A painful promise for us to keep—supporting the city's $424 million bond package. But Garland absolutely must have it, so we support it.

Despite huge tax increases due to DCAD's reappraisals, we continue to support the city's bond election, however painful that's going to be for us.

Like many Garland property owners, I opened our letters from the Dallas County Tax Appraisal Office this year with much trepidation.

I knew tax appraisals would be going up. I was expecting ours to rise also. Neighbors living in nearby areas had told me horror stories about how high their reappraisals were last year. I also follow such trends very carefully in the public media.

Was I expecting to see the tax appraisal on our personal home nearly double in this year's tax reappraisal? No. Only in my nightmares. Fortunately, of course, we are both over 65, so our taxes for our personal residence are somewhat capped at a lower value.

Except for one commercial lot in central Garland (whose tax valuation, oddly, stayed the same), all our other Garland properties were up at least 50 percent; most were like our personal residence and up nearly double. Those taxes will go up immediately with no restraints whatsoever—no homestead exemptions, no over-65 exemptions, no legislative measures to protect us. Only one's personal home is eligible for exemptions and protections.

What this means in plain English is that our combined city, county, and school district tax bills will jump dramatically next year. I'm talking thousands of dollars, not nickels and dimes. Since I don't like to raise the rent for excellent tenants (which all of ours are, because we go to excessive lengths to maintain our properties), I'm now left with the choice between personally swallowing a huge tax increase or raising rents all the way around—or finding some middle ground in between.

And all this is occurring as Garland marches toward its upcoming $424-million bond election, which will raise our taxes even higher.

I tell you all this to simply say, the dramatic increase in our tax bills from the reappraisals has given us cause to look again at all the items on the $424-million bond proposal on the May 4 ballot.

After receiving their letters from DCAD this spring, friends and neighbors are also asking lots of questions and closely scrutinizing the bond proposal and how it will impact them, too. Politicians meanwhile are doing their usual: hiding behind (and pointing fingers at) DCAD and the huge tax hike it is handing all the governmental entities in our area—as if they have no control whatsoever over what is happening.

If everyone in town received the same steep property tax increases we did (which some already have and others eventually will), the city, county and school district will reap a huge windfall in new money for their coffers.

Will that windfall be enough to offset the need for the city's new bonds?

My answer is an emphatic "no"! Garland has so many needs right now, both the steep increase in taxes from the reappraisals and the tax increases from the bond proposals will not do all that is needed to get this city to where it needs to be. After 15 years of no new bond election and the city's foot-dragging and reluctance to spend all of the money approved in the 2004 bond election, our needs are legion. Remember, the citizens study committee on the bond listed more than $1.1-billion in needs. And that was not an exhaustive list but one pulled together somewhat in haste, with parks and libraries incomplete.

Will the windfall the city is reaping from the reappraisals be enough to reverse our personal support for the bond election? Dampen, perhaps, but not change our support for the new bonds!

Why? This question is not new for us to answer. We've been asked questions like this for decades ever since we opted to become "urban pioneers" in the traditionally historic residential part of downtown Garland. Even family members shook their heads and wondered aloud why we were staying put in "old" Garland, which they considered a dangerous and declining area like much of south Garland.

We live and see firsthand the neglect of streets, parks, and other aspects of the city.

We live and see the neglect of streets, parks and other aspects of the city daily. Potholes are only the tip of the iceberg of what needs to be addressed..

After all, anyone who knows us well is aware that we have multiple options and choices for where to live. Unlike some, we are not "stuck" in Garland. We can live just about wherever we please. Being a native Houstonian, that city always beckons, but re-settling in Houston is in third place next to southern Oklahoma, where my Chickasaw elder benefits would increase by living within traditional tribal boundaries. Arizona where we already own two properties is a strong fourth option. Those are only the most obvious choices.

Kay is not only a native Garlandite with deep roots here, we both love Garland, so this city for multiple reasons is the most logical choice for us.

In our pursuit of a free-enterprise redevelopment of our small portion of historic downtown, I've had to turn aside from two stockbrokers and two bankers who tried to convince me Garland is not worth the risk. We believe it is. But, truthfully, it has been painfully slower and more difficult than we ever thought it would be when we returned to my wife's hometown nearly 20 years ago to care for aging relatives and "retire" from active employment. By now, fast approaching 2020, we expected all of downtown Garland (bounded by Garland Road, Walnut, West Avenue D, and First Street) to be flourishing much more than it is now.

The slow change in downtown and the city's failure to crack down seriously on slum-like conditions including illegal drugs and apparent prostitution in our own neighborhood presented us with the challenge: either to stick our heads in the sand and suffer the consequences, move, or buy up surrounding properties. Our last acquisition required four dumpster loads and about $5,000 just to clean out the filth and muck. And an additional $5,500 to rewire that whole house, which Garland Code Endorsement and Building Inspections and every electrician that inspected the place said was a ticking time bomb for a raging fire that under the right conditions could have taken out our home too—and maybe our lives.

We will support the bond package because Garland needs every item on the bond issue if the city is to have any hope of keeping up with the rest of the northeast DFW suburbs, which are experiencing a dramatic explosion in growth and wealth. These are crucial days in which Garland must keep moving forward and not slip backward. Otherwise, we will continue to deal with the painful stereotype of being a poor and under-educated community. (Unfortunately those realities were well documented in the bond study committee's reports, particularly the frank, honest, and superior analysis by the city's Library Board. We've got to pull ourselves up by the bootstraps and stop the pretense that everything is fine in Garland as is when indeed it is not. Then we have to pull together—ALL of us—to set the city on the right path forward to prosperity for ALL.

Kay and I are heavily invested financially, emotionally, mentally, and physically in Garland because we believe in this city and want to see it march forward into a brighter future. We've been wanting that for two decades now. If the city continues dragging its heels on fixing and upgrading its streets, parks, drainage, and other infrastructure as it has for the past 15 years, it may never recover. (And the lame excuse about "Oh, the Great Recession" isn't holding back other DFW Metroplex cities or other cities across the nation that suffered during that deep recession, which officially ended in June 2009, far worse than we did.)

The "surprises" here since we purchased our personal residence in downtown Garland in 1999 have been legion. To name just a few:

1. The slow redevelopment of the Central Downtown business area for the first decade we lived here was appalling.

2. The tendency of some city political leaders to put on Pollyanna, false faces instead of confronting reality has been discouraging.

3. The past immature turf-and-political-and-personality battles among the members of Garland city council, which has slowed redevelopment and added to Garland's poor image, have been majorly disappointing.

4. The failure of the city to plan on a grand scale like Plano and Frisco have (instead of in tiny baby steps like Garland tends to do) has seemed futile.

5. And the fickleness of some of our Garland banks and other financial institutions to commit to the cause of building a better Garland has been, well, frankly disgusting.

"It's not wise to buy so much real estate in such a small area," one area banker commented several years ago. We soon took our business elsewhere.

