Well, just got home and able to post about our big victory tonight!! The Watch Party started at 9:00 p.m. and the throught of the results not being available until 11:30 p.m. at the latest was a bit discouraging, but not half as bad as still sitting there at 11:30 p.m. and hearing it might be 12:00 midnight. It was 12:45 a.m. when we finally heard the first screams of joy from a nameless supporter. Then it was pandemonium at JJ's Oyster Bar!! IT was like the "Kiss and Cry" room in the ice skating event at the Winter Olympics!
I have never been to a "Watch Party" per se, before. Even when I ran for office, I never had one. I just went up to the polls and hung out and waited. When I won, it was crazy!!! You wanted so bad to talk to people to hug and yes, cry. So, it was crazy to finally be at one and get to do all the things I missed.!! It was great!! Living vicariously through someone else's Watch Party... weird.
Ken and Beverly were so gracious! They were excited of course and they were grateful. Totally giving credit to others and totally indifferent that it was their names on the ballot and not ours-people voted for them not us!. Ken gave a bit of a speech standing on a chair. There were hoots and yelling and applause! It was fantastic! The firemen were excited as this was their first endorsement as an organization and they were proud and happy. They were great by the way. They did a lot of door knocking and walking to get out the vote for Ken, Ronnie, and Matt. They deserved the alcolades they had heaped on them! Oh, the media was there too! JR Labbe of the Ft. Worth Star Telegram and John Haden from the Cleburne Times Review was waiting for the late breaking story! I guess the B Star guy was hanging out with the Pool group! Maybe they had better entertainment.
Everyone at the Watch Party had been a support to the candidates, specially to Ken and Beverly. By this time, Ronnie had given up and went home, not too much earlier. There was talk that he might have a run-off but nope, he kicked it hard and won with over 50%. Ronnie beat me once, but I am glad to say it wasn't by more than 30 votes!! I think that was how many it was. As time goes by, that spread gets smaller, in a few years, I will have it down to me winning! :)
Anyway, this race was about "common sense" in the words of the Mayor. Common sense that a 3 year resident with one year of service on the council doesn't come into town and take over and tell everyone else what they are doing wrong.. That is just wrong, especially when they are wrong. You want to change things, be honest and say what you want to change and don't just tell part of the story.
I moved here in 1974 and there are times I still feel like a new comer. My grand kids may one day feel like a Burlesonite, because they have grandparents that live here. There are too many people coming in and think they know more than anyone that was born and raised here. I don't think you have to have three generations here to be influential, but at least take some time and get to know the community. Spend some time learning before you try to take over. Then the most important thing is, don't think everyone is stupid because some of them are!
Those folks that attended forums and read the interviews in the newspapers knew the vote was a "no-brainer". It was obvious as to who was the more prepared and the best candidates. I am grateful that there some conservatives who still think for themselves and use their own brains to make decisions. I know some of my conservative friends did just that. Apparently many other conservatives crossed over and voted for Ken Shetter because it was common sense to do so. In all the races, there is just NO substitute for experience. Those that had experience won and those that didn't lost.
I'm just over the moon, Alice!! Over the moon!!
Just sayin'
Ann Rose
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Roots and Wings!!
I just had a post earlier today and I thought I was through with what I had to say, but I just got a previous of the new Vote Ken Shetter video put together by Susan Cloud and my previous post was just too morose to put this video in the middle of it.
Wow, this video is great! Susan did an outstanding job! It is so uplifting, so joyful, the Grim Reaper would be dancing. Anyone that watches this video and doesn't have a similar reaction, must really be a sour puss.
First, let me reminisce:
When we moved to Burleson in 1974 there were two stop lights on 174 going through town. Old Town was just that; old. I liked Burleson certainly more than I liked North Richland Hills and Hurst; where we moved after college from Oklahoma. My husband and I both worked downtown so when we decided to buy a house, it really didn't matter if we stayed north or went south - we would drive either way. We couldn't find a lot that we wanted to build the house that we fell in love with, so Bob Johnson told us about some lots he had in Burleson. I knew about Burleson because when I was young and then a teen, I spent time at my aunt's house who lived between Cleburne and Grandview. Of course, as a teen, I heard about drugs and bad behavior - in the late 1960's. So, when the builder mentioned Burleson it was a familiar name I'd heard years before. We took a drive, signed the papers for the lot and away we went. Interestingly, we learned something else about Burleson while building that house. That Burleson was known for being a "white" community. I was shopping one night at Seminary South - one of the nicest shopping centers in Ft. Worth (long before Hulen and even Rigmar). I told a clerk where I was moving and she said something to the effect that I was wanting to get away from minorities. What a shock. I was a Child Protective Services Worker at the time and was appalled that someone would think that I was picking my home based on that! I like to think that if our decision and money had not been so heavily invested, we might have made a different choice upon learning of that, but we will never know. We like to think of ourselves as free of racism, but are any of us ever evolved as much as we think we are? I certainly know that I have grown in the interceding 35 years. Yes, Burleson has changed in that way too; for the better.
Our house was on the corner of Rand and Ann Lois. There was a house across from us, and two houses at the other end of the street. There was nothing else. Nothing. Alsbury was just a two lane worn out road and Sierra Estates and Brown's Mountain were non-existent. Wow how times have changed. Rooftops are evident all the way up and down the back side of that hill, taking you into Crowley.
Whenwe wanted to go eat, you pretty much had to leave town. We always went to Bill Martin's Seafood located half way back into Ft. Worth on Sundays. Later he sold his interest and I guess his recipes and had a no compete clause that enabled him to open a new restaurant, but it was down near CR 921 and I35W. We had some fast food around, but mainly locally owned with Pizza Chains such as Pizza Inn and Pizza Hut. Oh, and I can't forget the Dairy Queen and the Dairy Twin,"Home of the Bacon Burger". We were here and attended the free pizza night at Pizza Inn when it first opened. We were there the last day they served a few years ago, too. Who that was here could forget the opening of McDonald's on the Freeway. We were really up-town. Yet, most clothes shopping still had to be done in Ft. Worth, at least until Beall's Department Store showed up. That was realy nice. Gave my daughter a job all through high school and college!
The fun part was getting to Burleson in the early years we were here. I-35 was like a Parkway; two lanes going each way, with a cross over that was as dangerous as any road you would ever drive on. Shortly after we moved, they began building the freeway we have now and I spent at least 5 years driving on access roads into Ft. Worth to work. I was just glad it was over before my youngest learned to drive.
As for the schools, what we had was all on the west side of I-35 because there were no city utilities (or at least the kind needed to service a school) on the East side. It was a big deal in the late 1990's to finally be able to place an elementary school on that side of town. Norwood was a brand new school the day my oldest started school. There was a little skinny tree standing outside in the front. It's was a giant oak the last time I was there.
I remember Walmart in those days. A small friendly store that never had any open check out lanes. Now its a big impersonal store and still doesn't have any check out lanes.
So, I could go on, but never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined a Burleson like this that you will see on this newest video. Never. Burleson will celebrate its Centennial this year and this video certainly contrasts days gone by with today.
Mr. and Mrs. F.A. Shad, may have voted to take Burleson back to its "roots". but I think I'd rather have Ken Shetter who gave it wings and at the same time kept the roots!! Why can't we all just enjoy the ride.
Watch me please!
Just sayin... Enjoy!
Wow, this video is great! Susan did an outstanding job! It is so uplifting, so joyful, the Grim Reaper would be dancing. Anyone that watches this video and doesn't have a similar reaction, must really be a sour puss.
First, let me reminisce:
When we moved to Burleson in 1974 there were two stop lights on 174 going through town. Old Town was just that; old. I liked Burleson certainly more than I liked North Richland Hills and Hurst; where we moved after college from Oklahoma. My husband and I both worked downtown so when we decided to buy a house, it really didn't matter if we stayed north or went south - we would drive either way. We couldn't find a lot that we wanted to build the house that we fell in love with, so Bob Johnson told us about some lots he had in Burleson. I knew about Burleson because when I was young and then a teen, I spent time at my aunt's house who lived between Cleburne and Grandview. Of course, as a teen, I heard about drugs and bad behavior - in the late 1960's. So, when the builder mentioned Burleson it was a familiar name I'd heard years before. We took a drive, signed the papers for the lot and away we went. Interestingly, we learned something else about Burleson while building that house. That Burleson was known for being a "white" community. I was shopping one night at Seminary South - one of the nicest shopping centers in Ft. Worth (long before Hulen and even Rigmar). I told a clerk where I was moving and she said something to the effect that I was wanting to get away from minorities. What a shock. I was a Child Protective Services Worker at the time and was appalled that someone would think that I was picking my home based on that! I like to think that if our decision and money had not been so heavily invested, we might have made a different choice upon learning of that, but we will never know. We like to think of ourselves as free of racism, but are any of us ever evolved as much as we think we are? I certainly know that I have grown in the interceding 35 years. Yes, Burleson has changed in that way too; for the better.
Our house was on the corner of Rand and Ann Lois. There was a house across from us, and two houses at the other end of the street. There was nothing else. Nothing. Alsbury was just a two lane worn out road and Sierra Estates and Brown's Mountain were non-existent. Wow how times have changed. Rooftops are evident all the way up and down the back side of that hill, taking you into Crowley.
Whenwe wanted to go eat, you pretty much had to leave town. We always went to Bill Martin's Seafood located half way back into Ft. Worth on Sundays. Later he sold his interest and I guess his recipes and had a no compete clause that enabled him to open a new restaurant, but it was down near CR 921 and I35W. We had some fast food around, but mainly locally owned with Pizza Chains such as Pizza Inn and Pizza Hut. Oh, and I can't forget the Dairy Queen and the Dairy Twin,"Home of the Bacon Burger". We were here and attended the free pizza night at Pizza Inn when it first opened. We were there the last day they served a few years ago, too. Who that was here could forget the opening of McDonald's on the Freeway. We were really up-town. Yet, most clothes shopping still had to be done in Ft. Worth, at least until Beall's Department Store showed up. That was realy nice. Gave my daughter a job all through high school and college!
