Well, well, well...look who favors making CHIP more accessible now.
"I think it's the right thing to do," said Rep. John Davis of Houston, who on Tuesday filed legislation to lengthen the CHIP enrollment period from six months to one year and ease other restrictions imposed by Republican leaders in 2003 to help bridge a $10 billion revenue shortfall without raising state taxes.Restoring CHIP coverage will be a "good investment" in a healthier Texas, said Davis, the House Human Services Committee's budget and oversight chairman. The state leads the country in the number of residents without health coverage.
The changes imposed in 2003 -- including the shortened, six-month enrollment period and an assets test that disqualified some families from CHIP coverage if they owned a second, used auto -- have been blamed for CHIP enrollment dropping from more than 500,000 in 2003 to about 290,000 in April 2006.
Also sharing the blame were errors by a private company, Accenture, hired to help process applications.
Rep. Davis was of course one of the main enablers of the onerous restrictions that he now wants to fix. I don't know what brought about this particular road-to-Damascus moment - I personally would not discount the salutary effect of his having had a vigorous challenger last election - but it is as welcome as it is overdue.
Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, who co-sponsored the law creating the Texas CHIP program in 1999 and fought the cutbacks in 2003, welcomed Davis' bill and said he will ask to be a co-sponsor. He already is sponsoring separate legislation to restore the CHIP cuts."This was bad public policy to begin with. I can't understand why it took John or anyone else four years to understand that," he said.
Coleman said he suspected the motivation was political since several Republicans who supported the CHIP restrictions, including former Republican Reps. Talmadge Heflin and Martha Wong of Houston, have since lost races for re-election or higher office.
"This wasn't done out of the goodness of someone's heart. This was forced. The public has spoken. The public wants change," he said.
I refer you once again to Rep. Coleman's work on CHIP. While I agree that the public has spoken on this matter, it's apparent that not everyone is listening:
But Gov. Rick Perry opposes at least one of the key changes, the longer enrollment period, spokeswoman Krista Moody said.She said Perry favors the current, six-month enrollment period and continuation of the assets test for eligibility. It wasn't clear whether the governor would support the less-onerous test proposed by Davis.
"The governor wants to ensure that those receiving government aid for health care are, in fact, eligible to receive those benefits," Moody said.
I hate to say this, but I can totally see a bill getting passed with bipartisan support, and then getting vetoed by Governor Thirty-Nine Percent. I don't have to re-enroll in my health insurance program every six months, and I'll bet neither does Rick Perry. Why should folks who need CHIP be treated any differently? How many people are likely to get an extra few months of coverage that they might not have gotten under the current rule? Not many, I'd bet - certainly far less than the people who have lost coverage in the past few years. The Governor's attitude is not only uncompassionate, it's not even fiscally sound. And of course, there are real world consequences:
Terri Cannon, whose husband is a doctoral student in physics at Rice University, spent months trying to renew her two sons' health insurance coverage last year.Her youngest was just turning 1 and was transferring from Medicaid to CHIP. Her oldest, then 3, had been on CHIP since January 2005.
Both qualified but went uninsured for four months while Cannon's efforts to renew their coverage met with one bureaucratic snag after another.
The loss of coverage was especially troublesome for her oldest son, a severe asthmatic who needed costly medicine to prevent his attacks.
"They needed to realize that they were not just dealing with paperwork," Cannon said.
"They were dealing with my 3-year-old who couldn't breathe, and I couldn't get past that."
In a sense, Terri Cannon was lucky. For some people, the fallout from lacking insurance can be fatal.
UPDATE: Dewhurst is with Perry. Gotta keep those GOP primary voters happy, you know.
As promised, the groundbreaking of Houston Pavilions took place yesterday amid much fanfare. Here's what we have to expect:
The developers of the Houston Pavilions say it will open in October of 2008.The $170 million project will have 360,000 square feet of retail space and a 200,000-square-foot office tower.
A nearby 1,525-space garage has been leased. It will be connected to the rest of the project via a skybridge.
The newest tenants include clothing retailer Forever 21 and Books-A-Million.
Both will build urban flagship stores and join House of Blues, Lucky Strike Lanes and at least seven restaurants, including McCormick & Schmick's, Red Cat Jazz Cafe and Lawry's, the Prime Rib.
The retail space will occupy the first two levels of the project, with entertainment venues on the third floor. A central courtyard will have space for restaurant patios.
"We will be the people place to see and be seen in the city of Houston," said [William] Denton, who is developing the project with Geoffrey Jones.
Not quite what people in my comments were looking for, but not too shabby overall.
Looks like we're going to have to be careful about driving through downtown soon, as there's a lot of construction going on, with perhaps more to come:
Construction on the Pavilions is happening at the same time as One Park Place, the 37-story apartment building with 346 units. It's the first of its kind to be built downtown in more than 40 years, according to developer Marvy Finger of the Finger Cos.The tower should be completed in early 2009 and have retail space on the first floor.
[...]
The developers shouldn't have trouble leasing the loft-style office space, as the amount of available downtown space has been shrinking. The office market posted a big drop in vacancy during the last quarter.
Vacancy for top-class downtown buildings fell to 10 percent, according to real estate firm CB Richard Ellis.
[...]
Real estate observers said the project will help spur more shops, restaurants and convention activity.
"I think it'll definitely be a catalyst for more development," said Mark Sixour of Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, a national mortgage banking firm that secured the project's financing and equity.
We'll see. Houstonist has more.
Yesterday was Debutant's first re-birthday; it was on February 27, 2006, that she received a stem cell transplant courtesy of a donation from her brother. I'm very happy to see that she's doing well. May there be many more re-birthdays (and the original kind, too) for you to celebrate, Deb.
I was reminded of this event by my friend (and regular commenter here) Patrick, who unfortunately also had some bad news: His cousin-in-law Kelly, who is a college student, was recently diagnosed with an aggressive form of lymphoma. Like Deb before her, she is about to become very well acquainted with MD Anderson and its employees, for at least the next six months.
Now, I've not met Kelly, and neither have you, but there's a simple thing that we can both do to help her and people like her: We can donate blood, and especially platelets. There are many fine locations around Houston for making such donations. I've been a regular customer at the Gulf Coast Regional Blood Center on La Concha lately, and I'm about due for another visit. It's good for your soul, it doesn't take long, and you can stuff your face with cookies afterwards, guilt-free. What's not to like?
I will be donating blood in the month of March. I hope you will please think about joining me. Thank you very much.
"Forecasters warned today that a La Nina weather pattern -- the nasty flip side of El Nino -- is brewing, bringing with it the threat of more hurricanes for the Atlantic.Officials at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced the official end of a brief and mild El Nino that started last year. That El Nino was credited with partially shutting down last summer's Atlantic hurricane activity in the midst of what was supposed to be a busy season.
"We're seeing a shift to the La Nina, it's clearly in the data," NOAA Administrator Conrad Lautenbacher said. La Nina, a cooling of the mid-Pacific equatorial region, has not officially begun because it's a process with several months with specific temperature thresholds, but the trend is obvious based on satellite and ocean measurement data, he said.
"It certainly won't be welcome news for those living off the coast right now," Lautenbacher said. But he said that doesn't mean Atlantic seaboard residents should sell their homes.
You might at least consider storm shutters, however. And make sure your insurance is up to date.
Forecasters don't know how strong this La Nina will be. However, it typically means more hurricanes in the Atlantic, fewer in the Pacific, less rain and more heat for the already drought-stricken South, and a milder spring and summer in the north, Lautenbacher said. The central plains of the United States tend be drier in the fall during La Ninas, while the Pacific Northwest tends to be wetter in the late fall and early winter.
SciGuy has more. Let me just say again, "Argh!"
Today is Planned Parenthood Lobby Day in Austin. The timing is propitious, as a couple of bills were filed yesterday to implement what is being called the Texas Prevention First Act of 2007. From the website:
The Texas Prevention First Act of 2007 will:
- Reduce the risk of unintended pregnancy and the spread of sexually-transmitted disease through accurate and effective sex education in public schools and outreach for family planning services state-wide. By reducing unintended pregnancies, we will reduce the abortion rate in Texas.
- Increase outreach for Texas' family planning program through print and broadcast media, websites, and a toll-free telephone number. When fully implemented in 2009, the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) projects that the Women's Health Program, created during the 79th Legislature, will serve only 12 percent of the eligible population. By increasing enrollment in effective and cost-saving programs such as the Women's Health Program, Texas will increase access to health care and family planning services for adult women in need and, ultimately, save money.
- Save public dollars while improving women's health. The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) estimates that it costs less than $170 per client per year for preventive family planning, whereas, it costs over $8,500 for the first year of a Medicaid pregnancy. In addition, one out of every two births in Texas is paid for with public dollars. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, every public dollar spent on preventive family planning services saves taxpayers $3 in Medicaid costs for prenatal and newborn care. The Women's Health Program, for example, is projected to save Texas $278M over five years, and the federal government matches Texas' investment in this program at a ratio of 9 to 1.
- Involve parents in their children's sex education by requiring school districts to notify parents of the content of their child's sex education curriculum, of State Law regarding sex education, and of ways to get involved in the development of this curriculum.
The bills in question are HB1842, co-sponsored by Rep. Mark Strama (Austin), Rep. Rafael Anchia (Dallas), Rep. Sylvester Turner (Houston) and Rep. Rep. Veronica Gonzales (McAllen), and SB837, co-sponsored by Sen. Kirk Watson (Austin) and Sen. Jeff Wentworth (San Antonio). I'm a bit leery about the odds of anything as rational and compassionate as this making it through the process, but one must always hope. Signing the petition couldn't hurt, either. BOR has more, while PDiddie reported from the previous PP Lobby Day.
Rightwing former radio talkshow host Jon Matthews was sentenced to three years in prison for probation violations that he was arrested for in August.
Matthews, 61, left the courtroom of state District Judge Brady Elliott after agreeing to a three-year sentence on a charge of indecency with a child.The state claimed Matthews violated several terms of the probation he received two and half years ago after he pleaded guilty to exposing himself to an 11-year-old girl. Matthews did not dispute the claims made in court this morning.
[...]
Court records show Matthews violated several probation conditions the court set in 2004 when he entered his plea on the charge that stemmed from the October 2003 incident.
The violations included testing positive for alcohol, being terminated from a sex offenders counseling program and engaging in sexual fantasy activity over the Internet, court records said.
The conservative talk-show host resigned from his position on KSEV-AM (700), where he sat behind the microphone 6-9 a.m. each weekday. He also stopped writing a column for the weekly newspaper Fort Bend Star.
According to a July 5 report prepared by the Community Supervision and Corrections Department of Fort Bend County, Matthews tested positive for alcohol in June of 2005 and again in July of that same year.
"He admitted to abusing alcohol for approximately three weeks before testing positive," the report said.
Matthews also was terminated from a sex offenders counseling program because he had been engaging in inappropriate online sexual conduct, according to court documents.
As noted before, the details of Matthews' activities are pretty lurid, so caveat lector. Not much else to say here except that the sentence is well earned and deserved. And may this be the last time we see his name in the news.
I still have a fair number of old-fashioned record albums. None of them have been played in at least ten years, which is approximately when I last had a working turntable. Some of these albums have CD equivalents in my collection, but most don't, and a couple may not ever have been released on CD.
I would dearly love to convert these suckers to MP3s, so they can be burned to CD and ripped to my iPod. I see that this is technically possible, though of course I have neither the equipment, the time, or the confidence to try it. I'm sure I could pay someone to do it, but if that guy's rates are any indicator, it won't be cheap. Which isn't surprising, given that it's got to take about an hour per album, since the damn things have to be played in their entirity to get everything into digital format, then cleaned up to remove the popping noises, but it is discouraging. Doing all fifty or so remaining albums would run into some serious money. Of course, finding CD replacements isn't necessarily going to be any cheaper. I suppose I could just shop the iTunes store for individual songs, but that seems like a daunting and time-consuming task, and foists a bunch of DRM-infected music on me, which limits my future MP3 player choices.
So it's a bit of a dilemma. What would you do in my shoes? I'd appreciate any feedback.
Looks like there's some blowback in the Great New Braunfels Cooler Crackdown: Via PinkDome, the city councilman who's been the driving force behind all of the recent spate of river regulations, including the beer bong and Jell-O shot bans, is now facing a recall by irate cooler-toters.
It took recall supporters fewer than five hours Saturday to gather about 570 signatures on a petition to remove District 6 Council Member Ken Valentine from office. It took less time than that for the City Council on Monday to reject Valentine's proposal to limit recall referendums."If you vote for this, you're probably going to end up in court," New Braunfels resident Bill Norvell said.
A retired attorney, Norvell was among more than 100 people who packed council chambers Monday to hear members discuss a range of new ordinances affecting tubers. Most of the those calling for the recall opposed the ordinances, which Valentine supports.
The petition was submitted to city Secretary Michael Resendez on Monday. For a recall vote to be held, Resendez must verify at least 221 signatures.
Robert E. Lee III, one of the recall's organizers, said he was confident of the petition.
"In business terms, that's what we call a supermajority," he said.
If enough signatures have been gathered, the City Council will vote on a resolution to call a referendum in May, Resendez said.
If Valentine is recalled, the city would hold a special election in November to fill his seat, which expires in May 2008.
If I were a betting man, I'd make the recall effort a slight favorite. I just get the impression that the pro-recall forces, which is to say the anti-tiny-cooler forces, will be more motivated to get out and vote in May. I could certainly be wrong about that, and the set of total voters involved in this race is small enough that anything can happen, but that's my seat of the pants guess. It'll be fun to watch, that's for sure.
And it looks like Council Member Valentine might be his own worst enemy:
Resendez said he has received phone calls from residents asking about the number of votes needed to hold recall votes for District 4 Council Member Pat Wiggins, District 5 Council Member Kathleen Krueger and even Mayor Bruce Boyer. But Resendez said he has not received any recall petitions besides Valentine's.Valentine, whose district stretches from West Bridge Street south across Interstate 35 to West County Line Road, tried Monday to stop the recall.
He proposed an ordinance that would let the council members have the final say in whether a recall referendum goes forward by determining by majority vote whether the petition properly identifies and supports grounds for recall.
Valentine recused himself from the ordinance's discussion and vote, and it failed without opposition.
So in one fell swoop, Valentine provided the recallers with another bullet point for their mailers, and demonstrated that his colleagues aren't willing to stand between him and the rabblerousers. Not a good sign. I'll keep an eye on this one, so stay tuned.
I don't know who Houston Consigliere is, but he has an interesting take on the Woodfill/Eckels affair, if you can get past the white text on a bright red background. Thanks to PDiddie for finding that.
I have an image of the letter Woodfill & Friends sent to Eckels if you're interested - it's here.
Finally, via Miya, we have DraftCharles.com. No, not me, and not this Charles, either, but Bacarisse, to be Eckels' replacement. It has a blog and everything. Honestly, what can one say?
Following up on his announcement to bring out stronger preservation protections for the Old Sixth Ward, Mayor White wants to enact a temporary ban on demolitions in that neighborhood until the details can be worked out.
The City Council on Wednesday will consider an ordinance that would exempt buildings in the Old Sixth Ward Historic District from a provision that allows owners to alter or tear down historic structures 90 days after the city's Archaeological and Historical Commission denies them permission to do so.City officials said the ordinance would prevent further loss of historic homes while White's administration develops a permanent plan -- one that includes design guidelines, financial incentives and other measures to protect historic structures in the neighborhood just west of downtown. The temporary ban would expire Sept. 1.
Houston preservationists, who have long complained that Houston's historic preservation law was inadequate, said the measure is significant even though it is temporary.
"I think this is a sign of good judgment, of being proactive rather than reactive," said Lynn Edmundson, the founder and director of Historic Houston.
But City Councilman Michael Berry, while predicting the ordinance will pass, said he intends to oppose it.
"It appears that we are changing the rules on people in the middle of the game," Berry said, adding that even a temporary ban on demolitions could cause financial difficulty for a property owner who had arranged to borrow money to tear down an old house and build a new one.
The ordinance amounts to a "regulatory taking," Berry said, and is likely to prompt lawsuits from property owners demanding compensation.
Okay, that's a fair point, but here's a question. The Old Sixth is a pretty small area. It should be determinable whether or not anyone in that area is already planning a demolition in the near future. We could do a permit check, for instance. What I'm getting at here is that given the temporary nature of the ban, we should distinguish between a theoretical concern and a concrete one. If there are no actual homeowners who fit Berry's description, then (again, given that this is a temporary action) what's the problem? And if there are, then we can try to find out if they'd have any objections to a delay, and if so what (if anything) could be done about it. Maybe Berry's right, and we are exposing ourselves to a lawsuit. All I'm saying is that this should be checkable and not hypothetical.
I feel like there's a point that needs to be made in this story about using dedicated funds as they were intended but which is lacking.
From electric-bill help for the needy to parks funding to abolishing a telephone fee, promises to spend state fees and taxes for their intended purposes or stop collecting them are working their way through the Legislature.But the open question remains whether lawmakers, struggling to fund state programs while keeping a pledge to subsidize lower school property tax rates, will be able to stop diverting much of the earmarked money.
The arguments for caution focus on the price tag. Unspent dedicated funds currently total $2.7 billion, according to the state comptroller's latest estimate. That's money that can be used to help balance the budget just by virtue of being on the books.
"It kind of boils down to, what does the Legislature want to do?" said Sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, Senate Finance Committee chairman. "I'm not for increasing taxes somewhere else to pay for that cut. And I'm not for backing off our property tax cut."
Arguments for spending dedicated fees as intended are fierce, particularly from advocates who see change possible now that leaders like Gov. Rick Perry are on board.
"The bigger question is whether or not we are going to budget with integrity," said Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, House speaker pro tem, who has long protested the budget-balancing diversion of a utility fee intended to help lower-income customers with bills. "And whether or not our political rhetoric matches what we do."
Why exactly is it that funds that were initially collected for a specific purpose, such as the much-ballyooed sporting goods tax, which is intended but underused for state parks, wind up getting raided for general revenue purposes? I say it's because too many legislators are reluctant to admit that our tax structure, which is supposed to fund our basic needs, is inadequate for the task. It's much easier, and less politically risky, to sneak a few dollars from this or that fund that most people are not aware of and not paying attention to than it is to talk about the big picture. So they play shell games instead, and hope for the best.
I'd like to see more truth in our taxation, too. It's not right to say that a tax or a fee is for one purpose, and then use it for another. But if we're going to be honest, let's not stop with this. Let's talk about what it's really going to take to meet the public's demands for things like properly funded public schools, because we're sure as hell not doing it now. What Sen. Ogden and the others are talking about here is perfectly fine, but it's also applying a band-aid to a broken leg. Until we fix the underlying issue, I guarantee we'll be right back in the same place again in the future.
I noted before that the local GOP is making demands about who Robert Eckels' successor as County Judge should be. I see now that they are fully prepared to hold their breath till they turn purple if Eckels and company don't bow to them.
Some Republicans are threatening to withhold future political support for County Judge Robert Eckels unless he backs a high-profile elected official as his successor rather than a relatively obscure former lawmaker."This decision is extremely important to whether the base will get behind Eckels if he runs for higher office," said County GOP Chairman Jared Woodfill.
Although Eckels is stepping down to become a partner in the Fulbright & Jaworski law firm, he has said he eventually may seek statewide office.
Many GOP precinct chairs want Eckels and the Commissioners Court to tap a Republican official already holding countywide office, such as District Clerk Charles Bacarisse or Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt, Woodfill said.
[...]
Eckels has agreed to discuss the appointment of his successor with the local GOP executive committee, which comprises the county's 450 precinct chairs, when it meets Monday.
Eversole and Radack also were invited to attend. Radack said he won't go because the three members of Commissioners Court would create a quorum, possibly constituting an illegal meeting.
Alice Rekeweg, a precinct chair from Kingwood, said some GOP activists are so upset that Eckels appears to be backing [Ed] Emmett as his successor that they would not support the county judge in a run for statewide office.
"It's a possibility some people will hold a grudge," she said.
Isn't that sweet? It's so nice to know that our next County Judge will either be the result of a crony backroom deal, or a hostage swap for Robert Eckels' future political considerations. I suppose the good news here is that Steve Radack would probably rather cut off his big toes than make a deal for Eckels' benefit. I don't think he'll allow himself to be out-grudged by a bunch of precinct chairs.
Remember, what Woodfill & Friends are demanding here would mean that more than one countywide office would be held by appointees for the next two years. If it's Bacarisse who gets tabbed, then two offices for which the last election was this past November will be vacated. Presumably, at that point, we'll get to hear who's on their list of Acceptable Replacements for Bacarisse as well. But who cares about all that? It's an Opportunity, and Opportunity requires Taking Full Advantage. Voters, schmoters.
Funniest quote of the week:
Eckels dismissed that as a concern. "I'm not worried about that at all," he said. "I'm just going to do what I was elected to do."
Um, Bob, what you were elected to do was to serve as Harris County Judge through the year 2010. That's the one thing for sure we know isn't going to happen. We wouldn't be having this conversation if you did what you were elected to do instead of heading off on your quest for personal and financial fulfillment. Just FYI.
According to Miya Shay, the Houston Pavilions project, which secured its financing last October, will have its official groundbreaking today, along with the announcement of two new "anchor" tenants. Here's who they have so far:
Tenants that have already been announced include House of Blues; Lucky Strike bowling center; Lawry's, The Prime Rib; Tuscany coffee shop; Yao's Restaurant and Bar; Antica Osteria Italian restaurant; Red Cat Jazz Cafe; and McCormick & Schmick's seafood restaurant.A grand opening is expected in October 2008.
Anyone want to speculate who'll be added to this lineup? Is there any particular entity you want - or don't want - to see? Leave a comment if so.
Sad to see the two big iconic Texas ranches locked in such combat over wind turbines, but that's the 21st century for you, I suppose. Based on what I now know, I'd have to award the debate so far to the Kenedys on points.
"(King Ranch Chief Executive) Jack Hunt goes around telling lies and misquoting information and has no technical skill whatsoever, trying to mislead the public that wind energy doesn't exist and doesn't add any value, doesn't produce much and is a tax debacle," said John Calaway, whose company plans to build 157 turbines on a plot now owned by the John G. and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation.[...]
Hunt says Sarita Kenedy East, who until her death in 1961 was the last surviving descendant of ranch founder Mifflin Kenedy, would disapprove.
"People who knew Mrs. Kenedy said she'd be spinning in her grave if she knew these lands were being used for this purpose," said Hunt. "I don't think this use is consistent with what the Kenedys had in mind. This area is important environmentally -- it's been called 'the last great habitat.' The King Ranch family feels very strongly about stewardship."
[...]
Marc Cisneros, a retired Army general who heads the Kenedy Memorial Foundation, rejects Hunt's claim that he and the trust are willing to sacrifice the unique South Texas environment for a quick payday from wind speculators.
"We at the Kenedy Foundation do not take a back seat to the King Ranch or anyone else in concern for wildlife," said Cisneros from his 17th-floor office in downtown Corpus Christi, adding that "what wildlife worries about is someone shooting at them," a swipe at the King Ranch's prominence as a hunting destination.
"We looked at (the wind proposal) very carefully. We were very cognizant of conserving wildlife. We have quantitative data that show it's not an issue."
That data is constantly flowing into Calaway's offices at Continental Center. A diesel-powered radar site, which sits on the lonesome Jaboncillos Pasture somewhere between U.S. 77 and the coast, has been taking continuous sweeps of the airspace since September, tracking every bird to see if dozens of spinning rotors would pose a threat.
"We're not seeing the 'river of birds' that Jack Hunt talks about," said Calaway, who holds research predicting minimal impact to bird populations. Plus, he said, the turbines practically stop on a dime if a major influx of birds does pour into the area.
Hunt admits he doesn't know whether the turbines will whack a single bird. His problem is that there's no regulation of building land-mounted turbines in rural areas, so no government body will vet the project.
And Hunt won't merely take wind operators at their word.
"We haven't seen any of that bird data," he said. "It's not peer-reviewed. How can you trust it when basically it's been done by the people they've hired to do it? ... If I wanted to build a feedlot down there, I'd have to have all kinds of permits."
The issue has been a struggle for bird advocates such as the Audubon Society, which also supports clean energy.
"On balance, Audubon strongly supports wind power as a clean alternative energy source that reduces the threat of global warming," Audubon President John Flicker wrote in December, outlining the organization's position."Location, however, is important."
It's certainly possible that the Kenedy folks have oversold their commitment to bird safety, and I don't doubt for a minute that there's insufficient oversight - for crying out loud, this is Texas; we don't have sufficient oversight for any-damn-thing - but Mr. Hunt has not made his case, as far as I can tell. I may see it differently down the line, but for now, I'm rooting for the Kenedys.
Some details on the plan to make the citywide WiFi project available to lower income folks.
Under a contract with EarthLink, the company chosen last week to build the network, about 40,000 discount Internet accounts would be available for low-income residents. Those who qualify would have Internet access for about $10 per month, compared with regularly priced accounts that would sell for about $22.Low-income residents also would get help accessing computers to connect with the Internet, and enrolling in classes to learn how to use it.
The efforts would be funded partly by EarthLink, which is expected to contribute $2 million during the first two years the network is up and running to market the product to potential low-income users, and provide computers and training.
After two years, EarthLink would turn over 3 percent of the revenue generated from the wireless system to the city, which would invest it in efforts to provide Internet access to low-income residents.
Will Reed, CEO of Technology for All, a local nonprofit that helps low-income communities access and use technology, said those funds would need to be matched by other sources to make the program successful.
"One million (per year) won't go very far," he said. "But if we multiply it with corporate contributions and other programs and activities that can build off of it, then I think we have the opportunity to make a difference."
I suspect that with EarthLink opening with $2 million towards this effort, the matching funds will be there. Mayor White has certainly shown the ability to milk those sources when needed. It's not clear from this story how much total funding will be required, but whatever it is, I expect it'll be achieved.
TMI brings word of the golden anniversary of "The Cat In the Hat", which was first published in March of 1957, and links to The Annotated Cat, a book about the two Cat books. One "did you know" fact they highlight:
The ring removal in The Cat in the Hat Comes Back recalls Ted Geisel's work on the 1935 advertisement for a spot remover called Ex-tame.
Here's the thing. Say you're Dick or Sally. This cat, whose tricks you know all too well, has invaded your house again, and has introduced accomplices for his mischief. At the point where Little Cats A, B, and C succeed in blowing the pink stain outside onto the snow, does it really make sense to insist that they then clean up the snow? I mean, it's snow for crying out loud. It'll melt. Your house and everything in it is clean, and all you need to do is say "Okay, thanks very much, we'll take it from here, nice seeing you, now goodbye." Why wouldn't you just do that?
Because it wouldn't have made for any fun, I suppose. Seuss' book is much more entertaining his way. We should be thankful that those kids didn't learn enough from the previous time to leave well enough alone.
Last week, the This Week/Heights section of the Chron had a big story about some pending changes to the prevailing lot size and setback ordinances, and what effect they may have on historic preservation efforts.
The ordinances apply to non-deed restricted areas inside Loop 610.The existing ordinance to protect against lot subdivision is the prevailing lot size ordinance.
If 75 percent of the houses on a block are the same size, the residents can apply for protection that would require all lots to remain the size of the majority of lots on the block.
Because many blocks are diverse in their lot sizes, this rule precluded many from protection.
The proposed minimum lot size ordinance instead would come up with a minimum lot size by adding together the square footage of lots on a block -- largest to smallest -- until 60 percent of the total square footage of a block is reached.
Whatever the size is of the lot that caps off 60 percent or greater of the total block area would become the minimum lot size.
The new rule would allow any two opposing block faces to qualify for some level of protection. A block face is comprised of all the land on one side of a block of a street.
Sterling said under the existing ordinance, residents have to do much of the legwork to find out if they qualify, whereas under the new ordinance the Planning Department would calculate each block's minimum lot size.
Sorvari said the new ordinance would improve upon the old ordinance, which "was made convoluted and burdensome to make it harder for us to do this as homeowners. This is simplified and puts the onus on the Planning Department to crunch the numbers."
A change to the building line ordinance, which has been working its way through city council in conjunction with the lot size ordinance, would create a standard build-to line for a block using the same formula as the proposed lot size ordinance.
Sterling said he believes, visually, the building line ordinance would have the greater impact of standardizing the look of a street.
Residents said they were concerned with the logistics of getting Planning Department approvals on minimum lot size applications if the ordinance change passes.
Sterling said the new law would have the potential to increase the number of applications because more people would qualify and the Planning Department would need to figure out how to deal with the influx.
If the ordinance changes pass council, Sorvari said, "we will do everything in our power to get the word out," so that more blocks can apply for protection.
My first reaction upon reading all this was to wonder what effect this might have on situations like what the Sunset Heights faced awhile back. My second reaction was to hope that someone who understands all of the minutiae would write a clearer explanation of what exactly this is all about, since I'm not sure I do. Thankfully, Marty Hajovsky came through. I'm still working my way through it all, but I'm farther along now. Go read his post and see if it doesn't help you, too.
The proposed $32 billion buyout of Dallas power giant TXU will halt construction of all but three planned Texas coal plants, cut power prices for North Texas customers by 10 percent and put the company on a more environmentally friendly footing.In a conference call this morning, TXU's management outlined the planned takeover led by private equity investors Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. and Texas Pacific Group.
Shareholders will receive $69.25 per share for TXU from the group, which will then split the company into three divisions: one that will own and operate TXU's power delivery system, another to run the company's power plants, and a third business to sell power directly to residential and commercial customers.
The investor group will assume about $13 billion in debt.
A key component to the deal, which was approved by TXU's board of directors Sunday night, was the support of environmental groups that were putting up fierce opposition to the company's plans for 11 new coal plants.
The national group Environmental Defense agreed to settle its federal lawsuit against TXU regarding one of the new plants in exchange for an aggressive environmental pledge from KKR and Texas Pacific Group. The Natural Resources Defense Council also agreed to support the deal.
"To call this a watershed in the fight against climate change is accurate," said Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense. "In this case, where you have a Texas company agreeing to reduce its carbon levels from current levels back to 1990 levels tells us the utility sector sees we're moving into a carbon constrained world."
Sounds awfully good, but you know how that can go. Anything that has Tom Pauken and Glenn Smith both raising concerns (different ones, of course) is something that will require close monitoring. Sen. Troy Fraser, who as we know was not a big TXU fan, is also concerned.
I don't have much to say about this, so I'll link instead:
McBlogger is suspicious.
The Observer has some background, and Vince has some details.
RG Ratcliffe wonders if the deal means more nukes - he asked members of the Environmental Defense Fund about that and has a podcast of their responses.
Inside the Texas Capitol revisits his cap and trade pondering from last week.
And finally, the Burka/Kilday Hart tandem have these three posts that look at the deal from various angles.
He's had his day in court for his civil citation for running a red light at a camera-enabled intersection, and now Michael Kubosh is fixing to file that lawsuit he's been promising to do.
Michael Kubosh said Sunday that he will argue the city cannot impose a civil penalty on drivers who run red lights."The city has gone outside their legislative authority," said Kubosh, who will be represented in court by his brother, lawyer Paul Kubosh. "We just can't let this go because accidents increase at intersections where these things are put up."
That fact is clearly in dispute, but as we've seen before, Kubosh is a little free with such statements.
State lawmakers debated for years whether municipalities should be able to issue civil citations to red-light runners using camera technology. In 2003, they amended the traffic code to permit the civil enforcement of vehicle safety standards under state law or municipal ordinance.Kubosh called that an "obscure provision" that does not allow the city to go ahead with its program.
City Attorney Arturo Michel responded that argument won't hold up in court. It doesn't matter under what bill the provision was approved, he said.
"Courts look at what the words say," he said. "The plain language of the rules allows us to regulate."
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott in June said the Texas Department of Transportation "may also install cameras on state highway rights-of-way to monitor compliance with traffic-control signals."
[...]
[Kubosh] argues the city cannot issue civil citations to offenders because that conflicts with state law, which defines running a red light as a misdemeanor criminal offense. Offenders caught by police can face a fine up to $200.
Getting caught on camera, however, is a civil violation that carries a $75 fine. The ticket goes to the owner of the vehicle, or the last person to register it, not necessarily the driver. Those who are ticketed are expected to pay the fine or contest the penalty in court.
"The city's administrative enforcement procedure deprives traffic-ticket defendants of their constitutional rights, such as the right to trial by jury, the right to remain silent, the right to confront witnesses against them, and the right to have their guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt," reads a draft of the lawsuit.
Those rights are reserved for criminal offenders, not civil.
I'm not a lawyer, but I can't say I'm impressed by the case Kubosh is making here. Still, as this report by the House Research Organization (PDF, hat tip to Newswatch) points out, there is no clear law on the subject, so who knows what a court may do. One possibility, given the opinion of AG Greg Abbott and pending legislation by Sen. Carona that would clearly legitimize some cameras, is that they're upheld for TxDOT-controlled intersections but not for others. We'll see how it goes.
While some legislators want to ban red light cameras, others would prefer to regulate them.
Cities and the state would share revenues from fines collected as a result of red-light cameras - but those fines also would be capped at $75 per violation - under compromise legislation proposed Wednesday by the chairman of the Senate transportation committee.The compromise measure by Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, received a good initial response from city and police officials - including several from the Dallas area - who had come to Austin on Wednesday to testify against bills that would either ban the use of red-light cameras by cities or take their fines and send the money to the state.
"I think we've reached a compromise that is acceptable," Mr. Carona said. "This makes good sense because it takes the financial incentive out of the process and assures that these cameras are used for public safety purposes."
Mr. Carona said his legislation was prompted by the "proliferation of red-light cameras" across the state since the Legislature inadvertently approved their use in 2003. He said he also wants to put the brakes on some cities that are levying fines of $150 or more on motorists who are caught on camera running red lights.
"My concern is that these cameras are being used more as a tool to generate revenues than for public safety," he said. "We want to remove the motive for profit" in installing cameras at intersections.
Under the compromise, there would be a statewide maximum fine of $75 for first-time offenses. Revenue from fines would first be used to operate the cameras - about 35 percent to 40 percent of the money - and the remaining money would be split equally between the state and cities. That would mean cities could get roughly $20 from each offense.
The bill would require the city to use its profits for public safety and transportation-related needs, while the state would deposit its share in the state trauma care fund and the Texas Mobility Fund.
In addition, cities would have to do a traffic study before they could place cameras at an intersection.
The first part of this legislation, to limit the fine for a first offense, would not affect Houston's implementation, as the fine here is already $75. I'm not sure about the rest of it - I presume Houston did some sort of study, as I presume they didn't pick locations at random - but whether that meets Sen. Carona's legal definition or not, I couldn't say.
The story mentions that some Dallas-area cities were okay with Carona's proposal. I was curious as to what the city of Houston thought, so I placed a call to Frank Michel of Mayor White's office and asked him. He said that he hadn't seen all the specifics of Carona's bill, but that his understanding was that it only affected TxDOT-controlled intersections. He said that since it's cities that bear the brunt of the cost of accidents that occur due to red light running, they should be able to use the revenues generated to help offset those costs, but beyond that he had no problem with sharing the revenue with the state. We'll see what happens if Carona's bill advances in the Senate.
Meanwhile, there are some other bills floating around as well.
State Rep. Chente Quintanilla, D-El Paso, filed a bill that would require the time between a yellow light and a red light be determined by consistent state standards at intersections with red-light cameras. He said that would be fairer to drivers."That's what we're trying to do - synchronize all lights in this state so that everyone knows how long they have to cross," he said.
[...]
State Rep. Bill Callegari, R-Houston, has also focused on making cameras fairer for drivers. His proposal would require cities that use red-light cameras to post warning signs before the intersections where they are used.
I have no problem with either of those proposals. I have no idea how likely either of them are to be adopted, but I'd have no objections to either of them.
One more thing, from that same article:
In El Paso, 11 intersections have 16 cameras. The city has issued more than 3,600 tickets since the cameras began operating last year, El Paso police Sgt. Jack Matthews said.He said the cameras have been effective.
At intersections with red-light cameras, accidents during November and December of 2006 dropped significantly from the same time the previous year, he said.
Accidents caused by red-light runners decreased 80 percent, right-angle collisions fell 58 percent, and injury collisions dropped 46 percent.
Some day, perhaps we'll get this same information for Houston, too. Some day. Thanks to the Walker Report for the heads up.
