5.10.2005
Six and a half long,
grueling, painful hours of this Council, my friends. Call it the long goodbye, but having to endure Cobos’s and
Cushing’s slanderous remarks, Wardy’s spineless fear of Ray Gilbert, and
Lozano’s continued befuddlement make me want to press fast forward on that
“goodbye.” A little U2 and a stiff drink would also help.
When will these guys be gone
again?
Read on! (But let me warn you, these are long
notes. But I do believe they’re worth
it.)
The Law is Strictly Relative (to Tony Cobos, that is)
Although the following issue isn’t one that I was at all interested in, a
part of the discussion was:
3. Discussion
and action to return all confiscated video game machines, cash, employee time
cards, computer hard drives, merchandise, receipts and other documents that
were confiscated by the E.P.P.D. on Thursday, April 28, 2005 to their owners;
to allow the closed game rooms to reopen and the city provide specific
guidelines for regulation ad operation in accordance with Texas Penal Code,
Paragraph 47.01(4)(B). The game rooms represented are Moonlight Video, TMO Game
Room, Sun Video Game Room, Wild Touch Game Room and Cielo Vista Game Room. (Attachment) [Thurman
Reynolds]
There were six people (not
including City staff and the District Attorney) who spoke on this item, and
Council spent an entire hour on it.
Mr. Reynolds said that over
the last several years he had investigated “eight-liners,” which are gambling
machines. Actually, the preferred term
nowadays is “gaming.” Makes it sound
less vice-like, I guess. Anyway, he
said that the activities, not the machines, are illegal and that his operation
(which clearly must have had those eight-liners) is no different from what the
kids have at Chucky Cheese. (Yeah, I
frequently hit the Chucky Cheese game room when I need my gambling fix…better
yet, Peter Piper Pizza. At least they
sell cheap beer there, too!)
He said he had worked with
Lt. Ramirez from the Police Department on the eight-liner issue to try to
approach his operations legally, and he said he provides the elderly, some
disabled people, and northeast residents with recreation. He said his business received the “okay”
from law enforcement last year, but that “police showed up with a search
warrant and seized the machines.” He
also said that Chief Wiles said the case is “against the machines” (kinda
sounds like this last election, eh, where ethical candidates went up against
the crony machine!). He said he had a
petition of support from over 800 people.
Numerous people spoke in
support of the machines and the recreation they provide. After these folks spoke, the District
Attorney discussed some general issues related to this ongoing criminal
investigation that involves the gambling, sorry, the gaming activities going on
at Mr. Reynolds’ place of business.
Esparza explained that eight-liners are “games of chance” that are
prohibited in the Texas penal code. He
said that despite the arguments of the speakers (that the business provides
jobs and fun), gaming is still illegal.
He gave Council a general explanation of the issue and said that the
“bottom line is eight-liners are illegal, they’ve always been illegal.”
Almost all the
Representatives asked questions, but the most revealing were those by Anthony
Cobos, newly dispatched Council member from District 8.
Cobos, who loves any
opportunity to fulfill his “I wish I were a lawyer” fantasies, once again
played the role of the slimy lawyer. He
began to ask specific questions of the District Attorney, demanding, for
example, to know who initiated the investigation. Esparza answered some but not all of his questions.
At one point, Cobos
proclaimed that “law is subject to interpretation,” a true enough statement as
far as it goes (were the law not subject to interpretation, we wouldn’t need
lawyers or judges). However, when the
slimy Anthony Cobos pontificates about how there is more than one way to
interpret the law, what he really means is that conduct can be legal, sometimes
illegal, sort of legal, almost legal, and, if attributable to his opponents,
extremely illegal. This sliding scale
of legality has always governed his conduct on Council, as a businessman, and
as a political candidate.
Cobos complained that,
“We’re expending an awful lot of resources” and then, trying to justify an
activity that District Attorney Esparza clearly described as illegal, said,
“And these are adults! They can drink
alcohol, I mean, they’re adults, for goodness sakes…this just seems so petty!”
I can hear him now, “I can
take this political contribution in exchange for certain considerations on key
Council votes; I mean, I’m an adult for goodness sakes! It’s only $250, I mean, to investigate me
would just be so petty!” Right, Tony.
Ridin’ the Eight-Liner Train to Prosperity
Esparza explained that he
doesn’t have “the luxury” of being able to ignore illegal activities (a
“luxury” I’m sure Cobos just loves to indulge in!). And then Cobos complained that these eight-liners are part of
“economic development.” Yes, folks, he
actually made that claim! I guess when
folks like Cobos and Wardy have no economic development plan whatsoever,
eight-liners begin to look like a pretty good plan! Wait a minute! Finally, finally, we’ve uncovered the secret
economic development plan of the Wardy administration! EIGHT LINERS!
To Cobos’s absurd “economic
development” claim, Esparza responded, “You would expect me to enforce the
law. If, for instance, if we had a red
light district, and we figured out that promoting that red light district was
really good for the economy, would you ask me then to wink my eye at that
violation of the law versus another?”
Making a face and adopting a
dismissive tone, Cobos said, “We’re not talking about a red light district.”
Then, as if to challenge the
fact that the law even exists, Cobos asked Esparza, “Do you have the law that
we can put up on the overhead for the world to see and for El Paso to see…your
authority, do you have that to put on the overhead?”
“I don’t have it [the law]
with me, but I am the prosecutor for this community and I represent the state
of Texas in every criminal case,” said Esparza.
You know, Tony, you’re
right. I can’t believe Jaime Esparza
doesn’t carry with him the Texas penal code just in case a bozo like you
challenges him on whether gambling is illegal.
It obviously never occurred to Esparza that anyone on City Council would
be so stupid. Go figure.
There was a lot more
discussion and it appeared that most of the City Council Representatives were
in favor of trying to create some kind of exception for the eight-liners
(that’s right…who cares about state law?).
You know, we can debate
about whether operators of eight-liners (and participants in other “vices”)
should be actively prosecuted. I agree
that there are much more serious crimes being committed in our community. But what the members of City Council
couldn’t or wouldn’t grasp is that the D.A. can’t just look the other way when
a law enforcement agency, in this case, the El Paso PD, brings him evidence of
criminal conduct. If they have a beef
on this issue, they should be taking it up with Chief Wiles, not Jaime Esparza. So what we had was a lot, and I mean a lot,
of hot air from City Council. I guess
they couldn’t resist the urge to pander to the “eight-liner community.” Thankfully, it doesn’t matter for Cushing
and Cobos. Hopefully, it won’t matter
for Wardy and several other members of Council come June 4th.
Ultimately, Council took no
action. On to the consent agenda…
Attachments This Time
For your reading pleasure,
the minutes of the May 3, 2005 meeting:
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: [Municipal Clerk, Richarda
Duffy Momsen, (915) 541-4127] Approval of Minutes for the Regular City Council
Meeting of May 3, 2005. (Attachment) Regular City
Council Meeting of May 3, 2005
They were, of course,
approved on the consent agenda.
Job Opening!
Also passed on the consent
agenda was the following new position:
6D. That the Classification and Compensation Plan
shall be amended, as recommended by the Civil Service Commission. The class of
PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAM COORDINATOR is hereby created as specified in the duties
and responsibilities attached hereto. The Code is 5177. The Grade is PM 75. Salary Range: $34,751.35 - $50,722.63 (PM
75) Fund Source: 55010303-15707-55000 (Attachment) [Human Resources,
Terry A. Bond, (915) 541-4509]
Despite protests and
questions about the need for the position from Lisa Turner, the local activist
and general voice of reason who frequently comes before Council, the position
was approved.
While I recognize that City
resources are very tight, I support this new position. The Arts and Culture Department has a tiny
staff and has been given large tasks.
