Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

November, 2011:

Early voting for city runoffs begins today

Nov 30th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
23 comments

You remember that we have runoff elections for four Houston City Council positions, right? Well, early voting starts today and runs through next Tuesday, December 6. Here are the early voting locations that will be open for the runoff. Early voting will run from 7 AM to 7 PM each day except Sunday the 4th, when it will be 1 to 6 PM. You can go any time you want, as I expect you will be the only person voting whenever it is you show up. The over/under for turnout in this runoff is 25,000, which is to say about what it was for the 2007 runoff. Districts A and B, and At Large #2 and #5 are up.

Eight day finance reports are due Friday, so I’ll be checking for those and posting them along with anything interesting I find in them. The one remaining question is who the Chron will endorse in the District B runoff. They had endorsed Kathy Daniels for the November election, but she finished third. In the other races, they went with CM Brenda Stardig in A, CM Jolanda Jones in At Large #5, and Kristi Thibaut in At Large #2. You can debate how much endorsements mean, but whatever it is it’s surely more so in a low-profile, low-turnout race.

And low turnout it will be. Look at it this way: your vote never counts more than it does when there aren’t that many votes cast. This is your last chance to vote in 2011, so go make it count.

Supreme Court upholds margins tax

Nov 30th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
3 comments

The days of the much-unloved business margins tax may be numbered, but it won’t be the Supreme Court that is responsible for its demise.

The Texas Supreme Court turned back a challenge to the state’s primary business tax, saying it doesn’t violate a constitutional ban on personal income taxes.

The Constitution allows personal income taxes only when if voters approve. Lawmakers didn’t seek voter approval when they revised the franchise tax in 2006, and Allcat Claims Service LLP and a limited partner there, John Weakly, sued for a refund from the state, calling it an illegal personal income tax and saying that it wasn’t applied in an equal and uniform way. In the majority opinion, written by Justice Phil Johnson, the court answered one of those questions:

“We hold that: (1) the tax is not a tax imposed on the net incomes of the individual partners, thus it does not facially violate Article VIII, Section 24; and (2) we do not have jurisdiction to consider the equal and uniform challenge.”

More from the Statesman:

The case focused on whether the franchise tax constituted an income tax for certain business partnerships, including many medical practices and law firms.

Allcat Claims Service LP, a Boerne insurance adjustment firm that filed the case last summer, argued that the franchise tax levied against the partnership reduced the income of Allcat’s partners, making it an income tax.

But a majority of the court maintained that the tax applied to Allcat, not the business partners, so it did not run afoul of a state constitutional provision that prohibits a personal income tax unless voters give their approval.

“In effect, the court said a business is a business, and restrictions against taxing persons do not apply. That gives the Legislature a broader range of options in revising the tax,” said Dale Craymer , president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, a business-backed think tank.

[…]

Monday’s decision will not, however, affect a separate challenge to the margins tax that was filed by food behemoth Nestle USA Inc. and two other companies this fall.

But Craymer said the court decision implies that that case will be sent to a trial court because it deals with specific rather than broad issues.

I was surprised we got a decision so quickly, but apparently the legislation that created the margins tax had a provision that said a challenge to it would go straight to the Supreme Court and that it must render a judgment within 120 days. I fully expect the 2013 Lege to address the margins tax in some fashion, but at least they won’t be under the gun of having to make it constitutional. We’ll see if they actually try to fix the budget’s structural deficit by making it bring in more revenue.

Two more points about redistricting

Nov 30th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
4 comments

First, go read what Greg has to say about the San Antonio federal court’s logic in drawing the districts that it did. I tried to get at some of this in this post, but he digs in and says it in greater detail and with more clarity. Check it out.

Second, something I meant to mention in this post but didn’t get to was the reason why Democrats are farther behind in terms of legislative caucus size now than ten years ago: We don’t have any rural members any more. Specifically, there are no rural Anglo Democrats. After the 2002 election, there were ten Anglo Democrats from rural districts. All are gone now – Chuck Hopson and Allan Ritter switched parties, Robby Cook did not run for re-election in 2008, David Farabee didn’t run for re-election in 2010, and the others (Stephen Frost, Mark Homer, Jim McReynolds, Patrick Rose, Joe Heflin, and Jim Dunnam) were all wiped out in 2010. Of these ten districts, two are at least somewhat competitive now and should be more so in the future – Cook’s HD17 and Rose’s HD45 – mostly because they’re evolving into suburbs of Austin, as HD17 is based in Bastrop and HD45 is anchored in Hays County. One other rural district is majority Democratic now based on 2008 data, and that’s HD54, based in Killeen, currently held by Republican Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock. I’m not going to say that no other rural district will ever be on the radar for Democrats – I believe 2014 could be a very tumultuous year after another session with an eight-figure budget deficit and a looming Supreme Court ruling on school finance, and these factors could make any district competitive – but the road forward for Democrats is urban and suburban, where the population and the diversity are increasing. But the loss of these districts, without which the Dems could not have come within one seat of attaining parity in 2008, means the hole is deeper and the climb is steeper.

(To be fair, the long term trends in rural areas are the same as everywhere else in the state, which is to say increasingly Hispanic. Many rural counties would have lost population over the last decade, or lost more population than they did, without growth from Hispanics. I’m just talking about the next ten years; whatever changes these population shifts bring to rural areas will take a lot longer than that to be realized.)

Anyway, just a couple more things to add to what has already been said as we wait for SCOTUS to take action. Feel free to add your own in the comments.

The Bellaire “urban transit village”

Nov 30th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

Very interesting.

Nearly a year in the drafting, a sweeping change to Bellaire’s zoning laws creating an “urban transit village” where there is now a collection of nondescript warehouses will soon be before City Council.

On Nov. 1, the city’s Planning & Zoning Commission unanimously voted to recommend Council approval of the zoning ordinance they’ve has been working on since February with Gary Mitchell of the firm Kendig Keast, which had helped design Bellaire’s comprehensive plan five years ago.

Before the vote, the commission held a public hearing on the proposal. While members of the public were present at many of the marathon workshop sessions the commission held throughout the process, this was the first opportunity they had to speak directly on the proposal.

The warehouse district, previously called a Retail Development District in the city’s zoning plan, is a 28-acre area near the intersection of the Southwest Freeway and Loop 610. It includes a site where preliminary plans by Metro call for a light-rail station on Westpark where the regional transit agency hopes to connect the University Line with the Uptown Line leading into the Galleria.

This is the same basic location as the one-time proposed alternate site for Dynamo Stadium. The proximity of a future Universities Line rail stop was a key feature in that proposal as well.

Richard Franke, a Bellaire resident who ran unsuccessfully for City Council in May, said that the proposed ordinance was “an extraordinary effort.” Still, he peppered the commissioners with a list of questions he’d prepared.

“How will the legitimate interests of taxpayers be protected?.” he asked. “What if it reverts to an apartment complex? It’s clear that the residents of Bellaire clearly prefer detached, single-family housing.”

Responding to Franke, [Bellaire community development director John McDonald] said that while the quiet suburban lifestyle may have served Bellaire well in the past, recent trends in development throughout the greater Houston region have shown that a more “urbanized” form is beginning to take hold.

If Bellaire wants to attract new residents, particularly young professionals, it needs to seriously begin considering new forms of development, he said.

That’s almost shockingly forward-thinking of Bellaire. Who knew they had it in them? I hope Houston is paying attention.

A little perspective about redistricting

Nov 29th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
12 comments

So now we wait for the full Supreme Court’s ruling on AG Abbott’s requests to stay the 2012 elections, which by the way would only apply to the elections affected by the disputed redistricting maps. Other primary elections for things like the SBOE, statewide and county offices, would proceed as usual in March while the Lege, the State Senate, and Congress would be pushed back till May if Abbott gets his wish. Yes, we’d have two separate primaries next year under this scenario. How big an unfunded mandate to the counties do you think that would be? Talk about “irreparable harm”.

