Mayor Randall is taking action regarding our transportation situation. From what I understand Mayor Randall has been invited to Washington DC to discuss the Park and Ride and Commuter rail transportation in Galveston County and has been recently appointed to HGAC Advisory Committee.
It’s refreshing to see an elected official do what they said they would do if elected. However not all elected officials do. This was a portion of Mr. Baron’s press release when he ran for office last year.
" “We must restore trust in our city government and change the direction of this city now” Baron said. “We need to make real ethics reform an immediate priority and we must stop allowing our elected officials to discuss and vote on projects that benefit their campaign contributors.” “We need to control residential growth and return fiscal responsibility to our city government now before it is too late.” “Big ticket spending items such as the proposed east side aquatic center and the numerous sewage treatment facility upgrades should be decided by the voters.” “I believe that I have the business experience and the ability to work professionally with others that we need to make League City the best city in Texas.” "
What a difference a year makes no ethics reform, a dog park for the chosen few, fighting the mayor on her appointments and showing little if any professional working relationship except with Tommy Cones and the good old boys. What a true disappointment.
The thoughts below were emailed to me and requested to be posted under a new thread. It outlines some of the reasons the citizens have lost faith in the judgment of Mr. Cones as well as Mr. Samulson.
Guardian of Taxpayers' Dollars ?
- Big league Dreams- the city does not collect tax dollars from this $22 million project billed to the city (Councilman Cones supported and voted for this project without voter input, as well as being invited to an all expense trip to California to tour their project.)
- Butler Long Horn Museum- costing the taxpayers nearly $1.8 million dollars; asking the city council for an additional $200,000. ; and still not open to the public after nearly 8 YEARS in the planning (Councilman Cones has consistently voted in favor of the project without voter input over the last 7 years)
- League City's Dog Park- a novel idea costing the city $379,000.00 but in the times of an Economic Recession very poor decision making on the council members voting in favor of this project. (Cones, Samuelson, Baron, Nelson) County Judge Yarbrough and Commissioners' Court favored the idea and were considering an area of Walter Hall Park to be used as a Dog park.
- Eastside Swimming pool and Senior Center- this "free project" will cost the taxpayers thousands of dollars in maintenance, personal, etc. The citizens of League City spoke very clearly when they voted down (by 3 to 1) the Natatorium/Senior Center. Why does council continue to approve money for this project without voter input? Cones leads the charge to continue the the east side swimming pool/ senior center without voter input.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Blank Check Cones
It appears that Leadership will be a key issue in this upcoming election. The question then becomes what type of leadership? Are we looking for good Conservative stewards of our tax dollar during this time of nation wide economic problems, when everyone must tighten their belts, reduce spending and ease the tax burden on our citizens, certainly for those senior citizens on fixed incomes, or do we wish to continue the "blank check" liberal spending ways? It appears that Mr. Cones and Mr. Baron have teamed up to continue the "blank check" liberal spending ways.
While our mayor saved the taxpayer millions of dollars in the last budget cycle, (Mr. Cones was out of town during some of the Budget workshops) it appears that he and Mr. Baron will continue to find savings and spend it. At the last council meeting this became evident when Mr. Baron and Mr. Cones wanted to bring in a facilitator to “rush” the charter review recommendations to a vote for the May election. Why is it now being rushed to the voters? Is this another “Public emergency” like the trash contract Mr. Cones helped push thought the council? While Mr. Cones and Mr. Nelson both were on the council when the final report was presented (November 2007) neither one did ANYTHING to start the process until a year later, so why the rush now? It was asked during the council meeting by Mr. Cones or Mr. Nelson (it's the same voice) if the facilitator (who will write the language that will be used on the ballot) could be here on Monday (Jan. 19th) without regard to how much of our tax dollar will be spent. Just like the 377,000 dollar dog park that Mr. Baron and Mr. Cones supported, it appears that cost to the taxpayer is not a consideration.
Below is an exchange that shows the level of concern Mr. Cones has about the cost to the tax payers regarding the project.
