text:
Michael Kubosh
January 2023 campaign finance reports: City of Houston
It's late January, so you know what that means: It's campaign finance report time again. The reports of the greatest interest will be for the city of Houston, but I'll be checking in on HISD, HCC, and Harris County as well. The July 2022 reports are here, the January 2022 reports are here, and the July 2021 reports are here.
Candidate     Raised      Spent     Loan     On Hand
Hollins      547,027    469,141        0   1,062,754
Edwards      567,005    195,257        0   1,044,338
Whitmire   1,148,015    249,142        0  10,100,086
Kaplan       465,180    177,578  200,000   1,164,527
Peck          10,750     13,940        0      20,729
Jackson        2,500     14,965        0      14,971
Kamin         52,080     12,255        0     238,337
Scarbrough        0          0        0      14,810
E-Shabazz
L Dixon            0        254      100         254
Thomas        43,996     11,310        0      89,042
Huffman        5,850      3,624        0      35,012
Castillo      37,448      1,037   10,000      41,935
G Lindner      4,503          0        0       4,503
Martinez      78,605      6,130        0      52,187
Pollard       17,350     15,412   40,000     718,379
Sanchez      30,140      4,201   20,000      25,938
C-Tatum       14,250     13,687        0     155,691
Hellyar       65,854      6,772        0      44,710
Coryat         5,626      4,063        0       1,562
Bess               0          0        0           0
Carter        85,926      9,456    4,000      78,768
Cooper        23,977     17,631        0       9,189
Plummer        4,125     10,309        0      24,741
Morales      12,900        417    5,534      18,016
Alcorn       155,301     28,187        0     306,273
Martin         8,250     12,493        0     161,851
Kubosh        22,900      3,612  196,000      54,289
Wolfthal      43,812     16,683        0      24,953
Flickinger         0      1,933   50,000           0
Turner       228,862    186,942        0     842,484
Cisneros         250      7,215        0      31,128
Gallegos      21,787     13,500        0     133,471
Knox          16,175     20,914        0      14,231
Robinson      44,894     27,296        0     271,624
Brown              0      5,404   75,000      29,316
Laster             0      3,254        0     147,138
I have collected all of the reports for the people listed above, and you can find them in this Google Drive folder. I decided not to link to all of them individually just because it was more work than I felt like doing. Omitting that means I don't have a complete listing, with full names and the office they are seeking, of all the candidates. I'll be sure to at least mention everyone of interest later in the post.
I've grouped everyone in the table above as follows: First are the Mayoral candidates, then the candidates for district Council offices, listed in alphabetical order by office – Amy Peck is District A, Tarsha Jackson is District B, and so on. The open offices are Districts E, H, and I. There are so far two challengers to incumbent Council members, and I have indented their names to indicate them – Daphne Scarbrough (yeah, the same person who was a leading opponent of light rail on Richmond Avenue, here to scourge us again) is running against CM Abbie Kamin in C, and Ivan Sanchez, who was a Democratic candidate for CD07 in 2018, is running against CM Ed Pollard in District J. Martina Lemond Dixon is running in E, Mario Castillo and Janette Garza Lindner (2021 candidate for HISD district I) are running in H (my district), and Joaquin Martinez is running in I. The one person that did not have a report filed as of Friday was District D incumbent Carolyn Evans-Shabazz.
The next group is for the At Large seats, of which #s 1, 2, and 3 are open. Nick Hellyar, who ran for At Large #4 in 2019, is running for #2, as are Marina Coryat and Danielle Bess (former candidate for HD147 in 2022), and Twila Carter and Dannell Cooper are running for #3. No one has yet filed a finance report saying they plan to run for At Large #1. You can be sure that will change, and that all of these fields will be much larger by the time the filing deadline rolls around. Indeed, they may already be larger, as there are two candidates who didn't specify an office in their reports; I'll get to them in a minute. As above, a candidate opposing an incumbent is indented. Yes, that's our old buddy Roy Morales running against CM Letitia Plummer in At Large #4.
Next we have the two term-limited Council members who are now running for City Controller, and following them are two candidates who did not specify an office on their report, Leah Wolfthal and Fred Flickinger. I met Leah Wolfthal at the January CEC meeting for HCDP precinct chairs, and I thought she told me she is running in At Large #2. Her website just says "for At Large City Council", so better not to make any assumptions. I've put her in this group for that reason.
Everyone after that is not running for anything, from Mayor Turner to the four CMs to Controller Chris Brown. Former CM Mike Laster, who termed out in 2019, still has a decent amount of cash on hand. I assume the four people in this grouping who remain with over $100K on hand have some plan, perhaps vague and unformed but still existent, to do something with it. What that may be is not known to me, and possibly to them, at this time.
The Chron picks a few highlights from the Mayoral portion of the reports. The one thing I will add to that is that I must have missed Lee Kaplan's July 2022 report, because I was surprised by his cash on hand total. Kaplan raised about $850K in the last period, which combined with a small amount of spending gives him the cash on hand total he has now. I have included Kaplan's July 2022 finance report in that Google Drive folder as well.
There are candidates now who have not yet filed a finance report, and there are people who will be candidates that have not yet formally announced their candidacies. The July finance reports will tell us a much more complete story, though even then there will be room for more, as the filing deadline is not until August. This is what we know now. If you have anything to add, by all means please do so.
The first two candidates for City Controller
Two term-limited Council members are the first to toss their hats into the ring.
CM Dave Martin
Houston City Council members Dave Martin and Michael Kubosh on Tuesday confirmed their plans to run for city controller in November.
As the city's independently elected financial officer, the controller certifies the availability of funds for the budget and all spending. It also processes payments, manages the city's $4.5 billion investment portfolio, audits city departments, conducts the sale of municipal bonds and produces an annual report of the city's finances.
Having served the maximum two terms, current Controller Chris Brown will step down at the end of this year.
District E Councilmember and Mayor Pro Tem Martin and at-Large Councilmember Kubosh previously had indicated their interest in the city controller position. They have not been able to announce their campaigns until now due to Texas's resign-to-run law, which bars city council members from running for another office more than a year and 30 days before their term ends.
CM Michael Kubosh
Martin, who has been on council since 2012, cited his decades of experience in finance and accounting in the private and public sectors. Having worked for "Big Four" accounting firms earlier in his career and currently leading the Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee at City Council, he said he is equipped to help Houston optimize its finances.
"I know more about city finance and general accounting and finance than any candidate that's going to pop up in this race," Martin said. "I'll put my credentials up against anyone's."
Kubosh, who has served as the at-large position No. 3 council member since 2014, touted his experience running in city-wide elections. Calling himself an outsider and a political activist, he highlighted his successful effort to advocate for the removal of red-light cameras in Houston prior to his time in office. He said he would not shy away from confrontations if elected.
"I have a cross-section of voters throughout the city. (Martin) hasn't run citywide. He's only run in District E," Kubosh said. "And I am very aggressive. I'll speak up for the people."
I've heard talk about CM Martin as a Controller candidate for some time now. CM Kubosh had been mentioned as a possible Mayoral candidate in the past but that had died down. For what it's worth, as of the July finance reports, Martin had $151K on hand to $60K for Kubosh. The January reports will be out soon and we'll see what they look like. There's plenty of time to raise more money, though the Controller's race usually doesn't attract the big bucks.
I say these are the first two candidates for Controller because there's just no way that they're the only two. Given the demographics and politics of Houston, it would be mind-boggling in the extreme for there not to be at least one candidate of color in the race. In 2015 the field included MJ Khan, Jew Don Boney, Carroll Robinson, and Dwight Jefferson. Khan also ran in 2009; he and Pam Holm lost to Ronald Green. Just a stray, idle thought, but maybe this would be a good opportunity for a Latino candidate. Anyway, this is the time of the cycle where we start seeing a bunch of candidate announcements. I'm sure there will be plenty more soon enough.
Houston to spend more fixing water pipes
Seems like a good idea.
The city is poised to at least double its annual spending on water line repairs, citing two years of pipe breaks and leaks driven in part by ongoing drought conditions.
Houston lost nearly 20 billion gallons of water from January to August of this year, according to records obtained through a public information request. That represents about $75 million in potential revenue for the city's water utility system.
City Council on Wednesday approved six emergency purchases related to water infrastructure maintenance totaling $21 million. In the previous five fiscal years, the city spent $9 to $10 million annually to repair broken water pipes, city records show.
Such emergency purchases are common during a drought, when extreme heat and dryness put pressure on the pipes around shrinking soils, Houston Public Works spokesperson Erin Jones said.
In June, record temperatures and a significant drop in rainfall prompted the city to issue a drought advisory — which remains ongoing — asking residents to limit outdoor watering and routinely check for water leaks. The last time Houston issued such restrictions was during a more severe state-wide drought in 2011, Jones said.
"All those warmer months without rain in April and May, that's causing like a domino effect of more heat and more breakage," she said. "It's not as bad as what it was in 2011, but it's important to remember that we were and still are in a drought."
Houston has an aging underground infrastructure, Mayor Sylvester Turner said during Wednesday's council meeting. Combined with more extreme weather conditions brought by climate change, spending more money on contractors to fix the main lines is unavoidable, he said.
"We were being overwhelmed, and so we ended up bringing on more contractors to address the situation. That has helped, and it does come with an expense," Turner said. "We have to recognize the changing conditions and the infrastructure that's going to be required in order to mitigate more water main leaks."
From January to May, the amount of water lost to leaks each month nearly doubled, from 1.8 billion gallons to 3.1 billion gallons, data show. The largest water losses occurred in March, April and May, when they accounted for more than 20 percent of the city's total treated water, slightly less than the 25 percent at the height of the 2011 drought.
That's a lot of water, and getting the pipes fixed is not just sensible environmentally it's also a good idea financially. I think the city has been a bit lax on this historically because we're in a pretty wet climate and generally haven't had to worry about having enough water. It's very clear now that that is not a safe assumption any more.
Councilmember Mike Kubosh said the city should ask the state for more support, noting Texas was to receive an estimated $35 billion over five years from the infrastructure bill passed by Congress in November 2021.
"Some of the cities have crumbling infrastructure, like ours," Kubosh said. "Thirty billion dollars just sitting there…It's the people's money. It doesn't make sense that they're not using it."
By all means, feel free to pick up the phone and call Greg Abbott and Dan Patrick and tell them that. I wish you the best of luck in that endeavor.
A too-early look at who's running for Houston city offices in 2023
Because it's never not election season.
With the midterm elections behind us, city election season is now heating up. Next November, Houston will elect a new mayor, a new controller and 16 City Council members.
The campaigns actually got underway long before the midterm elections were over. State Sen. John Whitmire, the longest serving member of the Texas Senate, announced his plans to run for mayor way back in November 2021. Chris Hollins, the former Harris County clerk, announced in February, and former City Councilmember Amanda Edwards launched her campaign in March.
Those announcements, and the millions of dollars the mayoral candidates collectively have raised for their bids so far, have set Houston off on its earliest start to campaign season to date.
As the candidates start making more public appearances and vying for voters' attention, here's your early primer on city elections, and who is running so far:
Mayor Sylvester Turner is serving out his second and final term, which means Houston will elect a new mayor in 2023. Voters also will decide 16 spots on City Council — 11 members representing geographic districts, and five members elected citywide in at-large seats — to round out the City Hall horseshoe.
City Controller Chris Brown also is term-limited, meaning the city will have a new controller as well. The controller is the city's independently elected financial watchdog.
Six council members face term limits, meaning their seats will be open. Ten council members are eligible for re-election and presumably running.
They have a list of the Council members who are not term-limited, as well as a list of people who claim they are running for something at this time. We'll get some idea of who is serious and who is just a name when the January finance reports come out. From past experience, nothing is truly set in stone until the filing deadline, and we're a long way away from that.
One more name that is out there as a potential Mayoral candidate is former Metro chair Gilbert Garcia. Don't be surprised to hear of other names, though at this point it's not very likely there will be any more high-profile names.
The incumbent Council members who are term limited include Dave Martin (District E), Karla Cisneros (H), Robert Gallegos (I), Mike Knox (At Large #1), David Robinson (AL #2), and Michael Kubosh (AL #3). I expect there to be a lot of At Large candidates, assuming At Large seats are still a thing next November.
There are also races for HISD and HCC boards of trustees. In HISD, Kathy Blueford-Daniels (District II), Dani Hernandez (III), Patricia Allen (IV), and Judith Cruz (VIII) are up for re-election. In HCC, the candidates whose terms are up are Reagan Flowers (Distrct 4), Robert Glaser (5), and Pretta VanDible Stallworth (9). Glaser is under accusation of sexual harassment, and as such I have to think there's a decent chance he'll choose not to run again. That is 100% fact-free speculation on my part, so take it for what it's worth.
This is the situation as it stands now. As I said, we'll know more when we see the January finance reports. If you know of someone not listed in the Chron story who's running for something next year, please let us know in the comments.
We could maybe vote on a piece of the stupid revenue cap next year
Yippie.
Mayor Sylvester Turner
Mayor Sylvester Turner said Wednesday he will ask voters in 2023 to amend the city's cap on property tax revenue to allow for more public safety spending, as the council cut the city's tax rate for the eighth time in nine years to get under that limit.
Turner said he would bring language to City Council shortly to put the measure on the November 2023 ballot, after At-Large Councilmember Michael Kubosh expressed concern about how the city will be able to afford the increasing police and fire budgets with strained resources.
"If there is strong sentiment on this council to at least allow the voters to decide, well, let's put it this way: I'm willing to put it before you and then allow the voters to make that decision," Turner said. "I will put it before you to be placed on the November ballot of next year."
City Council voted unanimously to cut its property tax rate by about 3 percent, moving from 55.08 cents to 53.36 cents per $100 in valuation. The city accounts for about 20 to 25 percent of a standard Houston property tax bill, with about half going to the local school district.
