You guys are gonna looove this one!
Put down your coffee so you won't spit it out!
On my post yesterday 'Speedy Delivery' I talked about my certified letter waiting for me at the post office (Northgate Station) from the city clerk's office.
As Murphy's Law would have it, I was rushing around and got sidetracked by some unanticipated visitors etc, so needless to say I was running late.
I take "mass transit" (da bus), so I have to plan out my strategy for the day as far as times and connections. I also had to add in the heat factor.
So 12noon came by pretty fast and I had to go to my bus stop and catch 46 to NorthPark, so that I could catch 42 downtown, then caught a circulator to the Union Depot for the 2pm CAC meeting. There would be no wiggle room for hopping over to the post office after getting off 46. No biggie- I had a plan!
Attended the CAC meeting for 2 hours, and as I usually do, went over to City Hall afterwards. These visits are spent checking in with certain reps and extending a hello to others I have talked to or worked with on projects and concerns of our city, usually on transportation or accessibility issues.
Ok, I'll admit it, these visits are really just to raid the candy coffers of certain reps that are known to have some pretty good pickins'! (Wanted to stop by Robinson's office but it was almost 5pm and had 3 other rounds to make- hopefully soon I'll get a chance to meet him as he is my district rep).
Anyway, my first stop was at, you guessed it, the City clerk's office.
May I add that Sylvia is always a joy to conduct business with. She's warm and friendly and pretty much on top of things.
So I tell Sylvia my dilemma. I tell her I received a notice of a certified letter from her office that needed to be picked up by me from the post office but that I had been ill and today (Tues) was the last day to pick up that letter but there was no way I was going to make it back to the NE post office in time as they close at 5pm. And could I please check her records as to what was sent out to me via certified mail?
Of course, Sylvia was more than accomodating and pulled my file and the only thing she had on record sent out certified to me was ....................
the letter to me from her office stating I needed to fill out my financial disclosure papers for the appointment as full member of the CAC!!!!!
Remember- this letter had been sent in error as I did not need to fill out any paperwork as my info was still on file from last June.
The letter was sent out the end of March!!!!!!!!!!!!
( I did end up getting the 2 letters via regular mail that I spoke about in an earlier post regarding filling out these papers and then the one saying I had been removed for lack of such papers being filled out in the time frame, so I have to give it up to the city clerk's office for following up with the regular mail sent).
The frakalakkn post office 'misplaced' this very important letter and was JUST NOW trying to deliver it to me!!!
Isn't that a kicker?!!!
So not only did I get 'stewed' over by local government, I got a double-whammy from the federal government giving me their two-cents-worth, too!!!
....fade to some patriotic music of your choosing and a calming and assuring male voice reciting 'Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these courriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds...'
disclaimer- no disrespect was intended to any mail courrier, past or present, by the above motto. It was intended for whoever works inside the post office that lost my mail for 4 months!
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Speedy Delivery
Almost forgot to mention...
I have to pick up a certified letter today before the CAC meeting.
I don't know if it's standard procedure, but my mailman has NEVER knocked on my door for me to sign for a certified letter.
Hmmmm?
Oh, and by the way...
the letter is from the City Clerk!
Can't wait to read what's in store today!
To be continued...
I have to pick up a certified letter today before the CAC meeting.
I don't know if it's standard procedure, but my mailman has NEVER knocked on my door for me to sign for a certified letter.
Hmmmm?
Oh, and by the way...
the letter is from the City Clerk!
Can't wait to read what's in store today!
To be continued...
The Kiddie Table
Ahhh the eve of another CAC meeting!
What's in store for us this time?
What little monkey wrenches will be tossed in to take the focus off our business at hand?
Last months' meeting was interesting, to say the least.
You won't read it in the minutes, but here's a few tidbits.
But first a little background...
I was nominated by the CAC members in October 2007. Due to delays and the December CAC meeting being cancelled by Sun Metro (yet another story there), I arrived at the January 2008 CAC meeting and was greeted by a laminated sign with 'Suzanne Fabian Alternate Member' at the conference table. OK- we're off to a good start here, I thought. There I go a-thinkin'!!! Lol.
I was seated next to Raymond Telles, Jr., our assistant city attorney that advised our meetings.
