Frankly, City Finances are in Sad Shape

DID YOU KNOW...
The City is short on income by more than a million dollars.
The City is a million and a quarter dollars under budget on expenses.
The vast majority of income has been received for the current fiscal year.....
but there are still 5 more months of expenses.

In a shocking expose based on the current City of Wilmer Profit & Loss statement, mayoral candidate Joe Aldrich blasted the City Council on fiscal irresponsibility and the budget. The City planned to overspend current income by $4,900 according to the published budget figures. Last year's budget doesn't seem to be quite in balance. It doesn't take an accounting background to see a problem here, just take a look.

No "red flags" appear in the report because everything is "under budget", so almost any expenditure the City cares to dream up (like the Dewberry drainage project) can be said to be in the current budget. The problem is the income shortage of over a million dollars and the vast majority of property tax proceeds already received, and little chance of significant additional revenue in the remaining months in the current fiscal year. All the while, expenses continue to accrue regardless of the availability of funds to pay the bills.

The City Council approved a budget with known deficiencies, such as the tremendous over estimation of permit income because Whirlpool's windfall last year wasn't factored out of the proposed budget. At time of adoption, the budget was known to have overstated $135,000 in permit fees alone.

No wonder those special public funds accumulating in the Economic and Community Development Corporation accounts seem so irresistible to the City Council - Wilmer only has a bit over $175,000 in the bank to last over the next 5 months - each of the development corps has a similar amount of money in their accounts currently. Perhaps this is why these development corporation boards can't seem to get enough cooperation from the City to be able to schedule a meeting and the directors can't get access to the financial records.

At the time the budget was being discussed in public hearings, last year's new council was in a huge battle with Jeff Steele. It's beginning to look like they may have approved a budget with the intent of embarrassing Mr. Steele and then forgot to repair the damage once in office - so now eight months into the fiscal year, they've neglected to come to grips with the issues and the responsibility lies solely on the current occupants of the seats in the governing body to repair the problem. After several budget workshops, why have no corrections or changes been made? How much is this going to cost US?

Read more!

Let's Make Wilmer a Great big SECRET

Former "resigned in disgrace" mayor Jeff Steele continues his journalistic endeavors and forays into social networking with the facebook group "Let's Make Wilmer Great!". Unfortunately, after hearing from a few people with opposing views, Steele kicked them all out, closed the group and made it secret - not very conducive to promoting the community's interests at large.


It seems the group started with the description that included "taking Wilmer back" but that was updated fairly early on in the lifecycle of the group. At one point during the holidays, Steele asked all the members of the group to invite as many folks as possible to participate in online group activities. Evidently, the suggestion to direct the group's attention to focus on one particular member was considered "abuse" and that's when the situation began to take on the character of a junior high school clique.

One member and all her posts were removed by Steele, two other member were booted off the group for being nay-sayers, but at least initially, their posts were allowed to stand. There were seventeen remaining members at this point following these expungements.

At this point Steele announced that the group had been purged of naysayers and was now closed so that only members could comment. He also made the group SECRET which restricts anyone not a member from seeing the page as well as eliminating the page from search results. Very odd behavior for someone trying to rally public support to re-take Wilmer politically.

What happens next is interesting: Now that the group was CLOSED and SECRET, former mayor Steele invited a number of folks to join the group and a number of them accepted: Alice(& J?) Holloway, Vicky Vandygriff, Anita Camehl, Eric Pon Victor Kemp, and Ellis County Press reporter Megan Gray. Of course, whomever rejected his invitation to join the group wasn't listed, but there was obviously someone that did not accept as Steele commented that he'd inadvertently invited a naysayer to the group. Fortunately, this reporter was not expunged at that time.

Vicky Vandygriff took the opportunity to comment about the upcoming City Council Meeting and budget workshop on 5 January. She commented, somewhat sarcastically, on having a productive 15 minute workshop and then stated that there wouldn't be a workshop. Whether she planned not to attend, to disrupt the workshop, or immplied that the content of the session wouldn't be workshop material is unknown. However she did publicly state that the Budget Workshop would not happen. Upon disclosing this information to City Hall, this reporter's access to the group was also eliminated.

So it seems that Mayor Steele is content to have his core supporters networking together on facebook to make their plans for the takeover and domination of the political subdivision called Wilmer. It's a good thing we've got members of our local police force watching this group - but it does look bad for those civil servants still answerable to the public and dependent upon taxpayer support to be recruited by former-resigned-in-disgrace-mayor Jeff Steele for his political ambition of re-taking the town. It's a good thing all those blackberrys, smart phones, computers and stuff owned by the city are subject to open records so we can see what our taxpayer dollars are subsidizing and what kind of online activities are considered necessary expenses and appropriate uses of time. Then we can clean house.

Read more!

Agenda Wars: The Initial Flames

Open Records Requests produced this email exchange between Mayor Steele and Alderman Pena regarding motions, agenda scheduling issues and authority. Note I've added my comments in blue and used bold to highlight important passages in the email. I invite readers to make their own assessments of the personalities involved and the issues to be resolved.


Thank you Alderman Pena for your timely response to my open records request. I will "re-order" the emails in ascending chronological order so that a historical timeline is evident. Through the use of colors, formatting and bolding I will highlight areas to which my comments will be addressed.