The city's cap on property taxes limits the growth in revenue to a formula that combines inflation and population increases, or 4.5 percent, whichever is lower. The city hit the former mark this year, as is standard.
Houston first hit the cap in the 2015 fiscal year, and its tax rate since has fallen about 16 percent, down from 63.88 cents per $100. The city has missed out on about $1.5 billion in revenue as a result of those cuts, according to Turner's administration. The owner of the median Houston home in that time has saved about $946, or about $105 per year.
Voters tweaked the cap in 2006 to allow the city to raise an additional $90 million in revenue for public safety spending. It was not immediately clear whether the ballot language Turner is proposing would increase that number or seek to carve out public safety spending entirely. The police and fire departments account for $1.5 billion in spending in the city's current budget.
You know how I feel about revenue caps. At least this will give all those who rail against "defunding the police" the opportunity to put their money where their mouths are. I expect there will be at least one lawsuit filed over this regardless, and given what we've seen with other litigation it will still be ongoing in 2033.
July 2022 campaign finance reports: City of Houston
We're still more than a year out from the 2023 election, but we are now up to three serious conteners for Mayor, plus two others in the wild, so the finance reports are beginning to generate some real interest. The January 2022 reports are here, the July 2021 reports are here.
Peck          19,100     19,457    5,000      24,057
Jackson       17,400     11,330        0      33,436
E-Shabazz      8,000      5,591        0      17,691
Thomas         5,750      2,887        0      51,761
Huffman       45,350     45,284        0      30,697
Cisneros      13,500      1,164        0      38,094
Pollard      286,341     11,800   40,000     716,441
Kubosh        14,000     31,141  196,000      59,273
Plummer                   6,417    8,175      33,010
Alcorn        38,305     17,321        0     178,429
Brown            500      4,849   75,000      34,861
Hollins    1,123,316    138,079        0     941,155
Edwards      789,227     96,378        0     712,066
As a reminder, no links to individual reports here because the city's system generates PDF downloads, and I don't have the time to rename and upload and share them. Next year, when there are candidates, I'll do that. Not this time.
All of the current officeholders submitted reports in a timely fashion this period. The only oddity was with the report for CM Letitia Plummer, which did not list an amount raised on either the summary or section totals pages. She clearly did raise some money, as a perusal of the rest of the report shows, but didn't include a total for it anywhere. I didn't feel like tallying it up myself, so I left the mystery in place. The only non-officeholders of interest to file reports are the two 2023 Mayoral candidates listed at the bottom, who made a decent splash with their unprecedented totals for this point in the cycle. While he did not file a city of Houston report yet, and while there is some uncertainty about how much he can move from his state account, Sen. John Whitmire had $9.7 million on hand as of July 15. Even if he can only transfer, say, 25% of that, it's a lot of cash to start out with.
We must once again talk about the finance report for Ed Pollard, who I will say again must be planning something for his future because there is absolutely no need for this level of fundraising for his re-election campaign in District J. I had speculated that maybe he was aiming for a Mayoral campaign, but at this point that seems less likely – I can't rule it out, but there's already a big field of well-financed players, and Pollard would be the least known and tied for least-funded among them. Maybe next time, or maybe something in 2024? Or maybe he just really likes fundraising? Who knows.
Other than that, honestly kind of a boring set of reports. Things should start to get more interesting with the January 2023 reports – if nothing else, I'd expect to see a few new names. I'll skip the HISD and HCC reports this cycle so look for those next January as well. I'll round up a few state reports of interest for next time. Let me know what you think.
Houston updates its noise ordinance
This was probably inevitable, though it sure took a long time.
Houston bars, nightclubs and restaurants must obtain new permits to play amplified music within 120 days under a revised ordinance aimed at cracking down on disruptive late-night noise without sacrificing the city's vibrant nightlife.
City Council approved amendments to the noise ordinance in a 15-1 vote Wednesday, two years after council members first began considering ways to address disputes between homeowners and neighboring businesses. Complaints against bars and clubs nearly doubled in the first three months of 2022.
The revamped noise ordinance sets stricter limits on nighttime noise and requires businesses abutting homes to obtain permits to play amplified music. It also creates a new administrative hearing process for bars and nightclubs that violate noise limits, giving business owners the chance to craft a mitigation plan within 10 days of the violation or risk losing their commercial sound permits for up to a year.
The permit will cost business owners $1,200.
Permitted businesses can play amplified music up to 75 decibels, which is about as loud as landscaping equipment, until 10 p.m. on weeknights or 11 p.m. on weekends. After those cutoffs, music would have to stay below 58 decibels until 2 a.m., as measured from the property of any resident who calls the Houston Police Department to complain.
At-Large Councilmember Sallie Alcorn, who shepherded the rule changes to the vote, said the amendments target repeat violators that "flaunt the rules" and are "destroying quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods."
"These changes aim to strengthen current rules and bring more businesses into compliance," Alcorn said Wednesday.
Ahead of Wednesday's vote, council members did not discuss the city's shifting demographics or the apparent connection between gentrification and increased noise complaints. Under the ordinance, enforcement largely will rely on nonemergency calls for service or 311 complaints, a feature experts said may lead to inequitable treatment among neighborhoods.
The changes moved ahead over objections from At-Large Councilmember Michael Kubosh, the sole dissenting vote. Kubosh said he worried it will have little impact while overburdening police officers with enforcement.
"Where is the actual solution here?" Kubosh said after the vote. "Why would we tie up police with noise when they are busy responding to murders, aggravated assaults and people stealing catalytic converters?"
Not mentioned in this story and forgotten about by me until I went looking in my archives is that Council had passed an update to the noise ordinance back in 2011 that was aimed at big vibrating bass sounds, as well as making the language of the ordinance more specific. It did not have an auspicious debut, though perhaps by now it has been more successful in its application. Noise complaints in various gentrifying parts of the city, especially but not exclusively the Washington Avenue corridor, have been a thing for a long time. I've expressed some skepticism in the past towards the complainers on the grounds that the noisy bars and music venues were there first, but after all this time I think this approach makes sense. Maybe we can at least get some consistency, so that everyone knows and understands the rules from the beginning.
As for CM Kubosh's complaint regarding enforcement, he has a point but the same thing could be said about literally any other law. I would not make noise enforcement a top priority for HPD, but I can think of some things above which it should be elevated. CultureMap has more.
January finance reports are always worth a look, if only as a ritual to start the new year. We're a year out from election season truly beginning for Houston, but as we now have two brand name contenders for Mayor already, we should check in and see how our current electeds are doing in the fundraising department. I last looked at these reports in July of 2021. Let's see what folks have been up to since then.
Jackson        2,775      8,725        0      27,367
Kamin         14,620      7,824        0     124,434
E-Shabazz      8,440     13,625        0      15,282
Martin        56,350     32,011        0     162,311
Cisneros       9,495      2,033        0      25,758
C-Tatum       10,000      8,576        0     118,827
Knox          13,385      5,227        0      17,884
Plummer       14,191     22,440        0      25,473
Brown          3,000      6,067   75,000      38,887
Mayor Turner is the biggest recipient of campaign cash, which is usually how it is. He won't be on the 2023 ballot, but we will have at least two charter referenda in our future, and I'm sure he'll want to be able to have some influence over them. As was the case with Mayor Parker and term limits in 2015, he might want to add one or two more to that list, on policy matters that have been discussed but not yet addressed. I'm thinking of the stupid revenue cap, and a second try at an equal rights ordinance, this time for the charter. I have no special insight on these matters, just a long memory and a searchable archive, both of which I endeavor to use for good and not evil.
The fact that we have two high-profile Mayoral candidates in place (well, as much as one can be at this early hour) doesn't mean that there aren't other potential Mayorals out there. Last time I noted CM Ed Pollard's prodigious fundraising, in which he amassed an amount that far outstripped his possible need for re-election in his district, and noted that he has been on some people's lips as a possible candidate for Mayor. His January finance report does nothing to turn that speculation down, though also as noted before he may have his eye on some other prizes as well.
On the other end of that spectrum is the one person I had felt most confident about as a 2023 Mayoral candidate, and that's City Controller Chris Brown, who seemed a natural fit for the Mayoral candidate role and who has demonstrated fundraising prowess in the past. Not these past six months, though, and his cash on hand total is looking awfully paltry. Does that mean anything? It's too early to say. But now that John Whitmire and Chris Hollins are out there doing Mayoral candidate things, the time to decide whether or not one wants to join them in that is not far off. Michael Kubosh, who is currently doing Michael Kubosh things, falls in between the two of them in fundraising action. He'll be facing the same decision as well.
A person who turned it up several notches after a sedate second half of 2021 is CM Sallie Alcorn, who was a top fundraiser for her initial election and now seems to be preparing for her second race. Note that in recent years, the old "blackout" period for fundraising was eliminated, so incumbents can get a head start on building up their treasuries. Fewer of them have need to do that now, as about half of them are term-limited. Some of those term-limited folks will be leaving with a decent amount of cash in their kitties – I'm thinking Dave Martin, Robert Gallegos, and David Robinson. It's not clear to me what if any office they might use those funds for in the future – maybe one of them has an eye on Controller – but they have them if they want them.
Not much else of note. Greg Travis is now filing state reports, so he's been swapped out for Mary Nan Huffman, who still has a few bucks in her account. I did not find a report for Tiffany Thomas. I'll do HISD and HCC next to finish this off. Let me know what you think.
Is it time to ditch At Large seats on Houston City Council?
Here's one argument for it.
The lack of Latinos on the City Council undermines the legitimacy of Houston's government, experts say, and is something that a prominent Hispanic organization is pushing to change with a lawsuit and ballot proposition.
The League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the largest Hispanic civil rights organizations in the country, is tackling what they characterize as a gross underrepresentation of Latinos in one of the most diverse cities in the U.S. by proposing that the five at-large positions on council elected citywide be replaced with four seats in heavily Hispanic districts.
Currently, just one Hispanic — Robert Gallegos — holds a seat on the 16-member body. By contrast, 45 percent of Houston residents are Hispanic.
"The most serious threat to the legitimacy of Houston city government is this idea that you can have half of the population of the city represented by 6 percent of the council," said Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University. "Imagine if we flipped things around and there's only one African American on the Houston City Council, or there's only one Anglo, or there's only one woman … It would be seen as a national travesty of democracy; it would be the subject of constant outcry."
The city is expected to look at redistricting prior to its 2023 election, and could redraw the 11 districts if they are deemed unbalanced at that point. But LULAC said replacing at-large seats with more single-district seats would reduce barriers that undercut Latino representation.
"If we had parity, half of this council would be Latino," said local LULAC leader Sergio Lira, co-chair of a new Houston taskforce created under the direction of the organization's national President, Domingo García, who launched the effort in a meeting with local leaders last week.
García, a lawyer with offices statewide, said the effort includes a push to bring a charter amendment with the proposition to citizens to vote on and to file a lawsuit against the city.
Houston has the worst Hispanic representation in city councils among all Texas cities with populations over 500,000, all of which have eliminated at-large positions in their governments, according to census and government data.
"Houston is the outlier in Texas when it comes to Latino representation and is the only large city with at-large seats," García said.
Those cities — San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, and El Paso — all have councils that look much more similar to their cities' Hispanic populations. Dallas, which is 42 percent Hispanic, has the next-lowest Hispanic representation on council with 29 percent Hispanics.
It's tough to get elected to Houston's at-large seats, García said.
"They are very difficult for Latinos to win because of the amount of money, coalitions and logistics it takes to win," he said. "It's like running for mayor."
There's a lot to say here, and I'll try to get to the main points, but let me start by saying it's a little more complex than what Garcia and Lira are arguing. There are multiple districts that have are at least plurality Latino – H, J, F, and A. H, currently held by CM Karla Cisneros, had reliably elected Latinos before Cisneros and likely will again; none of the others have elected Latinos. There is of course a big difference between "population", "voting-age population" and "citizen voting-age population", and that's before we take into account voter registration and who generally turns out to vote in our odd-year elections, where 20% turnout is on the higher end. We could elect more Latinos with the map we have now, at least in theory. It very much hasn't worked out that way in practice, and I doubt you'd find anyone who would argue that the current map is conducive to having more than two Latinos get elected from the current districts.
It's also true that Latinos have been shut out from the At Large seats since the days of Orlando Sanchez and Gracie Saenz twenty years ago. We also haven't had a lot of strong Latino contenders for At Large seats lately. In 2015, no Latinos ran for At Large #3 or #5, and the only one in At Large #1 was perennial candidate James Partsch-Galvan. There were Latinos in all the At Large races in 2019, but none of them raised any money. That's what Garcia and Lira are saying, and others have said it before them, but it just doesn't take as much money to run a credible At Large campaign as it does to run for Mayor. Mayoral candidates need well over a million bucks, but the big money candidates for At Large raise in the $200-400K range. Not nothing, but not a huge pile of money either. It's a bit of a vicious circle – people who might want to run are discouraged because it's hard for them to raise money and the recent record of citywide Latino candidates is brutal, which leads to a paucity of such candidates for anyone to support.
I can't leave this point without bringing up, once again, the 2007 At Large #5 runoff, in which Jolanda Jones defeated Joe Trevino in a race where about 25K total votes were cast. Jones had run citywide before (in At Large #3) and was better known, and the other runoffs on the ballot were City Council District D and HISD District II, both of which favored Jones' candidacy. Trevino was a longshot no matter how you looked at it, but still. This was the clearest shot to get a Latino elected citywide, and he got bupkus in terms of financial support, including from the folks who had been threatening to sue to force City Council redistricting prior to the 2010 Census. Public support of campaigns and candidates is a complicated and nuanced thing that is more often solicited than given, I get that. I'm just saying, none of the folks who were lamenting the lack of Latino representation on Houston City Council were moved to write Joe Trevino a $100 check. Make of that what you will.
(There was also the Michael Kubosh-Roy Morales runoff of 2013. The politics of that one are different, for obvious reasons. I went back and looked, and Roy Morales actually raised about $50K for that runoff, which isn't too shabby. There were only a couple of Latino names among his donors, though. Again, make of that what you will.)
