19 October 2005
Coverage of upcoming municipal election picks up
Yesterday, the Chronicle editorial board posted more endorsements for City Council races.
Also, Matt Stiles provided coverage of the District B race.
Finally, the Houston Democrats blog points to the League of Women Voters' guide (PDF) to the November 8 local election.
PREVIOUSLY: Chron editorial board offers at-large council endorsements
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 10/19/05 08:52 AM |
18 October 2005
Candidate meet and greet tonight
If you want to meet a variety of Houston candidates, head to the Arboretum tonight:
Candidates for Houston City Council, the Houston Independent School District school board, Houston Community College trustee and state representative will be on hand for a meet and greet at the Houston Arboretum Tuesday night.
The Arboretum is located at 4501 Woodway, and the free meet and greet will start at 6 p.m
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/18/05 04:01 PM |
17 October 2005
Karl Pepple: Houston Man of Mystery
Sunday's Chronicle Q and A conversation was with Karl Pepple, described by Dina Capiello as the "first-ever director of environmental programming for the city of Houston":
Charged with overseeing local air and water quality, recycling and garbage, Pepple jokes he often needs two people to do his job. Since he took the office, he has worked on a program that offers city contractors a bonus when they use clean diesel, is busy hiring a new recycling coordinator and is working to ensure Houston meets a 2010 deadline for smog reduction.
None of that information sounded familiar to me, so I searched the City of Houston's website and couldn't find anything for Karl Pepple. Next, I searched the Chronicle's archives and couldn't find any other story referencing Karl Pepple. Finally, I Googled "Karl Pepple Houston" and found references to H-GAC.
So, who is Karl Pepple and what are his qualifications?
Q: How did you get into the environmental field?
A: I always was interested in the environment. My father was a chemist. And there was a point source, for lack of a better word, in my hometown (of Ponca City, Okla.) and I was always interested in what it was doing to the air and water.
Oh. Okay.
Thanks Houston Chronicle, for being such a tenacious watchdog newspaper.
KEVIN WHITED ADDS: I grew up near Ponca City, in Pawhuska, Okla. I have a minor in Chemistry. I like camping, and practice Leave No Trace techniques when backpacking. In case the Mayor's office or Capiello are reading, I'm here for your environmental needs. :)
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/17/05 08:23 AM |
16 October 2005
Chron editorial board offers at-large council endorsements
The Chronicle editorial board offers its endorsements for at-large races for City Council today.
Unfortunately, the Chronicle is like most major metro dailies in that local political races just don't get the attention they deserve, even though the web operation could potentially be a great forum for more comprehensive local political coverage.
For those more interested in the candidates' substantive views than the preferences of the Chronicle editorial board, the Harris County Republican Party has posted the results of its regular candidate questionnaire.
The Harris County Democratic Party does not seem to offer any such tool for candidate evaluation on its site. If readers know of other local organizations that have conducted similar candidate surveys, please leave a comment or send an email. Voters in local elections can always use such information.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 10/16/05 06:33 PM |
15 October 2005
Sports Authority wants to save money -- bH has a suggestion
Apparently the Sports Authority is looking for ways to save money:
The Harris County-Houston Sports Authority may refinance as much as half of its more than $1 billion in bond debt if doing so would save money.
The authority has asked investment banks to submit refinancing proposals, and could get a deal done by late this year or early 2006, Sports Authority Chief Executive Oliver Luck said this week.
And why does the Sports Authority need to save money, you ask? Because hotel occupancy taxes and car rental taxes -- which the Authority uses to pay off the bonds -- haven't been keeping pace with the Sports Authority's needs:
Money for repaying bonds comes from hotel occupancy taxes and car rental taxes. When the bonds were floated, repayments were structured based on the assumption that these taxes would increase 3 percent annually.
The hotel occupancy tax revenue for the Sports Authority declined 5.42 percent in 2002 and 4.58 percent in 2003, said Harris County Tax Assessor/Collector Paul Bettencourt.
