Hopefully she will leave a forwarding address when she blows town just before we learn the Convention Center Hotel is a financial failure and we can back bill her for some of that money.

The Big guy can only think of one thing. Childish - yes.
Infantile - yes
sorry

http://www.newsfromme.com/images2/pat1.jpg

In addition, Ms. Reed controls a LOT of money directly from the City itself, from DISD, etc. For some reason, she was/is the gatekeeper for money related to different Dallas bond elections, and acts basically as the City's representative on how money is doled out to subcontractors, allowing the City to funnel money to her without having to bid out contracts.

It's obvious when bidding against her, that the fact that she is the Mayor's and Chamber's "go to" person definitely comes into play when people are making decisions. You can't tell me that when a large public entity is deciding who to award a marketing/campaign contract to, that it doesn't cross their mind that if they wanted the Mayor, Chamber, and other "connected" groups to support them, that they had better not piss those people off by giving the $$$ to some other consultant.

Unlike Farrington and some others, though, Ms. Reed DOES actually work for her money. It's just irritating that other companies not as well connected as her can't get their foot in the door for City work.

Does Carol Reed still owe the City $85,000 arising from the fireworks show over the Trinity several years ago?

Forgot to mention in the Angela Hunt item earlier this morning that she also addressed the lobbyist registration proposal on her blog Monday afternoon:

http://www.angelahunt.com/2009/10/19/lobbyist-reform-reduce-city-hall-corruption/

Then there is the issue of Carol Reed coming to the council to represent developers, who may or may not have any connection with the mayor. As we heard from Council member Vonciel hill yesterday, they all worry like hell about anybody who has the capacity to tip $5,000 or, God forbid, $10,000 to an opponent. So Carol Reed comes to you, with the Citizens Council money and the mayor's head in her pocket and says, "I'd like you to vote for this guy's deal." It's like an offer from the godfather.

On the one hand, being successful and having a lot of power is not against the law, and Carol Reed is where she is because she works hard and is smart and determined. On the other hand, the public has some right to protect the process, not to mention the pubic treasure.

That's why Hunt's idea sounds right: you can run election campaigns, or you can lobby for commercial clients at the council. But not both.

Willie Cothrum never touches campaigns, as far as I know, beyond writing checks maybe. He makes a good living as a lobbyist. Why not cut them all back to that level?

@JimS We have a Pubic Treasure? Does that come with a trail? Typos can be fun. ;)

Let's not forget Carol also spends a great deal of time fund raising for among other charities, Friends of the Dallas Police.

She has a great many friends in high, high places, she's definitely leveraged their love.

@IUSA

Just playing devil's advocate here, but the charity work could simply be the act of a guilty conscious. Remember, Bernie Madoff gave BIG to community non-profits:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99084451

Just when you thought the Reed pic where she has no body was creepy.....

What you muckrakers don't understand is that these figures paid to the consultants are mostly passthroughs to service venders: USPS (postage for direct mail); design work for brochures and direct mail pieces; labels and mail house services to assure that highly targeted pieces arrive to the homes intended and on time; production companies and talent for radio and TV spots; time on radio and tv stations; phone bank fees and headquarters operations. These are all fees typically paid to the lead consultant for payment for services contracted.

It is totally disingenious to toss around dispersements from the campaqign treasurer to the lead consultant without a breakdown as to where that money went - trust me not in their pockets. Bad journalism! Are blogs journalism anyway?

If I was on any Board or City payroll, I'd do what Reed said just because she looks like she might beat the crap out of me if I didn't! Good God, bring back the floating head; it's less threatening.
(Sam, does she have that raspy old lady smoker's voice?)

Are you serious Mike? You think that Jim and Sam don't "understand" that some portion of that money goes to subcontracted work? Apparently you are the only one daft enough to think that needs to be explicitly stated. I don't see anything in the posting or comments here that would imply anyone misunderstood.

In any event, consulting is a reasonably high margin business, so a lot of the money really is just going to the consultants and the owners of the business. Secondly, do you think Carol Reed would actually give anyone information about what portion of her fee went to profit? That would be a horrible business decision for her on so many levels. Even without specific knowledge of her business and cost structure, trust me - a lot of the money found its way into their pockets.

That is one odd photo......

Are they ex lovers?

I think mike just gave the readers of this blog an Angry Pirate.

Friendly reminder: starting 1 Dec 2009 anyone who blogs or posts reviews of a product or service for money will have to state that fact, or face fines from the FTC.