Unfortunately I was not able to chat with any member of city council on this issue before they voted yesterday to strike part of the proposed amendments/rewrites to the neighborhood association ordinance. In my place stood ill-informed, or just plain stupid, city attorneys who had been co-opted by neighborhood association stalwarts on the issue. The result is a nightmare scenario where political organizations can masquerade as civic associations and neighborhood associations.
Where do I start?
Apparently folks at the city have been eyeing the political involvement language for neighborhood associations (NAs from here on out because it's just too much to type) for a few years now. Both city staff and council members were noticing that NAs were starting to broaden their activities as they started to get their political legs under them. It was a natural progression - one that you can track historically at the national level where non-profit organizations sought to make their lobbying efforts (legislative outcomes) more potent by trying to affect political outcomes (birth of 527s and others).
Once Tom Brown pulled his little stunt (that ended up being unsuccessful because he only reads the Bible and nowhere in there did it tell him to register as a specific purpose political committee before setting off on his mission from God) things started moving fast at the city pertaining to any group threatening a recall.
In past recall efforts the results were laughably short of the needed signatures. When Brown whipped out his petitions folks at the city realized that recall efforts were no longer a laughing matter. Their plan to stop NAs from being PACs first and NAs second had to be initiated. However, it was too late - the NAshad become way too powerful and now control not only the representatives themselves, but entire city departments. The NAs made sure the political language was struck from the rewrite.
However, now that the issue has been put on the table there a lot of people who have started thinking about the ordinance and how they can use it to their advantage. I have on good authority that one local man of the cloth allegedly has a city wide plan to infiltrate NAs, call officer elections and load up the leadership with his God fearing minions who act at his direction. They will register each association as a PAC with the state and collect "dues" as PAC donations. The city will then be forced - BY THEIR OWN ORDINANCE - to give this soldier in God's army their undivided attention and even spend city dollars (tax dollars) to promote and support his agenda. Just read the ordinance Download NA ordinance.
Check out section 2.102.070 Services Available to Recognized Neighborhood Associations. Are you sure you want the city printing and distributing the political musings of these NAs with your tax dollars? Well, the morons in the city attorneys office told council to make sure that happens.
And the fun doesn't stop there.
Now that it is clear that any PAC can become a NA and any NA can become a PAC, there's some work to do - mainly register yourself with the state and start shaking down developers and real estate folks for donations! The NAs are highly involved in the zoning and development of their neighborhoods and they can squeeze prospective developers and current land owners into making large donations to their political fund in return for not protesting their plans. That money can then be spent to purchase a new candidate or line the pockets of a sitting council member who favors their positions. Can you imagine the kind of power these groups would have when they could pass $10,000 PAC checks to sitting representatives? The NAs have already showed they are so powerful that the city will violate a business owner's civil rights to please them, what happens when they command tens of thousands of dollars in campaign cash?
If you were a proponent of getting big money out of local politics - too bad for you. The latest ruling at council has set up these NAs to be megafunds for upcoming elections. From now on if you win their NA debate, you don't just get an endorsement - you get a check!
And just think - you only know of the alleged plot by a guy we already kind of know. Can you imagine who else is lurking out there ready to start a PAC, register it as a NA and get to using your tax dollars to print and distribute their manifesto? If you just had an image of Norma Chavez flash into you're brain - we think alike.
The city has ensured that what was once a program to help give residents a voice in matters that affect their neighborhood, is now just another reposit for political dollars and all the factionalism and back biting that comes with it. So much for honest, open community input. Way to go, morons - your ruined a good thing.
note: neighborhood associations aren't actually a good thing because they empower a small few who do not represent the majority of residents.
--------------
How did this happen? How did the city turn something so simple into such a mess? And believe me - it's going to be a mess. The city really can't stop this from happening - the politicalization (is that a word?) of these NAs has been known for a while and now it's a matter of law - PACs can be NAs and NAs can be PACs. So, really how did this happen?
First of all, watching council do its little dance each week is important because you get a lot of clues as to what is being said during executive session. The lovely and talented Ms. Acosta let the cat out of the bag when she lamented the fact that lawyers had once told her the PAC ban was okay and now were reneging on that opinion. A little digging around city hall yielded an admission that the city attorneys office was intimidated by neighborhood associations threatening to sue. On what basis? Apparently freedom of speech and since most of the people who work for the city attorneys office are experts in real estate and procurement law, they just figured the NAs had a point they didn't feel like arguing against.
A five minute conversation with the Texas Ethics Commission, Attorney General's office or any lawyer waltzing by the county courthouse would have proven the neighborhood associations to be full of shit.
As for Carl Starr's lawsuit threat - they laughed at his suit because he had a few major mistakes that would have resulted in it immediately being dismissed on the grounds it was stupid and incorrectly cited. So don't let Carl toot his horn when it was specific members of the NA community who were lobbying the legal department, other city staff and members of council. They (NAs) want the ability to start PACs under their NA name and serve a dual role - community advisers and king makers.
