Election 2013

2017 results: National

Here’s a pretty good indicator of what kind of day it was yesterday for Democrats:

Big win in the Virginia Governor’s race (and the other VA statewide races), despite a couple metric tons of pearls being clutched going into Tuesday. A minimum of 14 seats picked up in the VA House of Delegates, moving that chamber from 66-34 GOP to no more than 52-48, with chances for further gains. Oh, and the single best election result of the day:

Democrat Danica Roem will become the first openly transgender person to be elected and serve as a state legislator, after ousting one of the country’s most anti-LGBT lawmakers in a closely watched Virginia House of Delegates race Tuesday. Her opponent, GOP Delegate Bob Marshall, has served in the state legislature for 26 years. He’s known for writing Virginia’s constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. This year he introduced a “bathroom bill”—intended to prohibit transgender individuals from using the restroom matching their gender identity; his own party killed that proposal in committee.

Roem isn’t the first transgender candidate to win a legislative race, but she will be the first to actually take office. Her campaign focused on issues like fixing the “miserable” traffic on local highways, increasing teacher pay, and bringing jobs to the region. When I asked her last week about the historic nature of the race, Roem said that the truly historic development was that Route 28 will finally be fixed.

“Tonight voters chose a smart, solutions-oriented trans leader over a divisive anti-LGBTQ demagogue—sending a powerful message to anti-trans legislators all across the nation,” Aisha C. Moodie-Mills, President & CEO of the Victory Fund, an organization dedicated to electing LGBT lawmakers that supported Roem’s campaign, said in a statement. “Danica defeated ‘Bigot Bob’ Marshall not because she is transgender, but because she presented a positive vision for her constituents that will improve their lives.”

Virginia isn’t Texas, and that was a district that Hillary Clinton carried in 2016, but I have to think that a few anti-trans Republicans, maybe even here in this state, will take a look at that result and have a second thought or two. We need a whole lot more people to lose elections over being anti-LGBT.

Meanwhile, New Jersey elected a Democratic Governor and made gains in that state’s legislature (both chambers of which Dems already controlled) as well. The state of Maine voted to expand Medicaid over the strenuous objections of their troglodyte governor. And there’s this:

Pushback against Donald Trump helped lift Democrats to governorships in the two highest-profile U.S. elections since the 2016 presidential contest. In Virginia, voters by a 2-1 margin said they were casting their ballot to show opposition to Trump rather than support for him. In New Jersey the margin was nearly 3-1. And Trump’s weak approval rating among voters in Virginia, 40 percent, was weaker still in New Jersey, a dismal 34 percent.

Relatedly, a surge in turnout by politically liberal voters boosted Virginia Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam, as did a broad advantage on health care, which voters by a wide margin identified as the top issue in the vote.

So, maybe being against Trump can be a winner? Just a thought. Yes, of course, you have to stand for something, and the Democratic brand needs some work on that. But Dems are really mad about what happened last year, and that was clearly enough to help push a bunch of them to the polls. I can’t wait to see all the hot takes on this one.

Wilson whines to Commissioners Court

Apr 14th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Dave Wilson would like to not be sued any more, so he went to Commissioners Court to air his grievances over the lawsuit that stemmed from his controversial election last year.

Dave Wilson

After Wilson won the election, and County Attorney Vince Ryan sued Wilson, trying to keep him from office. To prove it before trial, Ryan combed over Wilson’s family Facebook pages and added his wife and kids to a witness list.

After he found that out Wilson told us, “They’re abusing their power. Vince Ryan is totally out of control.”

On Tuesday, Wilson was at commissioners’ court to ask it all to stop.

“I apologize for taking your time and I especially apologize for the county attorney wasting valuable taxpayer resources on his frivolous lawsuit against me,” he told Commissioners.

He claimed the county attorney has spent $100,000 on the case. The county attorney says the real amount (not counting staff time) is just under $8,000.

Among the costs, the county spent $3,000 on private investigators to trail Wilson. At least one of those PIs rented a room at the Super 8 across from Wilson’s claimed residence capturing video of Wilson coming in and out of that warehouse apartment.

When he saw the video Wilson told us, “He caught me red handed living at my residence.”

The county attorney’s office says this is important work to protect voters who deserve a representative who lives where he says he does.

“Mr. Wilson likes the publicity. He likes to make these appearances and he likes to make allegations that are difficult to respond to,” Robert Soard, Ryan’s chief of staff, told Eyewitness News.

That trial was originally set to start this week, but this story says it’s been moved back to July. Not sure what’s up with that. The fact that Wilson has been filmed at the warehouse he’s claiming as a home address is irrelevant; the question is whether he was living there in some meaningful sense before the election. The difficulty for Vince Ryan is how do you prove he wasn’t? If their case is based on the assertion that it isn’t habitable, Wilson can say “is too, I’m living there now!” I don’t want to think about how insufferable Wilson will be if he wins and can credibly claim to have been victimized by that mean old Vince Ryan. And I’ll say again, if Wilson does win we may as well just abandon the idea of residency requirements, because if his setup is kosher I can’t imagine what wouldn’t be. May as well just leave it to the voters if there isn’t an enforceable standard and an enforcement mechanism.

AG opines against Early To Rise

Mar 31st, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

This kind of snuck in there.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued an opinion Monday saying a court would likely have found a petition effort last year to send a 1-cent property tax hike to voters to buoy local preschools to be illegal.

[…]

On Monday, Abbott wrote in a 4-page opinion addressed to state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, who requested it, saying: “Because the Legislature has not authorized an election for the purpose of increasing a tax rate of a (countywide school district), a court would likely conclude that” the law does “not authorize a CSD to hold a petition-initiative election to increase the county equalization tax.”

Read the opinion here.

“I am grateful for the attorney general’s clear opinion today confirming the illegality of the Early To Rise initiative,” Emmett said in a statement. “Despite numerous threats of lawsuits, it was clear to me that this bizarre proposal was illegal and wrong-headed. It’s gratifying to have the confirmation of both the appellate court and the state of Texas.”

See here, here, and here for the background. Basically, the Early To Rise campaign submitted petition signatures on behalf of the Harris County School Readiness Corp, but County Judge Ed Emmett refused to put the measure on the ballot, a decision that was allowed to stand when the 14th Court of Appeals declined to hear HCSRC’s appeal. County Attorney Vince Ryan also submitted a request for an opinion on Emmett’s behalf, not that it makes much difference. As we know, AG opinions aren’t binding but they do have an effect, and as such I don’t see how the same process, with a differently worded petition, would be viable again. I do think we haven’t heard the last of this, however. The question is where they go from here. Neither the webpage nor the Facebook page has any reaction to the AG opinion. I sure hope there is a way forward of some kind, because there are lots of benefits to universal pre-K. Judge Emmett opposed the petition process but supports the idea. Surely there is a way to work this out and have another go in a way everyone agrees is legally acceptable.

January campaign finance reports for Houston officeholders

Feb 7th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

One more set of finance reports to document, from city of Houston officeholders and candidates. I’m not going to link to the individual reports this time, since the city’s system automatically downloads the PDFs and I don’t feel like uploading these all to my Google drive. Here are the basic summaries, with my comments afterwards


Officeholder   Office    Raised    Spent     Loan     Cash
==========================================================
Parker          Mayor   121,165  574,185        0  461,089

Green      Controller     6,575   39,253        0   14,585

Costello          AL1    81,200   62,410   15,000  144,753  
Robinson          AL2    26,246   33,265        0   32,918
Kubosh            AL3    83,691   84,157   15,000   11,452
Bradford          AL4     8,050   30,257        0   33,485
Christie          AL5    15,275   11,606        0   10,548

Stardig             A     5,250   30,393        0   24,238
Davis               B    19,300   28,798        0   84,551
Cohen               C    47,982   76,405        0   93,364
Boykins             D    16,375   49,004        0    6,727
Martin              E    45,650   27,968        0   43,423
Nguyen              F    21,269    5,795        0    8,750
Pennington          G    13,550   30,046        0  192,142
Gonzales            H    40,375   33,623        0   90,782
Gallegos            I    38,882   18,279        0   22,940
Laster              J     3,500    8,081        0   77,408
Green               K    10,150   15,455        0   77,366


Hale             SD15         0      472        0        0
Noriega          HCDE         0    8,690    1,000    9,335

Chavez            AL3     3,150    6,652      160   15,716
Calvert           AL3     1,600   65,031   10,000    2,654
Brown               A    21,969   22,121        0   25,729
Peck                A         0    2,811        0        0
Knox                A     1,220   17,271        0      931
Richards            D     2,000   16,043        0    2,727
Jones, J            D         0        0        0    3,203
Provost             D     7,960    9,033        0       15
Edwards             D     3,745    4,415        0        0
Rodriguez           I         0    3,581        0    6,731
Garces              I    32,950   49,802        0        0
Ablaza              I       380   10,288        0      673
Mendez              I     2,050   19,120        0        0

Mayor Parker has a decent amount on hand, not as much as she had after some other elections, but then she won’t be on any ballot until 2018, so there’s no rush. I know she has at least one fundraiser happening, and I’m sure she’ll have a solid start on fundraising for whatever office she might have her eye on in four years’ time.

And speaking of being prepared for the next election, CM Costello is in pretty good shape, too. It’ll take a lot more money than that to mount a successful campaign for Mayor in 2015, and there are likely to be several strong candidates competing for the usual pots of cash, but every little bit helps.

The other At Large incumbents are in reasonable shape. Both Kubosh and Christie have done some degree of self-funding, so their totals aren’t worrisome. While I believe there will be some competitive At Large races in 2015, and not just in the two open seats, I don’t think anyone will be caught short in this department the way Andrew Burks was.

I continue to marvel at the totals in the district seats. Many of those incumbents have been helped by not having well-financed opponents. CMs Gonzales and Pennington are well placed if they have their eyes on another race. Personally, I think CM Gonzales ought to consider running for City Controller. If nothing else, that will likely be less crowded than the Mayor’s race in 2015.

CM Richard Nguyen, who was nicely profiled by Mustafa Tameez recently, received nearly half of his total – $9,500, to be exact – from various PACs after the election; this is called “late train” money. As far as the money he received from individuals, every one of them had a Vietnamese name. That’s some good networking there.

Of the others listed, two of them – Ron Hale and Melissa Noriega – are running for something in 2014. The rest, with one exception, was either an unsuccessful candidate in 2013 or a term-limited Council member. The exception is former CM Jolanda Jones, whose eligibility to run for something else remains disputed. The one notable thing in this bunch is the $25K that now-former CM Helena Brown had on hand. Given that CM Brenda Stardig left a lot of money unspent in 2011 when Brown knocked her off, there’s a certain irony to that. Beyond that, no one left themselves very much for a subsequent campaign if they have one in mind. I won’t be surprised if one or more people on this list runs for something again, perhaps in 2015, but if so they’ll be starting out as they did in 2013.

How the voter ID law was and was not enforced in Harris County

Jan 30th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

Greg does some investigative reporting on how the new voter ID law was actually applied in Harris County in the 2013 election.

Still the only voter ID anyone should need

So what percentage of voters ended up signing an affidavit? … and what does it suggest about how the law was administered?

To get that answer, I obtained records from the Harris County Clerk and commenced tabulating the data. I’ll be spelling out some of these results in the days ahead. For now, here’s the big-ticket takeaway: voters in Harris County were qualified to vote by election workers in extremely different ways depending on the location that the voter voted at. In several locations, the law was followed in a manner as close to thorough as might be humanly possible. In others, it didn’t appear that election workers had gotten the figurative memo about the new law. In a plurality of Early Vote locations, the results were mixed.

