Sunny Side /South Park Super Neighborhood

Communications with Chief of Staff Stephen Tinnermon

Ethics Committee

(BY E-MAIL)

DATE: January 17, 2003

TO: Mrs. Willie Belle Boone, Ethics Committee Chair

Sunny Side / South Park Super Neighborhood



FROM: Stephen Tinnermon, Chief of Staff

Office of the Mayor



SUBJECT: Ethics Committee Issues



This correspondence is intended to respond to the issues raised in several letters and e-mails that Mayor Brown, Robert Litke and I have received from your Super Neighborhood organization. Further, it responds to a summary of those issues detailed in the January 6th memorandum (addressed Mayor Brown) that we reviewed during our meeting on that same date.



First, it was a real pleasure having an opportunity to confer with the Ethics Committee. I sincerely appreciate the committee members for taking time out of their busy schedules to meet with me, as I appreciated everyone’s willingness to engage in candid, frank discussion.



Finally, Mrs. Boone, I want extend to you my heartfelt thanks for the professional, firm and evenhanded manner in which you chaired the meeting.



I conferred with Mayor Brown regarding our meeting and must advise you that the Mayor is in agreement with the responses listed below to the issues summarized in the January 6th memorandum.



Finally, I’ll add that a formal hardcopy of the substantive text of this e-mail will subsequently be mailed out to you and all members of the Ethics Committee. However, in the interest of expediency, I ask that you'll excuse the informality of my taking advantage of the tools of the information age by sending you an advanced copy by email. You'll find that I have organized this response so that it correlates with the various sections of your January 6th memo.



Part 1: Policy Development from the City to City


I agree that the City of Houston needs to promulgate a written policy covering the items listed in Part 1 of your memo. I applaud your organization for bringing these matters attention of the Mayor. He has instructed me to give this matter priority attention. We plan to develop a draft policy paper covering these issues within the next 45 days.



Once the proposed policy paper is drafted, we will circulate it to the leaderships of all of the super neighborhood councils and to the Super Neighborhood Council Alliance for comment. After the public comment period closes, we will enact final guidelines.



Part 1(a): Suggestions for Policy Development for the City from the Ethics Committee -



I think the recommendations the Ethics Committee presents in this section are right on target. Let me assure you that your suggestions will be taken into consideration as we develop the aforementioned policy document.



Part 1 (b): Additional Primary Corrective Action Requested -



Beyond the general comments stated below, I won’t make any further response to the issues raised in Part 1(b). The City has made a definitive decision to honor the request of South Park Super Neighborhood to dissolve its participation in the pre-existing super neighborhood cluster. As pointed out in your memorandum (and during our discussion), you are not seeking to reverse this decision.



I must emphasize, however, that contrary to what appears to be the prevalent sentiment among Ethics Committee members, the City's decision to dissolve the cluster had absolutely nothing to do with complaints generated regarding your super neighborhood council officer elections held last year. Rather, the City’s decision was based purely on a fundamental cornerstone of the entire concept of neighborhood oriented government. Put simply, this tenet holds that each of the 88 super neighborhoods defined by Mayor Brown has an inherent right to self-determination over its own affairs. As such, Mayor Brown believes that every super neighborhood has the right to participate in the super neighborhood program as part of a cluster group – or not.



Based on our discussion at the January 6th meeting, I believe that your organization was not as clearly informed of the reasons why the City made this decision as you should have been. Having personally participated in several discussions involving this matter, I can absolutely assure you that this was not a result of any ill-intent. However, for whatever reasons, the apparent breakdown in communications never should have occurred. For this reason, I believe an apology is in order to Charles X. White, to the Ethics Committee to other leaders and stakeholders in Sunny Side community. On behalf of Mayor Brown, as his Chief of Staff, I offer my most sincere apologies regarding any real or perceived communications breakdown. I think that the steps that we plan to take to promulgate written guidelines will help us avoid any future missteps along these lines.



Let me further state that I join you in commending the dedication, commitment and vision that Charles X. White, as President of your Super Neighborhood Council, continues to demonstrate. Mayor Brown is particularly impressed by the invaluable contributions that Mr. White is donating to our efforts to strengthen the Super Neighborhood Alliance.