Mind you, everytime I go downtown my ears wreak havoc on me and I end up not being able to hear very well for at least half a day. Forget about going OVER the mountain- that's even worse!
So I'm sitting at the big conference table next to Raymond and our meeting starts and we vote on a chair and vice-chair. A couple minutes later Raymond whispers in my ear and I'm like "What? What?"- I couldn't hear him! So we go outside to talk.
Raymond tells me there's been a mistake (lol) and that my recommendation by the CAC members as an alternate was mistakenly left off the MTDB meeting so they never voted on my position yet! It had not been carried over to the MTDB by the secretary and had not been on the agenda! And I ask well why do I have a name placard? Another oversight, Raymond basically says.
So I ask "Can I still sit at the big table?" and Raymond agrees that that's okay.
And that's where I basically sat at for each meeting, unless it was too crowded at the table.
So we go back in and I sit down at the big table and place my placard face-down. Raymond explains the mix-up and we continue on with the meeting. After a couple more minutes I interrupt and ask the question that since I voted on the record and I'm not really eligible to- shouldn't we revisit that agenda item and take a re-vote without me? Raymond agrees. (Umm- why am I bringing up protocol and legalities to the assistant city attorney?- I'm just a lay person!)
Anyway... speaking of protocol and legalities, I had another incident late last year. This was in November.
I couldn't attend the CAC meeting but I called in to speak on certain agenda items. Our newly-assigned assistant city attorney (Raymond Telles Jr. moved on to other assignments) advised the CAC that I would be allowed to speak as a member of the public but only during the public comment portion of the agenda- not on items! That made no sense to me! I tried to voice my opinion but would not be listened to and was ignored the rest of the meeting!
If I was recognized as a member of the public, as I was, then I should have been afforded every right a member of the public enjoys- meaning being able to speak during public comment on non-agenda items if I so wished, and also on agenda items after the CAC discussed an item! You can't have one without having the other- that's changing the rules without the proper steps taken to change such rules!
And as the city likes to say "that's how we've always done it"- and that's how we've always done it in the CAC since I've been attending, so.....
Needless to say, I brought this up to our chair and the assistant city attorney and directed them to the CAC website where it stated at the time how and when a member of the public may speak at these meetings.
This time I DID receive an apology for the mistake, which was nice. But the damage had been already done- I was shut down from speaking.
Funny thing was- this was an agenda item I had been pushing for. Priority seating being truly 'priority'. I had spoken with Ms. Shang about being denied yet again to ride the bus with my client who is in a wheelchair because no one wanted to move from the priority seats and that the coach operators had nothing to back them up in enforcing the signage of priority seating on the buses. She couldn't believe it but investigated it and found it to be a true problem and soon we had an ordinance enforcing and empowering the coach operators to make it a priority. More on this matter on another post!
So, back to the table.
Last month I go into the conference room and I don't see my placard waiting at a spot at the table. Ok- no biggie- looks like we have a full house.
About a half hour in to the meeting a member had to leave, so there was a space open at the table, but I remained seated where I was.
Soon I wished to speak on an item and rose my hand. I was not recognized by the vice-chair. Maybe they couldn't see me? When another member was done speaking I rose my hand again. Nothing. I was overlooked again. Hmmmm.
After that other member spoke I rose my hand again- guess it was difficult to be seen.
Then someone pointed out that I wished to speak and I waited my turn as someone was already speaking.
In the meantime, 2 CAC members motioned me over to come sit at the big table. I hesitated and they kept motioning. So I scooted my chair to the table. I put down the placard that was in front of me of the absent member whose spot I took. Shortly another member went to a side table and grabbed my name placard and placed it in front of me. Suzanne Fabian Alternate Member.
After I spoke on the item I had wanted to I was told by the assistant city attorney (and I'm not quoting) that me being at the table would confuse people (what people?) and that only seated members should be at the table. This was according to the resolutions the assistant city attorney said.
WOW!
I never knew just sitting at a table would cause such a ruckus or ruffle some people's feathers!
I guess I was spoiled, even being "just" an alternate member. I almost always got to sit at the big people's table. Yes, I also almost always was part of the quorom. My placard said alternate so I thought that made things clear. And if I voted on an item I thought that made it clear if I was in the quorom. If I was silent during voting I thought it made it clear that I was not part of the quorom that day. Either way, as alternate I am allowed to speak on any item at any time- it's just kind of hard to be recognized when you're not at the TABLE!