For introductory purposes, a small sketch of the data: Trini Mendenhall Sosa Community Center in Spring Branch had signed affidavits from 0.43% (as in less than 1%) of its voters. Meanwhile, neighboring West Gray Multi-Service Center saw 15.1% of its voters sign affidavits. In other words: if you wanted to experience “no problem” with the law, then Sosa was the place for you to go vote. If you wish to subject yourself to more scrutiny by election workers, then head to West Gray. Discrepancies like this were rampant in Harris County. And I’m willing to guess that it’s not the way that architects of the law intended it to be administered.

What I find interesting about these results is that, for all intents and purposes, nobody can say for certain that the new law was followed in any kind of meaningful way. It’s that conclusion that makes it impossible to say “there was no problem” with the law since the law effectively wasn’t administered. I have little doubt that election workers knew to ask for a photo ID and that there may, indeed, be only the most minor of problems exhibited with this task during a low-turnout election. But if election workers weren’t checking the names on the ID against the names on the voting rolls, then there should be no assurance that they were doing anything meaningful with those IDs.

Through the remainder of this week, I’ll be rolling out some of the findings, and raw data to demonstrate how this played out in Harris County. Ultimately, I think there are findings that are likely to concern both advocates of the law as well as opponents. And while I’m not a believer in the necessity of the law, I think there are several things to review before the law goes full scale in a Presidential year.

Read the whole thing. Greg was an Election Clerk this year, so he got that training he’s talking about, and he is a staffer for State Rep. Gene Wu, so he’s in a position to help influence any potential changes to this law, assuming it doesn’t eventually get thrown out by the courts. For my own experience, I voted early twice at the West Gray location, once in the November election and once in the December runoff. In November I showed my ID and voted as always, no muss and no fuss. In December, the election clerk at West Gray noticed that my voter reg card has my full middle name and my “III” suffix while my drivers license has just my middle initial and no suffix, and had me sign the affidavit. So even at the same location, there were variations. I look forward to seeing the rest of Greg’s data.

Trial date set for Wilson residency lawsuit

Jan 24th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Mark your calendars.

Dave Wilson

County officials have dropped their request to temporarily keep Houston Community College trustee Dave Wilson from his office in favor of an expedited trial date that will allow jurors to decide if he lives in District 2.

Last month, the county sued to prevent Wilson from serving on the HCC board amid questions about his residency.

On Tuesday, First Assistant Harris County Attorney Robert Soard confirmed that the county will stop pursuing immediate legal action against Wilson in exchange for a civil trial beginning on April 15.

“We decided that it would be helpful to the people of District 2 and the people of the state of Texas to get this trial over with as quickly as we can,” Soard said late Tuesday. “We reached an agreement with Mr. Wilson through his lawyer that we would drop our request for a temporary injunction. In return, they would agree to an expedited trial.”

Wilson is ready for a jury to consider the case.

“I look forward to the speedy trial and getting my name cleared,” he said late Tuesday. “They’ve got a losing case and they know it. … I hope they come to their senses. This is nothing but partisan politics.”

The temporary restraining order preventing Wilson from taking his seat had already been lifted, so it’s not a huge concession to quit fighting that battle. I have no doubt that both sides would like to get the core issues resolved, so an expedited court date makes sense. I can’t wait to see what happens.

TRO against Wilson lifted

Jan 16th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

He gets to take his seat. After that, I don’t know what happens.

Dave Wilson

A judge Wednesday declined to prohibit small businessman and anti-gay activist Dave Wilson from taking his seat at the first meeting of the board of the Houston Community College Thursday.

State District Judge Brent Gamble turned back efforts by the Harris County Attorney’s Office to get a new temporary restraining order to keep Wilson from taking the dais as questions about his residency are litigated.

Another civil court judge had previously granted a restraining order prohibiting Wilson from taking the oath of office and declined to issue another one, saying the issues raised around Wilson will be heard in the court where the case landed when it was filed in December.

Wilson’s position is that he was not properly served with the restraining order before taking the oath at the beginning of the year after being elected in November.

This is the early story – it wasn’t on the houstonchronicle.com site by the time I went to bed – so I don’t know what Judge Gamble’s reasoning was. From this, it seems he can be seated but not take the oath of office, and I have no idea what that means. Nor do I know what happens if Judge Engelhart eventually rules that Wilson was ineligible for the ballot. So for at least one meeting, Wilson gets to be a trustee, and sometime after next week we find out if there’s an asterisk next to his name or not.

UPDATE: The paywall story is the same is the chron.com version, so that’s all we’ve got for now.

Wilson gets to take his seat

Jan 15th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

The legal battles continue, but HCC will swear in Dave Wilson today regardless.

Dave Wilson

Houston Community College has cleared Dave Wilson to take his seat at this week’s board meeting despite legal uncertainty raised by Harris County officials about the trustee-elect’s residency and prior to a possible court ruling on Wednesday that could prevent him from serving.

“Right now, Mr. Wilson has been elected and has taken an oath of office, and there is no prohibition from any court that would prevent him from taking his seat, so – from the perspective of Houston Community College – there is no legal basis at this time to deny him the opportunity to sit as a trustee,” HCC special counsel Gene Locke said on Tuesday.

[…]

Locke clarified that HCC did not participate in the controversy about where Wilson lives.

“HCC has not involved itself and is not involved in the legal issue regarding his residency,” he said. “It is a matter between the County Attorney’s office, appropriately, and Dave Wilson. We will abide by the outcome of any judicial proceeding regarding his residency.”

Most immediately, county officials are focused on a pending request that could prevent the trustee-elect from serving.

“We anticipate that the court will making a ruling on that on Wednesday,” said Robert Soard, the county attorney’s first assistant. “We’re asking the judge to order him not to participate until a judge has had an opportunity to hear evidence from both sides.”

He added that HCC’s decision has no impact on the case filed by Ryan.

“The restraining order only applies to Mr. Wilson. It does not apply to the Houston Community College or the board of trustees,” Soard said. “The restraining order was to prohibit him from taking office. We believe he violated that restraining order because he has stated he has taken the oath of office.”

Operating as a trustee on Thursday would be a further violation, according to Soard, who has stated previously that the HCC board would be irreparably harmed if Wilson takes office and casts votes while the courts decide if he is eligible to serve.

So just to clarify here, there’s the original restraining order, which barred Wilson from taking the oath of office, an order that he ignored, and there’s the lawsuit over his residency, for which there was a hearing on Monday, with another hearing to consider additional filings next week. With me so far? The lawsuit is in the court of Judge Mike Engelhart, but the hearing on the TRO, which was granted by Judge Elaine Palmer, will be heard by Judge Brent Gamble. If HCC is going to seat Wilson tomorrow, then I’m not sure what purpose the TRO, if it gets extended, would serve. I’m also not sure what will happen if Judge Engelhart eventually rules that Wilson is in violation of residency requirements. Have I mentioned that it would be nice to have an agreed-upon standard for this sort of thing that could be enforced in a timely fashion? Because that sure would have been nice to have here. We’ll see what the courts give us today. Stace has more.

Wilson’s status is still up in the air

Jan 14th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

The suspense is killing me.

Dave Wilson

The restraining order prohibiting newly elected Houston Community College trustee Dave Wilson from taking the oath of office until questions about his residency can be resolved will remain in effect for another two weeks, a judge ruled Monday, and the legality of a private swearing-in reported by the District 2 representative is still unclear.

Meanwhile, the HCC board is scheduled to convene and elect officers on Thursday.

Whether Wilson will be allowed on or restricted from the dais is undetermined. Whether trustees can proceed with the meeting or vote on items before the District 2 trustee-elect’s legal matters are resolved also is unknown.

[…]

After the filing, the trustee-elect submitted notarized documents to the Texas Secretary of State’s office and HCC showing that he already had been sworn in.

Reiterating what he said at a hearing last Friday, State District Court Judge Mike Engelhart said Monday that he wants to hear more information on several issues before ruling on whether Wilson can take office.

Keith Gross, Wilson’s attorney, said his client plans to appeal Monday’s ruling.

“It’s like granting an injunction against knocking a building down after the building has been knocked down,” he said in court.

Robert Soard, the county attorney’s first assistant, said the HCC board would be irreparably harmed if Wilson takes office and casts votes while the courts decide if he is eligible to serve.

It would be nice if Judge Engelhart could issue a ruling before Thursday’s meeting, but I can’t blame him for wanting to get all the information he can before making up his mind. At this point, I don’t think anything would surprise me.

There’s a lot of talk in the comments to the previous post about this officeholder or that not meeting residency requirements, with some rumbling about other complains being filed. Knock yourselves out, I say. What I want out of the Wilson case, more than anything else, is for there to be a standard that we can all more or less agree on as to what “residency” actually means. If Wilson is found to meet that standard, then I don’t see how anyone could fail to meet it. If he is found to be in violation, then at least we have a line that has been drawn, and we can see if anyone else falls outside it. First things first, though, and that’s to decide about Wilson.

You can’t stop Dave Wilson

Jan 12th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

13 comments

You can only hope to restrain him.

Dave Wilson

The battle over whether Dave Wilson is actually a Houston Community College trustee could come to a head on Thursday when the 67-year-old tries to take the seat behind the District II placard on the board’s dais.

“I’m going to represent the citizens of my district,” Wilson said Friday after a hearing on his residency. “I’m going to sit up front, vote and do the whole thing. I might even lobby to become chair.”

Wilson, a small-business owner and anti-gay activist, spoke after an hourlong hearing about the procedural machinations of a lawsuit the Harris County Attorney’s Office filed last month.

County Attorney Vince Ryan is alleging that Wilson was not legally elected to the board in November because he is not a resident of the district in which he ran.

A temporary restraining order issued in December prohibited Wilson from taking the oath of office, but Wilson filed notarized paperwork last week with the Texas Secretary of State’s Office showing he was sworn in on Jan. 1.

State District Judge Mike Englehart on Friday asked lawyers for Wilson and the county to file additional arguments about whether Wilson can take office while the lawsuit is being litigated, among other issues.

[…]

First Assistant County Attorney Robert Soard said the restraining order prohibits Wilson from taking the oath of office, so he is not a legal office holder.

“In my view, it would be like any citizen walking up there and sitting down,” Soard said. “It would be up to the HCC board to decide what they would do in that situation.”

Whatever else Dave Wilson may think of himself, he’s not the decider here. If Judge Engelhart puts a restraining order in place, he doesn’t get to take his seat, and that’s all there is to it. As I said before, HCC would be wise to have lawyers and security present in the event Wilson is legally barred from taking office at that time. They should explain the status of the court case to him, and for whoever else is present, and be prepared to usher him out the door if he refuses to back down. Until and unless he’s legally cleared to be sworn in by someone other than himself, he’s just another member of the public, and he should be treated as such. Obviously, if Judge Engelhart rules in Wilson’s favor then he gets to be sworn in as normal, but if not he needs to abide by that. The law applies to Dave Wilson, too.

Since it comes up in the comments every time I write about Dave Wilson, let’s be clear that I don’t fear him taking office for a minute. If he actually has evidence of current trustees or contractors or whoever else acting unethically, or if he has some hot ideas for how to improve ethics on the HCC board, great. Bring it on. But until he actually produces such evidence, or an ethics proposal, I see no reason to take him at his word. For a guy who claims to be a paragon of transparency and ethical behavior, he’s shown a remarkable willingness to push the boundaries of the law, to act deceptively for his own gain, and to be closed-mouth about his own personal information. His support of the deeply unethical Yolanda Navarro Flores at the very least calls into question his judgment about what ethical behavior is. I searched election results going back through 2001 and this is the first time he’s even run for an HCC position in that time, so it’s not like he’s some longtime crusader for this job who finally prevailed. He could prove me wrong – anything can happen – and if he does, great. More ethics is a good thing. I just see no reason to have any expectation of this outcome. I see him as a provocateur, and he managed to catch lightning in a bottle. What he does with it if he gets the chance remains to be seen, but my expectations are decidedly low.

