Click on pic for larger image
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Port of Corpus Christi Executive Board Members Get Obscene Raises, Bonuses!!
click on pic for larger image
Today's edition of the Corpus Christi Caller/Times carried a story that can only serve to outrage the people who work hard for a living and struggle in today's economy to keep their jobs, much less feed and clothe their families, on the normal working wages paid here in this city. This story outlined the outrageous, obscene bonuses and pay raises given to some on the executive board of the Port of Corpus Christi.
This arrogant, insensitive action comes on the heels of the naming of former CITGO plant manager Bob Kostelnik as Port Commissioner when he was apparently not in compliance with legal residency requirements, that is being a legal resident, registered to vote in the county for at least six months before he could be appointed.
These episodes smack of the smell of the continuation of "the good ole boy" system wherein the insiders of local industry take care of themselves and their friends at the expense of public interests.
Below is an excerpt from the article:
Port executives get raises, bonuses
The top three executives at the Port of Corpus Christi will get
hearty pay raises after port commissioners narrowly approved pay hikes and bonuses totaling nearly $235,000.
For Executive Director John LaRue, it’s the second raise and bonus this year. His 12.6 percent raise Tuesday brings his base salary to $310,000. He also was awarded a $75,000 bonus.
Frank Brogan, the deputy port director of engineering, finance and administration, and Maynard “Sandy” Sanders, the deputy port director of operations and business development, each received 7 percent raises and $50,000 bonuses.
Port commissioners voted 4-3 to approve La-Rue’s raise, with chairman Ruben Bonilla and Commissioners Kenneth Berry, Francis Gandy and Robert Gonzalez in favor and Commissioners Richard Borchard, Mike Carrell and Judy Hawley against.
While Borchard and Carrell voted against all three raises, Hawley joined the other four commissioners and voted for the two deputy port directors’ raises.
There wasn’t public discussion about the raises, which came after an executive session in which commissioners evaluated job performance.
“I don’t believe in giving raises twice in one year,” Borchard said after the meeting. “The amount of the increase, considering the state of the economy, is not right.”
LaRue received a 7 percent raise and $60,000 bonus in March, but that was based on his 2008 job performance, Berry said. Commissioners conducted his 2009 evaluation in December instead of the spring so that Bonilla, whose term expires in January, could weigh in on the staff’s job performance.
Berry said it was essential to pay port staff well to keep them in Corpus Christi. He pointed out that the Port of Houston recently hired a new director with less experience than LaRue and will pay him $325,000.
“How do you let your employees know they are doing a good job?” he said. “A pat on the back is great, but give them a wage increase and a bonus, and they understand.”
Berry said the port has done well during the poor economy,which should be rewarded.
“It’s not the commissioners out there doing the good work,” he said. “It’s port staff.”
By the numbers:
John LaRue Executive director
Old salary: $275,267
New salary: $310,000
Bonus: $75,000
Frank Brogan
Deputy port director: engineering, finance and administration
Old salary: $180,315
New salary:$192,937
Bonus: $50,000
Maynard “Sandy” Sanders
Deputy port director: operations and business development
Old salary: $180,315
New salary:$192,937
Bonus: $50,000
Notice the article said there was no public discussion and was enacted by a vote of the commissioners after an "executive session." This is so over the top of any sense of fairness or reality. It clearly demonstrates that this board needs to be reconstituted and stripped of the power to vote themselves such rich compensation which places these commissioners, supposedly public officials, into the ranks of the most wealthy percentile in the country. And this is in addition to the high paying positions they already hold!
The city and county governments, who are responsible for selecting the members of the Port commissioners, needs to step in and put a stop to this and possibly legislation should be enacted in the state legislature to regulate the pay and terms of service of such boards.
There have been many examples in the past when high powered executives performed governmental leadership roles for the sum of one dollar a year. Such a magnanimous gesture is woefully absent from the Port of Corpus Christi.
click on pic for larger image
Today's edition of the Corpus Christi Caller/Times carried a story that can only serve to outrage the people who work hard for a living and struggle in today's economy to keep their jobs, much less feed and clothe their families, on the normal working wages paid here in this city. This story outlined the outrageous, obscene bonuses and pay raises given to some on the executive board of the Port of Corpus Christi.
This arrogant, insensitive action comes on the heels of the naming of former CITGO plant manager Bob Kostelnik as Port Commissioner when he was apparently not in compliance with legal residency requirements, that is being a legal resident, registered to vote in the county for at least six months before he could be appointed.
These episodes smack of the smell of the continuation of "the good ole boy" system wherein the insiders of local industry take care of themselves and their friends at the expense of public interests.