The fun part was getting to Burleson in the early years we were here. I-35 was like a Parkway; two lanes going each way, with a cross over that was as dangerous as any road you would ever drive on. Shortly after we moved, they began building the freeway we have now and I spent at least 5 years driving on access roads into Ft. Worth to work. I was just glad it was over before my youngest learned to drive.
As for the schools, what we had was all on the west side of I-35 because there were no city utilities (or at least the kind needed to service a school) on the East side. It was a big deal in the late 1990's to finally be able to place an elementary school on that side of town. Norwood was a brand new school the day my oldest started school. There was a little skinny tree standing outside in the front. It's was a giant oak the last time I was there.
I remember Walmart in those days. A small friendly store that never had any open check out lanes. Now its a big impersonal store and still doesn't have any check out lanes.
So, I could go on, but never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined a Burleson like this that you will see on this newest video. Never. Burleson will celebrate its Centennial this year and this video certainly contrasts days gone by with today.
Mr. and Mrs. F.A. Shad, may have voted to take Burleson back to its "roots". but I think I'd rather have Ken Shetter who gave it wings and at the same time kept the roots!! Why can't we all just enjoy the ride.
Watch me please!
Just sayin... Enjoy!
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
The Home Stretch
Well, V-Day is almost here. It will all be over but the shouting or crying Saturday evening. Either Mayor Shetter will still be leading as he has for the past 8 years or we will be propelled into the world of confusion and mayhem. I would hope that we could count on the new City Manger being able to do his job without interference should the worst happen, but if the Burleson Chamber of Commerce's recent events are any fore-shadow of things to come, and Larry Pool wins, Burleson is in for a rocky ride.
What we have to look forward to is the Burleson Chamber of Commerce Shuffle. I am not a member of the Chamber and have been just as confused as the next person about the tenure of the current Chamber Director Dan-o Strong. First, I have never met anyone with a hyphenated name. I have a step sister with number for a name. That's odd too, right? Anyway, I've never met Dan-o. A lot of people I respect respect him and spoke on his behalf at the Chamber last week.
However, it does look like Dan-o was caught in the middle of a Tango of "Should I stay or Should I Go?" with the Chamber Board. The last I heard, he was staying. I think there was an appeal for amnesty and from what I read in the Burleson Star, one of Burleson's council members called out Keith Kelly, a member of theChamber Board, like it was OK Corral. The board retreated into a closed session and I wish I could say that Mr. Kelly was relieved of his board seat, but alas I cannot. However, that is probably what it will take for things to calm down around here. I'm glad that Dan-o is staying and I hope that there has been enough light shined on the situation with the Chamber that it will make it more difficult for Mr. Kelly and cohorts who sit with him on the Board to interfere with the Director's job. That may just make it a boring position for Kelly and he'll leave for greener pastures like in the Rio Grand Valley or even back to Massachusetts.
On to another issue that has gotten my attention... The housing fraud. Shelly Grant, also known as "Praise Jesus" and her partners in misinformation who are also running for the council and claim to be an anti-mud slingers, have a little Facebook Group. It's "How to be against the American Privilege of Living Anywhere You Can Afford. Well, it's something like that. I don't want to give it to you as I don't want you to get mucked up all the fodder they are selling. In any event, Praise Jesus has just been adding names like crazy. Some of these people have no idea they have been added. Basically, having your name on the list will make it difficult to have dinner conversation with disabled, elderly, those with mental and emotional challenges, minorities and just about anyone that doesn't look just like you. I'm sorry, but these women can call it anything they want. They can say it is because of over-crowding, etc... but the truth is, they are say, Not in My Back Yard orAnywhere But Here. This is not about where to put your nuclear trash. These are people that want the same things for their families as you do. Many of these people tried to own their own home and got caught in that crazy housing crisis where people that couldn't afford home were sold homes anyway. They just want a decent place to live in a good school zone and have places to shop. How is that any different than you???
It is not the practice of HUD to build the kind of housing complex that you may associate with that in Ft. Worth that you can see from I-35 and I-30 near the mix-master (for old timers). Those red brick buildings sitting on that ridge with stark grounds and no tree lined streets. However, since those are still there, they are used as they are. However, make no mistake. Rules are enforced. There is no trash outside those apartments. There are no jacked up cars sitting outside the front door. There is no kids running around the complex at midnight.Its a whole different ball game.
Today, HUD requires that apartments build with their Federal monies meet certain requirements for leasing and living there. They are mixed income. There are no felons, no druggies with convictions. There is a complex near me that has been there more than 10 years and it is well maintained as it was when it was build. It is full of working families getting a break on their rent so they can still buy groceries. Stop living in the 1960's. Take your head out and look around at your neighbors. The guy next door could be selling porno on line and mailing it from his garage. The head of a car theft ring could be living next door or across the street. Crime can be everywhere. You cannot tell who will rob you because of who makes the least amount of money-not if they do it for a thrill. Read the Mayors response to this misinformation being handed out by "Praise Jesus".
http://www.kenshetter.com/fact-check/1316-affordable-housing,
Also, read my previous blog post, "What Would Jesus Do".
Another thing that has amazed me is the people that have posted on my FB page (and then deleted it) or sent me private messages to to express how bad they feel for Larry the candidate for Mayor. First, isn't great to believe in something so much that you are ashamed to have your name associated with the thought?
This has been completely baffling to me. They ask, "Why are you being so mean to Larry?" Mean what do you mean? Oh, mean like saying, "he owned that bar and all". Oh, that. Well, he did own that bar. Yes he did. The State of Texas says that he still owns it. He filled out the paperwork twice saying he owned it after he "sold it". Yes, he did. As Susan Cloud said, that isn't being mean, that's 'vetting" your candidates. But, "you are being so mean by not saying you are sorry.". Sorry? Why? Because some one found out he owns something he didn't want us to know about? Hey, you need to be asking him to tell YOU that he's sorry. I've had several posts that have chided me for working "so hard" for Ken Shetter. They ask why? What's in it for me? Do I own a construction company or something? Why would I do such a thing? Another asks, "Don't you have anything better to do than message each person to tell them that their names have been put on a mis information website that is anti-housing for poor people?" Well, I'm retired, sorta. So, why not? I just refer them to my blog post about the "The Extreme Right of Right isn't Always Right". It'll give her a clue. She might want to touch on "No Apologies" as well, just so that she REALLY understand why no one should feel sorry for Larry the candidate.
Finally, I'd like to say that I have never been around so many people that care about the truth and getting information out to the public. There is a kind of "child like quality in their belief that if you can just let the people know the truth, they will embrace it and let the misrepresentations go. I want to believe that too. I have always believe that the truth is the best strategy. I've have begun to question that theory a bit after some of the people I have met. I realize that my truth isn't always the truth someone else has. But, there has been a full out effort to inform people and get information out. I remember when I served on the board of trustees in the mid to late 90's, I always felt that if you could just get the truth out that people would feel that were included and not feel so threatened. However, there are those who can never ever see truth and believe it. They are so jaded and cavalier. They will never accept it even when handed to them. Ken Shetter knows those people are out there, and he keeps on believing that he can trust them anyway to make the turn toward the light.
As we head down the home stretch, these are some of the things I will ponder. See you Sat.
Just sayin...
Ann
What we have to look forward to is the Burleson Chamber of Commerce Shuffle. I am not a member of the Chamber and have been just as confused as the next person about the tenure of the current Chamber Director Dan-o Strong. First, I have never met anyone with a hyphenated name. I have a step sister with number for a name. That's odd too, right? Anyway, I've never met Dan-o. A lot of people I respect respect him and spoke on his behalf at the Chamber last week.
However, it does look like Dan-o was caught in the middle of a Tango of "Should I stay or Should I Go?" with the Chamber Board. The last I heard, he was staying. I think there was an appeal for amnesty and from what I read in the Burleson Star, one of Burleson's council members called out Keith Kelly, a member of theChamber Board, like it was OK Corral. The board retreated into a closed session and I wish I could say that Mr. Kelly was relieved of his board seat, but alas I cannot. However, that is probably what it will take for things to calm down around here. I'm glad that Dan-o is staying and I hope that there has been enough light shined on the situation with the Chamber that it will make it more difficult for Mr. Kelly and cohorts who sit with him on the Board to interfere with the Director's job. That may just make it a boring position for Kelly and he'll leave for greener pastures like in the Rio Grand Valley or even back to Massachusetts.
On to another issue that has gotten my attention... The housing fraud. Shelly Grant, also known as "Praise Jesus" and her partners in misinformation who are also running for the council and claim to be an anti-mud slingers, have a little Facebook Group. It's "How to be against the American Privilege of Living Anywhere You Can Afford. Well, it's something like that. I don't want to give it to you as I don't want you to get mucked up all the fodder they are selling. In any event, Praise Jesus has just been adding names like crazy. Some of these people have no idea they have been added. Basically, having your name on the list will make it difficult to have dinner conversation with disabled, elderly, those with mental and emotional challenges, minorities and just about anyone that doesn't look just like you. I'm sorry, but these women can call it anything they want. They can say it is because of over-crowding, etc... but the truth is, they are say, Not in My Back Yard orAnywhere But Here. This is not about where to put your nuclear trash. These are people that want the same things for their families as you do. Many of these people tried to own their own home and got caught in that crazy housing crisis where people that couldn't afford home were sold homes anyway. They just want a decent place to live in a good school zone and have places to shop. How is that any different than you???
It is not the practice of HUD to build the kind of housing complex that you may associate with that in Ft. Worth that you can see from I-35 and I-30 near the mix-master (for old timers). Those red brick buildings sitting on that ridge with stark grounds and no tree lined streets. However, since those are still there, they are used as they are. However, make no mistake. Rules are enforced. There is no trash outside those apartments. There are no jacked up cars sitting outside the front door. There is no kids running around the complex at midnight.Its a whole different ball game.
