Author: parischamber

All local government is ideology

At its core, ideology is identity . . .

Too often, local governments – those we elect – end up listening to and carrying out  recommendations of staff bureaucrats, which raises some interesting observations:

For decades we’ve been “educated” to believe that local elections are not partisan, so no party affiliations are disclosed, as party labels might sway voters.

So the potential for local government officials to sway elections in their party’s favor seems obvious.

Special interest groups that put government interests ahead of taxpayers have long held sway over local elections. They want them to be officially declared nonpartisan – because party labels will sway voters.

Any faux outrage over partisanship entering local government elections is hilariously hypocritical.

Some of the indignation comes from those who routinely accuse others of being partisan because of their policy beliefs, their ideology. But they insist that their positions are not partisan.

Partisanship may most often be associated with party identity but, at its very core, it’s ideology

We all have an ideology – a collection of beliefs and ideas – but some people criticize someone with whom they disagree as an “ideologue ’… just as they apply a negative connotation to ‘partisan’ while extolling their own partisan ideology by claiming that they ‘just follow the science/experts.’

But cooperation between elected officials belonging to different parties is more likely to assure more transparency and better government.

The absence of party labels confuses voters; a voter who must choose from among a group of candidates whom he or she knows nothing about will have no meaningful basis in casting a ballot.

Today, local government is political.

Affable, cheerful, sincere, political-partisans that we elect are given the authority and responsibility to spend our dollars wisely, to make decisions that benefit each citizen equally, and to assure that our schools are teaching the values of limited government and equal economic opportunity in a society that requires personal accountability.

Unfortunately, those we elected have failed us for decades.We have allowed their political identity to hide behind a ‘nonpartisan’ facade.

They’ve listen to and allowed the “good government” professionals – the city managers, school administrators and the political opportunistic – those who benefit personally and professionally – to lead the process of setting the policies and making key decisions they want . . .

The reason we elect so many of the partisans is because they’re nice people; they mean well. Some just fail to understand, however, that the first part of their job is to ride herd on those whom we pay to carry out the policies to meet goals that benefit all of the community.

Too many of these seats are conceded to those who are part of the crowd who believe government is good and there should be more of it. It’s why Texas has the second-highest local debt nationally, and the 4th highest property tax rates in the nation.

Governmental staffs and the professional educationalists want these problems ignored.

When its for “the children” and “community” or “economic” development, there is no end that these partisans see to the use of taxpayer’s money.

When most of us think of government, we think of civil government with its various laws and controls.But local government is, like all government, ideology.

But in the most basic of terms, there are essentially two kinds of government – internal and external. Internal government or self-government is the most important and always shapes the nature of external government.

Self-government comes from the heart and the conscience, one’s character, motives, affections, and convictions of life. Self-government affects everything in a person’s life – the way one relates to his fellowman – his speech – his aspirations – his conduct – his hopes – his future.

Every sphere of civil local government is a reflection of this internal sphere.

Shouldn’t we ask ourselves why government keeps expanding?

In fact, the more self-government the people possess, the less external forms of government are actually needed.

No government can be good – or just – unless its citizenry and rulers have learned to govern themselves.

Paris Texas seems to fear what kind of town it needs to be . . .

return to the Paris Texas Chamber

TRASH PICK-UP . . .

 

Back in July, 2022, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce warned, “Privatization of trash collection is coming. It will be interesting to read the fine print.”

Evidently, we said, privatized trash pickup is more efficient and less costly. (And added, “than by government? Gasp!”) 

Sure enough, in February 2024, trash pickup by a private firm begins, and the base rate increases to $18.08 a month for residential pickup. This is good until September 2024 – which is a scary thought or a reason to rejoice, depending on whether you’re paying or receiving the money from the new rate.  The way the City of Paris keeps book, this is a $1.49 monthly increase.

CARDS, the private firm will receive $10.29 of the $18.08 fee to pickup and deliver the trash to the landfill.  The rest of the fee goes to the city for “bill administration, liaison between the two, and monitoring the city-owned landfill.”  Included in this rate-game-playing, $1.79 is ear-marked for “city street usage and maintenance.”

As CARDS picks up and delivers the trash for 10.29 per month, isn’t that the trash pickup rate? So, when such city categories as “administration, liaison, monitoring, and city street usage” estimated costs are increased, WHY aren’t such costs included as a rate increase? 

After the addition of two new assistant city managers, since 2022,  surely “administration” charges have increased?

 

The city budget HAS not increased by diffusion.

Back in 2022, when explaining why there was no corresponding reduction in rates when trash pickup frequency was reduced, the city manager offered that the reduction of trash collection is related to the volume of waste collected, not its frequency of collection.  He also claimed that the last rate increase was 12-years ago, and that he would not recommend adjusting rates “at this time”.

The Paris Texas Chamber observed that IF the reduced trash collection was related to the volume produced, Paris was either producing less trash or littering the streets with it – and it was hard to tell which . . .

Our Chamber also said If we were not losing population, it would be as clear as Buttermilk.