Finally, I applaud your plans to host several meetings in January / February and for inviting Mayor Brown and other city officials to participate. I respectfully request that you send out individual invitations to city officials you want to invite. As for me personally, I will of course, let you know which of the several meetings I will be available to attend.



Part 2: Additional Community Contact Issues -



The City is not prepared to directly involve itself in matters investigated by the Office of Inspector General (OIG). The City takes this position because investigations conducted by the OIG are done so independent of direction by this administration. For this reason, I will not respond to issues raised in Part 2 of the January 6th memo. If the Ethics Committee is dissatisfied with the OIG findings, then I encourage you to take the matter up directly with the OIG.



In closing, I once again thank you for inviting me to attend the Ethics Committee meeting. I am available to discuss any of the particulars of this response. However, most importantly, I sincerely hope that this response constitutes the breakthrough we need to resolve any miscommunications and conflicts we have recently experienced. As I pointed out during our meeting, Mayor Brown's neighborhood oriented government agenda is acutely focused on the future. I strongly encourage your organization to continue working with the Mayor in our efforts to institutionalize this very important initiative.



Sincerely,





Stephen Tinnermon

Red Tape

----- Original Message -----
From: charity productions
To: Stephen Tinnermon ; Rose Valenzuela
Cc: Willie Belle Boone ; Marvin Delaney
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 7:48 AM
Subject: Red Tape


To: Stephen Tinnermon, Chief of Staff of the Mayor

From: Charles X White, President Sunny Side/South Park SN

Subject: Red Tape

Date: January 21, 2003

Cc. Mayor Lee P. Brown -- Willie Belle Boone - Marivn Delanely



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mr. Tinnermon thank you for your response. Mrs. Boone is going to call you as a follow up from the committee. My responses to parts of your letter will be shared with the committee and stakeholders today after Mrs. Boone speaks with you to clarify some of your statements.

The spin that the city has taken in this matter in my view has to many unnecessary crooks and turns. However, my comments listed below is my way in giving the Mayor another view. We both think the NOG is a good concept and can be very help for the city and stakeholders in the 21st century. I am being frank and maybe brutally honest. My community work and its benefit to all citizens spans nearly thirty-years, I hope you and the Mayor or whoever else don't take this as a personal attack but rather a commitment to my community work. There are several comments that are left out that Mrs. Boone will address when she calls you today.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"I must emphasize, however, that contrary to what appears to be the prevalent sentiment among Ethics Committee members, the City's decision to dissolve the cluster had absolutely nothing to do with complaints generated regarding your super neighborhood council officer elections held last year".

When did the city make this decision and to whom and when were stakeholders notified?
Why didn't you use the formula that you referred to in your response regard getting input from other super neighborhoods. This is again selective intervention.
This statement has an odor of falsehood. There is no way that you can prove this statement to any reasonable degree after reviewing the timeline of events that happened after the letter dated May 21, 2001. Combining the deception or misinformation by the planning director and the Mayor and adding your statement (Tinnermon) related to the communication breakdown on the city's part acknowledges a communication problem however it doesn't address it. We are trying to address it but you keep changing our words.
The fact that both community groups requested an investigation and none was done however changes were made without any notification to us, clearly indicates collusion and deception.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rather, the City’s decision was based purely on a fundamental cornerstone of the entire concept of neighborhood oriented government".

This is purely a subjective statement on the Mayor's part. There are several cornerstone points, at least three others. One of which you stated -- self determination -- another would be problem solving. This administration is constantly making selective interpretation in this matter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Put simply, this tenet holds that each of the 88 super neighborhoods defined by Mayor Brown has an inherent right to self-determination over its own affairs".

All 88 super neighborhoods are separate to start with.
Why did the Mayor, you, and Robert Litke determine a course of action that falls under a self-determination action by the stakeholders and the city continues to ignore proper notification timelines before a final decision is made and communicated to the stakeholders?
Where were the tenants and protocols on May 21, 2001 and before?
If this statement is true someone must be giving the Mayor a lot of misinformation?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"As such, Mayor Brown believes that every super neighborhood has the right to participate in the super neighborhood program as part of a cluster group – or not".

