72°
64º | 77°
64° | 79°
When the Harris County Commissioners Court awarded a contract for vaccine outreach it initially flew under the radar. It didn’t receive much attention until the public was alerted that the contract, totaling $11 million, was awarded to a one-person communications firm owned by a local Democratic political operative with no experience in public health communications.
Commissioner Jack Cagle drew attention to the vendor and her lack of experience in this area questioning why some a critical contract was awarded to someone with no background in this field.
County Judge Lina Hidalgo claimed Cagle was lying about the vendor being a one-person firm even though the company, Elevate Strategies, said as much on its own website. In a heated meeting, Hidalgo even pulled contribution numbers of Commissioners Cagle and Tom Ramsey, attempting to call their ethics into question for receiving contributions from contractors.
Unsurprisingly, she didn't mention that her Democratic colleagues, Commissioners Adrian Garcia, and Rodney Ellis, also take money from the same firms.
When the story first broke, Hidalgo protested accusations that it was a kickback to an ally, saying she was not involved in the selection process. It later turned out that her current Chief of Staff served as the ranking member of the committee that recommended the vendor.
Not only that, but the vendor didn't even win the selection process. UT Health won the bid, and for a lower rate. Despite losing the competition and being more costly, the committee waived the financial requirements for Elevate Strategies and disqualified UT Health on a technicality.
Rice University's Mark Jones says the contract was to "provide political money for Lina Hidalgo's supporters."
After new information came out, Commissioner Tom Ramsey called for a re-vote on the item at the next Commissioner Court meeting, but before that vote could happen. Judge Hidalgo announced her intention to cancel the contract.
While the decision was correct, the mounting public pressure and criticism forced her to cancel it, not a sudden moral awakening that what she was doing with tax dollars was improper.
During this she still adamantly defended the decision, called critics "liars", chalked accusations up to "conspiracy theories", and downplayed her involvement in selecting the vendor.
When Hidalgo took office she made a deal with taxpayers, as do all elected officials, to hold herself to a high standard. But she went even further, raising the bar by refusing to accept, and subsequently returning, any contributions from vendors.
She received praised for this, and rightfully so, but in doing so she set a standard for her office that it must always be above reproach, maintain the highest levels of integrity, and avoid even the slightest perception of impropriety. At that, she failed.