There are many worthy public arts goals in this City, and I’m looking
forward to seeing what Larry Medina’s 2% for the Arts ordinance will do to
beautify our community. (Larry Medina
is the former City Representative for District 3, a position now held by
Alexandro “Lasagna” Lozano a/k/a Mr. No.
Medina is now in a runoff with Lasagna.)
Territorial Behavior
The following item was back
from two weeks prior, and I was interested in seeing what would develop:
14. COMMUNITY AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: (Attachment) [Community and
Human Development, Robert Salinas, (915) 541-4643] Discussion and action on a
resolution that, having conducted a public hearing and having previously
approved a Resolution adopting that portion of a Proposed 2005-2006 Annual
Action Plan, which includes items 1 through 55 of the Proposed Budget for
the 31st Year (2005-2006) Community Development Block Grant Program,
together with the Proposed Budgets for the FY 2005 Emergency Shelter Grant
Program, and the FY 2005 HOME Investment Partnerships Program, the City Council
hereby adopts the remaining portion of the Proposed 2005-2006 Annual Action
Plan, which includes items 56 through 96 of the Proposed Budget for the 31st Year (2005-2006) Community
Development Block Grant Program.
Community Block grant
funding is very important to communities like El Paso. It comes from the federal government, and,
according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development:
The
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program works largely without fanfare
or recognition to ensure decent affordable housing for all, and to provide
services to the most vulnerable in our communities, to create jobs and expand
business opportunities. CDBG is an important tool in helping local governments
tackle the most serious challenges facing their communities. The CDBG program
has made a difference in the lives of millions of people living in communities
all across this Nation.
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/index.cfm
Robert Salinas, Director of
the Community Development Department at the City, explained that Council would
be finalizing the resolution for the remaining funding (part of it had been
allocated two weeks ago). He
distributed the plan and said that projects had been shifted around per
Council’s requests in order to create a balanced budget.
City Manager Joyce Wilson
reminded Council that at the last meeting every Council member was asked to
propose changes to the final list, adding and deleting projects in order to
have “a balanced bottom line.”
Salinas went through a
confusing list of deletions and additions of CDBG projects, and when he
announced that Vivian Rojas was requesting deletion of a project in District 6,
City Representative Paul Escobar became very angry. Escobar said he didn’t want any changes and didn’t want anyone
“messing with” his projects, which he said he worked very hard on. I’ve never seen him so angry, and I’ve never
seen him fight so hard for something.
Facing a tough re-election bid contributed to his ire, I’m sure. I’m glad he’s fighting for his district. Escobar mentioned that he had attended
meetings, worked with his residents, and had asked the staff not to touch the
final projects once they were approved.
Susan Austin wanted to
delete the HVAC (heating and cooling) replacement at a downtown fire station in
favor of another project downtown.
Wardy asked City Manager
Joyce Wilson if there was other funding available for the fire station in case
it was taken off the CDBG list. Wilson
said that there were old Certificates of Obligation (COs), but that ultimately,
if Council chose not to use CDBG funding for the station, it would still get
done somehow. Susan Austin mentioned HUD regulations and seemed to be
challenging the use of those funds for a fire station, and argued that this is
“not the purpose…not the highest use of CDBG funds.” She’s right. Fixing fire
stations is a City responsibility. She
also said that Community Development staff did not recommend using the funds for a fire station, and that she
instead supports a project (Creative Kids) that would help revitalize the Union
Plaza area in Anthony Cobos’s district.
Cobos argued that fire
stations are the “cornerstone of community development,” and was adamant about
funding the fire station with CDBG funding.
Cobos’s Crony Twin (the
older, heavier twin), Robert Cushing, said, “I have a dog in this fight” (I
thought to myself, “Yikes! Poor dog,
hope he still has his bowels!” He
should know better than to reference dogs in front of old Sid!). Cushing promised that while he would support
the San Juan Citizen Center by cutting back on one of his own projects, he
would not support dropping the fire station in Cobos’s district. And although there was an extensive
presentation on the Creative Kids project two weeks ago, Cushing disingenuously
acted as if he had never heard about it before. Bob, you’ve lost; your political career is as over as over can
be; why do you keep playing these stupid games?
When Susan Austin asked
questions about diminishing funding for a project in her district, Cushing
brusquely chided and tried to humiliate her.
(Just remember Susan, you refused to stand with the sisterhood against
this brutalizer. Do you think that it’s
an accident that Cushing has repeatedly been rude and disrespectful to
you? Do you think, just maybe, it’s
because you’re a woman?)
Joyce Wilson urged them to
be aware of the fact that this was not a final adoption—that would happen later
in the summer. This was simply the
first step and not the last time the budget would be reviewed.
Some changes were made,
including adding the San Juan Senior Citizen Center to the list of projects. Council then moved on to the real fun.
Pander Fest 2005 Continued!
My friends, I hope you
haven’t just eaten, because if you have, you may end up losing your meal over
the disgusting and offensive pandering and war against the poor that we Council
watchers were subjected to this week at Council:
12A. Discussion and action regarding the Cedar Oaks
Townhomes Development Project. [Representative Vivian Rojas, (915) 541-4108]
If you recall, this item has
been championed by Vivian Rojas, who is trying to kill a tax-credit-funded
project in her district that would provide housing for low- to moderate-income
individuals (like the checker at your supermarket, the teacher’s aide who helps
your children, and the secretary who works hard for her boss).
Assistant City Attorney Lisa
Hayes detailed the history of the item and the conversations between the City
and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA). The upshot was that the City has no
jurisdiction to post an item on the TDHCA agenda for May 26, 2005 to ask for
reconsideration of the project, but State Representative Chente Quintanilla
would assist the City in doing that.
The City will be able address the board at that TDHCA meeting as a
result of his intervention, but no action will be taken according to TDHCA
officials.
Many of the same folks from
the affected neighborhood were in the audience, rehashing the same arguments
they had made before. They continued to
express their anger at the TDHCA, the agency that awarded the tax credits, but
they remained just as supportive and laudatory of the City—the body that zoned
the area for multi-family dwellings in the first place.
I have never seen such a
classic case of misplaced anger in my life.
Instead of placing the blame, if that’s the appropriate word, for this
state of affairs where it squarely belongs—the City, particularly the elected
official in whose district this project falls, Vivian Rojas—the residents and
the politicos directed an ungodly amount of not so righteous (and, frankly,
nauseating) indignation at the TDHCA.
The TDHCA is fast replacing certificates of obligation as the bogeyman
of choice for inept and corrupt elected officials running away from their
records.
These residents, who are
forced to come to meeting after meeting and sit through hours of pandering,
kept begging for legal action. But for
reasons I cannot understand, they also kept expressing their gratitude and
support for Wardy and Rojas, the two individuals who are working on behalf of
Bobby Bowling to kill a competing tax credit project, and the two individuals
who are milking these poor folks for votes.
Irony Alert!™
Although I have no intention
of documenting in detail the neighborhood folks’ classist and offensive
arguments against low- to moderate-income housing in their neighborhood, there
is one argument that made the hair on my neck stand up. James Camacho, one of the anti-TDHCA
District 7 regulars at Council, accused the TDHCA of being filled with (get
this) “back-room deals and cronyism,” and gave a speech that was much like a
prayer for help. As I listened to Mr.
Camacho’s charges, I felt like going up to him and asking, “Where was your
delicate sensitivity to cronyism, sir, when your hero, Vivian Rojas, was taking
phone calls from her string puller right before going into executive
session?” Give me a blanking break!
