It has a familiar ring: warning signs for Garland park's July 4 overcrowding needed creative solutions long before now

Garland City Council voted 8-1 on Tuesday night to close Windsurf Bay Park on this July 4 because the park was beyond successful on Independence Day 2017. The park abuts Lake Ray Hubbard and draws thousands from far and near.

Ignoring the signals regarding one of Garland's hidden jewels on July 4 is yet another example of a looming and potentially embarrassing crisis of poor planning that our city now faces.

If I could change only two things about our City of Garland municipal government, it would be to get it to spot problems faster and then react to them quicker and more creatively.

I was reminded of this Monday night as city council in work session discussed what to do about Garland's popular Windsurf Bay Park on the upcoming July 4 holiday. It was underscored even more so during the Tuesday-night regular council session on the same subject.

For nearly a year, city council has been warned that the Fourth of July last year at Windsurf Bay Park in Garland's southeast area abutting Lake Ray Hubbard was a mess and that the city needed to take proactive steps this year to avoid a potentially explosive situation.

Rather than study a whole range of possible positive options, the solution was a quick and easy negative decision to close the park on July 4 from midnight until 6 a.m. on July 5. Never mind that this "solution" carries with it another whole range of possible repercussions—many of which could end up tarnishing the city's image once again.

Windsurf Bay Park is one of the best-kept secrets and is a real jewel for our community. On the right is a bronze plaque noting the cooperating of the City of Garland and the State of Texas parks departments in establishing the park.

If something about this has a familiar ring to it, it should. Baylor Scott & White-Garland's closing went down the same path. Handwriting on the wall, handwriting on the wall, then bam! Garland has a potential crisis of mega proportions. Once again!

The controversy over Garland's 50-plus-year old animal shelter that has raged far and wide in recent weeks is another example of the city dragging its feet when positive action is needed.

According to Garland Police and city officials, the celebration of The Fourth at Windsurf Bay Park has grown in popularity in recent years so that people travel here from surrounding cities—and a few from out of state—to celebrate July 4 at our city park, which is almost totally lacking in good roads (they desperately need to be graded), adequate restrooms (nothing but a few portacans), and organized parking—all the things that are "supposed" to make a park more appealing.

A handful of portapotties can barely handle the daily visits from swimmers, fishermen, and picnic-ers to the park. No wonder it was such a mess last July 4 when thousands descended on our lovely park by the lake.

The crowd at the park last year was described as "in the thousands", with people doing all sorts of unacceptable things such as swimming in the lake without a lifeguard present, barbecuing along the shore line and dumping their used charcoal and ashes wherever they pleased, smoking marijuana and drinking beer and throwing their drink cans on the grass, illegally shooting off fireworks within city limits, and celebrating in overcrowded conditions so bad that emergency crews couldn't get through to them if, for instance, someone fainted from the heat or a firecracker burned someone else's hands.

Mercy me, it sounded a little like Woodstock back in 1969. Fortunately at least no one has described someone ripping off their clothes and running up and down the beach in their birthday suits!

The movie, Field of Dreams, made famous the expression, "If you build it, he will come." Our Garland parks department and the State of Texas parks department worked together to create this little gem. We built it. Now they come. And we want them to stay away this year because success outran lack of preparedness? That makes little sense to many of us.

The inscription on this bronze plaque says, "Windsurf Bay Park, a Texas Local Parks, Recreation and Open-Space Fund Project sponsored by the City of Garland (and) Texas Wildlife and Parks Department".

People from as far away as Louisiana and Oklahoma have discovered Windsurf Bay Park—something we've for years been begging Garlandites and non-Garlandites to do about our downtown area, our Firewheel Center, and other city hot spots. Discover us! Please pay attention to Garland; we really do have great things here!, has been the cry.

The "discovery" of Windsurf Bay Park wasn't supposed to happen. But after one trip through there in preparation for this blog, I can see why it did. It is truly one of Garland's hidden jewels. It's quite beautiful, appealing, and restful—all elements that a park should be.

The park did not appear to be on any city leader's radar screen or list of top priorities until last year after the last July 4 festivities. How the word spread far and wide about our little ole Windsurf Bay Park being so ripe for celebration on July 4, no one on city council or from city staff seems able to fully explain—or let alone comprehend. Apparently the grapevine mixed with the Internet is highly powerful. And maybe the intrigue of a little ruggedness and beach-like feel at the park added to its charm and appeal.

