5.31.2005
This week, Ray Gilbert takes
to space…the final frontier; we revisit Wardy’s irresponsible mouth; Vivian
Rojas tells more lies; and Susan Austin gets all rucked up.
What’s Good for the Goose…
The following public item was
placed on the agenda by Ric Schecter, a local west-side activist who first
championed neighborhood notification issues last year:
2. Discussion and action on a Motion to expand the
open meeting and notification requirements of the City Plan Commission as
follows:
Regardless of any wording to the contrary above, the
City Plan Commission shall be required to hold an open meeting/hearing on any
new action proposed for a parcel/tract that was previously subject to a
contested hearing. The petitioner shall be responsible for notifying all
previous participants of record (of the contested action(s)) regarding the
subject, date and time of the new hearing. [Richard Schecter]
Schecter said that this item
was a re-submission from August of last year, and in a reference to the current
war Vivian Rojas has waged against the TDHCA, he said he posted it because of
the “current problems with the state housing authority.” He said he was trying to point out that “the
procedure that caused so much trouble for Ms. Rojas and her constituents is
alive and well in El Paso.” The
problem, he explained, is that decisions that are believed to be final at the
City are sometimes not final, and neighborhoods and interested parties should be
kept informed.
The consistently confused
Wardy replied, “I think I understand what you’re asking,” but said that Council
couldn’t take action on his agenda item; Council would have to post and amend
an ordinance.
Assistant City Manager Matt
Watson recommended sending the item to the City Plan Commission (CPC) for
review, “since ultimately the CPC would be the body required to accept the
additional notice.”
Susan Austin asked questions
about notification and asked if anything that occurred at the City CPC
meetings, which are open to the public, would be “analogous” to what happened
to the TDHCA. Watson reminded her that
subdivision applications are not part of the City’s notification process and
went into an extended Q & A with Austin about the process.
Irony Alert!™
Presi Ortega asked who on
Council is in charge of the Legislative Review Committee (LRC) for this and
Austin replied, “Ms. Rojas.” Oh, the
irony! As a reminder, Schecter told
Rojas last week that she had promised (back in August 2004) to take this issue
to the LRC so notification issues could be resolved. She never did.
Instead of taking a long,
hard look at their own policies, Presi Ortega and Vivian Rojas shifted the
focus of the discussion to the TDHCA.
Presi, the little
grandstander (who, by the way, is already lobbying to be the mayor pro tem with
the next administration…God forbid!), said he wanted an LRC and complained that
when he and his delegation of fools went before the TDHCA to try to reject the
federal funds they were investing in El Paso to help with our affordable
housing crisis, he felt the board wasn’t listening to them. He said he wanted to make sure that “this
doesn’t happen again.”
Vivian Rojas said she wanted
a “red flag” on developments that they have opposed (like the red flags Anthony
Cobos complained suddenly appeared on him last week? Could it be viral?).
Maybe she should have done that back in August when she promised to do
it. Then, like Presi, she proceeded to
complain a bit about the TDHCA and Cedar Oaks.
Wardy asked her not to
“confuse the issue,” and reminded her that “any company can build apartments
there because of the zoning…our contest is with the TDHCA and the awarding of
tax credits…that’s our issue.”
He’s absolutely
correct. Vivian Rojas is so dense she
still doesn’t get it. The area’s zoning
allows for apartments. There is
absolutely no reason for “red flags” when someone applies for permits to
construct apartment buildings when the zoning allows for that. Viv, I can’t figure out how you graduated
from high school, much less how you managed to get a college degree.
As Wardy pointed out, the
issue for Miss Viv and the rest of the pander/Bowling crew has nothing to do
with fighting apartments—which cause the congestion and overcrowding that the
folks in the area claim to be concerned about—it’s about protecting Bobby
Bowling’s interests, pandering to the classism and racism of the residents, and
keeping federal funds away from El Paso that could help us create more
affordable housing. Because Lord knows,
we don’t want federal investment here in El Paso—no sir.
Schecter mentioned
notification issues related to construction in the Wildwood Arroyo and said,
“the neighborhood went away, believing…they had won,” and he said the
neighborhood didn’t hear about it again until surveyors were out platting for
homes. He said there was a second
example where Save the Valley had an agreement with a developer about
exit/entrances on Borderland Road.
Wardy said that he agreed,
and said, “But I don’t know that this is the place to do it,” and recommended
an LRC (which was exactly the recommendation made last year).
“Last August the same thing
was suggested and it was supposed to have been referred to the LRC and here we
are 12 months later…and we’re suggesting it again,” said Schecter, adding that
he wanted a definite date when it would be reviewed.
Wardy said that would be
more appropriate for the new Council to decide, and suggested postponing the
item.
Joyce Wilson suggested first
sending the item to the CPC so that the commission could begin drafting the
item in the interim.
Presi Ortega made the motion
to postpone the item for four weeks and the motion was approved unanimously.
I think I’ve lost count,
folks—how many times has the thick and incompetent Vivian Rojas dropped the
ball while an elected official now? I’m
hoping and praying that next week’s meeting will be her last and instead of
spreading her intolerance of the poor as our elected official, she can do it on
her own time and on her own dime.