In 2004, the revenue was 11.27 percent higher than the previous year, Bettencourt said. Through the first two quarters of this year, revenues are 4.55 percent higher than last year, Millican said.
Despite those increases, the authority's revenue continues to fall short of projections, Millican said.
Revenue for September is expected to be down because hotel occupancy taxes were waived for at least some evacuees from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
And then there was that little problem last year:
Last year, the cost of the three sports venues went up when the authority floated another $37.2 million in bonds.
The money was needed because hotel and car rental taxes weren't meeting projections. An investment rating agency, Moody's, was threatening to reduce the authority's holdings to junk bond status unless it beefed up its cash reserve fund.
(You can read more about last year's close call with junk-bond status here.)
We know how the Sports Authority can save $1.5 million per year:
The sports authority has about a $3 million operating budget, about half of which is dedicated to contractual obligations and professional fees that either the city or county would have to pay even if the authority were dissolved. However, the bonds are amortized over 30 years, so saving $1.5 million a year over that period is not chump change.
And as we learned the other day, $800,000 + per year could be saved immediately in staff (six people) salaries alone.
It's time to shut that bureaucracy down.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/15/05 04:11 PM |
13 October 2005
City to review TIRZs: some are better than others
Matt Stiles reports that Mayor White will begin reviewing 22 Tax Increment Reinvestment Zones (TIRZs) to see if any should be helping to pay for the police and fire services their zones use:
White's memo said a portion of some zones' diverted tax revenues should be funneled back to the city to pay for other priorities.
As development occurs in these zones and property values rise, resulting tax revenue above a base level is funneled back into the zone to pay for improvements to attract private investment. The extra revenue is called an increment.
The zones account for about 3 percent of the city's overall property-tax base, White said. In fiscal 2006, the zones should get about $30 million in increment revenue, said Judy Gray Johnson, the city's finance and administration director.
The mayor said the zones are a useful tool in some areas.
He said they can provide stable funding for affordable housing and a venue for joint projects between the city and county. They also provide an economic incentive for developers.
But others have outlived their usefulness, he said, or they are asking to spend too much on administrative costs with money the city could better use for other purposes, such as increased police patrols.
"You can't take the increased property taxes from one neighborhood and say that all that's going to go to buildings and streets and parks in that neighborhood, without accounting for the fact that our first obligation is public safety," White said.
Councilman Mark Ellis, who heads the council's fiscal affairs committee, said some zones spend too much on legal fees and that their financing rates aren't as low the city's.
"In reality, they wind up costing more money than necessary," Ellis said. "They also put an undue burden on property owners who are outside the zone."
Mayor White is still a fan of TIRZs, apparently, since he recently helped create one for the new downtown Pavilions development.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/13/05 06:11 AM |
12 October 2005
Latest Fitch bond ratings assume Prop. 2's failure
This Business Wire news release talks about the latest Fitch Ratings. I am far from an expert in these business/math/accounting things (feel free to help out in the comments), but these paragraphs caught my eye:
Despite recently agreed upon program changes and funding commitments that have reduced the $1.8 billion unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) of the city's municipal employee pension system by an estimated one-half, that program and the police officers' and firefighters' pension plans all face potentially sharp increases in UAAL over the near term. In addition, Fitch views the city's debt financing of a portion of the city's annual contribution to both the municipal and police pension systems as an indication of financial stress and considers this funding approach an unfavorable credit factor.
The impact of pension-related borrowing as currently envisioned is expected to have a minimal effect both on the city's capital improvement plan and projected debt service tax rates. The city's debt ratios, both on a per capita basis and as a percentage of taxable assessed valuation (TAV), are moderate. The pace of repayment on the city's tax-supported debt is slightly above average.
