Tag Archives: Amarillo City Council

City hears from the young and, until now, the silent

downtown amarillo

Amarillo City Council members got a snootful this week from some of their constituents.

No, it wasn’t the usual gaggle of naysayers who keep harping on why Amarillo can’t do this or that.

The pleas instead came from a handful of young people interested in seeing the city redevelop its downtown district into a place that would attract them, make them want to come back here or perhaps to stay and start their lives.

The open meeting at City Council Chambers featured a number of folks who support the concept that’s been developed for downtown’s rebirth — assuming, of course, that it’s allowed to come into this world.

They like the idea of a multipurpose event venue, the MPEV. They like the notion of redeveloping Polk Street, turning it into an entertainment district. They like the idea of a downtown convention hotel which, quite naturally, will require additional parking.

They didn’t speak to council members Tuesday about the nuts and bolts of funding. They spoke instead of the concept.

I’m not a young person. I do agree, though, with our young residents.

Some other, older residents, said they disapprove of what’s being promoted. While the young folks like the idea of emulating, say, Austin, at least one other said the city should retain its current flavor, its ambience and whatever else it currently boasts.

Well, so much for “thinking outside the box” for some folks.

Me? I’m willing to take a chance on turning Amarillo into something more than a tad more vibrant than it has been.

I’ve been helping produce a weekly newspaper in Tucumcari, the Quay County Sun. I just finished editing some stories that told of that community’s weekend festival, called Rockabilly on the Route — that would be Route 66, which runs through Tucumcari, just as it runs through the heart of Amarillo.

Isn’t there an opportunity for Amarillo, with its own Route 66 heritage and its own arts and music community, to capitalize in such a manner? Sixth Avenue runs right through the city’s central district, connecting with Historic Route 66 west of the central district.

How about not letting such an opportunity slip through our fingers?

That, I believe, is what the young people said they want for their city.

I’m glad they spoke out. I now hope the council members heard them.

 

 

Get rid of work sessions

Believe it or not, I am going to agree with an editorial published in the newspaper where I worked for more than 17 years.

The editorial published in the Amarillo Globe-News says the City Council needs to, in effect, get rid of its work sessions as they’re currently constituted and do all its business in the City Council Chambers meeting room.

That’s a good idea.

Here’s why. The work sessions, where city council members discuss much of the business on which they will vote in their open session, take place in a cramped meeting room. Most of the space in that room is taken up by a large conference table around which sit council members, senior city administrators and department heads.

The public is invited to attend, as the items under discussion are open to the public — until the mayor calls for an “executive session,” which is closed to the public to enable the council to discuss certain things exempted from public view under the Texas Open Meetings Law.

I’d share the editorial with you here, except that I don’t subscribe to the newspaper and, thus, I am unable to access the online edition because of its “pay wall” restricting access only to those who have paid subscriptions to the printed edition.

I left the paper unhappily in late August 2012, if you’ll recall … but enough about that.

The editorial suggests that the city shouldn’t scrap its work sessions, but merely take them into a room where more people can attend if they desire. If no one attends the work session, well, no harm-no foul. The council can convene its executive session, then open its regular session and pass the ordinances and other measures it has discussed.

I do not believe the city has kept secrets from the public regarding matters of public concern. I believe the mayor and the city administrator are honorable men who do not hide behind the Open Meetings Law to discuss things that must be kept in the open.

However, the work sessions have produced a perception among some in the community that these meetings somehow are meant to keep the public in the dark.

Let me stipulate once again: The City Council cannot keep the public away from its meetings except when it discusses certain items specified by state law Those items include pending litigation, sale or purchase of real estate and personnel matters. One major flaw in the state meeting law is that there’s little way to monitor what’s actually said behind closed doors; but that’s for the Legislature to change when it ever gets around to it.

The City Council work sessions are valuable in allowing council members an opportunity to discuss the pros and cons of issues before them. So, do it in the big room — the Council Chambers — to enable everyone who is interested a chance to hear it all with their own ears.