Ray Gilbert’s Two Cents on $5.8 million
Although the item regarding
the Palo Verde rewards was discussed ad nauseam last week and will be back next
week, Ray Gilbert placed it on the agenda this week:
3. Discussion, authority for, and action on the 5.8
million dollars to be refunded to the City of El Paso from El Paso Electric
Co. This is also known as Palo Verde
Rewards. [Ray E. Gilbert, Jr.]
Gilbert said that he first
heard about the El Paso Electric surplus in 1999. Back then, he claimed that discussions focused on an $8.00/month
decrease in residential rate payers’ bills.
He also claimed that after Mayor Carlos Ramirez was “done with it,” the
rate payers’ decrease had decreased – to $4.00/month. He said he’d hear “rumors” about the money, one of which was that
the City had made a deal with the PSB that their electrical usage would be
combined into one meter. Wardy shook
his head and said that wasn’t the case.
Gilbert said the rate payers
never got the $8.00/month decrease, and he wanted to know where the other half
of it went; “it just sort of disappeared,” he complained, and said that any
surplus money should go to the consumers.
He said that last week, he had seen the mayor’s assistant (Adrian
Ocegueda, the little Napoleon) outside Council chambers and asked him what the
Electric Company item was about and Ocegueda responded, helpfully, that he
didn’t know. Gilbert said he told him
that he ought to know.
Beam Me Up, Captain
Gilbert called the whole
thing “nauseating” and, implying that the City had opened up a can of worms, he
recalled a Star Trek episode where the characters were going to sit down and
eat and there was nothing but worms.
I had no idea Ray Gilbert
was a Trekkie—or does he prefer the more politically correct Trekker? I was half hoping Alexandro “I Need a Data”
Lozano would recognize the reference and interject a hilariously garbled
summary of this particular episode. Or
maybe he would turn to Wardy and doing his best impression of over-actor
William Shatner as Captain Kirk, announce, “I’m a pendejo, not a lawyer,
Jim!” Alas, Lozano/Lasagna was
silent. I sure would’ve appreciated
Lasagna’s perspective on this Star Trek discussion, as this is the man who
frequently launches himself into space.
Anyway, Gilbert said that
it’s not up to Council to become a charity and that Council has the discretion
to give the money back to the ratepayers; if it is determined that Council
doesn’t have the discretion to do that, it can go back to the PUC to amend the
agreement. He also suggested taking the
$5.8 million and applying it to debt service to decrease the debt levy
account. He said that would be a good
way to give the ratepayers a break. I
actually agree with that last part.
He said the questions that
were asked were “great,” and praised Wardy.
(What happened to the worms?)
Wardy told Gilbert that the
item would be back on the agenda next week and encouraged him to come back to
give his comments again next week.
Will the Real Joe Wardy Please Stand Up?
Cobos, sporting very puffy
bags under his eyes and acting as exhausted as he looked, asked Norman Gordon
if the City could pay off the debt service with the money. (I wonder if he was, once again, tossing a
few back with the down and outers by the canals. Remember Tony’s foray into ethnography and participant
observation when talking about the “hobos”?
Do they understand your pain, Tony?)
Gordon said that the agreement called for using the money for
demand-side management, and so Council would have to get approval by El Paso
Electric and the Public Utility Commission (PUC). He also said that Council was not required to follow the
agreement El Paso Electric had created with the outside organizations.
Then Cobos said something
that struck a nerve with Joe Wardy, but which (for the first time in his four
years on Council) was the truth: “This
City Government is looking at a tax increase if we don’t pay down that debt
service.”
I jumped out of my seat and
hid under my chair as I waited for the lightening to strike Tony…after all, I
think this is his first honest statement!
Not a millisecond after
Cobos uttered the words “tax increase,” Wardy sat up in his chair and declared,
“I don’t think so!” Wardy looked like a
Jack in the Box. Maybe he’s been
subjected to intensive behavioral conditioning by his wealthy handlers. That’s it!
I can see it now. Some of that
$500,000 in campaign contributions has gone to pay evil scientists to apply
electric shocks to Wardy whenever someone utters the phrase “tax increase.” The pain doesn’t go away until Wardy shouts
out “I don’t think so!” (which he did, of course).
My friends, behavioral
conditioning or not, Wardy is a dishonest man, plain and simple. When Anthony “Dishonesty is the Best Policy”
Cobos is being more truthful than Joe Wardy, you know Mr. Joe is in desperation
mode. All he can do now to ensure his
re-election is to lie like he’s never lied before. And all we can do now is hope that the voters see through his
many lies.
Let me remind you, dear
reader, that this is the same guy, who (eight short months ago) scolded Council
for not increasing taxes on the debt service side of the budget for 2005 (just
a little bit) to avoid a larger increase going into the 2006 budget (which I
believe was Joe Wardy’s most – and only – responsible moment).
The Tale of the Irresponsible Mouth
As I was searching the
archives, looking for evidence of this, I found many, many great Ray Gilbert
(the man who coined the name “Mr. Lasagna”!) moments. (I must confess, I’m gonna miss covering this guy.) My favorite, however, was a statement he
uttered during a heated debate he had with Wardy over the budget (when Gilbert
was recommending that they reduce the tax rate, but still give City employees a
cost of living allowance):
Wardy
told him, “You can’t have it both ways, Mr. Gilbert,” and when Wardy
“respectfully” disagreed, an angry Ray Gilbert yelled, “You’re showing the public the
irresponsibility of your mouth!”
[emphasis added] I had to stifle my giggle. Watching Gilbert lay into
Wardy was almost too much for me to bear.
http://www.thestrelz.com/shm/2004_0831.htm
Now, that little exchange
has little to do with this discussion.
However, I enjoyed that so much that I had to relive it with you
all. Really, folks, I couldn’t have
made it up…“the irresponsibility of your mouth.” Ah…I’ll miss reporting on Gilbert’s statements. But back to the issue at hand.
Joe Wardy’s true feelings on
the tax increase issue can be found in my notes, three weeks after Gilbert
declared Wardy’s mouth irresponsible, when Ray Gilbert and John Cook worked to
reduce the tax rate (which Wardy is now taking credit for). Here’s what I wrote then:
Wardy,
who clearly was not pleased with Gilbert’s recommendation, said, “Some of you
don’t plan to be here next year. If you
take a very, very short sighted effort on this it creates a burden on future
Councils to make up the difference…we’re trying to smooth these things out a
little bit…so we don’t burden future Councils.”
Gilbert,
unhappy about Wardy’s unwillingness to go along countered, “Apparently the tax
and spend is back…you’re not taxing to aid other Councils.”
El Bandido: The Tax Rollercoster
Folks,
my gut was hurting. I’m sure most of you
fondly remember the 11.8% tax increase from a few years ago, an increase that
was a result of previous administrations’ unwillingness to raise taxes little
by little. When government refuses to
act prudently and responsibly, someone’s gotta pay the piper at some
point. The Ray Gilbert strategy is
exactly what got us an 11.8% increase in 2003.
I
really hate to say this, but on this issue Wardy is absolutely right. The counterplay between Gilbert and Chapman
reminded me of the classic fable of the ant and the grasshopper. The grasshopper criticizes the ant for
“toiling and moiling” when he could play like the grasshopper. “I am helping to lay up food for the
winter,” replies the ant. “Why bother
about winter?” asks the happy-go-lucky grasshopper. We all know what happens in the fable when winter comes along,
don’t we, dear reader? Ray Gilbert was
saying, in effect, why bother about future years, Council? All that counts is this year. No, Mr. Gilbert, you could not be more
wrong. We don’t just tax for “this
year.” This is an incredibly
short-sighted and irresponsible approach to public fiscal policy.
Hector
Zavaleta, the City’s financial advisor from First Southwest, issued his own
warning.
Zaveleta
explained that in order to generate enough money to pay off outstanding bonds,
the City needs that small increase. “If you decrease the…tax rate by 2 cents,
you’ll have to generate more money this year and next year and each year after
that,” he warned. “That money is gonna
have to be found next year as well.
Either next year you’re gonna have to have a substantial tax rate or
you’re gonna have to find the money from your M&O dollars…every single year
for the next 20 years.”
Austin,
who seemed to have taken heed of the two separate warnings, made a motion to
accept the recommendations by staff. No
one seconded the motion.
“This
is an extremely difficult decision,” said Cobos, and he then made a motion to
amend the ordinance in order to set the M&O rate at .524662 and debt
service at .172015 for a total of .696677.
“The only taxing entity in El Paso to keep the tax rate the same,” he
said.
Cook
seconded the motion, and Council (including Susan Austin, who always ignores
her gut and blows with the prevailing wind) disregarded the advice of the
City’s Chief Financial Officer and their independent Financial Advisor, and
adopted the motion unanimously.
Gilbert
thanked Council.
Later
that evening, Wardy confessed to a local news station that he would consider
vetoing Council’s decision. But faced
with breaking his “no new taxes” campaign promise, he made the popular, not the
responsible, choice. In so doing, he is simply delaying the inevitable—leaving
it to future administrations to do the responsible thing. The truly sad thing about Wardy is that even
when his instincts are correct (which is rare), he lacks the courage of his
convictions.
Even
the El Paso Times, a big-time Wardy
supporter, was critical of the switcheroo.
In an El Paso Times
blurb later in the week when Wardy announced he would not veto the vote, Wardy
promised a 22% tax increase next year.
Ouch!
http://www.thestrelz.com/shm/2004_0921.htm
And this is the same guy who
is calling John Cook “Mr. Tax and Spend” while it was Cook who reduced the tax
rate, and it was Cook who did the legwork to get it lowered; it was Wardy who
vowed to veto the action and promised a tax increase in 2006.
The Political Speedbump Needs to Go!
Austin, in typical Susan
Austin style, repeated everything Gordon had just said in the form of a
question—twice. I’ve had enough of
her! Her voice grates on my nerves the
way nails on a blackboard affect others.
Rojas asked if the money
could be returned to the residents, and Gordon said that would require a
discussion with the PUC.
Cushing wanted to know how
the City got “lost” in the negotiations.
Gordon, a standup kinda guy
who looked irritated at that point, said, “We didn’t get lost. I don’t know why people are saying that we got
lost. We had a proceeding in 2001, that
proceeding was a fuel factor and a fuel surcharge case. As part of that proceeding, the City of El
Paso and El Paso Electric Company negotiated three things,” he said which were:
Gordon said that these
negotiations have saved ratepayers over $50 million.