Today, HUD requires that apartments build with their Federal monies meet certain requirements for leasing and living there. They are mixed income. There are no felons, no druggies with convictions. There is a complex near me that has been there more than 10 years and it is well maintained as it was when it was build. It is full of working families getting a break on their rent so they can still buy groceries. Stop living in the 1960's. Take your head out and look around at your neighbors. The guy next door could be selling porno on line and mailing it from his garage. The head of a car theft ring could be living next door or across the street. Crime can be everywhere. You cannot tell who will rob you because of who makes the least amount of money-not if they do it for a thrill. Read the Mayors response to this misinformation being handed out by "Praise Jesus".
http://www.kenshetter.com/fact-check/1316-affordable-housing,
Also, read my previous blog post, "What Would Jesus Do".
Another thing that has amazed me is the people that have posted on my FB page (and then deleted it) or sent me private messages to to express how bad they feel for Larry the candidate for Mayor. First, isn't great to believe in something so much that you are ashamed to have your name associated with the thought?
This has been completely baffling to me. They ask, "Why are you being so mean to Larry?" Mean what do you mean? Oh, mean like saying, "he owned that bar and all". Oh, that. Well, he did own that bar. Yes he did. The State of Texas says that he still owns it. He filled out the paperwork twice saying he owned it after he "sold it". Yes, he did. As Susan Cloud said, that isn't being mean, that's 'vetting" your candidates. But, "you are being so mean by not saying you are sorry.". Sorry? Why? Because some one found out he owns something he didn't want us to know about? Hey, you need to be asking him to tell YOU that he's sorry. I've had several posts that have chided me for working "so hard" for Ken Shetter. They ask why? What's in it for me? Do I own a construction company or something? Why would I do such a thing? Another asks, "Don't you have anything better to do than message each person to tell them that their names have been put on a mis information website that is anti-housing for poor people?" Well, I'm retired, sorta. So, why not? I just refer them to my blog post about the "The Extreme Right of Right isn't Always Right". It'll give her a clue. She might want to touch on "No Apologies" as well, just so that she REALLY understand why no one should feel sorry for Larry the candidate.
Finally, I'd like to say that I have never been around so many people that care about the truth and getting information out to the public. There is a kind of "child like quality in their belief that if you can just let the people know the truth, they will embrace it and let the misrepresentations go. I want to believe that too. I have always believe that the truth is the best strategy. I've have begun to question that theory a bit after some of the people I have met. I realize that my truth isn't always the truth someone else has. But, there has been a full out effort to inform people and get information out. I remember when I served on the board of trustees in the mid to late 90's, I always felt that if you could just get the truth out that people would feel that were included and not feel so threatened. However, there are those who can never ever see truth and believe it. They are so jaded and cavalier. They will never accept it even when handed to them. Ken Shetter knows those people are out there, and he keeps on believing that he can trust them anyway to make the turn toward the light.
As we head down the home stretch, these are some of the things I will ponder. See you Sat.
Just sayin...
Ann
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Radical Right is Not Always Right
The leadership of the radical extreme right of right Burleson Texas Patriot Tea Party is a threat to the City of Burleson.They have infiltrated the Burleson Chamber of Commerce and now they want city government. The BISD school board is next. They had the Johnson County Commissioners for several years as well as the Johnson County Emergency Services District. The common name in all of these is Keith Kelly. His surrogate on the Commissioners Court is Jerry Stringer.
That's right. I've named it and I've committed to it. Am I being negative? No, I don't think so - I think I'm being Paul Revere. I'm naming names; getting them out in the light.
What makes me think that anyone cares for what I say? Well, its not so much that I think people care about what I say, but that someone is willing to stand up and say it. Oh, many think it; and many believe it. It's just many don't want to interrupt their serenity to say it. To say it means you have to wear it daily. A lot of people don't want to have that aura around them every day. They are just not made that way. However, there are a few of us around that will take on the task.
We don't really know each other but we have kindred spirits I guess. The willingness, no, the necessity, to take a stand and say what needs to be said even at personal peril, is innate, either born there or inserted by some experience in our past.
I know this is a very myopic conversation that I am having, and I know that speaking out carries a price and it makes people wonder why I would do this. For attention? For notoriety? Not for either one of these. The only thing that I can honestly say about my motivation is "for right". I think if terms of a "plumb line". That line that divides right and wrong and it is immovable. A person's opinion has to be measured by that line, not by what one decides for himself. To hold differing opinions is a basic right as an American. It's when the opinion gets supported by a lie that the line is crossed. That is what has happened in this case.
Larry Pool ran for office on a lie. Yes, a lie about debt and percentage of industry growth, property taxes, the opportunity fund, the building standards, and yes, pretty much everything he listed as a platform. Others campaigning for other positions have used the federal housing issue, as well. Had Mr. Pool indicated that he just didn't like debt, and took it on as a philosophical issue of just debt and the use of it to grow; that would have been fine. Of course, the counter of that would have been that he would have preferred to tell businesses to go away because we didn't want to provide roads, water lines, sewer service, fire protection, police protection, etc... He would have had to have been the anti-growth candidate. I'm sure there are some citizens that would support that agenda. However, Mr. Pool and his campaign advisers didn't want that. They wanted to have the growth and attack the idea of the debt as it was the only way to unseat a popular and successful incumbent.
Because the Mayor, council, City Manager and staff had used debt responsibility to grow the city and had plenty of independent sources providing accolades to that fact, Mr. Pool and his advisor, Keith Kelly, had to obfuscate that fact. So, in the Keith Kelly Handbook on how to mold a conservative message*, he did what he normally does; he lies. He took real numbers and offered them up out of context. Grab a popular mantra - no new debt- which has been on the national scene (for good reason) and bring it to our town and apply it to the debt of an exploding city which is like comparing apples to oranges. Mayor Shetter has explained the differences on his website to anyone that is truly interested in the truth! * Taken from Kelly's biography on the Texas Patriot Tea Party website
Interesting thing about people in power, they can't hear anything that counters what they want to believe. It's a mob mentality when you are in power. For years, liberals were criticized by conservatives for refusing to listen to conservative voices and "be their own man" urged to reject the "party line", etc... So, now it is the same with the conservative movement; act just like the liberals acted - tow the party line, refuse to think for yourself, stay united, threaten and defame and defeat the enemy. Then it becomes personal, Every perceived slight that a citizen might have experienced, become a black mark on the Mayor. Interesting that the Mayor only casts a vote when there is a tie. How does the council escape criticism? Mr. Pool was on the council for an entire year and there is no evidence that he ever attempted to do the things that he now says he wants to do as Mayor. He went along, reaping the perceived glory of being a councilman including celebrating and hold the balloons during the opening of the BRiCK.
I've been told Mr. Kelly is a true "Patriot". He digs for the truth and holds people accountable. However, I believes he takes the truth and finds ways to cover it up; substituting a lie, even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary such as in the matter of the Burleson Opportunity Fund. Despite there being a video showing exactly what Mayor Shetter said the day that he discussed the initiative with extreme passion and excitement, Kelly puts out an email that says that Mayor Shetter promised to provide every kindergarten child in Burleson a four year education from the economic development fund. It is simply not true. So, Mayor Shetter has had to take action to give as many citizens as possible the opportunity to see the video in order to show that Kelly is untruthful.
There were many such example of his lies and misrepresentations* in his email. However, how many people have already voted not knowing that or not having the opportunity to know about the lies. Well, that is exactly what Kelly's campaign method depends on. Last minute tactics designed to fool his own backers. * Please read the previous post on the Opportunity Fund on this blog as it is entirely Mayor Shetters response to Kelly's and the "We the People" accusations against Mayor Shetter and the BOF.
One last thing. Many consider my blog and my posts mean, negative, derogatory, slanderous, etc... That is their choice. Make no mistake however, they are mine thoughts and statements alone. They are my opinions and/or they can be backed up. Mayor Shetter doesn't control what I say and doesn't suggest what I should say. I have never asked him what I should say.
Actually, Mayor Shetter is nothing like me. I'd make a terrible Mayor. Mayor Shetter, I've come to find, is a very humble man. It's hard for him to come out and ask you to even vote for him. I've watched him, and I've listen to him and he loves Burleson. He wants to serve. It is HIS passion. I'm proud to stand up for him. Not just for who he is, not just because he wants to be Mayor but because we need Mayor Shetter to continue his leadership for the betterment of Burleson.
Please vote for Ken Shetter, Ronnie Johnson, Matt Aiken and for school board, Beverly Volkman-
Powell.
Just sayin'
Ann
Please read other posts below for more information about this campaign.
That's right. I've named it and I've committed to it. Am I being negative? No, I don't think so - I think I'm being Paul Revere. I'm naming names; getting them out in the light.
What makes me think that anyone cares for what I say? Well, its not so much that I think people care about what I say, but that someone is willing to stand up and say it. Oh, many think it; and many believe it. It's just many don't want to interrupt their serenity to say it. To say it means you have to wear it daily. A lot of people don't want to have that aura around them every day. They are just not made that way. However, there are a few of us around that will take on the task.
We don't really know each other but we have kindred spirits I guess. The willingness, no, the necessity, to take a stand and say what needs to be said even at personal peril, is innate, either born there or inserted by some experience in our past.
I know this is a very myopic conversation that I am having, and I know that speaking out carries a price and it makes people wonder why I would do this. For attention? For notoriety? Not for either one of these. The only thing that I can honestly say about my motivation is "for right". I think if terms of a "plumb line". That line that divides right and wrong and it is immovable. A person's opinion has to be measured by that line, not by what one decides for himself. To hold differing opinions is a basic right as an American. It's when the opinion gets supported by a lie that the line is crossed. That is what has happened in this case.
Larry Pool ran for office on a lie. Yes, a lie about debt and percentage of industry growth, property taxes, the opportunity fund, the building standards, and yes, pretty much everything he listed as a platform. Others campaigning for other positions have used the federal housing issue, as well. Had Mr. Pool indicated that he just didn't like debt, and took it on as a philosophical issue of just debt and the use of it to grow; that would have been fine. Of course, the counter of that would have been that he would have preferred to tell businesses to go away because we didn't want to provide roads, water lines, sewer service, fire protection, police protection, etc... He would have had to have been the anti-growth candidate. I'm sure there are some citizens that would support that agenda. However, Mr. Pool and his campaign advisers didn't want that. They wanted to have the growth and attack the idea of the debt as it was the only way to unseat a popular and successful incumbent.
Because the Mayor, council, City Manager and staff had used debt responsibility to grow the city and had plenty of independent sources providing accolades to that fact, Mr. Pool and his advisor, Keith Kelly, had to obfuscate that fact. So, in the Keith Kelly Handbook on how to mold a conservative message*, he did what he normally does; he lies. He took real numbers and offered them up out of context. Grab a popular mantra - no new debt- which has been on the national scene (for good reason) and bring it to our town and apply it to the debt of an exploding city which is like comparing apples to oranges. Mayor Shetter has explained the differences on his website to anyone that is truly interested in the truth! * Taken from Kelly's biography on the Texas Patriot Tea Party website
Interesting thing about people in power, they can't hear anything that counters what they want to believe. It's a mob mentality when you are in power. For years, liberals were criticized by conservatives for refusing to listen to conservative voices and "be their own man" urged to reject the "party line", etc... So, now it is the same with the conservative movement; act just like the liberals acted - tow the party line, refuse to think for yourself, stay united, threaten and defame and defeat the enemy. Then it becomes personal, Every perceived slight that a citizen might have experienced, become a black mark on the Mayor. Interesting that the Mayor only casts a vote when there is a tie. How does the council escape criticism? Mr. Pool was on the council for an entire year and there is no evidence that he ever attempted to do the things that he now says he wants to do as Mayor. He went along, reaping the perceived glory of being a councilman including celebrating and hold the balloons during the opening of the BRiCK.
I've been told Mr. Kelly is a true "Patriot". He digs for the truth and holds people accountable. However, I believes he takes the truth and finds ways to cover it up; substituting a lie, even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary such as in the matter of the Burleson Opportunity Fund. Despite there being a video showing exactly what Mayor Shetter said the day that he discussed the initiative with extreme passion and excitement, Kelly puts out an email that says that Mayor Shetter promised to provide every kindergarten child in Burleson a four year education from the economic development fund. It is simply not true. So, Mayor Shetter has had to take action to give as many citizens as possible the opportunity to see the video in order to show that Kelly is untruthful.
There were many such example of his lies and misrepresentations* in his email. However, how many people have already voted not knowing that or not having the opportunity to know about the lies. Well, that is exactly what Kelly's campaign method depends on. Last minute tactics designed to fool his own backers. * Please read the previous post on the Opportunity Fund on this blog as it is entirely Mayor Shetters response to Kelly's and the "We the People" accusations against Mayor Shetter and the BOF.
One last thing. Many consider my blog and my posts mean, negative, derogatory, slanderous, etc... That is their choice. Make no mistake however, they are mine thoughts and statements alone. They are my opinions and/or they can be backed up. Mayor Shetter doesn't control what I say and doesn't suggest what I should say. I have never asked him what I should say.
Actually, Mayor Shetter is nothing like me. I'd make a terrible Mayor. Mayor Shetter, I've come to find, is a very humble man. It's hard for him to come out and ask you to even vote for him. I've watched him, and I've listen to him and he loves Burleson. He wants to serve. It is HIS passion. I'm proud to stand up for him. Not just for who he is, not just because he wants to be Mayor but because we need Mayor Shetter to continue his leadership for the betterment of Burleson.
Please vote for Ken Shetter, Ronnie Johnson, Matt Aiken and for school board, Beverly Volkman-
Powell.
Just sayin'
Ann
Please read other posts below for more information about this campaign.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
The Truth About the Burleson Opportunity Fund
BREAKING NEWS!!
Today, instead of referring you to a link, I thought I would let Mayor Shetter have his say on the blog. These are all his words in response to the email sent out by Keith Kelly and the Robo calls by Rob Orr. If you want to go to Ken's website, it's www.kenshetter.com
Mayor Shetter's response to Keith Kelly and "We the People PAC" -
In a not-so-shocking turn of events, some of my opponent’s principal supporters-- Keith Kelly, the Texas Patriots Tea Party and their political action committee--have launched an eleventh-hour attack, trying to influence the outcome of this election by attacking the Burleson Opportunity Fund (the BOF).
In the way of background, the BOF is a program developed through a partnership between the City of Burleson, Hill College and Burleson ISD to offer scholarships to graduating Burleson seniors to attend Hill College at Burleson. The program is designed to promote higher education and economic development.
In an email distributed to friends of the Texas Patriots Tea Party, Keith Kelly made several inaccurate statements about the BOF, and indicated the PAC has engaged an attorney to see that “the $240,000 in questionable contributions be returned to the City of Burleson Economic Development fund and that those individuals that directed these fund transfers and those members of the Burleson Opportunity Fund board that knowingly accepted these contributions be held accountable.”
While I acknowledge there are those who might hold the opinion that contributions to the BOF are not an acceptable use of 4A economic development funds, it is important to note the decision by the 4A Board and City Council to fund the BOF contributions through 4A was made after consultation and advice from the City Attorney. There are three primary reasons it was decided 4A was the best source of funding for the BOF:
- 4A funds are to be used for economic development and job creation. There are several justifications for utilizing the BOF and promotion of higher education as an element of Burleson’s economic development and job creation strategy, among them:
- In its 1998-2008 Economic Development Plan, the Texas Strategic Development Planning Commission concluded that workforce development is the most important economic development issue facing the state. Quoting from the report, “To continue our state’s strong economic growth, employers must have access to a pool of skilled workers. Texas is fortunate to have a growing population, however successful competition in the global economy and its resulting economic prosperity require us to eliminate the gaps that exist between current education and occupational skills. “
- In remarks at the 2004 East Texas Economic Development Summit, Texas Governor Rick Perry stated, “Education and economic development are two issues that are inextricably linked. Better education leads to more job creation, job creation leads to the creation of wealth, the creation of wealth leads to more revenue and more revenue leads to better funding for education and other priorities.”
- The availability of educated workers is commonly near the top of the wish list in business surveys related to location and relocation decisions. Enhancing enrollment in a local college is good economic development. According to the Buxton Company, “college campuses have a huge economic impact” on the city in which they are located.
- Community colleges have a direct economic impact on communities through the jobs they create and the retail activity associated with a vibrant campus.
- Because the 4A fund is generated through a one-half cent sales tax, it is not only the citizens of Burleson who contribute, but also the 300,000-plus people who regularly shop, eat and do business in Burleson. Since students who graduate from Burleson schools but do not live within the city limits are eligible to receive scholarships through BOF, it is appropriate to utilize funding from a source that is not generated from citizens alone.
- While gas funds were initially used to fund the BOF, they weren’t the best long-term funding source. It is acknowledged by nearly everyone that gas funds should not be utilized for annually recurring costs because they are an unpredictable source of revenue. Among the annually-recurring sources of revenue, 4A was determined to be preferable to the general fund for the reasons outlined above.
In his email, Keith Kelly badly misrepresented the history of the formation of the BOF, stating the following:
In 2007, Mayor Shetter along with his mother Beverly Volkman Powell (current BISD School Board President) along with staff from BISD, Hill College, City of Burleson and Texas Wesleyan University, formed the Burleson Opportunity Fund to provide scholarships so that Burleson students could attend Hill College for free.
In reality, my mother had absolutely nothing to do with the formation of the BOF. It was actually Richard Crummel and I who initially came up with the idea for the BOF. Of course neither of us had the power to form the BOF; we worked with the City, BISD and Hill College staffs, discussed the idea in City Council workshops and ultimately the 4A board and City Council unanimously approved creation of the BOF.As “evidence” of his theory that 4A contributions to the BOF are inappropriate, Keith Kelly sites the opinion of Representative Rob Orr:
In 2008, State Representative Rob Orr learned that Mayor Shetter intended to make contributions to the BOF from Type A Economic Development Funds. Representative Orr informed Mayor Shetter those contributions from Economic Development funds to the BOF were not allowed under the rules so the initial contribution to the BOF by the City of Burleson was made from Oil and Gas reserves.
Of course it wasn’t “Mayor Shetter” but the City of Burleson that “intended” to make the initial contribution to the BOF from 4A funds. It is true that Representative Orr communicated his opinion that 4A funds could not be used for the BOF. Interestingly, he qualified his opinion, telling me he thought the BOF was a good program and that we should be able to utilize 4A funds, but he didn’t think it was allowed under current law. I made it very clear that the City did not agree with his opinion, but that we would fund the first year from gas revenue, then work with Representative Orr to clarify the law in the next legislative session.When Representative Orr declined to sponsor legislation specifically authorizing use of 4A funds for the BOF, the City approached our other Representative, Chris Turner, and he agreed to do so. Contrary to what Keith Kelly wrote in his email, after representatives from the City, BISD, Hill College and the Burleson Chamber testified in front of the Local Government Ways and Means Committee in Austin, the bill was actually passed by that Committee. The only hurdle to ultimate passage of HB3956 was the Local & Consent Calendars Committee allowing it to be voted on. Unfortunately, when Representative Orr refused to give a “thumbs up”, HB3956 died in the Local & Consent Calendars Committee without ever receiving a vote.
Also, Keith Kelly references a passage in an early BOF position paper, wherein I wrote that the City would explore possibilities for dedicated sources of revenue and even specifically mentioned the possibility of seeking legislation to allow a portion of 4A funds to be used for the BOF. The simple explanation is that the paper was written before the City Attorney advised that current law would already allow the use of 4A funds for the BOF.
There are two “legal opinions” referenced by Keith Kelly, one from the Attorney General’s Office and one from the Comptroller’s Office. Neither of those state agencies has ever asked the City for a description of the Burleson Opportunity Fund and I have never seen an opinion from the Attorney General’s Office regarding the BOF (you’d think since I’m the mayor, I would know about one if it existed). Regarding the opinion from the Comptroller’s Office, Keith neglects to mention that the Comptroller’s Office made it very clear to him it did not have an opinion as to whether or not the BOF was an appropriate use of 4A funds.