Anyway. For all of the piteous wailing and gnashing of teeth that Republicans are doing about those big bad activist judges, let’s keep something in perspective: The court-drawn State House map, under a set of reasonably optimistic assumptions, produces a 2013 Lege with 90 Rs and 60 Ds. That’s a 60% Republican chamber, with two more Rs than what they had in 2003 under what was at the time the map of their dreams. Can anyone seriously say that this is unfair to the Republicans? Go back through all of the elections this past decade, and outside of the 2010 anomaly, only three Rs won statewide with 60% of the vote or more: Carole Keeton Rylander in 2002 against the hapless Marty Akin; George W. Bush in 2004; and Kay Bailey Hutchison in 2006, back when she was still popular among her fellow Republicans. And remember, 60 is far from guaranteed for the Dems. It requires them to recruit well, to defend the increasingly vulnerable Craig Eiland while retaining Pete Gallego’s open seat, and to defeat several R incumbents in favorable but not overwhelming turf. It assumes conditions are at least comparable to 2008, which initial polling says is likely to be true but which can change at any time. It assumes that there’s no great effect from the voter ID law, if it ever gets precleared, and that the usual suppressive efforts like what we see from the Harris County Tax Assessor’s office and the like are no more successful than usual. That’s a lot of assumptions, and if one or more of them turns out to be untrue we could be looking at 95-55, or a 63% Republican House. This isn’t enough for them?

Now let’s consider what I would consider a wildly optimistic outcome for the Dems, in which they capture 65 seats total. That’s still a 57% Republican advantage. No Republican got as much as 57% in 2008 – John McCain’s 55.45% was the best showing – and under these conditions, clearly none would get that much in 2012. Indeed, for the Dems to win 65 seats next year I’d expect some statwide Republicans to fail to get 50% of the vote. My point is that this map still tilts pretty heavily in the Republicans’ favor. Whereas the map drawn by the Republicans in 2001 came close to having a Democratic majority with Republicans still winning everything statewide, I can imagine Democrats sweeping all statewide offices but not getting a legislative majority under this oh-so-unfair judge-drawn map.

And that’s just the House we’re talking about. The best case scenario for the State Senate is for the Dems to maintain the 12 seats they have now, which requires Wendy Davis to hang on in a majority R district. That means Dems maintain 39% of that body, which is to say a lower percentage than in the House. If Davis loses, the Rs control 65% of the Senate. The wildly optimistic view has the Dems eventually winning SD09, giving them 13 out of 31, or 42% of the Senate. Tell me again how unfair this is to the Republicans?

And finally we have Congress, where the if-all-goes-about-as-well-as-we-hope scenario is 13 Dems out of 36, or 64% Republican. The low end for Dems is 12, or 67% Republican, while the high end for now is probably 16 – the 13 we’re all pointing to, plus CDs 06, 10, and 14. That’s still 56% Republican. Say it with me now – How is this unfair to the Republicans?

Now I’m not so naive as to think there’s anything “fair” about redistricting. Even under a system that everyone could agree was “fair”, for some value of that word, the end result of any given election is likely to favor one side or the other for any number of reasons. Fairness is not a legal requirement, either. The Republicans probably could have drawn a slightly less egregious map that pegged the Democratic ceiling in the House at 55-57 for this election and maybe 65 for the foreseeable future that would have had a chance at preclearance. They got greedy, they got caught, and now they’re screaming like stuck pigs even though the maps that were imposed on them will likely leave them in the majority for the rest of the decade without having to increase their appeal to Latino voters and even as their statewide hegemony crumbles. We should all have problems like that.

Be all that as it may, candidate filings began yesterday, under the assumption that the elections calendar will proceed as originally planned. Various entities are keeping track of who has filed for what so far. Houston Politics has Harris County information, of which the most interesting tidbit is that former State Rep. Robert Talton has filed for County Attorney against Vince Ryan; PoliTex has Tarrant County filings – Fort Worth City Council Member Kathleen Hicks was first out of the gate for the new CD33; Greg’s Texas Political Almanac has a running tally; and the TDP is tweeting filings from its Austin headquarters – follow @TxDemParty or search the hashtag #TXD2012 for more. Finally, one candidate I want to highlight even though I doubt he has a chance to win is Jack Ternan, running for the open SD08 that had been Sen. Florence Shapiro’s seat. My reason for noting and approving of his candidacy comes from his bio:

After completing school, I joined the law firm of Bickel & Brewer where I practice complex commercial litigation. The firm has provided me an opportunity to seek justice for those affected by the City of Farmers Branch’s anti-immigrant ordinances, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and an anti-competitive deal between Southwest and American airlines.

Anyone who’s been working to bring justice to Farmers Branch is all right in my book.

Metro signs Full Funding Grant Agreement

Nov 29th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
6 comments

Full speed ahead.

The head of the Federal Transit Administration on Monday signed $900 million in grant agreements to help pay for two Houston light-rail lines under construction by the Metropolitan Transit Authority.

The grants, the first federal funds ever provided for rail in Houston, were formally approved in a ceremony attended by the FTA chief, Peter Rogoff, Mayor Annise Parker, Metro officials, local members of Congress and others. They will pay half the costs of the North and Southeast lines, scheduled for completion in 2015, which will extend Houston’s light-rail network by 12 miles.

Local officials have been trying to secure the federal funds since voters approved a plan to expand Metro’s rail network in 2003.

It took a hell of a long time, and it nearly got derailed thanks to the previous Metro regime and its Buy America foolishness, but it got done. And remember, some people said it would never happen.

Here’s Metro’s press release:

METRO Inks Houston’s First Ever Full Funding Grants for Light Rail

Houston’s light-rail expansion is now cleared to receive $900 million dollars as part of two federal Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGA).  A special signing ceremony for the grants was held [Monday] morning at a rail expansion construction site overlooking downtown. The observation at 800 Burnett St. brought METRO officials together with FTA Administrator Peter Rogoff and a host of elected officials to sign long-awaited FFGAs for the North and Southeast rail lines.

Gilbert Garcia, chairman of the New METRO’s Board of Directors says, “The rail expansion team, METRO Board members, past and present and our entire staff, past and present, should be proud of accomplishing an enormous task. We’ve never lost sight of the prize and finally it is Houston’s. We thank all the community patriots for all their help in making this day happen. This is a major investment in the region that will not only create jobs but boost economic development.”

METRO President & CEO George Greanias says “The $900 million federal grants more than double the local dollars being used to construct the 5.3 mile North (Red) extension* and the 6.6 mile Southeast (Purple)* lines and mark the first time rail projects here have received FFGAs. This is a great example of how we can leverage our local dollars to improve mobility in the region.”

The total construction cost for the two lines is $1.6 billion dollars. Each line is receiving a $450 million dollar FFGA. The federal government has already set aside $484.5 million dollars for the two projects as part of the FFGAs. Of that amount, METRO has received $84.5 million dollars. The transit agency expects to continue receiving the federal funding over the next few years.

More than 30 percent of commuters heading into the downtown area and the Texas Medical Center ride METRO. The rail expansion approved by Houston voters in 2003 includes the North (Red) Line and extends the current Main St. Line starting at UHD to the Northline Transit Center, Houston Community College and Northline Commons Mall. The Southeast (Purple) Line connects downtown with local universities including Texas Southern University and the University of Houston central campus. The two federally funded lines and a third, locally funding East End (Green) Line currently under construction, are all expected to be completed by 2014.

For PDFs of work being performed see: METRORail North Line Construction Map – Nov. (PDF) METRORail Southeast Line Construction Map – Nov. (PDF)

The Harrisburg line is also under construction, but it is using only local funds. Still out there waiting their turn are the Universities line, the Uptown line, which will also be built with local funds but is entirely dependent on the completion of the Universities line to be feasible, and the Inner Katy Line, which was on the 2003 referendum but was not officially part of the 2012 Solutions plan. The Universities line received a Record of Decision (ROD) on the Universities line last July, and now awaits final design approval, which had been hung up to a degree by the other Metro projects in the queue ahead of it and now is waiting for Congress to get its act together and pass an adequate transportation bill so there will be more New Starts funds to grant. An Inner Katy line will likely be part of a larger next phase project – Metro Solutions 2020 or some such – that may be packaged together for another vote. I’m mostly speculating here, but such a line makes all kinds of sense and is already supported by the neighborhood. What it needs now is a funding source.

That’s something farther out to look forward to. For now, we have the North and Southeast lines and their historic funding agreement. It’s a good day for Metro and for Houston. The Metro blog and Dallas Transportation have more.

Teacher evaluations

Nov 29th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

HISD is gearing up to implement a new teacher evaluation system, but not without a fight first.

The Houston Federation of Teachers has launched what is expected to be a protracted battle to void the new evaluation. It starts with a hearing Wednesday before an attorney, who will hear evidence from the union and the district administration.

