Politics makes strange bedfellows

Often quoted, but rarely attributed to 19^thCentury journalist Charles Dudley Warner, the notion is that people with otherwise strongly different and disparate views can cooperate on a common goal.

So it seems that I am now allied with some Amarillo folks over downtown development — specifically advocating a vote opposing the baseball stadium so-called multi-purpose event venue. But on other issues, these people hold personal and political views so opposite to mine that I am a little flabbergasted I am working with them. These people are far more conservative, perhaps even right-wing, more religiously fundamentalist and overt about it. Their ways with words are also different, reflecting more of their more salt-of-the-earth characteristics than my university-educated and 20-year journalism career approach to thinking and writing.

But make no mistake about this: These are good people with good hearts. They have concluded, as I have, that, the current Wallace Bajjali-Downtown Amarillo Inc.-Amarillo Globe-News plan for downtown development is fatally flawed. These are good people who smell a rat, or several rats, in the downtown development cabal.

I don’t know if their views would lead to alternative plans or whether their views arise from a strict view that government’s role at every level should be limited and that so-called public-private partnerships betray that notion. From a pragmatic perspective on this one issue, it doesn’t matter. On the other hand, I hope we can turn the direction of downtown development back to revitalizing the Civic Center, restoring the Herring Hotel to its former glory and properly exploiting the cattle-cowboy-railroad Western Heritage to attract tourism.

For me, however, it’s a strange sensation, given my long history of wanting alliances to be with people more philosophically pure than on a case-by-case basis. At age 70, it is a strange sensation, one I like, although I still struggle a bit with the discomfort.

Hell has frozen over: Ballpark Vote — a change in position

Earlier today (Friday), I postedthat KAMR’s storyexposed another sneaky move buried in the Local Government Corp.-City Council-Downtown Amarillo Inc. contract for the downtown parking garage. The promoters of the Wallace Bajjali-DAI plan have placed a requirement that downtown Amarillo be “blessed” with parking meters in addition to the multi-million parking structure.

The purpose is pretty clear: People are either going to pay for parking downtown on the street or in the garage, come Hell or high water (of which we have plenty lately).

Let’s put aside the pro and con arguments of the garage and parking meters. Instead, let’s look at some underlying points:

First, this revelation is one of a long, well-documented list spin, misrepresentations and outright lies propagated by DAI, the Local Government Corp. and others in the Wallace Bajjali camp of downtown development — including the Amarillo Globe-News and (mainly) the former City Council. It is, as I wrote, the “the proverbial ‘straw that breaks the camel’s back’” in this almost decade-long push to shape downtown in the visions of:

• A fraudster master developer in the form of Wallace Bajjali;
• A third- or even fourth-rate planner heading DAI;
• Boards of DAI, the LGC and Amarillo Economic Development Corp. that show no analytical thinking skills, approving without question anything the bureaucrats want;
• The 10^th-rate publisher of the Amarillo Globe-News, a daily outlet for which the only love for this city is for the amount of money it can suck out of the economy by pandering to those here who can write the big checks;
• And, prior City Commissions/Councils so clueless and bereft of critical thinking skills that they have led the AEDC and others into an FBI and grand jury investigation.

How do we put a stop to all this?

The three new councilors ran on a platform calling for placing the proposed ballpark on a ballot so voters would have a say about downtown development. I supported all three of the new councilors as candidates on the basis of that position and their calls for transparency in city government. And, normally I would push for elected officials to adhere to their campaign promises. But in this case, I am changing my view.

So, in relation to this, why might Hell have frozen over? Because I agree with a July 18 editorialfrom the city’s propaganda-in-chief Globe-News that called on the City Council to take an open vote on going forward with the ballpark.

There are several reason why I am releasing the new councilors from their campaign pledge.

First, although I believe a decent turnout for citywide vote on the issue will defeat the ballpark, thereby opening the door to rebooting the entire downtown development effort, I want to eliminate the risk of the ballpark winning. The main ways I would consider supporting a public vote is if the City Council invoked its investigative powers under the City Code before the election and let the public judge if it wants to proceed after having all the facts exposed from people under oath. Or, if the council froze all money to DAI and others as to limit their propagandizing.