Lisa Turner, a true local
hero, then came to the podium. She said
she has been following this issue and noted that the residents have repeatedly
claimed that apartments are okay. Then
she pointed out the humongous pink elephant in the room. She asserted that the residents simply don’t
want low- and moderate-income people near them. And, folks, as far as the residents are concerned, that’s exactly
what’s going on here. Turner then gave
the residents and Council a body blow by pointing out that what they were
really doing was waging a war against the poor and middle income folks in this
community. She said that if they’re
church-going people, they need to go to church and ask for forgiveness. Amen, sister!
She went on to observe that
the City Attorney has made it clear that the City doesn’t have a leg to stand
on legally, and she expressed the hope that the City doesn’t initiate yet
another pointless and expensive lawsuit.
She said that if the argument against congestion and traffic held any
water, then we should shut down all development in El Paso and tell Washington
that we don’t want the 3,800 additional troops we’re getting for Fort
Bliss. She also said that if there’s
anything the neighborhood associations should complain about, it’s the City
because it didn’t follow up.
I’ve said it before, and
I’ll say it again: she’s absolutely
right…so, so, so right.
Looking For A Scapegoat
Frank Ainsa, attorney for
Investment Builders (owned by developer and Bobby Bowling nemesis Ike Monte),
noted that his views were well known.
He said that the Cedar Oaks Town Homes project was approved according to
a well-documented statutory process, and that there is no shred of evidence
that the process was not followed. He
said it is no fault of TDHCA if the residents and the City failed to follow
up. He said the decision to award the
tax credits is final and that the developer has applied for and received
permits. For the City of El Paso to
continue any kind of legal action to try to stop the project would be
unacceptable “and it would send a very, very bad message to the business
community and the citizens if the City tries to turn on a process.”
Wardy was clearly itching to
use Ainsa’s appearance at the podium to score rhetorical points and, sure
enough, he was talking big. In fact, he
interrupted Ainsa more than once to make angry pronouncements. He said he was going to demand that the
state create legislation to “tighten up their rules,” so the citizens can “have
a better voice in this process, ‘cuz the citizens got run over in this
process.” Wardy became very agitated,
raising his voice and pointing at Ainsa.
The crowd ate it up. They
applauded and yelled “hear, hear!”
Wardy, desperately clinging
to his mayoralty, has become an expert panderer, and made the most of his
moment in the sun. I bet he and Rojas
were damn relieved that the citizens weren’t asking them why the property had
been zoned for apartments in the first place, what they planned to do about
development issues in that area, and why they didn’t bother to keep on top of
the issue.
When Ainsa said that his
client should not be targeted, Wardy promised that he didn’t intend to
“prosecute” his client. How generous of
you, Joe. “This exercise is
not…in any means a reflection on your client,” said Wardy. No…it’s about helping Bobby Bowling, getting
votes, and deflecting responsibility, in that order.
Paul Escobar said that Ike
Monty, owner of Investment Builders and Ainsa’s client, is a perfectly nice guy
but that he does “the minimum” and doesn’t ask the neighborhoods for permission
to place low- to moderate-income projects in their areas. While he may very well be right—and I agree
the developer should be working with the neighbors—I wondered, does Bobby
Bowling do that, Mr. Escobar? I don’t
think so (more on this later). And
Bobby Bowling, I would add, sure as hell isn’t a nice guy. And also, wasn’t it Vivian Rojas’s
responsibility to make sure those conversations happened in the first place?
Ainsa said meetings had indeed
taken place, but they are still willing to meet with residents to discuss
concerns. Investment Builders won’t
stop the project, he said, which is what the neighbors want, but they would be
willing to talk with the neighbors.
Vivian Rojas, who appeared
to be sporting new Lee Press-On nails (for the runoff, don’t you know!),
complained about school overcrowding.
Ainsa explained that when
Cedar Oaks was denied, it went onto a waiting list. He also noted that once El Paso was designated a “Difficult to Develop
Area,” (DDA) the decision was made to allocate the tax credits to projects on
the waiting list. He said anyone could
have looked at the minutes of that July meeting to read the minutes—they are on
the website.
Bob Cushing, going into Mrs.
Blalock mode (taking orders from Satan to protect the demon seed son, don’t
forget!), said that he was “concerned” about local El Pasoan Pat Gordon’s
presence on that board. He said, “We’re
all expected to be honorable men and keep our hands above the table, and
there’s a perception of a tainted process…and this individual should not have
been on that board in the first place.”
Hmmm. Interesting. And this statement is coming from Robert
Cushing, the same individual who should never have been on City Council (or any
public board, commission, or position) in the first place. Actually, he should never have been anywhere
but in jail!
Cushing also said that he
believed that the tax credit deal was “done in a back room,” because Gordon has
a business relationship with Ike Monte, the developer. Where does one begin to dissect the
hypocritical slander of such a statement?
Only Bobby Bowling’s Rottweiler Bob Cushing could utter something like
this with a straight face. Or so I
thought at the time. But read on, dear
reader…read on.
Frank Ainsa, his voice
rising in indignation, responded that he considers Gordon to be “extremely
honorable,” and noted that Gordon recused himself from any consideration of
Monte’s appeal and any consideration of the tax credits. Ainsa said he believed the reason Gordon had
recused himself is because Gordon’s law firm had represented Monte in the
past. Ainsa stated that Gordon
“complied to the letter of the state law and I think it is very, very
inappropriate to criticize Mr. Gordon…as far as I know, he did the right
thing…and had nothing to do with the decision, and I do not take that well…and
I don’t think we should be criticizing TDHCA board members that comply with the
law.” When the mild-mannered and
extremely professional Ainsa uses language like this, you know he’s pissed.
Cushing simply responded
that he had a different opinion and, naturally, received applause as a result.
If I were Pat Gordon, I’d
sue Cushing for slander…oh, wait…never mind, Cushing is judgment proof. He deliberately owns no real property and
doesn’t believe in complying with lawfully obtained civil judgments. Never mind.
Susan Austin had lots of
questions about the TDHCA decision and she was asking Ainsa the questions. Wardy asked her not to, and said, “I can
arrange for you to contact someone from the TDHCA.” What? Will you dial the
number for her? (I can hear it now, a
new campaign slogan, “Vote for me, I’ve mastered the telephone, and I can help
you reach out and touch the ones you love!”)
Susan Austin said that the
fact that the property is zoned for apartments has created a traffic
problem. Ainsa said there is no traffic
problem because traffic studies are done before permits are issued.
I’m Still Grandstanding
Presi Ortega, the Little
Grandstander, cleared his throat and said he had a “couple of comments.” And then, he began his pandering. As he began to speak, I made a bet with
myself that he was going to deny that he was grandstanding. “First of all, something that just came up
right now, ‘difficult to develop area’ designation, I’d never heard of it. Did we ask for it?” Wardy responded, “No.”
Presi then said that Mr.
Camacho, one of the residents who spoke, had a great idea to put together an
early warning mechanism. He said, “I
still don’t think this battle’s over, and I’m not here to grandstand, I’m just
real upset.” (Bingo! I think we should ask Vegas bookies to make
book on whether Presi Ortega will deny he’s grandstanding when he is doing just
that. I could get rich!) I do think the great grandstander doth
protest too much.
Then Presi began attacking
Frank Ainsa by saying, “I understand the opinions of the person that was just
up there right now [I guess Mr. Ainsa doesn’t even deserve to be addressed by
his name…no, sir, not in Presi’s “How to Succeed at Grandstanding Without
Really Trying” book!]. He’s the hired
gun, he’s the one getting paid by the developer.” (Applause!) Well, Presi, in what way precisely does Mr.
Ainsa differ from the hired guns on City Council who are paid very handsomely
by the Bowling family of developers to destroy any and all Bowling
competitors? Hmm. I’ll tell you how. At least Frank Ainsa isn’t lying about why he’s up at the
podium. But, you’re right, Presi, you
and your fellow crony-meisters on Council are pulling out all the stops to
destroy Ike Monte’s project out of the goodness of your small-business-loving
hearts. Right. Well, as long as we’re just being honest,
Presi, let me observe that you, sir, are not just a panderer, not just a cheap
grandstander, you are transparently and laughably hypocritical. Other than that, you’re a great guy, I’m
sure. And I’m not grandstanding.
