I have finally decided that I have seen his true colors – nothing blindingly good or different is going to emerge from himNote: Seems like Ms. Hopson, of Wimberley, is on a roll and we couldn't help but share her letter to State Sen. Kirk Watson of Austin, the former Mayor of Austin and darling of Central Texas liberals and environmentalists. So, we ask, "What is Kirk thinking endorsing Patrick Rose?" seeing as how so many liberals and environmentalists inside District 45 are backing Rose's primary opponent, Andrew Backus. This is sure to plant another quill into the already well splintered local Dem Party. Anyone who thinks they can bring this picture into focus, or put on a good defense of Rose's actual record of accomplishments inside his own district, is welcome to give it a shot. Maybe it's a testament to how diverse Democrats' interests are and how they tend to lose focus on what it is they are trying to achieve. Or, in Sen. Watson's case, maybe he sees gold in them thar hills.
Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net, to Sen. Watson at kirk.watson@senate.state.tx.us, or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
Monday, February 15, 2010
Dear Kirk,
Sen. Watson
I received your email newsletter and almost always agree with what you say. However, today at home I had a robo-call from you to endorse Patrick Rose for re-election as State Rep for House District 45 (in which I reside). I was surprised that you endorsed Patrick, and I can only think that you are not aware of what he stands for and whom he truly represents.Patrick Rose is an ambitious young man who told at least some of his teachers as far back as elementary school that he wanted to be president some day. I've no doubt that that is still his ultimate goal. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but Patrick seems very single-minded, and he seems also to be one who believes it's okay to use questionable means to achieve what he considers a good end result.
I have voted for Patrick every time he has run for the HD 45 seat. Disappointments upon disappointments in him have piled up, and, like many others, I have finally decided that I have seen his true colors – nothing blindingly good or different is going to emerge from him.
Patrick does not represent his constituents, but instead is the water boy for powerful interests who contribute grandly to his campaigns. (By the way, Patrick said at the beginning of his first re-election campaign in 2004 that he was going to raise over a million dollars for that campaign, and he did. He raised over $900,000 for the 2006 campaign and over $1,000,000 for the 2008 campaign. As I say, he is a determined and single-minded young man. Don't get in his way.)
Hays County (which Patrick represents and where I live) was the most drought-stricken county in the entire state of Texas this past summer. The U.S. Weather Service had to invent a new description for the severity of our plight – "exceptional drought." But in the midst of that condition, Patrick did all he could to prevent Hays County from having the Chapter 36 authority (of the Texas Water Code) which almost all other water conservation districts in the state have. Patrick is in the pockets of land developers who helped him raise those millions of campaign dollars. I can tell you more about Patrick and his efforts to block rational water conservation, but I need to wind up this letter.
Suffice it to say that merely looking at a list of Patrick Rose's most generous campaign donors is very telling in itself. Some of them are:
Texas Land Developers Assn.
Texans for Lawsuit Reform (anti-consumer business group)
Texas Association of Realtors
Texas Assn. of Mortgage Bankers
Real Estate Council of Austin
Texas Land Title Association
Randall Morris (real estate offices in several Central Texas cities)
Wimberley Quicksand Partners (Wimberley Springs)
Richard Weekley (real estate)
Scott Roberts (Salt Lick Barbecue in Driftwood)
Rex Baker (owns title co. and water interests in Dripping Springs)
Bob J. (Bobby Jack) Perry (Houston land developer who also has interests in Colorado, Louisiana, and elsewhere).
-Source: www.followthemoney.org.
And, of course, both Patrick and his father, Mike Rose, are licensed real estate brokers. They likely will haul in fat commissions when they are agents for Scott Roberts as he develops the Salt Lick area.
