Tag Archives: Amarillo City Hall

local news

Amarillo City Council gets its own gadfly

When you mention the word “gadfly,” you ought to think of someone who annoys the daylights out of you.

I’m beginning to see a trend developing among the five members of the Amarillo City Council. It is that a gadfly has sprouted wings among them.

Randy Burkett got blood pumping apparently at a city budget meeting this week when he challenged a 3.5-percent budget increase for the Downtown Amarillo Inc., the non-profit organization with which the city contracts to promote our downtown district.

Burkett is one of the three new guys elected to the council in May. I guess he dislikes DAI Inc. He told fellow council members DAI should get a decrease in its budget or perhaps be eliminated.

That got Mayor Paul Harpole excited and the two men exchanged tense words, with Harpole accusing Burkett of “electioneering.”

OK, folks. Change has arrived at the City Council.

That ol’ trick knee of mine is throbbing once again and it’s telling me that we’re going to hear a good more from this new fellow as he seeks to get under the skin of his fellow council members.

I guess at this point I ought to mention the Facebook exchange he had with a member of a group called Amarillo Millennial Movement, a group of young residents who want the city to proceed with its downtown revitalization plans, which include the multipurpose event venue that the council voted 3-1 this week to refer to the voters for their decision on whether to build the MPEV.

I’ve lived in Amarillo for more than 20 years. I’ve spent most of that time commenting on policy decisions from City Hall, attending city government meetings, interacting with municipal officials. I’ve seen my share of contrarians holding elective office at City Hall. The late commissioners Dianne Bosch and Jim Simms come to mind.

But something is beginning to gnaw at me about the chemistry — or the lack thereof — that’s developing among the five men who set municipal policy. It’s palpably different than what we’ve been accustomed to seeing.

If this budget meeting exchange between Harpole and Burkett is an indicator of what’s to come over the course of the next two years, you are welcome to count me as someone who dislikes the change that has plopped itself down at City Hall.

And it’s fair to ask: Is this really and truly what Amarillo voters wanted when they elected this new majority, which includes an individual who seeks to become the City Council’s chief gadfly?

local news

City Council taking aim at the MPEV?

9 Comments

Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole and his City Council colleagues are set to commence an important discussion on the future of a proposed outdoor multipurpose event venue.

A part of me fears the worst. It is that the council will cast a highly split vote to refer this matter to city residents in a non-binding referendum that will ask: Do you want the city to proceed with building the MPEV? Yes, the referendum would be non-binding, but only a fool would go against what the voters decide.

The council vote — if it occurs — could be on a 3-2 split. The votes to refer the measure to residents could come from the three new men on the council — Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair. The three of them have stated publicly their concerns about the MPEV, the process that brought it forward and whether the city really needs it.

Count me, gentleman, as a constituent who believes in the project, the process that produced it and the potential it brings for downtown Amarillo’s hoped-for rebirth.

Another part of me remains hopeful that reason will prevail.

It’s a better than safe bet to assume that Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades want the MPEV process to keep moving forward. I would bet real American money they would vote “no” on sending this matter to a vote in November.

You might be thinking: Is this goofy blogger — that would be me — against giving residents a say-so in an important project?

The answer would be “no.” I believe in the democratic process as much as anyone. But in reality, we’re dealing here with a representative democracy, meaning that we elect individuals to represent our interests. We elect them to lead.

My own preference would be to have council members vote on this matter themselves.

There’s no compelling need to put this matter up for a popular vote. Residents of this city have had ample opportunity to view this project from the get-go. They’ve had equally ample opportunity to speak out.

Yes, there seems to be a serious divide in our city over this MPEV. There also seems to be an equally seriously divide among members of the city’s governing body. A 3-2 split on this issue — in either direction — does not represent a consensus. Think of it as a body that mirrors, say, the U.S. Supreme Court, which often votes 5-4 on landmark rulings; the court is split often along ideological grounds — pitting conservative justices vs. liberal justices.

The best option, to my way of thinking, would be for the five men who serve on the City Council to take a deep breath and ponder the consequences of killing this MPEV, whether they do it themselves with an up-down vote or refer it to voters to decide at the ballot box.

Do they really and truly want to scuttle a project that’s been years in the making? Do they really want to scrap it at this stage of its development and force the city to start from scratch, spending more time and money on an issue that’s been examined from every possible angle?

