On January 11, Gromer Jeffers of the Dallas Morning News posted the story, Leppert's likely departure sets off scramble to field Dallas mayor candidates, indicating that incumbent Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert is "all but certain" to not run for re-election. Based on previous rumors about Mayor Leppert's future plans, this could be likely to begin building a statewide campaign to take on Kay Bailey Hutchison in the 2012 Republican Primary. Time will tell what Leppert intends.
I mentioned in my previous post, Gearing up for 2011 in Dallas, that there were at least two Dallas City Councilors waiting to see if Mayor Leppert would run for re-election. Since that article, we already have one candidate who has announced their campaign and potentially four additional contenders. So without further ado, let's take a look into each of these candidates. I am including in parentheses what region of Dallas each candidate resides within.
Jim Moore (Preston Hollow) - Announced
Jim Moore gets listed first because he is the only candidate that has formally announced his campaign. Jim is a criminal defense attorney that resides in Preston Hollow (North Dallas) in City Councilwoman Linda Koop's district 11. While Jim may have voted in the 2010 Democratic Primary, his track record of voting in the 2006, 2002, 1998, 1996, 1994, and 1992 Republican Primaries give an indication of his political leanings. Unfortunately, Mr. Moore did not vote in any primary in 2008 or 2004.
Gromer Jeffers stated in his article that Jim is virtually an unknown compared to other potential candidates, and will have his work cut out for him. Since Jim announced his candidacy before 12/31/2010, it will be interesting to see what his upcoming finance report has to say about his campaign. Mr. Moore's campaign could be a potential dark horse, but that remains to be seen.
Angela Hunt has represented District 14 on the Dallas City Council since 2005. She was voted "Best Council Person" by the Dallas Voice in 2008 and 2009, and also "Most Effective Councilmember" by the Dallas Morning News in 2008. Councilwoman Hunt has also been a strong Democratic supporter, and many see her as a possible rising star for higher office.
Polling of Dallas City Councilmembers has suggested that Angela is one of the most well-known and popular members of the Dallas City Council on a citywide basis. However, her opposition to many of Mayor Leppert's policies and initiatives has put Angela at odds with many local leaders of the business community.
If Angela decides to run, she will need to raise several million dollars in order to win. Tom Leppert spent over $2.1 million dollars in 2007 in his election campaign. However, as former Dallas City Councilman and current School Board President Larry Duncan has proven multiple times, money is not everything when it comes to local municipal races. As a three term councilwoman, Mrs. Hunt is no stranger to campaigning, and can build a grassroots support network throughout the city.
Ron was first elected to the Dallas City Council in 2005 along with Angela Hunt. Councilman Natinsky is a former businessman who has a strong track record of voting in Republican primaries. While Angela Hunt has a strong history of opposing Mayor Leppert, Ron Natinsky has been the opposite on the matter and been an ardent supporter of the Mayor's policies. A key indicator that Natinsky is in and Leppert out is the fact that Natinsky has hired local consultant Carol Reed, who worked on Leppert's 2007 campaign as well as other Leppert initiatives such as the Trinity vote.
Ron Natinsky's campaign finance report posted on July 15, 2010 shows that Ron had $51k cash on hand. A strong start for any candidate running for city council, and Ron has had an additional 6 months to raise more money. Councilman Natinsky's strong support of Tom Leppert will likely allow him to step in with the business community that has backed the Mayor. This should allow him to lockup strong support and funds.
One local political consultant bluntly said "Natinsky is so far up Leppert's #%$#@ that you don't know where one ends and the other begins."
Mike Rawlings currently sits on the City of Dallas Parks and Recreation Board, which is considered a springboard for potential mayoral or city council candidates. Mr. Rawlings is also the former CEO of Pizza Hut, and has contributed thousands of dollars to both national and local Democratic candidates, including 2010 gubernatorial candidate Bill White.
If Mike Rawlings steps into the race, it is highly likely that he will lock up much of the Democratic fundraising community behind his banner. He is already independently wealthy and lives in Preston Hollow so he can also self-fund his own campaign. This will easily make Rawlings one of the heavies in the race should he decide to run.