Runoff precinct analysis: At Large races

Jan 10th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

I finally got a draft canvass report from the Harris County Clerk for the December runoff elections. Let’s take a look at the two At Large runoffs and see what we can learn about them. Here’s At Large #2:


Dist  Burks Robinson  Burks %   Rob %
=====================================
A     2,145    2,331   47.92%  52.08%
B     1,798      451   79.95%  20.05%
C     1,464    4,286   25.46%  74.54%
D     4,244    1,229   77.54%  22.46%
E     1,086    1,347   44.64%  55.36%
F       278      418   39.94%  60.06%
G     1,280    2,980   30.05%  69.95%
H       791      820   49.10%  50.90%
I     1,425    1,459   49.41%  50.59%
J       300      471   38.91%  61.09%
K     1,292    1,006   56.22%  43.78%

Andrew Burks did pretty well where he needed to, in Districts B, D, and K – better than he did in the 2011 runoff, at least on a percentage basis. It seems likely to me that the lesser turnout this year hurt him. He had about a 5,000 vote lead in B and D in 2011, but only a 4,400 vote lead this year, a drop of 600 votes in a race he lost by 500 votes. I don’t mean to pile on Burks, but I have to think that a better candidate could have pulled this one out. Robinson did just enough in C and G to edge him. It’ll be interesting to see if he draws a serious challenger in 2015.

On to At Large #3:


Dist Morales  Kubosh    Mor %   Kub %
=====================================
A      2,108   2,755   43.35%  56.65%
B        862   1,359   38.81%  61.19%
C      2,784   2,821   49.67%  50.33%
D      1,800   3,601   33.33%  66.67%
E      1,347   1,271   51.45%  48.55%
F        404     332   54.89%  45.11%
G      2,155   2,280   48.59%  51.41%
H        944     739   56.09%  43.91%
I      1,962   1,156   62.92%  37.08%
J        437     376   53.75%  46.25%
K        954   1,345   41.50%  58.50%

Despite Michael Kubosh’s relatively substantial win, it looks to me like the conditions were there for Roy Morales to pull it out. He held his own in the Republican districts, and got a boost from the elevated turnout in the District I runoff. He lost in B, D, and K, where you would expect Kubosh to do well, but he didn’t get creamed. If he had had David Robinson’s numbers in District C, he would have won. Obviously, Mayor Parker did not get involved, and Kubosh did a decent job of presenting himself to Parker supporters, which enabled him to not only be competitive in C but to carry it. You have to tip your hat to that. Further, despite my speculation that there could be a significant undervote in this race, the undervote rate was less in AL3 than it was in AL2. As with Robinson, I look forward to seeing who, if anyone, decides to challenge Kubosh in two years. Both of them, but especially Kubosh, can affect that with their performance in office. I can’t wait to see how it goes when Mayor Parker gets on with the rest of her third term agenda.

I’ll have a look at the other races in a later entry. In the meantime, let me know what you think about these numbers.

Falkenberg on Dave Wilson’s residency

Jan 9th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

7 comments

Lisa Falkenberg has another chat with Dave Wilson to try and solve the mystery of where he really lives.

Dave Wilson

No bathtub. No refrigerator. No TV.

If 67-year-old small businessman Dave Wilson really lives in a warehouse apartment on West 34th Street, and not with his wife, as he claims, it’s a pretty Spartan existence. And not a particularly clean, well-fed or entertaining one.

An inspection this week by City of Houston code enforcement didn’t help the Houston Community College trustee-elect in his quest to prove he meets district residency requirements for the job. The city ended up slapping a bright orange sticker to the glass door of the warehouse, indicating he doesn’t have permission to use it as a residence.

“Change of occupancy to reflecting living quarters on 2nd floor. Plans required,” it reads, warning that failure to comply may result in citations with minimum fines of $500-$2,000 per incident.

Photos from the city inspection, provided to me by Harris County Attorney Vince Ryan’s office, depict sparsely furnished rooms with mostly bare walls, tabletops and counters.

“If you look at these photographs, it does not look like he’s been living there for two years,” said Ryan, who sued Wilson to try and prove the trustee-elect didn’t live in the district he ran to represent.

Ryan, whose office had requested its own tour of the residence but never got one, said he wasn’t surprised by the city’s findings.

“We believe it’s very clear cut,” Ryan said. “Every piece of evidence we see indicates he does not have his address at West 34th Street.”

Too bad Wilson didn’t take my advice and have Falkenberg drop by for a visit, a courtesy he did apparently extend to the local Fox affiliate. Instead, she only got to see the County Attorney’s evidence, which needless to say isn’t favorable to Dave. Wilson is free to show or not show whatever he wants to anyone – other than the judge, of course – but it seems to me he could have advanced his PR if he’d given Falkenberg a tour. Assuming the place does resemble an actual residence, that is. If it is what he says it is, then he prevails in court, his critics look like fools, and the issue is settled forevermore. For a guy who claims, not without some justification, that everyone is out to get him, you’d think he might want to shove the evidence of his righteousness in their faces, but instead he’s playing it close to the vest. Which might lead to a Perry Mason moment in the courthouse, but which also raises a question that Falkenberg brings up:

He’s probably right that some people are scared to death to get him on that board. Wilson has vowed to bring transparency to the often opaque operations of the HCC board and to request independent audits of finances. Heads could roll.

It would be a welcome change. But candidates promising open, honest leadership should walk the walk. Playing fast and loose with election laws and ignoring a temporary restraining order aren’t good ways to start out. Districts exist for a reason: to give citizens a better chance at electing someone who represents them and their interests.

This latest episode, added to the list of Wilson’s other antics, makes me wonder if he’d be a breath of fresh air on that board, or a disaster.

Yes, for a guy who claims to be all about openness and ethics and all that, he sure is less than forthcoming about his own business. As for the matter of districts, I’ve said my piece on that. What I’m going to say now is that the reason we are where we are is because the residency requirements we have on the books are basically a polite fiction for which no effective enforcement mechanism exists. We should either fix that or acknowledge that we just don’t really care. We’re in this debate now because we don’t have an agreed-upon standard of what it means to be a “resident” of a political subdivision, and because even if we did there was no way to objectively validate Dave Wilson’s residency before the election; remember, HCC’s Board and general counsel said it wasn’t their job to vet his application. Not having a standard and a means of validating someone’s candidacy serves no one, and that includes Wilson. Either we do something about this, or we ditch the whole idea and let people file for whatever they want, and leave it to the voters to sort out who represents them and who doesn’t.

I thought the case of Sen. Brian Birdwell in 2010 was as clear a violation of residency requirements you’re likely to see, with Birdwell casting a vote in Virginia at a time when he would have needed to be a resident of Texas to be eligible to run for the Senate. The challenge to his candidacy failed, not on the merits but on technicalities of jurisdiction and documentation provenance. I thought at the time that was telling us that the requirements we had were basically meaningless and that we should act accordingly. This is another test of that hypothesis. If Wilson prevails, then let’s agree that anyone with the wherewithal to declare himself or herself a resident of a given location – a relative, a second home, an office, a warehouse, what have you – is one for the purposes of the law and get on with our lives. Even if Wilson is found to be ineligible, we really owe it to ourselves and every future candidate to clarify the requirements up and down the ballot, one way or another. That’s something the Legislature could address in 2015. If it means a bunch of current incumbents have to scramble to buy a new house between now and their next filing deadline, that’s fine by me. If it means that residency is little more than a state of mind in the eyes of the law, then so be that. Let’s just pick one and stick with it. That has to be better than what we have now, which are winks and nods and the occasional lawsuit.

Wilson swears himself in

Jan 4th, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

5 comments

Of course he does.

Dave Wilson

Days after a Harris County judge signed a temporary restraining order barring Houston Community College trustee-elect Dave Wilson from taking the oath of office, the perennial candidate submitted notarized documents to the state showing he has been sworn in.

Wilson, 67, a small-business owner and anti-gay activist whose eligibility to serve on the HCC board is being challenged in court, filed oath-of-office papers with the secretary of state’s office on Thursday, the office confirmed.

Spokeswoman Alicia Pierce said it is not legally required for local elected officials to file oath-of-office papers with the state, as it is for statewide elected officials.

HCC lawyer Gene Locke said the college – not the state – is the proper filing authority and also received the documents via fax on Thursday. Locke said Wilson completed the appropriate paperwork newly elected officials must file to be legally sworn in, but whether it must be honored will be decided in court.

“The legal issue is whether or not the temporary restraining order prohibited him from taking the oath of office and, therefore, if the oath of office, the swearing in, is valid,” Locke said. “We’re kind of a bystander waiting to see how this thing plays out.”

[…]

Wilson’s lawyer, Keith Gross, said he did not tell his client to submit the oath-of-office papers because it would be unethical for an attorney to advise his client to violate a court order. Gross also said he did not know Wilson was planning to do so.

“This is something I decided all on my own,” Wilson said. Asked why he did not wait for an official swearing-in ceremony, Wilson said, “I wanted to take that position just as soon as I could.”

Wilson said he figured out what documents needed to be filed at the swearing-in ceremony of two other board trustees just after the Dec. 14 runoff election.

“I was amazed at how simple it was, quite frankly,” he said. “It doesn’t take a legal mind.”

You kind of have to admire the utter disregard for protocol. Dave Wilson just doesn’t care, and he doesn’t care if you care. Who even knew you could self-administer an oath of office? The question is whether anyone besides Wilson and his buddies will take his do-it-yourself oath job seriously. If the TRO is still in effect at the time of the next board meeting on January 16, what do the other Board members do when Wilson shows up and demands to take his seat at the table? I don’t know, but it might make for the most interesting board meeting in the history of forever. My advice to Gene Locke is to be thoroughly read up on all the relevant statutes and case law and be prepared to quote them from memory, because I bet Wilson will have a few cites to throw at you. And a little extra security, just in case, wouldn’t hurt, either. Campos has more.

Judge grants TRO halting Dave Wilson’s inauguration to HCC

Jan 2nd, 2014

by Charles Kuffner.

15 comments

From the inbox:

A state district judge has ordered David Wilson to refrain from taking an oath of office to serve as trustee of Houston Community College System District II until a court can determine the issue of his residency.

Judge Elaine Palmer granted the application filed by Harris County Attorney Vince Ryan asking that David Buren Wilson be prohibited from being sworn in until a court can hear evidence about where Wilson actually resides.

Harris County Attorney Ryan filed suit last week in the 151st District Court questioning whether Wilson was a resident of Houston Community College District II at the time he was elected.

The judge set a hearing for January 10th at 3 pm.

See here for the background, and here for a copy of the restraining order. Here’s the Chron story:

Dave Wilson

Harris County Attorney Vince Ryan said it is unclear if Wilson resides at 5600 West 34th Street., which is the address he used in order to be eligible to run for the college district’s Place II position.

Wilson’s attorney, Keith Gross, questioned what is motivating the probe, including whether other board members fear Wilson will uncover corruption in their ranks.

He said his client, a 67-year-old small businessman, lives in an apartment inside the building, gets his mail there and has the address on his driver’s license.

“We are going to fight this all the way,” Gross said. “As long as I have known David Wilson, he does not roll over, ever.”

