Open letter to Sheryl Scully and Phil Hardberger (Houston, Dallas: salary, tax rates)

[tousel]

We've lived in SA for years. Taxes have always been high, even higher than Austin. I like what you're doing, new parks, new roads, cool events coming to SA (Rock and Roll Marathon)....

Now taxes haven't changed *that* much in the past few years, so it make me sick to question, what the *hell* were the previous administrations doing with our money???? Ughhh, all the cool stuff we could've had!

Great job, keep up the good work, I'm looking forward to a more pedestrian/bike friendly city.

[ShaneSA]

Can't cry over spilt milk. I agree the past administrations were lax and not very forward thinking. I think some were sitting around waiting for someone with good ideas to show up and get things going. PH and SS were the ones who showed up. I especially like the efforts to energize downtown. It's been years talking and planning the river expansion, now the riverwalk is coming to fruition. Bout time it got going and less talking about it. That seems to be the key...more action, less talk.
I'm thinking Gordon Hartman is grooming himself to be the next action figure in SA politics. As long as the momentum keeps up, it's fine.

[Bo]

If you like the results of having a grownup for a mayor and a person of action in the City Manager job, you should support the charter reform issue on the ballot in November. By swapping out city council reps and mayors every 4 years, we eliminate the possibility of someone growing to be truly effective in those jobs.

[traficdogn]

Originally Posted by Bowie

If you like the results of having a grownup for a mayor and a person of action in the City Manager job, you should support the charter reform issue on the ballot in November. By swapping out city council reps and mayors every 4 years, we eliminate the possibility of someone growing to be truly effective in those jobs.

I'm not so sure. Maybe the shorter term limits is what has helped us.

[tgannaway89]

Our local officials have done a great job over the past few years and hopefully will continue to do so as we move forward.

[tgannaway89]

Originally Posted by traficdogn

I'm not so sure. Maybe the shorter term limits is what has helped us.

San Antonio is one of the oldest cities in Texas, yet is minuscule compared to the Houston and Dallas metros (which are much younger). Even Austin is starting to leave us in the dust. How could anyone expect our elected officials to get anything done in the short time span they have? The proposed charter reform will simply allow us to elect officials for longer periods of time (up to 8 years). We'd still vote every 2 years. The only difference is that our officials would be able to run for 4 two-year terms as opposed to the current 2 two-year terms. If charter reform happened a decade ago I don't think we'd be saying goodbye to AT&T. Major city projects would get done a lot faster.

[traficdogn]

Originally Posted by tgannaway89

San Antonio is one of the oldest cities in Texas, yet is minuscule compared to the Houston and Dallas metros (which are much younger). Even Austin is starting to leave us in the dust. How could anyone expect our elected officials to get anything done in the short time span they have? The proposed charter reform will simply allow us to elect officials for longer periods of time (up to 8 years). We'd still vote every 2 years. The only difference is that our officials would be able to run for 4 two-year terms as opposed to the current 2 two-year terms..

At the salary council members are paid, I don't think any rational / non-corrupt person would stay on the council for 8 years.

4 (2+2) years is long enough to get things done. Imagine having a set of lame duck council-members for 4 entire years holding the city and mayor hostage? It would be Boss Hogg's dream come true.

[tgannaway89]

Originally Posted by traficdogn

At the salary council members are paid, I don't think any rational / non-corrupt person would stay on the council for 8 years.

4 (2+2) years is long enough to get things done. Imagine having a set of lame duck council-members for 4 entire years holding the city and mayor hostage? It would be Boss Hogg's dream come true.

I also think it is time we move into reality and start paying city council for the job they do. My hometown of Andrews, TX (pop. 9,000) pays city council more than the $20/meeting that San Antonio does. It takes about 2 years for council members to get things down and really get into business. Two years later they are out. It creates a problem for business looking to relocate or open operations in the city. It creates problems for developers looking to grow the city. Current term limits are prehistoric and really hold this city back.

[oldmanshirt]

Originally Posted by tgannaway89

San Antonio is one of the oldest cities in Texas, yet is minuscule compared to the Houston and Dallas metros (which are much younger). Even Austin is starting to leave us in the dust. How could anyone expect our elected officials to get anything done in the short time span they have? The proposed charter reform will simply allow us to elect officials for longer periods of time (up to 8 years). We'd still vote every 2 years. The only difference is that our officials would be able to run for 4 two-year terms as opposed to the current 2 two-year terms. If charter reform happened a decade ago I don't think we'd be saying goodbye to AT&T. Major city projects would get done a lot faster.

You said it.

[TexHwyMan]

Originally Posted by tousel

Now taxes haven't changed *that* much in the past few years, so it make me sick to question, what the *hell* were the previous administrations doing with our money???? Ughhh, all the cool stuff we could've had!

You do realize that while tax rates haven't increased, valuations have, and quite substantially in many areas. Therefore, the city is bringing-in more revenue now with the same tax rate than they did a few years ago.