Moving on. I have generally been supportive of having the hybrid district/At Large Council that we have. At least if you have a sub-par Council person in your district, you still have five At Large members you can turn to for support if you need it, and I think there's value in having people who need to have a broader perspective. That said, I'd bet that most of the At Large members we have had over the past 20 or so years have come from a limited geographical distribution – this was very much the problem with Austin's at large system, where nearly everyone on their Council came from the same part of town – and let's just say that some of our At Large members are better than others and leave it at that. All in all, I don't think it would be a great loss to change to an all-district system, and I would be inclined to support it if and when it comes to a vote. I'd like to see the proposal first – there are, as we well know, good and not-so-good ways to draw maps – but as a concept, I support it.
Knowing it is a long shot, LULAC decided to initiate a drive to collect 20,000 signatures in February in favor of their proposition, as the early voting for the state primaries begins. The number is the minimum needed to force the inclusion of a charter amendment in the ballot, bypassing the approval of City Council, which would only decide when it should be put for a citizens' vote.
LULAC is simultaneously preparing a lawsuit it plans to file in court by March to eliminate all at-large positions in favor of single districts.
We'll see how that goes. Petition drives have been pretty successful in recent years, even if they don't always get their referenda on the next available ballot. There are already two items scheduled for the ballot in 2023, and with an open seat Mayoral race that will make it a very busy cycle. An item like this could get a bit lost in the noise, or it could be a big issue, as surely the various Mayoral candidates will need to weigh in on it. I'll be very interested to see how the petition drive and the litigation go.
A long story about the bail industry
It's complicated.
Judges set bail, but it's the bondsmen who decide how much a defendant pays to get out of jail.
The long-held 10 percent standard — with defendants or their loved ones paying a tenth of the bail amount to a private company — is not gospel anymore in Harris County and likely never was. People have been securing their release from jail on lower fees for years, according to county data and bail agents.
Bondsmen recently have been accepting lower-percentage fees on an increasing number of violent felonies. The discount makes it clear that judges are not always determining what people have to pay to get out of jail, and the implications for defendants, victims and the system are far-reaching.
"That means the cash bond system itself is serving a danger to the community," state District Judge Chris Morton said. "Any time there's a for-profit aspect to criminal justice, that creates the opportunity for oppression and inconsistencies in justice."
Bail is the money a defendant must pay in order to get out of jail. A bond is posted on a defendant's behalf, usually by a bail bond company, to secure his or her release. Such a surety bond is like a security deposit.
Bail is not intended as a punishment. It is rather a way of securing a defendant's agreement to abide by certain conditions and return to court. The standard for bail in most jurisdictions — and other states — is that a bail agent requires 10 percent of the bail amount plus collateral to secure a defendant's freedom. In Harris County, bail companies rarely pay in full and give the court an equivalent of a provisional IOU with the backing of insurance agencies, said County Court at Law No. 8 Judge Franklin Bynum.
If a defendant skips court, prosecutors can move to revoke or forfeit the defendant's bond. Revocations trigger an arrest warrant and their return to court upon their capture. Forfeitures are a more tedious process that results in the court keeping the bail amount — but only after a judge agrees and prosecutors successfully sue to seize the money.
In Texas, the 10 percent figure is referenced in Texas Insurance Code, which states that payments above that amount could be subject to regulations. No minimum is required.
Profits diminished for bail companies after Harris County began adopting bail reform in 2017, requiring cash-free releases for most poor misdemeanor defendants. Bail licenses in Harris County have dropped by nearly two dozen since 2017, with about 80 permitted as of September to operate, records show.
One estimate from monitors tracking the implementation of bail reform indicated that bail bond earnings in Harris County went from around $3.5 million in 2015 to slightly over $500,000 in 2019.
The dwindling bail landscape caused agents to adapt or close up shop. Many padded their business with felony cases, some carrying higher bonds and more risk of defendants skipping court. Some bail agents are relying more on payment plans and are not asking for collateral — a house, car or other possession.
The Houston Chronicle reviewed hundreds of court records and found that bail bondsmen for years have been granting less than 10 percent rates on surety bonds. A sampling of data for the first six months of 2021 supported bondsmen, defense attorney and judges' anecdotes that bail agents are more frequently charging lower fees, sometimes as small as 1 or 2 percent, at times on more violent crimes. Some of the defendants are then put on payment plans for the remainder of the money.
"We're business people," said Michael Kubosh, an at-large city councilman and former bondsman. "You collect what you can."
While seemingly better for defendants, the lower fees are concerning to lawyers and jurists. Several judges worry that they no longer can count on defendants paying 10 percent for their pretrial release; others feel that even at lower rates, bail is still too much for some.
Authorities believe some defendants have committed more crime to pay bail for themselves and others, according to court records.
Jose Luis Perez — on bond for a prior offense — was charged in March with robbing a woman at gunpoint; he told officers he needed cash to pay for the bail, meaning he was likely on a payment plan, prosecutors said. He faced additional charges in federal court, and the state case was later dismissed.
Prosecutors say that the lower payments also minimize the pressure to return to court, because more money down means defendants would feel beholden to family members who put their livelihoods on the line to free them.
Advocates, meanwhile, do not believe any amount of cash bail keeps the public safe, and they feel bail discounts and payment plans show how many defendants — primarily poor people of color — remain on the hook with private enterprises after securing their freedom.
There's more, so read the rest. As the story notes, only the US and the Philippines have this sort of cash bail system, and that just seems to me like a bad place to be. As you know, I'm a believer in getting rid of cash bail as part of a larger overhaul of the criminal justice system. We've taken a small but important step forward in Harris County, but there's still a lot to do and a lot of resistance to overcome. This story will give you a feel for some of that.
The charter referendum will be in 2023
The organizations and residents who petitioned the city to give City Council members more power will have to wait until 2023 to vote on the measure, after the council declined to put it on this year's ballot.
Council voted unanimously to set the election in 2023 instead of this November, despite the objections of several council members and the groups that pushed for the charter amendment. An amendment to put it on this year's ballot failed, 13-4, before the 2023 vote. Councilmembers Amy Peck, Ed Pollard, Mike Knox and Michael Kubosh supported the earlier date.
The measure would give any three council members the power to place an item on the weekly City Hall agenda, a power almost entirely reserved for the mayor under Houston's strong-mayor format.
Mayor Sylvester Turner, who opposes the measure, said pushing off the election was prudent so the city could include other pending charter amendments, which would lower the cost by hosting one election instead of several. He also argued an off-cycle election would have low turnout.
"If any of you have problems getting something on the agenda, I'd like to hear that," Turner told council members. "So, we're going to spend $1.3 million in a very low-turnout (election) on an issue that doesn't really pertain to this council?"
At-Large Councilmember Michael Kubosh likened a delay to voter suppression, a suggestion that irked several of his colleagues. He referred to Democrats in the Legislature who fled to Washington, D.C. to stop a voting restrictions bill.
"If we don't vote to put this on the ballot, we are doing the same thing (as the Legislature): We are suppressing the vote," Kubosh said. "I believe voting delayed is voting denied."
District F Councilmember Tiffany Thomas said he deserved a "Golden Globe for drama," arguing the later election date would improve access to the polls by encouraging higher turnout.
Kubosh said it does not matter whether officials like the content of the charter amendment; their duty is to put it on the ballot.
I've said before that I believe this referendum, as well as the firefighters' referendum (the petitions have not yet been certified, which is another issue altogether), should be on this November's ballot. I do think the right thing to do is to be prompt about these things, even though the law allows for the discretion to put the vote on the next city election. But CM Thomas has a point, which is simply that at least twice as many people and maybe more will vote in 2023 than in 2021, and as such having this referendum in 2023 will be closer to a true reflection of the public will. I mean, even with a heavy GOTV effort by the pro- and anti- sides this year, we might be looking at 100K in turnout. Turnout in 2015, the last time we had an open Mayor's race, was over 270K, and turnout in 2019 was 250K. Turnout in all of Harris County in 2017, with no city of Houston races, was 150K; I can't calculate the exact city component of that, but based on other years it would have been in the 90-110K range. There's just no comparison. Is the tradeoff in turnout worth the two-year delay? People can certainly disagree about that, and I sympathize with those who wanted it this year. But putting it in 2023 is legal, and can be justified.
(No, I still have no intention of voting for the "three Council members can put an item on the agenda" referendum. Its proponents may have a point, but their proposition is still a bad idea. I remain undecided on the firefighters' item.)
Aug 2nd, 2021
PREVIOUSLY: Congress, Harris County
As we know, this is not an election year for city of Houston offices. That usually makes for a pretty dull summary of finance reports, since it's just incumbents and about half of them are term-limited and thus not really motivated to do much. But I had last checked on these in January 2020, which was the conclusion of the 2019 election cycle, and I didn't want to wait till next year for a first look. And you never know what you might find.
Turner       185,055     76,357        0     522,058
E-Shabazz     36,000     19,879        0      20,468
Martin             0      3,473        0     130,577
Travis        34,950      5,886   21,000      76,500
Cisneros       1,000        456        0      18,296
Gallegos       2,075      8,620        0      77,372
Plummer       30,770      6,417    8,175      33,010
Alcorn         3,200      5,251        0      31,013
Brown         24,550      3,892   75,000      19,281
Edwards            0      2,580        0      45,081
Sorry, no links to individual reports this time – the city of Houston's reporting system spits out downloaded PDFs, which I have to rename and upload to Google Drive to be able to provide links for them, and it ain't worth the effort at this point. I'll do that in 2023, when things heat up.
One of these things is not like the others. I've been asking folks who they think will run for Mayor in 2023, partly to see how my own speculations have turned out. One name that has come up a lot is that of Ed Pollard, the first-term Council member in District J. Let's just say his July report does nothing to temper that kind of talk. To put it mildly, one does not need $300K to run for re-election in a low-turnout district like J, and that's more than two years out from the actual election. Pollard may have his eye on something else, of course – he ran for HD137 in 2016, and who knows what opportunities the next round of redistricting may present – but if one is being mentioned when the question of "who is thinking about running for Mayor" comes up, this is the kind of finance report that supports such talk.
Other names that come up when I bring up the question include Michael Kubosh, Chris Brown, and Amanda Edwards. Neither of the first two has raised all that much, though they both have the capability. Kubosh has knocked $60K off his loan total, which may have contributed to his lower cash-on-hand total. As for Edwards, she's the opposite of Pollard at this point.
The one person who has been openly talked about as a candidate – by someone other than me, anyway – is Sen. John Whitmire, who has enough cash in his treasury to not sweat the small stuff. He recently announced his intent to run for re-election in 2022, which is completely unsurprising and not in conflict with any 2023 speculation. Mayor Turner ran for and won re-election in HD139 in 2014 before officially beginning his Mayoral campaign in 2015.
Beyond that, not a whole lot to report. Mayor Turner has some money on hand if he wants to influence a charter amendment or two. CM Tiffany Thomas did not have a report that I could find – sometimes, the system is a little wonky that way. The only other number of note was for term-limited CM David Robinson, who has added over $100K to his cash on hand since last January. Maybe that's a sign that he has his eye on another race, and maybe that just means that some people are good at fundraising. I'll leave that to you. Next up, HISD and HCC. Let me know what you think.
City's budget passes
There was a little bit of drama, but nothing too big.
Houston's City Council voted Wednesday to approve a $5.1 billion budget for the next fiscal year that relies heavily on a massive infusion of federal aid to close a $201 million budget hole and give firefighters their biggest raise in years.
Council members also banded together to rebuke the mayor by increasing the money given to district offices to spend on neighborhood projects for their constituents.
The council voted 16-1 to approve the spending plan after a lengthy meeting in which council members proposed nearly 100 amendments to Mayor Sylvester Turner's budget.
At-Large Councilmember Mike Knox voted against the budget. At-Large Councilmember Letitia Plummer later said she intended to vote no and tried to get the council to reconsider the vote, but her motion failed.
The body met in person for the first time in a year, with the members — most of whom are vaccinated — discussing the budget unmasked around the dais in City Hall chambers.
Most district council members joined forces to raise the amount their offices receive in a program that lets them spend money on neighborhood priorities. The 11 districts currently receive $750,000, and the council voted to hike that to $1 million each, at a total cost of $2.75 million. District J Councilmember Edward Pollard proposed the amendment, ultimately using money from the city's reserve funds, prompting visible disappointment from the mayor.
The amendment passed, 10-7, with the mayor opposed. Turner said it could take money from city services like Solid Waste and risked depleting reserves ahead of an uncertain year.
"I was going to insist on a roll call vote, because you're going to have to justify it," Turner said before members cast their votes. Those supporting the amendment were Pollard, Amy Peck (District A), Tarsha Jackson (District B), Abbie Kamin (District C), Carolyn Evans-Shabazz (District D), Tiffany Thomas (District F), Greg Travis (District G), Robert Gallegos (District I), Martha Castex-Tatum (District K), and Michael Kubosh (At-Large).
It is exceedingly rare in Houston's strong mayor form of government for the mayor to lose a vote, though Wednesday's motion marked the third time in seven years council members have aligned themselves to expand the district funds during a budget vote.
See here for the background. The "Council members add money to their budgets" thing has been done before, though as the story notes it may not actually result in that money going to them. This is money that is already being spent, it was just a matter of shifting it from one line item to another. I'd actually be in favor of Council members having some more funds at their discretion, though there's not likely to be room for that most years. A chunk of the federal money available for this year's budget was set aside for now, pending fuller guidance from the feds as to what it can and can't be used on. Not much else to say here.
In related news, from earlier in the week:
People caught illegally dumping in Houston now will face a steeper fine, after City Council approved a measure doubling the penalty.
The council unanimously approved hiking the fine to $4,000, the maximum amount allowed under the law.
