10/26/9  Council ignores real problem -- themselves!

There is so much hypocrisy at City Hall.  Rather than fix an obvious problem, the Council is chasing their respective tails to do something in a hurry, rather than do what's right.

The problems at City Hall start and end with ward politics.  Ward politics with the Plan Commission.  Ward politics with the city council. 

After 20 years of 14-1, there's not a lot that will change the way things are done at City Hall, but there is one major, yet simple solution.  Split up the Plan Commission into 3 panels of 5 like the Board of Adjustment.  It would immediately cut the opportunity for unethical behavior by half.

There's not much interest in easy solutions by most on the council.  There's not much interest in personal responsibility either.  Rather than enforce existing rules, the Mayor and others want to put rules on non-elected people, consultants who talk with them on behalf of third parties.  Forcing consultants to file monthly or quarterly reports is about the most ridiculous idea that has been pushed in a long time. 

No, the problems came and will always come from zoning cases.  As long as there are two levels of ward politics at City Hall, no rules will prevent another Don Hill-D'Angelo Lee team from embarrassing the city.  I doubt that any council member or plan commissioner will risk anything so stupid for a few years.  So, why the rush to a wrong fix?

The logical thing for the council to do would be looking at potential problems with the P&Z, but that would put a crimp in their control of their districts.

Last Fall, Councilman Dave Neumann decided the Board of Adjustment (where there's been no scandal) should be merged from three panels of 5 members into one panel of 15 like the Plan Commission (which  has been a petri dish for corruption for years).  He served as an alternate member on the BOA before he was appointed to the P&Z.  His argument for the change is the lack of consistency between the three panels.  He must have never paid attention to the various panel chairs when they read the opening spiel to the public attendees.  The official language states that no case sets a precedent.

Before the structure of the BOA can be changed, ZOAC (subcommittee of P&Z) had to study the matter.  Apparently, there was no support for a single panel of 15, but the politics of City Hall meant that a bone had to be thrown to Councilman Neumann's ego.  That bone was a recommendation of two panels of 8 members each (7 BOA members with the chair administering both panels). 

Most BOA members did not want the panels changed at all.  Darlene Reynolds and I respectively chair Panels B and C, and we are both opposed to changing the structure.  My panel currently has 2 vacancies because 2 council members have not appointed anyone to the BOA.  Councilman Neumann has not appointed anyone to the BOA for several months.  All of these vacancies make it difficult for us to do our job, but we manage.

Anyway, last week the matter went before the P&Z, with 2 recommendations to consider.  Staff recommended Neumann's single panel.  ZOAC recommended the compromise two panel.  Marla Beikman and Sam Gillespie from Panel B and I spoke to the P&Z, requesting they not change our structure.  We really thought it was a done deal.  Didn't work out that way.

When Commissioner Ann Bagley (Davis' appointee) made the motion to follow ZOAC's recommendation because she felt an obligation as a ZOAC member, she said her first concern was that the BOA not become a single panel.  I felt a stirring of hope.  It was clear Neil Emmons (Hunt's appointee) wanted to change the BOAC.  Commissioner Bob Weiss (Kadane's appointee) said he could not support the motion because there was no reason to "fix something that's not broke".  Several other commissioners joined in with similar comments.  The motion failed 8-4 (Bagley, Rodgers, Emmons and Anglin).

Commissioner Weiss made the second motion to not change the BOA, allowing one amendment to set the dates of the members' terms.  His motion passed 10-2.  The two commissioners voting against keeping the BOA in its current format were Emmons (Hunt's appointee) and Michael Anglin (Neumann's appointee).  Council members Hunt and Neumann are both very big on controlling all things in their districts. 

Lying Neil Emmons could not resist one last opportunity to lie in public.  He claimed the BOA is frequently overturned.  Marla, Sam and I looked at each other with surprise because we knew that is not true.  He talked about the "dirt skirt" case heard by Panel B, which Democrat Judge Eric Moye overturned right after he took office.  That was a typical Emmons deception.  The case before Panel B which Darlene Reynolds chairs was an appeal of a staff decision in East Dallas where a developer built a frame around the first floor of a condo that exceeded the above ground height of a structure.  The developer put dirt in the frame work and claimed the structure should be measured from the new level of the dirt.  Staff agreed with the developer.  Neighbors and other East Dallas community leaders appealed the decision to BOA.  Panel B voted 3-2 to overturn staff's decision.  Unfortunately, it takes 4 of 5 members to approve any case before a BOA panel. 

Lying Emmons said it was "embarrassing for the city" when BOA decisions are overturned.  Commissioner Weiss jumped right in his face (but very politely) and reminded Lying Emmons that the council overturns P&Z decisions all the time, and that is not embarrassing.  Commissioner Weiss said Lying Emmons' comments were disrespectful to citizen volunteers who made decisions based on the testimony before them.

The BOA structure still must go before the city council, and it will be interesting to see who votes how.  Here's my prophecy of the council vote:

Dist 1   Delia Jasso
Dist 2   Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Pauline Medrano will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 3   Dave Neumann will move heaven and earth to get his way and reverse P&Z's decision.
Dist 4   Mayor Pro Tem Dwaine Caraway will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 5   Vonceil Hill will vote with Angela Hunt to reverse P&Z's decision.
Dist 6   Steve Salazar will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 7   Carolyn Davis
Dist 8   Tennell Atkins will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 9   Sheffie Kadane will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 10  Jerry Allen will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 11   Linda Koop will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 12  Ron Natinksy will vote with Dave Neumann to reverse P&Z's decision.
Dist 13  Ann Margolin will support P&Z's decision.
Dist 14  Angela Hunt will vote to reverse P&Z's decision to strengthen her control.
Mayor Leppert wil likely vote with Dave Neumann to reverse P&Z's decision.

It will take 12 votes to reverse the P&Z decision, but it could happen.

So, Monday's positioning of various council members was particularly interesting to me.  Dave Neumann wants the Mayor to slow down his plans for ethics reform and give the council more time to understand the proposals.  Angela Hunt wants even more paper work and cost to developers.  Linda Koop and Ann Margolin seem to have the most reasonable suggestions.

As much as I have been at odds with Councilman Neumann since he started meddling with the BOA, I agree with him that there is no rush on these ethics reforms.  No one on this council is going to risk FBI scrutiny.  There is time to make reforms that make sense and are enforceable.

Let's not just do something to be doing something.  Instead, council members should take personal pledges to not only refrain from violating city ethics laws but to observe fellow council members and appointed officials and report wrong doing.  That's not going to happen.

So, we may have new rules that no one understands and no one can enforce.

Slow it down and do it right.

sb