Petitions are circulating for recall elections to unseat Galveston Mayor Joe Jaworski and several members of the Galveston city council in the wake of the decision to terminate former City Manager Steve LeBlanc.

The city council voted to fire Steve LeBlanc from his position as city manager on April 27. The former city manager's supporters attending the meeting shouted, “recall” during council’s discussion. Some interrupted Jaworski when he tried to give reasons for his vote to terminate LeBlanc.

To force a recall election, petition supporters must collect signatures from at least 10 percent of the city's qualified voters.

Do you favor recalling Jaworski or any member of the council?

My column Sunday discussed the Seawall parking issue and the nasty tone adopted by some on the anti-paid parking side. It focused on a piece of hate mail received by David Colombo, dentist, married father of three and supporter of paid parking.

That anonymous letter included obscenities and an anti-gay slur. Colombo refuses to respond to being called a “fag” in the letter. I wouldn’t dignify that with a response either.

So, Sunday at 8:11 p.m., my cell phone pinged as a text arrived. The text was from the cell phone of Greg Roof, who is the leader and spokesman for the group NOPE, which opposes paid parking.

Here's what the text said:

"Dolph, thanks for the enlightening editorial today. I didn't know David Columbo (sic) was such a fairy. Have a great night! Greg Roof"

The next day, I tried to contact Roof to confirm that he wrote the message. He never really answered my question, replying instead with vague, non-responsive tirades about an “untrustworthy city government” and my lack of “journalistic integrity.” The message undeniably came from his cell phone, however.

This behavior is typical of Greg Roof, who has in the past often sent me weird, inappropriate texts, usually at night. Then, if one attempts to initiate a dialogue over what he wrote, Roof won’t answer phone calls and instead bloviates and evades in text messages.

It’s a unique style of leadership for a man who sits on the Galveston College board of regents and once wanted to be mayor of Galveston. Maybe he still does.

There’s a respected Texas journalism professor who preaches to his students “people have a right to be known for who they are.” I agree.

Galveston, meet Greg Roof.

As we prepared Sunday's editorial about the Galveston Economic Development Partnership, we asked GEDP's board to tell us what the organization did that was of value to Galveston. A part of their response was to forward the organization's annual reports for 2009 and 2010.

In fairness, we present them here in their entirety.


Galveston Economic Development Partnership 2009 Report


Galveston Economic Development Partnership 2010 Report

One reason some people give for opposing paid parking along Galveston’s Seawall Boulevard is sign clutter. But note this: There is an entirely sensible way to put in pay kiosks every 200 feet (as proposed) and still reduce the total number of signs along the Seawall.

It’s simple: Get rid of the scores of totally useless signs along that thoroughfare today.

For example, did you know that there are 150 or so signs (yep, I counted them) that bear the inscription “Caution – Drop Off.” That’s a little like putting a sign on the Grand Canyon that says, “Don’t fall in!”

Maybe due to past accidents and potential lawsuits, or in spite of having paid somebody’s cousin to install the signs, maybe you really do need to actually tell people there’s a drop-off.

But 150 times? Really?

And even if you do, couldn’t that message be installed on the kiosks themselves?

Think, Galveston. Because somebody thought it was a good idea in the dim past, it may not be a good idea in the 21st Century.

I've suggested recently that Galveston should begin charging a beach user fee to park along Seawall Boulevard.

The island's seawall beaches are the city’s top tourist attraction. Galveston gives away about the only thing it has to sell each and every day. Reaction during the past week has been interesting.

As a resident and taxpayer, I want the chance to re-evaluate parking policies along the seawall at least once more. What can that hurt? Should Galveston put the issue to a vote?

This is someone else’s idea, but it sounds like a winner to me. My friend suggests Galveston should respond to all the panicky Houston TV talk about oil on our beaches with a satiric promotion.

“Folks, help us find the missing tar balls! Here in Galveston, we’ve been searching for all that oil that’s supposed to be washing up on our beaches, but we can’t find it. We’ve looked from Bolivar Roads to the San Luis Pass Bridge, and we can’t find any sign of the stuff.

“Instead, the beaches are open, people are swimming, puppies are romping in the surf and the sun is shining. This is a real dilemma.

“So come down and join the search. Whoever finds the most tar balls gets two nights free at the hotel of your choice.”

What do you think?

Here’s a prediction: In its quest for a perfect noise ordinance, the Galveston City Council will waste weeks or months, create an unwinnable argument and unwieldy law, hand the police a job they cannot and should not do, and, finally, accomplish nothing.