He explained that after
those issues were negotiated and presented to the PUC, the two organizations
discussed last week intervened, but at the time, and they were asking for money
on the applications of the performance standards. The City said their demands were not part of the case, which
involved the fuel factor and the change in Palo Verde performance rewards.
When Cushing asked if the
negotiations between El Paso Electric and the interveners did not bind the
City, Gordon agreed; however, he said that the City is indeed bound (or
“binded”) by the 1999 document.
Wardy said that no action
would be taken because there would be a major report by the City Manager at
next week’s Council meeting.
Council took no action and
moved on.
Minutes
Passed and approved during
the consent agenda:
4. APPROVAL
OF MINUTES: [Municipal Clerk, Richarda Duffy Momsen, (915) 541-4127] Approval
of Minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting of May 24, 2005. (Attachment) - Regular City
Council Meeting May 24, 2005
UnCivil Service?
I was very interested in
where the discussion on following item would go, especially because Lance “I
looked up Sidney Hall Maven in the phone book and couldn’t find him” Ruck was
present at Council:
11. PUBLIC
HEARING - HUMAN RESOURCES: (Attachment) [Human Resources,
Terry A. Bond, (915) 541-4509] An ordinance amending Ordinance 8065, Civil
Service Rules and Regulations, Rule 1, Civil Service Commission, Section 10,
Commission Recorder, to clarify
disciplinary procedures. POSTPONED FROM 05/24/05, 05/17/05 AND 05/03/05
My friends, neither Assistant
City Attorney Lupe Cuellar (who spoke on this item) nor Lisa Elizondo (the City
Attorney) ever gave a summary of the issue on behalf of the public, so I had to
try to reconstruct the incident (or incidents) that led to this proposed
ordinance. From what I could gather,
this item was the end result of a tug of war between the Civil Service
Commission (CSC) and the City.
Apparently, the Director of Human Resources, Terry Bond, reprimanded the
CSC Recording Secretary, Rosie Buenning.
The Recording Secretary apparently answers to the CSC and not the
department head (in this case, Terry Bond) or the CSC Secretary (also Terry
Bond). In order to ensure that the
department head never takes action against the Recording Secretary again, the
CSC created this ordinance requiring that any reprimands be approved first by
2/3 majority of the CSC.
Before any discussion on the
item began, Robert Cushing, a former member of the CSC and a friend and crony
of some of the current CSC members, asked a question. Regarding the ordinance, which had been postponed twice, he
asked, “Would this not pass by default on the 60-day time limit rule last
week?”
Lupe Cuellar, the Assistant
City Attorney who is also the legal advisor for the Civil Service Commission,
informed Council that she would defer that question to Lisa Elizondo, the City
Attorney and their counsel.
Hmmm. Interesting situation, eh?
Cuellar informed Council
that the CSC asked her to relay the following messages to Council: The CSC does not want the item postponed,
they would like Council to take action, and based on information they have, the
ordinance they have created (item 11) is legal and not a violation of the
charter.
This was getting more
interesting by the minute!
Cuellar said that the CSC members
were told that the City Attorney’s office had legal concerns, but they were
never told what those concerns were; Cuellar said that she had not been told
about those concerns either. She said
the commissioners believe that they should have been told what the legal
concerns were, and that they hoped that in the future, any legal concerns would
be brought to them.
Cuellar said that the only
legal concern she was aware of was a claim that the proposed ordinance is a
violation of the city charter. She and
the CSC have reviewed the concern and they don’t believe it is a violation of
the charter.
Cushing asked Lisa Elizondo,
Wardy’s legal eagle, about the 60-day issue and Elizondo said the 60 days had
not expired because the time on this item did not begin ticking until the
introduction of the ordinance was made (the charter reads “upon Council’s
receipt”).
Cobos roused himself to
interject, saying, “This item is very, very concerning,” and claimed it would
affect every Civil Service employee in the City.
Steve Blanco, a local
attorney, was standing at the podium and said he had been retained by the City
Attorney’s office “because there’s a disagreement among City Attorneys” (the
Assistant City Attorneys on staff and Lupe Cuellar, who is also an Assistant
City Attorney, but one who represents the CSC). Responding to Cobos’s sweepingly inaccurate statement, Blanco
corrected him and said this would not affect all Civil Service employees. The ordinance would only affect one
person: The CSC Recorder.
Blanco explained that the
disagreement in the City Attorney’s office was about the ordinance and whether
it violates the charter. He said that
the CSC believes the scope of the charter permits them to make the amendment,
but the City Attorney disagrees.
Because there’s a disagreement among the city attorneys in the
interpretation on the scope of the charter, said Blanco, there’s a conflict.
Cushing, who wanted to use
legal jargon and pretend he was Perry Mason (a corrupt, misogynistic, dog
disemboweling, pompous, and far less intelligent version of Perry Mason) said,
“Since you opened the door, I’d like to know what the nature of that conflict
of interest is?”
Cushing asked if the advice
Cuellar gave the CSC was “not proper.”
Blanco disagreed. He did say he
thought the ordinance does violate the charter because “it’s outside the scope
of the authority that’s granted to the Commission…on how they administer the
CSC function.” When Cushing asked if
this ordinance could be classified as “inappropriate,” Blanco agreed.
