tony jeter dot com

Yes, I’m a tightwad when it comes to birthday parties for my kids. For some reason I have an unshakable aversion to spending a gazillion dollars on these parties. This aversion ranks right up there with my strong dislike for clowns or getting my fingers dirty when I eat. I fully acknowledge this particular compulsion may very well doom my kids to years of counseling later in life. But hey, a penny saved is a penny earned. Last Friday we celebrated the Boy’s 6th birthday at Ferguson Spray Park and fun times were had by all — yes siree! When I got there early that morning to reserve a few picnic tables I was pleasantly surprised to find our Parks staff cleaning the grounds and the restrooms. Jerold was especially friendly and did a great job making sure the picnic area was extra clean. I know what you’re thinking. nobody on City staff knew we were having our party there. So the maintenance wasn’t just for me. Jerold did not know me from Adam let alone that I was on the Council. He was just treating me like he would anybody else.

This was one party that I couldn’t have paid to make any better. I am 100% sold on spray parks. The kids love ‘em, they are much less expensive to maintain, and they save the taxpayers a boatload of money. How you ask? Less chemicals & maintenance and no lifeguards.

If you haven’t been to Ferguson Park, drive by on a hot summer afternoon and check out all the action. This time next year there will be more spray parks around town to enjoy.

The picture below shows Jerold in the foreground and my boy, Ezra, in the background. A quick tip, show up at 9 in the morning and you’ll have the whole area to yourself for an hour or more.

I’ve spent a good bit of time reflecting on an item from the July 3rd Council meeting. Item #12 on the agenda reads as follows; “Consider adopting a resolution authorizing a construction contract with Ranger Excavating, LP, of Austin for construction activities required to build the Rail Park Detention
Pond and Underground Stormwater Conveyance System between Northwest H.K. Dodgen Loop and the future outer loop in an amount not to exceed $3,201,991.”

Both Mayor Jones and Councilman Schneider abstained from the discussion and vote on this particular item. The Mayor’s abstention makes it safe to assume that his company will be providing the aggregate (crushed rock) and Councilman Schneider’s abstention means that he will most likely be pushing the dirt around as a subcontractor on the project. I imagine that this project will be rather lucrative for both companies. Since the bulk of the work on the project appears to involve pushing dirt from one place to another, I would bet Councilman Schneider could make $1M or more for his labors.

In abstaining from “discussing and voting” on the awarding of this project they did indeed meet the requirements of State law. It is this meeting the letter of the law approach that I just can’t get comfortable with. How is it that they can’t discuss or vote when it is time to award the project BUT they can be actively involved in the discussions during the conceptual stages as well as vote to approve the funding for the project? How is their participation in bringing this project to fruition not a conflict of interest? Voting on the creation of a project that they will ultimately bid on in one capacity or another sure seems like a conflict to me. They are, by default, actively participating in the creation of opportunity for themselves. I know, I know it is completely legal you say. Legal today? Yes. Right thing to do? Depends on whom you ask. Legal tomorrow? Your guess is as good as mine.

I read the following comment a few days ago in an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. “Unemployment has risen every month this year. Gasoline is over $4 a gallon; people are canceling summer trips… Food prices are predicted to increase between 4.5% and 5.5% this year, the most in almost two decades.” The comment by Thomas Frank got me thinking about the tenuous and uncertain times we are facing today. I firmly believe that that the Council should be working to reduce expenses rather than focusing on minimizing budget increases. The current approach to budgeting ensures that taxpayers will see an increase in taxes year in year out. Maintain “current service levels” or the status quo is the mantra at City Hall. The City Manager and staff are doing as they have been instructed by the Council. It is the Council that needs to step up, bite the bullet and look for ways to reduce our costs from a big picture perspective. Rate increases for solid waste is a perfect example of this myopic strategy. Rather than looking for ways to more efficiently to run this business, it is just assumed that we will raise rates to compensate for increased costs. This is not how things work in the real world. Spending $2.7 for a facelift on the Mayborn Center is another example. This expense is completely discretionary and should be approved by the voters. Notice I use the “expense” when describing this outlay. There are others that want to use the word “investment” rather than expense. How can something that will yield little or no monetary returns be considered an investment?

There are three types of bonds the City can issue.

1. Certificates of Obligation “COs”
2. General Obligation Bonds “GOs”
3. Revenue Bonds

CO Bonds are not subject to voter approval and are usually supported by tax but can be combined with other revenue source.

GO Bonds are voter approved and tax supported.

Revenue Bonds are not subject to voter approval and are supported by a specific revenue stream e.g. water, sewer or drainage collections.

