings and
public objects after people, but she is willing to hear what the community has to say.
Councilmember Martinez stated he feels the same way, that he is opposed.
Mayor Scruggs said this thing said if there's not council support to go forward, then you are not
going to go forward. Six or eight months ago, the Council's thing was go and ask the
community, but now he's saying if there is not support. Two of you were not supporting it.
Councilmember Knaack said she didn't support it the first time. Vice Mayor Frate said there
were three of them who did not support it. He has not supported this issue the entire time he has
been on the council. He said it is difficult to say what the criteria is, why one person would get
their name on a building over another. He said you will never make everyone happy. Mayor
Scruggs asked and you like to stop the process now. Vice Mayor Frate said yes.
Mayor Scruggs asked if anybody else had any comment on this.
Councilmember Lieberman stated there are already parks named after people. Mayor Scruggs
advised that was a privately owned park. Councilmember Martinez said the park was about the
size of this room. Mayor Scruggs said it's a little different since it was private property and it is
owned by people who made the decision. She reiterated her question so do you want this to go
forward or not. Councilmember Lieberman said he did not care. Mayor Scruggs said you have a
majority now to keep what you have, so see you didn't waste all that time doing what Council
told you to do in January when Council might have come up with a different answer.
Councilmember Martinez said this will be the last we hear of this. Mayor Scruggs said probably
not. Council has never come up with a policy saying how many times certain subjects can come
back, so you have new people listening to it.
5. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: MARTY ROBBINS PLAQUE
9
Presented by: Jon M. Froke, AICP, Planning Director
At the June 7, 2011 Council Workshop, Council was advised that the request to place a bronze
plaque in the city to honor Marty Robbins would be forwarded to the Historic Preservation
Commission. This item was requested by Councilmember Lieberman at the March 11, 2011
Workshop.
At their meeting on September 22, 2011, the Historic Preservation Commission discussed a
bronze plaque to recognize Mr. Robbins. The Historic Preservation Commission recommended
not to proceed with a bronze plaque to honor Marty Robbins. Recognizing the accomplishments
of Marty Robbins has already been achieved through numerous books, fan clubs, websites, and
the existing wooden plaque in Historic Downtown Glendale.
In 2013, the Glendale Historical Society plans to discuss funding a bronze plaque to honor Marty
Robbins.
Mayor Scruggs asked if this was on private property so it won't be in conflict with what was just
said in the last item that Council doesn't want anything on public property. Mr. Froke agreed.
Councilmember Lieberman said he would donate money for it. He said Marty Robbins is the
most successful person to come out of Glendale and he doesn't see any reason not to celebrate an
artist known worldwide.
Councilmember Martinez said his brother and Marty Robbins were very close. He said the only
thing Marty Robbins ever did for the city of Glendale is the fact he was born here, and was never
heard from again once he left Glendale. Councilmember Martinez said Marty Robbins never
really contributed to anything in Glendale and he is opposed to this.
Mayor Scruggs said she thought this just plays out what Vice Mayor Frate said in the last item.
When you start naming things after people and then it's why this one and not that one and people
get upset. She didn't think there was support for this.
Vice Mayor Frate said he did not have a problem with it if they want a bronze plaque on private
property. Mayor Scruggs said that's what it is for. Vice Mayor Frate said it could be on the face
of a building that is Glendale Avenue, put it in a prominent place. He mentioned in Boston there
are plaques on newer buildings commemorating things that happened in the 1800's.
Councilmember Alvarez said the city honored Jordin Sparks and we should be proud of people
who went out and became successful, regardless of whether or not they came back to do
something for Glendale. She said the city should be proud and support it if it doesn't cost that
much. Councilmember Alvarez said a lot of people remember him and she doesn't see anything
wrong with supporting this.
Mayor Scruggs said Westgate is private property and there were events there. She believed it
was whatever channel American Idol is on that paid to bring her to appear there as part of the
10
American Idol show. The city, just so everybody knows, is not spending money to put up a
statue or plaque or any other object honoring Jordin Sparks in Westgate, but whatever the owners
of Westgate might choose to do, they are free to do,just as the Historical Society is going to talk
to some owners or private property about putting something for Marty Robbins.
Councilmember Lieberman said there is a Marty Robbins concert that is taking place in Sun City
during the first weekend in March. For the last five years in a row, there was a large Marty
Robbins festival and concert in Willcox, Arizona. He said it belongs in Glendale, not in Willcox,
Arizona. Entertainers come from all over the world just to participate in that concert. He is
proudly associated with it and will continue to be associated with it.
6. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: PUBLIC COMMENT PLACEMENT
Presented by: Pamela Hanna, City Clerk
Staff is seeking guidance from Council on the placement of the public comment item on the
agenda. As requested by Councilmembers Alvarez and Lieberman additional information was
collected and was presented.
