Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRequest for Recall of CS City Council Majority (02-24-1999) equest for Recall of College Station City Council http : / /www.issues.org /recall.html I Request for Recall of College Station City Council Majority On February 19th, 1998, five normal, ordinary members of the public submitted an affadavit to the I College Station City Secretary. The members which we requested be removed from office are: Lynn Mcllhaney, and Councilmembers David Hickson, Larry Mariott, Ron Silvia and Anne Hazen, which we frequently refer to as the Council Majority, since they almost always voted as a block. I The recall affadavit lists 24 major reasons for removal of these members. A list of those reasons, plus more, is shown below. Notice that there is substantial corroborating evidence presented for each item. Once a reasonable citizen reads the Majority's dirty laundry list, he will be MAD. 1 I The reasons for which we wanted to remove the above Council members was compiled by us. We are just citizens who have been regularly attending City Council meetings, acting as watchdogs for the public, listening to the issues, researching the facts. Many times we have presented our viewpoints at I Council Meetings about specific agenda items, stating logical straight - forward arguments, listing evidence and supportive opinions from the public at large and just using plain common sense, only to be ignored. rebuffed. and dismissed as inconsequential. As a matter of a fact, we hold the common belief I that we are just a small roadbump for their policies, a mere inconvenience that they grudgingly have to deal with. I We have the hope that there is still some integrity to those members, and that they do the right thing, the honorable thing, and resign immediately from their office. By resigning, the citizens of College Station will have the chance to select a new Council, to start with a fresh set of leaders, representatives who don't cater to special interests, responsible ones who don't risk your tax dollars on White Elephant C projects, Council Members such as Steve Esmond, Swiki Anderson, and Dick Birdwell who We Can Trust. I We strongly encourage the public to attend the City Council meeting on Thursday. February 25th. at 6:00 PM. Among the City Council Agenda items to be discussed at that meeting is the case dealing with Councilman Hickson verbally abusing a citizen, and the mismanagement of said case. If you ever I wanted to see what really goes on at City Council meeting, this will be the one to attend! We can talk until we are blue in the face, write letters to the papers, anything, and yet nothing ever comes of it. We have come to believe that there is little more that we can do, except demand that either I the City Council Majority, composed of Mayor McIlhaney, and Councilmembers Hickson, Mariott, Silvia and Hazen, either resign or be recalled from office. Given the long list of items, showing a clear pattern of consistent behavior, most rational people would agree it is time to clean out the dead wood. 1 Please check here for petition signing locations and schedules. Grounds for Removal of 1 City Council Majority Members The Grounds for Removal are as follows: The Mayor and above members of the City Council are no longer acting as representatives of the population of the City of College Station. I 1. The Citizens of College Station were forced to bring an initiative petition to City Council to preserve Fire Station #2 from ill- planned closure by the Mayor and above members of the City 1 of 4 02/24/99 12:40 PM equest for Recall of College Station City Council http : / /www.issues.org/recall.html Council. Without this petition, the safety and welfare of the residents of Southwood Valley and .1 surrounding areas would have been inadequately protected. Evidence 2. The City Council Majority permitted the R -1 rezoning for the Steeplechase subdivision, in spite of 1 a large number of affected citizens strongly voicing their opinion against it. Said citizens organized and submitted proper petitions for notification and supermajority votes on rezoning and made comprehensive presentations with compelling reasons against such rezoning. Evidence 1 3. The City Council Majority have grossly mismanaged the entire Munson street issue, to the point at which a once peaceful neighborhood is now embittered and the entire community has become divided. Evidence 1 4. The City Council Majority have consistently underrepresented the issues of the South Side residents and the historical homes in their area. Evidence 1 5. The City Council Majority have, by action, assigned a favored status for businesses and bars in the Northgate area, investing over $4,000,000 for special improvements (including $100,000 for sidewalk pavers) in that business area, while neglecting equal treatment for the rest of the city. I Evidence 6. The City Council Majority have abrogated their fiduciary obligations to the citizens of College I Station by permitting $270,000 to be lost through mismanagement of the construction of the Patricia Street Parking Lot project, and not attempting to recoup its losses. Further, the City has continued to accept work from the party that caused said loss. Evidence 1 7. The Citizens of College Station were obliged to bring a referendum petition ordinance to City Council to prevent the Council from constructing the Northgate Parking Garage. While said petition ordinance was in waiting for a citywide election, the Council chose to continue to invest I city funds, in spite of the possibility that the citizens could have easily rejected that project. Evidence I 8. The City Council Majority continue to support and endorse the Northgate Parking Garage project, in spite of overwhelming evidence that the project is financially unsound. There is evidence that misleading information about the revenues and usage of the Patricia Street Parking Lot is being used to support this widely considered financially unfeasible project. Evidence 11 9. The City Council Majority have caused the City to invest millions of dollars in the Wolf Pen Creek project, only to have the site, through improper design of its water areas, be considered an I embarrassment to residents and visitors alike. Also, the City insisted in investing additional monies, $92,000, to dredge the water areas, in violation of EPA regulations; with the water areas currently worse off than ever. Evidence 1 10. The City Council Majority are proceeding to plan and develop an expensive and unnecessary City Hall Center, a project that has been at the bottom of the priority list for the Capital Improvement Projects list since 1994. Evidence 11. The City Council Majority are proceeding with the City Hall Center project and yet, the City cannot fix the Wolf Pen Creek project's problems. Evidence t 12. The City Council Majority have failed in their oversight of City functions, including the persistence of cracks in the slab, inadequate ventilation, and lack of personal privacy at Fire Station i 1, and the floor elevation at the new City Library being too low according to the City's own floodplain ordinance. Evidence 13. The City Council Majority have condemned citizen's land for ill - advised projects such as the I Patricia Street lot and the Northgate Parking Garage. One of such condemnations ended in controversy when the land was resold for use in the Texadelphia restaurant, instead of the parking of 4 02/24/99 12:40 PM �equest for Recall of College Station City Council http : / /www.issues.org /recall.html lot as was promised to the original lot owners. Evidence 1 14. The City Council Majority have purchased property for the Northgate Parking Garage from general and other funds rather than from bonds that were authorized but not issued for the project. 1 Evidence 15. The City Council Majority have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars from Facade I Improvement Program funds into business at Northgate, when the owners are not in any extreme financial need, nor is there a socially redeeming value to creating any additional alcoholic beverage vendors in such area. Evidence I 16. The City Council Majority have been unwilling to even listen to sound engineering advice to consider less expensive and more reliable methods of wastewater treatment which would result in a permanent solution to the odor problems at the City's wastewater treatment plant. Evidence 1 17. The City Council Majority attempted to humiliate and embarrass Councilman Swiki Anderson by conducting an ill -fated investigation alleging charter violations, without open trial, which finally ended in each of the above having to vote to exonerate Councilman Anderson because he did no I wrong in the first place. The same members have neglected to pursue and investigate allegations concerning other Council persons and City Staff when presented charges. Evidence I 18. The City Council Majority have delayed the enactment of an Ethics Ordinance which is desperately needed and if enacted would hold the above to a higher standard than they currently attain. There is rampant suspicion that the delay is not because of scheduling and training requirements, but 1 because of a conspiracy to bypass the financial disclosure requirements of the Ethics Ordinance. Evidence 19. The City Council Majority denied citizens their right to be heard in Open Council and may have I violated the Texas Open Meetings Act. One such an occurrence happened while handling a citizen complaint for verbal abuse by a Councilmember during the November 12th and December 10th Council meetings. Another occurred on December 17th, concerning the suspicious postponement of I the Ethics Ordinance. Evidence 20. The City Council Majority have been unwilling to even listen to sound engineering advice to review the standards for foundations for the Teen Center. Councilman Anderson proposed that a 1 committee of three local foundation experts review the plans before the final acceptance of the contract. The above members not only voted the final review, but then improperly closed discussion of three other consent agenda items that had been requested by Councilman Anderson I for discussion. These three other projects also had concerns that were of interest to the citizens of College Station before final contract approval. Evidence I 21. The City Council Majority have consistently refused to televise the City Council Meetings and Planning & Zoning meetings. This is in spite that citizens have repeatedly requested it, and have pointed out that such meetings would help easily prevent problems such as the Steeplechase Fiasco. Moreover, the City has already spent $44,000 for Council Chamber remodeling and for Cable I Channel 19, a channel mostly unused, for just this purpose. The obvious fear is that the majority of citizens would subject their actions to public scrutiny, and many of the actions listed above would not have been allowed to happen. Evidence I 22. The City Council Majority have spent $14,000 to begin a public art project in College Station. The Council Majority spent $63,000 for food in Fiscal Year 1997. Yet the City cannot find $12,000 to I televise its own Council Meetings. Evidence 23. The City Council Majority have accepted a large percentage of campaign contributions from out -of -town sources, when public interest is better served by Councilmembers who don't cater to 1 such outside forces. Evidence 1 of 4 02/24/99 12:40 PM equest for Recall of College Station City Council http : / /www.issues.org /recall.html E 24. The City Council Majority have abrogated their responsibilities by making, under the pretense of efficiency, numerous transfers of power away from the City Council, which is elected by the population, to the City Manager and City Staff, which are not elected. This, in effect, reduces our citizen's control of the city's direction, and makes it harder to rein in abuses of power such as are I listed above. Evidence In summation, the Mayor and above members of the City Council, voting as the "Council Majority ", I have not acted as proper stewards of our Taxes, nor have they represented the views nor protected the needs of our Citizens. Signed, 1 Benito Flores -Meath Norma Miller I Sue McDonald George Sopasakis (you can reach him at Burger Boy) Carl Vargo LATE NEWS!!! Discussion on the Controversy about the February 20th Bryan Eagle article and Mr. Hickson's comments on Who Started the Recall? 1 Please check here for petition signing locations and schedules. 1 Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 4 02/24/99 12:40 PM i nitiative Petition to Preserve Fire Station #2 http: / /www.issues.org /recall /issues0l /issues01.html Initiative Petition to Preserve Fire Station #2 The Citizens of College o ege Station were forced to bring an initiative petition to City Council to preserve 1 Fire Station #2 from ill- planned closure by the Mayor and above members of the City Council. Without this petition, the safety and welfare of the residents of Southwood Valley and surrounding areas would have been inadequately protected. "...request that you reconsider the � � __� ^T� _____ - -- 1 council's decision to close the fire station on Rio Grande..." - Letter from Ellen and Charles Horner to Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney, dated Dec 20th, 1997 1 . "...in the midst of the most densely populated area of College Station and it will be closed soon if citizens do not protest by writing and calling the mayor, City Council an City Manager Skip Noe." - Letter from Craig and Margaret Griffith to The Bryan Eagle, dated Dec 20th, 1997 1 . "Please write or call today and ask to keep the Rio Grande station..." - Letter from Craig and Margaret Griffith to The Bryan Eagle, dated Dec 20th, 1997 1 . "We the undersigned support keeping Fire Station No. 2 open, opening up Fire Station No. 4, and maintaining taxes at their current level, per the position statement on the back side of this petition." 1 - Sample page from the Fire Station No. 2 petition initiative. . The residents of College Station may have differing opinions on what city monies should be given out for, but we can all agree that fire protection and emergency services take priority over much of ' what the city does. This time citizens can have "their cake, and eat some too." - Position statement letter included with the petition, describing many detailed reasons for not closing Fire Station No. 2. II . The petition presented, signed by approximately 530 residents, is in opposition to the possible relocation of Station Two... - Press release by John Holder concerning the petition, dated Feb 19th, 1998. 1 . "Residents have submitted a petition to the city of College Station seeking to keep open Fire Station No. 2, but city officials, citing a formatting technicality, say the petition may be invalid." - ' Quote from The Bryan Eagle, dated Feb 20th, 1998. . "...they're tired of the city going ahead and doing what they want." - Quote from The Bryan Eagle, Feb 20, 1998. I ▪ "What had become a hot issue for many College Station residents..." - Quote from The Bryan Eagle, dated Feb 27, 1998. . "Residents told the council they were concerned about increased response times to neighborhoods, schools and medical facilities in south College Station." - Quote from The Bryan Eagle, dated Feb 1 27, 1998. . "...you didn't have to do this.. ", - Quote from Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney at February 26th Council 1 meeting. . "Oh, yes we did! ", - Quote from citizen Benito Flores- Meath, in response to the above quote. "This was the first time I felt that the Council Majority could not be trusted." It must be noted that citizens 1 present at the meeting also joined in agreement as a loud chorus against Mayor Mcllhaney. . "...more than 530 residents to sign a petition asking the Council to keep Fire Station No. 2 open as well as proceed with the Easterwood Airport fire station." - Quote from The Bryan Eagle, dated Feb 27, 1998. 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:43 PM i nitiative Petition to Preserve Fire Station #2 http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues0l /issues01.html E . "During the City Council meeting on February 26, the Council approved the Fire Department's recommendations to keep Fire Station #2 at Rio Grande Drive open..." - Letter from Mayor Lynn McIlhaney to Craig Griffith, dated March 10, 1998 1 The Citizens Win! 1 Note: but it should be pointed out that if the Citizens had not come forward and FORCED the Mayor and Council Majority to act, the Station would have been closed. This was common knowledge. We are now in the same situation again; that's why we are recalling the Council Majority. Sign .up._Now! 1 . The City seemed to have no difficulty amending the budget to pay to keep Fire Station No. 2 open. At least one letter was sent to a citizen, listing, quite matter -of -a- factly, that the City would allocate I funds to keep it open. There was no mention of having to tighten belts, or fire employees, or even cutting into the Arts Council's funds. - Letter from Mayor Lynn McIlhaney to June Cooper, dated March 24th, 1998. B ack Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 2 02/24/99 12:43 PM ity Council Overrides Citizens Request to Protect Property Values http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues02 /issues02.html E City Council Overrides Citizens Request to Protect Property Values E The City Council Majority permitted the R -1 rezoning for the Steeplechase subdivision, in spite of a large number of affected citizens strongly voicing their opinion against it. Said citizens organized and submitted proper petitions for notification and supermajority votes on rezoning and made comprehensive I presentations with compelling reasons against such rezoning. . Goal #3 - College Station should continue to protect, preserve and enhance existing and future 1 neighborhoods. - College Station Comprehensive Plan, page 9, dated April 1997 . Goal #4 - College Station should continue to encourage community participation and involvement. I . Objective 4.1 - College Station should continue to actively involve citizens and business interests in the development review and approval process. o Objective 4.2 - College Station should encourage residents to be actively involved in community decisions... 