28 June 2006
Sanchez goes to the Hispanic card
Orlando Sanchez didn't take long to go to the Hispanic card in his quest to become Harris County Treasurer (and to ensure the office's survival):
Sanchez said Tuesday that eliminating the post would kill the immediate prospect of a Hispanic for the first time holding a countywide elected administrative office. Some Hispanics previously have won countywide judicial races.
Since commissioners didn't consider abolishing the office after the March primary when Cato was nominated, Sanchez also said the attempt now may be personal.
"It is interesting that up to Mr. Cato's death, they were supporting Mr. Cato and obviously keeping the office. After Mr. Cato died, they adopted a resolution to abolish the office," said Sanchez.
"It makes you wonder, especially since I could become the first Hispanic and the first immigrant elected countywide." Sanchez's family moved from Cuba when he was a child.
Yes, Orlando, that's it. Those of us who want the office abolished are simply tools of The Man, who wants to keep down Hispanics! Never mind that you wouldn't be the first Hispanic elected countywide, as the first excerpted paragraph makes clear.
PREVIOUSLY: GOP picks Sanchez as candidate for Harris County Treasurer.
BLOGVERSATION: Lone Star Times I, Lone Star Times II, Isolated Desolation.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 06/28/06 08:58 AM |
25 June 2006
Houston's sanctuary policy is not confusing
The Chronicle ran a story by Alexis Grant and Matt Stiles on Friday that attempted to assess the notion that Houston is a "sanctuary city" for illegal immigrants (I think). It's an unusual story in that it's one of the clunkier pieces of writing that's ever appeared with Matt Stiles' name attached (maybe the crack Chron editing team is to blame), although it does present two sides of the semantic debate over the "sanctuary city" designation.
Here's the lede:
The phrase "sanctuary city" does more than rally anti-illegal immigration activists and make city officials cringe — it causes confusion.
Oh come on. The phrase isn't confusing. The term is used in the immigration debate to denote a city that adopts policies intended to shield illegal immigrants from municipal enforcement of immigration laws. The policies usually involve prohibitions on inquiries into immigration status. This is not confusing.
The story continues:
The Houston Police Department for more than a decade have followed a policy that forbids them from asking people they encounter about their immigration status. But does that make Houston a "sanctuary city?"
Yes.
Members of the group [Protect our Citizens] say the policy protects illegal immigrants to the point that it qualifies Houston as a "sanctuary city."
A report by the Congressional Research Service reached the same conclusion.
HPD officers are forbidden from inquiring as to immigration status. The Congressional Research Service is right to refer to Houston as a "sanctuary city."
Mayor White disagrees:
''Houston is not a sanctuary city," said Mayor Bill White. "The biggest concern on something like this is somebody trying to confuse the voters."
The term is used most often by those who oppose the Houston policy and similar ones in other locales.
Mayor White offers no reason that Houston is not a sanctuary city. He just asserts it, and then changes the subject (to people misleading voters).
And then Alexis Grant and Matt Stiles immediately follow by offering editorial commentary on who uses the term.
Here are a couple of questions: Does it really matter who uses the term if it's accurate? And is the Congressional Research Service usually swayed so easily by political activists deploying demagogic rhetoric (the point that seems to be implied by the story's editorializing)?
If Houston's Mayor and other elected officials think the 1992 sanctuary directive is a good idea, then they ought to be willing to engage in a public debate over it, and put it to a vote on Council instead of hiding behind an order issued by a long-gone former police chief and complaining about a petition group. Indeed, if the Mayor and Council would take the lead on this matter, rescind the current policy, and engage in a debate on what should replace it (if anything), a petition would be completely unneccessary. That shouldn't even be too confusing for the journalists assigned to the issue!
BLOGVERSATION: Cigars, donuts, and Coffee.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 06/25/06 12:22 AM |
24 June 2006
SEIU: Equal opportunity campaign-finance rogue
The Chronicle's Editorial LiveJournalists had a fun observation in today's editorial celebrating Gay Pride Week:
Although recent years have seen voter approval of a state constitutional ban on gay marriage and the defeat of efforts to provide insurance coverage for the domestic partners of city of Houston workers, celebrants have plenty of progress to point to over the past three decades.
