Mayor Mike Pushes Ethics Waaaay Back!
by Steve-O
Some people watch NASCAR, I watch City Hall. That’s not a judgment of the sport, it just fits into my schedule a little better. And it moves a lot slower.
Otherwise, they are a lot alike – the competition, the intrigue, the spectacle, the fiery crashes. Like NASCAR, a lot of interesting stuff happens in the pits, and if you aren’t watching, you might miss it.
Unlike NASCAR, it’s harder to identify who the sponsors are. Mike Moncrief doesn’t wear the logos of the people who pay his way like Dale Junior or Jimmie Johnson do.
This much we do know: if Mayor Mikey were a NASCAR driver, his number would be No. 1. And his sponsorship would include Chesapeake Energy, XTO, Devon and Range Resources, among others.
No. 1 because Mike is all about Mike. And we know Mike’s sponsors because of information from the Mayor’s financial disclosure appeared in the Startlegram yesterday. The minimum value of his lease or royalty agreements with 55 oil and gas companies, including major players in the Barnett Shale such as Chesapeake Energy, XTO, Devon and Range Resources came to $633,000. Nineteen of those deals were worth more than $25,000 in calendar year 2007. Oh, and then there’s the small matter of the XTO stock owned by Moncrief’s wife. Those shares – between 500 and 999 of ‘em – are valued between $32,370 and $64,675 at Wednesday’s closing price of $64.74.
How much do his holdings really amount to? We don’t know because the Mayor ain’t talking. He’s released the bare minimum amount of information, and he’s not obligated to release more.
But just with that bit of information, two statewide ethics experts told the Star-Telegram what I have been saying for months – at the very least, the appearance of impropriety exists and Mayor Mikey shouldn’t vote on any natural gas drilling issues.
But here’s where it gets funny – the city attorney’s office released a statement saying that no conflict of interest exists. Go back to being the head cheerleader for the gas drilling industry, Mr. Mayor.
As the kids say with their koo-koo instant messaging shorthand, WTF?
Well, just like in NASCAR, the best stuff is happening in the pits. I’ve said before that I like my autocrats bloviating and obvious, like Tom Craddick. Mayor Mike’s machinations are subtle like a short story in the New Yorker. He knows how to work people behind the scenes.
In spite of the whitewash on the ethics report, people tell me that City Attorney Sarah Fullenwider is actually an ethical, stand-up person. They say that there is nothing untoward going on here. When I push, the worst they can say is she’s cowed by Mayor Mike. Because it always comes back to Mayor Mike.
“The Mayor plays it really hard,” one says. “He’s very direct about what he wants.”
And what does he want? He wants everyone on the bus. No dissent, no disagreement, no rocking the boat. Lots of unanimous votes and no staff members causing him problems about ethics.
So when I ask what’s going on with Sarah Fullenwider, that what a lot of it comes back to. She’s gonna do what Mike wants. Sarah’s on the bus.
Can you hold that against her? Maybe, maybe not. After all, she’s free to get off the bus at any time if she doesn’t agree with what she’s doing. But she’d also be free to pack a cardboard box with her things and look for another line of work. And I don’t imagine that being the one to tell Mike he’s got an ethics problem would do much for her shot at a glowing job reference.
That’s how Mike rolls. If you’re on the bus, life is good. If you’re not, life can be, um … not good.
But what about the rest of us? You know, citizens. What about those of us who would like to have a gas drilling task force that represents our interests. Instead, we get a task force that is packed with industry fatcats, toadies and sycophants, hand-picked by a guy who has north of 600 grand in oil and gas holdings?
Well, we ain’t on the bus. What do you expect?
What about the city gas well inspectors? Some will tell you privately that they want to enforce the gas drilling ordinance, but there are so many loopholes that it effectively leaves them unable to enforce the ordinance even if they find violations? Of course, they still need to get their inspection rate much closer to 100 percent.
Those bruthas definitely ain’t on the bus.
But when it comes to the gas industry in Texas, accusing people of questionable ethics is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500. As Channel 8’s Brett Shipp reminded us again last night, the “our” representatives on the Texas Railroad Commission take millions from the industries they are supposed to regulate. This is just business as usual.
And business is obviously very, very good.
Just ask Mike.
Tags: Mayor Moncrief
20 Comments, Comments or Pings
FWWeekly Anthony
Not to take anything away from the Startlegram’s excellent piece, but Jeff Prince here at the Weekly wrote the same story two years ago:
http://www.fwweekly.com/content.asp?article=4398
May 9th, 2008
Steve-O
So Jeff had access to the 2007 ethics report in 2006? Now THAT’S what I call reporting.
