elpasospeak

The mess on Mesa this Sunday did not occur.

Had they actually  closed the freeway  for 18 hours, public safety–ambulance, fire and police services would have been paralyzed.

After considering the safety issues think of  the economic ones.  How much time and money would have been wasted crawling Mesa?  What impression  would have we left on the people from out of town that were trying to pass through?

Our city representative on the west side was quoted in an opinion piece in the Times the other day.

“We’re a big city and this is not a bad problem to have at this time because it’s preparing us for the future,” said city Rep. Cortney Niland, who represents much of the area affected by construction. “I know it’s frustrating, and I’m stuck in that traffic, too, but I’m begging everybody to be patient and let’s get through this as best we can. It’s all we can do.”

Accepting failure

She was absolutely wrong.  There were  things that could  be done to lessen the problem.

I spoke with someone who told me that me he talked with the mayor this Sunday.  The mayor evidently indicated that he got a commitment from the people involved to keep three lanes open in each direction.

Thank you Mr. Mayor.

Governing involves more than posturing.

We deserve better

Brutus

We had an incident in last week’s city council meeting where one of the city representatives made it known that the city had culpability in the problems in the ongoing San Jacinto Plaza disgrace.

City council has been discussing the problems with the quality of life project in executive session for many weeks now.  They use executive session so that the public will not know what is going on.

At one point the city representative started to discuss an aspect of the problems with the project and the mayor interrupted in a manner that indicated she should not continue disclosing information.

Executive session discussions are not required to be kept secret

The Texas Open Meetings act makes it illegal to disclose to the public a certified agenda or tape of an executive session.  Participants in executive center are allowed to discuss and make statements about what occurred.

Why not?

Council’s discussions about the project do not need to be conducted in executive session.  They could instead have a status report made during the open session each week telling us what the current situation is.  They would not have to discuss the city’s potential liabilities to the contractor.

Council had indications that this project would be a problem when they approved the contractor.  Unsuccessful bidders stood in front of council and the public and told us that the project could not be done for the money being discussed.  Council ignored the information and gave the contract to the firm that did much of the remodeling needed to move city hall.  Those contracts were on a no-bid basis.

The city representative was trying to do the right thing.

City staff resisted.  It looked like another railroad job.

Thankfully council prevailed.

We deserve better

Brutus

Another proposition on the November 3, 2015 ballot looks sneaky.  Maybe some of our readers will take the time to figure out what they are really up to.

Should sections 7.2, 7.3 A, B, C and D of the City Charter relating to the City’s budget adoption procedures and requirements, be amended to require only that which is required by State law?

I suppose getting them to follow state law would be a good start, but why are they trying to reduce the requirements?

I can’t imagine their efforts being designed to help the citizens.  If there is something in our city charter about the budget process that does not work well why don’t they put their specific modifications in the ballot language?  Instead they are asking to be held to the lowest legal standard.

We deserve better

Brutus