So I scooted away from the table.
Anyway, it was a kind gesture by a couple of CAC members that tried to make a motion to over-rule the resolutions and have me come back to the table, but they were nixed by the attorney.
I looked at each resolution and I really don't interpret any of them broaching this subject. They can be viewed on the city's website on the Citizen's Advisory Committee to the Mass Transit Board/Sun Metro webpage, before you get to the list of members and alternates.
When the CAC members tried to over-rule the "resolution" they were told that this subject could be brought up in our by-laws under construction. Cool- maybe that would make things clearer. And more collegial.
So, I started this post last night and am just finishing it this Tuesday morning. Let's see what this new day holds, and if I'll be at the "kiddie table" or at the big people's table .
side note- since I had such a hard time being recognized to speak being on the outskirts of an oval table, I wonder if any members of the public that have shown up have had trouble being recognized? We need a larger conference room where the CAC members can face the public.
side note 2- it is stated that alternates will be called to attend a meeting if a full member has said they cannot show. We have always allowed our alternates to show at any meeting they wish and to participate, sometimes we even had all 3 alternates in attendance (when we had 3), and nothing was ever said. I have never been called to ensure my attendance as an alternate. Usually, we don't know if we'll have a quorom until we get to the meeting the day of. Drs appointments, illnesses, family emergencies etc are notalways scheduled, so I guess it's a good thing us alternates like to be there as much as possible!
What's in store for us this time?
What little monkey wrenches will be tossed in to take the focus off our business at hand?
Last months' meeting was interesting, to say the least.
You won't read it in the minutes, but here's a few tidbits.
But first a little background...
I was nominated by the CAC members in October 2007. Due to delays and the December CAC meeting being cancelled by Sun Metro (yet another story there), I arrived at the January 2008 CAC meeting and was greeted by a laminated sign with 'Suzanne Fabian Alternate Member' at the conference table. OK- we're off to a good start here, I thought. There I go a-thinkin'!!! Lol.
I was seated next to Raymond Telles, Jr., our assistant city attorney that advised our meetings.
Mind you, everytime I go downtown my ears wreak havoc on me and I end up not being able to hear very well for at least half a day. Forget about going OVER the mountain- that's even worse!
So I'm sitting at the big conference table next to Raymond and our meeting starts and we vote on a chair and vice-chair. A couple minutes later Raymond whispers in my ear and I'm like "What? What?"- I couldn't hear him! So we go outside to talk.
Raymond tells me there's been a mistake (lol) and that my recommendation by the CAC members as an alternate was mistakenly left off the MTDB meeting so they never voted on my position yet! It had not been carried over to the MTDB by the secretary and had not been on the agenda! And I ask well why do I have a name placard? Another oversight, Raymond basically says.
So I ask "Can I still sit at the big table?" and Raymond agrees that that's okay.
And that's where I basically sat at for each meeting, unless it was too crowded at the table.
So we go back in and I sit down at the big table and place my placard face-down. Raymond explains the mix-up and we continue on with the meeting. After a couple more minutes I interrupt and ask the question that since I voted on the record and I'm not really eligible to- shouldn't we revisit that agenda item and take a re-vote without me? Raymond agrees. (Umm- why am I bringing up protocol and legalities to the assistant city attorney?- I'm just a lay person!)
Anyway... speaking of protocol and legalities, I had another incident late last year. This was in November.
I couldn't attend the CAC meeting but I called in to speak on certain agenda items. Our newly-assigned assistant city attorney (Raymond Telles Jr. moved on to other assignments) advised the CAC that I would be allowed to speak as a member of the public but only during the public comment portion of the agenda- not on items! That made no sense to me! I tried to voice my opinion but would not be listened to and was ignored the rest of the meeting!
If I was recognized as a member of the public, as I was, then I should have been afforded every right a member of the public enjoys- meaning being able to speak during public comment on non-agenda items if I so wished, and also on agenda items after the CAC discussed an item! You can't have one without having the other- that's changing the rules without the proper steps taken to change such rules!
And as the city likes to say "that's how we've always done it"- and that's how we've always done it in the CAC since I've been attending, so.....