Union president Gayle Fallon said she anticipates losing but vows to appeal to the Texas education commissioner. The case could set a state precedent for districts that tinker with how they rate teachers.

“We have some really good arguments,” said the union’s attorney, Martha Owen. “I’m hesitant to predict (the outcomes). The commissioner hasn’t ruled in cases like this.”

[…]

Fallon contends that the Houston Independent School District violated state law in designing the evaluation. Among other problems, she argues, the district didn’t sufficiently take teacher input into account.

Texas law says districts may deviate from the state appraisal if the replacement is “developed by” district and school committees made up of teachers and community members. At least 87 percent of districts use the state model, according to the Texas Education Agency.

HISD officials and their consultants at The New Teacher Project have said they involved 2,600 teachers and 1,500 administrators, parents and community members in designing the appraisal. District- and school-level committees met and teachers could fill out online surveys.

I know I discussed the challenges of evaluating teachers when I interviewed Gayle Fallon last year. I don’t think we really have a handle on what the “best” way to do this is. I guess the way I look at this is this: How much faith do you have in the employee evaluation system they have where you work? Obviously, there has to be some way to do this, but if the people who are being evaluated by it don’t have faith in it, isn’t that a problem?

Division I wannabes are popping up all over

Nov 29th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

And they’re all interested in the same conference.

The Southland Conference likely holds the key to Incarnate Word’s dreams of moving its athletic program into NCAA Division I.

[…]

UIW students participating in a survey would support by nearly a 2-1 margin the school’s planned transition to Division I, according to results published Wednesday afternoon.

But according to the Student Government Association survey, a majority of students would not support proposed fee increases to fund the move.

The survey said 63 percent supported the push for Division I status, but 56 percent did not support a fee increase of $100 per semester.

A university official said there were 401 respondents, approximately 10 percent of the full-time undergraduate student body.

Other schools in the Division II Lone Star Conference contemplating the move up to Division I include Abilene Christian and Angelo State, SLC commissioner Tom Burnett said Wednesday.

“We’ve heard from those folks and a few others,” he said. “It’s an interesting time with the interest in Division I from some longstanding Division II members.”

We heard about UIW a couple of months ago. HBU has already taken the plunge. UTSA started out in the SLC before moving up to the WAC. I wonder at what point it will cease to make sense to be a Div II program in Texas because there aren’t enough nearby peer institutions to schedule. Which is good for the SLC, and presumably for the conferences that pick up the schools that feel like they’re getting too big for it.

SCOTUS asks for briefs in stay request

Nov 28th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

We still have a few more days at least before we get some kind of resolution over the maps we will be using for this election.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the implementation of interim maps for congressional and state legislative districts, arguing the three-judge panel that drew the maps overstepped their legal bounds.

“Today’s appeal emphasizes that no court has, at any time, found anything unlawful about the redistricting maps passed by the Texas Legislature,” Abbott said in a statement. He called the court-drawn maps “judicial activism at its worst.”

Democratic lawmakers and minority rights groups involved in the redistricting lawsuits assailed the state’s quest for Supreme Court intervention.

“It’s the same old tired arguments that have been made by the state of Texas that completely misapply Supreme Court precedent,” said Jose Garza, the lead attorney for the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, referring to the San Antonio federal panel’s recent denial of the state’s request to stay the court drawn-maps. The panel criticized the state’s lawyers for misinterpreting key case law.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia asked groups in the dispute to respond to the state’s request by Thursday.

Abbott’s request coincided with the first day for candidates to file paperwork to run for office in the districts determined by the court-drawn maps.

Redistricting trial observers question whether Abbott’s argument will appeal to Supreme Court justices who rejected similar arguments made by Democrats and minority groups against the redistricting maps backed by then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in 2004.

Michael Li, who is quoted in the story on that subject, has more to say here and here; apparently someone forgot to remind Burka about the 2004 stay request. Something that I don’t think has been sufficiently emphasized is this: Abbott and other Republicans base their claims in part on the fact that the court-drawn maps are significant departures from the Legislative maps. But the court didn’t base their map on the 2011 plans, because those plans have not been precleared. They based them on the last legal maps, which is to say the maps used in the 2010 election. Those maps, properly adjusted for population and demography, led to the court-drawn maps. Abbott complains that the court ignored the will of the Lege, but if the will of the Lege was to draw maps that violated the Voting Rights Act, what else is the court to do? How much deference does an illegal map deserve? The court’s answer is apparently “not much”, and while one may disagree with the conclusion, I don’t see any logical contradiction.

Anyway. SCOTUS will do what SCOTUS will do, but it seems to me that it will likely decide that its proper role is to wait for the appeal after the trials have run their course. For sure, there’s a considerable cost at this point in calling a halt and declaring a do-over. We’ll know soon enough if they agree with me. The Trib has more.

A look ahead to SBOE races

Nov 28th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

Regardless of what happens with the other maps, the one map that was precleared and is set for the next decade is the SBOE. With all 15 members up for re-election (like the Senate, everyone has to run in the first election post-redistricting), there are already some hot races shaping up. This Trib story from a few days back has a look.

Now, with three longtime (and reliably moderate) members stepping down and all 15 members up for re-election because of changes brought about by redistricting, political control over the divisive board hangs in the balance. And even though the filing period has yet to begin, there are already signs that these races could get ugly. Questions about one member’s sexual orientation, for example, are already being raised.

Some board members will also undoubtedly try to oust each other. [David] Bradley, who consistently votes with the board’s social conservatives, said he would be “actively working” against Thomas Ratliff, [Don] McLeroy’s replacement.

Randy Stevenson, a Tyler businessman who served on the board from 1994 to 1998, announced Wednesday that he would run against Ratliff, a registered lobbyist whose clients include Microsoft and whose opponents, because of that, have argued that he should be disqualified from office.

[…]

Bradley has yet to attract a declared opponent, but that’s expected to happen soon. Meanwhile, social conservative incumbents Ken Mercer and chairwoman Barbara Cargill have already drawn primary challengers, as has George Clayton. Bob Craig and Marsha Farney, moderate Republicans, and Mary Helen Berlanga, a Democrat, have all announced that they will not seek re-election.

Farney was elected in 2010, so while she may have been a moderate, she certainly wasn’t “longtime”. As noted before, all of these races make me nervous. Having to rely on Republican primary voters to do something non-crazy is not a bet you want to have to make. And will a Democrat please file to run against Terri “Don’t call me “Terry” Leo? I promise to contribute to your campaign if you do.

The race in Clayton’s district, which now includes all of Collin County north of Dallas, may prove especially contentious. Clayton, a teacher who lives in Richardson, defeated longtime incumbent Geraldine “Tincy” Miller in an upset during the 2010 primary. Miller now wants her old seat back and has launched a campaign attacking Clayton’s conservative credentials, in particular his support of a plan last spring that would have directed $2 billion from the Permanent School Fund to public schools.

[…]

But perhaps more damaging to Clayton in a Republican primary are the rumors that prompted him to send an email to members of the media last week with the subject line “sexual orientation.” Clayton, who was leaked the notes of a conversation between Miller and Tea Party Activist Susan Fletcher that mentioned his “living arrangements,” confirmed in the email that he has “a male partner who lives with me in my home.”

In a phone interview, Miller said that she was not the one who brought up Clayton’s sexual orientation, but she noted that others have. Fletcher said in an email that she was “urged by several sources in general” to investigate Clayton’s living arrangement — but not by Miller.

Clayton said in an email that when he realized his personal life might become an issue in the campaign, his first instinct was to “nip it in the bud.” That strategy has already cost him one supporter: Conservative blogger Donna Garner, who is a vocal follower of education issues, sent out an email Tuesday night retracting an endorsement of him.

Clayton said the political makeup of the board — and whether “cool heads and reasonable discussions” would prevail — depends on the next election. The board’s biggest responsibility in the next four years, he wrote, will be “to keep public education alive in Texas.”

Clayton’s win over Miller in 2010 might have been the most out-of-left-field result from that year. Nobody knew anything about the guy. He turned out to be an upgrade, so naturally the universe, or at least the Republican Party, is trying to course-correct. As with all of the other races so far, I have a bad feeling about this one.

Filing season opens today

Nov 28th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
5 comments

It’s supposed to open today, anyway. It may get pushed back a day or two until the remaining legal actions get sorted out. As we know, after being turned down by the San Antonio federal Court, AG Greg Abbott is filing a request for a stay of the election with the Supreme Court. If it gets denied, things will proceed quickly; if it gets referred to the full Court it could take a bit longer, perhaps a week or so; if it gets granted, God only knows what happens next. Basically, at this point we’re still in limbo. Oh, if things are allowed to go forward, Plan C220 was approved by the three-court panel for the Congressional map.

