This week at council: You’ll come for the death of Flock Cameras, but you’ll stay for the deliciously petty Price Center mural discussion! Exciting meeting this week.
First, though: VOTE FOR SAUL in the council run-off. Details below.
….
Onto the meeting!
Hours 0:00 – 1:17: Everything but Flock Cameras! Some zoning, and some TIRZ stuff. But mostly, please let me tell you a very funny story about the Price Center mural.
Hours 1:17 – 3:50: FLOCK CAMERAS go down in flames! Plus a new speed limit on FM 110, and some suburban sprawl.
Bonus! 3 pm workshops: Should we be sister cities with Inverness, Scotland? What about Monclova, Mexico?
And that’s a wrap.
…..
It’s Council run-off time! Please do go vote!
Details
Early Voting:
Monday and Tuesday, 8:00 am – 5:00 pm
Location: Hays County Election Office (the old Car Museum, on Stagecoach and Hunter.)
Election day:
Saturday, December 13th, 7 am – 7 pm
Locations: Broadway Polling Location (401 Broadway Street #A) Hays County Election Office (the old Car Museum, on Stagecoach and Hunter.)
Saul Gonzales: I’m endorsing Saul. He’s willing to state his positions. He promised to vote no on the data center, to remove Cape’s Dam, to remove Flock cameras. Has shown his cards about how he’s going to vote.
And he’s kept his word! This past Tuesday, he voted against renewing the Flock Cameras contract.
Josh Paselk: No. First off, he never sent answers in. He won’t say how he’ll vote on anything.
All they seem to care about is that wealthy donors should be able to hoard their wealth:
LISTEN YOU NUMBSKULLS. It is better for business when poor people have a little extra money to spend! A rising tide lifts all boats. You can pay your fair share and grow your wealth!
And then they’ve gotten deeply gross with the mailers this past week.
This week: contracts for SMPD and SM Fire Fighters, with a win for transparency. Also a Dunbar Historic Walk, some election talk, and a call to support our school librarians.
Here we go!
Hours 0:00 – 2:29: Basically all about contracts for SMPD and SMFD. How transparent should the process be?
But first! Two quick bits on the election and school libraries.
1. Well, we had an election.
Matthew Mendoza won re-election against Chase Norris.
Saul Gonzales and Josh Paselk are headed to a run-off, on December 13th.
I’m still grossed out by that PAC dumping $50K to sway a local election towards their preferred candidates.
Here’s the problem: we actually have some local limits on campaign donations:
If you receive more than $300 from someone, you must recuse yourself from votes related to that.
No one can donate more than $500 to any campaign, period.
Now look at the donor amounts to the Brighter Future for San Marcos PAC. Almost all are over $300, and most are between $600-$10,000. (And that list is not up to date.)
That PAC spent $35,000* supporting Matthew Mendoza and Josh Paselk. But they don’t donate it to campaigns, so the local laws don’t apply. The PAC just directly buys mailers and newspaper ads. So Matthew and Josh benefit, but would not be required to recuse themselves from votes that benefit the donors.
This is legal, but it’s deliberately sabotaging the intent of our local laws. What bullshit, right?
*also out of date. My understanding is it’s more like $50K+.
2. Our school libraries
At the past two school board meetings, around 10 or so people from New Braunfels, Seguin, Corpus, etc have shown up to harass our district. They find the spiciest parts of any book at any school library, and berate our school board for it. (They also post the spiciest parts to social media! Everyone gets titillated at the thought of saying such naughty words in public.) Then there’s a whole procedure where they flag books, we have to pull the books, review them, and bring the recommendations to the school board.
It might be nice to have some local voices supporting our librarians, our libraries, and our school district at these meetings?
Obviously say whatever you want, but if you’re stuck, I think the major points are things like:
you trust the judgement of our school librarians that they’re only including books with mature themes when there’s age-appropriate value to the book.
Parents are free to monitor the reading choices of their own children, but shouldn’t enforce their personal rules on everyone else.
Want to speak in person?
