The old switcheroo

What happens when you no longer need the levee taxpayers voted to pay for? Why, you just spend the money on some other big dumb project.

The brochure was sent out over a very handsome photo of our mayor, Ron Kirk, along with his signature and the names of people such as real estate czarina Ebby Halliday Acers, philanthropist Patricia B. Meadows, former city council member Lee Simpson, current council member Lois Finkelman, County Judge Lee Jackson, council member Veletta Lill, Mayor Pro Tem Mary Poss, council member Alan Walne, state Rep. Steve Wolens, and a bunch of other very impressive people in the city.

So, what else have we got here in the old bin? Well, here's a little yellow card the city handed out, giving a thumbnail sketch of the bond program for voters. It shows the Elm Fork Levee on the list for $30 million.

And, uh, deeper down in here...oh, this is bad. No, wait. That's a gourmet dog treat with a ribbon tied to it. Here is what I was looking for. Yes, here is an official city memo that went to Mr. Dybala himself, dated February 18, 1998, from Peter H. Vargas, who was in charge of the Trinity River project at that time, specifically cataloging everything in the bond program.

And in this memo to Mr. Dybala, an entire page is devoted to the "Elm Fork Levee." Hmmm. Quite a bit of detail here. Gives the dimensions, the cost, and so on. Says the feds will kick in $30 million. Guess again, eh? Describes how essential the Elm Fork Levee is to the rest of the system we're going to build.

You know, in addition to sending copies of some of this stuff over to Mr. Dybala, I think I'm going to run over to Whole Foods and get him a big old jumbo bottle of gingko biloba. For memory, you know.

Now, to be fair to the council, I should mention that some of them expressed a certain amount of squiggliness over Dybala's suggestion that they just take the $30 million and run.

Council member Alan Walne said to Dybala, "To just say you can spend it anywhere because it wasn't in the language, I think that's a terrible injustice to the people. I think we gotta be really careful there, not necessarily just for this project but because of future bond issues."

Council member Sandy Greyson asked City Attorney Johnson to just say yea or nay, whether it's legal to take money the voters authorized for one project and go spend it on other stuff.

Johnson said, "I don't think we can answer this question off the top of our heads." She said she would go study the issue.

Greyson said, "I really hope you do, because I am very uncomfortable with the idea that we can just take these dollars...and we can just switch them around willy-nilly, and if we can do that, I'd really like to know that, so I hope you come back to us with that answer."

Now, here is my worry. While both Walne and Greyson said they were "uncomfortable" with snatching the $30 million, neither one of them said, "So don't do it."

Nobody said that.

But the city council vote on this piece of business is coming up right away. Judging by Ms. Johnson's attitude, I don't see her rushing forward to get a definitive answer on this issue to the council before the vote.

So, again, I live to serve. Even though I am not a lawyer, I nevertheless have spent some time consulting my own life experience and some of the things my mom and dad taught me to see whether I could offer anything useful in this complex area of the law. I tried mainly to think of examples from my own neighborhood in East Dallas.

The question would be: What does it really add up to when someone tells you they need your money for one thing but they actually want to spend it on something else?

One example I thought of: There used to be a young woman in our part of town who had a lot of tattoos, and she used to run up on people's porches screaming that she needed money for an emergency operation because her baby had a hole in his heart. Lo and behold, we found out that she didn't even have a baby! In fact, we now believe that she was spending our money on illegal drugs!

We were extremely disappointed in her.

I know that our city council members would not want to get the same reception, if they were to come visit us in our homes, that she wound up getting: The last few times she showed up, we stood far away from the front door with a cordless phone in our hands yelling, "I am calling 911!"

No matter what the city attorney tells the council members about the bond language and the specific terminology and the case law and so on, if they take that $30 million for the Elm Fork Levee and spend it on something else, I believe that most citizens are going to have a 911-type reaction.

I care about my council people. I just don't want to see them getting sued or trucked off to the big house or stuff like that.

But if it does go that way, I should mention that I do have access to a comfortable truck.

« Previous Page
My Voice Nation Help