Don McLeroy and SBOE; Richardson Coalition PAC

The Nightly Build

---

For Once, Good News from the SBOE

Terrence Stutz, in The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers blog, brings us the rare bit of good news regarding the Texas State Board of Education. The SBOE has a near-majority of Creationists who have been working for decades to water down science education in Texas by casting doubt on the theory of evolution by natural selection. The chairman of the SBOE, appointed by Gov. Rick Perry, is Don McLeroy, a Creationist dentist from College Station. At a January hearing, McLeroy demonstrated his own lack of a science education by asking, "Isn't the fact that [teeth] fit together so perfectly a weakness of evolution?"

Stutz reports that the Senate might reject Perry's re-appointment of McLeroy as chairman. Confirmation requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Democrats, who control 12 of 31 seats, have signaled they would not vote to approve McLeroy. Hooray! Finally, there's a glint of sunshine on the SBOE. A glimmer of hope that the SBOE might be restored to a body that puts the education of Texas children above personal, religious agendas.

But it's only the beginning of the beginning. McLeroy could still win re-appointment. Or Perry could appoint another Creationist. Regardless, McLeroy would continue to hold his seat on the SBOE. The quality of education in Texas won't be out of danger until Texas voters remove these members from the SBOE entirely: Terri Leo, David Bradley, Barbara Cargill, Cynthia Dunbar, Gail Lowe, Don McLeroy and Ken Mercer.

---

The Giant In Richardson Politics Speaks

So far, the Richardson Coalition Political Action Committee (PAC) has been the unseen giant in the current campaign for Richardson City Council. The PAC is made up of all the power brokers of the Richardson establishment (five former council members, four Citizens of the Year, etc.). It's been accused of throwing its weight around, of being behind numerous nefarious deeds, of pulling the strings of various candidates. But mostly, such scurrilous talk has been in private, in emails, and on the blogosphere. Chris Davis is the only candidate who has bordered on the edge of bringing such accusations out in public. In one forum, she hinted of a conspiracy, suggesting that there is a "coalition" of people in Richardson who want to "go back to the council of old."

Up to now, the PAC has been silent regarding the election. Now, the giant has spoken. The PAC, in a mailer, is going public with its recommendations for City Council.

• Place 1
  • The PAC recommends Bob Townsend, calling him a "steady hand." I agree. There's nothing in his past or his vision for the future that calls for a change.
  • Bill Denton, who would make a fine candidate for an open seat, has not made any case for change at all.
• Place 2
  • The PAC recommends Mark Solomon, saying "his record of dedicated service" demonstrates both his competence and ability and to do the job. I agree.
  • The PAC rejects the other candidates because of their inexperience, not because of their visions for Richardson. I agree.
• Place 3
  • The PAC recommends John Murphy, crediting him with keeping Richardson's finances in good shape, keeping government growth in check while still providing excellent services. I agree.
  • The PAC gives its first "Not Recommended" rating to Chris Davis, saying that her service as executive assistant to our Dallas County Commissioner is a serious conflict of interest. I agree there, too. Chris Davis ought to address that conflict by pledging to resign her position with the Dallas County Commissioner if elected to the City Council. The PAC also charges Davis with unspecified "unethical, mean-spirited and untrue negative attacks against opponents." I consider these charges themselves to be unethical and mean-spirited. The PAC gravely undermines its own reputation by spreading unspecific, unsourced rumors.
• Place 4
  • The PAC recommends Gary Slagel, crediting him with leading Richardson through the collapse of the "tech boom" and calling on him to help lead us through the current economic downturn. I agree that Slagel's experience is valuable and good reason to keep him on the Council.
  • The PAC accuses Diane Wardrup of making "untrue, negative attacks" and distributing "illegal flyers." It makes a gratuitous attack on her, quoting unnamed "co-workers" saying unflattering things about her. Like the unsupported rumors spread by the PAC against Chris Davis, I condemn the PAC's methods here.
  • The PAC dismisses Tom Bache-Wiig as being "new to the scene." I agree. He needs to prove himself with more involvement in civic affairs before being ready for City Council. Why the Council saw fit to use the little space it devoted to Bache-Wiig to say he's had 14 jobs in 28 years is unexplained. It should not have been mentioned.
• Place 5
  • The PAC recommends Bob Macy, praising his "maturity and stability." Here I differ with the PAC. Bob Macy may be a genial man, and he may have served the city well in past volunteer positions, but his performances at the forums gave no confidence in his command of the issues or his ability to lead.
  • The PAC's recommendation here looks even more contrived in discussing the incumbent Pris Hayes. The PAC says she has "performed honorable service" during her term on Council, but says "some fresh ideas would be welcome." The PAC provides no examples of Pris Hayes' ideas that the PAC finds to be stale and offers no examples of fresh ideas of Bob Macy. Why the PAC has to use strained logic in recommending Macy over Hayes is more understandable when you see Bob Macy's name listed on the PAC's Web page titled "Who Are We." Leaving out this connection in its recommendations is irresponsible.
• Place 6
  • The PAC recommends Steve Mitchell, who is running unopposed. I agree.
• Place 7
  • The PAC recommends Amir Omar, singling out his strong support for a "Senior Tax Freeze". For that reason, I cannot recommend Omar. A tax freeze for seniors may be good politics now, but it is bad public policy in the long run. Sooner or later, Richardson will have to fix the distortions it will inevitably cause in the distribution of the property tax burden.
  • The PAC gives its second "Not Recommended" rating to Dennis Stewart, apologizing to the voters of Richardson for its past support of Stewart. Here, I'm inclined to agree with the PAC. Stewart made personal attacks on Omar at one forum, including an attack on the spelling of his name. Simultaneously, Stewart wrapped himself in the flag. Stewart, a former policeman, is endorsed by the Richardson Fire Fighters Association. The PAC omits to mention its recently published editorial criticizing union PACs for contributing to city council election campaigns. The PAC has no business denouncing another PAC for involving itself in city politics while doing so itself. Unfortunately, I can make no recommendation in this race. I don't like the politics of Stewart and the Richardson Coalition PAC and don't care for either the senior tax cap proposed by Stewart or the senior tax freeze proposed by Omar.

All told, I agree with the Richardson Coalition PAC on five recommendations, disagree on one and offer no recommendation on one. But I strongly disagree with the PAC's reasoning and tactics in several of the recommendations. So, although our recommendations may align more often than not, I cannot endorse or recommend the Richardson Coalition PAC itself.