"Do you REALLY believe those businesses on the (Garland) Square are making any profit?" queried another banker, who acted as if he knew something I didn't. We sought another source with a firm commitment to downtown Garland for our banking needs.

"Diversify, diversify, diversity," screamed our former stockbrokers—eyeing what they thought was too much investment in Garland's historic downtown area.

More than a decade ago, one self-serving local stockbroker even did a hilarious "review" of our finances, showing only stocks and bonds as increasing in value—and the values of our personal home and other properties not only in Garland but elsewhere too—as well as foreseeing the rental income from them—staying static over the next 30 years.  He, too, soon was toast.

Yes, we do believe Garland is worth it! We prove it not only by our words but by our actions, too.

We have not lost faith in this community—though I will candidly admit that in my weaker moments, sometimes it has been tempting to hoist the white flag, admit this still isn't the community we hoped it would be and never can be, and move elsewhere. We still want a better community for ALL Garland citizens. We still believe it is possible. And we still intend to work toward that goal.

With next-door neighbor Richardson drawing more multi-billion-dollar, jobs-generating operations, Plano to our north and northwest expanding economically at eye-popping speeds, Rowlett to our east building rapidly and beautifully along its large shoreline, and Dallas' massive economic boom and expanding rejuvenation and renovation at what seems like the warp speed, the stakes for Garland have never been higher than they are right now.

At the same time we continue to believe Garland will never succeed until it comes to terms pragmatically with its vast racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. Finding a way to mobilize those resources each community brings to the table instead of running from them or creating a false facade utilizing a few representatives is a major key to Garland's future success.

So, yes, even though we personally are going to pay a stiff price for it (on top of the horrible increase in our property taxes already), Kay and I stand behind our statements earlier that we  support the bond proposals—every one of them.

At our house a promise made is a promise kept—even if it is a costly one. And we already know this one will be!

 

Paying city taxes will be more painful for us because of the reappraisals and the bond election, but we still support the city's $424 million bond proposal.

What do you hope Garland 100 years from now will be like? A key question posed in Saturday's musical; we ask that same question today.

(I was honored to be the emcee at the premiere showing of Becoming Garland Avenue at the Plaza Theater at 2 p.m. on Saturday, April 13, as part of the Garland Heritage Celebration 2019. As my blog today, I am including my opening remarks because I want to invite readers to also send in their comments about what they would like Garland to be like 100 years from now and what they personally can do to set these wheels in motion now. A key moment in the musical was when Garland leaders in 1913 wondered what Garland residents 100 years hence would say about their actions in 1913. I plan to write a blog later about what Garlandites today say they would like to see the city to be like 100 years from now for their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. Obviously, most of us will no longer be living then, but our legacies will live on.)
 
Good afternoon. I'm Louis Moore, president of Garland's Historic Magic 11th Street, the 501(c)3 non-profit charitable organization that is sponsoring this show.

Ladies and gents, this is the moment you've been waiting for.

That opening line from the popular musical, The Greatest Showman, that took the country by storm in recent history, is appropriate to begin our afternoon, because it was this very movie musical that inspired the birth of our musical drama, Becoming Garland Avenue, which you're about to see today.

Just the hint of an expression, "Why don't we produce a play about the early days of Garland?", brought this germ of an idea to life in the mind of our show's creator. Because, through the Greatest Showman, the musical-theater genre was being elevated in people's awareness about the time this idea was voiced, we knew that what we produced couldn't be just a play; it had to be a musical drama, because only music was suitable to express the depths of emotion that surrounded the lives and circumstances of the long-ago characters that we'll be visiting in just a few moments.

First though, I want to remind everyone that this is community theater. These are not Broadway actors but friends, neighbors, family members, people who are from Garland or who are connected to Garland in some way—people who have a love for this community and who believe that this story should be told. We have some individuals on stage that are highly experienced in musical theater and some for whom this is a first. So if a line or two is missed or you see a bobble or a wobble in presentation, just remember that it's a commitment to Garland that overrides our desire for performance perfection.

In the Plaza Theatre foyer before the performance of Becoming Garland Avenue noted Garland Daily News and Dallas Morning News columnist Sue Holmes Watkins, a symbol of dedication to Garland, stands beside her mother, Willie Kate Holford Holmes' Garland High School graduation dress, left, and wedding dress, right.

We want to take a moment to recognize the Garland Cultural Arts Commission that graciously listened to our story and appropriated a part of its 2018-2019 grant funds to partially fund this drama. Thank you, Garland Cultural Arts Commission, for believing in us and supporting this endeavor. If you are a Garland Cultural Arts Commission member in attendance today, please stand so we can thank you.

We also thank our sponsors, Karin Wiseman Collection, Dos Banderas Mexican Restaurant, The MillHouse Pizza, and Intrinsic for funding our lovely Play Companion this afternoon. I hope you read it carefully. It is chock full of interesting tidbits about our actors, their lives, and their commitment to our city. We encourage you to support these businesses by taking advantage of the discounts they offer to this audience.

We want to recognize the family that is remembered today in the dedication of our performance. Several members of the Holford/Holmes family are in attendance. Today we honor the memory of Bill Holmes, who passed away last year. We thank him for his support of the arts in Garland but most especially his support of Garland's Historic Magic 11th Street in the research that led to the area being named to the National Register of Historic Places. We, like countless others, wish Bill were here today to see his family members commemorated on stage in a few minutes. But we do want to recognize his widow, Jean Holmes, and Bill's sister, Sue Holmes Watkins, who are in the audience.  Bill, we miss you. Thank you for all you did for our city.

The Saturday, April 13, performance of Becoming Garland Avenue was dedicated to the late Bill Holmes, who supported the arts and historical preservation in Garland. His sister, Sue Holmes Watkins, is in red in the center; his widow, Jean Holmes, is to the left of Sue in the picture. Others shown are family members.

We also held a contest to see which of our ticketholders would come in costume reflecting the era of our show, 1912-1913. By the way, this musical takes place in the same era as Music Man, Oklahoma, Fiddler on the Roof and many other prominent Broadway hits. Thanks to all who dressed according to the time period!

We have Karin Wiseman of Karin Wiseman Collections, the fabulous new store just to the southwest of us in downtown Garland, here to help me announce the winners. Karin has been roaming about, looking you over, and she has made her decision. May I have the envelope, please?

Winning the first-place award, a one-night stay at the luxury The Artesian Hotel in Sulphur, OK, is District 2 Councilmember Deborah Snyder Morris. We appreciate so much Deborah’s support of this performance, signified by her presence and outfit.

Winning the second-place award, this lovely gift basket from Bedré Gourmet Chocolates, is Zaden Roman, this precious young man sitting on the front row.

We thank The Artesian Hotel and Bedré  Gourmet Chocolates for their support of our event today and their desire to help Garland citizens to appreciate their history. By the way, four members of the cast are citizens of the Chickasaw Nation, which owns the Artesian and Bedré.