Needless to say, I brought this up to our chair and the assistant city attorney and directed them to the CAC website where it stated at the time how and when a member of the public may speak at these meetings.
This time I DID receive an apology for the mistake, which was nice. But the damage had been already done- I was shut down from speaking.
Funny thing was- this was an agenda item I had been pushing for. Priority seating being truly 'priority'. I had spoken with Ms. Shang about being denied yet again to ride the bus with my client who is in a wheelchair because no one wanted to move from the priority seats and that the coach operators had nothing to back them up in enforcing the signage of priority seating on the buses. She couldn't believe it but investigated it and found it to be a true problem and soon we had an ordinance enforcing and empowering the coach operators to make it a priority. More on this matter on another post!
So, back to the table.
Last month I go into the conference room and I don't see my placard waiting at a spot at the table. Ok- no biggie- looks like we have a full house.
About a half hour in to the meeting a member had to leave, so there was a space open at the table, but I remained seated where I was.
Soon I wished to speak on an item and rose my hand. I was not recognized by the vice-chair. Maybe they couldn't see me? When another member was done speaking I rose my hand again. Nothing. I was overlooked again. Hmmmm.
After that other member spoke I rose my hand again- guess it was difficult to be seen.
Then someone pointed out that I wished to speak and I waited my turn as someone was already speaking.
In the meantime, 2 CAC members motioned me over to come sit at the big table. I hesitated and they kept motioning. So I scooted my chair to the table. I put down the placard that was in front of me of the absent member whose spot I took. Shortly another member went to a side table and grabbed my name placard and placed it in front of me. Suzanne Fabian Alternate Member.
After I spoke on the item I had wanted to I was told by the assistant city attorney (and I'm not quoting) that me being at the table would confuse people (what people?) and that only seated members should be at the table. This was according to the resolutions the assistant city attorney said.
WOW!
I never knew just sitting at a table would cause such a ruckus or ruffle some people's feathers!
I guess I was spoiled, even being "just" an alternate member. I almost always got to sit at the big people's table. Yes, I also almost always was part of the quorom. My placard said alternate so I thought that made things clear. And if I voted on an item I thought that made it clear if I was in the quorom. If I was silent during voting I thought it made it clear that I was not part of the quorom that day. Either way, as alternate I am allowed to speak on any item at any time- it's just kind of hard to be recognized when you're not at the TABLE!
So I scooted away from the table.
Anyway, it was a kind gesture by a couple of CAC members that tried to make a motion to over-rule the resolutions and have me come back to the table, but they were nixed by the attorney.
I looked at each resolution and I really don't interpret any of them broaching this subject. They can be viewed on the city's website on the Citizen's Advisory Committee to the Mass Transit Board/Sun Metro webpage, before you get to the list of members and alternates.
When the CAC members tried to over-rule the "resolution" they were told that this subject could be brought up in our by-laws under construction. Cool- maybe that would make things clearer. And more collegial.
So, I started this post last night and am just finishing it this Tuesday morning. Let's see what this new day holds, and if I'll be at the "kiddie table" or at the big people's table .
side note- since I had such a hard time being recognized to speak being on the outskirts of an oval table, I wonder if any members of the public that have shown up have had trouble being recognized? We need a larger conference room where the CAC members can face the public.
side note 2- it is stated that alternates will be called to attend a meeting if a full member has said they cannot show. We have always allowed our alternates to show at any meeting they wish and to participate, sometimes we even had all 3 alternates in attendance (when we had 3), and nothing was ever said. I have never been called to ensure my attendance as an alternate. Usually, we don't know if we'll have a quorom until we get to the meeting the day of. Drs appointments, illnesses, family emergencies etc are notalways scheduled, so I guess it's a good thing us alternates like to be there as much as possible!
Monday, July 20, 2009
All Aboard El Paso to Las Cruces!
Commissioner Haggerty hemmed and hawed and voted nay, but the rest of the Commissioners and Judge Cobos pushed through the pilot program for bus service between El Paso and Las Cruces.
This will basically be an express route from downtown El Paso and UTEP to NMSU and downtown Las Cruces, 3x in the morning and 3x in the afternoon/early evening.
