elpasospeak

The El Paso Times printed an article January 3, 2013 titled “Wilson:  Times building remodel on schedule”.

The article indicated “the City Council approved issuing a purchase order of nearly $650,000 for the remodeling of the Times building…”.  According to the report the city manager “said the authorization was a formality because individual purchase orders of more than $500,000 issued under a previously approved job-order contract must be approved separately by council.”

I like to use the Oxford Dictionaries to help me understand the meaning of words.  They define formality as “(a formality) something done or happening as a matter of course and without question”.

Once again it seems as though the city manager does not understand her place.  The Texas legislature required that the approval be brought to city council.  The legislature did not do this to waste our city representatives’ time, it did it to require the council to pay attention.  If council had to vote on the issue it was not a “formality”.  They had the right to disapprove.  Evidently the city manager thinks of council as her personal rubber stamp.

Also troubling is the discrepancy between the costs reported by the El Paso Times in it’s November 7, 2012 article “El Paso City Council OKs buying 2 buildings for move” and this new January 3 article.

On November 7 they reported that the city would spend $9.4 million to buy the Times building and $2.1 million to remodel it.  The January 3 article reports the purchase price as $9.75 million and the remodeling at about $3 million.

Oops!  There goes $1,250,000 of our money.

The November 7 article reported the costs associated with the Texas Street properties as $2.3 million for the purchase and $9.5 million for renovations.  The January 3 article reported the costs as $2.4 million and $8.5 million respectively.

The reporting on the Luther building had the same kind of differences.

So the question at hand is why did the same newspaper print different reports?

Possible answers (without being unkind) are:

• One or both of the reporters was wrong
• The city provided different numbers for each report

If the city provided different numbers why were they not reported as being different in the second article?

Do the reporters read their own newspapers, or do they not care about accuracy?

I support the El Paso Times, otherwise I would cancel my subscription.  Let’s encourage them to do better.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

I was relaxing with the understanding that city council would not meet last week or this because Tuesday, the normal city council meeting day, would fall on Christmas and New Year’s day.

It seems however that council needs to meet this week so they will meet on Wednesday.

The agenda is not a very long one, there are three potential board appointments, a couple of zoning requests, a few other matters — generally housekeeping issues.

Oh wait, there is another item.  It seems that the city wants to spend $648,841.22 to remodel part of a building using that no-bid indefinite delivery contract  method that I have written about so many times.  Council voted on December 4, 2012 to grant another no-bid contract valued at $4 million through a buy board.  The Houston based Harris County Department of Education will get 4% (or up to $160,000) of our money under this deal.  Now the city wants to use that contract to remodel 30,000 square feet for the new offices of the city council, mayor, and the city attorneys.

Remember the El Paso Times building that is so ideally suited to be our next city hall?  On September 18, 2012 the Chief Financial Officer of the city told council (on slide 4 of her presentation under “Improvements Needed”) that they were “Minimal due to condition of building”.  Well it appears that the $648,841.22 is needed to make our city functionaries comfortable.

Remember the buy-board contract that is for “minor” projects?  The city wants to use that contract to do the construction.  But wait!  This is not minor.  Who says?  The Texas State Legislature says.  Section 2267.403 of the Texas Government Code requires all deals over $500,000 issued under indefinite delivery contracts to be specifically approved by the governing body (in this case city council) of the local government.  Why?  Because evidently they believe that half a million dollars is not so minor.

The backup material for the agenda item refers to specifications drawn up by an architect.  Those specifications are not part of the backup material.  Why?  City ordinance 017616 paragraph 8 requires that the contract be posted on the city’s web site   The material must be given to the city clerk by 5 PM the Thursday before the meeting.  Council must now separately determine that failure to take action on this item would be detrimental to the interests of the city before they vote on this item.  Council’s failure to do so puts them in violation of a city ordinance.

Section  2.92.050 (G) of ordinance 017112 makes that an ethics violation which is punishable under 2.92.150 (A).  “The failure of any officer or employee to comply with this chapter or the violation of one or more of the standards of conduct set forth in this article, which apply to him or her, shall constitute grounds for expulsion, reprimand, removal from office or discharge.”

Don’t call your city representative, that would probably be a violation of the city’s ludicrous “cone of silence”.

In summary we have:

• A sneak attack city council meeting
• We were lied to about the suitability of the El Paso Times Building
• A non-bid construction project of almost $627 thousand dollars where $25 thousand will go to Houston schools, not ours
• An agenda item that is improperly (illegally?) posted
• A city council that will probably ignore it’s own ordinance
• You might get in trouble if you call your city representative about this

Then, in the spirit of waiting for the other shoe to drop, please realize that we have not heard the end of this.  The contractor actually wants another $450,000 to demolish the old offices before starting on the new ones (read the backup material, such as it is).  Did the city forget to post this item?  Maybe they have some other creative way to handle the other half a million dollars.

Stay tuned!

We deserve better.