Since Mike Rawlings has not actually announced, he has no campaign website. I am including an article below discussing his appointment to the Parks and Recreation Board by Mayor Leppert for your reading enjoyment, instead.
Brint Ryan's name came up in a recent poll asking about potential mayoral candidates. Neither Brint nor the polling firm is saying who was behind the poll. However, Brint has been included due to his past willingness to run for elected office, and proven he is not shy about spending his wealth in an election campaign.
Brint Ryan is the CEO of Ryan, Inc, which is a large tax services firm based in Dallas and founded by Brint. Ryan, Inc is also where potential 2012 Senate candidate John Sharp works as a Principal out of their Austin office. In 2009, Brint Ryan made an unsuccessful run to take the open seat in District 13 that was vacated by Mitch Rasansky. While Brint lost to Ann Margolin, he did spend over $1 million dollars in his election campaign.
Brint has shown in 2009 that he is not above spending large amounts of money to build name recognition, and can easily self-fund his campaign. Brint also has the benefit of hindsight from 2009 to understand the potential pitfalls in his background that his opponents will try to exploit.
Unfortunately, Brint's voting history is sparse at best, which also dogged him during his own council campaign. During this campaign, he labeled himself as a conservative businessman. Since then he has gone on to vote in the 2010 Republican primary. All of these factors should give an indication of Brint's political leanings.
Dallas County is a solid Democratic county in North Texas. This was proven for a third time in a row when every countywide Democratic candidate won their election, despite the terrible losses in the State Legislature. As Dallas County is blue so is the City of Dallas. Presently, 8 Democrats sit on a 14 member City Council, which is led by a Republican mayor. In the 2009 Municipal Election, over 22,000 people who voted have also voted in two of the last three Democratic Primaries. Compare this to the roughly 14,000 people who voted in two of the last three Republican primaries and also voted in the 2009 Municipal Election.
I stated in my previous post that first-time partisan candidates who have campaigned and served in non-partisan offices typically make stronger candidates. They have a better idea of how to campaign, report finances, and also serve as an elected official. It is time that Democrats help elect their future leaders to municipal offices, such as Dallas Mayor and City Council.
While the 2010 Elections are over and most partisan politicos are waiting for 2012 redistricting, I wanted to take some time to write and talk about the non-partisan elections in the City of Dallas. Non-partisan elections are often the starting place for people to get involved in politics and run for office. The turnout is small and money needed to win tiny compared to some State House or even State Senate races, not to mention a federal race. Rafael Anchia (House 103), Carol Kent (House 102), and Wendy Davis (Senate 10) are examples of great Democrats in the State Legislature who got their start in non-partisan offices.
A quick primer on Dallas City Council
Dallas City Council is made up of 14 districted seats that run every 2 odd-numbered years. They are term-limited to 4 consecutive terms (8 years) and earn $37,500 per year. Dallas Mayor, also known as Place 15, serves a 4 year term for a maximum 2 consecutive terms, and earns $60k per year. You can see a map of Dallas City Council Districts at Dallas County Elections website.
Who's on First (Incumbents)
This year only a single City Council seat held by Steve Salazar in District 6 will be an open seat due to term limits. To my knowledge, no other incumbent has signaled that they do not plan to run for re-election. Below in a list of each incumbent currently up for re-election. The numbers to the right of these names indicate the terms each incumbent has completed so far.
District 1 - Delia Jasso (1)
District 2 - Pauline Medrano (3)
District 3 - David Neumann (3)
District 4 - Dwaine Caraway (2)
District 5 - Vonciel Hill (2)
District 6 - (Open Seat)
District 7 - Carolyn Davis (2)
District 8 - Tennell Atkins (2)
District 9 - Sheffie Kadane (2)
District 10 - Jerry Allen (2)
District 11 - Linda Koop (3)
District 12 - Ron Natinsky (3)
District 13 - Ann Margolin (1)
District 14 - Angela Hunt (3)
As the numbers indicate, a 2011 win will begin the fourth term for Angela Hunt, Ron Natinsky, Linda Koop, and Pauline Medrano.