Perhaps the most obvious is the citywide elections of Controller Annise Parker and at-large Councilwoman Sue Lovell, both of whom are openly lesbian. In the late '70s, the only way for local gay activists to influence the political process was to work for progressive candidates such as Kathy Whitmire, who served as city controller before serving five terms as mayor.
Parker's and Lovell's winning campaigns show the growing willingness of Houstonians to vote for the best candidate, regardless of sexual orientation. Parker won three successive terms as an at-large councilmember and is now serving her second term as city controller after being elected without opposition. Lovell is in her first term on council after winning a runoff last year.
In Lovell's case, perhaps it would have been more accurate to write about the willingness of a Houston union to boost one candidate to victory (skirting the city's campaign finance laws), regardless of sexual orientation. At least they get credit for being an equal-opportunity union.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 06/24/06 11:31 PM |
23 June 2006
Civilian cop program slides into new city budget at cost of $10 million
Holy moly: KTRH-740 is reporting that MayorWhiteChiefHurtt's civilian traffic patrol will now cost $10 million for four or five years:
A last minute add-in to Houston Mayor Bill White's newly-approved budget will end up costing city taxpayers $10 million over the next four to five years.
Mayor White says the city will only spend about $1.7 million on the "Mobility Response Team" over the next 12 months, but he says he wants a secure source of funding in place to ensure the team continues its work. Once the traffic team is formed it will consist of 24 police service officers.
[snip]
Since it was announced last month, the traffic squad has drawn its share of criticism. Houston's largest police officers union calls it a proposal to add "cheap cops" to city streets. Police union president Hans Marticuic says it seems civilian traffic squad members will be used to perform many of the duties now done by the HPD motorcycle squad, known as the "SOLOs".
Some Houston Council Members have also been critical of where money for the plan is coming from. The city is shifting the $10 million from what was formerly the "street and bridge repair" fund. Council Member Pam Holm has accused White's administration of raiding that fund to pay for things which have nothing to do with fixing the roads. City officials have said nothing is illegal or improper about how Houston's paying for its new traffic squad.
$10 million over four years (and these things never come in under budget; you just KNOW this will end up costing much, much more), to pay for civilian cops out of a street and bridge repair fund.
Goodness.
PREVIOUSLY: Houston's civilian accident investigators, Hurtt: It's cheaper to hire civilian pseudo-cops than real cops, More on civilian traffic patrol
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/23/06 06:37 PM |
21 June 2006
Councilwoman Alvarado: What sanctuary policy?
So now a petition drive has begun in an attempt to force a city-wide vote on how HPD should handle illegal immigrants:
Deriding what they call the city's "sanctuary policy," about a dozen members of a group called "Protect Our Citizens" conducted a news conference at City Hall to announce the petition drive for a city charter referendum.
"It is time to send a message to the world that Houston is no longer a safe haven for illegal, criminal aliens," said spokesman Paul O'Finan, a lawyer.
The group also includes Mary Williams, founder of Taxpayers for Accountability, who has been involved in successful citizen-led initiatives including term limits for city politicians and a 2004 measure capping city revenue.
Officers ask people their immigration status only after they have been arrested for some other reason. Police say the understaffed department doesn't have the resources or training to do more.
Except that the understaffed department DOES have the resources to answer repeated dog-barking complaints in Slampo's neighborhood. But I digress.
Officials also say changing the policy could erode the trust officers need to solve crimes in immigrant communities.
Police Chief Harold Hurtt and Mayor Bill White support the current policy.
[snip]
After Tuesday's event, Councilwoman Carol Alvarado dismissed the petition as "pre-election politics," saying the city doesn't offer "sanctuary" to illegal immigrants.
Nice try, Councilwoman. It's General Order 500-5, issued in 1992 by former Police Chief Sam Nuchia. It's a "hands off illegals" policy. Then you add city-funded day labor centers and voilà! You've got an unofficial official sanctuary policy.
"I don't think it makes sense to take our police officers off the streets from chasing real criminals, who are committing real crimes, and send them on some witch hunt," [Alvarado] said.
Guess what! Some of the real criminals, committing real crimes, are here illegally. Really! And by not allowing police officers to do their jobs fully (without the hindrance of a politically correct policy concocted by illegal immigrant activists), the public's safety IS at risk. And we are seeing the fruits of that policy every day.
