My opinion about homelessness is this. Some need help and shelter; they are candidates for programs to put them back into the housing/job/consumption rat race. Others have mental problems or various dependencies; they need more than a simple leg up; you are spinning your wheels if you try to fix things by putting them into a shelter only. Still others are homeless by choice, by lifestyle, what we used to call hobos.
Tough love implies that we don't coddle those in categories 2 and 3. It is a long term problem, and a few nights shelter won't accomplish a damn thing besides providing a few nights shelter.
I believe that there ought to be places to go and to stay with minimal strings. A sort of hobo incampment or Hooverville (Obamaville or Bushville depending on your persuasion) where the homeless can fend for themselves with only a smattering of rules for public health and safety.
Back in 2006 when I began thinking about homelessness and posting about it in a forum (the old Lubbockonline forum, now defunct), I envisioned a tract of land with concrete pads partly covered by a metal awning, with bathrooms, showers, and lockers big enough to accomodate duffels or sleeping bags, all under the occasional eye of one of Lubbock's finest. The only rules being no booze, no drugs, no weapons, and don't bother anybody.
Residents/campers would be free to build their own abode out of scavenged cardboard, plywood, whatever, without code restrictions.
It's a matter of freedom. Those who are homeless need to be free to be homeless, without being preached to or looked down on or changed.
And for the rest of us, it is freedom too, from the responsibility to provide for those who do not provide for themselves. It is the libertarian approach to homelessness. We don't want to be too nice to the homeless. Respectful, helpful, but not too nice.
So, I imagined an incampment in Lubbock, not too far from a free meal or public transportation, in the canyon off East 19th Street, down in the canyon out of the wind. Peppermint Trees, after the hobo song.
As it turned out, the location I liked for the incampment is a few hundred yards south of what is now Tent City. Tent City is not what I imagined, but it is mighty close.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
More on Tent City and Homelessness
There was a fine letter to the newspaper here: http://lubbockonline.com/editorial-letters/2011-10-23/letter-solution-homeless-tent-village-zoning-sorely-needed#comment-194107
Here's my comment:
If it can be shown the city council on Thursday that crime has not increased in the area, then surely the council will see that the objections of nearby business owners are based on smoke.
There is a valid argument that the presence of Tent City reduces crime in the area.
Paul Beane is pushing for 4 walls and a roof. Well, 4 walls and a roof mean more expense, more regulation, more rules for the homeless to follow and thus more selectivity.
Even Tent City is not for everyone, and park benches downtown are occupied at night, as are sheltered spots under certain trees or against certain walls.
What is needed is a way of helping without enabling and without strings. Tent City comes close to that.
Here's my comment:
If it can be shown the city council on Thursday that crime has not increased in the area, then surely the council will see that the objections of nearby business owners are based on smoke.
There is a valid argument that the presence of Tent City reduces crime in the area.
Paul Beane is pushing for 4 walls and a roof. Well, 4 walls and a roof mean more expense, more regulation, more rules for the homeless to follow and thus more selectivity.
Even Tent City is not for everyone, and park benches downtown are occupied at night, as are sheltered spots under certain trees or against certain walls.
What is needed is a way of helping without enabling and without strings. Tent City comes close to that.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Populism, Marxism, and Don May
When you want to put down an enemy, you get out your paintbrush and paint over the picture of your enemy, putting on pointy ears, horns, forked tail, and hoofs. We are conditioned how to interpret that picture: It's the devil! There are other devils we are conditioned to fear, and one of those is the name of Karl Marx.
Don May, the retired doc with too much time on his hands whose untra-conservative John Bircher blog is flogged by the Avalanche-Journal to try to rescue it's flagging circulation among its ultra-conservative, Lubbock base*, recently wrote this: "Marxists are the barbarians of modern history. Marxists purposely create class hatred and envy to attract and enlarge their political base."
Now why on earth would Don May be bashing Marxists, in an era when Russia and China have gone to the "greed is good" side of the equation and about the only communist country left is Cuba and Karl Marx is in greater decline as a prophet of history than at any other time after the publication of Das Kapital? Was May coming out of a bad dream where his retirement accounts at Merrill-Lynch were being assailed by barbarian hoardes?
Yes and no. There is method in his madness. For years now May has been painting Obama and the Democrats as socialists/Communists out to grab his pocketbook. And we, the readers, are conditioned from birth to regard Communists and communism as the ultimate baddie, after Judas and Osama.
Right now, May along with other ultra-conservatives are worried about a new popular movement. They worry that it might not fizzle out but take hold in ways that could threaten the value of their portfolios and the big spenders like the Koch Brothers who fund the Republican Party. They are worried about the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. They are worried about populism. They are worried about the power of the people.
Don May takes a warped and selective view of history. Warped by longtime affiliation with the John Birch Society View of the Universe and by the solipsism of extreme conservatism.
Fact was, one irritant that sparked off the American Revolution was popular hostility toward rich and influential Tories. Which was used and inflamed by clever manipulators like Samuel Adams.
The Civil War began partly because of the resentment norterners felt toward rich planters who augmented their wealth by the use of slaves. Apart from matters of fairness and civil rights, slaves were seen as unfair competition to paid workmen, sort of the way we today think of our jobs exported to El Salvador, Bangladesh, and Honduras.
The driving force of American politics after 1870 or so was the conflict between big banks and big railroads on one side and farmers on the other; free silver, and so on. Which morphed into conflict between big corporations and trusts on one side and the working class on the other. Which morphed into the war between the owners of companies and the politicians they bought and the union movement.
America has been a textbook of class struggle and economic conflict.
What is happening now in these Wall Street Protests are nothing new. They are not Marxist, they are populist. They are the people versus those who feed upon the people.
That said, I don't think the demonstrations will last. Too few are hungry enough and desperate enough or innured to hardship enough. No modern American has the balls to stand up to the clubs of Pinkertons and the bullets of national guardsmen the way laborers did a hundred years ago, for example. There are so many distractions in our consumption-driven lives; we suffer from national ADHD and will soon lose focus and wander off.
*I don't visit May's blog, nor argue there, because every click on that blog and every disagreement posted is a point increase in the blog's internet ratings and a victory for May. I saw the quote because nearly every hard copy issue of the Lubbock Avalanche Journal carries a quote from May in large print on page 2. (Damn, I have to stop subscribing to that newspaper! But I ought not to complain; back when the newspaper hosted an internet forum, they selected a quote from one of my posts often enough.)
Don May, the retired doc with too much time on his hands whose untra-conservative John Bircher blog is flogged by the Avalanche-Journal to try to rescue it's flagging circulation among its ultra-conservative, Lubbock base*, recently wrote this: "Marxists are the barbarians of modern history. Marxists purposely create class hatred and envy to attract and enlarge their political base."
Now why on earth would Don May be bashing Marxists, in an era when Russia and China have gone to the "greed is good" side of the equation and about the only communist country left is Cuba and Karl Marx is in greater decline as a prophet of history than at any other time after the publication of Das Kapital? Was May coming out of a bad dream where his retirement accounts at Merrill-Lynch were being assailed by barbarian hoardes?
Yes and no. There is method in his madness. For years now May has been painting Obama and the Democrats as socialists/Communists out to grab his pocketbook. And we, the readers, are conditioned from birth to regard Communists and communism as the ultimate baddie, after Judas and Osama.
Right now, May along with other ultra-conservatives are worried about a new popular movement. They worry that it might not fizzle out but take hold in ways that could threaten the value of their portfolios and the big spenders like the Koch Brothers who fund the Republican Party. They are worried about the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. They are worried about populism. They are worried about the power of the people.
Don May takes a warped and selective view of history. Warped by longtime affiliation with the John Birch Society View of the Universe and by the solipsism of extreme conservatism.
Fact was, one irritant that sparked off the American Revolution was popular hostility toward rich and influential Tories. Which was used and inflamed by clever manipulators like Samuel Adams.
The Civil War began partly because of the resentment norterners felt toward rich planters who augmented their wealth by the use of slaves. Apart from matters of fairness and civil rights, slaves were seen as unfair competition to paid workmen, sort of the way we today think of our jobs exported to El Salvador, Bangladesh, and Honduras.
The driving force of American politics after 1870 or so was the conflict between big banks and big railroads on one side and farmers on the other; free silver, and so on. Which morphed into conflict between big corporations and trusts on one side and the working class on the other. Which morphed into the war between the owners of companies and the politicians they bought and the union movement.
America has been a textbook of class struggle and economic conflict.
What is happening now in these Wall Street Protests are nothing new. They are not Marxist, they are populist. They are the people versus those who feed upon the people.
That said, I don't think the demonstrations will last. Too few are hungry enough and desperate enough or innured to hardship enough. No modern American has the balls to stand up to the clubs of Pinkertons and the bullets of national guardsmen the way laborers did a hundred years ago, for example. There are so many distractions in our consumption-driven lives; we suffer from national ADHD and will soon lose focus and wander off.
*I don't visit May's blog, nor argue there, because every click on that blog and every disagreement posted is a point increase in the blog's internet ratings and a victory for May. I saw the quote because nearly every hard copy issue of the Lubbock Avalanche Journal carries a quote from May in large print on page 2. (Damn, I have to stop subscribing to that newspaper! But I ought not to complain; back when the newspaper hosted an internet forum, they selected a quote from one of my posts often enough.)
Monday, October 3, 2011
About Health Care
Yes, risky behavior can lead to disease or accident, and it is not fair that those who are careless with their health should expect the rest of us to pay when they are not able to.
While not smoking, not becoming significantly overweight, not drinking too much or being a good driver lowers risk, it doesn't prevent bad things from happening. Accident and disease can happen to anyone, regardless of their choices.