Susan Austin wanted to know
how the rule read today, and Blanco read it aloud: “The commission Recorder serves at the pleasure of the
commission.” Austin asked him various
questions about classified vs. unclassified employees and about the Recorder’s
position. She also asked if the City
Manager, according to the charter, has the power and authority to delegate the
authority of oversight and supervision to department heads, and Blanco agreed. She also asked if the CSC had the ability to
choose their own CSC Recorder and Blanco said they were.
Austin also asked, “If the
CSC wanted to get rid of the Recorder and the City Manager did not, who would
have the ability to remove?” Blanco
said the CSC would.
Blanco explained that “What
the CSC’s proposed amendment would do is add an unnecessary area of oversight
where before an intermediate disciplinary action could be taken, you have to go
before the entire CSC. You can just
imagine how unworkable that would be.”
Cushing wanted to know what
had brought this to the “crisis where we’re hiring outside attorneys.” Was there some triggering mechanism, he
asked, and if so, what was it?
Cuellar wanted to clarify
that what the City Attorney’s office is alleging through Blanco is that the
ordinance is inappropriate, not illegal. I guess violating the City Charter is
no big deal to these guys. She said
that everyone is in agreement about the legality: it is legal. “Whether or not it makes sense policy-wise,
that’s up to you to determine.”
The World According to Ruck
Cushing asked why the CSC
got to the point where they needed to create this ordinance, and Lance Ruck
(crony and buddy to good ole’ Cushy) was eager to speak. He said he was the chair when the ordinance
was passed by the CSC, and this came about because the CSC Recording Secretary
was given a reprimand by Terry Bond.
According to Ruck, that reprimand was given because she was accused of
being discourteous and rude to a City Attorney and “effectively yelling by
using too big a font in an email. I
guess that’s a violation of the ‘too big a font’ policy,” said Ruck
facetiously.
Then it got fun. As soon as Ruck made those pronouncements,
pandemonium erupted in Council chambers!
Everyone was trying to speak
at once: Ruck, Cobos, Austin, Cushing,
and Elizondo.
Elizondo took over the floor
and said, “I don’t mind there being some broad discussion about how this came
forward, but in terms of the specific incident, I think we would have to be
posted to go into great detail about that particular incident and we’re
not.”
Both Cushing and Cobos
disagreed strenuously with Elizondo, yelping out in unison, “It pertains to
this item!”
“It may pertain to this
item,” responded Elizondo, “but the employee involved is entitled to specific
notice if you’re going to discuss specific personnel issues.”
Cushing said he still didn’t
know who authorized the hiring of outside counsel on this, and said, “There’s a
plethora of questions, but in a snapshot, this was a violation of the too large
a font rule, is that correct?” he asked Ruck.
They clearly didn’t like the
HR Director reprimanding the CSC Recording Secretary.
Ruck, who flaunts the same
type of “know it all” attitude that his crony Cushing does, said that he interpreted
the charter to say that notification to Council on this issue would have begun
the night the ordinance was first approved by the CSC. (These guys prove over and over that a
little education is indeed a dangerous thing.)
Ruck also said that the CSC is
not saying that the Recorder can’t be reprimanded by her supervisor, the Human
Resources Director. “We’re saying if
you’re gonna do that, it’s gonna take 2/3 concurrence from us.” (Should the HR Director also ask for 2/3
concurrence from you when she has to go to the bathroom, Mr. Ruck?) Ruck recommended that the item be passed.
Austin pointed out that it’s
going to be harder to discipline someone than it would be to terminate someone,
and Ruck said he had no problem with that because if the CSC is unhappy with
the Recorder, they wouldn’t write her up, they’d simply terminate her.
Austin raised her hands in
the air, and without finishing her sentence said, “Well, I just think this is
so jaked up, I can’t even envision...”
Jaked up? Oh, Fred! If you’re gonna go that route, I would’ve
said things were “rucked up!” If for no
other reason than the fact that she uses these stupid, cutesy euphemisms for
coarse epithets, Susan Austin has got to go!
(Who the Fred is this guy Jake and who the Jake is this guy Fred,
anyway?)
Ruck complained that what he
was “jaked up” (or “rucked up”) about was that the Recorder was disciplined in
the first place and that the City had spent money to hire an outside attorney
to tell them their item is not appropriate.
Cobos asked Wilson for her
opinion. Wilson said that the first
issue was whether or not this violates the charter or not. She said there are two attorneys with two
interpretations. The challenge Wilson
said she is currently working through is the fact that the Secretary works for
the commission, which only meets twice a month, and so the rest of the time,
the day-to-day operations are supervised by the secretary to the commission,
which is the HR director. She said passage
of this item is ultimately up to Council.
She pointed out that the Recorder’s contract expires in the fall, and
said the City will meet with the CSC, determine how many hours she will work,
and who the secretary should be.
Cobos asked if Council voted
on getting outside counsel and Elizondo said she didn’t need Council approval
to do that, and added that because of the conflict, “I had no authority not to
send this to outside counsel.” Huh?
Cushing asked why the CSC
wasn’t given an opportunity to have its own outside counsel and clearly
Elizondo couldn’t answer the question, but she acted like she knew what she was
talking about in an effort to fool Council.
“It probably will be in the future, it’s something that we’re gonna be
discussing with the Commission because in light of the fact that I do
anticipate having these type of management, uh, disputes or issues coming
forward.” This is classic Elizondo—a
non-answer answer.