KEVIN WHITED ADDS: What is interesting about some of the advocates of the sanctuary policy (including some bloggers who have just discovered it) is their notion that in the absence of said policy, HPD officers would be running around, out of control, harassing anyone whose skin is brown and trying to deport them. Frankly, that's ludicrous. If that were to happen, it would be because the HPD brass wanted it to happen (unlikely) or because the HPD brass is incompetent (hmm, on second thought, maybe that could happen under Chief Hurtt).
What we could really use is a debate over a directive crafted by a police chief in 1992. If the general order issued by a police chief 14 years ago is the right policy for Houston today, then there's no reason why members of Council can't debate the issue, seek the advice of experts in law enforcement, and produce a similar policy -- or not. I've yet to see a compelling argument why law enforcement should remain handcuffed by a directive issued by an unelected police chief in 1992. We elect a Mayor and Council to make those sorts of decisions. It's time for them to stop ducking this issue, and for the 1992 directive to be replaced by a real policy crafted by our elected officials after appropriate public input.
PREVIOUSLY: Mayor White: What sanctuary policy?, Gordon Quan: What sanctuary policy?
BLOGVERSATION: Lone Star Times, Newswatch: Immigration, Polimom, Too.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/21/06 08:39 PM |
19 June 2006
How much does volunteer work cost? About $150,000 a year
Over at Houblog, Ubu Roi has begun doing serious public service work by attempting to translate City Council agendas. There really ought to be a dictionary to help decipher some agenda items. Plain English, anyone?
Item number 59 is especially helpful to understanding the mindset of government folks:
59. ORDINANCE approving and authorizing contract between the City of Houston and HOUSTON CLEAN CITY COMMISSION, INC d/b/a KEEP HOUSTON BEAUTIFUL for Volunteer Cleanup Services of City Neighborhood Lots for the Houston Police Department; providing a maximum contract amount - 3 Years - $450,000.00 - General Fund TAGGED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS WISEMAN, HOLM and JOHNSON This was Item 22 on Agenda of June 14, 2006
Ubu's translation:
Well, I guess it counts as a volunteer effort if we’re paying some do-gooder organization with a swank Greenway Plaza address, instead of the people doing the actual clean up.
Ha! Yeah, volunteer work doesn't come cheap, you know!
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/19/06 07:28 AM |
14 June 2006
Gordon Quan: What sanctuary policy?
In today's Chronicle, former Councilman Gordon Quan takes exception to the notion that Houston is a "sanctuary" city:
THE characterization of Houston as a "sanctuary city" by Shelley Sekula-Gibbs was wrong. Houston has never — by ordinance, resolution or executive order — forbade its employees from cooperating with federal officials charged with immigration enforcement.
That's rather nit-picky of Quan. No, Houston is not an OFFICIAL sanctuary city. Rather, Houston has an unofficial sanctuary policy, as determined by General Order 500-5, issued by former Police Chief Sam Nuchia in 1992:
Maria Jimenez, a veteran immigrant-rights activist in Houston, told the council the "hands-off" order, which was issued in 1992 by then-Police Chief Sam Nuchia, was necessary because it was a public safety issue.
Right.
PREVIOUSLY: Mayor White: What sanctuary policy?
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/14/06 09:48 AM |
06 June 2006
Sports Authority to get new boss
Mayor White and Judge Eckels had an opportunity recently to let the Sports Authority quietly vanish into the sunset when Oliver Luck left to head up the Houston Dynamo, but instead, Billy Burge is bringing in someone from San Antonio to take over:
A woman who serves as acting head of the San Antonio Convention and Visitors Bureau is expected to be named chief executive of the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority today.
Janis Schmees will be given the mandate to attract new events, including track and field competitions, to the city, said Billy Burge, chairman of the sports authority.
That's nice. Except that attracting events to the city isn't a part of the Sports Authority's mission statement...proving once again that government never goes away, even if the stated purpose of a governmental agency has long since expired. Government just keeps rolling along, sucking up taxpayer dollars...
UPDATE: I just saw the Chron's editorial on abolishing the Harris County treasurer's position:
In a time when public sentiment demands lower taxes and greater economy of public services, why should taxpayers provide $96,000 a year for an extraneous position to be used only to revive flagging political careers? Harris County commissioners and state lawmakers should give voters the opportunity to answer that question in the near future.
