the Controversial Committee Report
“We don’t raise sacred cows...we just butcher them.”
“Collusion, PACs and Ramblings?”
Editor’s Note:
Time constraints and attending to personal issues account for this being a rather lengthy report. However, with the upcoming fireworks generated by a select few council member’s actions — concerning the current ARK agreement — dear readers should be alerted to what could be occurring in ‘beautiful downtown Irving.’
Clearing the smoke from a dimly lit room might answer the $500K question; alleviate what has already been approved — regarding the TIF funding issue and ARK; and, just maybe, keep the city out of the court house and council members not being held personally liable for any disingenuous actions. If nothing else, the verbal bullying, of a business entity holding a legitimate contract with the city, might be abated.
Settle down. Drag out the Blue Bell ice cream. And don’t doze off before reaching the finale of this extended report.
“On the Road Again”
Yes, dear readers, Willie Nelson is on the road again…but not in Irving. Kudos to the folks working to fix, repair, replace, and re-work some of the city’s most hazardous travel paths around ‘beautiful downtown Irving.’
Drivers can now zip down significant portions of Finley, Beltline, and other major arteries without having to immediately go have new shocks installed on their vehicles.
Keep the asphalt coming guys…Willie, if he ever comes to Irving’s Entertainment Center, is getting a bit aged to bounce and bump on those roadways which still require attention!
“Battle of Special Interest?”
A current council member failed to have a discussion regarding the ARK contract placed on the agenda for this week’s meeting…his attempt was even before knowing what had transpired at the mediation sessions between ARK and the city.
Not surprisingly, this was the same council member who attempted to introduced questions regarding the ARK agreement prior to voting to deny ARK a minor zoning change a couple weeks back. What makes all these efforts, by this council member, even more surprising is that the director of Irving Taxpayers Matter is a political fundraising-bro who is also engaged in a law suit against the City of Irving and ARK. The Irving Taxpayers Matter director even voiced his comments on the zoning case (just prior to his filing the law suit) which eventually passed by more astute members of the city council.
While most politicos will always relate that those who contribute to their campaigns do not have any added influence over their actions, this song and dance seems to be hitting a few sour notes lately when considering the ruckus currently being raised by a select few city council members concerning the ARK agreement. Of course, if “money is the mother’s milk of politicians,” wouldn’t it be great if more local politicos were lactose intolerant? Irving could use a few of those nowadays!
However, the ties of various parties to the law suits (including Billy Bob and Irving Taxpayers Matter utilizing the same lawyer) against the city and ARK might go beyond just campaign contributions to politicos. Wining and dining, visits to a ranch, or any other unknown glad hand non-financial amenity could enter into the equation of favoritism.
To refresh your memory, following is a copy of the June 9, 2013, CCR. The same two individuals, Councilman Meagher and Irving Taxpayers Matter director Chris Allen, are featured in this report. Be sure and note the date of the report and title of the PAC which was established by Allen.
Sometimes, the hardest part of producing one of these screeds isn’t the pounding of the keys to slam words on a page, but what to title the thing once finished. And staff of the CCR was having that problem with this publication. After reading, let us know if a better title would have been more appropriate.
When we scan politico mailings, there are several things that can be absorbed on first glance. Is the piece four-color process? Does it have a political disclaimer as to whom might be responsible for this fairy tale of fiction? Do any photos look like they have been staged...especially when the individual is wearing the same clothing at a backyard BBQ, answering a phone in an office environment, grinning like in a cosmetic dental commercial while shaking hands with some other known political flake, or showing a constituent how to replace a vehicle oil filter.
After reviewing these factors, the fun part starts. Just how gullible does the candidate really believe the brochure recipient must be for them to swallow the tripe being passed off as...how-great-I-think-I-am literature. And don’t forget all the claims being made which the candidate plans to accomplish if elected. (Even Mother Teresa wasn’t this optimistic about her spiritual endeavors.)
With several recent pieces of Allan Meagher-verbiage posing as campaign brochures cluttering our mailbox, staff of the CCR decided to parse these presentations and assist voters as they wade through the hype and Kool-Aid doses that Meagher is serving for the Place 2 city council runoff position.
Here’s a key point to consider. Meagher’s recent brochures noted that they were the product of Focus Irving PAC. While there is nothing wrong -- from a PACs standpoint -- with a PAC attempting to buy or ‘own’ a politico for future favoritism, it does seem odd that their web site offers little or no information as to why this PAC really wants to tout Meagher. Didn’t one of their brochures or mailings even reflect that they were a “grass roots” organization?