Below is an excerpt from the article:
Port executives get raises, bonuses
The top three executives at the Port of Corpus Christi will get
hearty pay raises after port commissioners narrowly approved pay hikes and bonuses totaling nearly $235,000.
For Executive Director John LaRue, it’s the second raise and bonus this year. His 12.6 percent raise Tuesday brings his base salary to $310,000. He also was awarded a $75,000 bonus.
Frank Brogan, the deputy port director of engineering, finance and administration, and Maynard “Sandy” Sanders, the deputy port director of operations and business development, each received 7 percent raises and $50,000 bonuses.
Port commissioners voted 4-3 to approve La-Rue’s raise, with chairman Ruben Bonilla and Commissioners Kenneth Berry, Francis Gandy and Robert Gonzalez in favor and Commissioners Richard Borchard, Mike Carrell and Judy Hawley against.
While Borchard and Carrell voted against all three raises, Hawley joined the other four commissioners and voted for the two deputy port directors’ raises.
There wasn’t public discussion about the raises, which came after an executive session in which commissioners evaluated job performance.
“I don’t believe in giving raises twice in one year,” Borchard said after the meeting. “The amount of the increase, considering the state of the economy, is not right.”
LaRue received a 7 percent raise and $60,000 bonus in March, but that was based on his 2008 job performance, Berry said. Commissioners conducted his 2009 evaluation in December instead of the spring so that Bonilla, whose term expires in January, could weigh in on the staff’s job performance.
Berry said it was essential to pay port staff well to keep them in Corpus Christi. He pointed out that the Port of Houston recently hired a new director with less experience than LaRue and will pay him $325,000.
“How do you let your employees know they are doing a good job?” he said. “A pat on the back is great, but give them a wage increase and a bonus, and they understand.”
Berry said the port has done well during the poor economy,which should be rewarded.
“It’s not the commissioners out there doing the good work,” he said. “It’s port staff.”
By the numbers:
John LaRue Executive director
Old salary: $275,267
New salary: $310,000
Bonus: $75,000
Frank Brogan
Deputy port director: engineering, finance and administration
Old salary: $180,315
New salary:$192,937
Bonus: $50,000
Maynard “Sandy” Sanders
Deputy port director: operations and business development
Old salary: $180,315
New salary:$192,937
Bonus: $50,000
Notice the article said there was no public discussion and was enacted by a vote of the commissioners after an "executive session." This is so over the top of any sense of fairness or reality. It clearly demonstrates that this board needs to be reconstituted and stripped of the power to vote themselves such rich compensation which places these commissioners, supposedly public officials, into the ranks of the most wealthy percentile in the country. And this is in addition to the high paying positions they already hold!
The city and county governments, who are responsible for selecting the members of the Port commissioners, needs to step in and put a stop to this and possibly legislation should be enacted in the state legislature to regulate the pay and terms of service of such boards.
There have been many examples in the past when high powered executives performed governmental leadership roles for the sum of one dollar a year. Such a magnanimous gesture is woefully absent from the Port of Corpus Christi.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Neanderthal Rick Perry Opposes Climate Bill
Click on pic for larger image
Texas Governor Rick Perry is now ready to mortgage the future of coming generations and the environment they will live in to further his own political aspirations. The following is an illuminating story from AP.
Perry leads Texas fight against climate bill
By JOHN McFARLAND
Associated Press
Nov. 26, 2009, 7:23PMShare Print Share Del.icio.usDiggTwitterYahoo! BuzzFacebookStumbleUponDALLAS — While the U.S. Senate considers a climate bill aiming to dramatically slash air pollution linked to global warming, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and other Republican leaders in the state that leads the nation in greenhouse gas production are watching closely — and objecting loudly.
Perry, backed by powerful business and industry groups, for months has been denouncing the measure, saying it would cripple the vibrant Texas economy and the heavy-polluting oil, gas and chemical industries it depends on. The governor plans to keep up his campaign against legislation he claims would lead to massive job cuts, industries fleeing overseas and more expensive energy for everyone.
“The bill does not help the environment,” Perry said in an interview with The Associated Press. “It seems like it's more about controlling than it is on having a real impact on the environment.”
The U.S. House narrowly passed the measure in June, with the Texas delegation voting against it 23-9, and a similar version is facing a tough fight in the Senate. Each bill would cut emissions significantly by 2020, with a “cap and trade” system allowing companies to buy and sell permits to release limited amounts of heat-trapping gases.
Most of the nation's 22 Republican governors oppose the measure — including Mississippi's Haley Barbour and Louisiana's Bobby Jindal — but Perry is one of the most vocal. He recently railed against it after being named the head of an oil group that includes elected officials from more than 30 states, and he says he'll use that position and the “bully pulpit” of his office to attack legislation he's called draconian, disastrous and onerous.