Considering there is no such service at the moment and that NMDot is paying for the largest chunk of it with TxDot the remainder and with no county dollars needed for the first year, it makes perfect sense to try this.
I can't wait to travel to Las Cruces!
I really hope I heard right that it would be $3 on-way! And on a coach that is wheelchair accessible and with a bathroom!
I will be first in line to be able to experience this, and if it is good I will travel to Las Cruces just for the 'halibut' as often as possible just to keep the ridership up for the trial period.
This will basically be an express route from downtown El Paso and UTEP to NMSU and downtown Las Cruces, 3x in the morning and 3x in the afternoon/early evening.
Considering there is no such service at the moment and that NMDot is paying for the largest chunk of it with TxDot the remainder and with no county dollars needed for the first year, it makes perfect sense to try this.
I can't wait to travel to Las Cruces!
I really hope I heard right that it would be $3 on-way! And on a coach that is wheelchair accessible and with a bathroom!
I will be first in line to be able to experience this, and if it is good I will travel to Las Cruces just for the 'halibut' as often as possible just to keep the ridership up for the trial period.
Justice for All?
Just finished watching Thomas Dorman at Commissioner's Court speaking on behalf of himself and citizens of El Paso regarding the CAD debacle.
Thomas says he is not a public speaker. In my opinion he did a fine job and was clear and concise.
Will he be invited to discuss this issue in Executive Session? I doubt it. But I believe he has put enough info out there for many in our government to want to take a serious look at this. The FBI sure is looking at it.
Quick synopsis-
Thomas placed an open records request with the CAD. From what I understand, he was treated with less than stellar cooperation on their behalf, delaying the process for ridiculous reasons and not abiding by protocol and constitutional rights of due process by the CAD.
Then the CAD compounded the problem by inadvertantly (?) giving him records that were confidential.
Thomas Dorman acted as a good citizen and has been transparent and more than forth-coming with this whole process and now finds himself having to deal with the FBI. Who knows what transpired with THAT meeting, but I'm sure it wasn't pleasant.
Thomas mentioned the saying his friend told him "No good deed goes unpunished"... and I say to Thomas hang in there, there are people that back you up. In my belief, "No good deed goes unseen".
You will have justice, Thomas, I just don't know how much or how fast.
Thomas says he is not a public speaker. In my opinion he did a fine job and was clear and concise.
Will he be invited to discuss this issue in Executive Session? I doubt it. But I believe he has put enough info out there for many in our government to want to take a serious look at this. The FBI sure is looking at it.
Quick synopsis-
Thomas placed an open records request with the CAD. From what I understand, he was treated with less than stellar cooperation on their behalf, delaying the process for ridiculous reasons and not abiding by protocol and constitutional rights of due process by the CAD.
Then the CAD compounded the problem by inadvertantly (?) giving him records that were confidential.
Thomas Dorman acted as a good citizen and has been transparent and more than forth-coming with this whole process and now finds himself having to deal with the FBI. Who knows what transpired with THAT meeting, but I'm sure it wasn't pleasant.
Thomas mentioned the saying his friend told him "No good deed goes unpunished"... and I say to Thomas hang in there, there are people that back you up. In my belief, "No good deed goes unseen".
You will have justice, Thomas, I just don't know how much or how fast.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Why Wheelchair-bound are not Allowed to Speak at City Council
I somehow remember the mayor mentioning something recently (last few months) about keeping items in order on the city council agenda as much as possible.
Hmmmmmm
So why is it that the Mass Transit Board meeting was changed to an earlier time Tuesday, away from it's posted 1:00pm slot?
It's almost like not even posting the meeting and this is why I say this....
From a reliable source I heard that there were 6 people from our disabled community in wheelchairs arriving to speak out on the $10,000 question on the agenda. There were other disabled people not in wheelchairs waiting to speak, too.
When they arrived for the 1pm meeting they were met with "oh well... we bumped the MTDB meeting up"- giving them NO voice on agenda items!
This subject has been brought up before to City Council and I thought they understood.
One- many in the disabled community rely on taking the bus or LIFT for transportation. So they have to plan ahead of time for travel time and can't really be changed at the last minute because City Council/mayor decides to change the order of items/meetings.