One more word: we do hope you'll take time to interact with the play and fill out the card that's part of your Play Companion this afternoon. As we make our way through the drama, you'll see why you're being asked this question. We will take these cards and compile the results and post them on the Facebook page, "Becoming Garland Avenue Musical Drama". We think you'll have plenty of ideas after this musical ends. A volunteer carrying a basket will be in the lobby collecting these cards. We are interested in what you say about the future of our city and encourage everyone here to fill out one of these forms.

If you don't have a pen or pencil with you, fill this out when you get home. Be contemporary. Take a snapshot of it, and post it on the Becoming Garland Avenue Facebook page. (Or send it as an email to louismoore@yahoo.com).

I also want to note that while this is a musical about one particular era in Garland history and one particular residential expansion and its connection to what was going on in that day in the city, the state, and the country, Garland history is filled with many people, places, and events that also would make for great theater and a great script. We hope this musical will inspire others to likewise learn more about our city, its neighborhoods, its people, and its amazing history.

I want to leave you with one inspirational thought. The more than 60 people who pulled together with the common cause of presenting this musical for you—as actors, support staff, and volunteers—have grown to be like a family. We've eaten many dinners together in each other's homes, we've practiced in each other's living rooms and music rooms. My home office, in fact, became the first location for costuming our characters. We've laughed, sung, studied, and teased each other in playful ways. And some have cried quietly on each other's shoulders. When someone has been down, we've been there to lift each other up. Truly this has been the essence of community.

We hope this will be a reminder of the strong shoulders from the past—people who helped build for us the solid foundations on which our city rests today—and an awareness that a century from now others will look back on us and wonder about our decisions made in this era that will impact them then.

*******

And now, ladies and gents, this indeed is the moment you've been waiting for. Enjoy the show!

Louis Moore asks the audience at Becoming Garland Avenue to fill out the card about what they would like Garland to be like 100 years from now.

Will Garland miss the Airbnb and VRBO phenomenon? Garland's city council needs to slow down, do more research, and write a much better ordinance governing short-term rentals

www.airbnb.com offers a wonderland of vacation and short-term rentals. Why, when trying to find one in Garland, does the website point you only to properties in Dallas and other surrounding cities? (Photo from Airbnb website)

Type in www.airbnb.com on your computer address line, and then in the search engine on the Airbnb front page type in the words "Garland, TX".

Almost instantly you will see listings of fabulous places to stay, such as a well-furnished bedroom in an affluent-looking home in an exciting neighborhood, a fully-furnished apartment close to major attractions, an intriguing guest house in the back of an historic home, and individual well-furnished homes from different eras sprinkled throughout the area.

In the listing on this premiere website for alternative vacation, business, and short-term housing you will see special offers such as coffeemakers stocked with every kind of flavored coffee imaginable, beautiful landscaping, interesting areas to walk through, and lots of fun things to see and do.

The website offers a wide array of options for exciting places to stay, visit, and enjoy.

Look a little closer and you will see that none of those Airbnb offerings that initially pop up on your screen actually is in Garland. The locations are in "Lower Greenville Avenue", Lake Highlands, "near Bishop Arts", "Uptown Dallas", Oaklawn, White Rock Lake, "Historic M Street", and "an Historic Dallas Neighborhood".

This cute and tiny little guest house in the backyard of an Airbnb host is situated in Oak Cliff "near Bishop Arts" according to the Airbnb website, yet it comes up when you type in Garland, TX, in the Airbnb website search engine some 20 miles away. Why? (Photo from Airbnb website)

All sound lovely. But where is Garland?

After doing this search online, I picked up my cell phone and dialed the hotline for Airbnb hosts (more on this later). I told the friendly clerk who answered that I needed a list of all Airbnb's in the City of Garland—not those in Dallas, Plano, McKinney, or other DFW Metroplex cities. I emphasized that the list needed to be of Airbnb's listings ONLY within the city limits of Garland, not outside Garland in any other cities.

"That's not available," she responded after a few minutes of delay. I then explained that I live in Garland, TX, but own two very successful Airbnb properties in Arizona. I also told her that members of my family utilize Airbnb services all over the country and that in fact we had recently reserved a large, lovely mountain home in Colorado for our extended family of 10 this summer. She looked up my account to verify my words.

I then explained that our Garland city council is looking at a revision to its existing ordinance on hotels and motels specifically targeting short-term rentals within the city. I told her Airbnb and its competitor VRBO, in effect, are written all over the revision, but the actual names of Airbnb or VRBO are not there anywhere. I also told her that the revised ordinance strikes me, as a veteran Airbnb "host", as flawed in several significant places and would create a major obstacle to anyone interested in ever owning or operating—or wanting to stay in—an Airbnb facility actually in Garland.

Will Garland's proposed revision to its hotel and motel ordinance encourage or discourage short-term vacation rentals in Garland such as this beauty in one of Dallas' historic districts? (Photo from Airbnb website)

I believed that suddenly I had her full attention.

I didn't need to tell the representative what people who love and support Airbnb and/or VRBO already know: The diversity of the offerings encourages tourism, helps local businesses, offers a different perspective of a city than the cookie-cutter motels and hotels provide, are safer, are more personalized, and cost a whole lot less to start up—and usually to stay in—than do the big corporate motel and hotel chains.

I told her more about the proposed Garland ordinance and its rigid rules for registration and collection of hotel-motel occupancy taxes—which are more designed for large chains than they are for small mom-and-pop businesses. (For instance, Texas sales tax laws allow a small business with limited sales to file annually instead of quarterly, whereas the new Garland ordinance threatens fines and punishments for anyone who doesn't file quarterly. The revised ordinance requires a permit and penalties for operators without one but doesn't address how any current, existing short-term rental owners are going to be notified of the change in law.)

She promised me that within 24 to 48 hours she would send me an email containing the names and addresses of all listed Airbnb properties in Garland. I'm still waiting for that email. I'm guessing it will be a very short list. Or nonexistent.

Like on Airbnb, when you type in "Garland, TX" on VRBO a number of homes for lease on a short-term basis show up, but on closer examination they all but one are in nearby cities, not Garland.

One large home in north Garland does show up on VRBO. It rents for $185 a night and specifically states that it is not a party house, which is often a matter of concern to neighbors of homes leased out on a short-term basis. (And is also not addressed directly in the proposed revised ordinance.)

I personally know that one small bed and breakfast exists in the Embree addition in downtown Garland, but it doesn't show up on any Internet searches I have conducted. It's neighbors have not expressed any opposition or concern about it.

Clearly these short-term rentals are few and far between in Garland.   

And if this ordinance revision is passed as is and goes into effect, it will likely throw more cold water on a business enterprise of smaller mom-and-pop shops that would benefit Garland greatly. After reading the ordinance, my initial reaction was, "Thank you, I'll just keep investing in Arizona and other places and forget Garland." I would imagine others who are studying the idea of Airbnb's here will feel the same way.  Too much bureaucracy. Too little incentive and encouragement. Too tilted toward the larger motel and hotel chains. Too little understanding of the whole Airbnb and VRBO systems and operations

Like any new business, getting a short-term residential Airbnb or VRBO rental going takes time and lots of advertising. One doesn't become successful at it overnight. These rentals don't just happen by posting a small sign on the property (a matter not addressed in the new Garland ordinance but addressed in other sign ordinances). Within the past year some Garland friends listed their home on Airbnb but gave up quickly after the first guest-stay fizzled because of unexpected plumbing difficulties. Just as with long-term rentals being a successful Airbnb or VRBO host requires a backup team ready to quickly address any major issues that arise.