 

Event venue facing increased scrutiny

Of all the elements of Amarillo’s effort to revive its downtown district, the one aspect that seems to be drawing the most criticism is the multipurpose event venue … or MPEV.

The scrutiny is making me ask the simplest of questions: Why?

Not “why” on whether we should build the place, but why the concern over it in the first place?

The city is about to launch a three-pronged effort: building a parking garage, development of a convention hotel and construction of the MPEV, which also is known as “the ballpark.”

Officials have said until they’ve run out of breath that the $113 million combined cost of the package will be financed through user fees. Hotel-motel taxes collected by people who pay for lodging in Amarillo’s hotels will finance the projects.

The MPEV? It’ll be paid with the lodging tax.

The hotel? Same thing.

The parking garage? Ditto on that.

No tax money will be spent on these projects. That’s what City Hall has pledged. Is the city’s record on such pledges perfect? No. The Globe-News Center for the Performing Arts was supposed to be paid entirely with private donations. It fell a million or so dollars short, so the city ponied up the rest to finish off the $30 million project. The deal still was a sweet one for the city.

What the MPEV critics say should happen is that the city should refurbish the Civic Center, make it more attractive for larger-scale conventions that now pass Amarillo by in favor of cities with more spacious meeting rooms.

How much will that expansion cost? A friend of mine who’s been active in downtown revitalization efforts told me privately that the “best estimates” of improving the Civic Center to a level desired by those who want it expanded would be 10 times the cost of the MPEV. Who would pay for the Civic Center, a publicly owned building? Taxpayers would foot the bill. Every nickel and dime of it.

The city could issue general obligation bonds without a vote, or it could put the issue up for a vote in a bond issue election. How do you suppose an election would turn out? Amarillo voters demonstrated two years ago they aren’t in the mood to spend tax money on “quality of life” projects, such as the huge recreation center proposed for the southeast area of the city; voters rejected that bond issue request handily.

I’ve visited with city leaders repeatedly over the years about the downtown plan. I like the concept. I endorse the vision the city has put forth. I believe it will work and it will create a downtown business and entertainment district that will make our residents proud.

I also am willing to trust that it can be done the way its proponents say it will be done: through lodging revenue collected at our hotels and motels.

Will there be some public investment? Sure. Streets and lighting must be made suitable. They belong to us already. But the heavy lifting — construction of the sites under consideration — will be borne by those who come here from other places.

And yet, the City Council has members who now might want to throw all of this in reverse because, by golly, they’re just plain mad.

I ask once again: Why?

 

City Council off to 'rocky' start? Maybe, maybe not

The headline in the Amarillo Globe-News this week referred to the city’s “Road to change” embarking on a “rocky start.”

We’ll see about that. But the story below the headline does portend a possible change in the longstanding dynamic that has driven city government — which has been a desire for unanimity.

Place 1 Councilman Elisha Demerson had just taken the oath of office and then, during a work session, he wanted to delay a vote on the appointment of a part-time associate municipal judge. Why? He wanted to await the results of the June 13 runoff election in Place 4 between Steve Rogers and Mark Nair.

The City Council hasn’t always been an amen chorus on every single issue. The late Place 4 Councilman Jim Simms was known to offer a dissent or three when he felt strongly about something; if memory serves, he opposed the city’s ordinance banning texting while driving. And way before Simms joined the body, it had the late Commissioner Dianne Bosch offering dissents, such as whether the city should sell its public hospital or whether it should impose a curfew on teenagers younger than 17 years of age.

Of late, though, the council has sought to speak with a single voice.

That a new guy, Demerson, would seek to stall a routine appointment does seem to suggest there will be fewer 5-0 votes on issues in the future than we’ve seen in the recent past.

That could result in some actual public discussion and debate. Hey, maybe some tempers might flare.

 

Will the City Council operate the same?

I wish I had been at City Hall this week to watch the swearing in of the new Amarillo City Council.

Then I could have seen up close how the new council is going to conduct its meetings.

Two new members took office Tuesday: Elisha Demerson in Place 1 and Randy Burkett in Place 3. The Place 4 seat will be filled by either Mark Nair or Steve Rogers, who are competing in a June 13 runoff.