I believe that. I believe Dave Wilson will appeal this to the end of the earth and back again. I hope you know what you’re in for, Vince Ryan. Because Dave Wilson can’t be bargained with. He can’t be reasoned with. He doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And he absolutely will not stop, ever.

Wilson did not return requests for comment, including an opportunity to let a Houston Chronicle reporter inside the metallic two-story building to see his quarters.

County appraisal district records describe it as a commercial building with 11,340 square feet of space. It appears to hold at least one classroom and a warehouse area.

[…]

Ryan, the county attorney, said the building does not appear to have an occupancy permit required for it to be a residence, and might not have undergone proper inspections.

Let’s talk about the residency requirements to run for office for a minute. I personally draw a distinction between residency in a district and residency in a taxing entity such as a county, city, school district, or community college district. District lines are drawn on sand. For districts determined by our Legislature, we’re lucky to have two consecutive elections where they’re all the same. As we learned in 2003, they can be changed at any time if the Governor wants them to be changed. People are regularly drawn into and out of various districts for political purposes. I’m in a different State Rep district and a different State Senate district than I was in 2011, and it’s not because I’ve moved. It happens all the time, and while I think it’s a perfectly valid campaign issue, I am comfortable with there being a very loose definition of who “lives” in what district for eligibility purposes.

It’s very different for taxes, ordinances, regulations, and other things may apply based on whether or not you live within that entity. If you’re running for a Harris County office, you better damn well live in Harris County. Same for Houston and other cities, HISD and other school districts, HCC and other community college districts. We just had a Mayor’s race where that was a salient issue, as it should have been. I don’t need anyone to be a native of these places, or even to be a longtime resident. I just need you to have the same skin in the game I do, and for this I don’t tolerate shenanigans.

That’s why this matters for Dave Wilson. The key point of contention is that Wilson actually lives outside of HCC’s territory, in a house on 7370 Lake Lane that is listed on the property tax rolls in the name of his wife, Connie. That house, which is in the taxing region for Lone Star Community College, has a homestead exemption on it, as you would expect for a primary residence. If that is where Wilson really lives, then he has no skin in the game by my lights and thus has no business running for HCC Trustee at all.

It would have been best to deal with this before the election, but the fact that Bruce Austin was too incompetent a candidate to raise the issue in time shouldn’t mean that Wilson gets a free pass. Permits and inspections are one piece of evidence, but we all know that there are plenty of homes in Houston for which that paperwork isn’t in order. So show me that 5600 W 34th St is really someplace someone would live. Show me that it’s got a bed, a shower, a fridge, a microwave oven, and a hookup for cable, satellite, or the Internet. Actually, show me that it has at least three beds, because if you do a voter registration search by address for “5600 w 34th”, you get three registrations, one each for David Buren Wilson, Cameron Hunter Wilson, and Taylor Renee Wilson. Are there really three people living there? If so, I will withdraw all my objections and will urge County Attorney Ryan to drop the lawsuit. Maybe Wilson will let Lisa Falkenberg drop by and see what she thinks. For what it’s worth, I found no registrations at 7370 Lake Lane.

One more thing. As I noted before, up until at least 2011, Dave Wilson had been using a different warehouse as his “home” for voter registration purposes. That warehouse was at 1512 W 34th, which is down the street a little less than three miles away. Why would he “move” from one warehouse to another? There’s one obvious answer to that question. To check that answer, I went searching for voter registrations at nearby addresses. I found one that’s just around the block from Wilson’s old digs. Here’s a Google map of the area, and a screenshot of the two together; A is the neighbor and B is 1512 W 34th. Lo and behold, Wilson’s near neighbor is in HCC District 1, not HCC District 2. That’s why he changed his registration from one warehouse to the other. He had to so he could target the HCC District 2 seat. If that were the only issue, as stated above I wouldn’t care. But if Dave Wilson really lives in the house on Lake Lane, he’s not eligible to run for any HCC Trustee seat, and it very much does matter to me. We know this isn’t the first time Wilson’s residency has been questioned. Let’s get this sorted out once and for all.

Wilson sued over residency for HCC

Dec 21st, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

5 comments

Dave Wilson and lawsuits go together like peanut butter and jelly.

Dave Wilson

The Harris County attorney sued Houston Community College trustee-elect Dave Wilson on Thursday, alleging the small business owner and anti-gay activist was not a resident of District II when he was elected to the post last month.

“We think there is a reasonable doubt as to whether he lives within the district, and it needs to be clarified,” said First Assistant County Attorney Robert Soard.

The three-page civil suit petition, filed in the 151st District Court, does not say where Wilson lives, but Soard said the grounds for the lawsuit are “similar” to ones raised by the defense in a still-pending lawsuit that Wilson, a perennial candidate, brought against the Harris County Democratic Party chairman in 2010, when he was kept off the ballot after filing to run for Precinct 4 Harris County commissioner.

That year, then-Chairman Gerry Birnberg argued that Wilson was ineligible to run because he had listed an address on his application that was not his residential address, as required by election code. Wilson’s wife, Connie, still lists a property at 7370 Lake Lane, which is in the Lone Star Community College System district, as her residential homestead, according to the Harris County Appraisal District website.

Wilson, who ousted HCC Chairman Bruce Austin in the Nov. 5 election by 26 votes, contends that he lives in “a 1,140-square-foot apartment upstairs” at his office, located at 5600 W. 34th St. in the college system’s District II.

The building there is an 11,340-square-foot commercial metal warehouse, according to county records.

Asked Thursday if he was living separately from his wife, Wilson said, “That’s a personal matter, and it’s none of yours or the Chronicle’s business.”

“I think that county records still show that we’re married. That’s all I’ll say,” Wilson said.

So to review, Wilson was removed from the ballot in 2010 by then-HCDP Chair Gerry Birnberg on the grounds that he did not live in County Commissioner Precinct 4. Wilson then filed a lawsuit against the HCDP to be reinstated on the ballot, but he lost. He subsequently also filed a federal lawsuit against a larger list of plaintiffs alleging that his civil rights were violated by being denied a spot on the ballot. The suit was dismissed by a federal district court, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted his petition for a rehearing in 2012. I don’t know where that now stands.

In any event, in looking at these old posts, three things stand out to me. One is that the address Wilson was using to get on the ballot in 2010 was 1512 W. 34th Street, not 5600 W. 34th Street as he apparently used for his HCC filing. He was still using the 1512 address in his 2011 filing for Mayor. Does he have more than one warehouse that he claims to be his residency when he needs it, or did he move between then and now? A little fooling around on Google Maps tells me the two addresses are 2.8 miles apart. Not very far, but it’s not impossible that one might cross a political boundary or two in the journey. That would be another reason why it would ne nice to know when he started using the 5600 address. Second, while Wilson is playing coy with his marital status now, in 2010 he stated he that he was in fact separated from his wife. Finally, the one constant in all this is the 7370 Lake Lane address where Connie Wilson lives. Make of this what you will.

So what this means is that we ought to get a fuller airing of the facts this time. In 2010 he was booted at Gerry Birnberg’s discretion, and the courts declined to give Wilson relief. Here it’s Harris County that’s taking action after the fact, and I very much look forward to seeing the case play out. The HCC Board itself says it wasn’t their job to vet the candidate filing. That’s a question Rep. Harold Dutton brought up to them, and I have a sneaking suspicion Rep. Dutton will attempt to deal with that in the next legislative session. Wilson ran again for County Commissioner in Precinct 4 in 2012. That time, his application was accepted, and he wound up losing in the primary to Sean Hemmerle. I don’t know which address he used for that application, but clearly someone should find that out. If he was still using 1512 W. 34th Street, then he needs to be pinned down on when he moved.

Anyway. The saga continues, as they often do. No indication in the story when there will be a hearing on this, but one presumes it will be after the holidays. One also presumes the question of whether or not the County Attorney has standing to file such a suit will arise. Like I said, I very much look forward to seeing how this plays out.

Yes, Council is short on women

Dec 17th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

It is what it is.

CM Ellen Cohen

The Houston City Council will have its fewest women in 15 years this January, which political observers called a troublesome regression for one of the most diverse cities in the U.S.

Just two women will remain on the 16-member council. And for the first time in about 25 years, a minority woman will not hold a seat.

“It’s more a step back rather than a step forward for the city of Houston,” said Rice University political scientist Mark Jones. “Women represent slightly over 50 percent of population but will account for less than a fifth of the City Council.”

There are currently four women on the council. Except for 1999, when there were also just two, the council has had at least three females in each of the last 25 years. It peaked at eight in 2005, according to data compiled by Rice University political scientist Bob Stein. Also, from 1989 until 1999, there were at least three women on council.

Political analysts say the makeup, likely a result of chance, is not an optimal mix.

[…]

Brenda Stardig

Stein said a persistent finding in social science research shows that a higher proportion of women on governing bodies means less gridlock and more efficiency. He said some believe this is a genetic trait in women and also because women have different experiences than men.

Stein said this election season saw a diverse group of candidates in the mix, including women, but the turnout was extremely low. He predicted it would be a challenging year for Mayor Annise Parker, who is heading into her final term with her sights on statewide office. In part, this will be because women may be more sympathetic to some of her issues, such as discrimination.

Rice University’s Jones said because Parker will be at the helm of city government, the policy impact will not be dramatic, but that the new council makeup could draw attention to the under-representation of women in governing bodies.

He said these election results were due to bad luck and he does not believe there is any broader anti-woman trends in Houston, noting several races where women were contenders. He also pointed out this low representation of women could persist because incumbents have such an advantage in future elections.

I noted this last week. Took about as long as I figured it might for the Chron to write a story about it. As I said at the time, I think it’s a temporary aberration and not indicative of any trends. If the ball bounced a little differently in the first round of At Large #3, we might not be having this conversation at all. Or maybe we’d be talking about another missed opportunity, who knows. Be that as it may, I don’t quite understand the comment about turnout. Turnout this year was roughly the same as it was in 2009, and it was much higher than it was in 2011 or 2007. It’s not clear to me what effect turnout is supposed to have had on the outcomes. It’s not clear to me that a higher level of turnout would have benefited Graci Garces in the runoff – given the margin of victory in District D, I don’t think any level of turnout could have helped Georgia Provost – or one of Jenifer Pool and Rogene Gee Calvert in November. As for the effect on Mayor Parker and her agenda, I look at it this way: Mayor Parker swapped out two troublemakers in CMs Brown and Burks, and got back only one potential troublemaker in CM-elect Kubosh in return. I’m thinking she’ll take that deal.

While I do think the results of this year’s elections are not predictive of future elections, that doesn’t mean that the current makeup of Council should be accepted without any need to do things differently next time.

Cindy Clifford, who runs a Houston-based public relations company, said she plans to start a group to empower promising women in Houston to consider public office and donate to female candidates. She said women have a harder time raising money and asking for things for themselves. She said she hopes to inspire confidence in promising female leaders.

“It’s important for women to have a seat at the table,” she said. “Women see things differently; there will be a different dialogue and discussion.”

Having good candidates run and ensuring they get the support they need is always a fine idea. If you find the lack of women on the new Council troublesome, now is an excellent time to start working on a solution for 2015.

Is CM-elect Stardig term limited or not?