Assuming things are allowed to go forward, I expect we’ll be buried under an avalanche of candidate filing announcements. I’ll try to keep track of them as best I can. Among the races I’ll be looking for:

CD06 – Chet Edwards, anyone? Ol’ Smokey Joe Barton is in a fairly competitive district, all things considered, but he has a boatload of money. Someone with experience and fundraising chops would need to get in to make this worth watching.

CD10 – Former candidate Dan Grant has expressed some interest.

CD14 – Everyone is still waiting for former Rep. Nick Lampson to say something. Here’s an alternate suggestion in the event Lampson declines to get in. Take a look at the 2008 electoral data for the new CD14. In particular, have a gander at this result:


SBOE 7

Bradley - R 105,472 47.5 %
Ewing   - D 110,265 49.7 %
Johnson - L   6,339  2.9 %

Based on the vote totals, I think there was a small piece of CD14 that did not overlap this SBOE district, but probably 95% of CD14 was covered. Laura Ewing was the one Democrat to get more votes than the Republican in any comparable race. Maybe we should be drafting Laura Ewing to run here.

HDs 26, 33, 34, 35, 40, 45, 54, 78, 105, 106, 107, 108, 113, 117, 134, and 144: These are all of the Dem-favored and Dem-attainable districts for which I am not currently aware of a candidate. (HD93 in Tarrant County has former Reps. Paula Pierson and Chris Turner already in.) Every last one of these had better have a good candidate in it.

SD09: The one Democratic State Senate district that can be remotely seen as a pickup opportunity. Sam Houston got 45.1% of the vote in 2008 for the Dem high water mark. It’s an uphill battle, but it’s an open seat, and those don’t come around very often.

Harris County Tax Assessor: Sylvia Garcia isn’t interested despite my best efforts, and Diane Trautman is running for HCDE Trustee. Someone needs to step up and run against the buffoonish Don Sumners.

Harris County District Attorney: Pat Lykos has made herself more vulnerable with the BAT van stuff. Surely someone senses an opportunity.

I’m pleased to note that there is apparently a candidate for SBOE in my District 6. I saw and signed a petition for someone at an event last week. I don’t remember the candidate’s name because he or she was not there, but I saw the name of the office. I also saw a number of petitions for positions on Appeals Courts #1 and 14. I have no idea if anyone is gearing up for a Supreme Court or CCA run yet, however.

In the meantime, we wait for SCOTUS. What filings are you eagerly awaiting? The Trib has more.

UPDATE: Further analysis from Michael Li.

HBU adds football, joins Southland Conference

Nov 28th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

Add another Division I football program to the city.

The holidays came early for Houston Baptist University and the Southland Conference as both crossed an item off their wish lists.

HBU joined a conference offering nearby members and a home for all its sports except men’s soccer, and the Southland added its first Houston member and an institution that will soon bring another football team to the league.

The Southland officially extended an invitation, effective July 1, 2013, to HBU on Monday.

The Huskies will begin a football program that will play in the Southland in 2014 and could compete as soon as 2013.

HBU’s Board of Trustees gave its approval to pursue football in June. Landing in the SLC, which is a much better geographic fit for HBU and which enables them to qualify for the SLC’s automatic bid to the NCAA basketball tournament, is a pretty good coup for them. It’s unclear where they’ll play as yet – Dynamo Stadium was mentioned as a possibility in the print version of this story, though oddly not in the online version – but in the end I suspect they’ll build their own facility. I wish them luck as they get their program off the ground.

From the “Things I will not be spending my money on” department

Nov 28th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
5 comments

This arrived in the mail last week:

My letter from George and Laura

I have no idea from which mailing list they bought my name. Suffice it to say it was not money well spent on their part. I got a good laugh out of it, which is more than they’ll get.

Weekend link dump for November 27

Nov 27th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

OK, now I’m ready to acknowledge Christmas season. But just barely.

On the plus side, I may not have to worry about it any more.

So, do these results mean that warp drives are still in play?

Doing nothing is still the best option for Congress.

A history of turducken. Which may not be fully accurate, but who cares?

How to get doctors to wash their hands.

Jack Abramoff deserves a lot more than that, but it’s a start.

Extinctions suck.

Building a bridge to the 19th Century, because they can’t quite reach the 18th just yet.

My grandmother could have told you that tomato paste is good for you. On the issue of pizza in school lunches, however, there is more to it than that.

People who watch Fox News are even less informed about what’s going on in the world than people who watch no news at all.

That recent trip to the Far East was pretty darned successful for President Obama.

I always understood the Bechdel Test to be the author’s own criteria for whether or not she would consider watching a movie, but obviously one can see it as more than that.

What John Chait says. And someday, when we elect another Democratic President after suffering through another Republican President (or two, God help us), we’ll moan about how that President is no Obama.

Pepper spray is actually pretty serious and dangerous stuff.

My lack of respect for the anti-vaccine movement has now been elevated to contempt.

I’m pretty sure pie is the best part of Thanksgiving dinner.

Oxford’s words of the year. You may now commence being sick of them.

You shouldn’t have such a thin skin if you’re an elected official. Pick on someone your own size.

My parents just got a new laptop so I don’t need to update their browser. I did just convince my next door neighbor to finally get rid of her ancient Window XP laptop, so I feel like I’ve done my part.

NBA lockout to end

Nov 27th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

Glad to hear it.

The NBA will be back on Christmas Day, pending approval of a tentative settlement of a lengthy, combustible lockout that came closer than ever before in league history to swallowing an entire season.

A 66-game schedule beginning with a triple-header — likely the originally intended season openers centered around a Finals rematch between Miami and Dallas — will begin Dec. 25 once the agreement is finalized, vetted by an army of attorneys and approved by the players and owners.

“We expect our labor relations committee to endorse this deal, this tentative agreement, and we expect our Board of Governors, at a meeting we will call after that, to endorse the deal,” commissioner David Stern said Saturday at a 3:40 a.m. ET news conference that followed a 15-hour negotiating session at a Manhattan law firm. “And we expect that a collective bargaining agreement will arise out of this deal as well.”

Billy Hunter, executive director of the National Basketball Players Association, which will be reconstituted as a union after disbanding Nov. 14 and taking its fight to the federal courts, estimated that the process — including a vote by the union membership — could be accomplished in three days to a week.

“I think it was the ability of the parties to decide it was necessary to compromise and to try to put this thing back together some kind of way and to be able to put an end to the litigation and everything it entails,” Hunter said. “And we just thought that rather than try to pursue this in court, it was in both of our interests to try to reach a resolution.”

Both sides will meet with their attorneys later Saturday and begin the process of withdrawing the lawsuits each has filed against the other. After convening at least twice by phone during the negotiations Friday, the owners’ labor relations committee will be briefed on the details of the agreement Saturday. At the same time, details of the broad agreement will be refined and B-list issues resolved, leading to a frenzied run-up to a shortened free-agency period — which could be so compressed it may coincide with the estimated start of training camp on Dec. 9.

“We’re confident that once we present it, [the players] will support it,” Hunter said.

Players gave ground on their share of revenue, which everyone expected, but apparently did a little better in the end than what had been offered previously. I think the key to this lies in this winners and losers compilation from ESPN:

LOSERS: The middle class

As owners and the league have spent a year obsessing about player costs, one clear factor has emerged: The poor-value contracts are the big deals for middling players. With or without stiff taxes, you can expect more teams to catch on to the idea of paying for stars and filling in the rest of the roster cheaply.

WINNER: The D-League

As more teams seek bargain players, more teams will invest effort in getting the most out of the NBA’s little brother.

LOSERS: Superstars

They have long made far less than they are worth, and that’s not going to change now.

NBA owners are going to need to learn something that MLB owners have finally started to understand: It’s not paying for stars that kills you. Star players by definition can’t be overpaid because they can’t be replaced. Indeed, star players are often underpaid by the metric of what they could be earning. It’s overpaying for replaceable players that kills you. Too many NBA teams are comprised of fungible talent locked into multi-year multi-million dollar deals, and that’s not sustainable. The adjustment to more of a stars-and-scrubs market is going to be painful, but it was inevitable. I’m just glad it didn’t take a fully lost season to start the process.