Why the curiosity about the conduct of the council?

Well, Mayor Paul Harpole is returning for another two-year term. He has adopted the same formula used by previous mayors who have presided over these meetings. It’s a fascinating spectacle and if you’re in the right frame of mind when you watch it, you actually can be amused by the way the council breezes through its process of approving measures.

It goes like this: After a discussion, the mayor calls for a motion to approve. Starting usually from the far right end of the dais, the council member says “so moved.” The council member in the next chair seconds the motion. The mayor calls for a discussion. Hearing none, he calls for the vote. “All approved say ‘aye.’ All opposed say ‘no.'” It’s approved.

The second motion to approve comes from the person next to the one who made the first motion; the second then comes from the next council member. The mayor goes through the same drill. Measure approved.

And on it goes.

It’s kind of like clockwork.

I remember one time when Debra McCartt was new to the then-City Commission. She got confused about whether it was her turn to make the motion to approve an ordinance. “Is it my turn?” she asked then-Mayor Trent Sisemore. “Yes,” he said. She made the motion and all was good.

The two new council members — Demerson and Burkett — both promised “change” was coming to the council. I’m betting the third new guy, whoever it is, will echo that theme.

I’ll be waiting to see if the change upsets the normally well-oiled process that drives the City Council to quick decisions.

 

'Getting rid' of good ol' boy system

Someone posted this thought on social media the other day, but it’s worth a brief comment here.

The comment was about the Amarillo City Council election and the calls from several non-incumbents to get rid of what’s called the “good ol’ boy system” of Amarillo politics.

So, what did voters do? They tossed out the two women who serve on the council: Ellen Robertson Green and Lilia Escajeda. They will be replaced by two men: Elisha Demerson and Randy Burkett, respectively.

It’s one of the puzzling aspects of the election.

I realize that “good ol’ boy” doesn’t necessarily describe the gender of those who are part of the system. It’s meant to characterize the back-slapping and the implied agreement that all have with each other any issue that comes before them.

But an all-male City Council is going to include a dynamic that the body hasn’t had in quite a number of years. It will lack a female perspective.

I think the city will become lesser because of it.

Don't presume anything, Mr. Rogers

“Dear John,” the form letter that arrived today started.

“Thank you for your support during the recent general election. Judy and I can’t express to you enough how much your encouragement and prayers kept us moving forward. We are proud of our positive campaign and thankful for every vote that came our way.”

The writer went on some more … blah, blah, blah.

He signed it “Steve,” as in Steve Rogers, candidate for Amarillo City Council, Place 4.

I wonder why I got the letter. I didn’t vote for him in the May 9 municipal election. I don’t know if I’ll vote for him in the June 13 runoff between him and Mark Nair, who finished at the top of a crowded field of candidates running for the fourth place on the City Council. Just so you know, my vote went to one of the other candidates.

I’m inclined to vote against him just because he seems to presume so much about the “encouragement and prayers” I allegedly sent his way.

This note reminds me of another note I got some years ago. A member of my family got married. He’s the son of one of my first cousins. I met him once — I think — when he was a very young boy. So, he married this girl on the East Coast and several weeks later, my wife and I receive a note thanking us for the “very special gift” we sent them.

We didn’t send them a gift. My wife and I laugh about it to this day.

So, candidates, please take to avoid presuming too much about the constituents you seek to serve.

Some of us might tattle on you.

Anger finds its way to Amarillo

Anger is not my thing.

Those who know me — I’m quite certain — would say I’m not an angry person. I see life as an adventure. The glass is half full. All that positive stuff.

I’m a bit dismayed, though, at the apparent anger among residents of the city my wife and I have called home for more than 20 years.

It manifested itself in the election this past weekend in which two incumbents were tossed off the City Council and the mayor was re-elected by a much smaller margin than he has in the past; some observers have told me that had Paul Harpole faced a serious opponent, he’d have been beaten, too.

Why the anger?

