Tag Archives: Amarillo mayor

local news, Uncategorized

Harpole stays the course on graffiti battle

1 Comment

Paul Harpole has had a difficult past few weeks.

The Amarillo mayor has seen two of his City Council allies lose their seats to challengers; then another ally, a non-incumbent, got beat in a runoff. The result has been a majority of council members who are new to the job and who have promised to bring “change” to the city.

All the while, the mayor has kept plugging away at a campaign promise he made four years ago when he first ran for the office to which he was re-elected.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/29326507/for-harpole-the-graffiti-fight-goes-on-and-on

He’s still battling graffiti “artists” who keep scarring buildings all over the city. He calls them vandals and says what they’re doing to people’s property is no different from someone smashing out car windows.

I’m glad to know he’s staying the course.

However, Harpole knows better than most that the fight likely will never end.

I don’t want to be melodramatic here, but it kind of reminds me of the war on terror. We kill one terrorist leader and another one pops up to take his place. You get rid of one vandal and, by golly, another one jumps out of the tall grass to continue “tagging.”

The mayor’s cause is a worthwhile one. He intends to dissuade enough of these individuals to stop blemishing people’s private property. Over time, Harpole says, he thinks he can put a serious enough dent in this graffiti problem.

Will he eliminate it? Likely not. That doesn’t mean he — and those who’ll follow him in the mayor’s office — should stop trying.

 

local news, media news, Uncategorized

Non-endorsement sends dubious message

Let’s talk about newspaper endorsements and what they intend to accomplish.

Editors and publishers will tell you they aren’t intended to make voters cast ballots in accordance with what the newspaper management wants. The folks who run these media outlets seek to stay on the moral high ground. “We just want to be a voice in the community,” they say. “It’s enough just to make people think. We know we cannot make people vote a certain way and that’s not our intention.”

It’s all high-minded stuff. I used to say such things myself when I was editing editorial pages for two newspapers in Texas — one in Beaumont and one in Amarillo — and at a paper in my home state of Oregon.

But the reality, though, is that newspaper executives — publishers and editors — never would complain if elections turn out the way they recommend.

Is there a dichotomy here? I think so.

Which brings me to the Amarillo Globe-News’s non-endorsement today in the upcoming election for mayor. The paper chose to remain silent. It wouldn’t endorse Paul Harpole’s re-election to a third term as mayor, nor would it recommend voters elect Roy McDowell as mayor.

The paper did express a couple of things about Harpole. It said it is disappointed in the missteps and mistakes that have occurred on Harpole’s watch and it also predicted that Harpole would be re-elected on May 9.

Newspapers fairly routinely encourage community residents to get out and vote. They encourage them to make the tough choices. Pick a candidate, the newspaper might suggest. Hey, none of them might not be statesmen or women, but they’re committing themselves to public service.

Suppose for a moment that Amarillo voters — all of them — took the Globe-News’s non-recommendation to heart. What if no one voted for mayor? What if no voter decided that one of the two men seeking the office deserved their vote? Would the paper declare that a victory? Or would it lament the chaos that would ensue?

This is why I disliked non-endorsements back when I toiled for daily newspapers. I’ve always believed voters expect the newspaper to recommend someone in a race, even if no candidate deserved a ringing endorsement. If nothing else, some voters do rely on newspapers to provide some guidance to voters who might not have sufficient knowledge of all the issues that decide these important elections.

Recommending no one? That’s their call. However, it’s fair to wonder whether a newspaper should ask voters to do something its management wouldn’t do, which is make a choice on whom to support at the ballot box.

 

political news

Be careful with war references, politicians

Listen up, politicians.

Whether you’re running for president of the United States, any seat in Congress, the statehouse or a seat at City Hall, take care when referencing any military experience.

There will be folks out here who are listening to your every word.

Roy McDowell is running for mayor of Amarillo. He’d been referring in public statements to his military service “in Vietnam.” Turns out McDowell didn’t serve in-country, but served during the Vietnam War era.

Why bring this up? Because some of us who actually did serve in Vietnam are keenly aware of these things and want to be sure that all vets — whose service is honorable — portray their service honestly.

Is this a deal-breaker? Probably not, but McDowell and other politicians need to be acutely aware that the world is watching and listening.

