Some Baytown city officials are concerned that voters may reject the bonds they are planning to place on the ballot this November.
Baytown resident Byron Schirmbeck wrote an open letter to the city’s elected officials and administrators saying he shares their concerns, but for different reasons.
“Like you, I believe there is a chance that the voters will reject these bonds, but not for the same reasons you think they will,” wrote Schirmbeck. “Voters may see this as an opportunity to punish the poor decisions of the city.”
“If this bond is limited to basic infrastructure like roads and the much-needed water system upgrades, it would be a setback if that happens,” he wrote.
Schirmbeck explained that bonds are not in themselves good or bad; they are merely a financial tool, a way for the city to pay for large purchases over time. Bond debt must be repaid with interest by local property taxpayers.
However, Schirmbeck says city officials’ past actions have left residents skeptical that they will responsibly spend tax dollars approved in future bond propositions.
“You think they will fail because the voters are unreasonable and don’t know what is best for themselves,” wrote Schirmbeck.
Or you falsely believe that those [who] push back on your wasteful spending and failed vanity projects are “anti-government” or “never want anything nice.” Some of you see us as little more than an obstacle to your ambitions instead of the beneficiaries of your service.
“Your attitude may inspire voters to reject anything you propose as a way to punish you for the bad decisions you have made,” he wrote to city officials.
Schirmbeck pointed to reasons voters might reject a bond proposal “other than a detached and wrongheaded view of your fellow citizens.”
“If it fails, maybe it would be because you have demonstrated that you don’t listen to us,” he wrote, citing a “twice-failed golf course” that voters rejected but city officials pursued anyway—except Councilman Ken Griffith, whose warnings against a $1.9 million bailout for the golf course were overridden.
“If the bonds fail, maybe it will be because we see that the budget increased 77 percent in just over 10 years, yet we don’t have 77 percent more residents or 77 percent more first responders,” he stated. “Instead of an increase in services, you gave us cuts to basic city services and fee increases. Where did that increase go?”
“Or maybe it will be because the city is diverting at least $75 million in tax dollars to an unnecessary sports center after tying its own hands in secret negotiations with ExxonMobil,” he added.
“If they fail, maybe it will be because you only offer lip service about being transparent,” wrote Schirmbeck.
The reality is that you cut back on the time citizens are allowed to speak at council meetings, stonewall public information requests, and you dissolved the ethics commission only to bring it back to use it against a councilman [who] doesn’t go along with your agenda. You are finding ways to have fewer open committee meetings and you threaten citizen volunteers with removal if they talk about their committee and important agenda items. That isn’t transparency.
“If they fail, maybe it will be because the city demonstrates that it doesn’t trust us,” he wrote, noting the city had installed a “massive surveillance camera system that tracks and records the movements of all law-abiding drivers.”
“If you are right and the people vote no, will you accept your role in that? Will you show us that you have learned something moving forward? Will you work to win our trust back? Or will you instead shift blame to those who don’t trust you to have their best interests in mind?” Schirmbeck asked city officials.
“If you are wrong and the people vote to approve the bonds, will you apologize for doubting them? Or will you smile and take the credit?” he added.
Schirmbeck noted that several items will be on the ballot in November in addition to the proposed bonds, including three city council seats.
“Everything on the ballot is a referendum on the current council and administration,” he wrote.
In December’s Mayoral election the voters clearly voted for a change in direction. So far we haven’t seen that change. I hope the city changes direction and attitudes in a clear and transparent way before the November referendum.
“Earn our trust back. Show us you are interested in responsible governance and fiscal responsibility,” Schirmbeck concluded. “Show us that you see yourselves as public servants and you may be rewarded. If not, then share ownership of the outcomes you caused.”
A 15-member Citizens Bond Advisory Committee appointed by the city is considering several projects for possible inclusion in a bond package.
The deadline for the city to add bond propositions to the November 4 ballot is August 18.