If they intend to deep-six this entertainment venue, then they will send the city skidding backward.

It’s going to be a big day at City Hall next Tuesday.

local news

Convention expert says: Your downtown plan won’t work

I’ve got to hand it to those who are seeking to promote a comprehensive effort to rebuild, remake and revive downtown Amarillo.

They are unafraid to hear contrary views.

They got quite a few of them Monday night when Heywood Sanders came to Amarillo to speak to them about plans to build a convention hotel downtown. Sanders, an expert on these matters, said it’s a waste of time, money and effort.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/29645624/convention-center-expert-claims-downtown-convention-hotel-doesnt-work

Sanders spoke to the City Council, Downtown Amarillo Inc., and the Local Government Corporation. Two of those three entities have serious designs on pressing forward; the council, with its new majority, has been thrown into the “undecided” category, at least for now.

I believe it’s fair to pose a couple of thoughts about Professor Sanders’ visit.

One deals with how deeply he looked into the specifics of what’s being proposed for Amarillo. Was he relying chiefly on his extensive research into the general notion of convention centers. He’s written a book, “Convention Center Follies,” which I understand debunks the notion that convention hotels boost communities’ economy.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this visit centers on the organization that invited Professor Sanders. It came from the TEA Party Patriots of Amarillo. Readers of this blog know that I like to capitalize “TEA” as in TEA Party, because the letters comprise an acronym that stands for “taxed enough already.”

The TEA Party branches throughout the nation tend to stand strongly opposed to government-initiated or sponsored projects.

The three-pronged downtown project — the multipurpose event venue, the downtown hotel and the parking garage — is being billed as a private-enterprise endeavor. However, the government is involved, as the Amarillo EDC is providing incentives and the city intends to use hotel-motel tax to help maintain the MPEV and the downtown Embassy Suites hotel that’s being proposed.

Did the TEA Party hosts look for someone who’d back up their anti-government agenda?

I did not attend the meeting Monday night, so I won’t critique the specifics of what Professor Sanders said.

Still, it was instructive to hear from someone with knowledge of these things. I’m glad the various pro-downtown project principals were willing to hear what he had to say.

business news, local news

Whether to vote on MPEV

It’s now been established that the new majority on the Amarillo City Council believes it brought “change” to the way things are to get done at City Hall.

I guess they believe, therefore, that the city residents need to vote on whether to proceed with the multipurpose event venue planned for a site just south of the City Hall building.

My strong sense is that they also believe voters would reject the MPEV. The reasons why aren’t precise. One thing I keep hearing — based on what I read through all the media outlets available — is that residents weren’t kept sufficiently informed about the project. Well, that reason makes zero sense. The public has been involved from the get-go. There have been public hearings, and question-answer sessions with City Council members and senior city administrators.

Others want the Civic Center improved, expanded and dolled up before proceeding with an MPEV. What’s missing in this argument, though, is the cost of renovating the Civic Center and, more importantly, how much of a burden the public would carry to finance an improvement though a bond issue election. I’ve heard varying cost estimates for expanding the Civic Center, but they all seem to hover around the $130 million mark. That’s a lot of dough and it will cost more than the three-pronged project — MPEV, downtown hotel and parking garage — being proposed for downtown Amarillo.

Oh, and there’s this: The proposal on the table now calls for private money to build it, with hotel-motel tax revenue being used to maintain it.

And who contributes the hotel-motel tax revenue? Those who visit Amarillo.

I want to reiterate once again that the concept being considered is a sound one for the city … in my oh-so-humble view. A move to put this matter to a vote is intended to scuttle the MPEV. If it’s defeated, the hotel and the parking garage don’t get built.

Then we’ve just wasted a lot of time, emotional capital, sweat equity and, oh yes, money.

 

Uncategorized

Can city return to semblance of calm?

Now that the knee-jerk faction of the Amarillo City Council has gotten its scolding out of the way, it appears the city can return to conducting business and moving ahead with some ambitious plans intended to improve everyone’s outlook and perhaps even their economic well-being.

The council had intended to take City Manager Jarrett Atkinson to task for things not entirely specified. Instead, it decided to table that talking-to. It’s now going to wait until next January, when Atkinson’s normal job performance review is scheduled.

It also had planned to seek the resignation of the entire Amarillo Economic Development Corporation board, which when you think about it is an even goofier idea. The council took that idea off the table altogether.

So, where do we stand?