I've got my interview with Melissa Noriega, the first of what I hope will be a series of interviews with all of the City Council special election candidates, posted at Kuff's World. I should have a podcast feed for these things ready to go later today, so check back for an update if that interests you. Any feedback would be appreciated as well.
Elsewhere, Who's Playin.com has an interview with BOR blogger and Dallas City Council candidate John McClelland. Check it out.
UPDATE: The podcast feed URL is http://blogs.chron.com/kuffsworld/podcasts.xml.
Dan Patrick versus the Texas Association of Business. There's not enough popcorn in the world, that's all I can say.
If the Dynamo don't come to an agreement with Houston for a stadium location, then one possible landing point for them is Sugar Land.
"Sugar Land is very viable for us," [team president Oliver] Luck said. "The discussions we've had with the city of Sugar Land and the economic development officials there at the city all have been very positive."Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace said it's too early to determine if his city is the ideal fit for the Dynamo.
"We need to look at a number of issues ranging from economic impact to cost to traffic to a number of other infrastructural issues," Wallace said.
"Those are some things that we will continue to look at as we move forward on these discussions."
A self-described "big soccer fan," Wallace said he is interested in the city continuing its talks with the Dynamo. He attended several of the team's games this past season.
"Everything is very preliminary at this point in time," Wallace said. "From their perspective, it's exploratory. They're wanting to make sure that they get the best economic arrangement."
A potential site for a stadium could be on 52 acres along the Brazos River that is the near the University of Houston System at Sugar Land, City Councilman Michael Schiff said.
The city doesn't own the property, but has a 99-year lease with the university for it, he said.
Seven acres already have been designated for a future city recreation center, Schiff said.
"Obviously, we could do some sort of a venue there," Schiff said. "We have the space for it. That would be probably the only clearly identifiable area that could even be considered because you have issues of traffic, congestion, noise, security and all sorts of things related to a stadium."
Schiff is interested in the Dynamo potentially building a stadium in Sugar Land, but said he is also realistic about the possibility.
"To have a major league championship team come here, I think it would be very exciting," he said. "There are a lot of issues though. Just because it would be exciting and seems like a great opportunity and just because we have a particular place that might accommodate it, doesn't mean we can bring all the factors together."
Whatever. It'll be interesting to see what kind of package the self-professed "fiscally conservative city" of Sugar Land puts together for this if they're serious. I've said before that I'd rather the team stays here, but I've no interest in a bidding war. If Sugar Land or some other suburb breaks the bank for them, I say God bless and good luck. Just please make sure a name change, from the Houston Dynamo to the your-suburb-here Dynamo, is part of the deal. Thanks to Metroblogging Houston for the link.
UPDATE: Juanita and The Muse are not impressed.
Via Houstonist, I see that some major changes to SH-288 are in the works.
The plans that were introduced have crews building toll road lanes on a 26 mile stretch of Texas 288.Two lanes in each direction will be build along the median from 59 to 610.
Three lanes will be build from 610 to the Beltway in each direction.
From the Beltway to County Road 60 near Rosharan will be back down to two lanes in each direction.
"TexDOT always planned for 288 to be a major corridor. We knew there would be a lot of expansion. There would be of course a lot of residential and a lot of coming from Brazoria county into Harris County," said Norm Wigington With the Texas Department of Transportation.
The drivers would have to have EZ tags.
Pearland City Councilman, Kevin Cole supports the plan. "It's a good thing. The 288 corridor is the last major corridor in Houston, with this close proximity to Houston to develop."
I'm okay with adding toll lanes. 288 is almost entirely a commuter road, especially south of 610 - it's pretty convenient to Reliant Stadium, the Medical Center, and the Museum District, so there is some non-rush hour traffic as well, but the vast majority of people driving it are folks living in places like Pearland who work in Houston. It's fine by me to put more of the burden to pay for the extra capacity on them. The current lanes will remain free, so people will still have a choice, and unlike the Trans Texas Corridor, I doubt there will be a non-compete agreement that will disincentivize maintaining the free lanes. I sympathize with The Facts, but only to a point. SH-288 is not I-10 or US-59. Its toll lanes will be like the Hardy or the Westpark toll roads, optional for getting where you're going rather than mandatory.
Tory has more on this. I will say, as one who drives south on that freeway in the morning and north in the afternoon, it's not entirely a one-way road, and the northbound direction gets pretty crowded from folks heading to 59 and 45 on their way home. Not really enough to worry about for the most part, but it is there.
The Chron reviews Rick Perry's history of executive orders, in comparison to his predecessors, and finds that he really has been doing things that weren't tried before. I'll leave it to you to read, but this pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole HPV fiasco.
At least four times, Perry has issued executive orders for state agencies to adopt policies that failed to pass in the Legislature -- including a bill by [Rep. Warren] Chisum to speed up the hearings process on air pollution permits such as the one involved in the TXU case.In three other orders, Perry took provisions of education legislation that had failed in 2005 special sessions and ordered the Texas Education Agency to implement them.
One was a requirement that school districts spend no less than 65 percent of their budgets on classroom instruction. School districts had been instrumental in killing the so-called 65 percent rule in the Legislature.
In another order, Perry one-upped a joint select legislative committee investigating efficiency and spending by higher education in the wake of dissatisfaction over tuition increases. Perry ordered state colleges and universities to perform efficiency studies and report to him.
And he also used an executive order in January to essentially re-create a criminal justice policy agency that he had vetoed out of existence in 2003. The agency had advised the Legislature on crime trends and whether new prisons would be needed. The new incarnation is a division of his office rather than an independent agency.
There also were some that it would have been hard to find detractors for, such as the executive order telling the Department of Public Safety to establish an Amber Alert system for notifying the news media about the kidnapping of children.
Chisum said legislators did not get upset over some of the earlier executive orders because they "weren't as important" to lawmakers in general.
"When you did the vaccine, that was statewide. It affected everybody. You can take on little groups, but you can't take on the whole group," he said.
No, Warren, the Lege - in particular, the Republicans in the Lege - finally got upset and objected because Perry finally issued an order that they didn't like. It's possible that things could have come to a head with the TXU coal plant order, but had the acronym HPV never tripped from Rick Perry's lips, the whole thing might be little more than grumbling from the minority party and an article or two in the Observer. If this really had been a matter of principle for the Lege, they'd have hashed this all out long ago. But they didn't, and so here we are today. Better late than never, perhaps, but it didn't have to be this way.
You do know that Daylight Savings Time will begin three weeks earlier this year, on March 11 instead of April 1, right? I know all about it because I've been working feverishly to prevent stuff like this from happening at work:
Though many devices will update automatically on the right day, enough clocks require special attention that there will be some confusion.A couple of decades ago, the worst-case scenario might have been people showing up an hour late to church on Sunday morning. Now consumers are relying on their phones, PDAs and computers to tell them when to be where, not to mention how to get there.
Wireless-phone providers said cell phones will automatically change their clocks March 11, but many PDAs and computers will need users to change them manually or download software patches to correct the problem.
New computers that came with Microsoft Vista will change their clocks automatically. Older PCs and Macs will be updated automatically if users accept the automatic updates. Those who don't can go online for software patches or manually reset the clocks themselves.
There's also the option of just ignoring the computer clock or the time on the electronic calendar.
Most BlackBerries will not adjust automatically - they are hardcoded to recognize the first Sunday in April as the beginning of DST, not the third Sunday in March. RIM has provided a patch, which we are in the process of deploying to our users, so that their calendars will not be off by an hour. That, not the time the handheld displays, is the problem, especially for recurring meetings that may extend well past the start of DST. If you have a BlackBerry and nobody has told you about what to do, point your handheld browser to http://www.blackberry.com/dst2007 and follow the instructions to download the patch. Good luck!
As someone once said, "Of course the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you--if you don't play, you can't win." Except that with scratch-off games, you might not be able to win anyway.
anyone spending $5 on a Deal or No Deal scratch-off Friday might entertain hopes of winning the $1 million top prize advertised on the ticket.But it'd be pure fantasy.
All three of the top prizes have been claimed. So have all four of the $100,000 prizes. And all 10 of the $50,000 prizes. They've been gone since Dec. 9.
"It's an unfair game," said Dawn Nettles, an unofficial, unpaid watchdog of the lottery commission.
In fact, of the 52 $10,000 prizes that were offered for that game, only one remained unclaimed Friday. Taken as a whole, more than 96 percent of the prizes and 99 percent of the money for Deal or No Deal is no longer available -- yet the game continues to be sold statewide.
"It's deceptive," said Gerald Busald, a mathematics professor at San Antonio College who also monitors the commission's practices. "Just because someone will buy it doesn't mean it's morally right for them to sell it."
The lottery's loophole comes in a one-sentence disclaimer printed on the back of each ticket that says: A scratch-off game may continue to be sold even when all the top prizes have been claimed.
"Our mission is to generate revenue for the state of Texas and if games are still profitable, they'll continue to be sold. For a lot of the games, there are significant prizes, second- and third-tier prizes," said agency spokesman Robert Heith.
Heith said the agency has no set formula for deciding when to close games. One rule of thumb is to close them when 80 to 90 percent of the prize money has been awarded.
But the Houston Chronicle found that upward of 90 percent of the prizes had been claimed in nine of the 75 or so scratch-off games on sale Friday.
I suppose it had never occurred to me that the various scratch-off games were each a limited set of game pieces, with a fixed number of prizes. For some reason, when I bothered to pay attention to the ads, I'd always envisioned these games as being continuous, with the prizes being a proportion of the pieces produced rather than a fixed number. Good thing I never paid any money for them, I'd have been a top-notch sucker.
I think Clay Robison put it well when he said that Rick Perry's bad week has continued with the release of a critical audit of the Trans Texas Corridor.
The State Auditor's Office issued a sharply critical report on the Trans-Texas Corridor on Friday, concluding that taxpayers may never know how much they could end up paying for a toll road that parallels Interstate 35 from San Antonio to Oklahoma.And if the Texas Department of Transportation doesn't improve its accounting of project costs, taxpayers won't know if the public costs are appropriate, auditors said.
[...]
Although costs for the Trans-Texas tollway, including financing, are to be provided through a developer, some costs could be partially paid by the state, the audit report said.
Texans could pay $13.6 billion in financing costs for the initial phase of TTC-35 plus a possible $16.5 billion for additional rail line projects, according to the audit.
[...]
The state agency has succeeded in carrying out part of the agreement with the consortium, auditors noted.
"However, weaknesses in the department's accounting for project costs create risks that the public will not know how much the state pays for TTC-35 or whether those costs are appropriate," they concluded.
The audit noted a "lack of reliable information regarding projected toll road construction costs, operating expenses, revenue and developer income."
The transportation agency plans to enter separate contracts with developers for each segment of TTC-35 and is negotiating a contract for the first segment, Texas 130 near Austin.
Although the state could receive $3 billion in concession payments from developers, such payments could be reduced if inflation, interest rates and other factors increase the developers' costs, auditors said.
Auditors recommended more legislative oversight of the Trans-Texas Corridor, the transfer of toll revenue projections from TxDOT to the state comptroller and increased public access to information about the project.
They also proposed that TxDOT officials provide regular financial forecasts to the governor, the Legislature and the comptroller and submit development agreement contracts of more than $250 million to the attorney general for review and approval.
The full report is here. This may be a critical report, but it's not one that challenges the concept of the TTC, just how it's being carried out. If we must have a TTC, then I'd want to see these recommendations carried out, but I don't accept the need for this scheme, and I'd hate to see this audit become the default compromise position. There is a better way. Let's not lose sight of that. Eye on Williamson has more.
This HAIF thread (scroll down to post #2532) has some reactions from people who attended the Thursday town hall meeting of Rep. Culberson's at Rice University. A brief sample, from "Quinlan":
It was a pretty full house and there was quite a bit of tension in the air. The crowd was overwhelmingly pro "Rail on Richmond"---I would say upwards of 80%. Culberson made many attempts to steer the conversation away from rail, but the crowd kept bringing the topic back to rail. There were many outbursts from the crowd, showing an obvious frustration with his, as one attendee put it, "pandering", and it seemed like many in the crowd had decided that he no longer deserves enough respect to keep these things civil and orderly. There were many times when Culberson, even with his microphone, could not make himself heard over the raucous crowd.Culberson kept repeating, ad nauseum, that he was only respecting the intent of the voters in the 2003 election, by insisting on his designated route that only has "slight modifications" from the map allegedly put before voters. It was pointed out to him that the map he had on hand as his prop was not accurate and that the language on the ballot proposal included that the "final scope, length of rail segments or lines and other details, together with implementation schedule, will be based upon demand and completion of the project development process, including community input." All of this went in one ear and out the other (unsurprisingly, with incredible speed).
[...]
Some of my thought about Rail on Richmond after reflecting on the meeting:
*Even if his so-called map is the map voted on by the voters in 2003, why should he get to decide what "slight modifications" should be permitted to it?
*What really is his agenda here? It's obvious that it isn't to "respect the actions of the voters". He breaks that tenet on a nearly daily basis. It is also fairly clear that the majority of his constituents favor Rail on Richmond. What political purpose is served by his continued opposition to Rail on Richmond?
And from "Furious Jam":
He wasn't interested in having a meaningful discussion on the issue. He even categorized the issue as moot from the beginning. And when he did speak, it was nothing but constant contradictions:"I'm a fiscal conservative", then "my option isn't much more expensive and the ridership will be nearly the same".
"I'm for control at the local level", then "I'm going to protect you from Metro".
"The voters approved Westpark only and we have to abide by that", then "my slight modification runs it inside the freeway".He kept pointing at a map that he claimed was part of the ballot (it wasn't) and said that we all had to abide by that map, but then promised to block Metro from using the public easement illustrated on the map and again championed his 59 option, which was never on any map prior to the election.
Check it out.
Grits notes that the Legislative Budget Board is using a more realistic approach to doing fiscal notes for crime-related bills, and goes from there to analyze their estimate for HB8, also known as "Jessica's Law". More background can be found here, here, and here. Check it out.
Okay, so they probably weren't doing the Time Warp, but still, what else can one think?
A troupe of Chippendales dancers won't face criminal charges for a West Texas performance featuring "pelvic thrusts" that prompted police to shut down the show and jail the dancers.The Lubbock County District Attorney's Office told police Thursday that eight dancers, their manager, a promoter and a manager at the sports bar won't be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges, and city officials also said they wouldn't pursue the case.
The men were arrested Feb. 16 at Jake's Sports Cafe during the first of three sold-out shows for the troupe famous for it's beefcake dancers. Police alleged that the dancers were performing a sexually oriented show without the proper permits. The show was shut down after one dancer, whom police said has his pants open, made "pelvic thrusts" in front of a woman's face.
The group spent a night in jail before being released without having to post bond.
Scott Stephenson, owner of Jake's Sports Cafe, said he plans to invite the all-male review back.
It's times like this that make me realize how much we all miss Molly Ivins. She could have made poetry out of this. Alas.
All things considered, this is probably moot, but Governor Perry has been sued over his HPV executive order. Here's Courthouse News:
Parents of three girls have sued Gov. Rick Perry to protect their daughters from inoculation with a vaccine against human papilloma virus, which causes cervical cancer. The John Doe parents claim Perry had no right to issue his Feb. 2 executive order that requires girls in sixth grade and above to be vaccinated before they can enroll in public school. The plaintiffs make it clear that they do not believe HPV causes cancer or that the vaccine is effective. "The school-aged girls of Texas are not guinea pigs who may be subjected to medical procedures at the apparent whim of Texas' governor," the suit states. "These girls, and their parents, may not be penalized for non-compliance with the Governor's wishes, and their privacy rights may not be invaded should they object to the Governor's mandates." They seek an injunction prohibiting enforcement of Perry's order.
I don't quite understand this, since the order allowed parents to opt out for various reasons, including moral and religious ones, but whatever. BOR has a copy of the suit here (PDF). As always, if any lawyers want to weigh in on this, please do so.
Patricia Kilday Hart, who is now also posting on Paul Burka's blog, takes a whack at the maneuvering done by the Republicans, in particular David Dewhurst, to bust the spending cap. She highlights a point that I had not seen as yet:
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst's pronouncement on the proposed state budget envisions setting aside $3 billion of this budget cycle's revenue to be applied to promised tax cuts in the next biennium. This is an unprecedented action that sets up the session's next important showdown. Senate Democrats are wondering aloud why the money should be set aside for tax cuts promised in 2010 and 2011, when no such special arrangements have been made for other important state obligations. How exactly do you set aside $3 billion for a bill that comes due in 2010-1011? Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, for one, thinks a constitutional amendment setting up a dedicated fund would be required.
Good question. Does the Lege have the authority to dedicate revenue from one biennium to a specific line item in future budgets? Maybe we need a ruling from Greg Abbott. I'd like to see how he answers that.
So sorry I was unable to make it to the Culberson town hall meeting last night. Sure looks like it was fun.
[The Universities] line was at the center of a raucous gathering Thursday night at Rice University, where supporters and opponents of a proposed segment on Richmond argued about the plan.Some supporters engaged in a shouting match with U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, who opposes rail on Richmond and hosted a town hall meeting on it.
When Culberson said that "97 percent of residents on or near Richmond oppose" a light rail line there, the audience of about 200 erupted in "boos" and catcalls.
RichmondRail.org, a group of civic associations, neighborhood groups and business owners, which supports light rail on Richmond, met in the same auditorium just prior to Culberson's meeting.
Culberson repeatedly had to ask the crowd to settle down and speak politely.
"One at a time!" Culberson cautioned. "I am not going to recognize anyone who does not speak politely."
Culberson was red-faced when the crowd gave a standing ovation to Robin Holzer, chairwoman of the Citizens' Transportation Coalition, who told Culberson that he was "misleading" the audience.
"I feel pandered to, I feel marketed to, I feel misled," Holzer said. "You never told us you oppose rail. And, I'm a bit suspicious about hearing you say local government makes the best decisions, then you come here and tell them how to do it."
Culberson responded, "I'm sorry you don't recognize reality."
Oooh, snap. Tell you what, when Culberson stops repeating that stupid 97% statistic, which can be more accurately characterized as "Of the people who contacted my office to say that they opposed rail on Richmond, 97% oppose rail on Richmond", then I'll take his judgment about reality recognition more seriously. Till then, I don't think so.
So. Anybody here attend that meeting last night? If so, please do tell in the comments.
UPDATE: Forgot to link to today's Chron editorial, which recapitulates the Neartown statement. Check it out.
At long last, it is finished.
There's good news for rodeo fans, barbecue lovers and thousands of drivers tired of jolting like a bull rider along Old Spanish Trail near Reliant Park and the Texas Medical Center.A repaving job that began in fall 2005 and was expected to take 11 months ended up stretched over 17, but it's finally completed.
"The weather has cooperated," Texas Department of Transportation area engineer Maureen Wakeland said Wednesday.
"The O.S.T. main lanes are all paved. The contractor has just started the median work."
[...]
Wakeland said the project was delayed by change orders and the discovery, when the old asphalt was scraped away, that deeper repairs were needed.
The project, initially estimated to cost $7.3 million, called for Forde Construction to rebuild 6.3 miles of the busy street from Kirby to the Gulf Freeway. TxDOT was in charge because O.S.T. is also part of the federal highway U.S. 90A.
Change orders after the start of work increased the time to complete the project and added about $1.6 million to its cost.
Since I've been so harsh on TxDOT for this project, I'll note that if it really extended all the way to I-45 and not just SH-288 as it appeared to me, then maybe there was work going on that I wasn't seeing during all those long, apparent delays. Be that as it may, I can't begin to tell you how happy I am for this to finally be done. Rodeo traffic is bad enough under good conditions - this was the last thing we needed. Hallelujah!
I'm a little late to the party on the demerits of HB23, which would force pharmacists to read a "warning" about the morning after pill to purchasers, as well as post a sign and keep records like they do for anything that could be turned into crystal meth. Vince was on it shortly after it was pre-filed. I got an email yesterday from Scott Henson which included a release from the ACLU of Texas about their opposition to HB23 that I thought was worth highlighting. From the release:
Unnecessary record keeping provision treats "morning after" pill like an illicit drug, creates a stigma, and may intimidate some women.HR 23 creates a requirement for sale that includes written consent by the purchaser, and storage of the written record (with the purchaser's name) for 2 years. This is similar to the logging now required for substances that can be used in the manufacture of methamphetamine, or the record keeping required to track prescriptions of addictive and often illegally obtained medications. The keeping of these records will discourage women from purchasing EC by telling them that their actions to prevent an unwanted pregnancy (the most private of actions) are being recorded and kept outside of their own control. Mistakes in such a log cannot be effectively corrected.
HR 23 places undue burden on business.HR 23 requires pharmacies to post a sign with the misleading notice printed on it, add printed notices to the purchaser's other drug information, and requires pharmacies to maintain logs of all purchasers for two years although there is no evidence that such a regulatory system will provide any medical benefit to the patient.
It's a burden on the business, and it stigmatizes the customer, and for what? The purpose of this bill is to make contraception harder to get in Texas. The sponsor, Frank Corte, tried to get a so-called "conscience clause" bill passed last session, but failed. This isn't about abortion - emergency contraception operates by inhibiting ovulation, rather than preventing implantation of a fertilized egg - it's about birth control. How far will the likes of Frank Corte go to control other people's sex lives?
One more point:
HR 23 will post sex education materials in public places.The two foot sign required by this bill must be placed beside the cash register in all pharmacies, including pharmacies in large grocery stores and other open areas where small children will be present. Whether their parents choose so or not, small children will read about the actions of sperm and egg and the implantation on the womb, and are likely to have questions that may be difficult to handle while pushing a shopping cart full of groceries. The ACLU supports age appropriate sex education by parents and credentialed professionals.
Pretty ironic, isn't it? We can't give girls a vaccine that would protect them against cancer because some people think it'll make them promiscuous, but we can force your local CVS to post big signs about how babies are made where your kids can read them whether you want them to or not. That makes sense.
Anyway. Keep an eye on HB23, and tell your Rep what you think about it.
UPDATE: Miss Melissa was on this before as well, and she has the actual language that the warning sign would require. Watch your blood pressure as you read it.
The Star Telegram takes a close look at why some legislators love the concept of separate property.
It's illegal for Texas lawmakers to use campaign funds to buy real estate or enrich themselves, but several legislators have used a loophole to maintain second homes in Austin while continuing to receive $139 a day for living expenses when called to duty in the state capital.One of them, state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, has paid rent of more than $140,000 since 2000 for a condo registered in her husband's name.
The Star-Telegram reviewed the Austin lodging arrangements of all 181 Texas legislators and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, focusing in particular on housing payments.
The controversial practice contributed to the defeat of two senior House Republicans last year, including former state Rep. Toby Goodman of Arlington. State Rep. Vicki Truitt, R-Keller, also announced last week that she would, at least temporarily, quit paying rent to her husband for an Austin condo listed in his name.
Nelson and state Sen. Kim Brimer, R-Fort Worth, now appear to be the only two legislators continuing to make such payments. The details of Brimer's housing arrangement are no secret in Austin. He helped pioneer the practice, and other lawmakers have cited the Ethics Commission decision in his case.
But the discreet nature of Nelson's transactions, and the absence of any Travis County real estate on financial disclosure reports provided by the Texas Ethics Commission, have kept them from public view.
Records show Nelson has paid $147,500 since 2000 to lease a condominium registered in her husband's name in the exclusive Westgate Building, which several Austin lobbyists and power brokers, including Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, call home.
It's a good piece and there's a lot to it, so just go read the whole thing. And when you do, remember that Muse and Coby were on it first, months ago.
I still think the most sensible solution here is to acknowledge that being a legislator is a fulltime job and should be compensated as such. Give them a real salary, and put real clamps on how campaign money can be spent, with real enforcement powers and real penalties for breaking the law. And maybe instead of the per diem, do a corporate card/expense reimbursement system, where someone has to approve the expenses or they don't get paid. That's pretty standard for the business world, and it seems to work fairly well. Nothing is perfect, and there may be some angle I'm overlooking, but it seems to me that if the goal is to limit expenditures of campaign donations to actual campaign expenses, you have to start by making it possible to live on what one earns as a legislator. Hal has more.
As you know, my social calendar is a bit curtailed these days. But that shouldn't stop you from making it to a fine event such as this:
The Houston Democratic Forum invites you to a Casual Q&A with Our Special GuestRepresentative Rick Noriega of the Texas House of Representatives, District 145
Representative Noriega will discuss his recent experiences serving in Afghanistan, organizing relief in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, border issues and serving in Operation Jump Start, and of course . . . the current legislative session in Austin. The entirety of our session will be in a free-association, free-wheeling Q&A format.
Thursday, March 1st, 6pm to 8pm
Il Rosso Room in the Quattro Restaurant at the Four Seasons Hotel
1300 Lamar, Downtown HoustonCash Bar
Valet parking is only $3 with validation, and there is ample self-parking in areaRSVP: ljdead@yahoo.com or 713.885.0697
Hope you can make it!
I expect to have more on this soon, but I have been told that Rep. Patrick Rose, the chair of the Human Services Committee, will have a meeting on March 1 to hear testimony about CHIP and the various bills that have been filed to enhance or restore it in Texas. As we know, it's not just the funding cuts that have been devastating, it's the enrollment requirements and the asset tests that count things like cars and childcare that have so drastically reduced CHIP enrollment. If anything is going to be done about this, it'll be via a bill that comes out of this committee. I'll pass along more details as I get them. Meanwhile, click on for a list of CHIP bills that have been filed for this session.
CHIP Legislation Filed1. HB 109 by Rep. Sylvester Turner
2. HB 171 by Rep. Richard Raymond
3. HB 669 by Rep. Garnet Coleman
4. HB 701 by Rep. Veronica Gonzales
5. HB 704 by Rep. Abel Herrero
6. HB 710 by Rep. Solomon Ortiz, Jr.
7. HB 714 by Rep. Jessica Farrar
8. HB 715 by Rep. Joaquin Castro
9. HB 718 by Rep. David Leibowitz
10. HB 720 by Rep. Valinda Bolton
11. HB 725 by Rep. Chuck Hopson
12. HB 729 by Rep. Jim Dunnam
13. HB 737 by Rep. Joe Farias
14. HB 739 by Rep. Ana Hernandez
15. HB 816 by Rep. Lon Burnam
16. HB 817 by Rep. Craig Eiland
17. HB 821 by Rep. Jose Menendez
18. HB 822 by Rep. Mike Villarreal
19. HB 824 by Rep. Joe Heflin
20. HB 838 by Rep. Abel Herrero
21. HB 852 by Rep. Dora Olivo
22. HB 1051 by Rep. Elliott Naishtat
23. HB 1095 by Rep. Borris Miles
24. HB 1119 by Rep. Eddie Lucio III
25. HB 1162 by Rep. Pete Gallego
26. HB 1220 by Rep. Ellen Cohen
27. HB 1261 by Rep. Armando Martinez
First mentioned in his State of the City address, Mayor White has unveiled the outline of his pay or play proposal for contractors that do business with the city.
In an effort to reduce the estimated 1.2 million county residents without health insurance, the city is preparing to set an example by requiring that its contractors provide employees with health benefits or pay a fee that would help defray the costs of medical care for the uninsured.The details of the "Pay or Play" program aren't all in place, but Mayor Bill White already has touted the plan.
He suggests that some employers aren't pulling their share of the health care load.
"Instead of shifting your health benefit costs onto your fellow citizens who pay taxes and the hospital system," White said, "we want you to contribute to this fund if you do not have health insurance for your full-time employees."
The proposal, scheduled to go before a City Council committee today, is one example of how local governments are working to deal with the uninsured, who are overburdening emergency rooms and local budgets across the country.
I look forward to hearing the details. This makes a lot of sense to me.
As envisioned now, the city program would apply to contractors with projects over a certain amount, likely $100,000. Such contractors who don't provide employee health insurance would pay the city $1 for each hour an employee worked on the city project. The money would be turned over to the Harris County Hospital District or another entity that serves uninsured patients.The rule likely would apply only to general contractors, not subcontractors -- about 450 contracts. That's about 45 percent of city contracts and 80 percent of contract dollars.
About three-quarters of those contractors already provide their employees with health insurance, according to city surveys. Those who don't have an unfair advantage, White said, because without that financial burden they can make lower contract bids.
"However small and incremental this is, if the mayor can pull it off, it's great," said Charles Begley, a University of Texas professor who follows public health policy.
But some contractors say if the rule is adopted, they'll charge more for city work to make up the difference.
"I'd be more than willing to do what the city wanted as long as I could raise my rates," said Michael Fisco, owner of AAA Flexible Pipe Cleaning, which has a multimillion-dollar contract with the city.
You go right ahead and do that. That will give a competitor the opportunity to undercut you. And even if that doesn't happen, if the city winds up spending less money on uninsured sick people than it spends on your higher rates, it's still a win. Color me unimpressed by the scare tactic.
The city is encouraging other large entities to follow suit on this, and so far both Harris County and the Memorial Hermann Healthcare System are considering it. On top of that, there's this as well:
Besides its "Pay or Play" initiative, the city is working with Harris County to create a further-reaching program that would provide an affordable health insurance option for working residents who make less than $50,000 a year.Called "three-share," the program would create a pooled monthly premium of $150 per participant, split evenly among the employee, employer and a funding source to subsidize the remaining third.
The problem lies in the subsidy. Officials asked the federal government last year for $80 million to fund the project for three years, but the request was denied. They're now looking into other ways to get the money, possibly from the state.
Smaller cities that have used similar models have turned to philanthropists or paid for the program using funding from Medicaid, the federal health care program for the poor.
Houston officials are considering lowering their sights to a potential 23,000 participants from 100,000. That would require an annual subsidy of about $15 million once the program is in full swing instead of $60 million.
"What we're doing now is trying to scale back the size of the three-share -- because clearly we can't come up with $80 million without federal intervention -- and try to find the point where it is large enough to make a dent and is still worth doing," said Elena Marks, White's health policy director.
Yes, well, unfortunately the state has other uses in mind for its money. But this is still a great idea, one that perhaps can be brought up again in Congress down the line. Kudos to all for pursuing it.
I'm about to start doing interviews with the candidates for the City Council special election on May 12. I hope to interview all of them, and will ask each of them a number of the same questions. I'm in the process of putting together the questions I intend to ask, on subjects like crime, the environment, historic preservation, and so on, but as nobody can think of everything, I thought I'd solicit some help. What one question would you like to ask the Council candidates. Leave a comment or send me an email (kuff - at - offthekuff - dot - com) and let me know. No guarantees that I'll use your exact question, but I will take all feedback into account.
I plan to have the first interview posted on Monday. Stay tuned.
Paul Burka, who says it feels like May in the House, previews the next budget atrocity about to be visited upon us.
Democrats believe that the play is that [Appropriations Chair Warren] Chisum will bring a bill to the floor with the $5 billion unallocated, leaving the maximum maneuvering room in conference committee. No doubt there will be a Calendars committee rule putting the money beyond members' reach with floor amendments. Then, in conference, the budget writers can put the money anywhere they want--and future property tax reductions is very likely to get a bundle.The advantage to the leadership of leaving the money unspent is considerable. It can be used as a whip or a carrot in the closing weeks of the session to browbeat or entice members into casting their votes as the leadership wishes. We should know the script pretty soon. The Appropriations committee has begun marking up the bill. If HB 1 does not show significant increases over the base bill in areas like health care and education, you'll know that the game plan is to make property tax relief the highest priority. Is it conceivable that this leadership could have a $14 billion surplus and still not make a significant effort to fund the basic needs of this state? It's conceivable to me.
Dear "Democrats for Real Reform":
Just so we're clear, this is why the rest of us are pissed off. Yes, we know, you got your shiny new committee chairs and whatnot in return for your support of the current regime. Who knows, you may even be able to do some good from those lofty perches. I hope you can, because Lord knows there's not enough good in the world, let alone in the Lege. But frankly, it won't matter, because it's not possible for you to do enough good to undo all the bad that's going to get done, and already has been done.
It's very simple. They don't care about restoring CHIP. They're not going to fully fund the schools. They took six billion dollars out of general revenue to fund a reckless property tax cut, and I guarantee you they're going to take more to pay for more of those cuts in 2009. There will be a few scraps left over to fight for, but for the third regular session in a row, we're gonna get screwed. That's just how it is.
Now, maybe things wouldn't be that much better with a different Speaker. I'm sure Jim Pitts would have done his darnedest to fund that property tax cut, too. But maybe, just maybe, with someone other than Warren Chisum in charge of the purse strings, we could have rejigged the priorities a little. Let's just say that this is one of those times where the devil you know was unquestionably the greater of the two evils.
So this is why we're mad, and why people are tossing around words like "primary" and "Iscariot". And just think, there's three full months left of this joy. How lovely.
Yours,
All of us cranky bloggers
Inside the Texas Capitol had a bit of an epiphany regarding the TXU fast-track matter, for which Governor Perry was slapped down on Tuesday. He's seeing a cap-and-trade angle that TXU might be trying to exploit while it still can. Check it out and see what you think. Also see Burka's account of TXU's turn as an inflatable clown punching bag in the Senate. You might almost feel a twinge of sympathy for them. Almost. And finally, McBlogger piles onto TXU and their complaints about how they're being treated. That'll help you deal with any lingering feelings of sympathy if needed.
UPDATE: And more from the Texas Observer blog.
Christof continues his tour of the Universities line route options, this time with a look at the Neartown area, which as we know wants the line built on Richmond. He's got the usual maps and diagrams to make everything clearer, but I want to highlight a couple of things.
[T]he Richmond alignment...provides a broad swath of transit accessibility through Neartown -- basically, everything south of Alabama is within walking distance. That includes a lot of people and a lot of retail and restaurants; it also includes the Menil and St. Thomas.The location of the center station is an interesting question. The community petitioned METRO last year for a station between Montrose and Shepherd, and METRO's been showing one since, at Dunlavy. That location nicely fills the gap, putting a lot more places within reach of transit, and the Neartown Association has endorsed it. But an equally good argument can be made for locating this station at Mandell, closer to the Menil and the Richmont Square apartments. This is related to the location of the Montrose station, too: METRO shows it straddling Montrose, but Neartown would like to see it to the west of Montrose, closer to UST and the Menil. That's a discussion that's already happening, but it has more urgency now as METRO moves closer to a locally preferred alignment.
Back in the early 90s I lived right near this area, on Branard just off Woodhead. Dunlavy and Mandell are just a block apart, and it's not a particularly long block, so having the station at one place or the other is only a minor variation, as the whole area would be served with either one. And this is the key, because the Culberson option, which would have the train run along US59 through this area, would not have any stop at all between Montrose and Shepherd. A whole lot of people in this area will be a ten minute hike or more away from a station under that alignment. You tell me how useful that will be to the residents there.
There's a final factor to consider in Neartown: the neighborhood is changing fast. That's been happening for 10 years now, as bungalows get replaced by townhouses. Even more is on the way: there are currently two multi-story apartment and condo projects under construction directly on Richmond just in the Neartown area, and there are surely more to come. These projects aren't coming because of rail, but rail could reduce their impacts by putting new residents on trains instead of in single-occupant cars. Just over a five year period (1996-2001, before 59 construction), the volume of traffic along Richmond here rose more than 15%. The question is not whether we have the status quo or light rail; it's how we handle growth: trains, or more traffic lanes?
Richmond is another one of those streets that I just won't drive on any more if I can help it. It was a pain in the butt getting from Woodhead to Shepherd and making the left to get onto 59 back in 1993, when I last lived there. It's much worse now - I've seen the line in the left turn lane stretch almost all the way back to Hazard, which means there's only one lane of through traffic squeezing by. One way or another, something will have to change, and I think Christof has it right: if it's not the rail line, it'll be street widening. The choice is not rail or nothing, it's rail or something else disruptive. The neighborhoods have made their choice. Will they be listened to?
I still don't care what Robert Eckels will or will not be doing now that he's cashed in and moved on. But there is an item of interest at the very end of this story, and it has to do with the process to select a replacement for him.
Commissioners Court -- including Eckels -- will make the appointment. Eckels and the court's two other Republicans, Commissioners Jerry Eversole and Steve Radack, form a 3-2 GOP majority.Ed Emmett, a transportation consultant and former state representative, recently emerged as a front-runner for the job.
Eckels said he hopes that the court's two Democrats, El Franco Lee and Sylvia Garcia, will vote with the majority so whoever succeeds him is appointed unanimously.
But the court's Republicans still haven't convinced leadership in their own party that Emmett is the best choice, said county GOP chairman Jared Woodfill.
Woodfill sent a letter inviting Eversole to discuss the appointment March 5 with the party's executive committee -- which comprises about 450 precinct chairs.
In the letter, Woodfill said the committee hopes the appointee is a conservative Republican who has experience in county government and the kind of name recognition that would allow him or her to win in 2008.
An election that November will fill the rest of Eckels' term, followed in 2010 by an election for the next four-year term.
Woodfill said the executive committee would welcome District Clerk Charles Bacarisse, County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt or County Clerk Beverly Kaufman as prospective appointees to succeed Eckels.
All three of the people that Jared Woodfill is pushing are current officeholders, of which two - Bacarisse and Kaufman - were elected last November along with Eckels. As such, if any of them are named to replace Eckels, someone else will have to be named to replace them. If it's Bacarisse or Kaufman, that means we'll have two countywide offices held by people who were not elected to those offices, for almost two years. While I welcome the opportunity for Democrats to take back two offices instead of just one, you have to admit that's a pretty neat trick.
And as far as Bettencourt goes, he's been office shopping for some time now. He'd have better odds in CD22 (assuming he can hold back the pink tsunami, of course), but this way at least the Republicans get to avoid having to defend an open seat. And hey, if they give Bettencourt a promotion, they can then bump Bacarisse up as well and have three offices held by appointees for the price of one. Woo hoo!
Bottom line, I hope that Commissioners Garcia and Lee give serious thought to dissenting. So far, at least, I'm not seeing any reason why they should give their seal of approval to this dog and pony show.
UPDATE: Maybe all of the grousing some of us have been doing has had an effect.
Resigning County Judge Robert Eckels said Wednesday that he weighed not seeking re-election last year but worried that lame-duck status would hamper his efforts to help the area recover from the 2005 hurricane crises.The hurricane emergency convinced him he should run, Eckels said in a meeting with the Houston Chronicle editorial board.
[...]
Once he decided to join Fulbright, Eckels said, he originally planned to resign next September -- nearly a year into his term.
But a number of people advised him to resign sooner rather than later after he told the Chronicle late last month that he had been discussing taking a post with a law firm.
Eckels said this week that he would resign his post as early as March to become a partner at Fulbright. He said he will work with lawyers in the public financing and governmental relations sectors but not do much lobbying.
Not so unfazed any more, apparently. Here's a helpful hint for you as a parting gift, Bob: Next time you're thinking about resigning, don't tell anyone about it until you've got the letter typed up and signed. It's a lot cleaner that way.
Looks like the golf-or-soccer conundrum regarding the Gus Wortham golf course has been resolved in favor of the fairways.
Mayor Bill White on Tuesday all but ruled out use of the Gus Wortham Golf Course on Houston's East End as the site for a new soccer complex."I'm not going to support something over the strong objection of the council member from that district, period," White said after Councilwoman Carol Alvarado, who represents the East End, said the golf course is not the right place for the soccer facility.
[...]
Several council members said they are committed to supporting youth soccer and keeping the Dynamo in Houston but suggested the city look for another site. They said the Wortham course is historically significant and provides much-needed green space and wildlife habitat.
White said other sites are under consideration.
But finding a suitable site inside the city, he said, will be a challenge.
High costs likely will compel the city to find a publicly owned site, White said, and some properties suggested by council members might require costly environmental remediation. Though it's unlikely a large-enough site could be found for a new stadium as well as the youth complex, White said, the locations should be reasonably close together and perhaps linked by transit.
Asked by Alvarado whether the Wortham golf course was "off the table" as a site for the soccer fields, White repeated his earlier statement that he would not support it over strong opposition from the community and the district council member.
As I said before, I've got no dog in this fight. I'm not really sure what the best solution is, and while I'd rather any snazzy new soccer complex be built here in the city, there's only so much I'm willing to pay for such a thing. We'll see where it goes from here. Houstonist has more.
That sound you heard yesterday was the spending cap being officially busted.
It took a GOP majority and the need to subsidize billions of dollars in promised local school property tax relief for the Texas Legislature to vote for the first time to break a constitutional cap on state spending.
Funny, isn't it? All that nonstop blather about how Democrats are big spenders, and it takes a Republican trifecta to bust the constitutional spending cap for the first time. No wonder Governor Perry has tried to claim that spending to buy down local property taxes isn't really spending and thus shouldn't count against the cap. The attack ads pretty much write themselves, don't they?
I won't bother getting into the details here. You already know what I think of this, and nothing has changed about that. Just remember, if at any time during this session any Republican says we "don't have the money" to fund some vital service at an appropriate level (or at all), over $6 billion of general revenue has been taken out of play to fund this property tax folly. We do have the money, but the Republicans insisted on spending it on property tax cuts instead.
One thing: The final vote on this sucker was 95-50 in favor, but the real vote, as with the Speaker's race, was during the amendments:
It was seen as more palatable for GOP lawmakers to tie the vote to break the cap to property tax relief, an idea with broad Republican support, rather than to general spending. A Democratic push to delay the spending-cap vote until the budget is considered lost 79-68.
As noted by the Texas Observer blog, that was an amendment by Rep. Craig Eiland. Note how Tom Craddick inserted himself into this debate, even casting a vote, which Speakers normally do not do. Very kinder and gentler, our Speaker. Thanks again to everyone who voted for him, we really appreciate it.
The Neartown Association, which includes multiple neighborhood associations, has sent a letter to Metro in which they "fully endorse and support" the Cummins route for the Universities line. They also characterize the Montrose route that's being championed by Rep. Culberson as "irresponsible and unacceptable", and challenges Metro to "look beyond the politics of today" in making their choice. I have a copy of the letter here (PDF) for your perusal. Check it out.
UPDATE: RichmondRail.org has more on this, including a map of the neighborhoods. Note that all four of the individual associations that co-signed this letter are bounded on at least one side by differing route options, with both Richwood and Castle Court falling between the Richmond and US59 options. There's also a town hall meeting tomorrow night on the Rice campus for anyone who wants to reinforce what public opinion really is on this to Rep. Culberson.
Former State Rep. Debra Danburg, who underwent cancer surgery yesterday, has a blog that is tracking her progress and serving as a collection point for well-wishes. If you would like to send a Get Well Soon sentiment to her, here's the most recent post. My thanks to Melissa Noriega for the heads up about this.
I loved this profile of new Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins that ran in yesterday's Chron. It's truly refreshing to see a DA who's more interested in getting it right than in racking up statistics.
When DNA evidence exonerated James Waller last month, freeing him from the crushing and false accusation that he raped a 12-year-old boy in 1982, newly installed District Attorney Craig Watkins was in the courtroom to express his regret."When you send someone to prison for something they didn't do, you go down there and apologize, and you don't let it happen again. I don't want to be apologizing 20 years from now," Watkins said in an interview last week.
[...]
[Prior DA Henry] Wade prided himself on a high conviction rate and stiff sentences, but along with the office's hard-nosed reputation came accusations of a win-at-any-cost attitude and a history of wrongful convictions that shadows it to this day.
In addition to Waller, 11 others have been exonerated since 2001 through new DNA testing, more than in any other U.S. county. Nine of those date to Wade's administration.
"I'm not part of that failed system," said Watkins, who twice tried for a job in the office. "I'm fresh. I have nothing to protect."
Here's the thing, which I've touched on before but I'll say again because it bears repeating: Truly being "tuff on crime" necessarily implies a strong commitment to take injustices, both past and future, seriously. Every time the system, through neglect, incompetence, disregard for due process, or just plain bad luck, locks up a James Waller, it's not just putting an innocent person in prison. It's leaving a guilty person on the streets to keep doing what he or she has been doing. Every James Waller represents a tolerance for and an indifference to the crimes that will be committed and the people that will be victimized by the person who should have been punished but wasn't. Fighting to keep a James Waller in prison in the face of real excuplatory evidence for whatever the reason isn't being tuff on crime, it's being myopic and pigheaded about it.
Watkins doesn't just get this, he knows how to communicate it:
In his first weeks on the job, he has worked to assure a skeptical public that his new approach does not mean he is soft on crime in the nation's most crime-plagued major city.Watkins said he is seeking the death penalty in the retrial of Thomas Miller-El, a case that shed light on the office's one-time practice of excluding minorities from juries.
Miller-El was sentenced in 1986 to die for the robbery and murder of an unarmed Irving motel clerk, but the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the conviction in 2003 because the jury selection was "suffused with bias."
"This person who killed two people heinously, who should have been dealt with a long time ago, he's getting a break because those prior administrations didn't see fit to do it right," Watkins said as he leaned over his desk in a spare office, its walls filled with bare spots and empty picture hooks. "We're going to do it right."
I love the framing of this. Because his predecessor didn't care about the process, we have to do it over. Because he was willing to cut corners, we're back at square one. Because we're going to treat the rules as a needed framework and not a nuisance to be gotten around, we won't have problems like these down the line. It's powerful stuff. I don't know if Watkins will cast an eye on higher office someday, but if he does I'll be very happy to support him.
I'm a big fan of early voting. I vote early in every election, and if I had my way, we'd extend the "voting center" concept of early voting to Election Day. If I had a complaint about Early Voting, it's that it always runs from a Monday to a Friday, and thus never takes advantage of as many weekends as it could or should. I hadn't realized that this was a statutory limitation, but thanks to HB 1642, filed by Rep. Solomon Ortiz, Jr., we may have the chance to rectify this. From his press release:
State Representative Solomon Ortiz Jr. (D-Corpus Christi) announced today that he has filed legislation to give counties the option of offering voters an additional weekend of early voting."It is important that voters have every opportunity possible to make their voices heard," Rep. Ortiz said. "Conducting early voting for a full two weeks will maximize civic participation."
Early voting normally begins 17 days before the date of an election. However, a quirk in the current law forces counties to wait until Monday to start early voting if the 17th day before an election falls on a weekend. Since 17 days before both the March primary and November general elections is a Saturday, the current law reduces early voting from two weeks to twelve days during two of the most important elections held in Texas. Ortiz's HB 1642 would give counties the option of conducting early voting on the initial Saturday and Sunday if they so choose.
"We want to make sure counties can allow for two full weeks of early voting," Ortiz said. "More people vote when more days are available."
Rep. Ortiz noted that one weekend of early voting may have been sufficient in the past, but non-standard workweeks and a highly mobile work force require that an additional weekend be offered.
"Many of my constituents hold two jobs and work weekends. Some of them are on the road or on offshore oil rigs for weeks at a time," Ortiz said. "Their voices need to be heard."
Counties with smaller budgets for elections will be not be forced to offer the additional days of early voting, Ortiz said.
"In some cases, offering additional early voting may be cost-prohibitive," Ortiz said. "My bill will not burden counties with any of the unfunded mandates they have become so accustomed to."
"This bill gives counties the flexibility to ensure elections are conducted in an efficient, cost-effective manner that maximizes participation," Ortiz added.
Nueces County Clerk Diana Barrera says the bill will improve voter participation in her county.
"As an elections administrator in an urban county, I understand the difficulties working people face in getting to the polls," Barrera said. "HB 1642 will ensure all registered voters have the opportunity to cast their vote."
Current ambiguities in the law led to an extended controversy over early voting during the special election for Congress in House District 23. A dispute over the beginning date of early voting in Bexar County eventually ended up in court. HB 1642 would clarify the law and prevent future controversy and legal action, Ortiz said.
"Counties need to be able to offer early voting without the threat of a court battle, " Ortiz added.
Representatives from both parties have come out in favor of the bill, Ortiz said.
I support this bill, and I hope it gets passed. If you like it, too, let your Representative know.
I've got to give the Senate Finance Committee credit here - they asked some pretty good questions about the proposed Lottery sell-off.
Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, wondered whether a private company operating the lottery might view slot machines as a form of gambling similar to the lottery."My concern is is that this is opening the door to the mentality of slots in 7-Elevens," Fraser said. "I don't want slot machines in 7-Elevens."
[...]
Sen. Jane Nelson, a Lewisville Republican and a past ardent opponent of attempts to legalize video slot machines, asked Lottery Commissioner James Cox in his appearance before the committee whether he envisions a private company trying to expand the scope of games.
"I'm very concerned about this proposal of selling the lottery if it would lead to an expansion ... of allowed games, and who would make that decision," Nelson said.
Cox, though he said lottery officials aren't part of the governor's office discussions with financial consultants, said there are a number of ways a sale could be structured. He said state laws and the sales contract would determine what gambling activities would be condoned.
The potential price of the lottery also raised questions from senators.
"The price tag seems to change daily, by billions," said Sen. Kevin Eltife, a Tyler Republican.
Perry has said $14 billion is a conservative estimate. Consulting firms that prepared documents for Perry's office said it could go as high as $28 billion.
"I read somewhere that someone said, you know, the private sector, if they buy it, they're very smart. They'll know how to maximize the return on the investment. Are we not smart enough to run the lottery?" Eltife said.
Perry said last week that a private company run by "smart people" would make "substantially more money" off of the lottery than the state does.
Lottery officials said that the state operates the lottery under constraints set by the Legislature. Its advertising budget is capped and tied to the amount of payouts.
Eltife suggested the state could find ways to change the lottery to make it more profitable under state ownership.
This is a good point, though it's always interesting to see it raised in a context like this and not one that isn't strictly about profit but generally about managing state issues and resources. You know, like with the Health and Human Resources Commission, where we proved pretty conclusively that "privately managed" != "better managed". In this case, maybe there are some tweaks the Lege can make to the Lottery's charter that will allow them to run things better and generate more money. (Whether that's a good thing or not is a separate issue.) Point is, it's not like there aren't other options.
The lottery was created under the Texas Constitution, Sen. Florence Shapiro, a Plano Republican, noted as she asked whether the sale would require a constitutional amendment. Shapiro also questioned what role the state would have in oversight if the lottery were sold.Lottery Executive Director Anthony Sadberry said it's possible it would require a constitutional amendment, or at least legislative action, to sell the lottery to a private firm. He and Cox also said under the current setup the lottery commission has the responsibility of overseeing and regulating the lottery.
"Possible"? You could maybe convince me that a simple bill signed into law by Governor Perry would suffice, but I say there's no way this can be done without some legislative input. Surely there's some limit to executive orders. Right? Eye on Williamson has more.
South Texas Chisme looks at the headline Legislature to debate the use of sporting goods tax for parks and wails in despair "WHY IS THERE EVEN A DEBATE? WHY WASN'T THAT TAX USED FOR PARKS BEFORE?" I don't have a good answer to that question (the short version of the long and depressing answer is "because there was nothing to stop the Lege from raiding those funds for other purposes as they saw fit"), and what's worse, I'm not sure that the proposed fix really addresses the underlying issue.
Rep. Harvey Hilderbran, R-Kerrville, filed a constitutional amendment proposal on Monday that would allow voters to decide whether to dedicate the sporting goods tax for Texas parks.It takes a two-thirds majority vote in both House and Senate chambers to advance a constitutional amendment proposal to the election ballot.
"This constitutional amendment is necessary to ensure that the money from the sporting goods tax goes toward the purpose for which it was intended," Hilderbran said.
Hilderbran wants to dedicate all the money from the sporting goods tax -- more than $100 million per year -- toward state and local parks, many of which have suffered neglect because of money shortages.
State lawmakers dedicated the sales tax on sporting goods for state parks in 1993 but capped that amount two years later at $32 million. Last year, lawmakers used only $20 million of the tax's proceeds on state and local parks. More than $80 million from the tax flowed into the state's general revenue fund.
Hilderbran has 118 co-sponsors for his House Bill 6, which would eliminate the $32 million cap. He chairs the House Culture, Recreation and Tourism Committee, which will hear public testimony on the bill today.
Emphasis mine. If parks wound up with less than the maximum amount they were allowed, then what good will eliminating the cap do? What will stop the Lege from doing the same thing with no cap as they did with a $32 million cap when parks weren't even getting that $32 million to begin with?
Don't get me wrong, I support Hilderbran's proposal. I just think it's only solving part of the problem. It will make more money available to the parks, but it won't ensure that they get it. Until that happens, watch out. B and B and Capitol Annex have more.
Here's some more info about the the citywide WiFi initiative, which was on today's City Council agenda.
Houston officials and the contractor they chose last week for the project say they have learned from other cities' mistakes."We're learning some lessons from what they went through," said Richard Lewis, the city's information technology director, who helped broker the deal with Atlanta-based EarthLink Municipal Networks.
Lewis said he and his staffers have looked at WiFi projects in various cities, including Corpus Christi, where city government built a 147-square-mile network with tax dollars and offered it free to residents. That city now is preparing to contract with EarthLink to maintain the $7 million network and sell access to residents and businesses.
Good to know about Corpus Christi. I don't know how well this will all turn out, or if it will be a service I'll eventually want to buy - I'm more hoping for it to become an add-on to what I've already got - but I figure EarthLink will be dropping a fair amount of money on this project, and as such they'll be pretty strongly incentivized to do it right. That's not a guarantee, of course, but it's not a bad thing to count on, either. We'll see how it goes. Dwight has more.
A state district judge today blocked Gov. Rick Perry's executive order creating a fast-track permitting process for coal-fired electric generating plants, a ruling that also could impact the debate over Perry's order requiring cervical cancer vaccinations for pre-teen girls.State District Judge Stephen Yelenosky ruled that four environmental groups "are likely to prevail on their argument that the governor lacks the authority" to issue an executive order telling a state agency to hold hearings and reach a decision by a specific deadline.
Yelenosky ordered the State Office of Administrative Hearings to ignore Perry's demand that hearings on new power plants be limited to six months.
He did not specifically halt a hearing scheduled for today on TXU Corp.'s request for permits for six coal-fired plants, but he told the state's administrative law judge to reconsider requests for a delay from environmental groups.
Works for me. Between this and Senator Fraser's hearings on the electric utilities, it's not been TXU's best day. BOR and Vince have more.
Yesterday, the House picked up where the Senate left off on the issue of busting the spending cap to fund the excessive property tax cuts. After a mostly harmonious debate concerning extending the tax cut from the last special session to seniors and disabled folks, they turned to HB2, which allocates the full $14.2 billion to school districts to pay for the tax cuts.
The arguments over House Bill 2, which would send $14.2 billion to school districts to make up for the revenue they would have garnered from local property taxes over the next two years, centered on budget priorities.Despite the debate, the measure was given preliminary approval by a 138-6 margin.
Democrats voiced concern -- as they have repeatedly since the session began -- that handling property tax relief separately from the rest of the budget elevates its priority over other pressing state needs, including funding for education and health care for the needy.
They unsuccessfully attempted to amend the bill to prioritize spending on items including textbooks, a teacher pay raise, pre-kindergarten programs, dropout prevention and an increase in the homestead exemption, which would deliver more tax relief to owners of low-valued homes.
"The issue is how we prioritize dollars," said Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, who offered the amendment to ensure the same level of funding for pre-kindergarten and dropout programs in the next two-year budget period as this one.
Coleman was among the six who voted against HB2.
GOP leaders, who decided to handle spending for tax relief separately from the rest of the budget, said they need to keep their promise to cut tax rates and to pay for those cuts.
"We're just fulfilling the agreement we already made with the people," said House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland.
Lawmakers must break a state spending cap just to subsidize the full amount of promised tax relief, even without putting additional money into state programs. Spending to subsidize tax relief counts against the spending cap -- which is tied to economic growth -- just as other spending does.
A resolution to break the cap for tax relief is scheduled for a House vote today. GOP backers note the effect of the resolution is also to free up money for other programs, because it removes spending on tax relief from counting against the cap.
If they don't break the cap, lawmakers would have to provide less tax relief or carve billions from planned spending.
Unfortunately, the former was never an option. If you're going to insist on this massive tax swap, it would make all kinds of sense to do it on a pay-as-you-go basis, where the actual revenue collected by the business and cigarette taxes are the determining factor for how much property tax reduction is then given. If that means we only make it down to $1.20, as it would stand right now, then so be it. And if the business tax takes in more money than projected - which, by the way, is the basic plan to fund future tax cuts when the general revenue surplus runs out - then we get to lower the rate more. Simple, right?
Nah. Tax cuts come first, everything else gets in line after it. Craddick and company want this money off the table before they discuss the rest of the budget, which is why this was done as two separate bills and not as a part of HB1, the main appropriations bill. If the tax cut had to compete with other priorities, who knows what might happen. This way, the GOP leadership gets to blow the extra cash on something it can't really afford, and figure out how to make everything else balance later. Pretty sweet deal, if you're into that sort of thing.
Vince has more on this, and Paul Burka has two posts about the debate itself that gives you all the details about how this particular sausage was made. I'd like to quote Burka's summation of the process:
I wrote earlier, in opposing Governor Perry's efforts to expand his power through executive orders, that I trust the legislative branch more than I trust the executive, because the procedures of the Legislature offer protection to all interested parties, and full opportunity for debate, whereas the executive branch has no such safeguards. I see no reason to change my position about the executive branch, but the process employed by the Senate to bust the spending cap and by the House to appropriate the money was designed to minimize public input and debate. House Democrats were left with little choice but to use the flawed vehicle of contingency riders to make their points, and Senate Democrats couldn't even do that; they were reduced to making ineffective parliamentary inquiries. This reminded me of congressional debates, in which the most important decision by the majority is not the substance of the legislation but the procedural contraints imposed upon the minority to prevent them from presenting effective alternatives.
This was what the Republicans wanted, and they did what they had to in order to make it happen. We never had an actual debate about the spending cap, and we won't have a real debate about what our spending priorities should be, but we're gonna get a big property tax cut, which will make a few people very happy, some people a little happy, and a lot of people not so happy.
Finally, I couldn't quite fit this in earlier, but here's the Legislative Study Group's analysis of HB2:
HB 2 is bad public policy because it uses money for other state priorities to pay for an under funded tax cut. An inadequate amount of revenue has been raised by the tax package that was passed during the 3rd Called Special Session of the 79th Legislature. Only $8.1 billion is available in the property tax fund to pay for the $14.2 billion needed to buy down local school maintenance-and-operations (M&O) tax rates from $1.50 per $100 of property valuation to $1.00.HB 2 spends $6.1 billion in current General Revenue to make up the amount lacking on tax cuts before the Legislature has the opportunity to review and debate the state budget. According to estimates from the Center for Public Policy Priorities, the $8.1 billion in the Property Tax Relief Fund would only buy down property taxes to $1.20 for the coming biennium instead of $1.00.
To fund the property tax cuts for 2008, HB 2 spends $4,231,466,000 from the Property Tax Relief Fund and an additional $2,724,934,000 from General Revenue. For 2009, HB 2 spends $3,846,492,000 from the Property Tax Relief Fund and $3,846,492,000 from General Revenue.
Budget decisions, including property tax cuts, for the 2008-2009 biennium should be made in the General Appropriations Act, HB 1, where all spending priorities can be debated side by side so that members can make a more informed decision.
Next up is the House vote on the Senate's cap-busting measure SCR20. Yes, this means they allocated the tax cut money before they actually voted to bust the cap. It was always about funding the tax cut by any means necessary. The rest was just details. More later.
I don't really care who Robert Eckels is going to work for. It was a safe bet it was going to be something high-powered and high-paying, it was just a matter of which big-name firm would be signing his checks. All that really matters in the story about where he is going is this:
"This is a new stage for me to play on. It's an international firm, and it has a broad range of expertise," Eckels said, citing the firm's energy and public finance practice. "I could have jumped last year if I was ready to go. But I wasn't. Now, mentally, I'm ready, and operationally, the county is ready."
Emphasis mine. If Eckels had been "ready to go" last year, in particular last year prior to August 25, we could have elected his successor in November. But because he wasn't "ready", and because such considerations apparently didn't weigh in his decision, we get a successor foisted on us instead. Maybe Harris County is "operationally ready" for a caretaker of Eckels' legacy to come in and keep steering the ship in the direction he's pointed it. Call me crazy, but I think we deserved the chance to make that decision for ourselves.
Dwight has a question for all you TiVo and TiVo-like users:
So how about you? Like commercials or hate 'em? If you own a DVR, do you watch the ads or zap through them? If you like them, 'fess up: Have you ever gone back to watch one over again?
I still watch some TV in real time, usually but not always sporting events, so seeing some commercials is inevitable. When I'm watching something that the TiVo has recorded, though, I zap away. I will sometimes stop and look at an ad that catches my eye, but usually just to satisfy my curiosity about its subject matter. Well, okay, I'll watch promos for upcoming shows sometimes, too. But generally speaking, I zap. To me, one of the huge benefits of TiVo is being able to watch an hourlong show in less than 45 minutes. I'm all about saving time.
On a related note, when I first got the TiVo, it had an effect on how I listened to the radio. I kept wanting to hit a back button so I could hear the song title and band name if I missed it, or to take a shot at finally figuring out what some tricky lyrics were. I was always disappointed that my car stereo didn't let me do that.
Oh, and now that I have an iPod, I almost always do the podcast version of "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" - as with hourlong TV shows, it's a nice tidy 45 minutes, and there's no annoying public radio stuff. Not quite TiVoing, but close enough.
Debra Danburg was my State Rep for most of the 90s when I lived in Montrose. I'm very sorry to hear that she has cancer of the bile duct and is scheduled for surgery today. I join Rep. Hochberg and all of her former House colleagues in wishing her a full and speedy recovery.
Rad Sallee must have really struck a nerve with his columns about the sorry state of Old Spanish Trail because he's gone back to the well for a third time.
Texas Department of Transportation area engineer Maureen Wakeland had briefly explained what caused the delay -- a series of change orders, then recent bad weather that delayed pouring asphalt -- but said the work should wrap up in a few weeks.Several readers had doubts and thought their misery deserved a fuller explanation. They had a point: The project, from the Gulf Freeway to Kirby, started in August 2005 and was supposed to last 11 months, but is about to come in around 17.
Here's why, according to Wakeland.
First, landscaping and other beautification work was added to the part of the contract east of Texas 288 at the request of the Almeda/OST Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone.
Then, after asphalt overlay was scraped away in the Medical Center segment, inspection showed that deeper roadbed repairs than anticipated were needed. These had to be made before a new surface could be laid.
Inspection also showed that the slope of the street had to be improved to ensure good drainage. This required surveying to determine needed elevations, negotiating a contract for the added work and drafting engineering plans.
"During this time, the public could have perceived that no work was going on," Wakeland said. But it was: Curb repairs proceeded in the Medical Center segment, as did the sidewalk beautification to the east.
August of 2005, eh? It'd been so long I'd completely lost track of when it had started. Geez.
Now, regarding the causes of the delays, as I remember it they scraped the right lanes in each direction first, then started work on the sidewalks. After that was done, they did the rest of the scraping, then there was that interminable period when "the public could have perceived that no work was going on", because that sure as hell is what it looked like. I'm still not sure why they did things in this order, but I suppose I'm a little mollified to know that it wasn't planned to be this disorderly. I continue to think it should have been managed much better than it was, however.
As of this week, they are finally mostly done with the repaving. Where the work is basically done - all lanes are repaved between 288 and Cambridge - it's much more pleasant to drive on. They still need to do some turn lanes there, and they still have some traffic lanes to do farther west - the stretch between Stadium and Greenbriar was down to one lane again on Monday - but for the first time I can see light at the end of the tunnel. All I can say to that is "Hallelujah!"
Marty Hajovsky brings me some good news about my neighborhood pub.
Following its inception in the fall of 2002, Onion Creek Coffee House has been an innovator, being the first establishment of its type in the area, and also being witness to the dramatic changes taking place within the Heights area. Onion Creek has filled the role of Neighborhood Bar - providing a comfortable, affable atmosphere for Heights residents - and subsequently became a city-wide destination for all Houstonians...a friendly place to have dinner, a welcome venue for after-work meetings, an intimate place for a date or just a good place to try a new beer or sip a cup of coffee. On Thursday, February 15th, Onion Creek will remain ahead of the curve by no longer allowing smoking indoors. We are one of the first establishments in the city to adopt the recently approved smoking ban prior to its actual date of enforcement in September of this year, and we look forward to providing a clean, smoke-free environment for our patrons and employees. Onion Creek values our customers who smoke, and will still allow smoking on its spacious patio. We see this as a win-win situation and hope that our customers - smokers and non-smokers alike - will appreciate our efforts to provide a comfortable experience for all Onion Creek visitors.
I have two words for this: Woo hoo! And just in time for a study from Kentucky (PDF) that claims its recent smoking ban caused no economic harm to the city. Newswatch has more.
As you may recall, the City of Houston will be required to redraw City Council boundaries, adding in two new single-member districts, when its population hits 2.1 million. It looked like that process was going to get started last August, but a subsequent - and in my opinion, suspect - census estimate left us short of the mark and caused the matter to be shelved. Well, according to Matt Stiles, there's been yet another estimate (PDF) that would put us well north of the 2.1 million mark. Is this a sign that redistricting will be back on the agenda? Too early to tell for sure, but I rather expect this will be noticed and the subject will be brought up. Stay tuned.
Juanita notes something that bears repeating.
Here we are in what is assumed to be the conservative stronghold of America. It's Tom DeLay's old district, for Pete's sake.Yet all three of the Congressmen from Fort Bend County - Al Green, Nick Lampson, and Ron Paul - voted against the President and his war.
Take that to your Lincoln Day Dinner and chew on it, Bubba.
Yeah, I know, Lampson will have a hell of a re-election fight to contend with, and Paul is a nut who may give up his seat because he thinks he can be President. Things may look very different in Fort Bend in two years' time. But for now, I think Juanita and her long-suffering brethren and sistren (tm, Molly Ivins) deserve the chance to revel in that. Slainte, y'all.
We now have some official opposition to the proposal that's been floated to turn the Gus Wortham golf course into a soccer facility for the Houston Dynamo. Walter Boyd makes the case for saving the Wortham course in this Sunday op-ed, while a much more pointed response comes from City Council candidate James Rodriguez. I've reprinted Rodriguez's full statement beneath the fold. I get the impression from the Mayor White quote in that Newswatch post that the city is likely to look elsewhere before this issue becomes hot, but you never know. We'll have to see how it plays out. And finally, I note yesterday's letters to the editor on the matter, not because sentiment clearly ran one way or the other, but because Letter #3 is one of the more openly racist missives I've ever seen published on the Chron's pages. I wonder if James Campbell will hear it about that.
Anyway, read on for Rodriguez's statement. I don't have a dog in this fight, but it has the potential to be an interesting fight to observe.
Statement of James G. Rodriguez Candidate for Houston City Council, District I Opposing the closing of Gus Wortham Golf Course February 15, 2007I join Carol Alvarado, Houston City Council Member, District I, and a number of East End civic organizations and leaders in opposing the closing of the Gus Wortham Park Golf Course. The ill conceived and poorly planned proposed initiative to convert the golf course into a soccer complex is an egregious example of government bureaucracy attempting to dictate public policy without the benefit of community input.
As the only candidate running for the Houston City Council, District I that is standing with the community on this important issue, I call on the city of Houston to reconsider its plans for a Gus Wortham soccer compound. I request that the city begin to engage the community in a constructive dialogue to invest in the future of this historical golf treasure as well as explore alternatives in the East End where soccer fields for recreational use can be developed.
The civic organizations and leaders of the neighborhoods surrounding the Gus Wortham Park Golf Course should have a strong voice and input on public policy matters that affect their community, particularly park space issues that have an everyday impact on their lives. It is apparent that the community was left in the dark on a critical quality of life concern that has a direct bearing on traffic congestion, flooding, parking, construction, and the environment.
I take pride in working over the past few years to make sure civic organizations and leaders have a strong voice at City Hall. When neighborhoods are a major part of the public policy debate within our great city, all communities benefit. It is obvious that in the case involving the Gus Wortham Golf Course, the communities that stand to lose the most were completely shut out of the process. This type of city government behavior will not be tolerated. We demand better from our city.
Today is my 41st birthday. I started the celebration early by changing Audrey's diapers at 2 AM and 4 AM, and by reassuring Olivia after she had a bad dream at 3 AM. Do I know how to party or what? I bet Prince Andrew (who turns 47 today) can't top that.
Ahem. Happy birthday as always to Justine Bateman, who arrived on this planet the same day I did, and happy birthday a day early to Cindy Crawford, who reminds us all that the forties aren't what they used to be.
You all know how I feel about claims regarding Bigfoot. Am I about to be proven wrong?
When the foot turned up at the Spotsylvania County, Va., landfill, the first thought was that someone had committed a brutal crime. Deputies began sorting through mounds of trash in a grim search for body parts.Now, the foot is a phenomenon.
The hairless 8-inch appendage isn't human after all. But no one knows yet what species -- known or undiscovered -- it is. And that has led to some wild conjecture.
Spotsylvania sheriff's officials have said the foot might have come from an "ape-like species," leaving Bigfoot-believers across the country wondering if there might finally be proof of the creature.
Bob Hagan, president of the Fredericksburg Regional Chamber of Commerce, said speculation about the owner of this left foot has become a game.
"We did see a suggestion that it might be a Yeti or a Sasquatch, and that might be why they call it Bigfoot instead of Bigfeet," Hagan joked.
Tom Biscardi, who runs Searching for Bigfoot Inc. in Menlo Park, Calif., posted an image of the foot on his Web site, www.searchingforbigfoot.com. Biscardi doesn't know if this foot is a Bigfoot's foot, but he is certain the creatures are real.
"I have no doubts in my mind," Biscardi said. "I've had six encounters over the past 34 years. Not in my dreams. Up close and personal."
He supports DNA testing to find out one way or another.
It's not always clear how much lag time there is on these wire stories the Chron prints - this one has a WaPo dateline on it. A little time with Google News quickly reveals that this is much ado about nothing.
Russell Tuttle, a University of Chicago anthropologist who specializes in primate locomotion, thinks the appendage is the skinned hind foot of a bear. He said the quest for Bigfoot is "an escape from the realities of life, like focusing on soap operas and the personal life of often-pathetic celebrities."He added: "I pray this does not start an armed search for Bigfoot in the area. One is more likely to shoot a person in disguise, a person hunting, oneself, someone's farm animal."
But Bigfoot hunters consider themselves realists. William Dranginan of Manassas, who heads the Virginia Bigfoot Research Organization, admits that his heart fluttered at the possibility the foot belonged to a Bigfoot. But he also thinks it's a bear's foot.
Matt Moneymaker, president of the California-based Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization, said one of his group's 200 members is a world-class hunter who has skinned more than 200 black bears.
"That hunter, in British Columbia, is certain that this is the skinned left hind foot of an Ursus americana," or North American black bear, said Moneymaker, whose quest for Bigfoot has been documented by National Geographic.
Jeffrey Meldrum, an Idaho State University anthropologist who is a proponent of Bigfoot's existence, said bear remains are commonly mistaken for humans. Like others who have seen photos of the foot, he said it appears the ends of the toes, including the claws, were probably removed and remain with the pelt.
[...]
Idaho State's Meldrum said officials should have publicly cleared up the matter by now. "The handling of the situation, as it's been portrayed in the press, has been extremely clumsy," he said.
Yeah, you could say that. Better luck next time, fellas.
If you hated the new clock rules that the NCAA implemented for football this past season, then this will warm your heart.
Upon review ... college football's rules-makers found evidence to overturn last season's controversial efforts to speed up games.Too many plays and too much on-the-field action were lost. Coaches hated the moves, which quickened clock starts on kickoffs and possession changes. And so the NCAA's football rules committee shifted direction Wednesday, throwing them out and approving a series of ostensibly more subtle time-saving measures.
One, mirroring the NFL, moves kickoffs from the 35-yard line to the 30 to reduce the number of clock-killing touchbacks. Another limits replay reviews to two minutes.
The moves should save close to the 14 minutes that last year's changes shaved from the average major-college game time, the NCAA said.
If endorsed by the association's Playing Rules Oversight Panel next month, they'll go into effect next season.
"We're comfortable with the decision we've made now," said Michael Clark, coach at Division III Bridgewater (Va.) College and chairman of the rules committee. "I think we've got a balance with the idea that we are attacking dead and elapsed time in a game while securing playing time not just for the players but for the fans."
The '06 changes, he said, "overall did not have a positive effect on college football at all levels."
No kidding. There really was no justification for starting the game clock with the play clock after a change of possession. Among other things, it meant that if you had to go on defense late in a game where you trailed, you needed more than three timeouts to keep time on the clock. That wasn't right. I'm glad the NCAA was willing to admit the error of their ways and go back to what worked. Thanks to Mac for the heads up.
