Commentary

He would be the last speaker to address the Lubbock City Council. An unusual occurrence for sure; it’s not every day; rare in fact, that a city employee uses the “comment period” of a regularly scheduled city council meeting to address the council. He walks up to the podium and begins to speak:

“My name is Tom Adams”; he then gives his home address. “I appreciate the chance to make a few comments. Let me begin by making an apology if I might (is he asking for permission?). This is an inconvenience for our citizens, it is much more than an inconvenience for many businesses and for that I am more than willing to accept responsibility and make a public apology for the situation we find ourselves in.” He continues, “I know the news and press have tried in their various ways to point blame and in many circumstances council takes the heat for that when it’s not council’s responsibility”.

He continues, "It was my assumption that we should proceed and complete the project even though the August deadline forces us to do construction in the summer. That was my assumption. It was my decision and I could have notified, should have notified council accordingly. This is not just a water distribution line that takes water to a few homes, this is a water supply line and we were not able to communicate that effectively to TxDot, even the August 1st deadline, they still don't understand how significant that is to the city”. “The rains we have had, we saw we were not going to be able to complete this project, pushing us into the summer months, our staff insured we could meet the essential needs and I made another assumption if we could meet essential needs, we would be Okay"

It's an inconvenience for the city and much more for many citizens," Adams said. "I am more than willing to assume responsibility (second time) and make a public apology for the situation we find ourselves in."

And the winner of the 2007 “CYA Award” is none other than Deputy City Manager Tom Adams; whose new mantra may be “water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink”.

And there you have it; in less than 300 words and in less time than it takes for water to evaporate on a hot west Texas day, Mr. Adams jukes and

weaves his way through a bureaucratic apologia which would have even impressed “Brownie”! You remember Brownie of Katrina fame don’t you? I tell you, there was so much smoke and mirrors in that performance I thought Adams would transform himself into the magician David Blaine right before our very eyes.

Let’s face it; Adams attempt at an apology was just an orchestrated event staged to apologize to the Lubbock City Council for making them look bad and for Adams to pretend to fall on his sword in an effort to absolve himself and blame the media who in his words “point blame”.

If Mr. Adams includes me as one who points blame; then he’s right. Though I call it just “telling it like it is”, without pussyfooting around like a “girlie-man” would; (with credit to Arnold for the girlie-man term).

Adams’ pseudo-apology was not aimed at city residents and business owners who have been financially affected; at best it was a pathetic attempt to make sure residents would not blame the council and a blatant attempt to do some damage control. And believe me; I know damage control when I see it; I’ve seen it from the very best.

It takes just a few lines before the typical bureaucrat in Adams starts to come out. As I wrote last week, most bureaucrats are loathe to blame themselves for any mistakes or bad decisions; it’s always someone else’s fault; in this case the media. Two lines into it he says; “let me begin by “making an apology if I might”; only a bureaucrat talks that way.

He then apologizes to the council for bringing “heat” on them when they don’t deserve it, he says. What about the business owners; do they deserve what they have gotten due to Adam’s inept performance?

Mr. Adams then goes on to understate the severity of the situation by labeling what has happened as an “inconvenience” for residents and “much more than an inconvenience” for businesses; notice how he doesn’t elaborate so as to not let us in on the serious consequences business owners and their employees have had to suffer through. Does Adams honestly think that describing the impact on city landscape business owners and others who depend on water to make a living as “much more than an inconvenience” do justice to the situation?

In fact the next to last speaker,

right before Adams spoke, was a gentleman by the name of John Smothers who owns a local landscaping business and is a member in a trade organization which represents these types of businesses. Mr. Smothers informs the council that “1,000 jobs have been affected in Lubbock and that there has been a 50% drop in normal sales volume”; that’s a lot of jobs! He goes on to point out that the landscape business is a time sensitive business and this is their peak season. I’m sure Adams heard this; but rather than acknowledge Mr. Smothers comments and apologize to him personally and publicly and by extension other affected employees and business owners who have been negatively impacted, Adams, in typical bureaucratic style just sticks to what seems to be his prepared statement.

For those of you who are thinking that I’m being too hard on Adams and should cut him some slack; well, we’ll just have to disagree on this one.

Because my view is that Adams’ job performance has been abysmal; and is grounds for dismissal; to put it blunt terms; he should be fired! I guarantee you low level management employees have been fired for less.