Yet Another Irony Alert™
Presi then began insinuating
that Ainsa doesn’t really care about the project or its impact and that he only
cares about what he’s paid to do. Gosh,
Presi, you couldn’t have described your buddies on Council better. Thanks, buddy. Presi also alluded to the fact that this is an east El Paso issue
(yeah, and last year it was a west El Paso issue, Presi).
Then he asked, “Who does
TDHCA answer to?” Someone from the
crowd yelled, “US!” He then said, “I’m
not sure where our senators, our state senators are on this [sic] issues, where
the Congressman is, but I think we need to go up past the state agency.” Then, during his speechifying and pandering,
he went from the absurd to the truly laughable by proclaiming, “We need to make
sure that the rules are changed, and if we have to go even up to the President,
remember, he’s from the state of Texas.
If we have to go up to him, that he knows that we’re real upset!”
You go, Presi! Why don’t you ask Wardy, who seems to
believe that he has a direct line to Donald Rumsfeld, to call Donnie boy and
ask him to get good ole Dubya on the line so Presi can say, “Hey, George, we’re
mad as hell and we’re not gonna take it any more!” I’m sure George Bush would respond, “You’re right, Presi! Let’s abolish the agency that helps poor folks
on the border…I’ll put that on top of my ‘to-do’ list immediately!” And if the President doesn’t respond, go
above his head…go to Dick Cheney! And
then tell Dick all about the TDHCA, Presi!
Presi, who was quite proud
of himself, leaned back in his chair as he received plenty of applause from the
NIMBY audience.
A Whole Lotta Slanderin’ Goin’ On
And then, it got ugly.
Cobos said he had a couple
of questions for Ainsa. He asked if
Patrick Gordon is married to Laura Gordon.
He said, “I have a concern here, and I don’t think the residents know
what’s really going on here, and what I have is, it appears that Mr. Patrick
Gordon gave a $1,000 campaign contribution to Ms. Rojas’s opponent…My question
to you is, do you think that Mr. Gordon, uh, maybe, uh, encouraged his other
board members to pass this item to raise a little controversy for Ms. Rojas’s
campaign for re-election bid?”
I didn’t think anyone could
top the Rottweiler Cushing’s statement for offensiveness, but I was wrong. Never underestimate the lengths to which
Bowling puppets—even lame duck Bowling puppets—will go to defend the interests
of their puppet master. Of course
Cobos’s statement was as absurd as it was offensive. My friends, last summer, when Vivian Rojas decided to take on the
TDHCA and challenge the tax credits for the Cedar Oaks project in order to
eliminate Bobby Bowling’s competitor (Ike Monte), she held a press conference
at the site. She rallied the neighbors,
she created the crisis (it’s about the tax credits, NOT the zoning, right,
Viv?), and she waged holy war against the TDHCA. I think if anyone was trying to “raise a little controversy,” it
was Miss Viv, who is following in Cobos’s and Cushing’s footsteps: Create a crisis that will help your cronies
and make you look like a hero to the neighborhoods at the same time.
Cobos then asked, “And why
would he give $1,000 to her opponent who she’s in a runoff with now?”
Maybe, Tony, it’s because
Mr. Gordon is tired of corrupt government officials and their string
pullers? Maybe because Mr. Gordon, like
the people who voted decisively against you, Tony, want honest, ethical
government? Maybe it’s because Mr.
Gordon, like most of us, would like to feel proud instead of ashamed of and nauseated
by our city representatives?
Mr. Ainsa, who looked
downright stunned by Cobos’s slimy and baseless implications, said, “Mr. Cobos,
I’m not going to dignify your statement with a response. Mr. Gordon’s an honorable man, I don’t know
anything about his politics. He does
probably like most people do, he contributes to the candidates he wants
to. But you should not be sitting on
that podium and trying to impugn his integrity. No one has ever done that, Mr. Gordon’s an honorable person, and
he serves with integrity on that board.
And you should not be using your position on this Council as a bully
pit. That’s totally inappropriate, and
I don’t think anybody should appreciate that.”
Naturally, Wardy did
absolutely nothing to prevent the utterly class-less Cobos from making
slanderous allegations against an individual who wasn’t even at Council to
defend himself.
Cobos then said, “Well let
me say, that it’s a fact, and Mr. Crowder’s here from the Times, if he does a little research, it’s public record! What’s really going on here, sir, what’s
really going on, huh?” Cobos of course
received plenty of applause from the crowd, a group that I was now completely
sickened by.
As Cobos made these shabby
accusations, I could see his eyes shifting back and forth between Ainsa and the
crowd. He was really workin’ it; he was
pulling out all the stops. Don’t
forget, Cobos is an expert at the “We must keep out the poor and middle-income
people, especially the brown kind” argument.
He did it with Suncrest (where he fought the same developer, Ike Monte,
and he did it for the same patron,
Bobby Bowling), and Miss Viv learned quite well from him. Cobos is nothing but an uncouth street bully
punk who doesn’t mind playing the race or the class card for the right amount
of money. I just wonder if mixed in
with his usual foaming at the mouth tenacity in advancing the interests of his
boss Bobby Bowling was just a little payback for being trounced at the
polls. Well, Tony, with respect to your
humiliating electoral loss, let me just quote the McDonald’s adds: “I’m lovin’ it!”
All the while, Wardy was
sitting back comfortably in his chair, watching the whole event unfold.
Ainsa, who had his arms
crossed in front of his chest, and who was clearly deeply offended by Cobos’s
lack of dignity and lack of public decorum, said, “Mr. Cobos, Mr. Gordon
recused himself in accordance with law.
He did not participate in any decision.”
“But he gave $1,000 to a…”
said Cobos.
Ainsa interrupted him and
said, “That has nothing to do with this case.”
“Well, sir, I beg to
differ,” responded Cobos over the applause coming from the NIMBY crowd.
“You are trying to
manufacture and politicize this event beyond what it is,” said Ainsa.
Cobos, who was shouting at
this point, trying to speak over Ainsa and the applause coming from the NIMBY
crowd, said, “[The record] doesn’t smell very good,” said Cobos. There was a
stench all right, Tony, but it wasn’t coming from TDHCA. “What’s really going on here? The residents
of District #7 need to look at the facts.
What is really going on here?
That is just amazing to me!” You
and me both, Cobos.
“Thank you, Mr. Cobos,”
replied Wardy. THANK YOU? THANK YOU?
Unbelievable! Instead of making
Cobos adhere to basic rules of decorum, he thanks him for engaging in
defamation. Not once did Wardy try to
stop Cobos from insulting, indeed slandering, a member of our community who was
not there to defend himself. This is
our parliamentarian? This is our mayor? He should be ashamed of himself, and he
should be thrown out of his office for allowing such behavior to occur on his
watch.
All right, now that I’ve
gotten that out of my system, my friends, let’s talk about what’s really going
on here. What’s happeining is that
Anthony Cobos—who was decisively booted out of office by the voters of District
8 on Saturday—is trying to help Vivian Rojas do three things: (1) defeat an honest and ethical opponent
(Steve Ortega) by making rabid and slanderous insinuations he knows have no
merit; (2) help their mutual puppet master, Bobby Bowling; (3) get the crowd as
riled up as possible so that Ms. Rojas looks like a hero and gains as many
votes as she can.
