tony jeter dot com

I am 50 pages into Atlas Shrugged and still waiting to find out who John Galt guy is. BTW, the print is so small it would be 100 pages in any other book, except maybe the Bible. Interestingly, I began to see many parallels to today’s politically correct thinking. Then it hit me like a lightening bolt instead of asking you readers for help with my quest to identify John Galt I should, instead, ask you who Tom Martin is.  If you are really interested in why this conflict of interest issue on the Council is such a big deal to me you will seek the answer to this question.  You will need to be patient and persistent in your quest. When, and if, you figure it out you will begin to grasp my consternation.

Back in December the City Manager met with our new State Rep. Ralph Sheffield to discuss transportation related issues. Click here to view the document that was presented to Rep. Sheffield that outlines the areas deemed critically important to Temple.  As you will see there is a whole lot of money needed to make these projects happen. So where will it come from? Maybe TxDot can get their hands on some of the $335M for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases our infinitely wise Congress included in the stimulus package approved today by the House.  As for me, I would prefer my tax dollars to be spent on concrete over condoms any day!

For those of you who are interested in how our local retail businesses are weathering the downturn, the following sales tax info might be of interest to you.

The sales tax allocations we receive from the State are directly tied to retail sales in the City.  Our sales tax allocations compared to the same months last year were up +4.7% for the month of September, +.9% for October and down -9.78% for November. The real question is how we did in December. We won’t have those numbers until February 11. So far, our year to date average is a negative -1.13%.  Not a very promising start to our fiscal year.  If this downward trend continues I anticipate some difficult budgetary decisions on the horizon.  The City Manager has assured me that he and the Finance Department are hard at work on financial contingency plans. Brings to mind an old saying I heard back in the 50’s “Pray for the best, prepare for the worst.”

Click here to view a PDF of last week’s building permits.

My boy and I watched Fox News this yesterday morning before we started to get ready for church. I was eating my oatmeal and he was hard at work whippin some bad guys on his DS. OK, he wasn’t really watching the news…. but he was listening. How do I know? Well, as the illustrious Senator Schumer from New York was discussing the stimulus package. He said something that the caught the Boy’s attention.  Schumer said, “We needed to spend the stimulus money as fast as we can.”  “No they don’t”, said the Boy. “No they don’t what?” I asked. “ They don’t need to spend the money as fast as they can,” he replied.  “Why?” I inquired back.  “Well if they spend the money as fast as they can then they are going to run out of money and then what will they do?” Hmmmm, I thought to myself. This is a pretty sharp kid if I say so myself. He was listening to the news, playing his game and talking to me. How’s that for multitasking? Can anybody tell me what will happen when they run out of money? That same question is bugging me as well and… he is still waiting on me to get back to him with an answer.  I wonder if our people in DC are asking this question.

I had an interesting conversation with an associate concerning economic development. The particular topic was whether or not retail development should be a part of the mission of our local economic development efforts. There are some folks in town that think that retail development is not as important as industrial development. There was one comment made in particluar that really hit the nail on the head…  “I don’t care if it wears a skirt, wears pants or dresses in drag…if it’s creating wealth and jobs then it’s economic development.”  I couldn’t have said it any better.

Last Thursday we approved another local preference contract.  This time around we paid $21,000 more than the low bidder from out of town. While I acknowledge the benefit to the local economy, I am also concerned about the expense to the taxpayers. So far we have spent almost $75,000 more on two projects than if we had chosen the low bidders. This is no small amount.  The conundrum for me is that, like last time, both contractors provided lists of subcontractors they planned on using. Both lists contained a good number of local sub-contractors so those dollars were going to stay local no matter what.  The only real difference is that the actual contractor himself was local.  Is that enough to justify the added expense? In this case I thought so and voted accordingly. Next time it may not.  Click here to view the agenda info including the contractors sub lists.

I want to call attention to an outstanding idea our City Attorney mentioned to me during the meeting. His idea was to let the local contractor match the low bid so that we do not have to pay the additional amount. I think this has the potential to be a good solution to these situations.  He is in the process of researching the legality of this option.  I will keep you apprised of what he finds out.

Is the community intelligent enough to make a decision via the ballot box concerning the Charter’s conflict of interest provisions?  Apparently there are some on the Council that don’t think so. At issue is the practice of elected officials significantly benefiting from construction projects paid for with taxpayer dollars.  I believe that it is wrong for elected officials to be involved in the formulation, discussion and approval of construction projects that they know full well they will bid on in the future.  By bidding I mean whether as a contractor, subcontractor or supplier. I also believe that the awarding of construction contracts to elected officials is in and of itself fraught with peril.  Do you think City employees look forward having to supervise a boss? It is common knowledge what can happen to a City employee when they get crossways with a Councilperson.  History is replete with tales of employees run off by Councilmen (and women).  Is it really right or fair to put City employees in this position? Finally, I also believe that it just doesn’t look right to the public.  In this day and age we need to be doing everything within our power to build the trust of the voters not to diminish it.

I have requested, on more than one occasion, that we place a Charter amendment on the ballot for the voters to approve or disapprove. My proposed amendment would prohibit the elected officials from benefiting from construction contracts that are paid for with taxpayer dollars.  I was informed by others on the Council that this was not an option because the “voters will approve anything when it comes to Charter amendments”.   Furthermore, I was told the Charter was not broke so there was no need of having an election in the first place.  I must admit I have a lot more confidence in democratic process than some.  What about you?

Click here to view a PDF of last week’s building permits.

As usual the paper gave a very thin account of the actual Council discussion on the Charter. What a disservice to the community to gloss over what many believe to be a significant issue. It goes without saying that giving some actual attention to the issue would sell more papers.  This why I so dislike the practice of discussing important or controversial matters in Council workshops.  These meetings are not held in the Council Chambers so they are not video taped. Thus the public is at the mercy of the Telegram as what, if anything, they say about the meeting.  Then again, this is why some on the Council would rather have these discussions at workshops.

Oh well, four to one is not that bad. Andrew Jackson once said, “One man with courage makes a majority.”  So a majority of one I make.