Was I ever mistaken!
For some reason, Mr. Nelson chose as his parting action to move for a proclamation of the city honoring past city administrator Chris Reed. This was handled poorly from the start and why Mr. Nelson wished to do so I find puzzling. The item was added to the last minute supplemental agenda, so obviously it was poorly coordinated to begin with. The real question though is why was it done at all? Anybody that has ever observed League City politics knows that Mr. Reed's tenure with the city began under questionable circumstances and caused numerous controversies through two mayoral administrations. Ultimately he was removed from office by executive action of council for reasons that to this day are held secret. Although I am personally aware of a number of Mr. Reed's misdeeds, I do not know the reason(s?) that ultimately forced council to remove him. I do know that whatever the cause for his termination, it was of sufficient severity and controversy that it was stupidly foolish of Mr. Nelson to reopen this old wound. Mr. Reed got an incredibly generous severance, landed a nice new job, and League City government has functioned better than ever. Mr Nelson should have known to leave well enough alone.
Given that Mr. Reed brought his attorney with him to the council meeting tonight, obviously he and Mr. Nelson knew that this move would be controversial and a lighting rod for trouble. Realistically, given Mr. Nelson's mostly contentious relationship with the mayor and most of council, this whole thing looked as though he had deliberately engineered this stunt as a parting poke in the eye at his enemies.
I've been content not knowing why council ousted Mr. Reed. It's old news, it's not my business, the city is running better, and we've all moved on. Except, apparently, Mr. Nelson. If the city is to make a proclamation honoring Mr. Reed, then it does become the business of the citizens to know why he was ousted. Either leave it be or tell it all.
Obviously, Mr. Nelson's fellow council members felt that his proclamation was inappropriate and moved to table it rather than dredging up the past. It was at this point that Mr. Nelson sacrificed the integrity of his legacy. Faced with determined opposition to his move by the rest of council, he threw a temper tantrum. There's really no other way to put it. He tried repeatedly to speak out of turn, even trying to shout down the mayor. When he failed to get his way, he walked out of the council meeting never to return and followed by Mr. Reed, his attorney, and his entourage.
Mr. Nelson's parting shot is particularly galling given that this council has shown him unprecedented latitude in forgiving his excessive absences from council this past term. By rights, he should have long ago been removed from office for failure to uphold his responsibilities and replaced by special election, but instead his absences were generously forgiven in order for him to finish out his years of service with the dignity of an elder statesman. In light of his antics this evening, he should have been give no such opportunity as there was nothing dignified about his parting actions.
Mr. Nelson's tantrum was one of the most embarrassing moments I've seen in politics. There is nothing dignified about a man in his 70's acting like a two year old.
Truly a classless way to finish his career. I am sorry he chose this way to make his exit and sorry I had to witness him do it.
A sad way for us to remember him, and a sad addition to our history.
Catch the re-runs on Channel 16 or here:
http://www.leaguecitycouncilvideos.com/
once the 5/11 meeting gets posted.
Jeff Hagen
27 comments:
Mr. Hagen,
I agree completely with you. Mr. Nelson should have left well enough alone.
Mr. Hagen,
Makes me want to ask, "Jim what were you thinking?"
Anyone - When does the rerun air on city channel?
I will save rest of my comments until after I view the event.
Out of deference to Mr. Nelson's service to the country and the community, he should have been allowed to speak and if the Mayor and Council did not want to support his proclamation should have done so at the appropriate time during the process. This was obviously a planned move by the mayor to shut down the last thing Mr. Nelson wanted to do at the end of his 6 year career on council.
In the first place, I recall very well the times past when Mr. Nelson & his friend were bitter foes of Mr. Reed and clashed openly with him in council meetings. It is perfectly obvious that Mr. Nelson's newfound alliance with Mr. Reed exists only to the extent of perceiving a common enemy. This was nothing more or less than a political stunt engineered by Mr. Nelson to deliver a parting shot on his way out, but it blew up in his face.
As for Mr. Reed, despite leaving a trail of serious mistakes in a job for which by his own admission he was not qualified, he was allowed to leave League City with a free year's salary and benefits and his reputation intact (with the reasons he was required to resign kept secret) and his resume enhanced such that he quickly landed a similar job. He received benefit from this city far beyond what most of us can imagine even after causing a great deal of problems for the city. That should have been more than enough for him. To the extent Mr. Reed was embarrassed last night, it is entirely Mr. Nelson's fault for poking a stick in a beehive that should have just been left well enough alone. This whole stunt was a juvenile act on Mr. Nelson's part and he had to have known that it would go badly.
Mr. Reed should content himself with counting his huge piles of undeserved money, thank his lucky stars, and leave the past behind.
Mr. Nelson should have acted his age and not stormed out of the meeting when he didn't get his way.
As for deference to speak, none was due. As I understand the rules, once the motion to table was made and seconded, it had to be voted on without debate.
Jeff
Mr. Smith,
The city website says that council meeting reruns are on Channel 16 at 10AM and 6PM. I'm not sure how soon they get the latest meeting running.
Link to Channel 16 schedule
Jeff
Thanks for stepping up and showing some courage, Jeff. The losers and the enemies of our new administration are groping for straws now. If all they can muster is some nasty little talk about a bridge and a gun range (see other blog), we're on a roll.
League City is finally sweeping the cronies out, and the sour grapes just can't stand it that they've been whipped and they're history.
This was a last ditch attempt to rub our nose in some dirty past, and it backfired, big time. Tsk tsk.
This has been a long, long time coming.
Pirate Paul, you forgot to mention the tactless attempt to suggest a possible link between a young man's tragic death and the Mayor.