If this sounds a lot like the long, futile argument over a smoking ordinance to you, well, you’re right. The two issues have much in common.

Galveston’s do-gooders are once again launching a campaign to create an island nirvana. They will be shocked to learn that perfection is in the eye of the beholder. And even some of us who don’t like noise will dislike even more the idea of cops snooping around businesses with noise-measuring equipment and smoke detectors.

Here’s a suggestion for the city council: Go ahead and put the noise ordinance on your to-do list, but put a few things on the list ahead of it. Such as:

• Reverse the island’s precipitous population decline (15-20 percent since the year 2000).

• Cure the perennial complaints about the difficulty of getting building permits and planning approval in Galveston.

• Clean up the city: Remove the 1,000-plus abandoned buildings that mark the city as dying.

• Enforce building codes on derelict homes and businesses still in use.

• Do something — finally, after 100 years — to provide amenities and generate revenue from the city’s most important tourist attraction, the Seawall.

• Fix the freaking potholes and synchronize the traffic lights.

• And once you’ve done all that, lower the dramatic, soaring cost of government permanently — and lower the property tax rate.

Council members, when you get all that done, please feel free to take up a noise ordinance or build a bullet train to Timbuktu. I don’t care. But it sure as hell appears that launching a debate now over an unenforceable noise ordinance will be nothing but a distraction from the truly important work ahead of you.

Why not establish some meaningful priorities and stick to them?

What do the rest of you think?

The Daily News published a story Tuesday about experts predicting that the population of Galveston will turn out to be roughly 48,000 when the 2010 Census is complete. The story reported that’s about a 9 percent decline.

It’s worse than that. To me, the most interesting thing about the story was what it did not way, which is this:

Since 2000, Galveston’s population had declined by 8.8 percent, roughly 5,000 people, before hurricane Ike. The population declined by another 4,000 since Hurricane Ike.

So if that 48,000 figure holds up, the total population decline since the year 2000 is not 9 percent — it’s nearly 16 percent. If the population figure for 2010 is less than 48,000, well, it’s not good.

Researchers from Texas A&M University estimated that when Ike struck on Sept. 13, 2008, the city’s population was then down to between 52,000 and 53,000. That’s down 5,000 from 2000, when the census reported the island was home to more than 57,000.

Think of that. In a decade, the city has lost close to a fifth of its population, and not all that loss — in fact, not even most of it — can be attributed to the storm. Sadly, most of that population loss is among the middle class.

Immediately following Hurricane Ike, this newspaper suggested the way forward was to do everything possible to make Galveston Island once again a place where middle-class families would choose to live.

That ongoing and increasing loss of middle-class families will have a huge impact on the city’s economy, on public services, on our schools (already has), on public safety, on medical care — everything.

So let’s talk about it.

Why are people leaving Galveston?

Is Galveston destined to become a smaller, less important resort community, or are there steps to turn things around?

Editor's Note: Blog updated to include minor additions from a June 3 newspaper column on the same topic.

If you served on the board of board of the Galveston Independent School District, wouldn’t you feel a bit shell-shocked?

Last Saturday, less than one-third of the voters said yes to GISD’s plan to build a lavish $35 million football stadium. That’s an old-fashioned Hong Kong caning.

What it indicates is broader than the fact that voters disapproved of the stadium. One heard it over and over, expressed in different ways and in different forums. The issue was trust, or the lack of it.

People wondered about what happened to the vanished millions that were committed but never spent on the stadium from the last bond election. People questioned the system’s priorities and its ability to maintain a new stadium after letting the old one fall into ruins.

The issue was GISD’s credibility, and voters clearly found it lacking.

But today, after last Saturday’s shellacking, GISD faces the same problems it faced before the vote — declining student population and physical facilities (including the stadium) that are below acceptable standards.

So what do you think GISD should do now? How does the local school district restore public confidence and move forward? Is it possible?

On May 8, voters in Galveston will get to decide the issue of building a $35 million multi-use sports complex for the Galveston Independent School District. But starting today, you can register your feelings in an online poll to find out what’s on voters’ minds.

Supporters of the stadium, say it will be a boost for the island’s economy, and spending $35 million is necessary to get the full benefit of the planned sports and events venue.

Most critics of the plan say a better stadium is needed, but they think this plan is far too costly, will encumber GISD with too much debt, won’t improve academics and is just plain too costly.

What do you think? Please take a moment and vote in our online poll.

Being against the proposed football stadium in Galveston puts me at odds with people I respect. Their intentions are good, and I wish I could support them.