Second, I am concerned that an additional four months of fighting over this will permit the Wallace Bajjali political descendants here to use their vast wealth to buy the election. They have far more resources than us rational folks and there is a strong possibility we’re at risk of them funneling public money through the city and DAI to sway the election.

Third, the Globe-News has a vested interest and lacks the journalistic ethics to give people here the straight story. The motives and power to purposefully misinform are strong. Finally, in the category of “be careful what you wish for,” I believe the people whom the Globe-News, Wallace Bajjali allies, previous commissioners and councilors have ignored, abused and demeaned need to teach those abusers a public lesson.

In short, “the little people” need to invoke that famous quote from “Network,” the Academy Award-winning movie: “I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!”

Why scrutinize the Amarillo downtown plan and ballpark?

John Kanelis is my friend, a fellow journalist and blogger and a gentle soul. His posts at High Plains Blogger reflect his kindness and decency. But on one issue, he and I disagree strongly and have for years.

That issue is Amarillo’s downtown redevelopment and the plan that Paul Harpole and the former City Council, aided and abetted by Downtown Amarillo Inc., the Amarillo Economic Development Corp., the Local Government Corp. and the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, have ramrodded since at least 2008.

The three-legged stool (the metaphor of stool is purposely chosen) consisted of a “convention hotel,” a parking garage and a so-called multi-purpose event venue. John focuses on the MPEV, questioning why this ballpark is getting so much attention and repeating, sadly, the City Council “party-line” that (and here is how John said it), “No tax money will be spent on these projects.”

I had a similar debate on Facebook with Walter Riggs, a veteran banker in Amarillo. Like John, he supports the current plan. The exchange with Walter was civil and courteous and in the end, we agreed to disagree. I am sure John and I will also. Nevertheless, here are some of the key points I made to Walter and offer for my reader’s and John’s consideration.

·In 2008, the then- City Commission still had political capital to overcome its sneaky trick of subsidizing the Globe-News Center shortfall, which was $1.8 million, not the “million or so dollars” John cited. The city could have, according to my sources, gotten a bond passed for redoing the Civic Center.

·Alan Abraham, a reluctant candidate who fell to long-time councilor Brian Eades in the recent city election, a while back showed the City Commission/City Council a university-based study that the cookie-cutter approach pushed by DAI and failed master developer Wallace Bajjali that packaged the ballpark, a garage and “convention center” hotel was doomed in a community of this size. I also posited that downtown could be revived using the Herring Hotel as the touchstone and capitalizing on Amarillo railroad and Western history. I still believe that would have been a viable approach.

·It was The Amarillo Independent that vetted Wallace Bajjali better than DAI, the Amarillo Globe-News and the city of Amarillo’s hired attorneys. I suspect those in power didn’t want to listen to the Indy because I was one of those horrible “liberals.” But my politics have nothing to do with it. Nor do I consider being right about this a matter of luck. I believe we uncovered information through hard work, due diligence and good judgment.

John asked why the scrutiny on the ballpark. He notes, “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.”

And perhaps that is the difference between a nice guy like John and someone who has watched politics in Louisiana, New Jersey, Colorado, New Mexico and, now, Amarillo. I am not willing to trust the city’s current administration or the prior City Council. Those experiences have informed my cynical view. Further, the way the city has treated the Herring Hotel reinforced my view that something is going on in Amarillo that doesn’t pass the “smell test” and ultimately, with the FBI and Grand Jury looking at the AEDC, may not pass the legal test.

And, that is why we need to watch the City Council and the rest of the downtown planning closely, and especially the ballpark.

Why scrutinize the Amarillo downtown plan and ballpark?

John Kanelis is my friend, a fellow journalist and blogger and a gentle soul. His posts at High Plains Blogger reflect his kindness and decency. But on one issue, he and I disagree strongly and have for years.

That issue is Amarillo’s downtown redevelopment and the plan that Paul Harpole and the former City Council, aided and abetted by Downtown Amarillo Inc., the Amarillo Economic Development Corp., the Local Government Corp. and the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, have ramrodded since at least 2008.

The winds of change blew into city Hall Saturday

The Amarillo City Council got a strong message Saturday. The voters have said, “We don’t like what you’re doing and we don’t like the way you’re doing it.”