Rose has also pushed through several MUD districts for developers in Hays and other Texas counties. Most mind-boggling of all is that he got the Legislature to pass a bill in 2009 which created a single-member taxing district of land owned solely by Scott Roberts, the owner of Salt Lick Barbecue. Roberts gets to collect and keep part of the sales tax he takes in at the Salt Lick. People who eat there are helping Roberts pay for the big development plans he has for his many acres.
If you aren't dubious about just whom it is that Patrick Rose works for, I don't know what to say. I hope you will cease supporting Patrick Rose in his bid again for the HD 45 seat. His Democrat opponent in the primary, Andrew Backus, has my vote and the vote of all who are concerned about water issues in Hays County and the rest of Texas.
Sincerely,
Barbara Hopson,
Wimberley
hopsonbarbara@yahoo.com
22 comments:
The Who song Naked Eye says it in a round about way:
"You can cover up your guts but when you cover up your nuts, You're admitting that there must be something wrong".. Rose protects his deals by not responding to questions especially concerning his dirty money and he could start a farm with the amount of dirt on his money. It's the intent of disclosure to have the public ask or at least consider the implied relationships between the donor and the elected representative. Hey Rose, what are you covering or hiding there?
Kirk Watson is no different that almost all politicians. They get so used to compromising to get anything of value, they can't see just how much they are compromising when they recommend another politician. Rose is an acceptable compromise for Watson because he believes he will get something in return later.
When dealing with politicians, most of them evolve into pathological liars from making so many promises -- with no intention of fulfilling those promises. Over time, they can't tell the lies from the truth even as they talk. This is why many politicians end up engaging in infidelities, because they lose touch with any sense of personal integrity and honesty.
Personally, I don't listen to either party's rhetoric anymore because here is how I see the two parties:
1) Republicans mean what they say but their ideas are the same old outdated failed "whitist" policies which recently culminated in the economy falling apart and the incredibly stupid Sarah Palin being the GOP front runner in 2012. Palin's influence with the GOP shows how pathetic and desparate the Republicans have become.
2) Democrats, on the other hand, have better ideas to solve America's problems but don't have the courage to stick to those ideas when challenged by their mean-spirited opposition. And they are just as addicted to their lobby bribe money as the Republicans (and they will sell out rather than jeapordize their livelihood). Also, the Dems naively think that negotiation and compromise will work -- when in fact the Reps have no intention to even try to solve America's problems until they have removed the "Negro immigrant" from the Oval Office.
Texas has a different scenario than the one described above. Texas is still run by the Republican "whitist" party, and the Texas power structure is going to do anything they can to make sure it stays that way. As a result, the career Texas Democrats - who are generally not "whitists" but are essentially liberal Republicans - must stick together and support each other even though there may be "differences" between them.
Hence Watson's endorsement of Rose. It ia a matter of convenience and political barter. And years of compromising their integrity for future financial or political gain.
It is interesting that the Democrat party in Central Texas has signed on to a strategy of being AGAINST a candidate rather than FOR one. This is the predicament that the Republican Party has been faced with in the last few Presidential elections, think McCain. One of the tried and true rules of politics is; Support a weak unqualified candidate and trash an established incumbent and lose an election. Those slamming Rose right now, need to sit back and think about the reality of the situation.
I think the current debacle is due in large part, to the increased liberalism of the Democratic Party here in the Hill Country. The increased immigration of big city liberals from Houston and elsewhere has changed things in the party. The recent Presidential election has also caused many covert liberals to come out of the closet and emboldened the overt ones. The mob mentality of the attacks on Rose is alarming and it signals an unprecedented desperation in the party.
Mr. Backus is a very intelligent and honorable man but somewhat flawed and in no way qualified for the office he seeks. His candidacy can be likened to a “tantrum” for not getting his way on the Chapter 36 authorization enhancement. A referendum on that subject would fail by leaps and bounds today and even the most liberal members of the party know this. Backing a candidate with a single mission of securing more authority and control over private landowners is bound to disappoint.
