- Residential Development
- Government Spending
- Ethics Reform
- Special Interest Influence
- Charter Revision
- The CIP
Who gets your vote and why?
Who gets your goat and why?
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Topical Discussion of the Candidates and Campaign Issues Only
This thread is dedicated to discussion of the candidates and the issues of the current election. Irrelevant posts intended to malign or disrupt will not be allowed. Where does your candidate stand on:
Who gets your vote and why?
Who gets your goat and why?
Who gets your vote and why?
Who gets your goat and why?
26 comments:
after 10 years is it time to review the benefits of zoning verses where we are now. nothing has been done to help the old part of the city. grandfathered business are still there and are expanding. new business are popping up run from homes.it seems all we have done is create a massive expensive buracracy at city hall. the code enforcement officer and nusance abatement officer are busy taking down garage sale signs and thats about it. also is it time to limit the amount a candidate can spen on a campaign.
Pat Hallisey has no experience in anything longterm unless you consider "division".
He is unemployed and has no understanding what the people are faced with on a day to day life. Why? Because he has no job and when he does, he can not keep it. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth. He goes on rants and acts out of anger and hate. Mr Hallisey, please tell me what experience you have in local Government? You were appointed the interim Mayor's job. You did such a horrible job in the 7 months you had it that the people would not even re-elect you. Step up and be responsible for once in your life. You have a black clowd over your head
FROM GALVESTON DAILY NEWS, I THINK THIS PRETTY MUCH SUMS UP WHY MANY ARE NOT SUPPORTING TC THIS TIME AROUND:
• Tommy Cones accepted a political contribution from the Houston Professional Firefighters Association Local 341, failed to disclose the full addresses of some of the people from whom he received contributions, failed to disclose the purpose of an expenditure, converted political contributions for personal use and filed campaign finance reports late, the group alleges.
For those not supporting PH< i think we need not say more. Other than his family, TC, JN, marc and jimmy, don't know who else is supporting him.
william, i agree with you, there should be a limit how much they can spend and how much they can receive from developers. Sounds simple enough of me.
william shirley
Good to hear from you. I clearly agree with your thoughts about capping contributions. Ethics reform was a hot topic for Mr. Baron's election last year. It seems to have stalled for 11 months. Maybe Baron wants to talk about "ethics reform" after the May election. Maybe he does not want to hinder Cones re-election. It will be amusing to listen to Baron, Nelson, and Cones discuss "ethics reform" before the May election.
StaightTalk (Pat) Divert attention from yourself. Kosty is not running. YOU ARE!
Pat, Can you tell us about your relationship with Lloyd Chris? You know, your new string yanker.
How is the job at Perry Homes going over in Friendswood?
How much did taxes go up in League City the year after you were gone? They had to clean up your spending mess. You know , over by the Cemetary.
And let us not forget about Tommy Cones: This will tell you the way Tommy acts when he is not up for reelection.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Hagen
To: Undisclosed recipients: ;
Sent: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 12:31 am
Subject: Re: League City council election update.
My apologies to everybody for the flood of emails that came in response to the update on city politics that I sent out last night. I addressed the message to those of you in Glen Cove who I have been communicating with about these political matters and copied it to the two city council candidates that we have been supporting and their campaign supporters that I have met.
I should have used blind copy for addressing the letter and I apologize to everyone who feels overwhelmed by all the messages that I forgot to take that precaution.
I have not had time to read all of the messages yet myself, but I see that there were informative messages of concern for our neighborhood and for League City in general, so perhaps some good came out of all this.
I do not know Chirs Mallios, I did not send him my letter, I did not intend the message for him, and I do not know how it got to him. I appreciate the concern that he has expressed for what has happened to Glen Cove, but obviously he has chosen to support different candidates and has allied himself with the political forces who are against us. I do not know his reasons.
I stand by the factual information that I have passed along which I have seen first hand and I have done my best to faithfully represent what others have told me in the quoted information that I have passed along.
Along those lines, some things that councilman Tommy Cones has said were passed along to me tonight by somebody who heard Cones make these statements in person. I do not have direct quotations, but the essence of what I was told is as follows:
1) Tommy Cones has claimed that he has a 'mole' in Glen Cove and knows everything that goes on in Glen Cove. Specifically he said that his 'mole' knew about the party at Kim Nix's house at which Arnold Polanco and Tim Paulissen came to meet the residents of Glen Cove. (This was not a secret meeting and I do not know why he would be inspired to think it an important thing to say.) I do not know if the previous message I wrote reached this 'mole' by some channel and I do not know if this person is responsible for that message having been distributed to a wider audience. I do not know who this 'mole' is and can not vouch for the story.
