​On December 10, 2018, Plano City Council voted to approve the appointments of two lawyers to be ethics investigators, even though one has serious conflicts of interest issues.
Glenn B. Callison and Kimberly S. Moore were picked by the City Attorney, Paige Mims,to replace two ethics investigators who have stepped down. There is a total of four Ethics Investigators contracted with the city. They are only paid if a case arises, and charge by the hour.
The city council was only made aware of Ms. Mims picks the Thursday before the meeting. That is not a lot of time to look into the candidates. Plus, the city council has until January 14, 2019 to replace the out going investigators. To top it all off, the appointments were placed on the consent agenda. So, to have more time to look at the candidates, Councilman Tom Harrison pulled it from the consent agenda to table it for another day. He would also like more candidates to choose from. Right now the council only gets to vote up or down on one person to fill an open spot.   
Ms. Mims seemed annoyed that the items were pulled from the consent agenda, and at the fact that some council members wanted more time to vet the candidates. She repeatedly asked the council to, "Respect my professional opinion and appoint these people." Ms. Mims also told the council, "If you have recommendations I would be happy to consider them, but it has to be people I can trust to represent my office…" She also said, “I have already asked these people to serve, [and] I don’t want to go back and tell [them] we are not going to use you. I am asking that you… appoint these people this year, and if we want to change [the process] next year and you want to give me names, I’ll be happy to do that.”
Now wait just a darn minute! Ms. Mims has clearly forgotten her place. First of all, Ms. Mims works for the city and under the council. The city council does not work for her. She also wasn’t  elected by the citizens, so she needs to drop the, “we” from her statement. If the city council wants to change the process, that is only up to them.
 Secondly, the Ethic Investigators do not work for the City Attorney: they work for the city. They need to be independent, because they may have to investigate the city attorney, or one of the staff members in her department. Instead of saying she “would be happy to consider lawyers the council recommends,” she should be saying, she would be happy to vet them.
Third, how dare she say, “I don’t want to go back and tell these people we are not going to use them.” She makes it sound like she told these people they had the job before the council voted on them. Just because she is sitting on the dais, does not mean she has the same power as the city council. If she wants a vote, she needs to be elected by the voters.
As for the process, Councilman Ricciardelli would like to see a more open application process. That way whoever wants the job can apply for it. He also wants candidates who have a significant focus on ethics in their practice. Another thing he suggested was for the council to pick people who do not live in Plano to avoid the appearance of favoritism, corruption, and conflicts of interests.
As for the candidates, Kimberly S. Moore is the more qualified of the two. This is because she does employment law. However, she was the chair of the Plano Chamber of Commerce, and Leadership Plano Board Member.
Glenn Callison has conflicts of interest issues and is not an ethics or municipal attorney. He is a commercial lawyer. He and his law firm have clients that have done, and are, doing business with the city. His wife is a former council member, and he has also been involved in politics. He personally knows most of the council members and lives close to Ms. Mims. It makes me wonder if he was picked just because Ms. Mims and some council members know Mr. Callison personally? He has also donated and voted for the Mayor and others council members. However, he did not support Anthony Ricciardelli’s campaign even though Glenn Callison says he is a Republican and Councilman Ricciardelli, a Republican, ran against a Democrat Precinct Chair in a run off. He also did not support Rick Smith’s election. Since the Ethics Investigator has a say on whether or not a council members have violated the law, Mr. Callison would have to recuse himself from those cases. His law firm also should not represent clients that do business with the city while he is an investigator.  
Three residents spoke out against Glenn Callison’s appointment. All sighting his conflict of interest issues.  
Of course the Mayor had to put his two cents in on the issue of the appointments saying, “The city attorney gets to choose who she believes is in the best interest of representing [her] office.”He went on to say, “I don’t want choices, I want the city attorney to give me who she thinks is the best person because if she gives me three choices next year for a spot, I am not sure that I’m qualified to say who is that better person.” The Mayor closed his remarks by telling the council to, “Stay in our lane. We tend to get into the business of the city manager and the city attorney.”
First of all, Mr. Mayor, the city attorney doesn’t get to pick, or get a vote; she gets to recommend. You vote yes or no. If city attorneys knew what was best, city councils wouldn't have to vote. Now Mayor, if you think you are not smart enough to pick an attorney, you can abstain from the vote. Just because you don’t think you are qualified to pick an ethics lawyer does not mean the others on the council are not qualified. Councilman Riccadelli is a lawyer, so he is more then qualified to choose one.
Second, everything that goes on in this city is in the councils “lane”, because at the end of the day the buck stops with the city council. The voters didn't elect the city council to just be a rubber stamp for whatever the city staff wants.They didn't make you Mayor to be a yes man. You and the council are the ones who are accountable to the voters. The council members are the gatekeepers. They are supposed to make sure the people’s money is spent wisely, things are running smoothly, and done correctly. They put you there to sometimes say no to city staff and bureaucrats.They elected the council to oversee the running of the city. If the city council members don’t want to do that, Plano might as well get rid of council and just have the city manager be the dictator of Plano.
In the end, the council approved both candidates. Council members Tom Harrison and Rick Smith were the only no votes.
This is Plano’s Political Pit Bull Signing Off.
 
 
  
 
 
 

(The following views are GARRY BECKHAM's only and, may or may not reflect the views of Plano's Political Pit Bull's owners or staff.)
BY GARRY BECKHAM
​|NOVEMBER 28, 2018
Written first for Empower Texans
A citizens’ rights tragedy is occurring in Plano. The tragedy isn’t just city officials’ disregard for over 4,000 legal petitioners against the city’s Comprehensive Plan, commonly called the Plano Tomorrow Plan, but a tragic loss of rights for all Plano citizens — and all Texas citizens too!
It doesn’t matter if you are for or against the Plano Tomorrow plan. What matters is this: “If you have a complaint against what the Plano mayor, city council, or hired management is doing, then you have the right to bring a petition to the secretary’s office.” The petition would then be reviewed and, if enough valid signatures have been obtained, it would then go to the city council.
The group that brought this legal petition against the Plano Tomorrow plan, and all citizens of Plano, has been stripped of their legal course of action against the city’s leadership that acted with impunity.
Plano’s legal beagles want to link the comprehensive plan to Texas zoning laws, which are supposed to be so complex that common citizens can’t understand them and thereby they cannot be petitioned.
While I am not a lawyer, Texas lawmakers were pretty clear that a comprehensive plan is not a zoning regulation. Title 7, Sec. 213.005 of Texas Local Government Code states:
NOTATION ON MAP OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. A map of a comprehensive plan illustrating future land use shall contain the following clearly visible statement: “A comprehensive plan shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning district boundaries.”
Texas law clearly states that a comprehensive plan is not a zoning regulation. Could it be any simpler?
Therefore, the petition against the Plano Tomorrow plan was legal, and it will be verified by an honest district judge in McKinney. A decision in favor of the city would lead to the loss of citizens’ rights across the whole state of Texas!
It is too bad that the judicial and legal system of Texas has allowed the city of Plano to maneuver and delay for several years to keep the petition from proceeding to the city council. This was the city’s plan: DELAY! DELAY! DELAY! And push Plano Tomorrow into action. The legal system should have forced the city to put the plan on ice until the petition issue was resolved.
In addition, the city wants to persuade a judge that a comprehensive plan is like other complex municipal planning documents, which the average citizen could not possibly understand. When one looks at the educational level of the citizens of Plano — one of the highest per capita in the nation, with many citizens having engineering and other highly technical degrees — I am pretty sure this is not the case at all. It is just a conniving way to take away citizens’ rights to petition against overzealous city leadership backed by the wealthy with special interests.
Plano’s leadership and lead lawyer actually acted unethically when they directed the city secretary to not count the votes and forward the petition to the city council. These actions have allowed the city to put the Plano Tomorrow plan into action without citizens’ approval, which allowed building that would have otherwise been stopped until the plan was approved or rejected by voters.
Why didn’t the city just hold a vote on Plano Tomorrow? I am pretty sure the city leaders calculated that a citywide vote would bring a defeat to the plan. At the time, there was a tsunami-size swelling of anti-Plano Tomorrow sentiment. In addition, in an era of voter apathy, low turnout means the city probably could not have mustered enough “For” votes to pass the plan. To give a little evidence to this theory, ex-City Councilman David Downs, an avid leader for Plano Tomorrow and rising star of the cronies, was voted out at the election following city council’s approval of the plan.
If you are a Plano citizen, do you think city leadership will act within Texas law if you bring a legal petition to the Plano secretary? Or will the city deny citizen petitions with legal maneuvering, using far-out, far-fetched, unrelated tangents, because they have special interests to protect? Just think, your petition may be the next one that is axed before being counted at the secretary’s desk!
Every decision has a consequence. What should the consequences for the leaders of Plano and Plano’s chief legal adviser be? Should the mayor step down? And should the city’s manager and chief legal adviser be fired and forced to repay all legal expenses, which include the city’s expenses, the opposition’s legal expenses, and court costs? How much should they pay for stripping citizens of their legal rights?
The bottom line is this: Texas citizens’ rights are at stake due to the actions of the city of Plano. This means the ensuing court case will impact citizens’ rights across the state, not just in Plano.
A citizens’ rights tragedy has already occurred in Plano. Let us hope the tragedy doesn’t continue.
This is an outside commentary submitted and published with the author’s permission. If you wish to submit a commentary to Texas Scorecard, please submit your article to [email protected].