Lupe Cuellar, legal counsel
for the CSC, stepped up to the podium and said, “Representative Cushing, if I
may add, they were given the opportunity to get outside counsel on this one
issue.”
Cushing made a motion to
approve and the item passed unanimously.
In my view, the whole thing
was “rucked up.”
So Who’s Being Empowered?
Approved with very little
discussion (and with public comment coming only from the El Paso Empowerment
Zone executive director) was the following item:
12. PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNING, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT: An Ordinance granting a Special Privilege to the El Paso Empowerment Zone to temporarily close portions of Texas Avenue, Florence Street, Ochoa Street, Virginia Street, St. Vrain Street, Ange Street, and Octavia Street on June 18, 2005, June 19, 2005, September 4, 2005 and October 29, 2005 for the "Texas Avenue Street Festivals". (Fee: $350.00, SP-05005) (District 8) (Attachment) [Planning Research and Development, Esther Guerrero, (915) 541-4720]
It still irritates me no end
that El Paso is using its empowerment zone federal funding for street
festivals. It breaks my heart that the
money is not going to help empower folks or create businesses or jobs in our
great community.
Bankrolling More Pandering
As I mentioned last week,
the following item had my ire up:
1. MAYOR AND
COUNCIL: Discussion and Action regarding hiring outside legal counsel to
further research and report back to the El Paso City Council with findings based on the most recent
developments from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs board
meeting held on 5/26/05. [Representative Vivian Rojas, (915) 541-4108] [attachment]
Before we begin discussion
on the item, if you need background information on the Cedar Oaks issue, check
out this good article (it covers most of the issues): http://www.newspapertree.com/view_article.sstg?c=8a345b4bac5b4d48&mc=809d3b8d3548a29b.
Lisa Elizondo was the first
to speak, and she said she had circulated a memo about this issue and the fact
that there would be “no value added” to hiring an outside attorney. What?
Lisa E. balking at spending our precious tax dollars to hire outside
attorneys? What gives? Elizondo said that while it is ultimately
Council’s decision, “I do think there needs to be a funding source identified.”
Cobos said they approved a
funding source when they approved her budget.
He said they’re asking for a second opinion and that he doesn’t think
the request is unreasonable. He
repeated that Rojas simply wants another opinion. No, Tony ol’ boy, what Miss Viv wants is to pander, pander,
pander. Maybe we should call her the
pander bear.
Elizondo again said she
didn’t believe an outside lawyer would give a different opinion, and because
they’re in lame duck mode the amount they could spend would be limited to
$3,000. Did Elizondo grow a conscience overnight?
Cushing noted that Presi and
Rojas had gone to Austin, and since he wasn’t there, he asked for a summary and
their “sentiments.”
Rojas said that the
sentiments voiced at the TDHCA meeting were the same ones that have been voiced
at Council. Basically, she’s alleging
that the TDHCA violated state codes (which they did not) and that there was a
lack of notification (also not true), a lack of due process (yeah, by Miss
Viv), inadequate evaluation of the application (not true), lack of
participation by elected officials (how can she say that with a straight face?)
and no public hearing (also not true).
She claimed the board made a decision that was “final” on July 28th
(this is the lie that she continues to perpetuate to move the focus away from
her ineptitude on this issue).
She added that if a mayor of
a municipality opposes a development, the TDHCA is required to conduct a site
visit to meet with the mayor. I
researched this issue to see if this statement is true, and as usual, Miss Viv
is Miss-Leading her constituents.
According to the TDHCA, they conducted site visits for all the 2004
competitive round applications (including Cedar Oaks, so a site visit has been
done), and the site visits have never had anything to do with opposition or
support of a program. They are routine business
for the TDHCA.
Yes, my friends, Vivian
Rojas can no longer tell the difference between the truth and her lies. After Lozano she is the most inept Council
member, and after Cobos, she is the most mendacious. That’s quite a record of accomplishments.
Cushing asked, “What was the
attitude of this board?”
“When they went into
executive session, they discussed this issue, it was on the agenda. When they came out they stated they would
take no action,” she said.
Cushing the would-be lawyer
then transformed before our very eyes into Cushing the would-be method
actor. He mustered all the incredulity
he could and asked, “This was even in light of the fact that we presented all
these issues to them where what they were doing was inconsistent with the way
the state statute is written?” Rojas
responded “yes.” Incredible! They really Jaked us over, huh, Bob?
Cook asked what kind of
legal remedies Rojas was looking for.
She never responded to that question.
Cook also said that that Council had already been given the legal
remedies, the protest and the appeal, both of which have done, and added, “no
matter what attorney you have come in here, he’s not going to give a different
opinion in my view.”
Cobos said that Rojas was
doing this because her constituents want her to fight and he repeated, it’s a
second opinion, and said “either you’re with the constituents or you’re not,
plain and simple.”
Presi, the little
Grandstander who couldn’t, said he was disappointed by the comments made by
Ainsa (the attorney for Investment Builders, the company trying to move forward
with their development) and in Shapleigh’s letter (that great letter I
introduced you to last week). He said
Shapleigh’s letter was read into the record and he said, “We know that there’s
much more behind the scenes.” Indeed,
Presi, indeed. But what’s “behind the
scenes” is you and the rest of the Wardy crew doing Bobby Bowling’s dirty work. Since I can’t believe you’re working for
free, I hope you make Bobby pay up.