On March 1, 2011, Councilmember Lieberman requested information about moving the Public
Participation to the beginning of the City Council Meetings. Information was presented on
September 6, 2011. On January 17, 2012, Councilmember Alvarez and Councilmember
Lieberman requested information about moving the Public Participation to the beginning of the
City Council Meetings.
Councilmember Alvarez said she thinks public comment should be at the beginning of the
meeting, giving people a chance to speak their mind early on so they can go home and take care
of their families.
Councilmember Lieberman agrees with Councilmember Alvarez, as the council is there to serve
the public. It is not serving the public by keeping them at the meetings from thirty minutes to
four hours before they can speak. The public deserves to be heard first at the start of the meeting,
and an overwhelming majority of those cities surveyed have public comment at the beginning of
the meeting.
Councilmember Martinez believes public comment should be kept as it is right now.
Councilmember Knaack asked the Mayor to give some background on the decision since she was
here when the decision was made.
Mayor Scruggs said the intent of moving the public comment on items on which no action can be
taken to the end of the meeting was because every single item that is on the agenda for action is a
time for the public to speak. But, time is of the essence on those items because a decision will be
made that evening. So, what Council was finding, if you think about liquor licenses, those often
have some interest by the public. At that time, the city was having a lot more activity in terms of
zoning cases. Now, the city didn't move this forward to help the zoning attorneys, it was for all
11
the people who were coming out from the neighborhoods that wanted to talk about what was
going to affect them, their property, their ownership, their neighborhood, their families. There
were times, and she was sure that several of you will remember these times, when Council would
have an hour and a half of comment from the public on something that was going to affect their
neighborhood versus people who are coming to talk about something that nothing can be done
about. So, because things were somewhat similar back then where there were a few regulars who
would come and maybe speak for thirty to forty-five minutes in the beginning of the meeting
about something that nothing could be done about, even though those people had two weeks in
between meetings to, if there was a real issue, try and work through it. Council was finding
people who were in situations where decisions were going to be made that evening that directly
affected them. So, Council did a lot of rearranging. The zoning cases used to be toward the end
of the agenda and it was moved up and Council put the resolutions and ordinances that usually
don't affect the public so much to the back. The liquor licenses were left at the front because,
again, those affect the public and the neighborhoods. So, Council rearranged the entire process,
and allowed for citizen comments at the end, again, remembering that the citizens, the people of
our community that Council served, can come and speak on every one of the five, ten, fifteen,
twenty, thirty, forty or forty-five items on agendas. Every one of them is an opportunity for our
citizens to speak about something that is going to be decided that is going to directly affect them.
The people who are there to talk about things on which there will not be any action taken that
evening and on which action generally can be initiated through talking to councilmembers or
staff in-between those two weeks that was moved to the end. That was the reason why it was
done; to serve the public who would be having decisions made that would directly affect them
immediately.
Councilmember Knaack said most of the cities said it is only three minutes and Glendale allows
five. She said Phoenix only allows two minutes. Some of the cities only allow so many speakers
so Glendale is pretty liberal in what they do. She suggested Council leave it the way it is.
Mayor Scruggs said she didn't know if Phoenix has changed their process or not, but Phoenix's
process was that there were designated listeners on the Phoenix City Council, so if it was your
turn to take this meeting, the majority of the council would leave, but the three of you who were
assigned to listen to public comment would stay and they rotate that around, so there certainly is
not any opportunity to close out the public. She thought the difference is that there have not been
these very significant situations recently, so a lot of people don't remember that. Let's say
Council has an agenda with twenty-five items on it, and twelve of them affect the public. They
can speak for sixty minutes during the meeting before they get to speak about something that's
not on the agenda, so this is definitely not closing out the public.
Councilmember Clark commented she was here when the public has spoken at the beginning of
meetings and end of meetings. She has no problem with either format. As a convenience to the
public, Councilmember Clark believes public comment should come at the beginning of the
meeting and there is something to be said for the general public having to wait up to several
hours simply to make public comment. The public should be afforded that right and convenience
at the beginning of the meeting.
12
Mayor Scruggs said Mr. and Mrs. Marwick would be really happy. Councilmember Clark said
we haven't seen them lately. Mayor Scruggs said no, because they go back to Chicago during the
summer. That's exactly the point, when you have citizens comments and they are very
interesting. She has found both of them fascinating and she listens to Mr. Marwick at MAG also.
He is very, very knowledgeable. They come week after week after week to talk on the same
issue, which is that Glendale should change their direction. It's not about anything that affects
their neighborhood because they don't live in the city, but is there a majority that would like to
change?