And when accident or disease do happen, the cost is often catastrophic. A broken leg and one day hospitalization can break a family's budget if they have to pay for it. The cost of insurance can break a family if they bear the full cost of the premiums.
The "health insurance" everybody has is that emergencies have to be taken care of at the county hospital regardless of ability to pay. Which means that Lubbock County taxpayers are providing a kind of health insurance for those who can't pay; it's already factored into our taxes.
Some can pay a little, and when they are threatened by a UMC lawsuit, they can get UMC to agree to accept a fraction, say 1/5 or 1/3 as payment in full. Which -- you guessed it! -- still leaves taxpayers in the lurch.
Other hospitals including "non-profits" like Covenant will transfer non-insured emergency patients to UMC if time permits, so that county taxpayers and not the "non-profit" will be stuck with the bill. (Thought non-profit hospitals don't worry about their bottom line? That they were in the harity business? Not necessarily.)
It's complicated. I'm tending to think that a big part of the problem has been government and health industry control of medicine and physician licensing. We need less expensive alternatives to physicians and hospitals. Allow RNs and nurse practitioners to do more of what physicians do now. Streamline medical education for some medical fields, by having a 4-year medical program beginning with college freshmen, so that one graduates from college as a doctor, eliminating 3-4 years of minimally necessary and duplicative training. Instigate price wars between doctors and between hospitals. And imo when a non-profit hospital turns away a patient who can't pay, they ought to lose their non-profit status. In fact, non-profits ought to demonstrate that their fees are lower than those of for-profit hospitals.
While not smoking, not becoming significantly overweight, not drinking too much or being a good driver lowers risk, it doesn't prevent bad things from happening. Accident and disease can happen to anyone, regardless of their choices.
And when accident or disease do happen, the cost is often catastrophic. A broken leg and one day hospitalization can break a family's budget if they have to pay for it. The cost of insurance can break a family if they bear the full cost of the premiums.
The "health insurance" everybody has is that emergencies have to be taken care of at the county hospital regardless of ability to pay. Which means that Lubbock County taxpayers are providing a kind of health insurance for those who can't pay; it's already factored into our taxes.
Some can pay a little, and when they are threatened by a UMC lawsuit, they can get UMC to agree to accept a fraction, say 1/5 or 1/3 as payment in full. Which -- you guessed it! -- still leaves taxpayers in the lurch.
Other hospitals including "non-profits" like Covenant will transfer non-insured emergency patients to UMC if time permits, so that county taxpayers and not the "non-profit" will be stuck with the bill. (Thought non-profit hospitals don't worry about their bottom line? That they were in the harity business? Not necessarily.)
It's complicated. I'm tending to think that a big part of the problem has been government and health industry control of medicine and physician licensing. We need less expensive alternatives to physicians and hospitals. Allow RNs and nurse practitioners to do more of what physicians do now. Streamline medical education for some medical fields, by having a 4-year medical program beginning with college freshmen, so that one graduates from college as a doctor, eliminating 3-4 years of minimally necessary and duplicative training. Instigate price wars between doctors and between hospitals. And imo when a non-profit hospital turns away a patient who can't pay, they ought to lose their non-profit status. In fact, non-profits ought to demonstrate that their fees are lower than those of for-profit hospitals.
Friday, September 9, 2011
Homelessness Overview
Here's my comment to today's AJ editorial, which, I agree with.
Homelessness is not necessarily a disease that needs curing. In this I disagree with Pappion.
Because there are some who cannot or will not settle down, get a job and work 40 hours a week in order to pay out 95% of what they earn on food and rent, and advance themselves so they are in debt to the grave like all good middle class Americans, we need a place in Lubbock where hobos and the homeless can camp out.
A tent city where you can stay and shower if you follow some basic rules is just perfect for that.
There have always been homeless. The history of our country has been a migration westward of the homeless from the first colonies in the new world to the settling of California, Oregon, and Alaska. We are all the children of the homeless
What is different now is that there are few unowned, unfenced-in places to squat down in, none to homestead, and that most homeless have lost basic survival skills other than asking for handouts and pilfering. If a homeless person tries to be self-sufficient and carries a gun for potting rabbits and squirrels, nowadays they end up in jail and gunless forthwith. So much for the 2nd Amendment.
So I am not one to believe that every homeless person needs a hand up. Sometimes they just need a place to hang out and be out of the way.
Because there are some who cannot or will not settle down, get a job and work 40 hours a week in order to pay out 95% of what they earn on food and rent, and advance themselves so they are in debt to the grave like all good middle class Americans, we need a place in Lubbock where hobos and the homeless can camp out.
A tent city where you can stay and shower if you follow some basic rules is just perfect for that.
There have always been homeless. The history of our country has been a migration westward of the homeless from the first colonies in the new world to the settling of California, Oregon, and Alaska. We are all the children of the homeless
What is different now is that there are few unowned, unfenced-in places to squat down in, none to homestead, and that most homeless have lost basic survival skills other than asking for handouts and pilfering. If a homeless person tries to be self-sufficient and carries a gun for potting rabbits and squirrels, nowadays they end up in jail and gunless forthwith. So much for the 2nd Amendment.
So I am not one to believe that every homeless person needs a hand up. Sometimes they just need a place to hang out and be out of the way.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Tent City Snag
Uh, oh. Tent City has hit a snag. The zoning commission has turned down the request to amend zoning to permit the use of that land as a homeless shelter or "tent city." Which means that unless the city council overrules the zoning commission, tent city at 13th & Ave. A will come to an end.
Sad. That seemed to me (and to others) to be the perfect location. Not too far from soup kitchens and other services yet a long way from any residences and mostly near fenced-in businesses like UPS and Mrs. Baird's Bakery. A place near Mackenzie Park, the South Plains Fairground which is unused most of the year, and large vacant weedy spaces. Literally a place on the other side of the tracks. No more isolated location exists in town.
There is no other location in the city limits, and probably not in the county, that could be expected to raise less opposition from those nearby.
Yet even the 13th & A location ruffled some feathers, and several businesses raised objections to tent city.
Maybe it was the stabbing that occurred in the neighborhood. Perhaps there were trespasses and break-ins, though it is quite unproved that any at tent city were involved.
Surely the city council will overturn the zoning decision. But considering the composition of the council., they well may. There are two councilpersons I trust, more or less, and those are Klein and Hernandez. The others, well, let's just say I'd hide my wallet and fancy pen and put on body armor before going near them.
If the council does uphold the zoning commission decision, then where do we go from here? Back to sleeping in parks, as some are doing anyway. Tents in parks in the winter. Pressure on the city to provide some kind of shelter.
The Salvation Army has raised a lot of money for a track program to shelter a limited number of the homeless and provide reentry to the workforce. If it is like most Salvation Army programs, it will be restrictied in scope and very expensive per person helped. So the pressure will remain on the city and public to do something.
Hell of a lot cheaper and less nuisance to Lubbockites just to have a tent city where it is.
Sad. That seemed to me (and to others) to be the perfect location. Not too far from soup kitchens and other services yet a long way from any residences and mostly near fenced-in businesses like UPS and Mrs. Baird's Bakery. A place near Mackenzie Park, the South Plains Fairground which is unused most of the year, and large vacant weedy spaces. Literally a place on the other side of the tracks. No more isolated location exists in town.
There is no other location in the city limits, and probably not in the county, that could be expected to raise less opposition from those nearby.
Yet even the 13th & A location ruffled some feathers, and several businesses raised objections to tent city.
Maybe it was the stabbing that occurred in the neighborhood. Perhaps there were trespasses and break-ins, though it is quite unproved that any at tent city were involved.
Surely the city council will overturn the zoning decision. But considering the composition of the council., they well may. There are two councilpersons I trust, more or less, and those are Klein and Hernandez. The others, well, let's just say I'd hide my wallet and fancy pen and put on body armor before going near them.
If the council does uphold the zoning commission decision, then where do we go from here? Back to sleeping in parks, as some are doing anyway. Tents in parks in the winter. Pressure on the city to provide some kind of shelter.
The Salvation Army has raised a lot of money for a track program to shelter a limited number of the homeless and provide reentry to the workforce. If it is like most Salvation Army programs, it will be restrictied in scope and very expensive per person helped. So the pressure will remain on the city and public to do something.
Hell of a lot cheaper and less nuisance to Lubbockites just to have a tent city where it is.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Space, A Coming Endangered Species at Texas Tech
It is with a certain pride that I see buildings going up all over the Texas Tech campus. With pride mixed with regret.
Why regret? Not just nostalgia for the way it used to be, but for the increasing lack of open spaces on campus.
What makes a melody beautiful? Sure tone is involved, but so is ... silence. One can argue that good music is good because of the uses made of periods of silence. Certainly continuous sound is merely ... noise.
So it is with architecture. Buildings are not seen alone, all by themselves, as though they are drifting in a cloud. They are part and parcel of their surroundings. The beauty, the impressiveness of a building, depends on the surrounding spaces that set it off.
Texas Tech is becoming an ugly, crowded campus, a ghetto of buildings that set off by themselves would be pretty but all stacked together are like a dozen symphonies played all at the same time-- noise.
The most precious commodity is space.
Why regret? Not just nostalgia for the way it used to be, but for the increasing lack of open spaces on campus.
What makes a melody beautiful? Sure tone is involved, but so is ... silence. One can argue that good music is good because of the uses made of periods of silence. Certainly continuous sound is merely ... noise.
So it is with architecture. Buildings are not seen alone, all by themselves, as though they are drifting in a cloud. They are part and parcel of their surroundings. The beauty, the impressiveness of a building, depends on the surrounding spaces that set it off.
Texas Tech is becoming an ugly, crowded campus, a ghetto of buildings that set off by themselves would be pretty but all stacked together are like a dozen symphonies played all at the same time-- noise.
The most precious commodity is space.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Savvy Shoppers in Today's AJ...
is about saving time shopping. Which is fine if you are really, really pressed for time and saving time is your main goal. (I'd link to today's S.S. but can't find it online.)
I have to point out though, that if your object is to save money, then you often need to take more time shopping and need to shop at different stores. Though to be sure you can save both time and money by buying items on sale in bulk. Andrew Tobias, the financial / investment writer, once said in a column that the highest return investment you can make for the degree of risk is buying a case of tuna fish when it's on sale. I seem to remember he said that if you don't have any place to store the case of tuna, put a board on it and call it a coffee table. Tobias also said that a penny saved is worth more than a penny earned.
But this is about health and fitness. What does that have to do with grocery shopping? Plenty.
A lot of older people need support while walking, and do fine leaning on a shopping cart. They need to shop 4 days a week to get their exercise. Stores are like free gyms or free physical therapy facilities. All those miles of aisles to walk through, and you get to borrow the cart to lean on, free!
Not just older folks either. Plenty of younger folk could use more time walking through the parking lot and striding through the aisles.
In fact, the main problem most Lubbockians have is not a shortage of time but an excess of fat. I still turn through the sports pages of the AJ, even though I have no interest in baseball or basketball and that along with out-of-season football and Nascar is 98.9% of that section and I end up throwing the whole paper away in disgust. Anybody see the photos of the winners of the Reese golf tournament? Did you laugh? You know those guys do not walk the golf course, probably haven't for 20 years. Nice though that someone 50 lbs overweight can play a sport competitively. Doggone it though, they need to walk, or maybe put the cart in neutral and get out and push the thing a mile or two.
Back to grocery shopping. Going several times a week for small items may be a waste of time to the Savvy Shoppers, but not when you consider it an excuse to walk or cycle to the store, replacing time and money spent at an exercise facility. Not when you reward yourself for an exercise program well done by going and buying a pint of ice cream or bag of chips.
How far is a grocery store from where you live? Do you ever walk there? Ride there? Do you drive and park as far away as you can?
Maybe one day there will be a sign up: "Grocery Store and Free Exercise Center." It's the truth; which we will not appreciate until some start to charge us for the exercise part.
I have to point out though, that if your object is to save money, then you often need to take more time shopping and need to shop at different stores. Though to be sure you can save both time and money by buying items on sale in bulk. Andrew Tobias, the financial / investment writer, once said in a column that the highest return investment you can make for the degree of risk is buying a case of tuna fish when it's on sale. I seem to remember he said that if you don't have any place to store the case of tuna, put a board on it and call it a coffee table. Tobias also said that a penny saved is worth more than a penny earned.
But this is about health and fitness. What does that have to do with grocery shopping? Plenty.
A lot of older people need support while walking, and do fine leaning on a shopping cart. They need to shop 4 days a week to get their exercise. Stores are like free gyms or free physical therapy facilities. All those miles of aisles to walk through, and you get to borrow the cart to lean on, free!
Not just older folks either. Plenty of younger folk could use more time walking through the parking lot and striding through the aisles.
In fact, the main problem most Lubbockians have is not a shortage of time but an excess of fat. I still turn through the sports pages of the AJ, even though I have no interest in baseball or basketball and that along with out-of-season football and Nascar is 98.9% of that section and I end up throwing the whole paper away in disgust. Anybody see the photos of the winners of the Reese golf tournament? Did you laugh? You know those guys do not walk the golf course, probably haven't for 20 years. Nice though that someone 50 lbs overweight can play a sport competitively. Doggone it though, they need to walk, or maybe put the cart in neutral and get out and push the thing a mile or two.
Back to grocery shopping. Going several times a week for small items may be a waste of time to the Savvy Shoppers, but not when you consider it an excuse to walk or cycle to the store, replacing time and money spent at an exercise facility. Not when you reward yourself for an exercise program well done by going and buying a pint of ice cream or bag of chips.
How far is a grocery store from where you live? Do you ever walk there? Ride there? Do you drive and park as far away as you can?
Maybe one day there will be a sign up: "Grocery Store and Free Exercise Center." It's the truth; which we will not appreciate until some start to charge us for the exercise part.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Two Obits
Jack Trammel was an entrepeneur here for many years. I met him back in the 90s, when he was in his 80s and still working every day in his bail bond business. When I visited him at home in the Tech Terrace neighborhood there was a pile of golf balls in a kind of atrium, where he had been practicing his putting. A busy and energetic man.
I read about Donnie Allison in shock. everyone knew he was ailing, but a 49 year old in hospice care, dying? Too soon, too unfair. A few weeks ago there was a benefit for him at the Cactus, and word was he had more health problems, but I never expected to read this. Didn't know him personally, but he was a good singer, an excellent performer, who worked hard on his roles and songs. Now he is gone, I wish his concerts had been filmed.
I read about Donnie Allison in shock. everyone knew he was ailing, but a 49 year old in hospice care, dying? Too soon, too unfair. A few weeks ago there was a benefit for him at the Cactus, and word was he had more health problems, but I never expected to read this. Didn't know him personally, but he was a good singer, an excellent performer, who worked hard on his roles and songs. Now he is gone, I wish his concerts had been filmed.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
New Courthouse Security
Well, the new scanners have been in place for a while. They are a bottleneck and do cost courthouse visitors time. How much time? I'd guess maybe 3+ hours per day total, assuming 200 visitors and 30 seconds to 2 minutes delay on average. Not a big deal. No crisis that I have seen.
What is not advertised are two things. First, cost. Someone pointed out the $180,000 scanners were obtained through a grant and so did not cost the county anything. This is fatuous. From 4-6 deputies have been staffing the scanners. Assuming 4 deputies at $30,000 each, that means total salaries of $120,000 per year, not counting the time spent by the 5th and 6th deputies at peak times or the manpower needed to staff the skybridge on the 3rd floor, that is now closed off to public use. So the total yearly salaries matches the cost of the scanner.
Second, the scanners are ticklish to adjust. They are set off by a belt buckle, if the buckle is of steel plate and not cast pot metal. BUT, the other day I forgot I had a big keyring with a dozen keys in my pocket. Well guess what! I went through without any problem. Now that doesn't mean that the scanner would ignore a 9mm pistol, but it probably does mean someone could go in with a box cutter or small knife, IF the scanner was left at that setting.
So as I've been saying, the sense of security is illusory, sufficient to placate the nervous nellies among the county commissioners, but not to defeat a thoughtful saboteur or terrorist.
What irks me about the new security is (1) I liked to carry a knife of maybe a multitool in, just to remove HD staples if for no toher reason, and (2) the public paid throught the nose for that skybridge, and now its use as is denied to the public.
For courthouse visitors to empty their pockets of tools, metal objects, or knives before going in is no great hardship for those who drive to the courthouse. But for those who walk or cycle, like me, that does not hold true. If I ride a bike for example, I will be carrying bike tools including a knife. What do I do with those tools when I go into the courthouse? Leave them on the bike? No good option. Now I am sure the county commissioners all drive to the courthouse, and probably would never think of anyone doing any different. But the day is coming when all public facilities will be required by law to facilitate access by walkers and cyclists; what will they do then?
What is not advertised are two things. First, cost. Someone pointed out the $180,000 scanners were obtained through a grant and so did not cost the county anything. This is fatuous. From 4-6 deputies have been staffing the scanners. Assuming 4 deputies at $30,000 each, that means total salaries of $120,000 per year, not counting the time spent by the 5th and 6th deputies at peak times or the manpower needed to staff the skybridge on the 3rd floor, that is now closed off to public use. So the total yearly salaries matches the cost of the scanner.
Second, the scanners are ticklish to adjust. They are set off by a belt buckle, if the buckle is of steel plate and not cast pot metal. BUT, the other day I forgot I had a big keyring with a dozen keys in my pocket. Well guess what! I went through without any problem. Now that doesn't mean that the scanner would ignore a 9mm pistol, but it probably does mean someone could go in with a box cutter or small knife, IF the scanner was left at that setting.
So as I've been saying, the sense of security is illusory, sufficient to placate the nervous nellies among the county commissioners, but not to defeat a thoughtful saboteur or terrorist.
What irks me about the new security is (1) I liked to carry a knife of maybe a multitool in, just to remove HD staples if for no toher reason, and (2) the public paid throught the nose for that skybridge, and now its use as is denied to the public.
For courthouse visitors to empty their pockets of tools, metal objects, or knives before going in is no great hardship for those who drive to the courthouse. But for those who walk or cycle, like me, that does not hold true. If I ride a bike for example, I will be carrying bike tools including a knife. What do I do with those tools when I go into the courthouse? Leave them on the bike? No good option. Now I am sure the county commissioners all drive to the courthouse, and probably would never think of anyone doing any different. But the day is coming when all public facilities will be required by law to facilitate access by walkers and cyclists; what will they do then?
Friday, April 29, 2011
An End to Victor Hernandez' Chapter in the City Property Tax Saga?
So, the Hernandez persecution has fizzled out, but legal research continues for future reference, by outside council, on a high-rate meter. http://lubbockonline.com/local-news/2011-04-29/hernandez-retains-lubbock-council-seat#comment-167336
One wonders, why does the city have in-house lawyers if they go outside all the time? Is it that they need someone to decide which outside lawyers to hire? Or is it the need to have someone outside to blame when mistakes are made, the way "consultants" are hired or committees formed before making any decision on anything, So much of our activity is no more than CYA.
See that headline? "Hernandez Retains Seat"? Makes you think he was about to be kicked off the council and hung on by his fingernails, doesn't it? Wasn't it pretty clear from the outset that he would not be ousted?
So Mayor Tom Martin is now saying “I don’t think it would have occurred to anybody that people would run for or serve for office not having paid their city taxes,” Oh, how unthinkable!
Really?
Then why think that city charter provision applied to unpaid property taxes in the first place?
That interpretation occurred to Mayor Tom and most on the Council and the City Attorney back in Jan/Feb. But that was then and this is now.
And what's the problem, anyway? Why can't someone who owes the city work for the city? Or be elected to city offices?
The only problem with that is the conflict of interest involved in working for an entity that is trying to collect from you, and in the case of unpaid taxes, there is no conflict because LCAD is in the picture. Maybe there ought to be a rule that everyone at LCAD has to be caught up on property taxes; no need for city employees.
In all this unpaid tax fuss, there is an irrational, angry, punitive element that Mayor Martin and others on the council have been pandering to, that paints those who are late paying taxes as bums and moochers, which is not the case.
Did anyone think Hernandez' taxes would never be paid? Or that Hernandez would pay the city a lot more in the long run? So what was the problem?
One wonders, why does the city have in-house lawyers if they go outside all the time? Is it that they need someone to decide which outside lawyers to hire? Or is it the need to have someone outside to blame when mistakes are made, the way "consultants" are hired or committees formed before making any decision on anything, So much of our activity is no more than CYA.
See that headline? "Hernandez Retains Seat"? Makes you think he was about to be kicked off the council and hung on by his fingernails, doesn't it? Wasn't it pretty clear from the outset that he would not be ousted?
So Mayor Tom Martin is now saying “I don’t think it would have occurred to anybody that people would run for or serve for office not having paid their city taxes,” Oh, how unthinkable!
Really?
Then why think that city charter provision applied to unpaid property taxes in the first place?
That interpretation occurred to Mayor Tom and most on the Council and the City Attorney back in Jan/Feb. But that was then and this is now.
And what's the problem, anyway? Why can't someone who owes the city work for the city? Or be elected to city offices?
The only problem with that is the conflict of interest involved in working for an entity that is trying to collect from you, and in the case of unpaid taxes, there is no conflict because LCAD is in the picture. Maybe there ought to be a rule that everyone at LCAD has to be caught up on property taxes; no need for city employees.
In all this unpaid tax fuss, there is an irrational, angry, punitive element that Mayor Martin and others on the council have been pandering to, that paints those who are late paying taxes as bums and moochers, which is not the case.
Did anyone think Hernandez' taxes would never be paid? Or that Hernandez would pay the city a lot more in the long run? So what was the problem?
Thursday, April 21, 2011
A Proposal for Control-Burn Strips
Controlled burns are labor intensive. You have to choose a day when hunidity is not too low, when wind speeds are low, and have a bunch of people standing by the fight the fire if necessary.
So burning half of Texas to prevent catastrophic prairie fires is not very practical.
But there is a cheaper way.
Why not do controlled burns in strips a half mile wide, separated by several miles of terrain that is not burned? Orient the strips at right angles to the prevailing winds?
This would limit the spread of wildfire to a smaller area.
So burning half of Texas to prevent catastrophic prairie fires is not very practical.
But there is a cheaper way.
Why not do controlled burns in strips a half mile wide, separated by several miles of terrain that is not burned? Orient the strips at right angles to the prevailing winds?
This would limit the spread of wildfire to a smaller area.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
The Salvation Army's Campaign for Survival
Living for most of my life a few blocks from Lubbock's Salvation Army, I can assure you there was a time when they were very busy. Recently, though, they have fallen on hard times.
"Hard times" for a charity means they are no onger relevant, and are about to be dropped from United Way funding.
The S.A. soup kitchen has been almost entirely supplanted by St. Benedicts, and the chronically homeless have been out of the S.A. system for a long time. They do get some few drop-ins for a night or two stay, mostly travelers who come by vehicle.
Facing extinction, Lubbock's S.A. has been desparate to come up with a function that justifies their continued existence. They hit on a step program for reintroducing the homeless into society.
Naturally, this is not done with the facilities they now have. There has to be a building program. Which gives the Salavtion Army's paid administrators job security, for a while. That being the purpose of charities in general: salaries for the higher ups. Charity, if any, is wholly secondary. It's sad to see the venerable S.A. playing this game with donated funds.
We'll see how it all works out. I myself am quite dubious. You don't end homelessness. Not entirely, and never for some. I don't even think it ought to be a goal.
"Hard times" for a charity means they are no onger relevant, and are about to be dropped from United Way funding.
The S.A. soup kitchen has been almost entirely supplanted by St. Benedicts, and the chronically homeless have been out of the S.A. system for a long time. They do get some few drop-ins for a night or two stay, mostly travelers who come by vehicle.
Facing extinction, Lubbock's S.A. has been desparate to come up with a function that justifies their continued existence. They hit on a step program for reintroducing the homeless into society.
Naturally, this is not done with the facilities they now have. There has to be a building program. Which gives the Salavtion Army's paid administrators job security, for a while. That being the purpose of charities in general: salaries for the higher ups. Charity, if any, is wholly secondary. It's sad to see the venerable S.A. playing this game with donated funds.
We'll see how it all works out. I myself am quite dubious. You don't end homelessness. Not entirely, and never for some. I don't even think it ought to be a goal.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Prairie Fire!
At first I thought it was a fog Saturday night, from the haze around the lampposts. But there was an acrid smell that tipped me off to the fact that it was smoke. Smoke from fires burning and that had burned scores of miles away from Lubbock.
Sad of think of lives burned up and destroyed. Why?
Observations.
*Fire -- forest fires, prairie fires--are normal. What is not normal is the absence of fire.
*The absence of fire makes fire worse when it does come, and it will come, sooner or later.
*Fire kills and destroys but it also renews.
*Periodic burns favor certain species over others. Part of what we think of as natural ecology is a product of periodic fire.
*The Indians used to set grass fires to aid in the hunt.
*Lightning can start grass or forest fires.
*Fires can be started any number of ways. A few years ago there was a line of fires following the progress of an old diesel locomotive on the Seagraves-Whiteface line. A hot catalytic converter can set off a grassfire.
*A narrow fire road alongside the fenceline on most ranches does not stop a fire if there is wind.
I am all for the old CREEP program, which rewarded farmers for planting grass on highly erodible land. A lot less blowing dust than we had years ago, in the 1950s-1970s. But that grass is highly inflammible.
Overgrazing is bad. Any argument there? However, undergrazed ranchland or pasture or CREEP land is a prairie fire waiting to happen.
In the old days, you didn't see a lot of wasted fodder. If there was good growth on the roadside, farmers would stake out cows or goats to take advantage of that food source. Mowing not needed. Farmers had big families, and there were always kids around who could be told to go stake out the livestock and mind them.
Now, we all live uptown, or think we do, even (and perhaps especially) farmers and stockmen. Labor costs are high. And nobody takes advantage of grazing opportunities. Nobody gathers twigs and limbs off the mesquites for firewood. Nobody cuts or plows over dried up weeds.
So the brush collects. Dry grass collects, especially on roadsides where a thrown-out cigarette can set off a multi-acre conflagration. Last year's roadside mowing has left some dry thatch on the ground. And so conditions are just right for fire, if drought and some wind is added in. Wind is rarely in short supply around here.
So what to do? It is too labor intensive (labor-expensive) for ranchers to go around staking out goats or mowing and sawing.
The only solution I see is to practice preventive burning, preferably when winds are calm and before a drought hits.
Sad of think of lives burned up and destroyed. Why?
Observations.
*Fire -- forest fires, prairie fires--are normal. What is not normal is the absence of fire.
*The absence of fire makes fire worse when it does come, and it will come, sooner or later.
*Fire kills and destroys but it also renews.
*Periodic burns favor certain species over others. Part of what we think of as natural ecology is a product of periodic fire.
*The Indians used to set grass fires to aid in the hunt.
*Lightning can start grass or forest fires.
*Fires can be started any number of ways. A few years ago there was a line of fires following the progress of an old diesel locomotive on the Seagraves-Whiteface line. A hot catalytic converter can set off a grassfire.
*A narrow fire road alongside the fenceline on most ranches does not stop a fire if there is wind.
I am all for the old CREEP program, which rewarded farmers for planting grass on highly erodible land. A lot less blowing dust than we had years ago, in the 1950s-1970s. But that grass is highly inflammible.
Overgrazing is bad. Any argument there? However, undergrazed ranchland or pasture or CREEP land is a prairie fire waiting to happen.
In the old days, you didn't see a lot of wasted fodder. If there was good growth on the roadside, farmers would stake out cows or goats to take advantage of that food source. Mowing not needed. Farmers had big families, and there were always kids around who could be told to go stake out the livestock and mind them.
Now, we all live uptown, or think we do, even (and perhaps especially) farmers and stockmen. Labor costs are high. And nobody takes advantage of grazing opportunities. Nobody gathers twigs and limbs off the mesquites for firewood. Nobody cuts or plows over dried up weeds.
So the brush collects. Dry grass collects, especially on roadsides where a thrown-out cigarette can set off a multi-acre conflagration. Last year's roadside mowing has left some dry thatch on the ground. And so conditions are just right for fire, if drought and some wind is added in. Wind is rarely in short supply around here.
So what to do? It is too labor intensive (labor-expensive) for ranchers to go around staking out goats or mowing and sawing.
The only solution I see is to practice preventive burning, preferably when winds are calm and before a drought hits.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Update on the Lubbock City Charter-Councilman Hernandez Situation
It is dying off without a whimper, after DA Matt Powell signed off on a letter to the city council declining to file suit over the matter. Powell cited a prior city attorney's opinion dating from 2008 concerning the city charter "no debts" provision and constitutional problems with enforcing it and that was that.
(Now why weren't the opinion and constitutional problems revealed by the current city attorney, who gets a higher salary than the DA does?)
Unsatisfying, to those of us who like to see final definitive conclusions. But for the political realists on the council and at the DA's office, it is enough.
(Now why weren't the opinion and constitutional problems revealed by the current city attorney, who gets a higher salary than the DA does?)
Unsatisfying, to those of us who like to see final definitive conclusions. But for the political realists on the council and at the DA's office, it is enough.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Changeable Minds on the City Council
My granddad said "Smart people change their minds." I take that to mean"smart people can reconsider and change their minds."
There has been a certain amount of mind-changing in Lubbock's city government. Two instances in point.
First, the Great Lubbock Visitor's Center debacle.
It was decided by the mayor and a majority of the city council that the city needed a visitor's center, not kiosks or like racks holding sightseeing literature at various places like we already have, but a palatial structure paid for out of the hotel and motel funds. And there was only one --ONE! -- place it needed to be, and that was on a half block of land between Buddy Holly and what is now Crickets Avenues and 18th and 19th Streets. No where else, only there.
One teeny little trouble being that the land was already occupied, by a night club called South Beach. Not a fancy building, and it was rented to SoBe, which also had an option to purchase the land.
After much criticism, the city bought the land and immediately, more immediately than anything involving the city usually occurs, the bulldozers appeared and took down the buildings on the site. Before any further objection or discussion could prevent demolition.
And there the property sat, vacant, blowing dust, for what seemed like an interminable time. Bulldozers, then,,, nothing.
One factor in the location selected being that a city councilwoman had an interest in an entertainment venue purely by coincidence right next to the land acquired for the new visitor's center. (She voted on the proposal too. Some demanded that she abstain but Ann Burgess, the poisonous city attorney, would not let any objection to the councilwoman's vote on be heard. So much for the wrong-headed theory that the city attorney represents the interests of the public, perish the thought!)
And then, and then, aftr all this, Councilman and former radio personality Paul Beane met with Maria Elena Holly, the professional widow of Buddy Holly, with whom the city had been at loggerheads for years over the right to use the name and/or image of the late Buddy Holly, and with alacrity terms were worked out for a solution to many of the matters in dispute.
And lo and behold the land that was destined to become a palatial visitor's center was now to become a park, named after Buddy Holly and Maria Elena Holly. [Did any later husband of Maria's object to playing second guitar to her husband, killed years before in the Iowa snows, in 1959? One pities the fool, whoever he was.]
So what happened to Lubbock's great and abiding need for a visitor's center, RIGHT THERE!, in the Depot District and nowhere else? All gone. Last I heard, they were thinking about kiosks.
Second, there was the Great Animal Shelter Controversy.
Lubbock's animal shelter (shelter, ha! Euphemism for a place where pets are killed) is located on Municipal Drive just off the interstate near other city maintainance buildings and the LP&L offices. But the existing facility is too small and needs to be enlarged and updated. Okay.
The idea was to relocate to a place where the people of Lubbock would find it convenient, so more animals could be seen and mayhap, adopted.
The trouble with that is that Lubbockites didn't want a kill center in propserous neighborhoods, close to their homes. So, scratch that idea. My idea of a semi truck set up as a portable adoption center didn't fly either.
Where to put the new animal control shelter? Low and behold it was announced that the city had bought property off southeast loop 289, in one of the most out-of-the-way places in the city that could be found. And that is the new animal shelter, soon to open.
I guess going by my granddad's aphorism those folks at the city are pretty smart.
There has been a certain amount of mind-changing in Lubbock's city government. Two instances in point.
First, the Great Lubbock Visitor's Center debacle.
It was decided by the mayor and a majority of the city council that the city needed a visitor's center, not kiosks or like racks holding sightseeing literature at various places like we already have, but a palatial structure paid for out of the hotel and motel funds. And there was only one --ONE! -- place it needed to be, and that was on a half block of land between Buddy Holly and what is now Crickets Avenues and 18th and 19th Streets. No where else, only there.
One teeny little trouble being that the land was already occupied, by a night club called South Beach. Not a fancy building, and it was rented to SoBe, which also had an option to purchase the land.
After much criticism, the city bought the land and immediately, more immediately than anything involving the city usually occurs, the bulldozers appeared and took down the buildings on the site. Before any further objection or discussion could prevent demolition.
And there the property sat, vacant, blowing dust, for what seemed like an interminable time. Bulldozers, then,,, nothing.
One factor in the location selected being that a city councilwoman had an interest in an entertainment venue purely by coincidence right next to the land acquired for the new visitor's center. (She voted on the proposal too. Some demanded that she abstain but Ann Burgess, the poisonous city attorney, would not let any objection to the councilwoman's vote on be heard. So much for the wrong-headed theory that the city attorney represents the interests of the public, perish the thought!)
And then, and then, aftr all this, Councilman and former radio personality Paul Beane met with Maria Elena Holly, the professional widow of Buddy Holly, with whom the city had been at loggerheads for years over the right to use the name and/or image of the late Buddy Holly, and with alacrity terms were worked out for a solution to many of the matters in dispute.
And lo and behold the land that was destined to become a palatial visitor's center was now to become a park, named after Buddy Holly and Maria Elena Holly. [Did any later husband of Maria's object to playing second guitar to her husband, killed years before in the Iowa snows, in 1959? One pities the fool, whoever he was.]
So what happened to Lubbock's great and abiding need for a visitor's center, RIGHT THERE!, in the Depot District and nowhere else? All gone. Last I heard, they were thinking about kiosks.
Second, there was the Great Animal Shelter Controversy.
Lubbock's animal shelter (shelter, ha! Euphemism for a place where pets are killed) is located on Municipal Drive just off the interstate near other city maintainance buildings and the LP&L offices. But the existing facility is too small and needs to be enlarged and updated. Okay.
The idea was to relocate to a place where the people of Lubbock would find it convenient, so more animals could be seen and mayhap, adopted.
The trouble with that is that Lubbockites didn't want a kill center in propserous neighborhoods, close to their homes. So, scratch that idea. My idea of a semi truck set up as a portable adoption center didn't fly either.
Where to put the new animal control shelter? Low and behold it was announced that the city had bought property off southeast loop 289, in one of the most out-of-the-way places in the city that could be found. And that is the new animal shelter, soon to open.
I guess going by my granddad's aphorism those folks at the city are pretty smart.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
New Coach
I've never been a fan of the idea that you can buy success by buying a track record, either in hiring on a new CEO or a new coach.
How many times has a CEO been hired on for an enormous salary, perks, and golden parachute only to be fired at great cost not long after? Same with coaches.
Part of this is statistical. All businesses want to succeed, all schools want their sports teams to win. But about half are going to have losing records. What makes the difference? Was Pat Knight so bad and Gillispie so good?
Success is not like a porfolio you carry with you from one gig to another. It is not readily transferable, it does not always follow the person.
Sure, I'll grant you that in college sports a famous coach will make a difference in recruiting. But do coaching skills differ by that much from a team that ends 1-29 as opposed to one that is 29-1? How much less do coaching skills differ between teams that are 20-10 and those that are 10-20?
It is the height of bombast and arrogance to declare that winning ways will start immediately. It is very much like the preacher in the pulpit declaring that his flock is going to heaven if they bless the collection plate.
How many times has a CEO been hired on for an enormous salary, perks, and golden parachute only to be fired at great cost not long after? Same with coaches.
Part of this is statistical. All businesses want to succeed, all schools want their sports teams to win. But about half are going to have losing records. What makes the difference? Was Pat Knight so bad and Gillispie so good?
Success is not like a porfolio you carry with you from one gig to another. It is not readily transferable, it does not always follow the person.
Sure, I'll grant you that in college sports a famous coach will make a difference in recruiting. But do coaching skills differ by that much from a team that ends 1-29 as opposed to one that is 29-1? How much less do coaching skills differ between teams that are 20-10 and those that are 10-20?
It is the height of bombast and arrogance to declare that winning ways will start immediately. It is very much like the preacher in the pulpit declaring that his flock is going to heaven if they bless the collection plate.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Bees!
Read in the newspaper this morning about the bees that killed a dog in a Lubbock backyard.
It was said the backyard was full of bees. A single swarm does not take up a whole backyard. If it was "full of bees," then there might have been more than one swarm, which would be possible only if the original hive was nearby.
The article said to call a pest control if you see a few bees in one area. Well, I love to see plenty of bees visiting my flowers. I and others often choose plants that attract bees. I have wanted to keep bees, but the small backyard makes that difficult, plus there is all the time and worry of taking care of them, seeing they are disease-free and so on.
A dog, if it has never been stung by a bee or wasp, will tend to get aggressive if it sees a swarm of bees in its territory, just like a dog will attack a water sprinkler. Unfortunate. Sad.
My family had an old farm house north of Idalou West of 400. Abandoned as long as I can remember, but bees had taken up residence in a wall cavity of the house. My grandfather didn't have a good beekeeper's rig and got stung pretty bad pulling off the siding in order to harvest a chunk of honeycomb. Nice to have the bees there though.
I remember when Sears Roebuck at 13th & Q stocked supers and beekeeping equipment. Ah, the good old days.
Bees spread by "swarming." When bee population or other conditions warrant, a queen (which may be a newly hatched queen or the old queen--only one queen being permitted to a hive) along with a mass of several thousand workers will leave the hive, like emmigrants leaving their home country. They will fly for a distance, then land in a swarming mass in an attempt to found a new hive. Commonly happens in May or thereabouts.
Back 20 years ago, I spotted a swarm on a tree in the front yard. Called a bee keeper, who brought over a hive with honeycomb inside and hived the swarm over a couple of days. Assuming the bees were healthy, they were worth some bucks. About that time, a queen cost $20 or more plus shipping. A few days later, we found a jar of fresh honey left on the porch as thanks.
So I would say, if you find a swarm of bees on your property you do not want, first try to find a bee keeper who might be interested and use pest control as a last resort. Or. you can go to the library and learn about bees and then try to hive them yourself.
Like the "prairie dog problem," IMO this is more a problem of too many citified people than bees or p-dogs. When are we ever going to classify people as "pests?" When a new family moves into the neighborhood, is there a pest control to call for that?
Actually, bees are essential to our well-being. And a big problem bees have is disease and pesticides. There reports of bees declining in population, much like amphibians have. Not good. Without bees, what or who will fertilize our crops? Without bees, we can starve.
It was said the backyard was full of bees. A single swarm does not take up a whole backyard. If it was "full of bees," then there might have been more than one swarm, which would be possible only if the original hive was nearby.
The article said to call a pest control if you see a few bees in one area. Well, I love to see plenty of bees visiting my flowers. I and others often choose plants that attract bees. I have wanted to keep bees, but the small backyard makes that difficult, plus there is all the time and worry of taking care of them, seeing they are disease-free and so on.
A dog, if it has never been stung by a bee or wasp, will tend to get aggressive if it sees a swarm of bees in its territory, just like a dog will attack a water sprinkler. Unfortunate. Sad.
My family had an old farm house north of Idalou West of 400. Abandoned as long as I can remember, but bees had taken up residence in a wall cavity of the house. My grandfather didn't have a good beekeeper's rig and got stung pretty bad pulling off the siding in order to harvest a chunk of honeycomb. Nice to have the bees there though.
I remember when Sears Roebuck at 13th & Q stocked supers and beekeeping equipment. Ah, the good old days.
Bees spread by "swarming." When bee population or other conditions warrant, a queen (which may be a newly hatched queen or the old queen--only one queen being permitted to a hive) along with a mass of several thousand workers will leave the hive, like emmigrants leaving their home country. They will fly for a distance, then land in a swarming mass in an attempt to found a new hive. Commonly happens in May or thereabouts.
Back 20 years ago, I spotted a swarm on a tree in the front yard. Called a bee keeper, who brought over a hive with honeycomb inside and hived the swarm over a couple of days. Assuming the bees were healthy, they were worth some bucks. About that time, a queen cost $20 or more plus shipping. A few days later, we found a jar of fresh honey left on the porch as thanks.
So I would say, if you find a swarm of bees on your property you do not want, first try to find a bee keeper who might be interested and use pest control as a last resort. Or. you can go to the library and learn about bees and then try to hive them yourself.
Like the "prairie dog problem," IMO this is more a problem of too many citified people than bees or p-dogs. When are we ever going to classify people as "pests?" When a new family moves into the neighborhood, is there a pest control to call for that?
Actually, bees are essential to our well-being. And a big problem bees have is disease and pesticides. There reports of bees declining in population, much like amphibians have. Not good. Without bees, what or who will fertilize our crops? Without bees, we can starve.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Lubbock's Homeless Issue
A couple of days ago the little tent city that arose this winter in the park at the corner of Ave. Q and Broadway has moved, to a new location on privately-owned ground, soon to be equipped with more rest rooms, showers, and washers.
Good. IMO this is a near-optimal solution for a number of the homeless in the city.
Back a few years ago when I was posting on the now defunct Lubbock Avalanche-Journal forum, I put forward the idea that the city should make available a piece of out-of-the-way undeveloped land where the homeless could camp and even erect makeshift shelters out of cardboard and scrap metal and lumber. The only amenities would be showers, restrooms, and lockers. There would be rules to fillow--no alcohol, drugs, or weapons--and random inspections by police.
I called it "Peppermint Trees" after the famous hobo song.
My reasoning was two-fold. First, that to some extent and for some individuals, homelessness is a choice, that ought to be respected and enabled for those who want to take that path. Second, that providing shelters and structure is to a degree condescending and paternalistic and ineffectual for the chronically homeless.
Also it helps to have a tolerable bottom level to which one can sink without total loss of self-respect. Maybe for women, the elderly and children the level of social concern should be higher and include shelters, but in Lubbock, Texas, one can camp outside 300+ days a year without extreme discomfort.
And where there is discomfort, well, fine, the discomfort is an incentive to change one's life. Our society needs more discomfort, I think.
Nobody liked my idea. They were either of the "we need to help them and bring them out of homelessness" school, or of the opinion that "the homeless are deadbeats by choice who are like flies and rats and are the dregs of society" school.
My father rode the rails during the Great Depression. Not a lot but some. Many did back then. The freight car was the poor man's coach. Many subsisted for a time in Hoovervilles or stood in breadlines. I wonder how many of those who condemn the homeless have ancestors who themselves lived on the road or accepted charity.
Good. IMO this is a near-optimal solution for a number of the homeless in the city.
Back a few years ago when I was posting on the now defunct Lubbock Avalanche-Journal forum, I put forward the idea that the city should make available a piece of out-of-the-way undeveloped land where the homeless could camp and even erect makeshift shelters out of cardboard and scrap metal and lumber. The only amenities would be showers, restrooms, and lockers. There would be rules to fillow--no alcohol, drugs, or weapons--and random inspections by police.
I called it "Peppermint Trees" after the famous hobo song.
My reasoning was two-fold. First, that to some extent and for some individuals, homelessness is a choice, that ought to be respected and enabled for those who want to take that path. Second, that providing shelters and structure is to a degree condescending and paternalistic and ineffectual for the chronically homeless.
Also it helps to have a tolerable bottom level to which one can sink without total loss of self-respect. Maybe for women, the elderly and children the level of social concern should be higher and include shelters, but in Lubbock, Texas, one can camp outside 300+ days a year without extreme discomfort.
And where there is discomfort, well, fine, the discomfort is an incentive to change one's life. Our society needs more discomfort, I think.
Nobody liked my idea. They were either of the "we need to help them and bring them out of homelessness" school, or of the opinion that "the homeless are deadbeats by choice who are like flies and rats and are the dregs of society" school.
My father rode the rails during the Great Depression. Not a lot but some. Many did back then. The freight car was the poor man's coach. Many subsisted for a time in Hoovervilles or stood in breadlines. I wonder how many of those who condemn the homeless have ancestors who themselves lived on the road or accepted charity.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Lubbock-Downtown Redevelopment
Here follows a series of my posts about Lubbock's planned redevelopment, still in the planning stages.
When I glanced at the newspaper article this morning, I was livid.
Did you notice this statement? "Tepper [the planner working for McDougal Companies] said there was still room for the Salvation Army’s complex, the size of a city block, at 16th Street between Avenues J and K."
Well [dad-burned, golnobbit, kerblasted] the Salvation Army is there right now and who the [heck] is this Tepper to be telling property owners whether they have a right to remain there or not? To continue operations or not?????????????????
Time to load up the shotguns and go hunt some Tepper.
Hey you guys who mouth off about Obama being a socialist, does it bother you that a socialistically planned economy'development is on tap right here in Lubbock-city?
It is bad enough that we have the city authorizing McDougal Companies to come up with a plan while McDougal companies are involved in property ownership, property management, and realty activities, which is as clearly a conflict of interest as you will ever see in all your born days, but for those [so and sos] at McDougal to presume to be prescribing property usages in the downtown area is socialistic, communistic, and unAmerican. It is time to take a lesson from Egypt and Libya and points east and conduct an armed march on city hall.
There. Now I'm like to get one of those [illegal] "criminal trespass" notices served on me....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The North Overton project [a massive redevelopment project of a whole Lubbock neighborhood] was private. What is planned for downtown is not.
What is planned for downtown is authoritarian planning imposed by government. You get people like Tepper who want to call the tune that others dance to.
I notice no one except Roger has responded to the matter of the McDougals being in a position to dictate (with city council approval) the course of development while they are major property owners downtown.
For example, McDougal Companies has a major ownership stake in the Wells Fargo building, which they also manage.
For example, you see McDougal Realty signs all over downtown, and more nowadays.
For example, the McDougals are sitting on a property that was once the Lubbock Hotel, that they wish to sell as condominiums. At this time, they likely have no takers, and that is likely why the project sits stalled and incomplete. Well, by structuring downtown redevelopment in their preferred direction, the McDougals will, they hope, be able to make that a viable project. And remember...
Remember that the McDougals are being paid, by the city, by taxpayers, BY US, for their work in consulting/planning concerning the redevelopment! Which means that we are paying them to enhance their profit manyfold.
No one except Roger and I sees this as one huge conflict of interest?
And don't you think it's funny how folks who are quick to protest government involvement in private business have no object to the manipulation of zoning and code enforcement and the use of condemnation in order to effect a master plan for the downtown area?
My proposal was to accomplish redevelopment via tax incentives and assistance in finding loans and grants, not by compelling private land owners to comply with government planning. Not by mass bull-dozing of buildings.
And this Tepper quote buried in the newspaper story shows precisely how arrogant and doctatorial these planners are going to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forgetting about government control and the tentacles of the McDougals, there was a entrepeneur who first put into practice entirely at his own risk the redevelopment of downtown.
His name was Kim Morris.
He successfully renovated the old Hester's/Draughan's and Welsh Plumbing buildings into living or mixed use space. He was the first to remodel downtown buildings for apartment space. Others followed with the abortive Anderson Jewelry building project and projects on Broadway just west of the underpass--which look good, btw.
Morris bought or optioned masses of downtown real estate, including the LubbockHotel/Caprock Retirement Center, the Myrick/Green building, Murphy's Dept. Store, the Townhouse Inn. He had great plans for Lubbock's downtown.
He was a partner in the remodeling of an old livestock-killing, meat-packing plant on the lip of the canyon into an entertainment venue. He was at odds with the city, who started another amphitheater project at the same time.
Unfortunately, Kim Morris did not have the financing or political influence of the McDougals. His little empire was highly leveraged and collapsed and he was sent to prison over some of his efforts to keep it going.
He was the first to have the vision and to bet his financial life on it.
Contrast that entrepeneurship with the bets being placed and guaranteed with our money in this new downtown redevelopment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocate, it's not the wealth of the McDougals that I object to. It's the interweaving of their interests with government. And the power of government to control land uses and development projects in the downtown area, which according to that AJ article you quoted, is more and more looking like the McDougal Companies' control of land uses downtown.
I was delighted that the McDougals launched a renovation of the Lubbock Hotel. A private enterprise, privately financed. Great! I myself am cool with the North Overton redevelopment, to the extent that public monies and influence were not involved. But for McDougal companies to be awarded a city contract to plan and manage downtown redevelopment is a whole other animal.
And remember, most of the city council are friends/cronies/proteges of the McDougals. Which means minimal oversite or criticism of the redevelopment plan.
When I glanced at the newspaper article this morning, I was livid.
Did you notice this statement? "Tepper [the planner working for McDougal Companies] said there was still room for the Salvation Army’s complex, the size of a city block, at 16th Street between Avenues J and K."
Well [dad-burned, golnobbit, kerblasted] the Salvation Army is there right now and who the [heck] is this Tepper to be telling property owners whether they have a right to remain there or not? To continue operations or not?????????????????
Time to load up the shotguns and go hunt some Tepper.
Hey you guys who mouth off about Obama being a socialist, does it bother you that a socialistically planned economy'development is on tap right here in Lubbock-city?
It is bad enough that we have the city authorizing McDougal Companies to come up with a plan while McDougal companies are involved in property ownership, property management, and realty activities, which is as clearly a conflict of interest as you will ever see in all your born days, but for those [so and sos] at McDougal to presume to be prescribing property usages in the downtown area is socialistic, communistic, and unAmerican. It is time to take a lesson from Egypt and Libya and points east and conduct an armed march on city hall.
There. Now I'm like to get one of those [illegal] "criminal trespass" notices served on me....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The North Overton project [a massive redevelopment project of a whole Lubbock neighborhood] was private. What is planned for downtown is not.
What is planned for downtown is authoritarian planning imposed by government. You get people like Tepper who want to call the tune that others dance to.
I notice no one except Roger has responded to the matter of the McDougals being in a position to dictate (with city council approval) the course of development while they are major property owners downtown.
For example, McDougal Companies has a major ownership stake in the Wells Fargo building, which they also manage.
For example, you see McDougal Realty signs all over downtown, and more nowadays.
For example, the McDougals are sitting on a property that was once the Lubbock Hotel, that they wish to sell as condominiums. At this time, they likely have no takers, and that is likely why the project sits stalled and incomplete. Well, by structuring downtown redevelopment in their preferred direction, the McDougals will, they hope, be able to make that a viable project. And remember...
Remember that the McDougals are being paid, by the city, by taxpayers, BY US, for their work in consulting/planning concerning the redevelopment! Which means that we are paying them to enhance their profit manyfold.
No one except Roger and I sees this as one huge conflict of interest?
And don't you think it's funny how folks who are quick to protest government involvement in private business have no object to the manipulation of zoning and code enforcement and the use of condemnation in order to effect a master plan for the downtown area?
My proposal was to accomplish redevelopment via tax incentives and assistance in finding loans and grants, not by compelling private land owners to comply with government planning. Not by mass bull-dozing of buildings.
And this Tepper quote buried in the newspaper story shows precisely how arrogant and doctatorial these planners are going to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forgetting about government control and the tentacles of the McDougals, there was a entrepeneur who first put into practice entirely at his own risk the redevelopment of downtown.
His name was Kim Morris.
He successfully renovated the old Hester's/Draughan's and Welsh Plumbing buildings into living or mixed use space. He was the first to remodel downtown buildings for apartment space. Others followed with the abortive Anderson Jewelry building project and projects on Broadway just west of the underpass--which look good, btw.
Morris bought or optioned masses of downtown real estate, including the LubbockHotel/Caprock Retirement Center, the Myrick/Green building, Murphy's Dept. Store, the Townhouse Inn. He had great plans for Lubbock's downtown.
He was a partner in the remodeling of an old livestock-killing, meat-packing plant on the lip of the canyon into an entertainment venue. He was at odds with the city, who started another amphitheater project at the same time.
Unfortunately, Kim Morris did not have the financing or political influence of the McDougals. His little empire was highly leveraged and collapsed and he was sent to prison over some of his efforts to keep it going.
He was the first to have the vision and to bet his financial life on it.
Contrast that entrepeneurship with the bets being placed and guaranteed with our money in this new downtown redevelopment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocate, it's not the wealth of the McDougals that I object to. It's the interweaving of their interests with government. And the power of government to control land uses and development projects in the downtown area, which according to that AJ article you quoted, is more and more looking like the McDougal Companies' control of land uses downtown.
I was delighted that the McDougals launched a renovation of the Lubbock Hotel. A private enterprise, privately financed. Great! I myself am cool with the North Overton redevelopment, to the extent that public monies and influence were not involved. But for McDougal companies to be awarded a city contract to plan and manage downtown redevelopment is a whole other animal.
And remember, most of the city council are friends/cronies/proteges of the McDougals. Which means minimal oversite or criticism of the redevelopment plan.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
George W. Bush's former Attorney General Gonzales now teaching at Texas Tech got a sidebar on the front page of today's (Sunday) Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, in relation to terrorism and the unfortunate young man from Saudi Arabia who got himself arrested here this week.
Probably the worst consequence of this alleged "terrorism" is the way it gives simpering refugees of the Bush administration a chance to get more attention and to air an opinion.
Poor Gonzales. He could fly to Kabul and hop up and down in the markets there, screaming his name and daring someone to shoot him, and nobody would waste a cartridge. Probably the same is true of his old boss.
Far as Dubya goes, this incident may have spiced up his life a little, and got him away from the booze. Being a former president is hell, unless you find a game worth playing.
Probably the worst consequence of this alleged "terrorism" is the way it gives simpering refugees of the Bush administration a chance to get more attention and to air an opinion.
Poor Gonzales. He could fly to Kabul and hop up and down in the markets there, screaming his name and daring someone to shoot him, and nobody would waste a cartridge. Probably the same is true of his old boss.
Far as Dubya goes, this incident may have spiced up his life a little, and got him away from the booze. Being a former president is hell, unless you find a game worth playing.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Trying to Be Rational About Those Past-Due Taxes...
It is kind of funny that city attorney Medina should have been late in paying taxes on a property back after he went to work for the city, considering that Medina was apparently involved with advising the Council that there was a problem with Victor Hernandez. Funny that several higher-ups in the city have been late while employed by the city.
But how serious is it really?
There's nothing morally or criminally wrong with being late in paying taxes. It is purely a business or personal decision. You pay now or you pay more later. Either way, you do pay your own way. You are not a moocher.
It doesn't hurt other taxpayers since delinquent taxes carry interest penalties that are so high they would be illegal even for a credit card company!
Since interest and penalties are so high, it does pertain to business judgment that one does not pay taxes even if they have to borrow money to do it. But it is not a black mark on character, the way so many are spinning it.
When interest and penalties are eventually paid, the tax authority and maybe taxpayers too come out ahead. More money received by LCAD.
The reason the city charter seems to make a big deal over debts owed the city is because employees and councilmen might be in a position to influence collection of their debt, or to cook the books. It's a matter of conflict of interest. Which by the way does not apply when LCAD is in charge of assessing and collecting taxes.
To come to Medina's defense, the guy is a businessman as well as a lawyer and former judge, has a lot of property, many irons in the fire. He could have overlooked that property, could have sold it to someone under a contract and then found they didn't pay the taxes as they should, could have moved a family member in with the provision they pay the taxes. He could have bought the property with taxes owing on it. All these things happen all the time.
But how serious is it really?
There's nothing morally or criminally wrong with being late in paying taxes. It is purely a business or personal decision. You pay now or you pay more later. Either way, you do pay your own way. You are not a moocher.
It doesn't hurt other taxpayers since delinquent taxes carry interest penalties that are so high they would be illegal even for a credit card company!
Since interest and penalties are so high, it does pertain to business judgment that one does not pay taxes even if they have to borrow money to do it. But it is not a black mark on character, the way so many are spinning it.
When interest and penalties are eventually paid, the tax authority and maybe taxpayers too come out ahead. More money received by LCAD.
The reason the city charter seems to make a big deal over debts owed the city is because employees and councilmen might be in a position to influence collection of their debt, or to cook the books. It's a matter of conflict of interest. Which by the way does not apply when LCAD is in charge of assessing and collecting taxes.
To come to Medina's defense, the guy is a businessman as well as a lawyer and former judge, has a lot of property, many irons in the fire. He could have overlooked that property, could have sold it to someone under a contract and then found they didn't pay the taxes as they should, could have moved a family member in with the provision they pay the taxes. He could have bought the property with taxes owing on it. All these things happen all the time.
Lubbock's Great 2011 Property Tax Controversy
It all started with local attorney and City Councilman Victor Hernandez, who was sworn into office in 2010 when he had delinquent property taxes owing on his office building. By February 1, 2011, he had two years of delinquent taxes. Someone, apparently a commentator on KFYO radio, broke the story, though KCBD-TV claims credit.