1 - College Station Comprehensive Plan, page 10, dated April 1997 When the residents in the Courts area found out that their neighborhood was to have a new I development next door, a development with small lots, zoned R -1, they organized into the Courts Homeowners Association so that they could protest the proposed development. Their opposition stemmed from the fact that a large number of duplexes and minimum sized single swelling units on I 5000 sq feet lots were going to be built next to their homes in an area that already had a lot of rental properties. They were concerned that this develpment would cause a deteriation of their neighborhood due to traffic, drainage problems, population density, loss of property value and loss of a quality of life. . On Oct. 22, the council created a new zoning district, R -1 B, which requires larger single - family lots than those required in R -1 districts, but which are smaller than rural residential district lots. - The E Bryan Eagle, dated Nov 14th, 1998. Note: this district is essentially the same as R -1, except it mandates lot sizes of 8000 square feet, 3000 square feet larger than R -1 requires. 1 . CS vote upsets some homeowners- Title to article in The Bryan Eagle, dated January 15, 1999 . The landowners of the properties near to the proposed Steeplechase Subdivision protest the requested zoning change of the parcel of land near our properties from Agricultural -Open to R -1. We are asking the City Council to deny the rezoning request. - Statement on petition submitted to City Council . There was a multi - person presentation at the City Council, presented by the neighborhood residents: Carl Vargo (Neighborhood Integrity, Protection, and Preservation) I o Traffic (Tom McDonald) o Drainage (Ken Welch, M.D.) o Property Values (Rita McMillian, Ph. D.) I o Population Density (Antonio Cepeda- Benito, Ph. D.) o Neighborhood Appearances (Sue McDonald, Ph. D.) The presentation included a through description of each item, included numerous graphics and 1 photographs. All topics supported the recommendation that the City not zone the Steeplechase subdivision as an R -1 district. The presentation is far too long to list on this web site, but it may be possible to contact the authors for questions or details. L . In January, this came up before council again and a valid petition was once again presented that fullfilled the requirements for the 20% protest rule (asking to deny the rezoning of part R -1 and part 1 of 3 02/24/99 12:43 PM Er ity Council Overrides Citizens Request to Protect Property Values http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues02 /issues02.html R -1B, which had been approved by P &Z but voted down in the November Council meeting), meaning that 6 out of 7 council members had to vote to over ride the petition for the proposed zoning to go into effect. Sue McDonald of Cortez Court presented the council with a legal opinion. Her attorney argued that the City of Garland case was not applicable in this situation and that particular ruling was based on a very specific set of circumstances for that case. Her attorney therefore argued that a protest petition signed by more than 20 percent of homeowners within the notification area meant approval of the rezoning request required a vote of three- fourths of the 1 council, or five of the six votes. - Quote from Sue McDonald on City Council meeting January 14, 1999 . Harvey Cargill, the City Attorney, issued a statement that based on case law for the City of I Garland, the 20% protest rule may not apply and that a simple majority was all that was needed to approve rezoning. One council member suggested that part of the property be zoned R1 -B and part R -1. This was voted down 4 -3 by the Council. Another councilmember then suggested it go back to I Planning and Zoning for R1 -B consideration for the entire parcel of land. This was approved 5 -2. Planning and Zoning approved rezoning part of the land to R -1 and part to R -1B, after the Council voted it down! - City Council Meeting January 14, 1999 I . City Attorney Harvey Cargill disagreed with the opinion of McDonald's attorney and ruled that a simple majority vote was appropriate. - The Bryan Eagle, dated January 15, 1999 I . The College Station City Council on Thursday voted 4 -2 to approve a rezoning of 28 acres in the Steeplechase subdivision. The vote disappointed serveral neighboring homeowners, one of whom said she would investigate legal options. - The Bryan Eagle, dated January 15, 1999 1 . A substitute motion to deny the request [zone 93.5 acres for Alexandria subdivision] and send the issue back to the Planning and Zoning commision for reconsideration as R -1B zoning was defeated.- The Bryan Eagle, dated January 15, 1999 I . We are concerned about maintaining our neighborhood integrity, protection and preservation, property values and quality of life. We desire that the Whole Steeplechase Subdivision be I renegotiated to have lots of 8,000 square feet or more and that quality homes be built... - Letter to The Courts Neighborhood Association, dated just after November 12th, 1998. 1 . We presented the petition to the City Council by landowners/homeowners beyond the 200 feet of the proposed development signed by 226 persons asking the City Council to deny the rezoning request. Thank you for each one who signed this!- Letter to The Courts Neighborhood Association, dated just after November 12th, 1998. 1 . Your presence again will visibly show your concern and interest in this issue. The Council Members are the ones whose votes will decide the zoning.- Letter to The Courts Neighborhood Association, dated just after November 12th, 1998. . Based on his recent interpretation of case law for the City of Garland, the College Station City Attorney ruled that land zoned A -O withn the City of College Station is considered "holding I zoning" and as such is not subject to the 20% protest rule. The 20% protest rule (provided for under State law and City of College Station Ordinances) is a mechanism by which landowners within 200 feet of property can submit a petition to protest the prospective rezoning. - Letter to the Bryan E Eagle from Sue McDonald, dated Feb 2, 1999 Note: the ruling by the City Attorney was countered at the Council Meeting by a letter submitted by the Court Homeowners Association's letter. The City Council Majority sided with their own attorney. . As an way to deal with these situations, one could propose that the next set of Council members modify the Charter to force the Council to: 1 . Remove R -1 from the zoning option list, replaced by R -1B. E of 3 02/24/99 12:43 PM • ity Council Overrides Citizens Request to Protect Property Values http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues02 /issues02.html This effectively will permit no more rezoning to the smaller, 5,000 square foot lots, also known as 1 postage stamp lots. Any existing R -1 zones areas will be unaffected. I Back Copyright 0 the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 3 02/24/99 12:43 PM C ouncil Majority Angers Residents by Mismanaging Munson Issue http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues03 /issues03.html Council Majority Angers Residents by Mismanaging Munson Issue I The City Council Majority have grossly mismanaged the entire Munson street issue, to the point at which a once peaceful neighborhood is now embittered and the entire community has become divided. 1 . The City of College Station shall not block or restrict, or impair or discourage by use of barrier... - Text from petition seeking to open Munson, dated Nov 6, 1998. 1 . Subject: damage to the neighborhood resulting from the City Council's closure of Munson Posted by: Susan Allen (susy2007 @aol.com ) Date Posted: Sat Dec 5 22:31:59 1998 I Message: ... You will see the damage that has been caused to the neighborhood by the decision of the City Council to close Munson, while leaving Ashburn open and unprotected. The lives of a lot of people have been disrupted by a capricious decision that was poorly thought out, with little regard for the 1 consequences to a majority of the citizens. The City Council acts on a whim, doing a flip -flop two weeks after a different "permanent" decision, and we now have to live with a continual, debilitating procession of noisy and unpleasant traffic. What you and the rest of the City Council I did was WRONG... . The Munson thing has now become such a sticky issue that I don't believe, at this point, there will I be any "winners" in regard to this matter. Disappointment and polarization of the community over this matter has occurred beyond short term repair, and it will take some time for the emotions of this matter to heal over, if ever. - Letter to Sharon Colson from Councilman Anderson, dated January 17th, 1999 I . There has been no clear voice from the citizens nor leadership from City Council. - Letter to Sharon Colson from Councilman Anderson, dated January 17th, 1999. 1 Back I Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 lofl 02/24/99 12:45 PM j ouncil Majority Underrepresents C...Historical South Side Neighborhood http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues04 /issues04.html Council Majority Underrepresents Citizens in 1 Historical South Side Neighborhood I The City Council Majority have consistently underrepresented the issues of the South Side residents and the historical homes in their area. 1 We, The People 1 Concerned Neighborhoods Organization "The Power of City Hall and Its Hidden Agendas" I or 1 "Is This Our City? Is It Theirs ?" Major areas of College Station are being considered for revitalization benefitting builders and /or I developers THOSE CHOICES MUST BE OURS. The betterment and preservation of our neighborhoods are our top priorities. Let's put the "Cityzens" 1 back y with energy, ethics and enthusiasm. , - Flyer for We, The People meeting the , F 1, 1999. 1 . We, The People was created to help preserve and protect Southside and other Historic neighborhoods and homes. 1 . Many things were tried in 1997. Meetings, committees, subcommittees, neighborhood forums, etc., and "We, The People" Southside Neighborhoods Organization seems to be the survivor. I There have been miles of talk...little or no action. The time has come for that to change. City Hall- -which translates to "city staff' has had the attitude: "Pat 'em on the head and they'll go away!" I We didn't....and we haven't. I wouldn't be far off to declare we are a thorn in the side of city management. We are not a flash in the pan. We are dedicated and sincere in our efforts to improve all our lives. - Statement from Cityzen Norma Miller, dated Jan 12, 1998. I Norma has been fighting the battle to protect our neighborhoods from City Hall for years. . Come 'on Cityzens, join up in the fight and Lick Tamminy Hall! 1 - - - Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 e 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:45 PM j ouncil Majority Favors Northgate Over Rest of City http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues05 /issues05.htm1 Council Majority Favors Northgate Over Rest of City ' The City Council Majority have y � y , by action, assigned a favored status for businesses and bars in the Northgate area, investing over $4,000,000 for special improvements (including $100,000 for sidewalk j I pavers) in that business area, while neglecting equal treatment for the rest of the city. I • ...be it resolved by the City Council that... The issuer reasonably expects to incur debt, in one or more series of obligations, with an aggregate maximum principal amount now estimated to be equal to $4,400,000 for the purpose of paying the costs of the Project. - Draft of Resolution Declaring 1 Intention to Reimburse Certain Expenditures with Proceeds from Debt, for the Patricia Street Redevelopment Project, at Northgate, for signature of Lynn Mcllhaney, Mayor. • Northgate Revitalization I 5 -8 -97 DeShazo Study recommended surface lot at Boyett or College Main. NRB [Northgate Revitalization Board] recommended. Council accepted. 5 -22 -97 Revised DeShazo study recommended surface lot but elevated lot at College Main passed I on 4 -3 vote. Also passed the temporary lot at Cafe Excel and $1M+ promenade. Council refused to grand Sopasakis any more time. - Handwritten notes written by Councilman Steve Esmond, from his records. 1 . Dick: So that's to spend a $1 million on a Patricia street parking lot, spend $1 million plus sell revenue bonds for a parking garage, and spend some unknown amount of money on Exeel. That's what we committed the citizens for. - Direct quote from Councilman Dick Birdwell, on verbatim I record (transcript) of the motion regarding Workshop Agenda Item No. S. Dated July 21, 1997. Note: It seems quite obvious from the transcript that Councilmen Birdwell, Esmond, and Anderson did not support the parking projects described in this discussion. There is supporting evidence to I this in this personal note by Councilman Esmond. • ...I have told you on many occasions, I will support North Gate improvements only if the merchants pay for part of the benefits they receive. The city has already spent more than the $500,000 I included in the bond issue. - Quote from email sent from Councilman Birdwell to Councilman Kennady, dated January 22, 1998, subject heading of Re: NORTH GAT 1E] APPRAISALS. 1 Expenditures that Benefit the Northgate Business District Purpose Expenditure I North College Main Reconstruction ($672,000 CDBG & $284,000 local) $956,000 Sidewalks ($105,000 CDBG & $40,000 local) $145,000 1 Relocation (CDBG) $29,000 I Facade Improvements ($172,000 CDBG & $92,000 local) $264,000 Rental Rehab I ($111,000 CDBG & 110,000 owners) $221 000 Underground Conversion (Electrical) $578,000 (All Projects) I Land Acquisition (Parking & Patricia Street) $829,000 (Hotel/Motel & General Funds) Patricia Street Improvements $1,050,000 I (Promenade, Parking, etc.) Total for all projects underway I $4,072,000 and Growing! 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:45 PM ouncil Majority Favors Northgate Over Rest of City http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues05 /issues05.html ' - Source: email from Mr. Charles Cryan, Director of Office Management and Budget, to Councilman Dick Birdwell, dated April 20th, 1998. Note: this figure does not include $100,000 for Waste Water line rehabilitation and $200,000 for 1 Water line rehabilitation. For more details, please visit this web page. . If someone offered me a $6 million gift, I would support a vote to make such a gift legal. Time 1 will only tell who will pay for the garage. - Letter to Bryan Eagle, by Bardin H. Nelson, dated April 25th, 1998 . ...we would simply like to state that we are committed to revitalizing Northgate, as well as assisting I you in your redevelopment activities... ...the City is prepared to work with you to make the project as attractive as possible. - Quote from letter from Skip Noe, City Manager to Mr. John Culpepper, a local developer, dated June 25th, I 1998. . I understand that the sale of Texadelphia is contingent upon being a participant in the Facade Improvement Program. - Quote from letter from Cheryl Anz, Member Northgate District I Association, Northgate Revitalization Board, and Facade Improvement Program, to Mayor and Council, dated August 14th, 1998. Note: it appears from this letter that Ms. Anz is involved with the Facade Improvement Program, 1 and is a business owner at Northgate. Is there a conflict of interest here? . What at one time was a solitary strip of bars visited exclusively by students has turned into a cash I cow being milked for every last penny. From expensive parking garages to large hotels, plans to sanitize the Northgate area are substantial, but at what cost? - Article in the Battalion, title "Bleed 'em dry", dated October 2, 1998, by Aaron Meier. 1 . To date, the program has facilitated renovations and improvements to three projects (University Bookstore; the Sparks Building; and the 315 Church Street retail property). Four other projects are in various stages of development, which include Holick's, Satchel's, Texadelphia and Loupot's. - ' From Agenda Item Cover Sheet, Workshop Item 5, December 10th, 1998. Note: all of these locations are in Northgate - none are in the rest of the city - hence the favored status charge. 1 . Map of the Northgate Facade Improvement Eligibility Area - From Agenda Item Cover Sheet, Workshop Item 5, December 10th, 1998. Note: there are no other Facade Improvement areas in the rest of the city. 1 . Northgate Crime Report Web Page This interactive application will enable you to remotely report crime to the Police Department. - Quote from special web page dedicated to report cr i n Northgate. Note: Why does Northgate get their own page? . We propose that the next set of Council members modify the Charter to force the Council to: 1 . Require voter approval for projects that exceed $2,000,000 (or 2% of the annual city budget). Back ................... ............................... Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:45 PM I Council Majority Loses $270,000 and Doesn't Try To Recover It http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues06 /issues06.html Council Majority Loses $270,000 and 1 Do Try To Recover It I The City Council Majority have abrogated their fiduciary obligations to the citizens of College Station by permitting $270,000 to be lost through mismanagement of the construction of the Patricia Street Parking Lot project, and not attempting to recoup its losses. Further, the City has continued to accept work from the party that caused said loss. . Due to the City's negligence, $270,000 of taxpayer funds was squandered on the Patricia Street 1 Project. . On 5/22/97 the City Council hired CRG to rebuild Patricia Street and the Northgate Parking Lot at I a cost of $1,087,000. Due to negligence on the part of City staff, this project was completed 6 months late, causing the contractor to submit claims for the delay and lost work. . Enclosed is your request of March 3 under the Texas Open Records Act asking for the complete I personnel file of ... - Letter from Skip Noe, City Manager, to Councilman Steve Esmond, dated, March 13th, 1998. I . Funding to pay this settlement will come from a combination of sources, the balance of funds available from the sale to Texadelphia sale (approximately $221,100) and the balance needed will come from the interest on streets capital projects funds. - Agenda Item #2, College Station Council I Agenda, dated January 14th, 1999. . On 1/14/99 the Mayor and Council Majority (subject of this recall) authorized $270,000 of taxpayers funds to settle the contractor's claim. 1 . Why wasn't the $270,000 claim paid by the City's insurance company? Simply put, insurance doesn't cover negligence. The City was found to be negligent. Yet now the Mayor denies the City I was ever negligent. Mayor, if the City was NOT negligent, why don't you submit a claim for $270,000 and force the City's insurance company to reimburse the taxpayers? Hummmmmmmm? 1 Back 1 Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:45 PM j ouncil Majority Supports Financially Unsound Northgate Parking Garage http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues08 /issues08.html 1 Council Majority Supports Financially Unsound Northgate Parking Garage I The City Council Majority continue to support and endorse the Northgate Parking Garage project, in spite of overwhelming evidence that the project is financially unsound. There is evidence that misleading information about the revenues and usage of the Patricia Street Parking Lot is being used to support this widely considered financially unfeasible project. . Many Northgate merchants - about 85 percent, according to Tom Raney, president of the Northgate I District Association - will reimburse their customers for fees paid in the garage. - Quote from the Bryan Eagle, dated April 23rd, 1998. Note: Why haven't they started to reimburse customers using the Patricia Street Parking Lot? 1 . Time will only tell who will pay for the garage. - Letter to Bryan Eagle, by Bardin H. Nelson, dated April 25th, 1998 I . A monster garage, in my opinion will not develop Northgate as downtown College Station. - Letter to Bryan Eagle, by Bardin H Nelson, dated April 25th, 1998 I • "...has observed the 115 car lot is less than a third full on weekdays. - Letter submitted to the Bryan Eagle by former Councilman Birdwell, dated Jan 29th, 1999. I . "the proposed garage will not pay for itself, even with the planned elimination of 300 on- street parking spaces." - Letter submitted to the Bryan Eagle by former Councilman Birdwell, dated Jan 29th, 1999. I • It has been claimed that the new hotel on the mud lot will increase business of the parking garate. How many of you would park in the Albertson's parking lot and walk to the Hilton? The distance from the proposed parking garage is about the same. 1 I urge you to take a hard look at the financial prospects of the proposed Northgate parking Garage. - Letter submitted to the Council by former Councilman Birdwell, dated Feb 8th, 1999. I . Tom Brymer stated that city staff will again review DeShazo's feasibility report before starting construction (Feb 5, 99). The council approved condemnation of three lots at the Jan. 28 meeting. Note: Why are we still buying and condemning land if we need to recheck our figures? 1 Haven't the four months of figures, which include the profitable football season, been enough of an indicator as to the profitability? II . Let's review some facts: o The Council was asked to lower the day rates on the Patricia Street Parking Lot to increase usage. I o The Patricia Street Parking Lot costs less to park than will the Northgate Parking Garage. I . The Garage will be located further away from Northgate than is the Patricia Lot. How do we expect to get patrons to use the Parking Garage? . But it seems quite unlikely the city council is going to spend tax dollars so students can have a $7 million place to park while they get sloshed. ...the fact remains that, slowly but surely, the life is being squeezed out of Northgate. - Article in the 1 Battalion, title "Bleed 'em dry", dated October 2, 1998, by Aaron Meier. 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:46 PM �ouncil Majority Invests Millions into Wolf Pen Creek "Swamp" http: / /www. issues. org /recalUissues09 /issues09.htm1 Council Majority Invests Millions into 1 Wolf Pen Creek "Swamp I The City Council Majority have caused the City to invest millions of dollars in the Wolf Pen Creek project, only to have the site, through improper design of its water areas, be considered an embarrassment to residents and visitors alike. Also, the City insisted in investing additional monies, $92,000, to dredge the water areas, in violation of EPA regulations; with the water areas currently worse off than ever. 1 Worst Public Works Project We hate to keep dredging this up, but College Station's Wolf Pen Creek project continues to be bogged 1 down. The waters are so muddy with the silt problem that it's easy to forget the project's original premise - to I take otherwise unusable land that would be a liability to the city and through careful planning and use, turn it into an attractive recreation facility. So far, the amphitheater aside, only the liability part holds true. I What was supposed to be a six -week dredging project to reclaim the lagoon that had become a mud flat stretched into a three -month boondoggle. City planners have floated several plans to keep the mud out, but only time will tell if the area should be renamed Wolf Pen Swamp. - Insite, dated January 1996. I . The rice paddy at Wolf Pen Creek has been known around the engineering community as "Lake Laza" in memory of Kent Laza's aborted attempt to dredge it back in the mid- 90s... He also supervised what work was accomplished without obtaining Federal permits which are required for dredging operations. He inquired of me if dredging permits were necessary, and I told him the I ddi i H i i �' they definetely were. He said he probably wouldn't get them and didn't. - Email from Councilman Steve Esmond to Councilman Swiki Anderson and citizen Norma Miller, dated February 5th, 1999. 1 . Dig a big hole, fill it with water, let silt build up. Call it the Wolf Pen Ceek Wetlands Preserve. - Letter submitted to The Bryan Eagle, by Benito Flores- Meath, dated February 11th, 1999. 1 Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! I 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:46 PM C ouncil Majority To Spend Millions on Unnecessary City Hall Center http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issuesl0 /issues10.html E Council Majority To Spend Millions on Unnecessary City Hall Center I The City Council Majority are proceeding to plan and develop an expensive and unnecessary City Hall Center, a project that has been at the bottom of the priority list for the Capital Improvement Projects list since 1994. . Last four options on Citizen CIP Ration Base, 2000 -2004. The list contains 40 projects. I o City Center Option D, $3.750M o City Hall Expansion Option A, $4.268M o Purchase land for new Complex Option, $1.5M I o City Center Option C, $8.250M - Capital Improvements Programs list 1 • Dig a big hole, fill it with water, let silt build up. Call it the Wolf Pen Ceek Wetlands Preserve. Build a parking lot, few use it. Half of its income is parking fines. 1 Build a parking garage next door. Remove 155 free parking spaces to force users to pay for parking. I Where is the logic in these projects? Thursday, the City Council will start debating the site acquisition and master plan development for the City Hall Center. This is a project that our own Capital Improvement Projects committee put at the bottom of priorities list.- Letter submitted to The Bryan Eagle, by Benito Flores - Meath, dated February 11th, 1999. Back 1 Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:46 PM C ouncil Majority Proceeds with Cit...le Wolf Pen Creek Slides Into Muck http: / /www.issues.org /recall /issuesl 1 /issues l I.html Council Majority Proceeds with City Hall Center While Wolf Pen Creek Slides Into Muck I The City Council Majority are proceeding with the City Hall Center project and yet, the City cannot fix the Wolf Pen Creek project's problems. 1 . Dig a big hole, fill it with water, let silt build up. Call it the Wolf Pen Ceek Wetlands Preserve. - Letter submitted to The Bryan Eagle, by Benito Flores- Meath, dated February 11th, 1999. I . Thursday, the City Council will start debating the site acquisition and master plan development for the City Hall Center. This is a project that our own Capital Improvement Projects committee put at the bottom of priorities list.- Letter submitted to The Bryan Eagle, by Benito Flores - Meath, dated I February I 1 th, 1999. . At the February 1 lth City Council meeting, one of the agenda items concerned proceeding with planning the City Hall Center. I • Councilman Anderson brought up the fact that the City had not completed fixing the Wolf Pen Creek project - questioning the wisdom of proceeding with yet another project. Mayor called I him out of order, claiming that the Wolf Pen Creek issue was not part of the item's discussion. Councilman Anderson disagreed with that logic. Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 1 02/24/99 12:46 PM Council Majority Neglects Basic Construction Principles http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues 12 /i ssues12.html Council Majority Neglects Basic Construction Principles The City Council Majority have failed in their oversight of City functions, including the persistence of cracks in the slab, inadequate ventilation, and lack of personal privacy at Fire Station 1, and the floor elevation at the new City Library being too low according to the City's own floodplain ordinance. Concerning the Library . As requested, we have revised the library plat to remove the floodway and floodway easement, but left the floodplain as determined by Kimley -Hora. We should advise you in the course of our work on this replat, we have observed the finished floor elevation indicated on the site plan appears to be ' approximately two feet lower than the finished floor elevation required by ordinance. - Quote from letter from Deborah Keating, Urban Design Group, to Kent Laza, City Engineer, dated December 10th, 1997. The letter was CC'd to Mark Smith, Director, Public Services. Question: Is there a flooding risk for the books on the lower two feet of shelves at the library? Concernin g the Fire Station No. 1 . The Holleman location is further away from Northgate and the Hilton than the original location next to City Hall. As a result, Northgate, the Hilton, Scott & White, and neighboring areas no longer fall within the 4.5 minute drive time limit. - Memo from Chief Giordano to Councilman ' Birdwell, dated April 23rd, 1998. . Poor sight distance leaving the Holleman location due to being on a hill and in the middle of a • curve - a prescription for collisions. . Bathroom facility is a "unisex" design with louvered doors, providing no privacy for both male and female employees. . Foundation is sinking and has half inch cracks running in a continuous plane propagating all the way through the walls from one end of the building to the other. Move -in was in the fall of 1997, 1 delayed by 6 months due to the foundation. - Report on KBTX Channel 3 News, dated July 17h, 1997 . Vestibules are unventilated, allowing diesel fumes to waft in the living quarters. . Condensate water from the air conditioner duct drips on top of the beds inside the living quarters. . City Manager Skip Noe concealed all of these problems from the City Council for 8 months. When Councilmen discovered the problems and KBTX reported them, Mr. Noe blamed the Councilmen for making unauthorized contacts with City staff - Memo from Skip Noe to Councilman Anderson, dated August 27th, 1998 Back 1 Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:46 PM Council Majority Condemns Private Citizens' Land file: / / /Cl/ WINDOWS / DESKTOP /Recall/issuesl3 /issuesl3.html 1 Council Majority Condemns 1 Private Citizens' Land The City Council Majority have condemned citizen's land for ill- advised projects such as the Patricia Street lot and the Northgate Parking Garage. One of such condemnations ended in controversy when the land was resold for use in the Texadelphia restaurant, instead of the parking lot as was promised to the 1 original lot owners. • The bulk of the land to be condemned was purchased by me more than 30 years ago. Two of the lots have duplexes on them. Thre other three lots fronting on College Main have a five bedroom house located on them. Judged by the few contacts with my son, the city expects to get our property at garage -sale prices. - Letter to Bryan Eagle, by Bardin H. Nelson, dated April 25th, 1998 • The Council approved condemnation of three lots of the 11 -lot parcel at the Jan 28 meeting. - The 1 Bryan Eagle, dated Feb 5, 1999 Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 c c L of 1 02/24/99 5:02 PM ouncil Majority Purchases Northga...ng Garage Land using General Funds http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues14 /issuesl4.html Council Majority Purchases Northgate Parking 1 Garage Land using General Funds I The City Council Majority have purchased property for the Northgate Parking Garage from general and other funds rather than from bonds that were authorized but not issued for the project. The city published and mailed out a brochure that said that the Northgate Parking Garage would be paid 1 with revenue bonds. Since then, the monies from the general and other funds have been used to pay for purchasing the land that the garage is to be built for. Councilman Esmond questioned Tom Brymer about this fact in the January Council meeting. 1 Question: if the Northgate Parking Garage was to be built using bonds that have been authorized, but not issued, why are we paying for the land with other monies? 1 Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:46 PM r ourcil Majority Grants $200K+ For Bars Owned by Rich Developers http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issuesl5 /issuesl5.html Council Majority Grants $200K+ For 1 Bars Owned by Rich Developers I The City Council Majority have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars from Facade Improvement Program funds into business at Northgate, when the owners are not in any extreme financial need, nor is there a socially redeeming value to creating an additional alcoholic beverage vendors in such area. ' . The City of College Station, with funding through its Community Development Block Grant and other funds that may become available, will provide a forgivable loan of up to TEN THOUSAND I DOLLARS ($10,000.00) to eligible property owners or merchants to make specifically defined improvements to commercial facades. This loan will not have to be repaid. The property owner and /or merchant will be required to provide matching funds of thirty percent (30 %) in order to I receive funding. - Source: Economic Development Programs / Facade Improvement Program, as of February 22, 1999 Note: all of the listings below received much more than $10,000. I . I understand that the sale of Texadelphia is contingent upon being a participant in the Facade Improvement Program. - Quote from letter from Cheryl Anz, Member Northgate District Association, Northgate Revitalization Board, and Facade Improvement Program, to Mayor and 1 Council, dated August 14th, 1998. . Consideration for approval of $112,795 in Facade Improvement Program (FIP) funds and execution 1 of related Facade Improvement Rehabilitation Agreement for eligible improvements to 303 Boyett. - Item 7 -C for Sept 24th, 1998 City Council Meeting Agenda. . Discussion and possible action on expenditure of $57,000 in Facade Improvement Program funding I to Mr. William Madden, Jr. d.b.a. Texadelphia Sandwich and Sports for eligible facade improvement renovations to 317 -319 Patricia Street. I Vote taken on the motion carried 5 -2. For: Mcllhaney, Hickson, Mariott, Silvia, Hazen Against: Anderson, Esmond - Minutes of November 12th, 1998 City Council Meeting. . I understand that the sale of Texadelphia is contingent upon being a participant in the Facade Improvement Program. - Quote from letter from Cheryl Anz, Member Northgate District Association, Northgate Revitalization Board, and Facade Improvement Program, to Mayor and 1 Council, dated August 14th, 1998. . Benito Flores -Meath urged council to be cautious about the uses of matching funds. - Minutes of I November 12th, 1998 City Council Meeting. . Approved by a vote of 5 -2, with Councilmen Steve Esmond and Anderson voting no, an expenditure of $57,000 in Facade Improvement Program funding for Texadelphia Sandwich and Sports, 317 -319 Patricia St. - The Bryan Eagle, dated Nov 14th, 1998. . Discussion and possible action approving $100,855 in Facade Improvement Program (FIP) funds L and execution of related Facade Improvement Rehabilitation Agreement for eligible improvements to the Loupot's Bookstore property at 335 University Drive. - Item 12.11 ofJan 28th, 1999 City Council Meeting Agenda. . For additional information regarding this program [Facade Improvement Program], please call (409) 764 -3778. - Source: Economic Development Programs / Facade Improvement Program, as of February 22, 1999 E . For the next set of Council members, how about a suggestion to modify the Charter to force the 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:50 PM ouncil Majority Grants $200K+ For Bars Owned by Rich Developers http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issuesl5 /issuesl5.html Council to: Not use Facade Improvement Program Funds for businesses primarily serving alcoholic beverages. o Create Facade Improvement Program Areas other than Northgate. I o Investigate why only Northgate has received funds. o Not permit use of Facade Improvement Program Funds if the developer has no pressing financial need. Check website for HUD /CDBG on this... I Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 2 02/24/99 12:50 PM ,Council Majority Overspends in Odor Control Project http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issuesl6 /issuesl6.html Council Majority Overspends ' in Odor Control Project The City Council Majority have been unwilling to even listen to sound engineering advice to consider less expensive and more reliable methods of wastewater treatment which would result in a permanent solution to the odor problems at the City's wastewater treatment plant. . At the February llth, 1999 City Council Meeting, the Mayor and Council Majority (subjects of this recall petition) authorized the expenditure of $750,900 to install odor control equipment at the ' City's wastewater treatment plant. - For details, please requestt the City Council minutes or audio tape for this meeting, available from the City Secretary. . The City built a sludge digestion process in 1996 known as the ATAD Process (Autothermal Thermophilic Aerobic Digestion), an experimental system brought over from Europe to replace the previous aerobic (non- odor - generating) system. Initially the chemical costs were 3 -4 times the amount budgeted, and very significant odor problems occurred after startup of the ATAD Process. . Rather than even determine the costs to abandon the ATAD process and revert back to the non - odor - generating aerobic system, on June 11th, 1998, the Mayor and Council Majority (subject of this recall petition) elected to spend hundreds of thousands more taxpayers money to treat the odors, even though replacing it with the aerobic system would cost much less and generate no odors. 1 . This Mayor and Council Majority would obviously prefer to continue down a path of spending more of your tax money than even CONSIDER a cheaper way to do the same thing. They fear that someone might accuse them of having made a mistake and this group considers it smart politics to just forge ahead, apply a band -aid, and cover up the mistakes of the past with an expensive odor control system. After all, it's only your money. . Why aren't your Council and the public informed about the cost savings of alternatives to the ATAD system? . Could it be that the Mayor and Council majority are just too proud to admit they made a bad 1 decision? Why don't you just ask them? Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 1 02/24/99 12:51 PM ! Council Majority Conducts "Witch Hunt ", Ignores Others Allegations http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues17 /issues17.html Council Majority Conducts "Witch Hunt ", Ignores Others Allegations The City Council Majority attempted to humiliate and embarrass Councilman Swiki Anderson by conducting an ill -fated investigation alleging charter violations, without open trial, which finally ended in each of the above having to vote to exonerate Councilman Anderson because he did no wrong in the first place. The same members have neglected to pursue and investigate allegations concerning other Council persons and City Staff when presented charges. ' . While the "monkey trial" before the Grand Jury and later the City Council are both now over, I remain interested in how this lurid mess was gernminated and how it unfolded. As my time has permitted, I have made serious inquiry into the City of College Station's compliance with the open records and open meeting acts, and what I was entitled to learn concerning the Mayor's, City Manager's, City Attorney's and Councilman's promotion and involvement in bringing false charges against me. I have attempted to make use of the laws governing open records and open meetings, considering at length filing charges against these City officials. To date I have not been able to discover and expose to the voters all who where behind the attempt to subdue and control me or Councilman Esmond, who are the central instigators were, and most important, what specific benefits, especially financial, that would have been gained by them. - Letter from Councilman Anderson to Bob Schober, reporter for the Bryan Eagle, dated January 31st, 1999 ' . I note that Section G(1) of the ethics ordinance requires that complaints against a Council member shall be made in writing and sworn before a notary. Of course this is basic fairness and part of normal due process. The section further provides that anonymous complaints shall not be considered. I understand that the new ordinance was not in force at the time of the investigation of Council Anderson. He was not provided with the name of the complainer. As I told you before I think this is unfair.- Letter from Dick Birdwell to Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney, dated December 1, 1998. . Council Anderson is due an apology from the Council.- Letter from Dick Birdwell to Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney, dated December 1, 1998. ' . Thu, 13 Aug 1998 11:22:05 From: Gary Halter I Mike: Is calling Mark "tabloid TV" Snyder an example of addressing issues rather than getting personal? I don't understand the rules. Also, thought you might enjoy the following: The following is a hypothetical political case study, put forth as something that could happen to a public official, if anyone cared to carry out such a hypothetical plan or not. This is only a hypothetical case and there will be no categorical assertions in regards to an actual instances of this plan ever being 1 implemented. Let us say for the sake of argument, that we have a city council divided on philosophical grounds in regards to the proper use of government. One side has a more progressive philosophy of government and the other side is viewed as being more regressive. These contrasting views will cause severe animosity among the two sides of the council and the community as a whole. In an attempt to reconcile these differences, the council will debate these differing views among themselves, but for the sake of this hypothetical case they will fail to reach a compromise and these L of 3 02/24/99 12:51 PM ' Council Majority Conducts "Witch Hunt ", Ignores Others Allegations http: / /www. issues. org /recall/issues17 /issues17.html differing views only become worse. This will lead the apposing sides to resort to the use of the court of public opinion to bolster support for their given side and to cripple their advisories actions. The progressive council members, with the help of the media who shares their philosophical convictions, will attempt to convince the public that the regressive council members are a detriment to the cities well being. The regressive members of the council will counter these attacks, with rebuttal letters to the editor and the occasional token op -ed piece, when the editors see it in their best interest to appear neutral on these matters. The result of these actions in the court of public opinion, have the opposite affect then each side is counting on. The result will be that the public is awakened to the progressive council members abuse of power and the regressive council members lack of support among the citizens. ' As the result of the dismal consequences that occur to both sides agenda in the court of public opinion, there will be a shift in attack on each sides position by means of the democratic process. The progressive side will further their cause by seeing that the regressive members are replaced in the up coming election with new members that mirror their views and the regressive members will further their cause by having the public vote on matters of public policies that the progressive members want to arbitrarily decide for themselves. The results of the democratic process will have devastating consequence on the regressive side, but this will not totally eliminate them entirely. Finding new strength from the election the progressive side will seek to totally nullify the power of the regressive minority once and for all. Due to the past results that occurred when the progressive members used the media to further their ' agenda in the court of public opinion, failed. They will now implement another plan, by using a court of law and not the court of public opinion. This is their only option due to the nature of their current plan, because the progressives do not want to be prosecuted for wrong doings themselves. ' The progressive members present plan will be to have the district attorney prosecutes one of the regressive members for official misconduct. Due to the nature of their plan and the lack of evidence to prove misconduct, they are counting on the grand jury to dismiss the charges against the ' regressive council member. The progressive members are not interested in a conviction, only in tainting the character of the accused, there by nullifying any further actions that member may pursue in regards to council business and giving the progressive side the ability to vilifying that member in the eyes of the public in the future. This will also be used to link the remaining members ' of the regressive side to the tainted member thereby insuring the total eliminate of the regressive party in the next election. ' This plan must be followed in this matter, for one simple reason and that is to protect the progressive members from prosecution and accountability. As stated before the progressives do not want to end up in court themselves. If they use the court of public opinion, with the help of the ' media to accuse the regressive member with misconduct, they will face libel charges themselves. However, by hiding behind the secrecy of the grand jury and it's policies, they are safe from being prosecuted on libel charges and they will not have to be held accountability for their actions. 1 As stated above, this is only a hypothetical case study of a plan that could be used under certain conditions to accomplish a hypothetical result. Therefore, I hope you found this hypothesis of educational value and something that should be prevented from ever happening in reality. However, ' if it does happen or has happened...the guilty parties should be found and prosecuted...shouldn't they ? ? ?? 1 Wonder who sent this. I can't figure it out. Can you? Gary H. -Email from former Mayor Halter forwarded to Councilman Anderson, dated Aug 13th, 1998 ' . Pursuant to Chapter 552, Texas Government Code, the Texas Open Records Act, I request 1 of 3 02/24/99 12:51 PM "Council Majority Conducts "Witch Hunt ", Ignores Others Allegations http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues17 /issues17.html information, both as councilman and under the open records act, concerning an alleged call or other I communication made to the College Station Police Department at approximately 4:00 PM on Thursday, February 12, 1999, the day of the last regular city council meeting, concerning me. Reportedly a radio message was picked up on a police scanner dispatching an armed police officer to the College Station City Hall with instructions to arrest me, using force if necessary, if I became "unruly" in the workshop meeting or in the council meeting. I do recall seeing a uniformed police officer at City Hall and upon checking with Councilman Esmond, I have learned that Councilman Esmond spoke with the officer, and jokingly asked him something to the effect I that "Well, I suppose you are here to keep the peace" to which the officer said something to the effect that "yes, if necessary". I I seek all documents, books, records, notes, and memoranda which relate to this matter to include tape recording of telephone calls or other communications made or received having to do with this matter or otherwise indentifying the substance of such calls, those making or receiving the calls, I verbatim instructions given, the identity of the office dispatched to city hall, who was responsible for the dispatch and what instructions were given the officer, who gave the instructions both at City Hall and at the police station, and who authorize this action at the police station and City Hall and the basis for any complaint made. I My God, if there is any truth to this, what has our City Government come to? I I expect an immediate response from the City concerning this and by copy of this letter, I request that the State of Texas provide me protection for my family, my home and my business. - Letter to Mayor Mcllhaney and City Manager Skip Noe, from Councilman Swiki Anderson, dated February 1 12th, 1999. Back 1 Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 3 02/24/99 12:51 PM �ouncil Majority Delays Implementation of Ethics Ordinance http: / /www. issues. org /recall/issues18 /issues18.html Council Majority Delays Implementation 1 of Ethics Ordinance I The City Council Majority have delayed the enactment of an Ethics Ordinance which is desperately needed and if enacted would hold the above to a higher standard than they currently attain. There is rampant suspicion that the delay is not because of scheduling and training requirements, but because of a conspiracy to bypass the financial disclosure requirements of the Ethics Ordinance. . ...the date we propose is Thursday, December 17th during the regular P &Z meeting at 7:00 p.m. - 1 Quote from an email from Connie Hooks, City Secretary, to the Council members, dated prior to November 17th. Note: the December 17th Agenda for the College Station City Council was not printed in the I Official Newspaper (the Bryan Eagle), even though there was sufficient time to do so. There is the concern that the Texas Open Meetings Act may have been violated. Also, by not publishing the Ethics Ordinance postponement agenda item, many citizens felt that there was a conspiracy to conceal the delay. I This matter bears more discussion. The Ethics Ordinance basically forces disclosure of financial practices outside of city business that can be affected by their position in public office. It affects City Council members and higher level City Staff. 1 . I have your letter of Nov. 25 asking me to serve on the nomination committee for the new Ethics Commission. I will be happy to serve. - Letter from Dick Birdwell to Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney, dated I December 1, 1998. . On Oct. 8, the council approved a new Ethics Ordinance and proposed to inaugurate it on Jan. 1... ...preparing for the ordinance could take 30 -60 days. - Quote from Dec 16th, 1998 Bryan Eagle. I Note: 60 days after the December 17th meeting would be in early February. As of February 21st, 1999, there is no activity on the City Council Agenda involving the Ethics Ordinance. Why not? 1 In addition, the City Charter itself specifies that "All meetings shall be subject to the provisions of the Open Meetings Act, Article 6252- 17..." . By a vote of 5 -2, with Councilmen Steve Esmond and Swiki Anderson voting against, the City I Council on Thursday night [Dec 17th] approved an ordinance delaying but not specifying a new implementation date. - Quote from Dec 19th, 1998 Bryan Eagle. I . Anderson said the council was "sending the signal that we're going to do whatever we want to do when we want to do it. " - Quote from Dec 19th, 1998 Bryan Eagle, stated by City Attorney Harvey Cargill while seated in the audience. 1 . ...even though the ordinance does not require the submission of financial records until April 30.- Quote from Dec 19th, 1998 Bryan Eagle. Note: insufficient time is, therefore, not an excuse to delay the ordinance. I . Several members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, for example, questioned some provisions of the ordinance, Quote from Dec 19th, 1998 Bryan Eagle. I Note: no members of the public were allowed to speak, yet members of PNZ could. Is this a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, the right of a citizen to speak at a public City Council meeting, as well as our inalienable right to Speak in Public? 1 . After the events of December 17th, I was sure that someone in the District Attorney's office would take notice that there was a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act and surely would contact me. I drafted this letter, in case I couldn't be reached.- Direct statement by Benito Flores Meath, dated 1 Dec 21st, 1998. 