Two- this leaves a huge segment of our community out of the loop and not having the opportunity to voice their opinions and suggestions. The city's website says 1pm- why can't they stick to it? Especially knowing that some in the community may be planning on coming to the meeting and speaking- let alone just coming to hear the meeting. Doesn't the website and the sign-in sheet at city hall mention a 1pm cut-off for speaking at the MTDB meeting?
I find this extremely rude and non-transparent. And dare I say- if this is a calculated move I find it very chickenshit. And unprofessional. And a dereliction of true and honest services. And I can go on and on. I think you get the point, tho.
A little more sensitivity on the part of our elected officials should be demanded.
And an apology at the next city council meeting. But don't just talk the talk... walk the walk. I'm trying to measure our elected officials by their character and they're not helping me any!
Hmmmmmm
So why is it that the Mass Transit Board meeting was changed to an earlier time Tuesday, away from it's posted 1:00pm slot?
It's almost like not even posting the meeting and this is why I say this....
From a reliable source I heard that there were 6 people from our disabled community in wheelchairs arriving to speak out on the $10,000 question on the agenda. There were other disabled people not in wheelchairs waiting to speak, too.
When they arrived for the 1pm meeting they were met with "oh well... we bumped the MTDB meeting up"- giving them NO voice on agenda items!
This subject has been brought up before to City Council and I thought they understood.
One- many in the disabled community rely on taking the bus or LIFT for transportation. So they have to plan ahead of time for travel time and can't really be changed at the last minute because City Council/mayor decides to change the order of items/meetings.
Two- this leaves a huge segment of our community out of the loop and not having the opportunity to voice their opinions and suggestions. The city's website says 1pm- why can't they stick to it? Especially knowing that some in the community may be planning on coming to the meeting and speaking- let alone just coming to hear the meeting. Doesn't the website and the sign-in sheet at city hall mention a 1pm cut-off for speaking at the MTDB meeting?
I find this extremely rude and non-transparent. And dare I say- if this is a calculated move I find it very chickenshit. And unprofessional. And a dereliction of true and honest services. And I can go on and on. I think you get the point, tho.
A little more sensitivity on the part of our elected officials should be demanded.
And an apology at the next city council meeting. But don't just talk the talk... walk the walk. I'm trying to measure our elected officials by their character and they're not helping me any!
Thursday, July 16, 2009
It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World!
The heat must really be frying everyone's brains here- this whole debacle now with the CAD f-i-n-a-l-l-y releasing open records to Thomas Dorman (see newspapertree.com and thestrelz.com ) has turned into an FBI and internal (lol) investigation due to the CAD releasing CONFIDENTIAL records!!!
I don't know if I should laugh, cry or pound my fist on the desk. What I DO know is I feel for Thomas. He was just being a good citizen, and dilligent at that, and now he finds himself in this whole mess!
It's about time they have their turn under investigation (if they haven't been already), but I don't know how all this mess will affect the budget hearings going on now.
We'll most likely be kept in the dark, though, as this may all be tied into the blanket investigation going on.
So what does that mean for anyone requesting open records from the CAD at this time?
Probably a whole lotta waiting!
We all make mistakes- we're all human. But like I mentioned in an earlier post- sometimes those mistakes have huge consequences.
There's people like me and Thomas who are everyday citizens trying to keep our government fair and transparent. We do our part to try and make things better, not just complain. And what do we get for all our trouble?
More trouble!
Don't worry- I still believe that no good deed goes unseen- but that's higher power... right now we're dealing with humans!
I had my own little debacle with the city making a mistake in their dealings with me on the Citizen's Advisory Committee to the Mass Transit Board/Sun Metro.
I received a letter saying that I had to contact the city clerk's office as I had not filed my financial disclosure papers as full-voting member of the CAC. I received this letter on a Friday (evening). The next day I received a letter stating that I had not filed those papers so I had been removed as a member! It being the weekend there was nothing I could do about it at the moment. This was the end of March,I believe, and I had just been nominated in February at the MTDB meeting.
Thinking that I had royally screwed up, I took it like the woman I am. Can't say it didn't sting, tho, and my ego was quite bruised for a little bit. I had been working so hard on certain projects on the CAC and had lots of plans for future projects. I had enjoyed an open communication with who became my rep even as an alternate member of the CAC and we would talk in person or on the phone or via email every once in awhile- not every week or month I must add.