If Backus were to be elected, then what, would he be able to build a consensus to get anything passed in that sea of sharks? An egghead in that lowbrow mix of borderline maniacs is bound to be entertaining to say the least.
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" (another Who tidbit) - Rose is just Green without so much religion but the money donors, sans the democratic party loyalist dollars, ARE THE SAME. Hey, who's taller Rose or Green? - that may be the only tangible difference.
So you hate Watson now because he disagrees with you? I hope you find that one politician that believes exactly everything you do without any tolerance of difference.
To Anonymous Comment #5:
I don't hate Kirk Watson. I subscribe to his email newsletter
because I like him and generally
agree with him. I am merely honestly surprised that he is making robocalls to support Patrick
Rose. I still want Kirk to be in
the Texas Senate; I just don't want
him to taint himself by association
with Patrick Rose, whose name John
Sharp today in a letter to the
Austin American-Statesman says has
become synonymous with "liar" --
as in "I've been Rosed."
Barbara Hopson, Wimberley
We've ALL "been Rosed!"
You've been Rosed! Vote for
Andrew Backus in the Democratic
primary.
If you want to tell Patrick Rose
that you're tired of being Rosed,
you can email him at
info@patrickrose.com or
snail mail him at P.O. Box 1053,
Dripping Springs, TX 78620.
Don,
As a very liberal voter, I have one major correction and one minor correction of your comments.
First, most true Hays County liberals are tired of their so-called Democratic incumbents making decisions more like Republicans i.e. supporting projects that they and their crony supporters will monetarily benefit from at the expense of their voting constituency. Unlike the Republican desparation, it is based on trying to re-establish party integrity rather than mob-rule miscalculations.
Second, I don't know where you live, but the Houston transplants are hardly liberals. The ones I have met are religious right wingers. I think you are getting them confused with Austin migrants into east Hays County.
Yes, the Hays County Democrats are having a GOP-Tea Party like reaction, but without the bigotry and the ignorance.
There have been shades of Kirk Watson that showed in part that he is a nut case.
I went to the meetings at the Capitol a few years ago on the topic of toll roads.
I watched the visitors to get the drift of who was for what.
While there were a few people for the toll roads and a few against, there also was a strong construction lobby present that obviously wanted these projects.
Watson clearly was pro-toll agenda and since he was the meeting chair, little was accomplished.
Also, he wanted to stop public statements before many of the anti-toll individuals and groups could be heard.
I knew from that time exactly where Watson stood on tolls and other issues that catered to wealthy lobbies.
Since he and Rose are of the same political mindset, it is not a surprise that Watson supports Rose as their many of their wealthy campaign contributors are the same.
Ralph:
Would you care to elaborate on the "ignorance and bigotry" of the Tea Party "reaction"? Dems are always good at euphemisms, but never at facts.
Ms. Hopson's description of Rose and Rose collecting "big fat commissions on Scott Roberts' development of the Salt Lick" is an ignorant statement in itself. To date Scott hasn't sold a stitch of dirt. What commission would Rose and Rose collect from no sales? None. See? Ignorant. No knowledge of the facts.
How about the one that complains about Mr. Roberts getting to keep sales tax that is collected inside of his district? Who pays that tax? Property owners outside of his district? No. The people who come to his businesses and receive in return for their money a product or service that he provides and they are satisfied with? Yes. (Which btw, government takes money in the form of taxes from its citizens and rarely provides a product or service that its consumers are satisfied with.)