I hope we stand on firmer footing than it appeared when the final of the three new council members took his oath and then that same day called for Atkinson’s resignation.

A lot is riding at this moment on Amarillo’s political stability.

We’ve got this downtown project to consider. There’s a number of projects all linked together that need to happen. The multipurpose event venue should be built; the city is negotiating a little more with a hotel developer to build a downtown convention hotel; and we have this parking garage under consideration.

No MPEV, no hotel. Neither of those two things, no parking garage.

The $90-some-million project is worthwhile. It’s concept is sound. It would turn Amarillo’s downtown district into a place worthy of the city residents’ pride.

Assistant City Manager Vicki Covey already has retired; City Attorney Marcus Norris has resigned and is slated now to “pursue other interests.”

To toss out the city manager and the entire AEDC board now would be foolish in the extreme.

I hope it doesn’t happen. I trust now that council members will have told Atkinson what they expect of him and if Atkinson intends to stay on the job, I also expect he has agreed to do what they have requested.

Let’s give this entire process some time and careful study before plowing ahead with the “change” that some folks think was mandated by the May 9 municipal election.

Uncategorized

To the woodshed … perhaps?

2 Comments

harpole

Texas open meetings requirements are pretty strict. They allow public bodies to meet in secret only for specific reasons, with personnel discussions being one of them.

And when the body shuts the door, it keeps the public out so that its members can speak freely about the issue at hand.

Tuesday, the Amarillo City Council had a lengthy closed-door meeting. No one outside the room knows what was said when the council shut the door to talk about City Manager Jarrett Atkinson and the Amarillo Economic Development Corporation board.

They went into the meeting to talk about the “status” of both — Atkinson and the AEDC board.

When the council came out, Mayor Paul Harpole announced that Atkinson’s resignation and the resignations of the AEDC board members was off the table. The city is moving forward, he said.

OK, so what the heck happened in that room?

Harpole and the rest of the council won’t say specifically. They papered over the discussion, calling it cordial, businesslike … all the things you might expect to hear. Perhaps it was all of that.

Councilman Mark Nair had called for Atkinson’s resignation on the day he took office. Councilman Randy Burkett, another council rookie, called for the AEDC board to quit.

Then they changed their minds.

Hmmm. Interesting, yes?

Since the public is left to speculate on what happened in that City Hall room, I think I’ll do a little speculating right here — about what I think should have occurred.

Harpole should have given the two brand new council members the tongue-lashing of their lives, much in the manner that President Reagan took then-Office of Management and Budget Director David Stockman “to the woodshed” for steering too far off course during the early years of the Reagan administration.

We don’t know what Harpole told his council colleagues. We do know, though, that he scolded Burkett strongly in public over Burkett’s assertion that he demanded Assistant City Manager Vicki Covey’s resignation when Covey’s retirement already had been in the works. Burkett wasn’t present to hear Harpole’s harsh words, although I’m quite certain he heard of them soon afterward.

It’s also instructive that Burkett left the Tuesday meeting quickly and fended off media attempt to question him as he exited the building.

So, all the principals say they’re happy with the way the direction the city is headed. Councilman Nair spoke of the need to pull together.

Good for all of you — and especially to Mayor Harpole, if he did what I hope he did behind closed doors.

local news

Mayor goes to battle with councilman

http://agntv.amarillo.com/news/mayor-calls-out-burkett-snide-brag

This video isn’t very long. It didn’t need to be to get Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole’s point across.

He ripped into Place 3 City Councilman Randy Burkett for contending falsely that Assistant City Manager Vicki Covey quit her job at his request … or, more to the point, at his demand.

Harpole said Covey “retired” from her post. He said the city had a letter in its possession that pre-dated Burkett’s assertion that he had sought her resignation.

What’s most compelling about the video is the strong language that the mayor is using to describe the conduct of one of his City Council colleagues. It’s the kind thing we haven’t heard from City Council members — or mayors — at least in the more than 20 years that I’ve been watching City Hall politics and government.

Harpole’s remarks came Monday at the joint City Council-Amarillo Economic Development Corporation meeting.

Burkett was absent from the meeting.

This, it seems to be, is likely to become the new normal at Amarillo City Hall at least for the next two years.

Voters wanted “change”? Well, there you have it.

Stay tuned.

 

local news

Big day awaits at City Hall

This could be a big day at Amarillo City Hall.

No matter how it turns out.

