The Valero “Angel” Mart at Main and SH 3 had its few days of fame. However, its support for council candidate Tommy “G” is no longer posted on the marquee. (Signs are retained at the corner) Also gone are Marc’s Blog heading and comments about the sign.
Two issues puzzle me.
First, why would someone pay $2.79 a gallon and prevailing prices are around $2.65??
Secondly, why has there been no discussion of the campaign finance reform? Many citizens see this is a big deal but details have been sketchy. Does this mean that candidates can no longer be funded by the homebuilder’s PAC and individual development companies?
I watched the council meeting and sound quality was generally poor. Mayor Randall’s mike was the worst!
Does someone have a link for the campaign finance ordinance?
23 comments:
I pay 2.79 at the shell on 45 and 518. But I use my Shell MC and get a 5% rebate. Do the math.
As for the signs, it is verrry interesting that the signs are back up at McDs and the posts on another blog are down.
Paul,
The LC finance ordinance link is
http://agenda.ci.league-city.tx.us/03-23-10/11a/03-23-09%20C%20Campaign%20Finance.htm
There is no executive summary for us busy taxpayers who have other things to do (like paying taxes). I would appreciate if someone accurately summarizes the ordinance in fewer than 100 words.
Mr. DiFalco,
Two words …no teeth. Campaign finance in League City has a big bark but the teeth are sitting in the glass on the night stand next to the bed. ANY city ordinance that creates a ethics commission can be UNDONE by ANY other council at ANY time. The Commission should be on the charter list to be voted on by the citizens.
BTW Vote against changing the city form of government. It gives control of the largest city in Galveston county, to an appointed bureaucrat taking out of the hands of the voters control. If the appointed city manager does not like the elected Mayor then the citizens have no voice in the way the city is run or how our tax dollar is spent. No checks or balances, all they would need to survive and thrive is four votes.
If the appointed city manager does not like the elected Mayor then the citizens have no voice in the way the city is run or how our tax dollar is spent. No checks or balances, all they would need to survive and thrive is four votes.
--------------------
I postulate that the citizens would have a voice in that they can share their concerns with council, and that any City Manager doing that poor of a job would get ousted. The benefit of a City manager is that there is leadership continuity regardless of who gets elected.
Good leaders will remain (oh if only during the Chuck Pinto term) and poor leaders will be shown the door.
I have submitted the following to another blog. It is being reposted here, just in case...
---------------------------------
Politics is dirty. Organized boycotts for political reasons displays a lack of class and professionalism, as does the spreading of assertion without presenting any evidence (i.e. Sharp is behind the email).
Ultimately, it is up to each individual to decide what businesses they will support or not. Whether they make that decision as an individual based on their own ethics or drink the kool aid, it's their choice.
I also find it very interesting that there is a certain sign prominently in the lower right hand column of the photo. I'm still waiting for an explanation of previous posts. That would be the ethical thing to do.
Paul I would like to suggest to you that you do not disparage the business in your photograph by discussing their gas price. What does that accomplish for the point of your writing?
Did everyone overlook the fact that the business is actually a franchise?
I guess I'm confused as to how the removal could be twisted towards boycott threats or candidates playing dirty.
Valero is just protecting its own name and enforcing their rights.
Richard,
Actually the thread started because there are campaign sings on the Restaurant on the corner of hwy 3 across for the gas station. Originally those signs came down, and now are backup. The signs coming off the Marquee is a secondary story. Yes you are correct, franchise rules generally mandate no signs in policy. Curious how the restaurant has signs up. Some serious arm twisting there.
Marc,
I'd imagine it depends on the franchise agreements and who owns the land the signs are on, not any arm twisting.
As to why they came down in the first place, I thought I remembered reading it was a misunderstanding between the candidate, employees, and management. Perhaps a district manager drove by and went "take those down unless you have approval" and then someone asked permission through proper channels to get the signs back up.
If Tommy wants his name with the Valero store, maybe he and the store owner should get permission from Valero.
Overall, I don't recall a sign hanging off of any golden arches, so no big-mac attacks there. This whole thing is somewhat comical to me.
Marc Edelman said...
Richard,
Actually the thread started because there are campaign sings on the Restaurant on the corner of hwy 3 across for the gas station. Originally those signs came down, and now are backup.
----------------------------------
And ME made a big deal about the signs being down and never explained where he may have been in error, nor offered any public apology to the candidate who's qualifications for serving were publically called into question by ME based on his own personal actions.
Oh sure ME can say he edited the photos to remove the candidate's name, but everyone in LC knows who's sign that was. So to hide behind the defense of not naming names is a cop out and a slefish refusal to admit one's guilt for falsely accusing a person, and as such is a biblical sin.