The new revenue limitation, also referred to as Proposition 1, is a measure approved by voters in November 2004 that applies to ad valorem tax revenues and water and sewer rates. The measure became effective in the current fiscal year, and the budget is in compliance with the new mandate. However, the limitation has the potential to hinder service delivery and capital financing going forward, including pension plan funding. The current rating and outlook presumes that the legal challenge by supporters of a competing, more restrictive measure that garnered less voter support is unsuccessful.
Isn't that interesting? Of course the second bolded part refers to Prop. 2 which voters approved last fall and which the city has been fighting ever since.
Also notice the references to the city's pension responsibilities.
(Just for fun, check out this page on Prop. 2's website.)
PREVIOUSLY: Fitch downgrades Houston bond rating (bH)
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/12/05 09:19 PM |
10 October 2005
County official recommends downsizing Sports Authority
A while back, Harris County Commissioners Court asked a county official to look at the Sports Authority and recommend what should be done with it. The Chronicle's Bill Murphy has the story:
Staff and operations at the Harris County Sports Authority, created to oversee the construction of the city's new pro sports venues, should be reduced, but not dissolved, a county official says.
Since construction has been completed, the authority has aided efforts to bring more attractions to the venues — a marketing responsibility best left to other groups, said Dick Raycraft, county director of management services.
"I don't think the authority needs to be running around marketing for events," he said Friday.
That argument -- that the Sports Authority fulfills a marketing role -- is one of the reasons Sports Authority CEO Oliver Luck has given for why the entity should not be dismantled. But that reason is not within the purview of the Sports Authority. The other reason Luck likes to give for keeping the Sports Authority up and running is bond management -- that no other entity can manage and pay off the bonds that were issued to pay for the three venues.
The authority has an operating budget this year of nearly $2.9 million.
That includes $473,000 for legal expenses, investment management fees and auditors, and $245,000 in bond insurance.
Director Oliver Luck is paid $200,000. It has five other employees making a combined $622,000.
The sports authority's job, now that venues are built, is to pay off $1.04 billion in bond debt owed on Minute Maid Park, Reliant Stadium and Toyota Center.
Holy guacamole! Six employees who make more than $800,000 per year are needed to pay off bonds??!! No wonder Luck is working so hard to get a soccer team here. That's a whole lotta dough that needs to be justified!
The rest of the story has more details of Raycraft's recommendations, Judge Eckels' desire to dismantle the Sports Authority, and HCHSA board chair Billy Burge whining. Jack Rains is not quoted in the story, so it's unclear if he was given an opportunity to respond.
We, of course, agree with Judge Eckels, Commissioner Radack and Jack Rains, that the Sports Authority has outlived its mission and should be dismantled. Reducing the Sports Authority's staffing and current purpose, and combining it with the Convention and Visitors Bureau is a step in the right direction.
RELATED: Billy Burge: THE best reason to shut down the Sports Authority! (bH), Jack Rains' letter in the Chronicle (bH)
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/10/05 08:08 AM |
09 October 2005
Houston wants to fund museums? Don't forget about our veterans
At last night's Icehouse gathering, I had a conversation with a gentleman which relates to a previous blogHOUSTON topic -- the city's funding of the African-American Museum.
The conversation led to this conclusion: if the city is going to enter the field of museum-funding, we think the city should be an equal opportunity museum-funder, including providing money for the proposed Veterans Museum in Texas.
This archived story from August 16th's Chronicle has some details of the struggle to get this museum up and running. I'll excerpt a brief portion:
The private group spearheading the proposed Veterans Museum in Texas got its biggest boost yet when it formally took possession Monday of 35 acres of land donated by Exxon Mobil near the Gulf Freeway and Scarsdale on which to build the museum .
[snip]
Browne said the land deal with the oil giant requires his group to break ground within five years or the property will revert to Exxon Mobil.
He said he needs about $75 million to start construction on the $140 million museum .
He expects building to begin within the next three years, he added.
