Leading Off

Leading Off (9/20/17)

Jury discusses fate of Jason Lowe, Theaster Gates wins Nasher Prize, and more.

Task Force Wants Robert E. Lee Statue in Museum. The mayor’s Task Force on Confederate Monuments said yesterday that the Lee statue should be moved to a museum from storage. It could be given as a gift or a long-term loan. The Cultural Affairs Commission and City Council will have to figure out the details.

Jury to Start Deliberations in Jason Lowe Murder Trial. Today a jury will begin to discuss the fate of 28-year-old Jason Lowe, the Richardson man charged with the murder of his girlfriend, Jessie Bardwell. He testified yesterday that he had sexted with a few other women while Jessie lay dead in his SUV for a week. He also said she died after falling in the shower. If convicted, Jason will face up to life in prison. His story sounds, at best, shaky.

Theaster Gates Wins Nasher Prize. The 44-year-old was awarded the third annual Nasher Prize for sculpture last night. His work couldn’t be more relevant.

Megashelter for Harvey Evacuees to Close. The downtown megashelter for Harvey evacuees at the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center will close today. The remaining 200 evacuees there will move to a shelter at Oak Cliff’s Tommie M. Allen Recreation Center, the final Harvey shelter open in Dallas.

Dallas County Votes, Keeps Tax Rates the Same. Commissioners voted yesterday to keep tax rates the same for county government and Parkland Memorial Hospital, even though property values have been increasing. Their reasoning for not cutting county tax rates was to fund raises for employees and fill in a budget hole of $13 million.


  • JamieT

    Joe Pappalardo has a good article detailing the illegalities actively pursued by all at City Hall who voted for and subsequently executed the removal of the Lee statue:


    “At the end of the day, the city has learned a way to circumvent the bidding rules whenever it determines the politics are too hot to handle.”

    I’m not a lawyer so I’m not sure what actions if any could be pursued at this point to reverse these illegal actions (put it back, then start over) or prosecute them, but it’s really a no-brainer to not give people like this who arrogantly refuse to follow the law when spending money any more to spend illegally on November 7.

    Replace the mayor and Council, then get back to us.

    • Los_Politico

      “Replace the mayor and Council, then get back to us.”

      LOL you and your ilk don’t vote in local elections, they don’t care what you think. We just voted this group in!!

      You won’t bother to vote in the bond election either.

      • JamieT

        I can certainly agree with some of what you say, and you represent it well, particularly within the context I presented.

        • Marcie Batten

          It certainly is obvious as Los Politico indicates “They (the mayor and city council) don’t care what you (the voters) think” In fact from the Pallalardo DO article about “Bending the Rules” “They” can’t even explain their actions of the last week (emergency? non-emergency?–the crane to remove the statue was in place before the vote–so I guess “they” don’t care what “they think” either). “Confused” and/or morally diffuse local politicians don’t deserve more of our tax dollars, IMO.

    • Mavdog

      “I’m not a lawyer so I’m not sure what actions if any could be pursued at this point to reverse these illegal actions”

      Your admit you are not a lawyer yet you have determined the City acted in an “illegal” manner…
      As Mr. Pappalardo mentions in the article there are several nuances to the awarding of a contract and its compliance with mandated notices and bidding procedures.
      Good thing we have you ready and willing to pronounce the legality of this!

      • Marcie Batten

        The title of the article is “City Bent Contract Rules to Remove Lee Statue From Park” not “City craftily exercises nuances to contract statue removal (in the absence of promised public input)”

        • Mavdog

          Notably absent in the title, as well as the body of the article, is the word “illegal”. The author understood where that line sits, others apparently not so much.