While the design of the Focus Irving PAC web site has a slick chamber of commerce-feel with file photos, the written materials actually could have been lifted directly from a chamber presentation manual for potential new members. Interesting, also, was one of the PACs web pages — the “About” section. The lone notation on this page -- that should relate what the PAC is really about -- contained: “Focus Irving is (period)” Wow, that says a lot about who is involved and why they might choose Meagher to be their standard bearer. Other than a later rah-rah “press release,” Focus Irving apparently is a dark political cloud that has only named Chris Allen as its treasurer.
One could even wonder if Meagher was as unaware of the creation of this Focus Irving PAC and its web site as he claimed to have been with the web site created on his behalf by Charles Cotton for his campaign. Was the same web site designer used for both?
Another interesting tidbit is that Focus Irving claims to be a “grass roots” organization. Huh? The only thing noticeably grass-rootsy (excuse the fabricated word) about this PAC is that they are spending an awful lot of ‘green’ in an attempt to get Meagher elected. Is, by chance, Irving Focus PAC an unofficially designated political PAC-arm and money funnel for chamber of commerce folks? If the PAC would disclose its list of all contributors (and amounts) before the election and Meagher fully disclose the actual and in-kind expenses the PAC has faded for him, then Irving voters might have a genuine opportunity to know the actual string pullers and agenda behind Focus Irving PAC.
With all the money Focus Irving PAC is presently pumping into the Meagher campaign, staff of the CCR is having another of their frequent Yogi Berra moments…”deja vu all over again.” This checkbook politics by Focus Irving PAC is starting to resemble a bad summer movie featuring ex-mayor Gears in a key supporting role. And you do remember the money (over a million bucks) Gears spent in a failed re-election effort and the expectations his “grass roots” sponsors/contributors had? Shouldn’t the same be anticipated with Meagher, since some of the known cast of characters observed on his sidelines closely resembles those who were also associated with the ex-mayor Gears re-election effort? ( Anthony Bond, etc.) The only difference in these two situations is that ex-mayor Gears had Billy Bob as his bagman while Meagher appears to be hiding his string pullers and significant contributors behind Focus Irving PAC.
Another similar parallel when looking at the Meagher campaign and comparing it with ex-mayor Gears failed campaign is that Focus Irving PAC is in an ‘attack mode’ against Meagher’s opponent. While most of Meagher’s campaign materials are not quite as sleazy as those that ex-mayor Gears papered the city with, Focus Irving must find it difficult to remind voters what Meagher’s prior service on the council looked like and produced.
After all, it is probably a lot easier to attack your opponent than it is to jog the memory banks of voters with: the McDougal Heritage District folly and its aftermath on tax payers; the fallout and failed efforts with LCG on the Entertainment Center fiasco; the lack of oversight for the most highly paid city manager in Texas; the open check book for the Irving Chamber of Commerce operations and their Dallas Cowboys stadium suite; a host of ordinances and increased fees that chaffed tax payers with increased taxes and regulations; and his demeanor about town and while sitting at the council dais. Yeah, that’s the ticket...attack your opponent and hope that voter minds are as dense as the “grass roots” trying to be sown by Focus Irving PAC.
While staff of the CCR cannot ascertain the degree of effectiveness that Meagher’s opponent, Kensley Stewart, might have, if elected to serve on the city council in the Place 2 position, we do know that he doesn’t have -- in his corner for this contentious political brawl -- the minions lurking and shelling out significant bucks into Focus Irving PAC coffers.
Would someone do a favor for the staff of the CCR and contact Neil Sperry’s WBAP radio program? We would like to see if Neil has an organic cure for the toxic infestation of crabgrass in Focus Irving’s “grass roots.” The Irving landscape is turning nut-brown...not green.
Editors Note:
The following CCR report was originally wordsmithed on June 19, 2018, but not published due to possible later developments concerning a push by select members of the city council to re-negotiate the current Entertainment Center contract with ARK. If you believe in conspiracy theories, the actions of some individuals could cause one to hang their hat on the ‘fact rack’ considering how this is being played out.
As it stands now, a mediation session is ongoing and no action has been taken by the council. The mediation is between the city and ARK. Additionally, the city has to weigh the matters of law suits filed by Billy Bob and Irving Taxpayers Matter (both parties using the same lawyer) against ARK and the city. However, could there be any “collusion” between two individuals, Chris Allen of Irving Taxpayers Matter and Billy Bob with perhaps Councilman Meagher carrying a few pails of water? Regardless, the political circus and bad PR the city could be experiencing with all of these actions doesn’t assist the overall concept of a vibrant Entertainment Center.
After all, the Entertainment Center is doing what it was designed to do: bring people, entertainment, conventions, and visitors to the city. In all probability, more individuals from Dallas have visited Irving in the past few months than in the previous five years!