Browne, who has been pushing the idea of a veterans museum in Houston since at least 1998, said the group has raised about $7,000 for the project.
"We had to get the land," Browne said in explaining the lack of funding to date. "But now, fundraising can get into high gear."
The museum board of directors plans to seek federal and state grants, as well as corporate and private donations.
My understanding from last night's conversation is that the city of Houston has been approached about providing some funding for The Veterans Museum of Texas and the city has declined to help.
That's very disappointing, in light of the city's apparent willingness to give $2 million to fund an African-American museum.
The gentleman I was chatting with last night made a good point: Houston has a whole lot of hotel rooms to fill, and having The Veterans Museum of Texas up and running could help that. How about a veterans convention at the GRB, and other assorted veterans events sponsored by the museum?
Come on, Mayor White -- think Big Picture here and do the right thing.
(Of course, the key here is that the city should NOT be in the business of financing museums, but if Mayor White and city council want to start down that road...)
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/09/05 06:11 PM |
07 October 2005
Is this good or bad? We really can't tell
From a Chronicle story by Matt Stiles:
After serving as a staging area for the Hurricane Rita recovery, the troubled Houston Emergency Center got a cleanup of its own this week, as city officials moved to refinance a lease deal and buy the building.
City Council approved a plan Wednesday to pay off the building with government bonds rather than continue with its lease. Officials said the decision could save millions of dollars.
Okay, this sounds pretty good:
The city likely would get a better deal by financing the building itself, rather than depending on a lease with an annual payment of about $4.4 million, said Jim Moncur, deputy city controller. "The essence of this deal that we're doing is simple: We're doing a refinance to save some money," he said.
Or maybe not:
The original deal under former Mayor Lee Brown was a "lease-purchase," in which a private developer took out a loan instead of the government issuing bonds. The advantage is that the city doesn't have to hold a bond election, dip into its capital fund or competitively bid the project. The disadvantage is that private developers can never get as low an interest rate as the government.
It isn't a lease in the commonly understood sense because the government owns the building for property tax purposes and at the end of the lease term, the government "buys" the building for $1.
The Houston Chronicle reported in 2002 that the city had done no comparative study of the center's construction price of $274 per square foot.
Under the current lease which runs through 2027, the city would pay about $95 million to settle its contractual agreement.
The new plan, more typical of how the city usually finances buildings, would cost an estimated $89.5 million, a $5.5 million savings over 20 years.
Mayor Bill White, who wasn't in office when the unusual lease arrangement was signed, said the refinancing was about saving city money.
The decision wasn't without controversy.
Councilman Mark Goldberg, who spent the night at the building as Hurricane Rita approached the Gulf Coast, didn't question the building's ability to serve its mission.
But he said the original deal was bad, and that the city ought to continue leasing so a future council could have the option of building a new, cheaper facility.
He said the technology could be obsolete in five to 10 years.
"We're only saving money with the assumption that we are going to stay in this building for the next 25 years," said Goldberg, who voted against the plan along with Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. "A building of that size, with everything that it offers us, certainly could be built cheaper."
Do any of our smart commenters (we have the BEST commenters!) have thoughts on whether this is good or bad for the city?
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/07/05 08:58 AM |
04 October 2005
WaPo discovers that red light cameras increase accidents in D.C.
Since Houston is on the verge of getting red light cameras -- you know, for safety's sake -- I think this Washington Post story is worth highlighting, talking about what has happened as a result of the District of Columbia's red light camera program:
The District's red-light cameras have generated more than 500,000 violations and $32 million in fines over the past six years. City officials credit them with making busy roads safer.
But a Washington Post analysis of crash statistics shows that the number of accidents has gone up at intersections with the cameras. The increase is the same or worse than at traffic signals without the devices.
Three outside traffic specialists independently reviewed the data and said they were surprised by the results. Their conclusion: The cameras do not appear to be making any difference in preventing injuries or collisions.