City Council members have this item on their agenda, to discuss the “status” of City Manager Jarrett Atkinson.

At least two council members — new guys Mark Nair and Randy Burkett — want Atkinson to quit. The third new guy, Elisha Demerson, hasn’t stated his preference. Two other council members, Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades, want him to stay. The council is facing a potentially serious fracturing among its members. All that harmony has given way to a cacophony of voices trying to outshout each other, perhaps reflecting the mood across this city of 200,000 residents.

Does the city manager quit? Does he stay on the job? Does he force the council to vote to fire him? If he gets canned, how much of a severance package is he going to demand, if he even deserves one?

And what does all of this mean for Amarillo’s march toward the future with its downtown revival plan already started. Construction has begun on a new Xcel Energy office complex. A large tract across the street from City Hall has been vacated to make room for a planned multipurpose event venue. Another tract has been wiped clean to make room for a downtown convention hotel. The hotel developer is waiting to see what happens with the MPEV.

All those plans are really what’s at stake here.

The new guys — or at least two of them — have acted recklessly with their call for Atkinson to quit. They barely know their way around City Hall, yet they’ve demanded radical change. City Attorney Marcus Norris is out, having given the city two weeks’ notice before he clears out.

My own hope — from my perch out here in the peanut gallery — is that the new guys will have settled down a bit from their giddiness at having been elected to the council. Councilman Eades has asked them to rethink their Atkinson-must-go mantra.

Yes. A big day awaits us at Amarillo City Hall.

local news

What if Atkinson goes?

atkinson

Let’s play a little game of “What if …?”

Are you ready? Here goes.

What if Amarillo City Manager Jarrett Atkinson decides — against the expressed wishes of one of the city councilmen to whom he reports — that he doesn’t want to resign?

What if, then, the City Council decides to terminate the city manager?

What if the city then launches a national search to find a new chief executive for the city administration? Lord knows they aren’t going to look inward for that one, given that they want “change” at City Hall. Nor should they. The job is a big one and it requires someone with considerable skill and — as seen in recent weeks — someone with a rhino hide.

What if the council dangles a job posting out there, offers to pay the next city manager a lot of money and it gets responses from dozens of qualified candidates?

What if, then, the city manager applicants one by one start looking at the city’s recent history? They note that the council fired the city manager who was up to his eyeballs in planning a downtown revitalization project. They also take note that one of the councilmen who wanted Atkinson to quit had barely taken his oath of office before spouting off.

Then they wonder, do I really want to go work in that environment, for that body of council members who were so quick to dismiss an experienced public servant?

What if the process drags on for months as the city keeps combing the country for the right person who’s willing to come to Amarillo, Texas — which, while it’s a nice city with nice people, isn’t exactly paradise?

Finally, what if the city manager selection process drags on so long that all the hard work that’s gone into redeveloping downtown Amarillo gets flushed down the toilet?

Therein lies the potential predicament that awaits these City Hall change agents.

Good luck, gentlemen.

local news

Keep it in the open, City Council

The Amarillo City Council agenda for Tuesday has been posted.

It’s in this link:

http://amarillo.gov/departments/citymgr/2015/agenda/agenda_07_07_2015_17_30_00.pdf

As you scan it you’ll notice that the council plans to discuss City Manager Jarrett Atkinson’s “status” and requests for his resignation. The item is posted as part of its open session. Not in closed, or executive session, which the Texas Open Meetings Act allows.

Here’s what I think ought to happen.

I believe the council should keep the item out there, to be discussed in full public view — if Atkinson agrees.

Why? Well, the call for his resignation came a few days ago in fairly dramatic fashion — and it was done publicly. The council’s newest member, Mark Nair, had taken his oath that day. Then he said, in public, that Atkinson should resign.

Nair is an agent of change, according to the election results for Place 4. So, by golly, he wants change and he wants it sooner rather than later.

So, why not allow a full public airing of the gripes against the city manager? State law allows it. It doesn’t require governmental bodies to meet in private; it merely allows them to do so. “Personnel” is one of those items that can be discussed in secret.

Nair and fellow new council members Elisha Demerson and Randy Burkett all seem to think a change at the top of the city administration is in order.

Why? Let’s hear it, gentlemen.

You’ve called for “transparency.” Here’s your chance to deliver the goods.

Oh, and be sure to let the city manager answer whatever assertions you intend to make point by point.