An industry publication current ranks the Entertainment Center as being 9th in the world for venues and operations!
And, dear readers, that’s good PR. Law suits…not-so-good PR.
The two individuals noted above (Meagher and Allen) are also the centerpiece for the following CCR report.
“Political Jekyll and Hydes”
Yes, staff of the CCR did see the “editorial” in the June 16, 2018, issue of The Rambler. No, we are not ticked off.
Although, Dylan, the CCRs “dog” mentioned in the last paragraph of the “editorial,” is miffed. After all, his “Almost” Mayor of Irving campaign went viral; plus he received e-mails, comments, and TV coverage which provided an international presence for the city. He was totally smashed in The Rambler “editorial.” Cheap shot? Was this blatant animal cruelty as he was the most liked of the two mayoral candidates that year? Why, he was even mentioned, with photo, at the Irving Chamber of Commerce “State of the City” function! Judge for yourself:
While The Rambler took-to-task the opinion blog (know by those who are not afraid to speak its name — the CCR), the “editorial” seemed to be lacking in “factual” information.
Consider this: Is there any difference between “fake news” and “fake editorials?”
With all that is going on in Irving, doesn’t it seem rather bizarre for a wee community publication, The Rambler, to leap on a local opinion blog which did produce facts in a report? Additionally, the report. “Billy Bob 2.0” asked some valid questions which have yet to be answered, or recognized as valid points.
If all that wasn’t bad enough The Rambler proceeded to pillar a DMN reporter and her article in the Dallas Morning News regarding the events surrounding the Entertainment Center law suits.
Did staff of the CCR miss the memo which ordained The Rambler as the guardian and ombudsman of journalistic purity and newspaper article relevance?
The facts, noted in the “Billy Bob 2.0” CCR report, were again communicated directly to a director of Irving Taxpayers Matter — in a separate letter after receiving his two somewhat disingenuous e-mails which seemed to be loaded with political-Torofeca — regarding his actions noted in the “Billy Bob 2.0” report.
When facts cannot be disputed, or valid questions answered, then those attempting to spin a different narrative resort to attacking the wordsmithing which could support the facts. This is the same as a lawyer who pounds the desk, in a rant, to obscure what is actually going on, or by addressing the issue in question directly.
So, if the CCR is going to deal with facts, in this particular penning, then some serious questions should be considered by The Rambler. The answers to these questions might even determine why The Rambler chose to attack the “Billy Bob 2.0” report over the thousands of other CCR reports which have been produced since 1984.
Would The Rambler readers want/need to know responses to the following questions which could be critical to understanding their sudden literary “editorial” attack on a local opinion blog?
- Does a current Irving council member still own a financial interest in The Rambler?
- Has this council member had his political campaigns basically financed by PACs and/or “dark money” groups established and controlled by a director of Irving Taxpayers Matter?
- Has this council member been the focal point of previous CCR reports due to, what some believe, his lackadaisical representation and campaign financing?
- Was The Rambler “editorial” co-written or highly “encouraged” to be written by this Irving council member, and/or the director of Irving Taxpayers Matter?
- Did the “editorial,” when written, ask the burning question of the director of Irving Taxpayers Matter: Does this director have any financial interest in or is a financial backer of any Entertainment Center party or facility?
- Does this director of Irving Taxpayers Matter spend a considerable amount of money with The Rambler on, primally, political ads, charity events, etc.?
- Is The Rambler totally independent and non-biased in their coverage, or “reporting” when it comes to matters dealing with this council member and Irving Taxpayers Matter director?
- Where was The Rambler when a local FaceBook blog was spewing actual hate and discontent to enshrine the previous self-aggrandizing ex-mayor? Did one of those blog posters have a family member who also has/had a financial interest in The Rambler?
Staff of the CCR did reach out to discuss the “editorial” with The Rambler to comment or determine their actual rationale for this rather disingenuous posting. (Yep, no response was received.)
Well, dear readers, once again the facts and questions are presented for your consideration. And even though good judgement dictates one should never enter a ‘pissing war’ with a publication which might buy their printing ink by the train tanker-car, staff the CCR will allow you to be the judge.
You can cast your ballot for the CCR or The Rambler as to which publication actually asked what is going on in the Entertainment Center with Billy Bob, Irving Taxpayers Matter, a particular council member, and ARK.
You pick. CCR or The Rambler.
……………………………….Mark Holbrook
Note: Staff of the CCR will not count the previous e-mails and comments received from readers, city leaders, or coffee shop personnel after the “Billy Bob 2.0” report was distributed. This wouldn’t be fair…as they were all positive comments except for the one received from the Irving Taxpayers Matter director.
