January 20, 2016
Column by Nelson Thibodeaux
This is my opinion and just that an opinion….
On January 5, 2016, after multiple efforts to obtain information via Open Records requests only to be met with; “No Responsive Documents” answers on the majority of requests, as a Citizen of Colleyville, per the City Charter, I finally filed a potential Conflict of Interest Complaint LNO Cover Sheet Complaint. (Hit the Back Arrow to Return to this page)
At the Council “Pre-Council” meeting the issue was brought up for discussion. The City Attorney’s opinion was the complaint was baseless and besides the statues call for a complaint to be filed within 15 days of the event AND the Comprehensive Plan was voted on December 15, 2015; therefore the Conflict Complaint was file 5 days late, so the council could just reject out of hand.
Concerning the Comprehensive Plan, the City Attorney stated; “Everybody in Colleyville was affected and the City Manager was not affected any more or any less.” Yes, I will agree with the City Attorney everyone in Colleyville was or will be affected. EXCEPT, that ignored the first paragraph of the complaint concerning the City Manager’s obtaining of investment properties in Colleyville.
What appeared to be obviously “pre-orchestrated,” the Mayor ask the City Manager if she would agree to an “Independent Investigation?” To which Jennifer Fadden, City Manager stated she has always been ethical and of course would agree to this type of investigation. Conversation was held by the City Attorney with the Mayor and the Mayor concluded and got a consensus that “outside counsel” would be hired.
However, the focus on the Comprehensive Plan is a “red herring,” because any reasonable person can ascertain the real question is about the property FIRST; then a decision can be determined about further Conflict of Interests including the seemingly lock step postures of the City Manager and Mayor David Kelly, on the provisions found in the Plan.
In addition, I further clarified my concern about a targeted investigation, with additional correspondence sent to the City Secretary, City Manager and all Council Members in order to focus on the major issue at hand. This was faxed to the City Secretary around 10 am, January 20, 2016:Complaint Clarified. (Hit the Back Arrow to Return to this page)
I spoke during Citizen Comments last evening, see the video on top by clicking on the image.
3 Comments
Rick Paddock
What an independent investigation will reveal is the timing of the City Managers purchase of properties in the City, what she knew that others were not privileged to know, and if she disclosed her investment purchases to the City Mayor at the time as part of her obligation as required by local and State laws.
The fact that the filing of a conflict of interest complaint doesn’t mean she’s guilty, but it does imply there is reason enough to call for an independent investigation which the Mayor suggested. I can only guess that Mayor Kelly is doing this to try and insulate himself from any liability if there is wrongdoing on her part.
As for the 15 day requirement, if the City Manager has acted inappropriately sometime in the past to purchase investment properties in the City, how is a citizen to know that fact at the time it happened much less to file such a complaint within 15 days of the occurrence? If the suspicion of impropriety is unfounded, the City Council must find a way and take the lead to plug the leak of distrust and division among its citizens.
Bobby Lindamood
I’m in total shock of the information you brought forth in citizen comments.
Have you found out why the protect glade road PAC ran by Lewis Miller was allowed Information and why your request was delayed?
Also, it’s unbelievable and disgusting that a “safety issue” about Glade road was manufactured by a sitting city councilman. (Please announce who it was so we can hold that person accountable!) This shows the city used confusion to sway the elections and the Glade vote.
What a shame!
Second.
It’s it common practice to have the city attorney look into lawsuits that do not pertain to the city? I’m at a loss to think the city attorney looked over my lawsuit with Taylor and charged the city taxpayers for advice. When did this happen? What was the conclusion of the attorney? Who presented this case to the attorney? So many questions to ask. This smells fishy and I think “greater powers to be” above the city level should look heavily into these actions, should it be unethical practices.
Wow – Just wow!
Editor - Nelson Thibodeaux
The alleged delay in providing, under the Texas Open Records statues, as well as the Freedom of Information Act, was so the City could determine if, in the release of correspondence with citizens, their emails could be revealed. Clearly this information Was not even requested, simply the contents with names. I have no indication why or if Lewis Miller received information that LNO did not receive. Nor is there an understanding of why Miller was so high profile and belligerent during the campaign, other than to assume it was for Miller’s passionate support of Michael Taylor for council.
The Councilman who was the most involved, was not even on the ballot last year, Chuck Mogged. All the information as presented to City Council is documented in emails obtained via Open Records from the City, as is the attorney billing. Therefore, WITHOUT A DOUBT, City Staff members KNEW the information provided by Chuck Mogged was a “false narrative” that he concocted when he announced to the City Manager and Staff that this was going to be his safety “angle” used on the Glade Road debate. He claimed there was a 31% increase from over the previous year for accidents on Glade Road, when in fact accidents had been LESS not more on Glade. And just announced by the Colleyville Police Department, accidents on Glade Road from 2014 to 2015 actually were 23% less! The fact that City Staff knew and Mogged, and apparently the Mayor, Taylor and Coplen all knew this was a false narrative shows how the lines have become blurred in Colleyville from objective city employees to city employees supporting a political agenda.
It is certainly not common practice for a city attorney to bill the city for lawsuits that do not involved with City of Colleyville. Upon asking for the information via Open Records, LNO was informed the City Attorney said the billing was “in error” and he would “reimburse” the city.
This explanation and the reason this was on the City Attorney’s bill must fit the alternative universe the City Administration and a City Attorney billing the city thousands of dollars AND BEING PAID EVEN FOR A BILLING A LUDICROUS option of REVIEWING A LAWSUIT TOTALLY ANCILLARY TO THE INTEREST OF THE TAXPAYERS OF COLLEYVILLE. At minimum how outraged should citizens be that these bills are paid without scrutiny of purpose?