Nonetheless, government gladly will spend every penny you earn unless someone says no occasionally. We don’t often have the chance to say no, and when waste seems egregious, we should do so.

In truth, the choice the community faces now is not between a $35 million stadium and no stadium, as supporters seem to contend. The choice is between an astronomically expensive stadium and a more modest but still first-class stadium several months, not years, down the road.

Let’s look at the six common arguments supporters make for spending $35 million on a new stadium.

Reason No. 1: Kermit Courville Stadium is a community embarrassment. We must act, and we must act immediately.

The old stadium is surely a mess, but we shouldn’t let its deterioration stampede us into wasting money. If advocates felt such urgency, they should have proposed a more acceptable plan.

By the way, who let Courville stadium deteriorate so disastrously?

Reason No. 2: If we spend less than $35 million, we surrender the ability to stage football and soccer plus track and field in the venue.

Not so. Communities all across Texas have built stadiums for multiple sports at a cost far less than $20 million. The high cost is not a necessity; it’s a matter of choice. Example: Who needs a $3.5 million press box, deluxe seating and field graphics?

Reason No. 3: The tax increase is relatively small; you should be able to afford it easily.

Don’t you love it when someone who doesn’t pay your bills decides what you can “easily” afford?

Moreover, the costs to taxpayers are being presented in ways that are confusing, such as deducting the homestead exemption. Second, whether the tax is high or low, that’s not a good argument to waste money. Third, you have to take this tax increase in the context of all taxes.

Reason No. 4: The deluxe facility will attract new tourism to the island. So, presto, it’s economic development.

That outcome is far from certain. No marketing study supports such a claim. And talk about mission creep — aren’t we trying to build a stadium for kids’ sports? When did economic development become the issue?

Reason No. 5: “If not this stadium, when does Galveston move forward and out of the 20th century?” (An actual quote from an Internet posting.)

Of all arguments, this one is lamest. If someone suggests a really bad, expensive solution to a problem, acting to implement it right away is not a virtue. The answer to “If not now, when?” is simple:

Galveston should build a stadium — it really should — almost immediately when the school board offers up a realistic plan.

Reason No. 6 (to me, the most compelling): This will help get Galveston back on track after Hurricane Ike. It’s a matter of pride. Why can’t Galveston do something first-class for once?

The implication is that Galveston’s a pretty sorry place, and nothing here is done well. Not sure I really buy that.

I understand the desire to step out and up, but there’s a flip side — why must Galveston always get shafted on the cost of everything? Building a stadium in Galveston may be more expensive than the same project in Dickinson. But two or three times more? Come on.

In education, Galveston can’t seem to get the fundamentals right. People are leaving public for private schools in big numbers. That’s definitely not because Galveston doesn’t have the most expensive football stadium in Texas.

I was talking with a stadium supporter the other day, listening as he laid out the arguments (see 1-6 above). I asked, “But what if the cost were $50 million or $100 million?”

“Well,” he acknowledged grudgingly, “I guess there’s a limit somewhere.”

Indeed there is, and that limit is about $20 million.

I wrote a piece for Sunday’s editorial page about public housing policy in Galveston. As I wrote it, the conclusion of the column was a direct appeal to Mayor Lyda Ann Thomas to seize control of the situation.

As I wrote it, the last paragraph began like this:

“Mayor Thomas, all of this seems to fall to you as the sole creator of this all-important community board.”

But when I glanced at the piece Sunday, the last paragraph started like this:

“Thomas, all of this seems to fall to you as the sole creator of this all-important community board.”

In editing, somebody omitted the mayor’s title. As a result, I thought the final paragraph sounded dumb, impudent and disrespectful. It conveyed a tone I did not intend. The tone I intended was respectful disagreement.

I apologize to the mayor for that tone. And I apologize to our readers for this reason: My gut (and a little independent research) tells me you want the newspaper to take strong stands on public issues, but you want us to do that in a way that avoids making the fight more personal than it has to be.

And this all got me thinking about the nature of public dialogue in general. This has been much on the nation’s mind in recent months as celebrity after celebrity has failed to manage the balance between clear disagreement and civility.

We’ve shouted and cursed at one another over everything from health care to a foot fault at the U.S. Open tennis tournament.

Here’s what I’d like people to know about my own opinions.

I have very grave concerns about policies of the Galveston Housing Authority, as an example. However, that’s not a personal disagreement.