Here’s where we stand with the unofficial final numbers posted at 9:18 p.m. (here)

Mayor — Paul Harpole retains his seat with 54 percent of 14,016 votes cast. That certainly is a less resounding victory than two years ago. The 8 percentage point spread isn’t that big in the context of the 2013 race and the other results down ballot. It should be clear that Harpole no longer can claim a mandate, as he has with such hubris. Don’t overlook that Harpole had tons of money and challenger Roy McDowell didn’t. McDowell is not a smooth operator like Harpole.

Place 1 — Incumbent Ellen Robertson Green falls to Elisha Demerson with 44 percent of the 14,148 votes in this nasty and hotly contested race. Voters going down ballot are clear they want a different councilor in this slot. How much the nastiness in Green’s campaign backfired isn’t clear; nor, is it clear whether Green’s record and the way she touted defeated her. Demerson ran on transparency and took the high road.

Place 2 — Incumbent Brian Eades’ victory over Alan Abraham is no surprise. Abraham, who ran more out of conscience and a desire to foment discussion than a fire to win, didn’t mount an aggressive campaign. Even at that, he got more than one-third of the votes (35 percent of 13,942 cast), which I attribute to anti-incumbent backlash. Eades garnered much support from the Amarillo medical community and for his role in the animal control debacle. He was also the only councilor who finally admitted some culpability in the city’s lack of leadership. Will we see an Eades-Harpole contest in 2017? If Eades decides to run for mayor in two years, he will be formidable.

Place 3 — Randy Burkett bested the five-contender field with 55 percent of the 13,956 votes, defeating incumbent Lilia Escajeda. Escajeda’s lackluster get-along-by-going-along record for downtown development and other issues coupled with Burkett’s more aggressive style sealed her fate, despite an eleventh-hour hatchet job by the Amarillo Globe-News.

Place 4 — Jim Simms’ seat, as it will likely be known for some time, heads for a run-off between Mark Nair and Steve Rogers. Nair’s 45 percent to Rogers’ 25 percent of 13,848 votes wasn’t enough to elect him outright. The three other contestants divvied up the rest of the votes. Undoubtedly, the upcoming contest in June will see many reminders that Rogers is the appraiser in the questionable Commerce Building deal and is also, if my sources are correct, Harpole’s hand-picked choice. If Nair can overcome the establishment, Harpole’s money and be aggressive, he can win this election.

There are some important lessons:

·Those who say there is no hope for change in Amarillo and voting doesn’t matter are wrong. The results are nothing short of stunning, especially if Nair prevails in the run-off. That gives the five-member council three anti-incumbent seats, leaving only Harpole and Eades to defend the council’s past actions.

·The City Council and mayor will need to back off on the headlong cockamamie downtown plans and the stupidity of the ballpark. It opens the door for a reboot of downtown planning and a re-evaluation of the roles of Downtown Amarillo Inc., the Local Government Corp. and the Amarillo Economic Development Corp. Whether some folks’ résumés over at city Hall need updating remains to be seen.

·Paul “Mr. Hubris” Harpole might consider this a lesson in etiquette and courtesy. Let’s see if it’s a teachable moment.

Of course, it ain’t over till it’s over. Stay tuned.

The winds of change blew into city Hall Saturday

The Amarillo City Council got a strong message Saturday. The voters have said, “We don’t like what you’re doing and we don’t like the way you’re doing it.”

Here’s where we stand with the unofficial final numbers posted at 9:18 p.m. (here)

Mayor — Paul Harpole retains his seat with 54 percent of 14,016 votes cast. That certainly is a less resounding victory than two years ago. The 8 percentage point spread isn’t that big in the context of the 2013 race and the other results down ballot. It should be clear that Harpole no longer can claim a mandate, as he has with such hubris. Don’t overlook that Harpole had tons of money and challenger Roy McDowell didn’t. McDowell is not a smooth operator like Harpole.

Election issues continue to roil

Jay Groom, a Facebook friend and real life acquaintance posted the following last night: “Very ashamed of the (so-called nsp) in our fine city. The editor (Les) has gone out of his way to increase readership and therefore revenue at the expense of putting a lot of well-meaning public servants in a negative light.

Are these public servants without fault? Am I without fault? Les, are you without fault? No. I have yet to hear thoughtful solutions for some of our city's problems from the nsp or many of the candidates looking to replace the present city council. So many of the negative views of the current mayor and city council have come from a relatively few anonymous posters in the nsp and a couple of mayor wannabees that for whatever reason, chose not to run. Rant is over. I throw it to George Schwarz for a thoughtful rebuttal.”