May 9th, 2008
brandon
Snarkiness aside, it really is the same story with a different dateline…
May 9th, 2008
Steve-O
Things haven’t really changed that much, unfortunately. But it isn’t worth letting go of, IMO.
May 9th, 2008
FWWeekly Anthony
It’s downright unconscionable. In the immortal words of Twisted Sister: Mikey’s “gall is never-ending” — and mastodonic.
May 9th, 2008
cozette
“Some people watch NASCAR, I watch City Hall. That’s not a judgment of the sport, it just fits into my schedule a little bitter”.
Fixed!
May 9th, 2008
Don Young
Your description of Moncrief reads like that of a dictator: He demands loyalty, allows no dissent and insists on unanimous votes. Not very democratic of him, is it? Nevertheless, I think a good sized statue of him should be erected downtown to commemorate his deeds. (Suddenly, I get pictures in my mind of Citizens looping ropes over such a statue. PIckup trucks are slowly backed up. You can take the day dream as far as you like.)
Citizens? Yes, Steve we need citizens to do what they are supposed to do: Stand up. Speak out. Show up. Not stick their heads in the shale, rooting around for money. That’s the kind of citizens Mikey, XTO and Chesapeake want. They appeal to the lowest level of human nature. We can do better.
Nice work, Steve. I hope your nudging encourages a few more people yank their heads up and take a look around.
May 10th, 2008
cozette
I have a hard time giving any credence to an article when it’s littered with “they say” and “people tell me”. Get some facts showing ethical wrong doing, not a bunch of unnamed sources saying Mayor Mike wants everyone on the bus. The most indicting point you bring up is some unknown source says, “He’s very direct about what he wants”. Boy-howdy, you sure got the goods on him there.
So what if the guy owns mineral rights and is a stock holder in oil and gas companies? If that were an indictable offense half the United States Senate would be in jail for owning stock in defense companies while voting to go to war, and to ramp up the war. Congratulations Captain Renault, now get over your shock that there is gambling going on in a casino.
May 10th, 2008
Pete Wann
Here’s some ethical wrong doing:
Mikey makes upwards of $600k a year through his oil and gas holdings. Income which he derives from the very companies that petition the City Council (which includes him) for permission and permits to operate in the city.
These companies (which the Mayor has financial interests in) generate income by drilling in the city. A portion of that income goes to the Mayor, who is involved in the decision whether to allow the companies to drill in the city…
Looks like the “facts” you can’t seem to see are right there in the open if you’re willing to see them.
Nobody implied that the Mayor had done anything WRONG, only that by conducting the above business, he’s behaving unethically. (Unethical is not equal to wrong or illegal. Unethical behavior is not always illegal, nor is it always “wrongdoing,” but it’s still unethical and we should expect better from our elected officials.)
Thanks for your comments, cozette.
May 10th, 2008
Don Young
Let me add to Pete’s post by recalling the night in 2006 when Moncrief walked out of a city council meeting, in session, to personally congratulate a Devon Energy rep. who just moments before had succeeded in getting the first High Impact variance from council and Moncrief. Shortly thereafter, it was discovered that some Devon gas wells were bringing radioactive material (NORM) to the surface.
Other ethical lapses include Moncrief’s refusal to conduct environmental impact studies and air quality baselines BEFORE gas drilling became entrenched.
He’s been “very direct” about cheerleading urban gas drilling while giving scant notice to the fallout that occurs from drilling. The environmental impacts and a solution found for dealing with toxic, gas well waste products should have been appropriately measured before even considering urban gas drilling. Moncrief’s cheerleading and votes that aid his and his friends pocket books clearly show a conflict of interest AND irresponsible behavior for a mayor of any town.
Curiously, these ethical lapses offer us a glimpse at his moral code - what means most to him. In that regard I think we DO have the goods on Mr. Moncrief.
May 10th, 2008
cozette
——————————————————————————–
Senator Charles Grassley: “You know, what — what makes our economy grow is energy. And, and Americans are used to going to the gas tank (sic), and when they put that hose in their, uh, tank, and when I do it, I wanna get gas out of it. And when I turn the light switch on, I want the lights to go on, and I don’t want somebody to tell me I gotta change my way of living to satisfy them. Because this is America, and this is something we’ve worked our way into, and the American people are entitled to it, and if we’re going improve (sic) our standard of living, you have to consume more energy.”
