Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Runoff watch: Sheriff

Ed Gonzalez

Ed Gonzalez

This one is straightforward. Democrats Ed Gonzalez and Jerome Moore will square off for the right to go against incumbent Sheriff Ron Hickman this November. Gonzalez led the way with 43.5%, while Moore tallied 29.8%. Gonzalez was the consensus establishment candidate – he swept all the group endorsements, while collecting the Chronicle recommendation as well. As a three-term Council member, he’s well known to officeholders, groups, and many of the kinds of voters who are likely to turn out in May. Moore is a career law enforcement officer who didn’t raise much money and who is I believe making his first run for office. He may benefit if turnout in the runoff is higher.

My interview with Ed Gonzalez is here. I didn’t reach out to Jerome Moore, who didn’t have a web presence at the time I was trying to set up interview appointments in the Sheriff’s race. I may try again for the runoff if I have the time and he has the interest. Gonzalez has all the factors in his favor to make him the frontrunner in this race, but as always in a low-profile setting one cannot take anything for granted. He’s fairly well known among party faithful, which is much more important in a runoff than in a March primary, but as someone whose electoral experience is representing a Council district with modest voter participation, that only takes one so far. Remember what I said about how Adrian Garcia could make people who might be mad at him for challenging Gene Green get over it? Helping his buddy Ed Gonzalez – visibly helping his buddy across the finish line in this runoff would be a fine start.

Related Posts:

16 Comments

  1. I’ll probably get heat for saying this.

    But i see no reason to change sheriffs in mid stream.

    Has Ed put forth any serious ideas?
    I ask because i haven’t seen any.

    Also, last I checked Ed didn’t support letting taxpayers vote on the revenue cap.

    Either because he doesn’t understand basic public finance or for political gain.
    Now he wants to become sheriff of a county without a revenue cap?

  2. Steve Houston says:

    If you see no reason to consider a change, perhaps you’ve been too focused on establishing a public bank over all else. Considering some of the many scandals Hickman has been involved with, tied to, or knee deep in that have little to do with deputies sleeping around with consensual partners. Those scandals leave him wide open to a qualified, credible challenger. I wouldn’t make too much of his experience though since he has little experience running the HCSO and we’ve already seen how his decision making process works (his command staff was lily white male picks until the stink from the public became an issue).

    Gonzalez is not without his own problems, his own lack of experience only slightly better than Garcia’s was, his ties to the homicide evidence scandal (he kept un-investigated or under investigated homicide files in his garage long after he left the city police), his modest offerings in terms of proposals better than generic Hickman but not by a large amount. But his stance on the revenue cap is and was irrelevant since he wasn’t mayor and had no ability to change it, nor would he as sheriff.

  3. Public bank is one of many solutions.

    If city council is too lazy to google solutions or alternatives then we have bigger problems.

    I could care less about candidates personal lives.

  4. Costello wasn’t mayor but we have a stupid rebuild program.

    Throw out rebuild and create a public bank and/or pass a land value tax pilot program.

  5. Steve Houston says:

    Costello did not push Rebuild over the wishes of the mayor, it was done in conjunction with what the mayor wanted or it would never have passed. That is a big difference and as far as the public bank idea, aside from the government being way outside its core competency area to begin with, if that is your biggest question to vet candidates for all publicly elected spots, you are probably the only one doing so.

    Whatever your take is on Rebuild, it has managed to pay down hundreds of millions in city debt, not a bad idea we find out as finances are not as strong as they should be. But the personal lives of candidates comes into play all the time, allowing those with insider knowledge to get better deals, be able to strong arm for contracts or even political appointments so yes, whether some creep who uses his female deputies as a dating pool does reveal a lot about them.

