ToniAnn, I would like to see David Hagan run against Slick Willie. But if he should win who would replace him in District 4? That could be a double edge sword.
A positive thought is when Armstrong is defeated, I believe you would see Halepaska and Polasek change their tune at council meetings. This also depends on Halepaska winning re-election. He has not made his intentions of running public....

The mayor doesn't have anything to do with schools John. As much as I would love to blame hime for the patheticness that is VISD, it simply is not his cross to bear.

All kidding aside, I’m sure the mayor is a nice man.

The number of vacant commercial properties, failure in “violent crime” prevention, a perpetual dropout rate, and last but not least, lack of planning or foresight to adequately address the lost of jobs by area plants; leads to only one thing. A great “salesman”, can sell you anything even falsehoods; which in this case, is the belief that more of the same is good.

In fact that should be the slogan of anyone that runs against the Mayor,

“Unemployment, Crime, and Dropouts; More of the same is not Good”

“Who was Mayor while you lost your job, who are you going to vote for”

“Who was Mayor while your neighborhoods were threaten by violent criminals, who are you going to vote for”

“Who was Mayor while your child gave up hope for their future and dropped out, who are you going to vote for”

“Who was Mayor, an continued business as usual, while your company struggled, who are you going to vote for”

“Who cares about all Victorians not just those of influence, actions speak louder than words, so now who are you going to vote for”

I would support any candidate that is committed to bringing hope, to those in Victoria that have lost it, regardless of party affiliation. While I have no real grievances against the Mayor, he is just human, he is just not the right person for the job during this time. Sometimes being to close to something, blinds you to the wrong that you are doing; he needs to graciously step down but not out.

The problems of Victoria are greater than one man or woman, they will require a comprehensive effort from all sides, this is not a time for business as usual. However, new leadership is needed to reignite vigor; into those that have allowed hopelessness to envelope their lives. This is not a time to be reserved but bold and determined.

“Business as usual”, does not speak of boldness and fruitful determination; more to the story of “Captain Ahab” telling everyone “stay the course“.

If you know the story, you know the price of staying the course, that is something most undesirable.

Mayor Armstrong needs to be replaced.

I am anxious to see who his opponents will be.

This is an open invitation to all of Armstrong's opponents to contact me directly. I want to know what you see for the future of Victoria, because if it is something that I support, I want to work hard for your campaign.

toni_marek@yahoo.com

Hopefully Mr. Armstrong will be a two term mayor. If the general consensus here tells anything, he will be. What is really sad for him is my sister who pays 0 attention to politics of any kind has heard he yells at people during City Council meetings & is a mostly disagreeable man. Add that to all of the bad decisions he has made as far as the city is concerned, IMO, that will be the nail in is poltical coffin...people are sick of bullies & dictators.

There is a saying that it’s not the part of the iceberg that shows, that will cause you problems-it’s what that is underwater that will sink your ship. The present city administration has a bad habit of just letting us see what is above water, being very careful to avoid any disclosure, which might cause one to question their actions. Two lessons that they have never learned are--

1) It costs less to do things the right way. Unfortunately POWER, CONTROL and PRIVATE AGENDAS are allowed to interfere what is best for Victoria. The need to have things-Their Way- is obvious with the careful hand picking of commission members and drafting of persons for the council. Any person with an opposing view or Nay-Say is overridden and phased out.

2) With every new project, department, or employee, comes reoccurring costs. Many times these reoccurring costs are projected with the initial idea to push it through council, however the true costs are often misjudged or quoted. Once it is up and running, the need to keep the project up is important as the public is watching. This however often takes away from the other projects. A good example is Riverside Park. Outside of a nice stadium the park has basically been neglected. Roads, Restrooms, Children’s Park Etc. are not what they should be. It is not considered to be a nice, safe wholesome place used by families.

It is not unlike the argument your parents had when you wanted a pony. A pony is expensive, but the upkeep is also high. A pony still eats when it is not being used.

We need to work of the basics which make this a clean safe place to raise familes.

Victoria is about to get a choice for mayor.

I just want to tell our mayor that he is responsible to the people he represents. He too often goes behind our backs then when caught red-handed he tells us it was for the good of Victoria. I don't see any good stemming from his ideas.
Too often he starts projects then realizes that it might affect a business or homeowner then he calls his consultants in to make it look like he cares.
I really hope that we can get one really strong candidate that Victoria can rally behind and get Armstrong out.

more coming soon.

Mayor for life has kind of a Haiti ring to it.

this city is past due for a change in leadership

My lawn is available for Jeff Williams for mayor signs.

Jeff, what do we have to do to get you to run for mayor?

To clarify, the .7% tax rate reduction is only last years 1/2 cent.

I have not confirmed Mr. Armstrong's statement that the rate has been reduced 5.5 cents in the last five years. If this statement is accurate this is a 7.8% reduction in five years in the tax RATE, from .70 to .645 cents. My home's assessed value has increased 23% during the same five year period. 23% increase in value, 8% reduction in tax rate equates to a 14% tax increase.

stay tuned.

Out with Armstrong!

The voters of the city of Victoria will only have themselves to blame if, God forbid, Armstrong is re-elected.

I guess the city of Victoria is going to be in for more of the same, political rhetoric rather then sound decisions.

Mr. Armstrong states the biggest issue facing the city is the loss of sales tax revenue. I raised this issue with the city council last summer in an effort to have the budget they were considering reflect the decline in sales tax that was taking place and moreso to allow for substantial declines that I explained should be anticipated. Their response was to INCREASE the estimated sales tax income by 5% for the new budget year.

Mr. Armstrong and 2 or 3 others on council had the unrealistic view that Victoria's economy was not going to be impacted. The reality they did not want to consider is; through the first 3 months of the city's fiscal year sales tax revenue is DOWN 23%. I project that when the next payment is received later this month the first 4 months of the fiscal year will have a revenue shortfall of over $1,000,000. This sales tax shortfall equates to $100,000,000 of lost revenue the businesses in Victoria that generate the sales tax have not seen. Mr. Armstrong has continuously stated Victoria's econcomy has not been impacted. In my mind $100,000,000 less in businesses revenues in 4 months is a substantial impact. When I tried to show Mr. Armstrong and two others on the council how important the sales tax numbers were I was told they did not matter. It is amazing how they matter now that election time rolls around.

Quick look at Mr. Armstrong's last 3 years on watch, general fund expenditures for 09/10 are projected to be over 16% greater then expenditures only 4 years ago (05/06). Expenditures UP 16%, assessed property values UP 20% and greater for many tax payers and the tax rate DOWN .7% A half cent reduction in the tax rate is just more political rhetoric so it can be said "we cut the tax rate". We need to quit playing games and focus on the fact that many, many people in Victoria are struggling to keep a job, keep their homes and pay their taxes. The time has come to CUT expenditures and CUT the tax burden on citizens.

"I'm a salesman for Victoria and I want to use my efforts as a salesman to promote sound business practices and growth in Victoria," he said.

Sorry, I'm not buying what he's selling. Good ideas don't need salesmen.

-----
"We have had a very concerted effort to develop the industrial park," he said.

How's that working out for us and at what cost?

Just say no.

One other question, I know the state payed for the medians on Navarro, but not for the ones on Sam Houston from about Evergreen to Navarro, or for the new ones on Laurent.

But they were approved by the city council and paid for by the taxpayers. And now you are against them? What changed your mind all of the sudden, if I might ask? Mr. Armstrong

Of course you SHOULD lower the tax rate, not by roughly 12% over 5 years, but by much more.

In the same 5 years the appraisal has increased by how much? 60% ? 80%? 100%?

Why don't we just talk bottom line, how much more are taxpayers paying in city taxes over the last 5 years?

then quit acting like a child, when things don't go your way, and say "i'm going to take my ball and go home if ya'll don't play right".