I don’t honestly know most members of the GHA board well, so I don’t bear them any personal animosity. The one commissioner I do know pretty well I like a lot. That’s Raymond Lewis, who’s a good man and a good citizen.

I’ve known him most of the decades I’ve lived in Galveston, and I’m convinced he has the community’s best interests at heart. That’s true though he and I have both agreed and disagreed with one another over the 20 years.

Likewise, Mayor Thomas and I disagree on a variety of policy issues. We also, however, agree on some. And none of this, at least in my mind, is personal.

I respect the mayor on a personal level.

My challenge, the challenge of the newspaper, is to speak out loudly and clearly on important public issues but to avoid descending into the gutter for a sloppy fight. The line between being rude and being forthright is not always easy to discern. But it is a line anybody in the opinion business should keep constantly in mind.

Bottom line: I would never call Mayor Thomas just plain Thomas. I respect her and the office she holds too much for that.

I’d like to hear more from readers about what they want from The Daily News in the way of public discourse and debate. Let us hear from you.

I'm reminded of the old land-shark skits on Saturday Night Live. Who's supposed to remove boats beached on dry land and private property all over Galveston?

There are four of these 'land boats' strewn along 61st Street from I-45 to Heards Lane, though it appeared this morning (Jan. 28), that one of them might be moving soon. Most of them are good-sized vessels, 30- to 50-foot sailing craft.

These boats came ashore from Offatts Bayou during Hurricane Ike and today, more than four months later, they're still sitting in parking lots, driveways and other dry land locations where they should not be.

Every day, these boats obstruct recover and are monuments to one of Galveston's worst moments — reminders of the destruction and damage caused by a terrible storm. I, for one, will be very happy when there are no longer so many such reminders all over town.

So the questions remains: Who's supposed to move them? Boat owner? Property owner? City of Galveston? FEMA? Just who?

What do you think?

I was in a meeting last week, when one of the learned gentlemen across the table asked me this question: Are you for or against gambling in Galveston?

“If I were king,” I said, “I would, at the very least, appoint a community task force to consider the issue. My instincts tell me it’s something we should go after. But I’m not the king, and I doubt whether gambling will ever clear the hurdle of local political opposition.”

Too many rich, powerful people are on record opposing casinos, including our mayor’s first cousin, Shrub Kempner, who has led opposition to gaming for almost 30 years.

Kempner told me not long ago (before Hurricane Ike) that gambling is one of the few things he could think of that would drive him away from Galveston. I just smiled.

These days, however, I think if the issue came to a vote of the people, they might well say yes to gambling. That’s especially true since Hurricane Ike, and since UT’s board of regents decided Galveston Island no longer is a member of the family.

Galveston’s opportunities for economic revitalization are dwindling to a precious few. Many people, including me, don’t see a leader out there with a sure sense of how to accomplish the economic rebirth of Galveston short of something dramatic like casinos.

Just recently, The Strand Merchants Association passed a resolution urging the city of Galveston to at least explore gambling as a part of the community’s economic recovery.

In a recent poll on the KHOU (Channel 11) Web site, 70 percent of the respondents said they believed Galveston should consider gambling. It’s not clear, however, how many of those people actually live in Galveston County.

Vic Maceo, whose family ran gambling in Galveston during its heyday, wrote a guest column in our paper last week. He made what was to me a persuasive argument for European-style small casinos as a partial answer to Galveston’s economic woes, which are undeniable and deep.

On the Mississippi Gulf coast, gambling has sped the pace of recovery from Hurricane Katrina, and it has created, so far as I can see, none of the problems of crime, congestion and skyrocketing property appraisals that local opponents of gambling say are the downside of casinos.

And, by the way, almost every one of the supposed downsides of gambling already plagues Galveston Island. These symptoms of economic and social malaise are getting worse since Ike, not better, and to that there is no end in sight.

Yet local leaders seem to be holding their breath in every public meeting, hoping no one will raise the issue of gambling. It’s a hot topic no one wants to touch.

Yes, if I were king, I’d be seriously considering gambling. If we don’t, others will.

It’s possible gambling might be expanded in Texas at dog tracks and horse tracks with no benefit at all to this community. That’s because, in our timidity, someone else will set the agenda and lead the discussion. And they won’t bring those dollars and jobs to Galveston.

So, for all those who disagree, who think casinos are worse than the long, slow economic decline we seem to face, here’s a challenge:

What is your solution to the problem of revitalizing Galveston’s economy? No fluff, no BS, no pie in the sky. Galveston needs answers, and we need them now.

Survey: Should Galveston consider casinos?