For principled voters, if the road bond deal stinks, then throw it out
COURIER of MONTGOMERY COUNTY Editorial Posted: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 12:15 pm
“I think the process stinks. This is not the way to do the people’s business …”
***
“We are up against a deadline. That’s unfortunate. … [W]e should have been meeting months ago to discuss these things, to have a unified strategy going forward.”
***
“… [T]his is indicative of what we are trying to change — an 11th hour deal, no matter how strategic it may be, is problematic when members have not had input.”
Sound familiar? Are these quotes addressing Montgomery County’s $280 million road bond on Tuesday’s ballot that was negotiated with no public input?
No. These are quotes from soon-to-be House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., and House Freedom Caucus member Mark Meadows, R-N.C., made to CNN regarding the last-minute budget deal – which is opposed by conservative Republicans.
Washington politics at its finest. It’s the kind of politics our local elected officials, including some members of Commissioners Court, attack in their campaign rhetoric during elections.
The concerns about this House budget deal include the back-room nature that forced a vote by lawmakers with virtually no time to review.
Sound familiar?
Fortunately, at least for conservative Republicans in the House, they won’t “hold their noses and vote for this deal.” Fruitless or not, they will stand by their principles and vote against it.
We expect nothing less of our public leaders in Montgomery County, as well as principled voters going to the polls during early voting or on Election Day.
The way this road bond was negotiated between at least two members of Commissioners Court, a political consultant and members of the Texas Patriots PAC, as well as possibly other members of Commissioners Court, stinks.
The lack of transparency has led to an investigation over possible violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act.
The county never turned over phone records to The Courier, per our initial Open Records request. The special prosecutor reportedly subpoenaed the servers of certain commissioners’ personal computers because they might not have released all of the emails or details requested by The Courier. It was up to commissioners to provide the requested documents because they were on their personal computers (again, sound familiar to Hillary Clinton’s email scandal?).
Local leaders Nelda Luce Blair and Joe Michels, who were members of the road bond committee that produced the failed $350 million road bond package in May, support this new bond.
They state: “Some have questioned how this current road bond was formulated, who supports it and why. Those factors can be dealt with through other channels, and in other elections if the voters so choose.”
We say voters have an opportunity to let their voices be heard and show their disgust for the way this went down right now — at the polls — by rejecting the road bond and showing them that more than just a Woodlands-based Tea Party is going to dictate what roads will be built and improved.
Where’s the Transparency?
Even after this deal was secretly negotiated Aug. 11-21 and commissioners — with virtually no discussion — voted Aug. 24 to put the bond on the Nov. 3 ballot, they still could have had public hearings for residents to address needed projects. But they didn’t, leaving the public completely out of the process before finalizing their lists … if they weren’t already finalized prior to that.
To add insult to injury for voters left out of the loop, Montgomery County Judge Craig Doyal announced Tuesday that the county will hold public meetings — starting Nov. 10, a week after the bond election — regarding the proposed Montgomery County Thoroughfare Plan “designed to guide road development for the future.”
Precinct 1 Commissioner Mike Meador, Precinct 2 Commissioner Charlie Riley and Precinct 4 Commissioner Jim Clark all agreed during a July court meeting that waiting on the studies was the right course of action before moving forward with another road bond.
This plan and the countywide mobility plan were supposed to be completed before another road bond was presented to voters — not after.
Sound familiar? Kind of like Obamacare? Vote on it, and then we’ll tell you what’s in it.
