HD112 – NTTP TeaApproval


In House District 112, the race is between Angie Chen Button, a three term representative from the district and Jared Patterson, the former councilman and Mayor pro-tem from Sachse. Each is running on their ability to foster economic growth and curb excess spending. Both candidates have strong socially conservative views, and so we were left to work through their fiscal records. Representative Button recently voted for both the budget passed by the house and the draw from the Economic Stabilization Fund (Rainy Day Fund). Patterson meanwhile, has voted for two tax increases as a councilman. We researched the backgrounds of both candidates- paying close attention to both the legislative record of Rep Button and the circumstances surrounding the tax increases in Sachse.
In true NTTP fashion, the first question we asked Councilman Patterson was: “You voted to raise taxes twice, and you want a Tea Party endorsement? TEA meaning ‘Taxed Enough Already’? Are you serious?”
He WAS serious; and he proceeded to teach us why- unusual in this case, we can assure you- that his vote was the fiscally responsible path.  Fiscal responsibility ALSO involves paying off your bills previously accumulated as required.  While he wasn’t in Sachse when the debt was accrued (a bond for 150% of the city’s annual revenue), he took every step that a fiscally-conservative person could ask for to manage the debt once he was in office. His record shows that he eliminated waste, rebuilt the city’s budget from the ground up and delayed tax increases for as long as possible by splitting the increase in two. And while his votes may look bad on a flier during election season, we feel confident that Councilman Patterson is a fiscal conservative to the core. (It also serves as a tale of warning about the dangers of excessive local borrowing, as clarified in this excellent article.)  We TeaApprove Jared Patterson for HD 112.

jared_patterson    NTTP_teaApproved_2014_100px
In the case of Representative Button, we found it more difficult to justify portions of her voting record. Certainly she started off on the wrong foot in the 81st session, voting for Joe Straus over local conservative heavyweight Ken Paxton. She then scored in the mid to low 70’s on the YCT and Heritage Alliance score cards for that session. She also voted for a very legally-questionable redistricting plan: one that punitively punished the  conservatives that went against the house leadership by drawing them out of their districts. In the 82nd session her ratings varied between the high 60’s and low 80’s depending on which organization compiled the data. In the 83rd, with a 26% increase in the budget, she voted for the budget and chose not to cast her vote with the north Texas conservative bloc. She also voted for the $2B raid on the ESF (proposition 6 on the Nov 5th ballot) for funding water- an item that should have been a part of the core budget, and should be subjected to the state’s spending cap. This is an item that the NTTP has publicly fought. While Representative Button has been a champion of small business (HB 500, 83rd), we feel that her fiscal choices have been hit and miss. It is for this reason that we have chosen not to Tea Approve Representative Button for 2014.

Advertisements

18 Responses to HD112 – NTTP TeaApproval

  1. Collin County Cowboy says:

    I respect the NTTP process but you got this one wrong.

    1. He did raise taxes higher than the bonds. Two real conservatives voted against it and he voted for it. Please check your facts again.
    2. The company he works for goes after and accepts federal contacts and pork projects. Easily verifiable.
    3. He supported raising the sales tax as well.

    • Mike O says:

      And the other candidate voted for a 23% increase in spending, for a budget that got high-fives from the Democrats. As well as multiple usages of the Rainy Day fund at a time of record revenue growth. FAR from fiscally responsible. It is a judgement call that was made.

  2. jsmithnttp says:

    While I didn’t participate in the decision for this race, I think you are skewing some of the facts.

    1. Both Mike Felix and Pat McMillan voted against the tax increase, but had put forth no alternative proposals from what I’ve found. Politically smart, practically wrong. Sachse was legally required to pay its debt by state law (it’s illegal for a city to declare bankruptcy). Here’s a few articles on it.
    http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/64832182.html
    http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/murphy-sachse-wylie/headlines/20100908-Sachse-City-Council-finds-way-to-6868.ece

    2. Rep Button works for Texas Instruments, which also accepts Federal pork contracts. I hold neither candidate responsible for using their skills to make a living. Neither candidate has an ownership stake in their company.

    3. The sales tax vote was unanimously approved by council, and passed by the voters as well in May of this year.
    Here’s where he voted against one of them:
    http://www.sachsenews.com/articles/templates/news.asp?articleid=1979&zoneid=4

    I haven’t seen or read anything that indicates that Patterson voted to raise taxes above and beyond what was required. In fact, one of the articles above states:

    “The spike is entirely on the debt service side of the budget, the result of a $37.9 million bond package that voters passed in 2006.”

    I think it’s pretty clear-cut.

  3. Pam says:

    We have just been put through the ringer by the liberal press for shutting down the government and almost defaulting on some of the debt. Because we stood on principal. Now Patterson gets a pass for raising taxes twice? This totally backstabs the brave leaders that stood up to AHA. This endorsement essentially makes the case of the people attacking the Tea Party for standing on principal.

    No way. Sachse and Patterson could have cut other places. Sachse now has the second highest rate in Dallas County. Many other cities have passed bonds and kept the tax rate in check.