I think that the proposed $2.7M renovation of the Mayborn Center should be taken to the voters for approval or disapproval in the form of a GO Bond election. This is a discretionary expense that will generate minimal returns on investment. The professionally prepared, tax-payer funded Mayborn Center report very clearly creates low expectations for any type of boost to the local economy see my previous post. In fact, it’s best-case scenario shows that it will still require over $400K a year in taxpayer subsidies to keep the doors open. I have no problem issuing COs for necessary infrastructure like water and sewer line replacement, road construction (unless the dollars go into the pocket of Councilmen) or economic development projects. But it is the truly discretionary projects that I think should be voted on by the public. The Parks Bond is a great example of the voters giving a mandate to invest significant dollars in our parks system. The voters spoke, we acted accordingly and the projects are underway. Why should the Council deny the voters an opportunity to be heard in this case? After all whose money is it?

My oldest daughter left me a voice message last week while I was in West Texas. In the message she asked, rather urgently, for a 19-week advance on her allowance. Evidently the net present value of this future sum was already burning a hole in her pocket. Instant gratification on tomorrow’s dollars. Coincidently it seems that the City is not going to buckle its belt too tightly for the upcoming budget year. Evidently spending $2.7M for a spit and shine on the Mayborn Center, in the name of civic pride, is looking pretty much like a done deal. Speaking about civic pride, I’m proud of paying my fair share of taxes. The thing is,  I’d be just as proud paying less.

I noticed my boy playing on the Internet the other day. He was busy taking care of his virtual pets on the website webkinz.com . It is a cool website where he plays games to earn virtual money to take care of his virtual pets. I asked him what he was doing and he informed me he had just bought a hot tub for Buddy, George and Rudolph, his virtual pets. “A hot tub?” I asked. I was surprised because he had just bought a pool the day before. “Yes sir,” he answered back. “Everybody needs a pool and hot tub,” he went on. When I asked him how much money he spent to buy the hot tub he just shrugged his shoulders and said, “I don’t know.” “Well how much did the pool cost,” I inquired. “C’mon Dad,” he said, “I’m not old enough to understand money yet, I just try to buy whatever I want. If the “puter lets me buy it then I have enough money.” Hmmmm this is getting interesting I thought. “So what happens when you run out of money?” I asked. “Oh that’s easy. I just play more games to make more money!” He triumphantly exclaimed.

This brief conversation with my wise-beyond-his-years, 5-year-old boy came to mind as I sat in our first of many to come Council budget workshops for the coming budget year. In that workshop, raising the solid waste rates by $1.25 a month ($15 a year) as well as spending $2,704,991 to fix up the Mayborn Center was discussed. Click here to view the Mayborn presentation given by City staff.

I expressed concerns over both the rate increase and Mayborn renovations. I think we need to be looking at ways to offset increasing rates with additional revenue and/or reduced expenses. Concerning the Mayborn Center, I can’t see spending this kind of money when we are supposed to be tightening our belts. The taxpayer funded study on the Mayborn Center goes so far as to say that renovating the facility will not provide much, if any, of a return on investment. “You can’t put a value on civic pride,” was a response I got when I pointed out the apparent lack of return for the taxpayers on this significant investment. It was at that moment that the above conversation with my boy came to mind.

Instead of finding ways to contain solid waste costs, let’s just raise the rate. Instead of making due with what we have, like most people are doing these days, let’s raise taxes a tad bit for a $2.7M spit and shine for the Mayborn Center. Sound kind of like my boy’s take on his virtual bank balance? When he runs out of money he just goes back for more. It sure looks like we are gonna to do the same.

BTW, Wouldn’t the world be a great place if cars ran on civic pride instead of gas. Oh well, one can only hope.

Check out the attached :30-second video clip from the last Council meeting.

Remember my hat analogy from my Dear Boris post? Which hat do you think Councilmember Schneider is wearing here? He is really perturbed that no local contractors could bid on the project because they were “confused about getting and laying the product.” He goes on to state that they were “actually run off” because this product was specified. I for one think we need to stress management classes to help ease the tension for our local contractors about this product. Maybe we could offer some hands on training to help them learn how to find and use it. A topic for another day…

• A little background information. The material Councilman Schneider wants the City to quit using is call pervious concrete. It is a material that has been in use all over the country for over 20 years. It is being used in parks in Austin and Georgetown. In fact, Austin is installing 7,000 feet of it this month at Zilker Park. Click here for information about pervious concrete and its uses. Click here for additional information

• Apparently Councilman Schneider was one of the “local contractors” that was “run off” because of being confused about getting and laying the product. Click here to see the list of contractors that picked up bid packets.

• Councilman Schneider has openly stated that he would like for the City to quit using the pervious concrete and go back to using the plain jane concrete.

My question is this. Which hat was Councilman Schneider wearing in the video clip referenced above and during the rest of the discussion on this project? Was he really working in the City’s best interest? What about the taxpayers who are actually going to be using the trail many years to come? Or, was he advocating for his own interests or for those of his contractor buddies? If you can’t be 100% sure that he is wearing his city councilman’s hat and not his contractor’s hat then there is a problem. This is just one more incident in a string of many that cause me concern for this very reason.