Dec 16th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

8 comments

Brenda Stardig

I brought this up yesterday in my wrapup of the city and HCC runoffs, and I’m asking it again here in the hope that someone who can provide a definitive answer will offer one. The question I have is whether or not CM Brenda Stardig is eligible to run for re-election in 2015. As I noted in that post, CM Stardig’s position is similar to that of former CM Jolanda Jones, who flirted with the idea of running in District D this year, thus igniting a stir over whether or not the term limits law allowed for her to run. The law says “No person, who has already served two full terms, shall be eligible to file for that same office.” City Attorney David Feldman interpreted that to mean that Jones could not run again, since she has served two full terms. My initial reaction was that Stardig was in the same kind of boat, but thinking about it again now, she’s not. If Stardig were to run for a third term, she would file for that election prior to serving out her second term, thus meeting the requirements of the term limits ordinance. A Houston Politics post from 2012 that includes a copy of Feldman’s position supports that view. In practical terms, that means that if you’re an incumbent Council member and you must lose an election, better it to be after your first term than after your second. You can win one, lose one, then win two more, but if you win two and then lose one, you’re out of luck. In other words, Helena Brown and Andrew Burks could come back and wind up serving three terms on Council just as Stardig could, but Jolanda Jones and Al Hoang are finished as Council members, though they could still run for Controller or Mayor.

All that assumes you accept Feldman’s interpretation, which Jones at least said she didn’t. I have to say, while this may be technically correct, it feels wrong to me. The clear intent of the term limits law was to restrict Council members, Controllers, and Mayors to three terms. It’s possible there was some discussion at the time of whether or not those terms had to be consecutive or not – it’s been a long time, I sure don’t remember – but even if there were I’m willing to bet that the prevailing opinion among city voters would overwhelmingly favor the simple “three terms and you’re done” perspective”. I presume that sooner or later this is going to need to be settled by a judge, or by a fix to the ordinance being passed by the voters. Be that as it may, I feel confident that the subject will come up again, any time the subject turns to Stardig and her possible re-election effort in two years.

One reason why this may matter, beyond the simple effect on folks like Stardig and Jones, was vocalized by Texpatriate, who wondered “if Brenda 2.0 becomes super conservative just to placate some of her angry, right-wing constituents”. Maybe the odds of that are greater if she has the option to run for re-election – she might emulate some of CM Brown’s positions in order to protect herself against a third matchup with Brown, for example. No guarantee she’s behave this way – Stardig might well conclude that there are limits to the crazy in District A, and her successful comeback is proof of that. Regardless, it’s not unreasonable to think that a term-limited Stardig could be a different Council member than a Stardig who has one more campaign to go.

So that’s my question. Writing this has led me to what I think is the technically correct answer, but I’m not convinced that the matter is settled. What do you think?

Runoff results: Rough day for incumbents

Dec 15th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

I have no complaint about the results.

Brenda Stardig

With all precincts reporting, controversial first-term council incumbents Helena Brown, in northwest Houston’s District A, and Andrew C. Burks Jr., in At-Large Position 2, fell to their challengers, as did HCC trustees Yolanda Navarro Flores and Herlinda Garcia.

Brown lost her rematch with Brenda Stardig, the incumbent she defeated to gain the seat two years ago.

“We’re very proud of the work we’ve done on our campaign and we wanted to get back out there and support our community,” Stardig said. “We’ve had the support of police and fire and so many in our community.”

[…]

Burks fell to challenger David W. Robinson, a civic leader and former city planning commissioner. Robinson raised far more campaign cash than did Burks, who had run unsuccessfully numerous times before winning his seat two years ago. Both men were among the 10 candidates who sought the post when it was an open seat two years ago.

[…]

In the At-Large 3 runoff, bail bondsman and civic activist Michael Kubosh, best known for leading the charge against Houston’s red-light cameras, topped former Harris County Department of Education trustee and former mayoral candidate Roy Morales.

“I appreciate all the people who have supported me and all of my staff that’s worked so hard through the last few months,” Kubosh said. “I’m looking very forward to working on City Council and getting things done.”

[…]

In south Houston’s District D, lobbyist Dwight Boykins bested businesswoman Georgia D. Provost. Boykins had thumped the 11 other candidates in fundraising heading into November. Term-limited District D Councilwoman Wanda Adams was elected to the Houston ISD board.

In a very low-turnout race in the East End’s District I, Harris County jailer and civic activist Robert Gallegos beat Graci Garcés, who is chief of staff for the term-limited James Rodriguez.

So I was three for four in my prognostications. I can’t say I’m unhappy to have been wrong about District A. I am curious about one thing, however, and that’s whether or not Brenda Stardig is eligible under the term limits amendment to run for election again in 2015. If you consider her situation to be analogous to that of former CM Jolanda Jones, and you go by the interpretation given by City Attorney David Feldman, the answer would seem to be No. I made an inquiry about this with the City Attorney’s office several weeks ago, but they have never gotten back to me. Guess I need to try again. Anyway, congratulations to CMs-elect Stardig, Boykins, Gallegos, Robinson, and Kubosh.

The results I’m really happy about are these:

In the Houston Community College contests, District 1 incumbent Flores lost to challenger Zeph Capo, a vice president of the Houston Federation of Teachers. In District 3, Adriana Tamez, an education consultant, beat incumbent Garcia, who was appointed to the post after the resignation of the prior trustee. In the runoff for the open District 5 seat, businessman Robert Glaser topped commercial real estate agent Phil Kunetka.

Capo over Flores is a huge step up, and Tamez is an upgrade as well. Both Flores and Herlinda Garcia were palling around with Dave Wilson, so having them both lose makes the HCC Board of Trustees a better place. Major congrats to Zeph Capo, Adriana Tamez, and Robert Glaser.

Here are the unofficial Harris County results. There were an additional 308 votes cast in Fort Bend, so the final turnout is right at 37,000. Here’s an update to that table I published Friday:


Year  Absent   Early   E-Day   Total Absent%  Early%  E-Day%
============================================================
2005   5,350   8,722  24,215  38,287  13.97%  22.78%  62.25%
2007s  5,464   7,420  11,981  24,865  21.97%  29.84%  48.18%
2007   4,456   6,921  13,313  24,690  18.05%  28.03%  53.92%
2011   8,700  15,698  31,688  56,086  15.51%  27.99%  56.50%
2013   9,883  10,143  13,517  36,123  27.36%  28.08%  37.42%

See, that’s the kind of pattern I was expecting for the November election. I guess the turnout was too high for it. Gotta tip your hat to whichever candidate’s mail program generated all those votes. It’s good to be surprised sometimes.

District I runoff overview

Dec 14th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

It’s runoff and a rivalry, all in one.

Robert Gallegos

Saturday’s runoff in City Council District I, which covers downtown and the East End, pits the protégés of two pillars of Hispanic politics against each other in the sort of showdown political observers love.

Surviving the November ballot’s tightest race, in which just 341 votes separated first from last among the four candidates, were Graci Garces and Robert Gallegos.

Gallegos, 54, a civic activist and Harris County jailer, served eight years as an aide to former eastside Harris County Commissioner and now-state Sen. Sylvia Garcia. Garces, 33, is chief of staff for term-limited District I Councilman James Rodriguez; both Garces and Rodriguez worked for former council member and now-State Rep. Carol Alvarado.

Graci Garces

Alvarado and Garcia waged a bitterly contested campaign earlier this year for the post Garcia now holds, a history that frames Saturday’s runoff.

“It’s going to be machine politics at its purest: Which machine can mobilize more people to turn out to vote?” said Rice University political scientist Mark Jones, who added that turnout is expected to be dismal. “Probably 2,500 votes gets you the seat, perhaps even less. That’s a small number of people to be electing a City Council member in a city the size of Houston.”

Gallegos acknowledges Garcia is promoting him, just as Garces acknowledges Alvarado has block-walked and Rodriguez has made fundraising calls. Yet, both candidates say they have waged their own campaigns, just as both suggest their opponent’s support has come mostly thanks to their mentor’s influence.

I suspect most observers who aren’t directly connected to either camp, especially those who like both Sen. Garcia and Rep. Alvarado, are more weary of this ongoing rivalry than looking forward to another round of it, but maybe that’s just me. I don’t even know what to make of stuff like this. I’m just glad that today is the last day of it. Be that as it may, as with District D there’s not much separation between these two on the issues, for the most part anyway. I’ve noticed that posts on the District I race generate a lot of heated comments. People pick a side, and that’s just how it is. We’ll see whose side is bigger, at least in this case. Texpatriate has more.

HCC runoff overview

Dec 14th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

A cursory look at the invisible races.

Zeph Capo

In District 1, incumbent and former state representative Yolanda Navarro Flores faces political newcomer Zeph Capo.

Capo, a 41-year-old former science educator, is a vice president of the Houston Federation of Teachers. He wants to help K-12 students and their families understand how a community college education can lead to “good, decent jobs.”

He said his opponent has been focused on “politics” instead of education and he hopes to “put a stronger firewall between trustees and the contracting process.”

Adriana Tamez

[…]

The District 3 showdown features incumbent Herlinda Garcia against educational consultant Adriana Tamez.

Tamez, 50, cited her background as an HISD teacher and principal as well as a former deputy executive director with the Texas Education Agency as reasons why she is the best candidate.

“A big piece for me is working to make sure we regain the trust of the community, that we’re going to do what’s right and always keep students, the college and the city of Houston at the forefront,” she said.

Neither Yolanda Navarro Flores nor Herlinda Garcia – the two incumbents, mind you – could be reach for comment for the story. Way to be accountable, y’all. You should of course be supporting Zeph Capo, and if I were in District 3 I’d vote for Adriana Tamez. I haven’t followed District 5 as closely, but if you’re into partisan affiliation Robert Glaser is the Democrat in the race, and he collected most of the endorsements, including the Chron‘s, in November. If you want more information, my colleague Texas Leftist did candidate Q&As with Glaser, Tamez, and Capo, and my interview with Capo is here. Remember to vote in these elections, and please vote wisely.

Runoff Day today

Dec 14th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

This is it, kids, our last election for 2013. You can find your polling place here. There were two last overview stories yesterday in the Chron, both blogged above, so there’s nothing else to do but go vote if you haven’t done so already. I’ll have results later, probably in the morning; today is a busy day for me. Happy Saturday, and good luck to all the candidates.

Final EV totals

Dec 13th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Here’s the final Harris County EV tally for the 2013 runoff, and here’s how the numbers stack up against the four most recent citywide runoff elections that did not include a Mayoral race.


Year  Absent   Early   E-Day   Total Absent%  Early%  E-Day%
============================================================
2005   5,350   8,722  24,215  38,287  13.97%  22.78%  62.25%
2007s  5,464   7,420  11,981  24,865  21.97%  29.84%  48.18%
2007   4,456   6,921  13,313  24,690  18.05%  28.03%  53.92%
2011   8,700  15,698  31,688  56,086  15.51%  27.99%  56.50%
2013   9,883  10,143

“2007s” refers to the At Large #3 special election, in which Melissa Noriega defeated Roy Morales. As a seat-of-my-pants, I-don’t-feel-like-thinking-about-it-too-much guess, I’ll venture that about 45% of the total vote has been cast so far. Projecting that out, and throwing in a thousand or two votes from Fort Bend County, and I’d peg the final total to be in the 45,000 to 50,000 range. Not too bad as this sort of thing goes, but hardly inspiring.

As for how the races are going, I feel about the same now as I did the day after the November results came in. I’d make David Robinson, Michael Kubosh, Helena Brown, and Dwight Boykins the favorites, with District I too close to call. I have no clue about the HCC races, which as always are about as visible as a star system from the Big Bang. Surprises do happen, of course, which is why we actually have the elections instead of just letting blowhards like me decide who’s winning. Go vote if you haven’t already – I’ll remind you again tomorrow – and we’ll see what the last Council of Mayor Parker’s tenure looks like.

At Large #2 runoff overview

Dec 13th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

One of these runoffs is not like the others.