    It feels like you have endorsed Patterson only because he is slightly better than the incumbent. That is not how we should make decisions. Giving no endorsement would be better than endorsing a fraud and demeaning the sacrifices we were willing to make for real change.

    • Mike O says:

      SPENDING is the issue; PAYING for spending committed to by the TAXPAYERS has to be done. That is fiscal responsibility. The problem is spending when you don’t need to- like happened in Austin this session- and NOT working to reduce the spending and future obligations put on the next generation is the biggest crime of fiscal insanity. the bond passed for Sasche was simply too large and it is the PREVIOUS council who bear the blame for that.
      We have major tax increases and spending on the ballot this Tuesday. Yet we are seeing VERY LITTLE opposition from all those folk who decry high taxes- but sit in $60 million stadiums to watch high school football.

      As for the government shutdown, we are think the millions who are receiving insurance cancellation notices and have not place to acquire replacement insure- or whose replacements are simply unaffordable- might think doing everything possible, including shutting down 17% of the government, was actually worth trying.

      Part of the knock on many Tea Party responses is the over-simplification of the views on fiscal matters As our leadership team includes some folks VERY knowledgeable in such issues – we feel comfortable with this decision. The piper MUST be paid.

      • mjwash says:

        I am pretty knowledgeable about such issues as well.
        The tax in broken into two categories; DEBT and OperationsaAnd Maintenance (O&M). Debt is set and needs to be paid, O&M IS DISCRETIONARY. Patterson voted to increase O&M and this is clearly demonstrated by the chart located here: http://www.cityofsachse.com/index.aspx?NID=114.

        To be clear:
        1. Patterson voted to raise taxes for Discretionary O&M spending beyond the debt.
        2. Discretionary O&M went up every year Patterson was in Office.
        3. Patterson voted for real and avoidable tax increases.

        Also, values increased during this were “hidden taxes”. Home values increase and the City collects more revenue. That is why they have to post an “effective rate”. Anything above the effective rate is also a tax increase. Patterson voted to go higher than the effective rate AND voted to increase the rate for Discretionary spending. So actually he voted to raise taxes four times.

        Those are just the facts. If NTTP committee wants to provide nuanced arguments and excuses as to why they endorsed a habitual taxer by calling it ‘fiscal responsibility”, then go ahead. But you are abandoning the people who made real political sacrifices to further our cause.

      • Mike O says:

        Compared to the overspending amounts approved by Angie in just this last session, there is FAR more justification to Jared’s positions than for Angie’s. Or are you just suggesting we vote for NO ONE in this race?

  4. mjwash says:

    You can vote for whomever you want, but our endorsements should be EARNED by standing up for our values. I thought our values were stopping excessive spending and lowering taxes. I thought that our values are that we are better equipped to handle our money than the government.

    Jared is better than Angie? OK. That may be true, but that doesn’t mean Patterson has earned our endorsement. Joe Biden may be better than Hillary Clinton, are you going to endorse him in the democrat primaries next year? Give him the stamp Tea Party Approved because he is better than her?

    Our Approval should be issued to people DONT RAISE TAXES. NTTP has have now said to the world that our position that raising taxes is complicated and complex. You can raise taxes if you are better than you opponent.

    Good people in congress are being attacked for standing up for our values during the shutdown. Brave people who would not yield on their beliefs in the face of pressure. We urged then to hold firm and not give in.

    With this endorsement, NTTP has said we do not have the same commitment to those values.

    • Mike O says:

      And what are you talking about ‘OUR’ values? Your email address is NOT listed in our rolls, nor other rolls I have access to. For someone who is talking about Tea Party values, you seem not to have much footprint there.
      It also isn’t Tea Party values to REFUSE TO MEET with Tea Party constituents, as Angie did during the Straus Speaker fight days, LITERALLY RUNNING from Tea Party folks in one instance. She obviously believed in those days what the ‘Powers That Be’ told her- that the Tea Parties were going to fade away. As in so many other things, they proved to be wrong.
      But this is about principle and policy and not personal. Angie has a voting record that could be far better on fiscal matters . Our review of Jared leaves us comfortable that he WILL do better in office in that regard. We are fully aware of all issues here and that is the judgement of people who put a LOT more time in this stuff than the soundbite material.

  5. mjwash says:

    I am sorry I thought everyone interested in limited government was allowed to post on this site. Of the items is listed which ones specifically do not match up with the NTTP values? Also I love the way you say it is not personal but spend the first three paragraphs launching personal attacks.

    I know quite a lot about governmental accounting. Please point out inaccuracies regarding the Sachse Tax Rate or Mr. Patterson’s voting record in my previous posts.

    Or answer these questions:

    Did Mr. Patterson vote to raise the Sachse O&M rate twice?
    Did Mr. Patterson vote to raise the Sachse Effective Tax Rate three times?
    Did Mr. Patterson vote to increase impact fees and water/waste fees during his tenure?
    Did overall spending increase or decrease under his watch?
    What is the Sachse Tax Rate and where does Sachse rank among cities in Dallas and Collin County?
    What percentage of the overall Sachse Tax Rate is used to service debt? What percentage is used for Discretionary spending?

