Although the agenda provides scant information on precisely what triggered the mayor’s decision to initiate these discussions, they do not appear designed to close loopholes that would lead to possible ethics complaints for any past transgressions some night believe have not been successfully adjudicated.
"It is the mayor's intention to bring forward at a later date revisions to the Ethics Ordinance that would correct conflicts within the ordinance, procedural problems, reporting requirements and other concerns," the item on Tuesday’s agenda reads. "Any changes in the ordinance would not apply to ethics complaints or other actions derived from conduct that have taken place prior to the date of council approval."
In other words, Webster seems to be declaring this discussion as well as anything that might result from these discussions are not intended as retribution.
That, of course, leaves unanswered many questions about the recent spat of ethic violation claims involving council members Daphne Tenorio and Travis Mitchell, including, but certainly not limited to:
1. What are the specific ethics violations, if there really are any, that Tenorio allegedly committed? We know the charges Tenorio made against Mitchell because those charges were made public. Tenorio’s attorney’s used a legal maneuver to silence any and all discussions on the part of the council concerning possible allegations against her.
2. What is Tenorio trying to hide? The city attorney rendered a formal opinion on the charges Tenorio filed against Mitchell that completely exonerated Mitchell of any conflicts of interest arising from a company he owns doing business with the City. We know that to be true because Mitchell voluntarily released the complete text of the attorney’s opinion. We learned during the most recent Ethics Commission meeting that the city attorney has also issued an opinion on the allegations against Tenorio. Why hasn’t she followed Mitchell’s example by releasing the text of that opinion?
3. Will Tuesday’s "discussions regarding revisions needed to strengthen the Code of Ethics" try to answer or even raise any of these or other questions? This type of obfuscation does nothing to enhance the public’s trust in municipal government.
Here is one Catch-22 mess a revision of the ethics code could prevent in the future. The City Council had an item on its Feb. 21 agenda that could have led to one or more council members formally filling either an ethics complaint or criminal charges, possibly even both, against Tenorio. Those discussions never took place — no criminal charges or ethics complaints were ever lodged — because Tenorio’s attorney sought a declaratory judgment from the Ethics Commission, and City Attorney Frank Garza said any further council discussion on the matter could prejudice the Ethics Commission. However, when the matter came before the Ethics Commission last month, it ruled that there was nothing to investigate because no real allegations had been made. The reason they hadn’t been made, of course, is because Tenorio employed some legal chicanery to keep any from being made.
As a result, the public still has absolutely no clue as to what is going on here, a fact that certainly does not promote transparency in our city government. That’s just one loophole that needs to be addressed in any future revision of the ethics ordinance
In chronological order, here, however, is what we do know about certain events swirling around this mess:
Last Aug. 12, an email from "soccerkyle" addressed to Hays CISD CEO Carter Scherff, Lehman High School Assistant Principal Rick Garza and former Lehman head football coach Todd Raymond said "Within these past weeks, we have been working hard to prepare for the Kyle Stallions ABA team as Sylvia Gallo went on August 3rd to speak about our team coming to Kyle and see about using the gym at Lehman high-school."
On Sept. 22, Michelle Richardson, the secretary to the athletic coordinator at Lehman, wrote to a number of CISD officials saying "I want to keep each of you in the loop of my most recenter interaction with Mrs. Gallo. Mrs. Sylvia Gallo just called. She explained that I had given her approval via email. That is not the case. The only communications I have had with her were about gym availability. She is trying to state that by me responding that some days the gyms were available that it means she was ‘approved.’ This is the same issue I had with her last year in regards to other requests (soccer) and the year before with the previous Athletic Secretary. When I told her we could not accommodate her requests, she went above me. I explained (again) to her that she has to fill out an application and provide a COI (Certificate of Insurance) before anything can be ‘approved’. As of right now, I am waiting on her to send me the email where I ‘approved’ these dates (for Lehman HS)."
Approximately 3½ hours later, Richardson sent the following e-mail to Geoff Harner, at the time the Stallions’ general manager: "I appreciate you taking the time out of your day to speak with me. Moving forward, we will need the District Facility Use Agreement completed. … Once we receive the completed agreement(s) and a copy of your certificate of insurance, we will move forward with the ‘approval’ process …
The next day, Ms. Richardson received two communications on this subject. The first was from Evann Radabaugh, who identified himself as an intern with the Kyle Stallions assigned to serve as the organization’s Office Administrator, who wrote: "We apologize for the miscommunication for the scheduling on October 1. We were under the impression that October 1 for Lehman High School was confirmed with Geoff Harner. At any rate, I have filled out the Facility Use Agreement and the Insurance certificate needed." The second, about six hours later, from Stallions Director of Operations Brandon Wakefield, said: "Did Evann, my intern admin get all the docs you needed for us to have authorization to use Lehman on October 1st next week?"
On Oct. 17, Harner sent Richardson a list of 16 dates between Nov. 5 and March 4 that the team wanted to play home games at Lehman’s "Blue" gym.
On Dec. 9, Hays CISD Facility Use Coordinator Ester Tavarez began notifying district officials the Stallions we cancelling games When Richardson tried to reach out to the team’s ownership to learn more about the cancellations, she was ultimately informed on Jan. 18 by Rachel Ates "We are no longer going to continue our ownership of the team at this time." In the same message Ates described the new owners as "interesting people and good luck with that."
