Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Bad Day in Court for David Morgan and the City of Richardson Staff

It was a bad day to be an upper city staff member of the City of Richardson today as they have been accused of effectively calling and holding an illegal election. There was lots of explaining to do to a judge hearing the case about Richardson’s City Charter election a few years ago.

Even more years ago, William Gordon filed suit against the city after city officials told him that if he didn’t like the fact that the city council violated the City Charter by hold secret conclave when it was not allowed, then just go ahead sue them about it. So, he did.

During that lengthy court battle the city council decided they needed to change the charter to allow for secret conclave (Executive Sessions). The mayor at the time, Steve Mitchell, saw that there was a problem with charter violations. He and other decided to not hold secret conclave until the charter was change to allow for it.

In addition to allowing for secret meetings, the council and city staff also saw the need to allow the city council to have meetings anywhere in the world they would like to do so and submitted another change at the same time to allow for the city council to meet anywhere.

Previously, the City Charter only allowed for their meeting to be conducted in public view and also only at city hall, or the municipal building as it was called at the time.

There are a few items to be concerned with during the prior charter change election. There was no public notice in a local paper as required, the campaign for the charter change was run out of the Richardson Chamber of Commerce and all of the then current council members, with the exception of Pris Hayes,  appeared to have publicly endorse the passage of the propositions with their signature appearing on the propaganda put out by the political action committee the president of the Richardson Chamber of Commerce put out using resources of the Richardson Chamber of Commerce. Just in case you do not know, the Richardson Chamber of Commerce is primarily fund with City of Richardson taxpayer dollars, a million dollars a year or so. Bill Sproull admitted he ran the Political Action Committee supporting the proposed charter change out of the Richardson Chamber of Commerce and used the postage meter for the mail. Those types of action are not permitted by chamber rules. They are also not allowed with the IRS considering they are a non-profit. Got some bad boys over there at the chamber too.

As for why the election was an illegal election, the city staff wanted to consider their monthly newsletter a “newspaper.” The judge said Richardson Today was not a newspaper, it have no sports section and not editorial and other things a newspaper does have.

The city staff did not post notice of the charter election in a “real” newspaper and in effect, the election should be overturned.

So overall it was a very bad day for those who want to have secret meeting of the city council and a bad day for those council members who think they should have the ability to meet and do public business anywhere in the world they have an itch to do so.

It is my hope, the election gets overturned and redone, LEGALLY this time around.


  1. The biggest problem with city staff and council is they treat thestate law and city charter as merely a list of suggestions when in fact they are the law and a thing that must be complied with.

  2. Richardson's city attorney DELIBERATELY wrote its ordinance to circumvent the federal ruling on Garland's program. He thinks they can get away with its ordinance as long as it gives tenants the right to refuse, while in reality, they aren't allowing tenants to say "no".

    The city council has no idea what it did by approving the ordinance update in Nov 2011, which added a warrant procedure.

  3. It's so unfortunate that it requires a lawsuit for citizens to get the attention of the city council.

    We really hope the city council will reconsider the rental registration program ordinance before a group of landlords and renters sue the city. We don't want our legal fees paid with our tax money!

  4. When the judge told the city attorney that election did not comply with the law, that should tell people the direction that this suit will be taking. The city attorney arguing that the word "must" in the statute means "suggestion" is laughable. The city will lose this lawsuit. We can only hope the right thing will be done and the whole election will be overturned. Then they can do it over correctly next time.

  5. The most significant issue at hand here is that scurrilous activities in the city of Richardson are being guarded by an unscrupulous bunch who use any/all public resource to assure their agenda prevails whenever respectable citizens call them out. John Murphy and his f***-off dare comes to mind.

    The average citizen, and even a group of respectable, willing citizens, have little ability to afford justice when faced with the legal manoeuvring to avoid culpability the city pays for using the public coffers. All it takes is a crooked lawyer, and a pile of money to manipulate the legal system toward the desired end. Right and wrong are secondary in Richardson.

    To make matters worse, the hi-jacking of Richardson's public resources by a bunch of spend-thrifts has resulted in buying off anybody who might object and get some attention. (If you can't be bought, you get a scarlet letter attached to your name) Virtually the entire list of who's-who in Richardson society are in the tank, enjoying the spoils and defending the bad behavior using denial and deception, the likes of which David Morgan is famous for.

    The beneficiaries to all the frivolous spending are quite content to look the other way when it comes to making tough decisions regarding fiscal responsibility. What! Cut spending? Reduce benefits? Are you crazy?

    By way of cover up, take a look at the lame excuse for the "on-line check book" that it is conspicuously missing almost every significant revenue and expenditure pertaining to public business. Notice there are few current entries.

    Where are the deposits in this check book that load the account for the disbursements shown? Where is the balance in the account? Where are the check numbers?

    While you're at it, search out the pay offs to David Morgan and other city operatives.

    The "on-line check book" is suppose to be a transparent view of all municipal transactions. What we see here is yet another crafted diversion from the truth, openness and transparency the public is demanding. It's a sham!

    Yet, the City of Richardson has managed to hood-wink the well-meaning leaders in Austin by representing this as compliant with requirements to achieve the "Gold Award" for transparency. Ha! The Gold Award should be for successful deception.

    And, friends, that's what this is all about. The people who hurt the most from high taxes and fees are not the recipients of the corporate welfare program being orchestrated by the goons ramrodding city hall.

    Those who have control over our public resources have borrowed and stolen at every opportunity in the pursuit of self-indulgence. The price for this self-indulgence is a broken local government, despised and cursed for exploiting the community and robbing it of the pristine, well funded, managed and appreciated town that could have been.

    What we have here is a run down slave encampment with slum-lords who have seized control and are running the show. World history is full of similar periods of human depravity. Notice how many survived. It seems the bad guys usually get top billing. Nothing new in Richardson.

    The Lord's blessing will be upon William Gordon and Cheri Duncan-Hubert for having the courage to challenge the evil.

    There is no hope for Richardson as long as the necessary number of people continue to enable the looting of the treasury.

    Nathan Morgan

  6. Dave Morgan? Is he not one of the Ronnie Glanton (Sherrill Park) supporters. Maybe a little to close?

  7. Anonymous @12/292012

    Mr. Morgan has "supervised" Sherrill Park Golf Course and Ronny Glanton who runs it since he became an assistant city manager.

    Because of that supervision, any criticism of golf course operations/losses also criticizes Mr. Morgan. The huge losses suffered by the golf course over the last five years would have resulted in heads rolling if the course had been in the private sector.

    But what happens in Richardson? The failure of the greens on course 1 (causing the worst losses in the history of the golf course and requiring some $700,000 to be transfered from the general fund)
    merely strengthens Mr. Morgan's support of the golf course management to the Council. And THEY BELIEVE HIM.

    Now management has a Guaranteed salary - a "maximum of
    $225,000", but if you look closely, most if not all of his persoanl expenses are paid from golf course revenues. For exammple, why shuld course revenues pay tournament fees for tournament he entener? Or pay an accountant for reports that his contract says the the City many not ask for?

    Hey, its all good! Mr. Mrgan got a promotion and a good raise, course management got to keep all their expenses and their job.

    But what tells you the truth about this contract is what staff said at the Council meeting to adopt it: "Now, this contract wouldn't be applicable to another professional."

    In other words, this contract, like the one before it, is one only applicable to a long term city insider, and noother well qualified golf management person.