Presi said he was “very upset” about “the tone and the way this has gone
forward.”
Then, as he always does,
Presi took the grandstanding to absurd depths and encouraged the residents to
“put some money together, and hire an attorney.” He said that the residents are
“the ones who are really being wronged in this situation.” Okay.
Presi is now the King of the Putz’s.
He knows damn well the residents don’t have a legal leg to stand
on. And because Presi has no problems
wasting our taxpayer money on this frivolous action, he’s encouraging the
neighborhood to do the same thing: To
waste their own money. Frankly, these
anti-poor zealots deserve representation like Presi’s and Vivian’s. The rest of the district, however, does not.
Cook asked how many
attorneys had looked at this matter, and Elizondo said four had and they had
all reached the same conclusion.
Cobos, seeing an opportunity
to get a dig in at Wardy’s mayoral opponent, complained that this was the first
time he’d heard Cook display any confidence in the City Attorney’s office. Cook drily responded, “Thank you for that
observation.” Well, Tony, this was the
first time that Cobos & Co. displayed a lack of confidence in Lisa E. Two can play at that juvenile game, you
putz.
Rojas said that she also
took issue with HUD’s Difficult to Develop Area designation and whether the
TDHCA complied with HUD’s guidelines and whether or not other developers (READ:
Bobby Bowling) had the same opportunities at that money.
Rojas made a motion to hire
outside counsel.
Cushing said that “legal
opinions, for the most part, are/aren’t worth the paper they’re written
on.” No, sir, it’s your legal
opinions that aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. But, Bob, if you feel that way about our
City Attorney’s Office, why are you paying Lisa E. and Jabba and all the others
such ungodly (sorry, Susan, such un-Jakely) amounts of money to render those
opinions? Now, I must confess, Bob, I
don’t know who’s the bigger putz—you or Cobos or Presi. It’s like Putzville up there on Council.
Rojas amended her motion to
limit the amount to $3,000. “That’ll
pay for the first week,” said Presi.
Everyone but Cook voted
yes. Everyone who voted yes should be
run out of office. Congratulations to
Cook for being the only member to do the right thing.
And the pain was over in
less than two hours!
Rumor Mill
Two loyal readers have
informed me that Anthony Cobos has decided to run for County Judge. Good Lord!
This guy can’t even get elected in his home district but he thinks he
can win a county-wide race? I hope that
if he does run, he gets trampled so badly that he can no longer live in Egypt
about the fact that his political career is over. Tell you what, Tony. If
you run for County Putz, I promise I’ll vote for you.
And the Letter of the Week Award Goes to…
R.
L. Niemira of Northeast El Paso! Yes,
applause, applause! Although the El
Paso Times and Joe Wardy and Silvestre Reyes don’t want to focus on any of
the not-so-positive BRAC news, it’s up to regular folks like Niemira to do so:
Poor
tradeoff
The three spin doctors -- Reyes, Wardy, and the El Paso Times -- are at it
again, saying that Fort Bliss is a big gainer from BRAC (just look at the
headlines).
However, if you care to look closer, there is one small article that says the
Air Defense School may be moving to Fort Sill, Okla. Great tradeoff. This is
the article that should have been in screaming headlines.
We will be losing scientists, engineers and skilled technicians, while gaining
tanks (with the accompanying pollution), mechanics and other skills that will
not promote El Paso as a high-tech area.
Will all the high-tech companies the Chamber of Commerce and the mayor have
been courting still come to El Paso, or will they go where the ADA is located,
namely Fort Sill?
The congressman and the mayor, along with his economic advisers, the Southwest
Gnomes of Zurich, have not done their jobs. The Times has done nothing except
aid and abet the BRAC results.
R. L. Niemira
Northeast El Paso
Unless we talk about this
issue, we won’t find a solution to this glaring problem. I still wanna know…is anyone up there
fighting to keep this school for us?
Helllooo? Wardy? Silver? Anyone there?
Speaking of Poor Tradeoffs…
On Sunday, El Paso
experienced a true tragedy: The loss of
funding for our medical school faculty and staff. Here’s a simpleton’s perspective:
Politics,
politics is name of game
So the Legislature failed to come up with funding for our medical school. Now
comes the wailing, teeth-gnashing and the inevitable rhetorical questions:
"Why doesn't El Paso have a voice in Austin?"
It's simple, really.
So long as El Paso remains a Democratic bastion in a Republican-controlled
state, we can expect little and receive less. Just how kindly do you think
Uncle Rick & the Boys are toward giving to a border town (which is always a
drain upon state resources) that always votes for the opposition?
It's politics as played by the two-party system in Texas.
If the situation were reversed, with a Republican El Paso and a Democratic
government, you may be sure we would be in the same situation.
It may not seem fair or right, but that's how it is and will remain so long as
El Paso remains out of sync with the powers that be.
Charles Fish
Northeast El Paso
If
only it were that simple.
El
Paso didn’t do well under a Democratic Governor, and it hasn’t done well under
a Republican Governor. I think one of
the problems is not how we vote…it’s the fact that very few of us bother to
vote at all. How can our elected
leaders make any real demands when their constituency is so apathetic?
