Comments

  • Need more info on what the officers issues are. Unlike some others on here I won't assume it's about money only.

    September 6, 2011 at 3:51 a.m.
  • I'm all for saving the tax payer money. Now we need the facts rather than speculation. What do the officers want? What does their pay, working conditions, staffing, and benefits currently look like compared to similar cities, cost of living in Victoria, and any other conditions which may factor into their request? What needs to be fixed, and how can they accomplish this without the city government gouging us for more, more, more. I'm all for taking care of the people that protect us, however we need to know the facts.

    September 5, 2011 at 6:05 p.m.
  • It's about starting a union, then taxes go up to pay for there wants!

    September 5, 2011 at 5:44 p.m.
  • lawdawger you are wasing your time. The ViCad is great at initial reporting from one side and not both, and even better at not follow up reporting,even when guided where to look.

    September 5, 2011 at 4:48 p.m.
  • This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

    September 5, 2011 at 3:26 p.m.
  • Let's see if I have got this right ....

    1. Hagen is in favor of this, so Halepaska is automatically opposed, no matter what the merits (per his statement on the tax rate vote) They canel each other out.
    2. That leaves 5 council members, 3 of which are against the police proposal and 2 who need more time to decide (Rangel always needs more time to decide)
    3. The VPOA, in their blog "The Truth Behind Our Actions", state that, "This petition is not a result of our disatisfaction with the City or Police administration." This must mean that they ARE satisfied? If they are, why the petition?
    4. The City Attorney says that individual police officers can not 'opt out' of this agreement. Officer Allen says the officers voluntarily participate. Which is right? Is this in conflict with Texas right-to-work laws?
    5. The city council does not want to do anything that will increase cost to the taxpayer, but 6 of the 7 voted in favor of a tax increase.
    6. The police are satisfied with the way things are, but they want to change.

    Somebody is speaking with a 'forked tongue'!

    The one bright spot to this article is ... "Four city councilmen will be up for re-election that month: David Hagen, Paul Polasek, Gabriel Soliz and Denise Rangel."
    Folks ... Next May is only 9 months away. Qualified canidates, start making your plans. Voters, keep this issue and others issues planted in your memory. It is time to clean house.

    September 5, 2011 at 10:44 a.m.
  • If these policemen have their way, get ready to pay higher taxes.
    Taxpayers and POA's have opposing interests - this is about money.

    September 5, 2011 at 10:15 a.m.
  • So let's see, Will and the boys vote for a higher tax rate, citing the 'executive session' as a reason for it. Seems the executive session was regarding this issue. So Will wants a higher tax rate, yet will vote against the very thing that he wants the higher rate for.

    I guess that's one way to rake in some extra tax money. Good try Will!

    September 5, 2011 at 8:10 a.m.