The next meeting is at 6 pm on Monday, November 17th, at the Felipe Reyna District Offices located at 1331 Hwy 123. (Right by Goodnight Middle School.)
You are supposed to sign up ahead of time. Swing by the Superintendent’s office (same address) or call (512) 393-6700 ext. 6767.
Hello everybody! It’s RIVER TIME! Let’s talk about the ugly fences, the litter (which did get better), and whether to start charging admission. Also tenants’ rights and some election talk.
Here we go!
Hours 0:00 – 1:15: Tenant’s Right to Organize and participatory budgeting. It’s a short meeting!
Fire up the press! We’re back! This week, we’re talking about the land next to El Centro, an ordinance protecting tenants, and a sketchy SMPD grant for $25K.
Let’s go!
Hours 0:00 – 3:27: the land next to El Centro, the Lions Club, and a $25K grant for SMPD.
Hours 3:27 – 4:14: Should San Marcos have a Tenants Rights to Organize ordinance? (yes.)
Want to talk about the big open natural area around the Hays County Courthouse, and if it should be housing? Want to get into the weeds on some very detailed decisions about mailing parking tickets, buying new Tahoes for SMPD, and more? I’ve got all your weedy deets right here, kid. Hit me up.
But first, it’s City Council Run-off Election time!
Go vote for Lorenzo Gonzalez. He’s a police officer who has some clear-headed criticisms of how police departments work. He gave solid progressive answers at the debate held by the Primrose Advocacy Council.
The other candidate is Roland Saucedo. His answers were fine, but his background is troubling. (Like I mentioned before, after my initial take, a lot of people reached out to inform me that he does not operate in good faith. Some details here, but not all.)
Why don’t you and me go vote? Let’s get Lorenzo Gonzalez across the finish line. Voting details here.
Onto the meeting!
Hours 0:00 – 2:39: There’s a lot of open space in the middle of town right now, around the Hays County Courthouse. Should it all be housing? Should Dunbar connect to Wonderworld?
Hours 2:39 – 4:58: Lots of little details. So many little details. Do you love passionate arguments over tiny little details? Then you are in for a treat. (I mean, I obviously do.)
Bonus! 3 pm workshops: Sneak peak into what Texas State is doing on campus over the next ten years.
See you next time, for the last meeting of the year!
Interviews with candidates on KZSM: Jane Hughson, Juan Miguel Arredondo, Atom Von Arndt, Griffin Spell (the others have not gotten in to KZSM yet. Station Manager Rob Roark says he will do a 30 minute to one hour interview anytime up to the election at the KZSM studios. Contact him at kzsmsanmarcos@gmail.com.)
#1 issue: Housing affordability. Every candidate said that housing affordability is the most important issue facing San Marcos. Everyone got that same memo, loud and clear. This makes it a little hard to distinguish the candidates.
Other issues: the river, the business community, bringing in good jobs, public safety, renter protection, Cape’s Dam.
Mayoral Race: Juan Miguel Arredondo is the progressive candidate. I’ll be voting for him.
Jane Hughson is the current mayor. She is the status quo candidate. Her strengths are her attention to detail and general conscientiousness. She always seems to read documents thoroughly. She is a strong centrist and generally beholden to NIMBY types.
Juan Miguel Arredondo is the change candidate. He’s an odd mix of progressive and conservative policies, but he does want to shake things up. More progressive than not!
Housing Affordability: Miguel wins on this issue. Jane was mayor when the SMTX Housing 4 All plan came up for a vote in 2019. Instead of working to address the issue, Council deep-sixed it, and never actually implemented the plan. Staff even gave a workshop on reviving the plan, and nothing came of it. (Instead, Council prioritized using extra money to hire extra police officers and firefighters. That wasn’t my favorite. If they’d been more mindful about sprawl, we wouldn’t have needed as many extra PD and firefighters.)
Jane will probably prioritize affordable housing now that it’s become everyone’s favorite buzzword. But she will be more NIMBY about it than Miguel.