I obliged.

Jay Groom, thanks for the toss and I’ll rise to the occasion — mainly because I can’t keep my damn mouth shut!

When I came to Amarillo in June 2003, I did so with high hopes of being on the staff of a medium-sized daily paper that was important to the community and provided high-quality journalism as the descendent of a Pulitzer-winning newspaper. When I interviewed for the job, I made it clear that along with being the health and medicine reporter (having a M.A. in hospital and health administration), I am also an investigative reporter. I joined Investigative Reporters and Editors in 1995, during my career change, and have never let the membership lapse. That’s my commitment to investigative reporting.

In the interim of the job offer and arrival, Les Simpson had fired Cathy Martindale as executive editor. I didn’t see that as a harbinger of the paper’s (I refuse to call the Amarillo Globe-News a newspaper) deterioration. But, for as long as I was there, I saw stories killed and scared cows protected. How ironic given Gene Howe’s quote above the door. Then there was the Franklin Covey program that Les and Morris Communications inflicted on the newsroom in which they declared there were no sacred cows. Most of the reporters there laughed at that one. By the way, I can give you all several specific examples of spiked or slanted stories, but not at the moment.

Fast-forward to 2008, with the two-year-old Amarillo Independent covering the City Council (I am using Commission and Council interchangeably, although I know the difference), when the current push for downtown planning reared its head. The Indy pointed out a lot of the problems with the plan, including the failure to focus on the Civic Center first. Despite the City Council’s duplicity with the Globe-News Center, enough political capital remained that the voters would have approved a bond issue for a big Civic Center project. The hotel and other projects, whatever they would be and whatever direction they took would have followed.

During that time, Richard Brown touted the establishment of Downtown Amarillo Inc. as the mechanism to bring the real estate and development expertise to the city, with it being a nonprofit not subject to the Texas sunshine laws. A lot of people objected to that; and many other people — including Alan Abraham (but not Brian Eades) — also objected to Les being placed on DAI’s and the Local Government Corp.’s boards. I remember objecting before the council and in editorials, arguing that if one media outlet was on those boards, all should be. Of course, it was clear why the council pulled that stunt — co-option of the worse kind.

I have said openly and will repeat it here. Les could have done the right thing as an ethical journalist and declined those posts. But, he didn’t. As far as I’m concerned, he forfeited any right to be called a journalist. Whatever his motivation, by repudiating core journalistic ethics, by being part of the process instead of being a watchdog of it, he made the Globe-News and himself bigger lapdogs than they already were. Even worse, he was part of the group that brought Melissa Dailey to DAI and she was the one who, with Les, brought Wallace Bajjali to the table. The Indy did its part with watchdog journalism in November 2010, revealing WB’s shady record at a council work session, all the while Les sat stewing and Dailey claiming DAI had done its due diligence. The city’s retention of a Dallas law firm to “vet” Wallace Bajjali was a ploy to simply grease the skids. As Don Yee pointed out, in commenting about the NFL’s law firm’s “Deflategate” report, law firms can be counted on to come up with findings the client wants. Did the firms do so for the city?

The downtown planning process was gamed from the start and, although the Kabuki Dance tried to make it look like an open process and invited other ideas, the truth is once Dailey and Wallace Bajjali got involved, it was going to be WB’s cookie-cutter ballpark approach. But worse, despite the Indy kicking open the public records and meetings doors at DAI, most of the efforts continued behind closed doors. The city can look cooperative while stonewalling. It’s really quite charming, but it isn’t transparent. As the downtown debacle unfolded and other city problems came to the forefront, failed oversight and transparency became the issues of this campaign.

I don’t think it’s totally accurate to fault the challengers for not having solutions. Many of them have articulated that rebuilding the Civic Center should be the next step; and that the Herring Hotel should not be shut out of the plans. And a call to revamp city management, draconian it may be, is a solution. When the Indy covered this issue, we took editorial positions calling for the Civic Center as a priority, focusing in the city’s railroad, Western heritage and the magic of Route 66. Those ideas were spurned but I am still convinced that those are the elements of Amarillo that people are interested in; I still subscribe to the notion that the ballpark is a joke. Alan Abraham has a university study showing what a bad idea those ballparks are and he showed it to the councilors. The council has a knack for rejecting good information.