If the above statement is accurate why wasn't it enforced before and after May 21, 200?
This is another discrepancy in your statements.
The three people that had some concerns and requested an investigation that was never forwarded to us to respond to -- by the city or them. The existing procedures to organize a super neighborhood as listed in the city of Houston requirements was not followed in that case. Along with this you all are not making any documentation available to the stakeholders and then you say you don't want to get involved with local issues --- self-determination etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Based on our discussion at the January 6th meeting, I believe that your organization was not as clearly informed of the reasons why the City made this decision as you should have been".

We know and you know that -- however we addressed this in our written material on January 6, 2003.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Having personally participated in several discussions involving this matter, I can absolutely assure you that this was not a result of any ill-intent".

If a person is accidentally killed or intentionally killed -- the result is the same.
However there is a penalty in either situation. You all are trying to by-pass the penalty that applies to you as well as deny your direct involvement and mismanaging this situation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"However, for whatever reasons, the apparent breakdown in communications never should have occurred. For this reason, I believe an apology is in order to Charles X. White, to the Ethics Committee to other leaders and stakeholders in Sunny Side community".
It is not for whatever reasons -- its for the reasons that you all don't want to answer. I have several communications and documented/corroborated witnesses that Robert Litke's misrepresentation of the facts when he tried to justify his position in this matter which contradicts what you are saying in your communication.
"You believe" -- is a denial of the facts.
Your continued misrepresenting our concerns and interests clearly identifies that you all have an agenda that is contrary to ours in several key areas. (we never requested the city to dissolve any cluster-- but you wrote that we did. We said change our original name on all city records and the other group can stay where they are and serve the community in a manner in which they see fit)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"On behalf of Mayor Brown, as his Chief of Staff, I offer my most sincere apologies regarding any real or perceived communications breakdown. I think that the steps that we plan to take to promulgate written guidelines will help us avoid any future missteps along these lines".
This is a good statement and looks good for the record but the other parts of your response are full of incorrect statements.
It seems that you are pushing the theme that you want us to say but you are saying and trying to make it appear that we are requesting something that we are not.

Clarifications for the Ethics Committee

To: Mrs. Willie Belle Boone, Chair of the SSSPSN Ethics Committee
From: Charles X White, President SSSPSN
Subject: Clarifications to Mr. S. Tinnermon
Date: January 20, 2003

Mrs. Boone we need some clarification on the wording used by S. Tinnermon in his correspondence dated January 17, 2003.

Part 1 (b)
1. Answer the question -- We did not request to dissolve any super neighborhood cluster.
What is he referring to?
Is he saying that the Mayor is honoring all of our requests?
What pre-existing super neighborhood cluster is he referring to ?
If he is talking about the Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood cluster what is he talking about?
Part 1 (b) Second Paragraph
When did the city decide to dissolve all clusters or which clusters is he referring to?
Who and when did the city contact any super neighborhood for consideration?
How can the city ask for input on some things and not others. This is a continuation of selective intervention, favoritism, unethical and unprofessional behavior from the top down.

Part 2

We never ask the Mayor to respond to the OIG report. We don't agree with the OIG findings. We would appreciate it if the Mayor and any other city employee would address our issues instead of referring to matters that we are not concerned with. Why does Tinnermon continue to bring that up? Our issues are related to city to city policies governing city employees and not making local decision for any community based orgainization.
Since the Mayor did not do the honorable and professional thing by forwarding the list of concerns to us and since we were informed about them through the OIG report we decided to respond for the record.
Through our new by-laws and the ethics committee we have set the frame to address any type of community issue in the future.
We did remind the city that they are the initiators of this expanded version of mess that they created.

Please call Mr. Tinnermon and clarify particularly the questions in Part 1 (b). If it seems as though he is continuing their selective intervention contact me quickly and send this response as part of our response. We will convene a meeting for a group response as soon as possible.

Thank you.