No new ground was covered Thursday during the mayoral candidate debate between Councilman Greg Brockhouse (D6) and incumbent Mayor Ron Nirenberg – but the television and online viewers were given another glimpse at the stark difference between two men vying to become the mayor of San Antonio for the next two years.
Nirenberg emphasized the strong foundation and momentum his first term has laid in the way of long-term policy and planning initiatives surrounding affordable housing, climate change mitigation, and transportation. Brockhouse said the mayor was “all talk and no action” and criticized him for governing by task force and furthering the gap between City Hall and residents.
“I’m again grateful for the opportunity to lay a clear and distinct difference between the vision of the city that’s moving forward and the record of getting things done at City Hall and Councilman Brockhouse’s continued bluster about things that he can’t get done,” Nirenberg said after the debate.
“It was kinda a rehash of the same things we’ve been talking about,” Brockhouse said. “Different styles, different beliefs.”
The last debate before the May 4 local election was hosted and broadcast by KLRN-TV, the local PBS station, and sponsored by the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. Click here to watch the debate, which starts at minute 15.
The negative attacks that Nirenberg’s campaign is lodging against Brockhouse – which cites domestic violence allegations, close ties to public safety union, child support payment issues – is a “sure sign,” Brockhouse said, “that I’m in a good position. … Nobody even thought we would be in the race as a first-term Council member challenging an incumbent mayor. I am thrilled at where we’re at. … We have the momentum right now.”
Many say that recent momentum has been fueled by the controversial City Council vote to remove Chick-fil-A from an airport contract.
Nirenberg said the decision to remove the fast-food restaurant was purely an economic, business decision, nothing to do with the religious ties the owners have. Brockhouse criticized the mayor for downplaying the decision’s ramifications for religious freedoms. The issue has been brought up at nearly all mayoral debates.
Polls are open on election day, Saturday, May 4, from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Click here for voting locations.
Not a word about the on-going RAPE OF THE ALAMO!!
Stupid chatter about bible-beating (Jesus is rolling His eyes) about Chick Fil A.
But NOT A WORD about the ongoing OUTRAGEOUS desecration of our iconic Alamo!!!
Jeez!!! Stupid politicians! The IGNORING of the PEOPLES’ WILL About OUR Alamo is what is REAL!!!!!
Mwm,
stupid politicians? – no, not ignoring people’s will, ignoring stupid people. Why do you think you know what is right for the Alamo? And how about if you explain this “desecration”.
Had to turn the TV debates off last night. Brockhouse is a broken record on the Chik-fil-A thing. Council voted TWICE on the matter – Brockhouse lost both times. Turn the page, move on! Yes, we know it’s your endless rallying cry for the 30+ percent that will follow you into artery-clogging hell. The rest of us? Do you have anything ELSE you can talk about??
Yes, there are plenty of issues to talk about. High property taxes, poor streets, transparency in meetings, Alamo issues, congested streets, poor maintained streets that have not been addressed properly over the years, high water rates and cps rates, homelessness all across San Antonio. Oh, but wait, city council installed a rainbow crosswalk. What did that do for the city? How did that improve relations between city government and the people? Time for new leadership.
When it is all said and done be sure to see just what percentage of the voters voted. That’s the real story, a very small percentage of people that get out and vote, and they make the difference.
I believe it’s up to Chick-Fil-A’s Board of Directors to decide when and where to be open. I also believe it is well within the structure of our City Council to change a decision that believes needs to be changed. Thus, if Chick-Fil-A decides that all locations will be closed on Sunday, they understand the risk of airports making better business decisions and using every day businesses.
The CFA was not just about CFA—it was about a councilman ignoring the legal process and council not doing due diligence before making a decision. SA has now set a precedent that no matter that businesses compete fairly through the RFP process, all that can be undone by one council member who, for political reasons, decides it should be changed-and a mayor who lacks the courage and forethought , for political reasons, to see how this makes SA look foolish and a bad faith city to do business with . Will every business now have to be scrutinized for the charitable contributions of their owners …and eliminated bc they don’t agree, not with the RFP, but the political needs of council members running for re-election and a mayor who did not understand this? (Btw-the mayor’s justification that it was an economic decision was not mentioned ..until the blowback and negative attention the decision received.) I’m just surprised it wasn’t done behind closed doors or given some acronym committee/task force/working group -headed by city insiders!
Craig Bell makes a good point, but also consider that the city did not make the decision based on them closing on Sunday’s. This is what they said to justify their discriminatory action, but it was also stated that it was due to them supporting the Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Makes me wonder how many events related to the Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes they have attended. Since when has supporting these ministries become hateful? While this is not the main issue at stake over our city, it is still very relevant.
In England they have not been listening to the people but doing what they want and the voters more than cleared the house last night. City hall needs to come down from the pedestal and listen to what the citizens here want.