As for the Globe-News not offering solutions or alternatives, what do you expect with Les so invested in this debacle? He has gone pretty low profile, hasn’t he? But the Globe-News turning on the city and incumbents has Les’ fingerprints all over it. I don’t know the reason or reasons, although I have my theories.

As for “relatively few anonymous posters in the nsp,” I make two observations. First, the City Council, DAI, WB and the AGN have argued that there was citizen input accepting all the elements of the downtown plan, but in the context of our city, those were relatively few. So, are the posters on the AGN website a disproportionate few? Second, I’ve posted on the AGN site for years, but every time someone there figures out my screen name, they ban me. I outed myself as “opinionista” this past weekend in response to Melissa Dailey using her maiden name and posting propaganda and inaccurate information. I expect to be banned any day now.

I can’t speak for anyone else’s tone, style or criticism of the incumbents. I’ve been harsh but civil. And I stand by my positions. I didn’t grow up in Texas. I grew up in New Orleans and, as an adult, lived in eight states before getting here. I never liked the “get along by going along” approach to politics, public policy or management, although I don’t like the nastiness we’ve seen. But what I see has blunt and straightforward comments and opinions are seen by others as harsh or negative. I see that as a “get along by going along” ploy. I am 70-years-old. I am beyond the point of needing to care what others think of me as long as I retain my own integrity.

Thanks for inviting me to comment and for reading.

Election issues continue to roil

Jay Groom, a Facebook friend and real life acquaintance posted the following last night: “Very ashamed of the (so-called nsp) in our fine city. The editor (Les) has gone out of his way to increase readership and therefore revenue at the expense of putting a lot of well-meaning public servants in a negative light.

Are these public servants without fault? Am I without fault? Les, are you without fault? No. I have yet to hear thoughtful solutions for some of our city's problems from the nsp or many of the candidates looking to replace the present city council. So many of the negative views of the current mayor and city council have come from a relatively few anonymous posters in the nsp and a couple of mayor wannabees that for whatever reason, chose not to run. Rant is over. I throw it to George Schwarz for a thoughtful rebuttal.”

I obliged.

Local group launches anti-council ad

Local group launches anti-council ad

Amarillo City Hall runs off the rails -- again

If you thought the stupidity out of Amarillo’s City Hall couldn’t get worse, think again. A story from

ABC 7 News reports that the city is considering making the $3 million Santa Fe Depot, which it bought with taxpayer money, into an “Intermodal Transportation Center.”

Normally I don’t quote a story this extensively, but I’ll make an exception in this case because you’ll have to read the verbiage to see how pathetic this is. The idea seems to have come from Downtown Amarillo Inc., which quoted DAI’s board chairman John Lutz, “We could take all of our transportation assets such as our busing — both private and public, our taxi system, and different things and put them all right here. This way they could be a better resource for the city at large.”

Yes, let’s do that, Mr. Lutz. All the assets, and “different things.” What different things? Like Amtrak? Oh, wait, the passenger train doesn’t stop here anymore. Does “all” include bringing the airport downtown?

Of course, that last little dig is mine, mainly to show how silly, ill-informed and scared the downtown development cabal is running. And if you want some more vague generalizations, check out the quote from Amarillo’s city manager.

“You're going to have the opportunity for many things,” said Jarrett Atkinson, City Manager. “You can take advantage of the space, take advantage of those historic buildings and keep moving forward.”

“Many things.”

“Keep moving forward.”

The city and DAI are grasping at straws, trying to generate some semblance of progress on downtown development. A few weeks ago, it was the Liberty Theater, with misleading information, if not lies, about how that icon of civil rights in Amarillo will be preserved. Now this.

You see, while the city, DAI, the Amarillo Economic Development Corp., the Local Government Corp. and the City Council were financially fornicating with Wallace Bajjali, and getting screwed in without even a kiss, the city sat on its butt doing nothing to get the Southwest Chief rerouted. Or, to explore other options that might have revived rail service for Amarillo. Can’t be done, you say? Look at other states: Illinois, the New England state; ones along the route of the Crescent up the East Coast.