Environmental groups and Texans who support the bill say Perry is ignoring the legislation's economic benefits in order to help powerful polluters that support him.
“In short, we can ensure the people of Texas have the responsible and clean energy policies they deserve and that Texas remains at the forefront of the energy field, or we can get left behind,” said state Sen. Rodney Ellis, a Democrat who traveled to Washington with state leaders this year to work with the White House on clean energy legislation. “We can't continue fossilized thinking, pretend there is no problem, and resist innovative thinking.”
Texas leads the nation in industrial pollution and has more oil refineries, chemical manufacturing plants and coal-fired power plants than any other state. The massive oil and chemical plants employ nearly 270,000 people and pay billions in state and local taxes. Texas provides about 20 percent of the nation's oil production, one-third of the natural gas, 25 percent of refining and 60 percent of chemical manufacturing.
Carbon emissions in Texas have dropped in recent years, and Perry says that's happened while those industries have helped build a strong economy that attracts about 1,000 people a day to the state.
“We've been able to reduce emissions and have a growing population and a growing economy, and we didn't do it through regulations and taxes. We did it through incentives,” Perry said. “Put the cap and trade legislation in place, and those businesses at some point will pick up and move offshore. They just can't stay in business.”
Jim Marston, director of the Texas office of the Environmental Defense Fund, doubts that claim. He says Texas companies can be at the forefront of a new green economy and that Perry's employing the same scare tactics used when the 1990 Clean Air Act was considered.
“This is just not credible,” Marston said. “Rick Perry gets extra campaign contributions from industry folks or these people he spends time with at the country club and he's going to say what they want him to say.”
Perry, locked in a tough primary re-election fight with U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison — who also opposes the measure — has been traveling around the state discussing the bill and the predicted consequences for Texas should it pass.
Environmentalists do agree with Perry on one point: his pushing of alternative energy.
Texas tops the country in wind energy, plans to expand a south Texas nuclear plant into the nation's largest and offers incentives for energy efficiency and solar-power use. In fact, Perry's usual speech calls for Washington to follow Texas' lead by offering incentives to cut emissions while promoting all sorts of alternative energy.
“This isn't just the governor of Texas standing up and saying no. I'm an all-of-the-above guy,” Perry said.
But it's his ties to the notoriously polluting big oil and chemical industries that rankle environmentalists. That, and the fact that Perry is skeptical of the science linking climate change and carbon emissions — a stance shared by the three commissioners he appointed to lead the Texas environmental agency.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality contends that capping emissions will not affect global warming, and it would be bad for Texas.
“Due to the significant petroleum and petrochemical industry base of Texas that supplies the rest of the nation with fuel and other commodities, it is certain that cap and trade legislation being discussed will disproportionately affect both citizens and industry of Texas,” spokesman Terry Clawson said.
Environmentalists say Texas needs to quit clinging to the past.
“I would say they are protecting the status quo — or even worse, protecting the status quo of the 1950s,” Marston said. “It's playing to the stereotype that we're yahoos, and we're not.”
Click on pic for larger image
Texas Governor Rick Perry is now ready to mortgage the future of coming generations and the environment they will live in to further his own political aspirations. The following is an illuminating story from AP.
Perry leads Texas fight against climate bill
By JOHN McFARLAND
Associated Press
Nov. 26, 2009, 7:23PMShare Print Share Del.icio.usDiggTwitterYahoo! BuzzFacebookStumbleUponDALLAS — While the U.S. Senate considers a climate bill aiming to dramatically slash air pollution linked to global warming, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and other Republican leaders in the state that leads the nation in greenhouse gas production are watching closely — and objecting loudly.
Perry, backed by powerful business and industry groups, for months has been denouncing the measure, saying it would cripple the vibrant Texas economy and the heavy-polluting oil, gas and chemical industries it depends on. The governor plans to keep up his campaign against legislation he claims would lead to massive job cuts, industries fleeing overseas and more expensive energy for everyone.
“The bill does not help the environment,” Perry said in an interview with The Associated Press. “It seems like it's more about controlling than it is on having a real impact on the environment.”
The U.S. House narrowly passed the measure in June, with the Texas delegation voting against it 23-9, and a similar version is facing a tough fight in the Senate. Each bill would cut emissions significantly by 2020, with a “cap and trade” system allowing companies to buy and sell permits to release limited amounts of heat-trapping gases.
Most of the nation's 22 Republican governors oppose the measure — including Mississippi's Haley Barbour and Louisiana's Bobby Jindal — but Perry is one of the most vocal. He recently railed against it after being named the head of an oil group that includes elected officials from more than 30 states, and he says he'll use that position and the “bully pulpit” of his office to attack legislation he's called draconian, disastrous and onerous.
