by Alex de Marban
While
Brigid Shea is doing her best to get the city’s ethical rulebook thrown at Eric
Mitchell, Ronney Reynolds confirms reports that he intends a run at the mayoral
seat in 1997, and Bruce Todd denies incessant rumors that he’s leaving office
early to seek a job in D.C.
Those affairs and more offered a stimulating intermezzo to a council meeting
stripped of a good portion of its dramatic potential, due to an absence by Max
Nofziger that caused councilmembers to delay the more controversial items on
the agenda until Nofziger’s vote returned. Winning a reprieve is Austin’s
homeless population, which anticipated third and final passage of Todd’s
“encampment” ordinance to outlaw sleeping and camping in public areas. Ditto
for lobbyists, who are the target of a proposal from the Ethics Commission to
require that they – whether compensated for their efforts or not – adhere to a $25 campaign contribution limit. Of course the proposal may, as
Mitchell likes to say, just “look good and sound good” since the only mechanism
to assure honest disclosure of compensation will be the conscience of the
lobbyist.
“Good faith” being the backbone of ethical laws, the ever-skeptical Shea isn’t
waiting around for city staff to determine whether a city subcontract held by
Mitchell’s firm, Wormley, Mitchell & Associates, should be voided. “Any
councilmember who’s doing business with the city or gets financial benefit from
the city should have their contract nullified,” asserts Shea.
As mentioned ad nauseum in this column, the ordinance states simply
that no councilmember shall receive financial benefit from any city contract.
But Mitchell’s firm is expected to receive $6,000 to provide insurance for an
airport construction project. The contract was awarded in December; Mitchell
voted to approve it. Mitchell would not return phone calls on this issue.
“It’s outrageous that this kind of thing is going on,” Shea says. “What kind
of confidence does that give the public if councilmembers can vote to give
themselves contracts?”
City Manager Jesus Garza, on the other hand, has explained that insurance
providers are peripheral to a project and should not be considered
subcontractors. Over the summer, he promised an ordinance to clarify the issue.
That has not been accomplished. Meanwhile, insurance providers are still listed
on applications for numerous city projects as potential subcontractors.
So last week, Shea took matters into her own hands and asked City Attorney
Andrew Martin to clarify the ordinance. According to Shea, Martin, who couldn’t
be reached last week, promises that a clarification of the rules is underway.
If so, Shea, who acknowledges that she consumes much of her job watchdogging
other councilmembers, says she will probably not rest until the contract is
nullified or explicitly permitted by city law.
And though her political beliefs often clash spectacularly with Mitchell’s,
she insists that her motives are based on principle. “I would do the same if
Gus or Jackie had a contract. I find it scandalous.” But almost most
importantly, she says, is her concern that the alleged conflict of interest
could “put the city in jeopardy of losing federal funding” since the feds are
helping to finance the new airport.
n
Speaking of D.C., the City Hall rumor mill has enveloped everyone
from councilmembers to top-level city staff in a thick intrigue that has the
mayor quitting before the expiration of his term in 1997 to take a post in the
Clinton Administration. Job security and the advancement of a political career,
then, would probably not be what the mayor has in mind. Instead, attempts to
explain the alleged move range from the absurd, like the mayor’s disdain for
the city, to the somewhat plausible, as in he just wants a higher wage.
Todd, for his part, laughingly dismisses the whisperings as so much
gemcrackery. If he were to leave office early, he says, he would work for “The
Sam & Bobby Show” and the only thing he would run for would be “the county
line.”
But the scuttlebutt, which has circulated through the corridors of City Hall
for years, may increase in frequency now that Reynolds has informed his
colleagues that it’s his “intention [stress on intention, please] to run for
mayor” in 1997. To some, making preparations for a campaign so early in the
game only signifies that Reynolds and Todd have conspired a cabal worthy of the
PRI, the party that has ruled Mexico for six decades. The line goes that Todd
has given Reynolds the thumbs up to replace him. The result may be a special
election that will catch potential opponents off guard.
An even more humorous and, perhaps, frightening explanation, since it’s making
the rounds of top-level city administrators, has it that Todd will take a
different PRI-like gambit and knight Mayor Pro Tem Gus Garcia as the new mayor.
Of course, before he could appoint a councilmember to his seat, Todd would have
to successfully execute a coup d’�tat, then declare himself
sovereign emperor of Austin.
Regardless, the certainty in all this is that Reynolds has zeroed in on the
mayoral seat in spite of other previously announced occupational dreams, like
State Representative Susan Combs’ job. It also means that Reynolds will
continue in his role as Mitchell’s white shadow, sailing in the frictionless
vacuum created by his colleague’s momentum while loading up the support of
Mitchell’s increasingly large following of African-Americans. It also means
that Reynolds will try to shore up his self-annointed position as the city’s
fiscal warrior and childrens’ advocate.
Reynolds, who would not expound on his mayoral bid except to say, “People
shouldn’t be concerned now about what’s going on for mayor,” improved his
status as childrens’ advocate this week, when he requested that the council
donate $1,600 to the “Children Giving to Children Parade.” Reynolds won only
the support of Jackie Goodman and his “other half,” Mitchell.
The rest of the councilmembers held fast their promise not to, as Shea say,
“nickel and dime” the city’s excess sales tax account “to death,” at least not
until March of next year. Reynolds then announced that he and Mitchell would
pay for the project out of their own pockets. The mayor and Goodman promised to
chip in, too.
n
In other action, the council unanimously voted to make Vision
Village, a multi-age rehabilitation project that Mitchell is pushing, eligible
for more than $1.25 million in financial assistance from the city. And, except
for a Mitchell abstention, the council unanimously passed the mayor’s handgun
ordinance that bars guns in city facilities.
n
This week in council: Max Nofziger returns; a public hearing at
5:30pm on Eric Mitchell’s CURE (Central Urban REdevelopment) to revive downtown
through fee waivers and other redevelopment incentives; and the third, and
final, reading on the encampment ordinance.
This article appears in December 8 • 1995 and December 8 • 1995 (Cover).