"This is to make people pay for illegally dumping," Mayor Sylvester Turner said. "It makes things far, far worse, it's unattractive, it's not safe. It's a public health problem."
Turner, who characterized the city's efforts against illegal dumping as an "all-out attack," also encouraged judges to enforce the law sternly.
Illegal dumping can range from a Class C misdemeanor — akin to a parking ticket — to a state jail felony, depending on the weight of the trash and whether the person previously has been caught dumping. Most cases involve Class B misdemeanors, or between five and 500 pounds. Enforcement is somewhat rare as it is difficult to identify perpetrators if they are not caught on camera.
The measure received wide acclaim from council members, who have noted anecdotal increases in dumping of late.
"It should be more," Councilmember Tarsha Jackson said of the fine hike.
Illegal dumpers are scum who deserve to be fined heavily, no doubt about it. The problem is catching them in the act, because that's about the only way this ever gets enforced. The city has deployed more cameras at frequent dump sites and that has helped some, but there's a lot more of it going on. We have a ways to go to really make a dent in this.
Charter amendment petitions are in
I need a simpler name for this thing, so that Future Me will have an easier time searching for relevant posts.
Houston voters likely will get to decide in November whether City Council members should have the power to place items on the weekly City Hall agenda, a power currently reserved for the mayor.
A group called the Houston Charter Amendment Petition Coalition on Monday delivered a measure with nearly 40,000 signatures to the city secretary, who now has 30 days to verify them. It takes 20,000 to get the issue onto the ballot.
If the city secretary approves the signatures, the issue likely would go to voters in November. It would allow any three of the City Council's 16 members to join forces to place an item on the weekly agenda, when the council votes on actions. The mayor now has nearly full control of the schedule in Houston's strong mayor form of government.
Two of the council's 16 members, Amy Peck and Michael Kubosh, showed their support at the press conference Monday when the coalition delivered its signatures.
The coalition includes a broad group of political groups, including the Houston firefighters' union, the Harris County Republican Party, and the Houston chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.
But the opposition is similarly wide-ranging. In addition to Turner, a Democrat, conservative Councilmember Greg Travis also thinks it would be harmful. He would be open to other reforms, but three members is too low a bar, Travis said, and would result in "all kinds of irrational, wacky, inefficient" items reaching the council.
"You don't sit there and open a Pandora's box," Travis said. "It's not the correct solution to the problem."
See here and here for the background. "Houston Charter Amendment Petition Coalition" it is, I guess, but that's still pretty damn generic. I must admit, I'm a little surprised to see CM Travis speak against this, since I had him pegged as a chief contributor to the forthcoming irrational wackiness. Good to know that our local politics can still surprise me.
If nothing else, this will be an interesting test of the ability for a (potentially high-profile) charter referendum to generate turnout, since this is a non-Mayoral election year. Turnout in 2017, the previous (and only so far) non-city election year was 101K, with the various pension obligation bonds that were a (forced) part of the pension reform deal as the main driver of interest. By comparison, the 2007 and 2011 elections, with their sleepy Mayoral races, each had about 125K voters, and that's at a time with fewer registered voters (about 920K in Harris County in 2011, and 1.052 million in 2017). I'm not going to make any wild-ass guesses about turnout now, when we have yet to see what either a pro- or con- campaign might look like, but for sure 100K is a dead minimum given the data we have. At a similar turnout level for 2007/2011, and accounting for the increase in RVs since then (probably about 1.1 million now; it was 1.085 million in 2019), we're talking 140-150K. Those are your hardcore, there's-an-election-so-I'm-voting voters. We'll see if we can beat that.
We're done with the 2019 Houston election cycle, but there are still things we can learn from the January 2020 campaign finance reports that city of Houston candidates and officeholders have to file. Other finance report posts: My two-part look at the State House was here and here, Harris County offices were here, statewide races were here, and SBOE/State Senate races were here.
Peck           1,075     17,435    5,000          72
Davis          4,000     14,164        0     139,068
Kamin         24,158     93,810        0      18,717
E-Shabazz     14,394     18,965        0       2,145
Travis         9,850     70,904   21,000      51,484
Cisneros      15,050     44,687        0      24,169
Gallegos      16,850     46,055        0      76,776
Pollard        4,525     25,007   40,000       1,882
C-Tatum       16,250      8,520        0      71,747
Knox           6,900     29,075        0       4,302
Robinson      11,625     82,515        0      40,735
Plummer       71,168     83,491   21,900      11,068
Alcorn        21,535     76,313        0      16,374
Brown          1,650    102,340   75,000      14,128
Bailey             0      2,400    2,600          70
Buzbee         1,903    460,888        0      63,531
King          29,925    161,047  420,000      11,567
Parker             0     38,750        0      26,184
Laster             0     12,579        0     162,209
Salhotra      24,010     75,837        0       9,060
Sanchez       40,056     92,678        0      10,636
Edwards          499    109,812        0      89,987
HouStrongPAC       0     10,000        0      51,717
Nominally, this period covers from the 8 day report before the November election (which would be October 27) to the end of the year, but for most of these folks it actually covers the 8 day runoff report to the end of the year, so basically just the month of December. In either case, this is the time when candidates don't raise much but do spend down their accounts, as part of their GOTV efforts. For those who can run for re-election in 2023, they will have plenty of time to build their treasuries back up.
Mayor Turner will not be running for re-election again, but it's not hard to imagine some uses for his existing (and future) campaign cash, such as the HERO 2.0 effort or the next round of city bonds. He can also use it to support other candidates – I'm sure he'll contribute to legislative candidates, if nothing else – or PACs. That's what former Mayor Parker has done with what remains of her campaign account. Nearly all of the $38,750 she spent this cycle went to the LGBTQ Victory fund, plus a couple of smaller contributionss to Sri Kulkarni, Eliz Markowitz, and one or two other campaigns. Tony Buzbee has restaurant bills to pay, and those endless emails Bill King spams out have to cost something.
Others who have campaign accounts of interest: As we know, Jerry Davis has transferred his city account to his State Rep campaign account. I've been assuming Mike Laster is going to run for something for years now. The change to four-year Council terms may have frozen him out of the 2018 election, when he might have run for County Clerk. I could see him challenging a Democratic incumbent in 2022 for one of the countywide offices, maybe County Clerk, maybe County Judge, who knows. It's always a little uncomfortable to talk about primary challenges, but that's what happens when there are no more Republicans to knock out.
Other hypothetical political futures: Dave Martin could make a run for HD129 in 2022 or 2024, or he could try to win (or win back) Commissioners Court Precinct 3 in 2024. If Sen. Carol Alvarado takes my advice and runs for Mayor in 2023, then maybe State Rep. Christina Morales will run to succeed her in SD06. If that happens, Robert Gallegos would be in a strong position to succeed Morales in HD145. Michael Kubosh wasn't on my list of potential Mayoral candidates in 2023, but maybe that was a failure of imagination on my part. As for Orlando Sanchez, well, we know he's going to run for something again, right?
You may be wondering, as I was, what's in Amanda Edwards' finance report. Her activity is from July 1, since she wasn't in a city race and thus had no 30-day or 8-day report to file. Her single biggest expenditure was $27K to Houston Civic Events for an event expense, and there were multiple expenditures categorized as "Loan Repayment/Reimbusement" to various people. Perhaps she has transferred the balance of her account to her Senate campaign by this time, I didn't check.
Most of the unsuccessful candidates' reports were not interesting to me, but I did want to include Raj Salhotra here because I feel reasonably confident that he'll be on another ballot in the short-term future. The HISD and HCC Boards of Trustees are both places I could see him turn to.
Last but not least, the Keep Houston Strong PAC, whose treasurer is former Mayor Bill White, gave $10K to Move to the Future PAC. That's all I know about that.
Council results
With one race still up in the air as I draft this:
With early voting tallies and most of Saturday's Election Day results posted, Houston's three incumbent at-large council members facing runoffs had won, while District H incumbent Karla Cisneros held the slimmest of leads over challenger Isabel Longoria. Four other incumbents already have reclaimed their seats, having won outright on Nov. 5: Dave Martin (District E), Greg Travis (District G), Robert Gallegos (District I) and Martha Castex-Tatum (District K).
At least half of the 16-member council will be new — five current members are term-limited and three vacated their seats: Dwight Boykins (District D) made a failed bid for mayor, Amanda Edwards (At-Large 4) is seeking the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate, and Steve Le (District F) decided not to seek re-election.
One council race will not be decided Saturday: The third-place finisher in District B has filed lawsuits contesting the election and challenging the second-place finisher's eligibility, citing her 2007 felony theft conviction and a state law that appears to bar candidates with such convictions from running for office. No election date has been set.
The simplest way to summarize what happened is this tweet:
With all but one runoff decided, here's what City Council looks like for @SylvesterTurner's second term >
AL1: Knox
AL2: Robinson
AL3: Kubosh
AL4: Plummer
AL5: Alcorn
A: Peck
B: ?
C: Kamin
D: Evans-Shabazz
E: Martin
F: Thomas
G: Travis
H: ?
I: Gallegos
J: Pollard
K: Castex-Tatum
— Jasper Scherer (@jaspscherer) 11:28 PM – 14 December 2019
With 367 of 385 voting centers reporting, Karla Cisneros had a 25-vote lead over Isabel Longoria. It had been a 14-vote lead with 323 centers reporting. Longoria had chipped away at Cisneros' lead all evening. I have to think this one is going to get recounted, so whatever the final numbers are, expect this to remain an unsettled question for a little longer.
The At Large results could have been better, but they were sufficiently close in #4 and #5 that they also could have been a lot worse. When Mayor Turner puts forward a new version of HERO, he should have ten of sixteen Council votes in his favor. We'll see how that goes. In the meantime, congratulations to all the winners.
8 Day runoff 2019 campaign finance reports
We start with a Chron story.
Mayor Sylvester Turner raked in more than $1.7 million from late October through early December and spent roughly the same amount, leaving him with almost $600,000 for the final days of the runoff, according to a campaign finance report filed Friday.
The total marked a fundraising surge for Turner, who was aided by newly reset donor contribution limits for the runoff, though he still was outspent by Tony Buzbee, a millionaire trial lawyer and the mayor's opponent in the Dec. 14 contest.
Buzbee, who is self-financing his campaign and refusing all campaign contributions, put $2.3 million of his own money into the campaign last month and spent almost $3.1 million between Oct. 27 and Wednesday, leaving him with about $524,000.
With a week to go in the election, Buzbee and Turner have now combined to spend about $19 million in what has become easily the most expensive Houston mayoral race yet. Buzbee has spent $11.8 million of the $12.3 million he has put into his campaign account, while Turner has spent $7.2 million since the middle of 2018.
As an earlier story notes, self-funding has only occasionally been a winning strategy in Houston. I don't expect it to be any different this time, but I do note that Buzbee's basic strategy has changed. I still haven't seen a Buzbee TV ad since November, but we've gotten a couple of mailers (someone needs to clean up his database if he's mailing to me), I've seen a bunch of web ads, and he's been littering the streets with signs. Gotta spend that money on something.
Here's a summary of the 8 day reports for the runoff:
Race   Candidate     Raised      Spent     Loan     On Hand
Mayor  Turner     1,741,906  1,722,625        0     597,624
Mayor  Buzbee     2,300,000  3,076,360        0     524,420
A      Peck          38,075     39,252    5,000      15,373
A      Zoes           6,600      7,562    4,000       3,723
B      Jackson
B      Bailey           355        284      200          70
C      Kamin        180,528    137,396        0     173,370
C      Kennedy       35,160     18,343        0      25,995
D      Shabazz       31,490     28,575        0       5,009
D      Jordan        28,190     11,688        0      53,724
F      Thomas
F      Huynh
H      Cisneros      54,700     75,012        0      41,632
H      Longoria      36,945     32,906        0      20,946
J      Rodriguez
J      Pollard       38,016     47,147   40,000      22,864
AL1    Knox          69,710     49,857        0      16,073
AL1    Salhotra     128,672    121,736        0      64,150
AL2    Robinson     111,280    199,791        0     189,649
AL2    Davis         27,725     10,367        0      19,816
AL3    Kubosh        72,215     69,164  276,000     113,500
AL3    Carmouche     17,570     11,757        0       5,812
AL4    Plummer       41,915     44,501   21,900      12,443
AL4    Dolcefino     19,215     17,482        0       6,478
AL5    Alcorn       195,105    154,757        0      49,463
AL5    Dick           1,100     65,205   75,000       2,545
I think there must be some reports that have not been uploaded – the Chron story mentions Sandra Rodriguez's numbers, but there was no report visible on Saturday. It and the others may be there on Monday. In the Council races, what we see here is a continuation of what we had seen before. Big fundraisers raised big money, others didn't. Eric Dick did his spend-his-own-money-and-file-weird-reports thing. Most of the spending has not been particularly visible to me – I've gotten a mailer from Robinson and Turner, and that's about it.
How much any of this moves the needle remains to be seen. As we know from the Keir Murray reports, the runoff electorate is very similar in nature to the November electorate. That's obviously better for some candidates than for others. If you think of fundraising in runoffs as being like the betting markets to some extent, then we're probably headed towards the expected results. We'll see if there are any surprises in store.
Chron overview of the At Large #3 runoff
The basic story should be familiar by now.
Janaeya Carmouche
In the race for the third of Houston's five citywide council seats, voters have a choice between candidates opposite in age, temperament, and, often, policy positions.
At-Large 3 incumbent Michael Kubosh is a bombastic 68-year-old bail bondsman. Seeking to deny him a third term is Janaeya Carmouche, 37, an even-keeled former nonprofit and government employee who most recently worked for Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis.
Kubosh relishes being a contrarian voice on the council, deploying thundering speeches, parliamentary delays or "no" votes when he sees fit.
"It's not in my DNA to go along to get along," Kubosh said. "You need me on council so I'll speak up when I see wrong. If everybody just votes with the mayor, then why in the hell do we have a council?"
