8.17.04
Jousting, big staffs, blank checks and a bevy of emails: I was amazed by what the Black Knight and his company got away with this week, folks.
Consensual Changes?
Yet again—for a third week in a row, to be exact—during what would normally be a routine approval of the minutes, Representative Vivian Rojas asked that the minutes for the meeting of July 20th be postponed. That meeting, my friends, was the same meeting where a legion of proud El Pasoans marched to City Hall to demand that their representatives voice opposition to the reopening of ASARCO by filing a brief stating such. Wonder if that’s why Viv keeps asking for a postponement, and I wonder if she’s requested any changes to those minutes.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: [Municipal Clerk, Richarda Duffy Momsen, (915) 541-4127]
Approval of Minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting of July 20 and August 10, 2004.
(Attachment) - Regular City Council Meeting Minutes - 07/20/04
(Attachment) - Regular City Council Meeting Minutes - 08/10/04
The minutes for the 8/10/04 meeting were approved.
Power Outage
As you’ve probably heard, Dan Power, the City Representative for District 5, has resigned. While I didn’t agree with many of his votes (specifically, his support of Wardy’s Towne Centre boondoggle, his support of a City Manager, his initial vote against filing an ASARCO brief and others), I always commended him for his good work. Whether one likes the idea or not, Dan Power is the one who initiated the idea of a City Manager system of government (not Joe Wardy). He also championed tourism and economic development, fought for programs that help disabled people, and (my personal favorite) told the emperor he had no clothes by pointing out that appointing Jim Martinez to the position of Chief Administrative Officer violated the City Charter. He was one of the most committed and hard-working members of Council and one of the few who voted his conscience (not his campaign contribution list).
His resignation is a shame.
However, I’m hoping that some good folks will take the opportunity to run for this open seat in November. Presi Ortega, the former District 5 City Representative, has already announced that he will run, but this community needs new ideas and fresh faces, not a re-tread like Mr. Ortega. More important, we need someone with ideas that go beyond filling potholes and who does more than spout empty shibboleths to private enterprise. We need a forward-thinking responsible voice on Council and someone who will stand up against Wardy’s cronyism.
C’mon folks, we’ve got until the October 1st filing deadline; certainly we can come up with someone!
Back to the meeting. During an early part of the meeting, John Cook politely asked to have Mr. Power excused because although he had resigned, he is not officially out of office until the fifth day after the resignation. Technically, Power was still a City representative at the time of Tuesday’s meeting.
Wardy bristled at the idea as did Lozano. Those two put up a petty and juvenile fight, claiming he was indeed not “excused,” but the other Council members finally stepped in and supported Cook’s efforts.
The Power Fallout
Power had placed four items on this week’s agenda, and since he was not there to champion them, the items were deleted:
26. PUBLIC HEARING - MAYOR AND COUNCIL: An Ordinance Amending Title 18 (Building and Construction), by creating Chapter 8.11 (Barrier Free Construction), to require Specific Design Features to create barrier-free construction in new Single Family Dwellings, Duplexes, Triplexes, and Townhomes constructed within approved subdivisions. The penalty as being provided in Chapter 1.08. (Attachment) [Representative Daniel S. Power, (915) 541-4189]
21A. Discussion and action on a tourism budget proposal for billboards, brochures, signage, and bus wraps. [Representative Daniel S. Power, (915) 541-4189]
21B. Discussion and action that the City of El Paso partner with the Empowerment Zone on the development of Texas Avenue as a tourism district, and instruct staff to prepare proposal(s) to be presented to city council within 180 days. [Representative Daniel S. Power, (915) 541-4189]
21C. Discussion and action on the creation of a separate office of Tourism within the Department of Economic Development. [Representative Daniel S. Power, (915) 541-4189]
Fortunately, Representative John Cook promised to take up the charge on item 26 (creating barrier-free construction, which would be a tremendous step forward in this community, especially for disabled people) and although it was deleted, the item will be brought back in eight weeks. All the other issues, however, are probably dead.