CM Andrew Burks

On paper, the Houston City Council incumbent most at risk heading into Saturday’s runoff elections is first-termer Andrew Burks, in At-Large Position 2.

Challenger David Robinson had spent more than $201,000 as of last week, to Burks’ roughly $76,000. Robinson, who also earned more votes than Burks on Nov. 5, was the only challenger to out raise a council incumbent. Robinson also had about $73,500 on hand entering the campaign’s final week, more than three times what Burks had.

Burks, a preacher and small businessman, was a long shot in a 10-candidate field two years ago, having unsuccessfully sought public office numerous times. Political analysts, however, said he nonetheless will enjoy the advantage of incumbency against Robinson, an architect, Super Neighborhood Alliance past president and former member of the city Planning Commission. Robinson was among those who sought the At-Large 2 seat two years ago.

David Robinson

Rice University political scientist Mark Jones said Burks may also be helped by a runoff in heavily black District D, which will drive turnout in areas likely to support him, whereas there are no district runoffs in Robinson’s best areas to drive turnout for him. Overall turnout is expected to be dismal.

“At-large races are tough because it’s citywide and it’s very difficult to reach voters,” Jones said.

Robinson’s cash edge will help him only if he spends it efficiently, said University of Houston political scientist Brandon Rottinghaus.

“In a low-turnout election, more money is likely to trump ideology or the incumbency affect,” Rottinghaus said. “If they can adequately use those resources to get turnout in their direction, then it could be a very close race.”

As was the case with the November election and as is now the case with the runoff, Robinson has easily led in fundraising, with his finance reports looking like an incumbent’s. That doesn’t necessarily mean anything – Burks won on a shoestring two years ago, with Kristi Thibaut raking in the establishment cash in the runoff as Robinson has been doing all year. It’s a matter of who turns out.

One more thing:

Burks claimed Robinson has tried to fool black voters into thinking he is related to one of several past black council members named Robinson.

“By not showing up or putting his picture out in that community, he’s trying to get votes I normally would have because I am seen in the community,” Burks said.

Robinson rejected the charge, saying he has worked to raise his profile citywide, not obscure it.

Yeah, Dave Wilson will continue to be a pollutant in our elections for years to come. Some people may be confused by David Robinson‘s name, but unlike Wilson, Robinson is not running a stealth campaign. That means he’s doing things like showing up to candidate forums and having an actual photo of himself on his Facebook page. I don’t think I’d ever seen a picture of Dave Wilson before this November. If CM Burks is concerned that people may not have an accurate impression of David Robinson, there is nothing stopping him from working to correct that impression.

Runoff 8 Day Finance Reports

Dec 12th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

5 comments

I did not get to looking at the 8 day finance reports for the November election – too many candidates, not enough time. But there was no reason I couldn’t take a gander at the 8 day reports for the runoff. Here’s the summary:


Candidate   Office   Raised   Spent    Loan   On Hand
=====================================================
Burks          AL2   27,150  14,933       0    21,563
Robinson       AL2   93,720  71,771       0    73,536

Kubosh         AL3   60,045  59,221  15,000    13,192
Morales        AL3   50,030  31,540   3,300    22,274

Brown       Dist A   38,928  29,875       0    30,272
Stardig     Dist A   35,909  15,102       0    45,321

Boykins     Dist D   81,175  65,667       0    25,974
Provost     Dist D   24,600  19,047  18,535     2,258

Garces      Dist I   53,355  42,056       0    20,071
Gallegos    Dist I   35,196  12,348   1,252    18,518

My comments, with links to the reports, is below.

Andrew Burks – Received $8,000 from Houston Fire Fighters Political Action Fund, $3,500 from Across The Track PAC, $1,000 from HAA Better Government Fund. He also got $375 from CM Bradford’s campaign, $250 from Justice of the Peace Zinetta Burney, and $250 from Jeri Brooks, who was the manager of Mayor Parker’s 2009 campaign and who is now working on behalf of the payday lenders. Burks’ wife Lillie contributed $1,500.

David Robinson – As has been the case all along, Robinson’s finance report reads as if he is the incumbent. He got $8,500 from TREPAC, $5,000 from Houston Council of Engineering Companies, $2,500 from HOME PAC, $2,500 from Houston Associated General Contractors PAC, $2,000 from HOME PAC, $1,500 from Allen Boone Humphries Robinson LLC, $1,000 from LAN PAC, $1,000 from Pipefitters’ Local Union No. 211 COPE Account, $500 from Bracewell & Giuliani Committee, $500 from Cobb Fendley PAC, $500 from HOUCON PAC, $500 from Houstonians For Responsible Growth-PAC, $500 from Amegy Bank of Texas PAC, and $250 each from Associated Builders & Contractors PAC, CDM Smith Inc. PAC Account, Houston Westside PAC, and Huitt Zollars Inc. Texas PAC. He also got $5,000 from Peter Brown, $1,000 from Locke Lord, which is Robert Miller’s firm, and $500 from Marcie Zlotnick, who I believe is CM Ellen Cohen’s daughter.

Michael Kubosh – $47,000 of the amount raised was his own contributions. He got $2,500 from the HPOU PAC, $1,000 from the IEC TX Gulf Coast PAC, $500 from the BOMA PAC, $1,000 from the Baker Botts Amicus Fund, and $1,000 from lobbyist/attorney/blogger Robert Miller, who is also currently working on behalf of the payday lenders.

Roy Morales – $5,000 from Houston Council of Engineering Companies Inc PAC, $1,000 from HVJ PAC, $2,300 from HOME PAC, $250 from Associated Builders & Contractors PAC, and $1,000 from himself. I did not see any contributions from Democratic-aligned PACs or prominent progressives on either his report or Kubosh’s. I’ll be very interested to see what the undervote rate is like in this race.

Helena Brown – $1,000 from IEC Texas Gulf Coast PAC, $500 from BAC-PAC, $250 from Seafarers PAC, $500 from Greater Houston Mobility PAC, $1,000 from Group 1 Automotive, Inc. PAC, $500 each from Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson LLP and Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP (Robert Miller’s firm), and $1,000 from TREPAC, which remember is the realtors. She also got $500 from Toni Lawrence’s campaign and $100 from Bruce Tatro, meaning that her predecessors that backed her in 2011 are backing her again after sitting out the regular election cycle. Finally, she too received $250 from Jeri Brooks. I think it’s fair to say the payday lenders are choosing sides in these races.

Brenda Stardig – $10,000 from HPOU PAC, $5,000 from Houston Fire Fighters Political Action Fund, $2,000 from Houston Council of Engineering Companies PAC, $500 from Houston Westside PAC, $500 from Amegy Bank of Texas PAC, $250 from Arcadis G&M, Inc. Texas PAC, $500 from Associated Builders & Contractors of Greater Houston PAC, $250 from CDM Smith, Inc PAC, and $250 from Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Texas PAC. She has about $2,800 listed as expenses for postcards plus $200 from radio ads, but I don’t see much else that looks like voter outreach. Once again I wonder why she’s sitting on so much cash.

Dwight Boykins – Another report that looks like it belongs to an incumbent. Boykins raked in (deep breath) $5,000 from Houston Council of Engineering Companies Inc. – PAC, $5,000 from TREPAC, $2,750 from HOME PAC, $2,000 from BEPC LLC, $1,500 from HOUCONPAC, $2,000 from HAA Better Government Fund, $500 from Fulbright & Jaworski LLP Texas Committee, $500 from Andrews & Kurth Texas PAC, $1,000 from Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP, $250 from Houston Westside PAC, $1,000 from Pipefitters’ Local Union No. 211, $500 from Greenberg Taurig LLP Texas PAC, $250 from Cobb Fendley PAC, $500 from Bracewell & Giuliani Committee, $250 from CDM Smith Inc. PAC Account, $500 from LAN-PAC, $1,000 from Plumbers Local Union No. 68, $500 from Arcadis G & M, Inc. Texas PAC, $500 from Locke Lord (Robert Miller’s firm), $1,500 from Allen Boone Humphries Robinson, $1,000 from I.L.A. Local 26 P.A.C. Fund, $1,000 from Baker Botts Amicus Fund, $250 from Huitt-Zollars, Inc Texas PAC, $1,000 from HVJ Political Action Committee, $1,000 from Southwest Laborers District Council PAC, and $2,500 from HPCP Investments LLC. Whew! He also received $1,000 from CM Stephen Costello, and $500 from Anthony Robinson, who I guess did ultimately endorse in the runoff.

Georgia Provost – $1,000 from Woodpest Inc PAC was her only PAC contribution. She got $4,000 each from Alan and Renee Helfman; Alan Helfman is her campaign treasurer. She also received $1,500 from Peter Brown, and $250 from Anthony Robinson. Maybe Robinson didn’t pick a side in the runoff after all.

Graci Garces – $8,000 from TREPAC, $2,000 from Texas Taxi PAC, $500 from Seafarers PAC, $1,000 from Wolpert Inc PAC, $500 from Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP, $5,000 from Houston Fire Fighters Political Action Fund, $2,000 from HAA Better Government Fund, $2,500 from HPOU PAC, $2,000 from Across The Track PAC, and $2,500 from HOME PAC. She also got $500 from the James Rodriguez campaign – no surprise there – and $250 from One World Strategy, which is Jeri Brooks’ firm. In other business-pending-before-Council news, in addition to the Texas Taxi PAC money, Garces got $2,000 from Roman Martinez, the President of Texas Taxis, $1,000 from his wife Diana Davila Martinez (also Garces’ treasurer), and $1,000 each from Rick Barrett (VP of Texas Taxis), Duane Kamins (owner of Yellow Cab), and Ricky Kamins (owner of Liberty Cab). I’m thinking she might be a No vote on Uber.

Robert Gallegos – $4,539.72 in kind from TOP PAC, $1,500 from Teamsters Local $988, $1,000 from Plumbers Local Union No 68, $500 from LAN-PAC, $500 from Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP, $1,000 from Pipefitters Local 211, $2,500 from HPCP Investments LLC, and $1,500 from Houston Dock and Marine Council PAC Fund. He also received $4,400 from Peter Brown, and $225 in kind from Sen. Sylvia Garcia.

You may be wondering why I highlighted donations from people associated with the payday lenders. Isn’t that supposed to come up for a vote with this Council? Well, maybe and maybe not. And maybe the votes on Council will be according to the contributions, and maybe not. But at least now you know.

At Large #3 runoff overview

Dec 12th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

10 comments

The Chron moves on to At Large #3, and unlike the other two previews there are new things to learn about the candidates involved.

Michael Kubosh

Mayor Annise Parker could be the biggest loser in the runoff race for the At Large 3 seat on City Council even though she is not on Saturday’s ballot.

The citywide position will be vacated by term-limited Melissa Noriega, generally seen as an ally of the mayor. The two conservative candidates in the runoff to replace her, bail bondsman Michael Kubosh and former Harris County Department of Education board member Roy Morales, have battled Parker in the past. Kubosh fought Parker to block the city’s use of red-light cameras, and Morales ran against her in the 2009 mayoral race.

“It’ll be tough for the mayor either way,” said Richard Murray, political science professor at the University of Houston.

[…]

Perhaps hoping to build ties on council, Kubosh has shifted the tone of his campaign away from questioning whether the mayor is willing to work with him.

“I thought about it a lot and I need a do over,” he said. “I will not use the position to ever disrespect anyone on council, including the mayor.”

He does not, however, back down on policy goals that could set up a confrontation, such as repealing an ordinance laying out rules for providing food to the homeless.