Galveston County redistricting plan blocked by federal judge

Nov 27th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
1 comment

Seems to be a lot of stories like this these days.

A U.S. District Court judge has blocked the county’s redistricting plan for this election cycle because it has not received preclearance from the U.S. Department of Justice.

In an order issued Tuesday, Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt wrote that “because the redistricting plans for Galveston County Commissioners, Constables and Justices of the Peace have not been precleared pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the plans may not be implemented.”

Some background on the suit is here.

The lawsuit contends the county filed its redistricting plan to the U.S. Department of Justice too late for the plan to take effect this election cycle.

All plans for redistricting must be approved by the U.S. Department of Justice in a process known as preclearance.

The lawsuit claims the county waited until the last minute to file the plan, which would prevent preclearance in time for the upcoming election.

[…]

[Plaintiffs’ attorney Jose] Garza said he couldn’t say whether the redistricting plan was the county’s answer to changing demographics or whether the new district lines were politically or even racially motivated.

“The timing of the filing for redistricting sort of muddies those issues,” Garza said. “The date of release of information was available in March. Then the county waited until August to adopt a plan, then sat on that plan for 50 days before (county officials) made a submission to the Department of Justice, fully knowing that we had an impending election schedule. That’s problematic.”

What was the basis of the lawsuit? Stop me if you’ve heard this one before:

The new boundaries fail to take into account Latino population growth, which accounts for 50 percent of county growth over the last decade, the lawsuit says.

The new map eliminates two constable and justice-of-the-peace districts – drawn in 1992 under a consent agreement reached in federal court to increase minority election opportunities – and reduces the percentage of Latino and black voters in most redrawn districts, the suit says. The 1992 agreement expired in 2002.

Judge Hoyt declined the plaintiffs’ motion for an independent three-judge panel to hear the merits of the case on the grounds officials were already disputing the map with the Justice Department. I presume what this means is that the districts and precincts that are in place today will remain in place for the 2012 election, and that the resolution of the preclearance question with the Justice Department will determine what happens after that. This was not an option for Harris County because the population variation between Commissioner precincts was unlawfully great.

It’s a long way to Damascus

Nov 27th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

The Trib has a good story about Williamson County DA John Bradley, whom you may recall as Rick Perry’s chief hatchet man on the Forensic Science Commission, and his apparent conversion to open-mindedness in the wake of the DNA exoneration of Michael Morton, who was convicted of murdering his wife in 1987 by Bradley’s predecessor and mentor, Ken Anderson. It’s a big scandal now because Anderson, now a district court judge, apparently withheld exculpatory evidence to the defense, and Bradley, as is his wont, fought against Morton’s attempts to get DNA testing done and unseal prosecution files for years before finally losing and learning how wrong he was to have fought. I have not followed this saga on the blog – you should read Eye on Williamson and Wilco Watchdog if you want the full story. Anyway, Bradley is now claiming to be a changed man as a result of this experience.

“I have been through a series of events that deeply challenged me,” Bradley, the Williamson County district attorney, said during an extended interview with The Texas Tribune. “I recognized that I could be angry, resentful and react to people, or I could look for the overall purpose and lesson and apply it to not only my own professional life but teach it. And I chose the latter path.”

In the last two years, Bradley and his trademark sharp tongue have been at the center of two of the most controversial murder cases in Texas. In 2009, as chairman of the Texas Forensic Science Commission, he and the New York-based Innocence Project battled aggressively over re-examining the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, the Corsicana man executed in 2004 for igniting the 1991 arson blaze that killed his three daughters. For six years, Bradley also fought the Innocence Project’s efforts to exonerate Michael Morton, who was wrongly convicted of murdering his wife under Bradley’s then boss in Williamson County 25 years ago.

Bradley discovered that not only was he wrong all those years about Morton’s guilt, of which he had been so certain, but that there are serious questions about whether his predecessor may have committed the worst kind of prosecutorial misconduct: hiding evidence that ultimately allowed the real murderer to remain free to kill again.

[…]

Bradley said he regrets that his opposition to DNA testing over the last six years meant more time behind bars for an innocent man. He also regrets sending letters to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles urging them to keep Morton locked away.

Had he known then what he knows now about the Innocence Project and Scheck, he said he might have handled the Willingham case differently, too.

This experience has taught him to be more open-minded, to try to see cases from both sides, he said. Bradley emphasized that his office is more open than his predecessor’s was. And in the future, when defense lawyers bring him cases to review, Bradley said, he will have a new perspective.

“If I had to come up with a slogan,” Bradley said, “I don’t know that I would use it, but essentially the slogan would be ‘We are more than tough on crime.'”

Some of his critics, though, see Bradley’s contrition as too little, too late. And they note that he is facing re-election next year. They want more than words.

“The jury is still out on whether those words will manifest themselves into real actions to help fix what is clearly a broken justice system,” said state Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, chairman of the Innocence Project.

Scott Henson, who writes the well-regarded criminal justice blog Grits for Breakfast, said Bradley could demonstrate his changed perspective by joining with innocence advocates to promote reforms to the Texas justice system. “He’s got a long record,” Henson said. “And it will take more than a few words of humility to get everyone to believe that he’s had some road to Damascus moment.”

I’m as big a believer in redemption as the next person, but talk is cheap. I agree with Sen. Ellis and Henson that it’s what Bradley does next that will determine if he means this or is just hoping to deflect a weapon that will surely be used against him in the 2012 election. A phone call to Craig Watkins for advice on how to go about ensuring the integrity of past convictions would be a good start. There’s a lot Bradley can do to try to atone and get right with the universe. It’s up to him to do it. Link via Grits, who has more here.

Yale Street Bridge load limit reduced by TxDOT

Nov 27th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
8 comments

This hit my inbox on Wednesday afternoon:

Yale Street Bridge Load Limit Reduced by TxDOT

A recent assessment of the Yale Street Bridge over White Oak Bayou performed by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDot) has resulted in a reduction in the bridge’s maximum traffic load rating.

The assessment was performed under the state’s program to monitor bridge safety across the streets and highway network called BRINSAP (Bridge Inventory, Inspection and Appraisal Program).

The Yale Street Bridge rating was reduced from a previous maximum weight load of 40,000 lbs and 21,000 lbs for tandem axle to a new rating of 8,000 lbs per single axle and 10,000 lbs per tandem axle. This lower weight limit does not impact use of the bridge by passenger vehicles or small trucks.

However, due to the new ratings, the City of Houston is restricting truck use of the bridge, effective immediately. This restriction will apply to all commercial truck traffic, including standard semi-tractor trailers, large panel vans, delivery trucks and buses.

The Houston Fire Department (HFD), Metro and the Houston Independent School District have been notified and have made route changes as necessary.

Signs noting the restrictions and directing trucks to Heights Boulevard south of I-10 were installed on Tuesday, November 22, 2011. HPD’s Truck Enforcement Unit has been notified and their assistance in enforcement has been requested.

The bridge is safe and is expected to continue to provide service over the long term to the public for traffic within the load ratings.

That’s a pretty remarkable change. The RUDH folks have been yelling about the Yale Street Bridge for months now, mostly out of concern for the truck traffic that the Ainbinder Wal-Mart will generate. One presumes this will have some effect on that.

Saturday video break: Got The Time

Nov 26th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
1 comment

Song #91 on the Popdose Top 100 Covers list is “Got The Time”, originally by Joe Jackson, and covered by Anthrax. Yeah, I think these two are gonna sound a little different. Here’s the original:

Nice. I like Joe Jackson, but I can’t say I was familiar with that song. Here’s the Anthrax cover:

Not quite as different as I was expecting. Not really my style, but it’ll do. What was your preference?

Rep. Charlie Gonzalez to retire

Nov 26th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

As the story says, it’s the end of an era.

Rep. Charlie Gonzalez said Friday he will not seek re-election, a decision that will end the congressional tenure of a Democratic family whose name has been synonymous with the city of San Antonio for more than half a century.

[…]

His decision not to run for another term ends nearly 50 years of representation by the Gonzalez family.

It also presents a political opportunity to state Rep. Joaquín Castro, twin brother of San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro. The Democrat likely will seek Gonzalez’s 20th Congressional District seat, his spokesman Cary Clack said.

Former U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, another Democrat, is eyeing the newly redrawn 35th district in which Castro originally intended to run.