It's not the Trans-Texas Corridor, but this report on how much you'll pay to drive on the new toll roads in Central Texas illustrates a point I've made several http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/008494.html#008494.
So, what does it cost you to drive on Central Texas' emerging toll road system?Well, about 12 cents a mile. Unless it's 18 cents, or 40 cents, or 64 cents. Or, in one notable spot near Lakeline Mall, a cool $1.50 a mile.
State and local toll officials chose to install a system that is based on paying every so often, rather than a more old-fashioned "closed road" system in which drivers pass toll plazas on the way in and out and pay a set per-mile amount for their exact mileage. Inevitably, the "open road" approach introduces sizable inconsistencies, with longer trips on the tollway typically more economical than a short jaunt.
There's more there, and McBlogger discusses it in a lot more detail. Check it out.
John M. McCardell Jr. used to be the president of Middlebury College. He believes that current law that restricts drinking to those 21 and over is bad social policy, and he intends to prove it.
With backing from the Robertson Foundation, he has created a nonprofit group, Choose Responsibility, that will seek to promote a national discussion of alternatives to the 21-year-old drinking age. The group is preparing a Web site with studies that challenge conventional wisdom about the advantages of the law, while explaining its flaws. The group will also push an idea -- floated without success in the 1990s by Roderic Park, then chancellor of the University of Colorado at Boulder -- to allow 18-20-year-olds who complete an alcohol education program to obtain "drinking licenses." And McCardell and others plan to start speaking out, writing more op-eds, and trying to redefine the issue.The current law, McCardell said in an interview Thursday, is a failure that forces college freshmen to hide their drinking -- while colleges must simultaneously pretend that they have fixed students' drinking problems and that students aren't drinking. McCardell also argued that the law, by making it impossible for a 19-year-old to enjoy two beers over pizza in a restaurant, leads those 19-year-olds to consume instead in closed dorm rooms and fraternity basements where 2 beers are more likely to turn into 10, and no responsible person may be around to offer help or to stop someone from drinking too much.
Any college president who thinks his or her campus has drinking under control is "delusional," McCardell said, although he acknowledged the political pressures that prevent most sitting presidents from providing an honest assessment of what's going on on their campuses. But he said that the dangers to students and institutions are great enough that it's time for someone to start speaking out. While he was president at Middlebury, one of his students died, a 21-year-old who was driving after drinking way too much.
When I started college, the drinking age in Texas was 19. (It was 21 in my home state of New York.) It went up to 21 on September 1, 1986, which was a little less than six months before I turned 21, so I went from being a legal drinker for a year and a half to a potential minor-in-possession charge for six months. I've never been convinced that there's anything magical about being 21. And it seems that McCardell has found there's little empirical evidence to support that.
What was striking about the research, McCardell said, was how little of it conclusively backs up claims about the positive impact of the 21-year-old drinking age. "This is by definition a very emotional issue, but what we need is an informed and dispassionate debate," he said. He said that the major flaw in analyses to date has been false assumptions about causal relationships. If DWI accidents among teens have dropped, that must be because of the rise in the drinking age, proponents say.But McCardell noted that a range of other factors could be at play, too -- such as changing attitudes about seat belts, the availability of airbags, etc. At the same time, those who see a causal relationship in one set of statistics ignore others -- showing continued drinking by college students (under 21) and substantial evidence of truly dangerous drinking by a subset of that population.
"Data are data," McCardell said. "Facts are stubborn things."
The factors cited above would not have any effect on teenage DWI rates, but a couple of decades' worth of pervasive anti-DWI messaging might. I'd like to know if you can separate out an effect from the overall societal drop in drunk driving from that in the 18-21 age group. It would not surprise me to learn that there's not much evidence to suggest that the higher drinking age has any measurable effect.
Michael P. Haines, director of the National Social Norms Research Center, at Northern Illinois University, said that while large majorities of Americans have reported being concerned about underage drinking, focus groups have found that this view is a nuanced one. When Americans say that they oppose underage drinking, they are thinking of high schools and middle schools, Haines said, not "a 19-year-old who is married and working full time, a 20-year-old in the military, or a 19-year-old in college."
I think this is a key point. I think there's a bigger difference between 16 and 18 than there is between 19 and 21, and I think most people would agree with that. As I recall, the rationale for lowering the voting age to 18 back in the 70s was that kids serving in Vietnam deserved the right to vote. Maybe that same logic could be used today for alcohol.
Anyway, it's a thought-provoking read, so take a look and see what you think. Link via Chad Orzel.
If this article doesn't make you very angry, there's something seriously wrong with you.
Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The common perception of Walter Reed is of a surgical hospital that shines as the crown jewel of military medicine. But 5 1/2 years of sustained combat have transformed the venerable 113-acre institution into something else entirely -- a holding ground for physically and psychologically damaged outpatients. Almost 700 of them -- the majority soldiers, with some Marines -- have been released from hospital beds but still need treatment or are awaiting bureaucratic decisions before being discharged or returned to active duty.
They suffer from brain injuries, severed arms and legs, organ and back damage, and various degrees of post-traumatic stress. Their legions have grown so exponentially -- they outnumber hospital patients at Walter Reed 17 to 1 -- that they take up every available bed on post and spill into dozens of nearby hotels and apartments leased by the Army. The average stay is 10 months, but some have been stuck there for as long as two years.
Not all of the quarters are as bleak as Duncan's, but the despair of Building 18 symbolizes a larger problem in Walter Reed's treatment of the wounded, according to dozens of soldiers, family members, veterans aid groups, and current and former Walter Reed staff members interviewed by two Washington Post reporters, who spent more than four months visiting the outpatient world without the knowledge or permission of Walter Reed officials. Many agreed to be quoted by name; others said they feared Army retribution if they complained publicly.
I don't have the words to express how outraged I am at this. But I am going to use some of the words that were expressed by opponents of the recent anti-surge resolution to do a little contrasting and comparing. Click on for more.
Former Vietnam POW Sam Johnson, a Republican congressman from the Dallas area, beseeched colleagues Friday to reject the resolution, which affirms support for the troops but disapproves of Bush's decision to send more to Iraq."Our troops and their families want, need and deserve the full support of the country and the Congress," Johnson said, receiving a standing ovation as lawmakers from both parties saluted his heroism. "Moms and dads watching the news need to know that the Congress will not leave their sons and daughters in harm's way without support."
What's going on:
Disengaged clerks, unqualified platoon sergeants and overworked case managers fumble with simple needs: feeding soldiers' families who are close to poverty, replacing a uniform ripped off by medics in the desert sand or helping a brain-damaged soldier remember his next appointment."We've done our duty. We fought the war. We came home wounded. Fine. But whoever the people are back here who are supposed to give us the easy transition should be doing it," said Marine Sgt. Ryan Groves, 26, an amputee who lived at Walter Reed for 16 months. "We don't know what to do. The people who are supposed to know don't have the answers. It's a nonstop process of stalling."
What they say:
Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble, previewed the strategy Republicans would use to fight any funding cuts."Does this Congress want to tell our troops in the ground 'Do more with less even though we in Congress have it within our power to give you aid?' '' Poe asked.
He dramatically read to the House the letter a besieged William Barrett Travis wrote from the Alamo in 1836 begging for reinforcements.
What's going on:
Vera Heron spent 15 frustrating months living on post to help care for her son. "It just absolutely took forever to get anything done," Heron said. "They do the paperwork, they lose the paperwork. Then they have to redo the paperwork. You are talking about guys and girls whose lives are disrupted for the rest of their lives, and they don't put any priority on it."Family members who speak only Spanish have had to rely on Salvadoran housekeepers, a Cuban bus driver, the Panamanian bartender and a Mexican floor cleaner for help. Walter Reed maintains a list of bilingual staffers, but they are rarely called on, according to soldiers and families and Walter Reed staff members.
Evis Morales's severely wounded son was transferred to the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda for surgery shortly after she arrived at Walter Reed. She had checked into her government-paid room on post, but she slept in the lobby of the Bethesda hospital for two weeks because no one told her there is a free shuttle between the two facilities. "They just let me off the bus and said 'Bye-bye,' " recalled Morales, a Puerto Rico resident.
Morales found help after she ran out of money, when she called a hotline number and a Spanish-speaking operator happened to answer.
"If they can have Spanish-speaking recruits to convince my son to go into the Army, why can't they have Spanish-speaking translators when he's injured?" Morales asked. "It's so confusing, so disorienting."
What they say:
"This sends a terrible message to the troops and to the terrorists," Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin, said.
What's going on:
The Pentagon has announced plans to close Walter Reed by 2011, but that hasn't stopped the flow of casualties. Three times a week, school buses painted white and fitted with stretchers and blackened windows stream down Georgia Avenue. Sirens blaring, they deliver soldiers groggy from a pain-relief cocktail at the end of their long trip from Iraq via Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany and Andrews Air Force Base.Staff Sgt. John Daniel Shannon, 43, came in on one of those buses in November 2004 and spent several weeks on the fifth floor of Walter Reed's hospital. His eye and skull were shattered by an AK-47 round. His odyssey in the Other Walter Reed has lasted more than two years, but it began when someone handed him a map of the grounds and told him to find his room across post.
A reconnaissance and land-navigation expert, Shannon was so disoriented that he couldn't even find north. Holding the map, he stumbled around outside the hospital, sliding against walls and trying to keep himself upright, he said. He asked anyone he found for directions.
Shannon had led the 2nd Infantry Division's Ghost Recon Platoon until he was felled in a gun battle in Ramadi. He liked the solitary work of a sniper; "Lone Wolf" was his call name. But he did not expect to be left alone by the Army after such serious surgery and a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. He had appointments during his first two weeks as an outpatient, then nothing.
"I thought, 'Shouldn't they contact me?' " he said. "I didn't understand the paperwork. I'd start calling phone numbers, asking if I had appointments. I finally ran across someone who said: 'I'm your case manager. Where have you been?'
"Well, I've been here! Jeez Louise, people, I'm your hospital patient!"
What they say:
"We need to lend our full support to the troops abroad in order to achieve a winning strategy in Iraq," said Rep. John Carter, R-Round Rock. "If we give up on our troops, we give the terrorists the momentum they need to further organize and bring the fight to our soil."
What's going on:
"Building 18! There is a rodent infestation issue!" bellowed the commander to his troops one morning at formation. "It doesn't help when you live like a rodent! I can't believe people live like that! I was appalled by some of your rooms!"Life in Building 18 is the bleakest homecoming for men and women whose government promised them good care in return for their sacrifices.
One case manager was so disgusted, she bought roach bombs for the rooms. Mouse traps are handed out. It doesn't help that soldiers there subsist on carry-out food because the hospital cafeteria is such a hike on cold nights. They make do with microwaves and hot plates.
Army officials say they "started an aggressive campaign to deal with the mice infestation" last October and that the problem is now at a "manageable level." They also say they will "review all outstanding work orders" in the next 30 days.
Soldiers discharged from the psychiatric ward are often assigned to Building 18. Buses and ambulances blare all night. While injured soldiers pull guard duty in the foyer, a broken garage door allows unmonitored entry from the rear. Struggling with schizophrenia, PTSD, paranoid delusional disorder and traumatic brain injury, soldiers feel especially vulnerable in that setting, just outside the post gates, on a street where drug dealers work the corner at night.
"I've been close to mortars. I've held my own pretty good," said Spec. George Romero, 25, who came back from Iraq with a psychological disorder. "But here . . . I think it has affected my ability to get over it . . . dealing with potential threats every day."
After Spec. Jeremy Duncan, 30, got out of the hospital and was assigned to Building 18, he had to navigate across the traffic of Georgia Avenue for appointments. Even after knee surgery, he had to limp back and forth on crutches and in pain. Over time, black mold invaded his room.
But Duncan would rather suffer with the mold than move to another room and share his convalescence in tight quarters with a wounded stranger. "I have mold on the walls, a hole in the shower ceiling, but . . . I don't want someone waking me up coming in."
Wilson, the clinical social worker at Walter Reed, was part of a staff team that recognized Building 18's toll on the wounded. He mapped out a plan and, in September, was given a $30,000 grant from the Commander's Initiative Account for improvements. He ordered some equipment, including a pool table and air hockey table, which have not yet arrived. A Psychiatry Department functionary held up the rest of the money because she feared that buying a lot of recreational equipment close to Christmas would trigger an audit, Wilson said.
In January, Wilson was told that the funds were no longer available and that he would have to submit a new request. "It's absurd," he said. "Seven months of work down the drain. I have nothing to show for this project. It's a great example of what we're up against."
A pool table and two flat-screen TVs were eventually donated from elsewhere.
But Wilson had had enough. Three weeks ago he turned in his resignation. "It's too difficult to get anything done with this broken-down bureaucracy," he said.
We sure wouldn't want to send the wrong message to anybody, now, would we?
If anyone reading this lives in Harris County and has received notice that they now have a warrant out for their arrest due to unpaid fines, I suggest you pay those fines posthaste, because you don't want to wind up in a Harris County jail.
A Houston Chronicle review of state and county records reveals that from January 2001 through December 2006, at least 101 inmates -- an average of about 17 a year -- have died while in the custody of the Harris County Jail. In 2006 alone, after three consecutive years of failing to be in compliance with state standards, the jail recorded 22 in-custody deaths.At the time of their deaths, at least 72 of the inmates -- more than 70 percent -- were awaiting court hearings and had yet to be convicted of the crimes that led to their incarceration.
Records and interviews show that almost one-third of the deaths involve questions of inadequate responses from guards and staff, failure by jail officials to provide inmates with essential medical and psychiatric care and medications, unsanitary conditions, and two allegations of physical abuse by guards.
In at least 13 cases, relatives or documents raise questions over whether inmates received needed medications prior to their deaths. Additionally, 11 of the deaths involve infections and illnesses suggesting sanitation problems. In 10 other cases, death reports suggest possible neglect, as in the Mack case.
Just read the whole thing, and remember that the key problems in Harris County are a guard shortage, exacerbated by indiscriminate incarceration of people who don't need to be locked up. Bad policies and indifferent implementations have a price. Ask the families of these 101 people about it.
At some point, I'm going to get a comment from some chucklehead who wants to know why we should care about how bad it is for prisoners. Putting aside the the fact that in Houston we've got a lot of unconvicted defendants in our jails, and the fact that what happens to a lot of inmates inside prison walls far exceeds the severity of their crimes, I look at it this way: The United States of America is supposed to be better than that. We're not a third world country. We shouldn't have third world jails.
Or, to put it in language that many people should understand:
31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
I'm just saying. BOR has more.
Via Capitol Letters, Rep. Warren Chisum has followed through on his willingness to apologize for the anti-Semitic kookery of his anti-evolution letter, but he still doesn't quite grasp what the problem is.
The Pampa Republican sent a letter late today to the North Texas-Oklahoma office of the [Anti-Defamation] league, which works to eradicate hatred of Jews and other minorities."I certainly meant no harm or disrespect for the religious views held by any person or group and for having done so, I am truly sorry," Mr. Chisum wrote.
Mr. Chisum said his colleague of 18 years in the Legislature, former Rep. Steve Wolens, D-Dallas, who is Jewish, could confirm that Mr. Chisum is not a bigot.
Mr. Wolens did just that Friday.
"I've always found him to be respectful of religions and respectful of my religion," Mr. Wolens said.
Hell, I never believed that Chisum was anti-Semitic. Homophobic, sure - he's as anti-gay as they come, though sadly that doesn't carry the same social stigma. But everything I've ever heard about the man tells me he's not nutty in that particular way. Of all the aspects of this story, that to me is the least compelling.
Mr. Chisum, a 10-term lawmaker, also distanced himself from the document he distributed to House members Tuesday.The memo by Georgia GOP Rep. Ben Bridges urges state legislatures to ban the teaching of evolution. It claims evolution was the religious doctrine of certain Jews in ancient times, and thus can't be taught in public schools.
Mr. Chisum said "the document in question does not accurately reflect my views." He did not elaborate.
This is the heart of the matter. Chisum handed this document to his colleagues, with a cover letter he wrote and signed. If it "does not accurately reflect" his views, then what the hell is he doing distributing this "important information" to every Member of the House? Did he trust this guy that much? (Note that even Bridges is backing away from it now.) I'm sorry, Warren, but your imprimatur is all over this thing. Own up to it or tell us how you let yourself get so badly duped. Those are your choices.
Here's a thought: Could the effort to sell off the Lottery be a back door to expanded gambling?
The Texas Lottery might look quite different under a private operator if the state opens the door to online games, casino-style Keno and video slot machines as suggested by financial firms that have consulted with Gov. Rick Perry's office.Documents prepared by three firms seeking to manage the deal for the state say the sale price would range from $14 billion to $28 billion, depending on the buyers' ability to increase profits by expanding gaming in Texas.
That may mean legalizing video slots or letting people buy tickets at home on their digital televisions, according to the documents reviewed by the Associated Press.
[...]
Perry spokesman Robert Black said the governor is not advocating the expansion of gambling and simply wants the state to get "the most bang for our buck."
"This is not unlike trying to sell your house," he said.
The deal and some new types of games would have to go through the Legislature, which has been reluctant to allow new gaming in recent years.
At first, Black said Friday that introducing some new games that aren't currently legal, such as Keno and video slots, would require a constitutional amendment, and the lottery sale most likely would, too. He said the governor's office thinks the best approach would be through a constitutional amendment.
But later he said "it's unclear" and that an attorney general's opinion may be needed to decide whether those questions would have to go before voters.
I can see it coming: Perry will make this happen by executive order. (Why not? That's worked so well for him so far.) And then he'll announce his intent to sell off the Alamo. Hey, with everything else that's happened, are you really willing to say anything is impossible? Eye on Williamson has more.
Folks who owe fines for traffic and other violations will soon face arrest if they don't pay up.
In what police called the first statewide warrant roundup, law enforcement agencies threatened Friday to arrest scofflaws who haven't paid their traffic and other fines.The roundup of more than 1 million outstanding warrants across the state was announced by Webster police warrant officer Andy Kerstens during a morning news conference.
Kerstens was flanked by uniformed officers from other area law enforcement agencies in the Houston area. In all, 153 cities in 52 counties across the state are participating in the roundup March 3-10.
"This is for all of those people that didn't comply with the court orders," said Capt. Doug Perry with the Houston Police Department. Police made similar announcements in other cities.
[...]
The number of outstanding warrants for Houston was not immediately available.
But, according to the Dallas Morning News, Dallas had 400,000 warrants with a value of $118 million.
Police said the total amount of money collected statewide in the sweep will be disclosed after March 14.
Each agency involved in the roundup has sent notices in the past week to people with active outstanding warrants.
"You will be arrested in your home, at work, or wherever we may find you. Act immediately to avoid arrest," the notices say.
Officers will concentrate on traffic and parking violators during the roundup, but those with other warrants also are fair game, Kerstens said.
"What we're hoping to do with this roundup is to have people comply with the orders of the court," said Kerstens, whose department has 6,900 outstanding warrants.
People who pay their fines within the next two weeks should see their case closed and they can "avoid the inconvenience and embarrassment of arrest at home or at work in front of family,
friends and co-workers," Kerstens said.
This sounds like a sensible idea. I'm sure Dallas would like a piece of that $118 million, and I daresay whatever the total is for Houston it would come in handy as well. I'd like to know what success rate they have with their efforts - what percentage of the people they round up actually pay and what percentage can't or won't and thus get arrested - in addition to the dollar total they collect. That will help illustrate how effective this sort of effort is. We'll see what happens.
Shorter Robert Eckels: So I quit. What's it to you?
County Judge Robert Eckels, drawing some heat for his decision to leave office just months after voters gave him a fourth term, offered no apologies Friday, and he noted that he had to file for re-election more than a year ago.New opportunities since then, and introspection as he approached age 50, convinced him -- as he said in announcing his departure Thursday -- that "the time is now."
Generally conservative Web site BlogHouston.net's response to that quote was typical of critical sentiment. "Actually, no. The time would have been right before the last election, so voters could have picked your replacement," wrote BlogHouston's Kevin Whited. "Thanks for your years of service and solid conservative governance, but jeers for the way you decided to quit."
[...]
As for the criticism of his timing, Eckels said, "The world is full of cynics. There is no answer I can give that will satisfy them."
"My election was over in January (2006) when no one filed against me and not November. There is nothing magic about leaving today."
Actually, that's not true, as a quick peek at the relevant laws makes clear. If Eckels had withdrawn from the ballot "on or before the 74th day before election day", which is to say around the end of August, then given the fact that he'd been unopposed, "the appropriate executive committee of each political party making nominations for the general election for state and county officers may make a replacement nomination for the office sought by the withdrawing candidate". In other words, if he had dropped out any time up till almost September, there would have been a contested election last November to replace him. Note that the key here is that Eckels was the only candidate on the ballot. Had there been a Democrat as well, we would have had a DeLay situation, in that the Republicans would not have been able to put up a replacement. But since an Eckels departure would have meant no candidates at all, as was the case with Vilma Luna in HD33, then both teams would have gotten to put in a sub.
What would have happened after the 74th day before Election Day? Eckels would have been barred from abandoning the race, meaning his name would have remained whether he still wanted the job or not. This is analogous to the situation in HD29 where the late Glenda Dawson remained on the ballot after her death. The difference here of course is that when her victory in November left that seat empty, an immediate special election to replace her was necessitated. With Eckels' sayonara act, a replacement is named and no vote is taken till next November.
Eckels' timing, however, may make it a little more difficult for Republicans to hold on to the seat, Radack said. He, Eckels and Eversole are the Commissioners Court's three Republicans."You increase your chances of losing the seat because there is an election in 2008 that we wouldn't otherwise have," Radack said. "He's put it in jeopardy."
[...]
Harris County GOP Chairman Jared Woodfill said the party regrets losing Eckels at the top of the county ticket because he is one of the GOP's top local vote getters. That's why Democrats didn't run anyone against him, Woodfill said. But depending on who the Republican nominee is in 2008, the GOP's chances could be just as strong.
"Politically, people could argue it both ways," Woodfill said. "We choose to look at it as an opportunity instead of a negative for the party. Right now, it's too early to tell whether it will hurt our ticket in 2008."
This is the critical thing. I guarantee you that Jared Woodfill would rather take his chances in 2008 with Ed Emmett or whoever else as the de facto incumbent than last November with no incumbent. That's why, no matter how Eckels cares to spin it, that his timing matters. Whenever it actually was that he decided he was bored with his job, he did what he could to give his party a leg up. Well played, Robert, well played.
Audrey came home as scheduled on Tuesday after her time under the bili lights. She gets to spend a little time in the sun now to make sure her bilirubin level stays in the normal range. So far, so good.
Also in the "so far, so good" department has been Olivia's reaction to and interaction with Audrey. She has been an exceptional big sister - she loves holding and hugging Audrey, she wants to see her when she wakes up and when she comes home from school, and she tells people she has a baby sister. She's shown some normal signs of anxiety resulting from all the change, but we really couldn't ask for more from her.
My three ladies. I'm a lucky guy.
The Texas Association of Business has frequently been a force for bad in this state, but they're on the right side here by joining with various Hispanic organizations to oppose anti-immigration bills in the Lege.
"The Texas Legislature should take no action with regard to immigration unless and until the U.S. Congress passes a law for comprehensive immigration reform," said TAB President Bill Hammond. "The federal government is perfectly capable of inflicting pain and suffering on business. We don't believe the Texas Legislature needs to be piling on."The groups are opposing a series of bills that Republican legislators have filed in the Texas House that would impose fees on money sent to Mexico, deny in-state college tuition to undocumented children and deny birthright citizenship to children born in Texas to illegal immigrants.
"Texas should not pass blatantly unconstitutional legislation that will only push immigrants farther into the shadows," said Luis Figueroa of the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
State Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, said he had filed House Bill 351 to impose sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants. He said his bill was "in response" to bills that targeted sanctions on immigrants.
"As a symbol of our solidarity and cooperation, I'm withdrawing HB 351 from further consideration in thanks to the business community who is bringing their power, their might and their heft to making sure the immigration debate is fought on the floor in Washington, not in Austin," Anchia said.
Now of course, TAB's motives aren't exactly pure here. They know fully well that immigrant labor, in particular illegal immigrant labor, exerts downward pressure on wages. That's good for them, not so good for workers, and the prospect of anything by the Lege to mitigate that situation are small indeed. But strange bedfellows and all that, and good on them for at least opposing forces of darkness and ignorance like Leo Berman.
The question I have, though, is how far does their opposition go? If Berman and others like him persist in their xenophobic ways, will TAB take concrete action against them? Will they withhold donations, endorse an opponent, or give (legal) money to an opponent (for administrative overhead purposes only, of course)? Or are they all talk and no action? Tune in after the session and find out, I suppose. Stace has more.
On Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee followed the Senate's example and voted to exceed the spending cap by passing SCR 20, the Ogden resolution. While three of the Lege blogs covered the happenings, for reasons I can't adequately explain there was only one actual newspaper story on it. Maybe there will be more when the full House votes next week, but color me disappointed so far.
The best summary of the gamesmanship that occurred in the House chamber comes from the Quorum Report.
[Appropriations Committee Chair and flat earth enthusiast Warren] Chisum convened his committee in a formal meeting rather than in a public meeting, which precluded public testimony. He said that he called a formal meeting because the Ogden resolution was procedural in nature and related to interpretation of House rules. Internal House matters have always been debated without public input and Chisum said he saw no reason to begin treating the subject differently now.
It's a pretty nifty trick calling this a procedural matter and not something that will have a huge effect on the entire budget. You have to admire their ability to do it with a straight face.
Chisum originally called the meeting for the smallish Agricultural Museum room in the west wing of the Capitol, announcing his intent on the House floor this morning. Democratic Reps. Jim Dunnam (D-Waco) and Craig Eiland (D-Galveston) and Republican Rep. Robert Talton (R-Pasadena) challenged Chisum, leading the meeting to be moved to the larger Appropriations Committee room in the Extension.Unlike the Agricultural Museum meeting room, the Appropriations Committee room is wired for Internet Web casts. Chisum had the discretion to broadcast the meeting, but to do so would have contravened House policy. Often times, formal meetings are held in rooms that are not wired for broadcasting and it has consistently been the practice and policy not to broadcast formal meetings, explained Chris Cutrone, a spokesman for Speaker Tom Craddick.
Afterward, Democrats complained that the measure had not received enough public scrutiny. Dunnam, the leader of the House Democratic Caucus, questioned how Republicans could back asking the general public to vote on a constitutional amendment to break the cap one week and then move a resolution through both chambers with no public testimony.
"That may be the fastest flip-flop in history," he said.
It's all of a piece. The goal is to not leave members open to the charge that they're free spenders. For once, Tom Craddick is worried about people's re-election prospects.
Committee members seemed confused at first by the speed of developments today. Chisum first laid out HB 2, which appropriates the $14 billion to make whole the property tax revenue lost by schools, and quickly moved to a vote. After several bewildered committee members said they were unsure on what they were voting, Chisum stopped proceedings so that lawmakers could get on the same page.Rep. Rick Noriega (D-Houston) told Chisum that things were moving a little quickly for an infantryman. The chairman told Noriega that they were charging the hill and would he like to join. "I just don't know what hill we're charging," Noriega replied.
Eiland, who is not a member of House Appropriations but is allowed to take part in committee deliberations, later asked Chisum if SCR 20 was required for HB 2 to be enacted. Chisum responded that HB 2 by itself would not break the spending cap so an authorizing resolution was not needed until the companion legislation, HB 1, was passed. That said, Chisum said he preferred to press ahead on the resolution anyway.
"We could do it either way," he said. "We choose to do it this way."
To Noriega, one of the two Democratic no votes (Chuck Hopson (D-Jacksonville) was the other), the Republicans were in a hurry to put property tax cuts at the front of the line when discussing budget priorities this session.
The state has many pressing needs, he argued, such as maximizing CHIP enrollment or boosting medical reimbursement rates. And those needs are only growing, he said. For instance, lawmakers had just heard a request from DPS for more law enforcement personnel, he said.
"We should discuss other needs of the state before voting to bust the cap," he said. With the cap resolution being passed before the budget is debated, "I think all of these other important needs of the state will be fighting for the scraps."
The key point to remember here is that the new business tax falls well short of paying for the full property tax reduction - it is estimated to generate about $8 billion, while the property tax cut costs $14 billion, which is nearly double what the spending cap allows. What that means is that another $6 billion is going to have to come out of general revenue, which means that it will compete with - indeed, it will be given priority over - everything else. Bear in mind also that a lot of the much-ballyhooed budget surplus is not the result of increased tax revenue but funds that were not spent, a situation that thanks to the property tax cut black hole will not happen again this biennium. The bottom line here is that by this vote, Chisum and company are putting the budget in a straitjacket, one which they'll still be wearing in future sessions. Burka has more here and here.
Since I got the iPod and figured out synching and playlists, one of the things I wanted to do was to load up all the CDs that I seldom or never listened to, put it on shuffle, and see what I thought. I think one reason why some CDs go in the "play once and put aside" pile is that they're a little monotonous - not every artist has broad range, after all - so mixing things up ought to keep things fresh.
Anyway, I did this last week, and figured I'd write down the first ten songs that popped up for a blog post. I did that, but then got too busy to blog it. I finally had a little time for that, so here we go:
1. "Blackleg Miner" - Steeleye Span I can't remember where this CD came from. I've had it for awhile, but never listened to it. I won't make that mistake again - this is good stuff.
2. "Slow Dog" - Fastball Of all the CDs I ripped for this mix, the "Best of Fastball" is probably the one I'd listened to the most. I got it at a live acoustic performance at the Mucky Duck that I attended with Michael Croft a few years back. It had been a regular in my car CD player until it started skipping. I'm hoping that it was the physical medium that was damaged and not the data. So far, no problems.
3. Little Beggarman - Great Big Sea Another CD of uncertain origin that I should have listened to before now. See what a good idea this was?
4. "Rebel Song" - Crazy Ivan This is my cousin Steven Kuffner's band. He gave me the CD last year when he was in town for our uncle Ken's funeral. Not quite "alternative", whatever that means, perhaps "alternative-esque", but not bad.
5. "Chi Chilichi?" - The King's Singers If you're a fan of a cappella music, you must own a King's Singers CD. This is from their 20th anniversay CD, which I bought about 20 years ago.
6. "I'm Old Enough" - Lou Ann Barton Barton is an Austin blues diva with a great set of pipes. She's also an example of the monotony problem I mentioned before. Singers like her are much better live. The CD, for which this is the title track, loses some energy and feels a little sterile compared to a live show. It definitely gains something from being in a mix.
7. "Let's Pretend We're Married" - Royal Company Scam This is from a collection of Prince covers by Austin artists called "Do Me Baby!". I got it at an Asylum Street Spankers show a few years ago, as a couple of their members are represented on it. I played it once and put it aside because while there were some fun and enjoyable songs on there, there were also a few that were just not to my taste. This was one of those songs.
8. "Automatic Rainy Day" - The Go Gos From their modern CD "God Bless The Go Gos" that I got at a closeout sale a few years back and never played. It's not bad - not as good as their iconic 80s stuff, but that's a high bar to clear. I mean, it's the Go Gos. You know what you're getting, and they give it to you. Either that's good enough or it's not.
9. "This Colorful World" - Eliot Morris Every year our friend Priscilla makes a CD of her favorite songs for that year and gives them as Christmas presents. This was from her 2005 effort, which I think I played once before. She likes acoustic singer/songrwriter stuff - she has a massive thing for Ellis Paul - and this is in that vein. Pretty good, and as with Lou Ann Barton it benefits from being in a mix.
10. "Kodachrome" - The Tufts Beelzebubs This is Tiffany's CD, an all-male a cappella group from Tufts University, which I believe she got in college. As you may imagine, I like a cappella stuff, and these boys are good. Another excellent under-my-nose find.
All in all, a worthwhile exercise for me. I may do another list like this later if I think about it. Feel free to razz me for my lack of musical taste in the comments.
SciGuy brings the depressing news of State Rep. Warren Chisum's bizarre anti-science crusade in the House - see here and here for the letter he distributed to all House members regarding the teaching of evolution. I'm not sure what's more pathetic - that one of the more powerful members of the Lege could have such ignorant beliefs, or that Chisum did all this without reading the web site his letter directed people to, and thus apparently had no idea just how completely insane it is.
House Appropriations Chairman Warren Chisum said Wednesday that he's "willing to apologize" for giving colleagues a document that contains what the Anti-Defamation League called "outrageous anti-Semitic material.""The stuff that causes conflicts between religious beliefs, you know, I'd never be a party to that," Mr. Chisum said. "I'm willing to apologize if I've offended anyone."
Mr. Chisum's comments came after he learned that the Anti-Defamation League, which works against anti-Semitism and other forms of hate, was demanding "a repudiation and apology" in a letter to his office. He said he hadn't seen the letter late Wednesday.
On Tuesday, the Pampa Republican distributed a memo written by Georgia GOP Rep. Ben Bridges to Texas House members' mailboxes. The memo advocated that schools stop teaching evolution and contained links to a Web site that warns of international Jewish conspiracies. It also directed readers to the group that created the Web site - the Atlanta-area Fair Education Foundation.
Mr. Chisum said he hadn't looked at the Web site and didn't realize that he was distributing that type of material. He expressed chagrin that he didn't vet the material more carefully.
The truly sad thing is that the "Jewish conspiracy" stuff isn't the most bizarre part of it - the same website claims that the universe is geocentric and not heliocentric.
I figure the embarassing revelations about the Fixed Earth website will be more than enough to prevent Chisum's letter from having any actual policy effect, but you never know. It'd be interesting to hear what Governor Perry thinks about all this. Given the way he's poked social conservatives in the eye with the HPV vaccine order, he might choose to make some amends here. On the other hand, he'll never realize his dream of Texas becoming the cancer curing capital of the world if he embraces Chisum's crusade. You'd think that after the state of Kansas finally got back on the right track, we'd be reluctant to take their place as the official laughingstock in matters scientific, but betting on common sense is seldom with the odds. In the Pink has more.
(DMN link via Dig Deeper Texas.)
UPDATE: The Chron gives Chisum a well-deserved slap.
We know that Earthlink will be the provider for Houston's Wi-Fi network when it is rolled out in 2009. But what are the details, and how will it work? I refer you to Dwight, the City Hall blog, and WiFiNet News for answers to most if not all of your questions. I'm looking forward to seeing what the actual product that Earthlink rolls out will be, and I join Dwight in hoping for something like this:
Here's what I'm hoping happens: AT&T and Comcast buy access to Earthlink's service, then provide free it as an incentive to keep existing customers and lure new ones. I suspect the two companies could negotiate a bulk rate with Earthlink that would allow them to write it off as a promotional cost. Subscribe to DSL or cable-modem access at home, and get anywhere access throughout the city of Houston!I'm a Road Runner customer, but if AT&T offered that as part of its DSL package, I'd consider jumping ship in a heartbeat. To keep me, Road Runner would likely want to offer a similar deal.
While I'm generally happy with my RoadRunner/Comcast service, I too would jump in a heartbeat to a competitor that offered me at home service plus roaming access. It makes a lot of sense for something like this to happen, so here's hoping.
Via Blue Bayou comes this fascinating data point in the red light camera debate.
Evaluating the effectiveness of red-light cameras at two intersections along Philadelphia's busy Roosevelt Boulevard, researchers from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety separated camera effects from the effects of extending yellow lights to give approaching motorists more warning that signals were about to turn red.Sometimes these two measures have been introduced simultaneously, which has caused confusion about their relative benefits. The new study reveals that both measures reduce signal violations, but it's the cameras that make by far the biggest difference. They all but eliminated the signal violations that remained after yellow lights were lengthened at the Roosevelt Boulevard intersections.
"Violations virtually disappeared at the six approaches to the two intersections we studied," said Richard Retting, the Institute's senior transportation engineer and lead author of the Institute's new red-light camera study. "This decrease in violations is all the more remarkable because the intersections were such high-crash locations. In fact, they had been identified as having some of the highest crash rates in the nation."
Researchers tallied signal violation rates at intersections before and after extension of yellow lights and again after red-light camera enforcement had been in effect for about a year. The first step reduced signal violations by 36 percent. The cameras reduced the remaining violations by 96 percent. At the same time, violations didn't change much at intersections without cameras in Atlantic County, New Jersey, about 50 miles away.