Ok, I haven’t been personally affected; I don’t own a landscaping business; my lawn is ok thanks to the rains, but when do we reach a point where residents of this city hold city management responsible and accountable for their inept and poor performance? If City Manager Lee Ann Dumbauld won’t do it; if the mayor and city council can’t do it because they cannot interfere directly with employees; then who is left to hold public employees accountable if it’s not the tax paying residents of this city? We sure can’t depend on the local Avalanche Journal to lead the way; like any other credible newspaper in any large city; that takes its investigative role seriously, would do.

In this comedy of errors Adams’ decisions and “assumptions” (his word) he says he made resulted in some serious consequences. Businesses have lost significant amounts of money. If the services offered by those businesses are taxable services, the city has lost potential tax revenue. The city sells water to us, its customers, and not only charges for water usage but taxes us as well. At this time last year water usage was at least 35 million more gallons than it is now.

How much revenue will the city, us taxpayers, wind up losing since residents have been unable to “buy” more water; what about those lost revenues?

And how about the people who have been laid off from their job; according to Mr. Smothers, 1,000 people have been affected. What about them; who makes them whole again? How do they recoup their lost wages; how do they pay their bills?

The latest is that the city has asked the contractor working on the Sharp project to work 24/7. The contractor already has crews working 16 hour shifts and now the city wants round the clock shifts to fix Adams’ mess. By the way, who will pay the tab for the extra hours; the extra overtime; the city; us?

Ah, but all Adams has to do is put on a show during the citizens comment period and all of a sudden he’s let off the hook. I would remind Mr. Adams that the citizen comment period is for citizens to address the council. It is not designed for employees who screw up to appear and continue to give flimsy excuses framed as an apology.

Luckily for Mr. Adams, it seems to have had the desired effect. Here’s Mayor Miller quoted in an AJ story published the day after Adams spoke to the council: “I appreciate a man stepping up and assuming responsibility.”

Ok let’s say Adams’ assumed responsibility; now what does City Manager Lee Ann Dumbauld plan to do next? Absolutely nothing would be my guess if history teaches us anything. Will there be any accountability; will Adams bear any consequences at all for his inept performance, poor decision making and inability to adequately communicate the severity of the “assumed” consequences to TxDot? A suspension perhaps; a reprimand maybe; I wouldn’t hold my breath.

The mayor is a business owner. I ask him, if one of his employees made a decision, similar to Adams’ which caused him to lose a very significant amount of revenue and resulted in his having to lay off employees or caused his major clients to lose money and negatively impacted Spirit Ranch’s business reputation; would he just shrug his shoulders and let the person responsible skate by just because he “assumed responsibility? I don’t think so.

The question then becomes, why should this situation be handled any differently than it would be in the business world? Why

should performance standards, if any exist in our city government; and I’m beginning to think that they don’t, be lowered to accommodate one person; Mr. Adams?

One thing is to assume responsibility; that’s fine. But what’s next? If there are no consequences to bear, then what’s the point of assuming responsibility? Once upon a time, if someone accepted responsibility for one’s actions; you can bet there were always consequences to bear. And what of the staff which “assured” essential needs could be met. What are the consequences for them?

Then there’s Mayor Pro Tem Jim Gilbreath’s comment: "I don't want to point fingers but I will say that there was, it looks to me that there was a significant communications breakdown and Tom got up and apologized and I appreciate him doing that." Listen closely to what he said: “a significant communications breakdown”. See how bureaucrats and politicians dance around the issue and try and find just the right words to suit their purpose? “I don’t want to point fingers; it looks to me that”; just tell it like it is Mr. Gilbreath; quit beating around the bush!

So that’s it; it’s over; no further consequences. If you are Adams all you have to do is use the word apology once, dance around the real issues; strike your chest a few times as you pretend to fall on your sword and viola you are “The Man Who did Nothing Wrong”.

Here’s an excerpt from the local AJ which is Adam’s most telling quote of all:

“Adams said as director of the city water department, he was responsible for the projects and that "elements that would like to beat up the council" over the restrictions were aiming at the wrong target. “It’s not appropriate that they've taken the hits that they've taken in this instance," he said of the council members.

Adams is clearly more concerned with the “elements that would like to beat up the council” and the “hits” the council has taken than he is about being sincere and directing his apology to the people most affected.

In short Adams’ supposed mea culpa was just a disingenuous sideshow. In my view, Adams’ performance and subsequent dog and pony show’s sole objective was designed and performed to impress the wrong people.

In case you’re wondering about my use of the word “apologia”; I’ve used it because it

is the perfect word to describe what Adams really did here.

Apologia - A statement that justifies or defends something, such as a past action or policy.

Better go, I hear someone in my alley messing around with my water meter!



Email: acruztsc@aol.com