Carmouche is a self-proclaimed introvert with a "wonkish" bent who says community service works best out of the spotlight. She chose to challenge Kubosh rather than seek an open seat partly because she said he grandstands but produces little for Houstonians.
"He's great at marketing, and I think we've given him a lot of credit for being politically savvy," Carmouche said. "He is the Wizard of Oz: Pull back that curtain and it's just a guy pulling knobs. We need to have sensible, thoughtful and critical-thinking folks around the table. This is a job of service."
My interview with Janaeya Carmouche is here, and my analysis of the vote in AL3 is here. There's not a whole lot to add here. Kubosh is what he is, Carmouche should get a boost from the Mayoral runoff, but she has a lot of ground to make up and Kubosh does better in the African-American districts than your typical Anglo Republican. We'll see what happens.
Precinct analysis: 2019 At Large #3
Another At Large race, another incumbent in a runoff. Here's At Large #3:
Dist  JCGonz  Kubosh  Marcel Janaeya
A      2,944   7,730   1,698   2,395
B      2,405   5,417   2,293   4,802
C      5,452  17,022   3,402   9,584
D      3,554   8,903   3,052   6,250
E      3,840  14,064   2,335   2,889
F      2,195   3,618   1,404   1,676
G      3,646  18,141   2,756   3,630
H      4,452   4,664   1,168   2,820
I      4,283   3,336     984   1,867
J      1,543   2,777     826   1,170
K      3,092   6,989   2,287   4,567
A     19.94%  52.35%  11.50%  16.22%
B     16.12%  36.31%  15.37%  32.19%
C     15.38%  48.00%   9.59%  27.03%
D     16.33%  40.92%  14.03%  28.72%
E     16.60%  60.81%  10.10%  12.49%
F     24.68%  40.68%  15.79%  18.85%
G     12.94%  64.39%   9.78%  12.88%
H     33.97%  35.59%   8.91%  21.52%
I     40.91%  31.86%   9.40%  17.83%
J     24.43%  43.97%  13.08%  18.52%
K     18.26%  41.27%  13.50%  26.97%
Here's what the 2015 data looked like. Incumbent Michael Kubosh cruised to an easy win against three white male candidates, with over 60% of the vote. This year he fell short of an outright win; he was over fifty percent after early voting, but could not keep up that pace. This time he had three non-Anglo opponents, and you can see that it had an effect on his numbers. He's still a strong performer and a heavy favorite to prevail in December, but he did decline from four years ago.
Janaeya Carmouche gets the chance to try again against Kubosh. She'll benefit from the turnout that Mayor Turner will generate, and she's the Democrat in this race, but she has no money, she has a 50K vote deficit to make up, and she trailed Kubosh in the three African-American districts. It's going to take a lot for her to win.
I don't know what to say about Marcel McClinton. He got a lot of hype for his candidacy – I was called by two different out of town reporters who were supposedly writing about him; I say "supposedly" because I never saw either of the stories that I was talking to them about – but it translated to nothing. He raised little money, he got no major endorsements, and whatever campaign he did have was invisible to me. Being a candidate is hard, especially citywide, and he's just out of high school, so I don't intend to be harsh. I'm just kind of puzzled.
Jose Carlos Gonzalez finished two points behind Janaeya Carmouche. I know even less about him. He got the numbers he got. I don't have anything to add to that.
About those Council runoffs
All of a sudden there's many fewer candidates to keep track of.
Tiffany Thomas
Some candidates said they were happy simply to have made it to a runoff. Several races had more than a dozen people vying for the top two vote counts, resulting in razor-thin margins that decided who moved forward.
Brad "Scarface" Jordan said he was still in shock Wednesday. The former member of the Geto Boys hip hop group hadn't expected to advance, but ultimately took second in a 16-candidate field for District D.
"This is unbelievable bro," he said. "I'm just as shocked as you are."
Others, like incumbent Michael Kubosh in At-Large 3 (47.8 percent), Amy Peck in District A (45.4 percent) and Tiffany Thomas in District F (38.9 percent), enter their runoffs with commanding leads.
"We could have won outright last night if those clowns weren't on the ballot," Thomas said of the candidates eliminated Tuesday, most of whom polled in the single digits. "They didn't work at the polls, they weren't at early voting."
Peck said her level of support indicated that voters want a continuation of the service they have seen under incumbent Brenda Stardig. Peck is Stardig's chief of staff, and she has pledged to work towards finishing drainage and infrastructure projects already underway.
"Being that far ahead, it's a clear message of what the voters want," Peck said.
Thomas, the top vote-getter in District F, raised questions that her opponent, Van Huynh, has faced about his residency. He is incumbent Steve Le's chief of staff.
Three of the last four District F council members, including Le, have faced questions about whether they live in the southwestern district, as required by city charter and state law.
"I don't run nasty races, but I do think it's a valid point that I'm in a runoff with someone who doesn't live here," Thomas said.
Huynh, who did not return calls for comment Wednesday, listed his address in campaign filings as a house he rents just off Brays Bayou, but he and his wife claim a homestead exemption on a home they have owned for two decades that sits outside District F.
The council aide has said he stays in the rental he listed on his filing form two to three nights a week, and last month provided a copy of his lease that lists his "main address" at his home outside the district.
Huynh said he and his family are in the process of moving to a new home in the district, but they did not purchase that home until July of this year. City rules require candidates to live in the district they hope to represent for 12 months before election day, but experts say the dictate is hard to enforce.
I must say, I appreciate Tiffany Thomas bringing a little spice to the conversation. She's also right – an awful lot of those 124 candidates never bothered filing a campaign finance report, which is a pretty minimal Serious Candidate Thing to do. Now that we're down to two candidates per race, we can get some focus. As I said before, all of the At Large races involve one Democrat and one Republican, which allows for some clarity of choice. Some of the candidates still on the ballot have done interviews with me, either this cycle or a previous one, and others I will try to get to between now and the start of December. Everyone will have either six or seven city candidates on their runoff ballot, depending on what happened in their district, so everyone has plenty of reason to vote again. Figure out who you want to support and make sure you show up.
Initial thoughts on Election 2019
All bullet points, all the time…
– Here's my opening statement on the election returns debacle. We have more information about this now, but we still need more before we can go anywhere else with it.
– All incumbents want to win without runoffs, but for an incumbent that was forced into a runoff, Mayor Turner did pretty darned well. Including Fort Bend, he got about 12K more votes than Buzbee and King combined, and missed by about 2K outscoring Buzbee plus King plus Boykins. Suffice to say, he's in a strong position for the runoffs.
– We are going to have a cubic buttload of runoffs. In addition to the Mayor, there are seven district Council runoffs, all five At Large Council races, two HISD races, two HCC races, and HD148. We might have had pretty decent overall turnout without the Mayor's race included, but with it at the top it will be a lot like a November election. I'll put the initial over/under at about 175K, which is roughly the 2009 Mayoral election runoff total.
– Among those Council runoffs are districts B and D, which along with HISD II and IV and HCC 2 will favor Turner. There are no runoffs in E or G, which would have favored Buzbee, and the runoff in A is almost certain to be a serene, low-money affair. Districts C and J went for King in the 2015 runoffs, but the runoffs in those districts involve only Democratic candidates. Turner has a lot more wind at his back than Buzbee does.
– For a more visual representation of the above, see this Mike Morris tweet. Nearly all of those Buzbee areas are in districts A, E, and G.
– In a sense, the main event in November is the At Large runoffs, all five of which feature a Republican and a Democrat. A Council that includes Mike Knox, Willie Davis, Michael Kubosh, Anthony Dolcefino, and Eric Dick is a Council that (including the members in A, E, and G) is fully half Republican, and could thus throw a lot of sand into the gears of the second Turner administration (or really grease the wheels of a Buzbee administration, if you want to extend the metaphor). Yes, I know, Council doesn't really work like that, but the difference between that Council and one that includes three or more of Raj Salhotra, David Robinson, Janaeya Carmouche, Letitia Plummer, and Sallie Alcorn, is likely to be quite large. You want to have an effect on the direction Houston takes over the next four years, there you have it.
– Council could have been even more Republican, but at the district level it looks to remain at least as Democratic and possibly a little more so than it is now. Districts C and J may have gone for King in 2015 as noted, but Democrats Abbie Kamin and Shelley Kennedy are the choices in C (Greg Meyers and Mary Jane Smith finished just behind Kennedy), while Ed Pollard and Sandra Rodriguez are the contenders in J. (Yes, Pollard is considerably more conservative than most Dems, especially on LGBT issues. He'll be the next Dwight Boykins in that regard if he wins.) District F has been (with a two-year break from 2013 to 2015) Republican going back to the 90s, but Tiffany Thomas is in pole position. She will no doubt benefit from the Mayoral runoff.
– I should note that in District C, the four candidates who were on a Greater Heights Democratic Club candidate forum I moderated in September – Kamin, Kennedy, Candelario Cervantez, and Amanda Wolfe; Kendra Yarbrough Camarena was also in the forum but switched to the HD148 race – combined for 55% of the vote in C. That's a nice chunk of your HD134, CD02 and CD07 turf, and another illustration of how Donald Trump has helped kill the Republican Party in Harris County.
– Speaking of HD148, 69% of the vote there went to the Democratic candidates. Jessica Farrar got 68% in 2018, and she was on the high end.
– Remember when I said this about HD148 candidate Adrian Garcia? "It's certainly possible some people will think he's the County Commissioner, but whether they'd be happy to vote for him or confused as to why he'd be running for another office is a question I can't answer." I would say now the answer is "happy to vote for him", because with all due respect I cannot see how he finishes third in that field if he was differently named. Low profile special elections are just weird.
– To be fair, name recognition also surely helped Dolcefino and Dick, neither of whom had much money. One had a famous name, and one has been a candidate multiple times, while littering the streets with his yard signs, so there is that.
– I'm just about out of steam here, but let me say this again: We. Must. Defeat. Dave. Wilson. Tell everyone you know to make sure they vote for Monica Flores Richart in the HCC 1 runoff. We cannot screw that up.
– If you still need more, go read Stace, Nonsequiteuse, and Chris Hooks.
Here they are. Refer to my previous post for the initial recap, I'm going to be very minimalist. Let's do this PowerPoint-style, it's already been a long day:
Mayor – Turner fell short of 50%, landing up a bit below 47%. He and Buzbee will be in a runoff. Which, if nothing else, means a much higher turnout for the runoff.
Controller: Chris Brown wins.
District A: Peck versus Zoes.
District B: Jackson versus Bailey.
District C: Kamin versus Kennedy. Gotta say, it's a little surprising, but quite nice, for it to be an all-Dem runoff. Meyers came close to catching Kennedy, but she hung on to second place.
District D: Brad Jordan had a late surge, and will face Carolyn Evans-Shabazz in the runoff. If Evans-Shabazz wins, she'll need to resign her spot on the HCC Board, so there would be another new Trustee if that happens.
District F: Thomas versus Huynh. Other than the two years we had of Richard Nguyen, this seat has pretty much always been held by a Republican. Tiffany Thomas has a chance to change that.
District H: Cisneros verusus Longoria.
District J: Pollard versus Rodriguez. Sandra Rodriguez had a late surge and nearly finished ahead of Pollard. Very evenly matched in Round One.
At Large #1: Knox versus Salhotra. Both candidates will benefit from the Mayoral runoff, though I think Raj may be helped more.
At Large #2: Robinson versus Davis, a rerun from 2015.
At Large #3: Kubosh slipped below 50% and will face Janaeya Carmouche in overtime.
At Large #4: Dolcefino versus Plummer. We will have somewhere between zero and four Republicans in At Large seats, in case anyone needs some non-Mayoral incentive for December.
At Large #5: Alcorn versus Eric Dick. Lord, please spare me Eric Dick. I don't ask for much.
HISD: Dani Hernandez and Judith Cruz ousted incumbents Sergio Lira and Diana Davila. Maybe that will make the TEA look just a teeny bit more favorably on HISD. Kathy Blueford Daniels will face John Curtis Gibbs, and Matt Barnes had a late surge to make it into the runoff against Patricia Allen.
HCC: Monica Flores Richart inched up but did not make it to fifty percent, so we're not quite rid of Dave Wilson yet. Rhonda Skillern-Jones will face Kathy Lynch-Gunter in that runoff.
HD148: A late surge by Anna Eastman gives her some distance between her and Luis La Rotta – Eastman got 20.34%, La Rotta 15.84%. The Republican share of the vote fell from 34% to 32%, right on what they got in this district in 2018.
Now you are up to date. Go get some sleep.
Unfortunately, we have to start with this:
Results of Tuesday's election could take until 2 a.m. Wednesday after the Texas Secretary of State issued a new regulation that upended plans by the Harris County Clerk's Office to speed vote counting.
The first tubs containing electronic ballot cards from across Harris County arrived at central count just before 9:30 p.m., where election judges and poll watchers waited to see the vote count in action.
Dr. Diane Trautman said she had hoped to have votes come in from 10 countywide drop-off locations, fed in through a secured intranet site, leading to faster results on election night.
Instead, Secretary Ruth R. Hughs ordered on Oct. 23 that law enforcement officers would instead escort the ballot box memory cards from each of the 757 polling sites to the central counting station.
That change, made nearly two weeks before Election Day, led to a major delay that left voters wondering for hours how races up and down ballot would turn out.
Early election results trickled in shortly after 7 p.m., but remained virtually unchanged for hours Tuesday.
Here's the County Clerk's statement about that order. I don't know what was behind it, but it sure did gum things up. In the end, final results were not available till quite late, with no more partial results after midnight because producing those was slowing down the input process. Here's the later statement on when results would be expected. Suffice to say, this was a mess, and no one is happy about it all. Expect there to be an extended fight between the County Clerk and SOS offices.
Anyway. I'm still groggy from a late night, so I'm going to hit the highlights, and we'll get final results later. Here we go.
Mayor: Turner leads, is close to a majority.