Next, Keith Kelly refers to a March 21, 2012 town hall meeting I held at the Hidden Creek Golf Course grill and says I mentioned my “vision of promising every student that enters kindergarten in Burleson a guarantee that they will be able to get a free four year college education.” In this case Keith either takes bad notes or simply is not interested in telling the truth. My vision, clearly explained in that town hall meeting, is that we should adopt a “last dollar concept”, whereby federal student aid dollars would be applied toward Hill College tuition first and the BOF funds would be used to pay what is left. By doing this, we could expand the program beyond the 40 or so students we are currently able to serve—possible to sixty or seventy students, and possibly for two years instead of one. I certainly described a plan to expand the presence of higher education in Burleson to include four year and graduate degree programs, but made no mention of the BOF covering four year degrees (Watch the portion of the town hall meeting that Keith Kelly completely distorted for yourself).
Here’s what else I said at the town hall forum (that Keith didn’t relay in his email): We currently utilize less than 1/50th of our 4A economic development revenue for the BOF. If it is appropriate to pay real estate brokers, developers, big corporations and giant retail chains millions of dollars in the name of economic development, surely it is appropriate to invest a tiny percentage of the funding we dedicate to economic development in our own human capital. Investing in higher education is one of the best things we can do for our own economic success; that is the adopted policy of this state, it has been confirmed through academic research and it is the experience of this community.
Finally, Keith was right that I mentioned a vision for kindergarteners, but once again he was wrong about what was actually said. What I said on March 21st is what I have been saying for five years: If every Burleson child knew from the day they entered kindergarten they would have access to college, how might that change their own expectations about their futures, and how might that shape the decisions they make along the way? Neither I nor anyone else has ever envisioned the BOF would pay for every Burleson child to go to college, or that it would ever apply to a four year degree. Many students will choose to leave the City to attend college, and that’s great for them. The BOF is designed to incentivize some students to stay home to earn their education, to promote higher education and economic development in Burleson, and to ease the transition from high school to college for Burleson families.
The BOF is widely recognized as an innovative way to improve the lives of children, youth, and families, and was singled out when Burleson was recognized as one of the 100 best communities for youth by the America’s Promise Alliance. How sad that members of our own community would mount such a vicious attack for purely political reasons.
Monday, April 30, 2012
No Apologies
The Cleburne Times Review published an article examining Larry Pool and his relationship with the Silver Star bar on Sunday April 29th. While I was not happy with their statement that documents were filed with the State of Texas indicating the sale of the bar to others (which I believe were negated by Mr. Pool's subsequent filings [ignored by the CTR]), I was happy that they talked to Calvin Rogers, who was the first to "buy" the bar from Pool. Mr. Rogers indicated that Mr. Pool was in the bar on several occasions including when bikini contests were held. It was later that the bikini contest that was highlighted in Susan Cloud's expose took place and with other owners/managers. Mr. Rogers still said that it was "illogical" that Mr. Pool would not know about what kind of entertainment went on in the bar. I agree wih Mr. Rogers.
Now, Mr. Pool wants an apology. No can do. First, Mr. Pool was asked by Ms. Cloud for his response to what she had learned at least two weeks before she released it. He refused to respond. I even sent him a FB message asking the same thing before I share her post on my Face book page. No response. So, had he made an attempt to clarify his involvement with Silver Star to someone at that time, he might have been spared the embarrassment. He did however, respond on his website after the information was released. The problem was the document he posted as evidence of sale to Mr. Rogers was a change in registered agent. That means nothing more than a change of address to receive mail. Additionally, he provided a County tax receipt that said his Homes-N-Land, LLC owned the property and Silver Star owned the bar. Shouldn't that bill have gone to the "owners" Well, when you check the website for Franchise tax and the Secretary of State, he is listed as the sole director and member of Silver Star Event Hall, LLC. So, if he doesn't know how to file his reports so that he isn't reflected as the sole owner, then it is his own doing that research reflected that. So, Ms.Cloud's information and my information was posted in "good faith". Had he filed documents correctly we would have known who actually owned the bar. So, no apology from me. Susan issued hers several weeks ago, in the You-Tube video entitled, "I'm Sorry" by Brenda Lee. You can watch it here. (Warning: mature pictures of bar entertainment)
Now, I'm not sure that I buy the "sold" idea due to the fact his name is still on the current corporation filings submitted over the past two years. However, if Mr. Rogers said he 'bought" it, OK. However, Mr. Pool's contention that he had no idea about what was happening in the bar that was operated on the property he owned, well, that just just doesn't seem true. Mr. Rogers says he began bikini nights on Thursdays to increase business. Mr. Pool visited the bar and even though he can't say that Pool was there on those nights, it seems "illogical" for him to have not known about the activity. How do you not know what entertainment goes on in bars. While Rogers wasn't the "owner" of the bar at the time the images were taken of the "Cowtown Hotties" or "midget wrestling", Pool had been there prior to the new owners and he was still the land lord. He collected money for the lease of the property. It would be completely naive to think he didn't visit the bar during this new ownership.
Another revelation from Mr. Pool was his statement that he never operated Silver Star as a bar. While he says that he originally bought the property to open an event center, his Certificate f Formation states "nightclub" as the purpose. He named his corporation "event hall", so why didn't he just say, "event hall"? Why say night club? Maybe his statement is true, but he certainly knew what Mr. Rogers was going to do with the business- use it as a bar. Why didn't he just sell the property and all?
I'm thinking this was about the time Mr. Pool decided to be the President of the Burleson Chamber of Commerce, someone would have advised him to get out of the bar business if he wanted to be seen as a conservative. So, why not sell all of it? Why not dissolve the LLC? Why let Mr. Rogers keep the name, Silver Star? Why file documents after the supposed sale to the next owners, with his name alone listed as Director and Member? I can't answer that. The editor of the Cleburne Times Review says it was just "paperwork" issues. If so, why does the State require your to report each year in the first place if they don't require it to be truthful. I have asked for answers to this last question from the State Comptroller's office. Can you just file anything you want to a state agency? Do you ever have to tell the truth?
So, what we are left with is a bar, opened first by Mr. Pool, sold to another man to run as a bar, with Mr. Pool as the landlord. Mr. Pool visited the bar during a time when bikini night was every Thursday. Were these bikini contests like the ones during the time that Ms. Cloud learned about? We don't know. However, it is "illogical" to think Mr. Pool didn't have a reasonable expectation of knowing that something short of "Judeo-Christian" values were being exercised there. According to Mr. Pool he "terminated the lease" of the current owners because the activity did not reflect his Christian values. Mr. Pool, they haven't reflected anyone's Christian values from the moment that you stated the purpose of the business as "nightclub". It just took being "outed" during a Mayoral campaign for it to matter to you. You just didn't get caught when you ran for the council.
Then there is the topper of it all. Mr. Pool's humility. He wants to know why anyone would want to impugn his character and integrity "after all [he] has done for the community". Exactly what is it that you have done for the community, Mr. Pool? You are a 3 year resident. Seems to me that you moved here because of the great community that was already here. Profited off of it and now, you want to destroy it.
Just sayin'
Ann Rose
Saturday, April 28, 2012
A Little "War and Peace"
Well, I know how verbose I can be, but I think more is better right? (or is that about butter?). Anyway, after reading the Burleson Star's reporting of the last candidate forum, I feel that everyone deserved to know exactly what happened at the Hill College Forum this past Thursday night. So, as a public service, I have provided you with a blow by blow of what I considered the best moments of the evening. I know that it's long, hence "War and Peace", but you just have to keep reading as it gets more interesting near the end because that is where the Mayor and his opponent get into the action. So, here goes!
Reporting from Burleson campus of Hill College:
April 26, 2012
I was one of the maybe 75 people that attended the Hill College Forum last night (Thrusday) to hear the City Council and Mayor candidates answer questions posed to them by Hill students and members of the audience. I was left a bit under-whelmed. (ump)
While I am very thankful that the students and faculty took the time and effort to put it on, and it was very well organized, some of the questions were not applicable to the questions facing Burleson council members in the coming years. Questions about Crowley-Rendon Rd status, sprinkler systems for historical buildings (eh, maybe), left me a bit needy for more. I did think the "Heart of Burleson" question was a good one and I liked the answers given by council candidates for the most part. I think "Old Town" was really the "right" answer in my opinion.
It was actually a bit humorous that all the candidates talked about the "Old Town" revitalization until they were almost giddy. For candidates, save one (That's you, Ronnie), that want to "change" how Burleson does things, they sure seemed to like what has been done over the last 8 years.
Oh, and one of the lighter moments for me was when the question was asked about what type of business would you like to see in Burleson that would attract 18-23 year olds? Well, one candidate was really stoked about bringing a Theatre to town (can you guess which candidate?). No, not to watch the "Hunger Games" or anything like that, but for live performances. She even indicated that it was apparently second rate to have to make use of the two perfectly good theater auditoriums that were build at the two high schools with tax paid bond money . If we can only find another Bass Brother. Oh, and I'm sure it would bring in some highly paid jobs that theatre always brings. (Exactly what did you do with that Theatre Arts degree specializing in Stage Design? Oh, yeah, you worked at Macy's.)
OK, Im getting on with it.
Matt Aiken gave a good videoed "vision statement" and introduction. He wasn't there due to a previous engagement, but his video with scrolling words was effective, I thought. I think that he certainly put to rest who has a better grasp of the job that needs to be done. Experience certainly speaks volumes. (The only problem I had with it was Matt like to say the word "Transparency" a lot. Come on now. Don't be so greedy, the city has already won that award how many years in a row now?) Just kidding, Matt. I'm still voting for you.
There were two subjects brought up -most likely as a queston from the audience - that sparked a little spit fire to the evening. One was about public housing and the other was about the Opportunity Fund. First the council candidates were given a shot at the questions and then the Mayoral candidates had a go. Actually, the Mayor started with a "shot across the bow" when he took the podium for his opening statement. Afterwards, the moderator asked the Mayor's opponent to give his views on the question. (that made him actually have more time to speak, but that could be a good thing).
Back to the council candidates.
Regarding the federal housing issue. It appeared that the candidates that had bees in their bonnets about the possiblity of five proposed housing developments coming to Burleson all at one time (never happen), appeared to have gotten the message* that had been spreading around town that these candidates were painting themselves into a corner should they actually win election and then have to serve on the council and live with their prior statements. However, I knew a few of them couldn't help themselves as I remember some of the candidates expressed flashes of anger while speaking at the Tea Party Forum. Apparently they wee indignant that the Mayor and current council members would not pledge to disapprove all additional federal housing requests for support. There was a lot of "humming and hawing" but even with guarded speech, it was clear who were saying, "NIMBY" (not in my backyard) to Federal housing.