Project Abajo?
During last week’s meeting (and since the decision was originally made this summer), John Cook has been fighting against a Council decision to pull Community Development Block Grant Social Service money away from social service groups and turn some of it over to Project Arriba. See last week’s notes for more details. Such a move would result in a financial tug of war between the social service collaborative groups and Wardy and his loyalty to Project Arriba and EPISO.
21D. Discussion and action on the adoption of strategic and funding priorities for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Social Service Collaboratives for the 31st CD Program Year (2005-2006), including, but not limited to, revising the funding allocations to the Social Service Collaboratives approved at the July 9, 2004 Special City Council Meeting. [Mayor Pro-Tem, Anthony W. Cobos, (915) 541-4123]
Susan Austin, who wanted to abstain from the vote, left the room so as not to participate in the discussion or the vote.
When it came time to discuss the item, Anthony Cobos announced that, “We have a compromise” between the Council members who support the decision made over the summer and the collaborative groups. When assessing the previous decision to cut funding to the homeless and shift it to Project Arriba, Anthony Cobos called it “hasty” and “an extreme approach.” He’s absolutely right (oh, God…did I just say Cobos was right?). While it’s a good thing to include more people, the manner in which this was done (without research and with one goal: to fund a pet project) was inappropriate.
Cobos specifically referenced his downtown constituents who spoke last week on behalf of renewing funding to the homeless collaborative; their concern was that the homeless population would go back on the streets of downtown El Paso if the City didn’t continue to support the homeless shelter.
Cobos outlined the financial compromise, but an unhappy Wardy didn’t like it and called it “tokenism.”
Wardy explained that “I’m not against helping the homeless, but we have other needs in the community.” Wardy’s reasoning in shifting the money away from the homeless and towards Project Arriba is that he wants to begin funding “economic self sufficiency” programs.
Cobos pointed out that when funding is cut to the homeless collaborative groups, these organizations lose federal matching funds.
Cushing jumped in and said, “I, myself, we voted and we approved something…and I think what we’re doing here, is more than anything, delaying the process…by continuing to second guess ourselves…I wouldn’t be adverse to some adjustment, but I wouldn’t be interested in any token adjustment.” Maybe it was the lighting, but I could’ve sworn Cushing’s nose turned a distinctly brown hue. Odd.
King of Swamp Castle
Wardy complained that “I want to remind council that there has to be some leadership from this Council…this is trying to change a strategy to serve more groups in the community…we have to open up this process to more in the community,” and referring to the controversy, he claimed that “it’s been driven way out of proportion.”
Wardy also kept bringing up the amount of funding the collaborative and homeless coalitions receive from other sources.
Cook, who pointed out that Wardy did a great job identifying additional funding numbers for the homeless groups, wanted to know how much we (the taxpayers) are paying for “economic opportunity” (i.e. Project Arriba) in total. Wardy said, “Well, I think you already know the answer to that question; why don’t you tell me.” Cook told Wardy that it was not a rhetorical question and asked again, “How much have you already placed in Economic Opportunity in Economic Development?” (I know the answer to that one! We’ve already shelled out $120,000 in City money, Mr. Wardy.)
Wardy responded by saying, “they’re not related, Mr. Cook…and if you want to joust, we can joust.”
“Fine,” said Cook, “Then I can start.” He thanked Cobos for all his work on the compromise and said, “We don’t want to create an economic development problem by putting the homeless on the street.” He added that he doesn’t “see how when we come up with a ten-year plan to reduce chronic homelessness in El Paso, cutting funding is how we get there.”
At that point, I expected the Wardy, the Black Knight, to proclaim that his cuts to the programs were “Just a surface wound!”
Florence Fowler from the Children’s Collaborative told Wardy that “No one is disagreeing with your drive and your vision…you’ve changed part of our vision, you have made tremendous impact. Allow us with a new City Manager to do a study to identify correctly what the funds need to be used for.”