Who's on Second (Challengers)
So far, the list of challengers is few. It is not uncommon for City Council seats to run unopposed. Dr. Elba Garcia (now County Commissioner Garcia) was virtually unopposed after winning her first term against now outgoing city council member Steve Salazar. Jerry Allen was actually elected to his first term unopposed on the ballot.
At the end of 2010, only Scott Griggs has come out as a declared candidate for District 3 against incumbent David Neumann. Scott Griggs is a patent lawyer. His campaign website is GriggsForDallas.com and link to his Facebook Page. I plan on discussing more of the District 3 race once campaign finance reports have been filed by both David Neumann and Scott Griggs after January 15.
Who's on Third (Mayoral Race)
The gorilla in the room for 2011 is "What will Mayor Leppert do?" Mayor Tom Leppert is up for re-election in 2011. However, Mayor Leppert has indicated an interest in doing a primary challenge against Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. The Mayor could decide to follow in the steps of Ron Kirk by running for re-election, and then leaving office 6 months later in order to run against Senator Hutchison. Alternatively, Mayor Leppert could decide to not run for re-election, and spent the next year raising money and building support among Texas Republicans.
If Tom Leppert does not run for re-election, that will cause a shift in City Council elections. Both city councilors Angela Hunt and Ron Natinsky have indicated an interest in running for Mayor. In Dallas City politics, Angela Hunt has been a solid voice of opposition to many of Mayor Leppert's initiatives, while Ron Natinsky has been on the opposite side. Naturally, other individuals outside of Dallas City Council would also seek the mayoral seat, but none have announced as of this writing.
Finding Home Base
As mentioned earlier, many local politicos are waiting to see what Mayor Leppert will do and for more challengers to announce their candidacies. It can easily be assumed that most challengers are waiting till after January 1 to avoid having to file a campaign finance report on January 15.
The official 2011 election calendar has not yet been released on the City of Dallas website. However, using the 2009 calendar, we can assume the following dates for 2011.
Jan 15 - Semi-Annual Campaign Finance Reports
Feb 14 - First day to file for office
Mar 14 - Last day to file for office
Apr 14 - 30 Day Campaign Finance Reports
May 02 - Early Voting Begins
May 06 - 8 Day Campaign Finance Reports
May 10 - Early Voting Ends
May 14 - Election Day
I hope to write further on Dallas City elections once campaign finance reports have been filed after January 15. I will go into how much cash on hand each incumbent reported, along with an analysis of past election costs in their district.
"The people of Freestone county have every reason to oppose the ash that is and has been buried there for over 40 years. You should see the mountains created out of that coal ash there and Luminant always has paid ads in the local papers claiming how they have restored the lands back to it original state after mining the coal." Vicky Prater, Navarro County Texas.
The EPA has proposed two competing rules to regulate the use of coal ash, a strong rule (C) and a soft rule (D), yet there is a glaring problem. Jeff Stant, of the Environmental Integrity Project: "The proposed C rule will not regulate the placement of coal ash in mines. We need thousands of letters demanding this loophole be closed."
In a report by EarthJustice, "Waste Deep: Filling Mines With Coal Ash Is Profit for Industry, but Poison for People.", they note that "in the absence of federal regulations, many states allow dumping of coal ash into unlined mine pits, where the waste's toxic constituents can migrate unimpeded into groundwater. Dumping coal combustion waste into mines is especially dangerous because mining often creates conditions that allow for more rapid contamination of adjacent groundwater"
"Minefilling coal ash is a slow-motion and invisible counterpart to the TVA catastrophe," says Earthjustice attorney and report co-author Lisa Evans. "There, the destruction was unleashed in a matter of minutes. For communities with water poisoned by the country's hundreds of coal ash mine dumps, the damage has been gradual and largely unseen, but it also presents a grave threat."