Thanks for ABC 7 News for exposing another problem with a City Council that is at the heart of a mismanaged city.

Amarillo City Hall runs off the rails -- again

If you thought the stupidity out of Amarillo’s City Hall couldn’t get worse, think again. A story from

ABC 7 News reports that the city is considering making the $3 million Santa Fe Depot, which it bought with taxpayer money, into an “Intermodal Transportation Center.”

Let's ask council incumbents some questions

I have already voted in the City Council, Amarillo College and Amarillo ISD races. As a result, I see

no need to attend the campaign ploy that Paul Harpole is running under the guise of being a mayor’s “town hall meeting.” That meeting was announced using city of Amarillo resources, by the way. The notice came from the city’s community relations coordinator and is posted to the city’s website (http://www.amarillo.gov/?p=6880).

If anyone goes, or knows of anyone going, please feel free to circulate these to pose to Harpole. In fact, if anyone encounters a city incumbent anywhere, perhaps these would be good questions to ask.

Why did the council ignore The Amarillo Independent’s findings about Wallace Bajjali? If The Amarillo Independent wasn’t good enough, why go to a law firm to investigate? Why not do your own due diligence?

Why did Alan Taylor retire? Was there any truth to the rumor that he disagreed with the downtown plan?

The Strategic Action Plan effort had fewer than 1,000 participants. Why did the City Council consider that representative of the city?

Why was the Herring not included in the land use planning? Why has the City Council ignored the Herring Hotel as a resource for conventions? Who is behind the squeeze play on the Herring?

What happened to the “citizen vote” that was promised? With such a pathetic voter turnout in 2013, how can you justify that this was a mandate or endorsement of the ongoing plans?

If the new hotel is such a strong asset, why does it need to be protected by a non-compete clause? Or revenue guarantees?

How does city ownership of the hotel square with this community’s prevailing Libertarian or Republican ideals of a free market, a market where government doesn’t pick winners and losers?

How is it that the City Council ignored university studies that showed the very cookie-cutter plans that Wallace Bajjali brought to you don’t result in economic development?

How can the city contract with the Southern Independent League without a city-owned stadium to play in?

Why does the City Council and city management stonewall public records requests?

Why does the City Council protect the Amarillo Economic Development Corp.’s and Downtown Amarillo Inc.’s incompetence?

Let's ask council incumbents some questions

I have already voted in the City Council, Amarillo College and Amarillo ISD races. As a result, I see

no need to attend the campaign ploy that Paul Harpole is running under the guise of being a mayor’s “town hall meeting.” That meeting was announced using city of Amarillo resources, by the way. The notice came from the city’s community relations coordinator and is posted to the city’s website (http://www.amarillo.gov/?p=6880).

If anyone goes, or knows of anyone going, please feel free to circulate these to pose to Harpole. In fact, if anyone encounters a city incumbent anywhere, perhaps these would be good questions to ask.

An Open Letter to Brian Eades

As I got out of the car yesterday morning after dropping my wife off at a sub job, I thought I got a whiff of the smell of cattle money. I didn’t detect a breeze, so I was mystified why the odor was so strong. Then I read your email and realized the smell was coming from that.

For someone who has repeatedly sat on the dais and said he makes public policy on the basis of facts and evidence, your pattern of behavior, support of the downtown plan and Wallace Bajjali betrays your principles. And that’s a fact.

Now, let’s address some of your comments.

· “Since that time, we have a new city manager, new mayor and all new city council members technically except for me.” — The “new” city manager was a long-time city employee and well in the loop about the downtown planning. If he wasn’t in the loop, your oversight of the city management is flawed because, as assistant manager, Jarrett should have been in the loop. A “new” mayor is equally fallacious. Paul has been part of the City Council before. He was well aware of the City Council issues and activities. And the same goes for other councilors. Jim Simms can’t be consider as new. Ron Boyd had been on the commission for years. Ellen was active on the Traffic Commission. Verdict: Spin failure due to your bad information or lack of understanding.