Here's why the city attorneys are stupid. They define in the proposed rewrite the following:
F. "Political action group" means any organization or group of persons, which engages in any of the following political election activities: the endorsement of a candidate for municipal public office; the soliciting or receiving of contributions from any person, group, or entity for the purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate for a municipal public office; the production of publications or advertising for or against a candidate for municipal public office or political parties; or the support of or opposition to any initiative or referendum petition drive or for the adoption or defeat of any ballot proposition.
If you're involved with a group of people who are organized by a charter of any kind, collect dues and are recognized by any level of government and you do any of the things mentioned above - YOU HAVE TO REGISTER AS A PAC. Just ask Tom Brown - he now knows.
The key to that provision up there is that the word "individual" doesn't appear. No person is being told they can not participate in any of the electoral, political or campaign functions listed above. You can be the President of the Sunny Slope Neighborhood Association and still personally do all of those things listed above. Hell, you could even be the President of the Sunny Slope NA and the biggest political fund raiser in El Paso and campaign manager for ten candidates and three ballot initiatives and there's no problem with that. What you can't do is sign up your PAC to be a recognized NA by the City of El Paso and receive the special benefits afforded those recognized entities. And that my friends is the key - special benefits.
When you receive special status with the government you may have to give up some of your "rights" in order to achieve that status. Ask a soldier if he or she may speak freely about whatever they want, whenever they want. Their rights under the constitution - most notably the First Amendment - are suspended due to the government's recognition of their status. The second an Army Private no longer wishes to be recognized by the U.S. Government as a soldier in their Army, he or she can say whatever the hell they want (I used the rank of private here because they aren't generally privy to major secrets and the rules change for people who know things - if you know what I mean).
A better example here are non-profit organizations. A non-profit organization, much like a NA, seeks to obtain a special status from the United States Government. This is generally in the form of some kind of tax break for donors and themselves. The government obliged to officially recognize non-profit organizations and give them a tax break so far as they abide a certain set of rules.
Here's where the parallel really begins - so pay attention people.
One of the rules that the United State Government puts on non-profits is that they must not do any of the shit listed in the italicized tabbed section above. If you do any of that crap, the United States Government will not only stop recognizing your non-profit status and start taxing you, they will also likely arrest you and charge you with a crime.
It's important to note that if you're currently a member of a non-profit group you can do any of the shit listed in the italicized tabbed section above on your own time and it's not a crime. You just can't do it in your official capacity as a member of the non-profit.
How the U.S. Government's prohibition on political activities for certain recognized groups receiving a "special benefit" isn't a first amendment issue and El Paso's prohibition of NAs functioning as PACs is, boggles my mind. How the city attorneys office doesn't know this is astounding... and sad, I guess.
If you take the side of the city attorneys office's reasoning on this issue, then you think Tom Brown and his group's first amendment rights were trampled on by the Texas 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. If you think this ordinance rewrite infringed on free speech protections, then you're saying you support Tom Brown and what his group did. You can not have it any other way.
So - did the city attorneys office issue an opinion to city council members that was in conflict with what the Texas 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the mayor's own recall? Yes they did.
To make this clear to all of you who suck up too much Juarez tire fire smoke. What the rewrite was doing was as follows -
Federal government says you can't be a non-profit and a PAC.
City of El Paso say you can't be a NA and a PAC.
Federal government says that if you want to be a PAC, you are free to do so, but you will lose your non-profit status. You may also start a PAC eligible entity under almost the exact same name as your non-profit if you'd like - however you can't take tax deductible donations.
City of El Paso says that if you want to be a PAC, you are free to do so, but you will lose your NA status. You may also start a PAC eligible entity under almost the exact same name as your NA if you'd like - however you will have to make sure they meet at separate times with separate agendas.
Please tell me I'm getting through to you people.
If I was a city council member I would be livid right now. For the city attorneys office to tell you that the rewrite was in violation of the United State Constitution was a baldfaced lie.
Little o'le David K the village idiot laid out the legal argument protecting the re-write and I only graduated from the second best junior college in El Paso (UTEP). You would figure with several million dollars worth of salaried attorneys prancing around in fancy suits at the city, one of them would have thought of the non-profit status argument. Then again, these people aren't real lawyers, they just play them on Tuesdays.
--------------------------
If you'd like to register your neighborhood association as a PAC right now before the city might change the law go to the link http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/filinginfo/g&mpacfrm.htm. It takes about an hour total to get yourself signed up and made all legal like. I would do it so that you can make sure your NA is grandfathered in. There's really no reason not be registered - it just adds a little width to your influence at city hall.
Those brain trusts sitting in a semi-circle on Tuesdays will be a lot less likely to twiddle with their computers and smartphones while you speak if they know you're commanding a five figure PAC. Every time that Lisa Turner asks for more time and gets shot down she can make out a check to the Mayor's opponent from her neighborhood associations PAC - I bet she'll get all the time she wants after $5,000 or goes to the challenger.
Forget I said any of this - I'm starting to think I could make some money on this deal. I've had the wrong attitude all along - I shouldn't be taking action, I should be taking advantage!
So what are you saying? Carl Starr's lawsuit was "vague and overly-broad"? LMAO
Posted by: Allen | March 11, 2012 at 11:02 PM