Editorial: Do You Trust the City Council?

Amarillo City Council/Photo by City of Amarillo

By Thomas Warren III, Editor-in-Chief

As we speed toward the November election, it looks like Amarillo voters will have three propositions for which to cast ballots. The questions of November for local voters will be whether or not to issue $275 million in bonds for downtown projects, whether to extend the terms of members of the Amarillo City Council, and whether to cut the City Council’s meeting calendar by half.

All three elections have been officially ordered and voters will now go into the process of mulling their votes on these issues. The one thing that keeps popping into my head while looking at these proposals is whether Amarillo voters can trust the Amarillo City Council and city officials to do the right thing on these issues, if they are passed. And to be totally honest, I have my doubts.

Over the past three years, Amarillo voters have seen a tornado of chaos and scandals from City Hall. From euthanizing pregnant dogs while in labor, to having citizens arrested in Council meetings, to potentially violating the Texas Open Meetings Act on numerous occasions, the Amarillo City Council has certainly not had a great track record of trust. Compounding this issue is the heavy Amarillo Matters PAC checkbook they hide behind at election time, with a willingness to hide from their records in hopes of glossy mailers doing the trick to buy them another term in office.

The track record of the Amarillo City Council is a problem alone, but there are so many other issues at City Hall and with this election that cause me to have doubts about these elections. Perhaps my biggest concern is the ambiguity of the term extensions proposition.

With Proposition 2, which would extend the Amarillo City Council’s terms from two years each to four years each, there remains questions about how the term extensions would be used. There is also the fact that Amarillo Mayor Ginger Nelson promoted this proposal last year, but later walked it back after criticism from citizens. Her original reasoning at the time was to prevent voters from having the opportunity to “flip the whole boat again,” calling for stability. That statement is hypocritical considering that Nelson was elected in a clean sweep of the Amarillo City Council in 2017, orchestrated by Amarillo Matters. I have never heard Nelson complain about Amarillo Matters “flipping the boat” in that election cycle.

I also have concerns about the Amarillo Civic Center bond, from the tax increases, to the remaining costs in the total $319 million project, to the size of the arena officials are planning to build if the proposal goes through. With a potential passage, I feel Amarillo voters could be signing on for a big tax increase at a time when the economy is suffering. This seems like a risky proposition to me.

Overall, I think the trust concerns with the Amarillo City Council and their track record over the past three years should cast doubts on whether voters can trust them on these ballot propositions. While we will discuss this more closer to the election in editorials, interviews, and voter guide profiles, I hope voters begin researching both the ballot proposals and the track record of this City Council. And before you go vote, ask yourself, “can I trust the City Council?”