Hopefully ME finds some time this Easter weekend to reflect on his actions, to consider the price Christ paid for us and why, and allow himself to be convicted by the Holy Spirit and make a proper repentance in this matter , as I hope we all do in whatever matters we may have sinned.
I don't think you can define "the company you keep" by being on an email list. I received the email, not sure if I was on the original list, but did not know some of the people on the list and some I had not seen or spoken to in over a year. There were people on the list I considered friends. I get goofy emails all the time. For instance, StraightTalk sends me emails. Did I ask for my name to be attached to StraightTalks email chain? NO... so it is foolish to assume you are defined by who you receive an email from? I believe in freedom of speech and choice. You can have anyone's sign but as a business you also take the consequences that go with it. That is why we have the First Amendment. Now that is a good example of the company you keep. So would one assume that if you eat at McDonalds or buy gas at Valero you have picked a candidate? Hardly so.
BTW- I don't think signs make a big impact in a campaign.
Meanwhile, can we talk more about the issues? Way too little about where candidates stand on them. Some answered specific questions at the Glen Cove Park presentation. Chris Stevens directly answered my questions even after he was no longer a candidate.
So what about the other candidate who is still in the council race? Here's what I've learned so far:
TG has lived here less than 2 years, hasn't voted in the last 4 elections, doesn't attend council, board or commission meetings (hasn't served on either of the latter).
TG is for the economic tax that voters turned down twice. He is for keeping crooks like AmeriWaste. He is for the dog people special interest park and other "feel good" projects we don't need, don't want (and we said so, loud and clear), and shouldn't squander our money on.
When these special interests who keep getting turned away but can't take "no" for an answer come back again, they should have to present new reasons why we should reconsider their pet projects.
Finally, TG is supported by all the usual Dark Side good old boys who I don't even have to name. What else is to know?
What else indeed. Someone just reminded me that TG welcomes developer, PAC and other special interest money too. It's all green to him, he says.
Unfortunately, most of my green is committed to taxes and other essentials, while developers always seem to be out-of-towners who haven't paid taxes here.
If there's such a thing as a taxpayer PAC to compete with them, I haven't heard of it.
Does anyone know if the Valero in question is related to the proposed Valero station at the southwest corner of NASA Rd. 1 & FM 270 which wanted to tear down The Outpost?
(Note that one of the property owners has managed to save The Outpost and is having it moved to the half of the lot not purchased by Valero.)
Jeff
Now there is a brand name for League City, League city, fill up here.
Mister E,
If you feel so strongly about the Valero sign issue, then put your candidate's name on your PC Cable fleet and exercise your "right".
Hopefully, you will display the proper disclaimer and your chosen candidate will include the value of the display as a contribution.
"My guess is nothing, only TG can call himself a fiscal republican."
The quote above is from "Scott" and was posted on the Edelman blog.
As I see it TG has not embraced any of the core principles of the Republican Party. Not one.
In fact, if you look at everything surrounding his candidacy it is clear that he is a tax and spend democrat.
Is mgr. Neil Baron now a Republican?
Look at TG's comments at the Republican Women's Forum.
Look at guests attending his party.
Ask TG how he will pay for his propositions for a better city.
Ask him if he understands zoning.
Ask him if he approves of Ameriwaste and real ethics reform.
Ask him if he supports a tax increase and how much it costs to add one cop to the police force.
Ask him how he really feels about the mayor and council.
Calling TG conservative is like calling a raven a cardinal.
As for Valero, if Mr. Edelman is so gung ho on the issue let him put his name on the PC Cable Fleet, complete with disclaimers, and let his candidate claim the value as a contribution.
The issue isn't signs it's how much will the citizens have to pay.
Jeff, I am guessing that Valero would build the station first, and then Angel Brothers Enterprises (or somebody) might buy the franchise.
For some reason, the Angel boys have managed to keep their name out of all this. Until now, that is. I am not waiting any longer for the other shoe to drop. Angel. There, I said it.
Make a thread on issues and what should come first and what should be put on back burner....PLEASEEEE
Jeff Hagen is such a panty boy. What kind of crap is that? Get real issues for God sakes, and maybe Peter Pan, sorry, I mean the Pirate can help you out.
WITHOUT DIRECT SUPERVISION A CITY MANAGER COULD SELL CITY PROPERTY,LIKE A BRIDGE THAT IT DOES'NT HAVE CLEAR TITLE TO ANYWAY,TO A DEVELOPER AND THE CITIZENS WOULD HAVE TO PAY LEGAL FEE'S IN A BATTLE TO UNWIND WHAT THE LAST ADMIN HAD DONE,AND GET SCREWED ALL THE WAY AROUND.
Dear "Davis"
I am not so much concerned about the Valero as I am about the protection of free speach and candidates placing signs on properties without permission.
Post a Comment