...Ken sent out two large flyers to Rep. primary voters in this district. One stated that Stephanie has only lived in the district for 4 months. David, ...she has lived in the same house for, I'm guessing, 8-10 years at least. She didn't move, the redistricting is what put her in this new district. She's still in the same community and quite involved in it. Ken is "technically" telling the truth, but it was said to mislead people. She is likely more aware of the community than Ken, having been the Tarrant Cty. party chair for the last number of years. I have stayed out of bashing Dewhurst and bashing Ken, but when I got that flyer, that made me mad. And not just me. We had friends calling and stopping by our house very frustrated by this plot.
Also, Ken has been stating that he has not raised taxes in NRH. Again, technically he is correct. However, he has failed to state that the property taxes in NRH have continued to increase every year, but the council, of which he is a voting... participant as councilman, continues to keep the tax RATE the same - effectively raising the taxes on the citizens every year. Jim is on council in HC, so we understand why cities do that, but to state that he's never voted to increase taxes is a misnomer...
1. Sapp's claim that Klick has only lived in District 91 for 4 months
Klick lives in the Park Glen area of Far North Fort Worth in the Keller ISD. Their house was built in 1999 and they bought it and moved in in March 2000 (SOURCE: public records). Klick was raised in the area and has lived here most, if not all, of her life. While it is true that her precinct was recently added to District 91 in the decennial redistricting, it's misleading to leave the inference that she's only recently moved to the area. If Sapp wants to make a case that he's more in tune with 91 because he's in North Richland Hills (the heart of the district, without dispute), make that case. Adding to the foul is the 4-month number. The Federal Appeals Court mandated the final district boundaries in February 2012, which is the basis for Sapp's timeline. But, Klick's precinct was added to 91 by the State Legislature in April 2011, and ultimately the court upheld that boundary, so at worst, Sapp would have to at least acknowledge that Klick has lived in District 91 for 14 months.
PENALTY: 5 YARDS FOR ENCROACHMENT, PLUS 5 YARDS FOR DELAY OF GAME.
2. Klick's claim that Sapp "worked to defeat tax relief for citizens."
Klick has put out multiple mailers with variations of this charge: "Do you support Tax Relief? Ken Sapp says you're not a conservative!"; "Ken Sapp worked to defeat tax relief for citizens." At issue is the property tax freeze for homeowners 65 and older in North Richland Hills. Sapp opposed the tax freeze on the very intellectually honest and mathematically defensible position that freezing taxes on one sub-set of taxpayers (over 65) would unfairly shift additional tax burden to other taxpayers, such as young families and businesses. Sapp made very good, strong, well-reasoned conservative arguments for his position. Klick can argue that Sapp's position was wrong, and that tax freezes for seniors are in fact solid conservative fiscal policy (which, by the way, I've never heard her say). But it's not truthful to say that Sapp "worked to defeat tax relief." In reality, he was working to protect the interests of his constituents who would be additionally taxed by an unfair, regressive tax policy. Neither did Sapp accuse those who supported the tax freeze as being "not conservative." His point was that opposing the freeze was the most intellectually consistent position for conservative ideology, and conservatives who supported the freeze didn't fully understand it. (To Klick's credit, on at least one of her pieces, she included this quote from Sapp: "So any conservative that supported this law didn't understand it.")
PENALTY: 5 YARDS FOR ILLEGAL FORMATION
3. Klick's claim that Sapp "voted to support a push for higher gas taxes."
At issue is a vote by the North Richland Hills City Council to support SB 855 in the 2009 State legislative session. SB 855 would allow Metroplex voters to vote for highway projects that would be funded by designated gasoline tax revenues which would be used only to fund the specific project and would sunset once the project was paid for. Think of it like cities and school districts that put bond elections before the citizens to allow them decide whether or not to spend the money for a new project. Sapp's vote in support of the City of North Richland Hills' position was a vote to give citizens a right to decide at the ballot box for themselves, not "a push for higher gas taxes." This claim is like saying that when the Fort Worth City Council voted to support thestate legislation that allowed the City of Arlington to help fund Cowboys Stadium with increased hotel taxes, the Fort Worth City Council "voted to support a push for higher hotel taxes." This one is 100% intellectually dishonest in my mind.
PENALTY: 15 YARDS FOR UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT
4. Sapp's claim that he never voted to raise taxes in NRH.
At issue here is how to define "tax increase". Does it mean hard dollars of total revenue brought into the city? If that's the case, then one has to take the position that any year-over-year increase in the budget is a tax increase. This position is absurd on its face. Let's say there is a little city somewhere with a $100,000 annual budget. All of a sudden, Ross Perot Jr. comes to their city and builds a major subdivision that doubles the number of homes in town, doubles the number of residents, and triples the total property value for the city. If the City Council adds these new homes to the tax rolls the annual budget jumps to $300,000, have they voted for a tax increase? There are about 178 other ways to look at this question, but all lead to the same conclusion: Sapp's claim is true to the extent that the claim can even be evaluated.
PENALTY: NO FOUL -- PICKED UP THE FLAG AND WAVED OFF THE PENALTY
Your thoughts, please. And please, send me more campaign lies to expose!!! Next up should be David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz.
No comments:
Post a Comment