"The data are very clear," said Dick Raub, a traffic consultant and a former senior researcher at Northwestern University's Center for Public Safety. "They are not performing any better than intersections without cameras."
[snip]
The analysis shows that the number of crashes at locations with cameras more than doubled, from 365 collisions in 1998 to 755 last year. Injury and fatal crashes climbed 81 percent, from 144 such wrecks to 262. Broadside crashes, also known as right-angle or T-bone collisions, rose 30 percent, from 81 to 106 during that time frame. Traffic specialists say broadside collisions are especially dangerous because the sides are the most vulnerable areas of cars.
The number of crashes and injury collisions at intersections with cameras rose steadily through 2001, then dipped through 2003 before spiking again last year.
The results were similar or worse than figures at intersections that have traffic signals but no cameras. The number of overall crashes at those 1,520 locations increased 64 percent; injury and fatal crashes rose 54 percent; and broadside collisions rose 17 percent.
Something to think about when MayorWhiteChiefHurtt cuts the ribbon on Houston's first red light camera before the year is out.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 10/04/05 10:01 AM |
02 October 2005
Mack on the Mayor's minor council setbacks
With the Rita excitement, I was remiss in calling attention to Kristen Mack's column from over a week ago, in which Mack noted that Mayor White recently suffered two rare public defeats in council:
The Council has bucked the mayor twice this month — shutting down a plan to give money to homeowners sheltering Katrina evacuees and refusing to renew the contract for embattled public-access channel Houston MediaSource.
The resistance emerged at an emergency council meeting Sept. 8 as Houston was in the second week of dealing with Katrina evacuees.
The council already had gone along with White's plan to set aside $10 million for evacuees. But when he called a second meeting for council to consider a $500,000 plan to reimburse Houstonians $15 a day per Katrina evacuee they accepted into their homes, council members rejected the idea. He directed his staff to refine it, but later found private funds for the reimbursements and did not take the issue back to council.
As Mack observes, Mayor White is usually much more adept at working behind the scenes to ensure easy victories (or, if an easy victory is not forthcoming, he simply does not bring matters to Council).
Still, despite the quotes from Michael Berry and Pam Holm, Council has mostly been a pushover for Mayor White, who has moved the important items on his agenda easily. That's not likely to change (especially after he racks up a big victory in the coming election), the quote about "moderate councilmen" from one of the Mayor's biggest Council boosters on SAFEclear and the Parking Authority Revenue Stream notwithstanding.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 10/02/05 09:38 PM |
15 September 2005
New TIRZ approved for downtown Pavilions development
It looks as though Harris County and the city of Houston have approved a downtown TIRZ (tax increment reinvestment zone) for the proposed Houston Pavilions:
The Market Square TIRZ, as it has been named, will be used to float $14.3 million in bonds, of which $8.5 million will come from Harris County and the balance from the City of Houston.
Partners William Denton and Geoffrey Jones are proposing to use three city blocks--Main, Caroline and Polk streets--to develop Houston Pavilions. The project is envisioned as having high-class retail, entertainment, condominiums and office space--all packaged in about 360,000 sf. But sources have noted that, due to the high cost of downtown land values and development, a TIRZ creation was necessary to help fund the project and push it forward.
"Yesterday, the commissioner's court approved it and last night, the TIRZ's board of directors approved it," says David Turkel, director of community and economic development for Harris County. The city council also has approved the TIRZ creation. "The next step is for the city and the developers to enter into a formal agreement," Turkel tells GlobeSt.com, estimating that TIRZ agreement could be finalized within weeks.
Jones, senior vice president and managing director of CB Richard Ellis Inc.'s Houston office, and Denton, president of Entertainment Development Group Inc., based in Agoura Hills, CA have formed the Houston Pavilions LP, to move to the next step of the process. If all goes according to plan, the Houston Pavilions will be similar in scope to Entertainment Development's successful 350,000-sf Denver Pavilions, which opened in 1998.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 09/15/05 07:04 PM |
But can Bob Stein explain where dust bunnies come from?
