Today, the San Antonio Express-News published their endorsement for Leticia Van de Putte in the San Antonio mayoral race. I don’t normally like to pick apart things like this, primarily because it leads to nitpicking. But this one deserves a rebuttal, especially in such an important race. While the Editorial Board of the E-N can pick who they want, I would expect a better justification for their choice than what was published. In fact, maybe the reason for the weak endorsement is their candidate isn’t really the best choice.
To start with, the claim that Van de Putte works well with colleagues is less than accurate. Throughout her career in the Texas House and Senate, she has been more an antagonist than collegial. In fact, she often took pride in how she fought others in the chamber many times. It was a fact she touted during her failed Lite Gov candidacy. With regards to the Bexar County delegation, she was the one who fought Villarreal over his Hemisfair Park bill. Doing more research, regarding her Alamo takeover bill, she ran afoul of Sen. Jeff Wentworth on the issue.
Mike, on the other hand, has had a better relationship with those across the aisle than others in the delegation. Speaker Straus considered him such a team player that he would often confer with Villarreal on issues in the Texas House. There were times when his position was counter to the delegation, but in those cases it was for the greater good of the state. It might be good for the Editorial Board to cite more evidence other than anecdotal positions.
In their review of her record in the Senate, they point to two key issues – veterans affairs and human trafficking. Both are definitely important issues, each having an impact on San Antonio. But they are the responsibility of the state, not the city, which is why they were taken up in the Senate and have never surfaced in City Council.
With regards to the final point, stewardship of the Alamo, it is an important issue in San Antonio, but hardly one that merits her pick over Villarreal or even Taylor, for that matter.
“Her deep knowledge about the Texas shrine and understanding of the issues surrounding efforts to protect the state treasure will be major assets if she is elected mayor,” according to the endorsement. Major assets? Above streets, public safety, infrastructure, and economic development? It seems the E-N is struggling to find value in their pick.
Looking at Villarreal, he has been a key part of our state’s budgetary discussions and has led efforts to look at fairness in taxation to balance the burden on Texas taxpayers. At a time when our city is in critical need of someone with budgetary expertise, Villarreal is the best pick of the pack.
Handling a city budget, even if it’s San Antonio’s, is almost a cakewalk compared with the state budget over the past several sessions. Van de Putte has never been in any semblance of a role like Mike. It seems the E-N overlooked that key fact.
Regarding Van de Putte’s recent money laundering scheme, they seem to have brushed past it to the point of overlooking their own reporting on the issue. To paraphrase, “It’s okay if she violated the law. She fixed it after she was called out for it.” Mike fixed it before his campaign started.
We’ve come quite a distance in reforming our city’s ethics in public office, it would be a shame to elect someone who violated it before being elected. It makes you wonder how much focus she would put on ethics across the board if she felt it okay to violate the ordinances during her candidacy.
Can we really trust a candidate in city affairs who would feel it acceptable to violate rules regarding her campaign? Maybe that’s why the San Antonio Police Officers Association endorsed her campaign so readily when our city is struggling to reach a deal with their contract.
Finally, what disappoints me the most about this endorsement and some in the past has been the lack of vision in the Editorial Board’s endorsements. You would expect this group to demand more of these candidates than “stewardship of the Alamo” as a major asset.
It really comes down to which candidate has a vision and which candidate seems to be just more of the same. Looking at those who have stood behind Mike, I find many of the visionaries of our city.
I find those looking for downtown development, economic development, and equality. I find leaders in cybersecurity, healthcare, and neighborhood revitalization. There are environmental leaders, education leaders, and community leaders. These are not more of the same. These are the future of our city.
So, comparing the Board’s justification to this, it’s hard to see how the Express-News could come to their conclusion. Mike Villarreal is still the clear choice for Mayor of San Antonio.