(Miguel makes me squirm when he starts talking about how property taxes are too high and bringing good jobs to San Marcos. Why not raise the minimum wage? All jobs would be good jobs if they paid a living wage! But there’s no difference between him and Jane on this issue.)
Place 6: I’m doing this one before Place 5, because it’s easier.
Amanda Rodriguez: Just exactly what we need. She has a strong vision, a strong sense of justice, and she answered questions with a depth of knowledge. She’s here to fight for the most vulnerable people in San Marcos, and she is straight-forwardly honest about this mission. It’s electric.
Look, Amanda is basically the Johnny Cash of San Marcos. She’s intense, she’ll speak straight to your soul, and you can practically hear her sing:
I wear the black for the poor and the beaten down Livin’ in the hopeless, hungry side of town I wear it for the prisoner, who has long paid for his crime But is there becausehe’s a victim of the times
How can you not vote for Johnny Cash?! We need her on Council.
🎵 Till things are brighter, she’s the candidate in black. 🎶
Maraya Dunn: She’s been on P&Z for about 5 months, but she has not said much during the meetings. During the debates, she is Team Business, and says things like, “If you make it easier on businesses, that will help solve the other problems, like housing.” She loves businesses of all sizes, and wants to reduce red tape.
There’s a kernel of truth to that – we do need to revisit our Land Development Code and see where we’re impeding the kind of growth we want. But her language is problematic – she is prioritizing making life easier for businesses, not prioritizing how to get the best results for San Marcos. It’s very conservative, business-friendly, and Texan.
(At the same time, she clearly has a soft spot for animals! She owns the Stinky Dawg Dog Spa downtown, and put Animal Welfare as one of her top three priorities. But I’m sure Amanda is pro-puppy as well, like any good person.)
Place 5: Ugh, this is the hardest one to write about. I would not be upset about any of them being in office.
Roland Saucedo: Seems to have a good heart. His answers are mushy and low on detail, but his heart is generally in the right place. [Updated to add: “Bad with details” is an understatement. More here, and it’s not good.]
Griffin Spell: He has been on P&Z for years, and so there is a lot of data to go on here. He has been great on P&Z. Thinks for himself, explains his reasoning, open to arguments from others. Politically, he is a centrist, but his process is high quality. He easily has the most experience of anyone here. He’ll govern as a thoughtful centrist.
Atom Von Arndt: He is fighting for the tenants. He uses the phrase, “Let’s make it hard in San Marcos for bad landlords.” This is a great fight for Council to take on!
His thinking is a bit muddled when it comes to the University and opposing Rent-by-the-Bedroom, in that he thinks there are simple answers to complex problems.
But overall, he seems smart, and a bit of a live wire. If you want to make life interesting on this blog, he’s your guy.
Lorenzo Garza: He’s the one candidate that I’d never heard of before he filed, so he’s at a disadvantage. That said, he gave reasonably good answers to the questions.
He wants to be responsive to the people, and he also wants to redirect some of the police department budget towards things like mental health. He comes across as a progressive who is pretty new to San Marcos.
Bottom line: I think you’ve gotta look in your own heart for Place 5. Are you a Roland, a Griffin, an Atom, or a Lorenzo? Someone write a Buzzfeed quiz for me!
Council races get exciting! We have a five hour meeting! So much to talk about, guys.
First: Last Tuesday’s meeting:
Hours 0:00 – 1:54: Malachi Williams, the SMART/Axis road annexation, and School Resource Officers
Hours 1:54 – 5:32: A lot on the budget, a little on tax rates, our utility assistance program, and the Homelessness Action Plan
Onto the Council Elections
Candidates have all declared themselves. These races got EXCITING, everybody. As your trusty local politics nerd, I cannot wait. What do they stand for? What will they fight for? Tell me, tell me! Do they read this blog???
I’ll share my opinions as I form them. (But seriously, so excited.)
Mayoral Candidates
Jane Hughson, the encumbent: Centrist, three terms, very careful and pays good attention to details.
