Water Texas a No Show

The cross partisan event hosted in Bastrop this weekend sounded a lot like the forum TRIP put on a couple of years ago, that the City of Fort Worth and the Trinity River Vision Authority bailed on.

WHY would those who are looking to spend millions of taxpayer dollars not answer questions of the taxpayers?  Anyone else see a pattern here?

Read about it in the Dallas Morning News.

Don't miss the comment from the event organizer!

Only in Texas

'If a U.S. President attempted such a maneuver, angry mobs would march on Washington.'

'TRWD lawyers plan to keep the suit held up in court past next year’s election cycle, by claiming governmental immunity (which was denied), and by making a jurisdictional plea (which doesn’t even make sense).  In other words, TRWD is willing to waste taxpayer dollars to defend their own shell-game, purely for short-term political insulation.'

These are quotes from the most recent Empower Texans article on one of the Tarrant Regional Water District's current lawsuits.

Read it, it will piss you off. Hopefully enough to make you show up at the next water board meeting.  Better yet, the next water board election.

Define Boondoggle.

Durango does, in true Durango style........

Googling "Boondoggle" and clicking on the Wikipedia Boondoggle article, in the first and second and third paragraphs we read....

A boondoggle is a project that is considered a useless waste of both time and money, yet is often continued due to extraneous policy motivations.

The term "boondoggle" may also be used to refer to protracted government or corporate projects involving large numbers of people and usually heavy expenditure, where at some point, the key operators, having realized that the project will never work, are still reluctant to bring this to the attention of their superiors. Generally there is an aspect of "going through the motions" – for example, continuing research and development – as long as funds are available to keep paying the researchers' and executives' salaries.

The situation can be allowed to continue for what seems like unreasonably long periods, as senior management are often reluctant to admit that they allowed a failed project to go on for so long. In many cases, the actual device itself may eventually work, but not well enough to ever recoup its development costs.

The Trinity River Vision Boondoggle has been boondoggling for over a decade. After that passage of time the Trinity River Vision's executive director has clearly stated that only about 20% of the project has been completed.

Boondoggle.

With the other 80% not expected to be completed until 2023.

Boondoggle

Completed if federal money can be acquired to pay for about half the current almost $1 billion price tag.

Boondoggle.

Three bridges are supposedly going to start being constructed in 2014, bridges spanning where a flood diversion channel will be built if those federal funds can be found to pay for it.

Boondoggle.

In the meantime dozens of business owners have had their property taken via the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle's eminent domain abuse. In many other parts of America taking property in this manner is not allowed. In other parts of America property can be taken by eminent domain only for projects for the public good, like roads, hospitals, schools. Not economic development projects or for an un-needed flood control project.

Boondoggle.

In other parts of America not only is this type of eminent domain abuse not allowed, using eminent domain to take property for the public good would not even be considered for a project for which the public has not voted. There has been no public vote to fund the Trinity River Vision.

Boondoggle.

The lack of funding is one of the reasons this project's construction timeline covers such a long time. And will likely grow longer. For years in to the future Fort Worth will have an un-finished construction mess, sporadically worked on, awaiting funds.

Boondoggle.

For the job of running the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle project the TRV could have conducted a nation-wide search for a person with the engineering credentials to run such a project. Instead the TRV found an assistant district attorney named J.D. Granger, whose qualification for the job was his mom is Fort Worth Congresswoman, Kay Granger. Kay Granger was thought to be key to getting those much needed federal dollars. But, that has not quite worked out as planned.

Boondoggle.

If the Trinity River Vision was a legitimate public works project, addressing a legitimate flood control problem, along with bringing needed development to a blighted part of town, why is there no urgency to build the project? Why is there no attempt to convince the public to vote to tax themselves to build this project,  if this project really did provide a big benefit to the people of Fort Worth?

Boondoggle.

Witness the vast amounts of delusional propaganda spewed by the Trinity River Vision. Check out the bizarre signage at Gateway Park's Fort Woof touting the imaginary wonders the Trinity River Vision will bring to Gateway Park and East Fort Worth. Check out the quarterly propaganda mailing from the Trinity River Vision. Make note of all the Trinity River Vision propaganda signage one sees at various locations. Check out the Trinity River Vision's website for more propaganda.

Boondoggle.

In addition to its main website the Trinity River Vision also has a Panther Island website. At the Panther Island website we read--- © Panther Island Pavilion - A Product of Trinity River Vision Authority. How many taxpayers dollars are being spent on all the Trinity River Vision propaganda products?

Boondoggle.

Anyway, I hope I have managed to somewhat illuminate some of the reasons I, and others, refer to the Trinity River Vision as the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle....

You're Invited to a Pubic Meeting on Water Services Privatization Study

Water Utility Task Force studying privatization of City water services to Take Public Input, Tuesday, Sept. 24, 6 p.m., City Hall

Please plan to attend and speak up on this very important issue.

On the evening of Tuesday, Sept. 24, Fort Worth water and wastewater customers have the opportunity to provide their feedback to the Water Utility Task Force at Fort Worth City Hall, 1000 Throckmorton Street. The task force is studying potential public-private partnership opportunities for the operation of the utility.
 
The City Council appointed the task force in March. It has met four times since early April. Two more meetings are scheduled before it finalizes a recommendation to the City Council.
 
The task force will host a one-hour open house with informational displays, starting at 6 p.m. in the area outside the City Council Chamber. At 7 p.m. the event moves into the City Council Chamber, where the public can provided comments after a brief presentation.

Speakers are asked to limit their remarks to three-minutes. Written comments can also be submitted either that evening or by e-mail to WTR_Study@fortworthtexas.gov.

The Sept. 24 public meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Station 27 and streamed on the city website.

This is what a "news" article looks like

The Fort Worth Business Press wrote a real news article on the growing lawsuits against the Tarrant Regional Water District.

We've enjoyed the factual, seemingly non biased writing of the Biz Press.  If they'd stop hiring former FWST writers to write their stories, they'd be way ahead of the game.  Those were so slanted, we didn't bother to finish reading them, let alone post them.

Kudos to the Fort Worth Business Press for printing news.  It's a tough job, but somebody's gotta do it.

Really?

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram never ceases to amaze us. Their most recent editorial made us LOL.

Decision by Army Corps of Engineers shortsighted, costly and hurtful 

Though it sounds like they are talking about the Trinity River Vision, it's the FWST, so of course, they aren't.

If the editorial board needs something to read, they might check out the book and the article both by the same name, "Par for the Corps".  One is by Greenwald and the other by Michael Grunwald.  A winner of multiple, prestigious journalist awards.  Below is an excerpt from a real journalist, YOU should check it out.  YOU can't afford not to.

If those YOU sent to Capitol Hill won't supervise the Corps, it's time to send someone WHO will.

In 2000, when I was writing a 50,000-word Washington Post series about dysfunction at the Army Corps of Engineers, I highlighted a $65 million flood-control project in Missouri as Exhibit A. Corps documents showed that the project would drain more acres of wetlands than all U.S. developers do in a typical year, but wouldn't stop flooding in the town it was meant to protect. FEMA's director called it "a crazy idea"; the Fish and Wildlife Service's regional director called it "absolutely ridiculous." 

Six years later, the project hasn't changed -- except for its cost, which has soared to $112 million. Larry Prather, chief of legislative management for the Corps, privately described it in a 2002 e-mail as an "economic dud with huge environmental consequences." Another Corps official called it "a bad project. Period." But the Corps still wants to build it. 

It came up occasionally in 2000, when Pentagon investigators, the Government Accountability Office and the National Academy of Sciences were documenting the agency's ecologically disastrous, economically dubious, politically inspired water projects. 

Then the Corps failed to protect New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina, despite spending more in Louisiana than in any other state. Last month, the Corps commander acknowledged that his agency's "design failure" led to the floodwall collapses that drowned New Orleans. So why isn't everyone asking questions about the Corps and its patrons in Congress? 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency's failures didn't inundate a city, kill 1,000 residents and inflict $100 billion in damages. Yet FEMA is justifiably disgraced, while Congress keeps giving the Corps more money and more power. A new 185-point Senate report on what went wrong during Katrina waits until point No. 65 to mention the Corps "design and construction deficiencies" that left New Orleans underwater. Meanwhile, a new multibillion-dollar potpourri of Corps projects is nearing approval on Capitol Hill. 

That's because the Corps is an addiction for members of Congress, who use its water projects to steer jobs and money to their constituents and contributors. President Bush has opposed dozens of the most egregious boondoggles, but Congress has kept funding them and the Corps has refused to renounce them -- while New Orleans has remained vulnerable. 

Even Prather, the agency's public representative on the Hill, complained in that private e-mail that the Corps has sacrificed its credibility by defending its indefensible projects -- he called them "swine" -- just as the Catholic Church defended its wayward priests. 

"We have no strategy for saving ourselves," he wrote. "Someone needs to be supervising the Corps." 

It came up occasionally in 2000, when Pentagon investigators, the Government Accountability Office and the National Academy of Sciences were documenting the agency's ecologically disastrous, economically dubious, politically inspired water projects. 

TRWD thinks it can not be sued while TFGT thinks otherwise

From Mr. Durango's blog---

Incoming tonight from Texans For Government Transparency regarding their ongoing attempt to teach the Tarrant Regional Water District that Soviet Union style governing is long gone from the planet and that the TRWD is operating in a place called America where dictators extending their terms of office, arbitrarily, is frowned upon......

TRWD Says, “NO! We Won’t Have Elections, And You Can’t Sue Us! We’re Exempt!”

Fort Worth, Texas) Attorneys for the Tarrant Regional Water District (TRWD) last week filed paperwork trying to dismiss the TFGT lawsuit against the board. The TFGT suit contends the TRWD board is unconstitutionally skipping elections and illegally extending their own terms in office. This suit was filed by Texans for Government Transparency (TFGT), John Austin Basham, and Darlia Hobbs.

The TFGT suit asks the court to intervene requiring the TRWD board to comply with Texas’ law and the state constitution. In court documents TRWD attorney Lee Christie asserts the TRWD and the board are immune from being sued by the people they govern. The court papers filed by Mr. Christie on behalf of the board also state Mr. Basham and Mrs. Hobbs as property owners and taxpayers have no “standing” to sue the TRWD for this blatant violation of the law. 

TFGT President John Austin Basham responds to Mr. Christie and the TRWD’s assertions “Imagine a President, or Congressman, or Governor declaring they would skip the next election and give themselves more time in office. That is exactly what these directors are doing.” Basham goes on to say,” They’ve done this once before with not one single member of the public present for their vote. The TRWD board continues to operate as if they are above the laws and constitution of the State of Texas. I say they’re not, they work for us.” TFGT entered this court action when property owners and taxpayers subject to the TRWD found no relief by addressing the board directly. 

The TRWD recently lost a very similar plea in Tarrant County District Court where they are being sued by a landowner for over 600 violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act. In that case the TRWD argued they are exempt from the open meeting laws of this state and like their response in the TFGT case they claim the plaintiff also couldn’t sue, again saying they are exempt. After hearing the TRWD’s attorney’s pleas Tarrant County District Judge Susan Heygood McCoy disagreed striking every part of their motion and pleas.

“I fully expect the court will rightfully side with the taxpayers and the law on this issue. The fundamental American right to have and election and choose your leaders can never be curtailed”, says Basham. “It is a shame however the TRWD will continue to spend hundreds of thousands dollars of taxpayer’s money to fight the rights of those very same tax payers.”

The water district has attempted other constitutional abuses in court with disastrous outcomes. Earlier this year, similar delay tactics and unwillingness to recognize they couldn’t steal Oklahoma’s water, cost the TRWD taxpayers over $6 million in legal fees in a stunning 9-0 loss in the US Supreme Court.

Tubing the Trinity Cancelled

Apparently there was a lot of crap talked at the Tarrant Regional Water Board meeting yesterday.

How would the General Manager not know that the Floating with Feces / Rocking the River on the Trinity was cancelled?

WHY would board members not vote to spend money to protect public health?  WHY would the paper not say any of it but say there was a unanimous vote when there wasn't?

Mr. Dickson, I attended this entire board meeting and was pleased to see Director Kelleher vote on a number of issues, BUT, she DID NOT vote to approve money for Trinity Uptown. In fact, She spoke about moving funds to issues she found much more important. One of which was an independent study to find a way to clean up the TRWD's recreational water (including the Trinity). As she put it, "Since we are inviting people to get in and tube in the river, shouldn't we make sure it's safe?" Director Kelleher also noted that at least twice the "Tubing the river" had to be cancelled due to high levels of fecal matter in the water. Mr. Oliver (General Manager TRWD) said he was unaware of this, but Mr. Thomas (Assistant General Manager TRWD) indicated they indeed have cancelled people getting in the river due to the E.Coli levels. But while Director Kelleher's vote was wrong in this story on "economic development" this article is silent on her moves at the board to bring forward a real public health issue. By the way, No other member of the TRWD board would second Director Kelleher's motion for a $200,000 study to identify was to make the TRWD water safe for recreation. I guess we're just stuck looking at the "Don't eat the fish" signs put up by parks and wildlife as we watch our children and friends wade into the river. But then again, maybe I just have my priorities wrong.
John Basham · Fort Worth, Texas

Define Unanimous

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is at again. And the readers they have left are paying the price.

There are several definitions online for "unanimous"

1. Sharing the same opinions or views; being in complete harmony or accord.
2. Based on or characterized by complete assent or agreement.
 3. Unanimously - of one mind; without dissent.

The ST said the Water Board voted "unanimously" to give the Trinity River Vision millions of your dollars.

Seeing how Mary Kelleher abstained from voting on this ridiculous money/land grab, does that really make for a unanimous vote?  True, she didn't vote "nay".  But is leading your readers to believe she voted "yay", the best way to run a business or educate the public?

We didn't think so either.

If they didn't tell you the whole story here, what else are they leaving out?  Wouldn't YOU like to know?

Ask.

Right on, Clyde

Read the latest Letter from Clyde in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.  If they won't tell you the truth, he will.

James Clawson wonders where the money is going since the city seems to be in a perpetual budget crunch.

Here’s where a bunch of it is going, James. The Trinity River Vision (TRV) Tax Increment Financing District (TIF) has spent $56,177,987 on the TRV and budget estimates rise to $320,000,000.

The TIF includes property along West Seventh Street over to University Drive, which gives up 80 percent of the tax revenues that have accrued from increased property values since the TIF was established around 2005.

That means that less tax revenue returns to the city’s general revenue budget. That also means less money to pay police and firefighters.

But remember, James, you voted for it in the 2004 bond election that included $5 million for Henderson Street bridge engineering. No, that didn’t include the $1 billion dollar price tag, but maybe it was implied.

Spending over a billion dollars for less than a billion in return only makes sense to government. As long as city government gives away more and more tax dollars in TIFs and abatements, expect less and less in public services.

— Clyde Picht, Fort Worth