Environmental groups and Texans who support the bill say Perry is ignoring the legislation's economic benefits in order to help powerful polluters that support him.
“In short, we can ensure the people of Texas have the responsible and clean energy policies they deserve and that Texas remains at the forefront of the energy field, or we can get left behind,” said state Sen. Rodney Ellis, a Democrat who traveled to Washington with state leaders this year to work with the White House on clean energy legislation. “We can't continue fossilized thinking, pretend there is no problem, and resist innovative thinking.”
Texas leads the nation in industrial pollution and has more oil refineries, chemical manufacturing plants and coal-fired power plants than any other state. The massive oil and chemical plants employ nearly 270,000 people and pay billions in state and local taxes. Texas provides about 20 percent of the nation's oil production, one-third of the natural gas, 25 percent of refining and 60 percent of chemical manufacturing.
Carbon emissions in Texas have dropped in recent years, and Perry says that's happened while those industries have helped build a strong economy that attracts about 1,000 people a day to the state.
“We've been able to reduce emissions and have a growing population and a growing economy, and we didn't do it through regulations and taxes. We did it through incentives,” Perry said. “Put the cap and trade legislation in place, and those businesses at some point will pick up and move offshore. They just can't stay in business.”
Jim Marston, director of the Texas office of the Environmental Defense Fund, doubts that claim. He says Texas companies can be at the forefront of a new green economy and that Perry's employing the same scare tactics used when the 1990 Clean Air Act was considered.
“This is just not credible,” Marston said. “Rick Perry gets extra campaign contributions from industry folks or these people he spends time with at the country club and he's going to say what they want him to say.”
Perry, locked in a tough primary re-election fight with U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison — who also opposes the measure — has been traveling around the state discussing the bill and the predicted consequences for Texas should it pass.
Environmentalists do agree with Perry on one point: his pushing of alternative energy.
Texas tops the country in wind energy, plans to expand a south Texas nuclear plant into the nation's largest and offers incentives for energy efficiency and solar-power use. In fact, Perry's usual speech calls for Washington to follow Texas' lead by offering incentives to cut emissions while promoting all sorts of alternative energy.
“This isn't just the governor of Texas standing up and saying no. I'm an all-of-the-above guy,” Perry said.
But it's his ties to the notoriously polluting big oil and chemical industries that rankle environmentalists. That, and the fact that Perry is skeptical of the science linking climate change and carbon emissions — a stance shared by the three commissioners he appointed to lead the Texas environmental agency.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality contends that capping emissions will not affect global warming, and it would be bad for Texas.
“Due to the significant petroleum and petrochemical industry base of Texas that supplies the rest of the nation with fuel and other commodities, it is certain that cap and trade legislation being discussed will disproportionately affect both citizens and industry of Texas,” spokesman Terry Clawson said.
Environmentalists say Texas needs to quit clinging to the past.
“I would say they are protecting the status quo — or even worse, protecting the status quo of the 1950s,” Marston said. “It's playing to the stereotype that we're yahoos, and we're not.”
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Texas GOP Selects Nutcase As State Chair!
Click on pic for larger image
Texas Republicans recently selected a bona fide nut job as state chair. Cathie Adams resigned from the Texas Eagle forum in order to take the position. Adams has a history of false, misleading and insulting statements against President Barak Obama and on many issues. She can only help push the Texas GOP even farther to the right than it was already!
Below read some of her more noted quotes:(from The Texas Observer)
- Earlier this month, she compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler, suggesting that his speech to American students was “eerily like Hitler’s youth movement.”
- In an e-mail to far-right activists in 2008, Ms. Adams viciously attacked the faith of then-candidate Barack Obama:
“While many question Barak Hussein Obama’s ‘religion’…, the more important question is whether he has a ‘relationship’ with Jesus Christ because that is the only HOPE that any of us have to obtain eternal life. I personally see NO evidence that Obama has that kind of ‘saving faith.’”
- Two years ago Ms. Adams opposed a ballot measure providing $300 million annually over 10 years for cancer research. Voters approved the measure, which had the support of Gov. Perry and then-President George Bush. But Adams didn’t, falsely claiming that the money would be used in embryonic stem cell research and suggesting that medical researchers are amoral monsters:
“Scientists are on the verge of cloning humans, injecting them with diseases and studying them, then killing them.”