Throughout his campaign, Kubosh admitted he has few specific policy ideas because he has much to learn about city operations. Nonetheless, he speculated his years as a bail bondsman could qualify him to tackle problems in the municipal courts.

Generally, he said he hopes to increase transparency by dragging more of the city’s decision-making out from closed offices and into the public’s view.

Rice University political science professor Mark Jones said Morales may be a better fit for maintaining the status quo of council dynamics.

“He would be very happy simply to be elected,” Jones said. “And he would structure his behavior to ensure re-election. He would occasionally vote in a conservative way to keep his conservative credentials, but for the most part, work with the mayor and majority to pass things along.”

I wrote about the potential dynamic with Mayor Parker shortly after the November election. She chose not to get involved in the runoff, which is certainly understandable. Since the November election, Kubosh has indeed changed his rhetoric and reached out to supporters of the Mayor. My observation is that while both Kubosh and Morales have a case to make to the voters who did not support them the first time around, neither one has clearly won that battle. Morales has picked up some support, such as from Noel Freeman, and so has Kubosh, who just received the endorsement of Peter Brown’s PAC. If the big Democratic groups have made runoff endorsements in At Large #3, I have not seen any announcement of them. I don’t think the dynamic of the race has changed much – based on November returns, I’d still call Kubosh the favorite. I’d also expect whoever does win to face a strong challenger in 2015, though that may change depending in part on how he performs on Council. By the way, I never did get a response from Kubosh to my runoff Q&A; Morales’ answers to my questions are here.

Among the things we have learned since we last voted:

Kubosh also has faced criticism for the long list of lawsuits tied to his name, including an ongoing civil suit in Jefferson County Court alleging barratry, the practice of illegally soliciting clients. He dismissed the frequency of lawsuits as normal for a bondsman and denied the barratry claim, calling the close ties between his brother’s law office and his bail bonding operation a family business.

Last month, Kubosh won a court battle started by Morales.

Using county homestead exemption records, Morales tried to get Kubosh removed from the ballot, arguing his opponent is not a Houston resident. The case was dismissed.

The disposition of Morales’ lawsuit against Kubosh was posted in the Houston Politics blog, but if it was in the print edition of the paper I didn’t see it. I don’t know anything more about the barratry claims than what is written above. I don’t know that any of this is likely to have an effect on voting at this point. Let’s do a totally unscientific survey here: Who are you supporting in the runoff? Leave a comment and let us know.

District D runoff overview

Dec 11th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

Clearly, it’s Runoff Overview Week at the Chron.

Dwight Boykins

Whittled down from 12 candidates to two last month, the Houston City Council District D race is a David-and-Goliath runoff.

Towering Dwight Boykins, 50, narrowly missed clinching the general election outright with 43 percent of the vote – three times the strength of his runoff opponent. He won most precincts and bigfooted the other candidates in fundraising by collecting more than $200,000.

Georgia Provost

The diminutive-but-fierce Georgia Provost, 72, is among the seniors she talks about protecting from crime and tax-hiking development. She raised just $30,000 for the general election and became a contender with 14 percent of the vote.

Both are vying to replace term-limited Wanda Adams to represent a diverse area anchored by institutions including the Texas Medical Center, Texas Southern University and the University of Houston. The central and southside district extends from just outside downtown to Beltway 8, up to the doorsteps of Pearland and Clear Lake and includes Third Ward, Sunnyside, South Park and a portion of the Museum District.

Boykins and Provost have at least two things in common: A penchant for hats – Stetsons for him and church-lady finishing touches for her – and deep concerns for what’s missing in District D. Where is the full-service grocery store in Sunnyside? Why aren’t there more banking institutions throughout the district’s core? Why are the streets so bad?

[…]

The District D winner will be determined by reliable voters, many of whom are seniors and vote early or via mail, according to Michael Adams, chair of TSU’s political science department.

I agree with that assessment, though honestly it’s true for all of the runoffs, where only the truly hardcore show up. Unlike District A, there’s not a lot of differences between these two on the issues and priorities. Boykins remains the big fundraiser, though Provost hasn’t done badly. There is one clear difference between them, however, and it could possibly be a factor.

Provost said she received about $30,000 in contributions and commitments after the general election, in part, because “you won’t have a woman of color on council” if she does not win.

As things stand now, only Districts A and C are sure to be represented by women in 2014. There will be no women serving At Large, which is a big step down from 2009 when Sue Lovell, Melissa Noriega, and Jolanda Jones were all elected. Depending on the outcome in D and I, there will be between two and four women on Council. It’s possible that could have some resonance in either or both runoffs. For what it’s worth I don’t think this dip in the number of female Council members is anything but a temporary anomaly, but it will stand out for the next two years, and I’m sure we will see stories written about it. You can say you heard it here first.

District A runoff overview

Dec 10th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

8 comments

It’s the same old story, just a little louder this time.

CM Helena Brown

Three years ago, when city voters narrowly approved what would become a controversial monthly drainage fee to fund $8 billion of street and flood projects in the next two decades, City Council District A stood out as an exception.

While the charter amendment that created the dedicated account to fund the Rebuild Houston program passed by a slim 2 percent, voters in the conservative-leaning swath on the northwest side rejected it 55 to 45 percent. That was despite the fact that residents name flooding as one of the district’s biggest problems.

Brenda Stardig

“This is a district that doesn’t like any spending at all, even when they’re the beneficiaries of it,” said Rice University political scientist Bob Stein.

Stein discovered a negative correlation between votes for and against the drainage fee in 2010 and votes for or against Mayor Annise Parker and some incumbent City Council members in 2011, including District A’s then-council member Brenda Stardig.

Despite her district’s position, Stardig voted in favor of an ordinance implementing the drainage fee, saying she pressed the mayor to exempt schools and churches from having to pay it. Later that year, the real estate broker and long-time neighborhood activist was ousted after one term by tea party favorite Helena Brown.

Brown had seized on the drainage fee vote and other issues – including an admitted lack of constituent response – to force Stardig into a runoff, which Brown won by 12 points. Two years later, the 36-year-old former civic club president again finds herself in a runoff with Stardig, 51.

The story recaps the issues and themes of this extended campaign, with which we are all familiar. I really have no idea how this election will go. On the one hand, a 38% showing in November for an incumbent usually spells doom. On the other hand, CM Brown has done better than I thought she might in fundraising and endorsements, and like it or not her slash-and-burn philosophy isn’t particularly out of step with the district. She probably has less to fear from a low-turnout race than Stardig does, though for what it’s worth the early vote numbers are heavier in District A than just about anywhere else. I don’t know if the Chron reporter reached out to any of the other three District A candidates, but as far as I can tell none of them has made an endorsement in the runoff. One thing I noted while interviewing Mike Knox, Amy Peck, and Ron Hale is that all three seemed to be running not just against Brown, but also against Stardig. As such, I’m not surprised that they have all gone quiet since the November election, but it’s another suggestion that while many voters may have been willing to make another change in District A, Stardig wasn’t necessarily the change they were looking for. What’s your view on this runoff?

Last day of runoff early voting

Dec 10th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

From the inbox:

“Tuesday, December 10th is the last day of Early voting for the City of Houston and Houston Community College System Runoff Election,” noted Harris County Clerk and Chief Election Official, Stan Stanart today as he urged voters to take advantage of what remains of the early voting period. “Your vote could make the difference in electing one third of these two important governing bodies.”

“Voters should take advantage of Early Voting before preparations for the Christmas Holiday activities totally consumes their focus,” advised Stanart. “Keep in mind, Election Day for this runoff election takes place on Saturday, December 14th, eleven days before Christmas.”

All 22 Early Voting locations will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. See www.HarrisVotes.com for locations.

Stanart reminded voters to bring Photo ID to the polls stating, “Texas law requires voters to present one of seven types of photo IDs when voting in-person in all elections. I urge voters to come prepared with one of the required photo IDs to the polls.”

The state approved photo IDs for voting include:

· Texas Driver’s License issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS)

· Texas Election Identification Certificate issued by DPS

· Texas Personal Identification Card issued by DPS

· Texas Concealed Handgun License issued by DPS

· United States Military Identification Card containing the person’s photograph

· United States Citizenship Certificate containing the person’s photograph

· United States Passport

With the exception of the U.S. citizenship certificate and some military identifications, the ID must be current or have expired no more than 60 days before being presented at the polling place. For more information about the photo ID requirements visit www.HarrisVotes.com.

Stanart also reminded voters, “A voter must be registered to vote in the City of Houston or the Houston Community College district in order to participate in this Runoff Election.”

To obtain a list of Early Voting locations, Election Day Polling Locations or to view a voter specific sample ballot, voters can visit www.HarrisVotes.com or call 713-755-6965 to find all of this information and more.

A total of 15,507 in person and absentee votes had been cast through yesterday. I’ll have a fuller report on that plus a refined guess on turnout later. In the meantime, go vote if you haven’t already done so, and remember to vote for Zeph Capo.

Runoff voting is underway

Dec 6th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

So early voting is underway for the City of Houston and HCC runoffs. Day One totals are here, and Campos ponders their locations. I’ll take a crack at projecting turnout once the EV totals are in, but if you don’t want to wait that long, here’s a quick and dirty shortcut. In three of the last four runoffs that didn’t involve a Mayoral race – the 2005, 2007 AL3 special, and 2007 runoffs – turnout was between 25,000 and 40,000 votes. In the 2011 runoff, which was boosted by the Jolanda Jones/Jack Christie race, turnout was about 57,000. I don’t think any race in this year’s runoff will be as high interest as that one, so my seat of the pants guess is “between 25,000 and 40,000”. I reserve the right to revise that once I see the EV numbers.

Here’s the Chron story on the runoffs, in case you missed it. They also reiterated their endorsements if you care about that sort of thing, as did the Houston Association of Realtors.

If you want more information, I collected all my first round interviews here, and you saw my Q&A with Roy Morales yesterday. I’m still hoping to receive Michael Kubosh’s responses. Other recommendations come from Rey Guerra, PDiddie, Stace, John Coby, and Texpatriate.

Runoff Q&A: Roy Morales

Dec 5th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

Note: As we know, the runoff election in At Large #3 is not what many people were expecting. In particular, Democratic voters have been trying to make a choice in that race. While both candidates have been busy reaching out to a broad range of constituencies, I thought it might be a good idea to ask them each a few questions that reflect current issues and concerns. The following are the answers I received from Roy Morales. I sent a substantially similar set of questions to Michael Kubosh, and I will run his answers when I receive them.

Roy Morales

1. What distinguishes you from your opponent?

Honesty, Integrity, Education and Transparency. When I give my word, I keep it. My opponent says one thing in one community and says something different in another. He even has different push cards depending on where he is. I have one push card that I have used across the city with the same message. My bottom line is this; we need to keep Houston moving forward. That means everyone needs to work together to make that happen. If elected, my obligation and responsibility is to the citizens and that means all of our citizens. We need to ensure there is opportunity for all of our communities, the creation of more jobs and that everyone’s city services run smoothly and effectively.

2. Mayor Parker recently made an executive order granting health insurance benefits to all spouses of legally married city employees, including same sex spouses, in accordance with the wording of the 2001 charter amendment, the Supreme Court decision on DOMA, and changes in federal policies resulting from that decision. Do you agree with this action?

I’m not a lawyer and this is a legal issue that has yet to be decided. The questions are: Is Texas required to recognize legal same sex marriages from other states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution? Is Texas’ Defense of Marriage Act superseded by federal actions, including the ruling by the Supreme Court that the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional? How does the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution affect this issue? All of these questions are on the table and should be discussed.