Mayor Sylvester Turner held a wide lead over Tony Buzbee in limited early returns late Tuesday and was within striking distance of an outright re-election win, though it was unclear at press time if he would secure enough votes to avoid a runoff.
Buzbee, a millionaire trial lawyer, jumped out to an early second-place lead that he appeared likely to retain over Bill King, an attorney and businessman who narrowly lost a 2015 runoff to Turner but struggled this time to compete financially with Buzbee, his main rival for conservative votes.
With a small share of Election Day precincts reporting, Turner remained a shade under the majority vote share he would need to avoid a December runoff against Buzbee.
Councilman Dwight Boykins, who competed with Turner for the support of Democratic and black voters, trailed in fourth place, while former councilwoman Sue Lovell was further behind in fifth. Seven other candidates combined for the remaining share of the vote.
Adding in the Fort Bend results, and we get the following:
Turner     63,359  47.28%
Buzbee     39,361  29.37%
King       17,878  13.34%
Boykins     7,848   5.86%
Lovell      1,433   1.07%
The Rest    4,121   3.08%
Three things to think about: One, Turner has at this point more votes than Buzbee and King combined, so if we do go to a runoff that's not a bad position to start with. Two, the Election Day results reported so far came mostly from Districts A, C, E, and G, so they would be more favorable to Buzbee and King than the city as a whole. And three, the election polling was pretty accurate, especially at pegging the support levels for Boykins and Lovell.
Oh, and a fourth thing: Tony Buzbee's drunken Election Night speech. Yowza.
Controller: Incumbent Chris Brown leads
It's Brown 62,297 and Sanchez 54,864 adding in Fort Bend, and again with mostly Republican votes from yesterday (Sanchez led the Election Day tally by about 1,700 votes). Barring a big surprise, Brown has won.
City Council: Most incumbents have big leads, and there's gonna be a lot of runoffs. To sum up:
District A: Amy Peck has 44.3%, George Zoes 16.8%
District B: Tarsha Jackson 21.0%, Renee Jefferson Smith 15.1%, Cynthia Bailey 13.7%, Alvin Byrd 10.7%
District C: Abbie Kamin 30.8%, Shelley Kennedy 15.8%, Greg Meyers 14.4%, Mary Jane Smith 14.0%
District D: Carolyn Evans-Shabazz 19.0%, Carla Brailey 12.3%, Brad Jordan 11.9%, Rashad Cave 11.4%, Jerome Provost 10.4%, Andrew Burks 10.3%
District E: Dave Martin easily wins
District F: Tiffany Thomas 39%, Van Huynh 24%, Richard Nguyen 18%
District G: Greg Travis easily wins
District H: Karla Cisneros 38.9%, Isabel Longoria 27.5%, Cynthia Reyes-Revilla 24.0%
District I: Robert Gallegos easily wins
District J: Edward Pollard 32.4%, Sandra Rodriguez 26.4%, Barry Curtis 19.7%
District K: MArtha Castex-Tatum easily wins
At Large #1: Mike Knox 38.1%, Raj Salhotra 21.1%, Yolanda Navarro Flores 16.3%, Georgia Provost 14.7%
At Large #2: Davis Robinson 38.9%, Willie Davis 28.8%, Emily DeToto 18.8%
At Large #3: Michael Kubosh 50.8%, Janaeya Carmouche 20.6%
At Large #4: Anthony Dolcefino 22.9%, Letitia Plummer 16.4%, Nick Hellyar 12.8%, Ericka McCrutcheon 11.3%, Bill Baldwin 10.5%
At Large #5: Sallie Alcorn 23.2%, Eric Dick 22.0%, no one else above 10
Some of the runoff positions are still very much up in the air. Michael Kubosh may or may not win outright – he was only at 46% on Election Day. Name recognition worth a lot (Dolcefino, Dick) but not everything (both Provosts, Burks). Not much else to say but stay tuned.
HISD: Davila and Lira are going to lose
Dani Hernandez leads Sergio Lira 62-38, Judith Cruz leads Diana Davila 64-36. Kathy Blueford Daniels is close to fifty percent in II but will likely be in a runoff with John Curtis Gibbs. Patricia Allen, Reagan Flowers, and Matt Barnes in that order are in a tight battle in IV.
HCC: No story link on the Chron front page. Monica Flores Richart leads the execrable Dave Wilson 47-34 in HCC1, Rhonda Skillern-Jones leads with 45% in HCC2 with Kathy Lynch-Gunter at 26%, and Cynthia Lenton-Gary won HCC7 unopposed.
Metro: Headed to easy passage, with about 68% so far.
That's all I got for now. Come back later for more.
30 Day campaign finance reports: Incumbents and challengers for Council
As before, my look at the July 2019 finance reports for these candidates is here, and all of the finance reports that I have downloaded and reviewed are in this Google folder. Except for the reports that were filed non-electronically, which you can find here. Erik Manning's invaluable spreadsheet remains my source for who's in what race.
Cleveland      5,682      5,330        0         352
Travis         9,800     20,193   21,000     121,297
Pletka         4,167      3,289        0           4
Baker              0        582        0           0
Longoria      49,639     20,243        0      23,589
ReyesRevilla  10,356      5,809        0      16,187
Gonzales       5,190      4,159    4,310       5,190
Castex-Tatum  15,850     11,568        0      44,409
Vander-Lyn       625          0        0           0
Sauke            100      2,008        0         130
Salhotra      81,218     67,748        0     180,947
Provost        4,850      4,775        0         468
Nav Flores       259        259        0           0
Blackmon
Davis         20,665     29,110    3,000       8,832
Griffin        1,350        700        0         650
Detoto            24      3,124      500         439
Kubosh        40,035     39,076  276,000     122,578
Carmouche      3,975      7,156        0         708
McClinton     14,787     18,577        0       4,895
Not a whole lot of interest here. There are multiple candidates who entered the race too late to have a July report who are showing up this time, but outside of Isabel Longoria in H none of them made much of an impression. That race continues to be the most interesting non-Mayoral challenge to an incumbent on the ballot. Karla Cisneros has plenty of resources available to her, but she's in a fight.
Beyond that, as I said, not much to say. I wish Janaeya Carmouche had raised more money. Willie Davis and Marcel McClinton did raise a few bucks, but not nearly enough to make a difference in a citywide race. There's just nothing else to say. I'll have more reports tomorrow.
UPDATE: Because I'm an idiot, I overlooked the At Large #1 race initially. Raj Salhotra continues his fundraising superiority, while Mike Knox at least raised a few bucks, and no one else did anything of note. I see a lot of Raj signs in my neighborhood, but I think I'd feel better if I saw a TV ad or two from his campaign. Old-fashioned, I know, but it's still the best way to reach a lot of voters.
Endorsement watch: Mistakes were made
A swing and a miss.
As a city council member, Mike Knox has not been afraid to clash with Mayor Sylvester Turner.
He voted against a $650,000 contract to boost participation in the 2020 Census, saying he had reservations about the "missions and agendas" of the firm chosen to do outreach.
He was one of six council members to vote against a contract that will pay up to $3 million over five years for musicians to perform live at Bush Intercontinental and Hobby airports — a program strongly endorsed by Turner.
And he was the only council member to cast a "no" vote on Turner's historic pension reform proposal.
But Knox, 60,a former police officer running for a second-four year term in the At-Large Position 1 seat, is not merely a contrarian. Knox objected to the airport music contract because he thought the money could be better used for airport amenities, such as improved signage. He opposed an ordinance banning smokeless tobacco use by professional baseball players at Minute Maid Park, on the grounds that it violated the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.
Knox's said he voted against Turner's pension plan because the mayor did not provide a draft copy to review. "Now I'm not in the habit and I will not be in the habit of voting for things that I don't know what I'm voting on," he told the editorial board.
The editorial board has tended to agree with the mayor on many of these issues, but what's important about Knox's positions is his ability to dispassionately look at policy options and, when he disagrees, to be willing to offer an opposing view anchored by logic. "We make too many decisions based on emotion, situational ethics and also just the desire to make a political statement."
Yeah, that's baloney. It's fine to have principles, as long as they lead you to doing the right thing. Voting against Census outreach, at a time when the state Republican leadership is openly hostile to cities, is in itself disqualifying, and no one who votes against the pension reform plan gets to call themselves "fiscally responsible" or "fiscally conservative", no matter what the pretext was for the No vote. The Chron rightfully had nice things to say later on about Raj Salhotra, but said he needed "some experience under his belt". If Mike Knox is what having experience looks like, then "experience" isn't all that useful, either. No thank you very much.
Anyway. My interview with Raj Salhotra is here, and the July finance reports that include At Large #1 is here; the 30 day reports are on their way, I swear.
That odd decision was then followed up with the even more confounding endorsement of CM Michael Kubosh.
In the last municipal election cycle, this editorial board endorsed Michael Kubosh for City Council At-Large Position 3 with a significant caveat: His opposition to Houston's equal rights amendment (HERO) and his use of fear-mongering rhetoric gave us pause.
"If HERO were the only issue on the agenda for City Council's next term," we wrote in 2015, "Kubosh's actions would be reason enough to boot him from office."
As reasons to look past his wrongheaded views on the gay and transgender community, we pointed to the political skills that helped him pass an amendment to the mayor's budget, his success in getting the funds needed to fish abandoned cars from the city's bayous in a joint project with Harris County and his knack for constituent services.
Four years later, we are again torn. Kubosh kept his promise to retrieve submerged cars, a project that has removed more than 80 vehicles from Sims and Brays Bayou. He has been spearheading an effort to bring an Astro World-like theme park to Houston, a project that Mayor Sylvester Turner hinted in a recent tweet may be on the horizon. He has advocated for distribution of Harvey relief funds to the victims most in need.
However, in a candidate screening, Kubosh several times expressed opinions that reminded us powerfully of the caveats the board felt when recommending him last time. He said it is wrong to fire someone because they are gay or transgender and cited his hiring of a gay lawyer as proof that he doesn't hold anti-gay sentiment, yet he also maintained — misleadingly — that the city's nondiscrimination ordinance would have allowed any man to dress up as a woman and go into a women's restroom.
"At the very end I couldn't vote with them to allow a woman's privacy to be violated not by a transgender person but by a possible predator who learned that Houston will now let you in their restrooms if you dress as a woman," he told the editorial board. The conflation of transgender women with predators is not only offensive, it has been thoroughly debunked. And to state the obvious: There are already plenty of laws making it a crime for anyone to sneak into a bathroom to harm or harass anyone.
Kubosh, 68, also described Drag Queen Storytime at the Houston Public Library as a showcase for "adult entertainment" that could potentially harm children. That mindset is troubling, especially for a council member who represents all Houstonians — including members of the gay and transgender community.
As one of Kubosh's challengers, Janaeya Carmouche, rightly pointed out, being a city council member is "not just simply the day-to-day minutiae of the job or the machinations of the job. It is understanding that you have a platform and your voice and your opinion will be amplified."
They then wistfully conclude that Janaeya Carmouche and Marcel McClinton, like Raj Salhotra, might be Council-worthy some day, but today they are too young and inexperienced, and then finish up by expressing the hope that Kubosh will somehow be a different person over the next four years than he has shown himself to be. Hey, remember when the Chron endorsed Ted Cruz in 2012 on the grounds that they hoped he would stop being Ted Cruz and magically transform into someone who would be more like Kay Bailey Hutchison? I sure do. How'd that work out? I don't know who's writing these endorsement editorials these days, but they sure seem to lack the basic experience needed to understand how human nature works.
Look, if the editorial board likes and agrees with Michael Kubosh, then by all means they should endorse him. If they think his accomplishments outweigh the things about him they find offensive and troubling, then endorse him. If they think there's sufficient value in having him on Council to serve as a check on Mayor Turner, then endorse him. (Just curious here: do they think Kubosh, or Mike Knox for that matter, would serve as a check on Tony Buzbee or Bill King?) But endorsing their fantasy version of Michael Kubosh, especially when they have already demonstrated that trick never works, is delusional and a disservice to the readers.
A brief look at the Council incumbents who face contested races
I think two, and hopefully three, of these races are truly competitive. The others, not so much.
Raj Salhotra
Asked how she would operate differently from City Councilwoman Karla Cisneros, the District H incumbent she is trying to unseat in November, Isabel Longoria did not mince words.
"What I would do different is … not be afraid to stand up to folks and say, here are the decisions we have to make — and not hide until the last minute because I'm scared to upset people," Longoria, a former city planning commissioner and legislative policy aide, told the Chronicle editorial board last week.
Cisneros, a former HISD board president and first-term council member, shot back, "I've experienced this my whole life. I have a very feminine look about me, my voice is soft, and I can tell you that I am often underestimated. I've been called an iron fist in a velvet glove, for good reason."
The exchange displayed the heightening intensity evident in many of the 16 Houston city council races, including eight involving incumbents defending their seats this fall. If any one of their challengers wins, the result would add to what already is guaranteed to be a seismic turnover on council, as half the current body is term-limited or not seeking re-election.
Aside from the District H race, which also includes real estate agent and neighborhood advocate Cynthia Reyes-Revilla and scientific researcher Gaby Salcedo, multiple challengers are hoping to force At-Large Councilmen Mike Knox (Position 1), David Robinson (Position 2) and Michael Kubosh (Position 3) into runoffs. Two district council members — Greg Travis of District G and Martha Castex-Tatum of District K — also face multiple opponents, while District E Councilman Dave Martin and District I Councilman Robert Gallegos each have drawn one challenger.
Knox, an Air Force veteran and former Houston police officer, generally is seen as one of the most vulnerable incumbents, thanks in part to a sluggish fundraising start compared to Raj Salhotra, one of his opponents. Salhotra raised $220,000 during the first six months of the year, compared to Knox's $40,000 haul.