The situation is also akin to someone planning and building sidewalks, only later to observe that people were making their own walking trails in the grass. Sidewalk planners might have benefited from first observing the natural patterns.

Complicating matters further, no one on council or in our city government had ever conducted a "catalyst study"—our city's ideal of how local government should revive an area—specifically on the park itself or even thought about it being something that potentially could draw people into our city—and at the same time make this a more lively place to live.

This road is the only entrance into the lakeside park.

Until, of course, after Garland Police Chief Mitch Bates did what he had been told to do: arrive at Council Monday night with plans for shutting down Windsurf Bay Park on July 4 (with the potential of returning to ask the same thing on Labor Day, another high-use occasion) and telling those awful non-Garlandites to leave our fair city and take their money (that they might spend nearby) elsewhere.

That's right. The message the city is sending is, "Leave our park empty on July 4. And take your money with you as you go! (Never mind that you might use it to boost Garland's economy.) And don't come back unless we tell you that you can."

Not exactly the kind of welcome mat the city needs to be putting out anywhere!

Wednesday morning after the council vote, the city's parks department was posting signs throughout the park and at the entrance telling people, in English and Spanish, that the park would be closed on July 4. 

Apparently we'd rather have an empty park, a temporary city-funded $5,200 fence (with a potential $700 per month additional rental fee if the city decides it needs to continue), and police apparently on overtime guarding the fortress than to figure out what the "vibe" is that has these visitors find so enchanting in a tiny, relatively unknown but quaint spot in our city.

We certainly don't want the likes of these people from outside our borders using a facility in our fair City of Garland. Right? Certainly we don't want to "make lemonade out of lemons", now do we?

Fortunately, sanity began to take hold of the city council meeting Monday night. At first two city council members expressed dismay that the city would be closing the park on July 4 and had no alternative plan for the situation. Eventually some who at first seemed to be encouraging the closing started backtracking and started stating their desire to make the park better—after this July 4. By Tuesday night only one council member—Rich Aubin of District 5—stood firm against the closing of the "highly successful" park while the others voted for closure.

Some among the eight who voted "yes" to closure argued that the city really has no options, with the July 4 holiday bearing down us like a fast-moving freight train. Time is definitely NOT on the city's side now, they said. After seeing the park Wednesday morning, June 20, I'm not so sure. Setting it up properly now would be a tremendous challenge but not impossible. Where is Garland's old "can-do spirit"?

Meanwhile, I am still left with that gnawing question, "What will it take for our leaders to wake up and smell the coffee BEFORE bad things happen again in this city?"

When Baylor Scott & White abruptly closed our city's only full-service hospital on February 28, city leaders had been warned more than a year earlier (and the handwriting had been on the wall for nearly a decade—see my blog on 12/19/2017) this might happen, but our leaders lived in denial, believing that something or someone was going to rescue them.

Unfortunately, the story is not new for Garland. Wait! Hesitate! Look to old solutions and past formulas. And let's console ourselves with a pat on the hand that says "everything is going to be OK".

It will, won't it?

"Just be quiet and don't say anything and maybe, just maybe, our problems will go away" often seems to be our motto here.

Meanwhile, our sister cities to the east, north, and west, blossom and sizzle. And some of our council members get irked at anyone who dares to suggest we are NOT in that fast-moving group.

Instead of renting a fence to seal off the park and positioning Garland police officers and squad cars to ward off any problems at Windsurf Bay Park—once again risking negative publicity about our city—why wasn't a citizens committee formed earlier this year and filled with blue-ribbon creative types empowered to look for win-win inventive solutions? The good idea of possibly requiring advance reservations and capping the number of entrants, turning others away once a safe cap was reached, was proposed Monday night by a brand-new city councilperson, but it didn't get enough traction to keep the park open this year. (Chief Bates said from 7-8,000 guests used the park last year.) A citizens group created to study the Windsurf Bay dilemma could have hatched up ideas such as this much earlier so some solutions could have been in place well before this July 4 loomed upon everyone.

Next to the lake, with storm clouds rolling in, Windsurf Bay Park is a truly beautiful place. Its dirt/sand roads, however, could use a visit from a tractor with a sharp grader!

Parking problems? Did anyone ever consider utilizing the parking lots at several nearby churches or apartment complexes (apparently destroyed by the tornado) and providing shuttle service for park patrons, then charging them an entrance fee to the park to pay for the shuttle and extra security?

