Carole Keeton Strayhorn is still lying about Capital Metro. And now she’s harassing Cap Metro CEO Fred Gilliam, to boot.
Granted, Gilliam probably deserves some harassment – there’s no shortage of people in this community who think he should step down – but let’s badger him about real problems, not fictitious issues, shall we?
Strayhorn has been pounding the mayoral campaign trail with an allegation that $85 million to $110 million of Capital Metro funds promised for transportation projects has “vanished” from the transit agency’s coffers. She sent Gilliam an open records request demanding an accounting of this supposed problem, and he replied by sending recent financial audits of the agency. That didn’t mollify Crazy Carole one bit:
Wrote Strayhorn:
Your response to my request for information is not satisfactory. Time is short if you want to tell the people of Austin the truth before Saturday’s city elections. I know the answers to my questions are either sitting on your laptop or sitting in a folder on your desk. I still want to know what happened to the $85 million to $110 million for traffic improvements in our Austin area that has vanished while my two council opponents [Lee Leffingwell and Brewster McCracken] sat on the Cap Metro board. Capitol Metro is not being transparent and open.
And as I noted in a previous Newsdesk posting, this is complete and utter bullshit. (And we’ll ignore the lesser problem that she doesn’t know how to properly spell “Capital Metro.”)
That money is owed to the city of Austin and other local governments under an interlocal agreement – but it is not missing. Strayhorn is seizing upon the fact that Cap Metro has burned through its savings at an alarming rate in the past couple of years, spending substantial sums of money on commuter rail and other projects, and possibly putting its ability to pay the money to Austin in peril.
But the bottom line: The money simply hasn’t been paid out yet – it has not “vanished,” Capital Metro is current on all of its financial obligations, and as of this writing, Cap Met still plans to stick to its payment schedule. Some of the money doesn’t even come due until 2013, plus there is a provision that allows payments “as funds are available.”
Nice campaign strategy, Carole: Invent a problem that doesn’t exist, and then get outraged when public officials refuse to deal with it.
The text of Strayhorn’s letter:
May 7, 2009
Fred Gilliam
Capital Metro
HAND DELIVEREDMr. Gilliam:
Your response to my request for information is not satisfactory. Time is short if you want to tell the people of Austin the truth before Saturday’s city elections. I know the answers to my questions are either sitting on your laptop or sitting in a folder on your desk. I still want to know what happened to the $85 million to $110 million for traffic improvements in our Austin area that has vanished while my two council opponents sat on the Cap Metro board. Capitol Metro is not being transparent and open.
None of the previous audits and reviews address the most important questions I asked you to answer. Financial audits do not address many of the fundamental operating issues most important to the citizens: Is Cap Metro providing the most effective public transit service for the huge amount of tax dollars being spent? Is Cap Metro fulfilling its obligations by doing what it promised to do in a responsible, cost-effective manner?
Financial audits and most of the previous “reviews” determine whether procedures and presentation of financial results are in accordance with federal standards and with financial accounting standards. While this is important, they do not address Cap Metro’s performance regarding operating commitments such as projections of costs and schedule for major projects including Rapid Bus routes. For example: Cap Metro committed that the initial Rapid Bus route (North Lamar to South Congress) would open in 2007. It would serve many more passengers than the commuter train for a fraction of the costs. This route is now projected to open no earlier than 2011.
None of the questions I asked are unreasonable or complicated and answers should be readily available if Cap Metro truly wished to be transparent and open.
There are, of course, many more questions which are important regarding such things as the true major rail subsidies necessary for Cap Metro riders, and the degradation of the backbone bus system serving the vast majority of transit riders which serves mostly citizens who have no other choice.
Time is short, and I am again requesting your immediate attention and answers to the specific questions I asked of you and Cap Metro.
Sincerely,
Carole Keeton Strayhorn
This article appears in May 1 • 2009.