One candidate added to her opening statement that all our elementaries were "busting at the seams" from all the students they had, citing the busing of students to her children's elementary from other schools due to "over-crowding". I am pretty sure that the busing is going on to keep from adding classes in the other schools to reduce the number of waivers necessary to maintain the 22:1 ratio. It really has nothing to do with space in the elementaries. Now, the middle schools, that's a different matter.
The other question that added a bit of excitement was the question about the Opportunity Fund, its original funding mechanism and whether it was legal. Wow! What if it had not been legal??
As luck would have it, Ronnie Johnson was there as he is running for the council and he just happened to have been president of the BISD Trustees when the Opportunity Fund was proposed and approved. Ronnie was Vice- President of the Opportunity Fund Board. Wow! Straight from the horse's mouth!! (Sorry Ronnie). He said unequivocally, "No, it (is) was not illegal". Stating there were more lawyers than .... I couldn't hear his comparison, but I got the message. It's not illegal. You would have thought that would have put it to rest, but no. With the two other candidates "passing" Ms. Gammon, gave a somewhat disbelieving sigh and said, "I'd like to know if it IS legal". She either can't hear or she believes she is the appeals courts and Ronnie was over-turned!
However, when the Mayor gave his opening speech, he was less than demure when he said he wanted to lay to rest this question. The Opportunity Fund is NOT illegal. It began as a method to develop a workforce to prepare for and entice industry to Burleson. There was always the intent to use economic development funds for it and they dedicate 1/50th of the fund to the Opportunity Fund. Then, taking a final swing, he added that businesses and individuals did contribute to it and yes, those funds have waned somewhat but the City of Burleson always planned to provided some of the funding. There! (Editorial comment here. I think that business gifts have waned because of who is in control of the Chamber of Commerce now.. Just sayin')
But wait. The moderator decided that since this was such an interesting topic, the Mayor's opposition needed to address the subject. The opponent began, "Well, I can't speak to the legality of it...." "What?" The Mayor said. "Yes you can. "You voted to fund it" just a short time ago.
Yes!!!!
Of course, the moderator called for decorum; the candidates aren't supposed to address each other but to addressed the student panel. The opponent didn't turn his head; just stared straight ahead. I did detect a bit of a twinkle in the Mayor's eye, however. I was high fiving in my mind!!
The discussion of the housing issue was much more mundane with the Mayor and the opponent. There really wasn't much left for the opponent to say other than, if the developer follows the rules, there really isn't much that can be done. I was sitting in the back by this time, observing one of the council candidate hacking 'poo" out of her mouth. There was obviously disagreement. Darn, it's maddening when you can't get your way, right?" The Mayor had already prepared a position statement on this issue and it was distributed at the Forum to the few people there. If you want to see it go to www.kenshetter.com and look for "housing". There were so many untruths, half truths and mis-understanding that have been given out, it is really hard to make the issue clear without a long two page article. So read his so I don't have to type it here.
One interesting thing that came up was the Mayor's opponent kept hammering on the his assertation that many industries have wanted to locate in Burleson but have not done so due to to many regulations. He added one other reason... they were not sufficiently "wined and dined". The opponent said that these people (industrialist) are "enterpreneurs" and they need to be handled "with kid gloves". Well, my husband has 30+ years in corporate manufacturing and that is code for "Wine, Women and Song". So, does that mean that Mayor Shetter and the city staff haven't been spending enough city money on big expense accounts and wild parties? I know where they can find some "Cowtown Hotties". You might even ask the opponent.
In regards to the burdensome regulations on building design, etc... Well, I agree that you probably don't have to have the same building design requirements in an industrial park as you do on Main Street, but it seems a little pre-mature to have those ready to go since they just turned dirt on the Highpoint Industrial Park not long ago. I also am sure that the Planning and Zoning Committee hasn't brought that before the council yet. I could be wrong, but I think I remember something about that. I wonder why the Mayor's opponent hasn't asked his friend Ms. Gammon about that since she is on that City Board and enjoys the job so much she wants to stay on it. Since that is a citizen group, maybe the "people" will have an opinion on what those requirments should be to house "widget" manufacturing.
I had a questions I was eager to ask the Mayor's opponent, but it didn't make the list. So, I was happy when the Mayor alluded to my question when he asked how it was possible to lower the debt, reduce taxes, reduce the budget, build infra-structure and pay police and firemen more. I agree with the Mayor, it sounds like a fairly tale.
Just sayin'
Ann
* For info on the "message" please read the previous post, "What Would Jesus Do?"
Also, if you haven't already, read the other two prior posts as well.
Reporting from Burleson campus of Hill College:
April 26, 2012
I was one of the maybe 75 people that attended the Hill College Forum last night (Thrusday) to hear the City Council and Mayor candidates answer questions posed to them by Hill students and members of the audience. I was left a bit under-whelmed. (ump)
While I am very thankful that the students and faculty took the time and effort to put it on, and it was very well organized, some of the questions were not applicable to the questions facing Burleson council members in the coming years. Questions about Crowley-Rendon Rd status, sprinkler systems for historical buildings (eh, maybe), left me a bit needy for more. I did think the "Heart of Burleson" question was a good one and I liked the answers given by council candidates for the most part. I think "Old Town" was really the "right" answer in my opinion.
It was actually a bit humorous that all the candidates talked about the "Old Town" revitalization until they were almost giddy. For candidates, save one (That's you, Ronnie), that want to "change" how Burleson does things, they sure seemed to like what has been done over the last 8 years.
Oh, and one of the lighter moments for me was when the question was asked about what type of business would you like to see in Burleson that would attract 18-23 year olds? Well, one candidate was really stoked about bringing a Theatre to town (can you guess which candidate?). No, not to watch the "Hunger Games" or anything like that, but for live performances. She even indicated that it was apparently second rate to have to make use of the two perfectly good theater auditoriums that were build at the two high schools with tax paid bond money . If we can only find another Bass Brother. Oh, and I'm sure it would bring in some highly paid jobs that theatre always brings. (Exactly what did you do with that Theatre Arts degree specializing in Stage Design? Oh, yeah, you worked at Macy's.)
OK, Im getting on with it.
Matt Aiken gave a good videoed "vision statement" and introduction. He wasn't there due to a previous engagement, but his video with scrolling words was effective, I thought. I think that he certainly put to rest who has a better grasp of the job that needs to be done. Experience certainly speaks volumes. (The only problem I had with it was Matt like to say the word "Transparency" a lot. Come on now. Don't be so greedy, the city has already won that award how many years in a row now?) Just kidding, Matt. I'm still voting for you.
There were two subjects brought up -most likely as a queston from the audience - that sparked a little spit fire to the evening. One was about public housing and the other was about the Opportunity Fund. First the council candidates were given a shot at the questions and then the Mayoral candidates had a go. Actually, the Mayor started with a "shot across the bow" when he took the podium for his opening statement. Afterwards, the moderator asked the Mayor's opponent to give his views on the question. (that made him actually have more time to speak, but that could be a good thing).
Back to the council candidates.
Regarding the federal housing issue. It appeared that the candidates that had bees in their bonnets about the possiblity of five proposed housing developments coming to Burleson all at one time (never happen), appeared to have gotten the message* that had been spreading around town that these candidates were painting themselves into a corner should they actually win election and then have to serve on the council and live with their prior statements. However, I knew a few of them couldn't help themselves as I remember some of the candidates expressed flashes of anger while speaking at the Tea Party Forum. Apparently they wee indignant that the Mayor and current council members would not pledge to disapprove all additional federal housing requests for support. There was a lot of "humming and hawing" but even with guarded speech, it was clear who were saying, "NIMBY" (not in my backyard) to Federal housing.
One candidate added to her opening statement that all our elementaries were "busting at the seams" from all the students they had, citing the busing of students to her children's elementary from other schools due to "over-crowding". I am pretty sure that the busing is going on to keep from adding classes in the other schools to reduce the number of waivers necessary to maintain the 22:1 ratio. It really has nothing to do with space in the elementaries. Now, the middle schools, that's a different matter.
The other question that added a bit of excitement was the question about the Opportunity Fund, its original funding mechanism and whether it was legal. Wow! What if it had not been legal??
As luck would have it, Ronnie Johnson was there as he is running for the council and he just happened to have been president of the BISD Trustees when the Opportunity Fund was proposed and approved. Ronnie was Vice- President of the Opportunity Fund Board. Wow! Straight from the horse's mouth!! (Sorry Ronnie). He said unequivocally, "No, it (is) was not illegal". Stating there were more lawyers than .... I couldn't hear his comparison, but I got the message. It's not illegal. You would have thought that would have put it to rest, but no. With the two other candidates "passing" Ms. Gammon, gave a somewhat disbelieving sigh and said, "I'd like to know if it IS legal". She either can't hear or she believes she is the appeals courts and Ronnie was over-turned!
However, when the Mayor gave his opening speech, he was less than demure when he said he wanted to lay to rest this question. The Opportunity Fund is NOT illegal. It began as a method to develop a workforce to prepare for and entice industry to Burleson. There was always the intent to use economic development funds for it and they dedicate 1/50th of the fund to the Opportunity Fund. Then, taking a final swing, he added that businesses and individuals did contribute to it and yes, those funds have waned somewhat but the City of Burleson always planned to provided some of the funding. There! (Editorial comment here. I think that business gifts have waned because of who is in control of the Chamber of Commerce now.. Just sayin')
But wait. The moderator decided that since this was such an interesting topic, the Mayor's opposition needed to address the subject. The opponent began, "Well, I can't speak to the legality of it...." "What?" The Mayor said. "Yes you can. "You voted to fund it" just a short time ago.
Yes!!!!
Of course, the moderator called for decorum; the candidates aren't supposed to address each other but to addressed the student panel. The opponent didn't turn his head; just stared straight ahead. I did detect a bit of a twinkle in the Mayor's eye, however. I was high fiving in my mind!!