2) Tommy Cones has said that because we are few in number that the city should be willing to sacrifice our interests in order to encourage a development that may increase the tax income of the city. Apparently he claims this is why he voted to abandon our bridge and has called on others to join him in this position. (I was told that he approached Tim Paulissen about this subject, but that Mr. Paulissen refused to turn his back on us and for that Cones is now opposing him.)
3) Tommy Cones has said that we do not really care about losing the bridge and that we are only complaining about it because we are upset about the threats to our 'boat houses'. I do not know where he got this idea, but I have heard other people who do not know me say this in the past.
(I know that all of you have heard me say the following, but for anybody who may read this message I want the following to be crystal clear. I can not speak on behalf of the true feelings of anybody else. I can say honestly that for my own sake that the bridge was a very important part of the neighborhood to me and that I am very disappointed that it is gone and consider it a significant loss of what I valued about my home. Anybody who says otherwise about me does not know how I feel and is speaking untruthfully. I have always clearly stated that I am willing to negotiate with the city for a compromise solution that benefits the city while minimizing the impact on us, but nobody representing the city has ever offered us a compromise position. I leave it to the imagination to explain why those residents of Glen Cove who do not even have 'boat houses' have expressed displeasure with the city's actions if they are not truly upset about losing the bridge.)
Given these statements by Tommy Cones, I think that we deserve answers from him to the following questions:
1) Why does he think the city is justified in trampling on some of its citizens in order to increase the size of the city coffers?
2) How many residents must be negatively affected before he considers it an unacceptable trade off?
3) Why is he unwilling to work towards a compromise that would mitigate or compensate the effects of his plan on us?
4) How are other residents of the city supposed to know whether they are among those who he considers expendable?
5) Can he convince the citizens that his motivation for supporting the plan to abandon our bridge has not been influenced by the unusually large contribution that he received from the developer who has benefited from this plan?
6) Why does he think he is qualified to make statements about our motivations when he has not even spoken with us? Where does he get the inspiration for the untruthful statements that he has made about our motivations?
7) How does he justify the potential conflict of interest that he has created by causing the city to hire as city attorney the same lawyer who worked on behalf of private interests to promote the development plan that caused abandonment of our bridge?
Jeff Hagen
Honesty. Honesty. Honesty.
That is what I consider to be the single most important quality in a candidate for City Council. We need honest, trustworthy people to make decisions and to represent the citizens.
Bill - you make a good point about zoning and bureaucracy! League City deserves much better, and we can seat two excellent candidates, Mick and Mike.
Is anyone else amazed when an elected official cries "this is political"? Good golly, he's in politics - of course it is political! Cones brought the TEC woes on himself! I am sick and tired when someone blames others for their own stupid mistakes. How egotistical!
Honesty, Accountability, Integrity, Ethics, and Applicable Knowledge/Experience are what I'm looking for in candidates.
I can't say who I'm voting for yet, but I can list two people I know I won't be voting for: Pat Hallisey and Tommy Cones.
http://galvestondailynews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=676c8894608215ca
After reading that article, I find it rather disappointing that only two individuals (Phyllis and Jim) can readily accept accountability for their mistakes (honest or not), and yet Tommy Cones appears to simply rejects it all as nothing more than political attacks.
The problem I have about this statement is that it has happened all too often in the City's history. With ethics reform we need representatives who can not only act in a manner that proactively prevents such ethical misconduct, but representatives who will accept accountability and take corrective action when their ethics are questioned.
Other than that, I must admit I'm rather curious about Dustin Gooding. He seems like someone I'd like to have a beer or two with. :)
and what happened to single member districts so we can finally get some real representation around here in old town lc?
My goodness Mr. Meyer comes up with a very good thread and some people cannot stick to the issues.
My issues:
Unchecked development, Developer contributions, Traffic, infrastructure, Smart Commercial development. Obstructionist interpreting our charter for their own purpose. Lack of support for the Mayor’s vision. Good old boy access to guiding city hall policy.
What gets my vote:
Truthfulness, honesty, integrity, knowledge of our city, its political history, the city charter and a willingness to move our city forward by working together. A true thought process in deciding how to vote on an issue, (I don’t expect you to agree with me but at least show me a truthful, logical thought process) logical thinking, a person willing to stand up for what they believe in. Someone who will put their money where their mouth is. Someone who will do what they say. Someone who will place League City first, before their personal and financial considerations.
