Everything's
functioning in Westlake
By Dave Lieber
Star-Telegram
Updated: Saturday, Sep. 14, 1996 at 18:58 CDT
Ross Perot Jr.'s characterization
last week of the town of Westlake as
"dysfunctional" was surprising.
The town appears united behind Mayor
Scott Bradley and the Board of Aldermen in its
opposition to what many believe would be Perot's
takeover of the city.
Rebellious? Yes. Westlake doesn't
want to become a nation-state of Perotville.
But dysfunctional? Hardly. Could a
troubled little town ever outmaneuver the billionaire
boy wonder if it weren't a healthy community?
From the start, Westlake outsmarted
Perot's lieutenants during the unveiling of Perot's
plans for the 2,000-acre Circle T Ranch. Westlake, not
Perot, controlled the terms of the public debate. The
Perot people are not used to such treatment.
Citing Westlake's supposed
dysfunction, Perot last week announced that he has
dropped his idea to build a "community unlike
anything this country has seen" on his Westlake
property.
"So we're going to do the
basics and move on," Perot said in an unusual
statement of defeat.
Asked his response, Bradley said,
"We're not trying to make this a personal thing.
It would not behoove us to get into a personal
repartee with him."
How did Westlake put a stop -- at
least for now -- to Perot's grandiose plans? It goes
back to the perception of Big Perot vs. Little
Westlake.
"The perception is there's this
big gorilla landowner trying to take control of the
town," Alliance Development Co. President Rick
Patterson says.
He says that's unfair, because the
city doesn't have a way to build utilities and roads.
"I understand this
perception," Patterson says. "Scott is a
master of creating perception. He's not very good at
telling the truth."
Here's the Perot/Patterson dilemma:
When Patterson says Scott Bradley is
"not very good at telling the truth," these
words do not ring true in the community. Bradley is a
respected man.
"I know why it's difficult for
them to understand," Bradley says of his
motivations. "They have the developer's mentality
that says that everything is a dollars and cents
decision.
"For me, Westlake is very much
like dealing with a family member. It's something I
love, I respect and had a hand in raising. I want to
see it develop to its full potential."
Westlake has much going for it in
the current fight against Perot.
For one thing, Perot can probably
never overcome the symbolism of his quest for
dominance over the city. His vision really is about a
takeover of the town.
Perot wants to take sales tax
revenues generated from the eventual corporate,
residential and retail development on the Circle T
Ranch and use it to build the infrastructure.
"Why couldn't the town build
water and sewer just as easily as they could?"
Bradley asks. "At least, we have the public
interest at heart. They have conflicts. They are both
the developer, and they control the municipal utility
districts."
The two utility districts on the
Circle T are controlled by Perot. The districts issue
bonds and levy taxes to construct utilities and roads.
Perot wants to keep this power for
Circle T development. He wants to make the decisions
about utilities and roads.
But three years ago, Perot
supposedly promised Westlake leaders that he would
help the city dissolve the districts, if they would
stop pushing a bill in the Legislature allowing
Westlake to abolish them. At the 11th hour, the city
agreed to Perot's request.
Perot apparently changed his mind
about helping the town dissolve the districts. So now
Perot and the city are hiring lobbyists to plot
competing strategies for a possible fight next year in
the state Legislature.
The future of Westlake is unclear.
Will the people who already live there maintain
control of the town? Or will Perot gain that power?
Alliance's Patterson describes
Westlake as a "virtual city," because there
is no city bureaucracy, no police department, no road
crew. Perot wants to keep it that way when the town
population increases to 10,000 or more.
"Let's keep it a unique
town," Patterson says. "Let's have, in
effect, a virtual city."
In other words, give Perot control.
"It's kind of scary,"
Bradley says. "Who, under that scenario, is going
to concern themselves with the residents of the town?
If a resident has a complaint, who does he take it
to?"
Scott Bradley pauses for a moment.
"I know who they take it to
now," the mayor says, laughing.
A mayor who is clearly not the
leader of a dysfunctional virtual city.