The discussion of the housing issue was much more mundane with the Mayor and the opponent. There really wasn't much left for the opponent to say other than, if the developer follows the rules, there really isn't much that can be done. I was sitting in the back by this time, observing one of the council candidate hacking 'poo" out of her mouth. There was obviously disagreement. Darn, it's maddening when you can't get your way, right?" The Mayor had already prepared a position statement on this issue and it was distributed at the Forum to the few people there. If you want to see it go to www.kenshetter.com and look for "housing". There were so many untruths, half truths and mis-understanding that have been given out, it is really hard to make the issue clear without a long two page article. So read his so I don't have to type it here.
One interesting thing that came up was the Mayor's opponent kept hammering on the his assertation that many industries have wanted to locate in Burleson but have not done so due to to many regulations. He added one other reason... they were not sufficiently "wined and dined". The opponent said that these people (industrialist) are "enterpreneurs" and they need to be handled "with kid gloves". Well, my husband has 30+ years in corporate manufacturing and that is code for "Wine, Women and Song". So, does that mean that Mayor Shetter and the city staff haven't been spending enough city money on big expense accounts and wild parties? I know where they can find some "Cowtown Hotties". You might even ask the opponent.
In regards to the burdensome regulations on building design, etc... Well, I agree that you probably don't have to have the same building design requirements in an industrial park as you do on Main Street, but it seems a little pre-mature to have those ready to go since they just turned dirt on the Highpoint Industrial Park not long ago. I also am sure that the Planning and Zoning Committee hasn't brought that before the council yet. I could be wrong, but I think I remember something about that. I wonder why the Mayor's opponent hasn't asked his friend Ms. Gammon about that since she is on that City Board and enjoys the job so much she wants to stay on it. Since that is a citizen group, maybe the "people" will have an opinion on what those requirments should be to house "widget" manufacturing.
I had a questions I was eager to ask the Mayor's opponent, but it didn't make the list. So, I was happy when the Mayor alluded to my question when he asked how it was possible to lower the debt, reduce taxes, reduce the budget, build infra-structure and pay police and firemen more. I agree with the Mayor, it sounds like a fairly tale.
Just sayin'
Ann
* For info on the "message" please read the previous post, "What Would Jesus Do?"
Also, if you haven't already, read the other two prior posts as well.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
What Would Jesus Do?
This is a copy of a Letter to the Editor of the Burleson Star that I know won't be published as they refuse to take political letters after April 24, 2012. However, this is important information that is not available to everyone. While some may feel that "Not in my backyard" is a good defense for homeowners, if elected officials bow to that pressure due to discriminatory reason (which NIMBYis) then they can be sued as well as the city. The officials are put in a terrible position by those who would quote Bible verses on one hand and claim the poor and disabled are the curse of the devil. Do not let yourself be a part of this movement. P.S. After you finish reading, don't forget to read the two previous posts, "Larry Pool and Silver Star" and "The Truth is Free".
To the Editor:
Below is a copy of aletter being sent to members of the Wakefield Home
Owner Association in Burleson, and probably others, by Shelly Grant, a Burleson
Community member who it is rumored to go by a Face book alias of "Praise Jesus".
Unfortunately, the rhetoric used in her letter has nothing to do with
"Jesus"; the words he taught or the behavior he championed. In fact, He
had a lot to say about our relationship to the poor. I guess Ms. Grant missed
those red lettered words. There is even a quote of John 3:16 at the end of the letter.
(It kinda sounds like someone thinks that low income people don't know Jesus).
BTW, she was assisted in distributing this letter by the HOM’s management group, DentonCMG. (Who won't return phone calls).
The basis of the letter is that according to her, some elected
city officials (the mayor and two city council members) have committed themselves publically to supporting the import of
additional HUD housing, mainly in the form of Section 8 apartment housing for
low income. She makes no distinction as to whether the purpose of the housing is
for the elderly, families, or disabled.
It is important to note that her statement is NOT TRUE. Officials
have gone on record saying that no commitment of any kind has been nor can be
made as decisions such as, setting housing development policy, accepting zoning
requests, giving abatements, and providing letters of support, cannot be made
prior to the presentation of facts and due consideration. While there may be
reasons to deny requests for zoning changes, letters of support for this and
other types of development, it can only to be based on non-discriminatory
factors.
Ms. Grant may write letters make inflammatory statements and
unfounded assumptions about her beliefs regarding low income housing as it is
her First Amendment right. Elected official are not free to act on threats
made by people such as Ms. Grant and her organization. They must adhere to
the Fair Housing law and do nothing to illegally impede the provision of low
income housing of protected classes. By the way, this month is "Fair Housing
Month" as declared by Governor Perry. What a coincident that Ms. Grant would decide to begin her crusade
on this topic.
If you would like to read a brief synopsis of a public official’s duty to give equal access to HUD housing applications, you can do so by going to:
Should Ms. Grant succeed in her efforts and a future official
that she endorsed has embraced her rhetoric in writing or in public; they will have left the city unable to ever deny housing applications that
were designated low income without putting the city in a vulnerable legal
position.
Is that where you want your tax money to go? Is that what Jesus
would do?
From: "Carter Low" <Carter.Low@DentonCMG.com>
To: " Carter.Low@DentonCMG.com" <Carter.Low@DentonCMG.com>
Subject: FW: Section 8 (low income housing) Location Listings on TDHCA Applications Near Wakefield Estates/Burleson/TX
This email is being sent to all members of the Wakefield HOA who have
provided their email address:To: " Carter.Low@DentonCMG.com" <Carter.Low@DentonCMG.com>
Subject: FW: Section 8 (low income housing) Location Listings on TDHCA Applications Near Wakefield Estates/Burleson/TX
The following information is provided by Shelley Grant from the Burleson Citizens Against Section 8 Housing. If you have any questions, please contact Shelley directly at
shelley@burlesonstars.com<mailto:shelley@burlesonstars.com > (817) 919-4982
Also, according to Ken Davis (Pastor, Calvary Chapel Southwest Metro), there is a City Council Candidate Forum this Thursday, at Hill College (130 E. Renfro) starting at 6:45PM. Please plan to attend the forum and find out where each candidate stands on section 8 housing near Wakefield HOA and other issues.
Dear Wakefield Home Owner Association Member:
The purpose of this letter is to send you the TDHCA log information which illustrates the Section 8 applications for the state of Texas which include Burleson locations located on Hwy 731, John Jones Road, Hwy 174, Summercrest and Alsbury Blvd.
In regard specifically to Wakefield Estates, located in Burleson, TX, 76028 the TDHCA log illustrates there are five locations listed for Section 8 application. The five Section 8 locations near Wakefield Estates are:
The 1701 Wilshire (Hwy 174) location application includes 175 Section 8 units.
The John Jones Road (FM 731) location application includes 160 Section 8 units
1300 Alsbury location application includes 120 Section 8 units
1300 Summercrest location application includes 120 Section 8 units
Alsbury at Ridgehill location application includes 84 Section 8 units
In 2007, our current Mayor, Ken Shetter, and the 2007 city council enticed a Section 8 apartment complex to Burleson by offereing the developer a $400,000.00 tax abatement. This Section 8 unit, the Alsbury Villas, is located at 755 Alsbury. As a result of the tax abatement, our city has been qualified for federal grant money from hud.gov< http://hud.gov> that stimulated the five applications currently filed with TDHCA for Burleson, TX.
The mayor and council have gone on record endorsing the Section 8 Multi-Family additions to our city. As a result, the citizens of Burleson have formed a political group seeking to seat a new mayor and 3 new council members in the May 12, 2012 municipal election. A new mayor and council will give the citizens of Burleson a window of opportunity to protect their home values from being jeopardized.
It is our hope that you will notify the members of the Wakefield Home Owners Association in order that they will have the opportunity to examine the city and TDHCA documentation, create their own opinion and have the opportunity to vote, if they so choose to, in the municipal election for the candidate of their choice.
Respectfully,
Shelley Grant
Burleson Citizens Against Section 8 Housing
Regards,
Carter Low, CMCA, AMS
Community Management Group
P.O. Box 104
Argyle, Texas 76226
(940) 464-1107 Phone
(940) 464-4502 Fax
Carter.Low@DentonCMG.com
The views expressed below are that of Community Management Group and do not necessarily reflect those of the HOA Board of Directors or the Homeowners' Association.
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. ~John 3:16
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
The Truth is Free
"All too often in politics today, elections are marred by negative advertising and innuendo about candidates. During my 2010 race for Congress, my opponent spent millions of dollars on negative advertising; and, as a result, I have a firsthand view of what it is like to be on the ‘receiving end’ of this type of behavior. Unfortunately, some of this behavior has arisen in this race and I am disappointed by the allegations being made about Larry. I want the citizens of Burleson to know that I think that Larry is a fine man, who has run his businesses properly and I consider the negative comments about him to be unfair and inappropriate.” Quote from U.S. Representative Bill Flores in the Cleburne Times Review -
Perhaps when the next financial reports are due, we can look to see how much Larry Pool paid for that endorsement. I post this here to make a point. No money has been spent to tell the truth about Larry Pool. Ken Shetter hasn't paid one dime to me or Susan Cloud to tell the truth about Larry Pool and the Silver Star Bar. Citizens in the Burleson Community learned of Pool ownership of Silver Star and made it public. He tried to disassociate himself from it by posting a useless document that meant nothing in regards to who owned and operated the bar. Mr. Pool is the sole Director and member of Silver Star Event Hall, LLC. The business that had the entertainment shown in Ms. Cloud's Facebook post and her Video took place in Silver Star bar. He cannot run away from it. If I have to take an ad out myself in the paper to publish this information, I will do so.
I want to make it clear that I believe that Pool attempted to hide his ownership of the bar because he wanted to get into politics in a conservative city. If he wants to disprove that, then he needs to show a bill of sale for his business to the people that bought it and then show why he is still the Director and only member of the enitity that he formed. He filed the documents saying he was Director - twice. If it is not true, then he is guilty of a misdomeaner for filing a false report. If he filed the report or caused it to be filed and knew that it was false information, then he is guilty of a state jail felony.