And Mr. Cobos, who (over the
last four years of his reign of corruption) has received thousands upon
thousands upon thousands of dollars from Bobby Bowling—the individual who would
very much like to remain the Tax Credit King of El Paso and have no competition
whatsoever—obviously didn’t see the irony in the whole thing. Because he (Cobos) is paid to do the bidding
of his contributors, he believes that others are as well. But his weak argument never proved what
Gordon was getting from Rojas’s opponent.
If there’s any buying of votes it was evidenced by the nice little check
Bobby Bowling gave to Vivian Rojas on the day that she stated publicly she
would help kill one of Bobby’s competitors’ projects. Here’s what I said about the Crony Crew’s campaign finance
reports, specifically Miss Viv:
On
to Vivan Rojas, who is now claiming in her campaign materials that she helped
work on the medical school (when she knows damn well she led a PR campaign to
kill the plans for a health-related industry surrounding it). As evidenced by last week’s vote to kill a
worthy affordable housing project near her district, she is still deeply
indebted to certain special interests (http://www.thestrelz.com/shm/2005_0308.htm).
My
friends, on the very day that
the San Antonio Alternative Housing Corporation (SAAHC) came before Council to
ask for their help, March 8th, the Bowling family began their
infamous deposits, giving Vivian Rojas $2,000 in a classic “quid pro quo” (to
quote Anthony Cobos, see below) http://www.elpasotexas.gov/city_clerk/_documents/2005%20Elections/Campaign%20Finance%20Reports/Rojas%20Vivian.pdf. Vivian, a good Bowling soldier, made a
motion to deny the project at that meeting, and it was clear that Cobos and
Lozano were on board, ready to deliver their “no” votes that day. It wasn’t to be because the item was
postponed, but Rojas had already made her objections public and clear, and
delivered her “no” vote when the project came back to Council three weeks
later.
http://www.thestrelz.com/shm/2005_0405.htm
Will TDHCA-Baiting And Rhetorical Sleights of Hand
Help the Hapless Viv?
But you know, folks, Cobos
has it all wrong…Rojas, Cobos, Wardy and Presi know there is absolutely nothing
they can do at this point. They also
know that Rojas dropped the ball—big time.
Did she never read the minutes of the meeting? Of course not; the pander crew doesn’t let the truth or the facts
get in their way. Instead, they use
this “controversy” as a way to grandstand and pander to voters. And the crowd, which, remarkably, hasn’t
held the City accountable for the zoning or for not following up with the TDHCA
or for not even bothering to read the minutes of a meeting, applauded and
cheered on these inutiles.
Presi Ortega, who took the
entire discussion from the absurd to the obscene, made it sound like someone
was “influencing HUD.” (Of course, he received applause for that.) Maybe it’s God, Presi! What body will you go to then?
Then Council provided an all
too brief respite from the pain by going into executive session. When they emerged after about half an hour,
Jimbo with the Jumbo Salary (a/k/a “Jabba” a/k/a “El Superstar”) read the following
motion into the record: “Motion to
direct the City Attorney to research the City’s ability to file a lawsuit
regarding the award of tax credits by TDHCA, and to file a formal complaint
with HUD and to research the implications of doing both, and report back in one
week.”
After the applause, Rojas,
making sure that no one beat her to the punch this week, made a point of
announcing that she would post the agenda item, and the item passed
unanimously.
Vivian Rojas then promised
to draft a letter to the Governor, the President, Sen. Shapleigh and the state
representatives. What about U.N. Secretary General Khofi Anan? What about the International Court of
Justice? The crowd clapped, the angels
wept, and President Bush is shaking in his boots.
Going Down in a Blaze of Glory
Folks, during this “lame
duck” period between the elections and the installation of the new Council,
we’re going to see Cushing and Cobos continue their dirty politics and their
slanderous remarks. Why? Because they want to help their patrónes keep as much of the Crony Crew
in office: Joe Wardy, Vivian Rojas and
Alexandro Lasagna. (Heck, they’re even trying to get Jr. Cronette and Luther
Jones Stepford Candidate Melina Castro into John Cook’s District 4 seat!)
The Bowlings, the Jobes,
David Escobar and Luther Jones will be working overtime to sully the worthy
challengers: John Cook, Steve Ortega
and Larry Medina. I have been told that
they are pulling out all the stops to ensure that their puppets stay in office.
And now, since Cobos and Cushing
were trounced on election day, these two feel absolutely free to do and say
whatever they want. (Not that they were
exactly reticent before.) As Janice
sang it, “Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose.” And with a parliamentarian like Joe Wardy
letting them say or do anything they want, it’ll be a free-for-all in the next
three weeks. I cannot emphasize enough,
dear reader, how important it is to vote the remaining Crony Crew members out.
A Closer Look
Let’s take a closer look, though,
at this whole Cedar Oaks, Vivian Rojas, Bobby Bowling love/hate triangle, shall
we? It goes waaaay back.
The history: A well-informed reader shared some general
historical information with me. Ike
Monte (owner of Investment Builders and the developer building Cedar Oaks Town
Homes) submitted his application for these tax credits in December of 2003
(Rojas was already in office then).
Although El Paso has always been a DDA (“difficult to develop area”)
because of our low income (per capita, I assume) the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) decided to eliminate the DDA designation altogether
(not just in Texas, but all over the nation) in January 2004. As a result, the math and rent numbers on Monte’s
project ended up being skewed and that was mainly responsible for the
non-recommendation in July 2004. When
HUD decided to restore the designation near the end of 2004, Monte’s project
(which was on a TDHCA waiting list) qualified and he got the tax credits and
the approval he had been waiting for for two years—the two years Vivian Rojas
was in office.
And because an alert reader
recommended that I look through the TDHCA minutes, I decided to do just
that. In fact, I spent a few hours
looking through the TDHCA website. Websites
are a wonderful thing, dear reader, because I found enough information to
school me very well. I’m not an expert,
but this is all information that anyone (including a sitting City
Representative) could easily find—if she truly cared to.
After spending hours on this
website, I’ve learned (as I suspected) that the bottom line is, Ms. Rojas was
clearly acting on behalf of the Bowling family to kill a competitor, and she
either didn’t care enough to follow-up on this item for the neighbors, or
wanted to only put up enough of a fight to make her appear to want to stop this project. For this reason alone, she should be decisively thrown out of
office by the voters in her district on June 4th.
Let’s Dig In
Here’s what I found on that
glorious website. Item number one was a
list of tax credit, low- to moderate-income housing applications from our Tax
Credit King, Bobby Bowling, pending approval by the TDHCA in July 2004 http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/040728-book-040721.pdf. Here they are:
Diana Palms on the 4700
block of Diana
Horizon Palms in Horizon
City
American Palms, two
miles away from Cedar Oaks Town Homes
(By the way, looks like
Bobby Bowling had some opposition of his own from the Mayor of Horizon City,
Diane Whitty, who opposed the Horizon City project because of what she calls
“environmental justice” issues.)
http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/040728-book-htcrecs-040721.pdf)
Because the two projects
(Cedar Oaks and Americas Palms) are so close in proximity to one another in
District 7, I wondered if Bobby Bowling had submitted his project (Americas
Palms) before or after Monte’s. After
asking a few questions, I found out that Bowling submitted his project AFTER
Monte did, so Monte was planning his project there first.
Anatomy of a Murder*
*The murder of Bobby’s competition,
that is
Then I read over the July
28, 2004 board meeting minutes and discovered that the TDHCA staff recommended
against funding the Cedar Oaks Town Homes because of several technicalities,
which included the market study and the feasibility issue that I mentioned
above (the DDA designation having been pulled from HUD). And I must make this very clear: Based on the minutes to the meeting, TDHCA
staff did not recommend
against funding it because of local opposition.
Investment Builders (Ike
Monte) later appealed the denial, which was based on the market study and the
financial feasibility and other issues, but again, not the neighbors’
opposition.