Councilmember Alvarez would like to drop this issue at this time and bring it back in January or
March. Mayor Scruggs said Councilmember Alvarez could since there will be new members of
the Council.
7. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: COUNCIL DINNERS AND
NETWORKING EVENTS
Presented by: Pamela Hanna, City Clerk
At January 17, 2012 Council Workshop, Councilmember Lieberman stated that he wants to meet
with the Westside neighbors such as Luke Air Force Base, Avondale, Litchfield Park, Peoria,
Surprise, and others. CM Lieberman advised he will give money from his personal city budget
towards this. He recognized that this has come forward already but he is not satisfied with the
outcome. This item is for Council discussion and direction.
Staff is seeking guidance from Council to determine if they desire to continue with networking
events in fiscal year 2012-2013.
Councilmember Knaack said at the last networking event only about five of the fifteen attending
the event were elected officials. This is the sixth time this issue has been brought up in two
years. The majority of the council has said five times they don't need to do this. Councilmember
Knaack said she continues to believe Council should not do this.
Councilmember Alvarez believes they should be spending time talking about this issue as many
times as necessary.
Councilmember Knaack responded saying she considers this a waste of staff's time. Staff is
already hard-pressed.
Councilmember Alvarez said Council always request information from staff. Council has them
doing a lot of work for things the staff doesn't believe in, but they still have to do it.
Councilmember Alvarez said the self-control should be with the council and not give anything
else to the staff, but when it is, you will have a special relationship and not be segregated from
everybody, and then it is worth it.
Councilmember Martinez asked what the networking event cost. Councilmember Knaack said
the Council Office paid for it and the cost was minimal, about $100.00. Councilmember
13
Martinez said he had no problem with networking events, like Glitter and Glow, but not the
dinners.
Councilmember Lieberman said he would continue to bring up this issue up and Glendale should
be a leader in the west valley. He doesn't worry about staff time because, with seven staff
people, they will spend part of a day on this, in an afternoon. He believes it is vital to meet with
contemporaries in neighboring cities. Councilmember Lieberman will contribute toward dinner
because he feels it is a necessary thing they do.
Councilmember Clark said she no longer supports this. She said the Arizona League of Cities
and Towns is the perfect venue to network with their counterparts in the west valley. She said at
the dinners, each council stays together. They don't split up and sit with people from other cities.
There are several venues to meet with others throughout the year. This shouldn't strictly be a
Glendale-led issue. Other west valley cities could host dinners.
Mayor Scruggs said she wanted to point out that the other communities regularly send Glendale
invitations to events in their communities, either a park dedication or a parade in Avondale,
Buckeye has an annual parade. There are a lot of things going on in other cities that Council was
sent invitations to. She thought that was their outreach to Glendale to get to know them better
and what is important in their community. She doesn't think Glendale does that. She didn't
think Glendale takes advantage of that. So, there are very many opportunities to network.
Regarding the Glendale Glitters event that Glendale has, the people who showed up were very
pleased to have been there, but everybody kind of looked around like now what. They thought
there was supposed to be something happening and there wasn't and the attendees were just
standing there. It was mostly Council and some of them and then they said well they would go to
dinner. If Council was going to do something like that, they have to think about what it is they
are going to do once the folks were here, because they were totally confused as to an appropriate
time to leave, would they hurt any feelings, should they stay. They came with their friends and
they stayed with their friends. She did not believe they needed to do anything further on this.
She commented that Councilmember Lieberman was leaving his Cactus post so his successor
may not want to offer the Cactus District budget for this or item number six.
8. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: RESIDENTIAL LOCK BOX PROGRAM
Presented by: Chris DeChant, Executive Assistant Chief
This council report is in response to a Council Item of Special Interest requested by
Councilmember Martinez at the January 17, 2012 Workshop. Councilmember Martinez asked for
information to institute a security lock box program where homeowners would have house keys
in lock boxes and emergency workers would be able to access the keys.
Elderly or disabled residents who participate in lock box programs provide emergency personnel
quick access to their homes without having to force entry. A lock box could potentially reduce
the resident's concern for damage to their property from forced entry by emergency responders.
However, in all cases emergency responders will exercise their judgment to utilize the key or
force entry.
14
Councilmember Knaack commented her mother had a lockbox, but Councilmember Knaack was
unable to get the lockbox opened. There are some issues with this. If there is a fire, the door
would be knocked down to get in due to the time it would take to get the lockbox opened. She
believes it is a great idea, though.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the lockbox program is widely used in other cities. Chief
DeChant responded that the city of Peoria was able to obtain a grant to set up their entire
program. The numbers of people using the program varies from city to city. Councilmember
Martinez thinks this is a good idea, but the cost is an issue. Chief DeChant said the most low
cost solution would be to mimic Goodyear's plan where citizens purchase and install their own
lockbox. They will provide the Fire Department with instructions on how to access the lockbox,
so it could be accessed. There would be limited cost to the city for tracking purposes and
inputting this into the system. Councilmember Martinez recommended this plan.