· “We have a new hotel developer, a new TIRZ chair, a new Center City president, a local government corporation and a new DAI executive director.” — The NewCrestImage people are not new. They did the Fisk Building, despite Melissa Dailey’s attempt to undercut them. The “new” TIRZ chair was on the TIRZ board so he wasn’t “new;” and he is a prominent lawyer in town and did the legal framework for TIRZ and Downtown Amarillo Inc. The Center city president came from within its own board, so he wasn’t new either. The new LGC board was made up of veteran city people, council members and others who have long been deeply involved with city public policy in one form or the other. You helped appoint them. If they were too new to do the job right, you shouldn’t have. And the DAI executive director? A third-rate or fourth-rate transportation planner who had no broad experience in major planning issues. Verdict: Spin failure due to your bad information or lack of understanding.

· “We have a new traffic engineer and even a new animal control director etc.” — Yep, sure do. Verdict: Irrelevant for downtown planning but emblematic of the City Council’s incompetent oversight of city functions.

· “Yes George, things change. As does the weather, economic indices, financial fortunes and your investment portfolio.” — And smart managers and others charged with oversight take changes into account and adjust accordingly. Verdict: Failure to oversee the environment properly.

· “Thanks heavens for some modicum of continuity.” — Wait, wait. Continuity? Didn’t you just regale me with all that “new” stuff that you think excused you from the poor decisions in which you participated and in which other commissioners/councilors undertook? Verdict: Contradiction exposes spin failure (again).

· “Now, in regards to your statement, I can't for the life of me find a question mark anywhere in there.” — This sentence elevated you from hubris past arrogance to unmitigated gall. Are you saying I have to bow and scrape to you, oh royal one, and can only ask you questions? I don’t see it that way. You and the others continue to run on the platform you represent all the people, but it seems that the only people to whom you listen are other Amarillo royalty. No, Brian, I wasn’t asking you questions. I was pointing out that you and the other council members are refusing to acknowledge how poorly you have governed this city. And how incredibly bad the decisions are you’ve made, especially with respect of downtown.

Further, on this last bullet point, my email to you and the other councilors was about how you and others ignored good, solid information about Wallace Bajjali — information beyond The Amarillo Independent’s 2010 story — that a simple Google search would have gotten you. (Spare me the Dallas law firm. They didn’t “vet” anything.) The council, had it been following WBDP’s problems elsewhere like Waco, Corpus Christi and Joplin, had the chance to kill this deal off in Nov. 2013. You didn’t. The council didn’t.

Verdict: The Amarillo Independent and others were right all along and the City Council continues to refuse to publicly acknowledge that fact. Let me say it again, slowly: The.Amarillo.Independent.was.right.

So, you want questions. OK, here are some questions.

First question: Are you up to answering the following questions honestly?

If you’re so wedded to facts and evidence in making public policy, why did you ignore them in choosing Wallace Bajjali? Why did you and the council ignore The Amarillo Independent’s findings?

Why did Alan Taylor retire? Was there any truth to the rumor that he disagreed with the downtown plan?

The Strategic Action Plan effort had fewer than 1,000 participants. Why did the City Council consider that representative of the city?

Why was the Herring not included in the land use planning? Why has the City Council ignored the Herring Hotel as a resource for conventions? Who is behind the squeeze play on the Herring?

What happened to the “citizen vote” that was promised? With such a pathetic voter turnout in 2013, how can you justify that this was a mandate or endorsement of the ongoing plans?

If the new hotel is such a strong asset, why does it need to be protected by a non-compete clause?

How does city ownership of the hotel square with your Libertarian or Republican ideals of a free market? A market where government doesn’t pick winners and losers?

How is it that the City Council ignored studies that showed the very cookie-cutter plans that Wallace Bajjali brought to you don’t result in economic development?

How can the city contract with the Southern Independent League without a city-owned stadium to play in?

And one final question for you, as I think back over the discussions we have had through the years that I’ve been a citizen and taxpayer in Amarillo. How is it that when we’ve discussed public policy on health care, you agree with me in private and then take opposite positions in public? You’ll want examples, so I’ll give you two. Certificate of need and that health care isn’t a free market.

I await your responses.

An Open Letter to Brian Eades

As I got out of the car yesterday morning after dropping my wife off at a sub job, I thought I got a whiff of the smell of cattle money. I didn’t detect a breeze, so I was mystified why the odor was so strong. Then I read your email and realized the smell was coming from that.

For someone who has repeatedly sat on the dais and said he makes public policy on the basis of facts and evidence, your pattern of behavior, support of the downtown plan and Wallace Bajjali betrays your principles. And that’s a fact.