Wardy told her he was willing to compromise on his position but he was not willing to support the compromise the groups came up with.
Snipping at the Cuts
Cobos gave up his first offer only minutes later and suddenly put up another compromise, one that gave Wardy much of what he was asking for, which meant taking a huge chunk from the social service organizations.
Ms. Fowler said she was “offended” by Cobos’ newly suggested cuts and Wardy’s desire to take money away from “five-year-olds who are so poor they can’t afford school uniforms and seniors who can’t buy food…the people in this community who go unserved” in order to fund “economic opportunity.” And as a direct response to Wardy’s callous criticism that “This isn’t their [the homeless collaborative’s] money,” she added, “We don’t call it our money.” It isn’t Wardy’s money either, although one wonders sometimes if he recognizes that.
Pretty soon, numbers were flying, spreadsheets were being posted, and I had no idea where the cuts were being made; however, because Council would soon have to recess (they were holding a 12:00 noon press conference to announce the appointment of Joyce Wilson as the new City Manager) the collaborative folks agreed to work outside of the Chambers and come up with yet another compromise.
Before the recess, Bill Schlessinger, one of the activists, stepped up to the podium and stated that he wanted the social service organizations to be able to compete in this new category created by Wardy.
Debbie Hamlyn, a Deputy CAO at the City, said that she felt that “just to be clear, what’s going on here is that they’re trying to move specific projects to a category…and that’s not what we’re about. We’re looking at opening this process up…what Mr. Schlessinger is talking about is moving a project to economic opportunity and applying for it.”
Yes, Ms. Hamlyn, when there’s money out there to compete for, folks might just want to apply and compete for that money. The impression I got from what Hamlyn said was that she didn’t really want the homeless coalition folks to be able to compete for that money in the economic opportunity category at all. Clearly, she knew that her mayor wanted that money to go to a particular group and the homeless coalition is not that group. She’s such a good sycophant…er…soldier!
Representative Cook asked Council to recess for half an hour, but before they did, they quickly took up item 21E
(By the way, Austin came back into the room when it came time to appoint the City Manager.)
Halftime
The item was approved unanimously with (thankfully) no discussion:
21E. Discussion and action on a Resolution that the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign an Employment Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" with Joyce Wilson to perform the duties of City Manager of the City of El Paso, Texas. (Attachment) [Mayor & Council, Adrian Ocegueda, (915) 541-4145]
In one of the oddest press conferences I’ve ever seen, Wardy, the new City Manager, and the entire City Council squeezed behind the podium in Council Chambers to make the introduction.
Wardy announced that “On behalf of the Mayor and Council today,I would like to present Joyce Wilson, who was just acclimated [sic] by our vote, to be the City’s first City Manager.”
Cobos said, “We want to welcome her, bienvenidos.” (En actualidad, Señor Cobos, that should be the singular “bienvenida.”) Cobos congratulated Wardy for taking the lead on this (and again, let me remind folks at home, it was Dan Power who pushed for this three years ago and it was the previous CAO and City Attorney who did most of the work).
Once the press conference was over, the meeting was resumed.
Compromising the Compromise
Once the recess was over, the collaborative folks came back with a compromise. Again, I was confused about the details, but what I caught was that the homeless collaborative would be reduced by $25,000; programs targeting children, mental health, seniors and disabled people would each be reduced by a little over $8,000. Ultimately, $50,113 would go Project Arriba…er…“economic opportunity.”
Cushing and Escobar voted no; Lozano, Cook, Rojas and Cobos voted yes.