- Defending the dominance of failed abstinence-only programs in Texas schools recently, Ms. Adams blamed the state’s sky-high rates of teen births and sexually transmitted diseases on the supposedly inferior morals of Mexican immigrants:
“If mom had a baby at age 15, are her morals going to be setting different standards than someone who has grown up in the American culture where that is not typical? As a matter of fact, we would look at someone impregnating a 15-year-old as child abuse.”
- She opposes the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which gives children of the working poor access to health care:
“Now illegal aliens will be able to purchase cheap insurance for their children. This is an incentive for them to come here.”
- In May she attacked legislation by fellow Republicans (and signed into law by Gov. Perry) to aid the study of how mental health services might be used in treating patients with other health conditions. Such a thing, she said,
“is now more dangerous than ever with the federal government taking up nationalized/rationed health care. Texans must not surrender our mental and physical health to a socialist State that President Obama is striving toward.”
Click on pic for larger image
Texas Republicans recently selected a bona fide nut job as state chair. Cathie Adams resigned from the Texas Eagle forum in order to take the position. Adams has a history of false, misleading and insulting statements against President Barak Obama and on many issues. She can only help push the Texas GOP even farther to the right than it was already!
Below read some of her more noted quotes:(from The Texas Observer)
- Earlier this month, she compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler, suggesting that his speech to American students was “eerily like Hitler’s youth movement.”
- In an e-mail to far-right activists in 2008, Ms. Adams viciously attacked the faith of then-candidate Barack Obama:
“While many question Barak Hussein Obama’s ‘religion’…, the more important question is whether he has a ‘relationship’ with Jesus Christ because that is the only HOPE that any of us have to obtain eternal life. I personally see NO evidence that Obama has that kind of ‘saving faith.’”
- Two years ago Ms. Adams opposed a ballot measure providing $300 million annually over 10 years for cancer research. Voters approved the measure, which had the support of Gov. Perry and then-President George Bush. But Adams didn’t, falsely claiming that the money would be used in embryonic stem cell research and suggesting that medical researchers are amoral monsters:
“Scientists are on the verge of cloning humans, injecting them with diseases and studying them, then killing them.”
- Defending the dominance of failed abstinence-only programs in Texas schools recently, Ms. Adams blamed the state’s sky-high rates of teen births and sexually transmitted diseases on the supposedly inferior morals of Mexican immigrants:
“If mom had a baby at age 15, are her morals going to be setting different standards than someone who has grown up in the American culture where that is not typical? As a matter of fact, we would look at someone impregnating a 15-year-old as child abuse.”
- She opposes the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which gives children of the working poor access to health care:
“Now illegal aliens will be able to purchase cheap insurance for their children. This is an incentive for them to come here.”
- In May she attacked legislation by fellow Republicans (and signed into law by Gov. Perry) to aid the study of how mental health services might be used in treating patients with other health conditions. Such a thing, she said,
“is now more dangerous than ever with the federal government taking up nationalized/rationed health care. Texans must not surrender our mental and physical health to a socialist State that President Obama is striving toward.”
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Power Lines Went Down As Storm Hits Yesterday
Click on pics for larger image
The storm was like a hurricane with winds clocked over 81 mph and driving rain. It was quite something!
Power lines along the access road near my house were blown down. The fallen power lines trapped motorists in their cars until power was turned off. Power was out at my house from 12:30 pm till 1:30 am.
Click on pics for larger image
The storm was like a hurricane with winds clocked over 81 mph and driving rain. It was quite something!
Power lines along the access road near my house were blown down. The fallen power lines trapped motorists in their cars until power was turned off. Power was out at my house from 12:30 pm till 1:30 am.
Big Storm Blew Through Yesterday!
Photo: Todd Yates CC Caller/times
Photo: Rachel Denny Clow CC Caller/Times
Photo: Rachel Denny Clow CC Caller/Times
Storm winds up to 81 mph were recorded at the Naval Air Station nearby my home as the storm toppled a series of power lines just down the street from me along the SPID acces road.
Photo: Todd Yates CC Caller/times
Photo: Rachel Denny Clow CC Caller/Times
Photo: Rachel Denny Clow CC Caller/Times
Storm winds up to 81 mph were recorded at the Naval Air Station nearby my home as the storm toppled a series of power lines just down the street from me along the SPID acces road.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
City Guv Plans City Pride Campaign To Clean Up City Yet Plans Still In Place For Once A Week Garbage Pickup
click on pic for larger image
A new logo was released today to promote a city wide cleanup effort.
This is part of an effort to instill civic pride and decrease litter and trash. A noble idea to be sure.
Mayor Adame formed the Advisory Committee on Community Pride composed of 11 "young professionals" (as described in a Caller/Times story this morning) who worked on his election campaign to lead in this effort.
The logo was created by the company headed by comittee chairwoman Monica Mcleod Sawyer.