Maybe our annual visitors really don't know that they are not supposed to dump their used charcoal and ashes on the ground in our parks. That's not posted in the park-rules signs already in place at Windsurf Bay Park. (However, littering, shooting fireworks, drinking alcoholic beverages, etc. are already posted!)

On Tuesday night Aubin suggested signs stating that no lifeguard is on duty. On Wednesday people were swimming and fishing along the shoreline. If these signs are needed on July 4, they also are needed on other days of the year as well. Did anyone ever think of that before Tuesday night?

And the issue of people parking in the nearby neighborhood? Doesn't the city own hundreds (maybe thousands) of barricades—far more than enough to block off access to all those streets? (As a rough estimate, I would say less than 50 would be needed.) And couldn't we have asked our Citizens on Patrol to staff those barricades voluntarily?

Our leaders seem to function with the idea that there are no solutions, except the most narrow and limited ones from the past. I doubt most have ever heard the entrepreneur's heart-cry, "Seize the moment!"

Take, for instance, another hot-button topic in our city right now: our antiquated animal shelter. Ever since I drove to Plano's animal shelter years ago and rescued a castaway Bichon/Poodle for our daughter after earlier visiting Garland's animal shelter and finding no suitable pet for a person with severe cat-and-dog dander allergies, I've been concerned that Garland's animal shelter needs to be replaced with something much better, more adequate, and more modern. Even then I knew that Plano dazzles while Garland plods and falls further and further behind.

Now, of course, the city is once again put in a bad light because of all the unresolved issues at the animal shelter that were brought to the surface by the controversy generated by a persistent CITIZEN group—including, heaven forbid, an "outsider" from Dallas—not willing to settle for our status quo. A citizens task force immediately after the last mayoral election starting to work on planning a new animal shelter with an eye to upgrading services could have been well on the road to having a solution.

City council members can no longer hide behind some members' disdain for our former mayor as their excuse for not leading properly. They wasted far too much time voting against things just because they presumed the former mayor supported those issues. So now there's no one else to blame for their blunders or lack of leadership except themselves.

It's time for council to start becoming proactive instead of bureaucratic. Foot-dragging and being reactive need to become council practices of the past—not carried forth into the future.

Garland City Council was at a fork in the road regarding Windsurf Bay Park Monday night. These signs tell much about that dilemma.

Do we live in a democracy? In Garland city elections the democratic process is all but eliminated because of the powerful Garland Fire Fighters Association

My membership in the Citizens Fire Academy taught me the rigors Garland firefighters endure to perform their jobs well. Because I care about our firefighters, I believe the Garland Firefighters Association needs a mid-course correction in the way it involves itself during local elections.

Garland citizens need to have an important and necessary conversation about the role, power and influence of the Garland Fire Fighters Association and its political action committee in our city's elections.

Our city's fire department is NOT involved directly in our city's elections. Like all city departments, it is by law supposed to be nonpolitical. However, the independent union-like association that includes many of our firefighters is intricately involved in city politics—and in ways and to the extent that may surprise average voters and citizens of our community. The law requires this to be done out of uniform and totally off hours and away from their places of work.

At the same time, an Open Records request to the city proved what many have long suspected and rumored but, in typical Garland fashion, is not readily in public view: Less than 5% (a total of 6) of our 119 firefighters (people in our fire department who bear that job title) actually live and vote in Garland. The other 95% live as far away as southern Oklahoma, East Texas, the western outskirts of Fort Worth and other places. The firefighters earn between $61,084 and $76,760 a year in Garland and from Garland citizens' pockets yet spend the vast majority of that money in other places, building the economic base of other locations. 

While 95% of our actual firefighters live outside the City of Garland, do not pay taxes here, and do not vote in our city, the firefighters association, which touts loudly and proudly "Garland Firefighters support . . .", exercises perhaps the most powerful influence of any individual or group over our city's municipal government. 

Before I go further in this blog, let me be clear: I love and respect our city's and our nation's first-responders, including the brave men and women who keep us safe when fire turns destructive. I am a proud graduate of the City of Garland's Citizens Fire Academy; I am a member of the Citizens Firefighters Club of Garland. Two of my four nephews are firefighters in Oklahoma. One of Kay's cousins is a firefighter in Dallas; another is retired from the volunteer fire department in a small town in East Texas. We have friends who are parents of firefighters. At our house we love firefighters as individuals and as a department of our city!