The issue that involves the
market study is very interesting. In
order to receive the tax credits, it seems that there cannot be an
overabundance of low- to moderate-income tax credit projects nearby. But guess who was proposing a project just
two miles east of Cedar Oaks? That’s
right my friends…Bobby Bowling, and he was proposing a project called Americas
Palms, just down the street from Cedar Oaks.
If the TDHCA included Americas Palms and the amount of housing that
project would produce, then there would indeed be an overabundance of
low-income housing in the area, making a direct impact on the market
study. However, Americas Palms,
according to the minutes, had not yet been approved, so the Investment Builders
folks argued that TDHCA should not have included it in the market study. There was also a discussion about financial
feasibility, which was a result of HUD pulling the DDA designation.
The minutes reflect that at
this July meeting, Rojas spoke against the project, saying there was already an
“overabundance” of projects in the area (which there could be, if Bobby
Bowling’s yet-to-be-approved project is included), and she also made the “it’s
not feasible” argument. But the fairly
detailed minutes reflect that Rojas never mentioned the
neighborhood opposition. And here’s
another interesting point to note:
Rojas was asked by the board if there was any opposition to the Bobby
Bowling projects and Rojas mentioned receiving petitions, but never answered
the question directly, so I couldn’t tell if there was or was not. In fact, I don’t know if the neighbors in
that area were or are even aware of the fact that Bowling is about to build a
project just two miles away from Cedar Oaks.
Bobby Bowling was also in
attendance at that TDHCA meeting, and guess what? He spoke out against the project. Of course! This project represents
direct competition to him. What I loved
was that he was admonished by two board members:
“Mr. Bogany and Mr. Salinas
asked that the political disagreements in El Paso be handled in El Paso and not
bring them before this board.”
How do you think it makes El
Paso look when TDHCA members have to admonish Bobby Bowling for injecting his
petty politics into TDHCA deliberations?
And, folks, if anyone has any doubt that City Council’s opposition to
Cedar Oaks is motivated (in large part) by an intense desire to protect the
Bowling family’s financial interests, this should remove all doubt. This proves that the opposition to Cedar
Oaks has quid pro quo written all over it.
Ultimately, the July minutes
show that Cedar Oaks was denied because staff had recommended against funding
it as a result of the issues I mentioned.
However, a little bit later in the discussion, at that same meeting, the
project is placed on a waiting list.
Vivian Rojas and Bobby Bowling were both at that meeting, my friends,
and again, all of this is documented in the minutes:
http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/040909-book-040902.pdf. For Rojas to claim she didn’t know about the
waiting list means that she was either asleep at the meeting, left immediately
(without reading the agenda about the waiting list), or is lying.
At the August 19, 2004
meeting, Ike Monte, undoubtedly trying to salvage his investment, came before
the board to ask for a “forward commitment” for the project. Monte let the TDHCA know that El Paso was
under-funded by $600,000, the highest amount of under-funding in the state, and
asked that Cedar Oaks be considered.
Monte’s staff said they had corrected the financial issues raised by
staff (and which occurred after the DDA designation was pulled), which caused
the project to be denied. However, all
forward commitment requests (of which there were many from all over the state)
were denied outright by the board.
http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/041014-book-041007.pdf
Then, on the December 13th
agenda (also posted on the internet in advance of the meeting), the
reconsideration of the tax credits for multiple tax credit projects was
posted. The items included Cedar Oaks by
Investment Builders and two of Bobby Bowling’s projects (Bowling was asking for
more funding) (http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/041213-book-041206.pdf). Again, Rojas could have and should have
known about the reconsideration because her ally and patrón Bobby Bowling was on that agenda. To quote Cobos, “What is really going on here?” Did Bobby never tell Rojas? I can’t believe that. Did Rojas never look at the website? That might be. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I believe Rojas knew that this
was about to be considered, but was biding her time…waiting for the right
moment…a moment when it would be too late to stall the project, but the perfect
moment to launch her “I’m your hero” campaign and to get enough votes to win an
election.
Back to the TDHCA December
agenda. The information made available
at that meeting included information about why Cedar Oaks Town Homes (the
Investment Builders project) was not considered feasible, and that was because
it did not receive a “difficult to develop area” (DDA) designation. But with new HUD rules, they did receive
that designation.
The other issue was the
“capture” rate, which measures the amount of low-income housing in one
area. The competing tax credit project
(Bobby Bowling’s Americas Palms, which was competing for tax credits at the
same time as Cedar Oaks was and which was very close by) hurt Cedar Oaks’s
capture rate. In order to rectify that
situation, here’s what the staff said:
A unique situation exists,
however, for the capture rate. When calculating the capture rate for a development, the approach taken
is that if two applications together would cause the capture rate to be
violated the Department “removes” or places the “violation” on the lower
scoring application. In this case, Cedar Oaks had a capture rate issue with
Americas Palms; at first indication then, Cedar Oaks, with the lower score,
would be “removed”. Nineteen points for
Cedar Oaks were deducted because they did not have evidence of subsidy for
their 30% units 14 days before the applicable Board meeting; however, because
they had restructured their application around not having the DDA designation
(and therefore not doing 30% units and not needing the subsidy), they were not
required to have the subsidy by that time. In retroactively scoring the
application, staff can not give these points without the proof of subsidy, but
if they had been continuing to compete for the 30% units the applicant has
indicated they would have finished the request process for the subsidy and
would have the proof in place. The
impact of this is as follows: if the application had not been restructured, the
subsidy letter would have been in place (we believe); therefore, the points
would have been awarded; therefore, the capture rate “tie” would have favored
Cedar Oaks; therefore Cedar Oaks would be eligible for an allocation (http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/041213-book-041206.pdf
page 351 of the pdf).
So, while there was
obviously confusion and some scrambling as a result of HUD having pulled its
DDA designation in January 2004 and then re-instituting it months later, it
also appears that Cedar Oaks was penalized in a way by Bobby Bowling’s
project. And I can understand why Bobby
Bowling would want to kill Cedar Oaks.
His project might’ve been denied as a result of the Cedar Oaks approval.
So what happened with Bobby
Bowling’s competing tax credit project?
The minutes of the December 13th meeting, (Demetrio Jimenez,
one of Bobby’s employees, was there to testify) indicate that the Bowling tax
credit projects were approved, as was the Cedar Oaks project http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/pdf/agendas/050107-book-041231.pdf.
Hmmm. I cannot believe for one second that Bobby
Bowling never told Vivian Rojas about the Cedar Oaks project reconsideration
(even if she didn’t know it had made the waiting list). Bowling would have seen the agenda, and his
projects are lined up with the Cedar Oaks project.
And it seems to me that if
the residents want to kill a tax credit project, it should be Mr. Bowling’s, which
is nearby, which is not yet in the process of being built, and which poses the
same issues for the residents that the Investment Builders project does. Why isn’t Ms. Rojas riling up the neighbors
on this one?
I’ll tell you why. Because she is Bobby’s handmaiden and she’s
happy to use the people in her district to eliminate his competition. And she has the gall to seek
re-election?
And the tragedy, my friends,
is that in a community that so desperately needs help and affordable housing,
Vivian Rojas, Joe Wardy and the rest of his crony crew have done a damn good
job of (1) demonizing the agency that’s trying to help us (the TDHCA) and (2)
killing affordable housing projects we need like the San Antonio Affordable
Housing Corporation’s project in District 6.
Shame, shame, shame on all of them.
Sigh.