The Advisory Committee on Community Pride, the mayor and members of the city council plan to take up trash bags and go to yet to be designated areas of the city to pick up trash on November 14.
It is a good thing to promote city pride and clean streets but this "Pride" campagin sure seems at odds with the notion of going to once a week trash pickup.
Mayor Joe Adame and the Corpus Christi City Council have once again demonstrated they put more store in PR stunts than the public interest.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
City Government Must Protect Public Property, For A Change...
Click on pics for larger image
The contention around the Memorial Coliseum and what to do with it is symptomatic of a long time problem in Corpus Christi. There are, and has been, some on the City Council and in city government who are always ready to give away public property to private developers for large, over reaching, grandiose projects in the name of "development." The American Bank Center was built to take away the functions of the Memorial Coliseum. However this has not worked so well because smaller organizations and events cannot afford the fees for that "Cow Palace." And the American Bank Center has been a loser for the City guv losing over $11 million so far!
But the Memorial Coliseum has been allowed to deteriorate and now the pro-development crowd, in the name of "doing something" about the Coliseum, want to give away this prime, bay front public property so a huge project with high buildings, private residencies, hotels, restaurants and God knows what else can locate right on the bay front. The project looks as if it was designed by a mad architect on LSD!
This is progress? For this you want to destroy the ambiance and familiarity of one of the city's best assets?
Click on pics for larger image
The contention around the Memorial Coliseum and what to do with it is symptomatic of a long time problem in Corpus Christi. There are, and has been, some on the City Council and in city government who are always ready to give away public property to private developers for large, over reaching, grandiose projects in the name of "development." The American Bank Center was built to take away the functions of the Memorial Coliseum. However this has not worked so well because smaller organizations and events cannot afford the fees for that "Cow Palace." And the American Bank Center has been a loser for the City guv losing over $11 million so far!
But the Memorial Coliseum has been allowed to deteriorate and now the pro-development crowd, in the name of "doing something" about the Coliseum, want to give away this prime, bay front public property so a huge project with high buildings, private residencies, hotels, restaurants and God knows what else can locate right on the bay front. The project looks as if it was designed by a mad architect on LSD!
This is progress? For this you want to destroy the ambiance and familiarity of one of the city's best assets?
Monday, September 21, 2009
Joe O'Brien; Our Local Don Quixote
Our local Don Quixote
Is Mr. Joe O’brien.
He fights waste and fraud
Wherever he can find ‘em.
Some say he’s tilting at windmills
But he’s fighting governmental ills!
Joe O'Brien is one of my local heroes. He has for years, much to their chagrin, tried to hold our local governments accountable.
Our local Don Quixote
Is Mr. Joe O’brien.
He fights waste and fraud
Wherever he can find ‘em.
Some say he’s tilting at windmills
But he’s fighting governmental ills!
Joe O'Brien is one of my local heroes. He has for years, much to their chagrin, tried to hold our local governments accountable.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Coliseum Follies
Coliseum follies
By Leon Loeb
Saturday, September 5, 2009 (published in the Corpus Christi Caller/Times)
Frustrated by the overreaching redevelopment proposals for Memorial Coliseum and the breathtaking lack of competence, discretion, and moral compass that brought them to us, I was ready to join the chorus for demolition.
Then a friend reminded me of some history: While World War II was fresh in their minds, our parents and grandparents erected buildings all over this nation and called them war memorials. They built them with the expectation that the sacrifices of family, friends, and neighbors would be forever honored.
They didn’t expect their descendants to demolish and replace these memorial structures with apartments and shopping centers. Is it moral for this generation to demolish the building, deal off the site for private development and create a “new memorial” from the old plaque? Absolutely not.
Another friend recalled that we had done a lot of listening to the public involvement in the bayfront master plan, the downtown redevelopment committee, the Coliseum committee, and my South Wharf proposal.
The Coliseum committee’s concept, developed after listening to citizens, is consistent with everything else we heard: We want a place that feels like it’s “ours.” We want a place on our bayfront where we can have a school dance, a craft show, a wedding, or quinceañera. We want a café, a shop, a drink stand, and some nice restrooms near McGee Beach. We want shade. We want a recreation center. We want to learn more about the wars in which our neighbors have fought and died. We want free parking. We want a facility which is public and maintains the memorial
character of the site. In other words, we want something like Memorial Coliseum once was, and a little bit more.
How did we get from that simple concept to mammoth, heavily subsidized, private ventures that take over public space?