He can put this to rest by showing the documents that actually show the sale and then explaining why he filed documents with the Secretary of State stating otherwise. If he doesn't want to do that, then I will file a complaint with the Secretary of State's office and he can explain it to them.
Mr. Pool is the one that has been telling untruths to the community about himself. Representative Orr and Flores just bought in and lied to you as well. There is no evidence of any kind that Pool has been successful at "balancing budgets and controlling debt." He has not released any information about his private business dealings. He has numerous corporations. Who knows how much debt he has as a real estate speculator? He has had one corporation suspended twice for not paying Franchise tax and for not having a registered agent on file. What do we really know about Mr. Pool's ability to be successful?
We can look at his one year on the City Council. Mr. Pool was elected with the idea or controlling debt and managing the budget. I don't recall any news reporting that described Mr. Pool asking to put debt on the agenda to discuss reducing it. In fact, I think he voted to increase it. I don't recall anytime that he pounded the table with his shoe insisting that debt be reduced. I don't even recall him voting "no" on the budget that he likes to complain about. If he didn't have it in him to vote against the budget then exactly why would you expect that he would do so any other time. No, this is about control and getting credit for things done by others.
At the Tea Party Forum in March, Pool stated without any hesitation, that "The Brick should never have been built". Yet, as Susan Cloud so aply showed in her last video, there was Pool holding ballons at the grand opening of the Brick supporting Mayor Shetter. I would have thought that a man as "principled" as Pool would have gone on record as opposing the opening of the Brick; maybe even not being present to "make a point". That would have been a man of integrity; showing consistency. That, however, is not the man that we see opposing the current Mayor.
It's a good thing that Bill Flores will not be representing Burleson in the next election, due to re-districting. I would have to campaign against him if he had opposition. If he doesn't, I could wait.
Just Sayin'
Ann
Perhaps when the next financial reports are due, we can look to see how much Larry Pool paid for that endorsement. I post this here to make a point. No money has been spent to tell the truth about Larry Pool. Ken Shetter hasn't paid one dime to me or Susan Cloud to tell the truth about Larry Pool and the Silver Star Bar. Citizens in the Burleson Community learned of Pool ownership of Silver Star and made it public. He tried to disassociate himself from it by posting a useless document that meant nothing in regards to who owned and operated the bar. Mr. Pool is the sole Director and member of Silver Star Event Hall, LLC. The business that had the entertainment shown in Ms. Cloud's Facebook post and her Video took place in Silver Star bar. He cannot run away from it. If I have to take an ad out myself in the paper to publish this information, I will do so.
I want to make it clear that I believe that Pool attempted to hide his ownership of the bar because he wanted to get into politics in a conservative city. If he wants to disprove that, then he needs to show a bill of sale for his business to the people that bought it and then show why he is still the Director and only member of the enitity that he formed. He filed the documents saying he was Director - twice. If it is not true, then he is guilty of a misdomeaner for filing a false report. If he filed the report or caused it to be filed and knew that it was false information, then he is guilty of a state jail felony.
He can put this to rest by showing the documents that actually show the sale and then explaining why he filed documents with the Secretary of State stating otherwise. If he doesn't want to do that, then I will file a complaint with the Secretary of State's office and he can explain it to them.
Mr. Pool is the one that has been telling untruths to the community about himself. Representative Orr and Flores just bought in and lied to you as well. There is no evidence of any kind that Pool has been successful at "balancing budgets and controlling debt." He has not released any information about his private business dealings. He has numerous corporations. Who knows how much debt he has as a real estate speculator? He has had one corporation suspended twice for not paying Franchise tax and for not having a registered agent on file. What do we really know about Mr. Pool's ability to be successful?
We can look at his one year on the City Council. Mr. Pool was elected with the idea or controlling debt and managing the budget. I don't recall any news reporting that described Mr. Pool asking to put debt on the agenda to discuss reducing it. In fact, I think he voted to increase it. I don't recall anytime that he pounded the table with his shoe insisting that debt be reduced. I don't even recall him voting "no" on the budget that he likes to complain about. If he didn't have it in him to vote against the budget then exactly why would you expect that he would do so any other time. No, this is about control and getting credit for things done by others.
At the Tea Party Forum in March, Pool stated without any hesitation, that "The Brick should never have been built". Yet, as Susan Cloud so aply showed in her last video, there was Pool holding ballons at the grand opening of the Brick supporting Mayor Shetter. I would have thought that a man as "principled" as Pool would have gone on record as opposing the opening of the Brick; maybe even not being present to "make a point". That would have been a man of integrity; showing consistency. That, however, is not the man that we see opposing the current Mayor.
It's a good thing that Bill Flores will not be representing Burleson in the next election, due to re-districting. I would have to campaign against him if he had opposition. If he doesn't, I could wait.
Just Sayin'
Ann
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Larry Pool and Silver Star Redux
There has been a lot of talk about the "outing" of Larry Pool's involvement in the Silver Star bar in Alvarado and the entertainment by the Cowtown Hotties and the "midget wrestlers". The latter exhibition attended by children as young as 12 as documented in pictures taken by the Hottie’s own scheduler.
Susan Cloud, a Burleson resident and producer of the morning talk show at WBAP, asked Mr. Pool to respond to some information that she had been given about his involvement in the Silver Star bar. She gave him nearly two weeks and he didn't respond so she posted her information with pictures and supporting documentation on her Face book page. This is her post – pictures are for mature audiences.
http://www.facebook.com/notes/susan-cloud/hows-this-for-traditional-family-values/10150634835026430
Mr. Pool cried foul and accused her of slander and demanded that she apologize. I re-posted her story as did others. I also looked deeper into the situation and found that everything she said was true.
http://larrypool.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/ChangeofOwnership-2010.pdf
However, one his documents was just a change in Registered Agent and the other a copy of the tax statement showing the property was owned by Homes-N-Land, LLC, which is Larry's Pool's corporation. The other document showed the business entity was owned by "Silver Star". He says that mean he doesn’t own the business. However, you will see that the Secretary of State will disagree with him; he is the only Director and Member of Silver Star.
While Mr. Pool apparently submitted documents on two occasions showing a change in Governing Person, he or his agent (Rogers Law Firm) later submitted Public Information Reports (PIR) showing that he and he alone remains the Director and only member of Silver Star Click here. Whether the PIR was filed out correctly or not, one thing is certain: he was attempting to prove a change of ownership with a document that did not carry that meaning. That is dishonest, deceptive and just plain wrong. It means that he thinks people are too stupid to know the difference.
Now, Mr. Pool has been attempting to dismiss Ms. Cloud's information. He doesn't think that he has to answer any questions asked by anyone. Apparently, he has made sure that the Burleson Star doesn't ask him any questions. The Texas Patriot Tea Party that is backing him doesn't want to ask any questions. Two elected representatives, Rob Orr a State Representative and Bill Flores, a U.S. Senator both are apparently ignoring this information. Everyone seems to be happy with Mr. Pool’s dishonesty. What does that say about their character?
This saddens me as it means there is no outlet for the average voter to learn that a candidate has represented himself to be one thing and apparently is something else.
In my opinion, I think Mr. Pool bought a building and some land in 2009. The filing of a Certificate of Formation 10-27-2009 with the State of Texas and in the name Silver Star Event Hall, LLC stated the purpose was a "nightclub" (bottom of page 3) There is no question; this is a fact. Mr. Pool registered the name Silver Star for a web address on 1-9-2010. He filed a franchise tax report on 5-11-2010. This report listed him and another name on the original formation documents as Director and Member.
Mr. Pool’s attorney took over as Registered Agent on 8-3-2010 and two days later became the only Governing Person. It was only a matter of a few months before the attorney found two other people to take over as Governing Person effective December 1, 2010.
However, why on 12-31 2010 did he file a Public Information Report (PIR) with the Secretary of State stating an effective date of 2-11-2011? This report showed Mr. Pool again as the sole Director and Member. Because he bought it back? The others didn't pay? He really never changed the ownership but wanted it to look like he did for a while?? To make it more astounding and less likely that this was the result of a mistake is the fact that another Franchise Tax filing was made on 5-5-2011, again showing Mr. Pool as sole Director and Member. This was followed by the filing of another PIR on 12-31-2011. Again Pool was listed as the sole Director and Member. This time the effective date was listed as 8-22-2011. That is the last document that has been filed. Click Here. . Another Franchise tax filing is due early in May, 2012. Whose name will be on this one? I guess we will see.
Now, some may feel that this is a non-issue. After posting Ms. Cloud’s post exposing his ownership, I was blasted by some of the Cowtown Hottie’s fan club. They didn’t see anything wrong with the entertainment and defended Mr. Pool. But, how can misrepresentation of your character be a non issue? Mr. Pool has made much out of being a "conservative". He brags about his belief in “traditional family values” as well as Judeo-Christian values. Yet, prior to his stint as President of the Burleson Chamber and his current campaign, he decided to open a bar. I personally don’t see that choice lining up with his value system. Not that I think you can’t drink or dance, but I can’t believe that Mr. Pool having had his values for so long and practicing them so ardently, didn’t have a good understanding of what kind of activity traditionally goes on in a bar.
Could Mr. Pool be so innocent that he doesn't know about wet tee shirt parties, 2 for 1 drinks, dancing girls, bikini contests, etc..? I would think that he would knows that bars over serve people all the time and those people get into cars and drive home. Morally, how does he think that it is Christian to be a part of enabling that kind of activity? He may not have known that the Silver Star allowed children to attend events at the bar even though the website states they have to be 18 or over. He may not have known that the Cowtown Hotties were dancing during their bikini contest or that they were making it easy for audience members to "touch them on their buttocks", but then again, should he have known? Is that really responsible ownership as a lease holder as he purports to be?
Maybe he doesn't wear women's clothes, but he might as well have, as he is not who he portrays himself to be.
Just sayin'
Ann
P.S. This was Susan's response to Larry's call for an apology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34d9gEyi3G8&sns=fb
This video has very risqué and adult content with all activity taking place at the Silver Star Bar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ashq4KuZQU&feature=youtu.be
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)