Now, let’s address some of your comments.

Irony, hubris and time will tell

The Amarillo Globe-News’ editorial on April 23 makes clear it is fed up with the city’s problems. And, in

the height of irony and hubris, refers to the “Wallace Bajjali debacle.

Anyone following city government, downtown development and the Globe-News’ role in all this knows that, for years and especially since 2008, the city could do no wrong. The city and the Globe-News were so enamored with one another that the City Council placed the paper’s publisher, Les Simpson, on key boards tasked with planning and implementing downtown redevelopment. In fact, Simpson was the head of Downtown Amarillo Inc.’s board when DAI recommended Wallace Bajjali as a master developer for the downtown effort.

You have to wonder what prompted the paper’s 180-degree turn-around. What triggered such a falling out between two lovers? I’d love to know other people’s theories on this one.

The Globe-News exhorts people to turn out to the upcoming city election. Stating it this way, “Voters that (sic — it should be “who”) are content with the way things are going in Amarillo — feel free to show your support for the status quo at the ballot box. Voters that (sic — it should be “who”) see the need for a new and fresh approach to leadership, at least for Amarillo government, opportunity is knocking — as the saying goes — at the same ballot box.”

The editorial concludes, “Amarillo residents can talk change all they want, but voting is the only way to accomplish change.”

But in the end, how much change does the Amarillo Globe-News really want? We’ll see when the Globe-News lists its endorsements in the race.

Early voting begins Monday and citywide polling occurs May 9.

Irony, hubris and time will tell

The Amarillo Globe-News’ editorial on April 23 makes clear it is fed up with the city’s problems. And, in

the height of irony and hubris, refers to the “Wallace Bajjali debacle.

Anyone following city government, downtown development and the Globe-News’ role in all this knows that, for years and especially since 2008, the city could do no wrong. The city and the Globe-News were so enamored with one another that the City Council placed the paper’s publisher, Les Simpson, on key boards tasked with planning and implementing downtown redevelopment. In fact, Simpson was the head of Downtown Amarillo Inc.’s board when DAI recommended Wallace Bajjali as a master developer for the downtown effort.

Harpole's hubris fools no one except the Globe-News

Yesterday I posted an observation that Mayor Paul Harpole’s “town hall meeting” was a political ploy that used the city of Amarillo’s resources — taxpayer money — to further his re-election chances. I wasn’t the only one to raise that issue, as some of the commenters on the Amarillo Globe-News storyon Tuesday noted. That Tuesday story shilled for Harpole and failed the basic test of journalism: thinking critically and asking the questions. So transparent. In the end, the Globe-News will end up endorsing the incumbents and call for staying the course on downtown development.

Today the Globe-News story raises the questions that should have come with the “announcement” storyon Tuesday. And the story confirms that Harpole fooled no one — except the Globe-News the day before. Also Wednesday, my friend and former Globe-News colleague John Kanelis bloggedabout this as well, asking whether Harpole “truly understands how some people can perceive what looks so patently obvious.”

The fact that this ploy blew up in his face means that, in this case, the perception was the reality and (1) a political move ahead of an election; (2) a crass attempt to undercut the Democratic hosts’ forum; (3) a calculated misuse of taxpayer resources for political purposes; and, (4) a reflection of Harpole’s hubris and arrogance, thinking he could get away with this.

As of a few moments ago, three commenters on the Amarillo Globe-News site were spot on about this ploy. What is more interesting is the Amarillo Globe-News helped Harpole in his denial of the ploy — very telling about the AGN and its ethics. And, finally, that he is moving the next so-called town hall to a private venue means someone has figured out that it’s clear it was a political poly that had no place in taxpayers’ property.

Harpole's hubris fools no one except the Globe-News

Yesterday I posted an observation that Mayor Paul Harpole’s “town hall meeting” was a political ploy that used the city of Amarillo’s resources — taxpayer money — to further his re-election chances. I wasn’t the only one to raise that issue, as some of the commenters on the Amarillo Globe-News story on Tuesday noted. That Tuesday story shilled for Harpole and failed the basic test of journalism: thinking critically and asking the questions. So transparent. In the end, the Globe-News will end up endorsing the incumbents and call for staying the course on downtown development.