I appreciate that Mayor Steele has asked for my opinion based on the research I've completed thus far into the city's records.

The Agenda for the July 7, 2011 Meeting in question can be found at cityofwilmer.com:
 Click Here to View the Agenda of July 7

============================

from hpena@cityofwilmer.com
to joealdrich@gmail.com
date Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 3:11 PM
subject FW: Re: Agenda Items For Special Called Meeting Monday, July 11, 2011

Joe, here is the email you asked for.

-----Original Message-----

On Jul 8, 2011, at 3:11 PM, hpena@cityofwilmer.com wrote:

Dear Mayor Steele:

As voted on and passed by council on the July 7, 2011 meeting to hold a Special Called Meeting Monday, July 11, 2011, below is a list of Agenda Items to be placed thereon:

A. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE RESIGNATION OF CITY SECRETARY ALICE HOLLOWAY. (ACTION AS REQUIRED)
B. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOV’T. CODE §551.074,
( A) (1) PERSONNEL: TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT, DUTIES, DISCIPLINE OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE: CITY SECRETARY MARCUS SMITH.
C. EXECUTIVE SESSION: PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOV’T. CODE §551.074,
(A) (1) PERSONNEL: TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT, DUTIES, DISCIPLINE OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE: APPOINTMENT OF CITY SECRETARY/ADMINISTRATOR.
D. ANY ACTION NECESSARY AS A RESULT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
E. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER RESOLUTION NO. 0711-11 DESIGNATING THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES FOR ALL CITY BANK DEPOSITORY ACCOUNTS REMOVING ALICE HOLLOWAY FROM ALL CITY BANK DEPOSITORY ACCOUNTS AND ADDING A NEW CITY SECRETARY. (ACTION AS REQUIRED)
F. REVIEW AND CONSIDER AMENDING THE 2010-2011 BUDGET CHANGING THE CITY SECRETARY LINE ITEM TO READ CITY SECRETARY/ADMINISTRATOR.
(ACTION AS REQUIRED)

Sincerly,

Hector Pena
Mayor Pro-Tem
There is Pena's request for a special meeting, claimed as a result of a council vote on Madrigal's motion. I would call Alderman Pena's attention to the statutory requirement for a City Secretary and a City Ordinance mandating a City Administrator are two different functions and cannot, by law, be combined.

From: "Mayor Steele"
Sent: Friday, July 8, 2011 10:36pm
To: "hpena@cityofwilmer.com"

Subject: Re: Agenda Items For Special Called Meeting Monday, July 11, 2011

I am happy to discuss these items with you. Especially city secretary.
Is there a candidate name?
The Mayor has stated he is aware of numerous candidates for the position. The appropriate venue for discussion is in an Executive Session to deliberate on the candidates. The fact that two people occupy the position currently must be resolved before considering or naming a replacement.

i dont understand you stating there was a vote for a special meeting.
Did you have a vote.
Where was it located?
At the meeting, the motion Alderman Madrigal put to a vote was abbreviated by the Mayor in his restatement when the vote result was called and may not have accurately reflected Alderman's actual statements. Mayor Steele is attempting to ridicule Alderman Pena's assertion, denying the original motion's existence, rather than its' validity.

What is the grounds of discussion for marcus smith?
Is there reason to discuss an officer of the city that i have not heard one council member state any grounds to intimidate an employee of the city?
Why does the Mayor refer to intimidation, when none is implied or intended? Indeed, is this not more self relevation, Mayor Steele inserting his bias into the motivational aspects of Alderman Pena's request? The grounds for discussing Smith have everything to do with his position and contract as City Secretary - the Mayor should notice the personnel action discusses "City Secretary Marcus Smith" referring to the fraudulent contract executed by the Mayor at the City Council's direction. Smith was an employee before the contract and still will be after the contract is quashed. He just won't have any claim to the statutory position of City Secretary.

There is not a position of city administrator so I dont understand this
item. your item e is redundant.
According to Wilmer City Codes Section 2-6 there is by ordinance a City Administrator position, although it is temporarily unfilled and the Mayor has assumed the duties, responsibilities, and authorities thereof, whether or not specifically empowered by statute or ordinance.

The secretary can be authorized to sign at time of appointment.
Prior banking signatory authorizations have been completed by resolution of the City Council, appointed boards must make resolutions approving any change in bank account administration. Fiduciary procedures require the City Council act in order to change the banking signatories, as they are the empowered authority of funds for the municipality.

Finally, you item f dealing with the budget will have to be researched. As i understand any change of the budget requires notice and possible public hearing. I will check and you can too
Mayor Steele's understanding of budgetary process is less-than-rudimentary and definitely non-compliant, but this time he errs on being overly cautious. Conducting a regularly noticed city council meeting is all that's required for a budget amendment, just like last year in case the Mayor has forgotten.

Last thing Mr Pena, if this is your idea of leadership, i can only hope that you see the errors that you are making because you are in for a rude awakening by these actions.
What are you trying to do to this city by these immature and irrational actions? I suggest you pick up a book and read it, perhaps the local government code for starters.
The Mayor's belittling comments are Arrogant and Insulting. There is an implied threat by the Mayor of a rude awakening. I would suggest the Mayor look in the mirror for immature and irrational actors in the city government and brush up on his own reading comprehension skills. I understand his best use of the Local Government Code is to hurl it across the City Hall at Mr. Pena.

