Douglas Athas, Mayor-Elect - Latest Comments

Jeanette Porcheddu [Visitor] in response to: Next Negative Hit Being Queued?

Jeanette Porcheddu [Visitor] — Wed, 08 May 2013 03:04:47 +0000

Thanks for this information. It isn't something I knew too much about, but glad you shared it. I have been unsure who I would vote for but now I know.

Randall Dunning [Visitor] in response to: Next Negative Hit Being Queued?

Randall Dunning [Visitor] — Tue, 07 May 2013 21:23:35 +0000

I was on that council and one of the 4 that stood in opposition to the Gang of 5 in their unlawful attempt to suppress an election. I will say right here that Doug's account squares with my memory of how the Gang of 5's failed scheme played out. The false charges Doug describes by the bitter losers of that court battle are nothing but nonsense and hogwash. What Doug and the rest of Let Us Vote! achieved not only saved elections in Garland, but may have had impact nation wide as well. Had the Gang of 5 set this precident, I am convinced that there would have been attempts at suppressing elections all across the fruited plain.

Randall Dunning [Visitor] in response to: Claims Too Bizarre

Randall Dunning [Visitor] — Tue, 07 May 2013 21:07:29 +0000

When Larry Jeffu$ was getting paid $60,000 by the Button campaign as a Political Consultant, he produced a media campaign against me saying I was being "investigated by the FBI". The truth was I was having my security clearance upgraded and was being investigated by Defense Investigative Services as part of the normal background investigative process for Industrial Security. These kinds of lies have, unfortunately, become a trademark of campaigns run by Larry Jeffu$. Don't let it get you down Doug!

Debbie [Visitor] in response to: Bad Signs of the Times

Debbie [Visitor] — Wed, 01 May 2013 15:12:06 +0000

Why is it that we, as citizens and residents can't even post a Garage Sale sign but political signs are EVERWHERE sometimes limiting our line of sight while driving?
Just sayin.......

Del Newberry [Visitor] in response to: Dirty Campaigning Continuing and Getting Worse

Del Newberry [Visitor] — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 05:28:28 +0000

I saw that article in the DMN. And sorry to say, that is one reason a lot of good people do not run for office. They don't want their dirty laundry aired out in public, and if the facts aren't 'newsworthy' enough, sometimes politicians have to get creative with the truth. They think truth is like a ladder - works better with a generous slant to it. Hang in there, all of this will pass. Like I have told you before, I like your blogs, I like how you keep us informed.

Jeanette Putnam [Visitor] in response to: Still the Only Candidate to Vote Against a Budget with a Tax Increase

Jeanette Putnam [Visitor] — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 03:36:51 +0000

Thank you very much for clarifying the situation.

We had truly hoped that this race would not be lowered the wallow in the gutter as so many political races end up.

Is there anywhere we can look up what the 3 previous city council members accomplished while in office? It would be helpful to see who really did something for the city and it's people, and who did nothing.

Douglas [Member] in response to: Lawsuits Coming Almost as Fast as Bullets

Douglas [Member] — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 22:55:17 +0000

Larry, in his post above, states that neither he nor I are ballistics experts but I am more familiar with some of the tools available for analysis and use than I was and I appreciate his bringing them to my attention.

To be accurate on one point, I did not say the range was "legally out of compliance." What I did say was, "State law, passed in 1991, Health and Safety Code; Title 9. Safety; Subtitle A. Public Safety; Chap 756. Miscellaneous Hazardous Conditions; Subchapter D. Outdoor Shooting Ranges, Sec. 756.042. Construction Standards states: 'The owner of an outdoor shooting range shall construct and maintain the range according to standards that are at least as stringent as the standards printed in the National Rifle Association range manual.' There are other requirements in that same section that are not met by the GPSR."

I do not know if the range meets NRA standards. In the same chapter are requirements for insurance, which according to media reports the owner has admitted not having. However, I do not know if there is another section that allows self-insurance as with automobiles. I do not know if the range is in violation of any law and won't jump to any conclusions without evidence.

If the range is being operated unsafely, it is not the responsibility of the cities of Rowlett or Garland to make the necessary changes and repairs. That would be the party responsible, the owner, not the taxpayers.

Larry [Visitor] in response to: Lawsuits Coming Almost as Fast as Bullets

Larry [Visitor] — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:41:47 +0000

I have had cordial emails with Mr. Athas about the ballistics of this case. Neither of us has any credentials about ballistics. I will restate that Rpwlett zoned the annexed property with knowledge of the gun range. At that time, evidently Rowlett officials saw no problem. There had been a previous incident (long time ago) with a bullet hole in the 4-H building in that area. The dump between Garland and Rowlett has, to my knowledge, not filed any complaints about the range. Yes it NOW is an unused landfill. Mr. Athas has informed me that the range has legally out of compliance since 1991. Has it been inspected or cited for non-compliance by Garland? I beleive there is a Texas State Rifle Association sticker on the door. CCL and private instruction has been taught there for years. NOBODY NOTICED a safety problem in 20 years? IMHO, the owner would have fixed the problem or gone out of business. Per Texas statues, shooting at occupied buildings is a felony offense, so why is this case being tried in a civil suit, and through a proxy name, paid for by Rowlett tax money? Would that money not be more efficiently spent in a joint effort to make the range safer? If it is a safety issue, FIX IT! IMHO, Rowlett and Garland are denying culpability in the situation and pinning a target on the back of GPSR owner for the April personal injury suit, guilt by previous guilt.