Juan Miguel Arredondo: Has been on the school board since 2015, although he took a term off along the way. He ran for Mayor before, and I do have questions about the rhetoric he used in that race. His voting record is generally progressive.
Place 5
Griffen Spell: Has been on P&Z for years, so I’ve heard more from him than the other candidates. Thinks for himself and generally sensible, although he’s more libertarian than I am.
Roland Saucedo: Often speaks at City Council and serves on many committees. I believe he works with homeless communities on housing? I’m not totally sure, looking forward to learning more.
Atom Von Arndt: Has run for council for the past two years. Last year, he spoke pretty well on issues, and he has spoken at city council meetings a few times this past year. So he is staying involved.
Lorenzo Gonzalez: I believe he ran for constable as a progressive? I really don’t know much about him. Not to be a broken record, but looking forward to hearing more from him!
Place 6
Maraya Dunn: She joined P&Z last spring, and has still been getting her footing, so I haven’t formed a strong opinion of her yet. I believe she owns a business downtown.
Amanda Rodriguez: She’s spoken at city council a number of times on progressive issues. I believe she’s very active with Mano Amiga, El Centro, and groups around town. I am very interested to hear what she has to say!
I will cover debates as I hear about them, so please let me know if you hear about events!
Someone go make an animated GIF of that for me! It’s still so funny. And look at everyone else’s expression:
Eight different ways to say, “What the fuck, Shane?!” with just your eyes. I love it.
More seriously: should you vote for Shane?
He was on council around 2010 for a while, and then was voted off, and then was voted back on three years ago. I’m going to focus on the past couple years, since that’s what I’ve paid closest attention to.
The good: We sometimes share a common enemy:
He has an anti-authoritarian streak, so he votes against the curfew and often looks askance at the police
He loves businesses and hates regulations, which often pits him against NIMBY types. I am interested in affordable housing and helping vulnerable populations, which often pits me against NIMBY types, as well. So, the enemy of my enemy is my friend?
For example, he voted against curfews, and voted to repeal Meet-and-Confer. (On the other hand, he voted to approve the new contract when it came back.) He voted against VisionSMTX++ this evening.
The bad: Often I disagree with him:
He’ll choose businesses over the environment
He’ll choose businesses over vulnerable people
Whereas I like the environment and vulnerable people.
Looking over my yearly summaries, these are things that jump out at me: Voting against the transportation master plan because of the bike lanes. Being rude to SMRF on multiple occasions. Voting against the lobbying ordinance. Voting against the eviction delay a full year earlier than its repeal, while the rest of council was still in favor of it. Voting for every single development that has come around, even the ones that end up being denied. He’s generally the most guaranteed vote for business interests, at the expense of anything else.
The ugly: Shane never seems to do anything. I can recall just a few things he’s ever initiated:
The first three are all from 2021. That’s over two years old! And scolding Max Baker was in March of 22. He hasn’t initiated anything else I can remember, for most of his term.
He doesn’t make amendments or improve policies or try to incorporate multiple points of view into a compromise. He just shows up, votes, gets annoyed when things drag out, and goes home. That’s a real waste of a position of power.
Atom Von Arndt, the unknown quantity
What is Atom like? He seems more prepared than last year. Last year, he had shallow answers like “How dare we spend so much on street lights down Hopkins!” This year, he seems to be thinking more strategically about the connection between vulnerable populations and policy. He sounded basically progressive!
He also said that he’s just going to keep on running until he’s elected. I actually admire that a lot.
My opinion: I’m leaning towards Atom for Place 4.
Also: Alyssa is unopposed for Place 3. Fortunately, she’s great. Vote for her!
The Debate
The League of Women Voters held their debate over zoom, on October 12th. The whole thing is very short – only 26 minutes. Opening statements, eight questions, closing statements, done!
The questions:
What motivates you to seek this position?
What would you strive to accomplish during your term?
How can council create opportunities for citizen input at the earliest stages of the review process for new commercial and industrial developments?
What steps should San Marcos take to prepare for extreme weather events?
