The letter reads:
City Clerk
City of El Paso
To Whom It May Concern:
The Coalition for Responsive Government hereby gives notice of its intention to circulate an initiative petition to rescind approval of demotion of city hall, financing of a downtown sports complex and use of certificates of obligation for non-emergency projects in excess of $25 million.
The letter provides notice of intention to pursue an initative petition consistent with Section 3.11 - Initiative: Whenever a number of registered voters equal to at least five percent of the voters who voted in the last general City election sign a petition setting forth the precise content of an ordinance desired by the signers, the Council must place that ordinance on the agenda of a council meeting to be held withing thirty working days of the receipt, by the City Clerk, of the petition bearing the authenticated names and addresses of the petitioners. Such an item shall be treated by the Council exactly as any other proposed ordinance. Should an ordinance proposed by such petition not be enacted by the Council, or should it be enacted in an amended form, a second petition, signed by a number of registered voters erqual to at least fiver percent of the voters who voted in the last general City election, may be submitted to the City Clerk and that official shall have twenty working days in which to authenticate the signature and thereafter must place the ordinance on the ballot at the next general election specified in State law, if the proposal received the favorable vote of a majority of those voting in that election it shall thereupon become a City ordinance.
The petition seeks approval of an ordiance that rescinds any and all ordinances relative to demolition of city hall, approval of a downtown sports complex and use of non-voter approved certificates of obligation for non-emergency projects in excess of $25 million.
In the event the city council fails to approved said rescission, the Coalition for Responsive Government shall gather a second petition to take the mater to the voters.
BALLOT LANGUAGE: Shall the City of El Paso rescind approval of the demotion city hall, taxpayer financing of a downtown sports complex to benefit private capital and use certificates of obligation to finance non-emergency projects?
Very Truly Yours,
Manny Hinojosa
Coalition for Responsive Government
I typed this as it was presented (cell phone camera not uploading) but this is a "wrench" in the public conversation (or lack of it) regarding the construction of a baseball stadium with 100% taxpayer dollars. Stay tuned....glad I was still here....
###
7 comments:
norma thanks for posting the letter from the CRG, it is important that we keep this issue in the air waves, because other media sources are not doing the responsiblable thing. you need to invite the CRG asap and then bring them back stratigicly so that we can all get behind this referendum. we need to let stevo and the rest of city council know that they can not keep stiffing the taxpapers with their "superior intelegence" because we do not know any better as pobrecitos tontos. i am in stevo's district and just can not wait till he is out.
norma thanks for keeping us informed on the CRG to add a referndum against the actions that our city council is trying to stiff the taxpayers.
Summer school math class is now in session. The cost of the stadium + new parking space (not including the huge cost of tearing down C.H.)=61m. If we invested that money at just 8% we would annually recieve 5m. There will be 70 home games per season,5m divided by 70=71.4k. Even IF (by some miracle) a game could generate $300000 (tics, parking fees, food-misc.) take that amount and divide it by our 8.25% sales tax, and you only get 24.7k.
What I have previously typed is only the bad news. Now here's the REALLY bad news: Since the Diablos will probably cease to exist, that means no more revenue generated from those games. And here's the part where it's REALLY going to sting: The numbers that I've previously crunched-out are misleading given the fact that most of those attending the games will be El Pasoans. In order for there to be TRUE revenue (and taxes) collected by the city, we need non-El Pasoans to attend. In other words, having a westsider decide to attend 5 baseball games which probably means that they will not be attending there usual 5 basketball games is NOT generating wealth, but rather moving it from one part of town to the other. And if you think that raising taxes on certain things is going to "magically" give us more coinage, then take a look at the states and/or cities that have raised there taxes. A lot of people have left those areas in recent years become they have had enough. Eric
The City Council has ceased to be a body who represents the legitimate voters. They are paid off and are used to provide a monopoly for special interests groups with lots of influence on government. The likes of Steve Ortega and Susie Byrd and Mayor Cook do not have a clue on Constitutional representation nor do they serve as representatives who uphold their oath of office. The City Manager also is used to manipulate decision making in council and policy that penalizes the voter and citizens of EL Paso to basically create more impoverished members of this community. With ICLEI and Agenda 21 policies influencing this city council and county, El Pasoans will be robbed their livelihood, property, and ability to use resources, and in order to do this, council and city manager attempt to indebt the city with boondoggle decisions like the stadium decision.
Norma, Please look up Behind the Green Mask: UN agenda 21 by Rosa Koire. It identifies most, if not all, of the agendas by this city and it's connection to ICLEI and UN Agenda 21. The stadium is yet another deal, through redevelopment programs, to control every aspect of our lives and properties.
Mistakes happen. The mistake itself is bad enough – so don’t make it worse by handling it poorly.http://www.samplelettertemplates.com/letters-of-intent/letter-of-intent-for-construction.html/
Post a Comment