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM ouncil Majority Delays Implementation of Ethics Ordinance http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues18 /issues18.html . The purpose of the joint meeting was for discussion to be held between councilmembers and I commisioners on the issue of R -1 and R-1B zoing districts. - Quote from letter from Connie Hooks to Council Esmond, dated January 8th, 1999. Note: where is the mention in this letter that the Council was going to vote on postponing the Ethics C Ordinance? . The [Ethics postponement] ordinance must be repealed, overturned, or suspended by injection [sic:injunction] or declaratory judgement. - Letter to the ACLU of Brazos County, dated January 1 18th, 1999, requesting assistance in protecting Benito Flores- Meath's right to speak at a public meeting, and too, that of all other citizens of College Station. I Further, it is important to note that the issue of citizen Benito Flores -Meath being refused the right to speak at the meeting, refused by Mayor Lynn Mcllhaney, is significant for the following reasons: I o A citizen was denied the right to speak at a public Open Meeting. o The meeting had other agenda items for which the public was permitted to speak. o Planning and Zoning Commisioners and City Attorney, none of which serve as Councilmembers, were allowed to speak. I Add those together and it becomes obvious that the Mayor had no intention of allowing the public to interfere with postponement of the Ethics Ordinance. 1 Now the logical question in your mind is: i What are they trying to hide? . We propose that the next set of Council members do the following: I o Reintroduce the Ethics Ordinance, effective within 10 days. o Investigate any violations of the Ethics Ordinance, dating from January 1st, 1999 until the effective date of the Ethics Ordinance. I Current Council members, especially those who voted to postpone the Ordinance, should step forward with their records and show that they have been in compliance. Refusal to comply or violations of the Ordinance should require Resignation. I No one should object to this, as Honest Councilmembers would be proud to show their Ethical Compliance. Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM Flowchart with Potential Violations of Ethics Ordinance http:// www. elitesoft .com/recall/issuesl8 /flowchrt.htm 1 Flowchart with Potential Violations of Ethics Ordinance Lynn Mcllhaney City of Mayor College Station ' Medical Benefits Fund Mcllhaney ' G M MD. I Lynn Mcllhaney • The City's annual budget allocates approximately $400 per employee for medical services, which the City pays into a Medical Benefits Fund. The program is self - funded through the Human Resources office at City Hall. Direct expenses are paid from the fund to health care providers. The Mayor is married to a physician who treats City employees. • In December, Councilmen Esmond and Anderson make a request for financial disclosure of the Medical program. It is being vigorously opposed by the City Staff. It should be noted that the request is merely for financial billing information, not for personal, private medical histories. The 1 Council members are asking for public records only. • Question: Why doesn't the Mayor abstain from voting on this program? The Mayor has voted to ' sustain this program every year since becoming Mayor. Isn't this an indirect financial benefit that is prohibited by law? ' • Further, the Mayor has resisted attempts to privatize the fund, a move that would save the City anywhere from $300 thousand to $1.4 million. 1 1 1 1 1 r of 2 02/24/99 2:09 PM Flowchart with Potential Violations of Ethics Ordinance http:// www.elitesoft.com/recallissues18 /flowchrt.htm 1 Larry Mariott City of City Councilm an College Station Pebble Creek Development Corporation Young Contractors, ■ Inc. Mariott Mariott Homes Inc Larry Mariott 1 • Councilman Mariott is a homebuilder and has purchased a number of lots from developers, on whose developments he votes. 1 • Shouldn't Mr. Mariott abstain from voting to expend City funds on developments in which he acquires land to build his houses? 1 • Also review these campaign contributors. Back 1 1 II 1 1 1 of 2 02/24/99 2:09 PM ouncil Majority Denies Citizens Right to Speak At Council Meetings http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issuesl9 /issuesl9.html Council Majority Denies Citizens Right to Speak At Council Meetings I The City Council Majority denied citizens their right to be heard in Open Council and may have violated the Texas Open Meeting Act and. One such an occurrence happened while handling a citizen complaint for verbal abuse by a Councilmember during the November 12th and December 10th Council meetings. II Another occurred on December 17th, concerning the suspicious postponement of the Ethics Ordinance. . Before the meeting, I went to sign up to speak. I signed in for items #2 and #3 for the P &Z and I asked Connie where I could sign in for your [Council] portion. She said I had to check with Lynn, as she wasn't sure if the Mayor was going to allow us to talk. C I asked the Mayor when she came in. She said the meeting was only for Council. I wasn't allowed to speak and I REQUESTED it. Not only that, but the Mayor did not call a public hearing. Now, if it was a joint meeting, and there was a public hearing for the P &Z, how come citizens II couldn't speak. Can you enact an ordinance [the ordinance postponing the Ethics Ordinance] without public I hearing? - Email to Councilmen Steve Esmond and Swiki Anderson from citizen Benito Flores- Meath, dated December 18th, 1998. I . Among the City Council Agenda items to be discussed at the February 25th, 1999 meeting, 6 PM, is the case dealing with Councilman Hickson verbally abusing a citizen, and the mismanagement of said case. If you ever wanted to see what really goes on at City Council meeting, this will be the one to attend! . From June through August of 1998, there has been questions posed before Council, both in C workshops and in regular sessions concerning compliance with the Open Record law requirements. When inquiries to local attorneys concerning compliance requirements were made by Esmond and I, we were refereed to the Attorney General's office and copies of the 19998 Open Meeting Handbook published by that office were obtained and review. That review of the Handbook identified the following deficiencies on the part of the City of College Station: 1. "When a quorum of the members of a governmental body assembles in an informal setting, IC such as a social function, [Council member's home or the Pebble Creek Country Club], it will be subject to there requirements of the Act if the members engage in an verbal exchange about public business or policy, " page 9 1 2. "telephone meetings are not permitted under the general provision of the Act." p.13 3. "A governmental body must give the public advance notice of the subjects it will consider in 1 an open or closed executive session." p 15 4. Place of Posting Notices and Time of Posting are discussed, pages 19 and 21. 5. "A final action, decision, or vote on a matter deliberated in a closed meeting under this chapter may only be made in an open meeting that is held in compliance with the notice provision of this chapter." page 28 6. Provisions Authorizing Deliberations in Executive Session. 7. B. Certified Agenda. A governmental body must make and keep a certified agenda or a tape recording of each closed executive session,... of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM �ouncil Majority Denies Citizens Right to Speak At Council Meetings http: / /www. issues. org /recall/issues19 /issues19.html I 8. A. Mandamus, Injuction, or Declaratory Judgement This provision states that an interested person, including a member of the news media, may bring an action by mandamus or injunction to stop, prevent, or reverse a violation or threatened violation of this chapter by I members of the government body, and the court may assess cost of litigation and reasonable attorney fees incurred by a plaintiff or defendant who substantially prevails in an action... - Letter from Councilman Anderson to Bob Schober, reporter for the Bryan Eagle, dated January 31st, 1999 I • Pursuant to Chapter 552, Texas Government Code, the Texas Open Records Act, I request information, both as councilman and under the open records act, concerning an alleged call or other I communication made to the College Station Police Department at approximately 4:00 PM on Thursday, February 12, 1999, the day of the last regular city council meeting, concerning me. Reportedly a radio message was picked up on a police scanner dispatching an armed police officer I to the College Station City Hall with instructions to arrest me, using force if necessary, if I became "unruly" in the workshop meeting or in the council meeting. I do recall seeing a uniformed police officer at City Hall and upon checking with Councilman Esmond, I have learned that Councilman Esmond spoke with the officer, and jokingly asked him something to the effect I that "Well, I suppose you are here to keep the peace" to which the officer said something to the effect that "yes, if necessary". I I seek all documents, books, records, notes, and memoranda which relate to this matter to include tape recording of telephone calls or other communications made or received having to do with this matter or otherwise indentifying the substance of such calls, those making or receiving the calls, verbatim instructions given, the identity of the office dispatched to city hall, who was responsible I for the dispatch and what instructions were given the officer, who gave the instructions both at City Hall and at the police station, and who authorize this action at the police station and City Hall and the basis for any complaint made. 1 My God, if there is any truth to this. what has our City Government come to? I I expect an immediate response from the City concerning this and by copy of this letter, I request that the State of Texas provide me protection for my family, my home and my business. - Letter to Mayor Mcllhaney and City Manager Skip Noe, from Councilman Swiki Anderson, dated February 12th, 1999. I Back 1 Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 6 L of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM �ouncil Majority Ignores Engineeri...oundations for Teen Center Project http: / /www. issues. org /recalUissues20 /issues20.html Council Majority Ignores Engineering Advice on Foundations for L Teen Center Project I The City Council Majority have been unwilling to even listen to sound engineering advice to review the standards for foundations for the Teen Center. Councilman Anderson proposed that a committee of three local foundation experts review the plans before the final acceptance of the contract. The above members not only voted the final review, but then improperly closed discussion of three other consent agenda items that had been requested by Councilman Anderson for discussion. These three other projects also had concerns that were of interest to the citizens of College Station before final contract approval. 1 . "I move to refer the Teen Center Project to a specially appointed facilities design peer review committee for study and design review, especially of the foundation design, consisting of Dr. Louis I J. Thompson, as chairman, Dr. Teddy Hirsch and Dr. Pete Keating, with instructions to report back to this Council in one month after the committee initially meets." - Motion made by Councilman Anderson concerning the Teen Center, College Station City Council Meeting, Feb 11, 1999 I • "I also propose that as a part of this motion that the contract award be tabled until such time as we have a recommendation for this committee concerning the long term proper function of the design, especially the facility foundation ". - Motion made by Councilman Anderson concerning the Teen Center, College Station City Council Meeting, Feb 11, 1999 . This motion was promptly defeated by a vote of 5 against and 2 for, Mcllhaney, Hickson, Mariott, I Sylvia, and Hazen for defeat and Anderson and Esmond for. This vote was taken after Anderson reminded the Council of the foundation failure of the new Fire Station #1 on Holloman where cracks in the buliding which has now been occupied for about one year have been as much as 1 " wide. 1 . 13.5 Bid No. 99 -36 — Motion failed (2 -5) to defer the award of bid for the construction of the College Station Teen Center in the amount of $358,200 to a committee `for review of its foundation II design]. Recommend award to Marek Brothers Construction, Inc. as lowest, responsible bidder meeting specifications. - City Council Minutes, Regular Meeting, Thursday, February 11, 1999, 6:00 p.m. 1 Note: If we are spending over $350,000 on a building, shouldn't we exercise due diligence and at least make sure the foundation won't crack? You've seen what has happened when projects such as the Wolf Pen Creek pond, the Wastewater treatment plant, and Fire Station No. 1 have design and I construction flaws that could have been prevented with a little more care on the part of City Staff and with more oversight by City Council. I . The Fire Station #1 problem has no solution as has been pointed out by Esmond and Anderson. Both Anderson and Esmond have requested, repeatedly, that foundation designs for commercial and other such building such at the teen center be done by a licensed Texas Engineer who would have to assume liability for slab failure damage. I . Anderson and Esmond have also asked fellow councilmen repeatedly that foundation designs for residents should either be done by a licensed engineer assuming responsibility for same or by a I residential contractor who would be required to post a bond to protect the new home owner's investment. At present a home owner has no recourse against a builder who shortchanges a building slab, should a slab failure occur and many unsuspecting and trusting retirees have suffered rather 1 significantly financially when their new home developed structural and foundation problems accordingly. I Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! of 1 02/24/99 12:51 PM c ouncil Majority Refuse To Televise City Council Meetings http: / /www. issues. org /recall/issues21 /issues21.html Council Majority Refuse To 1 Televise City Council Meetings I The City Council Majority have consistently refused to televise the City Council Meetings and Planning & Zoning meetings. This is in spite that citizens have repeatedly requested it, and have pointed out that such meetings would help easily prevent problems such as the Steeplechase Fiasco. Moreover, the City has already spent $44,000 for Council Chamber remodeling and for Cable Channel 19, a channel mostly I unused, for just this purpose. The obvious fear is that the majority of citizens would subject their actions to public scrutiny, and many of the actions listed above would not have been allowed to happen. 1 . Point of Fact: The City of Bryan televises its Council Meetings. I . The Mayor and City Council authorized the expenditure of $44,000 in the summer of 1997 to remodel Council Chambers for the installation of the new audio /video system and all the equipment necessary to televise the City's Council meetings. I . The College Station Comprehensive Plan, also known as the HOK plan, lists the following on page 171 (dated April 1997): I Goal #4 promotes public participation in the development process, and is currently being promoted by the City. However, it is suggestd that the City consider low -cost high -tech approaches to further promoting and enhancing public participation, such as: I U Cable -cast of Planning & Zoning and City Council meetings. Failure to televise Council meetings is the only one of 4 items in Goal #4 that has NOT been implemented by the City. Council adopted the HOK Plan on 8/12/97 on a 3/2 vote: Mcllhaney, I Kennady and Marion voting FOR and Esmond and Anderson voting AGAINST. Birdwell and Hickson were ABSENT. The City has been implementing the Plan as rapidly as possible, so why follow the plan and televise the meetings? 1 Note: Councilman Esmond commented that he voted AGAINST HOK for only one reason; he wasn't provided a copy of the final version on the day Mcllhaney asked Council to approve it. Councilman Esmond argued that this was the first time he'd ever witnessed a City Council voting I to approve something they didn't even have or knew what they were approving. It was 288 days later before the report was even issued - on May 27th, 1998. I . Only $12,000 more is needed to purchase cameras for the actual airing of meetings, which was budgeted in 1997, but the Council Majority decided on 10/9/97 and again on 9/10/98 that the funds were "better spent" on other public relations efforts to control the development dissemination of I certain information to the public - otherwise known as spin control. . Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Please take up the issue of televising Planning & Zoning and City Council meetings. - Letter to I Council, by Councilman Steve Esmond, dated June 12th, 1998. . The City of College Stationh experienced a budget surplus of $2.3 million during FY 96/97. The I argument give for not televising Council meetings is that "we can't afford it. "- Letter to Council, by Councilman Steve Esmond, dated June 12th, 1998. 1 • The Mayor and all of the Council members in this recall petition have voted against televising Council meetings. . A number of citizens have written letters and even publicly asked the Council to televise meetings, 1 all to no avail. 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM C ouncil Majority Refuse To Televise City Council Meetings http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues2l /issues2l.html . Councilman Esmond asked the Mayor to reconsider airing Council meetings in January 1998 but f Mcllhaney refused to put it on the agenda. In a letter dated 1/22/98, the Mayor stated, "... only you and Councilman Anderson expressed support for proceeding to televise Council meetings. The remaining members were either opposed to televising or felt that the $12,000 cost would be better 1 spent on some other program to inform the citizens about City programs and initiatives." . In support of the reasoning in the City's Comprehensive Plan recommendation to cable - casting P &Z meetings and City Council meetings, one must consider that problems such as those of the I Steeplechase Fiasco could have easily been avoided if the Public was more knowledgeable about the goings at these two meetings. I Note: the City's Comprehensive Plan was paid for by taxpayers at a cost of $370,000 and submitted to the City Council in May 1998. C . The Mayor drafted the City's Carver Governance Policy that says that the Council will ".... be accountable for the general public for competent, conscientious, and effective accomplishment of its obligations as a body." 1 . Ends Statement No. 4 (of 8) says, "Citizens benefit from access to broad based information and knowledge." I . We urge televising College Station City Council meetings on Channel 19, the City Cable Channel as a means of dissemination of factual information, unbiased by the reporting of others. - Letter submitted to the Bryan Eagle, by Councilmen Anderson and Esmond, dated April 25th, 1998 1 . Why isn't an informed public worth the investment of $12,000? Could it be that the Mayor and Council majority have something to hide? 1 Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I/ of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM �ouncil Majority Spends $14,000 on...Spend $12,000 to Televise Meetings http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues22 /issues22.html 1 Council Majority Spends $14,000 on Art, Won't Spend $12 to Televise Meetings I The City Council Majority have spent $14,000 to begin a public art project in College Station. The Council Majority spent $63,000 for food in Fiscal Year 1997. Yet the City cannot find $12,000 to televise its own Council Meetings. 1 . Actual [food] expenditures during FY 97 totaled $63,000 for all city operating funds. - Letter from Skip Noe, City Manager, to Councilman Swiki Anderson, dated September 3, 1998. 1 30% of FY 97 Food Expenditures Paid For Purpose I Event [ Expenditure I Citizen Banquet $5,300 Mayor and Council Support $6,200 Summerfest Employee Picnic $3,300 1 - .. Emp - loyee Banquet $3,500 - Source: letter from Skip Noe, City Manager, to Councilman Swiki Anderson, dated September 3, I 1998. If we can spend $63,000 for food, why don't we spend money on televising the meetings? I . Council OKs $119.5 million budget - Title for article, The Bryan Eagle, dated Sept 11, 1998. . $14,000 from the Hotel /Motel Fund was approved in the FY 1998 budget for the Arts Council of Brazos Valley to begin a public art project in College Station. I Each artist received a $2,000 grant to cover transportation expenses. The remaining funds of the $14,000 cover the cost of printing, postage, promotion, site preparation and administration of the project. - From a memo to City Council from Steve Beachy, dated March 11, 1998. III Note: We spent more than twice on expenses than the total we paid the artists? Who got cheated the most, the taxpayers or the artists? 1 . A lot of citizens have written www.issues.org with questions as to the wisdom of the whole project. Here are a few of the letters: . Posted by: Bill Batchelor (bbbtoms @juno.com) IE Date posted: Thu May 7 19:45:44 1998 Subject: Who decides what is "Art" I The City should not be in the art business. The City Council agreed to INCREASE the Budget of The Brazos Valley Arts Council, from $170,000 to $184,000, just to pay for these so- called sculptures. The Arts Council new Director, David Romei, has stated in several publications that he wants to attempt "alternative art." Does this mean more "art" like the famous "Piss Christ ", which featured a crucifix in a jar of urine? Who knows? That is why all arts need to be funded by private business and foundations, not my tax money. ' . Subject: Public Art Reply Posted by: Steven Cunningham (swc @computermon.com) Date Posted: Tue May 12 15:32:18 1998 1 I am in complete agreement with Mr. Batchelor. I own and run a small business here in town, and like others in my situation, work 80 hours per week or so (30 to 40 of that for taxing entities). I happen to love art, beautiful music, surreal sunsets, and masterful oil paintings. I I also am not so presumptous to not only ask my neighbor to help pay for them, but to demand same. Planting flowers is reasonable, but publicly funded art? "Alternative" art? (whatever that 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM �ouncil Majority Spends $14,000 on...Spend $12,000 to Televise Meetings http: / /www. issues. org /recall/issues22 /issues22.html means) Absolutely not. I work two jobs already, and I'm sick of unnecessary spending at all I levels of government. Perhaps we should demand a referendum regarding future arts expenditures? So far, the fiscal conservatives in this town have been dormant, judging by the garage vote. City council /manager: Please have compassion on us, the local taxpayers. And, I please, let us not have any strawman arguments about conservatives not appreciating art or not favoring "progess." (yuk) And if you all want to erect a bunch of goofy, expensive structures in the area parks, please, by all means, get out your checkbook :). Thanks Steven Cunningham 1 o Subject: Traveling art ( "sculptures ") exhibits Reply Posted by: Rosemary E. Boykin (RBoykin995 @aol.com) Date Posted: Sun May 17 22:55:02 1998 1 Were these so- called scuptures selected by a committess of local artists. Exhibits such as these should create a learning experience for the spectators, and I do not see anything to be gained I particularly by the "metal arch with dingle dangles." I have a degree in art and am insulted by such a display. I see no benefit in standing and observing such a creation, much less spending our tax dollars toward its support with so many wonderful REAL art exhibits to be had for display. What a lack of appreciation for the real masters!!! I If we can spend $14,000 for loaner art (we don't get to keep it!), why don't we spend money on televising the meetings? 1 Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 2 02/24/99 12:51 PM C ouncil Majority Accepts Campaign ...Developers and Out -Of -Town Sources http: / /www. issues. org /recalUissues23 /issues23.html Council Majority Accepts Campaign Contributions from 1 Developers and Out -Of -Town Sources I The City Council Majority have accepted a large percentage of campaign contributions from out -of -town sources, when public interest is better served by Councilmembers who don't cater to such outside forces. 1 Key Campaign Contributions for May 2, 1998 Election Contributor Mariott Mcllhaney Hazen 1 via _ Political Action Committees 1 Association of General Contractors (Austin, TX) $1,000 $1, 000 :[ $1, 000 Homebuilders for Brazos County 100 200 1 - 200 TIEPAC (Dallas, TX) f 300 Restaurants Don Anz $200 - - 1 $150 • I Don Ganter 2000_ �' - 100 ......... �_ ' 200 ( 100 Homebuilder 1 Larry/Glenda Mariott - $500 1 $500 • Glenn Thomas 100 100 1 - I 200 - Charles Thomas - 20 j Ed Froehling 200 E 100 - 100 1 Dan Sears 100 - - - Lawrence Link E 100 - - Real Estate I John C. Culpepper $200 : $200 E manuel Gloekzin (Kurten, TX) 200 Investments 1 Scarmardo Bros. i $500 $500 - 'L $500 Bill Lero (Real Estate) 500 20 0 - - __......._.._ H. Hughes 200 ( _ - l - I I L Construction Frank Peinado 200 j 250 `� 250 1 Weldon Jordan 100 100 100 100 Theo Rouse 100 - - - j I Lynn Stuart 100 Engineering Michael McClure 1 $100 [ - jI $100 ) $100 ! 1 Developer I John Hamilton 200 - J - - I .............................................................................................................. ............................... ....... Insurance Richard Smith 200 250 - • 200 Dick Haddox 100 1 100 - 1 Banking 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:52 PM �ouncil Majority Accepts Campaign ...Developers and Out -Of -Town Sources http: / /www. issues. org /reca1L'issues23 /issues23.htm1 1 William Atkinson I $100 I - it - I - Don Adams 100 i — 11 - Electric Contractor I Britt Rice $100 $150 - Attorney Timothy Crowley (Houston, TX) $500 $500 $500 $500 1 Tom Giesenschlag 500 100 - [ 100 Joe Horlen 500 - - 1 Larry Holt Lawrence 200 200 - - rence Haskins 200 - - 200 Kyle Hawthorne I 100 - 1 ource: ampaign mancia ' eports om exas t ics ommission. • Campaign reform could be done by the next set of Council members, by modifying the Charter to I force the following election regulations: O 80% of all donations must be from local residents or businesses. o All donations must be under $200 o Personal loans to campaigns must be less than 30% of of the campaign funds I o All donors over $50 must be identified/disclosed o All records must be disclosed to the public 2 days before election, to allow the voters to see who has been supporting each candidate. I o For winners of elections, 2 days after election they must disclose, to the press, a listing of all their contributors and the amounts. Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i of 2 02/24/99 12:52 PM c ouncil Majority Transfers Council Power to Non- Elected City Staff http: / /www. issues. org /recall /issues24 /issues24.html Council Majority Transfers Council Power to Non - Elected City Staff I The City Council Majority have abrogated their responsibilities by making, under the pretense of efficiency, numerous transfers of power away from the City Council, which is elected by the population, to the City Manager and City Staff, which are not elected. This, in effect, reduces our citizen's control of the city's direction, and makes it harder to rein in abuses of power such as are listed above. The case for maintaining ultimate control of the city in the hands of the City Council is simple. Council members are elected officials. If they do not act responsibly, they can be removed from office. On the 1 other hand, if City Staff does not act responsibly, then the voters have no control. A series of Council changes have been passed in the last few months. These changes transfer power I from the City Council to the City Manager, a position currently occupied by Skip Noe. If you feel that you should have more control over what happens in your city, let the Council know. . If you read the left column of page A9 of Wednesday's paper [Bryan Eagle, Nov 18th, 1998], you I will find an article about the public works employee who got caught "for improperly using his authority to make purchase using city accounts ". Isn't that similar to what I mentioned would happen if we allowed City Staff the authority to sign I for things at the CS Council meeting about 6 weeks ago? - Email from Benito Flores -Meath to Councilman Swiki Anderson, Councilman Steve Esmond, and citizen Mike McMichen, dated Nov 19th, 1998 . Well, I complained that we not should give that power to the City Manager *AND* to his staff, because of the possibility that illegal purchases may be made. Geez, I didn't expect to be proven correct so quickly.- Email from Benito Flores -Meath to Councilman Steve Esmond, dated Nov 19th, I 1998 . Unfortunately, building city halls and garages is not a criminal offense, but it is criminal and I C offensive.- Email from Benito Flores -Meath to Councilman Steve Esmond, dated Nov 19th, 1998 . 13.5 Discussion and possible action on an ordinance amending Chapter 9 of the College Station I City Code, establishing the Planning and Zoning Commission as the authority for plat review and approval... Motion to implement immediately and then review process and impact in four months (April) through a sunset review passed (5 -1). - Minutes of the December 10th, 1998 College Station City Council Meeting. II Note: This is a rare case - the Council is so unsure of relinquishing its power that if it isn't renewed, this ordinance automatically lapses. I . Personal notes of Benito Flores -Meath preparing for Jan 14th, 1999 Council Meeting: o Current liens are ONLY $215,100 and dropping o Mention the good handling by city staff in lowering these numbers. o We wish to keep it within the control of the city I o But if you must approve, amend the ordinance as follows: 1. No city official, councilmember, or staff member (and relatives/business partners) bound to the Ethics Ordinance No. XXXX shall be involved in any financial or oversight way I with any Tax Lien resold to outside investors for a period to include that specified in Section 10. 2. Encourage that outside investors have a home office in the B /CS (or Brazos County) area. I 3. The should also be bonded to avoid any abuses such as those that can happen with "debt collectors ". Use the same state standard for debt collectors. (if they are going to collect from the deadbeats.) - Notes prepared by Benito Flores -Meath for discussion of item 6.5 of City Council meeting, dated I Jan 14th, 1999. 1 of 2 02/24/99 12:52 PM C ouncil Majority Transfers Council Power to Non - Elected City Staff http: / /www.issucs.org /recall /issues24 /issues24.html . A number of Citizens have spoken at various City Council meetings on just this topic, including 1 Benito Flores -Meath and June Cooper. Please consult the City Council minutes for details. . Don't let them smoke screen the issue with the claim that it is just a matter of "improving I efficiency ". The real improvements in efficiency happen when citizens don't have a chance to slow down the Council Majority Bulldozer. - Suggestion repeatedly stated to City Council Meeting neophyte visitors by various regular attendees. Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 2 02/24/99 12:52 PM li no Started The Recall? http: / /www.issues.org /recall /articles.html Who Started The Recall? I After reading the Bryan Eagle's Flores- Meath ry agle s article on the Recall Petition, dated, Feb 20th, 1999, Mr. Flores Meath took issue with Mr. Hickson's comments about Councilmen Esmond and Anderson's involvement in the creation of the Recall Petition. I felt it was necessary to point out who started the recall, and for what reasons. Dear Mr. Borden, I'd like to address some misconceptions about who I am and what I stand for. Would you please print this letter as a letter to the editor? Thank you very much. I Benito ***************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** I Let's set the record clear. I started to watch the actions of the City Council majority when they tried to close Fire Station #2. Since then, I have regularly attended meetings, and many times stepped up to the I podium to counter other actions which I found were against the interests of our City and the public good. Anyone who has attended these meetings knows what I stand for. I am not just a naysayer, nor that I am one of a very small group. I I spoke against the purchase of land for the garage last November and found myself on the receiving end of abuse by Councilman Hickson. This action and the way it was mishandled caused me to decide to organize a recall. I talked to people who regularly attend these meetings and we decided to do it. This I recall was NOT instigated by Councilman Esmond and Councilman Anderson. It was the continuous pattern of actions by the Council Majority that spurred us on. My formal complaint on the Hickson matter will be addressed by the City Council on Thursday, February 25th, at the 6 PM meeting. Come by and see for yourself what we are talking about. Once the public sees the evidence we have collected, I believe they will stand together and demand resignations or force a recall election. I Thank you, I Benito Flores -Meath 901 Val Verde Drive College Station, TX 77845 -5125 - Letter submitted to the Bryan Eagle, February 20th, 1999, by citizen Benito Flores- Meath. I'm sorry, but you had a letter to the editor published on Feb. 11. We publish no more than one every 30 days from writers. Thank you. Robert C. Borden 1 Opinions Editor The Bryan- College Station Eagle P.O. Box 3000 II Bryan, Texas 77805 -3000 - Reply from Robert Borden, Opinions Editor of the Bryan Eagle, February 20th, 1999, to citizen Benito Flores- Meath. 1 ___ _ — _ 1 of 6 02/24/99 12:52 PM I Started The Recall? http: / /www.issues.org/recall /articles.html I Dear Mr. Borden, Thank you for reminding me about your policy on number of submittals to "Letters to the Eagle ". It is a I reasonable policy, as it allows as many citizens as possible to be able to share their opinions with the public. However, I would like to request that you waive the rule just this once. I There were some statements in Saturday's newspaper article that I felt misinformed the public about the nature of our complains and source of the recall. I was especially troubled with Mr. Hickson's comments, comments which I feel are unsubstantiated. As I clearly described in my letter, I started the whole issue, not either Councilman. When comments such as "Hickson grouped Anderson and Esmond I with those looking for his ouster" are printed in the article, and either gentleman was not allowed to voice their views and defend themselves, well, I would feel that it may put you at some peril with Councilmen Esmond and Anderson. I As a reasonable alternative, could I have one of the other members of the recall committee rewrite the letter and submit it under their own name? This would avoid the 30 day rule, and yet state the facts properly. I I feel that it is in everybody's interest to report as accurately as possible, and must I commend you for reporting everything that I personally said. My issue is with Mr. Hickson's statements, and I have to I assume that Councilmen Anderson and Esmond will probably feel the same way. I am enclosing a copy of this letter to them, so that they know that I don't support what Mr. Hickson said and that I have tried to state that fact. 1 It is in the public interest in knowing the truth and your ability to report it to them is best served by either method. Again, I thank you for your kindness and consideration. I Benito Flores -Meath 846 -2340 W 696 -8295 H I - Reply from citizen Benito Flores -Meath to Robert Borden, Opinions Editor of the Bryan Eagle, February 21st, 1999. Dear Bob, I The Eagle's story (2/20/99) on the recall petition quoted Councilman David Hickson saying that the petitioners were just "a small minority of nay- sayers who are trying to shove their views on the rest of the people." Mr. Hickson also stated that Councilman Anderson and I are part of the movement working I for his ouster. I am not one of the recall petitioners and did not initiate or secretly sponsor the recall. I am guilty of encouraging the average citizen to believe that they have a right to be heard and respected at City I Council meetings. I have also helped citizens understand that the City Charter gives them the right to participate in their local government. Councilman Anderson and I have given them hope by supporting open meetings, open records, and the airing council meetings on television. 