From today's Eagle Election myths This election season there are even more myths floating around concerning the candidates than usual. Myth No. 1 is that there are three "bought and paid for" candidates. Looking at the campaign finance reports reveals all candidates raised similar amounts except for Larry Stewart. John Crompton had the most donors of $500 or more. Dennis Maloney loaned himself more money than any other candidate. Myth No. 2 is that Crompton, Maloney, and Stewart are running independently. If true, then why are e-mails and flyers appearing encouraging people to vote for them as a bloc? Why do all three have the same five or six key financial supporters? Myth No. 3 is that this race pits developers vs. neighborhoods. In reality, this race is between Precinct 40 and the rest of us and a more accurate term is "Eastsiders vs. everyone else." One only has to look at the time and expense invested in the Eastside over the past two or three years for evidence. How does the Eastside Traffic Study benefit the entire city when Barron Road desperately needs widening and repairs? Myth No. 4 is that developers get a free ride from the city. Poppycock. Developers build the roads to city specifications, they dedicate the land for parks, they put in most of the utilities. Our current transportation problems and disjointed growth patterns are caused primarily by residents who, in trying to emulate Austin, refused to follow through on their own thoroughfare -- Appomattox Street -- and infrastructure plans. Myth No. 5 is that developers are evil and greedy. Actually, they are our neighbors, colleagues, and friends. They attend the same churches and schools as the rest of us. They give countless hours and dollars to worthy local causes and contribute materially to our great quality of life. DAVID R. HART College Station
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Myths?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This blog is not unbiased. While I try to provide a format for open discussion, I unapologetically support the citizen candidates. To this point the best way I have found for doing this is to repost the letters to the editor that were written to support the developers.
What will these three candidates do that is different than what has been done in the past?
Myth No. 1 is that there are three "bought and paid for" candidates.
Taking a look at the campaign finance reports (http://cstx.gov/home/index.asp?page=2785) the thing that stands out most is that the developer candidates seem to be financed almost exclusively by the development community. Randy French and his wife have contributed $6,000.00 to this point. Of course for the development community this is a wise investment. If they can finance candidates who will maintain the status quo, or maybe even sweeten the deal by expediting road improvements through bond elections these contributions will be a drop in the bucket. As far as I know, there is no restriction limiting the size of contribution or who contributions come from. Neither is there a restriction from citizens pointing out that the development community stands to gain financially from certain candidates being elected and they are paying handsomely to try to buy those seats.
Myth No. 2 is that Crompton, Maloney, and Stewart are running independently.
As one who has worked to try to convince these candidates to work more cooperatively, I can assure you that you are absolutely wrong about this. The developer’s large signs all went up together at the same time and in the same vacant lots and public right a ways. Obviously a collaborative effort. You also see the citizen candidates’ signs grouped together in yards. These signs have been grouped by homeowners not the candidates. The same is true of emails and flyers. I have sent and received many emails and letters encouraging a vote for these candidates. Again, this is an individual effort. It is not coming from the candidates. The citizen candidates are each very different. They do not represent a single mindset. Their only commonality is an opposition to unmanaged sprawl development.
Myth No. 3 is that this race pits developers vs. neighborhoods.
This is really sad. It is just another attempt by the developer crowd to try to drive a wedge into a community that is notoriously harmonious. First they tried to pit the students against the regular residence of College Station. And now they are trying to pit the east side against the rest of the town. This divisive political manipulation will not work here. I invite you to my neighborhood on the south side to see all the Crompton, Maloney and Stewart signs in yards. I dare say we have a larger percentage than the East Side. This sad attempt to split our community comes out of necessity. The developers know that they do not stand a chance without this sort of manipulation. It will not work.
Myth No. 4 is that developers get a free ride from the city.
You are absolutely right. We are not paying for 100% of these development costs. Then again, no one said that we were. Why should we pay for any of it? It is interesting to hear these developer candidates talk about market forces being the reason that we should not allow restrictions on development, but they don’t seem to have a problem letting the city have a hand in the market when we are paying for the road expansions they need to support their developments.
Myth No. 5 is that developers are evil and greedy.
Now we are into the spiritual realm. I agree with you. All people have inherent worth and dignity. This does not mean that they do not also at times work in greedy and despicable ways. Trying to buy seats on city council for personal gain and trying to drive a wedge between neighbors as well as the community and the students who this community has always welcomed with a full serving of Sothern hospitality fits the description.
Post a Comment