Do over

July 30, 2013

There seems to be a movement to rename the building at 218 N Campbell.

We currently call it the Luther building because of the moving and storage company of that name that occupied the building.

Originally it was named the Mulligan building after the local businessman who built it.

Soon after the building was built it became the Quartermaster Corps supply house for General Pershing’s Punitive Expedition into Mexico.

Now it will be one of the many buildings that our city government has been scattered into.

It seems that the building’s historical association with banditos will be continued.

Then again, those of you who play golf will understand why I would be happy to see the building renamed Mulligan if the tax payers get to take one on the whole deal.

We deserve better

Brutus

4 Comments | City government | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Children first

July 29, 2013

Now that the dust has settled and we have a new mayor and city council,  I want to bring up the subject of the children’s museum.

We had the Insights Museum and it got torn down as part of the ball park project.  So be it.

We passed  a quality of life bond issue with $19.25 million in it for a new children’s museum.

The city’s three year roll out plan for managing the bond spending does not include even preliminary action related to building a children’s museum.

We should each contact the mayor and our representatives.  Building the museum is not a matter of raising more money.  It is a matter of priorities for the city staff.

We need to ask that the children’s museum be given a higher priority so that it can be built soon.

Eternal vigilance is the cost of liberty.

Cato

6 Comments | City government | Permalink
Posted by Cato

Shrinking Times

July 28, 2013

The El Paso Times has introduced a new format that in addition to being pleasant to look at has larger print.  I am really enjoying the larger print.

It is a shame that the content on the page is shrinking, thereby conveying less information to the readers.

The front page of the July 26, 2013 edition is an example.  Allowing for margins on the top and bottom and on the sides, my calculations show that there are about 210 square inches available for printing.

This front page had three news articles on it.  The rest of the space was occupied by advertising, headlines, pictures, and indexing information.  The actual written articles occupied about 41 square inches of the page.

20 percent

In other words only 20 percent of the front page contained reporting.  If they can get it up to 26 percent then they will achieve the same percentage as the loser in the last mayoral election.

Times are changing in the newspaper business.  Newspapers are struggling to find ways to preserve their existing circulation numbers and would certainly like to increase them.   They claim not to have enough money to spend on reporting.   The Times is not the only newspaper that has resorted to this technique.

I don’t envy the people who are struggling with this problem.  I can however tell them that this reader would like to see more unbiased, in-depth reporting instead of what we have been seeing lately.

I hope that the Times can find it’s way.

Muckraker

7 Comments | El Paso Times | Permalink
Posted by Muckraker

Indian givers

July 27, 2013

Item 8C on the consent agenda of the July 30, 2013 city council meeting is troubling.

The item asks permission to reject the sole bid received by the city for some airport property.

It reads:

 Request that the Purchasing Manager, Financial Services, Purchasing Division, be authorized to reject the sole bid received for solicitation No. 2013-192 (Sale of Real Property Improvement, Airport Hangar #7) as the bidder did not agree to the terms and conditions of the Contract.

The backup material tells us that the city solicited bids from 16 parties.  One responded.  The backup material tells us:

Department of Aviation has reviewed solicitation 2013-192 and recommends rejection of the sole bid received as the bidder did not agree to the minimum lease rate for the ground lease.

The item will be rebid.

What gives?

The city sent out a bid.  Sixteen parties were invited to bid.  Only one spent the time and money it takes to bid.  The bidder made an offer.  The airport does not think it was good enough.

What are the chances that the sole bidder will try next time?  Slim is the word that comes to my mind.

What went wrong?

Did the city send the bid to 15 parties that would have no interest in the deal?  We can see the city doing that from time to time when they want to be able to say that they asked for bids but do not really want a wide field of bidders.

Does the city really want to lease the property or were they just testing the waters?  That would be a shameful waste of a private concern’s money.

Does the city want to hold out for a higher bid?  That is what this looks like.  Was the bid low because the solicitation was written poorly?

What makes the city think that they will get a better offer next time?  What will they do differently?  Was the bid poorly written and thus a waste of everyone’s time?

It seems to me that the sole bidder has set the market value for the deal and is being treated poorly.

Not alone

I have written before that I know many firms in El Paso that will not even bid for city business.  They feel the process is unfair and a waste of their time and money.

This bidder has the right to be furious.  It seems the bidder played by the rules but ended up wasting time and money.

We deserve better

Brutus

5 Comments | City government, Purchasing | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

Hurry up and waste

July 26, 2013

Back in May of 2012 word broke that the Texas Transportation Commission had 90 million dollars to spend on a street car system somewhere in Texas.

In the May 15, 2012 meeting of El Paso’s city council, a $1.25 million consulting contract was approved to prepare plans for a trolley system in El Paso.  Four months later on September 11, 2012  that amount grew to almost $4.7 million, just like many city projects that we get incremented into.

At 3 hours and 44 minutes into the May 15 session the video will show that a former city representative wanted to ask questions.  Her first was to question if the funding was  guaranteed if the council spent the money on the study.  She looked toward the city manager and asked the question.  Someone in that general area answered affirmatively, if the city spent the money on the consulting contract the state money was guaranteed.

Now we know that to be incorrect.  El Paso may or may not get the money.  The state does not have the money allocated.  A different Texas city may get the money.

Our study is done, the guaranteed money is not there.  It might come in future years.  Our study is valid for “more than two years”.

Slow down

City council needs to slow down before spending our money.  Slow down, not stop.  We have seen too many examples of city staff rushing us into wasted spending in the last few years.  Council needs to get the facts before voting to spend money.  They then need to hold people accountable when it turns out that they were not told the truth.

We deserve better

Brutus

5 Comments | City government, Purchasing, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Brutus

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »