|
Ethics Complaint
| |
04/25/02 $$ for Bridges to No
Where, $$ for Robber Barons, but not for Competitive Pay for the Men and Women
who Protect Us.
One of my "establishment" friends called me to see if there was
anything we could do to stop the Calatrava bridge. He is worried that in a
few years people are going to be laughing at us for building this multi-million
dollar bridge in a location that is as senseless as erecting London Bridge in
Arizona. They are laughing at us right now. He referred to Victoria
Loe Hicks' story that says the first bridge is a done deal. Well, maybe
not.
Want to get your blood boiling? Read Hicks' complete report
on what Sr. Santiago Calatrava says about the uneducated masses of Dallas.
Here are some snippets.
| Architect
challenges Dallas on bridges; Calatrava
beginning design work on one span that's funded 04/25/2002
by VICTORIA LOE HICKS / The Dallas
Morning News
When the Milwaukee art museum appealed for money to build an addition
designed by architect Santiago Calatrava, donors queued up, giving more
than double the original goal of $35 million.
When Dallas leaders sought money for five Calatrava bridges, the drive
wheezed to a standstill after scraping together the $6 million needed
for the first one. . . . "It appears that people are
not conscious of the very high symbolic significance of bridges,"
was the urbane Spaniard's reply delivered during a visit Wednesday to
City Hall. . . . Rivers are so powerful, they become
frontiers." Mr. Calatrava said. "Bridges provide the linkage,
activating interaction between the two sides of the river." . . . .
Mr. Calatrava said the public's apparent failure to understand the
"transcendental" potential of his bridges is understandable.
In Dallas, people are accustomed to bridges that are strictly functional
and, in some cases, built to be replaced at regular intervals.
"We need to educate them," he said. . . .
"I see the Trinity as the most beautiful place to live and work in
the city," he said. "We have to realize the potential of the
river. Otherwise we may miss forever that potential." |
Can you believe the nerve of some foreigner coming to our city and assuming
because hardly anybody likes his funky string thing of a bridge that we are
backward and uneducated?
It's Sr. Calatrava who needs some education -- such as being forced to stay in Dallas
near the Trinity from mid-July through September.
Who hired Calatrava in the first place? Not the city council!
Calatrava's involvement with the Trinity Boon-doggle goes directly to Halff
Engineering's screw-up before the Trinity Project bond election. Halff
Engineering did not do hydraulics testing before the election. When they
finally got around to seeing what would happen if you divide the Trinity into
two concrete troughs, the results were pretty much what the
environmentalists and the opposition had said during the election. The
Halff plan would force so much water with so much force that the existing
viaducts would be wiped out. No standard pier-type bridge would withstand that kind of pressure.
That's why
Halff started promoting Calatrava's suspension bridges.
They then started a PR campaign and coerced an oil widow to donate a hunk toward
the design. The bridge is not funded. The design work is
funded. The cost of construction is not funded.
What kind of a designer goes into a client's home and throws out all accumulated treasures and replaces them with furnishings and stuff
completely foreign to the client's personal history and life experiences?
For that matter, what kind of an insecure moron would let someone discard
possessions he had spent a lifetime accruing and using?
Sr. Calatrava has come into our home and has designed a bridge that has nothing
to do with any nearby architecture -- which actually conflicts with everything
in the area -- from the Crescent, to the Hicks/Perot Arena, to the industrial
buildings on the West of Stemmons, to the low income residences and businesses
on the West side of the Trinity. He shows contempt for our past by
ignoring our viaducts. There is nothing near the Trinity that could have inspired him to
design such a futuristic bridge for that area. He just took his
basic design and wants to plop it down here. What might work in
Barcelona is very unlikely to fit in Dallas, Texas.
Assuming, Calatrava's bridge inspires all sorts of development on the West end
of it, that would mean complete displacement of hundreds of
low-income Hispanic families and businesses who serve that community. It
may not be where you want to live, but there are several generations who live in
those little houses near Bataan Rec Center (off Sylvan). Where do they go?
Don't expect any concern for that community from the minority council members. The Black
council members would have no problem pushing hundreds of Hispanic voters out of the city -- look what they did to Hispanics during redistricting, both
city council and school district. This is where Dr. Elba Garcia could
really step up to the plate.
If Send Me Some Money John Loza finally decides to stand up for them, it will be
too little too late like his flip flop on Cadillac Heights.
This is more of what Jim Schutze talks about in his column discussed
below. All of these millions we are spending are only to benefit the very
wealthy and are actually forcing out the working class from living in Dallas.
Let's go back to Sr. Calatrava's comments. He says we just don't understand
the "transcendental" potential of his bridges.
"Transcendental"? What bridge does not transcend? We do
understand his bridges, we just don't
like the design. Sr.