Jeff Steele


-----Original Message-----
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 6:07 PM, hpena@cityofwilmer.com wrote:

Dear Mayor Steele:

In response to your email wherein you have questions regarding a simple email directing items be placed on a Special Called Meeting agenda which, in my humble opinion, you have no authority to question, I will attempt to answer as briefly as possible.
Sorry Mr. Pena, everybody has a right to question - statute gives three aldermen the right to call a meeting of topics of your choosing in LGC 22.038(b)

These items are not up for discussion with you or anyone else outside of council chambers in a meeting. The Attorney General for the State of Texas has determined that the presiding officer (you) are not authorized to control the content of the agenda, even though by statute you are the presiding officer. Under LGC 22.037(a) By statute and by virtue of our position, any one council member may place any item on the agenda for discussion and action if they so choose. No Reference

As to a Special Called Meeting. I call your attention to the motion made by council woman Madrigal and seconded by myself, passed with a 3-2 vote, wherein the motion was:
I make a motion to approve the consent items with the exception of any legal bills for City Attorney, any City Secretary appointed, interim or otherwise until we can set up a time to appoint a City Secretary that we can work with and possibly have a Special Called Meeting on Monday July 11, 2011 to appoint a City Secretary with action as necessary.

You were present at the meeting, presided over the meeting, and called for the vote of the council on this very motion. It is a fact at this point, you have once again failed and ignored the will of the majority of council and did not call a Special Called Meeting. Am I to exercise my right as Mayor Pro-tem and call the meeting myself, do you leave me another choice? Under LGC 22.037(c) There were no other legal motions that could be taken on the agenda you posted, typed and signed wherein you listed all other agenda items to be "(Discussion Only)" with no other line items for action necessary as a result of executive session. Therefore, any other actions, motions and votes taken after the above motion are null, void and invalid. The motion stands.
??? Evidently there's some disagreement between the Mayor and Alderman Pena on the Motion as passed by the Council!!!
Didn't the Executive Session proceed out-of-order and occur immediately after the discussion of consent items was initiated? Or did any action on the consent items get deferred? The only action item on the agenda was consent items - the only other item that could have resulted in an action would be the motion for adjournment. [ED NOTE: See the Link Above for the Agenda]

Marcus Smith is not to be discussed outside of council chambers and call your attention to 551. Mr. Smith is a personnel matter and shall be dealt with as such. Basic GC 551 compliance on employee matters If you perceive intimidation, no intent is made. Question Mayor how many employment agreements for the position of city secretary were signed and issued to employees?
I have two in my possession, one for Marcus Smith and one for Alice Holloway.

Please Mayor Steele, place items A. thru F. on the August 4, 2011 agenda that I previously emailed to you on July 8, 2011 for the special called meeting on July 11, 2011.

The governing body may change the budget for municipal purposes Mayor Steele. A simple change in wording. Post the agenda items and call the meeting Mayor Steele.

Blatant disrespect and disregard for the council members will not be tolerated by this council as long as I am a part of it. The high handed actions you are exhibiting could be construed as intentional unlawful behavior including an intentional or corrupt failure, refusal, or neglect to perform a duty imposed on you by law. And that would be the definition of official misconduct under LGC 21.022(4)


From: "Mayor Steele"
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 12:15pm
To: hpena@cityofwilmer.com

Subject: Re: Agenda Items For Special Called Meeting Monday, July 11, 2011

Mr. Pena,

First , I would like to address what you are assuming to be the authority that you have. The authority in which you have is null by yourself. It is only within a quorum of the governmental body in which you are a member vote on an issue. I am trouble by your lack of comprehension of the will of the council. You state there was no further action after executive session but sir, you are mistaken. After reconvening into open session, Mr. Turner moved to pay the Interim City Secretary. The motion was seconded by Vicky Vandygriff. The vote was 3-2 in favor of the motion.

As to the special meeting, I direct you to your own words of the motion,
"POSSIBLY have a special called meeting" Mayor Steele has a point on the verb used at the time, once the motion was followed with a written request, intent was clarified and the agenda items should have been accommodated in either a special or regular meeting. Intent of the majority was declared during the meeting. The follow-up email clarified that. Or not as you wish Mayor.
Your refusal to not speak to me and discuss what your issues with the secretary and city attorney are cowardly and immature. You have no authority to call any meeting whether you are mayor pro temp or God himself. I refer you again sir the the Texas Local Government Code.
More rude belittling commentary regarding Alderman Pena. Amusing the use of the phrase "refusal to not speak" which should mean you're getting an ear full! The incredibly blasphemous proclamation from the Mayor assuming authority over God for control of his precious meeting agenda. What else can I say except to remind Mayor Steele that I myself have un-called some of his meetings and unhinged an agenda item or two in the months leading to the election!

As to the governing body may change the budget. If the budget officer of the city (which is me )
The above sentence fragment is unintelligible and redundant.

Sec. 22.042. POWERS AND DUTIES OF MAYOR. (a) The mayor
is the chief executive officer of the municipality. The mayor shall at all times actively ensure that the laws and ordinances of the municipality are properly carried out. The mayor shall perform the duties and exercise the powers prescribed by the governing body of the municipality.
(b) The mayor shall inspect the conduct of each subordinate municipal officer and shall cause any negligence, carelessness, or other violation of duty to be prosecuted and punished.
(c) The mayor shall give to the governing body any information, and shall recommend to the governing body any measure, that relates to improving the finances, police, health, security, cleanliness, comfort, ornament, or good government of the municipality.
(d) The mayor may administer oaths of office.
(e) In the event of a riot or unlawful assembly or to preserve the peace and good order in the municipality, the mayor may order and enforce the closing of a theater, ballroom, or other place of recreation or entertainment, or a public room or building and may order the arrest of a person who violates a state law or a municipal ordinance in the presence of the mayor.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.

Sec. 102.001. BUDGET OFFICER. (a) The mayor of a municipality serves as the budget officer for the governing body of the municipality except as provided by Subsection (b).
b) If the municipality has the city manager form of government, the
city manager serves as the budget officer.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.

In summation I will say, how dare you accuse me of intentional unlawful behavior and you or Joe Alderich may visit and speak to me on your issues.

I observed no accusations from Mr. Pena, although he mentions the possibility of an appearance of intentional (mis)conduct. The second rule of disinformation is the Mayor's oft used "how dare you" ploy; it has no effect on matters of fact.

[ED NOTE: "2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit." from 25 Rules of Disinformation at http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html]

My observation is that Mayor Steele maintains his ignorance of propriety and the obligations of his office to the detriment of the City and the taxpayers. IMHO it amounts to "Criminal Stupidity".

And I thank Mayor Steele for inviting me to share my comments on his issues with you all. I would remind the Mayor that I will speak on these and any other issues I may have regardless of Mr. Pena's stance on matters, although I'd prefer not to subjugate myself to a personal visit with the Mayor!
Read more!

FINALLY - A Solution to the Water Problem

Many things can be said of the no-action city council meeting of July 6, but the Mayor and "senior aldermen" relieved themselves (pun intended) of anything to do with Wilmer's water service making progress on the problem at least possible.


There were several memorable quotes in the exchanges between Alderman Pena and the Mayor, but it was telling that Mayor Steele foisted all responsibility for solving the problem on Mr. Pena and then proceeded to castigate the voters, Mr. Pena's published opposition to the bond proposal - while emphasizing his own political agenda of connecting at Bonnie View to service the needs of the Allen Group.

WELL! MR. MAYOR LET IT BE KNOWN that there will be no solution to the water problem that includes anything to do with connecting at Bonnie View and running lines as planned in the bond package. Past Council's inability to reframe the parameters of the problem are completely at fault. Although the newly elected have not yet shown their capabilities, at least the imbecilic options presented by the past council are free to be given no consideration at all since fresh minds are engaging the problem.

The most mediocre high school graduate knows that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, and it takes a pretty strong mathematician to prove them wrong in a Riemann Space. The epic fail of the proposed piping plan was to bring any line down from Wintergreen at Pinto or Sunrise when ultimately it was to connect to well #2 at Millers Ferry north of Pleasant Run. Any geometry student with a ruler would properly indicate the best route straight from the source, down Wintergreen and then to Well #2, rather than proceeding farther South than necessary and return back north to connect. So other than to benefit the Allen Group properties and potentially certin sitting and recently departed members of the City Council, what justifiable explanation is there for this solution?

Not to mention that "Well #2" isn't particularly functional at the moment even as a transfer station. The "well" isn't usable at all since there's no structure to support the cooling tower that is needed to cool the water drawn from the deep well - the existing pump for water transfer isn't working so great either as there have been several outages of water service in the past weeks.

So what are some of the options?
Wilmer could participate with NTCOG in the 120 plan to bring a huge main off I20 down I45 - which somehow the mayor neglected to retain as he attended those South Dallas Infrastructure meetings (see the City of Wilmer web site).
Wilmer could cooperate in regional planning for future water resources. Wilmer could eliminate their dependence on outside water and operate an self sufficient Water Department.
Wilmer could dedicate all our facilities to Dallas Water and get out of the business of losing money for the taxpayers while providing marginal service to the customers.

At least we have VIABLE options that can be considered instead of preconceived boondoggles with no apparent benefit to the public. Read more!

Mayor Endorses Candidates

Well it looks as if the true colors are showing as the Mayor was campaigning with Dyess and Phinney last night at the gas stations and today the Mayor has provided a written endorsement of the John Eggen campaign candidates.

Click Here to View the Mayor's Candidate Endorsement Letter


There you have it folks, the Mayor's people with the purple signs aren't going to change anything, they're statisfied with and fully support the way the Mayor runs roughshod over the citizenry in this town gouging fees from businesses and homeowners - raising taxes just like the Sheriff of Nottingham back in the time of Robin Hood.

I guess this has become a popularity contest:
IF YOU LIKE THE MAYOR, VOTE FOR THE PURPLE SIGNS!

If you think the Mayor and his henchmen need to be replaced -
vote for Pena Madrigal and Wells.

And if you're thinking about voting for Abney... just say no. Read more!

Distracted Much?

Even before Early Voting in the City elections commandeered the Council Room, it seems the stewardship of the City has been "distracted". Public Hearings and Board Meetings are getting cancelled at the last minute due to "procedural error" or (perhaps) political expediency. Oops, my bad.


