Paramount Theatre
King's Exposé Sloppy and Misleading
RECEIVED Tue., May 9, 2006
Dear Editor,
As two of five Rollingwood City Council members who have an intimate understanding of Rollingwood's contract with the Lower Colorado River Authority for the construction and operation of the city's wastewater system, imagine our surprise and dismay when we read Michael King's sloppy and misleading “Naked City” “exposé” of what's happening in Rollingwood in the May 5 edition of The Austin Chronicle [News].
Mr. King asserted that only 500 of 1,400 homes in Rollingwood have been hooked up to the city's new wastewater system. Well, there are only about 500 homes in Rollingwood, almost all of which are hooked up. The fewer than 10 homes not hooked up have owners who chose to stay on septic. The number 1,400 refers to the number of residents.
Mr. King stated that the cost of the wastewater system was “originally estimated at $7.2 million, the job came in at $17 million, although that has reportedly been reduced somewhat.” Well, the costs have been reduced much more than “somewhat.” In fact, instead of having monthly capital costs once projected to be $144,000, the city's monthly liability now stands at $70,000 and will remain unchanged at that level.
Mr. King stated that the motion to hire outside legal counsel for review of professional services contracts was made by Mayor Pro Tem Dale Dingley. As reflected in the council meeting minutes of March 27, Alderman Bill Hamilton made the motion, which was seconded by Alderman John Barton.
We have no idea what Mr. King means when he says “The issue is now complicated by revelations of apparent conflicts of interest involving Mayor Hollis Jefferies (up for re-election May 13).” The negotiated amendment to Rollingwood's contract with LCRA that was signed by the city and LCRA in September 2005 has no complications. After five months of negotiation, you can be assured that both parties are crystal clear about what the contract and the amendment contains. The contract and the amendment are not renegotiable. Likewise, there are no “revelations of apparent conflicts of interest” involving Mayor Jefferies – period. A year ago Mayor Jefferies voluntarily recused himself from negotiations with the LCRA because of a purely coincidental and tenuous connection between his employer and the LCRA, over which Mayor Jefferies had no control whatsoever. Mayor Jefferies was under no obligation to recuse himself. He did so to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Unfortunately, by including “conflicts of interest” in the same sentence as “Mayor Hollis Jefferies,” Mr. King engages in a wholly unwarranted character assassination of a public official nine days before that official stands for re-election.
Lastly, we also have no idea what Mr. King means when he says “Maybe the entire city needs to adjourn to a neutral venue.” We're sure his intention was not to somehow try to belittle one of the most appealing small towns in the state, if not the nation, nor the 1,400 residents who are very proud to call Rollingwood home.
As two of five Rollingwood City Council members who have an intimate understanding of Rollingwood's contract with the Lower Colorado River Authority for the construction and operation of the city's wastewater system, imagine our surprise and dismay when we read Michael King's sloppy and misleading “Naked City” “exposé” of what's happening in Rollingwood in the May 5 edition of The Austin Chronicle [News].
Mr. King asserted that only 500 of 1,400 homes in Rollingwood have been hooked up to the city's new wastewater system. Well, there are only about 500 homes in Rollingwood, almost all of which are hooked up. The fewer than 10 homes not hooked up have owners who chose to stay on septic. The number 1,400 refers to the number of residents.
Mr. King stated that the cost of the wastewater system was “originally estimated at $7.2 million, the job came in at $17 million, although that has reportedly been reduced somewhat.” Well, the costs have been reduced much more than “somewhat.” In fact, instead of having monthly capital costs once projected to be $144,000, the city's monthly liability now stands at $70,000 and will remain unchanged at that level.
Mr. King stated that the motion to hire outside legal counsel for review of professional services contracts was made by Mayor Pro Tem Dale Dingley. As reflected in the council meeting minutes of March 27, Alderman Bill Hamilton made the motion, which was seconded by Alderman John Barton.
We have no idea what Mr. King means when he says “The issue is now complicated by revelations of apparent conflicts of interest involving Mayor Hollis Jefferies (up for re-election May 13).” The negotiated amendment to Rollingwood's contract with LCRA that was signed by the city and LCRA in September 2005 has no complications. After five months of negotiation, you can be assured that both parties are crystal clear about what the contract and the amendment contains. The contract and the amendment are not renegotiable. Likewise, there are no “revelations of apparent conflicts of interest” involving Mayor Jefferies – period. A year ago Mayor Jefferies voluntarily recused himself from negotiations with the LCRA because of a purely coincidental and tenuous connection between his employer and the LCRA, over which Mayor Jefferies had no control whatsoever. Mayor Jefferies was under no obligation to recuse himself. He did so to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Unfortunately, by including “conflicts of interest” in the same sentence as “Mayor Hollis Jefferies,” Mr. King engages in a wholly unwarranted character assassination of a public official nine days before that official stands for re-election.
Lastly, we also have no idea what Mr. King means when he says “Maybe the entire city needs to adjourn to a neutral venue.” We're sure his intention was not to somehow try to belittle one of the most appealing small towns in the state, if not the nation, nor the 1,400 residents who are very proud to call Rollingwood home.
Alderman John Barton
Alderman Mike Wiley
Alderman Mike Wiley
[Michael King responds: I apologize for the error concerning the number of homes in "The City of Rollingwood," and it's been corrected on the Chronicle Web site. To describe the rest of what I reported in last week's “Naked City” – based almost entirely on city documents – as an "exposé," is flattering, but a bit overwrought.]