What gets my goat:
Those candidates that collect developer contributions then push the developer’s agenda. Those candidates that try to win by dividing our community instead of uniting our community. Candidates who push ethics as their main issue then end up getting ethics violations and not taking responsibility for their actions. Candidates who want you to believe that they are more “patriotic” than their opponents. Candidates who do not answer direct questions with direct answers or Incumbents who do not take responsibility for their own voting record.
@richard - We can grab a beer any time you like.
Some quick things I'd like to mention:
With respect to zoning - I don't like it. I think it interferes with private property rights. It may be a tool to make it "easier" for a city government to plan growth and such, but at the expense of liberty? There are other ways.
With respect to campaign finance - The problem isn't that money is used in campaigns, the problem is that it is so influential. We have no right to cap spending or contributions... it would be "easy", but it would be wrong. However, we do have the right to determine how useful that money is and to track the money campaigns use.
With respect to single-member districts - This is one way to limit the influence of money in campaigns and ensure better representation of the people on the council. When candidates no longer have to canvass the whole city, their campaigns become less expensive and the "little guy" has a better chance of effectively reaching his audience (and yes, I'd certainly like that). This also helps ensure issues from across the city reach the council, not just issues supported by well-funded candidates. I imagine a 7 member council, 5 of which represent districts they live in and 2 of which are at-large. Sure, it's "easier" to have all at-large positions, but drawing districts and keeping them fair is the right thing to do.
With respect to strong or weak mayors - The executive of the city must be elected by the people, plain and simple. I can't imagine a democratic system of government where the head executive is not accountable to the people.
I don't claim to have all the answers, but I think my positions stem directly from my core beliefs in individual rights and limited government. There are certainly ways of making government "easy", but we must always attempt to do what is right.
"but we must always attempt to do what is right."
Ethics
Amen to ethics!!
I believe, as I have stated from the very beginning of the Charter review board meetings (back in Feb 2007) that the charter, THE CHARTER MUST include the formation of an ethics commission. That way it can only be removed or adjusted by the vote of the people. A city ordinance can be changed by a council that could very well wipe out such a commission without voter approval.
Dustin - re:zoning
What are the other ways? Having grown up in H-Town and lived out here 97% of my life and comparing it with the short time I lived in Portland, I can say there are definite positives.
You say "liberties", but liberties taken to extreme produces anarchy and destruction. The trick is finding the sweet spot that provides the optimum benefit to both the citizenry and property holder.
Pet peeves: Getting a recorded phone message from PH (from a 676 area code) this early talking about experience.
Funny thing about experience, it goes both ways. So Pat, let's talk about your resume and your accomplishments, shall we.
What counts: Honesty, a willingness to listen and learn, transparancy. Not everyone is as smart as Charlie and myself, just look as CJM. But those with the patience to learn will do good. Both Toni and Phyllis are great examples.
Issues:
- Setting priorities on spending
- Traffic
- Growth control
- Hiring compentent and knowledgeable people capable of strategic vision (sorry I'm no longer available) so we don't have to keep hiring consultants for every little thing
one of the problems with money is it keeps good, quailified people from running because they do not want to take money from developers and or from the wife and kids. with only 2000 voters it is rediculus to hire a political advisor and spend 15 or 20 thousand for a position that pays what a thousand. the zoning is a good way to control future growth but what about the cost and enforcement in old town of the grandfathered business is it really worth it and do we really need a code enforcement officer and a nuisance abatement officer.great to hear from cjm keep up the good work son.
I enjoyed PH phone call, I wish to get Mr. Lee's phone call so I can hear what he has to say.
Chris, You need to rename your blog to the "I hate Tommy Cones and Pat Hallisey Page"
I ponder the connection between ethics reform and special interest influence. I listen to arguments that ethics reform can be just another layer of government that limits personal choices (such as placing a cap on campaign contributions). On the other hand, a review of special interest campaign contributions has a direct link to planned and on-going local projects, both land developments and contract services. These campaign donations should do not legally come directly for companies but are presented as donations from company leaders and even their wifes. The source of other large contributions is a homebuilder’s PAC whereby donations are made by companies to the political action committee then by agreement disbursed to specific campaigns.