While our mayor saved the taxpayer millions of dollars in the last budget cycle, (Mr. Cones was out of town during some of the Budget workshops) it appears that he and Mr. Baron will continue to find savings and spend it. At the last council meeting this became evident when Mr. Baron and Mr. Cones wanted to bring in a facilitator to “rush” the charter review recommendations to a vote for the May election. Why is it now being rushed to the voters? Is this another “Public emergency” like the trash contract Mr. Cones helped push thought the council? While Mr. Cones and Mr. Nelson both were on the council when the final report was presented (November 2007) neither one did ANYTHING to start the process until a year later, so why the rush now? It was asked during the council meeting by Mr. Cones or Mr. Nelson (it's the same voice) if the facilitator (who will write the language that will be used on the ballot) could be here on Monday (Jan. 19th) without regard to how much of our tax dollar will be spent. Just like the 377,000 dollar dog park that Mr. Baron and Mr. Cones supported, it appears that cost to the taxpayer is not a consideration.
Below is an exchange that shows the level of concern Mr. Cones has about the cost to the tax payers regarding the project.
-----Original Message-----
From: Csilla Ludanyi
To: Mayor&Council CC: Chris Reed; City Attorney; Barbara Long; Diana Stapp; Hazel Henry; Jeanne Hammack
Sent: Wed Jan 14 15:33:24 2009
Subject: Charter Review Workshop scheduling
Mayor and Council,
After receiving feedback from the attorney, Monty Akers, who will facilitate the Charter Review Workshop, it has been determined that this workshop will take about 4 hours. In the interest of getting this workshop scheduled as soon as possible, the following dates have been proposed:
Friday, February 6th from 1pm to 5pm
Saturday, February 7th from 8 am to 12 pm
Please email me and let me know if either or both of these times will work for you.Also, in order to best prepare the facilitator and organize this workshop, an agenda will be prepared. Please send me any requests you have for items of discussion regarding the charter review and proposed amendments.
Thanks,
Csilla Ludanyi
City of League City, Texas
Email: csilla.ludanyi@leaguecity.com
*******************************
Please note, per the Texas Public Information Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 552.002(b) most email correspondence pertaining to city business is subject to "open records requests" and is considered the property of the public.
The Mayor replies asking about the cost of this project.
From: Toni Randall
Sent: Wed 1/14/2009 4:18 PM
To: Csilla Ludanyi; Mayor&Council Cc: Chris Reed; City Attorney; Barbara Long; Diana Stapp; Hazel Henry; Jeanne Hammack
Subject: Re: Charter Review Workshop scheduling
Has anyone asked the cost of this project?
Toni Randall
Mayor
City of League City, Texas
************************************************************************
Please note, per the Texas Public Information Act, TexasGovernment Code Chapter 552.002(b) most email correspondencepertaining to city business is subject to "open records requests"and is considered the property of the public.
Mr. Cones replies
-----Original Message-----
From: Tommy Cones
To: Toni Randall; Chris Reed; Csilla Ludanyi; Mayor&Council
Sent: Wed Jan 14 17:07:30 2009
Subject:
RE: Charter Review Workshop scheduling
I'm sure the cost will be less than the investigation cost for the attorneys created by Cynthia and Travis.
And then the mayor replies.
-----Original Message-----
From: Toni Randall
To: Tommy Cones; Chris Reed; Csilla Ludanyi; Mayor&Council
Sent: Wed Jan 14 17:45:24 2009
Subject: Re: Charter Review Workshop scheduling
Or the lawsuits that you have caused
1 ameriwaste
2 glen cove
Oh that's right you have an EXCUSE You were not the only one voting.
Toni Randall
Mayor
City of League City, Texas
************************************************************************
Please note, per the Texas Public Information Act, TexasGovernment Code Chapter 552.002(b) most email correspondencepertaining to city business is subject to "open records requests"and is considered the property of the public.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Who’s on first?
The discussions have been going on for a few months now and a few names are beginning to emerge as viable candidates for our city. Do you have any suggestions of who should run and who should not? It has been said that Tommy Cones is thinking about not running but we know that is a smoke screen because just like his embarrassingly beaten idol and worshiped leader Jerry Shults, he has no choice. He MUST run because he has too many promises to keep to his good old boys. Marc Edelman was spreading the rumor that he may run but why replace Tommy with a Tommy clone? Is it important to elect individuals who will work with our Mayor to move our city forward or should we reelect the two that continually try to obstruct our city’s progress for the sake of personal power, more roof tops and personal “pet” projects? Lastly what about attorneys on council? My goodness it seems that they are all the same. (Yes I do know a few good ones) They tell you what they think you want to hear to get elected and then they make concessions for the chosen few and not for the good of the majority of the city and the citizens just to get their “pet” projects approved.