Airbnb's and VRBO's tend to cluster around "cool" places people like to visit on vacation or short-term getaways, but they also are utilized by business and other travelers. Our daughter, for instance, stayed in an Airbnb in the downtown area of a large city recently while on a business trip because she liked the convenience of being able to prepare her own meals.

This little jewel is a hot Airbnb property in the White Rock Lake area. Just like Lyft and Uber are the wave of the future in transportation, Airbnb is popular all across the country and around the world. Many people today prefer personalized and out-of-the-ordinary vacation and short-term housing. (Photos from Airbnb website)

Airbnb and VRBO are somewhat akin to the trendy new Lyft and Uber driving services, which provide cheaper, more localized, more efficient, and better services than traditional cab companies. Some might call Airbnb or VRBO "the Amazons of the alternative vacation and short-term housing industry".

As we talked, the Airbnb representative assured me (which I already knew) that Airbnb collects the hotel-motel occupancy taxes on our AZ properties and then pays the appropriate amounts to the State of Arizona and the city in which our properties are situated "in your name, of course".

She also told me Airbnb does the same thing for all of its listings in Texas and would do that for any listings in Garland.

After I hung up the phone, I reflected on how much this proposed revision (of Section 1, Article II, Hotel Occupancy Tax of Chapter 40, Taxation, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Garland targeting short-term rentals) reminds me of another Garland fumble about two decades ago. At that time the City of Garland's attempt to adopt an ordinance governing rentals and landlords in our city created a full-blown controversy that lasted several years and threw a pall over the single-family rental market in our community. The first version of that ordinance was ill-informed and penalized the "good" landlords instead of driving out the "bad" ones—which city leaders at that time said was their goal. After much turmoil that first wrong-headed ordinance was withdrawn and the current, much-better ordinance was put in its place.

After reading what was on the agenda for tonight's (March 19) city council regular session but has now been requested to be pulled to be returned for further discussion, my hope is that council will slow down, talk with people who truly understand and know thoroughly the business of vacation and short-term rentals, get a clear fix on what the current situation with short-term rentals is in Garland, then revise what's in front of them and come back later with a much better version of this ordinance that we can all live with.

Otherwise, history will repeat itself: council will adopt a flawed ordinance; its shortcomings will quickly become apparent when business goes elsewhere (or never comes here in the first place), and a future council will need to rescind what's on the agenda now and rewrite a much-better version to be adopted later.

To encourage the growth of more Airbnb properties in Garland our city council needs to take a closer look at the short-term rental ordinance before it right now. A delay and further study would be better than a flawed ordinance that has to eventually be thrown out in favor of one that better understands and supports Airbnb and VRBO properties in Garland. (Photo from Airbnb website)

THE RIGHT OF RECUSAL: Elected, appointed officials must step aside any time a question might arise; legislators don't deserve a free pass either

After being seated on Garland's Plan Commission in August 2006, I worked diligently to understand and follow the rules for recusal for public officials.

In the summer of 2006 when then-Councilmember Laura Perkins "Perky" Cox called to ask me to represent District 2 on the City of Garland's Plan Commission, my only hesitation involved our property holdings in downtown Garland.

Perky's response was simple: Any time there is the least bit of question about whether you might possibly have a personal interest in something on the Plan Commission's agenda, then you should just recuse yourself.

After our phone conversation ended, I had to look up the word "recuse" in the dictionary to be sure I understood its full meaning. To recuse means to step aside temporarily from a decision-making governmental body any time a matter is before that body in which a person who is a voting member might have or be perceived to have some kind of personal vested interest.

After I was seated on the Plan Commission in August 2006, I very quickly observed how often members of that city board recused themselves. When At-Large (Mayor-appointed) Commissioner Stan Luckie had a insurance client who had a case before the Plan Commission, he immediately without hesitation recused himself. When District 1 Commissioner (now-Chairman) Scott Roberts had an architectural client with a case before the Plan Commission, he, too, without hesitation and immediately did likewise. They were fastidious about rising from their seats and leaving the room before the discussion ensued.

I quickly figured out the pattern and recused myself any time I had the least bit of concern that there might be even perceived conflict of interest. During my 10 years on the Plan Commission I probably recused myself more than 30 times. It became so routine that I actually lost count. When it occurred, I just simply and methodically followed protocol and bowed out of the issue. I never made a big deal out of it.

Most often it was because a property matter before the commission was within the state's legal requirements for recusal of anything Kay and/or I owned in downtown Garland. (The law is very specific about the number of feet from one's property boundary, including property owned by one's spouse, that requires a public official to recuse himself or herself.) One time I recused myself merely because I held the Power of Attorney for our Aunt Frances and monthly wrote a $4,000 or so check from her funds for her care to a local nursing home, which had appealed to the Plan Commission for modifications to its facility.

Better to err on the side of caution than to leave even the slightest impression of conflict of interest.

One time I recused myself because I as POA signed the monthly checks for Aunt Frances' stay in a local nursing facility that applied to the Plan Commission for an addition to its facility. She died at that facility in 2009 at age 102.

Recusals on the Plan Commission involved privately signing a legal document BEFORE the matter was brought up stating that one was recusing himself/herself from a particular case. The document stated why the recusal was occurring. Then when the matter was ready to be brought before the commission, commissioners who were recusing themselves were required to leave the room immediately before the discussion began and to stay in a special room near the council chambers. We were not allowed to participate in any way in the commission's discussions or decision about the matter, though we were permitted to watch the proceedings on TV.

In one very unfortunate situation which was never made public, a plan commissioner recused himself from a case involving one of his clients, but then it was questioned whether he had actually lobbied other commissioners on behalf of his client to pass the motion. Ultimately the commissioner resigned. The determination was that recusals also mean not lobbying privately for that which a public official cannot vote publicly.

As Kay and I became more interested in the innerworkings of the Garland City Council, we noted how often former Mayor Douglas Athas recused himself whenever he believed a potential conflict existed. His actions were right and in keeping with the Plan Commission rules.

Councilmembers, however, don't seem as fastidious as the former mayor or my former colleagues on the Plan Commission were about recusals. I've seen several situations in recent months in which I wondered why a councilmember hadn't recused himself or herself and left council chambers forthrightly before a discussion or vote. I was supportive last evening (Monday, March 4) when one member of council appropriately did recuse.

One city official explained that the city walks a fine line with councilmembers on the matter of recusals, weighing carefully whether a councilmember, by recusing, loses his/her ability to represent his/her constituents.