Just prior to the April 7 meeting of the "Board of Adjustment" aka Wilmer City Council, a letter was circulated among the council members listing a number of Attorney General Opinions prohibiting a City Council from acting as a Zoning Board of Adjustment. With no prior notice, the meeting was cancelled and the Mayor called it a "procedural error". Further he stated that the research was out of date due to a new clause (Section 211.008g of the Local Government Code) that allows a Type A General Law Municipality city council to act as a zoning board of adjustment. As it turns out, the "procedural error" referred to by the Mayor was the mandate in the statute that the Council may only act as the Zoning Board of Adjustment after enacting an Ordinance naming themselves as such. Ouch, that's some procedural error totally ignoring the restrictions in the statute - and let's not forget the City Council had already met three times this year as a "Zoning Board of Adjustment" on February 3, March 3, and March 17.

As a side note: None of the quoted AG Opinions (JM1069, LO1992056, LO1997062) has been revised or overridden since the law was last changed in September 1997.

The P&Z Board Meeting of April 19 and Public Hearing on a Proposed Lighting Ordinance to amend the Zoning Ordinance didn't go much as planned for the City Administration either. Alice Holloway confirmed today that the Public Hearing on the Lighting Ordinance before the City Council planned for May 5 wasn't going to be on the agenda because the ordinance was being rewritten and updated at the request of Councilman Bell AND the P&Z Secretary had stated in the minutes that the motion had passed, causing her to schedule the May 5 Public Hearing before the City Council. Myself being the only member of the public attending the P&Z meeting other than the Chairman's spouse, I knew what had transpired as did the Secretary, Chairman and Mr. Vandygriff. Mayor Steele was waiting outside the community center smoking when I departed following the meeting, so he would have immediately known the outcome had he been interested.

How could the minutes of the P&Z meeting have been a factor in scheduling the Public Hearing before the City Council on the matter? How could the minutes of the meeting have been written before the meeting?

Although the City Administration turned off the display of the document upload time stamps, they just don't get that the information is there anyway. The document time stamps from my downloaded copy of the May 5 Public Hearing Notice on the Proposed Lighting Ordinance from the City of Wilmer's web site (http://cityofwilmer.com) show 2:19PM April 7 five hours earlier than the beginning of the P&Z meeting at 7:00PM.

Read more!

Minority Voter Suppression?

Well, it's election time in Wilmer and already the (incumbent) City Administration is cracking down on political signs. Fire Chief Marcus Smith attended the TAFYC sponsored Voter Registration Drive to enforce the City's sign codes. Fortunately, the citizens were prepared with an actual copy of the codified ordinances which detail the full scope of the ordinance and it's exceptions (including political signage).


In an effort to register minority voters in time for the May elections, TAFYC sponsored a voter registration drive at River Oaks Mobile Home Park. There were hot dogs and refreshments offered to the public and a certified voter registrar was onsite. Evidently, the City's code enforcement csar, Marcus Smith received a complaint about an illegal sign and in response demanded that the sign be removed. After several concerned citizens intervened, Chief Smith decided to let the sign remain for the additional 90 minutes until the event was over. No citations were written at the time.

Good call on Chief Smith's part, but we must wonder who complained?
Is it possible that Chief Smith was acting on his own?
Who knew that the code enforcement office was open on a Saturday?
Or how to contact the code enforcement officer outside business hours?
Who would have an interest in restricting minority voters from participating in a local election?
Does this incident need to be investigated by the USDOJ as Texas remains on the list of states under scrutiny under the Voting Rights Act of 1965?

The obvious answer is that it's political. Politics as usual in Wilmer Texas. But we will not know for sure until the records of that call are released under the Texas Public Information Act. Or a government entity conducts and inquiry or investigation.
Read more!

City of Wilmer & Chicago Share Hiring Practices

On March 7, the Chicago Sun Times posted this story about the City's hiring practices The Watchdogs: City Hall hired 139 ex-cons in two years

The March 7 Washington Examiner posts this story about the District's proposed new hiring policies D.C. Council Wants city to hire ex-convicts. Readers may remember D.C. re-elected their convicted mayor after he served his sentence on cocaine charges.

Does it surprise you to know that the City of Wilmer engages in the same hiring practices as the City of Chicago? Criminal records searches reveal a number of Wilmer City employees with felony convictions, currently on active felony probation, fugitives from justice in other states, even a long standing employee was returned to prison on a felony parole violation.

Wilmer seems a bit more "progressive" than Chicago by going the extra mile and bailing out employees on probation who commit felonies on city time. 

Perhaps, like Chicago, our City's progressive hiring practices can be remedied in similar fashion.
Read more!

What I Heard at Thursday's Town Hall Meeting

Though I've vowed to publish only contributed content I feel compelled to share what I heard at the Town Hall Meeting.


REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU VOTE ON THE BOND ISSUE - the City intends to spend the money and complete the proposed project anyway. The Mayor stated unequivocally that regardless of the will of the voters, the water improvement project will proceed and that the funds must come from water customers.

The Mayor stated that the City of Wilmer was "For Sale".

The Mayor confirmed that he considers City Hall "His House".

The Mayor confirmed that he "wears a crown in this town".