“It’s about having lived in this district almost my entire life,” said Rodriguez, who previously served in the 28th district before being ousted by Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, and in the 23rd district before losing to Rep. Quico Canseco, R-San Antonio.

And just like that, the redrawn Congressional map may have eliminated the need for two potentially contentious Democratic primaries. In the case of Doggett versus Castro, that’s surely a good thing, as it will avoid a ton of bad karma and hurt feelings. In the case of Ciro Rodriguez and Pete Gallego, who now has a clear path to the CD23 nomination, it may or may not be so good, as a primary would have helped Gallego raise his name ID and get him up to speed for this next level. On balance, it’s probably a positive, but you can make a case the other way.

The Trib confirms that the dominoes will fall as described by the story, so this gives Texas Democrats a good chance to boost its bench without losing Doggett’s strong progressive voice. It will be interesting to see if Castro will represent a leftward move from Gonzalez, who was a strong voice on a number of issues but typically “centrist” on things like the environment. Regardless, it’s better to have the open seat in a Presidential year, when turnout should not be an issue. I thank Rep. Gonzalez for his service and wish him well in whatever comes next. BOR and News Taco have more.

Going for the stay

Nov 26th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
1 comment

Late Wednesday, AG Greg Abbott requested that the San Antonio court stay its order implementing new maps for Congress, the State House, and the State Senate, exhibiting his usual grace and class in doing so. Not unexpectedly, the San Antonio court declined to change its mind to satisfy his whining, so it’s off to the Supreme Court next. As Texas Redistricting notes, this is basically 2004 all over again, with the shoe on the other foot for each side.

Responding to arguments in 2004 that going forward with elections under the DeLay map would result in ‘irreparable’ harm, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott was dismissive of many of the same arguments the state likely will try to make in 2011.

In 2004, redistricting plaintiffs argued that little harm would result from allowing the existing, legally enforceable map to be used for one more cycle. On the other hand, redistricting plaintiffs told the Supreme Court that if the court allowed elections under the disputed map and lated “reverse[d] the judgment below, the rights of Texas voters will have been illegally abridged, and their Representatives will have been thrown out of office solely based on party.”

Abbott sharply disagreed in his 2004 response:

Applicants [minority groups and Democrats] suggest that the loss of incumbency advantage would constitute irreparable harm …. Applicants argue … that the incumbent, once beaten in an election, would be unable to win again even if district lines are restored later. That claimed anti-democratic advantage in an election is hardly sufficient to justify extraordinary relief.

Today, Abbott sounds a whole lot more like the 2004 plaintiffs when he argues:

[M]ore troubling is the injury that will result from allowing the 2012 Texas House elections to go forward on an unlawfully composed redistricting plan. Once done, the harm caused to the State and its citizens cannot be undone when if the elections are later invalidated, because the results of the election would be irreversible.

So how might this play out this time?

In key ways, the state’s hand seems weaker than in 2004.

You never know what the Supreme Court will do, but you’d think that they’d let the lower courts go about their business before they got involved. I presume we’ll know soon enough. See here for all the feedback on the interim Congressional map, and here for the alternate maps that accompany those comments.

Pena steps down

Nov 26th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

Bye-bye, Aaron.

State Rep. Aaron Peña will retire at the end of this term rather than seek re-election under interim political maps for the Texas House of Representatives that stripped him of a district offering the best opportunity for a Republican candidate to win office in Hidalgo County.

Peña, R-Edinburg, said he will not seek a sixth term in office in a court-drawn district he deemed unwinnable for any Republican candidate, nor will he move to a conservative-friendly district to vie for votes from the constituents of state Rep. Veronica Gonzales, D-McAllen.

That “conservative-friendly” district – I presume they mean Rep. Gonzales’ HD41 – voted 57% for Barack Obama in 2008. That’s essentially the same as the current HD41, and in fact the court-drawn HD41 comprises 96.7% of the current HD41. So yeah, good luck with that. Pena’s a me-first opportunist who’d rather run than fight, so none of this should be a surprise. I will simply note, as others have done already, that for all Pena claims to be bothered by the one-party hegemony of South Texas, the one-party hegemony of the state is apparently just fine. The fact that the district his new buddies drew for him was one of the reasons the State House map was thrown out is a nice bit of justice. Stace has more.

There’s congestion on I-10: Film at 11

Nov 26th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
3 comments

I’m sure you will be completely unsurprised to hear that I-10 has bad traffic congestion. You may be surprised to hear where the worst of it is, however.

Just in time for Thanksgiving travel, a new study has found that a stretch of Interstate 10 through Houston is one of the nation’s most congested highways.

The study by The Weather Channel, the Texas Transportation Institute and INRIX, a provider of traffic information, found that eastbound I-10 between T.C. Jester and San Jacinto is the fourth-busiest road in the country.

According to study highlights released today by the Weather Channel, this 4.4-mile stretch costs $43 million dollars a year in wasted gas and drivers’ time.

In 2010, this section of I-10 cost drivers 475,000 wasted hours and 951,000 wasted gallons of fuel, according to a news release about the study.

Yes, I-10 inside the Loop is the stretch cited by the study as our worst and one of the worst nationally. I don’t know how much this study factored the current construction into its calculations, but it’s certainly a factor. Even without that, it’s been getting worse, thanks in my opinion to the bottleneck at I-45. I’m willing to bet that after the service road expansion is completed we’ll still see frequent major backups.

A summary of the study is here, and all of the reports are here. I have to say that I’m not exactly clear where that “fourth-busiest” ranking comes from. If you look at the Congested Corridors Report and scroll down to Table A-2, Congestion Leaders, this bit of I-10 is ranked #26 overall. The Houston roadway ranked highest on Table A-1, Reliably Unreliable, is Loop 610 from 290 to Yale. All the data for Houston corridors is here. If you can see how any one overall ranking was determined, you’re seeing more than I am. The Houston Business Journal, which discusses a couple of other Houston corridors and which appears to have a more accurate depiction of their rankings in this study, has more.

Friday random ten: Black Friday edition

Nov 25th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

Today is Black Friday, the traditional start-of-the-Christmas-season holiday in which crazy people get up before the crack of dawn to have first dibs at discounted merchandise. I understand our neighborhood Target took things to the logical extreme and opened at midnight. How can I not celebrate this in song?

1. Black Friday – Steely Dan
2. Black Annie – Solas
3. Black Blade – Blue Oyster Cult
4. Black Coffee In Bed – Squeeze
5. Black Eye Blues – Asylum Street Spankers
6. Black Is The Color – SixMileBridge
7. Black Rain – Fastball
8. Black Horse and the Cherry Tree – KT Tunstall
9. Black Night – Deep Purple
10. Black Widow – Michelle Shocked

Happy day after Thanksgiving, y’all.

Minor tweaks to interim county map approved

Nov 25th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

Barring anything strange, we should have a final county map for the 2012 election.

A federal judge has granted several small changes Harris County requested to an interim redistricting map produced as part of a lawsuit Latino activists filed against the county’s adopted map.

According to an email from First Assistant County Attorney Terry O’Rourke, U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore signed an order Wednesday, splitting one voting precinct near T.C. Jester at the Beltway between Commissioner Precinct 1 and Precinct 4. Gilmore also accepted the county’s request to return a voting precinct near Clay Road and Highway 6 to Commissioner Precinct 3 from Precinct 4.

The effect of these changes is to keep two important facilities — including office space and road maintenance equipment — in the commissioner precincts they were built to service.

Thanks to the judge’s changes, Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle regains his central administration office and largest road camp, and Precinct 3 Commissioner Steve Radack also regains his largest road camp.

The plaintiffs did not object to these tweaks, as they did not affect Precinct 2 in a material way. At this point, the Justice Department still needs to weigh in on preclearance, and the lawsuit needs to be resolved. I presume that these issues will not be settled until 2013. It’s possible the county could reach an agreement with the plaintiffs, but I suspect the matter will go to trial instead.

Sports Authority will not impede Astros move to AL

Nov 25th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

One of the odd side stories that came out after MLB officially approved the sale of the Astros to Jim Crane was this contention by attorney Kevin W. Yankowsky of Fulbright & Jaworski that the Astros’ lease at Minute Maid Park required them to be in the National League. At the time, Sports Authority Chair J. Kent Friedman said it was an “interesting analysis” and that he’d have their legal beagles look it over. It didn’t take them long to kick it out.

On Tuesday, McLane and Crane completed the transfer of the Astros.