Tightening Everyone Else’s Belt
I actually don’t have anything to say about the following item:
/I<29.>PUBLIC HEARING - HUMAN RESOURCES: An Ordinance amending Ordinance 8065, Civil Service Rules and Regulations, Rule 16, Hearings, Section 2, Continuance of Appeals Hearings, to change the procedures for requesting and granting a continuance. (Attachment) [Human Resources, Terry A. Bond, (915) 541-4509]
However, speaking of Human Resources, I couldn’t help but snicker when I read the following article in the El Paso Times: http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20040816-156214.shtml. I’d like to remind folks at home that Mayor Wardy has announced that there will be some belt-tightening at City Hall because of a limited budget; 100 positions will be eliminated and layoffs have also been announced.
Father Knows Best
I’d like to also remind my readers that City Council has already hired a City Manager. The City Manager will be taking over most of the Mayor’s responsibilities and, as a result, the mayor will become a figurehead.
However, our ever cost-conscious mayor has stated in no uncertain terms that he will not be doing any of the belt-tightening. Instead, he will retain his nearly $300,000/year staff including two Executive Assistants, an Executive Secretary, public relations staff and a secretary.
Meanwhile, the new City Manager, who will be taking over all of the Mayor’s administrative responsibilities including oversight of more than 6,000 city employees, will be given one secretary.
Let me get this straight. Wardy wants to lay off hundreds so that, as a figurehead, he can maintain his large and very expensive staff. That makes sense. Okay, never mind.
At least one City representative supports Wardy’s efforts to hang onto his entire staff. In an email response to one of his constituents protesting the salaries for executive staff on the 10th floor, Lozano essentially brushes off this taxpayer’s concern. Here’s a look at the exchange:
-----Original Message-----
SENT: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 10:17 AM
TO: district#3@elpasotexas.gov
SUBJECT: Suggestion ((Other))
I urge you to consider carefully and to question why the Mayor's office needs so much staff at highly inflated salaries now that a City Manager is hired. Please consider how our tax dollars are being spent on individuals with highly inflated salaries.
-----Reply-----
FROM: "Lozano, Jose A." LozanoJA@ci.el-paso.tx.us
RE: Suggestion ((Other))
DATE: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:40:05 -0600
I believe that that is the Mayors decision, he knows best!
Obviously, Lozano isn’t the least bit interested in constituent concerns when it comes to this issue. I hope the others feel differently.
Who Needs Services When We Have Executive Staff?
An additional issue that came up this week was that both Robert Cushing (the self-anointed City employee “advocate”) and Joe Wardy went on the record as stating that they would like to make even more staff cuts (not their own of course) in the future: http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20040819-157370.shtml. The morning that this article appeared (August 19th), both Wardy and Cushing called in to a local morning talk show on am radio to back track. Although Cushing made these statements in a public meeting and Wardy made his statements to a seasoned reporter, Cushing denied making the statements and Wardy complained about being misquoted. Then they both stated that they thought the City employees (read: voters) were great. (By the way, the Times stood behind their reporter, calling the quotes “accurate” http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/opinion/ourviews/20040820-158193.shtml.)
What is not a mistake is that these folks will be eliminating 100 positions in a City government that is already pretty lean. Positions for worker bees will be cut, making the City more top heavy and an already challenged city organization will be run with fewer hands. What we can ultimately expect is a decline in the delivery and availability of City services.
In fact, in a Friday story in the newspaper, Laura Uribarri, a member of Wardy’s executive staff, admitted that "We're already making some pretty significant cuts in a lot of areas, and we already have some pretty significant gaps in service” (http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20040820-158157.shtml).
Who Said These are Tough Times?
However, when it comes to their own budgets, the Mayor admitted on that radio show that although these are “tough times”, the Mayor and Council have awarded themselves a $70,000 budgetary increase.
You tell me if any of this makes any sense.
El Pasoans have less than a week, however, to make their feelings about this known. The City Council will be adopting and approving of the Mayor’s budget at the next City Council meeting (August 24). Once it’s done, it’s done.
Lickin’ Their Chops…
The item that made the Jones/Jobe/Green “El Paso Group” salivate:
25. TAX OFFICE - BUDGET TRANSFER: BT2004-1154 TAX To appropriate funding for anticipated increase in delinquent tax collection.
Increase $700,000 to 06010022/01101/502201 CollectAgency
Increase $700,000 to 99010335/01101/401004 DelinqTaxColl
Killing You Softly With Our Obstruction
The following items were taken up together:
19D. Kern Place Merchants Association to use amplification (4 speakers) at the corner of Cincinnati and Mesa (2 speakers will be located East of Cincinnati/Mesa & 2 speakers will be located north of Cincinnati/Mesa) on August 28, 2004 and September 11, 2004 from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Approximately 20 persons will take part and 4,500 spectators are anticipated for each event. PERMIT NO. 04-080 (District 1) (Attachment) [Kenneth Rico Velasquez]
19E. Kern Place Merchants Association to use amplification (4 speakers) at the corner of Cincinnati and Mesa (2 speakers will be located East of Cincinnati/Mesa & 2 speakers will be located north of Cincinnati/ Stanton) on September 12, 2004, and October 30, 2004 from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Approximately 20 persons will take part and 300 spectators are anticipated on September 12, 2004 and 4,500 spectators are anticipated on October 30, 2004. PERMIT NO. 04-081 (District 1) (Attachment) [Kenneth Rico Velasquez]
27B. An Ordinance granting a Special Privilege to Kern Place Merchants Association to temporarily close a portion of Cincinnati Ave. between Mesa Street and Stanton Street for a "Schools Out" celebration on Saturday, August 28,2004 and Sunday, August 29,2004. (Consideration: $137.50, SP-04002) (District 1) (Attachment) [Building Permits & Inspections, Raymond Bonilla, (915) 541-4767]
Susan Austin asked that the items be taken off the consent agenda to be discussed during the regular agenda; the items outline plans by the Kern Place Merchants, local innovative business people, to host two outdoor events for El Paso.
In case you’ve never been to Cincinnati Street, it’s a wonderful hub of restaurants and bars in a cozy setting near the university. It is also near a busy street (Mesa) and a neighborhood (Kern Place), two things that can pose some problems. Despite that, it’s become a magnet for college students and young folks.
Dear reader, it’s been a long time since I’ve been a college student or a young folk, but I haven’t forgotten those days. Because I am a card carrying member of the “non-young folk” community, I’m sympathetic with complaints of noise and crowds from the neighborhood residents who spoke out against the events noted in the agenda. However, there’s also a part of me (the portion that remembers being a part of the “young folk” community) that is so pleased that the transformation on Cincinnati Street actually took place. Additionally, I believe that any thriving college town would naturally have such areas near its university – as it should. And finally, if you live adjacent to a commercial zone like the older folks who were complaining at this meeting, you can expect…well…commercial action.
This issue brings up an important point. For decades, young people in this community have complained that there aren’t enough entertainment venues in El Paso. They’re absolutely correct. In fact, there were more entertainment venues and dance halls in El Paso during the 1950s than there are today (but that’s back when downtown was actually booming, not a ghost town). We finally have some innovative local business owners who have come together and created a unique entertainment area where these college students and young El Pasoans can congregate and enjoy their community. From what I hear, it’s the trendiest place in town. I’m not the only one who thinks this; at one point, Representative Cook remarked how much it appeared to be like 6th street in Austin.
There’s one huge difference, however, and that’s that the City of Austin has helped 6th street succeed, making it a draw for college students and tourists alike; instead, the majority of folks on this City Council seem intent on preventing the area from thriving.
This is “Business Friendly?”
Ken Velasquez, Event Coordinator for the Kern Place Merchants Association, spoke before Council, and kept his cool despite Wardy’s finger wagging and condescending tone.
Once again, I was confused. I have lost track of the number of times this self-proclaimed “business friendly” mayor has stuck it to various small businesses. Is this the same group of City Council members who made a big to-do about being “open for business?” is this the Mayor who claims to have an “economic development priority?” I do believe it is.
At one point, making it seem as if it’s a bad thing for bar and restaurant owners to want to draw customers, Wardy wagged his finger disapprovingly and told Velasquez that his group of merchants would be responsible for anything bad that happened anywhere in the proximity of Kern Place. In a scalding tone, Wardy actually said, “They’re only coming to drink there because of your function.” Yeah, that’s probably true. I had to suppress my laughter at this point.
Wardy, Austin and Lozano complained about all the cars the event would draw. I wondered if they ever complained to UTEP about all those darned basketball and football games and major concerts. It is so incredibly thoughtless of UTEP to have athletics (and, God forbid, the occasional winning team) and to bring major entertainers to El Paso. We oughtta run UTEP out of town!
Mr. Velasquez was very patient and described the extreme measures his group of merchants was taking to accommodate the City and the neighborhood concerns.
At one point, Mr. “The City is Open for Business” himself, Alexandro Lozano, dumb-foundedly asked, “Why are you stubborn to have it at Cincinnati? Why can’t you bring it to the Union Plaza area?” I wanted to rush up to the podium, and say, “Let me answer that, Ken. Uh, Mr. Lozano, maybe it’s because these are the Kern Place merchants who own businesses on Cincinnati Street?!” He continued his criticism by saying “I’m in the same business and I wouldn’t do something like this.” I’m sure you wouldn’t, Mr. Lozano. And if ever there were a ringing endorsement of any plan of action, that was it.
I checked my notes, just to make sure, and yep, I was right…the item placed on the agenda didn’t include an invitation for Alexandro Lozano to participate. Nope, you weren’t asked to do it there, Lozano.
Ultimately, items 19D passed, but with a limitation of 3000 spectators placed on the event. Lozano and Rojas voted against approving the item.
Item 19E was postponed for two weeks, and the vote was unanimous.
Austin promised to “keep a very close eye” on the event; you young folks out there might just consider buying Ms. Austin a cold one if you see her on Cincinnati Street for this event!
Payday for Carl Green
I referenced the following item in last week’s notes:
6A. That the City Attorney be authorized to negotiate and sign retention agreements with outside counsel for the representation of the City in lawsuits. (Attachment) [City Attorney's Office, Lisa A. Elizondo, (915) 541-4550]
Representative Susan Austin pulled this one off the consent agenda for separate discussion.
As you may or may not know, after firing her chief litigators (Laura Gordon and Mike Moffeit, who replaced Gordon), Lisa Elizondo handed over all the City’s litigation to Carl Green, a local attorney who was Jim Martinez’s former law partner and one of Elizondo’s previous employers.
During the meeting, Susan Austin (referencing the item and the handing-over of cases to Green) wanted “a handle on whether we were talking an open-ended number of cases…or whether we could put a time limit on it.”
Defending her actions, Lisa Elizondo replied that “This is a somewhat unique situation…we expect this to be very temporary in nature,” and she said her ultimate goal would be to hire a candidate who would take over the litigation for a position. What position? She didn’t say, but she later mentioned a “Full Time Trial Supervisor” position.
Elizondo further recommended that “any and all litigation that we have received to date be referred to outside counsel.” She admitted that a list of all the lawsuits against the City she provided on August 9th wasn’t up to date, so outside counsel (Carl Green) would be receiving even more cases than Council was originally told. How many? Well, she gave the classic Elizondo response: she didn’t know. “I don’t have an active list for you of those cases,” she further admitted.
Should the City Attorney have such a list, dear reader? What do you think? Do you think it would be important to know just what cases the City is litigating? Do you think it would be a good idea to know, just approximately, how much of our tax money Ms. Elizondo is paying outside attorneys for litigation? Particularly since, by Ms. Elizondo’s own admission, her staff is not competent to handle it? Do you think the fact that she has fired every chief litigator she’s ever had (including one she herself hired) might have been a factor in placing her office in the dire straits she claims it’s in?
When asked if the litigator currently on staff (an individual hired by Elizondo) would be doing any litigating, Elizondo’s response was “If the determination was made either because of her workload or her experience level it was appropriate to send it out to outside counsel, we could do the new cases under the existing authority.”
The meaning of Ms. Elizondo’s non-answer, as I interpret it (pardon me, Mr. “Only the Author Can Interpret His or Her Own Words” Cushing) is this: No. But Elizondo doesn’t have the guts to give Council a straight, non-tortuous answer. And Council lets her get away with this. Shame on Council.
The bottom line is all cases will be outsourced, and the City Attorney will continue to send out new cases because she has the authority to do so (courtesy of City Council)) and because the staff she herself has hired is not competent to do it. Beautiful.
But her current authority to spend up to $5,000 per case just isn’t good enough, she argued, stating that “I have authority for a $5,000 cap on each case…the problem is that several of the cases are set for trial…and they [Carl Green] have raised some concern that they will exceed that cap and they’re feeling restricted by that monetary amount...I need the authority to be able to approve these [retention agreement] invoices in excess of $5,000.”
Well, of course they’re feeling restricted! When there’s a bottomless pit of money is being dangled before your eyes, wouldn’t you, too, feel restricted by a measly five grand per case?
Just how much money this blank check would end up costing us (the taxpayer) in total, no one asked. I guess it’s not important. I’m sure, though, the answer would be Elizondo’s classic “I don’t know.” Or probably something like this: “If the determination was made either because of the dollar amounts involved or the amount of work required, we would make a decision on expending fees to outside counsel to perform litigation work.”
John Cook asked how many cases had been sent to outside counsel (Carl Green), and the answer was that it was between 35-40 cases. Cook asked why she couldn’t bring those cases to Council on a weekly basis for approval (which would limit her power). I couldn’t document the non-answer quickly enough in my notes, but it didn’t matter as her response was meaningless. And unfortunately, Cook had no support from Council.
I did some quick math when I heard Elizondo report the number of cases that needed an excess of $5,000. If you multiply 40 cases times the $5,000 cap, the initial total is $200,000. Wow. That $200,000 is just for the first three weeks and doesn’t even include bills for September and October yet. That Carl Green is one lucky guy.
I’d like to remind folks at home that the chief litigator Elizondo fired was making $90,000; the litigator currently on staff is said to be paid around $70,000 a year. So the City was paying two staff members $160,000 a year to handle these cases. We’ve already exceeded that number and Carl Green has just gotten started, folks.
Susan Austin wanted an updated amount of what this legal work was costing so far, and Elizondo said she wasn’t sure about that. Austin then asked Elizondo if she had any idea as to what cases are currently set for trial; Elizondo said no.
When Austin probed further and asked if she has “any idea if any [of the cases] are going to trial this week,” her reply was “No, I don’t.”
And this is our City Attorney?
Cobos asked, “Can we handle all these cases internally?”
Elizondo replied, “Absolutely not.”
Hmmm…interesting. The City was able to handle these cases internally for the last three decades at least. Suddenly, under Elizondo’s leadership, the City cannot and must expend hundreds of thousands of extra taxpayer dollars to boot. Has there ever been a more clear-cut case of incompetence that demands immediate termination? Opps. I forgot. Emma Acosta. The beat goes on.
Gutting and Destroying an Office
How did we get here folks? Those of you following along for some time know the answer, but I’d like to give you new subscribers a quick recap:
To sum up: because of inexperience and the loss of competent and seasoned litigators from the City Attorney’s office, someone outside the office now has to be paid enormous amounts of taxpayer money to represent us (on an hourly basis) because the staff inside the City Attorney’s office cannot.
Got it. Back to the meeting.
Elizondo admitted that she’s doing this because “We do not have the experience” on staff to handle these cases.