So what's the big deal? He plans to use those sales tax dollars to maintain his development without draining public property tax dollars by building it and turning it over to the public taxing entities (County) to maintain. Where is the intelligence behind the stupid statements that Democrats like Ms. Hopson continue to espouse but fail to support with any logic? How did Mr. Roberts's development hurt Ms. Hopson? If she doesn't go to the Salt Lick or Thurman's Mansion, then she will never contribute a dime to Mr. Roberts' development. However, a great many people continue to come and buy barbecue and hold weddings and other events at Thurman's Mansion. All at no expense to the taxpayers of Hays County. (And before the stale and tired argument of his customers using the public road for which public taxes paid for, stop before you even open your mouth. If you don't live on 1826 and you have driven it, then you are as guilty as anyone else who has used it and doesn't live on it. At least Scott pays his property taxes on his property for which he pays commercial rates and values to Hays County; and for which he gets no service since his commercial interests are on a State-maintained highway for which no County money gets expended - and yes even if some bond money is spent on it, this is also reimbursed by the State to the County.)
Any takers on providing facts for the ignorance? Please? Or will all I hear is how stupid and bigoted I am because of being a conservative?
Dear Anonymous,
I did not say that Patrick and
Mike Rose are PRESENTLY making
commissions on Salt Lick property
sales -- I said that they likely
will do so whenever Scott Roberts
starts developing the property (as
the bill Rose authored and got the
Lege to pass provides for -- conference centers, hotels, etc.
are some of the possibilities
mentioned in the bill). If you want to
attribute words to me (anonymously,
of course), please get them right.
Barbara Hopson, Wimberley
To Anonymous again:
You say, "How about the one that
complains about Mr. Roberts getting to keep sales tax that is collected inside of his [single-
member] district? Who pays that
tax? Property owners outside of his
district? No."
Actually, Anonymous, you are
exactly wrong. It is ONLY people
who live outside his single-
member taxing district who pay
the additional sales tax which
Roberts collects and keeps.(Roberts and family are the only people living inside his tax district.) But if
I go to Ace Hardware or Brookshire
Brothers and
pay sales tax on my purchases, ALL
the tax money goes to state or
local government -- Ace or Brookshire doesn't keep some of the tax money
to improve their business or
fatten their bottom line as Mr.
Roberts does.
Please "reason" more carefully
before you fire off nonsense.
Barbara Hopson
Barbara:
Nonsense would be if you actually believe people outside of Roberts' district are affected as PROPERTY TAX payers. They do not pay property tax to Mr. Roberts. Only, and ONLY, if they visit his establishment will they be paying sales tax on goods and services that he provides.
The sales tax collected goes towards specific projects that have to be related to the District - roads, water, utilities, etc. It is not to enrich Mr. Roberts, but to improve his district with monies that will not come from the government. He could do the traditional subdivision that would be turned over to the County for maintenance, and then all of us taxpayers could pay to maintain it. Is that what you want to see happen, Barbara?
Nonsense is to accuse people of motives of which you do not know, and to assume that you are the be all and know all of the County and to cast aspersions on people's character without knowing them or their plans. If you don't want to be affected by or affect Mr. Roberts' development, stay away from the Salt Lick.
Anonymous,
We all understand that we will
not be paying PROPERTY tax to Mr.
Roberts -- just additional SALES
tax. No one pays property tax to
anyone except to a government entity, last I heard.
"The sales tax collected goes towards specific projects that have
to be related to the District --
roads, water, utilities, etc.,"
you write. EXACTLY! The DISTRICT
is property owned only by Scott
Roberts. He gets to use the
additional sales tax to build roads, put in water and utility lines, etc. So the people who go to the Salt Lick have to pay an additional sales tax they DIDN'T EVEN VOTE ON (talk about taxation
without representation!) to help Roberts develop his property for homes,a conference center, and all the other uses outlined in the bill that Patrick Rose wrote and got passed for Scott.
Shall we start letting every business declare itself a single-member taxing district as Roberts
did? Do you want to pay additional
sales tax the next time you go to
a business, and that money is used
just by and for that business
instead of going into the coffers
for the general public good?
Why are there only negative Rose commentaries on this blog.
I would like to hear other comments from people who like him.
I would like to know WHY they like him so I make a more informed judgment on the man and then vote accordingly.
Why isn't the publisher of this blog printing them???