How should San Marcos work with agencies to ensure the environmental health of the river?
What will you do to support a vibrant economy in San Marcos while also controlling rampant growth?
Explain the status of the San Marcos water supply, and what should be done to ensure future supply is adequate.
Fire danger in Texas is increasing due to hotter summers, drought, and development. Please discuss your position on the city’s present fire fighting resources, and any changes you’d suggest.
I don’t love this set of questions? Questions 4,7, and 8 are all technical issues. The only respectable answer is, “Well, I’d listen to the experts since they know way more than me.”
So we wasted three questions on important-but-wonky issues. But there was nothing asked about:
Sprawl
Affordable housing
SMART Terminal
SMPD
Cape’s Dam
In short, I want questions that could potentially distinguish how candidates will vote on issues.
However! The LWV are a bunch of hard-working volunteers, who are running debates and volunteering because they believe in democracy. I’m not really going to crab at anyone who is donating so much time and energy towards democracy.
The rules: Each candidate gets one minute for anything, no rebuttals.
Debate Summary: I think they tied, debate-wise. Neither one sounded much stronger than the other. I basically transcribed their answers below, but it’s kind of jumbled, since they only had a minute to make their case.
Opening statements:
Shane Scott: – Council for 3 years, – 5 year term about 5 years earlier. – Glad to be here!
Atom Von Arndt: – Regular guy: renter, dad, – Got the same problems that everyone is having.
What motivates you to seek this position?
Shane: The community, the issues that are coming. The growth we’re going to see. The jobs we need to create. Transportation issues. Wanting to serve in general.
Atom: Housing issues, affordability issues, lack of transparency with the roads. I face all these same problems and I want to help. I’m concerned with the people on the bottom of the food chain. Getting resources for the homeless and people in need. Service.
What would you strive to accomplish during your term?
AVA: Get better resources for mental health issues. If you’re on disability, there aren’t resources and you get forced out of town. How do you move to a bigger place if this isn’t affordable? Increase resources. Second, housing. Rent-by-the-room is hurting our economy.
SS: Same things! Affordability, housing, homeless. List goes on. Transportation is coming in the future. I see the traffic. We work for homeless and people with mental health issues. We do a lot. We lower rates. I did the debt forgiveness for utilities. We do a lot.
How can council create opportunities for citizen input at the earliest stages of the review process for new commercial and industrial developments?
SS: All plans for any kind of development should be out and open for the community to observe and have input! Too many times it’s done before it even gets to council. Committees can help decipher! But the community needs a birds-eye view of any development that’s going to come to San Marcos.
AVA: Community outreach. I hear that this is difficult. People need to know. How do we get their attention? More town halls. More block parties. Use businesses to bring people in to announce decisions and upcoming things, especially P&Z. Make town halls exciting! Give them some pizzazz to get people to show up and make people feel like council is operating on their behalf.
What steps should San Marcos take to prepare for extreme weather events?
[Kinda unfair as a question!]
AVA: It’s been a drought, and then we’re worried about floods. Need emergency plans in place. Need to worry about all this new development and how it will affect the flood plains. Preparedness and emergency plans – focus on that. “I’m no weatherologist, but eventually we’re going to to have the rain again, we’re going to have the water, and it’s going to need to be an issue we get out in front of.”
SS: Is this the winter storm you’re asking about? We’ve done a lot! Hardening our water and utility lines to protect during freeze. Federal funding for flood mitigation, we went to Washington. Bypasses are getting built, underground drainage is getting built, GPMRS system just got up, will let people get on the channel if you have no cell ability.
How should SM work with agencies to ensure the environmental health of the river?
SS: That’s one of our key issues! We’re talking about a can ban. Removed styrofoam from parks, moved BBQ pits away, we do river clean up 2-3x a year. Educate people about the river and let them know about the endangered species and why we love it.
AVA: Love the can ban. Boils down to enforcement. Gotta make sure people do that. But development is happening by the river. Gotta enforce rules on development as well, though. Enforce the rules and regulations around the river and pass more things like can ban to keep people from flooding the river with garbage.