1 Group after group of citizens have come before Council at public meetings to express their views and are poorly treated by Mr. Hickson and the Mayor. Group after group have gone away angry or humiliated. I (Hello out there, this isn't my opinion - anyone can verify this.) Some of these citizens evidently have now become committed to making government more responsive. It remains to be seen whether only a "small minority" are ready for change. I Since Robert Borden won't print Benito's clarification on the source of the recall petition, perhaps you could do a story yourself. 1 of 6 02/24/99 12:52 PM II / Who Started The Recall? http:// www .issues.org/recall/articles.html I Regards - Steve Esmond 1 c: Robert Borden Steven E. Esmond Esmond Engineering, Inc. I 2700 E. Bypass Ste 4600 College Station TX 77840 409/764 -7640 800/444 -7640 I Fax 409/693 -6729 E -mail see @esmondinc.com - Letter submitted to Bob Schober, reporter at the Bryan Eagle, February 21st, 1999, by Councilman 1 Esmond. I Date: February 20, 1999 To: The News Media, Brazos County From: Swiki Anderson (fax at 779 -6085; email:swiki @bihs.net) Re: The May, 1999 Regular City of College Station Election I have decided not to run for re- election to the College Station City Council in the upcoming May I election. At this time, I can best serve by removing myself to allow focus on issues and matters besides Swiki Anderson. College Station Citizens can be best served with new faces, fresh ideas, and allegiances to none other than an involved Citizen majority. I call upon the McIlhaney, Hazen, Marion, Hickson and Silvia to do likewise; i.e. best serve the Citizens by removing yourself as a source of infection and I allowing the healing to begin. In the future I do anticipate serving the College Station Citizens again - but in a higher capacity. I Service on the council has certainly been extremely educational. Like all education, while it has been painful and hard work at times, overall it has benefited me. I have met and enjoyed work and friendship with some outstanding people of high integrity, who are truly concerned with the welfare of the Citizens. I I have been part of a team of citizens walking petitions, supporting my neighbors in their efforts to be heard on the Northgate Parking garage project and in keeping Fire Station #2 open. I have supported both the ethics policy and adherence to the concept within the City and I remain encouraged that someday these goals may be realized along with accountability to, openness in, and respect for each citizen and citizen resources. In the future, I hope we see many more of the highly qualified individuals of integrity amongst us I seeking to serve, especially our retirees and TAMU students. Many have much to give in our community and are willing to do so without expectation or desire of personal favor or gain. And, with the use of modern technology allowing much better and faster communications, positive changes can be made. I For those of you who have supported me with your prayers, advice, friendship, financially and in seeking a better College Station, I humbly thank and appreciate you. In the meantime, I will await the opportunity to again be of service in the future. Now, I charge you to carefully examine the facts I concerning the College Station City Government, and when informed, act and vote responsibly. Government is not about false image building and distortion of the truth to control voters. Rather it is about running a business that best serves the taxpaying citizen majority, not a few who curry special I favors and considerations. Swiki Anderson Councilman, Place 3 I - Letter submitted to all local media, February 20th, 1999, by Councilman Anderson. 1 of 6 02/24/99 12:52 PM ' Who Started The Recall? http:// www .issues.org/recall/articles.html Bob, I faxed this over to the Eagle for you last night about 9:00. I am afraid you may not get it. Re :College Station City May, 1999 Election Transmitted find is an announcement that you may wish to publicize. I am also including a copy of an email that I received today from Benito Flores -Meath as was sent to Robert Borden at the Eagle. Allow me a quotation taken from some else. I A newspaper creates major credibility problems for itself when it fails to read its own past published stories, can not get the facts and the players straight, and sacrifice objectivity and fact to gain political favor among a select few. While publication of truth can not be questioned, fluff can only be self I humiliating. Concerning Hickson statement that "It's unfortunate that sometimes the voice of the few naysayers try to overrule the voice of the majority" in Saturday's Eagle in response to the RECALL ELECTION sought I for Mcllhaney and those currying her favor, sometimes you have to forgive David. He gets all carried away with his own babble, especially since he bought all of CIC. The idea that Esmond and I are "..a small minority of people who are trying to shove their views on the rest of the people.." -- given I Mcllaney, her gavel, the grand jury event in my life, and my trial before council with parts and script assignments -- well, this is all humorous. I It is especially humorous now with this announcement that I will be joining Esmond by not being a candidates in this upcoming May election. Concerning my involvement in the RECALL ELECTION, nope. Wrong again fearless MAJORITY! Lynn, David, Larry, who are you going to blame for the stupidity, crookedness, other faults after your two whipping boys are not on council? Who are they going to call the cops on now? WOW. Regarding Hickson's ouster, I am so concerned about this that I have been planning a trip with my wife I to Germany in March since Christmas, and I promise that I am going to "..move forward.." with this issue when the time comes for me to board the airplane. I To the area radio station receiving this transmittal... Do you want to increase your audience? If you do, please note that I am available for talk shows and interviews with a little advance notice. I think that I can also talk Esmond into participation in this and I I guarantee you we can make it entertaining and lively. If you want to pursue this, the rules of engagement are that it has to be humorous, kinda like Will Rogers and his approach to politics. I Quotations from Will Rogers.... The only trouble about suggesting that somebody ought to be investigated is that they are liable to suggest that YOU ought to be investigated. And from the record of all our previous investigations, it's II just like nobody can emerge with their noses entirely clean. I don't care who you are, you just can't reach middle life without having done and said a whole lot of I foolish things. If I saw an investigation committee headed my way, I would just plead guilty, and throw myself on the mercy of the court. 1 Imagine a congress that squanders billions, trying to find out where some candidate spent a few thousand. You can't believe a thing in an official statement. The minute anything happens connected with official I life, why, it's just like a cold night back home -- everybody is trying to cover up. 1 of 6 02/24/99 12:52 PM ' Who Started The Recall? http: / /www.issues.org/recall /articles.html America never has been represented at any investigation ever held. It's always only the two sides who I are interested in the outcome. The queerest investigation has sprung up in Washington. Mr. Wheeler, one of the presiding questioners I at one of the various investigation, was himself indicted in his home state, and he turned around and caused an investigation to be made, and a committee formed, to investigate where they got the grounds to indict him. Now the people who had him indicted will appoint a committee to investigate where he found out that I he had been indicted. There is many an investigation ongoing on in Washington. I never saw such an eager senate. You see, I there is something about Democrats that makes 'em awful inquisitive, especially if it's on a Republican, and there is an awful lot to find out about most Republicans. I - Letter submitted to Bob Schober, reporter at the Bryan Eagle, February 21st, 1999, by Councilman Anderson. I From: Robert Borden [mailto:rborden @theeagle.com] Sent: Monday, February 22, 1999 9:31 AM I To: bflores @elitesoft.com Subject: RE: Reply to article I I'm sorry, but I cannot waive the policy, nor will I accept the same letter written by someone else. I have forwarded the letter to the reporters who wrote the story so they can decide whether to do a follow up. Thank you. I Robert C. Borden Opinions Editor The Bryan - College Station Eagle I P.O. Box 3000 Bryan, Texas 77805 -3000 - Reply from Robert Borden, Opinions Editor of the Bryan Eagle, February 22nd, 1999, to citizen Benito Flores - Meath. I I Thank you for proposing an alternative I hadn't considered. I would be happy to be interviewed by either Bob or Pat, at their convenience. I've gotten along quite well with them and feel they would report my statements accurately. I'm forwarding your suggestion to Councilmen Esmond and Anderson. Judging from the letters that got cc'd to me, they would be quite interested in being interviewed to. Boy, I bet they were hopin' mad! I Sincerely, Benito Flores -Meath - Reply from citizen Benito Flores -Meath to Robert Borden, Opinions Editor of the Bryan Eagle, I February 22nd, 1999. Robert, Yes, to answer your question, I agree that you have a such a rule and that is seems reasonable. However, I like most rules, there are occasions when exceptions should be allowed. Any time a false accusation is made by someone against someone in the newspaper, common sense and fairness would dictate that the 1 of 6 02/24/99 12:52 PM Who Started The Recall? http: / /www.issues.org/rccall /articles.html record be corrected. Who better to do that than those "in the know ?" 1 For the record, I did not ask Benito to write you that letter. He did it entirely on his own and I got a copy well after the fact. 1 Fairness and accuracy are higher goals than disallowing someone to submit a story twice in one month. Regards - 1 Steve - Reply from Councilman Esmond to Robert Borden, Opinions Editor of the Bryan Eagle, February 22nd, 1999. 1 I And surely the story will continue... Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 6 02/24/99 12:52 PM Councilman Hickson verbally abusing a citizen, and the mismanagement of said case. file: / / /Cl/ WINDOWS / DESKTOP /Recall/hickson/attack.html 1 1 Councilman Hickson verbally abusing a citizen, and the mismanagement of said case. I This case started from a verbal attack by Councilman Hickson on Benito Flores -Meath at the College Station City Council meeting, on November 12th, 1998. I • Letter to Ethics Committee, presented to City Council on December 10th • Partial Transcript from November 12th City Council Meeting, supporting Letter to Ethics I Committee • December 21st Statement, not released as it was not called for. 1 • Reply to Mayor's 1st Ethics Letter, dated Jan 7th, 1999 I • Partial Transcript from December 10th City Council Meeting, supporting Reply to Mayor's 1st Ethics Letter 1 • Reply to Mayor's 2nd Ethics Letter, dated Feb 2nd, 1999 • Suprisint Update On Request For Ethics, dated Feb 8th, 1999 1 This issue will be discussed at the College Station City Council meeting, Feb 25th, 1999, at 6 PM. I Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,of 1 02/24/99 1:53 PM r t ttn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Ma>fn ti/SWWINDOWS/ DESKTOP / Recall/ hickson /LettertoEthicsCommittee.htm Attn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmembers Anderson, Esmond, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silvia Cc: City Secretary, City Attorney P Re: Request for Ethics Committee Review Date: December 10, 1998 N Members of the College Station City Council, I humbly come to you with a formal request concerning a matter that occurred at the November 12th College Station City Council meeting, involving Mr. David Hickson, a member of Council. l i At that meeting, I addressed a number of topics from the meeting's agenda. One of those topics was item 11.7, concerning the lowering of the rates for the Patricia Street parking lot; another was item 12.4, concerning the purchase of land for use in the Northgate Parking Garage Project; finally, I added comments on the item 12.7, the Texadelphia request for Facade Improvement Program funds. L Let me present my case. It was during my presentation for item 12.4 that the following circumstances occurred. 1 1 started out by pointing out that I felt that the Northgate Parking Garage Project was still not proven economically feasible. I used as a basis Mr. Brymer's comments on the existing Patricia Street Parking Lot, since the Council was considering lowering parking rates to increase use of that lot. I felt that if we artificially had to do this to use the existing lot, it was F not practical to even consider building the garage - ergo, we shouldn't be buying land for this purpose. 1 This frank and honest argument was presented to the Council by me. I encourage you to review the audio tapes made for this meeting to hear my voice and how I presented my comments. To make it easier for you, 1 have taken to task to manually transcribe the entire L conversation - a tedious task - but one that will enable you to consider my ethics review request as easily and expeditiously as possible. During this conversation, there were a few times that Councilmember Hickson questioned me, i increasingly abrasively. The first rough comment was his abrupt "Have we done that yet ?" question, asked twice. At this point you can easily detect his rising temper. Please, encourage you to listen to the tapes - you can't tell how harsh he was just from my transcript! k 1 was aware of his attitude change when at the podium - but it became even more apparent once I reviewed the audio tape at home. At one time, the Mayor is speaking and you can clearly hear an obvious, I'm- really- annoyed- with -you sigh from Mr. Hickson. Further into the tape, you can hear Mr. Hickson muttering in the background, angrily, audibly, while the Mayor is talking. l' The final blow occurs when Mr. Hickson flies out of his chair, walks behind the mayor toward the ice chest, yanks it open, roots noisily (much more than necessary) through it, and slams it shut. As a father of two, I've seen this type of reaction before; it cannot be considered anything E . less than a childish temper tantrum. It is entirely unacceptable behavior for Council Chambers. In addition, during the entire time I was at the podium, there are numerous occasions where t Mr. Hickson interrupts the conversation of the current speaker, including the Mayor and myself. At the end of all of this, I pretty much had it. I felt demeaned for having dared to bring up this t issue; I felt intimidated by his antics - interruptions, aggressive talk, muttering, and physical shenanigans. There was a lack of respect for the citizens present and for the council itself I of 4 02/24/99 1:15 PM ttn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Malt // lOWINDOWS/ DESKTOP / Recall/ hickson /LettertoEthicsCommittee.htm (and especially the Mayor). I could tell that the audience behind me was astounded. I was so upset that I was not able to complete my discussion. Many times I have come to Chambers with positive suggestions, and I was quite prepared to offer another one here. I was going to close my discussion with a question and suggestion about the mineral rights for the land. I was going to ask that if we do purchase the land, that the City secure any mineral rights, if it ordinarily does not do so. I felt that since we were buying such a large tract of land, one that we released to the public decades ago, that we might be able to bring back into the fold. And since oil prices are so low, buying those mineral rights at this time might be quite cheap and profitable for the city. Later that evening I mentioned this suggestion to the Mayor (more on this later). But, at the moment, I never had a chance to tell you this - I was so distracted that I just couldn't continue - it was hard just to contain myself. This is the main reason why we shouldn't tolerate these conditions - the Council missed out on some valuable input (in my opinion) because a citizen felt dissuaded from bringing it up. Perhaps it is his arrogance toward citizens who oppose his viewpoints that rubs him wrong. For those of you who feel that this was a fluke, please remember that this is not the only time that has been demonstrated. At a previous meeting, on February 26th, when the citizens were discussing the same parking garage, Mr. Hickson righteously mentioned that the citizens of College Station lacked vision. Ouch! I even wrote about this in my Letter to the Editor (to The Eagle) a few days later. Should you feel that I am voicing only my opinion, when I sat down, at least three people tried to console me, to calm me down. As a matter of a fact, I must have appeared so upset that both the Mayor and Councilmember Esmond weren't sure that they too were in trouble. I'm sure if you check the impression of other attending members of the audience, and among yourselves, that you will find consensus as to the accuracy of my statements and the circumstances. It is quite obvious that, by his actions, Mr. Hickson crossed way over the line. 1 Perhaps you can draw from my own actions as to how one should be expected to act. As hurt as I was, as flustered as I felt, I still managed to behave myself. I stated politely that I was rudely attacked and that I wish that this issue be taken up by the Ethics Committee. I was not rude, I did not toss things around, I did not do any of the things that Mr. Hickson did. I was grateful that the Mayor suggested that Mr. Hickson and I talk about this later. This left an opening to where Mr. Hickson could have easily approached me to apologize. Since I was the offended party, it would have been his responsibility to do this, to approach me first. He could have done this when I was at the podium for item 12.7. I waited after the meeting to see if he would apologize. I stood up at my chair and saw him walk by, not three feet away, and even look at me. He didn't say a word, nor have I received a letter, a visit to my home, or even a simple phone call. All he had to do was apologize. After the meeting I approached the Mayor, as I know that we are supposed to address these issues with her. I tried to explain as best as I could what I felt happened, and I was quite encouraged that she was willing to mend the fence herself. She even offered to have him write an apology letter. I asked her not to do it, not because it shouldn't be done, but because I felt, as a matter of principle, that he should be mature and responsible enough to figure it out by himself, to be, as I said, "man enough to apologize on his own ". As I mentioned to her, I was hoping that he would. I really didn't want to be in the position that I'm in now. It is with great regret that it has come to this. Since he has decided that he had no need to address this issue, even after I verbally requested that it be put forth to the Ethics Committee, well, here we are. It's been a month and nothing. He has had many chances to apologize, and frankly, it would have been less painful for me if he had. I don't like to have to come here and do this - but I feel it is the right thing to of 4 02/24/99 1:15 PM Attn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Malti/SEWINDOWS/ DESKTOP / Recall / hickson /LettertoEthicsCommittee.htm do, the only thing I can do, to make sure that this type of behavior does not happen to embarrass our Council again. It is now time for his peers to determine what should be done about his actions. This is also a matter of principle - citizens should not feel intimidated to come forth to the Council. What if an sweet, old lady wanted to bring up a concern? After seeing this happen, I doubt that she would. This is wrong. Verbal intimidation, muttering and bad mouthing, disruptive behavior and physical shenanigans are not appropriate behavior of a Councilmember, much less of the Mayor Pro -tem. The possessor of the position of Mayor Pro -tem, who represents the mayor in her absence, you should meet a higher standard. ' I must state, clearly, that this is no personal vendetta. I have no other motives other than what have outlined here. As to what I feel is reasonable for the Ethics Committee to do - it's obvious that this is not an extreme offence that needs to be dealt with impeachment. However, drawing from Congress' example, I have a couple of simple requests that are not out of line for the nature of Mr. Hickson's offenses. ' I am requesting a complete apology from Mr. Hickson, not only to me, but to the entire Council and to the citizens present at the meeting. This could be done at a future Council meeting or via public letter - the ethic's committee's choice. This is essentially what the Mayor initially suggested. I also request that a letter of reprimand be issued to him, stating that the above actions are out of character of what is expected from our Councilmembers. It should state the actions for which this letter is drafted. It should be placed in the Official Record. I don't know how you will handle this request, as I think that the Ethics Committee chairman, when they first convene, is supposed to be Mr. Hickson. If he will have that position, he will have to recuse himself from the proceedings. How unfortunate that the first action of the Committee involves one of their own. I hope that these requests don't taint my relationship with the Council. I must remark that I have always felt welcome - even with opposing views - here, in Chambers. I was concerned that if I brought these up, that you would start ignoring me - treating me as a malcontent. Hopefully, you know me enough to judge that I wouldn't bring these issues up if they weren't so important. I hope that once the Ethics Committee proceeds on this, we can get past this. 1 don't harbor any ill feelings. 1 can get past this - you see me here today - expressing my views, both positive and negative, about the issues the Council faces. Don't get me wrong; my concern is for the future. If you just let this issue rest, then you are excusing his behavior. And encouraging it to happen again. Please don't simply dismiss it. Sincerely, L Benito Flores -Meath 901 Val Verde Drive College Station, TX 77845 -5125 696 -8295 Home of 4 02/24/99 1:15 PM Attn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silviutp: / /www. issues. org / recall/ hickson /UpdateOnRequestForEthics.htm Attn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Council Members Anderson, Esmond, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silvia Cc: City Secretary, City Attorney Re: Problems with the disposition of Mr. Hickson's two incidents Date: February 8, 1999 Your Honor, as I mentioned in my last letter, dated February 2, 1999, my complaint with Mr. Hickson's personal attacks on me was not entirely closed. As a matter of a fact, the problem has grown due to the mishandling of this matter. I have come to find out, through someone independent of the Council, that both issues were not discussed with the entire Council, but were instead handled only between yourself and Mr. Hickson. This is a violation of the Council Relation Policy Guidelines, since the matter was not properly referred to the Council itself or the appropriate Ethics Committee /Council Relations Committee, as I was lead to believe it would be. ...you want this request to still go forward, I will have the Council review it under authority of the Code of Conduct. - Your letter to me, dated December 14th, 1998 Since the council relations policy guidelines have been met,... - Your letter to me, dated January 25th, 1999 All of my verbal requests to you have been made in public, at both the November 12th and December 10th City Council meetings. All of my written correspondence was made via the City Secretary. All communication, both verbal and written, were addressed not to only you and Mr. Hickson, but to the entire City Council, and the City Attorney and City Secretary. My intentions to have this issue handled by the Council's Ethics Committee /Council Relations Committee were clear and explicit. even after I verbally requested that it be put forth to the Ethics Committee - My letter to Council, presented at Council meeting, December 10, 1998 / don't know how you will handle this request, as I think that the Ethics Committee chairman, when they first convene, is supposed to be Mr. Hickson. If he will have that position, he will have to recuse himself from the proceedings. How unfortunate that the first action of the Committee involves one of their own. - My letter to Council, presented at Council meeting, December 10, 1998 Since none of the proceedings were being done in public, I could only assume they were being handled in Executive Sessions, to which I am not privy. All the time I felt as though this matter was to be handled by the Council as a whole, and not by two members, acting on their own, rather than under the entire Council's authority. I have been following every meeting the Council has had and never has there been a reference to appointing members to the Council Relations Committee concerning my request. There has not been a vote by the Council authorizing you nor anyone else to act in that capacity. After finding out who was doing the actual disposition, I did a bit of research. I find it quite L _ of 5 02/24/99 1:23 PM Attn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silviutp: / /www. issues. org / recall/ hickson /UpdateOnRequestForEthics.htm distressing that, in addition to acting without the Council's authority, you and Mr. Hickson may have also violated the Texas Open Meetings Act. At the time I wrote my last letter, I was not very knowledgeable of your responsibilities under this Act. By acting alone in this public Council matter, both of you may have violated Sec 551.101 of ( the Texas Open Meetings Act, because there was no quorum. Also, this could not have been an open meeting, since it was not properly published. "1 believe that this matter is closed." - Your letter to me, dated January 25th, 1999 Since you completed your decision on the two Hickson issues while in a closed meeting, I believe you violated Sec 551.102. It could not have been an open meeting, since it was never published as required by Sec 551.041, nor could it have been a valid closed meeting since the exceptions in the statutes don't apply. Also, I'm sure you did not record this meeting, provided by Sec 551.021 (open meetings) and Sec 551.103 (closed meetings). I truly hope that you and Mr. Hickson have not been placed in criminal jeopardy due to this. Unfortunately I have no control on the County District Attorney's handling of this matter, since 1 the District Court has jurisdiction for the Act's criminal penalties; they would be the party interested in prosecuting any such violations. To conclude, let me remind you of my original request: 1 / am requesting a complete apology from Mr. Hickson, not only to me, but to the entire Council and to the citizens present at the meeting. This could be done at a future Council meeting or via public letter - the ethic's committee's choice. This is essentially what the Mayor initially suggested. - My letter to Council, presented at Council meeting, December 10, 1998 It is important to note that since the Council was not consulted in this disposition of this matter, my request for apology to the Council is now doubly important. / also request that a letter of reprimand be issued to him, stating that the above actions are out of character of what is expected from our Councilmembers. It should state the actions for which this letter is drafted. It should be placed in the Official Record. - My letter to Council, presented at Council meeting, December 10, 1998 Up to now, I feel that I have acted in good faith. I have supplied you with proper documentation, politely provided you with as much assistance as I can give, and have always stated my opinions in the simplest English there is. 1 Frankly, I feel deceived by the secrecy. I placed my trust in you to handle this properly and now I feel this trust was violated. I hope that you can make amends with all parties and not disappoint us again. Please place this issue on the City Council's next meeting's agenda for L proper legal discussion. Sincerely, [signed] Benito Flores -Meath 901 Val Verde Drive College Station, TX 77845 -5125 L of 5 02/24/99 1:23 PM ttn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silvigtp: / /www.issues.org' recall / hickson /UpdateOnRequestForEthics.htm I r B /CS Resident since 1979, and proud of it! I Enclosure Sec. 551.021. Minutes or Tape Recording of Open Meeting Required. L (a) A governmental body shall prepare and keep minutes or make a tape recording of each open meeting of the body. 1 (b) The minutes must: I (1) state the subject of each deliberation; and (2) indicate each vote, order, decision, or other action taken. 1 Sec. 551.041. Notice of Meeting Required. I A governmental body shall give written notice of the date, hour, place, and subject of each meeting held by the governmental body. i Sec. 551.101. Requirement to First Convene in Open Meeting. If a closed meeting is allowed under this chapter, a governmental body may not conduct the closed meeting unless a quorum of the governmental body first convenes in an open meeting for which notice has been given as provided by this chapter and during which the presiding officer publicly: (1) announces that a closed meeting will be held; and I (2) identifies the section or sections of this chapter under which the closed meeting is held. 1 Sec. 551.102. Requirement to Vote or Take Final Action in Open Meeting. L A final action, decision, or vote on a matter deliberated in a closed meeting under this chapter may only be made in an open meeting that is held in compliance with the notice provisions of this chapter. i I Sec. 551.103. Certified Agenda or Tape Recording Required. (a) A governmental body shall either keep a certified agenda or make a tape recording of the L proceedings of each closed meeting, except for a private consultation permitted under Section 551.071. (b) The presiding officer shall certify that an agenda kept under Subsection (a) is a true and t correct record of the proceedings. v. 1 of 5 02/24/99 1:23 PM t ttn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silvittp: / /www.issues.org/ recall / hickson /UpdateOnRequestForEthics.htm (c) The certified agenda must include: 1 (1) a statement of the subject matter of each deliberation; 1 (2) a record of any further action taken; and (3) an announcement by the presiding officer at the beginning and l the end of the meeting indicating the date and time. (d) A tape recording made under Subsection (a) must include announcements by the presiding I officer at the beginning and the end of the meeting indicating the date and time. I Sec. 551.143. Conspiracy to Circumvent Chapter; Offense; Penalty. (a) A member or group of members of a governmental body commits an offense if the member I or group of members knowingly conspires to circumvent this chapter by meeting in numbers less than a quorum for the purpose of secret deliberations in violation of this chapter. (b) An offense under Subsection (a) is a misdemeanor punishable by: (1) a fine of not Tess than $100 or more than $500; (2) confinement in the county jail for not Tess than one month or more than six months; or (3) both the fine and confinement. 4 F Sec. 551.144. Closed Meeting; Offense; Penalty. (a) A member of a governmental body commits an offense if a closed meeting is not permitted under this chapter and the member knowingly: 1 r. (1) calls or aids in calling or organizing the closed meeting, whether it is a special or called closed meeting; 1 (2) closes or aids in closing the meeting to the public, if it is a regular meeting; or f (3) participates in the closed meeting, whether it is a regular, special, or called meeting. (b) An offense under Subsection (a) is a misdemeanor punishable by: L (1) a fine of not less than $100 or more than $500; (2) confinement in the county jail for not less than one month or more than six months; or 1 (3) both the fine and confinement. L Sec. 551.145. Closed Meeting Without Certified Agenda or Tape Recording; Offense; Penalty. L : of 5 02/24/99 1:23 PM t ttn: Mayor Mcllhaney, Councilmemb...d, Hazen, Hickson, Mariott, Silvitttp: / /www. issues. org / recall / hickson /UpdateOnRequestForEthics.htm (a) A member of a governmental body commits an offense if the member participates in a closed meeting of the governmental body knowing that a certified agenda of the closed meeting is not being kept or that a tape recording of the closed meeting is not being made. (b) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class C misdemeanor. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 of 5 02/24/99 1:23 PM f �etition Signing Locations and Schedules http: / /www.elitesoft.com /recall /schedule.html I Petition Signing Locations and Schedules Location Times 2902 - Cortez Court Thurs 25, 7 AM -10PM 1 2902 Cortez Court Fri 26, 7 AM 10PM Please check back daily, as we add locations and times. I Back Copyright © the Public - Everything listed here is in the public domain! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I of 1 02/24/99 12:42 PM PETITION FOR RECALL College Station Council Members For your convenience, if you want to come sign this petition for recall, Carl Vargo will have a table in the garage at 2902 Cortez Court during the following times: Thursday, February 25 from 7 a.m. - 10 p.m. and Friday, February 26 from 7 a.m. - 10 p.m. Please exercise your freedom of ex- pression and personal convictions. You know how the council members voted on Steeplechase. We were not really heard and they twice nullified our valid peti- tions regarding the rezoning. Please bring your voter registration card. If you can not find it presently, please call Summer Bass at Voter Regis- tration 361 -4490 and she will give you your registration number. If you want to read a copy of the reasons for the petition, please look at page A3 of The Eagle for Tuesday, February 23 or e -mail Bonita Flores -Meath - bflores @elitesoft.com and ask him to e -mail a copy to you. If you have already signed the peti- tion, please notify your friends to come sign. Carl Vargo 696 -2208