Efficient, hardworking city staff

January 15, 2013

The earlier comments about the construction manager at risk selection and how qualified the firms really were for the city ballpark piqued my curiosity.

According to the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) issued for the ballpark, the city would issue a Request for Proposals after it selected candidates that passed the Request for Qualifications process.  In other words step one would be to select those firms that in the city’s opinion were qualified to receive the Request for Proposals (RFP).  Step two would be to issue and evaluate the RFP.

The document indicates that the RFP would be issued on December 4, 2012.  That was two days before the same document indicated they were supposed to figure out who would get the RFP (I guess that was just a typo — who cares about these things when you already have your mind made up?).  Anyway, the lucky firms would have until December 19, 2012 to respond with their offers.

Two weeks to figure out what your offer should be on a project this size is not a lot of time.  That is unless you knew about it before hand and had a chance to be working on your offer before the other firms.  At least four firms did respond though.

The city’s “Score Summary Form” can be found here.  It is a remarkable document.

I cannot help but note that the city staff reviewing the responses was able to work their way all the way through what must have been a lot of paper and technicalities and somehow issue their evaluation of the offers only one day after they received them!

Not only that, but they were unanimous in picking the number one and number two responses.  (A more cynical person might say that they were unanimous in selecting the responses that they were told to select.)  There was evidently some critical thinking necessary in ranking the number three and four responses since the results were not unanimous here.

I also note that the “Raters” did not have their names listed even though the city has listed them on RFQ’s in the past.  This is unfortunate.  Maybe the citizens would like to thank them individually for their hard work and diligence on this matter.

Let me say again that I support the ballpark.  It is the way we are doing it that bothers me.

We deserve better


Hope springs eternal

January 11, 2013

Okay, Okay!  People tell me that I am naive.  Guilty as charged.

Yesterday I wrote in Baseball art that it looked like the city at one time thought about spending $850,000 for art at the new ball park, with most of the money going to out of town artists.  I saw some documents that made me hope that the amount had been cut down to $150,000 and would go to a local artist.

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride …

Next Tuesday’s (January 15, 2013) city council agenda has item 11B on it that would approve the 2013 Public Art Plan for the City of El Paso.

The plan includes $850,000 for art at the soon to be built baseball park and $478,000 for art at the new city headquarters (why can’t we move art from the soon to be demolished city hall?).  Dozens of other projects are listed in the plan.

Art is something that I know nothing about.  I suppose we need it.  Please don’t make me pick it.

My objections here are that we evidently are using certificates of obligations (borrowing) to fund this.  If we borrow I think it should be for necessities.  We should pay for niceties with money that we actually have.

Secondly (but certainly no less important) if we are still giving preference to out of town artists I think that we are doing the wrong thing.  It appears from reading the document that the artists have already been chosen, and some are indeed from out of town.

Take a look at the document. It shows what they plan to spend and where the art will go.  It even has conceptual renditions of what some of it may look like.

Much of the plan addresses dressing up the Bataan Railway right next to the proposed ball park.  What a coincidence.   Should we consider this part of the cost of the ball park?

We deserve better


You wouldn’t do this with your own money

January 7, 2013

Brutus’ post Foul Ballpark has me wondering why we put up with this stuff at the city.

Would you:

  • Decide to build a new home
  • Sign a contract to have the house built for $150,000
  • Have the plans drawn up later
  • Give the builder 30% of what is left if the house ends up costing less than $150,000
  • Let your real estate agent decide how the home will be built?

Of course not!  You would:

  • Have detailed plans before you signed the contract
  • Keep control over the design, not let someone else decide for you
  • Make sure that the contractor built what was promised, not delete a bathroom or leave the roof off …
  • Walk away from any contractor that proposed such nonsense

It appears that this is what the city wants to do to us at their Tuesday meeting.  The El Paso Times article this weekend did not point this out.  I hope they write an editorial about this.

Why do we allow the people at the city to do this to us?

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.


City Manager’s Statement

December 19, 2012

Last Sunday (December 16, 2012) El Paso, Inc. published a public statement recently made by the city manager.

I don’t know whether to take it as an apology or as a promise to do better.  I hope that it is both but fear that it might be another exercise in misdirection and self justification.

Let me re-print the message as it was printed in the El Paso, Inc. and intersperse some of my thoughts in blue with the hope that the city manager will take them to heart.

I want to thank the mayor and City Council for their continuing vote of confidence and support.  I realize that the controversy surrounding the public release of volumes of emails has created an unfortunate distraction from the important work of the city and a regrettable conflict in relationships between myself and some members of City Council,  (The controversy did not cause the conflict.  You did.  You were wrong when you thought  it was your place to judge your bosses as having dementia.  You were wrong when you committed your thoughts to a written note to someone else.)  and the potential to permanently tarnish my career as city manager (your job, which is not a career, has been tarnished by this and other actions).

I once again want to publicly apologize for my role (not your role, you were not part of the problem, you and you alone  caused the problem) in causing this situation.  I am committed to doing my very best to rebuild those damaged relationships with the City Council and community (I hope that you will learn to put your obligations to the community first.) and to ensure that this conflict doesn’t adversely impact the community’s overall confidence in its city government (face it, it has) and the council/manager form of government in particular.