By Mark Reid, PCC President

​(The following views are Mark Reid's only and, may or may not reflect the views of Plano's Political Pit Bull's owners or staff.)

In the City Council’s Preliminary Open Meeting on Monday, November 12th, city staff provided a year-end report. General revenue was reported at 2.4% ($8.2 million) higher than budgeted and expenses were reported at 1.5% ($4.3 million) lower than budgeted. As a result the city finished the fiscal year with just under a $13 million surplus. This follows a $4.7 million surplus in 2017, and an $11.1 million surplus in 2016. As staff reported “We came in a little over in revenue and a little under in expenses and that is not abnormal to how we usually perform.” 
These numbers actually represent very good forecasting and management by the city staff and City Manager. They also represent almost exactly what the Plano Citizens’ Budget Committee anticipated and discussed during the budget and tax rate discussion last summer. 
In the regular City Council meeting following the preliminary meeting, there was a discussion about the budget process. Councilman Grady began the discussion stating that “For the benefit of staff…” people should submit their ideas about budget adjustments NOW, rather than during the normal public review process in July and August. I’m sure the staff appreciates Councilman Grady’s sensitivity to the challenges they face in preparing the budget, his suggestion ignores the normal process. 
Even the City Manager recognized that staff does not ask the City Council for direction until March. Then the various departments prepare draft budget recommendations that go to the City Manager at the end of May. So the impassioned calls for input NOW seems like little more than a thinly vailed attempt to preclude public input during the established budget review cycle. 
There was broad discussion about how the budget should be based on service levels rather than some arbitrary number like the Effective Tax Rate. In fact, Councilman Grady said that “The Effective Tax Rate is the worst model … that he has ever seen in his life!” As justification for this statement, Councilman Grady went on to state that adopting the Effective Tax Rate “…means that you need less and less money every year…” Apparently, Councilman Grady does not understand how the Effective Tax Rate works. 
The mayor stated that “The idea that we set a tax rate to set a budget is not how we operate…” and that he would “…vehemently oppose … setting a tax rate and then … deciding on the level of service that we want to deliver.” He attempted to use a business example, but failed to complete his analogy. Business base budget decisions on revenue they can reasonably expect to earn in a competitive market place. They then go to work, finding ways to provide the level of services necessary to generate the revenue they need to be profitable in those competitive markets. If they fail, they go out of business. The city has no such competitive pressure. They simply set the tax rate to generate the tax revenue they want.  
Councilman Kelley expressed his concern about how we “Got bogged down with a citizens’ group” who looked at the budget and argued for the Effective Tax Rate. He then said that a comment was “…put out there … that [the city council] does not know how to run the City of Plano…” and that there were accusations about “… incompetency of the city staff…” No such accusations or statements were made by the Plano Citizens Budget Committee and I challenge Councilman Kelley to produce the source and record of such comments by anyone. Vilification of one’s opponents in a debate is indicative of weak arguments and only diminishes Councilman Kelley’s credibility. 
Councilwoman Prince expressed concern about the City Council “… playing its proper role …” and not “… micromanaging …” city staff. She expressed her view that the City Council should “… set the vision …” for the budget and not get bogged down in line item analysis. We agree. 
The City Council’s oversight responsibility does not involve minutia … it involves vision … a vision of excellence in city services with a focus on core functions of city government while keeping city property taxes in line with growth plus inflation. The Effective Tax Rate allows for growth but Plano property taxes have outpaced inflation by two to three times over the last several years. This is simply unsustainable and the City Council under our current mayor consistently refuses to take steps to mitigate property tax increases. 
Councilman Smith recommended a “zero based budgeting” approach, focusing on the city’s core needs like public safety and infrastructure first then prioritizing other services as needed. Councilman Smith also pointed out that had the City Council adopted the Effective Tax Rate it would have been the highest budget ever adopted by the City of Plano. Of course the mayor and his allies took exception to Councilman Smith’s suggestions. 
Councilman Ricciardelli suggested a process along the lines of budgeting to the Effective Tax Rate as a base, then adding additional services as needed. Councilman Harrison echoed such an approach. These recommendations were also dismissed. 
The mayor and Councilman Kelley commented on how adoption of the ETR would cause reductions in services or the elimination of departments, how “citizens” did not want the library to buy new books, and how there are those that don’t want us to invest in our parks. Plano tax payers would be far better served by a city council that engaged in reasonable discussion, prioritization, and direction of our city manager and staff than this kind of tax and spend hyperbole. 
Getting back to what we pointed out at the beginning of this article, city staff confirmed what the Plano Citizens Budget Committee pointed out last summer. The City of Plano normally over forecasts expenses and under forecasts revenue. This is good fiscal management and it leads to surpluses, year after year.  This is how the city is able to maintain surplus accounts roughly equivalent to the entire annual budget, well in excess of $500 million. 
The surplus from 2018 alone is equivalent to the savings Plano taxpayers would have enjoyed by adopting the Effective Tax Rate for 2019. No services would have to be cut! No departments would be cut! The libraries would still have been able to buy new books!  The parks would still be well maintained!  Nothing would have to be reduced … except the budget’s rate of growth. 
Plano Citizens’ Coalition applauds and thanks Councilman Harrison, Ricciardelli, and Smith for their support of transparent, fiscally responsible city government. It is unfortunate that our mayor, along with Councilman Grady and Kelley (and presumably Councilwoman Miner) fail to recognize that the city of Plano can remain a City of Excellence without tax increases that grossly outpace inflation year, after year, after year. It is high time for the Plano City Council to adopt a vision for the budget process that focuses on core functions of city government while limiting property tax and budget growth to no more than inflation and growth. After increasing property taxes and the city budget roughly 40% in the last five years, it is time to stop business as usual and adopt policies that protect Plano taxpayers. 

That taxpayers are funding their own opposition is egregious, and should stop.
 