Earthjustice estimates that about 25 million tons of coal combustion waste -- 20 percent of all such waste generated -- is dumped into mines each year. The practice is occurring throughout the U.S. coalfields, including West Virginia and Texas, and presents a serious threat to public health.
So why wasn't minefilling covered by the EPA's coal ash rule? The problem lies in part because the EPA shares jurisdiction over mine filling with the Office of Surface Mining.
But there's hope. If we can win a strong C rule (which we'll get only if we can overwhelm the EPA with comments and hearing attendance at the 7 hearings across the country) we will have set a strong precedent for regulating minefilling. By requiring that coal ash be placed above the water table (so it doesn't leak into groundwater) and in sites with composite liners and leachate collection, we'll be laying the groundwork for requiring those same safeguards in regulating minefilling.
So step by step, we're getting there.
1) Tell the EPA you're disappointed minefilling isn't covered by the coal ash rule, and urge them to adopt the strong coal ash rule (C). Send a message to the EPA here.
2) Go to the Dallas coal ash hearing on September 8th. Transportation and logistics provided by the Sierra Club. We've got to outnumber the industry goons. Sign up to go to the hearing here.
3) One we get the strong coal ash rule, keep up the pressure on the EPA to make sure they work with the Office of Surface Mining to regulate minefilling.
Even if Congress can't pass a climate bill, we CAN make a difference.
We know about the Bad Health Brigade, and that coal ash contains toxic amounts of them, but there's an insidious friend of theirs that just isn't getting any attention at all.
Burning coal can produce Radon (it's actually TENORM, technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive materials), Polonium 210 and Lead 210- and it can be emitted as solid radioactive material, as gases, and as both.
For example, Radon gas emissions at the proposed NRG coal-fired power plant result from its presence in the coal, which means that alarming quantities of radon gas will be released into the air during large-scale coal combustion.
Radon gas emissions at the proposed Oak Grove plant result from the presence of radon in the coal, and significant quantities are released into the environment. The highest potential concentrations of radiation would be in the Robertson County area closest to the oak grove plant.
However, there is NO information about the average concentrations of radon and its radioactive relatives in the coal in the permit application, the TCEQ's technical review, or the draft permit for the Sandy Creek plant.
The Law:
1) TCEQ's Regulatory Definition of "Air Contaminant" in state law includes "radioactive material".
2) Radon is a radionuclide classified as hazardous air pollutant/HAP under Title III of the Clean Air Act.
Why isn't the TCEQ regulating radon exposure to radon and its carcinogenic byproducts? Well, they don't regulate much.
Has any radiation been detected near coal plants? In Texas!?
Yes.
The U.S. Geological survey conducted extensive flyovers of the US looking for radiation hotspots. Every coal-fired power plant had two radiation hotspots. One for the coal and one for the coal ash piles.
The highest concentrations would be in the Robertson County area closest to the Oak Grove Plant. Radon gas emissions at the proposed Oak Grove coal-fired power plant results from its presence in the coal, and significant quantities of radon gas are released into the air during large-scale coal combustion.
Get involved, fight coal ash at www.cleanuptexasnow.org
The EPA has proposed two rules to regulate toxic coal ash, and they're going to hold only five hearings across the country to hear from citizens. One of those hearings is going to be in Dallas, Texas, on September 8th, so we are putting all hands on deck to make sure that there's a powerful voice demanding a strong coal ash rule.
Not sure what coal ash is? It's all the waste produced when burning coal (you can imagine how toxic it is). It may look like dirt, but it tastes like a Superfund site: monitoring data at 31 coal ash sites found arsenic, lead, selenium, cadmium, thallium antimony, mercury, boron, sulfate, and more exceeding drinking water standards in groundwater at 26 of the sites.
Right now, coal companies are free to put it wherever they like, usually in ponds, landfills, and uncovered earthen pits.
