Monday, June 8, 2009


My view is, we should give Melissa Zamora and Rose Gowen a six month honeymoon before judging their actions on the Brownsville City Commission. There is a reality behind being an elected official that many people do not seem to understand. It is one thing to stand on the sidelines and play Monday morning quarterback, yet another to be in the circle of decision makers.

Here is an example - I personally believe that Zamora and Gown should push for an immediate end of the Brownsville Police Union litigation. It is time to pay the police what was promised to them. My view is a sideline view. But the reality is, in Executive Session Zamora and Gowen are going to be presented with numbers, lots of numbers, on the impact settlement will have on the budget - a budget which is bursting at the seams.

To pay what is owed to the police will mean cutting the budget of other departments, laying off people (this we can actually do - way too much dead wood in the City of Brownsville) or do the cardinal sin, propose a tax increase. So it is easy for me to say pay the police when I am not the one who has to decide who may loose their job, or to vote a tax increase which is a guaranteed one way ticket to the end of one’s political career.

Personally, I would pay the police and then order every department to cut personnel to pay for it. But here is the problem, every politician will rationalize - "If I can stay in office I can do more good for the people, than just solving this one issue with the police." This is the rationalization which always allows the politician to avoid the hard decisions.

The other day I heard Glenn Beck whining that he wished just one elected official would agree to tell the people what they need to hear and just make the hard decisions even though it means losing the next election. Yes, Glenny boy there was such a president - his name was Jimmy Carter. He warned us it was time to tighten our belts on the oil and gas issue. The guy you voted for Glenny boy, Ronnie Reagan told everyone "there he goes again" be happy and vote for me.
As is always the case, the people will demand the world and then vote out of office any politician who does not give it to them, all the while complaining about the budget and taxes. The people suck. My best advice to Zamora and Gowen - ignore the people - they’re idiots.


Anonymous said...

Bobby, I believe the suit is over with. I believe there was a signing ceremony a few commission meetings back. Keep up with the news, man. You are losing your touch.

BobbyWC said...

was it in the paper? But the example still stand as to the challenges in making decisions - they are never simple or black and white without consequences

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Was it in the paper is a good question. You wouldn't know. You've said recently you rarely read the paper. I think you may have mentioned that in one of your many diatribes against its publisher.

I don't remember reading a special article about it in the paper. It was mentioned in a Sunday EPT article critical of Sossi. Or do you still think she's an unfit journalist as you claimed sometime back.

Don't you recall Sossi giving himself credit for negotiating the end to the lawsuit? He used it as evidence of his good work for the city and excusing his one bad day. Remind me if you ever criticized the city's new attorney for not wanting to show up because of unknown (well maybe to you but not to me) personal reasons. Maybe I missed your critique or support of Sossi.

It shouldn't matter if it is in the paper, Bobby. You are a source of and for news. You shouldn't need the paper. The lawsuit ended over a month ago. It was an action item on an open city agenda. Don't you read those? There was an impromptu signing ceremony led by our mayor. It's one reason why Sorola had an ad in the paper, which you probably didn't read, essentially implying funny business in the police endorsement of Cisneros.

How is it an example of anything other than you not knowing something as important as stopping a costly appeal and higher attorneys fees? Are you blind or ignorant to your own causes? Are you claiming there are challenges in making decisions that have already happened? By a former city commissioner no less? I demand you give Commissioner Cisneros and all of the commission credit for ending the appeals process.

Changing the subject, Bobby, with a new commission coming in, I believe the mayor must decide on retaining or appointing new positions on the commission. Do you agree? Who would make a good Mayor Pro Tem or Deputy Mayor with the new commission in place next week?

Anonymous said...

was it in the paper?

not to my knowledge, but then the paper does not advertise everything.

The police and fire mediation was going on while electgions were happening and is a done deal.

BobbyWC said...

To the angry Anony - you are wrong about stopping an expenseive appeal - the last I reported on the issue was the oral argument - once you reach oral argument it means you have paid out 100% of the costs of appeal.

I just checked the history at the court of appeals - yes the case settled, but not because Cisneros did anything - it settled after Oral argument which means the Court of Appeals left the lawyers for the city feeling like they lost.

While it is true I never read about the settlement anywhere - it is also true you are a liar by claiming the city and Cisneros saved the costs of an expensive appeal - they settled after paying 100% of the costs associated with the appeal

this means the City Commission under Cisneros guidance cost the taxpayers a fortune for no damn good reason.

Bobby Wc