I worked in politics for far too long to be swayed by politicians’ stump speeches. Fortunately, last night’s first town hall featuring the three leading mayoral candidates – Mayor Ivy Taylor, City Councilman Ron Nirenberg and Bexar County Democratic Party Chair Manuel Medina – facing off in the May election was at least two-thirds free of such soliloquies.
The coming election will be my wife Misty’s and my first in San Antonio, which holds ostensibly nonpartisan municipal elections. I say ostensibly because Medina has been quite vocal in proclaiming his status as a Democrat. To me, both Taylor and Nirenberg seem to be progressive leaders, and they’ve kept with the tradition of nonpartisanship by not advertising their political affiliations.
It was Medina who throughout the town hall spent his time allotted to respond to audience questions repeating his stump speech, lobbing snide remarks at Taylor, stating that Broadway should not receive bond money for improvements because it’s the doorway to the wealthy enclave of Alamo Heights (this coming from a guy who lives in the Dominion and is self-funding his campaign) and advocating for a bullet train between Austin and San Antonio.
As someone who lived in Austin for many years, I’d suggest Medina check with Austin leaders to see what they say. I haven’t heard them talk all that seriously about one. In fact, I saw little belief in Austin that improving connections with San Antonio was even a priority beyond lip-service.
Medina took an early swipe at Taylor when he was asked what his response to President Trump’s executive orders and proposed policies would be if he were to be elected mayor. He argued he would be in Washington, D.C. at that very moment telling Trump what San Antonio needs. That’s great campaign rhetoric but completely implausible. Does he really think Donald Trump is worried about South Texas beyond building the border wall and killing trade?
I don’t mean to only criticize Medina. Taylor and Nirenberg have their issues. Taylor opposed the local nondiscrimination ordinance when she was on City Council. Nirenberg has done something wrong – I just can’t think of it right now. (He does seem a little obsessed with a water pipeline.)
All three candidates have their faults.
But Taylor and Nirenberg speak as leaders while Medina takes the fire-and-brimstone populist approach. In fact, Misty noted that he seemed to take a Trumpian tack. That’s sad to see from a Democratic Party leader.
I find San Antonio to be a very nice city. I think its leaders have done a great job planning, developing, and growing with the population. I hope the city continues to be run by people who are good stewards of San Antonio, its resources, its land, its diversity, its history, its culture, and its people. I want City staff who not only manage and invest in today but plan and build for the future; because you can’t do the latter without the former.
That said, I want a leader. Not a bomb-thrower.
One of the best things about San Antonio, and one that was proven again last night, is that there appear to be a number of leaders – at least two – on the bench just waiting for an opportunity to share their expertise, skills, knowledge, and abilities in City leadership positions. That can’t be said of all or even many cities.
I won’t vote for Medina, and I’m leaning toward Taylor over Nirenberg – but it’s damn close. I do have issues with Taylor using the same local firm Trump used for marketing and her vote against the nondiscrimination ordinance, but I also believe her urban planning experience has served the city well. Sometimes cities need managers and sometimes they need visionaries. Whichever one considers Taylor to be, I think (in my limited time following city politics) she’s served San Antonio well so far.
All that being said, my vote is still open to persuasion.
Ivy lied to her colleagues on council and to the whole city for the mayoral appointment when Castro vacated his seat. Power change doesn’t come easily when there is abuse of power. Both Ivy and Ron have damaging voting records on council right there for you to see, for Vista Ridge, against Mission Park residents, for city manager pay raises, against police and fire, against ndo and on and on. San Antonio needs an educated electorate, so at least one candidate, Manuel Medina, is bold enough to point out unethical behavior and fund his own campaign to run for office. Funny to compare him to Trump, his campaign style may be one thing but he’s a dreamer and he wasn’t born with money. On the contrary, he worked hard to finish his degrees and become a successful consultant and businessman.
I find this article more ostensible than this election, except Mr. Pate is even more full of it than simple ostensible rhetoric. I would urge any reader of this article to remember the fact Mr. Pate has only lived here for a short period of time and clearly does not advocate a response based on knowing the issues the city faces. This election is not a popularity contest. People are tired of the lack of transparency and leadership coming from City Hall. Mr. Pate calls on leadership, but I do not know how one can dicredit the amount of work Chairman Medina has contributed to this city, such as organizing to increase the vote in the past elections, rallying behind the NDO (which Mayor Taylor does not care about), and initiatives like Pre-K 4 SA.
There is nothing wrong with “bomb-throwing” if the attacks stand true. The fact is that progressive Leaders do not vote for an environmentally unfriendly water pipeline, which is what Councilman Nirenberg chose to favor, twice at that. If the mayor has been such a great leader, why not question the $850 million dollar bond – the highest in the city’s history? Why has the crime rate increased while the poverty gap grows and more people begin to struggle?
We need a leader who is willing to call out the false rhetoric, fight for real progressive values like removing corporate influence at City Hall, and help all sectors of the city and not just the northside. I could care less that Medina lives in the Dominion. If Mr. Pate were a real jouralist, he would know where Medina comes from and just how successful his course through the American Dream has unraveled.
I am much more concerned with the poor intellectual response from someone who claims to have been involved in politics for so long. And by the way, no, one can not claim to be open by persuasion, yet state, “I won’t vote for Medina.”
On May 6th, we must vote in favor of a real progressive focused on SA today – Manuel Medina.
Your point regarding my willingness to change my vote is well-taken. I should have clarified that I could still be persuaded to vote for Chair Medina were he, as noted by a commenter below, to engage in more policy-oriented discussion.
To address criticisms based on my short residency in San Antonio: You’re absolutely correct. I do not claim to know the history of all controversial policies or which individuals are considered to be the entrenched power players in San Antonio politics. My comment on the water pipeline is a great illustration of my attempts to be open about what I don’t know about San Antonio.
However, I think I’m doing a pretty good job for a guy who just moved here from New Orleans at the end of December.
My main point in this piece — which I considered entitling “A Naive’s Perspective on SA Politics” on my blog — is that San Antonio clearly has many leaders waiting in the wings to take on the issues the city faces.
More important, out of the four cities I lived in last year, I’m happy to call San Antonio my new home.
You arrived in SA less than 2 months ago. You, William Pate, are the epitome of the problems we have here in SA. Big interest pushing out the little guys.
You literally have no experience in SA cultural or community. You were paid by a non-profit organization that masquerades itself has being fair to all candidates, but thanks to Christian Archer, we know the Rivard Report is incredibly biased.
Classic media is dying, and so are your morals.
Austin, this commentary was republished from Mr. Pate’s blog, meaning it represents his personal opinion. The Rivard Report did not compensate him for this submission. Would you care to clarify your statement regarding Christian Archer?
I tend to agree with Mr Pate. Medina needs to tell us more about his good ideas and stop attacking the other candidates. That style of politics isn’t good for our city
I do not believe Mr. Medina is attacking the other candidates. Attacking would be if he was attacking them personally but he is just simply stating the facts of their vote and stance on the issues; he just happens to be doing it to their face.
I think that is exactly what Medina needs to continue doing. Sure the opposition does not want their bad deeds exposed but Medina’s doing a good job and should continue exposing them.
Medina rubs me the wrong way. I too sense he’s borrowing from Trump in his populist strategy. That sort of divisiveness sounds like a bunch of insincere bs meant to fire up his base and get headlines. Something I bet he honed in his party chair job.
I will be watching to see how much Nirenberg can differentiate himself from Ivy. So far the only difference I see is the lgbtq issues. She’s been good but I am bothered by her failure to directly support the LGBTQ community with the same passion as she does for racial issues.
I concur.
Both Ivy and Ron are the city manager’s puppets there’s no difference. If that’s what you want well then special interest and lobbyists will continue running City Hall. But remember this will continue at the expense of regular citizens.
if you want council to have more power then you should petition to change the way they serve. of course the city manager is the expert-she’s been here far longer, has worked with way more elected officials, and knows what it takes to get stuff done. She’ll always be the expert regardless of who is in office. That’s how our city is set up.
Ivy’s lack of support for NDO is a deal breaker. Contrary to what Medina said, Ron met with us early and supported NDO from the start. Medina has no policy making experience at a municipal level. His experience is all partisan. Yes, SA went blue this last time…but so did every single metro area. He really can’t take credit for that.
The NDO vote may well be what my vote turns on. Thank you for the clarification, as well. Good to know.
By the way, welcome to SA- It’s a great city!
Thank you! We’re extremely excited to be here. 🙂
What you guys are forgetting this at this City’s run by the city manager, lobbyist, and special interest. If you put the two puppets that are ready they’re back in things will continue as they have been for a while, on the other hand if you elect a new person at least with the intentions of keeping the city manager in check the entire city will benefit.
It is quite obvious Mr. Pate does not understand the history of San Antonio Politics. We have for generations have had special interest and big money control the direction in how the city invest its tax money and it has not benefited a very large segment of our community. We here at the Democratic Party have developed an opportunity for our community to use the local party as a vehicle for change in local government under the leadership of Manuel Medina. Under his leadership we the Precinct chairs raised more money in the history of the Democratic Party to contribute to the B.C.D.P. coordinated campaign which is the reason we also had historic straight democratic votes inside the city limits this past elections 61 % to be exact.
As community leader and life long advocate in San Antonio Ron Or Ivy are not progressive, they have had opportunity to do right by our community and have failed us on many occasions one being the vista ridge pipe line allowing saws to begin the process to privatize our water! Mr. Pate please do your home work and take the time to come visit our community out side you Neighborhood we have a very diverse community and large portion them living in poverty!
Designating SA as a sanctuary city and asking for all of the political drama that comes with it is not what I consider progressive. I don’t want a politician I want a real person who isn’t insulated from the real world.
Real solutions is building a democratic party that is inclusive of all communities. His leadership is about encouraging our comunities to participate in the political proccess and move a progressive agenda.
Sorry you have a problem with protecting the rights of the undocumented comunities Ms. Lewis its quite obviousely you care nothing about our Hispanic communities!
Ha ! I only care about whether you contribute to our community or a take from it. Whether you’re American or from another country makes no difference.
By the way my name is pronounced hi-meh, not jay-mee.
Judging by his supporters’ comments (and his own regarding downtown at the town hall), it sounds like Chair Medina wants to serve a slice of the community. If that’s the case, seems to me he’d be better-suited for a city council seat than an at-large position like mayor. (Of course, that may necessitate moving.)
Agree, Mr. Pate do your homework, your still wet behind your ears.
Citizens are tired of the inequality perpetrated at City Hall. Especially with the disbursement of our tax dollars.
The most interesting part of the recent mayoral candidate town hall, I think — beyond the use of Periscope and Twitter (how I participated) — was that only 3 of the 10 declared candidates seem to have been invited and at least one declared mayoral candidate apparently had to welcome himself to the public discussion: Antonio ‘Tony” Diaz — who also did not make the article above despite his attendance and the presence of some of his supporters at the gathering.
Diaz might take heart, however, that based on at least past election seasons, Rivard Report candidate endorsements, tacit or otherwise, seem to be a political kiss of death.
Is Tony Diaz a ‘leading’ mayoral candidate? Well, he’s declared, has a Facebook page and been out block-walking since January. He’s also lobbied the County and the City of San Antonio (somewhat) successfully for recognition of a local Indigenous Peoples Day — declared in 2015 after his years of determined effort. This past December, Diaz apparently met with Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein to discuss national presidential election recount efforts.
There’s not much online about Diaz’s mayoral platform, which makes his exclusion from the recent town hall event even more of a shame. The Rivard Report’s failure to recognize this local political leader (who the Express-News and SA Current have interviewed in the recent past) as a mayoral candidate should concern readers turning to the Rivard Report as a nonpartisan outlet.
Candidate listings:
http://www.sanantonio.gov/Candidate-Listing
Antonio Diaz’s mayoral candidate Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/Antonio-Diaz-337285616363753/
E-N: Indigenous win day of recognition from county (October 2015)
http://www.expressnews.com/news/news_columnists/elaine_ayala/article/Indigneous-win-day-of-recognition-from-county-6565320.php
SA Current: San Antonio man still pushing City to create Indigenous Peoples Day (July 2015):
http://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2015/07/17/san-antonio-man-still-pushing-city-to-create-indigenous-people-day
(In follow-up – City and County neglect their commitments to recognizing the most recent Indigenous Peoples Day?): http://indigenousway.blogspot.com/2016/10/city-council-continues-to-refuse-to.html)
Indigenous Way (Diaz’s blog):
http://indigenousway.blogspot.com/2016/12/jill-stein-san-antonio-meeting-with.html
Mark, this commentary was republished from Mr. Pate’s blog and represents his personal opinion. Antonio Diaz was mentioned in our coverage. Our staff has been in contact with several other mayoral candidates. As far as the town hall goes, we invited the three candidates who have demonstrated the ability to mount credible campaigns, including raising sufficient funds and attracting enough paid staff and volunteers to reach voters in a city of 1.4 million people. A previous record of public service and community engagement and putting forward a detailed platform are other measures of a candidate’s legitimacy.
It’s obvious that the Rivard Report wants set the standard as to who we should consider to vote for and exlude others. My question is who appointed them as Gatekeepers of who we should consider? Everyone running should be heard! Once again The again , the establishment trying to control the agenda. Obviously they have no shame!
No one is making you read the Rivard Report… Medina is the establishment, “Robert”–he’s been the Democratic Party Chair in Bexar County……… That’s about as “establishment” as it gets.
“That’s sad to see from a Democratic Party leader.”
Many Democratic candidates (and unfortunately too many democratic voters) are neoliberals (corporatist, conservative-lite, socially moderate), who were left behind in the great rush to the Right by the Republican party back in the ’90s. Personally, I’d rather have a truly progressive party to support rather than a lessor evil neoliberal party espousing and fighting for policies that I don’t agree with but used to hold my nose and vote for because it was either that or Fringe Right BS that seems all that the Repugnant party (and I say that as a Republican progressive who was left behind during that party’s mid sixties shift to the hard Right) has to offer. 2016 broke that trend for me as I did not and will not vote for “lessor evils” ever again.
The neoliberal turn is a much longer conversation, and I welcome it. Suffice to say, I’d be surprised to find a single person on the ballot who isn’t a neoliberal.
I see nothing wrong with Manuel Medina is fighting for more inclusiveness in our local government, less special interests and lobbyists controlling the agenda and decisions. Our tax dollars being spent equally among all 10 districts in our community. These are things that are long overdue and someone has finally come around that says I will try to change things. I will not be the city manager puppet.
The duty of our Mayor/Council is to effectively spend our tax money. And what if NO ONE in these positions currently has a financial background, neither educational nor experiential?
Either Mayor Taylor or Ron Nirenberg would perpetuate this naiveté, continuing our dependence on massaged financial inputs from Sheryl Sculley’s City staff (the same body that never answered the question, “How much more will it cost to own and operate streetcars than the buses they would replace?”) Fiscal effectiveness is subject to the old maxim, “Garbage in, garbage out.”
Mr. Medina has financial expertise emanating from a successful business career. So we are challenged, do we want an ELECTED mayor who is ACCOUNTABLE for City finances. or do we want to continue the UNACCOUNTABLE administration of an APPOINTED bureaucracy that thrives on the economic illiteracy of our Mayor/City Council?
My MBA degree from Harvard Business School pleads for an ACCOUNTABLE City government, equipped to deal with the City’s problems and challenges, all of which have a financial component?
“Politics is for a term; economics is forever.”
Stan Mitchell
It’s kind of hard to sell yourself as a fighter for the little guy when you drive home through a gate meant to keep out the little guy and surround your kids and family with some of the richest and mostly white neighbors in SA