|
Top Secret – Part 2 By Ron C. West, April 2, 2004
|
| The saga of the closed
society at the North Richland Hills seems to be a never ending story. As
we approach the election for Mayor and City Council Places 2,4 & 6, you
would think that the incumbents would begin to look more open and
responsive to the electorate. With the only local newspaper showing signs
of bias on a grand scale, they could look magnanimous by simply
condescending to the challengers which they feel are totally unqualified
to even be in the same room with them much less than have the audacity to
challenge them. After at least few years on the Council, however, it
appears that they may suffer from hardening of the brain. They know that
the challengers should show them the respect that the power of their
position demands. Unfortunately, they have chosen the course of making information very difficult to get for the challengers and anyone else that who might want to try to understand their actions. Every other week, there is a City Council Meeting with a scheduled pre-council meeting preceding it. For each such meeting, city staff prepares a package of information containing all new ordinances and any supporting material for contracts, zoning changes or other items to be considered by the council. In all cases, even when public hearings are scheduled, the decisions of the council are effectively made with all ordinances pre-drafted and prepared for council action. This information packet is supplied without charge to the Fort Worth Star Telegram prior to each such meeting. Four candidates, myself included, have filed to oppose the council in the upcoming election. About a week ago, I made a face to face request to the City Secretary to provide the same packets without charge to the four challengers for the period preceding the election on May 15th. She said that she could not do so, so I asked her to discuss the matter with Mr. Larry Cunningham, City Manager and to have him call me to discuss the situation if he wished to do so. I received no call. Instead, I received the following email from the City Secretary... From: PHUTSON@nrhtx.com Subject: Agenda Packets 3/22/2004 3:47 PM Mr. West,
You asked today on the phone that all candidates be provided with a copy of the Council meeting agenda packets beginning now until the conclusion of the election. Agenda packets are open to the public and you, any of the other candidates or public may purchase a copy at ten cents per page. The agenda packet for tonight’s meeting consists of 46 pages without the 4 page agenda which you can print from the city’s home page. The copy charge for this agenda packet is $4.60. As I mentioned to you on the phone, a copy is also available for public use in the Library each Friday prior to the Council meeting. A copy is also placed in the Council Chambers during the Council meeting for the public’s use. Please advise if you would like to purchase a copy of the March 22 agenda. Requests for future agenda packets will need to be made after the agenda packets have been completed.
Patricia Hutson City Secretary, City of North Richland Hills , 817.427.6060 Translation... This information will not be made available to the candidates for help with a smooth transition should they be elected. In order to get this information, we must effectively file an open records request, only after they have created the documents, and then pay for it. The bottom line is that they do not want the public or any of us as challengers, to have this information and they are acting in a manner to discourage the disclosure of it. On March 31st, just to make sure that I had the “correct” information, I again called City Hall and requested that the City Manager call me back to once again discuss the open records issues with him. He returned my call on April 1st, 2004 and reiterated that the only way we could see the packets was to visit the library after 3PM on Friday preceding Council Meeting and/or City Offices. If we wanted copies of anything, we could then request and pay for them. It is important to note that the information we are seeking is copies of ordinances and resolutions that the Council will consider and vote on in the meeting on the Monday following their “printing”. Since the Council must operate under the Open Meetings Laws of Texas, this must mean that the Council is reading, considering and voting on ordinances, fees and resolutions – without hardly any discussion or prior consideration. City staff prepares the information, submits it to the Council in the packet and they rubber stamp Mr. Cunningham’s operations. This does not seem to me to be the way things ought to happen. This exchange followed several open records requests. The first regarding the Council’s intent to issue new Certificates of Obligation to pay for maintenance on a ground level water tank and to build a new pavilion at Iron Horse Golf Course. The Council plans to spend $560,000 to refurbish the tank. We wanted to see why it was costing so much and why this was not normal maintenance that should have been covered by our water bills. Our request yielded a reply that it would cost us $184 to see the required documents. I have since met with the City Secretary and have reviewed enough of the documents to learn that there was some type of citation by EPA officials at State level concerning lead pollution around the tank and a demand to correct it. Apparently, the city intends to sand blast the old lead based paint off the tank as part of their solution. It also appears that the most expensive ways possible to “upgrade” the tank have been approved by city staff and the council. Here again, the City Manager and the Council do not want to show the information to anyone who questions their judgment. A second Open Records Request was regarding a trip planned to go to New York City to supposedly help the city sell their bonds. Mayor Trevino, Councilman Metts, Councilman Welch, City Manager Cunningham and the Finance Director are all supposed to make the trip which we believe to be planned for the first week in April. We also understand that there was a similar recent junket to Washington, DC – probably for a photo op. As it turns out, the City Secretary has indicated that there are NO records of expenses or travel planning for any of the folks going to NYC. If our understanding is now correct, the entire trip is being paid for by the city’s “bonding agent” and all such expenses will be folded into his fees to the city for selling the bonds. The bonding agent’s records are not subject to Open Records Requests. In this manner, the above group can travel in style, hide the expenses and the taxpayer still gets to pay for it. I wonder how much more of this is going on in NRH under this City Council and City Manager? As a group, the challengers now have more Open Records Requests pending with the city but under the current administration, data is hard to come by. It is our understanding that it is very unusual for Councilmen to go on the type this type of bond sales junket – but when no one can see what you are doing, why not? When I called the agent supposedly representing the City in selling the upcoming bonds, to see if I could gain a better understanding of the trip, he would not return my calls. When I told the City Secretary that he would not return my calls, she didn’t seem surprised. We currently live in a city that appears to have much to hide. I fear that the control of the City is in the hands of Mr. Cunningham and staff while the sitting city council is concerned about beautification, micro-management of new businesses entering the city, and PR while they look important at the Council Meetings. At the behest of the staff, they have incurred debt without voter approval of over $17,000,000 and are still adding to it. If they want the trust of the citizens and voters, they need to live up to the intent of the laws and their pledge to serve. Open records are basic to any citizen control of our local government. If there is a deliberate and concerted attempt to obscure and hide records by NRH, we need to change things. If this concerns you, there will never be a better time for you to contact the Mayor or any member of the current City Council to ask them what they are hiding or are afraid of. If they are doing their job right, the spotlight of public attention should be something they are proud of. I personally don’t think that is what you will find in NRH right now. While the sitting City Council and Mayor pay lip service to serving the citizens, they seem to act as if they are kings and the tax payers and citizens of the city are their serfs or peasants. Texas State Law says: Texas Government Code , Chapter 552 - Public Information, Subchapter A. Under the fundamental philosophy of the American constitutional form of representative government that adheres to the principle that government is the servant and not the master of the people, it is the policy of this state that each person is entitled, unless otherwise expressly provided by law, at all times to complete information about the affairs of government and the official acts of public officials and employees. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created. The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed to implement this policy. (b) This Chapter shall be liberally construed in favor of granting a request for information. Our current elected leadership has demonstrated over and over that it will fulfill the letter of the law to the minimum standard required. This is illustrated in the “top secret” nature of how they allow information to be released, how they hold hearings long after the decisions are finalized and how they treat citizens who try to speak before the council or who express any opposition to their positions. My question continues to be – Is this the type of local “top secret” government we want to live under? |