Who knew the LiveJournalists were so economy-minded with taxpayer dollars? Especially considering that they were not in favor of shutting down the Sports Authority to save $40 million (and an immediate savings of over $600,000 in salaries). Now why are the LJ's so hot to get the Harris County treasurer position shut down?
Sanchez has made it clear he would use the office for a political agenda having little or nothing to do with its job description.
It's all becoming clear.
RELATED: Sports Authority archives
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/06/06 06:50 AM |
02 June 2006
More on civilian traffic patrol
KTRH-740 has more details about a civilian traffic patrol program which would help HPD:
Assistant Police Chief George Buenik says there will be two types of patrollers. One group will essentially be traffic signal repairmen — another will control traffic as a sort of civilian police force.
Houston plans to pay for the plan with cash from an account now used for bridge and street repairs.
But there might be a glitch in that type of funding:
Councilmember Pam Holm says that method of financing the patrols may violate city rules. And, she says, it brings back a long-discarded practice at City Hall of having an "any lawful purpose fund."
The program is expected to cost $1.5 million this year.
Bridge and street repair fund???
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/02/06 06:13 PM |
01 June 2006
Mayor White: What sanctuary policy?
I wish I had the exact wording, but KTRH-740 just had a soundbite of Mayor White saying something to the effect that Houston doesn't have a sanctuary policy. The quote was in response to Rep. Ted Poe saying that cities that have sanctuary policies should lose some federal funding.
Yet, in contrast to Mayor White's statement today, last year he was supportive of the (not a) sanctuary policy:
Since 1992, a Houston Police Department policy has officially forbidden officers from enforcing immigration laws in most cases.Mayor Bill White has said he supports continuing the policy, because he believes immigration is a federal matter and he wants to free police up to protect the city from violent criminals.
As a refresher for Mayor White, the policy is General Order 500-5, according to one news story.
PREVIOUSLY: Sanctuary policy could jeopardize federal funding
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 06/01/06 04:18 PM |
31 May 2006
Day labor center funding approved (updated)
A controversial proposal for a day labor site on Houston's east side has passed a close vote at city council.
The finally tally was eight to six, mostly along political party lines. Councilmember M-J Khan was the only republican to support the labor site.
I can't find anything on Councilwoman Wiseman's amendment yet.
UPDATE: Chris Baker emails that he contacted Addie Wiseman's office and was told her amendment failed.
MORE: KHOU-11's story includes this:
But the new contract comes with a catch. The day labor site will be required to give these to people hiring workers at the site an I-9 Form, which is supposed to verify whether potential employees are U.S. citizens. But the city government will not require day laborers using the center to fill out the forms.
Gosh, giving employers I-9's, coupled with Houston's really tough stance on illegal immigration ought to make a difference.
How ridiculous. With this being the standard, what can American citizens get away with here in Houston, with this fine model to emulate? Surely Mayor White and city council are sending a message to Houstonians about law and order and the value of citizenship. And oh, what irony: on the same day Council approves red light cameras to catch all those renegade red light runners, Council approves a center that will cater to illegal aliens. Pretty much speaks volumes, doesn't it?
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/31/06 03:20 PM |
30 May 2006
May 31st Council meeting
This week's Council meeting includes another chance to consider the day labor center contract, and Councilwoman Addie Wiseman has suggested the following amendment to that contract:
62. WRITTEN Motion by Council Member Wiseman to amend Item 62A below as follows:
E. RECRUITMENT/INTAKE/REGISTRATION/DOCUMENTATION PLAN, OF EXHIBIT B, CONTRACTOR, AND/OR ITS SUBCONTRACTORS OR DESIGNEES, will take action to verify that laborers wishing to utilize services at this location are authorized to work in the United States.
Laborers who do not meet criteria prescribed by OMB No. 1615-0047, will be prohibited from obtaining service at this location.”
Sounds reasonable enough.
Also, the red light camera contract is on the agenda again (Items 58 and 59). And can anyone translate this item?:
57. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, HOUSTON, TEXAS, relating to the Regulation of Parking by providing for the transfer of the Residential Parking Permit Program to the Convention and Entertainment Facilities Department and the clarification of provisions concerning the adjudication of parking violations; containing findings and other provisions relating to the foregoing subject; providing an effective date; providing for severability
TAGGED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WISEMAN
This was Item 20 on Agenda of May 24, 2006
I'm just wondering what that's all about.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/30/06 04:03 PM |
28 May 2006
Alvarado emails suggest consultant had interest in COH business
Last week Matt Stiles reported on emails that pointed to city staffers helping arrange meetings between Councilwoman Carol Alvarado and a San Antonio businessman. Here is what Alvarado's spokesman Joe Householder said of the councilwoman's outside work:
Householder said the councilwoman made about $73,000 since 2002 as a consultant for a few businesses on non-city work. Much of that money came from Rodriguez, but she did little consulting work in 2005, he said.
