As The Dais Turns: The RonAnaBravo Triangle
Regardless of the drama surrounding the events at city hall on the day council approved the 2023 budget, some details are instructive.
To recap: District 1 Councilman Mario Bravo thought he had District 8 Councilwoman Ana Sandoval’s support for his weatherization plan. This would have been funded with the revenue surplus that flowed into CPS due to the blistering summer we just endured.
It was essentially a showdown with the plan championed by Mayor Ron Nirenberg, who wanted to rebate it to CPS customers. Councilwoman Sandoval abstained from the vote, thereby dooming Councilman Bravo’s plan.
Hence, the sparks.
Councilman Bravo is alleged to have said “she put the knives are in my back.” That was after he told her tendencies like those are why he didn’t want to have children with her, and why their relationship fell apart a few years ago.
An investigation has been opened. The mayor has already stripped him of his committee assignments. We suspect though, that this has as much to do with what happened next.
During the session, Councilman Bravo referenced the mayor and the councilwoman a few times, often in tandem. This is not an uncommon practice, but one that City Attorney Andy Segovia, in our opinion, mistook for “comments directed” at them. He subsequently reprimanded the councilman.
At one point, when Councilman Bravo requested to speak, a look of mild exasperation came across Mayor Nirenberg’s face. Perhaps understandably so; Councilman Bravo was dropping truth bombs.
He reminded attendees that the council passed the Paris Climate Agreement resolution in June of 2017. “They took 28 months to pass a climate plan” when “they said they’d take 18.”
He also claimed they let “prominent members of the business community line-item veto” things out of it before it came to a vote. “They took a year to seat a climate adaptation committee” that still has done nothing. But yet “they pushed back against my bold, visionary proposal.”
Now there are calls for his resignation, headlined by the San Antonio Express-News. These demands are political garbage.
It’s important to note that some of us opposed Councilman Bravo’s plan. We also feel he has too much of a penchant for spending, and seems too selective with who should get relief on property taxes.
Our biggest difference though, seems to be faith in the effectiveness of government.
Government is a plodding enterprise. It needs no competition with any other entity to remain in existence. It knows it can always take from the taxpayer. Consequently, it lacks sufficient incentive to do things well.
When a top city bureaucrat tells a citizen they’ll at least “not do numbskull things,” you know the bar is set low.
It’s conceivable the council is aware of this. It might explain the aforementioned veto. Perhaps they know what too much government can do to an economy. See the Great Depression.
It’s this kind of politics however, that breeds cronyism, a hint of which seeped into Councilwoman Sandoval’s statement explaining her abstention. This is part of what Councilman Bravo was shining a light on, and we applaud him for it.
The footdragging on pledges to voters. The backroom gutting of policy proposals. It may be why he lost his cool. Were his alleged words harsh? Sure. Was his behavior boorish? Maybe. Should he resign? Please.
By leading this charge, the EN implies they’re OK with business-as-usual. Based on their usual political endorsements, they’re fine with government seizing people’s earnings/assets, but it’s Councilman Bravo’s behavior that’s the problem?
He is not fine with the status quo. We fear however, that he’ll continually be frustrated the more he learns that efficiency and effectiveness are just not in the cards for government.
Nevertheless, his fate should be left in the hands of his constituents. They may appreciate his spirit and dedication enough to forgive him this transgression. If it happens again, it may be a different story.