Calatrava does not understand the reality of walking across a bridge
spanning the Trinity in the middle of August. Not very conducive to
tranquility.
Sr. Calatrava says
"Rivers are so powerful, they become frontiers." Except after a
really heavy rain, the Trinity hardly moves at all. The only powerful
thing about it is the smell. What is the ODB's obsession with turning that cesspool
into something nature never intended it to be?
The Trinity is a glorified creek that
sometimes fills up and pretends to be a river for a few days.
Bridges should get people across some obstacle. We have those wonderful
old viaducts that move cars and people every day from one side of the Trinity to
the other. The Sylvan Bridge does need to be replaced because it is so low
that it is frequently below water when the Trinity rises. It does not need
to be replaced with something that is totally inappropriate for the area.
There is a very important conference coming up that would be well worth
attending if you are concerned about the future of Dallas. The Dallas Institute of
Humanities and Culture is hosting "Imagining Dallas" on 5/3/02 (9 a.m. - 6 p.m.). Their scheduled
speakers are people who really do know Dallas and its history. www.dallasinstitute.org.
Sr. Calatrava might not see us as so uneducated if he were to hang out with all
the intellectuals and thinkers at The Dallas Institute instead of the artsy
crowd and the incompetents at Halff.
If you think it's ridiculous in these times of personnel layoffs and
decaying infrastructure for the city to be building a bridge that goes
absolutely no where, you will really get hot reading Jim Schutze's perspective
on the Palladium/Victory issue.
Money,
Honey
That's all the city council cares
about in the big debate over downtown development
BY JIM SCHUTZE (The Dallas Observer,
4/18/02)
The city
council debate on the Palladium and City Center-Madison development
deals downtown will rise or fall on an issue that has little to do with
downtown but everything to do with the votes on the council.
Money.
It is the very strong impression of certain key council members that
both of these developers are willing to kick out millions of dollars
from their deals to put into special programs in certain council
districts. . . . Are the developers trying to dangle it or are
city council members trying to wangle it? . . . One council member told
me he thinks there could be as much as $12 million available from the
Palladium deal alone.
He said, "I want my money."
And you know what? If this money really were available, the council
members seeking it would be doing exactly the right thing for their
constituents. Downtown is being developed entirely for rich people. The
yuppie loft thing in the old buildings, which assumes downtown will be
vibrant once it has been taken over entirely by infertile
cappuccino-heads, was launched on the back of a $25 million subsidy with
money hijacked from poor neighborhoods. Downtown owes poor people money.
But none of that is really in the underlying issue I'm trying to
excavate here, which is about governance and whether we are going to
bribe ourselves with some of our own money to give away the rest of our
own money. |
It's connected -- bridges to no where,
tax abatements to developers who have not fulfilled their original obligations
under the first and second tax abatements, shakedowns by council members, personnel layoffs at City Hall and
underpaid cops and firefighters.
These are all decisions and results of
years of mismanagement and stupid decisions at City Hall. Have you come to
any position on city manager vs. strong mayor form of government for Dallas?
I am completely ambivalent on this issue. Granted, we are in a holy mess
right now and most of our problems come from the series of city mismanagers we
have had since Chuck Anderson -- different colors, different genders, but same
results. It's just that whenever we change things in Dallas -- no matter
how noble the initiative -- the results are disastrous. Roy Williams and
Marvin Crenshaw moved heaven and earth to get single member districts, thinking it would mean more community representation. They were
wrong. The only thing 14-1 has gotten us are gerrymandered districts, ward
politics and crooked elections.
On May 8th (Union Station, Noon), the Dallas Rotary Club is hosting a debate
between James Northrup and
D Magazine's Wick Allison
on council/manager v. strong mayor. You might want to call the Rotary Club and buy a
ticket. The council is currently appointing members to a commission to
review and recommend whether we should change our form of government.
If we change, will we get more money for our cops and firefighters or more
efficiency at City Hall?
Doubtful.
If we change, will we get more ward politics and guarantee more gerrymandered
districts? Probably.
Here's another thing to worry about -- while they are changing from city manager
to strong mayor, you can bet Beat that Indictment Fantroy and
Shakedown Chaney will try to get term limitations removed. That is the
most dangerous thing that can happen to this city. Nothing is worth that
risk.
Rather than change from city manager to strong mayor -- we should be electing
better people to the city council. There are a lot of things we should be
doing and not doing.
We should not be building a bridge that goes no where and has the potential for
displacing hundreds of Hispanic families.
We should be telling Palladium they have all the money they are getting from us,
no matter how much they are giving Don Hill over and under the table.
We should be voting to give
our cops and firefighters competitive pay. | |
|