Even though all our actions surrounding the development of the ballpark project and related agreements were undertaken with only the community’s best interest at heart (thank you for your intent, but please understand that the community gets to decide what is in it’s best interest, not a city employee), the conflict surrounding these decisions did devolve into an erosion of civil discourse (it was not an “erosion” just because the discourse ran contrary to your actions) over a very important and transformative initiave, and I want to do my part to prevent a future reoccurence of same.

Of the many important lessons recently learned, all citizens are entitled to be heard and treated with respect as are all elected officials regardless of their respective positions on issues (I would have hoped that you knew this before taking the job.  The fact that you are just now learning it speaks volumes about your prior actions).  Process and relationships are equally important as results.  I am not the first person to make statements they regretted or which they could take back (Are you trying to say that since other people have made mistakes  that you are less accountable for yours?), or to not fully appreciate the impact of technology on communications (don’t you really mean that you did not realize the Public Information Act would allow someone to catch you?) and casual (casual?  It is not your place to gossip about and denegrate the people that you work for.) chatter.  I am not perfect, even though I recognize that I must be held to a higher standard because of the office I hold (If you had said “I am not perfect and I recognize…”  this would not have sounded like an excuse–are you saying “poor me, I have to be held to a higher standard”).

However, regardless of my personal failings (What are you saying here–you still think they are demented?), the public needs (deserves, not needs–you don’t get to decide what we need to do) to retain its confidence in the organization and leadership and know that this community and organization has been my passion and devotion (I thank you for that but would like to point out that your passions do not entitle you act differently from our will.) since taking office in 2004.

I am deeply saddened to have created a situation which compromised the city government reputation and for letting the mayor and council, the community and my staff down (good, but remember that the members of the community should come first in your thoughts).

2013 will be a year of significant change.  I am committed to providing appropriate stewardship and leadership (I just wish you knew what was appropriate.) going forward to ensure a smooth relocation of City Hall with minimal disruption in customer service, good oversight of the ballpark construction project, a seamless transition of a new mayor and council in June 2013 (What do you have to do with that?  Do you intend to tell us who to vote for?  I hope that you meant to say that you would do what you could to support the new officials.) , which is only six months away, and then a thorough process to recruit my successor (Please stop right there–you should have nothing to do with picking your successor other than answering those questions that the selection group poses.) so there will be no major upheaval or loss of continuity for the future (Who are you to decide about continuity?  Maybe the voters  want an upheaval.)

We also need to successfully launch the quality of life bond initiatives.  The community gave us a huge vote of confidence (That is presumptuous.  Some of us voted for the facilities despite our current government.) on election night and we need to make sure that this present conflict doesn’t undermine this extraordinary movement in El Paso’s history (How are you going to do that?  Silence the opposition?  I suggest that you administer our affairs in a professional manner).

I would like to again reaffirm my gratitude to the mayor and council for your continued support, and in particular to the mayor for the manner in which he constructively handled  (By prohibiting public comment from an elected official?) this situation and review.  Thank you.

Time will tell.  It is not too late for the city manager to start running an open, transparent government that responds to the will of the people.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.


Council Deceit

December 15, 2012

I try to keep each article focused on a single issue.

Next weeks council agenda won’t let me do that.  There are too many things that they are planning to do to us.

Here is a list of the items that caught my eye on my first reading of the agenda:

  • Item 19 on the regular agenda allows the city to sign a lease for antenna space on top of the Wells Fargo building for the public safety radio system.  Those antennae used to be on top of city hall.  Turns out that city hall was a ten story building and the multiple new buildings they want to move into are not tall enough for the antennae.  Cost? $40,800 a year (to start) for ten years.  That’s another $408,000 that I will add to the running total of the cost of tearing down city hall.
  • Item 18 on the regular agenda asks for permission to change the Bond Overview Advisory Committee (BOAC) resolution. Council created the BOAC so that we citizens would feel that we might get someone honest to watch how the bond money was spent — trust us, we will have civilian oversight.  The resolution stated “No member of the BOAC shall hold any other public office of honor, trust or profit in the government of the city, county or state during his or her term of office”.  That meant no elected officials or government staff.  The agenda item includes “The City Council will consider deleting this provision in order to allow more individuals to apply and be considered for appointment to the 2012 BOAC.”  In other words we want to stack the board with our insiders so that we can spend the money without citizen interference.
  • Item 17A on the regular agenda asks for permission for to have “City Development Department staff draft an ordinance implementing urban design standards/criteria for public assembly use buildings to include all City of El Paso civic buildings and schools.  Furthermore, that staff develop a process by which civic buildings and schools are vetted through an Architectural Design Review Committee to ensure compliance with urban design standards.”  In other words they want control over the design and construction of all of our local schools.
  • Item 10A on the regular agenda contemplates the establishment of the “Baseball Stadium Venue Project Fund”.  Maybe that makes sense.  What does not make sense is that it allows the city to use money in the fund to “pay the principal of, interest on, and other costs relating to bonds or other obligations issued by the City or to refund bonds, notes, or other obligations; …”   In other words they can steal money from the fund to pay for other things not related to the ballpark.  Is this an accidental phrasing?  Do they mean they only want the fund to pay for the ballpark?  Regardless of their intentions, the language is clear — they want to be able to pay for anything.

I will stop now to let you think about these things:

  • $408,000 being spent because the antennae on top of city hall need to be put somewhere else
  • Change the bond oversight committee to allow politicians and government insiders to control what is happening
  • Let us decide how schools will be built and what it will cost to build them
  • Let us spend the Hotel Occupancy Tax on whatever we want to spend it on.

We deserve better