In its July issue, D[allas] Magazine has published its ranking of Dallas suburbs. I know what you're thinking. What does D Magazine, host to the FrontBurner blog, self-described as a "snarky celebration of ignorance," know about Dallas suburbs?
After the jump, let's hear them out.
A child on a road trip with his family asks, "Where are we?" and the father answers, "Let's check the map. We're off the blue roads [the Interstate Highways marked in blue on the road atlas]. We're off the red roads [the US and state highways]. We're off the black roads [the county highways]. I think we're off the map altogether." It was always my dream to be off the map altogether.
After the jump, a few of the random places (and I mean random literally) that I visited vicariously last month that are "off the blue roads".
 |
At Monday night's Richardson City Council meeting, attorney Richard Tanner spoke during the open-mic visitors section and accused the city council of illegally violating the city charter by issuing certificates of obligation (bonds) without first submitting the matter to the voters. Serious accusation. This wasn't your stereotypical "old man yells at cloud" rant. He's a lawyer. He must know what he's talking about, right?
After the jump, what the lawyer didn't know. Or at least what he didn't tell us.
Movie franchise sequels tend to disappoint, then peter out altogether. Matrix Reloaded, Matrix Revolutions, anyone? That's the same feeling I got watching the third briefing of the Richardson City Council on the West Spring Valley Corridor Reinvestment Study. I'd seen it all before. It wasn't really answering any of the questions I had from the first movie. And it wasn't going anywhere. My take on the first two briefings can be read here and here. After the jump, my take on the third briefing.
Twitter tracks from June, 2010:
After the jump, more Twitter tracks.
 |
| From 2010 0707 Chicago |
We're back. Seven states. Ten cities. Thirteen days. 2,932 miles. Countless good times and memories. Click on the links below to see where we went and what we were up to.
Yesterday we had a pop quiz on civics. The two questions dealt with compensation for public employees. Today's question deals with government transparency. It is prompted by Jim Schutze's report of a Dallas City Council meeting.
"Before the council bit into [a contentious issue], [Mayor Tom] Leppert called a 10-minute recess. This is where the real stuff happens. The microphones are off; they've stepped away from the dais; and all we can see out here in the peanut gallery is who's shmoozing whom."
The Texas Open Meetings Act forbids government bodies from deliberating public business in private serial meetings of less than a quorum (so-called "walking quorums") then ratifying their actions as a quorum in a subsequent public meeting. The question is, why is the schmoozing described by Schutze not an illegal "walking quorum?"
Pop quiz time. Topic? Compensation of public officials. Get your blue books out. Use as many as you need. Take all the time you want. Open book. Consult with classmates. Whatever it takes to get the right answers.
After the jump, ... begin.
You'll need it.
Four months ago, GOP party primary voters denied nominations to two members of the State Board of Education (SBOE) representing north Texas. Don McLeroy in District 9 (northern Collin County and much of east Texas) and Tincy Miller in District 12 (much of north Dallas and Richardson) were rejected by Republican Party voters. McLeroy and Miller continue to hold their seats until the November general election. A month ago, the SBOE approved changes to the social studies standards used in Texas public schools. The lame duck far-right majority on the board dictated far-right changes, seemingly against the primary voters' wishes.
With the damage done, the SBOE has been out of the news lately and is likely to remain that way through the November elections. After the jump, why we should still care.
Recently, first-time candidate for Texas House District 102 Stefani Carter was caught plagiarizing lines from Barack Obama for her own stump speech. The wording of Carter's speech was thoroughly covered by many, but today I want to look at her side's defense against the charges of plagiarism and resume padding. It exhibits just as much political spin as her stump speech that got her in trouble.
After the jump, a case of political spin deconstructed.