He’s not the first politician to fudge a little. U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., did a doozy of a job mischaracterizing his own military service before being elected to the Senate. He, too, said he’d served in Vietnam when he hadn’t. Bad call, senator.

This also reminds me of a young man whose acquaintance I made some years ago. He told my wife and me he “flew helicopters” in Bosnia and Kosovo in the mid-1990s. When he said he “flew,” I assumed immediately he piloted them. We would talk about his experience “flying” Apache choppers for the Army. I assumed, of course, that he either was a warrant officer or was commissioned. He well might have flown aboard the choppers, but perhaps as a crew member.

Why make that leap? Well, years later, I happened to be browsing through his office and discovered his discharge certificate on a wall. It listed his rank as private, E-1. What? How could he have “flown” helicopters if he’s a mere enlisted man — and a buck private to boot?

Take great care, politicians. If you fudge on your service record, you can be caught.

 

local news

Perception meets reality, Mr. Mayor

Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole is a good man who I believe is motivated by the best intentions.

However, for him to dismiss concerns about whether a new town-hall policy somehow isn’t driven by politics leaves me wondering whether he truly understands how some people can perceive what looks so patently obvious.

The mayor is facing a re-election fight next month. So, on the eve of that balloting, he announces a series of town hall meeting with constituents. He wants to hear their concerns. He wants to act on them, if possible. He is all ears. He’s an open book. He’s receptive to people’s gripes. He wants to let people talk for as long as they want, without the restrictions they face during regular City Council meetings.

Roy McDowell, who’s running against the mayor, isn’t buying it fully. He thinks Harpole is doing this as some sort of political stunt.

Is that how he and some others around the city perceive it? If they do, does that become some form of reality in their mind? Yes and yes.

Which brings me back to my initial point. Is the mayor tone deaf?

Harpole says he’s got meetings scheduled through the rest of the year and that whether he continues with them will depend on how responsive residents are to his outreach.

The mayor and City Manager Jarrett Atkinson conducted the first town hall meeting this week. They answered questions about city issues ranging from downtown improvement plans to street repair. I applaud them both for making themselves available to residents.

However, as the great Boston Red Sox slugger the late Ted Williams used to say about hitting a baseball, “Timing is everything.”

So it is with politics.

 

local news

Candidates go on the air

Panhandle PBS general manager Chris Hays sent this email out to media representatives, so I want to share it here.

I’m excited to inform you about a special edition of “Live Here,” as individuals running for office in the upcoming City of Amarillo elections join us for a Candidates Forum. The special airs tomorrow at 7. 

The 16 mayoral and city council candidates will participate in this exclusive forum with members of Amarillo media-television, radio, print and online-asking the questions. 

Viewers have the opportunity to see the candidates respond, listen to their answers and decide for themselves which ones deserve to represent them. Share your thoughts on each candidate’s answers on Twitter using the hashtag #LiveHerePBS. 

Here’s Panhandle PBS blogger John Kanelis’ preview of the forum. 

That’s public television truly serving the public. Be an informed voter before you head for the booth (and you will head to the booth, right?). Tune in Thursday, April 2 at 7 p.m. for this special edition of Live Here…”City Elections 2015: A Candidate’s Forum.”

OK, I just left in the part about the blog I had written about that Panhandle PBS posted earlier.

But the crux of this post is to drive home an important point that I’ve sought to make on High Plains Blogger as well as the blog I write for Panhandle PBS. It is that the local elections matter more than elections at any level.

Sixteen residents of Amarillo have offered themselves as candidates for Amarillo City Council and for mayor of our fine city. Their commitment to doing something positive for the city is demonstrated merely in their declaring their intention to run for public office. The offices of council member and mayor are essentially volunteer positions; we pay these folks $10 per weekly meeting, plus whatever expenses they might incur doing business on behalf of the city.

Why not, then, demonstrate our own commitment to the city simply by listening to what they have to say at the televised candidate forum and then voting on the candidates of our choice when the time comes?

Once more, for the record, I’ll simply point out that the message of turning out for local elections should resonate far beyond Amarillo’s corporate border. Wherever you live, in whatever city, you need to pay attention to what your fellow neighbors have to say when they seek public office.

Do not let your next-door neighbor, or the folks across town, decide this election for you.

Citizenship works better when more people — not fewer of them — get involved in the government process.

It starts with voting.