The Coliseum committee concept included a few small tenants and concessionaires paying rent. It is a huge leap from there to building apartments on McCaughan Park. Even asking the question of the city’s legal department shows a lack of comprehension or willingness to dismiss the politics of our public spaces that’s
astonishing. Time and again this skirmish has been fought. The people of Corpus Christi do not want public spaces used for private development. Can’t our leaders understand, abandon the “public-
private partnership” dream, and move on?
Common sense says razing Memorial Coliseum won’t be cheap or fast. There is a lot of concrete underground, and thousands of citizens believe that the structure is important for memorial, architectural, or even sentimental reasons. Given the millions of dollars it will cost to clear the site, and the inevitable delay,
disharmony and legal cost of any attempt, working with the existing building seems both economical and expedient.
Can we afford to have the public facility we want? We can afford the Nueces County Fairgrounds, Whataburger Field, and American Bank Center. My conclusions? Commercial development of the Memorial Coliseum site should be permanently off the table. It is
the wrong thing to do. Besides, our city government can’t handle the process. Learn to live with and honor the Coliseum; it is the path of political feasibility. Execute the bayfront master plan and the concept developed by the Coliseum committee. That is what the community has said it wants. How difficult can it be?
Below: An email I sent to Mr. Loeb:
Dear Mr. Loeb,
I read your piece concerning the future of the coliseum the other day and I congratulate you on writing the best thing on the subject I have yet to read. I think you hit the nail on the head.
So far the developers, the mayor and several council members have only shown interest in maximizing the redevelopment of the area and have favored these large, elaborate plans which are promising more bay front clutter, diminished views of the bay, more loss of
green space and public parks and a total disregard for the purpose and history of the building.
Like it or not the Memorial Coliseum is a local landmark and many have special memories of events there. World War II, and those who died in the service of their country, should be remembered and not allowed to just slide into the oblivion of ancient history.
The public has an interest, a paramount interest I feel, in what happens to the city's most important attractions, that is the bay and the Padre Island and Mustang Island beaches.
Though labeled as "aginners" and other choice epithets, people who are opposed to the many over reaching development plans, to use your very appropriate words, are not necessarily opposed to all development but to the kind of development which alters the character of the city and would deny public access.
I hope everyone in the city, and especially the city government, will read your piece and consider the wisdom and correctness of your position on this issue and I certainly endorse the sentiments you so ably expressed.
Best wishes and thanks,
Coliseum follies
By Leon Loeb
Saturday, September 5, 2009 (published in the Corpus Christi Caller/Times)
Frustrated by the overreaching redevelopment proposals for Memorial Coliseum and the breathtaking lack of competence, discretion, and moral compass that brought them to us, I was ready to join the chorus for demolition.
Then a friend reminded me of some history: While World War II was fresh in their minds, our parents and grandparents erected buildings all over this nation and called them war memorials. They built them with the expectation that the sacrifices of family, friends, and neighbors would be forever honored.
They didn’t expect their descendants to demolish and replace these memorial structures with apartments and shopping centers. Is it moral for this generation to demolish the building, deal off the site for private development and create a “new memorial” from the old plaque? Absolutely not.
Another friend recalled that we had done a lot of listening to the public involvement in the bayfront master plan, the downtown redevelopment committee, the Coliseum committee, and my South Wharf proposal.
The Coliseum committee’s concept, developed after listening to citizens, is consistent with everything else we heard: We want a place that feels like it’s “ours.” We want a place on our bayfront where we can have a school dance, a craft show, a wedding, or quinceañera. We want a café, a shop, a drink stand, and some nice restrooms near McGee Beach. We want shade. We want a recreation center. We want to learn more about the wars in which our neighbors have fought and died. We want free parking. We want a facility which is public and maintains the memorial
character of the site. In other words, we want something like Memorial Coliseum once was, and a little bit more.
How did we get from that simple concept to mammoth, heavily subsidized, private ventures that take over public space?
The Coliseum committee concept included a few small tenants and concessionaires paying rent. It is a huge leap from there to building apartments on McCaughan Park. Even asking the question of the city’s legal department shows a lack of comprehension or willingness to dismiss the politics of our public spaces that’s
astonishing. Time and again this skirmish has been fought. The people of Corpus Christi do not want public spaces used for private development. Can’t our leaders understand, abandon the “public-
private partnership” dream, and move on?
Common sense says razing Memorial Coliseum won’t be cheap or fast. There is a lot of concrete underground, and thousands of citizens believe that the structure is important for memorial, architectural, or even sentimental reasons. Given the millions of dollars it will cost to clear the site, and the inevitable delay,
disharmony and legal cost of any attempt, working with the existing building seems both economical and expedient.