That's pretty phenominal. Even I wouldn't have expected red light violations to essentially disappear. I wish the study had also included data about accidents, but I daresay you'd need to see a real spike in rear end collisions to outweigh the virtual elimination of T-bones. Whatever you think of red light cameras, is the prospect of wiping out red light running enough to overcome privacy concerns? I can only presume that claims about the cameras being revenue grabs would melt away if they wind up generating little more than token money, but privacy is still an issue. At what point, if any, is the tradeoff worth it for you?
I should note, by the way, that this study stands in contrast to one from California that claimed lengthening yellow light times was sufficient to nearly wipe out red light running. There's a lot of competing data out there, that's for sure. Which is why, as interesting as this is, it would be nice to finally get that data for Houston's experience. I know, I know, it's been less than six months. I'm just saying that we still need to objectively evaluate the cameras here. Who knows how much effect local conditions and driving habits may have on the results? John makes the same observation, and I agree with him completely.
One more thing:
In Philadelphia and elsewhere with camera enforcement, conspicuous signs warn motorists as they approach camera-equipped intersections. The signs posted along Roosevelt Boulevard include images of traffic signals and the words, "PHOTO ENFORCED."
I have been dismissive of the need to highlight camera enforcement with signage, but this suggests they contribute to the overall reduction in violations. If so, then I'll happily retract what I said previously.
UPDATE: I drafted this earlier in the week, and now I see via NewsWatch: City Hall that there's a second study showing a dramatic decrease in crashes at camera-monitored intersections, this time in Virginia Beach.
As expected, Robert Eckels is now the former Harris County Judge.
He did not say in his speech when he will resign from the county job he has held for 12 years, or what he will do afterward. He was elected to a fourth term in November."Today, the time is right," Eckels said, his eyes welling up as he concluded his prepared text and turned to the subject of greatest interest to the audience. "I had a friend who told me, 'You never become what you want to be while remaining where you are.' Harris County is moving forward, and it's time for me to do the same."'
It's not every day that I agree fully with blogHouston, but this is one of those days. The time was right before last November - in particular, before the January 2 filing deadline. Frankly, I could care less about Robert Eckels' need for personal fulfillment. If he wasn't satisfied with the powerful, visible, and might I add not exactly slave-wage-paying job he told us all he wanted, then he should have been honest about it back when we the people had the chance to pick his successor. His announced departure a month into his term, when he is one of three people who can pick his replacement without any public input, is a slap to every voter in Harris County. For shame.
Eckels said he will remain on the job at least until the Commissioners Court considers the upcoming annual budget next month.He also will participate in the vote on his successor, who will be picked by Commissioners Court, which comprises the county judge and the four commissioners.
Eckels, a Republican, and the two Republican commissioners form a majority that could name the next county judge even if the court's two Democrats dissent.
The three told the Chronicle last week that Ed Emmett, a transportation consultant and former state representative, was a possible consensus candidate for the post. But today, the judge also mentioned District Clerk Charles Bacarisse as a candidate for the job.
Eckels said he hoped his successor can be chosen on a unanimous Commissioners Court vote.
I suppose if there's one positive to the elevation of Ed Emmett is that at least then we won't have a second countywide office held for the next 23 months by someone who was never elected to it. And I sincerely hope that both Democratic commissioners vote No to whoever gets picked to replace Eckels just so some kind of official disapproval gets registered. It's the least they can do.
UPDATE: Miya reports that former Harris County Democratic Party Chair David Mincberg plans to run for the seat next year.
As we know, today is the day that Harris County Judge Robert Eckels gives the state of the county address. Among other things, we may finally find out what his plans for the next four years are, and whether or not they include doing the job he was elected to do.
Eckels wasn't talking, but a close Republican ally, Commissioner Jerry Eversole, said Eckels' departure is a sure thing, and the only question is when he announces it. Eversole has advised Eckels to make his intentions known during the luncheon speech today, even though Eckels indicated he wanted to wait for a previously scheduled fundraiser next week."My plea to him was don't leave that building without telling people what you intend to do," Eversole said. "Somewhere he should say 'this is my last State of the County.' He should divulge to the people what his intentions are. That's the dignified thing to do. This needs to come to closure."
[...]
Republican Commissioner Steve Radack, who hasn't attended the address in years and initially turned down an invitation to this year's event, plans to show up today.
"We are referring to it around the county as the 'Eckels Watch.' We don't know what's going to happen. We are hoping for some type of climactic result," Radack said. "I would say the state of the county right now is in flux."
Allen Blakemore, Eckels' political consultant, has seen a copy of the speech. He wasn't sharing details, although he did hype the event.
"He will give the crowd its money's worth," Blakemore said. "The State of the County is usually kind of a snore, but it won't be this year."
"Somebody might actually come and listen to what you have to say," Blakemore says he told Eckels.
I'm already annoyed by Eckels' actions so far, and I find Blakemore's comments to be especially irritiating. "Come out and hear Eckels tell you losers what fantastic things he'll be abandoning you for!" is what it sounds like to me. Well, at least if he did sell his soul, he got a good price for it. That's always something.
Though the Senate tried to go the constitutional amendment route, in they end they simply voted to exceed the spending cap on their own.
"It's essential in order to permit us to provide local school property tax (relief) to homeowners and to businesses ... and not shut down government," Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said after the 17-12 Senate vote.If approved by the House, Senate Concurrent Resolution 20 would allow lawmakers to break the cap that ties certain state spending to economic growth. It thus would allow them to keep their promise to cut local school property tax rates without cutting billions of planned spending in other areas when they write the budget.
"There's only one thing to do if we can't pass this resolution. That's start cutting," said Sen. Steve Ogden, a Bryan Republican who heads the Senate Finance Committee and authored the resolution.
Dewhurst said the resolution's language had been cleared with House Speaker Tom Craddick, whose staff said the measure would be considered next week by the House.
Republicans Jane Nelson, Robert Nichols, and Dan Patrick voted no along with every Democrat except for Eddie Lucio. I expected this to pass one way or another, and given a choice, I'd prefer it to have happened this way. If nothing else, it'll allow for a nice clear distinction about which party sides with the majority of the public regarding school funding. There was a bigger issue at play here, however:
Because the vote was done in the form of a resolution, it didn't go through a committee hearing as other legislation does -- although the idea was considered in a committee as part of another measure. It also didn't require the usual two-thirds vote to consider legislation.The two-thirds tradition in the Senate -- where the GOP has a 20-11 edge -- generally requires the majority to work with opponents to achieve some measure of consensus before a bill is debated.
"If you can circumvent the committee process like this, then how does the public really have the opportunity to weigh in?" said Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio.
GOP Sens. Jane Nelson of Lewisville and Robert Nichols of Jacksonville, who joined nine Democrats and Patrick in voting against the measure, expressed concern with how quickly the vote proceeded.
As noted by Vince, this raises the question of how else David Dewhurst is going to seek to circumvent the two thirds rule. Like it or not, the 2010 GOP gubernatorial primary appears to be underway.
Ogden noted lawmakers also got flak when they proposed tying the spending-cap vote to a proposed constitutional amendment on tax relief for seniors. He cited testimony about holding "elderly people hostage."Such sentiments helped prompt lawmakers to strip the spending-cap vote from a separate measure approved Wednesday to amend the state constitution to ensure older Texans get the same proportion of property tax relief as other homeowners.
The measure for seniors passed unanimously, and I fully expect you'll see it on a ballot near you soon. Now we'll see what the House will make of all this. Stay tuned.
New comets owner Hilton Koch has his new head coach: current assistant Karleen Thompson.
On Feb. 2, Koch contacted Thompson, who was in Prague, Czech Republic, serving as an assistant coach on a team based in Moscow. After that phone call, which came at 4:30 a.m., Thompson realized she was one step closer to fulfilling her ultimate career goal."It's hit me," Thompson said. "Probably when I get home, it'll knock me out, I'm sure."
Thompson, who played at Southern California with Comets forward Tina Thompson and Los Angeles Sparks center Lisa Leslie, spent eight seasons with the Sparks. After Michael Cooper departed to take a position with the Denver Nuggets, Thompson served as L.A.'s interim co-head coach for the final 14 games in 2004. She joined the Comets the next summer and for two seasons served as an assistant to Chancellor, who resigned Jan. 4.
Renowned as a player's coach, Thompson acknowledged the daunting task of succeeding Chancellor, who led the Comets to four WNBA championships from 1997 through 2000. She also discussed the challenge of serving as Comets general manager, aspiring to combine what she learned under Cooper with the Sparks and with Cheryl Miller and Marianne Stanley at USC into a philosophy that will serve the franchise well.
"I've looked at our roster, and I know where it needs to go," Thompson said. "I know what places we need to fill, what holes and gaps we may need to replace. I know what it takes to win a championship. I want to build our team around defense. I want defense first."
Thompson, who won WNBA titles with the Sparks in 2001 and '02, becomes the fourth female head coach in the 13-team WNBA. Her hiring reverses a recent trend that has seen men with no WNBA ties land opportunities over tenured female assistants.
Sounds fine to me. The one bit of intrigue is that there were earlier reports by the Houston Roundball Review that a fellow named Reggie Dixon had been the frontrunner. HRR follows up on that here and here. Apparently, Dixon may wind up as an assistant to Thompson. We'll see what happens. In the meantime, congratulations to Karleen Thompson, and go Comets!
The New Braunfels cooler crackdown has survived a second reading and become law.
The measure, approved in a 4-3 vote, limits floaters on the Comal River to one small cooler, big enough to hold six 12-ounce cans. On the Guadalupe River within the city limits, which starts at the Gruene Road bridge, tubers will be allowed a cooler large enough to hold 12 cans.Proponents predict the limit on cooler sizes will reduce litter and alcohol-fueled bad behavior. Riverfront residents have complained for years about having to put up with drunken, cursing, fighting and trespassing tourists floating by their backyards.
"I've lived here for 24 years and the status quo is no longer acceptable," said Councilwoman Kathleen Krueger, who supported the cooler limits.
But most of the dozens of residents who spoke at the meeting opposed the new rules.
Resident John Seidel said his family has floated the Comal River for five generations and he is "upset that a handful of people are trying to come in and change the rules."
Many complained that the small coolers are not big enough to hold the snacks, suntan lotion, medicine or other items people store along with their drinks.
Mayor Bruce Boyer, who voted against the cooler rules, said that although the rule is supposed to encourage families to visit the rivers by taming rowdy behavior, he has heard from many families it will be unworkable for them.
I think this is a case of good intentions gone awry, and that it will harm people who are not part of the problem. I can definitely see this bill doing damage to the tourist industry in New Braunfels. We'll see if they wind up repealing or amending it.
The new Presidential dollar coin, which is already circulating in Houston, goes nationwide this week as people from coast to coast wonder what the point is.
An AP-Ipsos poll found that three-fourths of people surveyed oppose replacing the dollar bill, featuring George Washington, with a dollar coin. People are split evenly on the idea of having both a dollar bill and a dollar coin.A new version of the coin, paying tribute to American presidents, goes into general circulation Thursday. Even though doing away with the bill could save hundreds of millions of dollars each year in printing costs, there is no plan to scrap the bill in favor of the more durable coin.
"I really don't see any use for it," Larry Ashbaugh, a retiree from Bristolville, Ohio, said of the dollar coin. "We tried it before. It didn't fly."
[...]
People say they just prefer the traditional greenback.
"The dollar bill is lighter, takes up less space in a clutch or a man's wallet and paper money counts easier and stacks up easier than metallic coins," said Nena Wise of York, Pa.
I've pondered the existential question of why there's such a misperceived need to phase out the dollar bill, but I don't think I've seen the case stated as succinctly as Ms. Wise just did. Kudos to you, madam. This is not to say that come people won't like the idea of dollar coins. It's just that there's no need to make them agents of elimination. Far as I'm concerned, the Mint can crank out a new design for a dollar coin every few years if it amuses them. Long as they're seen as enhancements and not replacements, it's fine by me.
This is ridiculous.
As supporters of Metro's planned North Bus Rapid Transit line told reporters Tuesday that the community strongly favors the project, 30 opponents made a long march in blustery winds and said the line will infringe on their property.[...]
When the opposition marchers reached City Hall, one of the leaders, Mario Umanzor, said that many who voted for the line were misled by the Metropolitan Transit Authority about where it would go.
Umanzor, who owns Poppa Burger on North Main, said many expected the line to be along the Hardy Toll Road because the corridor was designated "North Hardy" on the 2003 transit referendum ballot.
The name North Hardy originated with a joint corridor study by the Texas Department of Transportation and Metro that focused on a broad area, including both the Hardy Toll Road and the North Freeway.
Metro contends that corridor names on the 2003 ballot did not designate specific streets, since details of routes depend on studies that consider cost, ridership and neighborhood impact.
The matter also has come up in the opposition to a light rail line proposed for Richmond, where residents argue that ballot language referred to a "Westpark" plan.
Yes, it has. It's BS there and it's BS here. Where were these people when Metro was holding public meetings back in August about the North Corridor route? The options presented there were between Fulton and Irvington, with the Fulton forces prevailing. The Hardy Toll Road, which was never an option because nobody lives along the Hardy and so no one would ever use such a line, was never mentioned. As Christof points out, there is no "North Hardy" street, and the actual ballot language specifies that the line will go to Northline Mall, which is nowhere near the Hardy Toll Road. Indeed, the basic alignment of this route has been known since before we voted in 2003. Why is this particular and familiarly-framed "concern" just coming up now, and why are the naysayers suddenly adopting the language of the anti-Richmond forces?
There are several possible answers to that question, and I'll leave the theorizing to you. In the meantime, one more thing:
Umanzor and Ron Robles, who organized Tuesday's protest march, told the marchers at City Hall that Metro intends to condemn nearly 250 properties to build the line.Although that number is in the line's federally required environmental impact statement, Metro now says it will acquire 33 entire properties and 71 partial ones.
As I said, there's a serious disconnect here. I can't say why Metro listed all those properties in its document if it had so many fewer actual takings planned, but they need to deal with this. In the absence of clear information from them, the troublemakers will flourish.
This is a real eye-opener.
A big majority -- 71 percent -- agreed that "the school finance plan was only a temporary band-aid because all of the new state tax dollars were dedicated to property tax relief," according to the poll conducted by Republican, Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group and Democrat Paul Harstad of Harstad Strategic Research.While the state's preliminary budget proposes cuts for some public education programs, such as pre-kindergarten, the poll shows that 66 percent of Texans want more state spending on public education. Only 5 percent of Texans want to cut public education funding, according to the poll.
Texas lawmakers have made school property tax cuts their top priority. But Texans have different priorities, according to the poll that puts public education on top with 33 percent followed by health care, 23 percent; illegal immigration 22 percent; and property tax cuts, 10 percent.
"The message from Texas is clear -- last year, the Legislature's school finance plan represented, at best, a first step," said Donna New Haschke, president of the Texas State Teachers Association, which commissioned the poll. "Should the Legislature adjourn this year without taking a second or third step toward addressing public education funding as a top priority, they will have failed to meet the needs of the school children of Texas and the expectations of their constituents."
There's a PowerPoint presentation that summarizes the results and compares them to previous years' tallies. The data have been remarkably consistent going back to 2002. What it unfortunately doesn't provide is sample size and demographic information about the poll. If I had the time, I'd try to contact one of the pollsters and ask for that stuff. It'd be nice to know, that's for sure.
I will note that this story about a bipartisan/business pro-public school coalition offers some corroborating evidence to that survey:
The group cited a poll of 1,000 Texas voters conducted this month showing 54 percent believe state lawmakers are not spending enough money on education. A similar poll conducted last month by Republican and Democratic pollsters for the Texas State Teachers Association found 61 percent of respondents believed that.
So that's reassuring. I'd still like to see the crosstabs, though. Not because I doubt the results, but because I want to know as much as I can about them. Full information is always best.
Eye on Williamson has more.
Scott McCown of the Center for Public Policy Priorities has sent a letter (PDF) to AG Greg Abbott urging him to rule that Governor Perry has overstepped his bounds with his recent executive order on the HPV vaccine. It's a scanned image, so I'll just transcribe this one brief bit to give you the gist of it:
The governor is wrong for two reasons. First, when the legislature gives authority to an executive officer, unless the legislature provides otherwise, the governor cannot compel the executive officer to exercise that authority in a particular way. Second, even when the governor has power over an executive officer, the governor cannot order that executive officer to proceed in a way contrary to the law.
I have cheered Perry's decision because I believe the benefits of the HPV vaccine are clear. But much as I'd like to see this order carried out, I can't ignore the mounting evidence that even when acting for good, Perry is acting in a way that exceeds the constitutional bounds of his office. There's the 65% rule, about which many of the anti-HPV vaccine complainers have been shamefully silent, there's Perry's public university power grab, and who knows what else in the coming years. We've already got a President who doesn't respect the Constitution. We don't need a Governor with the same problem.
I can't even think of a good snarky intro to this, so I'll just say it: Governor Perry's son has been hired by one of the financial consulting outfits involved in the proposed Lottery sell-off.
UBS, one of two large financial firms consulting with the governor's office over the possible sale of the Texas lottery, hired Gov. Rick Perry's son to work in its Dallas office about two weeks ago.The governor's office said that there is no relationship between the two events and that Griffin Perry, 23, is a bright young economist who is pursuing a career on his own merits.
"He stands on his own two feet. And he got this job on his own," press secretary Robert Black said Monday.
[...]
Karina Byrne, a UBS spokeswoman, said that Griffin Perry was hired for a specific program in which about a dozen entry-level employees rotate through various parts of the company. The company has 11 such programs nationwide.
"We have a vigorous interview and application process. He would have been subjected to the same criteria that would have applied to any other young person applying for the associate program," Ms. Byrne said.
She said the fact that his father is governor would not have weighed into the calculation.
Of course not. It's just another happy coincidence. Is it Governor Perry's fault that so many serendipitous things happen to everybody he knows?
Most likely, this won't amount to anything, especially given the cold shoulder that the Lottery sell-off plan has received. And for a lot of officeholders' children, this would be barely worth a passing mention, not an actual news story. But with Governor Perry's deep and abiding commitment to cronyism, how can anyone not be derisive? There is no benefit of the doubt left to be had.
We've had the State of the Union, the State of the State, and the State of the City, so all that's left is the State of the County. The Greater Houston Partnership will host that event on Thursday. From the press release:
The Greater Houston Partnership and the League of Women Voters will host Harris County Judge Robert Eckels for his annual State of the County Address at the Hilton Americas on Thursday, Feb. 15, 2007. The luncheon presents a platform for the Judge to address the business community and outline his initiatives for the year ahead.WHO: Greater Houston Partnership and the League of Women Voters
WHAT: State of the County Address with Harris County Judge Robert Eckels
WHEN: Feb. 15, 2007, noon to 1:30 p.m.
WHERE: Hilton Americas, 1600 Lamar, Ballroom of the Americas (2nd floor)
Seating is limited.
Will this be Judge Eckels last such address? Will anybody in attendance recognize his potential successor? We'll see.
The city disclosed today that it has chosen Atlanta-based EarthLink Municipal Networks to provide a citywide, wireless Internet network within the next two years.An official announcement was scheduled for a 4 p.m. news conference today, but the city sent out a premature news release announcing its selection.
While the agreement with EarthLink still needs City Council approval, its terms put Houston in line to have the largest such network in North America, covering nearly all of the city's 600 square miles by spring of 2009, White told the Chronicle.
Some low-income residents could get subsidized access for as little as $10 a month, and most customers would pay less than they do now.
"This is a very important initiative for Houston as it will bring the consumer cost of broadband down significantly and already has,'' said Mayor Bill White in the news release. "It will provide a scarce resource to help our low-income households have access, benefiting students at home, helping telecommuters for whom childcare or transportation creates limitations, and benefiting telemedicine in the future. Houston's workforce will be more productive.''
The project likely won't be completed till the spring of 2009, which is later than previously advertised. It won't shock me if that slips a bit, given the vastness of Houston and the nature of any large undertaking. I'll bet Mayor White will do whatever he can to have it finished by the time he leaves office, however. I expect City Council will approve this without too much fuss. We'll see how it goes from there. I look forward to seeing the finished product, that's for sure.
Tiffany called me after I returned home on Sunday night to tell me that Audrey had an elevated bilirubin count, and that she had been placed under the bili light as a result, in order to prevent any serious problems. I'm pleased to say that the therapy has been successful, and that we expect to bring Audrey home later today as originally scheduled. If you've never seen such a thing, as I had not, it's a little strange. Depending on your perspective, you might think of it as a tanning bed or a microwave for infants. Look here and you'll see what I mean:
Audrey hated wearing the little eye shades. We had to check her every few minutes to make sure they hadn't slipped off from her constant wriggling and squirming. I told her this would be her last chance to sunbathe without guilt, but that didn't have any effect.
Olivia was fascinated by the bili lights, and insisted on opening the little access windows so she could touch her sister. I can't say enough about how beautifully Olivia has acted around Audrey. She's been a totally sweet big sister, and we are very proud of her.
Olivia had received a little teddy bear as a "big sister" present from her aunt Pamela, but she wanted it to be put in with Audrey while we were visiting. Isn't that nice of her?
Today is homecoming, in which we find out just how much crazier things will get with two kids. I can't wait.
I have not followed the news about Governor Perry's intent to fast-track approval of construction of 11 coal-fired power plants for TXU very closely - for background, see here, here, here, and here. I do note that as with so many controversial things Perry has done of late, it was an executive order that got everyone riled up. Be that as it may, there was a big rally on Sunday to stop the fast-track authorization and require the plants to go through the normal approval channels, with Republican Rep. Doc Anderson of Waco filing legislation to enforce a 180-day moratorium. BOR has pictures and details from the event here and a diary by Rep. Garnet Coleman on his push for more solar power here. Check it out.
I must confess, it had never occurred to me that Texas' laws regarding the use of deadly force to protect one's property needed to be loosened, but that's what they're fixing to do in the Lege.
Sen. Jeff Wentworth of San Antonio and Rep. Joe Driver of Garland have sponsored bills to have Texas join more than a dozen states with the so-called "Castle Doctrine," a sort of shoot-first, retreat-later approach to defending hearth, home, truck and business.Essentially, the Castle Doctrine is born out of the common-law theory that a man's home is his castle and he has a right to defend it.
And although Texas already has some of the broadest self-defense laws in the country, Wentworth says his bill would expand the legal rights of crime victims to protect themselves, their relatives and their property from intruders in their home, occupied vehicles or business.
It would create a legal presumption that an intruder is there to cause death or great bodily harm and that victims have the right to use deadly force. He says current law in some instances imposes a duty to retreat before using potentially deadly force on an intruder.
"I believe Texans who are attacked in their homes, their businesses, their vehicles or anywhere else have a right to defend themselves from attack without fear of being prosecuted and face possible civil suits alleging wrongful injury or death," Wentworth said.
Like I said, call me crazy, but I thought that's how it already was. Turns out I'm not alone in thinking this:
Jerry Dowling, a criminal justice professor at Sam Houston State University, said state law already protects self-defense of life and property, particularly in one's home, or castle."I've lived in Texas 30-plus years and I would be astounded to hear of a Texas jury that convicted someone who blasted a guy who was in his house," Dowling said. "It would just be anathema to the culture down here."
Prosecutors have had mixed reactions to the bill, said Shannon Edmonds, spokesman for the Texas District and County Attorneys Association.
District Attorneys are waiting for proponents of the change to produce an example of someone wrongfully convicted and imprisoned in Texas for an act of self-defense.
"Is this a solution in search of a problem?" Edmonds said.
I'm going to guess that the answer to that question is Yes. This is apparently part of a national push by the NRA, and it seems to me that if there were an example of such a wrongfully convicted person, his or her heart-tugging story would have been the lede of this article. But if you want to take something nationwide, it helps to score some easy wins first, and if the NRA thought the Texas Lege would be low-hanging fruit for this sort of thing, they were right.
Wentworth's office said nearly all of the 31 state senators have signed onto his bill and more than 100 house members have signed Driver's bill in that chamber.
Well okay then. I don't particularly object to this bill, on the grounds that I figure it won't have any practical effect, but as is often the case, I wonder about our priorities. Don't we have bigger fish to fry?
Also from last week: Preservation Texas lists its most endangered historic places for 2007. As noted by Houstonist, five of them are in and around Houston. Some of these you know about, like the River Oaks Theater and Shopping Center, and the Alabama Bookstop, some you probably don't. Check it out, and see what you can do to help save these living pieces of history.
Catching up on an item from last week, the Senate moved closer to passing a constitutional amendment that would permanently remove buying down local taxes from spending cap calculations.
Despite complaints that they're trying to pass the buck to voters, Senate budget writers moved ahead Wednesday on a proposed constitutional amendment to exempt expenditures for local tax relief from a state spending cap.Senate Joint Resolution 13, as approved by the Senate Finance Committee, also would ensure that older Texans get the full benefit of lower property tax rates. If approved by two-thirds of lawmakers by the end of this month, the resolution would go on a statewide ballot in May.
Activists for older Texans have protested linking the two ideas, with the AARP suggesting seniors are being used as "political human shields" in the fight to break the spending cap. A constitutional change is needed for older Texans, whose property taxes already are frozen, to get the same level of tax relief as other homeowners.
The measure passed pretty easily out of committee, but it's unclear to me what its fate will be in the full Senate. A unanimous No vote from Democrats would be enough to kill it, since as an amendment it needs a 2/3 vote to pass. There's also Sen. Patrick, whose criteria for a Yea vote have not been met. But even if it makes it through the Senate, there's already indicators that it won't pass the House. DallasBlog reported the following statement from House Democratic Caucus chair Jim Dunnam.
"I find it incredible that any member of the Legislature would vote to bust the state spending cap without first seeing a real budget," Dunnam said. "We are in this position because of the irresponsible fiscal policies of Governor Rick Perry and Tom Craddick and four years of budgeting that created this crisis. Busting the state spending cap without first seeing a budget simply gives them another blank check to continue their gross fiscal mismanagement of our state. I agree with the AARP that it is wrong to hold our seniors hostage. We should immediately vote to give Texas seniors the property tax relief they deserve, then separately debate the issue of busting the state spending cap on its own merits. We should have all the information before taking the unprecedented step of authorizing excess spending."
Blocking this in the Senate may take a high level of unity, but in the House it'll require only the anti-Craddick Dems to stick together, and that's assuming no Republicans have any qualms about this approach. At this point, I am hopeful that we'll wind up with a straight up-or-down vote in each chamber to suspend the cap for this specific purpose. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Burka has more on this. The House appears to be prepared to de-couple the tax breaks for seniors from the spending cap. Click on for a statement from Rep. Pete Gallego about that.
Statement from State Rep. Pete Gallego on HJR 1 ~House Democrats Work to Provide Tax Relief for Seniors and Disabled Texans~
"I appreciate Jim Keffer setting HJR 1 for a public hearing tomorrow and accommodating my request to move this resolution instead of the more problematic alternative. The vast majority of members want to expeditiously give senior citizens and the disabled the same tax relief given to all other Texans last year. This is a great way to show all Texans that Democrats and Republicans are working together to provide our elderly and disabled with the property tax relief they were promised."Background and History
Last week, the Senate opted to entangle their proposed constitutional amendment regarding tax relief for seniors with language used to justify busting the state's spending cap for the first time in history. Over the weekend, Speaker Craddick embraced the same problematic idea, despite the fact that many members believe that any discussion of busting the state spending cap is premature until a proposed state budget is available for review.
The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) was dead on when they said "it's wrong to hold tax cuts for seniors hostage to the spending cap issue." The umbrella of giving senior citizens the tax break they have earned should not be used to provide cover for busting the spending cap, especially when the specific expenditures (and amounts of those expenditures) for which the cap is to be busted are unknown.
Yesterday, State Rep. Pete Gallego (D-Alpine) sent a letter to Speaker Craddick asking that HJR 1 be brought to the floor as a stand-alone measure. HJR 1 had not even been set for hearing prior to Rep. Gallego's letter - only HJR 60, which coupled the senior citizen tax relief with busting the spending cap - had been filed. Today, Rep. Gallego asked a series of parliamentary inquires on this same topic.
Immediately after Rep. Gallego concluded his inquiries regarding the need to get HJR 1 to the floor, Chairman Keffer moved to suspend all necessary rules so that his House Committee on Ways and Means could hear HJR 1 in committee tomorrow.
And from that same Rad Sallee column, some feedback on the sorry state of Old Spanish Trail.
Rick Beal finds fault with the "he said, she said" nature of much that appears in Move It.
"Here is your format," he wrote. "Someone writes in to complain about a situation. You call TxDOT or whatever agency is responsible. The agency gives you some lame reason. You report the lame reason."Where's the journalistic yearning for the truth?"
[...]
Beal cited the response in Move It to a reader's complaint about the slow progress of street paving in a 2-mile segment of Old Spanish Trail between Fannin and Texas 288.
L. Kian Granmayeh had said he passes the area daily and seldom sees anyone working. He wondered if the job would be completed in time for the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo's annual barbecue cookoff, beginning Feb. 22 at nearby Reliant Park.
TxDOT engineer Maureen Wakeland replied that the work had been delayed by rain -- you can't lay asphalt on a wet surface -- but she said she sees crews at work there when weather allows.
Beal was skeptical. "Could it be that the engineer always shows up on Tuesday at 10 a.m.?" he asked. "I wonder how long it takes a road crew to figure out the schedule?"
He suggested driving out to see. We actually do that a lot, especially when a ramp or signage problem is hard to visualize from a verbal description. But in this case, what would one visit prove?
You'd need to get a sample from visits at random times, or better still, knock on doors and ask what neighbors have observed. Frankly, that seems like overkill in this instance, but we'll keep an eye on the situation.
And we did check back with Wakeland. "We have made good progress this week," she said. "The contractor has completed about 50 percent of the asphalt work from Almeda to Kirby."
The contractor is also working longer hours to take advantage of good weather and should finish in time for the cookoff, Wakeland said.
Well, I can tell you that workers magically appeared on OST shortly after Sallee first addressed it. Where they were for however many weeks or months before that, when nothing at all was happening on this project, remains shrouded in mystery. Their re-apparition is somewhat of a mixed blessing, since they've taken to blocking off two of the three lanes on OST, thus hopelessly snarling the traffic, but at least now we can detect some signs of actual progress. This task will probably be done relatively quickly, assuming the rains didn't send everyone scurrying back to the same hidey hole they'd been in, which will once again force me to wonder why it took so damn long to finish what should have been a few weeks' worth of work. But hey, at least I won't be commuting this week, so maybe I'll miss some of the pain. As long as the job gets done before the street needs to be dug up again, that's all I ask.
I was wondering if there was more to this than the original story reported. Turns out, there is.
Space was tight in Friday's newspaper and some important information got cut on deadline. The story was about Northside merchants worried that Metro will condemn their properties to build a new transit line.Several said the agency's environmental study of the North Line includes their properties among nearly 200 that Metro plans to acquire.
What readers did not see was news that since the study was released Dec. 29, Metro has cut back sharply the number of properties it says it will need.
Spokeswoman Sandra Salazar said the agency now plans to acquire, at fair market value, 33 whole properties along the route instead of the 114 listed in the environmental study.
It also plans 71 partial acquisitions, compared with 85 in the study, she said. Of the partial acquisitions, 44 are 10 feet or less in depth and another 27 are "corner clips," small amounts of footage at intersections, Salazar said.
These numbers could change as detailed plans are developed and the city has its say about sidewalks, building setbacks and other concerns, she cautioned.
We'll follow the issue closely. Northsiders, please keep in touch.
And please beware of anyone spreading the usual fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Nobody is going to lose their property without knowing about it well in advance.
And from the Stuff I Was Going To Publish Yesterday But Didn't Have The Time Department: Eric Scheffey, the poster boy for tort "reform" opponents who was arrested in 2005 for allegedly practicing medicine without the license he finally had revoked, has beaten the rap.
Scheffey's attorney, Dick DeGuerin, said prosecutors made the decision after a day of testimony from former patients asserting that Scheffey treated them after his license was suspended."Mr. Scheffey is very relieved," DeGuerin said. "Now he can go on with his family."
In a bench trial in front of state District Judge Vanessa Velasquez, DeGuerin explained away the charges, saying Scheffey was working to transfer his 800 patients to other doctors after his medical license was suspended.
"He had a moral and ethical duty to transfer care," DeGuerin said.
Prosecutors based their case against Scheffey on the testimony of five former patients who said Scheffey was treating, not transferring them.
[...]
Assistant District Attorney Rob Freyer said he decided to drop the charges because he didn't think the state could meet the burden of proof in the case. He said prosecutors will file paperwork next week to dismiss the charges.
"Sometimes the way things come out in trial are different than the way they are before trial," Freyer said. "This is the just course of action."
Oh, well. Given that there's not much else than can be done to Scheffey at this point for all the harm he's caused, the best we can do is make sure he can never do any more. That falls pretty far short of justice, if you ask me, but that's the way it goes.
Just a little roundup here, since I'm short on time:
1. Christof continues his look at the Universities line options, with a review of the western end of the track out in the Gulfton area. The good news here is that all options include this area. The bad news is that none of them appear to be taking maximum advantage of what's there as yet. Check it out.
2. Tory passes along the following Metro stats, courtesy of a presentation by chair David Wolfe:
- The Main St. light rail line has 7,000 riders per day per mile, which is #1 in the nation out of 29 systems.
- 40% of those riders are new to Metro (not formerly bus riders).
- The University line is on a schedule about 1-2 years behind the other lines. One year behind in planning, but 2 years behind in estimated completion (Dec 2012 vs. Dec 2010).
- We have the largest HOV lane network in the U.S., over 100 miles, and it moves the equivalent of 24 freeway lanes worth of people
- Park-and-Ride has 25 lots, 31,000 parking spaces, and served 8.5 million riders in 2006.
- They're using a new town-center public-private model for park-and-rides which is very cool, starting with the new Cypress P&R. There will be lots of pedestrian accessible shopping as you transition from your car to the bus and vice-versa.
- Their light rail accident rate has substantially improved, and their overall bus rate of 0.75 accidents per 100K miles is impressive. I'm pretty sure I couldn't drive a bus on Houston's crowded streets for 100,000 miles without hitting something.
3. Also from Tory, a piece of potentially hot news concerning TxDOT, from an anonymous source he considers to be reliable. This is the source talking:
I caught wind of a pretty big deal at TxDOT today.... Looks like TxDOT underallocated state gas tax revenue to Houston, Dallas, Arlington and San Antonio and spent the $$ to build roads down near the border. It appears they owe Houston about a billion dollars from this underallocation over the past six years. The top Texas Transportation Commissioner is under fire, creating lots of momentum for the anti-concessionnaire movement in Texas. Story is slowly leaking.
Like Tory, I'll be on the lookout for any news articles relating to this.
4. And finally, I hope you caught Robin Holzer's op-ed in the Chron about the Universities line (you can also see it here, with some additional notes). As with Christof's criticism, now I can say we've finally had a real debate in the Chron's pages about the direction this project should go.
After I came home and made the announcement about Audrey's arrival, I took Olivia to the hospital to meet her new baby sister. So far, so good - she was very interested in this new baby, and gave her multiple hugs and kisses. We'll see how it goes when Audrey comes home, but no complaints as yet.
More pictures:
Olivia climbed right into Tiffany's bed for a closer look.
A view from the other side, so Audrey's face is visible.
Olivia holds Audrey for the first time. Ain't that sweet?
Thank you all for the kind words and good wishes. We appreciate them very much.
It gives me great pleasure to announce the slightly early but very welcome arrival of Audrey Elizabeth Kuffner, who made her intentions known early this morning and officially entered the world at 1:13 PM CST on Sunday, February 11. Like her big sister Olivia, Audrey's debut came after a Friday visit to the doctor in which he said there was "no significant progress" towards her birth. Unlike her big sister Olivia, Audrey arrived before her due date, which had been the 14th.
She checked it at 7 pounds, 14.5 ounces (one ounce lighter than Olivia), and twenty inches in length. So far, she has proven to be mellow in temperament and ravenous of appetite, both of which mark has as cut from the same cloth as her big sister. Tiffany is doing well, and both mother and child will be at St. Joseph's Hospital until Tuesday. If you want to visit, send me a private note.
Enough of that. I know what you want - pictures. Here you are:
The new star of the household.
Audrey and Daddy.
Audrey, Mommy, and Daddy.