Soooo.....
being the person I am, I finally dusted myself off and got to thinking... hey- something's not right here. I'm not going to give up that easily.
In the meantime, my rep nominated someone else for my position.
Then it dawns on me..... wait! I didn't do anything wrong! I had my papers on file with the city clerk's office since last year and good through June 2009! I DIDN'T have to file any papers again as it was not required! The city clerk's office made a HUGE mistake that literally cost me my position on the committee!
And I hate to say that- because I have nothing but respect for Richarda Duffy-Momsen- I think she's the hardest working lady in El Paso- but it was her signature on my letter stating I had not filed in time. It was her office that made that mistake and cost me my position!
I have to say, when all this went down I heard through the grapevine that my rep would try and do what she could for me and to contact her, but remember- I thought I had made the mistake and thought there was no way out of it and felt like a fool for overlooking such a small yet significant detail and I certainly didn't want to speak to anyone- I felt like an idiot! So I acted in accordance with what I had been told by the city clerk's office- I was no longer a member so I had nothing to say, probably wouldn't have changed things anyway.
So- I get on the horn with our assistant city attorney that now attends our meetings of the CAC and is there to advise us and Sun Metro (Raymond Telles used to attend until he went to the MPO). Upon her investigating also and realizing that the city clerk's office made a mistake, we held off on certain discussions until we had clarification from the city clerk and my reps office.
Here's where things get even more weird.
The city clerk's office never bothered to contact me with any kind of apology.
My rep contacted me and the conversation went basically like this-
She had already nominated someone else for my position because she received notice from the city clerk's office that I had been removed. Have to admit she wasted no time in doing so. I have absolutely NO record of her ever trying to contact me but ONCE via a voicemail from her assistant on this matter. She claimed she tried several times to call me and sent me tons of emails trying to sort this out. WRONG! I went through ALL my emails dating back months before and I never received one from her on this matter, nor from her assistant. Mind you, I had sent her an email when I found out she was nominating me thanking her and expounded on some things we had talked about previously- and I never received an email back from her acknowledging anything about that email. I never called her office back that one time her assistant left a vm for the reasons I stated above.
So who is more wrong? The city clerk's office for making the original mistake that led to my behavior and lack of action because of such, or the feeble attempt by my rep's office to communicate with me, or me for believing there was a mistake made on my part and thus taking the action (or inaction) that I did because of such?
My rep also stated that she was going to remain with her other nomination basically because he seemed more willing to talk with her- this really gets my goat! My rep and I had always had open communication before this incident and NOTHING was said or written or agreed upon between the two of us that she was nominating me because I was to call or email her daily or monthly or with any set schedule! She replaced me in a matter of WEEKS of being nominated by her with the sad excuse that we don't communicate!
I have to say, I did get some good backup from CAC members. I was renominated as alternate in case this whole mess did not come out in my favor. Alternate is nothing to sneeze at- last year I voted as a full member more times than not because we didn't have a quorom.
What also burns my behind is that our reps can take back their nomination of a citizen on a board or committee at will and without cause!
That fact seems hardly transparent.
So if they decide they don't like you or what you say or whatever they can dismiss you without any explanation. Yet we hear all the time that we need our citizens for the public input process- but the city doesn't want to treat us with the smallest amount of respect!
There's much more drama with this whole episode- the novella continues sin fin and I will post more on this later.
I don't know if I should laugh, cry or pound my fist on the desk. What I DO know is I feel for Thomas. He was just being a good citizen, and dilligent at that, and now he finds himself in this whole mess!
It's about time they have their turn under investigation (if they haven't been already), but I don't know how all this mess will affect the budget hearings going on now.
We'll most likely be kept in the dark, though, as this may all be tied into the blanket investigation going on.
So what does that mean for anyone requesting open records from the CAD at this time?
Probably a whole lotta waiting!
We all make mistakes- we're all human. But like I mentioned in an earlier post- sometimes those mistakes have huge consequences.
There's people like me and Thomas who are everyday citizens trying to keep our government fair and transparent. We do our part to try and make things better, not just complain. And what do we get for all our trouble?
More trouble!
Don't worry- I still believe that no good deed goes unseen- but that's higher power... right now we're dealing with humans!