Householder said he did not know the circumstances of Alvarado's request to her chief of staff to give Rodriguez a ride.
Householder said Alvarado never got paid to help Rodriguez or his clients with city-related business.
Now KTRK-13 has obtained more emails and they paint a less certain picture:
Besides her work at city hall, Alvarado is a consultant for a San Antonio businessman named Rudy Rodriguez. Her staff confirmed that in the past three years, Rodriguez paid Alvarado approximately $72,000 for what it calls 'outside consulting.' But from the emails we found, it's clear that Rodriguez had an interest in Houston's city hall and potential contracts. One appears to be a duty-free airport concessions agreement.
And KTRK's Miya Shay has the emails to back up those assertions:
In an email to Alvarado in 2004, Rodriguez writes about Simon Falic, the CEO of a company called Duty Free Americas.
"We need to be prepared to discuss the current status of duty free vender at Bush."
Later, a follow-up email from Alvarado's scheduler asks...
"Do you want to meet with Rodriguez and Falic in your office?"
Here is the email referenced above (there are more emails in the story) :
-----Original Message-----
From: rudy( ***)
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 9:04 AM
Cc: Carol Alvarado
Subject:Simon falic - duty free - tomorrow 3.30 - we need to be prepared to discuss current status of df vendor at bush
i need your direction as to making contact with m moore - ellis told him he was not in favor of extending the current df contract for any reason but would like to discuss how falic might propose something that got the cit new vendor as well as its past due money from current vendor
ellis also suggested meeting with nini foxhall at continental - please advise.
i will spend night wed night
M Moore refers to Mayor White's chief of staff, Michael Moore.
Mayor White's response:
We showed Mayor Bill White what we found.
"I think the red flag is if Councilmember Alvarado was paid to specifically arrange a meeting with somebody at city hall. That would not be proper," he said. "But I have no evidence that that was done."
[snip]
Mayor White maintains he doesn't know if Alvarado did anything improper, but admits...
"It doesn't look good," he told us. "I'll say that."
And Alvarado says:
"...that work was not related to the city of Houston and I am confident that I have always upheld the highest ethical standards."
The councilwoman's actions don't look good and the emails KTRK obtained certainly cloud the issue even further. And the Chronicle editorial board's hopes for this whole untidy mess to go away are dashed again.
(Thanks to bH reader Joe for the heads up on the story.)
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/28/06 12:10 PM |
24 May 2006
City staffers helped facilitate Alvarado's personal business meetings
Matt Stiles has obtained some emails that indicate Councilwoman Carol Alvarado used city personnel to arrange meetings with a San Antonio businessman:
City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado used at least four city employees to arrange meetings with a business associate who paid her tens of thousands of dollars in consulting fees in recent years, according to e-mails obtained by the Houston Chronicle.
At least once, she asked her chief of staff to give the associate a ride, the e-mails show.
The messages from Alvarado's city e-mail account show that the employees scheduled meetings with San Antonio businessman Rudy Rodriguez, recently subpoenaed by local prosecutors who have opened a preliminary investigation into Rodriguez's relationship with Alvarado.
Rodriguez, former chair of the San Antonio River Walk Commission, has said he hired the councilwoman in 2002 to help expand his water-related development business in other cities.
Alvarado's lawyer, Rusty Hardin, says nothing unethical occurred, but others say that is not standard operating procedure:
"We wouldn't allow that," said Councilwoman Addie Wiseman, who owns a small business. "I keep my private life and council life so separate."
Other council employees, who asked not to be identified, confirmed the approach that Wiseman described: Council members block off time on their schedules for non-city events, but don't ask employees to schedule personal business appointments.
Alvarado's activities are of interest to prosecutors because she was mayor pro tem during a period when four employees in the Office of Mayor Pro Tem received bonuses that Alvarado and other city officials say were unauthorized. The employees have been fired.