Despite what appeared to be dissatisfaction, Representative Austin made a motion to allow Elizondo to do this through November 10th or until the time that the Trial Supervisor (read: Jim Martinez) is hired, whichever comes first. That means that for the next three months, Carl Green (Jim Martinez’s former partner, Lisa Elizondo’s former employer) will be charging us – the taxpayer – for work previously done by a salaried employee.
In November, once the contract with Green is over, Elizondo will then ask Council to allow her to hire and pay an unemployed Jim Martinez $165,000-$185,000 a year to take over the job. I’ll be keeping a close watch on that Council vote for you when it comes up.
As if she were providing Council with any consolation, Elizondo promised to provide the Council with reports “to keep you apprised of what’s going on with outside counsel.” Austin complained that the reports Elizondo is currently sending Council have a “considerable lag time between the time that work was actually done” and the time that the bill was paid. She said the reports aren’t representative of the costs being racked up by that outside law firm because “That doesn’t tell us a whole lot about how much work is being done as we speak,” she said.
Wow. Where can I get a sweetheart deal like that?
Again, despite Austin’s seeming disapproval, she supported the item. Now that’s having the courage of your convictions. The vote was 5-1 (Cook was the only “no” vote—he wanted limitations that no one else seemed to care about--and Lozano was long gone).
Spending Money to Save Money OR Ignorance is Competence
I thought I would remain the only writer in town talking about this abuse, but finally, a local news station has reported on it. Two different stories aired on two different nights (the first night’s story is online at http://www.kvia.com/Global/story.asp?S=2186981&nav=AbBzPy1Z, but the story that’s more damning to Joe Wardy is not available on KVIA’s website...interesting) on KVIA.
For Wednesday night’s story (August 18th), ABC 7 interviewed John Gates, a former Assistant City Attorney who resigned during the reign of terror. Finally there was someone with enough courage to come forward! He told Channel 7 all about what he called Wardy’s “cronyism” (although that story, unfortunately, was not available online, I took notes!).
In that story, Wardy responded to Gates and told Channel 7 that “It’s always the poor performers that say it’s cronyism.” Referring to all the attorneys who have left the City, Wardy claimed that they “weren’t getting the job done,” and said that paying Carl Green lots of money isn’t a big deal. Talking out of both sides of his mouth he justified the rather extravagant expense of paying a local lawyer hourly wages by claiming “cheaper’s not better,” but moments later told the camera that he was actually saving us money. “If we have lawyers that aren’t competent, it costs us less money [to outsource].”
I guess competence, in Wardy’s eyes, isn’t measured by…oh…at least knowing what cases in your office are set for trial? Or did Wardy have his ear plugs in at the City Council meeting when Elizondo admitted to knowing precious little about what goes on in her office?
Even if you buy Wardy’s insultingly specious argument, how would he counter this next one? One of their own attorneys—recruited and hired by Elizondo/Wardy—had some of the same complaints as Gates. In an email to City brass before he left, Mike Moffeit expresses his own concerns.
-----Original Message-----
FROM: Moffeit, Michael P.
SENT: Friday, July 16, 2004 3:39 PM
SUBJECT: Possible resignation
Dear Council: Although I have not mentioned this to any of you, I have had misgivings about the leadership, management and direction of the Office of the City Attorney for some time. The morale of the office is at perhaps an all time low with resignations of experienced and qualified counsel in recent times. More I fear are coming, including perhaps my own if things do not improve. I am available to speak with each of you about this at either [personal phone numbers omitted] if you wish. I would send a copy of this to the Mayor but my email to him will not get through to him. You nay [sic] wish to share this with him.
Michael P. Moffeit
Assistant City Attorney
En guarde, Mr. Wardy!
“If You Choose Not To Decide, You Still Have Made a Choice”
Unfortunately, folks, with the departure of Dan Power, the voices of dissention are shrinking. Either good people run in his seat so we can have an ethical voice on Council or the powers that be will run someone to be another rubber stamp.
The choice is ours.
Until, next week.