Still, Knox's opponents — Larry Blackmon, Yolanda Navarro Flores, Georgia Provost and Salhotra — may have a tough time unseating him, depending on how many people turn out to vote. Knox would have the edge "if the electorate is the way it typically is in a municipal year — older and conservative," [UH poli saci prof Brandon] Rottinghaus said.
Salhotra's fundraising, and Provost's strength among black voters — especially with competitive races in District B and D drawing voters — will counter Knox's strengths, said Jay Aiyer, a public policy consultant and former chief of staff to Mayor Lee Brown. However, Aiyer added, Knox's opponent in a potential runoff would need to draw at least some non-traditional voters.
"That's one of the dangers when assessing the vulnerability of someone like Knox," Aiyer said. "A lot of the younger candidates running social media-driven campaigns, geared toward energizing new or young voters — that's a real uphill battle in a municipal election."
Rottinghaus said the partisan nature of the race — with Democrats generally coalescing behind Salhotra and Republicans backing Knox — means the result will say a lot about the state of Houston's electorate.
"This is really a story about the changing nature of the city. In a microcosm, this will be the most telling election — in addition to the mayor's race — of how Houston and the region has changed," he said.
Beating Kubosh, meanwhile, will require a mix of grass-roots support and a large war chest, Aiyer said. One of Kubosh's opponents, Janaeya Carmouche, has built connections in progressive circles as a city council staffer and, more recently, deputy director of engagement for Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis. Carmouche also will have to report a significant fundraising amount in her next campaign finance report to be competitive, Aiyer said.
"I'm undaunted by the idea of incumbency, because I don't believe in ownership of a position," Carmouche said. "I believe that we have to earn that right every time."
Also challenging Kubosh is Marcel McClinton, a recent high school graduate who has gained renown for his gun control advocacy after surviving a 2016 church shooting. He said he would push council to consider recommendations from the mayor's commission against gun violence and prioritize climate change initiatives and flood control.
At Large #1 and District H, where I am, are definitely the ones to watch. Raj Salhotra has run a strong campaign and raised a lot of money, which he's going to need to get his name out there to enough voters. I remain puzzled by Knox's anemic fundraising totals. He's a conservative Republican in a Democratic city, he's not been very high profile on Council, and he has nowhere near enough money to run a robust citywide campaign. Maybe he figured he was playing with house money to begin with, maybe he just isn't much for doing the dirty work, I don't know. What I do know is that if Raj can get him into a runoff – he has to finish ahead of Georgia Provost, which is not a slam dunk – he can win.
As for District H, I don't underestimate CM Cisneros, but I will note that in my neighborhood, which is also her neighborhood, I see a lot of Longoria and Reyes-Revilla signs. That doesn't strike me as a great omen for her. I do see Cisneros signs, too, it just seems like her base has eroded. Looking back at the four-person race in November of 2015, she got 269 of 510 votes (52.7%) in Precinct 3 and 361 of 578 votes (62.5%) in Precinct 4, which combine to cover much of the Woodland Heights. I'm not feeling that for her this time. I could be wrong, and she can at least easily make it to a runoff even with a lesser performance in those two boxes. Outside of Knox, though, she appears to be the incumbent with the strongest opposition.
I'd like to add At Large #3 to this list, but I'm going to need to see a stronger finance report from Janaeya Carmouche first, and I'm going to need to see some evidence of actual campaigning from Marcel McClinton. (This isn't quite what I had in mind, but it is impressive and laudable nonetheless.) Michael Kubosh hasn't raised much money, either, but he has some self-funding capability, and unlike Knox has a fair amount of name recognition. He's the favorite until and unless something changes.
The open seat races are more competitive, and much more chaotic overall. I have no idea what might happen in most of them. I presume we'll get some overview stories on those contests in the next week or two.
Previous interviews with current candidates
I've said a few times that I'm going to be doing just a few interviews this fall. I will start publishing them tomorrow. I may pick up some more for the runoffs, but for now my schedule just does not accommodate anything more than that. But! That doesn't mean you can't listen to past interviews with some of the people on your November ballot. Many of the people running now have run for something before, and in many of those cases I interviewed them. Here then is a list of those past interviews. The office listed next to some of them is the office they now seek, and the year in parentheses is when I spoke to them. Note that a few of these people have been interviewed more than once; in those cases, I went with the most recent conversation. Enjoy!
Sylvester Turner (2015)
Bill King (2015)
Dwight Boykins (2013)
Sue Lovell (2009)
Council:
Amy Peck – District A (2013)
Alvin Byrd – District B (2011)
Kendra Yarbrough Camarena – District C (2010)
Carolyn Evans-Shabazz – District D (2017)
Richard Nguyen – District F (2015)
Greg Travis – District G (2015)
Karla Cisneros – District H (2015)
Robert Gallegos – District I (2015)
Jim Bigham – District J (2015)
Edward Pollard – District J (2016)
Mike Knox – At Large #1 (2013)
Georgia Provost – At Large #1 (2013)
David Robinson – At Large #2 (2015)
Michael Kubosh – At Large #3 (2013)
Letitia Plummer – At Large #4 (2018)
Controller:
Chris Brown – City Controller (2015)
HISD:
Sergio Lira – District III (2015)
Jolanda Jones – District IV (2015)
Judith Cruz – District VIII
HCC:
Monica Flores Richart – District 1 (2017)
Rhonda Skillern-Jones – District 2 (2015)
July 2019 campaign finance reports: Incumbents and challengers for Council and Controller
Let me start by saying that I began this post before Amanda Edwards became a candidate for Senate. I'm going to keep the AL4 race in here, in part to include Edwards' June report totals, and in part because I'm just stubborn that way. I did add in the candidates who have jumped into AL4, so this is as up to date as I am. Feel free to tell me who I've missed.
As before, my look at the January 2019 finance reports for Houston candidates is here, and all of the finance reports that I have downloaded and reviewed are in this Google folder. Except for the reports that were filed non-electronically, which you can find here. Erik Manning's invaluable spreadsheet remains my source for who's in what race.
Dave Martin – District E
Sam Cleveland – District E
Ryan Lee – District E
Greg Travis – District G
Karla Cisneros – District H
Isabel Longoria – District H
Cynthia Reyes-Revilla – District H
Robert Gallegos – District I
Rick Gonzales – District I
Martha Castex-Tatum – District K
Mike Knox – At Large #1
Michelle Bonton – At Large #1
Georgia Provost – At Large #1
Raj Salhotra – At Large #1
David Robinson – At Large #2
Willie Davis – At Large #2
Emily Detoto – At Large #2
Michael Kubosh – At Large #3
Janaeya Carmouche – At Large #3
Marcel McClinton – At Large #3
Goku Sankar – At Large #3
Amanda Edwards – At Large #4
Christel Bastida – At Large #4
Tiko Reynolds-Hausman – At Large #4
Ericka McCrutcheon – At Large #4
Jason Rowe – At Large #4
Nick Hellyar – At Large #4
Letitia Plummer – At Large #4
Chris Brown – Controller
Amparo Gasca – Controller
Travis        68,234     15,749   21,000     131,691
Cisneros      54,325      8,959        0     109,471
R-Revilla     19,408      1,859        0      17,130
Gonzales         400      3,627    3,510         400
C-Tatum       37,200     13,664        0      40,128
Salhotra     220,377     30,340        0     178,539
Davis         10,250      3,051    3,000         807
Detoto         2,600      2,660      500         439
Carmouche      8,950      5,397    1,000       3,706
Sankar
Edwards       73,807     42,179        0     192,791
Bastida        1,103         51      200         750
R-Hausman
McCrutcheon    5,100      7,225    5,000
Rowe               0          0        0           0
Hellyar       37,017     34,446        0      20,501
Brown         66,611     36,522   75,000     234,350
Gasca
I know Tiko Reynolds-Hausman and Isabel Longoria entered their races in July, so they have no reports yet. That may be true for some others as well, but if so I'm not aware of them.
Let's get the easy ones out of the way first. Greg Travis and Martha Castex-Tatum don't have opponents. Chris Brown, Dave Martin, and Robert Gallegos may as well not have them, either. I know, there's still a few months to go before the election, but none of the purported challengers appear to be doing much. Heck, only Sam Cleveland even has a website, though Ryan Lee and Rick Gonzales do at least have Facebook pages. So yeah, nothing to see here.
David Robinson and Michael Kubosh have opponents who have been a bit more active – Willie Davis is a repeat candidate, having run in 2015 against Robinson – but so far don't appear to pose too much of a threat.
The threat to Karla Cisneros is greater, and potentially severe. I've already seen a couple of signs for her opponents in my neighborhood, and while Isabel Longoria hasn't had a chance to post a finance report yet, Cynthia Reyes-Revilla's totals are OK. Not terrifying if you're the incumbent, but not nothing. Keep this one in your back pocket, and we'll revisit when the 30 day reports are posted.
Had Amanda Edwards decided to stay in Houston and run for re-election, I'd have grouped her with the not-really-challenged incumbents. With AL4 now an open seat, and the field likely to expand further (*checks the Manning spreadsheet one last time to make sure no one else has entered the race*), it's also open in the sense that there's no clear frontrunner. Nick Hellyar and Letitia Plummer, who had started out in other races, have the early fundraising lead, but not enough to present a significant obstacle. Hellyar has picked up multiple endorsements from current and former elected officials, which ought to boost his coffers, but we'll see what that means in practice. We really don't know anything about this race right now.
And then there's At Large #1. If you knew nothing about this election and I told you that Raj Salhotra was the incumbent and Mike Know was a challenger, you'd believe me based on their numbers. I can't recall the last time an incumbent was so thoroughly outclassed in this regard. That's great for Salhotra, whose biggest challenge isn't Knox as much as it is Georgia Provost, who nudged past four better-funded candidates as well as ultra-perennial candidate Griff Griffin to make it into the runoff in 2015. She's going to get her share of votes, especially if the voters don't know the other candidates on the ballot. Salhotra is well on his way to having the resources to run a sufficient citywide campaign and introduce himself to the electorate. In what should be a prelude to another runoff, he just needs to finish in the top two. So far, so good.
I'll break up the open seat races into two or three more posts. Did I mention there were a crap-ton of candidates this year? Let me know what you think.
July 2018 finance reports: City of Houston
Every level of government requires finance reports in January and June, whether or not there is an active election cycle in that year. That includes the city of Houston, whose january report data we inspected here. Our next election is in 2019, and while this is still traditionally a little early for there to be much activity, there are the finance reports. Here's what we've got:
Candidate       Office    Raised      Spent     Loan    On Hand
S Turner         Mayor   585,267    137,758        0  2,260,407
C Brown     Controller    13,070     17,650        0     59,164
M Knox      At Large 1    28,225     12,691        0     62,856
D Robinson  At Large 2    61,650     21,468        0    162,079
M Kubosh    At Large 3    72,475     23,841  276,000     82,360
A Edwards   At Large 4    40,345     26,349        0    147,883
J Christie  At Large 5     3,263      6,055        0     25,918
B Stardig       Dist A    56,439     24,738        0    116,794
J Davis         Dist B    22,750     12,487        0    147,300
E Cohen         Dist C    33,990     18,591        0     57,264
D Boykins       Dist D   126,000     55,556        0     96,400
D Martin        Dist E    43,900     17,226        0    123,730
S Le            Dist F     4,000      6,445   30,823     10,570
G Travis        Dist G    69,468     81,775   21,000     56,571
K Cisneros      Dist H    34,399      5,660        0     49,176
R Gallegos      Dist I    32,875     21,319        0     80,288
M Laster        Dist J    20,330      7,524        0    173,358
M Castex-Tatum  Dist K    15,375        339    3,788     43,822
A Parker                       0     10,383        0     82,854
L Green                    5,500     42,118        0     40,492
Lift the Cap PAC               0          0        0      3,987
Citizens to Keep               0      1,803        0     47,564
Houston Strong
As you may recall, there wasn't much in the way of fundraising for anyone except Mayor Turner last time. I don't know if it's due to the time of year, the approach of the next election, or the overall political climate, but as you can see nearly all of our elected officials have been busy. The report for Martha Castex-Tatum, who was elected in May to succeed the late Larry Green, is in a shorter period than everyone else since she had to post 30-day and 8-day reports for her cycle; the others are all for the full January through June time frame.
Looking at these numbers, only Jack Christie has acted like the term-limited Member that he is. Brenda Stardig, Jerry Davis, Ellen Cohen, and Mike Laster have been more or less business as usual. I've speculated before about the possible future ambitions they may have, and I don't have anything to add to that. I'm sure there's a reason why the three non-Cohen members have been stockpiling the loot like this, but until they do something tangible it's hard to say what that might be.
Which doesn't mean we can't speculate at all. I look at what Dwight Boykins and David Robinson are doing and I wonder a little. Both are on the ballot next year for their final terms (as always, modulo future rulings in the interminable term limits litigation), and while Robinson had to fend off four challengers and win in a runoff in 2015, Boykins cruised home unopposed. It could be that Robinson is merely gearing up for the next battle while Boykins is doing his best to keep potential opponents at bay. It could also be that they're looking beyond their next term to a time when both the Mayor's office and the Controller's office will be open seats. I have no idea and no evidence – like I said, I'm just speculating. Dave Martin is also in that "one more term and has a lot of cash" group, but we don't tend to elect Mayors who fit Martin's political profile, though perhaps Controller might appeal to him.
Be all that as it may, this is the first time since we switched to four-year terms and no blackout period for fundraising that we've seen incumbents establish a clear financial advantage for themselves. No one on the outside has yet taken a concrete step (like designating a campaign treasurer and raising their own money) towards running for a Council seat, but do keep in mind there are several now-former candidates for Congress in town who likely have some cash remaining in their coffers (sorry, I'm only checking on still-active candidates). Surely it would not be a surprise if one or more of them decided to act more locally next year. Given that possibility, it's hard to blame any of the members who are up for re-election next year to take precautions.