At least one of them, office manager Rosita Hernandez, has said Alvarado authorized her bonuses because of extra work she did for the councilwoman. Alvarado has denied authorizing bonuses or requiring any staffers to perform non-city work.
Hernandez, who also served as the councilwoman's scheduler, was one of at least four Alvarado employees who helped arrange meetings with Rodriguez, according to e-mails. The e-mails examined by the Chronicle don't show other pro tem employees had contact with Rodriguez.
The messages, among thousands released to the Chronicle under the Texas Public Information Act, contain dozens of instances of Alvarado's employees arranging meetings with or fielding calls from Rodriguez.
There is much more in Stiles' story.
Even if Alvarado didn't do anything unethical, she has shown an amazing lack of good judgment for an elected official.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/24/06 08:46 PM |
City Council action
A couple of items were (temporarily) put on hold during today's Council meeting.
First, funding for a day labor site was tagged by Councilmembers Toni Lawrence, Pam Holm, Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, Michael Berry and Anne Clutterbuck (Item 54). Councilwoman Carol Alvarado was not pleased.
Second, approval of the red light camera contract with ATS was stalled again, this time by Councilmembers Addie Wiseman, Ron Green, Jarvis Johnson, Pam Holm, and Toni Lawrence (Item 22).
UPDATE: KTRH-740's story says the day labor site contract was delayed by Councilwoman Addie Wiseman, too.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/24/06 03:14 PM |
Red light camera "trial and error"
Look at what happened in Capitola, CA, with a fairly new red light camera program:
The city of Capitola, California admits that it issued at least $9525 in bogus red light camera citations this month. The Santa Cruz Superior Court notified the police that their failure to review citations issued by red light camera vendor ATS allowed 25 duplicate citations, each worth $381, to be issued. "With a new program there's a lot of trial and error," Capitola Police Chief Richard Ehle told the Santa Cruz Sentinel.
And which company is about to get the Houston contract? Yep, ATS.
Do you suppose Chief Hurtt told city council that "with a new program there's a lot of trial and error"?
This was not the first time [Capitola] has allowed improper citations. In January, the city had allowed 134 citations worth $51,054 to be issued despite the lack of required information on the ticket. In December, an ambulance driver had to go to court to have a ticket reversed even though the photograph clearly showed his emergency lights were active.
Lots and lots of trial and error!
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/24/06 11:20 AM |
Debate over day labor center heats up
KHOU-11 and KTRH-740 report that city council, after a contentious public comments time yesterday, is likely to approve funding for a day labor site.
KHOU's story provides a taste of yesterday's debate:
“When we have drug dealers and prostitutes coming along, we do not build crack houses or brothels. Instead we send law enforcement into these areas to enforce the law,” said opponent Curtis Collier.
[snip]
"The operation of a day labor center violates the law by aiding and abetting illegal criminals looking for work,” said opponent Leslie Wetzel.
The afternoon’s most tense moment came when Councilman Adrian Garcia, who supports the funding, had a question for that woman.
“If you were unable to produce the necessary documents that would allow someone to employ you right now, would you see it as favorable to be put in the category of an illegal alien?” asked Garcia.
[snip]
Supporters countered that the center could support anyone legal or not, and that the real question is dignity.
“The clumps of unemployed men standing in the extreme heat and cold, lining several blocks of Canal Street in search of an honest day’s work need assistance in getting off the streets,” said Joe Rubio.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/24/06 06:54 AM |
20 May 2006
Council to consider red light camera contract...again
On again, off again. On again, off again.
Now it's on again. Next week, City Council will address the red light camera contract MayorWhiteChiefHurtt want to give to ATS. A five year contract. Has anyone in a watchdog role seen the contract? How is it set up? Does ATS get a percentage of ticket revenue or is there a set fee? Who reviews the photos -- HPD or ATS? What happens when there is a dispute? Who's going to verify yellow-light times to see that intersections getting the cameras have sufficient time now and that they will not be shortened further into the program (to generate more revenue)?
The issue has been contentious, with White and other city officials saying the cameras would increase safety and reduce accidents. Critics contend they are intended mostly to generate revenue, and may increase rear-end collisions.
[snip]
The plan — which officials project could bring in $6.5 million in its first year — almost certainly will be delayed in a procedural move when the council hears it Wednesday.
If Mayor White wants to prove these cameras are all about safety and not revenue, he should send all the money generated by photo tickets to public schools or charity.