Thanks for the question, Curious. We have not posted any positive comments about Mr. Rose or his record of accomplishments inside District 45 simply because we have not received any. Certainly, anyone wishing to speak up FOR Mr. Rose is welcome to do so.
Dear No Brains between the ears:
When was the last time you got to vote for anybody's sales tax? What is sales tax for? It goes to the City, County, State for general purposes.
In Mr. Roberts' case, he has a piece of property that he wishes to develop. That's a fact. He could follow the traditional path of development and build roads and other improvements that then become the burden of all PROPERTY TAX payers. Now, I ask you as I asked Ms. Hopson, is that what you would prefer? More infrastructure and more burden on all taxpayers? Or is it not a better plan that when a district can be created to provide a revenue source (and the additional sales tax has to be spent specifically on the district's improvements) that takes care of this development's infrastructure rather than government?
Name for me how many business owners have the ability to develop a piece of land for residential and further commercial use? Are you not aware that this same type of district has been used in the Houston area for years already? This isn't rocket science. As usual when liberals, or Dems, are provided with information that is contrary to their government first nature, then they fail to see the benefit for the failure of the government not having a hand in this development.
Again, no one has yet shown how Mr. Roberts ability to generate additional sales tax LEGALLY as approved by the duly elected Legislature (nearly equal in number of Democrats and Republicans) is wrong, unethical, illegal, immoral, etc. Jealousy is a great deal a part of this if I don't miss my guess. It is class envy, one person getting to do something that someone else can't; or that they have worked hard to achieve success and are using the laws of the State to take advantage of funding mechanisms to actually REDUCE the tax burden on Property Tax payers. Where is the bad part of all this? Can anyone clear this up?
Scott Roberts now has a kingdom. He's found a way to bypass the banks and finance his infrastructure and it only cost him $93,000. It cost the EMS district how much? the citizens, how much? Even if you buy into that insane argument that all is fair in profiteering, Saltlick Scott still used our representative for his personal gain. Pinocchio Ro$e puts a profiteer ahead of the citizens in the EMS district. That's plain to see. Hey Saltlick, did you order fries with that?
Anon # 20 -
You don't get it either do you? Again, even if it cost Scott $200,000 of his PERSONAL MONEY, did it cost the taxpayers ANYTHING? You, nor anyone else can answer that question with anything besides a solid NO!
Using the Representative for his "personal gain"? No, he will be spending millions more developing this property. The sales tax represents a way of maintaining infrastructure at a cost that is kept private, without the need for floating bonds as a MUD would, and keep it afloat on the back of his businesses' success or failure.
Our State Rep, no matter who it is represents us all, and at a request from a constituent, Scott Roberts, Mr. Rose placed a bill before the Legislature that was approved by a majority of the legislators. Do you think that Mr. Roberts bought all of them off? If so, you are a bigger idiot than you sound from your writing.
FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC: So I guess there are no takers on providing a rebuttal regarding how this harms the general tax paying public? Anyone? Thought not.
Whew, the venom is so thick here against Representative Patrick Rose and Scott Roberts. Both are fine gentlemen and don’t deserve all this hate speech. It is funny that most of the attacks seem to come from Liberal Democrats. The same Democrats that gave us a whole host of historically failed office holders. Patrick Rose has not been brought up on charges nor has Scott Roberts. As far as anyone can find they are squeaky clean and with all the spooks looking into it, it appears that their only sin is being aggressive and successful in their pursuits.
Ms. Hopson went off half-cocked in her letter to Senator Kirk Watson in an attempt to create more unfounded criticism of Patrick Rose. From the diatribes seen here, she seems to have been successful. The way I see it, you have two choices here, and it’s Rose or Backus. One is an experienced and powerful public servant; the other is an intelligent but week newcomer with no experience and only one issue on his plate.
My vote will go to Patrick Rose and I look forward to having some fine ribs and brisket at the Salt Lick. Cheers!
Post a Comment