More on the Rules and the election
Published in The Brownsville Herald June 10, 2007
The news in the last two weeks has been full of stories of public officials not following their own rules and violating their oath of faithful service to the people they represent. This just not those instances where criminal activity has been discovered but instances where individuals have done things that look like conflicts of interest such as using job appointments to ensure political support or have benefited from a business relationship that can be influenced by the public office. In the case of the Port of Brownsville the report of the bridge examination indicated that employees and / or one of the Commissioners had signed checks for payments that were not approved by the “Board” and even though they were not even authorized to sign. Perhaps there were extenuating circumstances but still a violation of the rules in place and served to diminish the confidence in the management. The loss of confidence as a result of the apparent horrendous port mismanagement has been again been aggravated by some of the same players disregarding their own rules to appoint another Port CEO, that does not meet the requirements of the position. Mr. Campirano may turn out to be an excellent manager, but when there were no applicants that met the published requirements those requirements should have been publicly revised and the position re-announced. Instead the board has told us that they have no respect for the rules and will do what ever is more convenient. What little confidence I had in the management is even more rapidly being eroded, and reflects very poorly on anyone in authority that has acquiesced.
Before the system breaks down beyond repair, we in South Texas who depend on the maritime and transportation industries should seriously examine consolidating all the transportation related public facilities into an “authority” similar to those in other parts of the U.S. such as in Tampa, Detroit, Charleston, and Philadelphia with no taxing authority. The media has also reported that several members of the Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Board of Education have been indicted on a number of bribery and extortion related criminal charges. This scandal not only affects those communities but also casts a shadow on other communities as well. This has caused many of us who have watched on TV or attended BISD meetings where the enormous expenditures were discussed and mistakes noted, as well as hearing of questions related to the proper use or misuse of bond money. I recall one many such instances, raised by former board member Munoz, calling into question whether the proper service was completed for the payment received. In that case, even though staff had certified that the correct work was done, it appeared that the size of a parking lot was substantially smaller than was contracted for. Based on issues like that, Mr. Munoz suggested that all such contracts be examined by a forensic auditor (who does not get paid unless problems are found). No such action was taken! Why? When all of the above is taken into consideration more and more suspicion of the job our representatives are doing is supported. As I wrote previously in these pages in my article “Rules, Rules, Rules” on May 13, 2007. “This is just a very public symptom of the near anarchy we find in our society today….., …. the “rule of law” that is touted as most important to American society has been lost and laws are only followed by the suckers and then only when it is convenient.”
Unfortunately we get what we deserve by not voting or voting for folks without examining and considering the candidate. Currently, the local election season is still ongoing and we still have the opportunity to examine the candidates for the most influential positions in our community, that of mayor and a commissioner at large. I have made my decision based on the positions espoused and whether the candidate presented them in a clear unambiguous manner. I also looked for instances where the candidate tried to make issues of personal attacks, as I find that the media does a good job at bringing them to light and the candidates need not expend their precious resources on them. When I do see them, it appears to me that they are being used as a diversion from some other issue or other. At the end of it all, we must actually cast a ballot, not just talk about it. Just because the polling place isn’t just were we thought it was last time is no excuse. We need to make the effort to find the right place and not let administrative changes, possibly influenced by a candidate, affect the election. In a community such as ours where only 7 to 15% vote, the students at the University or possibly one of the extended families common to our community could determine how the community conducts its business. In such cases the chances, when all of the community is not heard, there may well be an increase in inept performance or worse as a result ;
unfortunately we have been seeing what “worse” is!