I also love Garland and our city's firefighters enough to ask the difficult questions about their political action committee, their union leaders, and their excessive over-involvement in our city's political elections. I want better for them and don't want to see them continuing to go down a troublesome path many in our city are beginning to seriously question and which could majorly damage our fire department's reputation overall.

I cherish my experience as a member of the Garland Citizens Fire Academy, where I and my fellow class members learned a bit of what goes into a firefighter's workday. Regretfully only 6 of Garland's firefighters (less than 5 percent) live in Garland, yet the union of which many are members makes far-reaching decisions that will impact our city's citizens for decades.

I would ask the same questions if another group—for instance, employees of the Garland Environmental Waste Services or the city's Streets Department—has a PAC and conducted themselves in this manner. Regular city employees also are by law under the same restrictions about campaigning and being involved in municipal elections as are the fire and police employees. They may not use their positions to directly influence a campaign or election.

This is also not meant to reflect personally on the candidates that the political action committee endorsed in the most recent city election. Because of the way this firefighters' PAC operates, however, the election was not a fair fight—and local elections down the road can never be a fair fight as long as this organization's practices are not seriously studied or countered.

To counterbalance the excessive power the Garland Fire Fighters Association wields in our city elections, other groups of city employees, disenfranchised residents, or others may be forced to rise up to challenge the GFFA-dominated power structure here. I heard grumblings of this during the recent Mayor of Garland campaign.

The way the Garland Fire Fighters Association's PAC operates creates the type of municipal election here that essentially eliminates the democratic process. Only a candidate endorsed by the PAC has any chance of winning at all, given the deep pockets the firefighters' union has. In this blog I repeatedly have encouraged Garland citizens to run for public office and to throw their hats in the ring in local elections and to exercise their rights as citizens to do so. However, very few people can stand against this kind of onslaught. The average citizen can't expect to take on this challenge unless the person is independently wealthy and can outspend the deep-pocketed Garland Fire Fighters Association union. Even at that, there's no guarantee, because who is going to oppose the "motherhood-and-apple-pie" questionable approach of "Hi, I'm a Garland firefighter" or "Hi, I'm a firefighter" that occurs when GFFA representatives electioneer at polling places and approach voters with their endorsements and materials as they enter to cast their ballots? It represents an extremely unfair advantage. It has earmarks of what one might experience if he or she lived in a country where there is really no choice in an election or where successors are pre-selected.

Let's first define three terms that are crucial to this conversation. The terms sound alike but legally apply to three different entities.

1. The Garland Fire Department. This is the unit of our city assigned to save lives and property by fighting fires and transporting and sick and injured to area medical facilities. It is top quality with an annual operating budget of $32,635,109 for fiscal year 2017-2018. The city employs 119 firefighters and 141 others in that department. Mark Lee is the city's fire chief.

2. The Garland Fire Fighters Association. This AFL-CIO affiliated organization is known as the International Organization of Fire Fighters Local 1293. While a separate entity from the Garland Fire Department, its membership is overlapping and is composed of most of the men and women in the Garland Fire Department, not just "firefighters" per se.

3. The Garland Fire Fighters Community Interest Committee is a political action committee, aka a PAC. It is somewhat similar to those PAC's you read about in national elections, which are funded by extremely rich U.S. citizens who often have right-wing, left-wing, and other political agendas. The local Garland PAC pools money given by firefighters (often deducted directly from their city paychecks) to be used in political activities, such as elections for Garland city council and mayoral races. Many Garland politicos believe it is almost next to impossible for an ordinary citizen in a competitive race against a council or mayoral candidate endorsed by Local 1293 to win. Because the group is so well organized, skilled, monetarily endowed, and powerful, the Firefighter PAC is able to throw as much money and influence as necessary to win an election here.

The Fire Fighters Association even has its own private offices in the basement of the Chase Bank Building near the intersection of Garland Avenue at Main Street.

Garland firefighter David Riggs, president for many years of the association, and Garland firefighter Brandon Day, secretary-treasurer, are key leaders in the organization and the organization's political campaigns. Riggs is a skilled, seasoned politician who is scheduled to retire from the Garland Fire Department in 2019. I will be very surprised if he doesn't opt to run for public office in coming years or create his own consulting business for political candidates. Riggs lists on State of Texas paperwork his address as Sulphur Springs, TX. He is among Garland's most astute political powerhouses right now and one of the most influential people in Garland city elections, even though his address is in Sulphur Springs.