Getting A GRIP on More of Our Money
This week we had another gas
issue (again, thankfully, not one emanating from Robert Cushing):
13. CITY ATTORNEY: [City Attorney's Office, Jorge
Villegas, (915) 541-4550] Discussion and action regarding Texas Gas Service's
proposed adjustment to its base rates pursuant to the Texas Gas Reliability
Infrastructure Program. POSTPONED FROM 05/03/05
Norman Gordon, the City’s
outside counsel, explained that Texas Gas was requesting a rate “adjustment,”
which would mean an increase in gas prices for rate payers. He explained that the legislature passed a
law in 2003 (the Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program or GRIP) that allows the
gas utility to raise its rates without a “rate case.” GRIP is limited to increases or decreases in its invested
capital. The rate of increase, said
Gordon, is based on the return on the investment. (As a reminder to my readers, Council allowed a $200,000 increase
in August in order to fund REDCO, the Regional Economic Development
Corporation, which Wardy falsely claims doesn’t cost tax payers a dime…that’s
one mighty big dime, folks).
Gordon explained that he had
negotiated a lower rate increase with the utility, and the increase will be about
$3.84 per year for residential customers and $14.04 per year for commercial
customers.
Cobos reminded Mr. Chapman
(don’t know his first name or his title) from the Gas Company that the utility
had just asked for money last year, and Chapman said that the statute allows
for incremental increases over a five-year period instead of creating a large
one-time increase that would create “rate shock.”
Cobos, who bills himself as
an accountant, asked if any accountants had looked at this.
Richard Fleager, VP of Texas
Gas Service (and a real accountant) was there and answered Cobos’s
questions. Cobos responded by saying,
“You know, you accountants are slicker than some of those attorneys. That’s a compliment!” I guess Cobos wants to believe that he
himself is “slicker” than any attorney could ever be, and that it’s a good thing to be called “slick”…well…I
wouldn’t call him slick, but he certainly is slimier!
Gordon said that there are
two options: Approve the request and
pay more right away or deny the request in which case the utility will appeal
it to the railroad commission or initiate an action to start a rate case and,
in all likelihood, end up charging rate payers a lot more. So if the City denies the small rate
increase, the utility can appeal or file a rate case. The rate increase is needed, apparently, as a reimbursement of
their $6 million capital investment.
Cobos moved to postpone the
item for six weeks, and Fleager said that the utility had been working on this
with the City Manager for the last month.
City Manager Joyce Wilson
warned that if Council did not approve this small increase now, rate payers
(you and I) would receive a larger increase later as a result of a rate
case. She recommended that they approve
the resolution as submitted.
Lisa Turner spoke out
against the rate increase, saying the utility had tripled its revenue, and Ray
Gilbert urged them to spend more time investigating the rate increase.
Wardy again asked what would
happen if Council were to vote no on the increase. He was told, again, that the utility would appeal the decision to
the railroad commission, the city would not be able to participate in that
appeal, and that the railroad commission would probably approve the increase as
filed (which would be a higher request than what was negotiated between the
City and the utility).
Joyce Wilson issued one last
warning: “It is our contention that if
action is taken elsewhere from this body, that the impact to the rate payers
will be higher, which is why we brought this forward for Council’s
approval. Now you certainly can pass on
the decision-making to the two state bodies, but the cost of that ultimately
will not benefit the ratepayer.”
The choice seemed pretty
clear to me, folks.
Cushing, who now has no
reason to pander to voters, said that the negotiations between the City and the
utility had taken place “in good faith,” and that the rate increase was not
unreasonable.
Cobos asked Fleager if a
six-week postponement would be okay, and Fleager said, “When we started this
process last year we asked the City, ‘do you want us to file a rate case or do
you want us to file GRIP filings?’” And
he said that the City decided to file a GRIP case (where the City can negotiate
a lower increase and make the deal). My
interpretation of his statement: “You
all told us to do it this way…why are you backing out now?!?”
After a lengthy,
mind-numbing, migraine-creating discussion, it was time to vote. Susan Austin moved to approve and Presi
Ortega seconded the motion.
Ray Gilbert had to get his
last two (shrill) cents in and said, “If you all think it’s okay…to rape the
people of El Paso, then do it, and let’s see how the election turns out in a
month!”
I cannot tell you hire
tiresome Ray Gilbert’s threats have become, my friends. And it seemed to me, we either accept a
small rate increase now or deal with a larger one later. Part of the problem with this Council is
that they rarely have the courage to do the right thing, and part of it is
because they’re so afraid of folks like Ray Gilbert. So instead, they pass on the tough decisions to other
people. How many times have I been
chronicling this on Council? How long
are El Paso voters going to accept this abject failure of leadership?
I’m sure you can guess what
the spineless wonders on Council did.
Pass it on they did. Here’s how
the voting went:
Voting for the modest
increase in order to avoid higher rates later were Austin, Cushing, Ortega and
Escobar.
Voting against the small
rate increase were Lasagna, Cook, Rojas and Cobos.
Leadership Void Alert!™
Or…Frankie says “RELAX” (sing along
with Wardy, folks!)
When Wardy was told it was a
tie, the other Council members laughed out loud (so did I!). Paul Escobar said, “You’ll be in the same
boat with us!”
So Wardy, who has absolutely
no courage to do the right thing (has he ever?) said (with that mierda-eating grin on his face), “This
is one of those actions, ladies and gentlemen, where it is not prudent for the
mayor to make a decision on a major policy vote.”
An exasperated Susan Austin
said something like, “Oh, Fred!”
Now…she probably didn’t say “oh, Fred,” but I’ll tell ya, that’s what I
made out (and I went to the streaming video to review that part of the meeting
five times to make sure she said, “Oh, Fred!”). Whatever it was she said, she was mighty frustrated with Wardy’s
lack of leadership. I don’t know, maybe
she thinks Wardy’s Fred Flintstone.
Yabba dabba doo!!!
“Mrs. Austin, I don’t need
your comments, okay?” responded Wardy.
And in what surely was a veiled tribute to recently reunited classic 80s
band Frankie Goes to Hollywood, Wardy also said, “C’mon, let’s relax here.”
Oh, sure, Joe. Let’s just “relax” while we truly get
“raped” by the railroad commission, which will probably approve a much higher
gas rate increase than what your pricey outside lawyer negotiated! And yes, let’s just “relax” while you pander
to Ray Gilbert. And yes, let’s just
“relax” while you all push off the tough decisions on others. You are a joke, sir.
Wardy, of course, voted no.
John Cook moved to
reconsider the item, and then he moved to postpone the item by six weeks, and
both motions passed unanimously.
On Arroyo at a Time…Or Not
After the item was read into
the record, a jovial Cobos, joined by Cushing and Lozano, began funnin’ with
Austin and pretended to move to delete the following item (I’m so glad two out
of three of those bozos is gone for sure):
16. PUBLIC HEARING - MAYOR AND COUNCIL: (Attachment) [Representative
Susan Austin, (915) 541-4886] An Ordinance amending Title 19 (Subdivisions) of
the El Paso Municipal Code by amending Chapter 19.16 (Improvement Standards and
Design Principles) Section 19.16.050 (Stormwater Design) Subsection 19.16.050.H
(Preservation of Natural Arroyos) to require that the City Plan Commission
determine whether to approve a modification of conditions to allow improvements
on natural drainage courses known as arroyos.
The penalty is as provided in Section 19.04.190 of the Code. POSTPONED
FROM 04/12/05, 03/15/05 and 03/01/05
Austin explained that this
item had been through a lengthy process, including going before the City Plan
Commission, the Departmental Coordinating Committee, the Ad-Hoc Arroyo
Committee, and the Legislative Review Committee for Planning. All of these committees approved the item.