Mayor Scruggs said she would go that way. She said that she thought about this ever since
reading it and thought about whether she would want one or not. She didn't know, but to limit
people's choices is not a good thing. The Fire Department looks for all sorts of ways to provide
additional service to the public. Think about somebody who may be is gone for a month or two
months in the summertime and it's not like the house is raging on fire and would you really want
to break down their door and then who's in charge of putting a door up because they are gone in
another state. Obviously, the elderly, come to mind quite a bit. She was wondering is this just
for Fire? Is there any interaction with police at all, like those calls, those burglar alarm calls and
you don't know if somebody's in there or not in there. In any of these cities, are the Police
Departments also using the lockboxes? Chief DeChant said he was not prepared to answer that.
The Fire Departments are using them, but only specifically for injured people and medical issues.
Mayor Scruggs said so it is only for injured. She didn't get that from the material. So, in other
words, if somebody is gone on vacation and there's a small fire in the house or whatever, Fire
wouldn't go use the lockbox, you'd break down the door. Chief DeChant said if the information
is in the dispatch system, they could use the lockbox to access that. He said typically these
would be used for folks that are impaired, could not get to a door, but they have a way to access
911. Mayor Scruggs said she support going forward and let people make the choice. She
supports the residents buying their own lockbox, which she thinks would be less liability for the
city too. They can go buy whatever they want. Does Goodyear charge something for the initial
registration of this?
Chief DeChant said Goodyear does not charge for this. Fire would draft a liability clause with
the City Attorney's Office and Risk Management. That would be the only staff work required
and then making sure the information gets entered into the dispatching system. Goodyear does
not charge and a recommendation would be that Glendale would not either.
Vice Mayor Frate asked if the lockbox is the same that realtor's use. Chief DeChant said there
were a lot of different manufacturers of lockboxes and you can purchase them at a home
improvement store. The citizen would choose the lockbox they felt would be most appropriate.
15
Vice Mayor Frate recommended residents use the simplest combination of numbers for easier
access. Chief DeChant said he could provide a sample of the simplest type of lockbox.
Mayor Scruggs said she thought that the suggestions are good, but telling people what to buy,
and if that doesn't work, you've set up liability for the city. So, suggest the fewer numbers, it
makes it faster and so forth. She asked Councilmember Knaack if she had any idea as an
insurance agent, whether this would affect or lower their insurance. Councilmember Knaack said
it would not lower their insurance.
Councilmember Clark thinks the lockbox is a great idea but she does not support it. There are
costs associated with this, input from the Attorney's Office, ongoing maintenance for this
program. The Fire Department has only received two requests to provide lockboxes for
residential use over the past four years. This is not a screaming need, and she would not support
it.
Mayor Scruggs said how about we modify the direction to ask them to put something together
that indicates how much time is involved, how much cost is involved, and then come back again
and review and maybe at that time, the public will start to hear about it and let Council know if
this is something they would find useful.
Councilmember Martinez said this is providing a service, as opposed to the memorials they
talked about earlier. This service may save a life. It's not a fair comparison with the roadside
memorials. It would be voluntary and only minimal staff time. He thinks the Mayor's
suggestions are good.
Councilmember Clark said Council was looking at these services in an economic situation that is
not robust. She doesn't think it is wise to move forward due to the fact next year Council may
have to look at cutting services. However, she would entertain the Mayor's suggestion of looking
at the staff costs of this service and look at it again in the future.
Councilmember Knaack said many people might have a rescue alert system already in place.
With the lockbox in place, rescue could get right in.
Mayor Scruggs said you bring up a good point though. Somebody could have an injury or have a
need that doesn't really warrant calling 911, but a family member who doesn't have a key then
could use the lockbox. The cities that have had them, she knew Peoria just went in, is there
anyone that has had this in place for a year. Chief DeChant said he believed Sun City and also
Goodyear. Mayor Scruggs said so besides cost and staff time, she thought there were other
issues that would be helpful in a future staff report, such as what Councilmember Knaack's
talking about the rescue alert. Then somebody, a listener, who is interested in this topic, could
send her a question saying what happens if somebody moves or they change their lockbox thing,
how do you do that. She thought that the cities that have had this in place for a while already
have come up with some of these unique situations and that might be helpful too. She believed
strongly that this is a service of the department that the city was required to have for the public to
protect and to serve. This is a service just like the crisis teams. They are volunteers, but yes,
16
there is money spent on those programs too. If it is feasible, make it available to folks. Not
everybody is going to want it, but some might.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if there was a problem getting into homes a percentage of
times. Chief DeChant answered they have had issues before where an injured person might be
unable to get to the door. If they don't have a lockbox and no can come to let them in, they
would force entry. Councilmember Lieberman asked if the percentage was five percent. Chief
DeChant advised he did not have a number. It would strictly be happenstance with that particular
emergency and what is going on with that person. Councilmember Lieberman said Surprise gets
fifty dollars for the box, and he asked if that was a reasonable fee to charge. Chief DeChant
answered that would be a reasonable fee if Glendale used the same type of program as Surprise,
where the city would purchase the lockbox, as opposed to using a program like Goodyear uses
where the citizens purchase and install the lockboxes themselves.