When did land of the free come to mean that goods and services are also free? What a bunch of pathetic whining freeloaders this nation has become, our politicians parroting what their bird-brained constituents shout at them lest they not get re-elected.
Now there is a case for American entitlement for you. We believe we’re entitled to cheap energy — we elect representatives to bring it to us. I would suggest that instead of focusing on the representatives we elect to take oil in foreign countries at the cost of 49 American lives in April, or Mayor Moncrief who you may correctly believe is overlooking enviromental impact you might take a look at we the people who elect these clowns to do our dirty work. The problem is not our politicians — the problem is we the people.
I can’t disagree with the facts y’all have put forth nor can I substantiate them. I only suggest you have “fingered” the wrong culprit. Senator Grassley, President Bush and Mayor Moncrief are only doing what “we the people” desire them to do.
May 10th, 2008
JW
I think the real story here is how similar this write up is to the FW Weekly piece. Even the cheerleading analogy. Talk about rhetoric.
I think the mayor should recuse himself on issues where he has a direct financial interest such as approving a drilling permit for a well-bore that would be under his house. To say he shouldn’t vote on an issue because it concerns a company he owns a small amount of stock in is a little far removed IMO. Direct financial interest v. indirect are very different.
May 12th, 2008
John Peter Smith
I have a question for Pete W and anyone else that wants to jump in. How much, if any, income should we allow council members or potential council members to earn from gas royalties before we require them to abstain from votes on gas drilling? If I sign a gas lease for my suburban home does that mean I could not vote on the issue if I was on the council?
If Mayor Mike is over the line, where do you draw the line? This is a serious question because if we are going to require any council member with a gas lease to abstain from voting on gas issues the council won’t be able to vote at all for lack of a quorum.
May 13th, 2008
Steve-O
JPS, I think you ask good questions. If a council member signs a gas lease on their home, should they be required to abstain from voting on all gas issues? With more and more people in Fort Worth signing gas leases, the city needs to be clear about where that line is and willing to enforce it. I personally believe that if a council member signs a gas lease on a normal residential lot and receives similar terms to those of his or her neighbors, that shouldn’t disqualify them from voting on all gas issues, but on a case-by-case basis. I think it would if the issue was, say, a high-impact variance for the well the council member signed the lease on, the member should recuse him or herself.
In the Mayor’s case, his
holdingslease or royalty agreements in active Barnett Shale players Chesapeake, Devon, XTO and Range Resources are beyond the pale. The Mayor’s compliance may be within the letter of the law, but not the spirit or the law.For an interesting outside perspective on the Mayor’s situation, please refer to Robert Wechsler’s post at the City Ethics blog.
JPS, as a frequent W&C commenter, where do you come in on this issue?
May 13th, 2008
Ben
Does it really say he has “holdings” ? I think all he really has is leases with those companies, for which he is paid royalties. What difference does it make if he owns an interest in a well in another state/county? If he had holdings, it would be listed like the XTO stock his wife owns.
May 13th, 2008
Steve-O
You are correct, Ben. I clarified in my comment.
May 13th, 2008
John Peter Smith
Generally speaking, I’ve always favored full disclosure over a lot of hard and fast rules. Let the citizen’s have the complete facts and let them decide. So to a certain extent I agree with the mayor (one of the few times). It comes as no surprise to Cowtownites that someone with the last name MONCRIEF has oil and gas investments.
However, 633k is a lot of money, even for a Moncrief. The mayor is rich, but he’s not Bass-rich. Also, it’s my understanding that most of the Moncrief oil-money is on the other side of the family.
Not only is that a lot of money, but this 10% threshold is not low enough. I ask myself, if I were on the council, would I be tempted by an investment that was 10% of my income? Honestly, yeah, I would. Now maybe that’s because I’m more ethically challenged than the mayor, or maybe it’s because my income has fewer zeros than his, but I think 10% is to high a number. 5% would be more appropriate, with a slightly higher number for cumulative investments in the same industry.
I don’t look for any change in the ethics rules at city hall since the foxes on the council are guarding the hen house. I predict that real ethics reform won’t come until there is some type of bribery or corruption uncovered. Sadly, with all the money flowing into the Barnett Shale, I don’t think that day is too far off.
May 15th, 2008
Steve-O
Thanks for a cogent, thoughtful answer, JPS.
May 15th, 2008
Reply to “Mayor Mike Pushes Ethics Waaaay Back!”