I'm all for Jez handing out a heroic citizen award. (Too bad CR wasn't shopping at Krogers many years ago when TN happened to be there.) I'd even go so far as to suggesting Mayor Toni make a short statement noting Chris Reed's actions as a citizen should serve as a guide for all citizens (of course if you don't have the physical training, don't get combative - call 911 instead and let the ounk know it's done), especially considering the recent tragic death of a homeless good samiritan in NY a couple of weeks ago.
But for Jim to plan on making a public spectacle knowing the past history is simply beyond common sense.
I have one question that I would like to have answered.
Who initially contacted Chris Reed that a "Chris Reed Day" was going to proclaimed in League City at the LC council meeting Tuesday night?
Chris, now that Marc has turned his blog over to the mysterious "Max Kelly", would you consider revealing the true identity of Max Kelly?
Mr. Campbell,
If you look at this http://www.youvebeenleft.com/ website and view the last entries, by connecting the dots, you may get a good idea of who “Max Kelly” really is. I gave “max” my word and if you know me then you understand.
Do we really care who Max Kelly is ? The other blog had to shut down again because their cauldron of hate was spilling over. The talking bobble heads were once again out of control. This bad behavior unnerves the local developers and their interests.
Enter "Max Kelly" or is it Terry Matula, no relationship to Sherrie Matula (from Clear Lake)? I met him once at Molly's Pub. He certainly put on a good show. I will never truly know. Maybe Max is the medicated Jekyll of our own Mr. Hyde. Will we ever know? The bigger question is why do we really care?
The tale will end, when Max exits (again) due to business (again) and the bobble heads will return.
That's my story and I am sticking to it.
Elaine Kosty
My thoughts are that in order for a political blog to have any legitimacy, the true identity of the host is imperative. Max Kelly's blog history and motives have only been to stir up $#!t.
Thanks for the hint Chris ;-).
Mr. Campbell,
I agree with your thought regarding knowing the identity of people who are running a blog. If you have to hide then you can’t be that proud of what you have to say.
Mr. Kelly,
Regarding your statement “This was obviously a planned move by the mayor to shut down the last thing Mr. Nelson wanted to do at the end of his 6 year career on council.” Are you saying that the opens meeting act was violated? If you believe the statement you made then you should take your evidence to the D.A. I would hate to think that you would make such a statement without “concrete evidence”
Morgan Campbell:
Your point is well taken, but where is the legitimacy?
"You've been left" ; "The League City Blog" ; "The Think Tank" ; and now "Max Kelly". Have these aliases changed the outcome of an election?
Their bad behavior has cost them 200 more votes.
Legitimacy?
The host hides in plain sight. I look forward to next year's un-election, and another new blog with with the same old agenda.
Elaine
So Chris, are you saying that you are not Max?
I have been very clear that I am not max.
Now I will say that "you’ve been left" was helpful in spreading the word about Jerry Shults and Chris Reed as they made some very poor decisions for our city. But the Max Kelly of old is gone forever.
From the GDN letter to editor..
"In League City, the city council tabled a proclamation honoring former City Administrator Chris Reed in a 4-1 vote.
Council Shows Lack Of Professionalism
To the League City Council: All of you were completely embarrassing Tuesday night with your lack of professionalism regarding Chris Reed’s proclamation. I would only suggest, if it had been your wife, daughter, or loved one he helped, would you have the same opinion?
Even previous mayors did not stoop so low — not to honor a fellow citizen who placed himself in harm’s way for another human being. It was a proclamation, not an action item!
The action taken Tuesday violated the very resolution passed by previous council members on “placement of items on agendas.” I would suggest you read the resolution.
Also, for the members who abstained, look at the city charter, the one you stated you honored.
The charter is very clear that when you abstain from voting, you must give a valid reason for not voting. For the individuals who abstained, can you give me your reasons? I wonder why your city attorney or city manager doesn’t pick up on this. It’s City Charter 101.
For the members who voted to table the item, it’s obvious you have nothing more than a political agenda or are just a puppet to the mayor. In any case, your actions or lack thereof were nothing less than despicable.
To Jim Nelson: Thank you for your attempt to honor a 20-year-plus citizen and employee for the city.
Tommy Cones
League City"
----------------------------------
Tommy talking about lack of professionalism on council makes me want to puke. I can't help but wonder if Jim was played one last time by the puppeteer.
bhl, i think JN holds the record for walking out on meetings. We all still remember when TC and Mayor JH walked out and guess who was at the end of the leash? yes, JN. Wonder if TC ever reviewed some of the recorded meetings and the numerous times he embarassed the city, citizens and fellow members. How quickly we forget.
Texas Ethics Commission (TEC)
Order Date – April 21, 2010
Order and Resolution (14 pages)
James E. Nelson - Respondent
“This order and agreed resolution describes violations that the commission has determined are neither technical nor de minimis.”
TEC Imposed $500 civil penalty.
Link to TEC report:
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/sworncomp/2009/290339.pdf
Good one Paul, again great research. Tell me Pauly how hard is it to file an ethics complaint? Right, pretty easy. Why didn't you post the violation Paul? So Paul tell us have you had a bit too much to drink lately and went talking to a friend? Would you like to discuss here in open?
Anonymous Joe
Are you one of those who think ethic violations are a joke?
It’s state law and elected officials are being held accountable.
Not only in Galveston County but throughout the State officials are being required to lawfully and correctly file campaign finance reports.
Sure, I would be glad to open a discussion on Texas Ethics Commission and the pesky laws that govern elections.
Ask Mr. Nelson if he thinks TEC violations are a gag.
Excuse me Paul maybe you should read the post again? Not what I said. BUT you seemed to skip my question? Why do you avoid it?
Pauuuuullll come out and plaaaaayyy. Mr. Hogan can Paul play tonight?
Joe maybe because your questions are obviously the product of a mad troll.
chirp, chirp, chirp
Post a Comment