3. The Houston Chronicle and Texas Observer have written several article recently documenting issues with HPD’s disciplinary process and its oversight of the use of force by police officers. What steps would you like to see taken to improve the process?

More openness and transparency in the process.

4. Some people have been calling for a comprehensive review of Houston’s city charter, with the possibility of putting major changes to how city government operates up for a vote. Do you support this idea? What if any changes to how city government operates would you like to see proposed?

We should strive to bring better government and better performing government to our citizens and one way we can accomplish this is by continuing to examine and update our City Charter.

5. You have taken issue with the way the Chronicle characterized you in their endorsement of your opponent in the runoff. Why were they wrong about you?

First, let me say that I was not extended the same invitation as my opponent was with regard to meeting the new editor of the Houston Chronicle at a small gathering of insiders. Second, I am proud of my military career. I enlisted in the Air Force and received an officer’s commission. I was given many great opportunities to work on exciting projects. With that came security clearances and even though I am retired, I honor those requirements. People want to make fun of such things and that was obvious in the Chronicle’s characterization. In fact, Assistant Chief of Police (Ret) Jerry DeFoor has endorsed me and issued a statement why the City of Houston hired me as the Chief Technology Officer for the Houston Emergency Center.

“I am proud to endorse Retired Lt Colonel Roy Morales for Houston City Council At-Large Position 3. As a retired Assistant Chief of Police and former Director of the Houston Emergency Center, I hired Roy to be our Chief Technology Officer. Roy possessed the technology and management skills and military experience we required to activate the new Houston Emergency Center. Most importantly, Roy also had active security clearances that would be of great value in protecting our city and citizens. Only after a short time I awarded Roy the Director’s Commendation for his outstanding work performance. Roy was also assigned as our liaison to the Federal Bureau of Investigations, Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security because of his active top security clearances. Roy’s dedication and exemplary performance reflected great credit upon him, the Houston Emergency Center, and the City of Houston.”

The topic the Editorial Board chose to criticize me with has been written about extensively in their paper and I indicated that to them in my response. I certainly don’t dwell on this, but we would all be foolish to think that our city is somehow immune to the threat of terrorism especially in this post 9-11 country we live in and with the assets our city has. My philosophy is a prepared city is a safe one and I believe those in city government strive towards that goal. What I find most interesting is my opponent’s answer on profiling during that Chronicle interview, something the Chronicle chose to ignore. My opponent believes that police officer when stopping someone for a traffic violation should have the right to ask the driver if they are a U.S. citizen. I am against racial profiling and have always been against racial profiling.

6. Many Democratic voters are wary of their choices for this runoff. Why should a Democrat who voted for one of the other candidates in November support you in this runoff?

As I have already stated in a previous answer, my message is the same across the city. My message does not change depending on what community I am in. If elected I will have an open door policy for all of our citizens…nothing less is acceptable. As an elected official for the Harris County Department of Education, I represented a Democrat district and I worked to keep taxes down, ensure our teachers had fair wages and promoted the Head Start program. I will work with the mayor and all of our council members. We need to keep our great city moving forward and we need to continue to work on quality of life issues with more green space including parks. I will work to ensure city services are delivered effectively to our citizens and the creation of more jobs will continue to define us as a top tier city and why we see so many new people coming to Houston.

UPDATE: Super Neighborhood 22 will host a candidate forum tonight for both At Large runoffs. All four candidates have committed to be there, so you can hear what Morales, Kubosh, CM Andrew Burks, and David Robinson have to say for themselves. The event runs from 6 to 8 PM at the West End Multi-service Center, 170 Heights Blvd. My thanks to Tom Dornbusch for the reminder.

Early voting begins today for Council and HCC runoffs

Dec 4th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

Here’s the map. Note that only City of Houston locations are open, since the only runoffs are for City Council and HCC Trustee. Early voting runs from today through next Tuesday, December 10, from 7 AM to 7 PM each day except for Sunday the 8th, when it is from 1 to 6 PM. Odds are pretty good you won’t encounter any lines whenever you go to vote. Remember that precinct locations are likely to be heavily consolidated on Runoff Day itself, December 14, so voting early will avoid confusion for you.

All City of Houston voters will have at least two races on their ballot, the two At Large runoffs. There are also runoffs in Districts A, D, and I, plus the three HCC Trustee runoffs, in HCC 1, 3, and 5. I will say again, if you live in HCC 1 I strongly urge you to vote for Zeph Capo. Let’s limit the number of friends Dave Wilson has on the board.

Here are the interviews I conducted with the various runoff candidates:

At Large #2
CM Andrew Burks
David Robinson

At Large #3
Michael Kubosh
Roy Morales

District A
CM Helena Brown
Brenda Stardig

District D
Dwight Boykins
Georgia Provost

District I
Robert Gallegos
Graci Garces

HCC 1
Zeph Capo

Get out there and vote, y’all. A press release from the Harris County Clerk is beneath the fold, and Hair Balls has more.

(more…)

Bob Stein on the District I runoff

Dec 2nd, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

9 comments

I’ll cut to the chase and just excerpt the conclusion of Rice poli sci prof Bob Stein’s analysis of the District I runoff between Graci Garces and Robert Gallegos.

The runoff election in District I should be highly competitive with the slight advantage to Garces. Gallegos must rely on turning out [Leticia] Ablaza’s supporters, who appear to be more likely to support his candidacy over Garces. Voter turnout in District I was only 9 percent, well below the citywide voter turnout at 18 percent. [Sen. Sylvia] Garcia’s support of Gallegos should be instrumental in providing Gallegos the resources needed to turn out Ablaza’s supporters for the runoff. [Rep. Carol] Alvarado’s support of Garces and her history of support in the district (she was District I city council member for six years) and Ablaza’s voters past support of Alvarado provides Garces a potential advantage.

He arrives at those conclusions via some heavier-duty math than what I usually bring, but don’t worry, it’s all summed up in graphs. Check it out. Via Campos.

Where the early vote was

Nov 25th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

As you know, I thought that the high turnout we were seeing in Early Voting for this past election was not so much an indicator of high turnout but of a shift in voting behavior similar to what we had seen in even-year elections. That prediction was incorrect – final turnout was higher than I thought it would be, and the reason for that was it was still the case that a majority of the vote was to come on Election Day itself. However, it is the case that behavior is shifting, and a bigger share of the vote was cast early than in prior odd-year elections. Let’s take a closer look at the early vote numbers, beginning with how much of the vote was cast early in each of the City Council districts:


Dist   Total    Mail   Early   E Day  Mail%  Early%  EDay%
==========================================================
Hou  174,632  20,280  60,135  94,217  11.6%   34.4%  54.0%
A     13,532   2,347   4,513   6,672  17.3%   33.4%  49.3%
B     13,753   1,868   5,563   6,322  13.6%   40.4%  46.0%
C     32,466   3,107   9,791  19,568   9.6%   30.2%  60.3%
D     19,663   2,295   7,462  10,652  11.7%   37.9%  54.2%
E     18,702   1,788   6,920   9,994   9.6%   37.0%  53.4%
F      7,790     564   3,516   3,710   7.2%   45.1%  47.6%
G     27,286   3,879   8,215  15,192  14.2%   30.1%  55.7%
H     10,249   1,041   3,109   6,099  10.2%   30.3%  59.5%
I      9,538   1,133   3,110   5,295  11.9%   32.6%  55.5%
J      5,942     679   2,193   3,070  11.4%   36.9%  51.7%
K     15,461   1,479   5,563   8,419   9.6%   35.6%  54.5%


All  259,962  24,000  87,925 148,037   9.2%   33.8%  56.9%
Non   85,330   3,720  27,790  53,820   4.4%   32.6%  63.1%

“All” is all of Harris County. “Non” is Harris County minus Houston. As you can see, districts B, F, and A are the trendsetters in early voting, while Districts C, H, G, and J are behind the times. The city of Houston overall was more likely to vote early than Harris County, and much more likely to vote absentee than the non-Houston parts of the County. This makes sense because it’s usually candidates that drive absentee voting. Note that the four districts with multi-candidate races – A, B, D, and I – were all above average in absentee participation; District G was the other big performer there, and it was a contested race.

I don’t have any grand conclusions to draw from this, I was just curious about what the numbers looked like. I continue to believe that we will see a shift towards early voting in these elections – the level we saw this year was easily the high water mark for odd-year elections. Note that the higher early totals for the city, admittedly driven more by absentee ballots than by in person early voting, suggests that the Astrodome wasn’t a major component of early vote turnout. It was a modest driver of non-Houston turnout, as the city of Houston comprised 67.2% of all Harris County votes. That compares to 73.6% in 2011, 69.5% in 2009, and 63.6% in 2007. For those of you that had been playing the “guess the final level of turnout based on early voting” game, the right scenario among the ones I presented was 45% early plus high Houston turnout, which pegged it at about 170,000. More data to file away for 2015.

Who’s supporting whom in District D

Nov 24th, 2013

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

The Chron checks with the ten candidates that did not make the runoff in District D to see who is endorsing frontrunner Dwight Boykins and who is going with runnerup Georgia Provost.

[Keith] Caldwell and [Demetria] Smith are supporting Boykins.

“I will be endorsing Mr. Boykins at this time,” Smith said, adding that she will aid in his runoff campaign.

Caldwell said Boykins “has a pretty good plan and that’s something I can live with: Somebody with a plan. … As voters, we can make him what we need him to be. He has a vision I can live with, right now, until I decide to run again.”

Four others – [Ivis] Johnson, [Travis] McGee, [Larry] McKinzie and [Christina] Sanders – have declared support for Provost.

Georgia Provost

“I have to decided to, without a doubt, support Georgia Provost for this election. If she is not elected, there will not be a black woman on Houston City Council,” Sanders said, adding that she is working to get her supporters back to the polls next month to vote for Provost. “We’ve got a lot of critical things happening in the district, particularly when it comes to development, and we need to make sure that we have somebody who is going to really have the community in mind and at heart if people are interested in buying and taking property.”

McGee called her “the best option” and had strong opposition to Boykins prevailing in next month’s runoff.

“He has too many special interests out there, too many favors to pay back and those are the people he’s going to pay attention to,” McGee said. “If Mrs. Provost can do this, it will also show that everybody can’t be bought. When has there ever been a time that a special interest group has ever put that much money behind a candidate for a predominantly black district like District D?”

McKinzie said he considers Provost “the more truthful candidate.”

Neither Assata Richards, who came in third, nor Lana Edwards are endorsing anyone in the runoff. Richards had been endorsed by former District D CM Ada Edwards, who sent out an email on Tuesday announcing that she was endorsing Boykins. As for the other candidates, Kirk White hadn’t made a decision yet, and Anthony Robinson said he was going to wait to see which candidate addressed the issues that were most important to him. As a reminder, my interview with Dwight Boykins is here – he also spoke with New Media Texas and did a Q&A with Texpatriate – and my interview with Georgia Provost is here. The Chron endorsed Anthony Robinson in November, so they have to name their second choice as well.

As for the other races and other candidates, if there have been any announcements in the At Large races on in District A, I have not seen them. In District I, Ben Mendez announced his endorsement of Robert Gallegos. His opponent, Graci Garces, released an open letter to him accusing him of letting people believe he is related to the late Sen. Mario Gallegos. If you are aware of any endorsements for a runoff by a candidate from November, please leave a comment or drop me a note.

Election 2013

Calendar

Search

Categories

Archives

My linkage

Polling Texas 2020

Polling Texas 2018

Polling Texas 2016

Polling Texas 2014

Polling Texas 2012

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Tags

Blogroll

Utilities

Categories

Archives

Calendar

Pages

Meta