Saturday, December 1, 2012


Back in April 2012, I discussed the key $35,000 threshold - contracts under $35,000 do not need the city commission's approval.  This means private companies can be hired to do any number of things for the city with little to no oversight by the city commission.

Here is part of my original post.

"The most Tony Martinez has to offer these veterans is nothing. He has no vision for a better Brownsville. The remodeling jobs - the handful which exist are already awarded. They all will be under $35,000 so no open bidding will be required. Pay attention people - the mayor along with his corrupt compadres on the city commission can insist that Cabler makes sure all of the contracts go to their compadres without any bidding. They can give endless contracts to a handful of people so long as they are all under $35,000. This is not a vision for progress. It is a policy of handing out masa y grasa to friends and family, while ignoring any possible vision for Brownsville."

This is where people are missing the mark.  I will bet the farm a large number of the contracts under $35,000 can be tied to Tony Martinez's friends and associates, along with friends and associates of any number of the city commissioners.

For this scam to continue all it takes is a city attorney and city manager willing to play along.  This is exactly the model for contract rigging which is used at BISD.  There is nothing new here. 

Based on my internal research some city commissioners have had their hands slapped for asking too many questions.  City employees have been given stern looks over the wrong questions.

The fundamental problem remains - no vision.  Tony Martinez has zero vision for Brownsville beyond more bars downtown and chump change contracts for his friends and associates.  The mayor can point to nothing he has done or proposed which has as its purpose the creation of an economic engine to move the city forward. 

If our leaders were focused in on a real vision for Brownsville, they would not have time to bother with these petty contracts.

1 comment:

BobbyWC said...

I do not disagree with your comment - I suspect is it 100% correct, but I cannot allow for defamation of a business on allegations I have not verified

Bobby WC