On Jan. 29, Richardson wrote to district officials "I have reached out to the Kyle Stallions several times in the past two (2) weeks requesting an updated schedule. They have cancelled games and have ‘no shows’ which has resulted in our facilities being OPEN without personnel on campus. I was informed they have a new team owner and only have 2 games left for this season. I have yet to receive any schedules or other information. At this point, I feel it is in our best interest to protect our facility by cancelling all events previously scheduled, Please cancel all security opening, closing, custodians, AC/Heat, and any others. In the event that I receive an updated schedule, I will have Kyle Stallions submit a NEW contract with those dates."
On or about this same time, Hays Free Press News Editor Moses Leos III told me later he began seeing number of Facebook postings in which Tenorio claimed to be the new owner of the Kyle Stallions. Based on those postings, Leos said he contacted Tenorio requesting an interview on the subject, which she agreed to.
On Feb. 7, an email sent to Ms. Richardson from Tenorio’s personal email account said "Japan cancelled. So we must cancel our game."
A little more than a week later, in the Feb. 15 edition of the Hays Free Press, a story bylined by Leos appeared that began: "For the past several months, Kyle resident and District 6 city council member Daphne Tenorio had envisioned herself as a potential franchise business owner. Little did she realize her dream was quite literally a phone call away. By fielding a call from friend Leticia Luna earlier this year, Tenorio was given, and ultimately accepted, the opportunity to buy ownership of the Kyle Stallions basketball team."
Then, the Feb. 21 City council agenda included three related items.
The first was one posted by Mitchell as a "general discussion to project ‘Just Preachy’," which turned out to be a potential development project involving a multi-purpose athletic facility located on land leased from the city. The second concerned "discussion and possible action regarding Misuse of Information … by Daphne Tenorio." The third was an obvious, President Trump-like retaliatory item placed on the agenda by Tenorio for "Open discussion about potential, perceived or real conflicts of interests as it relates to all council members."
Hours before the meeting, Tenorio’s attorney released a letter claiming Tenorio did not own the basketball team and that he was seeking a judgment on Tenorio’s guilt or innocence from the city’s Ethics Commission. City Attorney Frank Garza advised the council to cancel any discussions on either of the agenda items involving Tenorio and other council members as it could prejudice the Ethics Commission’s hearing.
However, before the general discussion on "Just Peachy" began, Tenorio, without precedent, asked for a five-minute delay in the council’s proceedings to give her an opportunity to consult with her attorney. When the session resumed, she announced she was recusing herself for the duration of the "Just Peachy" discussion. One of the many questions that needs to be answered is why, if Tenorio did not own the Kyle Stallions, as her attorney claimed, did she feel she needed to recuse herself? Did she, perhaps, somehow amend an agreement to allow her to assume ownership at a later date?
But the big question that needs to be answered — what her husband, school board trustee Willie Tenorio recently called "the elephant in the room" in a completely different but related context — is what exactly is the relationship, if any truly exists, between project "Just Peachy" and any real or perceived misuse of information by Tenorio.? And will Tuesday’s "discussions regarding revisions needed to strengthen the Code of Ethics" answer those questions since the agenda makes it clear no action can be taken against Tenorio as a result of any possible revisions. She is has, in effect, been granted immunity.
Other items of interest on Tuesday’s agenda include:
- The possible awarding of a contract "not to exceed $177,000," to Halff Associates of Austin to produce in 13 months a Stormwater Master Plan. The purpose of the plan is "to develop a comprehensive evaluation of the existing drainage conditions throughout the city by developing an accurate and current understanding of the drainage infrastructure. This understanding will include a comprehensive inventory of existing data, accurate simulation, flooding problem area identification, and flood mitigation solutions. A drainage Capital Improvement Project (CIP) plan, including costs and potential funding mechanisms, will be developed to address flooding issues."
- Discussing sending a letter to the Hays School Board to show the council’s appreciation of the board’s vote to grant businesses a freeport exemption, a vote that economic development professionals predict will lead to more businesses desiring to locate in the Kyle/Buda area.
- Approving a resolution showing the council’s support for the realignment of FM 2001 between I-35 and State Highway 21, which the resolution describes as "a discontinuous east-west roadway, requiring drivers to merge onto SH 21 for a distance before accessing the continuation of FM 2001, has numerous 90-degree turns and narrow shoulders" and "has become a confusing and unsafe facility that no longer can address the current and projected mobility needs of the region."
- The possible approval of an agreement with the Hays Caldwell Public Utility Agency regarding Kyle extending 12-inch diameter water line to a point where it will connect with an HCPUA 24-inch diameter line as part of what is being called the Phase 1A Project "that consists generally of a water pipeline, pump station and related facilities that will serve as a connection between the water distribution systems of Kyle and the City of Buda." There is no cost to the city associated with this project (it claims all costs will be borne by HCPUA, but, of course, the agency is funded by its members, on if which is the City of Kyle). It is also difficult to determine exactly how long the Kyle extension is from the exhibit that accompanies the agreement. Nor is there any specific construction timetable with the exception of a provision that states the completion of the Kyle extension will "occur at the same time as completion of Segment A of the project."
- Mitchell has placed on the agenda an item to discuss fencing at the Historic Train Depot, across Front Street from City Hall as well as "possible action to approve improvements for restoration of caboose." Based on Mitchell’s previous stands on various issues, especially those involving city funding, it’s highly doubtful he will be asking for the expenditure of any tax dollars for this caboose restoration.
No comments:
Post a Comment