Mayor Scruggs asked Chief DeChant if he had any questions regarding the direction. Chief
DeChant advised he had no questions. Mayor Scruggs said it would be an interesting report, for
sure, especially the variances from the other departments.
9. COUNCIL ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST: CAMELBACK RANCH GLENDALE
Presented by: Diane Goke, Chief Financial Officer
The purpose of this report is to address Councilmember Lieberman's request for information on
the finances of Camelback Ranch Glendale. Councilmember Lieberman requested information
on the finances of Camelback Ranch Glendale and the involvement of the consulting firm
TLHocking&Associates LLC.
The financing for the stadium was finalized in October 2008 and bonds were issued by the
Western Loop 101 Public Facilities Corporation in the amount of $199.75 million with an
interest rate of 5.75-7.5%. The bonds are an obligation of the city and are secured by the excise
taxes of the city. The bonds were issued with a call date of five years in order to take advantage
of future refinancing opportunities since interest rates were fairly high at the time of issuance.
Debt service payments of$13 million annually have been funded by a revenue stabilization fund
that was part of the original bond issuance.
Councilmember Lieberman asked how was the city refinancing the $431 million that is owed,
Ms. Goke advised they are working with the financing community, but the matters of the Coyotes
and the sales tax have to be settled. Councilmember Lieberman asked why the Coyotes issue has
to be settled in regard to Camelback Ranch Glendale. Ms. Goke advised there was no direct
relationship, however, the finances of the city and the future finances of the city depend a lot on
that agreement. The finance community looks at everything of the entire city before they make a
decision.
Councilmember Lieberman asked the amount of money that the city received, $87,443, was that
the percentage of ticket sales that was going to the city because of the $33 million put into
Camelback Ranch. Ms. Goke advised Glendale's agreement with the City of Phoenix allows
17
Glendale to recover eighty percent of the generalfund taxes that are generated at the stadium and
that includes concessions, ticket sales and that sort of thing. Councilmember Lieberman asked if
that was separate or if it was included in the payback of$37 million. Ms. Goke stated that is the
amount that the city received from the City of Phoenix, eighty percent of the taxes generated.
Councilmember Lieberman asked does that include the amount that they guaranteed as payback
from Camelback Road. Is that included in the $87,000? Mr. Skeete advised the portion of the
sales tax collected from the facilities at Camelback Ranch and the surrounding development in
Phoenix is dedicated to the city. It is not separated out. The portion of the infrastructure
development is about $37 million and the sales tax collected is to be applied to Glendale over a
period of time. There is a time limit on the collection of that sales tax. Councilmember
Lieberman said in twenty years that will never approach the $37 million they agreed to pay
Glendale back for the money spent on Camelback Ranch. Mr. Skeete advised the agreement is
whichever comes first.
Councilmember Lieberman commented that he asked because Glendale was not in first position
to receive funds from AZSTA and the city may only get a very small portion of the amount owed.
He asked if there was any current agreement on any stipulation from AZSTA for that service.
Ms. Goke advised the original agreement was for $67 million, coming from the AZSTA. The
first payment was expected in 2019; however it is contingent on their funding. Glendale's
position has been moved out for several years
Mayor Scruggs said Mr. Skeete, and she was asking him because she was not sure Ms. Goke got
into the agreements as much, would he refresh Council's memories regarding land ownership out
there, who owns what, what does the city of Glendale own that is developed, not developed,
could he recap that please. Mr. Skeete advised the city originally owned slightly over 200 acres
of the Camelback Ranch. About 140 acres were used for the facility and another 67 acres were
sold to the Mainstreet Development Group. Mayor Scruggs asked how much did the city get for
that. Mr. Skeete said the payment was in the vicinity of$10 million for that. Mayor Scruggs
asked so if the city gave the 140 for the teams, the city didn't get any money from them, right.