October 26, 2018 by Salvador Ayala From Empower Texans

​Contempt for Plano taxpayers is on full display after a recent item on the city council’s consent agenda raised eyebrows among residents.
The controversy stems from “Item R” on the October 22 agenda, which appears to authorize the city manager (or their designee) to engage in lobbying activities on behalf of the city. While lobbying is a normal function of government, the practice of using taxpayer dollars for lobbying is generally frowned upon by constituents. Even more so when that lobbying promotes anti-taxpayer measures, as is the usual case.
That agenda item reads as follows: “To adopt the 2019 Legislative Program for the City of Plano, Texas; directing the City Manager or his designee to act with regard to the City’s 2019 Legislative Program.”
Unsurprisingly, the city’s 2019 Legislative Program makes clear that maximizing the taxing authority of the city is paramount, and seeks to “protect municipal revenue such as property taxes, sales taxes, right-of-way revenues, service fee, and court fines.”
Largely due to skyrocketing property values, property tax bills go up concurrently when a city refuses to adopt the effective tax rate—the rate that would keep your bill the same as last year. Rising property taxes are putting people out of their homes, and curtailing their growth has become a top issue in the state.
In fact, just last month Plano City Council approved a 4.5 percent tax hike. In a 5-3 vote, the council ensured that the average Plano homeowner will see a 40 percent increase in their city tax bill over five years.
During the last legislative session, measures were offered that would empower voters with an automatic tax election when cities raise their taxes by four percent or more. Though they met with defeat in the Texas House, the governor and many lawmakers plan to revive those reforms in the coming 86th session.
It stretches credulity to claim that a city employee lobbying against tax reform is in any way beneficial to taxpayers in that city, especially when it comes to property taxes. That Plano taxpayers are funding their own opposition is egregious, and should stop.
Ironically, as bills are also filed to combat the practice of tax-funded lobbying, government employees and officials like Plano’s city manager can be expected to lobby against those reforms on the taxpayer’s dime as well.
 

            On the Consent  Agenda for the Monday, October 22, 2018, City Council meeting is a resolution to lobby the state and federal legislatures. The item on the agenda reads as follows, "To adopt the 2019 Legislative Program for the City of Plano, Texas; directing the City Manager or his designee to act with regard to the City's 2019 Legislative Program." Right now you are probably asking, what the heck is the Legislative Program? This is a list of items that the City supports or opposes. The resolution instructs the City Manager to "actively pursue passage of the appropriate legislation [the City supports]", and to "impede the passage of any legislation [the City opposes]." Simply put, the City wants to send Bruce Glasscock to lobby the state and federal governments. So, who gets the privilege of paying for this lobbying? You, of course. One of the items on the City's support list is "legislation that protects municipal revenue such as property taxes." Now we have a problem. To read the full resolution and Legislative Program go to
file:///C:/Users/jsgro/Downloads/GOVT102218-01Resolution.pdf
and file:///C:/Users/jsgro/Downloads/GOVT102218-02Exhibit_A.pdf
       Residents across the state of TX and the city of Plano have been complaining about the rise in property taxes. If you have read this site before, you know that the Plano City Council has raised property taxes over 40% in five years. For the past two years, residents of Plano have gone to the City Council begging them not to raise taxes. Sadly the City Council has ignored these pleas. Plano residents are not alone when it comes to being ignored by their city councils; many other cities in Texas face the same issue. Naturally, Texans were not going to let City politicians and bureaucrats stop them. Residents went to their state representatives for help, and in response, Plano and Collin County reps are working with the Lt. Governor and Governor to pass legislation to halt or slow the rise of property taxes. One idea that has come from this is letting the residents vote if a city raises taxes more then 4%. This would let residents decide if they want their taxes to go up.
      Of course, the city is against any proposal that would limit the amount they could raise taxes. They clearly don't care that residents are suffering from the tax increases. Hence, the city is more than happy to spend our tax dollars to lobby the government on this issue.  
The fact that a city would spend residents tax dollars lobbying against its own people is morally reprehensible. This is akin to gun control groups being forced to pay the NRA to lobby against gun control legislation. Therefore, a city should not be able to lobby against its own residents with tax dollars. If Bruce Glasscock or the Mayor want to lobby against the people they serve, they should do it on their own dime. 
        If you are against the city using your money to lobby for higher taxes go to the meeting, fill out a card to have the item 'r' removed from the consent agenda, and speak against it. In fact, this should not have been put on the consent agenda in the first place. That is supposed to be for items that are not controversial, and taxes are definitely controversial.
      Write to the members of the City Council and to your state reps as well. Tell your TX reps to ignore the lobbying from Plano staff on property taxes. The only people they should be listening to are the residents of Plano. 
       You can also call the City Secretary's Office at (972) 941-7120 to have a speaker card filled out or register your opinion for item 'r' on the consent agenda if you can not attend the meeting. 
City Council Members
Angela Miner: [email protected]

Anthony Ricciardelli: [email protected]

Rick Grady: [email protected]

Kayci Prince: [email protected]

Ron Kelley: [email protected]

Mayor LaRosiliere: [email protected]

Tom Harrison: [email protected]

Rick Smith: [email protected]

State reps.
Van Taylor - [email protected]  

Matt Shaheen House District 66 - [email protected]

Jeff Leah House District 67- [email protected]

HD 89 will definitely have a new rep for the next session. I would wait until after the Nov election to email the winner.  

This is Plano's Political Pit Bull signing off.

by A. Vindex
         On Monday, October 8, 2018,  the Plano City Council passed the Master Park Plan. This is a massive bureaucratic central plan that is updated every five years.  The plan is a whopping  260 pages. In contrast, the Constitution is 19 pages. One makes a more perfect union and the other plans for future parks. The Declaration of Independence is two pages, not including the signatures. It declares the colonies free states, while the other plans for future bike trails and pickleball courts.  If you want to see the plan go to the city's website http://www.plano.gov/DocumentCenter/View/32546/DRAFT-Park-Master-Plan?bidId=  If you would like to see what happened at the city council meeting go to http://planotx.swagit.com/play/10092018-520 
      This master plan is the third Plano bureaucrats have made, and the council has passed in the past few years. This latest bloated plan, that would make any progressive giddy, has me pondering two questions. What is a local government necessary role?  Is it governments responsibility to entertain us?
       To answer these questions let us take a hypothetical. Suppose a small group of people were to start a new town. They have their houses, well water, and septic already. With those basic needs taken care of,  what is one of the first thing this new town would need? Most intelligent people would say a Constitution. The next thing residents would need is a police department, so it could keep its residents and their property safe. This role of government comes from John Locke who said, "The great and chief end, therefore, of men's uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property." This role is also in the words of our US Constitution, "Establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, .... and secure the Blessings of Liberty"  The next thing the townspeople would need is a fire department.  This hypothetical town would also need a Mayor and Council. It would also want judges and prosecutors to try criminals and settle civil disputes.  The people would also need a department to create and maintain roads and collect trash. Those are the basics items every local government would have to provide its residents.
Did you notice what was not on the list? Parks, recreation centers, a golf course, pools, trails, and even libraries were not on the list of needs for our hypothetical town. That is because those items are not necessary for a town to function. 
      To that point, the Plano library system was first created in 1965, 92 years after Plano incorporated in 1873. The first park was built in 1925 privately by The Plano Lions Club and the Haggard family. They name it Haggard Memorial Park. So, for 52 years Plano did not have any parks, but it continued to survive and thrive. The Parks and Rec. department was not even established until 1968. Yet, Plano continued to grow more than 35 times its population from incorporation. Today, however, Plano has over 60 parks, 9 trails, 7 rec. centers, 1 golf course, and 3 pool centers. Even though we can clearly see from our own history that Parks and Rec. are not the basic functions of government and not therefore necessary. 
        Yet some people say over 60 parks, 9 trails, 7 rec. centers, 1 golf course, and 3 pool centers are not enough; hence, the "need" for a plan. But, we also need money; parks, pools, rec. centers, and golf courses cost a lot of money to build, run and maintain. The Parks and Rec. department has a budget of  $29.63 million. Each recreation center cost millions to operate and maintain. For example, the Tom Muehienbeck Center will cost us 1.91 million in 2019, and the Liberty Recreation Center will cost $1.06 million. That money will come from taxpayers. Some of you might be saying, "Wait, the rec. centers are not free; if a resident wants to use them they have to pay a fee." In that aspect, you are correct, for there are fees to use the centers. However, these fees only cover 4.17% of the cost to operate and maintain the centers. If these were private clubs, they would have gone out of business long ago. The responsible and fair thing would be for the center's fees to at least cover their operating costs. This would alleviate some of the burdens these centers are putting on taxpayers. Some, who don't use the rec. centers at all. 
        This brings me to my last question, Is it governments responsibility to entertain us? We can find evidence of government entertaining its citizens as far back as 140 B.C.E. during the Roman Empire. Roman politicians passed laws to keep the votes of citizens. Lawmakers introducing a grain dole: giving out cheap food and entertainment, "bread and circuses", became an effective way to rise and keep power. Basically, keep your voters fat and entertained, and they will vote you back into office.  The bread and circuses were also used to distract residents from the problems the government was facing.
     Fast forward to today and local governments support all kinds of forms of entertainment and build buildings to house the entertainment instead of letting the private sector do it. Think of these as the modern-day coliseum. Over the years politicians have approved government run rec. centers, pools, and parks for every part of Plano, so residents don't have to travel far to access these "coliseums". City Council officials have also approved government owned event centers, theaters, and pavilions. Politicians have given taxpayer money to help fund a multitude of festivals or "circuses". Some examples are The Plano Balloon Festival, The Plano International Festival, and the Art and Music Festival. All so residents can be entertained and politicians can say, "Look at what we did; vote for us. " 
    Now, Plano residents have become conditioned to expect the government to fund their entertainment. Instead of going to private businesses, people are going to the government demanding it. Residents go to the City Council demanding more museums, more parks, more trails, and even pickle-ball courts. Where will the money come for this entertainment? The taxpayer of course. Those who want these things are overjoyed when politicians kowtow to their demands; while those who don't want or use these things are forced to pay for them in rising tax bills. Those folks would like to know why they should pay for entertainment they don't want or participate in? These people want to know when entertainment became a necessity? Of course, it never did.
​      Let us go back to my hypothetical town. Entertainment was not on the list of departments that a starting town would need. As I have outlined, for most of Plano's history, residents did not require the government to entertain them. Why? Because they knew what the government was for. This role is outlined in the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence. They knew governments' role was to protect its resident's life, liberty, and property and not to distract the people with bread and circus. 

The Parks and Recreation Master Plan anticipates that Collin Creek Mall will be redeveloped in the near future, and thus uses this as a justification for interconnection between the two sides of US 75. The plan notes that this project would be similar to the Continental Avenue Bridge in Dallas, which began as a large, six lane wide roadway bridge.

The plan did not provide any estimation as to what the cost of these two large projects would be. However, given the magnitude as conceptualized in the above images, it is certain that new bonds would have to be approved by the Plano electorate. As neither of these lavish projects fit the description of "usual and customary parks", why should the City (that's you and me) pay for it?  Shouldn't the developers, whose nearby projects will be enhanced by these expenditures foot the bill? Once again, the city is picking winners and losers, instead of letting the free market compete. Proposals for new parks throughout the city were also present within the plan; notably, such “opportunities” are located in West Plano in the vicinity of the Legacy area, the Downtown area, and along the George Bush Turnpike on the southeast edge of Plano. Currently, these regions are exempt from a requirement in which developers must pay a fee to be used in the acquisition and construction of new parks. The need for these new parks is attributable to the recent addition of numerous multifamily units. Parks constructed without contribution through the developers’ fee will come at a higher cost to the taxpayers throughout the city.
As previously mentioned in past news stories, the City of Plano has also expressed an interest in unearthing the creek which presently flows underneath the Collin Creek Mall parking lot. This is thought to require roughly $50 Million. The re-exposed creek would also be landscaped and utilized in the form of open space adjacent to a redeveloped Collin Creek Mall. Again, unless the City has a plan for recouping the cost through sale of the creek, let the developer pay for this enhancement to its adjacent property instead of the taxpayer.
If this plan is approved, key aspects will eventually be included in the Community Investment Program Budget. The CIP Budget is a five year plan meant to address the City’s infrastructure. Included within the CIP, is anticipated spending on parks and recreation. Most of the revenue in the CIP budget comes from bonds that were approved by voters. With this in mind, the proposed Parks and Recreation Master Plan Would almost certainly have a large impact on the CIP Budget. This means that the Interest and Sinking tax rate (a portion of the overall city property tax rate) which funds the debt service could potentially rise if enough new bonds are approved, thus contributing to the continuing trend of residents having to pay higher property taxes. It is difficult to ascertain the potential for tax increases without any cost estimations from the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
The City Council should table this plan in its current form so that it can be revised to prioritize the needs of existing parks and amenities, both in their ongoing upkeep, as well as their repair. Rather than just listing ideas for new projects, a transparent effort must be made to inform the public of the practical impact the plan would have on the CIP Budget and ultimately on the property tax rates to which residents are subject. A carefully formulated plan must also take into account how projects will continue to be paid for upon implementation. Developers must be expected to contribute when applicable as they have done so in the past. Lastly, City Leadership must keep in mind that the issuance of debt should be a tool to ensure that infrastructure can be adequately provided at the present time of need, and it should not be squandered for the sake of vanity or a desire to earn awards for projects that benefit only small segments of taxpayers.
Speak or Register in Opposition at Monday's Council Meeting

Call the City Secretary's Office at (972) 941-7120 to have a speaker card filled out or register your opinion on Item No.4, Consideration of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Contact the City Council

Angela Miner: [email protected]

Anthony Ricciardelli: [email protected]

Rick Grady: [email protected]

Kayci Prince: [email protected]

Ron Kelley: [email protected]

Mayor LaRosiliere: [email protected]

Tom Harrison: [email protected]

Rick Smith: [email protected]

By Planos' Citizens Coalition The second and FINAL public hearing on the Plano city budget is Wednesday, September 5 at 6:30pm at the Plano Municipal Center, located at 1520 K Avenue. NOW is the time to speak up and let your voice be heard. It’s now or never.
You can do so by:
Telling Plano City Council to not raise your city taxes by signing the informal Empower Texans petition (access by clicking the link. https://action.empowertexans.com/planotaxrate
The petition was presented to each city council member with 557 signatures at the last meeting. Let’s double that number! 
Sign the Petition: Tell the City Council to Adopt the Effective Tax Rate
Voicing your protest in person or by telephone. 
If you would like to speak before City Council on Wednesday or just register your opposition, you can call the City Secretary's Assistant, Alice at (972) 941-7515. She will record your opinion or speaker card. Tell Alice that you want to register your opinion on Public Hearing Item #1. Council should vote "No" to the proposed tax rate of $0.4603 cents. Let them know you want them to cut the property tax rate by 3 cents (effective tax rate). 
Emailing your opposition of the proposed tax rate to Plano City Council Members.
You can reach all city council members directly at: [email protected]
Or you may also contact city council members individually at:
Mayor Harry LaRosiliere: [email protected]
Ron Kelley: [email protected]
Angela Miner: [email protected]
Anthony Ricciardelli: [email protected]
Rick Grady: [email protected]
Kayci Prince: [email protected]
Rick Smith: [email protected]
Tom Harrison: [email protected]
Remember, the effective tax rate IS doable regardless of what they tell you. It is up to us to insist on it. By the way, it will not require they cut any city services, jobs, or incur debt. Those are scare tactics used to silence taxpayers.

"      The following is from The Plano Citizens' Coalition. The members of their city budget committee have been combing through the budget. They have found line items that have not been used in over three years. They also found wasteful line items. Plano Citizens' Coalition members sat down with the city staff and council members, and gave them suggestions of things that can be cut or reduced in the budget. Their budget committee is made up of accountants, teachers, tech professionals, business men, and moms. All are residents of Plano. 
Enjoy
This is Plano's Political Pit Bull Signing Off.
"After the budget workshop meeting on Saturday, August 18 and other disinformation being
bandied about by the city’s apologists, this battle boils down to a few very simple facts. 
 Plano taxpayers have seen their city tax bills increase at more than five times the rate of
inflation, increasing the City Property taxes on the average home in Plano by 39.7% in
the last five years.  This is unsustainable … it has to stop … adopting the Effective Tax
Rate (ETR) does this. 
 Adopting the ETR means that the city would have to find a way to survive with only
about a 3.6% increase in property tax collections (approximately $7 million from new
properties) rather than a 7.1% increase in its property tax budget (approximately $13
million).  After increasing the city’s property tax collections by over 39% in the past four
years, there is no reason that the city can’t slow down and live with only a $7 million
(3.9%) increase for next year. 
 
It’s not complicated. 
 It’s not about carry forwards. 
 It’s not about sales taxes (which are forecast to be $5 million over budget in 2018).  In
fact, one of the issues is that the budget only includes $79 million for sales tax
collections for next year even though actual collections have been at least $85 million for
the last 12 months. This intentional under-budgeting of sales tax revenue is part of what
causes the city to say it needs to collect more property taxes and cannot reduce the
property tax rate.
 It’s not about restricted account funds - the City has over $500 million of cash and
investments. 
 It’s about competent management.  It’s about our city council making our city
management, exercise fiscal constraint.  It’s about our city council providing oversight
and representing the taxpayers of Plano. 
In addition, the city wants to increase our water rates by 12% and sewage by 5% which is totally
unnecessary. Yet they paid an outside firm $21,000 for a several hundred-page report to justify
over-charging us for water. The city charges the water and sewer fund $8.7 million for the right
to do business in the city, saying that is what they would charge a privately-owned water utility,
similar to how they charge Atmos Energy) the gas utility). There are no costs associated with
this franchise fee, it’s just another way to get revenue from the citizens. Similarly, they charge
$1.8 million as a charge in lieu of property taxes but government-owned properties are not
charged property taxes in Texas. These and other made up charges to the Water & Sewer
Department are a hidden tax. When the city says our property taxes are low, you need to add
another 4 cents to the rate to account for these hidden taxes.
Now is the time to speak up/show up. City council needs to know you are paying attention.
Mayor Harry said he expects only 2 people to show up. Let’s pack the auditorium!
 The first public hearing on the budget is Monday, August 27 at 7pm.
 The second public hearing on the budget is Wednesday, September 5 at 6:30pm.
Let them know you want them to cut the property tax rate by 3 cents (effective tax rate). It IS
doable regardless of what they tell you. It is up to us to insist on it. BTW, it will not require they
cut any city services, jobs, or incur debt. Those are scare tactics used to silence taxpayers.

If you would like to speak on Monday or just register your opposition, you can call the City
Secretary's Assistant, Alice at (972) 941-7515‬.  She will record your opinion or speaker card.
Tell Alice that you want to register your opinion on Public Hearing Item #1.  Council should vote
"No" to the proposed tax rate of $0.4603 cents.  This is the first of two required public hearings
on the proposed tax revenue increase. The second public hearing will be held on September 5,
2018 at 6:30 p.m. 
You can reach all city council members directly at: [email protected]
or
You may also contact city council members individually at:
 Mayor Harry LaRosilere: [email protected], 972-941-7107
 Ron Kelley: [email protected], (972) 941-7107 
 Angela Miner: [email protected], 972-941-7107
 Anthony Ricciardelli: [email protected], 972-941-7107
 Rick Grady: [email protected], 972-941-7107
 Kayci Prince: [email protected], 972-941-7107"

                 It has come to this sites attention that people are wondering who Plano's Political Pit Bull is. Some people have started guessing names. Whoever's name they guess it will be wrong.  Plano's Political Pit Bull is not just one person. It is a team of people. We have a group of like-minded residents who help with this site. We have people who edit the writing. We have a person who makes our videos and edits them. We have people who narrate our video scripts.  We have folks who do research for our posts. Our team has people on it who know economics, history, and technology.
         Everyone who helps with this site cares about Plano. They are tired of the local government ignoring the residents. Our folks hate the fact that the city gives taxpayer money to large corporations and developers while residents struggle to keep a roof over their heads.  They are sick of the Plano media only copy and pasting the Mayor and city staff's talking points in their papers. That is the reason this site started in 2016. Residents realized that if they only read the local Plano papers, they were only getting half the story.  Sometimes the papers would ignore important things that happened at city council meetings. So this site was born to give residents of Plano another option and a different opinion. 
             When this site started we decided not to divulge the names of the people on the Plano's Political Pit Bull team. There are evil people in the world who would not hesitate to harass, assault and, even try to kill those who disagree with them. Just look at the news and you will see example after example of this, the following being only a few recent examples. Sarah Sanders and her family harassed while eating dinner at a restaurant, a grown man assaulting a teen for wearing a Make America Great Again hat,  another man being kicked out of a coffee shop for wearing a Trump hat, a Jewish man having his car vandalized because he is a Trump supporter, Congressional Republicans almost killed by a Democrat while practicing baseball, an angry mob in Berkeley, CA smashes the windows of a college because they don't agree with the speaker, a person wishing for a pre-teen boy to get molested because his father is President Trump, and the list goes on and on. Obviously, our team did not want to worry about their safety and/or the safety of their families everytime they went out. So we keep the identities of the Pit Bull team private. In the end, the identities of our team do not matter. What matters is what we post. We do our best to get our information right, and if we make a factual mistake we try to correct it as soon as possible. 
         Maybe when people don't feel it necessary to attack others for having different opinions the PPPB team can reveal their identities, but until then we will remain private.  
We hope you all enjoy reading and watching our posts, and for everyone to hopefully learn something new when coming on to our site.  
This is Plano's Political Pit Bull signing off.

               On Aug 11th and Aug 13th PPPB posted two articles on Plano's water.  Plano Pocketing Money From Water. (https://planospoliticalpitbull.weebly.com/posts-about-council/plano-pocketing-money-from-water)
and More Water Profits Found. (https://planospoliticalpitbull.weebly.com/posts-about-council/more-water-profits-found)
                       The city has responded to these findings with the following letter.
"Thank you for your questions regarding all the transfers made from the Water & Sewer Fund. I wanted to pass on the response from Willdan & Associates our Rate Model Consultants regarding the transfer to the General Fund and the philosophy behind it.   Willdan completed our Rate Model last November 2017.
“It is unfortunate but not that uncommon that ratepayers sometimes think that municipally-owned water and wastewater utilities such as Plano are making a “profit”.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The City of Plano only recovers from its ratepayers those revenues required to fund its water and wastewater operating and capital costs.  As is common practice for thousands of utilities across the USA, this cost includes a transfer to the General Fund to reimburse other city departments  (administration, public works, engineering, police/fire, etc.) for the very significant cost each department incurs in providing services to support the utility operation.  If such a transfer were not made, then the General Fund would essentially be subsidizing the water and sewer fund through the provision of costs and services without reimbursement.   The common amount of General Fund transfer for many cities is 10-15% of gross utility revenues, which is precisely where Plano’s General Fund transfer is positioned.  While not all cities make a general fund transfer,  financial and utility professionals across the USA consider these transfers to be prudent financial management and best practices.
           Plano uses the revenues it recovers from its water and wastewater fund to pay operating expenses and make the capital expenditures necessary to ensure that the system operates at an acceptable level of service. Projecting revenues can be inexact, as revenues are dependent on unpredictable weather patterns  (for example, people purchase more water during hot dry months than cool wet months). If in any given year Plano recovers more revenues than all its costs, including its reimbursement of the General Fund, then this additional revenue is simply used for utility capital expenditures.  There are no profits, no stock dividends, and no use of these funds for any purpose other than the provision of water and wastewater service.”
          In addition, the transfer from the Water & Sewer Fund to Capital Maintenance Fund is for two primary purposes:
1. Paying for Pump Station Rehabilitation (replacement of pumps and motors) and Water Design Standard Updates.
2. Paying for facility projects that either tie directly to the utility system (such as roof replacements at lift stations or emergency generator replacements at pump stations) or where utility system personnel have a substantial presence (Parkway Service Center, Municipal Center etc.).
      Our transfer to the Technology Services Fund is to pay for the portion of the staff, operations, and equipment for Technology that is specifically dedicated to Water & Sewer items.
             Let me know if you have additional questions.  
Thanks, Karen [Budget Dircetor] "
           While this letter was meant to answer questions, it only leaves me with more. Why do we need  Consultants Willdan & Associates? How much do we have to pay for them? If transfers to the General Fund only covers operations coasts, why are these costs not listed under water and sewer operations?  What does the department of administration, public works, engineering, police/fire, and others do for water and sewer that they need reimbursement?  What are all the capital expenditures that Plano is spending this money on? Is this all for water and sewer projects? If the money from water and sewer is put into other funds for things related to water, how does the city earmark the money to make sure it only gets spent on water? The simplest way to make sure that water money is only spent on things related to water is for the city to specifically list what every penny of water money is spent on, and why, in the budget. But, of course, that would be too easy and transparent for the government to do. 
This is Plano's Political Pit Bull Signing Off.

The above chart comes right from the City of Plano. It shows the city profits from water. It also shows the city takes the profits and transfers it to non-water funds. This is morally wrong! 
This is Plano's Political Pit Bull Signing off.

​
​The following is written by a guest of this site. Anyone is welcome to leave a comment in the comment section. Any comments that are disrespectful to anyone, mean in nature, not about this articles content, or meant to stop discussion will be removed from this page. This is a private web page. I am not the government, so the 1st amendment does not apply here.
Plano's Political Pit Bull
The following was written By
Mark Reid
President of Plano Citizens Coalition

City of Plano property taxes are increasing at an unsustainable rate. In the last five years, according to the city’s own data, the average homeowner has seen their city tax bill rise 36 percent, while inflation has increased only 16 percent. This is a direct result of city officials refusing to reduce their tax rate enough to offset rising property values.

Plano city leaders will argue about the tax rate. They will say that the tax rate is the same as it was ten years ago or that they lowered the tax rate two years ago, but that is irrelevant when property values are increasing faster than the tax rates are decreasing. For example, if over the last ten years your $250,000 home increases in value to $400,000, that is a 60% increase. If over that time, the tax rate stays the same, the property taxes you pay would go up 60%. If over that time, the tax rate dropped two cents per hundred dollar valuation, which is about 4%, then the property taxes you pay would go up 53%. The increase is less, but still unsustainable.

City staff has proposed yet another 4 percent tax increase again this year. And they’re using confusion to try and convince residents they aren’t. They say they are “not raising the tax rate,” implying they aren’t forcing taxpayers to pay more. But the truth is, they are.

The solution is for the Plano City Council to adopt the “Effective Tax Rate” which is the tax rate at which, on average, homeowner would pay the same amount of tax this year as they paid last year. As always, even with a lower tax rate, the city would still collect additional revenue from the city’s growth, but the tax hikes on existing homeowners would stop. This seems quite reasonable after a decade of annual tax increases.

The city will predict dire consequences if they are not allowed to continue on their tax-hiking path, but a committee of concerned Plano citizens has been studying past budgets for several months, and is now studying the proposed 2018-2019 budget. All that’s required to enable adoption of the Effective Tax Rate, and reduce the property tax rate by roughly 3 cents, is for the city to grow its budget at a slower rate than before. No spending cuts are required to lower the tax rate. If the city simply increased spending at a slower rate, they could easily lower the tax rate.

There are many areas in the budget that year after year are budgeted at levels millions of dollars more than are actually spent when the year is over. In other words, city staff will ask for millions more in each department than what they actually need. Yet, each year these line items are increased over their previous year’s budget, rather than over the previous year’s actual expenditures. Eliminating this shell game alone will allow the city to adopt the Effective Tax Rate.

Again, no spending cuts are required. Even at a lower tax rate, total tax revenue and spending will still increase. Our committee will work with any City Council member that has an interest in our findings and is willing to consider reasonable ideas to stop unsustainable spending and property tax hikes in the City of Plano.

It’s common to find a home in Plano that went from $250k in taxable value to $400k, in last 10 years. That Plano homeowner now pays:
58% higher property taxes to City of Plano
Inflation over that same period was only 16%.
Cause: MOST local officials are not lowering property tax rates enough to offset higher home values -
Looks like the Plano City Council needs to significantly LOWER their property tax rate this year to the effective tax rate. That means the amount we pay to the city in 2019 is the same as last year. The city will still collect more money in 2018/19 because new properties came online. 
Council is debating this topic right now, and will make the final decision in early Sept.

    
            On July 23, 2018, after a long drawn out City Council meeting, the Envision Oak Point Plan passed by a vote of 6-2. Councilmen Tom Harrison and Anthony Ricciardelli were the dissenting votes. In case you don't know what Envision Oak Point is, please read my other articles titled Oak Point May Be Coming Back From the Dead https://planospoliticalpitbull.weebly.com/posts-about-council/oak-point-may-be-coming-back-from-the-dead and Envision Oak Point Update  https://planospoliticalpitbull.weebly.com/posts-about-council/june-21st-2018 . You may also watch my video and first post about the plan, The Oak Point Plan is Dead https://planospoliticalpitbull.weebly.com/videos.html .
             The plan was the ninth and last item on the agenda. People who went to the meeting to voice their opinions had to wait until almost 10 pm to be heard. Coincidence, I think not. More often then not controversial items are put last on a full agenda.
            Nine people spoke and twelve filled out a card in favor of the plan. Some of the people in favor of the plan said it was a vision and would guide new development. The President of the Plano Chamber of Commerce said, "It reaffirms that the City of Plano is open for business." So, somehow companies like Toyota, Liberty Mutual, and Boeing don't reaffirm the message that Plano is open for business? Maybe we should put an open sign on our border for those who still don't know.
         Forty-three people filled out a card against the plan, and fifteen people spoke against it. Two moved to East Plano for a more rural and quiet life; they don't want to lose that. One of those people did not appreciate the other side calling him a racist just because he was opposed to the plan. Other residents worry about the number of housing units that would be built.
Currently, the plan calls for 3000 housing units. The types of homes would be single family on small lots, condos, townhouses, small cottage homes under 1000 square feet, and of course apartments. Residents who spoke worry that this area would become too crowded. That it would lead to more traffic and cause over crowding in schools. Unfortunately, the one thing the plan does not have is a new school. Two residents talked about letting the free market and residents decide what should be built instead of government bureaucrats; people after my own doggy heart. To reduce the amount of density, the majority of the people who spoke against the plan asked for it to be tabled.
              After the public spoke it was the councils turn. Councilwoman Angela Minor read from a prepared speech. Clearly she did not care what any of the residents said. Since she refused to listen to anyone, I am going to skip her remarks and go to the next councilman who spoke.
            Councilman Rick Smith said, “It seems that we as a city have not done a good enough job educating the public about the plan'…'I think there is some very good things about this plan. To get good quality revitalization and redevelopment going on the East side'…'It seems everything has zeroed in on high density housing. I feel like if that we're not in the plan, I don't think everybody would be fighting'…'I think generally everyone agrees that we do need some type of revitalization, refreshing on the east side.” He is right about one thing; if the density is taken out the people would be much happier, and maybe not as opposed to the plan as they are now.
             Councilman Anthony Ricciardelli spoke next. He said, “There is so much good in Envision Oak Point. Revitalization of Plano Market Square Mall, the Ave K corridor, [and] affordable single family neighborhoods'…'There is so much good, yet I continue to have reservations about the housing density and the density of development in general'…'It seems that one thing that keeps coming up [from the people] is housing density.” Councilman Anthony Ricciardelli also talked about how one residents words resonated with him. “The plan talks about a community vision, and there are many areas of this plan in which we do have a community vision'…'That [must be a] vision that is broadly shared by a super majority of the community. Something that we can rally around and move forward on. But a vision is not a vision if it is 51/49 or worse yet 40/60. That is not something we can all rally around. That is not a statement for moving forward together'…'It has become clear to me that the high density is the critical sticking point [with] the community. I think if we were able to take that out and express no opinion on high density development in this plan, and leave that to individual zoning cases in the future, what is left is a broadly agreed upon vision that the community can rally around…'I think it is important to make a statement that we want and need revitalization and reinvestment in the Oak Point area and in East Plano'…'I think the inescapable conclusion is that the community is divided about the density of development in this plan'…'This is a plan we need to move forward on, but we need to move forward united. We can't move forward united if the plan contains a strong statement in favor of high density development.” While I agree that the community needs to be united on what it wants, I don't agree that we need government inference to make redevelopment happen. Councilman Ricciardelli also wanted to make modifications to the plan, but the Mayor put a stop to it.
           Councilman Harrison went next. “I think the plan is probably a very very good plan expect for one thing. I think if you go with retail, restaurants, and redevelopment you have a winner. The problem I have is high density. Three years ago I ran for this office on two things, high density and apartments. It involved cars, traffic, and education/PISD and what it was doing to residents. This plan is doing the same thing. We had two people talk about PISD, and we had about four people talk about traffic. The other thing that bothers me is the infrastructure that was built in East Plano was done with a comprehensive plan forty years ago. That is why we have to build a new [sewer] lift station by 121 and the Dallas North Tollway, because some of the infrastructure (sewer and water) is old and is getting dilapidated and needs to get repaired.” It also was not built with the Shops at Legacy and Legacy West in mind. That just proves that we cannot predict what will happen 30 years from now. He went on to say, “That is a thing we have not really thought about, because as we add people in Plano East we are going to put more strain on sewer and water. Those are the reasons I can't bring myself to vote for this plan.” In other words, Envision Oak Point plans for more people, but does not plan for things those people will need. East Plano's infrastructure is simply not equipped to handle 3000 new housing units.
             After Councilman Harrison finished his comments, the Mayor did something very fishy. He recessed the council into a private executive session. Now, why would the Mayor do that? Could it be he was worried that four council members were going to vote no and kill the plan? Council members Smith, Harrison, and Ricciardelli statements made it seem like they were 'no' votes. Could it be the Mayor wanted to twist some arms to make sure this plan passed? I would not put it passed the Mayor to resort to bully tactics just to get his way. He bullies residents, so why not council members? Reportedly, Councilman Grady was so upset that the plan might fail he started cursing his fellow council members out. Now, why would he get so mad? Could it be he has some kind of invested interest in seeing the plan implemented?
             The council were recessed from 11:22 pm – 11:48 pm. When they reconvened the Mayor said, “We broke into executive session to discuss legal matters.” If you believe they only broke to discuss legal matters, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
            After they returned Councilwoman Prince started her comments. “Two people mentioned that it is important to let the free market determine what happens. To that end, I think that is why it is important to have a variety of housing options included in this plan.” Although, technically those people said, “The free market and the residents.” She then went on to say, “Since we don't know exactly what is going to happen 10, 15, or 20 years down the road, I think it is important to have all the options on the table.” Someone should tell Councilwoman Prince that leaving development up to the residents and the free market does not take anything off the table. If the market and residents have a call for something, a developer will come along to fill it. She then appeared to go on to read from a written statement saying, “I think Plano has been fortunate to enjoy many years of success. It is easy to take that for granted, and assume that we will always be successful. Success is not guaranteed, and it is up to us as leaders to put a plan in place that will help insure that our city is economically viable and attractive to citizens in the future. I believe this plan attempts to balance the needs and views of a diverse group of citizens living in Plano today and the future.” Did she zone out during the residents comments? It seemed like she missed all the people who have problems with the plan, and their views were not listened to. She ended her comments with, “Cities with vision become cities that thrive, and because I want Plano to always be a city that thrives I will be supporting the vision tonight.” While there has not been a “plan” specifically for this area, Plano has had comprehensive plans before. For example, the Plano Tomorrow Plan which is currently in place. The city has created many plans that have failed East Plano, and will continue to fail. It is like we are driving towards a cliff and the driver (government) thinks the car just needs more gas. I have a better idea, the government needs get out of the car and leave the driving to the residents.
          Councilman Ron Kelly spoke next. He started with a question for the City Attorney, in which he asked her, “Is this a zoning case?” She said, “No.” He then quoted a resident who said, “Plano has always had vision…Some recent examples of that are Legacy West. It started with a vision.” Apparently it forgot to vision a lift station. “The resurgent of downtown Plano started with a vision…'Make no mistake about it, our actions tonight creates no zoning changes, and no development plans.” He also stated he has talked to residents from the area who had their homes go down in valve. “I think we can do much much better in that part of town. I have done some research into what people are looking for today and there is a consistent theme. They are looking for neighborhoods that are loaded with amenities. They are also looking for civic gathering places. They are looking for retail, businesses, restaurants, green open space and envision oak point can do that.” Excuse me Councilman Kelly, the developer who built Frisco Lakes in Frisco already did that on his own. He also did not cram the people in like sardines to do it. People are also not all looking for the things Ron Kelly stated. Apparently he did not listen to the residents who spoke either; some people want to live a more rural lifestyle. For example, the people in Parker (the town right next to East Plano) move there for that specific lifestyle. Houses in Parker have to have a minimum number of acres. Yes, acres not feet. The people there prefer the wide open space, and would certainly not be happy to live somewhere with buildings every few feet. Councilman Kelly finished by saying he would be supporting this vision.
          Now the people who helped get Councilman Kelly elected are extremely hurt and upset with him. He got elected after the Plano Tomorrow Plan was passed; his supporters voted for him to stop high density things like this. Now the people that voted for him feel he turned his back on them and say he is a traitor. However, this is not the first time Councilman Kelly's supporters have been disappointed by him, for he has voted for three budgets and three tax rates that his voters were not happy with. Councilman Kelly is up for reelection in May 2019. With his support for this plan and other votes, I predict he wont be getting the same support he got in the last election. I predict if he does not start voting the way the people who put him in office want and expect him to, Councilman Kelly will not win re-election in 2019.
Councilman Grady took his turn next. He started by saying, “Opportunity only knocks once'… 'You either have progress or you have regression'…'If you don't change others will pass you by'…'We need to be as progressive as possible'…'I really appreciate all of the input that everyone has put in either strongly one way or in strongly another.” He appreciates it so much he told his fellow councilmen that were against the plan, “F... you.” Councilmen Grady continued, “If we don't plan and determine things, then somebody else will.” Of course he does not tell us who this someone else is. He would prefer it if government did the planning. So, he supported the plan, and said it was a terrific piece of work.
            After Councilman Grady, Councilman Rick Smith spoke again. He said, “It is just a wish list'…'It is not being incorporated into our master plan [Plano Tomorrow Plan]'…'I want to see good things happen for the East side'…I am in support of this plan.” This shocked Councilman Rick Smith's supporters. He, too, was voted into office to stop high density, so his supporters also felt he turned is back on them. I must give Councilman Smith credit, however, for going up to the people who were unhappy with his vote and talking to them. He understood why they were upset, and he seemed sorry that he disappointed them. On the other hand, Councilman Kelly did not stay around to explain himself to those who were upset with him and his vote.
         Last but not least, the Mayor got his turn. The Mayor, yet again, did not care about what the residents had to say. He was for this plan from the beginning, and nothing was going to change his mind. He wants to make a Legacy West in East Plano. Personally I hate Legacy West; it is far too crowed for me. “We know how to do this [plan a development like Legacy West].” the Mayor said. Except when he planned for Legacy West he forgot about sewer and water for it. “[We] plan out in a thoughtful way.” He must mean thoughtful to people who want that kind of development. It is very unthoughtful to the people who don't like it. The Mayor then pointed out the gentleman who said he did not like the fact that he was being called a racist for simply opposing the plan. The Mayor said, “Not everyone who opposes Envision Oak Point is a racist but some are. When you equate high density and apartments with crime and bad schooling it's racist.” First of all Mayor, not everyone who is against high density or apartments are racist. South Lake does not have any apartments and does not want them. Does that make everyone in South Lake a racist? Of course not. Secondly, to allege that only minorities live in apartments and high density areas is completely racist. Who says only white people want to live in a rural or suburban area? Further more, people of all colors and backgrounds live in apartments. People who are worried about schools going down due to high density are not racist. They are worried the schools will become overcrowded. It is a fact that children in overcrowded schools do not do as well as children who don't. That has nothing to do with color; it has to do with the ratio of teachers to children. Here is another fact, the more people you have the more crime you have. Again that is just what the numbers tell us. It is one reason why people who compare crime rates of cities only look at cities with similar population sizes. It would also not be fair to compare Plano's crime rate with that of a city with only 1000 people. If they did, Plano would have the higher crime rate every time. It is also racist of the Mayor to allege that only minorities commit crimes. The last time I checked white people commit crimes too.
           I titled this piece, The Day Democracy Died, because more people were against the plan than were for it. If you did the math at the being of this post, you would have realized that 58 people were against the plan and 21 were for it. Even though the USA is a constitutional republic, we do hold elections democratically. If the people who were there last night voted on this plan, it would have failed by a landslide. That is only the people who filled out cards. More people emailed and called the council members to voice their opposition to the plan, however, those people's votes were not seen. Six of the council members ignored the results of the “vote”, and by ignoring the will of the people, they killed the last bit of Democracy in Plano. Why? The reason is the same in every oligarchy, they think they know what is best.


This is Plano's Political Pit Bull

             ​On June 25, 2018, the City Council voted unanimously to lease five acres of city land for free, so Radisson could build a hotel on it. The land is next to the Plano Event Center.  City staff believes that the new hotel will bring more business to the Plano Event Center and more tourist to Plano. Having a hotel next to the Event Center has been an 18-year goal for Mark Thompson, Executive Director of Visit Plano. Apparently, he has been trying to get a company to build a hotel for 18 years, but no one has agreed until now.   
          There are currently fourteen hotels in the area. The nearest hotel is Fairfield Inn & Suites 3415 Premier Dr, Plano, TX 75023. It is six minutes from the Plano Event Center. The farthest is Super 8 at 1704 N Central Expy, Plano, TX 75074. That is eight minutes away.  Apparently, those fourteen hotels are not helping the Event Center bring in business or tourists. However, city bureaucrats believe a hotel next door to the Event Center should do the trick. Maybe the staff did not see the article in Community Impact that said, "[H]otel occupancy is down in Plano." The article indicates that, while the supply of hotels has gone up, the demand for rooms has gone down.  That is probably why the city had to basically give away land so a company would build a hotel on it. 
          If Radisson really wanted to build a hotel in Plano, it could afford to buy or lease the land. The parent company of Radisson is Marriott International. That company is worth almost 50 billion dollars. In the first quarter of 2018 Marriot International's revenue was $1.23 billion, and its net income was $398 million. Their net profit margin for the first quarter was 32.28%. Clearly, if Marriot thought building a hotel next to the Event Center would be profitable, it could have and would have paid for the land to build a hotel long ago. The government did not have to give the Marriot anything. By giving the land away, the city lost the money it would have made from a sale or a lease agreement. It also sends a message to other companies. If a business wants to come to Plano,  they can hold out for a handout.  
        This deal is a disgrace to the free market and is not capitalism.  In a free market system, the government gets out of the way. It is not supposed to do things to boost or hinder business. Companies succeed or fail on their own. 
       This act of corporate welfare is a prime example of corporatism. Corporatism is a practice invented by the infamous Mussolini, himself. When most people think of Mussolini's fascism, they only think of the violence attached to it. What they forget, is that there is an economic side too.  
     One aspect of Fascist economics is dirigism. This is where the government controls the incentives of investment and economic planning. Using dirigism, the government can restrict any action or promote any action. This can help or hurt companies. When politicians and bureaucrats create stifling regulations, they restrict business. When they give money or other economic incentives to corporations they are promoting it. The goal is to control who succeeds and who doesn't. The result is an all-powerful controlling bureaucratic government that thinks it knows what is best. 
      Do Plano citizens really want a controlling economic fascist local government? I didn't think so... 
But what do the people know? According to the City, nothing. For we are only providing their paycheck. 
This is Plano's Political Pit Bull Signing Off

          The charitable organization We Got Your Six is looking to build a village for homeless veterans and have their headquarters in Plano. The village would be called Heroes Village. The group wants to build this village on about 50 acres. According to the Executive Director of We Got Your Six, “We will take the property and divide it into sections. One section will have solar powered tiny homes in it where the homeless veterans will live, this section will also have a trailer as a common room with television, computer lab, and other entertainment means. This section will also have a trailer that will be used for teaching classes as well as have offices for counselors to do their work there. We will also have a workshop, so people that have trade skills to share, can come and teach people their trade.
          Another section will have our hydroponic gardens, where the homeless veterans will grow their own food, helping make the property self sufficient. We will also be growing hay and wheat which will be used as a cash crop, so that we can help fund the facility without having to always rely on grants and donations. This is also one of the ways that the homeless veterans earn their stay in the program, so that we know they are serious about being in the program. Another section will have a barn, stable, round pens, and other things for our horses and cattle that we will use on the property as another income sources. The homeless veterans will be taking care of all the maintenance around the property and will be taking care of the livestock and horses. We will also have apiaries, so that we can have our own source of honey and bees wax that we will be able to sell as yet another form of income.
       All of these different parts of the program will be run by the homeless veterans with guidance and direction from the agricultural departments of the local colleges as well as locals that have agreed to help support We Got Your Six in our mission to help end veteran homelessness. In fact, once we secure the property, which we are looking for investors for, we have a company willing to help sponsor 5 of the tiny homes for our village.”
         As a patriotic dog, I love this idea. The growth of homeless veterans is on the rise. This program sounds like a wonderful way to give homeless vets homes, skills, and jobs. It will also give our brave veterans something we all need, a purpose. With that purpose will come a sense of accomplishment.
          In order to create Heroes Village, We Got Your Six needs land designed for agriculture. East Plano has over 700 acres of land next to Levon Farms and Collin College, off of Spring Creek and Jupiter. This area is known as Oak Point, and it would be a perfect place for Heroes Village. Since We Got Your Six wants to works with Colleges, the fact that this area is next to Collin College is a great bonus for them.
         The development of Heroes Village would be wonderful for Plano, since it would bring jobs. Furthermore, the City Government gives out taxpayer money to large developers and corporations that don't need it; however, Heroes Village does need money and would bring new jobs and new residents to Plano. Personally, I would rather see tax dollars go towards helping build Heroes Village, of which will benefit the city, then a large corporation that doesn't need it. The City also doesn't just give away money, it gives away land too. For example, the City just gave land away to Radisson, so it can build an unneeded hotel on it; even though the corporation that own Radisson is worth 50 billion dollars. I would rather see land donated for a noble cause and for something that is needed. I can't think of something more noble and needed then a place to live for a homeless veteran.
        If you would like to find out more about We Got Your Six or donate to the charity, go to www.wgy6.org. If you would like to see Heroes Village built at Oak Point please contact the members of City Council. You can email them at the following emails……
Rick Grady – [email protected]
Tom Harrison – [email protected]
Ron Kelly – [email protected]
Anthony Ricciardelli - [email protected]
Mayor Harry LaRosiliere – [email protected]
Rick Smith – [email protected]
Angela Miner – [email protected]
Kayci Prince – [email protected]
This is Plano's Political Pit Bull signing off.