Monday evening, the Richardson City Council held a public hearing on the proposed budget for fiscal year 2009-2010. There was much discussion about overtime expenses, car allowances, staff salaries and other areas to keep costs under control. New councilman Bob Macy's budget concern seemed to be the cost of answering the public's questions and open records requests as required by state law. My transcript of his remarks (Item 5 Part 2 beginning 29:10):
Bob Macy: "Uh I have a comment to, to, I'd like to bring up. The uh, we have a lot of, I'm glad that we have people that come up in front of us to have comments and they take their time to look into situations and make recommendations and, uh, I, I'm complimentary about that but I also think we need a line item or a budget item to keep track of the time that the city staff has to, to, work with and prepare results, prepare answers to the questions that come up, and uh, I don't know what the magnitude of that would be. Bill, I don't know, do you have any kind of recommendation on what kind of a magnitude a budget item would be for that?"Love that Bob.[Bill Keffler's answer not transcribed]
Macy: "Well, do you think maybe, uh, that there ought to be some accountability on that because it's taking time from your staff that, I mean, they're hired to do a certain job so when they take time to answer these questions it ought to be something they can charge to or get credit for in addition to their regular job."
[Bill Keffler's answer not transcribed]
Macy: "I'm hearing that you don't think we need a line item, a particular item."
[Bill Keffler's answer not transcribed]
Macy: "I'm just, uh, putting out the notion that we ought to have a budget item for that. If you think it's not necessary or not advisable, that's fine."
[Bill Keffler's answer not transcribed]
Macy: "Is there a level that it becomes onerous, I mean, you know, is too much? Do we have any kind of control on, you know, when it's normal and when it gets to be, you know, out of reason?"
[Bill Keffler and rest of council's answers not transcribed]
16 comments:
After I read your post, I had to watch the video myself. Very precise reporting, Ed. What is this elderly man thinking? His disjointed comments, barely understandable, gave the distict impression that he thought that this entire "Open Records Act" was a real bother.
Someone needs to clue Mr. Macy in on the fact that the city has no choice in complying with THE LAW. If the Open Records requests become excessive, then the city has the right to charge a minimal amount to recover their expenses. And, from what I understand, they occasionally do.
I had my issues with the woman that he unseated, but, the more I watch this guy, the better Ms. Hayes looked in comparison to him. If it is true that Mr. Eisemann and his associates talked Mr. Macy in to running - or didn't discourage him - then they did Mr. Macy a huge disservice. Perhaps, in his prime, he could have been a good councilmember, but, today, he isn't - and I doubt he ever will be. "Poor Macy"
The Richardson Coalition recommended Bob Macy over Pris Hayes because of his supposed "fresh ideas." I don't know if this is what they had in mind.
Those ideas were fresh during WW2. Not so much now.
Does anybody see the hypocrisy in this brand of public service? What representative in their right mind would suggest the people should not be informed about the business being conducted in its name?
A 20% rise in public information requests is a reflection of the quality of communication between those conducting the business and those who desire to be informed. Clearly, the Coalition's preposterous position that the Richardson administration is "open" carries little weight in reality.
Instead of carrying on like the administration of public business in this town enjoys the secrecy of a private enterprise, our public servants need to get comfortable with the fact that it is our business we have given them the authority to conduct. That does not mean they can exclude the public, and dare them to make their disappointment known at the next election. That is at least one reason a couple lost their privileges in the last round.
In light of the poor job being done in the area of communication and production of records, might I suggest the best manner in which to provide public access to all the records would be to park them in a publicly-accessible repository in the basement of our public library. There, they could be secure and a clerk could be assigned to work on digitizing the lot for easier access via the Internet. Now, there is a worthwhile, full-time job to add to the budget!
It's wrong to criticize Bob Macy's age. His competence, intelligence, imagination, leadership, etc., on the other hand, are fair game for review.
Anonymous at 8/26/2009 7:16 AM, to be fair to the rest of the council, no one else supported Bob Macy's suggestion. Several mentioned the city's legal responsibility to answer the public's questions. Bill Keffler indicated a positive interest in doing so.
You're right, Ed - NO ONE, including Bill Keffler supported Bob Macy's ridiculous comments. I thought Steve Mitchell's comment about focusing on the proper staffing for the city secretary's office to accommodate the requests was right on.
Honestly, watching the video made me cringe - I suspect that this council and the city manager were pretty embarrassed for this this guy.
Note to the Richardson Coaltion: is this kind of "fresh" ideas that you thought Bob Macy would bring to the table? Surely, in your quest to oust the only councilWOMAN, you could have offerred up a better candidate.
No one should cricize anyone for their age. As a senior citizen, I can do things that I never thought that I would be able to do before I retired.
However, with that said, the thought of running for city council at the age of 81 is not something that I would ever do. OK - that's my choice - but, frankly, Macy should have never done this.
As a fellow senior, I believe that Bob Macy exhibits strong signs of dimensia or maybe alshiemer's disease - which frequently comes with advanced age. He has a great deal of trouble putting his thoughts in to words, as exhibited by his confusing comments on Monday night. And, even those rare comments that make sense are outdated and reflect thinking from long ago.
So, no one should cricize Bob Macy's age, but his advanced age is why he unable to serve effectively. When he decided to run - or those who encouraged him to do so - should have taken this in to consideration. My hope is that this poor man will simply resign and stop his public humiliation.
Anyone deciding to run at that age is either selfish or deluded. I'd have the same cricism of someone who is too young.