The EPA has proposed a strong option, which would classify coal ash as hazardous waste, and under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle C, the EPA would have the power to federally enforce the following requirements: getting a permit for a disposal site, require effective clean-up in the case of a leak, groundwater monitoring, and storage sites. The soft option means continuing to classify coal ash as solid waste, which means that the regulation would be state-to state and enforcement would depend on the oh-so-easy citizen lawsuits. If you remember Pirates of the Caribbean, the soft option is kind of like Pirate Code. It's more of a guidelines, really, which means Elizabeth Turner is still going to be a prisoner on the Black Pearl and coal companies are still going to dump coal ash wherever they like.
Not sure how destructive this can be? See what happens when 1 billion gallons of coal ash sludge destroy a Tennessee community.
This was an obvious destructive catastrophe, but coal is a silent killer too. Living near a coal ash site is like smoking twenty, yes, that's right, TWENTY packs of cigarettes a day. Except if you live near a coal ash site, you can't just quit. You have to leave your home.
In Texas alone, the Brandy Branch Coal ash dump, the Southwestern Electric Power Co. coal ash dump, and the Texas Utilities Electric Martin Lake Reservoir have leaked elevated levels of selenium and toxic metals. There are no leachate collection systems in Texas, and there is no groundwater monitoring. It's worse than using a plastic bag for your goldfish- it's definitely going to leak.
But it's not just about coal ash. This is about making sure that polluters are responsible for external costs. This is about making sure that when there is environmental impact, the burden of responsibility falls on those who are responsible for the impact, not for those who suffer the collateral damage.
Earlier this week, Democratic District Attorney Craig Watkins appears on the Colbert Report to talk about his efforts in Dallas County to use DNA evidence to fix wrongful convictions. The clip is embedded below and for further reading, browse through this interview of Watkins by Reason Magazine.
Despite repeated campaign promises to always be in the District on weekends, Pete Sessions is working overtime today to kill health care reform.
His latest outburst on the House floor drew "a burst of chatter" in the room, kind of like it does in bi-partisan settings here at home when Sessions gets stuck for an answer and says the first thing that comes to mind, usually a tangent about "socialism" or "Nancy Pelosi."
In his latest gaffe, Pete Sessions defended the insurance industry's practice of charging higher rates to women, comparing the practice to charging higher rates for smokers. Transcript over the jump...
Eric Johnson, who is challenging Democratic incumbent Terri Hodge in House District 100 in Dallas, picked up the endorsement of District Attorney Craig Watkins in a press release this morning.
The endorsement announcement coincides with the Statesman's Jason Embry declaring Hodge, whose federal bribery trial is scheduled for next year, to be the most endangered Texas house incumbent in next March's party primaries.
However, many would disagree with Hodge being number one on that list and Embry concedes that the long time incumbent's campaign is "far from dead." Hodge still retains the support of U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson and County Commissioner John Wiley Price. To be sure though, Johnson, who raised $100,000 in 100 days, is the most serious opponent Hodge has faced in years.
While endorsements are important at this stage of the race to build credibility, Johnson himself told the DMN's Gromer Jeffers, "Endorsements don't vote. People vote. We're going straight to the people of District 100 for their support."
Dallas district Judge Tena Callahan ruled today that the state's bans on same-sex marriage, passed by voters in 2005 as Prop 2, violates the constitutional guarantee to equal protection under the law. As such, she is ruling to allow a same-sex couple married in 2006 in Massachusetts to be granted a divorce in Texas. This is in spite of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's intervention in the case saying it just can't be allowed under his interpretation of the law.
She denied the attorney general's intervention and said her court "has jurisdiction to hear a suit for divorce filed by persons legally married in another jurisdiction."
"This is huge news. We're ecstatic," said Dallas attorney Peter Schulte, who represents the man who filed the divorce. The man, identified in court documents as J.B., asked that he and his former partner not be identified.
Schulte said the ruling was a surprise and that he hoped to have a divorce order for the judge to sign in the "next few weeks."
In a prepared statement, Attorney General Greg Abbott said he would appeal the ruling "to defend the traditional definition of marriage that was approved by Texas voters.
If Greg Abbott is so against gay marriage why does he want them to stay "gay married"? Maybe we'll see Abbott advocating for abolishing straight divorce next to help defend the institution of marriage.