Oh, and his wife works for Mayor White.
Anyway, we just wanted to say thanks to the Chronicle's Kristen Mack and Matt Stiles for properly identifying Stein in recent stories. Readers have a right to know of the local expert's mayoral connection.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 09/15/05 04:36 PM |
14 September 2005
HPD changes its mind on conducting day laborer stings
One could get whiplash trying to follow HPD decisionmaking. First HPD was photographing "day laborers" (our newest euphemism to describe illegal immigrants apparently) as a means of ID, then HPD said it wouldn't take any more pictures after activists came unglued, and then we read in a story that HPD IS photographing "day laborers" after all!
Well, recently in the news there was a story about a sting conducted by HPD that ended up with thirty "day laborers" under arrest. Of course, all the usual illegal immigrant apologists were horrified at this outrageous act of law enforcement, so today we have HPD's latest cave-in:
Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt said his department will not do any more day labor sting operations like the one mounted west of downtown earlier this month.
In a meeting with activists Monday, Hurtt said he wants to build trust with immigrants, and he was concerned about the way the operation was handled, according to a police spokesman.
Members of an HPD tactical unit dressed up as contractors and arrested 30 day laborers near the corner of Shepherd and Washington. The men were charged with soliciting work in the roadway, a misdemeanor.
"We will not be doing this again," said Lt. Robert Manzo, an HPD spokesman.
Residents of the neighborhood west of downtown say the area has experienced a quick rise in the number of burglaries, which they link to the immigrant day laborers who loiter on the corners looking for work. Some expressed frustration at the chief's decision.
"It sounds like we need to get together neighbors, the victims of crime, and have a meeting with the chief," said Lisa Flores, who lives in the area. "If he has made a decision like that, he doesn't understand how bad the crime is."
Flores' home was invaded last November by knife-wielding robbers, she said.
Juan Alvarez, leader of the Coalition Against Intolerance and For Respect, said he was pleased with the promise from the chief. Alvarez, who was in the meeting, said the chief explained that the operation was organized by a HPD tactical unit without proper input from the police command.
So there you go. Houston's police chief wants to get along with law breakers. That's nice.
UPDATE: Woops, I missed today's Chron editorial applauding HPD's decision. Dang, that was a fast editorial! We didn't know the idealists had it in them! This must have been a critical issue in the comfy confines of the Chron's editorial board room. I take it none of the editors lives in the area affected by "day laborer" loitering and knife-wielding robbers.
KEVIN WHITED ADDS: Actually, there's a very simple explanation for the fast turnaround of the editorial. In my masochistic review of a week's worth of Chron editorials, readers will recall I discovered a new Chron approach to editorializing: Simply write, "in the aftermath of Katrina," followed by whatever opinion the Chron previously held on unrelated issues. So, today we get:
In Hurricane Katrina, mistrust of authorities compounded the tragedy that befell New Orleans' poor. Even in ordinary times, citizens who fear police won't report crimes and won't inform on others' illegal behavior. Their silence endangers everyone.
Translated: "In the aftermath of Katrina," HPD should ignore laws it doesn't want to enforce, just as we editorial idealists have advocated previously, because happy criminals are more likely to cooperate with law enforcement.
The idealists really might want to think of a new rhetorical strategy. They've about worn out the aftermath of Katrina.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 09/14/05 07:41 AM |
13 September 2005
The Brown Administration legacy grows
With the trip out of town and the Katrina blogging last week, I neglected to mention that the legacy of the Lee Brown Administration managed to grow just a bit more.
The Chronicle's Dan Feldstein, who has provided good reporting on this story, wrote:
Former city of Houston official Monique McGilbra was sentenced to three years in federal prison Friday for accepting bribes from a Cleveland businessman, while former mayoral chief of staff Oliver Spellman got probation for a similar crime.
