Continued shortfall

December 20, 2013

The numbers on our hotel occupancy tax (HOT) for the third quarter of 2013 are out.

Remember that the interest on our new ball park (serious principal payments are not scheduled until 2024) is being partially paid for by the HOT.  The city has projected a 3 percent increase.

The new numbers show that for the first three quarters of the year we are down 1 percent when compared to 2012.  That means that our HOT numbers projected by our city staff are wrong to the tune of 4 percent.

Property taxes cannot be used to pay for the stadium so other revenues like sales tax will have to be used.  The city budgeted a 4.3 percent increase in sales tax revenue for this year.  So far the numbers are coming in at 2 percent.

At what point do we hold these people accountable?

We deserve better

Brutus


Wired deal?

December 16, 2013

The December 17, 2013 city council agenda has an item on it to approve a 614 thousand dollar contract for planning for what is now known as “Multipurpose Cultural & Performing Arts Facility, Cultural Center, and Children’s Museum”.

Sit back and watch told us how the city wants to combine the three separate projects into one project.  Tuesday’s agenda item lets us know that the Hispanic Cultural Center project is now a plain old Cultural Center.

The backup material says:

“This contract provides for hiring an urban planning firm to facilitate a community-wide, bilingual dialogue and gather input on these projects.  The firm will engage the community in an extensive public input process, develop business plans for the facilities, identify programming options, evaluate appropriate venue sizes and amenities, evaluate and recommend siting options that provide connectivity and serve as a catalyst for revitalization and economic growth in the community.”

An out of town firm is being hired.  They will spend about half of their contract with “sub consultants” here in El Paso.

Translation

Extensive

The term “extensive public input process” means that someone will spend 131 hours conducting public forums, workshops, presentations and interviews.    There will be a maximum of four meetings to facilitate “extensive public input”.  The complete engagement will consume 1183 hours.

Connectivity

I think this means they can pick any place they want as long as it is  part of the downtown complex.

Catalyst for revitalization

I doubt that this contemplates revitalizing northeast El Paso and I suspect that most of this blog’s readers would interpret this to mean downtown.

Looking for trouble

It seems that someone anticipates that there may be some trouble with the final report.  The consultant’s proposal includes this language:

“Crisis management is not included in this scope of services and if required will be an additional service”.

We deserve better

Brutus


Balk!

December 10, 2013

According to this article in the El Paso Times,  this Wednesday the city is going to release a traffic study relating to our new ball park.

Wrong answer?

Brutus wrote Planned failure, a post about a ball park traffic study that the city commissioned and then published in December of 2012.

Are we going to see a new study?  If not, why does the article tell us that the city is going to release the study this Wednesday?

Could it be that the first study was unflattering?  Read it for yourself here.  Personally I think that waiting 875 seconds at one intersection while leaving a game is pretty bad.

Say it ain’t so, Joe

Maybe this is a new study.  Maybe it will predict different outcomes.

Maybe the city did not commission the study to try to get a better answer.

Maybe the Times will start researching subjects before just printing whatever the city tells them to.

Muckraker


Saying it doesn’t make it so

December 5, 2013

Our strategic thinkers are scheduled to ask city council for approval to change some of our city statements at the December 10, 2013 meeting of council.

Self promoting

The city’s current vision statement is “To be a high-performance, customer-focused organization.”

The proposal will be to change the vision statement to “The City of El Paso is a high-performance, customer-focused organization”.

Evidently they think that if you say something often enough it becomes true.  I would think that if they were customer focused they would have included some citizens in the feedback process.

Less community

They want to change the city government’s mission statement from “Dedicated to outstanding customer services for a better community” to “Dedicated to providing outstanding customer services for a better El Paso”.

This change goes right over my head.  I don’t understand what they are trying to say.  Why drop community and replace it with El Paso?   Hopefully the blog readers will be able to explain it.

Cost be damned

They propose changing the statement of core values to:

We value:

  • Excellence
  • Integrity
  • Respect
  • Accountability
  • Our People

I think it would be nice if they included cost effectiveness, but then again they aren’t paying the bills.

New direction

Thankfully they do include this statement in their presentation for council and the public:

We will ensure continued financial stability and accountability through sound financial management, budgeting and reporting.

Maybe this way we can avoid having a promised $30 million move of city departments that has cost us more than $70 million so far, or having to spend an extra $17 million because of a failed bond issuance, or maybe we could actually build a ball park for what city staff told us it would cost.

We deserve better

Brutus


Disenfranchised and disappointed

November 30, 2013

Ball park

Many of us are upset about the way the ball park happened.

We tore down city hall and the Insights science museum, have spent over $70 million dollars moving city functions, and have done nothing about replacing the museum.

We have sold $61 million worth of bonds for the ball park and are paying for other ball park related things through various city funds.

The voters of El Paso might have approved this but were never given a chance.

Bigger problem.

An even bigger problem for future El Paso taxpayers is the county approving $152 million to build three new health clinics and remodel parts of the county hospital.

Once again voters were not given a chance to consider this.

The county hospital district is going to build clinics with our money and will compete with private practice doctors.  El Paso has fewer doctors per capita than other major cities, yet we are using taxpayer money to compete with them.

Then we will have the ongoing costs of maintaining these clinics.  At the same time the nation is moving toward a system of universal coverage where the national government sees to it that everyone has health coverage.

Why are we building these clinics now?  Why not wait a few years to see if the national program takes hold and then let the private sector and the national government handle this?  Why the hurry?

Why are we taking on local debt when this has become a national issue?

We deserve better

Brutus