The question is how does this impact most citizens? Some citizens have said the impact of the special interest influence has been more traffic and higher taxes. I am also told there are examples of lesser neighborhood parks, missing sidewalks, inadequate capital recovery fees, and unusually high MUD and PID fees.
What is the impact on the citizens if a council person or mayor accepts $10,000 to $50,000 in campaign contributions from developers and special interest groups? These elected officials also appoint vital board members and can be vocal in the day-to-day operation of the city. There is an instance of a sitting board member that ran for office and received large developer donations, failed at the attempt to be elected and later became board members voting on development issues. I am not suggesting any wrong doing.
The Texas Ethics Commission has an on-line training course titled Ethics 500. The introductions states “As a public servant you should act fairly and honestly and should avoid creating even the appearance of impropriety.” Time requirement for this course is estimated at 30 minutes and real time is about 15 minutes. Anyone can take the course and it is mandatory for state officials and many local elected officials.
Comments appreciated.
@bhl - I fully admit zoning has its advantages. But just like you took liberty to the extreme and made it something to fear, it's just as easy to take things the other way. You are absolutely right, though, finding the sweet spot between the extremes is the key. My preferred sweet spot may be closer to the libertarian end, and yours may be closer to the authoritarian end. When issues are not cut and dry, I tend to err on the side of protecting the people's rights than making their lives easier.
As far as other ways, remember that the idea of zoning is relatively new (since about the turn of the century). How did we get by until then? How do cities get by without zoning today?
@paul - Honesty and ethics are hard to legislate into existence. Attempts like the ethics courses and the Code of Fair Campaign Practices provided by TEC are, in my opinion, only effective at keeping honest people honest. Do you really think a slimeball would have a change of heart at seeing his signature under a pledge? Or do you think that would just be his way to show voters, "I'm honest. See? This signature proves it."
I understand and share your position on the undue and usually bad influence that large donations have in politics. They cause elected officials to reward their contributors with Privileges instead of protecting the people's Rights. But, instead of prohibiting the actions of the people, what about prohibiting the actions of the government? What if we amended our Charter such that members of council must abstain from voting on issues that involve contributors to their campaign or office? The intricacies of that would obviously need to be ironed out, but you get the idea. Let them take contributions and blow tens of thousands of dollars on those silly plastic yard signs... but if they win, they're neutered on certain issues.
I've actually thought a good bit about conflicts of interest in voting. As I said above, ethics are hard to legislate. One option, though admittedly authoritarian to the extreme and not something I'm in favor of at all, is to completely outlaw campaigning with private funds. Each candidate will be given, say, $500 from the public coffers to campaign with as they please. Strict records must be kept of spending, and any evidence of private spending (even by third parties) will be punished. Who is the candidate beholden to then?
Agree with Dustin. BHL, I don't like you saying "anarchy and destruction" as if one goes with the other. Think Boston Tea Party. We NEED one every once in awhile.
Paul,
Please hold my statement in context. Boston Tea Party had nothing to do with liberties concerning usage of personal property.
How about a League City Tea Party where we toss certain elitests into their canal?
LC Con,
That’s a good one.! I picked up the phone and it said “Hi I’m Pat Hallisey” and I hung up. If you wish to know what Mr. Lee’s positions are then you should look up his web site, call him or email him. Pat will only tell you what you want to hear to get elected. (much like Neil Baron) Can you imagine a city council consisting of Hallisey, Clones, Stations, Nelson, and Baron? Oh my goodness. How long do you think it would take to concrete the whole city? With the developer money flowing not long. And this is not a I hate anything blog. Why does disagreeing with someone equate to hate in your eyes? Do I say on every post No Hallisey. No Stations and No Clones…er uh Cones? You need to understand that politics is just the business of picking the best person to represent ALL of League City and in not personal.
BHL,
Give me a chance I’m trying to be as intelligent as y’all but I know I will never be. I'm just an average citizens trying to do what is best for our city. I leave the heavy thinking to y'all. ;-)
As for the League City Tea Party why not make it April 4th at the nature center. They will (for the most part) all be there and we have water as well!!
Mr. Shirley,
Thank you sir, You can bet I will !!!
BHL: Sorry for the wrong analogy. When we all go down to the canal, I'll bring the chains and cinder blocks. Then we'll see if elitists can do Houdini tricks.
Y'all will want to see the editorial about the council race, published on the front page of the current Seabreeze. Gator never fails to deliver. There is also a related letter inside the cover.
Here's the link:
http://seabreezenews.com/issue/Page_01.pdf
Post a Comment