The Mayor repeatedly stated that "he had faith" that TCEQ air quality measures would be enforced, that TX DOT would monitor and certify construction vehicle contamination to safe and appropriate levels and that NO additional measures or ordinances would be enacted by the city to ensure the safety of our children attending the school in such close proximity to the proposed cement batch plant for Whirlpool's construction.

The Mayor would confirm only that existing water/sewer pipes with "asbestos" would be replaced under the proposed water and sewer improvement plans.

The Mayor would not credit his sources for any material he referred to in his rhetoric, even though it was asked several times to show the cover of the report to which he kept referring.

Read more!

Phinney Editorial on Bond Issue

Thanks to John Phinney for this Contributed Editorial. WATER. WATER NO WHERE
AND
WHERE WILL THE HUMAN WASTE GO?
NO WHERE!!!

The above could be true; the bond issue to improve the infrastructure of the water and sewer system of Wilmer, Texas is needed. The pipes are quite old. The section west of Highway 45 should have been replaced in the early 1990s and if not then by at least 2000 to 2002 but it was not. The Mayors and City Councils then did not address that situation as they should have. Now we (the citizens of Wilmer) must do it. In the last 18 months I have seen changes for the better in the city and this Bond Issue, up for Vote on November 2, 2010, can do that. It will provide a new water supply line into the city and will replace the pipes in the city that are breaking from age. I can remember my Grandfather Nelson, he maintained the water and sewer system for the City of Lincoln, Nebraska (110, 000 people at the time), stating that a patch of a leak was fine
but within the year or so it would again leak near the patch. You need new
pipes, technology changes and pipe connections change. If this is not passed, then where will the funds come from to continue to fix the leaks as pipes age and break? I would guess from higher water bills. There would be higher bills for all of Wilmer—East or West of Highway 45. Wilmer is on the way back with new business to increase the tax base and they, as well, will want a sound water supply.

If you want Wilmer to grow and gain respect as a city, where you life, then pass this Bond Issue. If you do not, then why do you live here?

John F. S. Phinney Read more!

Citizen Reaction to 16 Sept City Council Meeting

Thanks to Mary Phinney for this Contributed Article.

Please Click on the "Read More!" link below or the Headline for this Article to view the full text of Mary's message.

And don't forget to use the "Comments" button!




Read more!

Thought for THIS 9/11

The attached is from a 26 year old who's father is a veteran. On this special anniversary I invite you to read it... and weep. I know I did.

For the original posting (with comments) click here

or click Read More for the full text below.



My dad spent 26 years in the Armed Services as part of Strategic Air Command. He's become a bit of a poet in his golden years. Today he sent me this:
_

In Arlington we lay to rest
our bravest and our very best.
We send our children off to war
defending what we soon ignore.
_

“You’re free to worship,” so we say.
“But if you’re muslim, go away.”
Is this what they were dying for:
Intolerance, and nothing more?
_

Must one be christian to obtain
the liberties that we proclaim?
These soldiers died for liberty.
They didn’t die for bigotry.

_
So look upon this hallowed field,
not only crosses are revealed.
For you’ll see stars and crescents too.
They also sacrificed for you.
_

In Arlington we lay to rest
our bravest and our very best.
They knew what they were dying for.
It’s something that we can’t ignore.

Joe G

EDIT: I've always been proud of my old man.

EDIT #2: Wow, I wake up this morning to see this on the front page! I'm humbled, as I'm sure my father is.

Nothing would honor my father and the service his veteran brothers and sisters more than to share this poem with whomever you wish. All I ask is that you at least provide the same level of attribution that I did.
Read more!

Citizen Rebuttal to TAFYC Pamphlet

Thanks to Mary Phinney for this Contributed Content.

[ED: Attache is Mary's letter in it's complete form and true format. Thanks again to Mary Phinney for resending her letter.]

Please click the "Read More!" Link Below or the Headline to view the entire Article.

And don't forget to submit your comments!






Read more!

Second Newsletter from "Wilmer's Only News Media For Local News"

Citizen's Group "Take Action For Your City" has published a second newsletter as "Wilmer's Only News Media For Local News".

Click Here to read the entire publication in English.


More Community generated content for our publication.
Keep up the interest folks - and don't forget the comments button!. Read more!

Open Letter in Three Languages

Thanks to Mary Phinney for this contributed content.

Three translations in English, Spanish & German are included below - just click the "Read More" link for the full story.


I have been told that only the Hispanic residents received invitations to the last City Council Meeting. Written or vocal if only the Hispanic Residents were targeted then the person responsible is "playing" for some hidden agenda. The invitation should have been offered to every citizen of the City of Wilmer.
Once again, when I asked who I was met with denials and blank stares.
Here is a fact: Hector Pena records every session of the City Council. He knew that the Water Bill issue was not on the Agenda and he KNEW if the City Council addressed it in any fashion they would be breaking the Open Meetings Codes/Law. He set the Mayor and the Council up for being publicly embarrassed by not answering, he is counting on the ignorance of the audience or worse trying to force the Mayor and City Council into breaking the law.
Most of us have immigrant parents or grandparents. They came here to escape this kind of Cultural, Religious, and political bigotry.
Don’t let it get a foothold here.