    You should know since you far more knowledgeable on these matters than me.

    • Mike O says:

      When that interest does not appear publicly except in defense of an longtime incumbent, in the exact same manner we’ve seen in other instances, one DOES suspect insincerity on that point.
      And your willingness to overlook BILLIONS in overspending- as long as it is farther away in Austin- seems to show a lack of consistency as well.

      Tax rates, as you should know are heavily based on bonded indebtedness, as well as the amount of commericial property available to share the load. Tax rates MUST cover this, as well as ESSENTIAL services to the city (Fire, polices, streets).. Kindly point out the specific areas of ‘fluff’ within the city budget there; do they have an ‘urban forester’, for example? I’m sure the city councilmen would like to know. Including those supporting Jared who voted against tax increases.

  6. marcus says:

    Did Mr. Patterson vote to raise the Sachse O&M rate twice?
    Answer: YES

    Did Mr. Patterson vote to raise the Sachse Effective Tax Rate three times?
    Answer: YES, I think so. At least twice and maybe 3 times.

    Did Mr. Patterson vote to increase impact fees and water/waste fees during his tenure?
    Answer: I really cant figure that one out. Give me more time.

    Did overall spending increase or decrease under his watch?
    Answer: OH YES.

    What is the Sachse Tax Rate and where does Sachse rank among cities in Dallas and Collin County?
    Answer: Of the 22 cities in Dallas County, Sachse has the fourth highest local property tax rate, only Cockrell Hill, Lancaster and Glenn Heights have higher rates. If Sachse were compared to Collin county cities it has the second highest local tax rate. Wylie has the highest rate. The only other Collin county city even close is Farmersville at .6975. Sachse’s rate is .77.

    What percentage of the overall Sachse Tax Rate is used to service debt?
    Answer: The M&O is .5425 and the I&S (debt) is .2281 therefore the percentage ratio is 29%.

    What percentage is used for Discretionary spending?
    Answer: 71% of the Tax rate is Operations.

    • Mike O says:

      Did his opponent support a 23% increase in budgetary spending, Mr. Fallon? Yes, she did. Did she support committing billions from the reserves for the water project- while most of $6 billion already set aside for water remains unutilized. Did she vote at take 50% of the cashflow that feed the reserve and commit it to the transportation, rather than include this basic state function in the operational budget? Yes she did.

      Voting for massive spending, as opposed to PAYING for spending already committed to by others, is a more serious issue.
      And being this is an EXACT CLONE of the words from another commenter, Angie needs to get people who are a little more creative into making her talking points for her.

      • mark says:

        I took the questions asked by mj wash and answered them since i know where to find that sort of infomation. I don’t work for Angie Button or even support her. I could care less. I live in Jody’s district so i dont care who wins 112.

        My answers were factual, check them for yourself.

        But it seems you are a little over eager to carry the water for Mr. Patterson and attack people who state facts. I didn’t attack you of the facts you charged at Ms. Button. I simply answered the questions. All of this information is public record.

        One last thing, i was under the impression that we could post under this site with only our first name as long as we stick to the point and are not abusive. I only posted my first name, YOU posted my last name from my email that is not to be made public. Is that how you get back at people you disagree with? Pretty Underhanded. By the way Fallon is wife’s name.

      • Mike O says:

        No, But being I have the courage to post MY name and I think it pretty gutless for those who criticize to hide in anonymity, I thought I’d bring a bit of light to things. As for the facts, If you want me to list the DOZENS of votes where Angie fell out of the fiscal conservative line, I’ll be HAPPY to. You list three; we can go through them ALL if you’d like.

    • jeff says:

      Lets not forget that Sachse has nothing to offer its citizens with respect to retail, shopping, restaurants etc. The real reason the taxes are increasing each year is the fact that our city has done a very poor job of attracting any viable businesses….meanwhile every city that surrounds us continues to grow. The council/city listens too much to a select group of citizens here that want things a certain way, including the opposition of growth. Most everyone here shops/eats in other cities. Citizens have been screaming this for years…if you dont attract new business, the tax burden shifts to the homeowners. Frankly, we are tired of hick town politicians that cant get anything done in little ol Sachse….Im not sure where the jump to state rep gets any validation. If you cant do it in Sachse, Washington’s the answer?!?! As for my family and I, we have decided to move to Wylie.

      • jeff says:

        Mike…the reason certain people dont post their names is you have peoe like Bill Adams that served as a councilman in Sachse and harrasses anyone who disagrees with him, threatens to sue them, blocks them from facebook posts, personally attacks them yet brags about being a “Christian”…this is the maturity level we have for politicians. Its obvious you have a vested interest in Patterson, and nothing wrong with that…but if you have to reach and call someone out for not using a name, thats pretty lame…stick to issues instead of attacking them

      • Mike O says:

        Not vested at all; our committee just took a measure of both candidates and made their decision ( each is considered separately and it wasn’t even close for EITHER decision). And if you don’t think we have faced our share of harassment, you are sadly mistaken. But we don’t quake in our boots from such- to do so would be to dishonor the service people who have fought for and died for us to get and keep our first Amendment rights.