Andy - "Anyone deciding to run at that age is either selfish or deluded. I'd have the same cricism of someone who is too young."
I disagree totally.
If a young, middle-aged, or senior person can do the job (and get elected) then so be it. Ditto for sex, race, religion, orientation, whatever.
(I didn't vote for Mr. Macy, but it wasn't due to his age).
Good point, bloggermouse. However, I think that the point here is that Bob Macy is NOT doing the job. And, more than likely, the reason why is the effects of his advanced age - nearly 82 years old. I really want to believe that if he was a younger man, he'd be up for it - but not today. Could there be some 82 year old person out there who could serve effectively - perhaps - but it is NOT Bob Macy.
And, let me throw my 2 cents in on the Richardson Coalition talking this poor old soul in to running for this position. Honestly, since nearly all 15 of it's members are 70 years old or older, they probably didn't think anything about his age when they endorsed him for all of his "fresh" ideas.
While I don't support Mr Macy's comments, fishing requests that produce nothing and fuel paranoia cost the taxpayers more than they realize.
I would suggest that a bulk of taxpayer money spent on open record requests are these paranoia enhancing requests which end up proving nothing.
Further, these tin foil hat requests take time and money away from the reasonable requests.
I can hear the parrots singing in response. There will be insults of "Richardson Coalition" and all of that.
Bullsnot I say. If you are truly interested in transparency and accountability, then you would want to know how much of your money tin foil kooks waste. I don't want them wasting money any more than I want any elected or appointed person doing it.
Bloggermouse,
Every candidate should ask themselves what they are bringing to the table when they run.
For instance:
In the case of a young individual (21 yrs), what makes them think they are qualified to run for a position that requires some amount of life experience?
In the case of an elderly candidate, are they fully able to meet the physical and mental demands for the position?
I pick on the 2 obvious questions for candidates of a specific age, but such questions would apply to ANY candidate of ANY age.
The last person who posted as Anonymous still doesn't seem to get it. Regardless of who requests a document from the city, regardless of whether they are a tin-foil hat person, and regardless of the cost (which the city can recover), the city is REQUIRED BY LAW to provide it.
If you don't like the Texas Open Records Act, you should speak with your legislator or the one you probably campaigned so hard for, Angie Chen-Button. Only the TX legislature can change this law with the governor's signature. Fat chance of that happening....
So, last anonymous aka RC, rather than calling everyone who requests documents a tin-foil hat person - which they may or not be - why not focus on getting the resources to provide these documents and come up with more effective, less manpower intensive ways of procuring them - and less time on name calling. Capiche?
And, honestly, your comments sound strangely like Mr. Macy's (although you state you disagree with him - yeah, righ). I suspect that you and Mr. Macy are BFF.
"the city is REQUIRED BY LAW to provide it.
If you don't like the Texas Open Records Act, you should speak with your legislator or the one you probably campaigned so hard for, Angie Chen-Button. Only the TX legislature can change this law with the governor's signature. Fat chance of that happening...."
More tin foil hat-ness or just plain dishonesty. At no time did I express displeasure with the Open Records Act. I expressed displeasure with people wasting my money and using some holy state law right as a writ to do so.
That people have a right to do something is not the same thing as asking if someone ought to do something.
I'm sorry pal, but if an elected person's use of public money can be scrutinized so can an unelected person's use of my money and I can speak about it. If you don't like that I'd suggest you should speak with your Senator or the one you probably campaigned so hard for (John Cornyn) and get him to revoke the First Amendment.
"rather than calling everyone who requests documents a tin-foil hat person..."
That's a lie. Nobody said anything like that.
Anonymous - let me respond to your most recent post.
"More tin foil hat-ness or just plain dishonesty. At no time did I express displeasure with the Open Records Act. I expressed displeasure with people wasting my money and using some holy state law right as a writ to do so."
Wow, so following state law is now called some "holy state law right as writ to do so"? That's interesting. I'm surprised that even the Richardson Coaltion would use terms like this. Like I said, the city has no choice, but to follow state law regardless of the cost.
"That people have a right to do something is not the same thing as asking if someone ought to do something."
If you have problem with these people making these requests, then you should address your frustrations with the offenders or the creators of the law - not the ones who have to follow it.
"I'm sorry pal, but if an elected person's use of public money can be scrutinized so can an unelected person's use of my money and I can speak about it. If you don't like that I'd suggest you should speak with your Senator or the one you probably campaigned so hard for (John Cornyn) and get him to revoke the First Amendment."
You addressing your concerns about open records requests to the city is pointless, as they must follow the law.
"'rather than calling everyone who requests documents a tin-foil hat person...'
That's a lie. Nobody said anything like that."
You have made references to "tin foil hat" numerous times in your post. Not sure how you can say this is a lie.
Children! We have laws because some take liberty with the rights of other people. It is plain as the nose on Keffler's face that government exercises the business of the people only because the people consented so. Unfortunately, there are many flimsy administrative laws that get abused, more so by public servants charged to uphold them than than citizens who are on the stink end of the stick.
Clinton said it best, "It depends on what is is."
There "IS" no argument that government was established to do those things individuals were not able for the common good. Somewhere we got away from building roads, water systems, electrical grids, and trash removal. Because they abused authority, our local government is involved in countless losing private enterprises.
The secrecy behind this form of governance results in public information requests. If you want a real cure for the problem of mounting cost of public information requests, open government properly and don't have so many secrets.
--doodah
Post a Comment