* Our municipal tax rate is among the lowest in the state, so we aren’t pay “too much” for city services.

* City officials are moving forward with a plan to rejuvenate its downtown district. Show me a lively city and I’ll show you one with a downtown district that’s bustling.

* We have an economic development corporation that is using sales tax revenue to lure business to the city. People gripe about the EDC using “our tax money” to bring in those “out of towners.” They fail to recognize that 60 percent of all sales tax revenue comes from folks who don’t live here.

* One City Council candidate said it’s time to “run the city like a business.” Successful local governments and successful businesses are mutually exclusive concepts. The most successful businesses are run, more or less, by tyrants. Is that what we want at City Hall? I don’t think so.

The anger is palpable. Who feeds it? Has it splashed against us from the hysteria we hear in places like Washington, D.C., and Austin?

This new City Council is going to take office soon. It will have three new guys on board — with the third one being chosen from a runoff that’s occurring next month to fill a seat occupied by an appointment incumbent who didn’t seek election.

Let’s all settle down, fellas, and get to work for the common good.

 

Change has come to Amarillo City Hall

I’m going to wait before passing any judgment on the new Amarillo City Council lineup.

A couple of obvious changes are worth noting, so I’ll do so here.

Two women were voted off the council: Ellen Robertson Green and Lilia Escajeda. They lost to men. So an all-male council will be making decisions affecting Amarillo taxpayers’ lives.

There’s something a bit unsettling about that prospect.

As a red-blooded American male myself, it’s not that I think the five men set to serve are all bad. But I do trust women’s judgment.

Ellen Green, for example, offered up my favorite retort to those who were yapping their discontent about the red-light cameras the city has deployed at various intersections. Her answer? Don’t run the red lights and you won’t have anything to worry about. Who in the world can argue with that?

The fellow who defeated Green in Place 1, Elisha Demerson, made history by becoming the city’s first African-American council member. He once served on the Potter County Commissioners Court, as a commissioner and later for a single term as county judge. His record as county judge came under scrutiny during the municipal campaign. It didn’t gain any traction with voters who elected him anyway.

It’s worth keeping our eye, though, on his relationship with the guy who won in Place 3, Randy Burkett, who defeated Escajeda. Burkett, it turns out, has some pretty caustic views about issues involving race relations, as was revealed late in the campaign on his Facebook page.

Will these men be able to work together? They appear to have widely differing world views. City policy, though, would seem to require them to set those differences aside. The City Council, after all, is a non-partisan body.

Demerson and Burkett both talked about accountability and transparency. Mayor Paul Harpole was re-elected and he, too, has talked openly about the need for transparency. Returning Place 2 Councilman Brian Eades brings some continuity to the new council. Mark Nair and Steve Rogers are running off against each other for the Place 4 seat.

It’s a new council, all right. Time will tell whether voters have made a good investment or purchased the proverbial pig in a poke.

 

Does election diminish need to rethink voting plan?

Elisha Demerson’s election to the Amarillo City Council made history.

It also might have taken a bit of the bite out of those who think the city should revamp its voting plan to create a single-member district for its council members.

I am continuing to consider that a change in the city’s voting plan is in order.

My long-standing support of the city’s at-large system continues to waver, even though Demerson’s election as an African-American candidate in the current system might augur against such a change.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2013/12/22/re-thinking-single-member-districts/

I’m not keen on creating four single-member districts, while electing the mayor at-large. If I were King of the World, I’d consider expanding the council by two places, giving it six council member and electing two of the six at-large while dividing the city into four wards.

Other cities have done something like with varying degrees of success.

Indeed, Demerson’s victory is a ringing triumph for those in Amarillo who’ve declared that it’s virtually impossible for a minority candidate to win an at-large contest. The city’s black population comprises less than 10 percent of the total.

But think also about this: While Demerson was defeating incumbent Ellen Green in Place 1, Lilia Escajeda — the council’s sole Hispanic member — lost her seat to challenger Randy Burkett.

Does her loss lessen the joy that minorities are feeling today over Demerson’s victory?

Hey, I’m just askin’.