|
Lorrie Burkhalter
Tim Dickey
John Willis
| |
09/23/04 Ethics Don't Exist at City
Council.
This week's Dallas city council meeting
changed my concept of law and order. Most of the council (12 out of 15) absolutely ignored
specific
restrictions in the City Charter regarding conflicts of interests.
|
It no longer is just Beat that Indictment James Fantroy's shaking down
developers to force them to contract with his
security guard business whenever they apply for some zoning change or variance to do a new multi-family project in South
Dallas. Now, 12 out of 15 council members are in on the scam and assisting
his wrong doing. |
|
|
Rad Field:
In Providence (History), the Mafia mentality ruled.
There, it was not "Security" firms, but the
"CEMENT" business. One or two companies still control cement.
Gamino being one--even after Petracca,
the Mafia boss, was found in the Providence River.
Makes for a colorful, exciting city.
In Providence, Federal Hill
still houses the families of the old bosses --
complete with push cart fruit and vegetable
wagons. |
|
Mayor Laura Miller, Dr. Elba Garcia and Councilwoman Sandy Greyson were the only
council members who refused to go along with an obvious wrong decision regarding
a zoning case involving some state tax credit process for multi-family projects.
Most of the 11 cowards or crooks (or both) who supported Fantroy's scam expressed concern about the glut of
apartments in Dallas and the potential for this Southern Sector overdevelopment
turning into another Vickery Meadows (which is inevitable). Several
council members admitted discussing the matter with Fantroy or knowing what he wanted
them to do.
When each council member mentioned what Fantroy had told them he wanted, they
were admitting to a clear
violation of the Charter prohibition of an elected official discussing a zoning
case with his colleagues in which he has an interest. |
|
|
Michael Davis:
You've got to be kidding me.
The southern sector is already bad, so
what do they do? Give away millions in property
taxes to support this mess that we will have to
pay to fix dozens of times over?
Of course, no mention of this from the Downtown Managed News and
or Chl 8, since they
the have the same owner.
Many other major cities
have more mixed-income developments that include affordable
townhouses and market rate housing, but not apartments. Apartments
are the worst thing you can build in a struggling neighborhood.
The only way to
ever justify more apartments is if you're tearing down old
apartments.
Congrats city council - you've now
taken away a another valuable parcel of land that could've been used to
develop businesses and generate tax revenue (HELLO?).
These bribe-takers are selling our city
down the drain, one fixed vote at a time.
DENSITY KILLS
NEIGHBORHOODS. When will they get the point?
How do we get rid of these people?
|
|
CONFLICT OF
INTEREST?
Does anyone at City Hall besides the Mayor and Councilwomen
Garcia and Greyson know what it means?
Last October, we learned Fantroy is hitting up
developers to contract for security with his company.
Conflict
of Ethics. At that time,
Mayor Miller was able to confirm with Provident (the same developer who scored
this week) that they did hire Fantroy's company BEFORE the case got to council. She called the council into executive session.
Our worthless City
Attorney told the council Fantroy could shakedown these developers, so long
as he recused himself from the vote. The gutless Ms. Johnson apparently didn't
remember or place any significance in the City Code clause prohibiting Fantroy from discussing the case with
other council members. Ms. Johnson needs to get some meat on her bones and
a rod in her spine. She's not a law clerk. She's supposed to be the
City Attorney and keep the council on the straight and narrow.
Except for Mayor Miller, all the council voted for the Provident case even
knowing that they had bribed Fantroy. At least Councilwomen Garcia and
Greyson have now decided they can no longer go along with this stuff. The
rest of the council have been sticking their noses in such awful places that
when they sniffed the air on this latest bribe and handoff to Provident, merely
holding their noses suffices to quell the stench.
Once upon a time in Dallas, the City Attorney was the people's lawyer, too.
Now, the council and Ms. Johnson (and her predecessor) see the office as the
Council's attorney to cover their crooked rears.
| |
|
*ARTICLE II.
*PRESENT CITY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES.
SEC. 12A-3. IMPROPER ECONOMIC BENEFIT.
(a) Economic interests affected. To avoid the appearance and risk of
impropriety, a city official or employee shall not take any official
action that he or she knows is likely to affect particularly the
economic interests of:
(1) the official or employee; ...
(5) a business entity that the official or employee knows is an
affiliated business or partner of a business entity in which he or she
holds an economic interest;
(6) a business entity for which the city official or employee serves as an
officer or director or in any other policy-making position; or
(7) a person or business entity: ...
(B) with whom the official or employee, directly or indirectly, is engaged
in negotiations pertaining to a business opportunity. ...
(c) Recusal and disclosure. A city official or
employee whose conduct or action on a matter would
violate Subsection (a) or (b) must recuse himself
or herself. From the time that the conflict is recognized, the
city official or employee shall:
(1)
immediately refrain from further participation in
the matter, including discussions with any persons likely to consider the
matter; and
(2) promptly file with the city secretary a written statement disclosing
the conflict on a form provided by the city secretary.
...
(8) a city council member shall promptly disclose his or her conflict
to the city council and shall not be present
during any discussion or voting on the matter....
SEC. 12A-4. UNFAIR ADVANCEMENT OF PRIVATE INTERESTS.
(a) General rule. A city official or employee may not use his or her
official position to unfairly advance or impede personal interests by
granting or securing, or by attempting to grant or secure, for any
person (including himself or herself) any form of special
consideration, treatment, exemption, or advantage beyond that which is
lawfully available to every other person or organization.
...
(3) Reciprocal favors. A city official or employee may not enter into an
agreement or understanding with any other person that official action by the
official or employee will be rewarded or reciprocated by the
other person. |
|
| |
The most important provision
for you to remember in the above cited Sec. 12A-3 from the City Code is (c)(1) "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter".
Planning & Zoning staff
explained to the council why they recommended denial to the Plan Commission,
which political hacks unanimously ignored the professionals' opinions.
Staff's primary basis for denial is
this case changes single-family residential to multi-family, when there is a
glut of available multi-family zoned property already available for development
in the Southern Sector, particularly in District 8.
Staff also recommended denial to the council. Staff said they wanted to
encourage single-family development in the Southern Sector. Mayor Miller
later reminded the council that at last week's briefing session Fantroy himself bemoaned the lack of
single-family residences in his district.
After each comment I note from the city council meeting, I will repeat the City
Code's admonition that a council member "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter"
to help you keep the shocking events and revelations of this
particular council meeting in perspective.
After staff's statements, Bill Blaydes (former PZ Commissioner) said "Think Vickery Meadows"
(an area near Greenville Ave so overbuilt with large and aging
apartment buildings that it is now a war zone). Some Vickery Meadows residents and property
owners have made a little progress toward stabilizing the area, but
there's much more to be done and the apartments and condos are getting older.
They now have the Queen of Parkdale on their team, but it's still pretty much a
losing proposition.
Blaydes went on to say
about apartment construction: "overdoing it ...
gets disaster."
Don Hill said the Southern Sector is "trying to learn from the experiences in the North and
East". Yeah, he and Fantroy, et al are trying to learn how to get more $$
for themselves and destroy the area faster than the council crooks who let
Vickery Meadows happen.
Mayor Miller reminded the council the case changes single-family to multi-family
when there is a real market for single-family homes in the area. She said the state seems to be
gleefully subsidizing these multi-family projects. (I have to learn
more about these state tax credit scams.)
Mayor Miller said many new
projects in the Southern Sector are only half leased, that the area has already
reached saturation and there are currently 1000 units more than can be absorbed.
Mayor Miller asked Brain-Dead Thornton-Reese (Fantroy's water girl),
if she would consider delaying the case to October to be heard with a similar
case in Don Hill's district. T-Reese refused.
T-Reese said she had talked with Fantroy and
he wanted it to pass. Do you understand what she said?
T-Reese confirmed in a council hearing that Fantroy
discussed the case with her (a council member who would be voting on the case) in defiance of City Code (c)(1) "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter".
Send Me Some Money Loza said he would support the zoning case because "It's in
Fantroy's district."
Sandy Greyson warned against making the same mistakes in the Southern Sector
that were made in North Dallas where there are "way too many". She said
she had been told they were not changing single-family. Apparently,
someone lied to her. Imagine that from this bunch of crooks!
Councilwoman Greyson said the city
already has a 60-40 ratio of multi-family to single-family, which is the highest such ratio
of any city in the country. Although several expressed similar
reservations, Greyson was 1 of only 3 who voted against Fantroy's wants.
Aging apartment complexes are the very heart of crime in Dallas. In NW
Dallas, we justifiably blame much of our deterioration and high crime on
topless bar, illegal dance halls and bars -- easy targets.
The real source our blight are the apartment complexes in this area -- everyone
of them! Some are in less disrepair than others -- but very few are fit
for families and create environments where children are pushed into gangs and
other criminal activities.
Lois Finkelman talked about the glut of aging apartments in her district that
were built in the 80's which have been resold several times and are now deteriorating
and a drain on our schools. She suggested a moratorium where an older
apartment building has to be eliminated or torn down before a new project can be
built. Finkelman also talked about the saturation of apartments, but when push came to shove,
she voted for the project.
