Thursday, August 29, 2013

The Richardson City Council is in the Mood to "Retreat"

click on image to enlarge



1.       (of an army) withdraw from enemy forces as a result of their superior power or after a defeat.

2.       move back or withdraw

3.       withdraw to a quiet or secluded place.

4.       change one's decisions, plans, or attitude, as a result of criticism from others


1.       an act of moving back or withdrawing.

2.       an act of changing one's decisions, plans, or attitude, esp. as a result of criticism from others.

3.       a signal for a military force to withdraw


  1. Very, very disappointing to see that under the new mayor, transparency and keeping the public informed takes a very back seat. I wonder how many people would have voted for Laura if they knew she would get a zero for transparency as opposed to Amir's 10.

    1. Couldn't agree with you more! Setting goals and basically the agendas for this term should be a very public event.


  2. Run away! Run away!

  3. Were the goal setting "retreats "public"? Yes, in the sense that one could go very early in the morning to the Eisemann Center, the scene of those meetings.

    The problem is they weren't televised as were the Budget Retreat sessions a the Women's Center. And that lapse is a problem.

    A common comment regarding this and past councils is that there is little if any public discussion of issues by the members before they vote on an issue. They listen to a presentation by staff, (unfortunately most times staff presents only one means of solving the issue), one or two members may ask nominal questions, others sit mute most of the time, as though there was a penalty for their expressing a personal comment, then seven hands go up in favor.

    So when does the public get to see real give and take discussion of issues among members? Unfortunately, most times we don't. It could be surmised by the routine 7-0 votes that discussion among the members regarding an issue occurred at some point, but it doesn't seem to be where the public can see it.

    So where is the best opportunity to see and hear actual give and take discussions from our elected officials? In the meetings or "retreats" where goals are set. And that's why it was unfortunate that those Eisemann Center meetings were not televised. Citizens not able to attend in person couldn't see or hear real discussions of important issues and what our individual representatives thought about them and why.

    Goal setting "retreats" in the future should be televised and archived. Not to do so this time was a mistake.

  4. Are the goals the Council's or Chuck Eisemann's?

  5. This is the worst kind of criticism because it is the kind of criticism that doesn't really mean anything and just hurts people personally. When you people write things like this I don't think you really grasp the effect it has on the people who are reading it, especially when some of them are the same people you are bashing day in and day out.

    Obviously everyone knows that "retreats" are not uncommon for teams or groups to hold for various purposes. Saying we're "n the mood to retreat" is a bit misleading and makes it sound like we aren't interested in doing our jobs. You may disagree with how we do them but I don't think you can seriously argue that we are disinterested.

    To the Chuck Eisemann question, give it a rest already. You guys want the truth? Yes, he has influence. Yes he makes a point of being very involved with city affairs. Yes he has direct access to the council. Guess what? So do you.

    If you want to be a part of what happens in Richardson, pick up the damn phone and give any of us a call. Or send us an email. We are not difficult to find. We'll talk to you, we'll meet you for coffee to have a serious discussion, we'll tell you what WE (not Eisemann) think.

    By the way, what do you think Chuck's interests are? Do you think he's money-hungry? I can assure you he's doing just fine in that department, and he was doing fine long before the Richardson Coalition and long before Gary Slagel. Like anyone else, he's concerned about legacy and he's concerned about the city he has chosen to call home. He wants Richardson to flourish like we all do and again, you may disagree with how he does business, but he gets it done. He's helped us on so many fronts and still continues to do more despite the apparent hatred of so many people who don't even know him.