A familiar face in matters pertaining to Garland politics is David Riggs, president of the Garland Fire Fighters Association, and one of the most powerful political figures in Garland.

During the most recent election, Riggs worked tirelessly for his candidates, not only ordering, paying for with PAC funds, and putting up their campaign signs and orchestrating multiple targeted mailings and robo phone calls but even bringing meals to them and delivering and taking other actions at their beck and call.

The Garland Fire Fighters Association's Community Interest Committee is the strongest and most financially able of any PAC in Garland today. It makes the other Garland PAC's associated with such entities as the Republicans and Democrats in our community look weak and anemic.

The only comparable Garland entity to the firefighters is the UA Plumbers and Pipefitter Union Local PAC Fund, which gives mostly to non-local races. It does not seem to want or have an influence in our city's politics. Its focus seems to be on state and national politics.

So the firefighters' PAC stands alone in financial strength and political power in our city. Nothing else in Garland compares to it. No wonder our local politicians appear to live in awe—and at the same time fear—of it!

One has to follow the rabbit-trail through state government maze at the Texas Ethics Commission's website to discern the true wealth and influence of the Garland Fire Fighters Association and its powerful PAC, aka the association's Community Interest Committee.

Fortunately, the State of Texas requires the PAC to file paperwork for its fundraising and expenditures on political campaigns. This is yet another classic example of how the state appropriately has to supervise what goes on in a city.

The role of the Garland Fire Fighters Association's Community Interest Committee is especially significant in a city where voter apathy is extreme and financial means for elections is desperately small. Those unfortunate elements combine to magnify the influence of the firefighters' PAC. (In the last election only about 3% of Garland voters exercised their right to vote.)

The Garland Fire Fighters Community Interest Committee has the financial resources and political clout in the city to elect just about whoever it wants in a city election. And when it deems necessary, the PAC uses those resources to whatever extent necessary, leading to what could make a significant portion of our current Garland City Council beholden to it, living in fear of it, or going begging after its support.

The city has little it can do to cure the union's influence, especially since the majority of the members of the Garland City Council were elected with its help—and three of the others have never stood for election and received even one citizen's actual vote and easily could live wondering what would happen to them if they ever became involved in a REAL contested election and needed the firefighter PAC's assistance to stay in office.

It represents an extremely unfair advantage, especially when those approaching the voter with the appealing introduction, "Hi, I'm a firefighter”, fail to reveal their actual place of residency elsewhere. Members of the Garland Fire Fighters Association say they perform these election-related tasks in their off-duty hours. One told a member of our campaign staff that he was paid by PAC money to be present at the polls. (Initial reports filed in Austin indicate the firefighters who work the poll are paid by the PAC. More on this in another blog later.)

And why not live in Garland? If firefighters and other city employees work here and earn their salaries here, why would they not want to support the hand that feeds them and help bolster the economic base that in turn could help their lot economically? Garland has nice homes, wonderful people, good schools, and a city with an economic base that needs all the help it can muster! If our city council had courage, it would ask important questions like that when the union leaders come calling asking for their pet projects such as setting up a special "retirement stability benefit" for them.

In late 2017, the Garland Fire Fighters Association's Community Interest Committee reported to the State of Texas that it had available assets of more than $120,000 and was still collecting funds to disperse during elections in 2018 and beyond. (In Garland, a contested City Council race can cost upward of $10,000 and a mayoral election more than $50,000.) I personally ran a frugal mayoral campaign that spent more in the realm of what candidates for council normally spend (when a contested race actually occurs!) In its May 3 filing, the Garland firefighters PAC reported that for the year its receipts reached $33,228.00 and its expenditures $34,494.29. Those funds seem to have been disbursed mostly for Texas legislative races. Most of the expenses for its involvement in the Mayor of Garland special election on May 5 are not included in that May 3 report. I will report to my readers on them later when all those reports are filed and publicly available.

A major issue that Garland faces, as one reader pointed out recently in a response to one of my blogs, is that Garland does not have its own independent newspaper or other media such as TV or radio stations to help ferret out the truth for us. That means we have no independent voice in the community to determine and assess the information about city elections, including information about the oversized role of the firefighters association and its PAC.

During the most recent city election, one couldn't readily tell the difference between the city's fire department and the firefighters association and the activities of its PAC. Many citizens were quite confused by the distinction. Representatives of the Association hustled voters at the polling stations and identified themselves as "Hi, I'm a Garland firefighter" or  "Hi, I'm a firefighter", further muddying the waters between politically active city employees under the guise of the firefighters PAC and city practice restricting political activity of its employees.