“Basically what we have is a
law on the books that we’re having difficulty enforcing,” said Austin. “There’s a lot of uncertainty right now
about what is the right procedure and what happens if a subdivision comes in
right now that involves an arroyo. Yes,
we’ve got an arroyo ad hoc committee working on new comprehensive language,
but…what’s on the screen before you are the revisions to the ordinance as
recommended by the Planning Legislative Review Committee. And what that is, is instead of using the
definition…that the City Engineer said he wanted, we are instead letting that
be an administrative matter. The City
Engineer is going to make a determination within the initial five-day review of
the subdivision application of whether there is an arroyo involved or not. So, the City Engineer has the ability to do
that administratively.”
She closed by urging Council
to “close this gap,” and she said she had been holding up the ordinance by
eight weeks, waiting for the Arroyo ad hoc committee to finish its charge, but
they still haven’t even met the first goal, which is defining what an arroyo
is.
George Sarmiento, Director
of Planning, Research & Developemnt, said he had been hoping the committee
would have a definition that would not allow a subjective decision by the City
Engineer which could be challenged.
Austin made a motion to
approve, and Presi seconded the motion.
Cushing said he wanted to
hear from the Arroyo ad hoc committee, and Rick Cordova (who I believe is a
member of the development community, he’s either an engineer, an architect, or
something like that) came to the podium and asked Council to delete Susan
Austin’s ordinance. He said, “This
doesn’t do anything to the process, it just makes it more broken; we’re almost
there, I think this is just a waste of time, personally.”
Wardy asked him if he was
speaking on behalf of the committee, and he said he was not, but that he and
four other members were there to ask that they deny Austin’s item.
Ray Gilbert said that he’s
watched this “arroyo fight” for months (me too, Ray, me too). He recommended that they pass this.
Stuart Mitchell from the
Mountain Arroyos Neighborhood Association said that he’s been there several
times about the ordinance and has “consistently been complimentary about the ad
hoc committee,” but he said he’s run out of patience with them. He also said that each Council member has
claimed to be “passionate” about arroyos, and if they are indeed passionate
about arroyos, “there are many frustrated lovers because your passion hasn’t
produced any results.” He said that the
item has been delayed over and over so that the ad hoc committee could finish up
their work. And holding the ad hoc committee
agenda up for all to see, he said that those folks are still “trying to simply
come up with what was their primary charge from six months ago: To define what is an arroyo. And they’ve done nothing to get it to the
place where we have a definition we can work with.” He asked them to approve Austin’s item.
Cordova said that the
committee had not approved the latest draft, and that they do have a definition
of an arroyo, there were just issues about the width.
Wardy asked Cordova when
Council could expect a finished project, and Corodova said before the deadline
is up (he didn’t say what that deadline was).
John Cook moved to include
language that more specifically defines arroyos, but Rick Schecter said that
the definition of arroyo that John Cook was proposing was only the trickle
running through the arroyo. Charlie
Wakeem said that he had contacted the USGS Chief Scientist in Denver, Colorado,
who gave him the definition of an arroyo that the feds use: “Arroyo is a Spanish word that means water
course, usually intermittent, with a flat floor and vertical or semi vertical
walls.” I could’ve told them that! Wakeem said that the definition clearly
covers rim to rim; Cook accepted that definition instead.
The befuddled Lasagna asked,
“Do we have anything like that?”
“Yeah,” replied John Cook drily, “and they’re called arroyos.”
“I don’t understand what you
don’t understand about it,” responded Wakeem,
“It’s very simple.”
Mr. Wakeem, none of us will
ever understand what Alexandro Lozano fails to understand about this world
(maybe he understands space a little better).
It’s a subject of such immensity and mystery that I recommend you don’t
even attempt to enter it.
Lozano argued that, under
this definition of an arroyo, the Franklin Mountains to the Juárez mountains is
an arroyo.
Oh, Fred!
Both the legal department
and Stuart Mitchell wanted Cook and Wakeem to slow down on making such leaps in
the definition, but Cook and Wakeem argued that the language would protect the
arroyo in its entirety.
Lozano made a motion to
postpone, and Austin said she’d rather have the old (smaller) definition than
to postpone the item. Cook seconded the
postponement, and the postponement passed (the no vote came from Austin).
And then the excruciating pain
was over. At 3:30 in the afternoon,
with a numb behind, a throbbing hand from all my note-taking, and lingering
nausea from the vile slanders and posturing by the Wardy/Cobos/Cushing Gang, I
left my friends on City Council.
Intermezzo
Before I get onto the
conclusion, I have a request for any techies out there in my audience. I’d like my answering machine to say,
“Hello, you have reached…Mr. Lasagna!” I want to hear Ray Gilbert’s voice saying
“Mr. Lasagna” on my answering machine for the rest of my life. Any advice on how to make this a reality?
Thanks, folks.
Election Glory 2005
And see the bird
with a leaf in her mouth
After the flood all the colors came out
It was a beautiful
day
Don't let it get away
Beautiful day
Okay.
I know, I know…pretty cheesy.
Forgive me for gloating and for my sappy response to the greatness that
was May 7th. The voters have
spoken…and they have spoken oh so well!
Robert Cushing: Voted out! No more
spitting or gum chomping, no more bullying or stretching, no more noxious
gasses and references to dogs at Council meetings! Yee Haw!
Anthony Cobos: Voted out! No more
Mafioso suits, no more slandering, no more insulting, no more bid rigging, no
more slavish adherence to the “make Bobby Bowling richer at the expense of the
city” agenda from his corner! Double
Yee Haw!
Vivian Rojas, Alexandro Lasagna, and Joe
Wardy…well…let’s hope their days are numbered.
Let’s make that happen, shall we?
As the early voting results came in that
evening at 7:00 p.m., I couldn’t help but scream out loud (and for someone who
likes fishing and is used to being very quiet, this was a sight to see!). I could’ve sworn I heard the same yelps of
joy emanating from houses all over El Paso…it was like a wave of joyful
yelps. I was amazed, proud, delighted
and drowning in euphoria.
The work, though, is not over, and the
challengers in runoffs very much need to win.
They can only win with assistance from the rest of us. We must get the vote out for this runoff. We must inform the community. We must do everything in our power to get
the most ethical Council and Mayor possible.
I am wholeheartedly endorsing Steve Ortega
in District 7, Larry Medina in District 3 and John Cook for Mayor.
In District 4, the northeast folks have two
horrible choices. Don’t forget that
Melina Castro is a Luther Jones puppet (not to mention an inarticulate
embarrassment). I guess that means
holding one’s nose and voting for Jerome Tilghman.
In District 1, while Susan Austin has been
absolutely infuriating at times, I have to say that I’ve been torn of
late. I appreciate her recent efforts
at leapfrogging over Cushing’s Ad Hoc Arroyo committee…it’s too bad it took her
two years. I also appreciated her
efforts at pushing the $8 million San Antonio Alternative Housing Corporation’s
project. So, I’d support either Lilly
or Austin (although, again, I don’t know if we can trust Austin to do the right
thing 100% of the time…plus, she’s incredibly irritating).
In District 6, ditto for Paul Escobar. I have heard some very disturbing
information (of the Bowling kind) about Eddie Holguin, and I am trying to
verify it before I discuss it in the column.
However, Escobar fought Bowling on the San Antonio Alternative Housing
Corporation project, and he held firm on it.
I would prefer Escobar over Holguin.
I’m going to keep writing
until we know the final outcome, especially after seeing what these bozos keep
trying to do while they’re still on Council.
It’s going to get ugly,
folks. I’ve heard from a loyal reader that
the push polls are starting up again and that Bowling and Luther and Martie are
going to work overtime to get their puppets in. Will it be the people’s candidates or the Crony candidates? Again, it’s up to us.
Until next week…the drumroll
continues!
Comments or questions: shmaven@yahoo.com
My commentaries are posted weekly at
http://www.thestrelz.com/shm/shm.htm
Also, if any of my readers would
like to add their own comments or thoughts, they can do that at
http://strelzbacktalk.proboards19.com/index.cgi?board=shm