Mr. Skeete said that is correct. The bank has repossessed the 67 acres that was sold to Mainstreet
Development and it is currently up for sale again. There were an additional ten acres that the city
still owns along Ballpark Boulevard that was carved out for a separate sale, but was not
completed.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the city was paid the $10 million. Mr. Skeete answered yes.
Mayor Scruggs said and the 140 acres that the facility is built on, does the city own that or was
that given to, or do we retain ownership. Mr. Skeete advised the city owns it. Mayor Scruggs
said so right now we have ten acres is all. Mr. Skeete clarified that was additional undeveloped
land. Mayor Scruggs asked if Mr. Skeete had any idea what that is worth. Mr. Skeete said he did
not know at this time. Mayor Scruggs said is there any other land in this area. She commented
that she had heard a lot of great ideas coming from people running for office that don't always
seem to have all the facts. Is there any other land that can be sold off or traded to somebody or
anything like that? Mr. Skeete stated in this area, no. The parcels have since been returned to
the owners and all are with the mortgage company that had the lien on them. Those parcels are
18
now all for sale. There are 16 Yz acres of city-owned property north of Bethany Home Road,
south of Maryland, that is also available, but that is not part of the Mainstreet Development.
That property was purchased by the Utilities Department from ADOT to secure a site for a water
pump station for a water treatment plant.
Mayor Scruggs clarified there were originally 400 acres in the whole Mainstreet. One hundred
forty of that is owned by the city of the 400 acres that the ballpark sits on. The city also owned
60 of those 400 and sold those to Mainstreet for around $10 million, is that correct? Mr. Skeete
said that was correct. Mayor Scruggs said so that is all part of the 400 acres, this discussion is
about the same 400 acres, and now the city still owns 10 acres that is along Ballpark Boulevard.
Mr. Skeete said that is correct. Mayor Scruggs asked now of the 400 acres, how did the city
come into possession of 400 acres. Mr. Skeete said Mainstreet Development did. Mayor
Scruggs said and the 140 acres that the facility sits on is the 140 acres that the city has owned for
a long time to protect our airport. Mr. Skeete said that is correct. Mayor Scruggs said so that is
the 140 acres that back in the nineties, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors that sat on the
board at that time thought it was a swell idea to let that land be used for housing development,
residential development. The challenge was well if Glendale doesn't like it, then Glendale can
just go buy the land, so Glendale went and bought the land to protect the airport because they
were at that time going to build within 1000 feet of the end of our runway. The development
plan would go within 1000 feet of the end of our runway, which would pretty much shut down
the airport and then the city would have to pay back the FAA money that they gave the city for
the airport. So, it was kind of a gauntlet that was thrown down because she was there and she
remembered. So the city bought it to protect the airport and then leased it out for farming, for
agricultural purposes because the City of Phoenix was very concerned Glendale was going to do
something terrible like put a wastewater treatment plant there, or whatever, so it was leased out
for agricultural purposes. The last lessee that she remembered was Mr. David Russeau, who is
now the president of Salt River Project, the Board of Directors. She asked if she had that history
accurate. She continued that was how the city came into ownership of all of that. It's good as a
refresher to put out because a lot of time has passed and some of the councilmembers weren't
even on the council when the city was facing that threat. She was trying real hard to remember
the developer's name, it began with a"B". He was going to put up a lot of little bitty houses that
were all going to be right there and the land at that time was in the county, so they got to make
the decision.
Vice Mayor Frate said he was glad this was said because a lot of residents of Glendale don't
know that the city owned that land. Mayor Scruggs said that's right. Vice Mayor Frate said the
city may owe money on that property, but the city also owns 140 acres with a ballpark facility.
It's tangible, bricks and mortar. The land will always be valuable. The ten acres on Ballpark
Boulevard will only appreciate. There is no urgency to sell it. It could be a future hotel, it could
be anything.
Mayor Scruggs said and just to go a little bit further. That decision that the city made to purchase
the land at Camelback Ranch is not the only time that the council made a decision to invest
millions of dollars to protect an important city asset. The airport is a huge asset. If that was
closed down, there's no place else you can move the airport to. That's the only place it can be.
19
The city did a similar thing in purchasing several parcels; she was going to say three or four,
maybe more, around the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plan. Most folks that live in Glendale
don't even know that the city owns Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant, much less where it is.
But, those folks who are familiar with the north part of the valley, if you think of 67th Avenue and
Pyramid Peak, that's where the water treatment plant is, that was the middle of nowhere. The
police shooting range was out there. There was nothing out there that they could go shoot out
there, whatever. Then all of a sudden, development started coming and it started up north and it
started moving down further and further and the city realized if they didn't buy up the land,
others would. They would build houses and they would find the water treatment plant to be an
extreme nuisance. They would probably think it smelled, they might be worried about chlorine
or whatever. Council sat here and asked the question did they want to spend that kind of money
for land that Glendale could never use. Council really didn't and it turned out there were
different sized parcels and several owners and a huge amount of money, but people have water in
the city of Glendale and Peoria. Peoria, yes, Glendale gets paid to develop their own, on land
that is not in the City of Glendale. Vice Mayor Frate said it's Phoenix, but Glendale owns it.
