What’s in store in 2017?

January 12, 2017

What should we look forward to locally in 2017?

Will we see a newspaper that allows their reporters to ask the obvious questions of our local politicians and then write articles that serve the interest of the citizens instead of the newspaper?

Will we see a district attorney that handles cases based upon alleged crimes instead of who the parties are?

Will our county judge be held responsible for the messes she has presided over?

Will our city manager make time to answer phone calls from citizens?

Will our government employees realize that they work for the citizens, not the other way around?

Will EPISD handle our bond money well?

Will we end up having the second highest tax rate among the top 50 cities in the U. S. ?

We deserve better

Brutus


Ethics violation?

December 22, 2016

It would appear that members of our city council deliberately held what is called a “serial meeting” where meetings were held to discuss the arena but there was never a quorum of council present.

The Texas Local Government Code says this about “serial meetings” that are held to violate the Open Meetings Act:

Sec. 551.143. CONSPIRACY TO CIRCUMVENT CHAPTER; OFFENSE; PENALTY.

(a) A member or group of members of a governmental body commits an offense if the member or group of members knowingly conspires to circumvent this chapter by meeting in numbers less than a quorum for the purpose of secret deliberations in violation of this chapter.

(b) An offense under Subsection (a) is a misdemeanor punishable by:

(1) a fine of not less than $100 or more than $500;

(2) confinement in the county jail for not less than one month or more than six months; or

(3) both the fine and confinement.

We deserve better

Brutus


City representatives choke

December 19, 2016

The Times published a disturbing account about the actions of some city representatives the other day.

Evidently two city council members were meeting with some citizens in a public hotel restaurant to discuss the arena situation.

A Times reporter and photographer approached the group, whereupon one of the city representatives “rushed to the front desk to request a private area to meet to shield the discussions from the Times”.

Upon reconvening another city representative stood in the doorway to the room “to prohibit the Times from entering”.

The group could be heard “talking about the convention center as a potential site”.

Then a third city representative arrived and used his cell phone to play something “to block out the conversation inside”.

It seems that we have three out of three city representatives that did not realize that all they had to do was adjourn and meet somewhere else.  Instead they have antagonized a reporter and shown us what they think of the public.

Will the Times editor endorse these representatives next time?

And what about the hotel?  Why did the city representative think that she deserved special treatment?  Does she think that she is entitled to special privileges because of her office?  Would one of us get immediate free access to a private room for any reason at all?

We deserve better

Brutus


City debt

December 2, 2016

I guess that I should be proud to be thinking similarly to Rich Write over at elchuqueno.com,  The link should take you to an article he posted on November 28, 2016.  The post below was written on November 26 but was not scheduled to be posted until today:

The Texas comptroller keeps track of each city’s debt.

This clip came from the comptroller’s web site last week:

citydebt

It tells us that from 2005 to 2014 our per capita debt increased by 83.9%.

Quality of life bonds

We probably should expect that with the $470 million or so of quality of life bonds that we approved.

Except:

citydebt2

The comptroller’s analysis shows the quality of life bonds substantially unissued.

We deserve better

Brutus

 


Different times

November 13, 2016

The Times seems to have suddenly developed a concern about government construction projects.

They recently printed a front page article that indicated that our new army hospital is two years behind schedule and $22 million over the original $648 million budget.

The Times did not seem to be so concerned  when the San Jacinto project came in $1.5 million over the original $4.5 million  budget.

San Jacinto was 33% over budget.  The new hospital is 3% over budget.

San Jacinto was a city park that was remodeled.  The new hospital is a multi-story six building medical campus with a lot of technology.

Maybe the army should have bought something from the Times.

We deserve better

Brutus