But that'll never happen.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 05/20/06 08:31 PM |
18 May 2006
Councilman Johnson kills "glitch" that benefitted Yellow Cab
The Chronicle's Alexis Grant reports that a "miscommunication" has temporarily scuttled the city's plan to allow door-to-door airport shuttle service:
Mayor Bill White said Wednesday the delay should only be temporary, and he expects the City Council to approve an amended contract in the next two months.
The five-year contract between the city and a SuperShuttle franchise run by Yellow Cab was scrapped because it would have prohibited vans that transport passengers directly between airports and hotels from continuing to operate at Houston airports.
That stipulation was not included in the city's original request for shared-ride shuttle proposals.
"It was never our intention in this process that it would eliminate another type of service," White said.
[snip]
Councilman Jarvis Johnson, who noticed the contract glitch and brought it to White's attention Tuesday, said both van services should exist to give passengers more options when traveling to the airport.
[snip]
Richard Vacar, the city's airport director, said allowing hotel-to-airport vans to continue to operate would decrease SuperShuttle's odds for success.
He believed the City Council was aware of the stipulation in the contract that is now being disputed, he said.
"Starting this business up in this huge geographic area is an expensive effort," he said. "What we we're trying to do in the contract is give them a chance to succeed."
Thank goodness Councilmember Johnson read the details of the contract before the city simply signed off on it. Had he not done so, the deal would have hurt firms like Texans Shuttle, which competes in the shuttle-hotel business, by effectively freezing them out of that business. Indeed, the details of the contract are so onerous that one wonders if SuperShuttle/Yellow Cab didn't have a big hand in helping write the contract with Vacar.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 05/18/06 10:19 PM |
17 May 2006
Classless councilmember takes on the doctor (part two)
Several months ago, councilwoman Carol Alvarado called doctor-councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs a profane name during a meeting. Alvarado's breach of decorum provided fodder for bloggers, radio talkers, and journalists for a short time, until Alvarado's inept management of the Mayor Pro Tem's office overshadowed her lack of grace and manners.
The lack of grace and manners made a return today during a contentious debate over municipal funding for a day-labor site, according to Chronicle reporter Alexis Grant:
The national debate over border security fueled a fight at City Hall today when a council member seeking a Republican congressional nomination charged that city funding for a day labor site encouraged illegal immigration.
Supporters of the funding accused Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs of flip-flopping on the issue to gain conservative voter support for the nomination to succeed U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay of Sugar Land.
"Some people will do or say anything in order to sway with that political climate," said Councilwoman Carol Alvarado, who has a history of squabbling with Sekula-Gibbs. "It's almost like changing your name during an election to gain support from a certain community," she added, sparking gasps and chatter in the Council chambers.
The tactless councilmember was surely pleased with herself afterwards, but her comments really didn't contribute much to the debate.
UPDATE (05-18-2006): The Chronicle posts a longer story today about some of the emotional outbursts that took place during yesterday's Council meeting. Councilmember Ada Edwards joins the fun:
[Sekula=Gibbs'] comments provoked an animated discussion — not typical at weekly City Council meetings — including a tirade by Councilwoman Ada Edwards, who said discriminating against laborers was "the closest thing to fascism I've seen since I've been on the council."
"I am not going to be in the same league as a Hitler or Franco going around telling the big lies, folks, so that I can get my economic and my social agenda passed," said Edwards. "It's demonization of a people and we need to stop it."
Comparing the doctor-councilwoman to Hitler and Franco didn't add much to the debate of a legitimate policy issue. Then again, this is the same member of Council who compared Chief Hurtt's recent efforts to deal with HPD's significant manpower shortage to the establishment of a police state.
Some members of council were able to debate Sekula-Gibbs reasonably:
Councilwoman Sue Lovell criticized Sekula-Gibbs' assumption that workers who use the day-labor site are illegal immigrants.
"It's a really unfair leap by the councilwoman to say because you go there seeking work that, first, you're an immigrant and, second, that you're illegal," she said.
It's not so hard to keep the debate about issues, instead of name-calling and insults. Kudos to those councilmembers who conducted themselves with decorum on this contentious issue.
BLOGVERSATION: TBIFOC, Isolated Desolation.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 05/17/06 10:34 PM |
[Previous 20 Entries] [Next 20 Entries]