Can we afford to have the public facility we want? We can afford the Nueces County Fairgrounds, Whataburger Field, and American Bank Center. My conclusions? Commercial development of the Memorial Coliseum site should be permanently off the table. It is
the wrong thing to do. Besides, our city government can’t handle the process. Learn to live with and honor the Coliseum; it is the path of political feasibility. Execute the bayfront master plan and the concept developed by the Coliseum committee. That is what the community has said it wants. How difficult can it be?
Below: An email I sent to Mr. Loeb:
Dear Mr. Loeb,
I read your piece concerning the future of the coliseum the other day and I congratulate you on writing the best thing on the subject I have yet to read. I think you hit the nail on the head.
So far the developers, the mayor and several council members have only shown interest in maximizing the redevelopment of the area and have favored these large, elaborate plans which are promising more bay front clutter, diminished views of the bay, more loss of
green space and public parks and a total disregard for the purpose and history of the building.
Like it or not the Memorial Coliseum is a local landmark and many have special memories of events there. World War II, and those who died in the service of their country, should be remembered and not allowed to just slide into the oblivion of ancient history.
The public has an interest, a paramount interest I feel, in what happens to the city's most important attractions, that is the bay and the Padre Island and Mustang Island beaches.
Though labeled as "aginners" and other choice epithets, people who are opposed to the many over reaching development plans, to use your very appropriate words, are not necessarily opposed to all development but to the kind of development which alters the character of the city and would deny public access.
I hope everyone in the city, and especially the city government, will read your piece and consider the wisdom and correctness of your position on this issue and I certainly endorse the sentiments you so ably expressed.
Best wishes and thanks,
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Coliseum Bay Front Plans Favor Developers At Public Expense
(Click on pics for larger images)
The long running fiasco over what to do with the Coliseum on the Corpus Christi Bay front continues to get "curiouser and curiouser!"
The interests of the public have always taken a back seat in all of the proposals put forth over the last several years. The process has been pretty strange and the most ardent supporters of allowing development plans, which include huge, grandiose projects, have been in such a rush to get it done they have overlooked deed restrictions which state much of the land must be used for public park space and that no demolition of the building be allowed without a review by the state's board concerning historic buildings.
So now the scope of the project, if it is to be allowed at all, is reduced in square footage so the new plans are now composed of taller structures.
The pro-development factions would not be satisfied unless every inch of bay front or beach property has been developed, leaving the public on the outside looking in, that is unless one could afford to pay for the view of the water!
(Click on pics for larger images)
The long running fiasco over what to do with the Coliseum on the Corpus Christi Bay front continues to get "curiouser and curiouser!"
The interests of the public have always taken a back seat in all of the proposals put forth over the last several years. The process has been pretty strange and the most ardent supporters of allowing development plans, which include huge, grandiose projects, have been in such a rush to get it done they have overlooked deed restrictions which state much of the land must be used for public park space and that no demolition of the building be allowed without a review by the state's board concerning historic buildings.
So now the scope of the project, if it is to be allowed at all, is reduced in square footage so the new plans are now composed of taller structures.
The pro-development factions would not be satisfied unless every inch of bay front or beach property has been developed, leaving the public on the outside looking in, that is unless one could afford to pay for the view of the water!
Monday, August 31, 2009
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Los Tres Malditos De Tejas!
Rick Perry will be challenged by Kay Bailey Hutchison for the Republican nomination for Governor of Texas in the primary of 2010. John Cornyn may be looking ahead to the 2012 Presidential race. Imagine a Palin-Cornyn ticket! Guvmint Lite!
Perry and Hutchison are engaged in a race to the right in order to appeal to the Republicans of the state, which, they believe, will ensure a victory in the general election to follow.
Cornyn continues to be the classic example of the "empty suit" as he continues his vacuous rhetoric and self aggrandizement. Cornyn's explanation of why he opposed President Barack Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, was a perfect example of his demagoguery. Hutchison, too, opposed Sotomayor in a hypocritical attempt to cozy up to the Texas far right and demonstrates she is not worried about the Latino vote in the state. Maybe she should be.
Rick Perry will be challenged by Kay Bailey Hutchison for the Republican nomination for Governor of Texas in the primary of 2010. John Cornyn may be looking ahead to the 2012 Presidential race. Imagine a Palin-Cornyn ticket! Guvmint Lite!
Perry and Hutchison are engaged in a race to the right in order to appeal to the Republicans of the state, which, they believe, will ensure a victory in the general election to follow.
Cornyn continues to be the classic example of the "empty suit" as he continues his vacuous rhetoric and self aggrandizement. Cornyn's explanation of why he opposed President Barack Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, was a perfect example of his demagoguery. Hutchison, too, opposed Sotomayor in a hypocritical attempt to cozy up to the Texas far right and demonstrates she is not worried about the Latino vote in the state. Maybe she should be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)