===== SPANISH ======
Me han dicho que sólo los residentes hispanos recibieron invitaciones a la última reunión del Consejo de la ciudad. Escrito o vocal si sólo los residentes hispanos fueron específicamente que la persona responsable es "jugar" para algunos agenda oculta. La invitación debería haber ofrecido a todos los ciudadanos de la Ciudad de Wilmer.
Una vez más, cuando le pregunté quién era yo se reunió con rechazos y miradas vacías.
Aquí hay un hecho: Héctor Peña registra cada período de sesiones del Concejo Municipal. Sabía que la cuestión del agua Bill no estaba en el orden del día y sabía que si el Ayuntamiento se dirigió en cualquier forma, su actuación infringía el Código de Reuniones Abiertas / Derecho. Dejó el Alcalde y el Consejo para ser públicamente avergonzado por no responder, él está contando con la ignorancia de la audiencia o, peor aún tratando de forzar el Alcalde y el Concejo Municipal, a terminar con la ley.
La mayoría de nosotros tienen padres o abuelos inmigrantes. Ellos vinieron aquí para escapar de este tipo de cultural, religiosa, y el fanatismo político.
No permitan que se quede aquí un punto de apoyo.

===== GERMAN =====
Mir wurde gesagt, dass nur die hispanischen Bewohner Einladungen zur letzten Stadtratssitzung. Schriftliche oder vokal, wenn nur der hispanischen Einwohner wurden gezielte, dann ist die Person verantwortlich ist "Spielen" für einige "hidden agenda". Die Einladung sollte auf jeden Bürger der Stadt Wilmer angeboten wurde.

Wieder einmal, als ich fragte wer? " Ich war mit Dementis und leere Blicke trafen.

Hier ist eine Tatsache: Hector Pena Aufzeichnungen jeder Sitzung des Stadtrates. Er wusste, dass das Wasser Bill Problem nicht auf der Tagesordnung stand, und er wußte, wenn der Stadtrat es in irgendeiner Weise angesprochen werden, sie zu brechen würde die Open Meetings Codes / Law. Er stellte dem Bürgermeister und dem Rat bis zum Wesen von öffentlich nicht beantworten verlegen, ist er auf die Ignoranz des Publikums oder schlechter Versuch, die Bürgermeister und Stadtrat in Kraft, das Gesetz zu brechen Zählen. Beide Ziele sind verachtenswert!

Die meisten von uns haben eingewanderten Eltern oder Großeltern. Sie kam hierher, um diese Art der kulturellen, religiösen, rassischen und politischen Fanatismus und Manipulation zu entgehen.

Lassen Sie es nicht mehr Fuß fassen hier!
Read more!

And Now For Something Completely Different

Big Changes for the Wilmer Citizen. Is there a benefit to continuing? Are we providing a public service?

It's been a while since we last posted a story and this isn't really much of a news item at all. Some months ago I accepted an appointment to the Wilmer Economic Development Corporation. This is the body charged with spending the extra sales taxes we voted in a few years back. Thus I've been conflicted about the duties of public service and the obvious journalistic challenges that might occur as a result of receiving non-public information in the course of performing those duties. So I withdrew from publication for a while and as the laws of physics dictiate, I must now overcome inertia if I am to resume my former activities.

Fortunately, I don't see the same needs in the community that drove the inception of this august publication. While we may be an ornery bunch - and nobody wants any more taxes - it appears to most citizens that our daily interface with the city is less stressful and more consistent than a few years back when the Wilmer Citizen was conceived. Now you can visit the city web site, get all the information on meetings and hearings, budgets, press releases - although it does lack a certain editorial style and wit - the information is now openly available.

There is one area where we might be able to provide a service IF there is any community support (I'm not talking about money here folks).

Community Notices and "Member Generated Content" Here are a couple of examples I've neglected until it's too late (almost).

Click Here to View the Bike Rodeo Announcement for Saturday May 22, 2010 at 9:00AM at the Community Center.

Click Here to View the Red Cross Blood Drive Announcement for Monday May 24, 2010 from 11:00AM to 3:00PM in the Wilmer Community Center.

So here is my proposition to readers and supporters - send me stuff to publish and I'll get it out there - make it easy use email attachments and send it to reporter@wilmercitizen.info. If you've found an online article you want to let others know about please send the link with a brief description of the content so I only have to write a headline. Even better - send your article or link WITH a headline and synopsis (for articles) and a byline if you want one.

If you've really got some breaking news CALL ME at 213-244-7689 and we'll work on an article. That's about all I can do folks - other than redesign the interface so it's less "news oriented" and that can wait until there's something to publish from you, our faithful reading public.

Joe Aldrich

Read more!

Gun Control Results Down Under

Australian Gun Law Update

Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts...
From: Ed Chenel, A Law Enforcement Officer in Australia


Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns..' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.

The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note Americans, before it's too late!

Will you be one of the sheeple to turn yours in? WHY? You will need it.
Read more!

VICTORY IN WILMER (VW Day?)

It is official: "People Not Politics" sweeps the election - Second Street to remain open (The Party is as 420 Belt Line).

mayor Jeff Steele tramples soon-to-be-former-resident Tiny Lange in today's election. City Council candidates Bell, Dyess and Vandygriff all totaled more votes than Billy Wicklffe, Eugene Lowe and Dean Rolison. Matina Abney makes decent showing with 29 votes.

A new age dawns in Wilmer. We're guessing the announcement of new charter school coming to town laid the old timer's campaign to rest. Or maybe it was the venomous negative campaigning they chose to engage in.