McGilbra apparently earned the disdain of U.S. District Judge James Gwin in his Cleveland courtroom, insisting that she thought the gifts she accepted from businessmen seeking city work were purely part of dating.
In a trial against the businessman this summer, she testified that she took gifts from five people or companies seeking business with the city building services department she supervised.
McGilbra told Gwin at her sentencing that she was "a woman, a mother and a lover" and that it shouldn't be a crime to have expensive tastes, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
"My involvement with the men in this case was primarily personal that became business. There were personal advances. I never had my position or City Hall for sale," she told the judge.
Judge Gwin apparently was not swayed by that argument.
Later, the Chronicle's Harvey Rice checked in with Houston sentencing:
A former Houston city official was sentenced to two years and six months in federal prison today for accepting cash and gifts from businesses seeking her influence in gaining lucrative city contracts.
[snip]
[Monique] McGilbra, 41, is the second Houston city official to plead guilty in a continuing investigation that began in Cleveland and expanded to include Houston and New Orleans.
Oliver Spellman, 51, chief of staff to former Mayor Lee Brown, received probation and a $10,000 fine Friday in Cleveland federal court for taking a $2,000 bribe from a Cleveland consultant.
U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore said McGilbra's Houston sentence will run at the same time as the Cleveland sentence, meaning she will spend no more than three years in prison.
McGilbra was more repentant in her statement to Gilmore than in her statement to U.S. District Judge James Gwin in Cleveland, who was unmoved when she told him that having expensive tastes shouldn't be a crime.
"I'd like to say how regretful and sorrowful I am," McGilbra told Gilmore. "I'll spend the rest of my life trying to make amends for that."
[snip]
Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward Gallagher and Mary Butler, a prosecutor with the Department of Justice's public integrity unit, told Gilmore McGilbra was cooperating in an ongoing investigation.
"We are striving to discover the extent of corruption and we are not going to leave any stone unturned," Gallagher said outside the courtroom.
The legacy could grow even more.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 09/13/05 07:47 PM |
08 September 2005
Mack on the Mayor's technocratic/progressive parking plans
In her column last week, Kristen Mack wrote the following about Mayor White's parking priorities:
Last week, the city created a 15-member public parking commission — composed of nine voting members with experience in the field and six non-voting members representing the city, county and Metropolitan Transit Authority.
The idea is to create a body whose mission will be to create a"forum for input on present and future parking needs and plans for citizens, stakeholders and other interested parties."
But downtown parking is a touchy subject. It doesn't help that parking has been managed poorly for years, and that many residents, and even some elected officials, believe that the city's motivations have more to do with revenue generation than parking management.
White hopes to change that perception, and the City Council apparently is on board. It approved the parking commission unanimously.
Parking is being restructured under one umbrella, moving from municipal courts to the Convention and Entertainment Department, which already manages the 7,500 parking spaces in city-owned lots.
The city has to sell this carefully. Critics will say that the city is creating a new government bureaucracy only to create a new revenue stream.
Hey, that sounds familiar!
Does this mean we've graduated from mere bloggers to actual critics?
And does it also mean that it's now even LESS likely that Mayor White's communications staff is going to honor our repeated requests to be added to their press release email list?
Probably so on the latter.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 09/08/05 12:12 AM |
07 September 2005
Katrina gives city reprieve from SAFEclear headache
The City of Houston bought itself some time in dealing with a judge's SAFEclear-killing ruling by saying it needs to focus on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:
At the city's request, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt delayed the ruling until November. The move gives the city time to determine whether to change the program to comply with his order or pursue an appeal.
Hoyt ruled Aug. 31 that the city can't give towing companies exclusive contracts to remove cars from Houston freeways or to regulate the fees charged to motorists who consent to long-distance tows.
