Sunday, November 23, 2014

Several Inaccuracies, Misleading Statements in Sunday's "Brownsville Herald" Article: "Park May Be Election Issue"

Brownsville Herald Reporter Ty Johnson
Brownsville Herald reporter Ty Johnson's article Sunday, Park May Be Election Issue, contains several inaccuracies as well as misleading statements. 

Understanding that Ty likely does not write his own headlines or subheadings, please note the subheading:  

"Some fume over sale agreed to in 2013"

Ty: "As dozens spoke out against the sale, which was essentially agreed to in 2013, they also noted the upcoming city elections in May, almost as a warning to the commissioners sitting at the hearing with terms expiring this spring."

MMB: The tone of this subheading implies that some locals are bellyaching over something they should have spoken up about in 2013.  Actually, Lincoln Park was first put on the agenda February 25, 2013 as an "ACTION ITEM" with NO PUBLIC COMMENT ALLOWED.  

Ty:  "A lawsuit over the sale has the potential to stretch discussions about selling the park property to the Uni-versity of Texas System into next year, with some vowing that the May 2 election will be a referendum on the sale even with the beginning of the election filing period still more than two months away."

MMB:  Actually, Ty, the election will be held May 9, not May 2.  According to City Attorney Mark Sossi, the City Commission merely agreed on a resolution to "enter into negotiations" with the University of Texas concerning a transfer of Lincoln Park.  Sossi claims there is no actual sale agreement.

Ty:  "In February 2013, the city agreed to sell land to the University of Texas at Brownsville for expansion as part of a deal to keep the school downtown when it was floating the idea of relocating."  

MMB: The notion that the University of Texas would vacate over $100,000,000 worth of buildings paid for by Brownsville taxpayers is ludicrous. They were NEVER leaving, with or without the 48 acres of Lincoln Park.
Ty: "(In February 2013) No one voted against the deal, though District 2 Commissioner Jessica Tetreau abstained."

MMB:  Totally wrong.  There were two votes to "donate" property to UT in February 2013, one February 5, the other February 25.  Here are the two action items considered February 5, 2013:
"ACTION on Resolution Number 2013-015, authorizing the donation of a 55.43-acre tract of land to the University of Texas System, designating signatories, and dealing with related 
matters. 

ACTION on Resolution Number 2013-016, authorizing the donation of a 21.5-acre tract of 
land to the University of Texas system, designating signatories, and dealing with related matters."

Ayes: Mayor Martinez, Commissioners Vasquez, Zamora, Gowen, Longoria, and Villarreal.
Nays: None 
Abstained: Commissioner Tetreau

MMB:  Neither  one of these Action Items concerned Lincoln Park.  According to Tony Martinez, UT considered the two tracts above, came back and suggested the 48 acre Lincoln Park be offered instead.

This change necessitated a "clarification" in an Action Item presented February 25, 2013:  


2. Consideration and ACTION on Resolution Number 2013-022, clarifying property to be donated to the University of Texas system if a downtown location is selected for a campus.


MMB:  Assistant Attorney John Chosy presented this item, stating that Lincoln Park would be substituted for the two tracts mentioned February 5, 2013.  Here is the voting for the clarified Agenda Item presented February 25, 2013:  
Ayes: Mayor Martinez, Commissioners Gowen, Longoria, and Villarreal;

Nay: Commissioner Zamora. Commissioner Tetreau and Vasquez were absent.


Ty:  "When it came time to transfer the land, Brownsville spokeswoman Patty Gonzalez marketed a required public hearing ahead of the sale as an opportunity for residents to discuss their plans for a replacement park, which would be located across the expressway and built with the proceeds of the sale."

MMB:  Again, totally incorrect.  The hearing, by law, HAD to be about WHETHER OR NOT sell the park, not about the amenities of the new park.  The City of Brownsville, through their newly hired Public Relations Officer, Patty Gonzalez, DID try to spin the purpose of the meeting as Ty suggests, but, after being called out in the city's blogs, the official public notice reflected the legal purpose of the meeting, not what Patty had told The Herald.

Ty:  "City leaders and supporters insisted the $6.5 million could easily replace amenities at the current park, itself a replacement for the original Lincoln Park, which was closed in 2001 when the Texas Department of Transportation built the expressway, but opponents seized on the proposed location of the new park, which is across East University Boulevard from a water treatment plant."

MMB:  Actually, at the November 4, 2014 City Commission Meeting, City Manager Charlie Cabler said assessment of the cost of utilities and replacement of amenities on the proposed new park site had not been completed, but that the numbers looked "close."  Not very reassuring!





15 comments:

  1. WASTEWATER treatment plant

    ReplyDelete
  2. "WASTEWATER treatment plant"

    Good catch!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barton is sloppy, as always. Don't come for fair, objective news here. the dude wants the park to stay where it is, nevermind anybody else's opinion. Makes for a useless blog.

      Delete
    2. Well then......be gone; GENIUS!

      Delete
  3. While I believe Ty Johnson to be an excellent reporter these inaccurate statements might indicate the contrary and somehow the Brownsville Herald deserves to print an errata statement to the general public to clarify all of these mentioned points. I was rather suprised though at the Herald publishing a follow through article on Lincoln Park. Very unusual indeed. You could read the typical Brownsville Herald slanted pro UTB writing style in Mr. Johnson's article. Without doubt our community newspaper has always been all for UTB politics. Just about every day there is somehing about UT on front page or articles and photos of the university that are used as filler space while some of of the more important topics are left out completely or relegated to the sports pages. I gues it has been accepted that the BH will never print anything negative against UT no matter if the general public disagrees. Please be fair Ty and retract, correct or issue an explanation for these many errors pointed by the MMB blog. In my opinion journalistic credibility should be important to any good reporter. The facts speak for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The arrogance of Tony Martinez can be seen in his comment that "the votes can't see the long term or can't see the big picture". Tony, instead of presenting his long term plan or "vision" and "leading" the public, has caused this battle because he is not a leader, hasn't given the public any long term plan a and has denied the public input on the issue and treated the public like mushrooms....(keep us in the dark and feed us bullshit". This failure to lead and his arrogance have caused this negative public reaction.....Tony has, by his failure to lead and failure to explain his "vision", given the voters the impression that Tony thinks the public is stupid. Hey, Tony, the natives are restless....and its your own fault.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Zamora was the only nay vote?

    ReplyDelete
  6. If Ty Johnson is a journalist then Pat Ahumada is brain surgeon.

    ReplyDelete
  7. She wanted language added to the agenda item. When Tony nixed that, she voted nay.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I didn't know Pat was a brain surgeon!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't know Ty Johnson was a journalist! For all practical purposes, he is a pen for a third rate rag in a town run by mental midgets with more money than they know what to do with.

      Delete
  9. Ty looks pretty.


    Dags

    ReplyDelete
  10. ty Johnson es un pendejo

    ReplyDelete
  11. From the people who brought you "Pee Wee No Vale Wee Wee", "El Padre No Vale Madre" and "Poach The Coach", today we launch "ABTM!"

    Anybody But Tony Martinez!!


    Sincerely,

    Remember Lincoln Park

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sad! No wonder the Herald went bankrupt. STOP KOW-TOWING TO YOUR PAID ADVERTISED SPONSORS!! It's supposed to be INDEPENDENT journalism, losers! Give us something real. Jesus. Who in their right mind PAYS to read advert-sponsored spam? Seriously? We get the bargain book free, and internet pop-up ads, when we want that worthless advertiser paid sponsored crap.

    ReplyDelete