Makes no difference: Wilmer seems to have a future after all.

Read more!

guest Editorial: Enough is Enough

One of our readers felt strongly enough about the campaign materials being distributed all over town to speak out about it. As Editor of the WPC I couldn't agree more.


I have worked in this area for 20 years. I moved to the community about a year ago. I attend the city council meetings on the nights that I do not have to work. For the past couple of weeks I have received political mailings from both sides that are currently running for council/mayor. I am assuming that it is both sides because one side comes out and says who they are, what they support and what they would like to see happen for the city of Wilmer. The other mailings are not signed and do not say who they are unless you count the one that is signed by a fictional television cartoon character. They contain negative hatefull context. How anyone who lives and works in the community and who wants to LEAD in the community can mail out something that is so negative, hateful and vindictive is beyond me. What would they say/do about me or you if we did something that they disagree with. Do they really think that calling people names and digging up past behavior (whether true or not-because I do not know) is morally responsible? Do they really think saying/mailing such repulsive literature will persuade anyone to vote for their side? Joe poses some good questions on this site that every voter should ask those that are running. I know that in the past councils that there have been many of the same problems that the mailings are accusing the mayor of now. Some of the people running for council now have been on the council before when those problems happened. I do not really care what happened 30, 20, or 10 years ago. There have been many good things that have happened in the past 6 months that past councils have been trying to make happen for years and years. Do you want to stay in the past?
Read more!

Ask the Candidates About These

Wilmer Public Citizen promised to pose questions for each of the candidates in the upcoming election May 9th. While exigent circumstances prevented our getting this out to the candidate and publishing their replies, Wilmer Public Citizen poses these questions for YOU to ask the candidates as they wrap up campaigning. In our final decision not to interview the candidates, we evaluated the probability of getting decent comparative responses to report and determined that our reporting would be criticized as "not fair" by the candidates.


There aren't any "right" or "wrong" answers - the voter is tasked with determining how the candidate's answers meet the needs of our community - just ask the candidates yourselves.

Questions for all candidates:

1. Do you envision the City of Wilmer successfully changing the community's image in the near future, and if so, would you see that future change in image as more or less progressive, regressive, libertarian, conservative, or otherwise?

2. Wilmer and Hutchins are inevitably compared and "linked" in the public viewpoint. Where do the similarities and differences between the two cities lay in terms of revenues, existing and targeted industrial/commercial development, and future growth?

3. Voters assume that a successful candidate for public office commits a great deal of time and effort in representing the citizens and operating the city government. What amount of time per week do you believe is required to fulfill the duties of your position, both with and without a full time City Administrator - and what kind of time commitments are you willing and able to make per week if you are elected?

4. What are your top five priorities for this term in elective office? What are your top five priorities for an additional two year term in office?

5. What do you perceive as the greatest problems, threats, or weaknesses facing Wilmer economically, politically and socially over the current elective term? Over two terms?

6. Rate the following statements on a scale of -3 (completely disagree) to +3 (completely agree). A rating of zero indicates no opinion.
a.- What is best for me is best for Wilmer.
b.- Serving the citizens of Wilmer is my primary mission.
c.- Regulating public behavior is a top priority for me.
d.- Encouraging public participation is a top priority for me.
e.- Maintaining the status-quo is a top priority for me.
f.- Investing my time and energy in governing Wilmer is my highest priority.
g.- I support consecutive term limits for elected city officials.
h.- I support lifetime term limits for elected city officials.
i.- I support on-premise liquor by the drink within the City of Wilmer.
j.- I support eliminating ad-valorem homestead taxes on seniors and the disabled.
k.- I support a local school for Wilmer's students.

Candidate Specific Questions ("zingers"):

Tiny Lange:
Why does your candidate application list your permanent residence as Panola County if you actually reside in Wilmer? or is it Gilmer?
Last election you stated that if you won you'd be here for two more years, otherwise you'd move to Gilmer in a few weeks - what kind of commitment to reside in Wilmer are you making this election?

Jeff Steele(I):
How do you address the concerns of certain council members regarding the proximity of your residence to Allen Group properties which have been the subject of recent council actions? Why or why not does this represent a conflict of interest in your position as mayor?

Stan Bell:
How much service to the city have you given in your latest appointment to the P&Z Commission here? Do you see the city council position requiring more or less of a commitment to serve the needs of the citizens?

Marlena Dyess (I):
What formal education have you received that has prepared you for elective office?
What other training have you received that has prepared you for public office?

Eugene Lowe (I):
You have long term care commitments that have in the past restricted your attendance at City Council workshops and meetings - has this situation changed to allow you to invest more time in governance activities?

Dean Rolison (I):
Your work schedule recently changed to evenings, precluding your attendance at some recent City Council meetings - what are your time priorities between work and representing the citizens of Wilmer? How much time do you have to govern the community (in addition to your Fire Department duties)?

Vicky Vandygriff:
Last election you ran for office and did no campaigning - what's different about this election? Do you consider city council duties as an obligation, a commitment, a duty, or otherwise?

Billy Wickliffe:
How do your recent health problems affect your ability to perform the duties of a city council member? Would you ever consider stepping down if your health issues preclude your participation in council meeting and if so, how much "missed time" do you consider reasonable before stepping down?

Read more!