More pics to come later. As you might imagine, I'll be on a reduced-posting schedule for the immediate future. Thanks for all the kind thoughts, and I'll see you tomorrow.
Eddie Feigner, the greatest softball player ever, has passed away at the age of 81.
With a fastball once clocked at 104 mph, Feigner threw 930 no-hitters and 238 perfect games and struck out 141,517 batters while playing more than 10,000 games. He was inducted into the National Senior Softball Hall of Fame in 2000.A stroke in 2000 -- a day after he threw out the first pitch before the women's softball competition in the Sydney Olympics -- ended his playing career at age 75. He left the team for medical reasons last summer and lived in Trenton, Tenn., for the last several years until recently moving to Huntsville.
[...]
Feigner not only pitched from the standard mound, 46 feet from home plate, but also from second base, behind his back, on his knees, between his legs, from center field and blindfolded. In a nationally televised exhibition against major-leaguers at Dodger Stadium in 1964, he struck out Willie Mays, Willie McCovey, Maury Wills, Harmon Killebrew, Roberto Clemente and Brooks Robinson in order.
Feigner began "The King and His Court" in 1946 on a dare in his hometown of Walla Walla, Wash. He had just thrown a shutout in his nine-man team's rout of a team from Pendleton, Ore., and the Oregon team challenged him to another game. Backed by just a catcher, first baseman and shortstop, Feigner pitched a perfect game, winning 7-0.
At the height of Feigner's popularity, the team played at major-league ballparks, including Yankee Stadium, and Feigner appeared on numerous national television shows, including "The Today Show," "I've Got a Secret," "What's My Line?" and the "CBS Sports Spectacular." On the "Tonight Show," he pitched blindfolded to Johnny Carson, who loosely held a bat over a home plate. Feigner hit Carson's bat on his first pitch.
In 2002, ESPN named Feigner's fastball one of the ten best pitches of all time. I regret never having seen him pitch in person, but his legend was almost vivid enough to make up for it. Rest in peace, Eddie Feigner.
UPDATE: Comments are now closed, but I received the following in email, which I'm adding here. If you want to comment on this post, send it to me at the address above.
I know this is a late post, but I just learned of Eddie Feigner's passing in last week's Parade Magazine. I consider myself privileged to have seen the King & his Court play back in the 60's and 70's in the Detroit area. He was an awesome softball player. I took a special interest in him because I was a softball pitcher too, back when fast-pitch softball was a popular men's game. One special memory: after the game, he invited the opposing catcher out to catch a few of his pitches. When Eddie threw the poor guy his best fastball, it knocked the catcher right over! I will always have fond memories of the "King".Posted by: Dick Schultz | April 14, 2007 4:07 PM
I'm sure you'll be as shocked as I was to learn that Governor Perry's harebrained scheme to sell off the Texas Lottery comes complete with its own cozy lobbyist connections, just like the HPV vaccine order did.
Former U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm, a friend of Perry's, is handling discussions for the proposed lottery sale, a spokesman for Gramm's company acknowledged.Gramm is vice chairman of UBS Investment Bank, which has been advising the governor on the proposed privatization of the state lottery. Gramm was a federally registered lobbyist for UBS last year.
Ray Sullivan, a lobbyist registered with the investment firm in Texas, worked as a spokesman for Perry several years ago. Sullivan is now in business with Michael Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff.
Toomey said he does not represent clients with lottery-related interests, and he added that Sullivan does not work on lottery-related issues for UBS.
Phil Gramm! Man, some of these guys are like cockroaches. You just can't get rid of 'em. And yes, that would be the same Mike Toomey as in the HPV vaccine deal, too. He does get around, does he not? Maybe it's time for a Six Degrees Of Mike Toomey game.
A spokesman for the governor dismissed suggestions that Perry's personal friends might profit from a future sale."There have not been any agreements signed. Just conversations," spokesman Ted Royer said.
Yeah, we've heard that before. Hell, someone could probably write a script to auto-generate those statements. Why bother waking up one of Perry's spokespeople? Just click the link and you'll get your very own indignant dismissal of the very idea that there could possibly have been any favors, special considerations, quid pro quo, or what have you. Hell, given how much of their time must be tied up with this sort of thing, the 'bot could probably take the place of at least one such spokesperson. Now that's what I'd call gaining efficiency!
I see also that Perry appears to have listened to the actual experts about his plan, because the asking price has gone up.
Initially, he said he thought the state could get $14 billion from the sale, but he later raised that estimate to $20 billion. At $14 billion, he said the state could raise $300 million more each year through interest generated by a sale than by keeping the monopoly. That's assuming a 9 percent return on the state's investment.
At $20 billion, you'd need only a five percent return to do better than the $1 billion the Lottery generates now. That's a much more attainable figure, but it still brings us back to a basic question: Why would anyone with $20 billion lying around want to spend it on the Lottery when investing it in something else - like, say, whatever the State of Texas would do with it - can get a better bang for the buck? And if they think they can make up the difference by just managing the Lottery better, why not just contract with them to do so and split the marginal gain? Again, that's a less risky proposition, and it leaves a public good in the ownership of the public. Makes too much sense, I guess.
UPDATE: Burka makes a good point:
Nothing generates more money for less effort than the percentage big financial institutions make from handling transactions of this type.
Indeed.
Via Houstonist, here's another update on the West 11th Street Park.
On Jan. 8, Houston City Council opted to buy the 20.2 acres for $9.2 million. Of that purchase price, $4 million will come from city funds, $1.7 million from private donations raised by the nonprofit Houston Parks Board and other groups, and $3.5 million from a loan the Parks Board secured from Amegy Bank to make up for a fundraising shortfall.If the 12-month, $3.5 million loan cannot be paid off, 5 acres of the park -- which includes a baseball field used by the Timbergrove Sports Association -- would be lost.
"We're very, very concerned about that," said Nancy Greig, point person for Save This Park!, an organization formed to help save the West 11th Street Park. "We're excited that this is the next step, but we're determined that we're going to get all 20.2 acres.
"One thing we are concerned about is part of the land put up for collateral is the baseball diamond. It's an important practice area for (the Timbergrove Little League)."
Russell Baumbach, chairman of the Timbergrove Sports Association that runs the Little League, said loss of the field could be a devastating blow.
"As development continues to occur in and around Timbergrove, baseball fields that we have been able to use for practices are continuing to be reduced. This has an impact in the baseball product that we are able to offer our local youth," Baumbach said. "The West 11th Street Park has always been able to offer Timbergrove Sports Association a baseball practice field venue. If this was lost, it would jeopardize our ability to provide local practice fields to support the needs of our league."
Man, I hadn't realized that about the Timbergrove Little League. That's the league for which I was a coach for two years. We used different practice fields when I coached, off of 15th Street and outside the Loop on TC Jester, but as every team is assigned a practice field, losing this one would hurt.
The 12 months on the loan have not begun yet.The expected property closing date was Wednesday, but everyone raising money for the park would like to pay it off as quickly as possible.
"The Houston Parks Board is fortunate to be working with Mayor (Bill) White, council member Toni Lawrence and the community volunteers who are working so passionately to save every acre of the West 11th Street Park," Houston Parks Board director Roksan Okan-Vick said.
Lawrence plans to hold a fundraiser in late February or early March to help with the effort, said her chief of staff, Mike Howard.
"Preserving the 20-plus-acre park is extremely important not only to the council member and the adjacent community, but the entire city," Howard said.
The loan was, "a last ditch effort to make sure they don't lose the entire park," he added.
"We're very optimistic that we can raise the money to keep the entire park."
I hope you're right. Kudos to Council Member Lawrence for taking such an active role in this. Here's the donation form if you want to help.
I don't often do a post that just says "What he said", but every once in a while circumstances dictate it. So, without further ado: What he said. That is all.
(Thanks to Greg for the pointer.)
UPDATE: Jack Cafferty is my hero.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Is Anna Nicole Smith still dead, Wolf?BLITZER: Yes, we're going to -- updating our viewers coming up shortly on...
CAFFERTY: I can't wait for that.
BLITZER: ... the mysterious circumstances surrounding that, Jack. Thank you.
At the risk of repeating myself, what he said.
Via The Walker Report, State Rep. Carl Isett is trying again to pass a bill that would outlaw red light cameras.
Isett's bill, which has been refereed to the House Urban Affairs Committee, would bar any 'local authority' from 'operating a photographic traffic signal enforcement system.'The measure would also ban local governments from collecting any 'civil or administrative penalty' from the owners of vehicles which are photographed driving through red lights.
Isett's bill would overturn a 2003 measure introduced by State Representative Phil King of Weatherford which allowed use of the cameras by city and state governments, but restricted penalties to a basically uncollectible 'civil fee.'
Isett's measure comes on the heels of a bill filed by State Senator John Carona (D-Dallas) which would allow use of the red light cameras, but would require that all revenue collected from motorists be turned over to the state to help support emergency and trauma medical care.
The Walker Report has more here. You can find HB55 here, and the text of the bill here. It's got a relatively low bill number, so that may mean it's got a decent chance of making it to the floor. Expect there to be a fight if it does.
One more thing:
1200 WOAI news reported exclusively last month that there is no enforcement mechanism which requires motorists to actually pay the tickets they receive in the mail from the Arizona based company, and, in fact, the compliance rate in Houston, which installed the cameras last fall, is in may (sic) cases no better than 10%.
That's not what the Chron reported. In fact, it's not even what the considerably lower preliminary numbers were. I have no idea where WOAI got that figure, and I'm not having any luck finding their "exclusive report" from last month, so I can't judge their methodology. Will that figure start getting cited uncritically by camera opponents? It's already out there, so keep an eye on it.
I'm scratching my head over this article, in which business owners along the proposed North Line GRT route are saying Metro wants to condemn their properties but hasn't told them about it yet.
About 30 owners and residents attended a news conference at Doneraki Restaurant and Cantina, 2836 Fulton, where several said Metro gave them conflicting information."I don't know what I can do," said Cesar Rodriguez, who opened Doneraki in 1973. "I thought they would take five or six feet in front and now they say they need all my property."
Jose Reyes, owner of Uncle Johnny's Good Cars at 1901 N. Main, said he emigrated from Mexico in 1971, became a U.S. citizen and went to work for a car dealer in the neighborhood. Reyes owns the business now and said he is worried about having to move.
Months ago, Reyes said, Metro told him it only would need the corners of his property, but the final environmental impact statement for the line calls for acquiring the entire property.
Several owners said they had not spoken with Metro recently about its plans but were concerned after seeing their properties listed in the thick environmental statement released Dec. 29 as among those to be acquired.
The statement was a hurdle Metro had to clear to qualify for 50 percent federal funding of the $275 million, 5.4-mile line. On Aug. 23 the Metro board approved the route, from the University of Houston-Downtown to Northline Mall.
Metro spokeswoman Sandra Salazar said the actual number of properties needed will probably be much smaller than the 114 entire parcels and 85 partial ones listed in the document.
She said Metro real estate personnel have contacted all owners of properties that the agency intends to acquire entirely, and all but eight owners of parcels to be acquired in part.
There's a serious disconnect in here somewhere. Putting aside any possible failure of communications, it doesn't make any sense for Metro to want to condemn businesses like Doneraki or Uncle Johnny's. For one thing, doing so would greatly increase the cost of construction as well as the risk of litigation and delays if there's a dispute over fair market price (both of which happened with the Katy Freeway expansion, by the way), and for another removing such destinations undermines the need for a rail line in the first place. Nobody will take a train that runs along empty streets. Having Doneraki on Fulton Street is a feature for Metro, not an obstacle.
It also stretches credulity to think that Metro would try to sneak something like this past everyone by making such significant changes in the final EIS document without public comment. Yeah, sure, accidents happen, but if that's what this is, Metro will be digging a pretty deep hole if it doesn't own up to it and explain itself forthwith. I have a very hard time believing this is the case.
In any event, it should be simple enough to resolve this. Metro says they've contacted everyone whose property they intend to condemn, a list which presumably doesn't include these fellows since they say that haven't been contacted. Metro can talk to these folks directly, they can state specifically that the businesses represented at that meeting are safe, they can release a full list of eminent domain acquisitions, they can do any number of things to clear things up. Let's hope they do so.
I can't make it to this event, but you should:
FORT BEND DEMOCRATS
Invite you toA Tribute to an American Family
An Evening with Rick and Melissa NoriegaFriday, February 16th at 7:00PM
Quail Valley Country Club, Missouri City
Dinner will be served
Silent AuctionRick Noriega
Member of the Texas State House serving District 145
Lieutenant Colonel recently served 14 months in Afghanistan
Site Manager at GRB Convention Center helping those displaced by Hurricane KatrinaMelissa Noriega
Special Projects Manager at HISD
Honorably served in Rick's place, in the Texas Legislature, while he was on military duty
Announced she will run for At-Large city council seat in NovemberSpecial Guests: Long time Fort Bend Democrats
Dr Charles and Connie Meisgeier
Call JoAnn at 281-341-5489 to order tickets. You can pay at the door with a reservation, or pay with a credit card online here: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscrPlease make checks payable to: Fort Bend Democrats
This event will be a sell out. You must order your tickets by 5pm Monday February 12th
Our website has been redesigned, so check it out!
http://www.fortbenddemocrats.org
Fort Bend Democrats is an official Democratic organization (GPAC)
fully registered with the Texas Ethics Commission
and in complete compliance with campaign ethics and finance reporting.
www.fortbenddemocrats.org
4800 Avenue H
Rosenberg
281-238-9006
As you know, I'm a supporter of Melissa Noriega for City Council. If you've not yet had the pleasure of meeting her, this would be a great opportunity to do so.
Paul Burka considers the constitutional aspect of Governor Perry's executive order regarding the HPV vaccine, for which AG Greg Abbott has been asked to issue a ruling. I'll leave the details and the politics of it to Burka, who covers it pretty thoroughly, I just have one question: If AG Abbott agrees with the complaining legislators that Perry has overstepped his constitutional bounds, then does that retroactively wipe out the 65% rule, too? I'm no lawyer, but if the HPV vaccine order was making a law by Perry, then wasn't that as well? All I'm saying is that if we're going to draw a line, let's be consistent about it.
On a side note, whatever one may think of Rick Perry's actions, his intent was, admirably enough, about improving women's health. The facts about the HPV vaccine are pretty clear, despite the efforts of a certain freshman Senator from Houston to obfuscate them. See here for more (thanks to Muse for the pointer).
Governor Perry has reappointed Albert Hawkins to his post as the head of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.
Hawkins, a former official in the George W. Bush White House who has served as commissioner since January 2003, was reappointed to a term that expires Feb. 1, 2009.As commissioner, Hawkins has overseen the consolidation of the health and human services agencies mandated by the Legislature in 2003. He has also been in the hot seat during the past year as a new system using call centers to enroll Texans in public assistance programs hit problems.
Yeah, that THHSC. I suppose I should be glad that he wasn't nominated for a Congressional Medal of Freedom as well. Sheesh.
I've highlighted the logical incongruities of Governor Perry's plan to sell off the Texas Lottery, but as I'm not what I'd consider a financial expert, I wasn't sure if I was missing something obvious. Now, thanks to Vince, I see that some people who are genuine financial experts have the same kind of doubts.
Without additional state money, "there's a high probability that they would run out of money in 20 or 30 years," said Philip Cooley, a professor at Trinity University in San Antonio. Aides to Mr. Perry said their numbers were solid.At the same time, a lottery run by a private company could be more efficient and easier to police than the state-operated system, some analysts and one lottery watchdog said.
Mr. Perry has suggested the state could get $14 billion from the sale of the lottery, and experts interviewed Tuesday said the sale price could be even higher.
"It ought to be a bigger number," said Jerry Love, chairman of the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants, after performing a rough valuation of the lottery based on public data.
[...]
The 9 percent investment return may be possible, but only if the state is willing to invest aggressively. Stocks have typically returned 10 percent annually over long periods.
"It's optimistic," said David Wyss, chief economist of Standard & Poor's, the Wall Street ratings agency. "Potentially, it's doable, but only if you're willing to invest in a relatively risky portfolio."
Ted Royer, a spokesman for Mr. Perry, called the 9 percent expected annual return conservative for any long-term investment and said the state comptroller had signed off on the projection.
There's a lot more in this article, but I think it pretty much boils down to those last three paragraphs. Who are you going to trust for this sort of thing, the chief economist for Standard & Poor's, or one of Rick Perry's paid flacks? And if Susan Combs really has signed off on this, then that's as clear a demonstration as you could want that she's exactly the rubber stamp I figured that she'd be, and that we deserved a much better alternative on the ballot last November than what we got. Alas.
Took him a little while to do it, but in the end John Edwards did the right thing.
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards said Thursday he was personally offended by the provocative messages two of his campaign bloggers wrote criticizing the Catholic church, but he's not firing them.Edwards issued a written statement about the fate of Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen, two days after the head of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights demanded they be fired for messages they wrote before working on the campaign.
The campaign distributed written apologies from the two women, who stressed they were writing on personal blogs and not on behalf of the campaign. Edwards said he believes in giving everyone a "fair shake."
Edwards' statement is here, Marcotte's is here, and McEwen's is here. I'd have liked something a little stronger from Edwards, not to mention sooner, but he hits the main points and basically gets it. I still don't know who I'll vote for in the primary, but he's still on the list.
This isn't over, however. Just because it was Edwards' turn in the barrel this week doesn't let the other contenders off the hook. If they don't realize that sooner or later they'll be exactly where Edwards was, they're deluding themselves. While it would be ideal for them all to issue some kind of statement in support of Edwards, that's probably too much to ask. What's not too much to ask is for them to not buy into this bogus line of attack for their own gain. Any Democratic contender who sides with Bill Donahue and criticizes Edwards for not firing Marcotte and McEwen will lose my vote just as surely as Edwards would have had he caved. Bill Donahue is not your friend. You can't appease him. You can only fight him. Whether you do that on your terms or his is up to you. Anybody who doesn't get that is not who I want representing the Democratic Party next November.
Now then. When will we be taking that closer look at some of the genuinely shady characters on other campaigns? Or at William Donahue, for that matter? It's only fair, after all.
Is it just me, or does the tone of the voucher rally sound a tad bit desperate?
San Antonio businessman James Leininger, arguably the state's biggest supporter of school vouchers, sought out a shady spot to talk about his soon-to-end scholarship program for low-income students.If Texas lawmakers this year don't create an experimental school voucher program for those students, "they'll just be out on the street," said Leininger, whose 10-year, $50 million project ends after the 2007-08 school year.
I like this response to Leininger's worries:
Kathy Miller of the anti-voucher Texas Freedom Network said: "Private schools may be willing to put those kids out on the street, but the great thing about our neighborhood public schools is that they would never do that."
I'm not going to rehash all the arguments against vouchers. It's clear based on November's election returns that supporters have lost ground in the Lege. Even Leininger recognizes that.
There appears to be little momentum at the Capitol this year for a publicly funded voucher program. The House could not pass a pilot voucher plan last year, and, by Leininger's count, he's lost five allies in the 150-member body since then.House Speaker Tom Craddick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst support limited voucher programs, but neither sounded ready to make a hard sell for the issue when asked about it this week.
"I think we need to do a better job of being able to explain what it is that we're trying to accomplish to help at-risk kids and not undo public education," Dewhurst said.
Though the Senate avoided a public voucher debate last year, House members on both sides of the issue caught flak for their votes.
"A lot of House members feel like, at this point, it needs to come from the Senate to see if there's support for it before they get involved," Craddick said.
Gov. Rick Perry, a longtime voucher proponent, did not mention them in his 55-minute State of the State speech Tuesday.
Leininger credited public school employees with defeating repeated voucher proposals.
"A lot of these (legislators) know there will be a price to pay if they embrace it," he said.
As well there should be for bad ideas like vouchers. It's just a shame that no one ran against State Sen. Kyle Janek, who will be filing a pro-voucher bill, last year. Maybe he'd have met the same fate as some of Leininger's other minions. Some people need the message delivered to them personally, I guess.
More from Vince, South Texas Chisme, Hal, and most amusingly, the Texas Observer. Who knew John Stossel was such an expert in these matters? Nice to see he thinks there's still mileage in comparing public schools to communism. No wonder he gets paid the big bucks.
Scott McCown of the Center for Public Policy Priorities wades in on the HPV vaccination controversy and makes the same point I did, with a lot more detail.
Both the vaccination order and the 65 percent order, however, violate the law in the same way. Under the state constitution, the governor administers the law; the governor doesn't make the law. This principle is textbook civics. Making law is for the Legislature.With this principle so clear, how can the governor possibly claim the authority to require vaccinations? Well, when the Legislature passes a law, it cannot think of every detail, particularly in our increasingly complex world. To deal with the details, the Legislature often authorizes a state agency to adopt rules. So, in his executive order, the governor hasn't actually required vaccinations; rather, he has ordered a state agency to write a rule requiring vaccinations.
Rules, however, must be consistent with state law and must implement, not expand, the law. To ensure that rules comply with the law, the Legislature requires a state agency to go through a careful process of evaluating its legal authority before adopting a rule. In addition, to ensure that a rule is wise, the Legislature requires a state agency to give the public notice of any proposed rule, give the public a chance to comment, consider the public's comments and provide a written justification for the final rule.
Having heard no cry of outrage from the Legislature over his 65 percent order, the governor has grown bolder, leading to his latest order to a state agency to adopt a rule regardless of legal review, public comments or agency judgment. We have no idea what he may decree next.
I'll say it again: If conservatives are mad about Rick Perry's usurpation of the legislative process with the HPV vaccine order, they should have stepped up and complained about the exact same kind of usurpation when he implemented the 65% Rule by executive fiat. It's not too late for them to do that, either. If one was wrong then so's the other, and it's time for them both to go. If not, if it's just politics, then I'll take my winnings and go home. We're in this together or we're in it for ourselves. I'm willing if they are, but I want to see what their commitment to this principle really looks like before I jump in. What say you, Sen. Nelson?
Meanwhile, Chris Bell released a letter urging support for Governor Perry's order. Not everybody in his target audience was impressed. The Harris County Republican Party has issued a call to action to oppose Perry's order (but not the 65% rule, of course - that's just different). And on it goes.
The Federal Transit Administration has given a helpful push to the Metropolitan Transit Authority's plans for its North and Southeast bus rapid transit lines, Metro President and CEO Frank Wilson said Tuesday.FTA officials announced early in the day that the two projects are among six nationwide that might qualify for 50 percent federal funding under the Bush administration's 2008 budget proposal.
Wilson said that last week the FTA also issued Metro a "record of decision" in favor of the North line and followed up Tuesday with one for the Southeast line.
"The record of decision allows us to go ahead and spend money on various elements of the project -- land acquisition, engineering, some elements of construction," Wilson said.
"It also is a signal to the marketplace that if we borrow money for the projects we are likely to get federal support," he said.
Nice to know some parts of the Metro plan are proceeding smoothly. I'm just curious about one thing:
Metro plans to build the East End and Uptown lines with its own funds.Wilson said federal officials determined in December that the intermodal terminal will not have significant negative impact on the North Side neighborhood, clearing the way for land purchases and design work.
The University line, a proposed light rail from the University of Houston to the Galleria area that has drawn neighborhood opposition, trails the others by about a year, but Metro will seek federal aid to build it, too, he said.
What is the likelihood of Metro funding the Universities line on its own if it gets screwed? I mean, the Uptown line is not particularly useful without the Universities line in place. Would Metro re-prioritize its dollars if push comes to shove?
And speaking of new sports venues, here's one that's a way long time in coming.
Rice announced Tuesday a $7 million gift from [Bobby] Tudor, a 1982 Rice graduate, and his wife, Phoebe, that will jump-start a $23 million, 18-month renovation of 57-year-old Autry Court.[...]
Under a tentative plan, Autry Court will be gutted this summer, with its infrastructure undergoing a redesign. The renovation will include upgrades specific to basketball and volleyball as well as updated amenities, new locker rooms and offices, and a student-athlete academic center. The facility will serve as a student service center and also as a fan-friendly environment for those patronizing athletic events.
Attracting the community beyond Rice's hedges and creating an economic stream out of Autry Court is part of the business model of Rice athletic director Chris Del Conte who, following his hiring last June, targeted Autry as a facility in need of an overhaul.
With the opening of Reckling Park in 2000 and last summer's renovations at Rice Stadium, Autry moved to the front of the line.
[...]
The student-athletes Rice targets opt for the superior facilities at Duke, Vanderbilt, Stanford and Northwestern, and that has hamstrung the development of the basketball programs.
Because Rice has been unable to generate significant revenue from men's basketball, the football program shouldered a disproportionate burden to supplement the department.
Del Conte believes a renovated Autry Court finally will put Rice on par with its peers.
"With a facility that is completely updated, we're going to get a better student-athlete to come here," Del Conte said.
Reactions to the plan are here and here on the fan board. Couple of points to discuss, some of which were raised in those threads:
- This will perhaps settle once and for all the questions about Willis Wilson as Rice's basketball coach. Basically, there are two factions: the "Wilson does the best anyone could possibly do given the crappy facilities he has to contend with" camp, and the "Wilson has never truly maximized the talent that he has brought in and it's time to find someone who can" camp. Finally getting a venue worthy of intercollegiate sports (forget Division I - the gym we had at Div III Trinity back in the day was better than Autry) should bring about a resolution to that argument one way or another.
- A more solvent basketball program means less pressure on the football team to play so-called "body bag" games for big paydays. Rice will also be in a better position to lure topflight opponents to Houston for basketball, as their home court will not be considered a joke any more.
- They probably could make some money auctioning off pieces of the infamous Blue Curtain of Doom (BCOD). Somebody needs to think outside the box here.
I can't wait to see what they come up with. Thank you, Bobby Tudor!
Since I stopped paying attention to the Dynamo a few minutes after their team name was chosen, I hadn't realized that they were seriously looking at moving to a to-be-built stadium somewhere out in the 'burbs unless the city of Houston puts out for them.
Shouts of "goal!" could replace "fore!" at the venerable Gus Wortham golf course under a plan to provide a permanent home for the Dynamo soccer team and keep it in Houston.City officials quietly have been looking into converting the old East End course into a soccer-oriented youth facility, which the Dynamo is requesting along with its own stadium as a condition for staying.
Several suburban cities also are kicking around proposals to land the championship soccer team. That's putting pressure on Houston to make a move.
The proposed sports complex, however, would mean the end of existing operations at Gus Wortham Park, which is in a heavily Hispanic community and is one of only four golf courses inside the Loop.
So some community leaders and residents of surrounding neighborhoods want to nix the plan.
[...]
Andy Icken, planning and development director with the city's Public Works and Engineering Department, said the city's goal is to present a package to the Dynamo within a month in hopes of keeping the team from moving to the suburbs.
"We have been investigating a broad range of opportunities," said Icken, who has briefed Mayor Bill White on the effort. "We haven't really put pen to paper yet, as far as the economics and how we would pay for all this."
Icken said plans for the 150-acre site could include a practice complex for the Dynamo as well as public soccer and baseball fields.
A new downtown stadium could be linked to the site by a planned expansion of the Metropolitan Transit Authority's rapid transit system into the East End.
"The Dynamo have told us from the beginning that part of their program is to involve youth in soccer-related, sports-related activity," he said.
[...]
Icken said it's too early to discuss how the city, perhaps in conjunction with the team, would finance a soccer stadium. Possible funding sources include city sales tax revenue, private donations and money from the team itself.
"Where we are is, can the city come up with a package of options that compete well with those other places?" Icken said. "I can't answer that question yet."
But he said the team's talks with Houston's suburban neighbors have added urgency to the planning.
"I don't think we can procrastinate," he said.
All things being equal, and bearing in mind my general lack of fan-ness in this regard, I'd rather have the Houston Dynamo than the Pearland Dynamo or some such. But only at a minimal cost. We've spent enough on stadia these past few years, thanks very much. If some suburb wants to make them an outrageous offer, I say wish 'em well and hold the door open as they move out. Any package has to include the Dynamo paying a nontrivial amount, and the city getting some tangible benefit out of its funding. Otherwise, it's a nonstarter for me, whatever the real fans might want.
Chron fanblogger Stephanie Stradley returns from attending the Super Bowl in Miami with a report of the festivities and, sadly, an announcement that she's retiring from the blog. I'm not much of a Texans fan, but I enjoyed her blog - if nothing else, it's always a pleasure to read about sports from a different perspective. Steph is well informed and has a unique voice, qualities that make for excellent reading. The Chron's pages will be the lesser without her.
If you think you have those qualities, plus the time and obsessiveness that this kind of blogging takes, Steph has the contact info for you to apply for the position. Check it out, and my best wishes to Steph for a peaceful retirement.
Now that I've seen the plan to sell the Lottery, I just have one question: What in the world are they thinking?
Perry centered his State of the State address on the idea of selling the state lottery for at least $14 billion. The proceeds from the sale would be divided into three trusts: $8.3 billion for public education and $3 billion for cancer research.The remaining $2.7 billion would be used with federal money in a new health insurance program that could cover as many as 600,000 currently uninsured Texas adults, according to Perry staffers.
The lump sum from the lottery sale would be invested, not spent, generating a yearly return of some $1.3 billion, about $300 million more than Texas gets from owning the state lottery, according to estimates from Perry's office.
[...]
Perry's plan assumes that the state will find a buyer willing to fork over $14 billion and that the state's investments will yield a 9 percent annual return.
"If that's true, I'd like to know what they plan to invest in," said Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio. "Every investment has a pattern of going up and down. What happens during those years when we're not earning that rate of return?"
Never mind what plan Perry would invest that $14 billion in. What I want to know is why the potential buyer of the Lottery wouldn't just take the $14 billion and invest it the same way. I mean, if the Perry Investment Plan would generate $1.3 billion annual return, while the Lottery yields only $1 billion, what rational actor would choose the latter? Am I missing something here?
Forget the details. Either the money from the Lottery sale can generate more revenue than the Lottery itself, in which case no one will want to buy it, or it can't, in which case we shouldn't want to sell it. The only way that a sale makes sense is if the cash we got for it was slated for a capital investment - say, building a boatload of new schools - for which the money could not otherwise be raised. That's not the case here.
OK, I suppose that the putative Lottery buyer might think they can run it better and improve sales to the point that it can out-earn the Perry Investment Plan. But if that's really the case, why not just let them run it, and split whatever they can earn above the current $1 billion per year? Everyone benefits, at a much lower risk, and the state retains a valuable asset.
I mean, seriously. Am I missing something here? This isn't the real plan, right? Joke's over, fellas. Time to come clean.
UPDATE: McBlogger breaks out the financial terms and comes to the same basic conclusion.
I've already said that I'm not terribly interested in obsessing over the Presidential primaries right now. I have, however, figured out what my minimum requirement is for being considered worthy for my vote.
Two bloggers hired by John Edwards to reach out to liberals in the online world have landed his presidential campaign in hot water for doing what bloggers do -- expressing their opinions in provocative and often crude language.The Catholic League, a conservative religious group, is demanding that Mr. Edwards dismiss the two, Amanda Marcotte of the Pandagon blog site and Melissa McEwan, who writes on her blog, Shakespeare's Sister, for expressing anti-Catholic opinions.
Mr. Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, is among the leading Democratic presidential candidates.
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said in a statement on Tuesday, "John Edwards is a decent man who has had his campaign tarnished by two anti-Catholic vulgar trash-talking bigots."
Mr. Edwards's spokeswoman, Jennifer Palmieri, said Tuesday night that the campaign was weighing the fate of the two bloggers.
If you want my vote, the bare minimum that I expect of you is that when a two-bit thug like Bill Donahue threatens you, you fight back instead of handing over your lunch money like a little weak-kneed fraidy cat. Anybody who tries to appease the likes of William Donahue instead of standing up for himself or herself is not going to be able to survive the general election, so I'll be looking for someone else to represent the Democratic ticket. You would think that John Kerry's running mate would understand that.
Now, I don't want to jump the gun here. No decision has been made yet, so John Edwards hasn't lost me yet. But the fact that they're publicly "weighing the fate" of their bloggers instead of telling Donahue to go pound sand means they've lost some measure of my respect. What they do from here is up to them.
And on a side note, will the people associated with other candidates' campaigns get this kind of scrutiny, or only those who William Donahue disapproves of? John McCain has a blogger with a foul mouth, for example, not to mention a campaign manager with an extremely spotty history. If we're going to engage in this exercise, I say let's go all out.
I occasionally drive down Houston Avenue on my way to or from downtown. Like some other historic thoroughfares in Houston, it is in need of some revitalization. Recently, I've started noticing some indicators that this is beginning to happen.
That's the Hynes Bakery at the corner of Houston and Crockett. I've always liked their hanging sign. It looks like the building that it hangs on may be getting a facelift:
That white area with the windows looks new to me. I'm not sure what else is happening there, but I hope this is a positive omen. Click on for more.
That empty lot is across Crockett from the Hynes Bakery site. Note the For Sale signs, and the new construction in the background. Something is happening here.
This is across Houston Ave from the Hynes. I can't tell if the Dharma Cafe is a going concern or not, but either way it looks like it'll be getting some neighbors soon.
Down the road a bit at Summer Street. If you were to turn right here and follow Summer to the east, you'd wind up at the David Adickes studio. Note also the railroad crossing in the background. That's an active track. I don't know why anyone would want to buy a luxury townhouse near where freight trains go at all hours, but someone thinks they will.
In case you're one of those people who wants one of those luxury near-downtown-and-the-freight-trains townhomes.
This would be the reason that HHN and similar outfits think they can sell those townhomes. Who wouldn't want that as a backdrop?
I love this: Members of RichmondRail.org have organized a "Tuesday Nights Out" club, in which they and other supporters of rail on Richmond patronize restaurants and other businesses along the possible routes, both to meet and greet neighbors and to show their support for the businesses that would be affected by the rail line. Houston Intown Magazine has a great story about this, which I can't easily quote from since the page is a scanned image. But check it out, and if you too want to see the best line built, consider joining them on a future Tuesday. Current event plans include:
- Feb 13 at Mykonos, 2181 Richmond
- Feb 20 at El Tiempo, 3130 Richmond
- Feb 27 at the Edwards Greenway Palace Stadium 24 - 3839 Weslayan
Contact one of these folks for more info. Thanks to Houstonist for the catch.
Following on the heels of the complaint by Comptroller Susan Combs about the business tax surcharge that Sprint is attempting to levy on its customers, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has filed suit against the company to make it stop.
"Texans will not tolerate Sprint Nextel's unlawful business practices," Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said in a statement announcing the lawsuit, which contends the way the wireless company labels the surcharge and its name both are deceptive.The legal action was filed against Sprint Spectrum, L.P., a subsidiary of Sprint Nextel Corp. doing business as Sprint PCS.
[...]
[Abbott] contends Sprint's label on its surcharge, the "Texas Margin Fee Reimbursement," is illegal because it "causes confusion as it implies that the state of Texas has imposed this fee on the consumers of Texas" or endorsed Sprint's decision.
"In truth and in fact, 'Texas Margin Fee' refers to a discretionary cost recovery fee which Sprint has elected to add to consumers' bills in order to recover part of its cost of doing business," the lawsuit said.
The suit asks for an injunction to stop Sprint from labeling its surcharge as the "Texas Margin Fee Reimbursement" or "representing ... that the state of Texas obligates consumers to pay any specific fee or tax."
The attorney general asks that Sprint pay civil penalties of $20,000 per violation and credit accounts of Texas consumers who have already paid.
A copy of the lawsuit is here (PDF). Any legal eagles want to take a crack at evaluating its merits?
I got some good comments to this post about wind farms, specifically addressing the issue of danger to birds. From that, I gather that the peril is fairly small. I particularly like this quote from John Flicker of the Audubon Society:
"If we don't find ways to reduce [greenhouse gas] emissions, far more birds - and people - will be threatened by global warming than by wind turbines."
That's an admirably practical way of looking at it. My thanks to P.M. Bryant for finding that.
In other alternate energy news, I received a press release from the General Land Office regarding some new geothermal leases off the Gulf coast. You can see a map of the locations here. As with the wind farms, I don't really know enough about this to make a value judgment, but in the absence of anything terrible, my general feeling is that having more non-greenhouse energy sources is a Good Thing. Feel free to enlighten me in the comments if I'm way off base here. And click on for the release.
Texas General Land Office Jerry Patterson, CommissionerLand Office awards Texas' first geothermal lease
Coastal tracts of land in seven counties went to highest bidderAUSTIN - Texas reinforced its status as the nation's new frontier for renewable energy today, awarding the state's first lease for geothermal energy production.