The Paris Chamber stated that “It’s difficult to believe there hasn’t been a rate increase on everything over the past 10-years. And there has been – check a few past water and sewer bills.”  And we still stand by that . . .

 Every time an “adjustment” is made on “administrative, liaison or management cost” relating to city services, a rate increase is soon to follow. Money is swept from services – based on an estimated cost the city assigns for those items – and added to the general budget. That process allows the city to keep crying about how sad it is that rates for a service must be increased to cover the increased expenses of the selected service.

Its all a financial game or a way to fleece the rate-payers.   

Worse, what should be a criminal act of deliberate lies, citizens are told that trash pickup rates have “not been adjusted in more then 10-years.” It’s the chattering of weasels.

In 2017-18, the city added an estimated $7.60 monthly to the local sewer rates (around $100 a year MORE than we were paying) to “help pay for a new sewer treatment plant.” Then, in 2020, water and sewer rates were again increased another $$7.65 a month for 5,000 gallons. This we were told, again, was needed to help the sale of bonds to “finance construction of a new wastewater plant.”

And if the income from rate increases isn’t in an established, ear-marked fund for a new plant, as was promised, where did the money go? If the money isn’t there, where is the accountability? For that matter, where is the accountability for the jiggery-pokery with estimated “related? costs and deducting it from a services’ rate income?

 

Priorities lack structure.

Even published legal notices in Paris lack transparency; you seldom know what’s where – addresses are hidden behind legal descriptions of who did the surveys and unknown large block numbers.

Transparency, despite any claims to the contrary, does not exist in Paris, nor in government, local or otherwise. Government is very good at snow jobs, and coming up with schemes whereby it can fleece money from the taxpayers.  Supposedly, its the reason why we elect people to oversee those in government positions: To protect the rest of us, the citizen taxpayers, who provide the money.

But what do you do when they do wrong? Or even when they never ask, “Is it needed; is it worthwhile; and can we afford it?” or even more importantly, “Why would we waste the taxpayer’s money on that…?”

Paris has a history of using tax dollars to pay a few too much and too many too little.

There are not twelve people in Paris who knows to a dollar the total amount of incentives, in cash and kind,  given to a few large firms or insiders over the last two years – or the net value (if any) Paris has received in turn?

It’s doubtful, if even twelve people know the actual costs of trash pick-up in Paris. But looking at voting results in city elections, there are not 599 who care . . .

Occasionally, however, taxpayers are rewarded with a small Dr. Pepper, as those who close the door on full transparency know, man cannot live by the bread of chicanery alone.

                        return to    Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce

 

links:  On Organizational Innovation

         Local Government

       A Free Press . . .

Since 2008, the Paris Texas Chamber of Commerce has repeatedly stated that our local community and economic development organizations need restructuring.

After 14-years, they still do. Every time we say it, the local organizational bureaucracy react as if we had called their mothers a bad name (or told the truth about them).

The first objective of our local community and economic development organizations seem to be protection of the status quo at all cost, regardless of how much it costs Paris.

So, allow us to re-frame the problem this way: Would bad organizational structure subtract from how citizen’s value their community?

Each of us can all think of ways in which it might do so: For example, when you encountered employees who face the public but are not empowered to make key decisions; where Artificial Intelligence (AI) robots have replaced live agents and you really want to talk to some high-management idiot; or when, signing up with a provider of Internet service, such as Suddenlink / Altice / Optimum (a franchisee of a City that protects the monopoly against any equal opportunities for access), you are, as with taxes, subjected to forced compliance: To give your money and every right you have under the Bill of Rights in exchange for Internet service, which is a “must have” in today’s digital age.

Forced compliance, it should be argued, is a violation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution.

In those cases, restructuring by those organizations could generate improved customer experiences, enhance customer’s value, and enrich community value.

Years ago, the Paris Chamber realized that knowledge and knowledge flow must replace formal management structures and face-to-face administration. (As there is a world of difference between formal and informal management.)

Make no mistake, we’re not saying that daily production, a conventional planning-and-control approach, should be thrown out with the bath water. We are saying that greater freedom, flexibility, and an open attitude toward restructuring should focus on the individuals within the community; that removing boundaries and a constant exchange of transparent data and information with the community are ways of liberating their power – providing them a setting in which they can express their creativity.

These are a necessity for community and economic improvement.

After making sure headquarters are running smoothly, and cooperatively, the first goal is to try every initiative, while assuming that it could be a new opportunity.

Do not follow. Take the lead, change the standard, practice creative destruction (open dissent, when needed), and constantly try to understand how to increase value for the community – not the organization.

Promoters are bundling these common sense steps as “development of a process of innovation” – including, of course, calculation of how much they can charge!

It’s all terminology: Branding and Innovation; terms to relieve taxpayers of their money.

But all endeavors, except for government, live or die based on whether the market – the customers – pays for value perceived, or not.

Increase community value by more wealth generation opportunities, and this will reward the organization by its increased value to the community.

The advice is free.

The knowledge on how to do is is not.