Ed Oakley said there is a huge concentration of apartments about to come on line
at the same time in Oak Cliff, which will mean existing units will be under leased, and will
deteriorate. He mentioned several new criteria that should be implemented
in approving these type of projects, and gave all kinds of reasons for voting
against this case. Being the complete political wh*** that he is, Oakley
concluded his speech with Fantroy "wants this to move forward".
Not only did Oakley show himself to be a coward, but he confirmed Fantroy
discussed the case with him (a council member who would be voting on the
case) in defiance of City Code (c)(1) "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter".
After his earlier expressed reservations against turning the Southern Sector
into another Vickery Meadows, Bill Blaydes said "JL wants this"
and voted for it. How would
he know what Fantroy "wants" unless Fantroy
discussed the case with him (a council member who would be voting on the
case) in defiance of City Code (c)(1) "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter".
Blaydes even warned that approving all these "tax credit" multi-family projects
takes "$12-15 million" worth of property off the tax rolls, but he
voted to do that to us, too.
| Gary Griffith asked if delaying the case would affect the project. Staff
said delaying it to October when Hill's similar cases are to come back allows the applicant plenty of time to meet other deadlines for the state tax
credit (whatever that is). Even knowing that there would be no harm to the
developer to delay the case, Griffith voted to turn more single-family land to
multi-family. |
|
|
James Northrup:
Gary Griffith should know approving more tax subsidized low income
apartments in Fantroy's district (when he has been
paid by the developers) is probably not a good
precedent.
I agree with the Dallas Morning News that
the fiefdom approach to zoning cases has to stop and each case considered on
its own
merit, or the whole process will become corrupted by guys like Fantroy.
Some council members are taking this "go
along to get along" approach a bit too literally. |
|
Mitch Rasansky said "I understand the councilman is for it." How would he
"understand" that unless Fantroy
discussed the case with him (a council member who would be voting on the
case) in defiance of City Code (c)(1) "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter".
Nothing good Rasansky has done or will do will overcome the damage he has done
to city hall with his acquiescence to ward politics in zoning cases. It's
shameful and he knows better.
Again, the Mayor warned them they were turning single-family land to multi-family
when there is plenty of multi-family undeveloped land available, and there is
currently a glut of
multi-family in the Southern Sector that may not ever rent out.
Of the 11 voting to following Fantroy's demands, Blaydes, Griffith, Oakley and
Rasansky (even Fantroy) are all former Plan Commission members. They know
what they did was wrong. The same restrictions as to discussing a case
with one of their colleagues who has a conflict of interest are supposed to
govern Plan Commissioners, too.
PZ see, PZ do. That's why the Commission is sending so many unanimous
decisions up to council when staff (professional planners and not political
hacks) has recommended otherwise.
The vote was 11-3 in favor with the NO votes being Mayor Miller, Councilwoman Greyson and
Councilwoman Garcia.
The YES votes were Blaydes, T-Reese, Hill, Griffith, Lill, Finkelman, Rasansky,
Chaney, Oakley, Salazar and Loza. They deserve no title and should be
removed from office for openly admitting to violating City Code (c)(1) when they
discussed the case with Fantroy or someone Fantroy had discussed the case with.
It gets worse. Provident is the sleazy company that hires the sleazy
Fantroy company to protect their properties, so their cases go sliding right on
through the slime at city hall. They have 8 or so cases
coming to council. Another company, Potashnik, refuses to hire Fantroy's
company, and he hates them. They have 5 of these coming to council.
The Potashnik cases will be the ones where Fantroy decides his district has too many
apartment projects. The same 11 cowards who violated City Code (c)(1) will
follow his lead on those cases.
If Potashnik's attorneys are even halfway good, he will get very rich suing the
city without having to build anything. What they did yesterday was
illegal. Just like the Red Bird Airport case, Potashnik might have to wait
2 or 3 years for his millions but he can start planning how to spend them right
now.
Two weeks ago, Brain-Dead Thornton-Reese turned retail into multi-family.
Even Darren Reagan asked the council why they were taking retail when
Pleasant Grove and Southeast Dallas are so desperate for shopping.
Still, this is not just about the council violating the City Code, it's about
what they are doing to the future of this city.
If you want to know how bad this glut of hastily built and under-needed
apartments can be for the Southern Sector, go to Walnut Hill
and Webb Chapel and drive South to NW Highway. Be sure you do it in the
middle of the day, because you do not want to be south of Park Lane on Webb
Chapel after dark. Even in the daytime, you better watch out for drunk
drivers and speeders and red light runners. The impact of the apartment
projects on the nearby single-family homes is devastating.
As bad as the physical reality of the council approving Fantroy's zoning, it's
worse
that most of the council blatantly violate City Code is (c)(1) "immediately
refrain from further participation in the matter, including discussions with any
persons likely to consider the matter".
It's time to get the FBI involved.
sb
| |
|