The ruling came in a lawsuit filed in February by the Houston Professional Towing Association and three local operators who did not receive exclusive contracts.
The city argued in a court document that, without a delay, the ruling would cause confusion for the city, towing companies and the public at a time when resources are stretched thin as a result of Hurricane Katrina.
The stay, issued late Tuesday, doesn't affect the underlying conclusions in the ruling. A meeting on how to deal with the ruling is planned today, City Attorney Arturo Michel said.
Of course the city is extremely busy with Katrina evacuees, but what I find interesting is that when SAFEclear was implemented there was no grace period for drivers on Houston freeways, despite the confusion and hardship the draconian program caused.
RELATED: blogHOUSTON's SAFEclear archives
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 09/07/05 07:51 AM |
29 August 2005
Sale of city parking garage stalled
The Houston Business Journal's Jenna Colley reports that the city's effort to sell a parking garage is being held up by one member of Council:
A potential brokerage contract between the City of Houston and real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield of Texas Inc. has been stalled for two consecutive weeks over concerns by at least one City Council member that more minority firms should have been given a shot at the deal.
Council member Ronald Green claims that the city's proposal to hire national brokerage firm Cushman & Wakefield to sell a 13-level downtown parking garage owned by the city is indicative of the municipality's overall disregard for minority- and woman-owned businesses for high-dollar deals.
"When we only look to our circle to find vendors, I find that insulting," Green says of the deal.
Although a formal asking price has not been set, Green estimates that the sale of the parking facility, known as the Fannin Garage, could bring in as much as $15 million. A 1.25 percent brokerage commission would bring the value of the contract with Cushman & Wakefield to $187,500.
Shouldn't the new Parking Bureaucracy be handling matters of this nature, thereby removing the tendency to play politics with what ought to be the simple business of selling off surplus city property?
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 08/29/05 08:55 PM |
19 August 2005
It's just like Monopoly (updated)
On the heels of yesterday's idiocy about the fantabulous Astrodome Hotel, today we learn that the city of Houston may soon take control of a second hotel:
Houston taxpayers have millions of dollars on the line -- money that former Mayor Lee Brown's administration loaned to private hotel developers. Now the current mayor is threatening to foreclose on two hotels that owe the city a small fortune.
As downtown Houston revived, the city government orchestrated a hotel building binge.
Around the same time, the city built its 1200 room convention center hotel. It also helped private developers build two other downtown hotels.
But the 11 News Defenders reported earlier this year that the Magnolia Hotel hasn't paid back a dime of the $9.5 million it owes the city -- missing payment after payment.
[snip]
But the Magnolia is a different story. City officials are already talking about foreclosing on the property and hiring an outside management team to come in and take the place over and keep it running until another buyer can be found.
In effect, the city of Houston would own yet another downtown hotel.
Some downtown hotels managers complain the city government helped flood the market with empty rooms.
"It seems, sometimes, politicians get into the supply and demand business, trying to force supply and demand to balance," said Sergio Ortiz, GM of the Lancaster Hotel. "But there's only one way it is balanced, which is free economics."
Now the city government's playing a different tune, saying it'll never again put taxpayer's money on the line for one of these downtown hotel deals.
It's a little late for that epiphany now.
As Tom Kirkendall has said previously, this is why the City of Houston should not be in the business of financing redevelopment projects.
UPDATE: Tom Kirkendall cautions Mayor White about seeking to foreclose on The Magnolia Hotel:
Note to Mayor White -- before you have the City foreclose its second lien on either of those hotel properties, please check to see whether either of them is generating enough revenue to pay operating expenses, much less debt service on the first lien indebtedness. Hotel properties "eat" money, and if the current owners are at least contributing enough to subsidize negative cash flows to operations, considering an alternative to foreclosure could save the City a ton of money. Sometimes you get more than you wish for when driving a hard bargain.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 08/19/05 08:05 PM |
[Previous 20 Entries] [Next 20 Entries]