Based on what Dallas is now discovering about some of its current and former city councilmembers who are heading to trial or jail over benefiting through bribes and other means from certain projects,  leniency for councilmembers is NOT a good idea.

If I were mayor or a councilmember, I would want to be held consistently to the highest standard possible. I would recuse myself following the same rules as I followed on the Plan Commission.

I was quite surprised recently to learn that the issue of public servants having special legal privileges is also a statewide matter. During the social hour for the four finalists in the City of Garland's quest for a new police chief, the candidate from the Austin Police Department revealed that state law forbids Austin police as well as other police departments around the state from arresting a sitting legislator while the legislature is in session. That means every time the Texas Legislature meets, Austin police face the dilemma of what to do when a legislator in the legislative session is stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The candidate indicated it happens more frequently than most Texans realize.

Texas legislators should NOT be exempt from tickets or arrest because the Legislature is in session.

If something is illegal for the average citizen, it ought to be equally illegal for a federal, state, or local government official, too. Americans in general have had enough of their "privileged" elected officials and the perks of their offices. The playing field on this matter needs to be leveled anywhere and everywhere in our various levels of government.

Several have told me that the law regarding legislators came about to prevent police from stopping a legislator on his/her way (speeding perhaps?) to a crucial vote in the legislature. I don't buy that excuse. If a legislator is caught speeding or DUI at any time anywhere, he or she needs to suffer the same punishment as an ordinary citizen would. And if it impacts a vote in the legislature, then the politicians who run the legislature ought to suffer the consequences of one of their own—be it Democrat, Republican, or Independent—who has broken the law.

When I was a reporter for the Houston Chronicle, a prominent local Roman Catholic priest that many of us believed was headed toward the episcopacy invited me to a private lunch at his residence. His motivation was to ask me behind the scenes what would happen if he did become a bishop and was caught DUI. He knew that I knew that alcohol sometimes presented a challenge for him.

My advice to him was simple: Get help to stop drinking, or get a driver when he was drinking, or reject any offer from the Vatican to elevate him to the rank of bishop. I told him in no uncertain terms I could not ethically and would not morally attempt to keep a DUI arrest of a Catholic bishop or any other religious figure out of the newspaper—no matter how good of friends we might be!

It's advice that our Texas legislators and our community leaders also need to follow: Don't try to be above the law; live in such a way that you don't violate the law!

I will always be grateful to former District 2 Councilmember Laura Perkins "Perky" Cox for making me aware of the practice of recusals before I was officially appointed to the Plan Commission. 

What were THEY thinking? Is city council REALLY rejecting a nearly $100-million gift to revitalize the whole downtown Garland area?

TXDOT is willing to pay some $100 million to untangle the mess it made of downtown Garland nearly 50 years ago including wrapping Garland High School in major traffic.

Garland is on the verge of missing the opportunity of a lifetime to fix about two-dozen major issues facing its downtown area, using about $100 million in state funds and without raising taxes on our citizens.

Astoundingly Garland City Council on Monday night at its work session turned a cold shoulder to such an offer. Council told TXDOT to cancel its planned stakeholder meeting scheduled at 2 p.m. yesterday, February 21, to talk about the proposal to reroute State Highway 78 through downtown Garland to fix those long-standing, serious matters. The meeting would have reviewed four options open to the city to fix the problems it has been facing for years without a resolution.

At first it seemed council opposed the Thursday meeting because members would be in Austin for a city-expense-paid meeting, but by the time the council session was over, their fury oddly had reached such a fever pitch that it seemed unlikely they would reschedule the meeting at all.

Ironically this rebuff of state funds happened on the very night that council took further decisive action on an upcoming $424-million bond issue that will raise Garland property taxes significantly.

By Tuesday morning state officials were reeling from the rebuff and promising to return to hold a much larger stakeholder meeting in the near future. I was in touch with several of these officials and promised to help to try to find out how something so important to the future of downtown Garland could have so easily gone off the tracks at the council session.

TXDOT has indicated a willingness to be flexible in the design, a fact along with many others councilmembers seemed to have missed.

Council's odd action sent me scurrying to our notes from the September 25, 2014, stakeholder meeting held at our home on the topic. It was one of the first such stakeholder meetings on the issue in Garland and had been widely publicized. Former Mayor Douglas Athas, former Councilmember Anita Goebel, Transportation Director Paul Luedtke, and former city council highway consultant David Dean along with about 25 concerned citizens from throughout downtown Garland were present.

With Athas and Goebel now gone from council, I realized immediately that the majority of current city councilmembers were not on council at the time of the meeting. I also quickly ascertained that most of the current councilmembers are not impacted by the issue—or at least they don't think they are—and probably have little knowledge of the history or the serious nature of the matter, despite a short briefing at council's Friday, December 15, 2017, staff retreat at a local hotel. Even then, the councilmember in whose district much of the rerouting would occur had not yet been elected.

Members of Garland's city council seem to have little knowledge of how the failed, antiquated "couplet of the 1970s impacts Garland traffic today, including the congested "Z" intersection on First Street where Highway 78 enters from Lavon then suddenly shifts to Westbound Avenue B and Eastbound Avenue D.

And some just plainly don't care about it because it is not in their district. (The irony is that fixing the issues in downtown Garland caused by the failed, antiquated "couplet" will make better things happen in other districts too, even if those councilmembers don't realize it now.)

Apparently the groundwork had not been laid properly for the current council to even discuss the issue Monday evening. So much misinformation bubbled to the surface during that council discussion that I needed to listen carefully to try to discern facts from fiction.

Furthermore, the fact that Athas, a political enemy of many on council, once supported the idea seemed to drive the opposition rather than the issue itself. Why throw out an important funding source for Garland to correct serious issues in our city just because of personal political disagreements that have nothing whatsoever to do with the merits of this case? Such personalized, illogical thinking by public servants is beyond my ability to comprehend. What is best for Garland should always drive our city council's decisions.

Despite council's action, several councilmembers said they would "not be opposed" to TXDOT going on with information-gathering and its sharing processes on the reroute of Highway 78 through downtown Garland.

Meanwhile, the downtown area languishes in major need of all that the state is offering. All the political posturing council can muster won't sufficiently cover over the gaping wounds in the area right now either. One downtown business owner told me just this week that something MUST be done to drive more customers into the core of downtown.

Some of our councilmembers don't realize that the State of Texas has been discussing the rerouting of Highway 78 through downtown Garland FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS. It started well before every one of our current councilmembers plus former Mayor Athas ever became involved in Garland politics. It began decades ago when the state realized that the "couplet" concept through downtown areas throughout the state, not just Garland, wasn't working and needed to be fixed or replaced.

Just after this underpass, notorious as a "speed trap", Highway 78 shifts from overlaying Lavon Drive, to turning on First Street, and then abruptly turning on one ways Avenue B and D. TXDOT wants to straighten out this situation as the highway winds through downtown Garland at a cost of about $100 million, but Garland City Council is balking

The reroute proposal addresses all sorts of issues important to Garland citizens, ranging from providing more and better visibility and access to downtown Garland's Central Business District and providing vastly improved safety for Garland High School faculty, students, students’ family members that drive them to school daily in some of the city's worst traffic messes as well as for First United Methodist and First Baptist church members who attend church in Garland's "couplet".

The reroute would likely be a better stimulus to the downtown area economy than the apartments and city office buildings that the city has built—using Garland taxpayer money—trying to revitalize the city's inner core.

And the State of Texas—and not Garland's poor and overburdened taxpayers—would be footing most of the $100 million bill for this important highway reroute which has the potential to revitalize the city's inner-core and not just the city's central former Square.

And think of the tax windfall that could emerge from a truly revitalized downtown area paid for without even any city "incentives" or funds!

No councilmember seemed to realize they were rejecting an amount equivalent to nearly one-fourth of the bond proposal and which would dovetail quite nicely with some of the proposals in that bond package. Again, the $100-million state-funded Highway 78 reroute would not increase City of Garland property taxes, but the proposed $424 million bond package will.

Compounding further the situation on council Monday night seemed to be a total lack of knowledge about the history of the original rerouting of Highway 78 through downtown Garland nearly 50 years  ago and how the blunders and miscalculations then have created so many serious issues in our city today.

The city keeps trying to put bandages on the gigantic problems in downtown instead of getting to the root of them and allowing the state to fix the broken parts.

The problem started with the couplet itself, which was designed intentionally in the 1970s to divert traffic away from the downtown central business districts.

The thinking then was that "downtowns are dying" and "older neighborhoods are getting in the way of progress".

The couplet was designed to superimpose a highway over an older downtown area, bypassing important elements in an attempt to make them irrelevant.

In Garland's case, once-quiet residential streets Avenues B and D were widened and converted to one way to accommodate the heavy flow of highway traffic. The Central Business District, including the former Square, was bypassed completely.

What was "modern" then quickly turned into a nightmare for cities all across Texas, with Garland being one of them.

Suddenly:
1. Garland High School was surrounded and engulfed in heavy highway traffic on three sides, creating dangerous pedestrian and driving conditions for students, parents, and faculty. (Remember when last year at three separate times GHS students were struck and injured while trying to cross Garland Avenue, which is part of Highway 78? Those were just the most recent examples.)
2. First United Methodist and First Baptist churches suddenly discovered that traffic conditions at their front doors facing Avenues B and D respectively were highway-like, not quiet residential or respectful, and sometimes dangerous, especially for older church members who were accustomed to parking along those thoroughfares (and still do) or walking across, as in the case of the United Methodists, West Avenue B, aka Highway 78 westbound .
3. Residential homes fronting Avenues B and D and on the corners of side streets feeding into those main arteries suddenly found the noise inside those houses almost unbearable. Some homeowners reported damage to their siding, foundations, porches, and others spots due to the highway traffic. The damages are continuing to grow worse as traffic increases in the area.

 But worst of all:
1. The literal bypass of the old Garland Square led to the shuttering of businesses and deterioration of many buildings in the Central Business District.
2. Main Street from First Street to the then-Square began to look more like a slum. In fact the whole east side of the downtown area (east of the railroad tracks) began to rapidly deteriorate into slum-like conditions.
3. The crazy intersection where Highway 78 feeds from Lavon onto First Street and then Avenues B and D became a scary, complicated, snarled, and sorry traffic mess, especially during rush hour.

Then just as suddenly as the "couplet" arrived with its devastation, the folks in Austin realized their BIG MISTAKE and started to unwind it. Almost overnight downtowns across the state became valued, touted, and "in". Talk of a "walkable" city arrived.

One option for the rerouting of Highway 78 would widen and clean up east Main Street and turn it into a beautiful new entrance to downtown Garland. Unfortunately Garland city council doesn't appear to want TXDOT to spend around $100 million fixing the problems in the heart of Garland's downtown area.

Some cities such as Garland were caught in the whiplash of the changes. And that's where we in Garland remain to this day! Many cities, with the help of TXDOT, have already fixed their problems—their outdated couplets. Garland simply hasn't; we suffer from the ill-effects from it.

So can the devastation ever be undone? Can Garland's central core be put back together again in the way it once was? It's worth a try—especially since TXDOT is willing to spend some $100 million to correct the mess it created nearly 50 years ago. The solution is called "the rerouting of State Highway 78 through Garland's Downtown area".

Garland's transportation office in coordination with TXDOT and the North Texas Council of City Governments has drafted a proposal of what might work. It offers four separate options. Two are quite good for Garland's downtown district. A third is OK. The fourth is the cheapest and easiest for TXDOT but the worst for Garland.

Unfortunately, after City Council's negative reaction to the whole discussion Monday night, we may end up with either the status quo, which can't bear the predictions of traffic growth and patterns in the future, or with No. 4, which would be yet another disaster because it wouldn't really undo the mess created nearly 50 years ago—only add to it. Negative reactions such as those expressed on council Monday night will only make matters worse long term.

Garland's best hope is to face the issue head on, with eyes wide open, and negotiate with TXDOT the best plan and best deal it can get for Garland.

The best plans will:
1. clean up (by widening) either Main Street or State Street (or both) from First Street to near the central downtown area near the venerated Roach Feed and Seed.
2. Set the stage for the city to create a beautiful new entryway into downtown Garland from the east.
3. Bring Highway 78 within "kissing distance" to the central downtown area, thus bringing more customers and clients to the customer- and client-hungry area.
3. Divert the heavy traffic away from Garland High School as well as the churches along Avenues B and D, thus vastly improving the safety for thousands of Garland citizens from every council district.
4. Return Avenues B and D west of Glenbrook to more residential-like streets, perhaps even two-way streets like they used to be before the disgraced "couplet" entered the picture, thus improving values and desirability of homes in the area west of Glenbrook. (Think more tax money for the city!)
5. Eliminate or seriously transform those horrible turns and intersections at First Street and Garland Road, including that complex intersection at Garland Road at Miller near Saturn and the railroad tracks.
6. Provide us with a brand-new highway paid for with state money through the center of town, thus perhaps drawing attention away from the miserable streets in much of downtown Garland now.
7. Turn Glenbrook into a portion of Highway 78, thus quickly carrying traffic out of the downtown area and past Central Park and the planned new dog park and ADA-compliant children's playground there.
8. By swinging past the proposed new dog park and improvements at Garland's Central Park those expensive new amenities will become more accessible to ALL Garlandites from throughout our city, who are paying their tax money for those improvements.

I can go on, but you get the idea. Only the most uninformed city councilmembers would look this gift horse in the mouth and reject it. Our city has so much more to be gained by it. I personally can't think of a negative that can't be worked around in this opportunity set before us.

And just to set the record straight: Except for one home that is identified with Garland's early history, the other houses on East State Street are small, post World War II and dispersed between vacant lots—also they are easily movable. I know of no houses belonging to Garland citizens that will be destroyed by the Main Street option. Only Option 4 poses the potential of tearing up an established older neighborhood, apparently portions of Chandler Heights. I frankly can't imagine any Garland citizen supporting Option 4.

Garland citizens deserve a full, transparent, and honest evaluation of the TXDOT-initiated $100 million reroute of Texas Highway 78 through downtown Garland. They deserve to be given the FULL and COMPLETE facts necessary to make an educated decision.

All four of the rerouting solutions TXDOT is studying would get Garland High School out of the dangerous situation for students, faculty, and parents where the school is surrounded on three sides by a winding, twisting Highway 78.

A raised voice for openness, transparency, vision, and explaining how things work—a valuable citizen role with or without holding public office

The afternoon pictured here, almost one year ago, kicked off one of the most enriching times of my life—an experience I urge other Garlandites to experience as well—the gift of running for public office. (Photo by Deborah Downes of Take to Heart Images)

The photo posted at the start of this blog recalls an afternoon that began one of the most thrilling and enriching times of my life.

On the afternoon of February 15, 2018, standing on the front porch of Garland's historic Pace House, I announced my candidacy for mayor of the City of Garland. That kicked off a series of weeks I'll never forget: knocking on doors, meeting citizens, visiting a wide variety of churches and businesses, addressing groups large and small, articulating my vision for our city.

With a dynamic volunteer team gifted with a wide array of talents and expertise, we set high goals. We heard from the people—their heartcries, their needs, their feelings of neglect. They opened their hearts about the city's direst needs. We believed we had heard from the very essence of what Garland is, and we promised to help. 

The outcome of the election didn't make that possible in an official capacity, but throughout this ensuing year I have never forgotten what the citizens of Garland said to me. I have used my journalistic training to continue to write my Louis Moore of Garland blog about the vast diversity and needs of our city.

And that is the capacity I intend to continue to use to try to create a difference in an enduring way. Though filings are now under way for the May 2019 municipal elections and the opportunity for a repeat citywide campaign avails itself, I do not feel compelled—nor called—to be a part of a political race for this year and will not declare as a candidate for mayor.

Conversing with citizens from all walks of life and from all regions of our city was a true blessing in being a candidate in a citywide race. I would wish for contested races in this spring's municipal election so that the ultimate outcome is not "all sewn up" and so that candidates, through campaigning, can hear the heartcries of the people.

I have been absolutely delighted to see any number of changes come about in our city as a result of last year's contested mayoral race and through this blog. 

Garland residents are now more aware of how our political system operates, who some of our behind-the-scenes political gatekeepers and kingmakers are, and who actually funds our elections and to whom many of our politicians, to a large extent, owe their jobs. Identifying the problem always is the first step toward a cure or solution.

Some city councilmembers have picked up my actual wording from the campaign and this blog and now use those words and phrases as their own, which I am absolutely delighted for them to do. I am particularly pleased that so many on our city councilmembers have pressed for causes that I have long advocated—for instance, a new animal shelter and massive renovations in our parks such as Rick Oden Park. Until the mayor's race last spring, few in this community talked about being a "political independent" or about making this "a better community for ALL citizens" or about the myriad of unfunded and unaddressed needs in our city.

I also take great delight in knowing that on the May 4 ballot, Garland citizens will have the opportunity for the first time in 15 years to address major funding needs to pull our city out of the sad condition too many of our streets, parks, and other amenities are in today. The kernel of an idea for a 2019 proposed bond issue that was germinated a year ago in mid-December in a non-televised and non-video-recorded council retreat held at a local hotel under the leadership of former Mayor Douglas Athas was ultimately constituted and moved on to publicly identify more than $1.2 billion in much-needed projects, less than half of which will actually be on the bond election ballot in May. If approved by voters, it will be a good start to pull our city out of the malaise and the declining state Garland has been in for too long.

I raised my voice loudly about the city's tendency to permit so much to occur away from the public spotlight outside city hall. Later I was pleased to see that Councilmember Robert John Smith wrote a new policy, which council adopted unanimously, encouraging as many meetings as possible at city hall, where instant TV access is readily available.

A better Garland—where truth, transparency, openness, fairness, honesty, and prosperity abound for ALL our citizens—is what I desired during last spring's mayor's race. It is what I still want most for my hometown of Garland. Words are not sufficient, but they are at least a beginning.

I hope that all candidates in this year's election are blessed to have a dynamic volunteer team gathered around them, as we did in last year's race, that are multi-talented, dedicated, and deeply in tune with the needs of our city.

I ran for mayor of Garland a year ago not for any personal gain or to fulfill any personal needs in my own life. Throughout my adult years I have been personally blessed by God far beyond my greatest dreams. I need no other honor or role.

I ran for mayor because, as former President John Kennedy said of himself, I can see what can be and am not bogged down with what is. I see a city that CAN rise above current downward trends—such as growing poverty, decreasing educational and work opportunities for so many, increasing racial, language, and cultural polarization, unfair and unAmerican political control by the few and not the many in our city, and other trends dragging my hometown down the hill from where it should be.

I fervently hope that this spring's municipal elections ALL will be contested races, without an insider group believing they have everything "all sewn up", because I believe only in such situations can our citizens truly benefit and can democracy thrive. Why vote for someone when you truly don't know what the person believes? Competitive races give us the opportunity to more fully know what candidates—even those deemed qualified—stand for and not just who has endorsed them to feather their own nests.

While I see too many trends in Garland going in the wrong direction, I remain hopeful they can be reversed. The recent bond-issue discussion has brought to the surface so many of these negative realities. Our needs are legion; our resources are limited. Yet our people are basically good, friendly, and hard-working. The flush of expansion and growing wealth of our neighbors to the north, west, and east of Garland only brings our deficiencies to the surface to see more clearly.

We must, therefore, move forward with confidence in a future that CAN be brighter for ALL Garland citizens.

I have never forgotten what the citizens of Garland said to me during the weeks of campaigning, and in the ensuing months I've pressed on to work for those causes, even in a nonofficial capacity, and will continue to do so. (Photo by Deborah Downes of Take to Heart Images)

Now on a personal note:

On August 30, Kay and I will celebrate 50 years of marriage. The love of my life and my best friend for more than a half-century and I call this golden anniversary our "Jubilee Year".

We have much to celebrate and will be doing so throughout the whole year. We have been blessed in more ways than we can ever count. We have a host of special events and outings planned already to celebrate and walk down memory lane with family and friends and in places special to us. Almost every day between now and the rest of the year we have so many special memories to relive as the days leading up to and following our marriage were filled with special times, incredibly kind people, and an unbelievable outpouring of love and support from so many.

The year 2019 is our golden anniversary year. We are spending the year walking down memory lane and reflecting on all we have experienced in this half-century.

Garland played such an important role for us—both before, during, and after our marriage. From before her birth, Kay was a Garlandite. She grew up here, went to school in Garland ISD schools (a handful at that time), was a member from her early days at First Baptist Church of Garland, and was involved as were her parents in community life fully. When we began dating while students at Baylor, I became acquainted with Garland not only through my bride-to-be but also through her parents, especially during long walks with her father in the downtown neighborhood where the family lived (which also is the neighborhood where we live now).

The era in which we married was filled, like today, with great political turmoil—the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War, to name only the two most prominent at that time. Throughout our marriage, from college and graduate school until now, we have lived on the cutting edge of so many other societal trends and causes large and small: From equal rights for employed women, to the adoptee-rights movement, to the ecumenical movement, to the push for freedom for Soviet Jews in that defunct empire, to the pro-life movement, to the rightful recognition for Native Americans and other underrepresented American and worldwide people groups, to the cry for political and social reform and freedom that echo through our land today. We expect to continue to be involved in these and other cutting-edge issues for the rest of our lives.

I am also very pleased that so many of you now read my blog. As a newspaper writer and editor, I learned what it is like to live in the public eye—where, regardless what I say, someone somewhere will have a differing opinion. As a debater in high school and a journalist in college and my whole career, I believe firmly in social discourse, in which various opinions and options are put on the table to be examined and studied from various angles and perspectives. My mind is open to change; I hope my readers' minds are, too.

I will continue to write this blog partly because this is a city without a traditional daily newspaper and existing next door to a bigger city whose Dallas Morning News cares less and less about what happens in our Garland community.

The year 2019 is also important for the nonprofit organization Kay and I helped found—Friends of Garland's Historic Magic 11th Street. This spring the group is sponsoring a fabulous drama, with eight original songs in it, entitled Becoming Garland Avenue about the early days in Garland. Besides writing the original script and music, Kay has done an amazing job of recruiting some of the finest, most talented people in Garland to carry the gauntlet for performing the musical live at 2 p.m. Saturday, April 13, on the stage of Garland's historic Plaza Theater in conjunction with Garland's Heritage Celebration 2019. I hope you will attend.

The Historic Magic 11th Street organization also has two other special projects planned for 2019 to focus the spotlight on two underrepresented people groups here. Look for more information on these later.

Instead of our annual spring historic home tour, which has been held for four straight years now, during the Christmas season 2019, our Travis College Hill Historic District in downtown Garland (in cooperation with neighboring Embree) will be lit up and decorated to welcome visitors from far and wide to see our 100-year-old-plus historic homes in their Christmas finery—some on the inside and all from the outside. 

All in all, 2019 is shaping up to be a memorable, exciting, busy, and great year at the home of Louis and Kay Moore, who are proud to say they live in the heart of Garland, Texas.

May God bless you, dear readers. And may God bless Garland.

 

Where have ALL the African-Americans who once led City of Garland departments gone? Just coincidence? And why no black councilmembers to represent this big segment of our population?

Black History Month 2019 in Garland finds the city without an African-American city councilmember or plan commissioner and with three prominent African-Americans recently gone from city department leadership.

Quietly over the past few months Garland has been losing its top department heads who are African-American.

This fact was duly noted to the membership at a recent meeting of the Garland chapter of the NAACP.

The most recent departure was that of Lonnie Banks, head of Garland's Environmental Waste Department, whose retirement party was held on January 30 after 29 years of exemplary service to Garland and 10 years of combined service in Longview and Marshall.

Lonnie Banks' retirement party was January 30. He headed Garland's Environmental Waste Department.

Priscilla Wilson, senior managing director of human resources, retired in December with little attention after 15 years and 7 months of service to the city. Kristen Smith, director of human resources/civil services, says she knows of no plans to fill Priscilla's position. 

Jermel Stevenson, Managing Director of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Arts, whose 3-year tenure here was marred by the fight over dog and skate parks, suddenly stopped showing up in the middle of the bond-committee meetings.

One had to listen very carefully to the bond-committee's videotapes to realize what had happened—that suddenly new faces were on the screen representing the Parks Department and that the central personality was not there.

Former Garland Parks director Jermel Stevenson visited with my wife, Kay, during a Garland event last fall. He is one of three African-American city department heads suddenly gone.

I tried to contact both Priscilla and Jermel by email to discuss their departures but neither replied.

All this has occurred while the city has no sitting city councilmember who is African-American. B.J. Williams, the most recent African-American on city council, became ineligible for reelection last spring after six years representing District 4. No African-Americans appear to be in the wings in any council district either. The few who might be look at city politics and shake their heads. Nor are there any members of the Garland Plan Commission who are non-white—in a city where the majority of the citizens are affiliated with one of three minority racial groups!

A sad commentary to be occurring at this particular time of the year, which is Black History Month.

Anglos/whites are no longer the majority group now. They've been eclipsed by the growing 39-40 percent who are Hispanic and overshadowed by all the other minority groups lumped together. About 13 percent of Garland's population of 234,000 is African-American. The fourth biggest people group here is the 10 percent who are Asians (not just Vietnamese, which some of our politicos seem to mistakenly believe).

In case you are doing the math, these are the important numbers: (13 percent blacks + 10 percent Asians + 39 percent Hispanics = percent, leaving 38 percent for whites and other minority groups.)

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not big into quotas, but something is seriously wrong with this picture.

At the same time, this month the city's leadership will choose our new police chief. One out of the four finalists is African-American. He is Captain Charles Rene, an assistant chief, who has been with the Garland Police Department since July 1989.

If Garland Police Assistant Chief Charles Rene isn't chosen from the list of four finalists for Garland police chief, he is likely to become one of the most sought-after candidates for police chief in other cities across the U.S.

As I told Charles personally face-to-face recently, if he is not chosen, which is possible since he is up against highly skilled and well-mentored Garland Police Assistant Chief Jeff Bryant, an Anglo. he will then become one of the most sought after police-chief candidates in the country. Given the national controversy over the recent shootings by police of African-American individuals and also Garland's reputation as having an excellent but tough police force, many cities across the United States will likely pay Rene big bucks to come their way. Garland will then lose the highest-ranking and second-longest-tenured African-American in its police department.

The saga and its complexity go on and on!

Perhaps the brightest rising star in the African-American community in Garland right now is Garland ISD trustee Robert Selders Jr., whose business is in downtown Garland. Unfortunately he lives in Rowlett. This enables him to run for election in GISD but not in the Garland municipality. Wherever he lives, I'm sure he will have an extremely bright future there. But that doesn't help the City of Garland very much!

So, whither Garland's African-American community that has worked so steadfastly and so diligently for so many years to find its role in the political structure in this city?

Identifying and grooming new leaders and potential candidates who are African-American must become a major thrust in our community not only for the African-Americans but for ALL of us. Otherwise, we risk turning back the clock several decades to a time in Garland and the United States that is embarrassing even to recall.

As too many in Garland and this country seem to have forgotten: We ALL rise or fall together! 

Martin Luther King Jr. said, in his final speech in Memphis the night before he was assassinated, that ". . . we as a people will get to the promised land." With the backward steps Garland seems to have taken in the last year, one can't help wondering whether we as a city are still heading in the direction of that honored individual's great dream.