[…]

Crane said he will attend the winter meetings. One thing he won’t have to deal with is any challenge from the Harris County Houston Sports Authority over the Astros’ move to the AL. A partner from Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. last week said a move to the AL would violate the terms of the lease at Minute Maid, but the HCHSA said in a release that its legal team has a differing opinion. Withholding consent for the Astros playing as an AL team, the HCHSA determined, would be “unreasonable.”

Here’s the Sports Authority’s full response:

The Lease provides in Section 5.1(a) that the Astros have the right to use the Stadium for “the operation of a Major League Baseball franchise.” There is no reference in this Section to league affiliation. Further, as defined in the Lease, the term “Major League Baseball” expressly includes the National League, the American League and all Member Teams. In addition, Section 5.1(a) of the Lease expressly uses the uncapitalized word “franchise” instead of the capitalized, defined term “Franchise.” Only the capitalized, defined term “Franchise” is limited to a National League franchise. The uncapitalized term “franchise” is not so limited. Finally, the reference to “Baseball Home Games” (basically defined as Astros baseball games as a member of the National League) in Section 5.1(a) of the Lease is not a limiting phrase. Rather, it is used as an example of a use incidental to the use of the Stadium for the “operation of a Major League Baseball franchise,” not as an exclusive use. This interpretation is confirmed by the use of the phrase “including, but not limited to,” which precedes the phrase “Baseball Home Games.”

Accordingly, the Astros are permitted under the Lease to operate a Major League Baseball franchise in either the National League or the American League and to play their games in the Stadium attendant to such operation. Therefore, the Sports Authority is not in a position to prevent Major League Baseball from potentially moving the Astros to the American League.

The Astros transfer to the American League does require a minor change to the Non-Relocation Agreement to confirm that the Astros cannot play any home games outside the Stadium in violation of the Non-Relocation Agreement. The Astros have agreed to this minor change.

Even though the Astros cannot assign their interest in the Lease or mortgage their leasehold estate in most instances without the consent of the Sports Authority, the Sports Authority may not unreasonably withhold its consent. The Sports Authority’s withholding of its consent based solely on a potential Astros move to the American League could be considered unreasonable and therefore a violation of the Sports Authority’s covenant not to act in an unreasonable manner in this regard.

I don’t know, I have a hard time believing this will be the end of it. I just have a feeling that there’s a lawsuit out there to force the issue. I certainly could be wrong, I have nothing more than my gut to go on, but this is what I think. What do you think?

Runoff overview: District A

Nov 25th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
14 comments

I don’t remember there being a Chron overview story for the District A regular election, but now that it’s in overtime we get an overview story about the race between CM Brenda Stardig and challenger Helen Brown. Better late than never, right?

Just a few thoughts about the article. First, it’s a little silly to call this runoff a “referendum” on Mayor Parker. Not to put too fine a point on it, but we just had a referendum on the Mayor, and she passed, if just barely. A 5000-vote (if that much) Council runoff in a single district four weeks later isn’t going to tell us anything we didn’t already know. I’ve no doubt the Mayor is an issue in this race, perhaps the key issue, but let’s keep some perspective here.

Some of the other issues in this race are a bit curious.

Brown supports the repeal of Proposition 1, the voter-approved initiative that called for the creation of a monthly drainage fee. Stardig voted in favor of the ordinance that Council passed to implement it. Brown calls for the removal of George Greanias as Metro CEO because of his viewing of pornography at work. Like Parker, Stardig favors leaving that decision to the Metro board “until it impacts the actual function of the business.” Stardig favored the city’s approximately $20 million investment in infrastructure and land to get the Dynamo to build a $60 million soccer stadium downtown that the city and county will own. Brown argues that is an improper public investment in a private business.

I’m pretty sure Council can’t pass an ordinance that overturns a charter amendment that has been adopted by referendum – we do have to respect the will of the voters, right? – but I suppose they could vote to put a repeal referendum on the ballot. That is, if the Mayor gives them a repeal referendum to put on the ballot, which needless to say isn’t going to happen. Or there will be another petiton drive, for which the vote to put it on the ballot is a formality. Greanias isn’t going anywhere unless the Mayor wants him to, and she has shown no inclination of that. As for Dynamo Stadium, last I checked it was about six months from being completed. This Council did vote twice on aspects of the deal – both unanimous, for what it’s worth – but the vote to make the land available for the stadium was taken in 2008, which is to say before Stardig’s time on Council. And ironically, it was Annise Parker who ran an ad that disparaged the deal during the 2009 election. Politics does make strange bedfellows.

Not that there’s anything wrong with examining past issues. I certainly asked plenty of questions about what had gone on before when doing my Council interviews, and knowing how someone would have acted tells you a lot about what they’re likely to do in the future. Long as everyone has a realistic expectation about what a single Council member can do about some of these past issues, I guess.

Finally, I’ll say again that if this election turns out to be little more than a Republican primary, I don’t see how Stardig wins. She’s clearly lost a lot of favor among the activists. She needs the electorate to be bigger than that, which means she needs to convince some Democrats and independents to come out and vote for her. How she does that I don’t know – maybe point out Brown’s history lessons and hope for the best – but with early voting for the runoff set to begin this Wednesday the 30th, she better figure it out quickly.

Still more evidence that tort “reform” is a scam

Nov 25th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

Recently, I blogged about a Public Citizen report that documented the ways in which tort “reform”, specifically medical malpractice damage caps, are a scam that has done none of the things its backers promised. You might have read that and thought “sure, but Public Citizen is a lefty group, and so they would never have liked med mal caps to begin with”. If so, then you should know that a researcher at the libertarian Cato Institute just released a paper that came to similar conclusions. Here’s a quote:

When asked how consumers benefit from medical malpractice insurance, industry executives typically mention only patient compensation. Yet much more is at work.

Competition in the market for medical malpractice insurance, and each insurer’s interest in reducing its exposure to malpractice awards, leads insurers to provide oversight that protects consumers from physician negligence. Malpractice underwriters review physicians annually. They evaluate claims histories and investigate loss of hospital privileges, substance abuse, and loss of specialty board certification. They alert the medical community to situations that result in bad outcomes and offer advice on how to reduce such outcomes. The evidence presented here shows that physicians pay a price for putting patients at risk. Carriers reward claims-free physicians and physicians who take part in risk-management activities. The industry provides oversight of risky practitioners, dictates patterns of practice, monitors the introduction of new procedures, imposes policy exclusions for specific activities, and denies coverage in the most egregious cases, precluding affiliations that require insurance.

More broadly, patients derive protection from an interdependent system of physician evaluation, penalties, and oversight that includes hospital and health maintenance organization credentialing and privileging activities, specialty boards, and the medical malpractice insurance industry. Underlying nearly all of these activities is the threat of legal liability for negligent injuries. Reducing physician liability for negligent care by capping court awards, all else equal, will reduce the resources allocated to medical professional liability underwriting and oversight and make many patients worse off. Legislators who see mandatory liability caps as a cost-containment tool should look elsewhere.

So there you have it. And in the irony department, Texas Watch adds this:

The Cato paper is written by Shirley Svorny, an economics professor at Cal State-Northridge and an adjunct scholar at Cato. Her bio reports that she has participated in health policy summits hosted by the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

That would be the right wing, tort-“reform”-touting TPPF. Something tells me Professor Svorny will not be invited to share this research at their next meeting.

Modified House and Senate maps are out

Nov 24th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
3 comments

The federal court in San Antonio has now issued orders that slightly tweaked the State House and State Senate maps; the new plans are H302 and S164, respectively. The modifications are minor and mostly affect a few districts in Harris County. You can see the new interim maps at the Trib. Barring the unlikely and extraordinary step of a stay issued by the Supreme Court or an even more unlikely motion to disqualify one of the Republican judges, what you see is what we’ll get for 2012. As noted by the Trib, the State House map was not unanimously drawn by the three-judge panel. I suspect that may be an issue at some point, but I don’t know when.

Here’s a boatload of new data on these maps:

2008 general election data for Plan H302.

2010 general election data for Plan H302.

Hispanic population profile and CVAP tabulation for H302.

How Plan H302 overlaps with the current districts (Plan H100) and with the legislatively-drawn districts (Plan H283).

A complete listing of what precincts are in what districts, county by county, for H302.

If all that isn’t enough, the hard-working and raise-deserving folks at the Texas Legislative Council have a whole pageful of election analyses of all three new maps, going back to 2002. Knock yourselves out on that. Never let it be said that I don’t give you enough data.