Mayor Scruggs said it is in Phoenix, it may have been County at that time, but it's Phoenix. If
people go up there now and they would see how close the developments come and Glendale's
land is the only buffer from development coming right up to the fence line. It's the only buffer
and sometimes you have to make those investments. It is not returning a darn thing to the city
other than the city can tell their people they have water. Maybe that's a good return.
Councilmember Clark said it is a good return. Thank you for recapping that for me.
Councilmember Martinez said it's a refresher.
10. FUTURE COUNCIL ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Presented by: Horatio Skeete, Acting City Manager
This is the quarterly opportunity for City Council to identify topics of interest they would like the
City Manager to research and assess for placement on a future workshop agenda.
Staff requests Council to identify future items of interest for follow-up by staff during the next
quarter.
Councilmember Knaack said her council item of interest is council items of interest.
Councilmember Knaack asked about revisiting council items of interest, especially with the new
council coming on, it would be an opportune time to look at this issue again, why we do them,
how often, the level of response from staff, the whole council items of interest.
Councilmember Knaack said it will probably be January before getting to this issue again.
Councilmember Martinez said it has to with the Adult Center. He would like to explore the
possibility of opening it up to use. Several Councilmembers were pushing for the facility to be a
multi-generational facility. Councilmember Martinez said it is something that it should be
looked at for some programs tailored for teens.
20
Mayor Scruggs said she was going to add on to Councilmember Knaack's. She didn't think that
it is complete. It's not just the council items of special interest. It is what other ways are there to
bring things forward. The Arizona Republic did a story that featured what happens in other cities
and other cities don't go through this obstructionist policy that the Glendale City Council has
been held to. The policy definitely is one that precludes any ideas coming forward from really
ever getting legs, or doing it in a timely manner. So, she would suggest, in January when
whoever is here is here, that it goes beyond what Council has now and say, it seems to work okay
in other cities for the Council to be able to have more of a role in bringing items forward, setting
agendas and determining what issues need to be worked.
Councilmember Martinez said regarding the items of interest, the process was you needed three
Councilmembers to agree to bring a certain topic forward. He wanted to throw the idea out there
for consideration.
Mayor Scruggs said the open meeting law interpretation changed that, but hopefully that will be
part of the report.
11. FORMATION OF AN AUDIT COMMITTEE
Presented by: Diane Goke, Chief Financial Officer
Staff is proposing the formation of an Audit Committee. Upon formation, the committee would
be a part of the annual financial review team. Such a committee is typical for most jurisdictions
the size of the City of Glendale and is recommended by the Government Finance Officers
Association (GFOA) as a component of prudent financial management and best practices. With
Council affirmation, this item will subsequently be brought to a Voting Meeting for official
Council action.
As a part of the city's continuing effort to increase transparency related to the city's financial
data, a review of"Best Practices," as recommended by GFOA, highlighted several opportunities
for the accessibility of financial information for the public. This year's budget process also
highlighted the interest the public has in the financial operations of the city. The Financial
Services Department believes that the creation of an Audit Committee will strengthen the
relationship between the various levels of the governmental structure through opening up the
financial records of the city for greater review. This committee will complement the other
financial reporting tools and documents provided publicly such as"Follow Your Money" and the
quarterly financial reports; and in addition, the audits performed by the Internal Auditor that are
now available online for the public.
An Audit Committee provides an additional layer of oversight for the details related to the city's
finances. It provides members of the public and City Council an opportunity to directly
participate in the audit of the city's finances as a member of the committee. Not only does this
increase transparency, but it also provides continued opportunities to showcase the methods and
practices of the city's Financial Services Department.
Vice Mayor Frate asked where the Glendale City Auditor was involved in this process. Ms.
Goke answered that the audit committee would only be dealing with the external auditors. They
21
also might look at the internal audit reports that come out and the findings in those reports, but
the committee would solely be responsible for the external audit.
Vice Mayor Frate asked if the internal auditor is doing enough audits to provide the information.
He thought the auditor might not be doing enough audits for a city this size. Mayor Scruggs said
Mr. Skeete you might want to review what you've sent us in memo form.
Mr. Skeete said he has asked the city auditor to develop an audit plan and to define a series of
processes in which she conducts the internal audits. The auditor has provided an audit plan that
has been posted on the website. The auditor is working on two full-blown audits of two
departments and two minor audits of processes in different areas of the city. The audit
department has only two employees currently.