I had my own little debacle with the city making a mistake in their dealings with me on the Citizen's Advisory Committee to the Mass Transit Board/Sun Metro.
I received a letter saying that I had to contact the city clerk's office as I had not filed my financial disclosure papers as full-voting member of the CAC. I received this letter on a Friday (evening). The next day I received a letter stating that I had not filed those papers so I had been removed as a member! It being the weekend there was nothing I could do about it at the moment. This was the end of March,I believe, and I had just been nominated in February at the MTDB meeting.
Thinking that I had royally screwed up, I took it like the woman I am. Can't say it didn't sting, tho, and my ego was quite bruised for a little bit. I had been working so hard on certain projects on the CAC and had lots of plans for future projects. I had enjoyed an open communication with who became my rep even as an alternate member of the CAC and we would talk in person or on the phone or via email every once in awhile- not every week or month I must add.
Soooo.....
being the person I am, I finally dusted myself off and got to thinking... hey- something's not right here. I'm not going to give up that easily.
In the meantime, my rep nominated someone else for my position.
Then it dawns on me..... wait! I didn't do anything wrong! I had my papers on file with the city clerk's office since last year and good through June 2009! I DIDN'T have to file any papers again as it was not required! The city clerk's office made a HUGE mistake that literally cost me my position on the committee!
And I hate to say that- because I have nothing but respect for Richarda Duffy-Momsen- I think she's the hardest working lady in El Paso- but it was her signature on my letter stating I had not filed in time. It was her office that made that mistake and cost me my position!
I have to say, when all this went down I heard through the grapevine that my rep would try and do what she could for me and to contact her, but remember- I thought I had made the mistake and thought there was no way out of it and felt like a fool for overlooking such a small yet significant detail and I certainly didn't want to speak to anyone- I felt like an idiot! So I acted in accordance with what I had been told by the city clerk's office- I was no longer a member so I had nothing to say, probably wouldn't have changed things anyway.
So- I get on the horn with our assistant city attorney that now attends our meetings of the CAC and is there to advise us and Sun Metro (Raymond Telles used to attend until he went to the MPO). Upon her investigating also and realizing that the city clerk's office made a mistake, we held off on certain discussions until we had clarification from the city clerk and my reps office.
Here's where things get even more weird.
The city clerk's office never bothered to contact me with any kind of apology.
My rep contacted me and the conversation went basically like this-
She had already nominated someone else for my position because she received notice from the city clerk's office that I had been removed. Have to admit she wasted no time in doing so. I have absolutely NO record of her ever trying to contact me but ONCE via a voicemail from her assistant on this matter. She claimed she tried several times to call me and sent me tons of emails trying to sort this out. WRONG! I went through ALL my emails dating back months before and I never received one from her on this matter, nor from her assistant. Mind you, I had sent her an email when I found out she was nominating me thanking her and expounded on some things we had talked about previously- and I never received an email back from her acknowledging anything about that email. I never called her office back that one time her assistant left a vm for the reasons I stated above.
So who is more wrong? The city clerk's office for making the original mistake that led to my behavior and lack of action because of such, or the feeble attempt by my rep's office to communicate with me, or me for believing there was a mistake made on my part and thus taking the action (or inaction) that I did because of such?
My rep also stated that she was going to remain with her other nomination basically because he seemed more willing to talk with her- this really gets my goat! My rep and I had always had open communication before this incident and NOTHING was said or written or agreed upon between the two of us that she was nominating me because I was to call or email her daily or monthly or with any set schedule! She replaced me in a matter of WEEKS of being nominated by her with the sad excuse that we don't communicate!
I have to say, I did get some good backup from CAC members. I was renominated as alternate in case this whole mess did not come out in my favor. Alternate is nothing to sneeze at- last year I voted as a full member more times than not because we didn't have a quorom.
What also burns my behind is that our reps can take back their nomination of a citizen on a board or committee at will and without cause!
That fact seems hardly transparent.
So if they decide they don't like you or what you say or whatever they can dismiss you without any explanation. Yet we hear all the time that we need our citizens for the public input process- but the city doesn't want to treat us with the smallest amount of respect!
There's much more drama with this whole episode- the novella continues sin fin and I will post more on this later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