I have asked the Texas Ethics Commission in Austin, the state's watchdog on elections, for a reading on just how close the association came to stepping over the fine legal line of what is ethically right for it and at the same time harmful to our citizens who want to do right in elections.

Texas law is very specific about what political signs can say and how wording is presented. Our campaign noted several areas needing clarification in the Garland Fire Fighters Association's signs.

Some of the PAC's larger campaign signs during the Mayor of Garland race need clarification about whether they could have violated the law. In my document filed with the Texas Ethics Commission in Austin I cite several potential areas of question with their signs. My campaign workers and I deliberately acted cautiously and opted to wait until after the election was over rather than sending the mayoral campaign into chaos by deliberately and legally raising the issue and demanding during the waning days of the campaign that the Garland Fire Fighters Association's possibly illegal signs be removed.

Now that the campaign is over, I believe the city must face up to and address the matter publicly, so that citizens understand fully how their votes are being influenced by the firefighters' PAC, its money, and what citizens' options are going forward for dealing with it.

Many Garland citizens approached, emailed, and or called me to complain about "the firefighters'" aggressive behavior, including numerous robo phone calls, excessive direct mailings, signs, and electioneering voters at the polls. All this went well beyond the mere act of issuing an endorsement for a candidate. Most citizens didn't seem to know the fine points that distinguish the city fire department, the independent association, and the powerful PAC. They just referred to what was happening in the election and at the polls as "the firefighters".

Our firefighters rightfully bemoan the higher cancer risk firefighters face today due to chemicals used in all sorts of manufacturing. And they have asked City Council for a special "retirement stability benefit" to help offset that danger—a perk that even our police who daily face untold dangers said was not a priority for them. Yet the firefighters association spends on city political campaigns vast sums of money that could be used for a more worthwhile cause such as care of firefighters battling cancer or maybe even special cancer insurance for them. An individual fire department employee could funnel his or her funds now going to the PAC and reallocate them into a savings account for his or her retirement, if that is a matter of concern. The association's and PAC's stewardship of these funds seems puzzling at best. For the past decade, they've been growing in their involvement with our city politics. In fact, many sitting city council members (those that were actually elected by citizens in a competitive race, not by council because no one filed against them) are in their debt for the money the organization has fed into their campaigns to get elected.

During the most recent mayoral election, the firefighters association seemed almost in a state of panic to make sure their candidate won. It reminded me of my classes in the Fire Academy in which we were taught to go into a fire using everything we had to put it out and not let it spread. The Garland Fire Fighters Association already had an outstanding track record for steering elections in their preferred direction, so their response in this election was more than noteworthy. 

The issue is NOT our valued firefighters individually nor as a department of the city. It is the element within the firefighters community that tries to exercise unfair political influence far beyond that which most people truly understand or believe is right in our nation.

Whether the group's actions are ethical, moral, or right—and should be allowed to continue unchallenged—is the question that Garland's citizens need to answer for themselves—after getting all the facts out in front of them, something that hasn't been done until now.

Like the proverbial "elephant in the living room", Garland politicos and wannabe politicos have much they need to tell our citizens and the public in general about the influence this group of city employees has over City Council and the city itself. What exactly is the firefighters association and its PAC being promised in exchange for its money and support at the polls? I suggest that every local candidate who has accepted firefighter PAC money publicly disclose the exact amount and how it was used, since the public seldom if ever reads the candidates' city-required campaign financial statements.

One antidote for the issue is to encourage other groups of employees and citizens to do the same as the firefighters association. If the firefighters association is allowed to continue to be so active in city politics, why not encourage every city department (engineering, animal control, library, waste management, et al) to form its own political action committee (PAC), to raise funds through withdrawals from their city paychecks and lobby for whatever monies or issues they desire?

For the sake of future candidates in all Garland elections—and certainly for the well-being of Garland firefighters themselves—this matter needs to be out in the open, freely discussed, and solutions sought. It's not fair to others in the city that one group gets to exercise power so much greater than other groups, especially since members of that power-wielding group are city employees, mostly do not live in our city, do not pay taxes as the rest of us are required to do, and do not vote in our city elections. They take Garland taxpayers' money and spend it in other locales, while wielding major influence that impacts our city for years and years to come.

Free access to our city's political system is part of building a better community for ALL Garland citizens.