Vice Mayor Frate said those audits are quite a bit more than has been done in the last couple of
years.
Mayor Scruggs said you are right, in sixty days. She asked Mr. Skeete to tell the public because
there was a lot of interest in this whole subject of audits. She asked where on the website would
an interested person find these audits that they can read. Mr. Skeete said the financial audits are
posted on the Finance Department's website, under the caption CAFR. Mayor Scruggs
commented just where everybody would know to go, right.
Mr. Skeete said there is also a link on the Follow Your Money page on the top right hand column
of the page. If you open the dollar sign, you will also see a link to the annual financial audits.
There is only one internal audit completed and posted and that is on the Audit Department's
website. It is under the City Auditor Department. It will give details on the audits occurring in
the city. Upon completion of the audit, it is posted on the website as well. The staff report
action plan will also be posted along with a timeline and changes that are to occur.
Mayor Scruggs said that's great. That has never existed in the history of this city. It's a lot of
work in sixty days. That's great. Congratulations. You are right, because there was quite a
backlog because permission was not being granted for the auditor to move forward so no
permission had been granted. So the CAFR thing is the big audit. Mr. Skeete said that's the
financial audit. Mayor Scruggs said but you might still want to put that under something other
than CAFR. She continued everybody who is listening who has been waiting for this kind of
information, there it is.
Councilmember Martinez asked if there was just one external audit a year. Ms. Goke advised
that is correct. The external audit is based on the financial information for the past fiscal year.
Councilmember Martinez asked if this audit committee would meet with external auditors and go
over information and report back to the council what will happen. Ms. Goke recommended that
once the committee is formed and sworn in that they meet with the external auditor to go over the
FY12 report which will be issued in November or December of this year, then go forward with
planning the audit plan for the next fiscal year.
22
Councilmember Clark said she loves the whole idea of an audit committee and the transparency
that it brings to Glendale government. She asked if someone from Risk Management Trust Fund
would be considered for the committee. Ms. Goke said one of the reasons they chose the
Municipal Property Corporation is that they deal with a lot of the city's finances for various
projects. Glendale also provides a report to them every year on the city's finances.
Councilmember Clark said the reason for possibly broadening the search for members is they are
looking for someone with a financial background. They might want to broaden the scope of
where the citizen expert would come from. She thinks this is really great.
Mayor Scruggs. Following on your suggestion that you expand this, if you have somebody from
the PFC or the MPC, there is almost like, not a conflict, but why is the same person doing both
things, versus somebody who is not already on one of the city committees or commissions, the
PFC probably will come under a lot of examination. She asked why not reach out and get
somebody else that is not sitting on another board or commission that is financially related.
Councilmember Clark asked why not make a requirement that it has to be a CPA or somebody in
the financial field with a certain level of expertise. Mayor Scruggs said but not sitting on another
city commission. Councilmember Clark agreed. Mayor Scruggs said yes, definitely, you want
someone with expertise, not just somebody who just says well I have time on my hands.
Councilmember Clark said the Mayor could write the criteria for a citizen participant, because
she knows the level of expertise for that. Mr. Skeete said the two citizen members do not have to
come from one of the financial related committees, but should have a financial background, so
staff will develop criteria for that and an application process. Mayor Scruggs said she would go
further and say that the person on the audit committee should not be sitting on one of the other
committees because those corporations are part of the audit. Mr. Skeete said not an exclusive
membership. Councilmember Clark said she would leave it open to see what citizens come
forward. Vice Mayor Frate said he was sure there were some qualified people on both. Mayor
Scruggs asked if the audit would look at the PFC and the MPC. Mr. Skeete said only to the
extent as they flow through the financial statement. Councilmember Clark suggested still leaving
it open. Mayor Scruggs said okay,just remember that what people are seeing that everything has
been closely held among a very few and now they are looking for things to be opened up so that
more people are brought in and get access to information. Mayor Scruggs said so there is
direction to create an audit committee.
Councilmember Martinez asked if they were going to get the criteria. Mayor Scruggs asked if
staff could bring the criteria back or take it to a meeting. Mr. Skeete said he will put together
criteria for the selection and will forward it to them.
Councilmember Clark said the committee was going to meet in November or December to
review the 2012 audit and it should be a temporary committee that lasts through December 31st
and then reconstitute the committee in January. Mayor Scruggs said for the information to be on
first workshop agenda after the committee is created including an agenda item to select two
Councilmembers to serve on the audit committee. She did not believe anybody was prepared to
do that today. Mr. Skeete and Ms. Goke said that was not the intent.
23
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:14 p.m.
24