Private club

May 1, 2014

Is our district attorney part of the corruption problem here in El Paso?

If we look at the problems that we have had with our local governments we see that our local district attorney is not involved in the prosecutions.

The word I get is that he will not prosecute another elected official.

I’m trying to find out what has happened with  our west side city representative who back in October was accused of threatening a city employee.  I have been told that the investigation is over and that our district attorney is stalling.

What about the mayor?

According to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure the mayor of an incorporated city is also a magistrate under the law (title 1, chapter 2, article 2.09 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure).

The code goes on further to specify:

Art. 2.10. DUTY OF MAGISTRATES.  It is the duty of every magistrate to preserve the peace within his jurisdiction by the use of all lawful means;  to issue all process intended to aid in preventing and suppressing crime;  to cause the arrest of offenders by the use of lawful means in order that they may be brought to punishment.

If the police investigation has not been completed at this point we clearly have a problem.  The accusation was made last October.

If the investigation clears the city representative of wrong-doing we have a right to know.

If on the other hand the investigation indicates that a crime has been committed we should move forward to a grand jury.

Our mayor should either let us know that the case is cleared or he should do his duty and bring charges.

We deserve better

Brutus

3 Comments | City government, County Government, State Government | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Play ball

April 28, 2014

Our new ball park is scheduled to open today.

There will be difficulties.  The contract to build the facility does not require completion before the end of August.  Parts of the ball park are not finished but are not necessary to have a game.

Traffic and parking will be problems that hopefully the authorities can learn how to handle.

I agree with the mayor.  Many of us do not agree with how we got here.  However if the  venture is not a success we will end up paying much more than we think we will pay now.

In a few months the city should be finished with most of the project.  At that point in time the voters should be able to look at the bills to learn more about the costs incurred just because some people wanted to have a new city hall.  I may be wrong but I don’t believe that the sports team owners had to have the facility where it is or that it had to be completed for playing this year.  I still think that this was all about forcing the city hall issue.

The Times does not seem to be able to decide whether the ball park is a 72 million dollar project or if it is a 74 million dollar project.

It is neither.  One of these days we will start to learn about all of the costs.  The city has done much in the areas around the ball park that they are not talking about.  My uneducated guess at this point is that those costs will exceed 25 million dollars.

From all that I can see we now have a first class facility.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could say the same about our local government?

We deserve better

Brutus

 

15 Comments | Ball park, City government, County Government, El Paso Independent School District, El Paso Times | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Know your place

April 20, 2014

The chief appraiser of our appraisal district had this quote attributed to her in the Times recently:

“We’ve been able to increase (property) values and put more income in your budgets. Remember that it takes people to do that.”

She was speaking to her board of directors.

Wrong

The chief appraiser is wrong.  Texas law requires the appraisal district to set a value on each piece of property.  That value is then used to determine the proportionate share of a particular tax burden that the property will bear.

In other words if a particular property is valued at 200 dollars and the total value of all properties is in a particular taxing district is $1,000 then that property will bear 20% of the tax burden for that district.

The taxing entity then sets their tax rate.  They must first determine how many cents per hundred dollars of the most recent valuations from the appraisal district will be required to come up with the same tax revenue as they came up with last year.

As an example, if our $200 dollar property last year was taxed at five cents per hundred the tax bill for the property would be ten cents.  Once again if the value of all the properties was $1,000 the total tax bill would be fifty cents.

If the next appraisal raised the value of the properties to a total of $2,000 then the tax rate would need to be two and one half cents per hundred, yielding the same fifty cents.

Tax increases

After the appraisal district determines the individual and total valuations of the properties the taxing entities then determine what the new tax rate must be in order to raise the same amount of revenue.

In Texas the taxing entity can change their rate to lower (that seldom happens) or raise their tax revenue.  If the new tax rate results in more than an 8 percent increase in revenue a roll back election is in order for some of our governments.

There are some exceptions to the basic formulas above but it should be clear that the appraisal district does not raise revenue for anyone.  They spend revenue.

Know your place

Our chief appraiser is off the reservation.

Referring to the appraisal district’s legal budget, the Times article provided this quote from her:

“When you chip that down to next to nothing, we’ll have to just roll over and give (property owners) whatever they want because we won’t be able to defend our appraisals and provide the best values to the entities.”

It sounds like she considers the property owners to be her opponents.

Maybe she should apply for the job of city manager.

 

We deserve better

Brutus

3 Comments | City government, County Government, State Government | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

The county can count

April 17, 2014

It seems that there are limits to the ball park story, at least at the county.

According to an El Paso Times article “Negotiations between the county and MountainStar over the use of the county’s parking garage fell through after the group offered to lease 600 parking spaces on games days for their employees for $1 a year”.

We don’t know if that offer was for $1 per year per parking space or $1 per year for the whole thing.

The sports group probably does not really plan to have 600 employees.  If they do, expect to pay a lot for each hot dog.  If it is true that the sports group wanted 600 spaces, it would seem reasonable to assume that the sports group was going to re-sell the spaces.

It is hard for me to believe that the sports group offered only $1.

Either way it would appear that they taxpayers are not going to subsidize this part of the plan.

Maybe the county could help the city learn how to negotiate better.

Something got better

Brutus

7 Comments | Ball park, City government, County Government | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Holier than thou

April 2, 2014

The El Paso Times editorial Stubborn judges should back down took the El Paso Council of Judges to task for their “unilateral decision to raise indigent defense fees”.

They wrote:

“These judges, who were not elected to make budget and tax decisions, have decided nonetheless to levy added costs amounting to about $500,000 the remainder of this year and $1 million next year. That forces the people who were elected to make such decisions — county Commissioners Court — to cut money elsewhere or raise taxes”.

Actually

The judges do have the right and the responsibility to set the rate of reimbursement.  The Times knows this and even wrote in their December 27, 2013 editorial:

“The Council of Judges’ recent unilateral decision to raise attorney fees in indigent defense cases by $15 an hour is a classic example of the dysfunctional system set up by the Texas Constitution.”

Further, according to the Times:

“The judges requested a $10 an hour increase for attorney fees in indigent defense cases before the county budget was adopted in October. Commissioners rejected that proposal because the funding wasn’t available.”

Who’s wrong

The judges made a request for an increase in the reimbursement rate as part of the normal county budget process.  The commissioners decided not to honor it.

The judges have the authority to set the rate.  Commissioners have to pay it.  Pretty simple really.

We elect judges in Texas.  If our voters don’t approve of what they have done we will see new judges in the next election.

The all knowing Times

The Times evidently feels that their judgment should trump the Texas Constitution.

They also evidently feel that while it was good for the city to pay more than market value for the Times building it is not good for lawyers to get paid a fair rate to defend people who cannot afford a lawyer.  Now they are taking on the United States Constitution.

How would the Times have responded if the city had used eminent domain to steal their building, or if the city had used code violations to condemn the building and then steal it?

Unjust enrichment

Before the rate increase local lawyers were paid $75 per hour when they worked in court.  Most of us pay more for plumbing.

We deserve better

Brutus

9 Comments | City government, County Government, El Paso Times | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »