I got through my 73rd birthday last week with family time both here and on the phone.
I’m mostly easy to please on the gift front, other than a new pickup truck.
So my 2005 Silverado will have to make do.
Being an A&M partisan and having a daughter who has long worked in retail in Bryan-College Station, I have a wide assortment of things bearing the Aggie logos and colored maroon.
Some of my friends here must think I’m really gung-ho judging how often I wear A&M clothing items or caps.
The truth is that I have so often received maroon and white gifts for every Christmas, Father’s Day, and birthday that the maroon is far more pervasive in my closet than the rest of my sartorial choices.
Shifting gears, I’d like to expand on last week’s column about elected officials explaining they vote against major projects that came before them.
While last week’s column focused on commissioners court votes, I feel the same about how elected officials vote on key matters with all government entities.
The public has a right to know what formed an elected official decision to vote yay or nay, especially if the issue has been under consideration for a while.
That’s a pretty important education function that officials can perform for all voters.
We need to know why they vote against something high profile.
Is there something negative about a proposal that hasn’t been revealed?
I’ve seen this play out many times over the years – not only here but in other places I’ve reported from.
A big vote is being made, a split vote ensues and then silence.
If you seek public office you owe it to the public you serve to explain why you oppose something.
Actually, most votes taken at all levels are positive ones made for a measure.
The split vote is a rarity and all the more reason to explain the reason why.
I suppose something that rankles me comes as no surprise to people who know me.
There often are times when officials do their talking in executive session and make a silent vote in public when they return from behind closed doors.
Again, it’s a detestable practice to talk down a measure in private when you’re part of a taxpayer-funded government.
There’s nothing democratic about that.