Nevada-based geothermal industry leader, Ormat (NYSE: "ORA"), had the high bids Tuesday for six tracts of coastal land in seven counties totaling more than 11,000 acres. The lease allows Ormat to explore the potential of the land's geothermal resources and produce geothermal power from the tracts.
"Texas is hot for geothermal energy," said Jerry Patterson, Commissioner of the Texas General Land Office. "At the Land Office, renewable energy means renewable revenue for the schoolchildren of Texas."
Geothermal energy provides a steady, reliable power source that doesn't create any carbon dioxide, and its "fuel" * the earth's natural heat * is unlimited.
Ormat paid $55,645 to lease the submerged land for an average of about $5 an acre, or more than twice the minimum bid of $2 an acre. In addition to the lease bonus, the Texas Permanent School Fund will earn 10 percent of any electricity produced from the geothermal leases.
Multiple bids received for the land ensured that the bidding process was very competitive, Patterson said. "We got more bids than we expected," he added. "I think that's a good sign geothermal might just be an economically viable form of renewable energy for Texas."
The tracts of land range from 1,174 acres to 2,480 acres and are along the coast in Jefferson, Galveston, Chambers, Calhoun, Jackson, Nueces and Kleberg counties.
Geothermal energy is heat energy from the earth's molten interior. Heat can be brought to the surface from movements in the Earth's crust or by deep circulation of groundwater, which forms reservoirs of hot water under pressure.
Texas isn't exactly known as a geothermal hot spot like Hawaii or California, which sit on the volatile Pacific Rim. But relatively new technologies, such as binary power plants, are primed to take advantage of Texas' medium-heat geothermal potential.
Binary power plants take hot water from an underground reservoir and use it to heat a secondary fluid with a lower boiling point. The resulting vapors can drive a turbine and create electricity.
That electricity can then be sent to the power grid and used to power homes, businesses or industry. Much as with oil and gas leases, the Texas General Land Office would make money from a royalty, or a percentage of the energy production, from any geothermal lease.
"There's no way to tell what the potential is until private industry invests its capital to find out," Patterson said.
Since 1854, the Land Office has deposited more than $9 billion into the state's Permanent School Fund, mostly from oil and gas production on state lands. But oil and gas production in Texas peaked in 1971. Since taking office in 2003, Patterson has aggressively sought new sources of income for the Permanent School Fund.
Patterson made history in 2005 when he signed the nation's first lease for offshore wind power. In 2006, he signed the nation's second * and biggest * lease for offshore wind energy development. All proceeds from lease sales, as well as a percentage of proceeds from energy produced from them, goes into the state's Permanent School Fund, which helps pay for the state's share of public education.
Ormat is a publicly traded company with about 70 U.S. patents and has geothermal projects operating in more than 20 countries worldwide. Ormat power plants are producing clean, renewable energy in New Zealand, the Philippines, Mexico, Iceland and Kenya, as well as in Nevada, California and Hawaii. Ormat has manufactured and supplied geothermal power plants that produce more than 800 MW.
Ormat isn't new to Texas, either. It provided the power plant technology used in the El Paso solar pond project in the 1980s. In that project, an Ormat Rankine cycle unit operated for 16 years at temperatures as low as 175 degrees Fahrenheit.
"Ormat is very pleased to return to Texas to explore and develop its geothermal potential," said Lucien Bronicki, chairman and chief technology officer.
Bronicki explained the company has made improvements to its organic Rankine cycle technology, which allows for electricity production at lower temperatures, and is using it to provide about 900 MW worldwide.
"These leases provide Ormat the opportunity to capitalize on low temperatures associated with geothermal water in oil and gas wells, for which Ormat has field-proven technology," Bronicki said.
I knew that there had to have been a previous example of an inappropriate Executive Order by Rick Perry that usurped the Legislature, and Paul Burka reminds me of it: the Sixty-Five Percent order for public schools. If anyone can find me an example of Sen. Jane Nelson, Rep. Charlie Howard, then-Rep. Glenn Hegar, or any of the other strident objectors to the HPV vaccine directive raising a fuss about proper procedure at that time, then I'll take their current complaints seriously. Until then, all I can say is welcome to our world, folks. This is the Rick Perry we've been dealing with all along. If you don't like it, well, you missed your chance to do something about it. Suck it up like the rest of us have been told to do.
I also see that Sen. Nelson has written a letter to Governor Perry asking him to respect the legislative process, which 25 of her colleagues have signed, with Sen. Gallegos to follow. I'd like to ask the Democrats who have joined in on this effort, in particular my own Senator, why they haven't asked Sen. Nelson where her letter to Gov. Perry regarding the 65% rule is. Why are they being asked to act like grownups on a matter that they might have otherwise supported when Sen. Nelson and her partymates are apparently under no such burden to do the same?
Meanwhile, my State Rep., Jessica Farrar, who was the House sponsor of the legislation that Perry enacted by fiat, has been on TV talking about the HPV vaccine. See here (scroll down to Monday's Video, then click on 'HPV vaccine mandatory in Texas') and here (on the right side, click 'Launch' underneath the picture) to watch the clips, or go to Muse Musings, where there's embedded YouTube video. A letter from Farrar to her constituents regarding this is beneath the fold.
In an effort to update you on what I have been working on here at the Capitol, I'd like to let you know what is happening with HB 215. HB 215 would require girls entering the 6th grade to be vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV). As you may be aware, Governor Perry issued an Executive Order on Friday requiring this. As a result of the Governor's decision, much media attention has been shed on this very important legislation that I am continuing to carry here in the House. I would like to share two of the interviews I gave in the last few days with you, and I hope that these provide some insight into why I feel this is such a crucial piece of legislation. The national media coverage, which has included the Today Show, Paula Zahn Now, Washington Post Radio, and MSNBC, has been a chance for me to educate the public on why I feel so strongly that we should do what we can to protect Texas girls and women from cervical cancer. (Links to the two mentioned interviews are located at the end of this letter.)
HPV causes virtually all cases of cervical cancer. By the age of 50, over 80% of all women will have been infected with this virus. Certain types of HPV cause dysplasia, which is when abnormal cells develop in the cervix. Regular pap smears many times catch these abnormal cells early, but not all abnormal cells are found in time and not all women have access to regular preventative screenings. When precancerous cells are not caught, dysplasia many times turns into cervical cancer. In 2007, the American Cancer Society predicts there will be 44,000 cases of non-invasive cervical cancer and almost 10,000 cases of invasive cervical cancer in the US alone.
This vaccine will prevent many cases of cervical cancer in the future. Requiring it is important because it will now be covered by health insurance companies, CHIP, and Medicaid. In addition, more people will be know about the vaccine and its benefits, increasing the rates of immunization.
The FDA (Federal Drug Administration) approved the vaccine, and the following organizations recommend it:
ยท CDC
ยท American Cancer Society
ยท American Academy of Pediatrics
ยท American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
ยท Society of Gynecological Oncologists
As always, state law continues to ensure the rights of parents to object to the vaccine for religious or philosophical differences. Parents are allowed to opt out through a simple process, just as they may for any other required vaccination. This process is now able to be completed online.
In order to improve the health care system for all Texans, placing science before ideology is crucial. We have the capability to prevent numerous occurrences of the 2nd most common type of cancer in women. We must embrace this medical victory in order to ensure that our girls benefit fully from this scientific advancement.
Respectfully,
Jessica Farrar
We've had the State of the City, we've had the State of the Union, and now it's time for the State of the State, much of which we know about already. I'll skip the preview for now, and just note that you can watch the speech here (or try the direct link), and that Rep. Garnet Coleman will have the Democratic response on his website later today (it will apparently air on News 8 in Austin as well). I'll have my own commentary on it later as well, probably tomorrow. Happy viewing!
UPDATE: Grits has a copy of the speech (PDF), which apparently deviated from the pre-SotS reports in that he did not advocate more prison building. Very interesting. More as I get it.
UPDATE: Forgot to mention that Rep. Coleman's response may not be on his site right away. I expect to receive a copy of it, and will post it when I do.
UPDATE: Video of Rep. Coleman's response is here. The text of his response is here, and I've reprinted is beneath the fold if you can't get to that.
UPDATE: And here's the BOR response.
Rep. Garnet Coleman's Response to Governor Rick Perry's State of the State
Hello, I'm Garnet Coleman. I represent House District 147 in the Texas House, I am a Democrat, and I am Chair of the Texas Legislative Study Group. I would like to thank News 8 for this opportunity to respond to Governor Perry's State of the State speech.The state of our state is strong, because the people of Texas are stronger and more resourceful than anything Governor Perry or I could say. The people of Texas deserve a state government that works as hard for them as they work for their families. Today, I'd like to take a few moments to discuss the things we, your elected officials, must do to move Texas forward for all Texans.
When Texans voted last fall, they made their priorities clear: improve public education in our children's schools, make college affordable for every Texas family, provide access to health coverage for Texas families - especially Texas children - and lower the cost of our electric bills.
Our priorities are about the basics - about the future of the Texas economy, and more importantly, about how that future affects the pocketbook and quality of life for every Texas family that works for a living.
Today, we heard the Governor address issues we agree with and others we disagree with. For example, we're all excited to work with the Governor to help secure funding for cancer research. But when it's time to put your state tax dollars to work for the priorities of most Texans, only the state budget will determine whether our priorities will be met or continue to shortchange the vast majority of Texans.
The budget priorities we've heard discussed so far revolve entirely around property tax cuts. While lowering property taxes is an important priority, the fact is we still don't have adequate funding for our public schools. Instead of gambling on selling the Texas Lottery, the people of Texas deserve greater investments in their budget priorities, including better schools for our children, affordable college for our families, and a healthier Texas.
Texans deserve and have demanded continued improvements in our children's public schools. We must do more to increase teacher pay across the board to attract and retain quality teachers for our classrooms, secure a strong pension and good health benefits for our retired teachers, and keep our textbooks up to date. We also must stop teaching to the test. Twelve years of careful evaluation and classroom study cannot possibly be boiled down to "A, B, C, or none of the above."
Our children deserve better, and the people of Texas have called for a real investment in public education.
We agree that the state should increase student assistance for college, but even more than that, we should eliminate tuition deregulation. We must make college affordable again for all Texas families, because our students deserve the best shot at every opportunity for their future.
Most Texans believe we should have a tomorrow. That's why we had a Texas Tomorrow Fund to help pay for higher education opportunities. The doors to that fund have closed to too many Texans, because of higher tuition rates.
Tuition increases are pricing many students from middle class families out of the opportunity that can only be provided by a college education. A 47% increase in the cost of admittance to the University of Texas at Austin has led to a tuition increase of $2,500 a year for Texas families. But the problem isn't just at UT -- there has been a 54% increase in tuition at UT-Brownsville, a 34% increase in tuition at Texas Tech, and a 49% increase in tuition at the University of Houston.
The simple fact is that all Texans should be able to send their children to college.
Texans believe every Texan should have the opportunity to receive affordable health coverage. I commend the Governor for acknowledging that Texas has the highest rate of uninsured people in the country, both children and adults. 24.5% of people in Texas do not have health coverage. With the seriousness of that issue, we should not rely on the privatization of the Texas Lottery to fund a limited health insurance program for adults.
In addition, we must closely watch the proposed cuts to Medicaid benefits. The last time the state of Texas cut health benefits, in 2003, hundreds of thousands of children lost their health coverage through the Children's Health Insurance Program. The fastest way to insure the children of Texas is to repeal those policies that caused 200,000 Texas children to lose their health coverage.
And the cuts we've seen in CHIP have lost us $893 million in federal matching funds.
Finally, all Texans should be able to expect truth in taxation, so that our tax dollars go where we expect them to go. The taxes you pay for sporting goods should go to improve state parks. The taxes we pay for the System Benefit Fund should go to help pay for seniors' utility bills. Those taxes have been diverted to other purposes, and it's time those taxes were spent the way they where intended.
We need to invest state dollars to lower utility bills immediately and to increase renewable energy technologies in Texas. Wind energy is good, but we should also invest in solar energy. Texans know how the sun beats down on us - why don't we put it to work for us.
Developing clean and renewable energy technologies like solar and wind power will help answer the state's growing need for additional energy sources and mitigate the need for unhealthy options such as the new coal plants Governor Perry is currently attempting to fast-track to completion - a fast-track that increases health risks for all Texans, including the risk of cancer.
Texans are calling for action on all of these priorities. To date, we've seen too many of our priorities harmed by privatization efforts. Privatization of our public schools. Tuition and electricity deregulation. Private call centers for CHIP and Medicaid. And let's not forget the greatest privatization scheme of them all - the selling of Texas' great land to a Spanish company for the construction of the unwarranted and unwanted Trans-Texas Corridor, and the continued push for toll lanes on every new freeway in Texas.
Instead of learning from these past mistakes, Governor Perry has decided to explore other avenues for privatization: a private school voucher project for Pre-K, and selling the Texas Lottery. In a move he admits will create a billion-dollar budget shortfall and cut money from public education, Governor Perry has called to sell the Texas Lottery. It is flat-out fiscally irresponsible. We need to invest in proven measures of dependable revenue to support Texan's top priorities.
The strength of Texas lies in its people. They are raising their voices to demand the Texas they were promised by Governor Perry when he was first elected Governor four years ago. And even more importantly, they are raising their voices to demand a better Texas they can promise to their children for years to come.
Let's work together to build a better, healthier Texas that moves forward with fairness, equality, and opportunity for all families. If we listen to the voices of its people, we can build a Texas everyone can be proud to call home.
Thank you, and God Bless Texas.
I have to say, however the matter of Governor Perry's Executive Suggestion regarding the HPV vaccine plays out, it's been all kinds of fun watching the Republican-on-Republican action that has resulted from it.
"This needs closer examination. How much will it cost the state?" asked Sen. Jane Nelson, chairwoman of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee, at a press conference. "Most importantly, as a mother of four daughters, I want to make sure our daughters' health is protected and parental rights are preserved."Nelson, R-Lewisville, asked Perry to reverse his order and said she also would ask the attorney general whether the Legislature has any recourse if he doesn't.
Sen. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy, said he would file legislation to reverse Perry's order. There also is the question of what happens to several bills already filed to make the human papilloma virus shots mandatory for school enrollment.
[...]
Nelson said her computer was "burning up" with e-mail from other lawmakers and citizens angered by Perry's action. Saying that the public had a right to testify about the issue, Nelson said she was stunned about the decision and worried about the precedent it might set.
House Ways and Means Chairman Jim Keffer, R-Eastland, said he supports the vaccine, but he noted that other state legislatures have decided not to make it mandatory.
"What kind of deal was made?" asked Keffer, apparently referring to comments by Cathie Adams, president of Texas Eagle Forum, that political ties by drug company Merck, maker of the Gardasil vaccine, may have influenced the governor's decision.
I'll say again that the process objection is one that carries some weight with me, but let's be honest here. If this order had been to establish something like a fund promoting abstinence, would Jane Nelson, Glenn Hegar, and assorted others be out in front of the cameras demanding that "the public have a say" and "the Lege should be allowed to do its job"? Call me crazy, but I think not. I freely admit that my inclination to support this action has everything to do with what it provides, and that this has pushed my concern for procedural questions to the back burner. However much contempt I have for the Cathie Adams crowd, at least they've maintained consistency by not being bothered by such niceties. It's all about the end result for them. Why shouldn't I feel that way the one time in this administration that the result goes in a direction I like?
Because I don't want to be lumped with them, that's why. Man, I hate nuance sometimes.
Look, can someone please get Nelson, Hegar, Howard, Patrick, et al on record stating unequivocally that any time any Governor tries to circumvent the Lege and appropriate funds via Executive Order they'll object to it regardless of what those funds are being appropriated for and what their odds of passage would be by the normal channels? If I'm going to argue against my own interests, I'd at least like to know that I won't end up looking like a chump for it.
Finally, as far as the dark imprecations being muttered about the insidious influence that campaign contributions may have had on Perry's decision, I think a picture will say more than any words I can type here:
Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?
Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
Croupier: Your winnings, sir.
Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
[aloud]
Captain Renault: Everybody out at once!
Okay, maybe a few words. You get the idea. My thanks to Julia for the photographic inspiration.
It was a long time in coming, but the city has finally won the lawsuit against it that will allow it to finally implement the 1997 sexually oriented businesses (SOB) laws.
U.S. District Judge Nancy Atlas has ruled the city can double, from 750 to 1,500 feet, the distance required between the clubs and "sensitive" areas including schools and churches.That new requirement could imperil dozens of topless clubs and adult book stores.
Atlas wrote that the ordinance, passed in 1997, didn't violate the businesses' First Amendment rights because alternate sites are available where they could relocate and comply with the regulations.
[...]
The decision is the latest twist in a years-long legal battle about changes in 1997 to the city's sexually oriented businesses ordinance, and a victory for police and some neighborhood activists, who have sought tougher regulations for years.
"They may be lawful businesses, but they create a danger to our kids," said Houston police Capt. Steve Jett, who heads the department's Vice Division. "It's just a big success for Houston to be able to regulate where these sexually oriented businesses operate."
The ruling could affect well-known establishments including The Men's Club at 3303 Sage, and Treasures at 5647 Westheimer. Managers at those facilities couldn't be reached Monday, but city officials said they wouldn't be eligible for licenses under the ordinance Atlas upheld.
It restricts sexually oriented businesses from operating within 1,500 feet of schools, parks, churches and day-care facilities.
Such businesses must be at least 1,000 feet from each other and outside of residential areas.
First things first: I've been critical of the city for spending the large amount of money that it has defending itself against this suit. I have always thought that it would have been more prudent to punt on the aggressive distance requirement, which likely would have led to a quick settlement on the other points, and use that money on more pressing matters. Given that they ultimately won the suit, I can't really claim their expenditures were unjustified. Winning will do that for you.
But I still think that part of the law was overly restrictive. With all due respect to Captain Jett, how exactly do the Men's Club and Treasures threaten kids at their present locations? It's not like kids - or anyone else, for that matter - are walking past these clubs on a regular basis. If it's the mere fact of their existence that imperils kids, then how does pushing them out to unincorporated areas inside Harris County, where the city's laws won't affect them, improve matters?
I suppose he's really referring to the video stores, newsstands, and massage parlors, which by their smaller nature can be in the same places as other commercial establishments and thus puts them in contact with folks who are not out specifically looking for that sort of thing. I'd argue that a lot of those locations are not particularly kid-friendly with or without the SOBs present, but perhaps that's beside the point. Maybe it wouldn't have been practical for the city to attempt to distinguish between types of SOBs when drafting this ordinance. That's not how I recall the debate over these laws going way back then, but perhaps I'm not remembering it clearly after all this time. In any event, barring an unlikely reversal on appeal, the question appears to be moot. We'll see what happens from here.
On the bright side, maybe this will be the last we hear of five-month-long undercover investigations into allegations of excessively dirty dancing at the local clubs. One can only hope.
UPDATE: 'stina is pissed about this. She also found this blast from the past.
"What they are proposing now would shut down 90 percent of the legitimate clubs, and allow the outlaw businesses to flourish," said Bob Furey, president of the Colorado Bar and Grill. "This is not what the public wants."Councilwoman Helen Huey, chairwoman of the committee, said consideration of the proposed new regulations will include input from business owners.
"There is no effort on anyone's part to rush to a decision on this; we have worked too long and too hard on this to succumb to that," Huey said.
I don't know what input they ultimately sought out, but they certainly didn't heed that part of it if they did get it. Alas.
Rep. Garnet Coleman has joined the ever-expanding list of House Democrats who are blogging/vlogging/podcasting. You can see his current video on that page, and videos plus podcasts here. More from the Rep himself is on BOR. And yes, he has an RSS feed, too. Nicely done!
This article on the dynamics behind wind farms was interesting but a little unsatisfying. I got some good information out of it, but I think it needed some more to really finish the job.
Though embraced by state political leaders as a clean, renewable electricity source and welcomed by many rural landowners as newfound income, wind farms are gathering fresh opposition from Texas ranchers who say they are an ugly, noisy blight on the wide-open landscape.Opponents say the turbines, which extend up 400 feet to the tips of their blades, not only threaten birds and wildlife but devalue property in areas such as the distant outskirts of Dallas-Fort Worth, where ranchland is increasingly being used for recreation and second homes.
"We're in a 100-yard dash trying to fight these things and, they're already 50 yards ahead," said [ranch manager Dan] Stephenson.
Because Texas does not regulate the siting of wind projects, power companies need only assemble a group of agreeable landowners to set up operations. Royalties paid to ranchers in the Abilene area average about $12,000 per turbine per year, according to testimony in a lawsuit there.
Without governmental oversight, wind farm opponents say, their only recourse has been to head for the courthouse.
[...]
Gamesa and larger producers in Texas like FPL Energy, which operates 11 wind farms in the state, have been encouraged to build by the Legislature, which in 1999 mandated renewable energy goals. In 2005, lawmakers called for an output of 5,880 megawatts by 2009 -- about 3 percent of total demand -- from sources such as wind, solar, landfill gas and flowing water.
Last year, wind turbines in Texas accounted for nearly a third of all those installed in the U.S., according to a report released last month by American Wind Energy Association. And the state now hosts the world's largest operating wind farm, the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center in Nolan and Taylor counties.
"When they put 1,000 of those next to your property, you're not living out in the country anymore," said Dale Rankin, referring to the slim white towers arrayed on the bluffs around his property in Tuscola, about 20 miles south of Abilene.
[...]
Jack Hunt, president of the legendary King Ranch in South Texas, scoffs at comparisons between wind turbines and power lines or pump jacks. "They're not 400 feet tall and moving," he said.
The King Ranch, owned by descendants of Capt. Richard King, has taken issue with a proposal to locate 267 turbines on a neighboring ranch near the coast in Kenedy County. County commissioners last spring denied the project a tax abatement, but it could go forward without one.
"The Kenedy and King ranches go back more than 150 years, and we're at each other's throats over this deal," Hunt said, referring to property owned by the John G. Kenedy Jr. Charitable Trust.
He said the proposed wind farm is likely to have a major impact on the so-called "River of Birds," the flyway from Canada to Mexico that funnels scores of migrating bird species through the area. "You're erecting a 10-mile wall," he said, echoing criticism from environmentalists and birders. "Nobody's looking at how the birds will react to it."
Two offshore wind farms that state officials are proposing to build in the Gulf will receive considerable federal scrutiny for their effect on the birds, marine life and other ecological impacts.
"Onshore, there is no oversight," Hunt said. "Once they start killing birds, and you happen to find out about it, then you can bring in the feds."
Hunt and other critics say the wind power hardly merits the major tax subsidies it receives. Because wind is so variable, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which controls most of the state's power grid, calculates it can rely on only 2.6 percent of wind power capacity being available during peak summer demand periods, council reports show.
"They've been on the cusp of becoming efficient and useful for a quarter-century now, and they never quite get there," Hunt said. "We're destroying so much scenery for so little power."
I wish I knew more about this so I wouldn't have to research it after reading this article. Two-point-six percent for peak summer months? That isn't much. And what about the birds? Is there a definitive study of this? I've heard that concern for years, but don't know of any real research.
Given a choice, I'd rather have wind farms going up than coal plants (and note the dollar amount listed there; you want to woo Rick Perry, there's your minimum opening bid), but if wind is slated to be nothing more than a bit player then I'll be much more sympathetic to the ranchers' complaints. Guess I need to do some more reading.
On a related note, the Observer blog has flagged SB444 by Sen. Juan Hinojosa, which would make some big changes in the utilities code, as a bill to watch. Check it out.
One presumes that Barry Bonds' pursuit of Henry Aaron's record of 755 home runs will be a top story line this year. The question is how likely is he to actually get there? John Beamer of Hardball Times takes a stab at a projection, based on the limited histroical data for 41 and 42 year old players available. Bottom line: If he stays healthy, he's (just about) a lock. Check it out. Link via David Pinto.
And on a related note, happy belated 73rd birthday to Hammerin' Hank.
Damn those illegal immigrants!
Despite an uptick in crime in 2003 and 2004, the 10-year crime rate dropped 27 percent from 1995 to 2005, according to figures from the Texas Department of Public Safety.The average value of a Farmers Branch home increased 63 percent over 10 years to $149,421 in 2006, according to the Dallas Central Appraisal District. That's less than the average increase of 85 percent for Dallas County.
The Carrollton-Farmers Branch school district's average SAT score bounced up and down for the last seven years but is still up 83 points from a decade ago, according to the Texas Education Agency. The class of 2005's average SAT score was 1008. The state average was 992.
The district's state accountability rating, which is based on how well its students score on standardized state tests, rose to recognized from acceptable. The rating's rise came after more and harder tests were introduced, agency spokeswoman Suzanne Marchman said. She said most school districts' ratings went down under the tougher standards.
Boy, what a hellhole that place must be. No wonder their City Council is so bent out of shape over immigration. Link via Dig Deeper Texas.
Last month it was reported that only 25% of drivers ticketed for running a red light in front of one of the cameras had paid the fine by the end of 2006. Many of these people had till the end of January before being in violation, however, and when you take those payments into account, the compliance rate is much higher.
Nearly two-thirds of drivers cited for running red lights during the first three months of the city's camera-monitoring program have paid the $75 fine, according to new Houston Police Department data.The figure is higher -- and police say more precise -- than previous reports because it includes more payments delayed until near or after a 45-day deadline.
"It's a more accurate reflection," said Sgt. Michael Muench, who oversees the program.
Previous data, obtained by the Houston Chronicle through an open-records request, showed about a quarter of violators paid through the end of December. Police predicted then that the final percentage would be higher.
The Houston Police Department released the new data, which adds payments made in January, after a Chronicle story reported the less favorable statistics.
The breakdown by month is as follows:
September - 1,127 citations, 800 (71 percent) paid.October - 1,590 citations, 1,175 (74 percent) paid.
November - 3,420 citations, 1,983 (58 percent) paid.
Three-month total - Citations: 6,137, Paid through January: 3,957 (64 percent)
December totals aren't included because some still are within the 45-day payment period.
The monthly totals for number paid are my approximations based on the percentages cited. The article suggests, and I believe, that the November total will creep up as late payments filter in. I'd keep an eye on it, though, because it will take almost 450 more to get November up to the same 71 percent compliance level as September. What will happen if the payment rate is lower than expected? How cost efficient is it to go after these people?
Statistics for September and October, which police consider the most complete because those violators have had the longest time to pay, show almost 2,000 violators paid the $75 ticket. That brought nearly $150,000 to the city.The city paid about $90,000 of that to American Traffic Solutions Inc., which operates the system, police spokesman John Cannon said.
Jim Tuton, that company's CEO, has said he expected the collection rate to be as high as 90 percent, based on collections in other cities.
In other words, the city took in about $60,000 from this. It's a little hard to extrapolate to an annual figure, since there was a big jump in November, presumably due to the addition of more cameras. I think it's safe to say the yearly total will be nontrivial, though still a small piece of the overall city budget. Houstonist has more.
Various Republican legislators have complained to Governor Perry about his Executive Suggestion that girls be vaccinated against HPV.
State Sen. Jane Nelson, chairwoman of the Senate's health and human services committee, said lawmakers should have been allowed to hear from doctors, scientists and patients before the state implemented such a sweeping mandate."This is not an emergency," said Nelson, a Republican from Flower Mound. "It needs to be discussed and debated."
Perry ordered the Texas Health and Human Services Commission to adopt rules requiring the Merck & Co.'s new Gardasil vaccine for girls entering sixth grade as of September 2008. The vaccine protects girls against strains of the human pappilomavirus that cause most cases of cervical cancer.
The Legislature has no authority to repeal Perry's executive order. Nelson said she plans to ask Attorney General Greg Abbott for an opinion on the legality of Perry's order.
A Perry spokeswoman did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment.
Nelson was joined by Republican state Reps. Jim Keffer of Eastland and Dan Flynn of Canton, all of whom said their phone lines were filled with parents complaining about Perry's order Friday. They said many of their colleagues had expressed similar concerns.
Sen. Nelson's objection is essentially the same as the one raised by Grits in the comments to my earlier post, and I admit it has some resonance for me. Unfortunately, I feel to a certain extent that this ship has already sailed, in that Governor Perry has done quite a bit in his six years in office to expand and consolidate his powers, much of which with the tacit support of folks like Sen. Nelson. Maybe this time he has finally stepped over a line. If so, I'll just note how different things can look when it's one's own ox being gored.
Still, it is a valid concern, and though I support this particular order I'm glad that Sen. Nelson brought it up. I don't doubt for a second that the next order Perry issues will be one that will infuriate me, so all things considered it would be better if we went through the proper channels instead of breaking precedents. I just don't think that he has any intention of pulling back and throwing his support behind Rep. Jessica Farrar's bill to do the same thing.
I also expect that the narrative of this controversy will continue to be about the idiotic "this condones premarital sex!" objection, and about how Perry has benefited financially from Merck. The former is utterly contemptible but makes for good copy, while the latter is almost quaint. I mean, Rick Perry wouldn't give you a used Kleenex for the lousy six grand he got from Merck. It costs a lot more than that to curry his favors. Our Governor may be many thing, but he ain't cheap.
Other views: from Eye on Williamson, Pandagon and Pandagon again, Broadsheet, Dig Deeper Texas, and Burnt Orange Report, which examines the question of precedent more closely.
UPDATE: Whatever you think of this order, you have to admit it's a little weird hearing words like this emanate from Governor Perry:
"Never before have we had an opportunity to prevent cancer with a simple vaccine. While I understand the concerns expressed by some, I stand firmly on the side of protecting life. The HPV vaccine does not promote sex, it protects women's health. In the past, young women who have abstained from sex until marriage have contracted HPV from their husbands and faced the difficult task of defeating cervical cancer. This vaccine prevents that from happening."Providing the HPV vaccine doesn't promote sexual promiscuity anymore than providing the Hepatitis B vaccine promotes drug use. If the medical community developed a vaccine for lung cancer, would the same critics oppose it claiming it would encourage smoking?
"Finally, parents need to know that they have the final decision about whether or not their daughter is vaccinated. I am a strong believer in protecting parental rights, which is why this executive order allows them to opt out."
I swear, I didn't see any dogs and cats lying together on my drive home, but maybe I just wasn't looking in the right places.
Been a little while since my last check on the Robison Warehouse site. There are a few things that are different, but the first thing to notice is that unlike some other recent demolitions, this site seems to have transitioned right away into a construction zone:
At the very least, they've cleared out all the debris, and they're moving out a bunch more dirt. I presume it's to redo the foundation, but as you'll see, the new structure appears to have a bigger footprint than the old one. Click on for more.
One difference from the last time we looked was the extension of the hole westward towards Montrose. What you see here just behind the new cyclone fence was once concrete - I took a lot of my closeup pictures from there - and it was higher than the sidewalk. Will the new building encroach on the street like the warehouse did, or will they repour the concrete in such a way as to provide a wider front walk? We'll have to wait and see.
This was taken just inside that cyclone fence. I didn't want to move too far inside it, since I still think that sooner or later someone is going to spot me and chase me off.
This is from the same spot, but facing northward instead of east. Note the concrete wall on the far end. I think that might have been part of a north end loading zone, but I'm not sure. In any event, it looks to me like the hole has been extended that way, which is why I think the new structure will be bigger. Compare to this picture and you can see what I mean.
I'll keep an eye on this. I suppose at some point I should stop calling it the Robinson Warehouse site, but until the new building is actually being built, that's how I think of it.
Continuing his tour of the rail routes that are on the table for the coming years, Christof looks at the impact on UH, where both the Southeast BRT GRT and the Universities light rail line will serve. There are some options for the Universities line out this way, but one of the three is clearly the best, and unlike the western portion of that line it appears to be a consensus choice. Check it out.
Congratulations to the Colts on their Super Bowl victory. You might have seen some of them wearing official gear at the end of the game last night, proclaiming "Indianapolis Colts - Super Bowl XLI Champions". The NFL has such items made up for both teams ahead of time. But what happens to the losing team's stuff?
Beth Colleton was working for a relief agency in Ethiopia when she spotted a boy wearing a Green Bay Packers 1998 Super Bowl champions T- shirt. She might have been the only person in the village to do a double- take; the Denver Broncos were the 1998 Super Bowl champions.After Colleton, director for community ventures for the National Football League, returned home, she saw a documentary film about Romanian orphans. One of them was wearing a Buffalo Bills Super Bowl champions T- shirt, even though the Bills lost four consecutive Super Bowls in the 1990s. "I almost fell out of my chair," she said.
This year, as usual, the NFL ordered 288 T-shirts and caps depicting the Indianapolis Colts as the winner of Super Bowl XLI. And they ordered 288 more depicting the Chicago Bears as the winner.
Rather than discarding those made for the losing team, the league now donates them to World Vision, the relief organization that Colleton worked for in Ethiopia for a month, for distribution in places like Niger, Uganda and Sierra Leone. This way, the NFL can help one of its charities and avoid traumatizing one of its teams.
"Where these items go, the people don't have electricity or running water," said Jeff Fields, a corporate relations officer for World Vision. "They wouldn't know who won the Super Bowl. They wouldn't even know about football."
On the one hand, this is a fine idea. It would certainly be a waste to simply destroy the articles for the losing team, which is apparently what Major League Baseball does. Giving them to charity is a much better alternative.
On the other hand, it seems like a sub-optimal use of these items. With all due respect, 288 T-shirts ain't that much. I understand the NFL's reluctance to rub a Super Bowl loss in the teams' faces, but how much do you think these items could fetch in an auction, with the proceeds going to those same charities? I daresay that could buy a lot more than what's currently being provided. Just a thought.
Nancy Sarnoff wonders if the imminent demolition and redevelopment of the Allen House apartments will cause a spike in rents around town.
The day after the owner announced that the 896-unit complex would be torn down and replaced with an urban mixed-use development, one nearby apartment complex raised its rents for one-bedroom units by about $60 a month, said Drew Pursell of In the Loop Properties, a residential leasing firm.Pursell wouldn't name the complex -- and he said the rent increase could have been the result of other factors -- but he expects more rents to rise in the area as the displaced Allen House tenants create more demand.
"Places are getting five and six leases a day from Allen House, and they're running out of apartments," Pursell said.
Tenants may have a tough time finding similar properties.
Because of its age, rents at Allen House have been lower than other area complexes, but its units are nice and well-maintained.
Many residents pay less than $800 a month in rent for a one-bedroom. And its unique location and amenities, like free daily shuttles into downtown, have long made it popular with students, professionals and seniors.
[...]
Not everyone agrees that the Allen House situation will affect the market.
Ric Campo, chairman and CEO of Houston-based Camden Property Trust, which owns apartments nationwide, said the market here is already so strong and big that 900 units shouldn't create any serious changes.
"We had one of the best years we've had in Houston, Texas, last year," said Campo, whose company is now building more inner-city projects.
I don't know enough about the Houston real estate market to predict what effect if any the Allen House demolition will have on rents, but I do know this: There ain't a whole lot of places like Allen House, where you could live close to downtown for a modest price in a non-skanky building, left in Houston. There will be plenty of places to live well, and I suspect there will always be plenty of places to live poorly, but the places in between are getting a lot harder to find.
Isiah Carey reports about the likelihood of former HPD Chief C.O. Bradford running for Harris County Sheriff next year.
It was last year when this rumor first surfaced and now I'm hearing from a credible source that former Houston Police Department chief Clarence Bradford is seriously considering a run for Sheriff. This source was bold enough to say "he is running." I have not been able to get Bradford to confirm this. I recently saw him at the Black Heritage Gala with a cowboy hat on and he surely looked like the sheriff then. However, he only stopped briefly to say hello and said he enjoyed reading The Insite.
I've been hearing these rumors for awhile now, too, and I've seen Bradford at several political functions lately, something which had not been the case not too long ago. I have some mixed emotions about this. On the one hand, I believe he'd be able to raise the kind of funds needed to make a serious challenge; if the Democratic candidates for offices like District Attorney, Tax Assessor, and potentially Harris County Judge can do the same, that'll be all to the good for the entire ticket. I get the impression from talking to people that Bradford would run a strong race, and that he'd do well against the incumbent, Tommy Thomas. On the other hand, Bradford has some big negatives, namely the HPD Crime Lab and the botched K-Mart raid, to which he'll be tied during a campaign. Given that the case against Tommy Thomas is basically that he's incompetent, it'd be nice to have a less baggage-laden candidate to press that issue against him.