The remaining reports I included because they're there. As we learned after the death of El Franco Lee, the remaining funds in Larry Green's campaign account are to be distributed by his campaign treasurer, whose name is Kevin Riles. As we see from Lee's July report, there's no particular rush to do whatever that turns out to be. I don't remember what Citizens to Keep Houston Strong was about, but Bill White is their treasurer. I'm sure we'll see plenty more PACs and PAC activity as we move towards referenda for firefighters' pay parity and the revenue cap.
No quorum for very special Council meeting
Close, but no cigar.
A handful of city council members who organized a rare special meeting to push for a Houston firefighters petition seeking pay "parity" with police to appear on the November ballot fell short of a quorum Friday and broke up without a vote.
The resolution they had put forward called on Mayor Sylvester Turner to let the council vote at its meeting next week to place the parity petition on the ballot.
Turner told one council member last Friday that he planned to have that discussion at the Aug. 8 council meeting, but word of that plan had not reached the full council Monday when members Greg Travis, Michael Kubosh, Brenda Stardig, Martha Castex-Tatum and Dwight Boykins signed a memo calling the special meeting.
No more than seven members reached the council chamber Friday morning, two short of the count necessary for a quorum, so Councilwoman Brenda Stardig called off the effort after 15 minutes.
Signatories Travis, Kubosh, Stardig and Boykins were present, though Boykins grew impatient and left. Council members Mike Knox, Steve Le and Dave Martin also were present. Castex-Tatum did not attend.
Martin had said he would skip the gathering, but the New Orleans native acknowledged he showed up in Cajun mode, spoiling for a fight.
See here for the background, and here for Mayor Turner's statement. CM Martin did indeed mix it up, getting into squabbles with CMs Travis and Kubosh, which I encourage you to read. If more Council meetings had that kind of entertainment, I'm sure more people would tune in to them. There will be a Budget Committee hearing, followed by a Council vote on August 8, and we'll have this thing on the November ballot.
A very special Council meeting
Who knew there was such a thing?
In a rare maneuver that sidesteps Mayor Sylvester Turner's authority, five city council members have called a special meeting this week, hoping to force the issue of Houston firefighters' push for a referendum on pay "parity" with police.
The council members aim to secure their colleagues' support for a resolution calling on Turner to place an item on the council's July 24 agenda to schedule a November election on the petition, which seeks to grant firefighters the same pay as police officers of corresponding rank.
In Houston's strong-mayor form of government, the mayor generally has sole authority to decide what appears on the agenda for the weekly council meetings.
The lone exception allows three council members to set the agenda of a special meeting. Such gatherings — including this one — typically are organized without the mayor's approval, and often struggle to muster a quorum, as many of the 16 council members are loathe to invite the mayor's wrath.
Council members Greg Travis, Michael Kubosh, Brenda Stardig, Martha Castex-Tatum and Dwight Boykins signed a Monday memo calling a special council meeting for Friday at 10 a.m.
Turner is on a trade mission in South America and will not be back in time to attend the meeting.
Kubosh said he signed the memo to help ensure the issue was discussed, noting that several elections have passed since the petition was submitted.
"They were successful last year at stalling it a whole year, so, yes, I think that's possible," Kubosh said, referring to the Turner administration.
[CM Dave] Martin [who chairs the Council's budget committee] said he does not intend to attend Friday's meeting and doubts the organizers will have the quorum necessary for a formal vote.
"If they don't show up, they don't show up," Kubosh said. "But I'll show up."
It is unclear what the impact would be if the proposed resolution reaches a vote and passes.
City Attorney Ron Lewis declined to address whether that outcome could force the mayor to act, given that the city charter gives Turner control of the council agenda.
"As a practical matter," Lewis said, "the item will go on an agenda that's timely, and the mayor's committed to that."
Insert shrug emoji here. The petitions were certified in May, and one would think the vote would be in November. According to Mayor Turner's chief of staff and confirmed by CM Martin, this was to be discussed at the budget committee hearing on July 26, with the item for placing it on the ballot to be on Council's August 8 agenda. I don't know what else there is to say.
Council approves Mayor's budget
The annual ritual is observed.
Houston City Council adopted Mayor Sylvester Turner's $4.9 billion budget by a vote of 13-4 Wednesday, ending three hours of otherwise amiable debate with an impassioned speech from Councilman Jack Christie that concluded with the councilman resigning his post as budget committee chair and voting no.
Christie was joined in opposing the budget by council members Mike Knox, Greg Travis and Michael Kubosh, who said they wanted the mayor to make more of an effort to cut spending.
"I can keep playing politics, go along to get along, or start fighting vigorously for our tax-paying citizens and not waste their money," Christie said, listing his past ideas for constraining costs or forming commissions to study cost-cutting that were not implemented. "As a political body, we are failing the people of Houston."
Turner rejected the criticism. He said the budget is "sound," and noted that Kubosh's lone amendment would have given each council member an additional $100,000 for staff salaries. Knox submitted no amendments, and Travis submitted amendments that sought cost-cutting recommendations from the administration but listed no specific cuts.
Christie also submitted no cost-reduction amendments, and, in fact, twice admitted one of his items — earmarking $150,000 to fund an external study on the emissions of the city's vehicle fleet — was "a waste of money" because he already knows a shift to alternative fuels is the right move.
"It's so easy to just say to the administration, 'Mayor, you didn't cut enough,'" Turner said after the meeting. "Every individual that voted 'no' put forth no ideas, no amendment to reduce the cost. Not one. Not that they offered it and we voted them down — they didn't offer any. To the contrary, they put forth amendments that would increase the amount that we were going to have to expend."
The general fund budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1 is $2.5 billion. That fund is supported primarily by property and sales taxes and funds most core services, such as the police and fire departments, parks, libraries and trash pickup.
That is $83 million, or 3.5 percent, more than the current budget. The increase largely is driven by a $42 million increase in debt service, related mostly to the issuance last year of $1 billion in pension obligation bonds as part of the mayor's pension reform package.
Also driving the increase is $14 million in previously-agreed-to raises for police that take effect July 1. About 57 percent of the general fund, or $1.4 billion, goes to public safety — the police and fire departments, the municipal courts and emergency operations.
See here for the background, and here for the Mayor's press release. The story also notes the $17 million the city may wind up being short thanks to an unfriendly Census estimate and the stupid revenue cap; it's not clear to me if that would apply to this year or next if the city's appeal fails. I'm not surprised there were no cost-cutting amendments of any substance. Turns out that's a hard thing to do, especially in a budget that's mostly about public safety, trash pickup, parks, and libraries. You know, basic things that people want and need. Good thing talking about it remains free.
Houston will get involved in the SB4 fight later this month
Very good to hear.
Mayor Sylvester Turner plans to ask City Council to vote this month on joining lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Texas' new "sanctuary cities" law, ending months of equivocation on the controversial immigration enforcement measure.
If City Council votes to sue, Houston would join San Antonio, Austin, Dallas and several other local governments already challenging the state or planning to do so.
"I will ask this month City Council to consider and vote to join the lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of SB4," Turner tweeted Thursday morning, after the Houston Chronicle ran a front page story about his decision to remain on the sidelines of debate over the statute.
Here's that front page story. You can see what a change of direction this is.
Turner has asked the city attorney's office to review the law known as Senate Bill 4, which allows police to ask people their immigration status if detained even for a routine traffic stop, but otherwise continues to deflect questions about whether he plans to challenge it.
That has meant carefully sidestepping the term "sanctuary city," while touting Houston as a diverse, "welcoming city" and assuring residents that Houston police will not violate their constitutional rights.
On Wednesday, the mayor attempted to redirect attention to Austin by urging Houstonians to take up their concerns at the Capitol, even though the law has been signed and the Legislature is not slated to revisit the issue during its July special session.
"The right forum to reconsider Senate Bill 4 before it goes into effect on Sept. 1 is Austin, Texas, and I'd encourage people to write to call to drive or go to Austin," Turner said. "Go to Austin by the hundreds, by the thousands, and ask those who authored, voted for and signed Senate Bill 4 to repeal Senate Bill 4. Those of us around this table, we cannot repeal Senate Bill 4, as we did not author Senate Bill 4."
So Houston may follow in the footsteps of San Antonio and Bexar County and Dallas, if Council goes along. According to the full Chron story, it looks like that will happen.
Houston could sue over SB4 without City Council approval, but Turner nonetheless promised a vote. City Council is in recess next week, meaning a vote would come June 21 at the earliest.
As of Thursday, the left-leaning City Council appeared to be breaking along party lines, with Democratic members largely favoring a lawsuit and Republican members generally opposed.
District I Councilman Robert Gallegos, who supports a lawsuit, said he worried the law could tear families apart if it causes more parents to be deported, calling it "an open door for racial profiling."
District C Councilwoman Ellen Cohen also plans to vote to sue, citing concerns that the law could discourage victims from reporting crimes, echoing law enforcement leaders across the state, including Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo.
"We now have a percentage of the population that, out of fear for their own lives and deportation, won't report, and it jeopardizes women's lives and others," Cohen said.
At-large Councilman Michael Kubosh said he opposes a lawsuit because of the potential cost.
"I don't want to spend the money on a lawsuit that's already been well-funded by other cities," Kubosh said. "It won't have an effect on the outcome of the case."
He and others also worried that suing the state could put Houston at risk for losing federal funding.
Two council members, Mike Laster and Brenda Stardig, declined to say how they would vote, and at-large Councilman Jack Christie said he was likely to abstain.
"I'm not in favor of suing people to just show where we stand," Christie said. "We show where we stand by example."
There's a sidebar on the story with a vote count for when this does come before Council (and while it could come as early as June 21, you can bet your bottom dollar someone will tag it for a week). Counting Mayor Turner, there are eight Yeses, five Nos, Christie's abstention, and three who declined to comment or could not be reached. Of those three, I'd expect two Yeses – Mike Laster, who has since suggested on Twitter that he would likely vote in favor, and Jerry Davis – and one No, Brenda Stardig. You should probably reach out to your Council member and let them know how you feel about this. In the meantime, I agree with Campos, this would not have happened, at least at this time, had not there been pressure from the Texas Organizing Project and the DREAMers. Activism works, y'all. The Press has more.
Bail reform bills
Glad to see this.
Sen. John Whitmire
An unusual bipartisan coalition of lawmakers and judges has teamed up to back broad reforms in Texas that could eliminate cash bail for nonviolent offenders who are not deemed dangerous or a flight risk.
Bills introduced simultaneously in the House and the Senate this week by Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston and state Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, would require all judges statewide to use a proven risk assessment tool and quickly determine within 48 hours whether a defendant accused of a nonviolent crime might be eligible for a so-called personal bond — a measure that carries a financial penalty only if the person fails to how up for court. Now, defendants who can't afford to pay bail are left in jail, even for minor crimes.
The proposals have been hammered out by jurists and legislators following reports that show more than 1,100 people died in Texas jails in the last decade – most of them pretrial detainees such as Sandra Bland, who committed suicide in the Waller County jail after being locked up after a traffic stop.
Nonviolent defendants detained after the first hearing would be re-evaluated within 10 days. And judges would be required to seek alternatives for those deemed mentally ill or disabled.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht, who is backing the measures, said he and other members of the National Conference of Chief Justices of the United States generally have concluded that America's bail bond system "simply doesn't make any sense."
He said he'd like to see Texas follow the model of New Jersey, Washington D.C., Kentucky, Arizona and other states in pursuing reforms that restrict or eliminate monetary bail for defendants who pose no real risks.
Hecht said bail reforms elsewhere already have saved taxpayers' money by eliminating unnecessary jail expenses and spared hardships for low-risk defendants who often lose jobs, homes or their health while being locked-up awaiting trial.
"There are constitutional problems, there are practical problems, there's a burden on taxpayers — change is just the right thing to do," he said. "We're just talking about low-level crimes —we're not talking about crimes of violence. So across the country, there's been an effort to change bail procedures to get away from high bond and jail time in all of these low-level crimes."
Hecht chairs the Texas Judicial Council, 22-member group that includes Murr. Sharon Keller, the presiding judge of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is vice chair. He said the council studied bail reforms and recommended changes last fall.
See here for some background. Via Grits, the bills in question are HB3011 and SB1338. Grits also notes that the bail bondsmen are fighting these bills, which is not surprising. A later version of this Chron story goes into that.
"We have a very conservative governor, lieutenant governor, Senate and House," said Michael Kubosh, a Houston City Council member and long-time commercial bondsman. "To get all that through, there's going to be a real battle, and our lobbyists are talking to them. They're not going to want to let crime run rampant and give everybody free bonds."
Kubosh and other industry supporters say bondsmen help make sure low-level defendants appear in court – and track them down when they fail to appear. They say they also get families involved, since relatives often must post cash or property to back bail bonds even when commercial bondsman are involved. He and other advocates are simultaneously monitoring a federal court challenge to a fairly rigid bail schedule used for years by Harris County judges even for low-level misdemeanor offenses.
The legislation also says that defendants are entitled to have lawyers present at pretrial detention hearings – not a common practice today.
On any given day, the Harris County Jail is crowded with 1,500 or more misdemeanor offenders awaiting trial. The county has spent more than $1.2 million in legal fees so far defending county court-at-law judges and hearing officers in the federal civil rights case before Judge Rosenthal.
Kubosh, the commercial bondsman, said he agrees that truly indigent defendants often don't get personal bonds in Harris County. But he argues that bondsmen routinely save the county money by helping ensure that those who are released on commercial bond follow court conditions and by tracking down those who fail to appear. With fewer commercial bonds, he argues, "you're going to see a spike in people thumbing their noses at the courts … you'll see huge increases in warrants."
No question, this would affect the bail bond business, and I can't blame them for opposing these bills. I don't agree with CM Kubosh's assessment of what may happen if these bills pass, but there ought to be an objective way to evaluate it. Personal recognizance bonds are used with far greater frequency in other states. Is there any evidence to suggest that crime "runs rampant" where PR bonds are more the norm? Show me some numbers, or this is just going to sound like scaremongering.
← Earlier Posts