  6. Joshua ben bullard says:

    Stephen Costello wasn’t worth a dollar fifty in service to the public,as an official he lined contracts up for him and cm david Robinson to gain fortunes in “building contracts” Stephen Costello had his chief of staff simply transfered to head the offices of Gregg Travis in district g,then Costello had his deputy chief of staff moved to head the offices of council member Amanda k Edwards,(you would have assumed Amanda would have hired from our colleges and universitys,the corruption and cronyism at city hall and Amanda Edwards and david Robinson’s office ,I feel is worth being investigated.

  7. If idiots on city council can’t google solutions or alternatives to TIRZ or Revenue Cap.

    We have bigger problems.

  8. Joshua ben bullard says:

    Its the staff advisers running the show,cutting the deals,Amanda Edwards sold out

  9. Steve Houston says:

    Joshua, in any big city, especially Houston, you learn to play ball as a part time city council member or you get nothing done. If you go all in, as many have over the years, you and your friends are rewarded handsomely, just as mayors with allegedly “blind trusts” make big bank (even if not on the same scale as those on Commissioner’s Court). If any of this surprises you, then you really know much less about city politics than you have claimed in the past.

    Joe, they don’t get elected based on Googled solutions as you have found out from your own experiences running for office. The structure of Houston’s city government, especially since term limits, really doesn’t provide individual members much incentive or power to initiate programs of the kind you’d like instituted without the Mayor’s express pre-approval. I know that doesn’t shock you any more than saying it’s even worse in the county in some ways but until enough voters decide they want change, it will remain the same (and I don’t mean some tiny fraction that wants the city to swing further to the left in public programs).

  10. Maybe i should run for mayor on 3 issues:

    1. Paid sick leave ordinance for private sector employees
    2. Paid family leave for city employers
    3. Pass a comprehensive package allowing council members to put items on agenda

    Such as but not limited to…

    Simple majority needed to put items on agenda
    Mayoral veto with 2/3 override

    If Turner won’t do it, who will?

  11. Steve Houston says:

    Joe, the outcome of such a race would be a foregone conclusion but good luck if you think you have a chance in four years. 😉

  12. If i could get 5-10% of city wide vote with spending any money for at large

    I could easily swing the same percentage for mayoral vote.

    I think voters are just as tired as i am of the bullshit.

  13. Steve Houston says:

    Joe, even if that made sense, which it doesn’t since the level of scrutiny greatly increases as does the spending and need for name recognition, you aren’t going to win an election based on “5-10% of city wide vote” (or even make a runoff for that matter). There are all sorts of changes that I would like too but given the general level of distrust from years of unfulfilled promises, a no name candidate for mayor is unlikely to garner much interest (ask Jimmy Galvan).

    When you harp on demanding expensive benefits for employers to provide, you lose a sizable portion of the voters out of the gate. They then remind centrists how increasing costs equals increased prices and fewer jobs as well as more incentives to locate businesses outside the city. While there would also be a racial component involved to further marginalize you, even the poorest know there is no such thing as a free ride. So if you think past experience with local government hasn’t shown us all of the many, many failures of relying on city government when it acts outside of core competencies, you are engaging in wishful thinking.

    The expectation that a “public bank” would automatically be a superior choice to a private sector credit union or bank that has a great many regulations seems curious. I believe you mean well and in a perfect world, some of your “Googled solutions” would be great but human nature hasn’t changed much in all of recorded history. When residents start voting in droves each election, showing a willingness to research choices in credible fashion, and elect leaders that earn our collective trust, perhaps some of the ideas will bear fruit. I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

  14. See you in 2019

    Tell Turner to step it up.

  15. voter_worker says:

    Mr. Mcelligott, anyone can use Google but not everyone can separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Graduates of Google U have given us the anti-vaccination and anti-GMO movements, chemtrail and HAARP paranoia and 911 Truthism just to name a few off the top of my head. Google is an amazing tool which I use every day, but your expectation that it should lead Councilmembers to wisdom in the realm of policy just seems unrealistic to me.

  16. I predict amanda edwards will do the same thing as sheila jackson lee.

    Use city council as a spring board without putting forth any real ideas or even supporting paid parental leave.