On the third hand, assuming Bradford is interested in this race, I haven't heard his pitch yet. I don't know how good a speaker he is, how he plans to address the issues that will surely be raised about him, and how he plans to argue against Thomas. In other words, I don't know how good a candidate he might be yet. He has a record in public service - and again, all I know off the top of my head is part of that record; I don't know his presentation of it - but not a record as a candidate for me to judge. I'll wait and see on this one. Who knows, maybe the accompanying rumors of Adrian Garcia possibly being interested as well will turn out to be more than wishcasting. I won't mind having a few high-profile primaries to help me make up my mind in these races.
I agree with Smarty Pants. The time to start raising money for John Cornyn's eventual opponent is now. (And no, whatever his flacks may say, it ain't gonna be this guy.) If you're on board with that, click here to donate. The filing deadline for 2008 is sooner than you think, and depending on what happens in the Lege, it might be even sooner than that. Cornyn isn't as well-funded as KBH was, but he can make that up quickly, and there's no reason why whoever runs against him should have to start out in a hole. You can help with that. Thanks very much.
Houston's traffic isn't this bad, right? Right?
If you think rush-hour traffic is frustrating, imagine what it was like for three women who gave birth in their vehicles because they couldn't make it to the hospital along clogged Interstate 5.Two little girls entered the world during the morning commute in as many days this week, and a boy was born along the north-south artery on Jan. 5.
"We simply attribute it to coincidence," State Patrol Trooper Jeffery L. Merrill said. "Who wants to have their baby in their car on the freeway?"
I mean, you can't even boil water in your car. Clearly, the lesson is to leave for the hospital a little earlier than you think you need to.
Liz Kirkman and her husband Brian got caught in a rush-hour slowdown while driving to a hospital east of the downtown area."Once I was in the moving car, I was like 'Uh-oh,'" Kirkman, 28, said Tuesday. "I started doing the math in my head and thought, 'I am cutting this real close.' Then I got this urge to push."
Finally she propped her leg up on the dashboard and delivered Juliet, her seventh child, as her husband drove in the car pool lane.
Well, that's one way to avoid a ticket. I don't think it's very scalable, however.
Remember the fuss over K-Fed's Super Bowl ad? Well, the man himself wants you to know that he meant no offense to fast food workers.
Kevin Federline has something to say to those who are offended by an upcoming Super Bowl ad featuring him as a fast-food worker: He's "really sorry.""The commercial is completely intended for me, making fun of myself and my own situation," the aspiring rapper, 28, told Associated Press Television in a recent interview. "It has nothing to do with anybody in the fast-food industry at all. So, you know, if we've offended anybody, I'm really sorry about that."
[...]
It's a "Saturday Night Live skit on myself ... Maybe it'll land me some good roles in Hollywood," said Federline, whose debut rap album, Playing With Fire, has had dismal sales since its release last fall.
Yeah, maybe it will. Dream big, dude. I have a feeling you'll have plenty of time to indulge in such woolgathering.
Here's the ad in question, in case you plan to skip the Super Bowl later today. I think it's pretty funny, but to each her own. Thanks to Julia for sending me the link.
If you do a good thing for a bad reason, is it still a good thing?
Acting on an issue that is stirring controversy in the Legislature, Gov. Rick Perry on Friday made Texas the first state to require girls to get a new vaccine for a sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.The executive order, which would apply to all girls entering sixth grade next year, prompted surprise and relief from one lawmaker who didn't think her bill requiring the same would have passed. But it so angered many social conservatives who have consistently backed Perry that they suggested money and political ties to the vaccine's manufacturer were behind the decision.
Perry's office insisted that protecting girls ages 11 and 12 against the human papilloma virus was a public health issue, not politics.
"Requiring young girls to get vaccinated before they come into contact with HPV is responsible health and fiscal policy that has the potential to significantly reduce cases of cervical cancer and mitigate future medical costs," Perry said in a press release.
"This is 'follow the money' if I've ever seen it," said Cathie Adams, president of Texas Eagle Forum.
Yes, Rick Perry may have acted in the best interest of a major campaign donor with whom he has close ties. In other news, the sun will rise in the East tomorrow.
Be that as it may, and putting the FRC's objectively pro-cancer position straight into the trash can where it belongs, this is a good thing, and I applaud Governor Perry for doing it, whatever his motivation may have been.
"I'm very proud of the governor for this bold move that sends a signal not only to the people in Texas but nationwide that Texas will opt to protect their daughters from cancer," said Sen. Leticia Van De Putte, D-San Antonio, who has a bill to add the HPV vaccine to the state's required immunizations.Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston, who has filed a similar bill, said her legislation faced an uphill battle in the Texas House because of opposition from the Eagle Forum and other groups.
"I think it's wonderful," said Dr. Maurie Markman, vice president for clinical research at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. "I don't know any details, but I think it's exciting to be in the first state to make a statement about preventing the infection shown to cause cancer."
Here's some background, if that helps. Lord knows, whatever spurred Perry to take this action - and in case you haven't noticed, there's pretty much nothing he does any more that isn't scrutinized through the lens of whose bread is being buttered; the notion that he might be motivated by a desire to Do The Right Thing and Make The World A Better Place is way too quaint for this administration - he did it and it was good. As I don't expect to say those words very often, I'll gladly take it when I can.
Just one small question:
Perry's order directs the Health and Human Services Commission to adopt rules for the requirement, which is effective in September 2008.Parents would be allowed to opt their daughters out for medical, philosophical, religious or moral reasons, as they can do now for other required vaccines.
The governor also ordered state health officials to make the vaccine immediately available to eligible females through state programs that provide free and reduced-cost vaccines to children from low-income families and for women ages 19 to 21 who qualify for Medicaid. Krista Moody, a spokeswoman for Perry, said it would cost the state $29 million to administer the shots to these girls and women up to age 21.
Critics say the vaccine is expensive -- $360 to $600 for the three required doses -- and hasn't been on the market long enough. Moody said most private insurers would be expected to cover a vaccine that is required to attend school.
I don't see how you can say that Texas is "requiring" girls to get this vaccine if parents can opt out for "medical, philosophical, religious or moral reasons". Sounds to me like this is more of an Executive Suggestion, with funding to make the vaccine available to people who might have wanted it but couldn't afford it. The Cathie Adamses of the world are still free to do what they want with their own daughters, they just now have less say over other people's. Which is fine by me. South Texas Chisme, TexasKaos, and PinkDome have more.
Galveston County Judge Susan Criss has entered the blogosphere with one of the better-titled efforts I've heard of lately, As The Island Floats. Judge Criss has done some guestblogging before, and she's already shown a flair for storytelling in her new effort, so I'm looking forward to seeing what else she can do. Check it out.
One unnecessary state lobbying contract down, one to go.
The dispute between Democrats and Texas Gov. Rick Perry over the hiring of Washington lobbyists for the state appeared to have ended last month when the governor canceled the controversial contracts.But Democrats' anger has returned with their discovery that the Texas Department of Transportation has engaged its own lobbyists to advance the agency's interests in Washington.
TxDOT will pay more than $1.5 million in lobbying fees during a 13-month period that began in December.
The contracts, at $117,692 a month, are almost five times the cost of those that Republican Perry canceled in January with two well-connected Republican firms after an outcry in last year's campaign from Democrats and gubernatorial rival Carole Keeton Strayhorn, a Republican who ran as an independent.
"Obviously, that's ridiculous that they would pay $1.5 million for five lobbyists in Washington, D.C.," state Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, said Thursday. "It just really is an outrage."
Just for a little perspective here, that kind of money could buy you twenty METRO bloggers.
The Department of Transportation defends the contracts as necessary to the state's years-long campaign to bring back more of the gasoline taxes paid by Texas motorists into the federal Highway Trust Fund. The state gets 92 cents for every dollar it pays into the trust fund while some other states get well more than they contribute."Our position is: Until we receive all the gas tax funds that Texans send to Washington we are going to need to have every voice we can get to help us," said TxDOT spokesman Randall Dillard. The department has "not hidden the fact that we use federal consultants."
Funny, but I seem to recall that being a campaign issue of Barbara Radnofsky's.
[Radnofsky] chided Hutchison for her support of a $286 billion transportation bill the Senate and House approved in July, saying the legislation gave away far too much of Texas' federal gas tax dollars to other states.Hutchison's campaign manager, Matt Matthews, countered that Texas has increased its return over her two terms. Texas received only 76 cents back on each dollar of gas tax in 1993, Matthews said, but "because of her work and this legislation" it's now getting back nearly 92 cents.
So does this mean TxDOT is blaming Kay Bailey Hutchison for this problem?
Back to the story:
Democrats on Capitol Hill said, however, they learned of the existence of the TxDOT lobbying contracts only last week when two of the lobbyists -- former Texas Land Commissioner Garry Mauro and William K. Moore of the lobbying firm ViaNovo -- visited their offices.The pair's longstanding Democratic ties did not mollify Texas Democrats who were dispatched by voters to Washington to represent the state's interests and who contend it's a waste of taxpayer money to hire lobbying firms.
"I like Garry Mauro, but I don't need Garry Mauro to talk to me about Texas transportation issues," said U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston.
Amen to that, and good for Gene Green for putting it that way. Let the other guys practice crony politics. We can do better than that.
Mauro lost the 1998 gubernatorial race to George W. Bush, and Moore was for years a Democratic congressional aide and campaign strategist.
He's also, as Eye on Williamson reminds us, a shill for the Trans Texas Corridor.
Bottom line: This is a waste of money. We have bigger spending priorities. Let's tear this contract up.
I'll say this about the Perry administration: They're consistent about their desires.
Gov. Rick Perry said Thursday that his State of the State address on Tuesday would include a plan to fully privatize the Texas Lottery by selling it to private interests.Perry said such a sale would raise substantial funds that could be used for health care and research.
[...]
Suzii Paynter, a gambling opponent with the Christian Life Commission, said she would have to study Perry's proposal before taking a position. But she said the timing seemed odd.
"With a $14 billion surplus," she said, "it sees like the last thing we need is a huge infusion of cash."
State officials have said all but $2.5 billion of that $14 billion is committed already.
But there are other considerations besides money.
Many public officials argue that the state should not be in the gambling business. Selling the lottery would remove Texas from that role.
Then again, public lotteries arose because of scandals in privately run lotteries.
Also, the state might lose control over where lottery tickets are sold and how aggressively it is marketed. The state restricts marketing it considers objectionable.
Even if the state tried to require the lottery buyer to follow current state guidelines, the buyer later could lobby to relax the rules.
It's unclear how selling the lottery would affect ongoing efforts by the gaming industry to persuade the Legislature to approve casino gambling or slot machines at dog and race tracks.
Lawmakers are concerned whether expanding gambling opportunities would hurt or help lottery sales.
If it doesn't move, privatize it, I guess.
The article does a pretty decent job of bringing up the main points of concern, but there are a few things to discuss:
1. I realize that this is an obvious point, but it never seems to sink in, so I'll say it again: Whatever private firm we'd sell this or any other asset to (*cough* *cough* toll roads *cough* *cough*) is in the business of making a profit. That means that no matter how much they pay for this, they expect to make more money than that off of it. Now, maybe they're wrong about that, and maybe we'll not be able to agree on a price point so the whole thing falls apart, but never forget that if we make a sale and we don't have a specific use for that money that will make up for the future lost revenues, we lose on this deal.
2. So what are the specific uses for this money that Perry has in mind? I suppose we'll find out when he delivers his speech, but color me skeptical going in. And would any of this money be subject to to constitutional spending cap? If so, what happens if the effort to lift it fails? What happens if the only way to make a deal to lift the cap involves using some of that finite amount of money to help pay for those irresponsible property tax cuts, or the even less responsible rebate scheme? There's a king-sized devil in these details, to say the least.
3. How will this affect the push to allow more legalized gambling in Texas? Will it grease the skids, or will the private lottery owner become a new big-money special interest that will have to be greased as part of any plan to expand gambling? I strongly suspect the latter, which in and of itself is a good argument against the deal.
4. What controls will the state still have if it sells off the Lottery? Will we be on the hook to guarantee future payouts in the event the privatizer goes bellyup? What rights will people who play the privatized lottery have in the event of a grievance?
Lord knows, I'm not going to claim that the Texas Lottery Commission is a well-run organization, or that a private firm can't do a better job than they can. BOR spoke to lottery watchdog Dawn Nettles, who brough that subject up. But however bad the TLC is, I'm not seeing the upside to this, and I have no reason to trust the Governor's acumen. Maybe he can make a convincing case in the SotS address, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I know it's early for the November City Council elections, especially when we have a May special election to worry about first, but it's already clear that the highest profile race is going to be in District I, where current Council Member Carol Alvarado is term-limited. The contestants are James Rodriguez, the former Chief of Staff to Alvarado, who not surprisingly has Alvarado's enthusiastic backing, as you can see in this letter posted on Miya's blog; and community activist John Marron, who is backed by County Commissioner Sylvia Garcia and several other local politicos, as you can see in this Word doc that I've taken from a campaign email. I'll be keeping an eye on this one. Stay tuned.
You've heard of prison labor, right? I daresay this isn't what you think of when you hear that phrase. Tell me again why we need to build more prisons?
Last year, on their second attempt, federal prosecutors secured convictions against former Enron Broadband Services CFO Kevin Howard. Yesterday, those convictions were dismissed.
A theory used by prosecutors and an instruction to jurors regarding deliberations prompted U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore to issue a ruling Wednesday that erased five convictions of conspiracy, wire fraud and falsifying books against Kevin Howard, former finance chief of Enron's broadband division.Howard was convicted of those crimes after facing a jury for the second time last year. His co-defendant, former broadband accountant Michael Krautz, was acquitted of the same counts.
Their first trial alongside three other ex-broadband executives ended in 2005 with no convictions, a few acquittals and jurors hung on dozens of other counts.
Howard's attorney, Jim Lavine, said his client was "very humbled and very grateful" at Gilmore's ruling.
"It has been a long road for him and very hard, but he has incredible support from his family and friends," Lavine said. "He has always believed the right thing would happen eventually."
The government retains the right to try Howard a third time. Justice Department spokesman Bryan Sierra said prosecutors were reviewing their options.
The government conceded last November that four of Howard's five convictions should be tossed aside because they likely would not stand up on appeal. But prosecutors argued that the fifth count stood apart from the others and should be upheld.
Howard's lawyers responded that the prosecution's theory tainted all five counts.
Third time's the charm? Color me skeptical. For more, read Tom, who saw this coming.
State Rep. Richard Raymond has joined the ranks of blogging legislator, and he's upped the ante by doing a video blog. From the press release:
"Technology has given us an opportunity to keep our constituents more fully informed on the important issues facing our state. With this new tool I hope to bring more insight into the legislative process, and make it easier to stay informed even if you are hundreds of miles away from the Capitol," Rep. Raymond said.Rep. Raymond noted that the video reports can also be used as a way to involve more young people in the legislative process, since they are increasingly interested in getting their information from the internet. The website and blogs will feature the latest news from the Capitol, and they will include Rep. Raymond's personal observations about the bills and resolutions making their way through the legislative process.
"These reports will not only be about legislation, I also intend to address questions and concerns that are emailed to me. These video reports are going to be an open window into the legislative and political process at the Texas State Capitol," Rep. Raymond said.
The "Capitol Report" will be reported once or twice a week or more often and can be viewed at www.RichardRaymond.com.
Looks good. Who'll be next on the train? C'mon aboard, everyone, the more the better.
How big do you think the Day One sales for this will be?
The last installment of the Harry Potter saga will be published on 21 July, author JK Rowling has announced.She confirmed the date fans will be able to get their hands on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows on her website.
[...]
This is the 10th anniversary of the first book of the hugely successful series being published.
Shops opened at midnight and queues formed when the last book, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, was released.
It sold 2,009,574 copies in Britain on the first day of its release, publisher Bloomsbury said.
Note that's just Britain. The worldwide number is probably ten times that (I'm just guessing). I've reserved my copy via Amazon UK (we like the British versions at our house), that's all I know.
When asked about Harry's fate, Rowling has said she could understand authors who killed off their characters off, to stop others writing new adventures.But she admitted being worried about the reaction from fans if the boy wizard came to a sticky end.
Rowling always made it clear the series would be in seven parts and much of the plot was almost set in stone.
In a recent web posting, she said: "I'm now writing scenes that have been planned, in some cases, for a dozen years or even more."
While I've no reason to doubt Rowling's assertion that there is no more to the Harry Potter series after Deathly Hallows, I continue to believe that we've not seen the end of the Potter universe. There's way too much demand, and a nearly endless amount of material, some more obscure than others, from which to mine for further stories. The question is whether Rowling maintains absolute control over her characters, or if she allows other people to offer their own interpretations, presumably within some defined set of rules. The "Star Trek" franchise is a good model for that - there's the official canon of the TV shows and movies, and there's the free-form stylings of the novels and comics, which allow for all kinds of exploration but which can be (and have been) contradicted by later official releases. We'll see.
Today's big local politics news is the announcement by Harris County Judge Robert Eckels that he may step down to take a higher-paying private sector job.
"In the last 90 days I've had conversations with a New York firm and international investment banking firms," Eckels said, saying he often has been approached by lobbying and law firms interested in hiring him."I have had more serious discussions than in the past. They are more concrete."
He is contemplating those offers, he said, but it is premature to talk about who he is "visiting with."
"I don't have to decide today. But I don't rule out anything," said Eckels, who was in Los Angeles on business. "I wouldn't do anything until I knew the county was in good shape and I had a chance to visit with my colleagues. I'm not looking for something else to do."
Either way, Eckels said he will make a decision sooner rather than later. He has been county judge since 1995.
[...]
If Eckels stepped down, it could create a political standoff, since the commissioners, who would be charged with appointing someone to serve until the next general election, are split 2-2 along party lines.
"The constitution doesn't allow offices to be vacant. Eckels will still serve until his successor is appointed and qualified," County Attorney Mike Stafford said. That also means that Eckels, a Republican, potentially could break a partisan tie in appointing his successor.
Couple of points:
1. A long time ago, Eckels had sworn that he would serve no more than three terms, which would have meant he wouldn't have run last year, but he changed his mind.
2. If Eckels resigns anytime this year or before late August of 2008, there will be an election in 2008 to fill the rest of his term, which expires in 2010. Otherwise, the next election for County Judge will be as scheduled. Here's the relevant statute:
ยง 202.002. VACANCY FILLED AT GENERAL ELECTION.
(a) If a vacancy occurs on or before the 74th day before the general election for state and county officers held in the next-to-last even-numbered year of a term of office, the remainder of the unexpired term shall be filled at the next general election for state and county officers, as provided by this chapter.
(b) If a vacancy occurs after the 74th day before a general election day, an election for the unexpired term may not be held at that general election. The appointment to fill the vacancy
continues until the next succeeding general election and until a successor has been elected and has qualified for the office.
In other words, the sooner he leaves, the longer his appointed successor has to act like an incumbent for the replacement election. That could be a very big deal.
3. Regardless of how long the interim judge will have to sit in Eckels' seat, expect the Democrats to make a big push for that office. There is already likely to be a big Dallas-in-06-style push for other countywide offices, and it rather goes without saying that this one would be the big prize. This will be one very expensive race.
4. If a Democrat does eventually claim Eckels' seat, there will be ripples felt at the state level. This is because Harris is one of the rare counties in Texas that officially supports a lowered appraisal cap. With a Democrat as County Judge, thus giving Commissioner's Court a Democratic majority, that could change, though someone would have to get Sylvia Garcia to change her mind first. Assuming this is still a wish-list item for that crowd in 2009, a change in position by Harris County could have a dampening effect on their efforts.
Lots of intrigue and drama in the offing here. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Houtopia and PDiddie have more.
From the Orange Show mailing list:
CALLING BEER VOLUNTEERS!Our Volunteer Happy Hours at the Beer Can House have been so successful and productive that we're extending the fun for two more Thursdays (Feb 1st & 8th). So bring your friends and help us cut, punch, wire and trim (and drink!) the last of the vintage beer cans to restore this Houston treasure!
place: the Beer Can House - 222 Malone St.
time: 6:00pm to 9:00pm
date: Thursdays, February 1st and 8thThanks to all our volunteers: from the Rice Military neighborhood to the far reaches of Houston's suburbs - and even as far as California. (seriously!)
Let us know you are coming so we're sure to have enough tools and BEER!
Contact Jessica (jessica@orangeshow.org)And if in the last two weeks you've found skills you didn't know you had... found zen in the meticulous art of beer can fabrication... or would love to get friends/family/co-workers together for a volunteer day in February or March... please let us know! We will be continuing Beer Can House restoration at our new warehouse just down the street from The Orange Show (I-45 South at Telephone Rd.)
Now that's what I call a good cause. Here's a Google map to help you find the Beer Can House. Skoal!
Mayor White has taken another step towards real preservation in Houston by outlining an ordinance to help the Old Sixth Ward.
He proposed creation of a special district within the neighborhood west of downtown with design guidelines for new construction and renovation, along with financial incentives to discourage demolition of historic houses."The Old Sixth Ward is a very special place in Houston," White told the City Council. "Thank goodness it's there. Though we have preservation needs in many parts of the city, this is unique in the concentration of historical structures."
[...]
Preservationists said the mayor's comments reflect growing public support for stronger efforts to protect historic neighborhoods and buildings in a city whose preservation laws have been criticized as inadequate.
"I think it's a positive, great step," said Lynn Edmundson, the president of Historic Houston. "It's a response to a big outcry from all the older neighborhoods."
With its competing pressures for protection of historic houses and for development close to downtown, the Old Sixth Ward is the perfect laboratory to test new preservation strategies, Edmundson said.
Larissa Lindsay, the president of the Old Sixth Ward Neighborhood Association, said she was delighted at the mayor's commitment, particularly since he agreed to give neighborhood leaders a role in developing the ordinance.
"We've been working on this for 10 to 15 years," Lindsay said. "We have a lot of history and institutional knowledge."
Janice Jamail-Garvis, a Realtor who heads a group opposed to stricter controls on development in the Old Sixth Ward, said she would have to see the details of White's plan before deciding whether to support it.
See here for some background on the Old Sixth and the opposing viewpoints of Lindsay and Jamail-Garvis.
The city's existing preservation ordinance permits owners of buildings in designated historic districts to raze the structures 90 days after they apply for a demolition permit, even if the city's Archaeological and Historical Commission initially denies the application.White said this waiting period should be longer and should be coupled with financial incentives that would diminish the owner's motivation to tear the building down -- a strategy used successfully in other cities.
The Houston measure also must include provisions for funding in hardship cases in which historical houses have fallen into disrepair and the owners lack the money to fix them up, White said. These funds would come through the neighborhood's Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, in which revenue generated by rising property values funds neighborhood improvements.
[...]
"I am confident that our public attitudes toward historical preservation have matured within this city and that people don't need to get all carried away in thinking that if we do one thing to protect a unique neighborhood ... it means that nobody can do anything anywhere with their property without some ... official telling them what to do," he said.
The idea of using various tax incentives as a way of promoting preservation has come up before, in the context of the River Oaks Theater and Alabama Bookstop. I think it's a good approach, and more importantly I think it's an approach that can get passed by Council and accepted if not embraced by the developers and property-rights activists. I look forward to seeing the details of Mayor White's proposal.
Last night, I mentioned that Molly Ivins hated being copy-edited by the New York Times, because they excised every bit of color she put into her writing; the best example was when "a beer gut that belonged in the Smithsonian" was transmogrified into "a protuberant abdomen". As if determined to prove her point, the Times obituary of Ivins contains the following gems:
In 1976, her writing, which she said was often fueled by "truly impressive amounts of beer," landed her a job at The New York Times. She cut an unusual figure in The Times newsroom, wearing blue jeans, going barefoot and bringing in her dog, whose name was an expletive.
The dog's name, as we know from "Molly Ivins Can't Say That, Can She?", was Shit. She told of the times he'd escape from her on the street and she'd be standing there shouting "Shit! Shit, come back! Come back here, Shit!" to the amusement and consternation of passersby. She also said that he had "terrible politics" - back in Texas, at the Observer's office, he'd growl and snap at progressives who'd come to visit, while letting all manner of "no-account sumbitches" pet and play with him.
While she drew important writing assignments, like covering the Son of Sam killings and Elvis Presley's death, she sensed she did not fit in and complained that Times editors drained the life from her prose. "Naturally, I was miserable, at five times my previous salary," she later wrote. "The New York Times is a great newspaper: it is also No Fun."After a stint in Albany, she was transferred to Denver to cover the Rocky Mountain States, where she continued to challenge her editors' tolerance for prankish writing.
Covering an annual chicken slaughter in New Mexico in 1980, she used a sexually suggestive phrase, which her editors deleted from the final article. But her effort to use it angered the executive editor, A. M. Rosenthal, who ordered her back to New York and assigned her to City Hall, where she covered routine matters with little flair.
That "sexually suggestive phrase" was the infamous "gang pluck", which in my mind is an eminently apt description. I suppose I should thank the Gray Lady for reminding us of this story, while still reminding us why it was a story in the first place. Somehow, I think Molly would approve.
Yesterday, we were led to believe that the failure to suspend the 60-day rule meant a whole lot of nothing for the House in the immediate future. (The fact that this impression is substantively wrong in many respects is beside the point.) Today we hear that a compromise is on the horizon, and that it should be hammered out today. As reported by Laylan Copelin, "House Resolution 189 would allow local bills to move forward. [Rep. Warren] Chisum and the resolution opponents are negotiating the meaning of local."
That's the key sentence to this whole thing: Team Craddick is negotiating with the Democrats. They're doing this because they have to. As Rep. Mike Villarreal put it in his interview with Vince, the Dems had leverage here, they used it, and now they're bargaining from a position of strength. As long as the Dems have to use tactics like these to be able to have a say in what's happening, they will. Give them a seat at the table, and they won't because they won't have to. It's as simple as that.
Christof picks up the slack in the latest Universities line debate. Combine it with his look at the options for the Universities line, and now you've got a more comprehensive response to the Culberson op-ed from Sunday. Check 'em out.
As noted last week, the sale of the Comets to Hilton Koch has been completed.
The WNBA board of governors has approved sale of the Comets to Hilton Koch/Hilton Acquisitions, LLC, Rockets owner Leslie Alexander announced [Wednesday] at Toyota Center.The sale made Koch, owner and president of Hilton Furniture and Mattress, just the fifth independent owner of a WNBA franchise. The Comets will continue to be based in Houston and play at Toyota Center.
[...]
"I'd like to thank Leslie Alexander and the entire Rocket Ball organization for their commitment to the WNBA and for setting such high standards since the league's inception," said WNBA president Donna Orender. "I am confident that Hilton and his vision for the Houston Comets and his passion for the team and the community will continue to elevate the high standards that have been set."
"It was with great pleasure that Houston was awarded one of the first eight WNBA franchises," said Alexander. "We were a pioneer in women's basketball. The franchise had incredible success as it won the first four WNBA championships.
"Nothing is better in sports than to win a championship and get a championship ring and a trophy. The parades in downtown Houston were great fun and I hope the city enjoyed them.
"We worked very hard to find a local buyer and Hilton Koch will be a great owner who brings a lot of energy and passion for women's professional basketball. I believe he will work tirelessly to continue the winning tradition we have built over the past decade."
If enthusiasm counts for anything, Koch will be a good owner. He's certainly emotionally invested in the product, as well as being financially invested. It'll be interesting to see what he does differently. Oh, and there's the matter of hiring a coach, too. I'll be rooting for it all to go smoothly.
I've put Koch's letter to fans, which I as a season ticket holder got in my email, beneath the fold. More info on Koch and the team, from yesterday's press conference, is here. I note the following with some interest:
Q: Are you the WNBA's new version of Mark Cuban?A: "That's what I'm hearing. I don't mind that comparison at all. I plan to bring the energy and focus on the mission statement."
Yes, I've heard that, too.
UPDATE: Oops, missed this updated story. Two bits of interesting news from it:
Koch, who was a Comets corporate sponsor and is a Rockets season-ticket holder, said his goal is to raise $4 million from corporate sponsors. He also hoped to sell 1,000 season tickets during his first day as the team's owner and said ticket prices will remain unchanged.Paola Furber of Furber Advertising, which has handled Hilton Furniture's ad accounts for four years, said Koch "will reinvent the Comets. We have fresh faces and fresh ideas and a different approach to get the city excited about the team."
[...]
Also on hand for the announcement were former Comets star Cynthia Cooper, the women's basketball coach at Prairie View A&M, and Basketball Hall of Famer and former Rockets broadcaster Calvin Murphy.
"I've known Hilton for a while, and I would like to be involved in any way that can help take the franchise to another level," Murphy said.
That could include work in community development, his former job with the Rockets, or a return to the broadcast booth.
"That (broadcasting) has been my expertise for the last 15 years, so why not?" Murphy said.
Koch said he has not determined Murphy's role with the team but said he "has always been a friend to me."
Like I said, I'll be interested to see what Koch does with the marketing. That's an ambitious plan for selling season tickets, but I think it's doable. As for Calvin Murphy, you didn't think you'd heard the last of him, did you? I think I'd rather have him in the role of Goodwill Ambassador than broadcast booth member, but it's not up to me. Koch was admirably coy here, so we'll just have to find out what (if anything) this means.
Thank you for your support of the Houston Comets. I have enjoyed sharing the last three years with you as a supporter of the Comets and with Hilton Furniture & Mattress as a sponsor of the team. During that time, it has been clear to me that our fans are among the most avid, passionate and inspirational in all of professional sports. Today, I am extremely excited to announce that I have become the new owner of the Houston Comets. I am also proud to announce that the Comets will stay in Houston and continue to play at Toyota Center.In my life, I have always prayed that God would place me in situations that will allow me to have a powerful and positive impact in the community and in people's lives. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and I plan to take full advantage of it. The number one reason that I decided to become involved with the WNBA and the Houston Comets is to give back to the Houston community. The Comets have been and are a great resource to the people of Houston. Whether you want to support women, you are looking for female role models for your kids, you enjoy feeling connected to the team and players, you want to see first class entertainment at a great value, or you just love basketball, the Comets are your answer.
I believe that the Comets can be number one both on and off the court. Our goal is to be the model franchise in the entire WNBA and all of professional sports. I realize that for us to be number one, it all starts with you, our season ticket holders. I would like to pledge to you that we will strive to continually add value to your season tickets and offer outstanding customer service. We will need your continued support if we are going to be successful.
We have a lot of work to do before the start of the 2007 season. However, I know this is going to be the beginning of great things for the Comets. We are proud of the history and legacy that the Comets stand for, but we are more inspired about what the future holds!
In closing, I would like to again pledge to you that our entire organization is committed to making your Comets experience first class. When the Comets are playing, you belong in the stands. Ooooo! And That's A Fact Jack!
Go Comets!
Best Regards,
Hilton J. Koch
Owner
Houston Comets
Yesterday, the Chron reported about Sen. Rodney Ellis' announcement that he was filing legislation to ban smoking in public places throughout Texas, in a similar fashion as many municipal smoking bans. (We knew this was coming.) I was waiting for a followup story for after his announcement so I could have some details to blog about, but as far as I can tell there isn't one, so let's look at what we've got:
"A broad array of cities in Texas have stepped up and shown leadership on this issue," said Ellis, D-Houston. "In my judgment you have to make this a public awareness campaign. Members aren't champing at the bit to vote on this. They will feel as much pressure to vote on it from constituents as they will financial pressure from lobbyists and commercial establishments to vote against it."Fourteen Texas cities are smoke-free, and 47 have passed some type of limit on public smoking, including Houston, where a smoking ban will be expanded to bars in September.
When Houston passed the tougher ordinance in October, Mayor Bill White said he hoped the county and state would consider bans. Before the vote on the tougher city ordinance, Houston restaurant and bar owners had complained that they might lose smokers' business to restaurants outside the city.
Sixteen states have comprehensive smoke-free laws that prohibit smoking in all workplaces, restaurants and bars.
"We are one of those states that would be a tipping point," Ellis said. "If you fight this battle in Texas, it helps make the case elsewhere."
Sixty-six percent of Texans favor making the state's workplaces, restaurants and bars smoke-free, according to a survey conducted by pollster Mike Baselice earlier this month on behalf of "Smoke-Free Texas," which is advocating the legislation.
There isn't a House sponsor for this yet. Based on Ellis' statement that he's looking for someone to "help balance out the political dynamics", I'd say he's looking for a Republican to carry this in the House.
I do have some more info on this, courtesy of Sen. Ellis' office. I don't know why the press release says the level of support for the ban is 71% while the Chron story says 66%, but I'll try to find out.
Senator Rodney Ellis (D-Houston) and Smoke-Free Texas, a diverse health care coalition, today announced the filing of SB 368, legislation banning smoking in public places. The group also announced the results of a statewide poll showing an overwhelming majority of Texans support a statewide ban of smoking in public places.Smoke-Free Texas members include the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association and Texas PTA. The coalition is advocating that Texas join 16 other states that have passed comprehensive, smoke-free laws by passing SB 368.
A statewide poll commissioned by the coalition found that 71 percent of Texans would favor a statewide law eliminating smoking in all indoor workplaces and public facilities including public buildings, offices, restaurants and bars, according to Mike Baselice, president of Baselice and Associates, which conducted the poll. The statewide poll mirrors Texans' choice at the ballot box - 14 cities have passed comprehensive smoking bans and 47 others have passed more limited anti-smoking measures.
"Texans have spoken loud and clear: they want to ban smoking in public places and the best and most efficient way to do so is to pass this legislation," said Senator Ellis. "It is time for Texas take a giant leap forward for Texans' health and ban smoking in public places."
Senate Bill 368 will eliminate smoking in indoor public places, including municipal worksites and private worksites including restaurants, restaurant bars and stand-alone bars.
Secondhand smoke is a known cause of lung cancer, heart disease, low birth weight, chronic lung ailments (such as bronchitis and asthma) and other health problems, and it leads to the death of 53,000 Americans each year studies have found. Of Texans polled by Smoke-Free Texas, 92 percent said they realized that secondhand smoke is a health hazard.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, an estimated 37 percent of adult nonsmokers inhale secondhand smoke at home or work. Levels of secondhand smoke in bars are 3.9 to 6.1 times higher than in office worksites and up to 4.5 times higher than in homes with at least one smoker, according to the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Ellis predicted widespread support of the measure, and called on critics to join the fight by supporting this common-sense reform.
"It is interesting how some people will applaud efforts to put more funding in cancer research yet oppose a simple common sense legislative effort to keep more people from getting cancer," said Ellis. "This common-sense reform will have an enormous impact combating a disease that is responsible for a fourth of all Texas deaths. I call on all sides to join in the debate and work together to help reduce smoking in Texas."
Interesting reference to the legislative anti-cancer crusade there. I wouldn't have thought of that, but it's a sensible fulcrum to use for this effort. We'll see how it goes.
I've blogged before about Texas' prison population and why it's a problem of our own making and not one of inevitable demographics (see here and here for examples). On Tuesday, the relevant House committee heard some testimony from an expert who explained in detail why we can fix things without building more prisons.
More drug and alcohol treatment and fewer new prison cells could save Texas $442 million over the next five years, a new study shows.The study, presented Tuesday at a joint meeting of the House Corrections Committee and Senate Criminal Justice Committee, shows the state could avoid spending $377 million for construction of prisons for 5,000 more inmates.
The analysis also estimates the state could save another $65 million by reducing recidivism, diverting probationers into treatment and paroling nonviolent substance abusers sooner to halfway houses.
"This is not a Republican or Democratic issue," said House Corrections Committee Chairman Jerry Madden, R-Plano. "I look at it as being one that's smart for Texas."
[...]
The report, prepared by national criminal justice consultant Tony Fabelo, notes that Texas prisons are full and will run out of capacity unless the state changes its policies.
Part of the rethinking focuses on what to do with those who violate the terms of felony probation by relapsing on drugs or alcohol, said Fabelo, who was director of the state's defunct Criminal Justice Policy Council. "We need to enhance the probation-treatment component of the probation system so that we are able to stop the recycling of offenders coming in and out of our prisons," he said.
Fabelo estimated a change in policies could result in a prison population of 155,600 -- 12,500 fewer than if the state sticks to current policies.
Food for thought. Hopefully, the Perry/Dewhurst/Craddick threesome are listening.
As you might expect, there's plenty more info on this at Grits for Breakfast.