Meanwhile, on the Congressional front, we have some more pitiful whining from AG Greg Abbott, who must find it hard to type with his thumb in his mouth like that. I think Harold has an appropriate response to that; MALDEF and PDiddie also weigh in, and Daily Kos’ Steve Singiser adds his analysis. Again, responses by all parties is due on Friday, and one presumes we’ll have a final map Monday. After that, it’s filing season. I don’t know about you, but it feels like a cloud has lifted, because up till now none of this felt real. None of what we have now is likely to be permanent, but it’ll at least get us through 2012, and that’s all we can ask at this point. Let the filings begin!

Beyond turducken

Nov 24th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

You’ve had turducken. You’ve had turbaconducken. Where do you go from there? How about the Quaducant, with Creole sausage? That’s just one of several options presented to you at that link. I may have to ask for that next year. This year, we’re having turkey enchiladas, made by my most excellent mother-in-law. Oh, and pie. There are some side dishes as well, but really, what more do you need to know? Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.

Texas blog roundup for the week of November 21

Nov 24th, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
Comments are off for this post

The Texas Progressive Alliance would like to wish everyone a happy and healthy Thanksgiving as it brings you this week’s roundup.

(more…)

First thoughts on the new Congressional map

Nov 23rd, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
16 comments

OK, down to business. Here’s a map of the new plan, which was unanimously approved by the three judges, the 2008 election data, and here’s 2010 election data. Going by the 2012 data, I break it down as follows:

Strong R


Dist  Obama Pct  Houston Pct
============================
01         30.5         36.4
02         34.4         35.6
03         37.4         36.8
04         29.4         37.6
05         36.5         41.2
08         25.6         29.3
11         23.0         28.4
12         34.1         35.5
13         22.2         27.4
17         33.2         38.2
19         28.0         32.4
21         33.0         31.5
24         38.0         37.5
26         35.4         35.5
31         39.8         41.3
34         32.9         37.1
36         31.1         39.8

Likely R


Dist    Obama Pct    Houston Pct
============================
07         42.5         40.8
14         41.9         47.3
22         40.6         41.2
32         43.0         43.1

Lean R


Dist  Obama Pct  Houston Pct
============================
06         44.8         47.5
10         46.5         45.5

Strong D


Dist  Obama Pct  Houston Pct
============================
09         77.3         77.6
15         61.9         65.8
16         66.6         68.8
18         77.4         77.5
25         68.4         65.2
27         58.3         62.1
28         58.6         63.0
29         62.0         67.6
30         81.5         81.3
33         62.5         63.1

Likely D


Dist  Obama Pct  Houston Pct
============================
20         58.5         58.8

Lean D


Dist  Obama Pct  Houston Pct
============================
23         51.4         53.1
35         54.4         55.9

Barring any surprises, that’s a 23-13 split, which means (contra the Chron and its funny math once again) a four-seat gain from the current 23-9 split. The Dems have more upside than downside, and it’s not crazy to think that over the course of the decade some districts could move into a different classification, such as currently solid R seats 05, 24, and 31. I was just on a conference call with Matt Angle and Gerry Hebert about the new map, and Angle suggested CDs 06 and 14 as ones that will trend Democratic. I asked him about CD10, which has a similar electoral profile right now to those two, and while he agreed it can be competitive, he didn’t think the demographics will change as much as in the others.

Note that CD33 is now a majority-minority seat in Tarrant County – BOR notes that State Rep. Marc Veasey, one of the plaintiffs and strong fighters in these suits, has already indicated his interest in running for it. He’s already got an opponent if so – a press release from Fort Worth City Council member Kathleen Hicks that announced her entry into the CD33 sweepstakes, hit my inbox about ten minutes after the publication of the new map. PoliTex confirms both of these. One way or another, though, it sounds like sayonara to Roger Williams.

CD34 stretches from the Gulf Coast into the Hill Country, taking a chunk out of the southern edge of the old CD10. CD36 is more or less as it was before, in the eastern/southeastern part of Harris County and points east from there. CD35 is no longer in Travis County, so the Doggett/Castro death match is no more – Rep. Lloyd Doggett gets his Travis-anchored CD25 back, and Rep. Joaquin Castro gets a new Bexar-anchored district to run in. I don’t know if freshman Rep. Blake Farenthold can run in CD34 – I suspect he’d face a challenge from some Republican State Reps if he tried. Perhaps State Rep. Geanie Morrison, based in Victoria and now paired with State Rep. Todd Hunter, might take a crack at it, or maybe Hunter will. I presume State Sen. Mike Jackson will continue to pursue CD36. All of the Republican contenders for the Lege-drawn CD25 are also now out of luck, so bye-bye to former Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams as well. Not a good day for Williamses who wanted to run for Congress.

Comments and objections are due on Friday, and one presumes it, along with the other two, will be finalized by Monday the 28th, which is the opening of filing season, though I hear that could possibly get pushed back a day. Greg, Stace, the Lone Star Project, Postcards, the Trib, and Trail Blazers have more.

Interim Congressional map is out

Nov 23rd, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
2 comments

It’s a Thanksgiving miracle! Plan C220, which you can find here, is the Court’s proposed interim map for Congress. I will be looking at this, and will have my thoughts plus electoral data later.

Apartment boom coming

Nov 23rd, 2011
by Charles Kuffner.
5 comments

I have many things to say about this.

High occupancies and rising rents for apartments are driving a new wave of development in Houston’s high-end urban neighborhoods.

More than 3,500 units in a dozen complexes are under construction primarily inside the 610 Loop and around the Galleria. Nearly 8,700 more are proposed, according to Houston-based Apartment Data Services. Most, if not all, are being planned with top-notch finishes and high-dollar rents.

The flurry of activity is meaningful after a period where construction was virtually nonexistent. Amid the nation’s economic crisis, developers couldn’t get loans to start new construction and the appetite for apartments soured as renters moved in with relatives or doubled up in units.

But with the local job market beginning to recover, demand has been ramping back up, and the numbers of available units are dwindling. Few are concerned about a glut.

“If we ever needed construction, we need it now and need it soon,” said Bruce McClenny, president of Apartment Data Services.

Most of the units won’t be ready until late 2012 at the earliest.

The print edition of this story, which ran on Sunday, included a completely inaccurate map that among other things confused Weslayan with Shepherd and Richmond with both Bissonnet and Allen Parkway. I eventually gave up trying to make sense of it.

Among the projects listed were several of the longstanding vacant lots that I’ve noted from time to time. One that is actually under construction is the Ashton Rice Village, formerly the hippie bohemian attorney Sonoma development. Two others that are listed as “proposed” are Regent Square, home of the former Allen House apartments, which claimed last year that it would break ground in 2012, and the infamous Ashby Highrise, which may have lawsuit issues of its own to deal with. Not included: The site that used to house The Stables restaurant, which was torn down nearly five years ago. I have absolutely no idea what is going on with that site and when if ever something will be built there. At the time, one of the buyers said “We’ve acquired a crucial one-acre parcel in the Med Center area, which is hard to do”. You’d think by now someone would want to do something with it.

About two thirds of the 37 properties shown on the crappy map are in the rectangle bounded by the West Loop, I-10, the Southwest Freeway, and I-45. In other words, basically Montrose, Rice U/Med Center, Upper Kirby, West U, and River Oaks. If all of these projects get built, and all of the apartments get leased (I know, not going to happen) you’re talking 20 to 25 thousand more people in the area. As these are mostly high-end places, you have to wonder what effect this will have on the demographics and the politics; most of this territory is in the court-drawn HD134, and in the new City Council District C. Greg often talks about the re-honkification of the Heights. This isn’t the Heights, and this area was pretty Anglo to begin with, but there’s likely to be an effect nonetheless.

(Alta Heights, at 141 Heights Blvd, is the closest project listed to the Heights proper. This is basically across the street from the Ainbinder Wal-Mart site, and used to be a low-income apartment complex.)

With all this dense construction taking place in an already crowded part of town, you would hope that the need for more and better transit would be seen as increasingly urgent. Some of these projects will be close to the Universities rail line when it finally gets built, but a lot more than that is going to be needed to handle this and to allow for future projects like them. I’ll say again how nice it would be if the county, instead of spending gazillions of dollars on a road to nowhere to accommodate people that might live there 20 years from now, spent a few dollars helping to improve mobility where people are right now.

← Earlier Posts