RULES, WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING RULES!

 

October 3^rd, I addressed the Navigation District over its handling of the Application for a Place on the Ballot deadline by Tommy Moore and Keith Barrett.  My presentation covered nearly 2 pages.  At 3 minutes, Chairman Dieckow told me time was up and held up his phone as evidence of having timed me.  I was nowhere near finished and told him so.  He said I had used my 3 minutes and told me to wrap it up quickly.  A few seconds later, he cut me off again.  Since the meat of my presentation concerned Tommy who was absent, I chose a break point and sat down.  I would take it back up at the meeting on the 17^th.

 

A few days after that meeting, I acquired the Navigation District’s RULES OF PROCEDURE, CONDUCT AND DECORUM.  Article IV, Public Participation in Meetings, Section 2 reads: Each member of the public who appears before the Commission shall be limited to five (5) minutes to make his or her remarks.  When called upon yesterday by Dieckow, I asked for a point of order and handed him the Rules, pointing out that I should have 5 minutes and not 3.  He looked up at me and said “you have 3 minutes”.  I objected and said I would stop speaking when I was finished.  I started my presentation and within seconds, Tommy was talking to Malcomb loud enough for me to hear.  Frustrated, I asked Tommy to shut up.  I admit it was not my best choice of words and I think I reacted exactly as he wanted me to.

 

This is just another case of the District ignoring the rules.  They ignore Texas Open Meeting’s Act rules, Robert’s Rule of Order, Public Information Act Rules, Election Deadline rules and in this case their own rules.  I noted many rules violations in previous Posts.  And now for another.

 

A friend of mine, Sterling Frank signed up to speak in the October 3^rd meeting also.  Sterling questioned the absence of financial data: Balance Sheet, Income Statement and comparison of Actuals to Budget.  Dieckow told him they cover those items in the 2^nd meeting of each month.  Sterling attended the meeting yesterday as well and when the Agenda items Accounts Payable and Treasurer’s reports were covered, Sterling spoke up.  He asked about balance sheet, income statement, and budget related reports that Dieckow said at the prior meeting would be reviewed.  This meeting Dieckow told him he could sign up to receive them by email and told him to stop by the office and provide his email address.  Tommy echoed, “we’ll sure get them to you.”  Why weren’t they reviewed at this meeting as Malcomb promised?  Sterling went to the office and was met by Keith Barrett.  Keith told him the office was just too short staffed to do the reports on this short of notice.  Any off the shelf office accounting software can produce this set of reports with a single keystroke.  So, what’s the rest of the story?

 

I researched Minutes recorded on their website until they stopped recording them in May of 2021.  There was nothing recorded showing they reviewed any financials or budget matters monthly.  There are only 2 possible conclusions to be drawn.  Either they do not review financials or budgets at all in the course of a year or they do so in Closed Session.  The sections of the Texas Open Meetings Act they utilize to justify closed meetings do not cover discussions of financial matters.  Those are clearly open meeting issues for the public to see.  But then again as they have shown, they can’t be bothered by rules.  And Transparency is not a part of their vocabulary.