Another person’s thoughts

June 26, 2013

There was a comment posted yesterday that I think was saying that we edit or refuse to post comments that we do not agree with.  I say think because the comment was hard to understand. I reprint it here for your convenience:

Sounds like someone is making excuses for editing or deleting comments that he doesn’t agree with. Chicken shit bloggers always fail.

If your commenters are hurting your ego, maybe you ought to rethink your incorrect conspiracy theories.

To my knowledge every legitimate (non spam) comment that has been sent in has been posted.  There may have been an instance where I edited out some vulgarity.

I don’t know why this blog is getting spam.  The service we are using  catches several bogus messages every day.  When I  set the site to allow all comments to be published automatically, some spam messages get through.  This is an inconvenience to those who get an email from the site when activity is posted.

I choose to vet comments from new posters before they are published.  Those who have commented more than a few times are evidently white-listed and their comments go through without delay.  I have published every comment that seemed to me to not be spam.  I plan to  continue to do so and I  also reserve the right to edit comments to keep them civil, although most on this blog are civil.

It appears that the same person who made the comment also has his own blog.  I do not know that they are the same people but I do know that the names match.

He published this yesterday about ElPasoSpeak and it’s readers.  While I appreciate the different point of view, I have great difficulty understanding why some people feel the need to get personal or to try to put words in someone’s mouth.

We deserve better

Brutus

11 Comments | Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Pruning

June 25, 2013

Several people have made similar comments to me recently.

They feel that government at the local and national  levels has become too active.  In Texas local governments are only allowed to do those things that the laws specifically authorize them to do.  They don’t seem to care though.

Now it seems that their attitude is aggressive.  Their government is in charge.  Citizens should do what they are told.

We will never be able to write laws that are specific enough to stop that kind of thinking.  Those that want to game the system will always be able to find a loophole that they can use.

What we need is people in government who know how to do the right thing.  Not the right thing in their arrogant view, but the right thing according to the will of the people.

Local governments in Texas must be authorized by law before they can conduct a specific activity.  Our national government should only do those things that are specifically allowed by our Constitution.

Shortly after we adopted that document the people saw the government doing things that the people thought was prohibited already.  The 9th and 10th amendments were clear language designed to inhibit growing government.

Unfortunately those amendments  have long since been eviscerated.  What we should learn from this is that we cannot legislate morality.

Our hope lies in demanding the right conduct from our governments and the people who work in them.  It would help if shame could become an element of our fiber again.

You know that I often refer to our national government as the feral government.  While we strive to reign them in we should recognize the growing problem locally and tell our local people how we think.

Our recent election was a good start.  Now we must be vigilant as Cato says.  We should watch their activities and provide input to help them govern properly.

We deserve better

Brusus

3 Comments | Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Testing the newbies

June 23, 2013

It is disappointing but not surprising that city staff is taking the opportunity to try to increase their power at the very first meeting of the new city council.

Item 1C on the regular agenda is titled “AN ORDINANCE FOR ESTABLISHING DEADLINES AND PROCEDURES FOR PLACING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND REPEALING NO. 17016”.

Why?

Ordinance number 17016 was the old ordinance according to this item.  It required council to take a special vote before approving any item where the backup material is not complete  declaring that failure to take action would be detrimental to the interest of the city.  I wrote about this in Sneak Attack.  In other words council needs to be given all the paperwork that they are being asked to approve.

If city staff does not make the material available per the requirements of the old ordinance, and city council votes on the agenda item without the special vote, city council members violate an existing ordinance.  Violating an ordinance is an ethics violation.  That could lead to severe consequences for city council members.

Not explained.

What the backup material for this proposed new ordinance does not explain is that city staff frequently submits agenda items without the required backup material.  This makes it easier to keep council members from doing their homework.

Why now?

City staff has put this on the first agenda of the new council.  The new members are trying to get their feet on the ground.  The new ordinance removes the requirement for the special vote as well as other things.  Staff is trying to get this through before council figures out the rules.

City staff will now be able to leave important documents out of the material that they give to city council without breaking the law.  Council will not know what hit them.

I hope that someone finds a way to explain this to the new mayor and the council members.

The new ordinance is a very bad idea.

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

Cato

9 Comments | City government, Open Government, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Cato

Another chance

June 21, 2013

The recent city election has given us another chance to try to make our city manager form of government work.

I hope it does.

In my view the city manager is supposed to take direction from city council, not give direction to city council.  Council should decide what they want and then direct the city manager to implement.  The city manager should be on a leash.  Agenda items giving the city manager “authority to sign all documents necessary to …” are a horrible mistake.

The last eight years we have had a council that allowed such language in agenda items.  The mess that we have seen is largely because of inattention and fear of the city manager.   Some may claim that council does not have time to approve each contract.  Council should as past councils have.  Otherwise the city manager will have too much power and will be able to subvert the will of council while treating the public and those that do business with the city poorly.

What has been missing is a strong mayor.  I don’t mean the strong mayor form of government.   I mean a mayor with a strong personality and strong management skills.  Our current city charter does not allow the mayor to vote except in case of a tie.  My recollection is that under the old strong mayor charter the mayor was in the same situation.

What the mayor has is the bully pulpit.  The mayor operates city council meetings and can call attention to items.  The mayor can explain agenda items and their consequences to city council members.  The last several years the explaining has come from city staff.  Their presentations have been supportive of what the city manager wanted.  Many half-truths have been told.  I believe that many lies have been told.

I hope that the new mayor takes control.  Council members should vote their consciences.  The mayor should help them to understand the issues.  This will take a lot of time on the part of the mayor.  It is the way successful mayors operated in the past.

We need a competent, independent city council, not one that fears the power of the city manager.

The incoming mayor has said that he will put the city manager form of government on the ballot.  He will have to wait two years to do that.  In the meantime we have an opportunity to try again.  It should help clarify our choice in two years.

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

Cato

1 Comment | City government, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Cato

Whither the Times

June 17, 2013

Where does our recent election put the Times?

If for the moment you were to assume that their editorial policy has been well intentioned and that their conflicts of interest did not influence them,  the fact is that the Times is woefully out of touch with the voters of El Paso.

Unless I have missed something, only one of the eight candidates they endorsed was chosen by the voters.

Maybe their circulation numbers will not be affected and as a result the Times does not care.

What to do?

Stay the course and be proud in knowing that the editorial board is smarter than the citizens.  74% is an incredible number. Personally I have never heard of that kind of victory in any free election of this size.  The voters do not like what has been going on.  The Times claims it does.

Hector the new mayor and council.  Point out every little thing that they can to put them in a bad light.  The Times largely ignored the mis-deeds of the city the last few years.  Attacking the voter’s choices would be interesting but dangerous.

Switch horses and claim righteous indignation as the facts come out about what has been happening.

Pretend nothing happened.

Some combination of the above will probably be their choice.

On a side note, I was particularly irked the other day when the Times needed to refer to an article in El Paso Inc.  Instead of attributing the article to the publication’s name the Times referred to it as a weekly newspaper.  Maybe that is how the game is played and the Times followed the editorial style of other newspapers.  I found it to be petty.

I hope that they find their way.  El Paso needs a good newspaper.  It would be nice if I could start reading the Times looking for balanced coverage of news items instead of to see what news they are trying to influence.

Muckraker

4 Comments | City government, El Paso Times, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Muckraker

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »