Susie's Flip Flop:
Is She Disingenuous or Just Dizzy?
Rep. Byrd first votes “No”...um... then “Yes”...regarding eminent domain abuse
DESPITE THE SOMBER, mortician-like faces of the El Paso City Hall politicos, there’s been a lot of theater of the absurd comedy going on recently. That is if you can understand all the mutterings and stutterings.
At Tuesday’s (1-20-07) City Council meeting, City rep. Eddie Holguin moved to introduce a resolution that prohibited the use of eminent domain to strip El Paso citizens of their homes and businesses in order to transfer them to wealthy developers. [Read proposed ordinance]
The resolution introduced by attorney Stuart Blaugrund reflected the language of anti-eminent domain abuse resolutions drafted at a national level by the Institute for Justice and by the City of Austin, Texas. In essence, the resolution stated that eminent domain should only be used for public uses like schools or hospitals. It can be used to condemn specific properties that are a hazardous to the community, but it should not be used to raze entire areas that include viable businesses and homes. Most important of all, it should not be used to hand over people’s homes and businesses to super-wealthy developers who almost always have more connections with the political class than the communities who are victims of eminent domain abuse.
At first, Holguin’s motion passed by a vote of 5 to 4, with the Mayor casting the tie-breaker. To everyone’s surprise, Susie Byrd—who always sides with pro-eminent domain majority on the council—voted in favor of the motion for the City Attorney to work on the anti-eminent domain abuse proposal.
Then the politicos took a coffee break in the room behind City Council chambers.
When they came back to the public hall, Ms. Byrd decided she wanted to change her vote on the eminent domain issue. (What happened during her backroom meeting? Did she get admonished by William Sander’s son-in-law, Robert O’Rourke? Or did she get a phone call from the big chief himself who helped her see the light? Or some other "advisor?")
Byrd muttered and stuttered an explanation as to why she wanted to change her vote that went something like this:
“I...um...I have been stewing over this..I ..well..er..um...if we can reconsider it for a moment...Mayor, one of the...er...um...and I guess...representative Holguin..the reason I wanted to revisit this...my position has not changed on this...I think that...that...the statute is sufficiently limiting in what...um... a city can do...and um..we’ve done all sort of things to affirm that...um...and..and...er... I voted in favor...you know... because it has always been a council..I mean...a person’s prerogative to....um...but I don’t know if you just wanted us to state whether we support further limiting that...um..I..I..just want to go with whatever the state...and..um..it has sufficiently eliminated..plus...er... so that we do not put the city attorney through additional work that we might not support once it’s gone through an introduction process."
“Ahh...um...I ...I just wanted to make that clear,” Byrd said.
[Thank you for clarifying that Ms. Byrd!]
Then Byrd, to change the subject and shift the focus away from her own confusion, asked if attorney Stuart Blaugrund shouldn’t be registered as a lobbyist?
No, the City Attorney told Susie, as long as he is bringing up his resolutions publicly and not involved in backroom private deals with the politicians (like Billy Sanders, for instance?), then there’s no need to register him as a lobbyist.
After Ms. Byrd’s highly articulate explanation of why she flipped flopped, Presi Ortega proposed that “The City take no action on the resolution.”
Then City Hall voted again. This time Susie Byrd voted firmly and clearly to "take no action" that would limit eminent domain abuse.
After calling it a day, the politicians all went home to watch themselves on TV. Except there was a media blackout on the City's vote to "not take action" on eminent domain abuse. Not a peep or a squeek about this flip flop has appeared in the mainstream newspapers or any TV station.
Our local media probably just didn’t want to waste their super-valuable time on an issue as insignificant as something that’s going to result in thousands of people being displaced and uprooted from their homes and businesses.
If it’s any consolation, we’ll keep you informed on the web. Stay tuned for more.
[Watch the video of Susie Byrd’s flip flop] |