The tax records, by the way, are public and available online at http://www.lubbockcad.org/Appraisal/PublicAccess/, so the story did not require a lot of investigatorial digging to unearth, especially since it was an issue in the campaign for that council seat back in 2010.
Hernandez is one of two Democrats on the city council, and has a habit of asking embarassing questions. Lately he has expressed the intent to take a look at the relationship between local banker and LP&L utility board member W.R. Collier with his son who happens to be involved in building a utility outside the city and perhaps buying power generating stations to sell to the city utility. In Chicago or New York, situations like this would occasion shootings and nighttime burials in concrete foundations. In Lubbock, Texas, it means the city council get together to ban the offending questioner.
And so, after a few days' legal research, the city attorney, former state district judge Sam Medina, reported to the mayor that the City Charter was violated when Councilman Hernandez was sworn in with delinquent property taxes due.
And here is where it gets interesting. Where the fur starts to fly.
The Lubbock City Charter is online at http://z2.franklinlegal.net/lubbock-flp/ . The relevant provision is at Article IX. Section 4. Quote--
"Sec. 4. Qualifications of mayor, councilmembers, officials and employees.
The Mayor and each Councilmember shall be a resident citizen of the City of Lubbock and have the qualifications of electors therein. The Mayor and all Councilmembers shall be bona fide residents within the City and within the applicable District at the time of filing for office and must continue to reside within the City and the applicable District during the term of office. The Mayor, Councilmen, and other officers and employees shall not be indebted to the City; ..." Emphasis added.
The question is, does owing delinquent taxes constitute being "indebted to the city"?
The city attorney took this question and returned with a strong "Yes!"
My initial take was, "Maybe." Since then, I've moved steadily to the "no way" category. Several reasons. The city has been ignoring this provision as to employees, and not checking at all regarding concilpersons or mayors, so there is the appearance of waiver. The city's portion of property taxes are assessed and collected by a separate intergovernmental entity called the Lubbock Central Appraisal District. Since the charter provision probably was intended to keep those owing money to the city from being in a position to forestall collection or alter the books, it does not apply at all to property tax collection under the auspices of a separate entity like LCAD. And then there is the problem of what is meant by indebtdness to the city. There is a debt when a bill is sent out, so everyone owes a debt, for taxes or for city utilities, for a period of time, perhaps even months, in the case of property tax bills that are sent out in September but not delinquent until February 1.
So this week I have been commenting and posting, trying to alter public opinion. I may have been the first to point out that the city charter provision applies to employees too, and there are thousands of employees. In any case, the search for tax delinquents at the city of Lubbock snowballed, with -- interesting -- results. And my arguments have come to be more and more reflected in the comments of others, which either mean I have influenced them or that we are all moving together independently; either way it's gratifying.
Some of the revelations about the tax bills of prominent Lubbockites are in my opinion due to the researches of Clif Burnett, whose blog is located at http://lubbockcountyregister.blogspot.com/ Clif has been a long-time gadfly in the local Republican party and lately concerning city government and politicians as a whole. I think Clif's criticisms and exposes are healthy. Others think he is crazy. And back in January, both city and county served criminal trespass notices upon Clif to keep him away from city and county buildings, meetings, etc. I protested this publicly.
Clif and I have a mixed relationship. When we get together in a forum, we argue like cats and dogs, until Clif gets banned. One time, he took umbrage after a dispute with me over what the copyright law meant and posted this exposure of me: http://lubbockcountyregister.blogspot.com/2010/11/ironfoot-mcgurk-of-talklubbock-unmasked.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FVARK+%28Lubbock+County+Register%29 Regardless, I think I've helped Clif with investigative tools, and started him looking into the LCAD website for prominent tax delinquents. I get ideas from him, and think he gets ideas from my posts. Local media gets ideas and stories from Clif's blog, though more often it works the other way.
At any rate, I've been campaigning in a low key against the charter provision that the powers that be, mostly Republicans, have been using against Victor Hernandez. I've done this in two ways, by commenting in the Avalanche Journal newspaper website, and in posting on the forum http://www.talklubbock.com/index.php?sid=0c6b0ff7418ef144d155fe1c8f17590f .
Today, there was the ultimate descent into theater of the absurd:
http://lubbockonline.com/filed-online/2011-02-10/council-hires-outside-attorney-after-sam-medina-found-have-tax-issues The city attorney who opined that Councilman Hernandez violated the charter by owing delinquent taxes was exposed as having had delinquent taxes for a time after he was employed by the city. His interpretation of the city charter that he applied to Victor Hernandez applies to him as well!
Now that doesn't mean that Hernandez is off the hook. If the charter provision is valid, and if indebtedness to the city includes past-due taxes, then Hernndez should not have been sworn in. On the other hand, a councilman or employee who for a time owes taxes and cures the default is likely not removeable merely for having a momentary tax delinquency.
And so it goes in the City of Lubbock. More to come, you may be sure.
The tax records, by the way, are public and available online at http://www.lubbockcad.org/Appraisal/PublicAccess/, so the story did not require a lot of investigatorial digging to unearth, especially since it was an issue in the campaign for that council seat back in 2010.
Hernandez is one of two Democrats on the city council, and has a habit of asking embarassing questions. Lately he has expressed the intent to take a look at the relationship between local banker and LP&L utility board member W.R. Collier with his son who happens to be involved in building a utility outside the city and perhaps buying power generating stations to sell to the city utility. In Chicago or New York, situations like this would occasion shootings and nighttime burials in concrete foundations. In Lubbock, Texas, it means the city council get together to ban the offending questioner.
And so, after a few days' legal research, the city attorney, former state district judge Sam Medina, reported to the mayor that the City Charter was violated when Councilman Hernandez was sworn in with delinquent property taxes due.
And here is where it gets interesting. Where the fur starts to fly.
The Lubbock City Charter is online at http://z2.franklinlegal.net/lubbock-flp/ . The relevant provision is at Article IX. Section 4. Quote--
"Sec. 4. Qualifications of mayor, councilmembers, officials and employees.
The Mayor and each Councilmember shall be a resident citizen of the City of Lubbock and have the qualifications of electors therein. The Mayor and all Councilmembers shall be bona fide residents within the City and within the applicable District at the time of filing for office and must continue to reside within the City and the applicable District during the term of office. The Mayor, Councilmen, and other officers and employees shall not be indebted to the City; ..." Emphasis added.
The question is, does owing delinquent taxes constitute being "indebted to the city"?
The city attorney took this question and returned with a strong "Yes!"
My initial take was, "Maybe." Since then, I've moved steadily to the "no way" category. Several reasons. The city has been ignoring this provision as to employees, and not checking at all regarding concilpersons or mayors, so there is the appearance of waiver. The city's portion of property taxes are assessed and collected by a separate intergovernmental entity called the Lubbock Central Appraisal District. Since the charter provision probably was intended to keep those owing money to the city from being in a position to forestall collection or alter the books, it does not apply at all to property tax collection under the auspices of a separate entity like LCAD. And then there is the problem of what is meant by indebtdness to the city. There is a debt when a bill is sent out, so everyone owes a debt, for taxes or for city utilities, for a period of time, perhaps even months, in the case of property tax bills that are sent out in September but not delinquent until February 1.
So this week I have been commenting and posting, trying to alter public opinion. I may have been the first to point out that the city charter provision applies to employees too, and there are thousands of employees. In any case, the search for tax delinquents at the city of Lubbock snowballed, with -- interesting -- results. And my arguments have come to be more and more reflected in the comments of others, which either mean I have influenced them or that we are all moving together independently; either way it's gratifying.
Some of the revelations about the tax bills of prominent Lubbockites are in my opinion due to the researches of Clif Burnett, whose blog is located at http://lubbockcountyregister.blogspot.com/ Clif has been a long-time gadfly in the local Republican party and lately concerning city government and politicians as a whole. I think Clif's criticisms and exposes are healthy. Others think he is crazy. And back in January, both city and county served criminal trespass notices upon Clif to keep him away from city and county buildings, meetings, etc. I protested this publicly.
Clif and I have a mixed relationship. When we get together in a forum, we argue like cats and dogs, until Clif gets banned. One time, he took umbrage after a dispute with me over what the copyright law meant and posted this exposure of me: http://lubbockcountyregister.blogspot.com/2010/11/ironfoot-mcgurk-of-talklubbock-unmasked.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FVARK+%28Lubbock+County+Register%29 Regardless, I think I've helped Clif with investigative tools, and started him looking into the LCAD website for prominent tax delinquents. I get ideas from him, and think he gets ideas from my posts. Local media gets ideas and stories from Clif's blog, though more often it works the other way.
At any rate, I've been campaigning in a low key against the charter provision that the powers that be, mostly Republicans, have been using against Victor Hernandez. I've done this in two ways, by commenting in the Avalanche Journal newspaper website, and in posting on the forum http://www.talklubbock.com/index.php?sid=0c6b0ff7418ef144d155fe1c8f17590f .
Today, there was the ultimate descent into theater of the absurd:
http://lubbockonline.com/filed-online/2011-02-10/council-hires-outside-attorney-after-sam-medina-found-have-tax-issues The city attorney who opined that Councilman Hernandez violated the charter by owing delinquent taxes was exposed as having had delinquent taxes for a time after he was employed by the city. His interpretation of the city charter that he applied to Victor Hernandez applies to him as well!
Now that doesn't mean that Hernandez is off the hook. If the charter provision is valid, and if indebtedness to the city includes past-due taxes, then Hernndez should not have been sworn in. On the other hand, a councilman or employee who for a time owes taxes and cures the default is likely not removeable merely for having a momentary tax delinquency.
And so it goes in the City of Lubbock. More to come, you may be sure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)