Furthermore, when you have people like Norma Chavez, who traded her soul to Tom
Craddick in exchange for an appointment on the Border Affairs Committee (which
has no money and less power, whoopee!), we have our own folks selling us down
the river as well.
The
greater problem, in my view, is that as long as we have evildoers like Tom
Craddick leading the way in Texas, we will continue to do poorly. According to Texas Monthly, even
Craddick’s fellow Republican, Texas’s Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst, “views Craddick as someone who has few
motivations at all beyond his Midland district and his business interests” (http://www.shapleigh.org/news_detail.sstg?id=320).
So
while Craddick played “hide the salami” with El Paso and the rest of the
border, Midland ended up with a nice chunk of change that should’ve gone to our
medical school.
I
say thank goodness that—at the very least—we have one or two voices of reason
in Austin representing us in order to speak up in the face of the kind of
raping of the border that routinely goes on in Austin.
I assume we can use Mr.
Fish’s analogy here in local government.
I guess if we just went ahead and voted for people of Wardy’s
ilk—Cushing and Cobos come to mind— our community would be better off, right
Mr. Fish? I guess we should just go
with the flow and keep our fingers crossed, right? No, sir! We need folks
like Susie Byrd and Beto O’Rourke (who kicked the Jake of out of Cushing and
Cobos, respectively) and hopefully candidates like Steve Ortega and Ann Morgan
Lilly. We should never stop voting our
conscience simply because the majority of the city (or the state for that
matter) is voting another way. Then
we’d be no better than Susan Austin, a City Representative who can never seem
to vote her conscience at all. I don’t
even know if she has a conscience.
What a stupid response to
the thievery of Tom Craddick.
Those “high-powered” west
side guys who are making careers out of kissing Rick Perry’s backside better
get on the horn, pronto. They certainly
have worked hard for their boy and he now needs to work hard for this community. That will be the true test of how much our
“high-powered” Republican business representatives and “community leaders” can
get done.
Campaign Finance Reports Are In!
There were no big
surprises. With the exception of the
Foster/Schwartz developers, who weighed in heavily this time around (for the
incumbents, of course), it was a lot of the same players giving more
money.
The only interesting pieces
to Lozano’s reports are that he paid his volunteers (um…Lasagna…they’re not
“volunteers” if you pay them), he fed all of them (using his campaign money to
pay for it all) at his restaurant (Alexandro’s), and he paid Jaime Perez a
little over $1,000 to write his campaign materials: http://www.elpasotexas.gov/city_clerk/_documents/2005%20Elections/Lozano%20Jose%20Alexandro.pdf.
Vivian Rojas never listed
Bobby Bowling’s letter as an in-kind contribution (which she should have), and
the Foster/Schwartz crew also dropped money on her http://www.elpasotexas.gov/city_clerk/_documents/2005%20Elections/Rojas,%20Vivian.pdf.
Wardy received an obscene
amount of money and his total is nearing half a million dollars. If only these guys gave as much to local
charities, non-profits and other worthy organizations. But noooo…they want to pour half a mil into
the coffers of a not so smart but ever so willing front man to do their bidding. Of course, Wardy paid Gail Mortimer to
proofread his work (she’s Luther’s friend and whenever she helps, it’s a clear
indication that Luther’s the puppet master of the candidate paying her) http://www.elpasotexas.gov/city_clerk/_documents/2005%20Elections/Wardy%20Joe.pdf
The other interesting piece
is that Wardy paid $100,000 for Rindy Miller Media in Austin. He lists them as providing “media services
and poll.” I looked on their website (http://www.rindymiller.com/whatwedo.html) and it doesn’t
appear that they do polling. On
Wednesday I sent Rindy Miller Media an email asking them if they conduct push
polls or message testing, and here’s what I got back:
We are known primarily as a media firm, but we often provide
polling, direct mail, fundraising advice, or other campaign services.
It varies from campaign to campaign. When polling, our normal
procedure is to subcontract the voter interviews and statistical computation to
some pollster or firm we’ve hired to collaborate with us on the project.
We do not do, and have never done, push polls.
---Dean Rindy
RindyMiller Media
So far, Wardy has spent
almost $300,000 on media consultants for his all-out war on ethics and John
Cook. That amount of money is
staggering, and again, I ask…imagine what that money could do for our medical
school, for a children’s hospital, for other great organizations. Instead, it’s being used to buy your
vote. And speaking of buying your vote,
there was a great piece in the Upper
Valley Beacon about buying elections (http://beacon.valleypublishinginc.biz/beastory_050523_oped.html),
which is exactly what Joe Wardy and his puppet masters are trying to do.
The one comforting piece in
all of this is that the Wardy crew thought they would’ve bought the election
outright on May 7th. Not
only did they not do that, but they ended up in a runoff with a worthy
challenger who had only a fraction of the amount of money they did and is
giving Wardy the scare of his political life.
Go John Cook!
Go Steve Ortega!
Go Ann Lilly!
I say let’s keep out Eddie
Holguin, and by virtue of that, I’d support Escobar if I were in his
district. And district 4…ay, ay,
ay. All I can do is shake my head at
how things turned out there.
Go El Paso! Go vote and get your friends, family and
neighbors to vote…give them a ride, give them an earful, give us a chance!
Drumroll, please…
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