What will you do to support a vibrant economy in San Marcos while also controlling rampant growth?
[What does “controlling rampant growth” exactly mean? It sounds like “try to prevent” which is nonsense.]
AVA: This is tricky! Businesses open and close downtown a lot. Seasonality of economy, poor college students. Grants to support small local businesses. Work with small local businesses. Make downtown beautiful, open up boarded up shops. Encourage growth with larger businesses, grocery store chains.
[May I humbly suggest that we strongly look at a vacancy tax?]
SS: With covid, small businesses were hit. We did a lot as a city, but many did close. I’m focused on bringing the jobs – Amazons #1 and 2. A place to live, work, and play, with a job that pays enough to live here. Looking for ways to help people.
[HRM. Have we been concerned with minimum wage jobs, SHANE?]
Explain the status of the SM water supply, and what should be done to ensure future supply is adequate.
SS: I know this one pretty well! I voted for the water rights from Gonzales. GMRA and us bought 50% of it and literally purchased our water security for the next 50 years. So we’re not going to run out like Kyle does. In fact, Kyle didn’t want to join originally, and so I was like ‘we’ll purchase your portion and sell it back to you later on, to make money and lower utilities for our citizens.’ So I’m always trying to get someone else to pay for our lifestyle, because we were here first. [off-putting chuckle.]
AVA: The majority of our water we don’t pull from the Edwards aquifer. Most of us are coming from another source. The college is using a lot more aquifer water than the city does. Selling off water to Kyle is great! It’s income. Obviously let’s educate them to keep them from blowing through their limits though. I want to look into more of this college vs city stuff another time.
Fire danger in Texas is increasing due to hotter summers, drought, and development. Please discuss your position on the city’s present fire fighting resources, and any changes you’d suggest.
AVA: Having a well-funded, well-equipped fire department is essential for any city in Texas. We can and should spend more money on it, especially with the record heat. More firefighters over police officers, not to start any fights. Houses catch on fire all the time, we don’t have any crime waves going on in SM right now. [Note: I can’t tell if this is straight or kidding.] We need to be prepared and equipped.
SS: We keep increasing the Fire Department needs as the chief presents them. Also education what the fired department can and can’t do. We have to call air supply to the hill country. We’re always paying attention to that. Community engagement and people paying attention so that fires don’t happen.
[A good answer here would be to connect it to sprawl. The more sprawl, the more expensive your fire department becomes.]
Closing Statements
SS: Thanks you! It’s been a pleasure. I hope I’ve answered questions that help you understand. I’m a small business owner, been here 30 years. My kids go through the school system. We’re part of everything. I love serving, problem-solving, forethought for planning, 50 year water supplies, 3% that we bought into the electric utility that earned us 25 million during the Uri Snowstorm*. Those are things I enjoy putting together as a councilmember, and I enjoy the business side of that. Lower the rates, lower the taxes!
[Wait. The city earned $25 million from electricity during Snowvid?! That’s super gross!]
AVA: Thank you! It would be an honor. I’m in sales. I’ve always worked for other people, rented from other people, so I feel the effects of when this all happens for the working class. My superpower is communicating and talking to people, it’s what I’ve always been good at. Finding common ground. So many different people with different people, and I think I can be the voice for them. It’s a great city, there’s a lot we can do. I’m not going anywhere! I’ll run again next year! I think I have a good head on my shoulders, and I’ll talk to anyone who wants to talk to me.
And…SCENE! My guess is that Shane is so well-connected that he breezes to re-election. But it wouldn’t hurt to at least make him sweat a little.
Hello San Marcos! We’re back! Let me be honest: this week is a bit dry. We’ll just muddle through as best we can. Maybe tax rates are your thing?
Hours 0:00 – 2:36: In which we talk about the budget, and taxes, and exemptions, and a sneaky little bit of the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer even gets in there.
Hours 2:36 – 3:14: Some Right of Ways get altered, some speed cushions arrive, we talk about CARTS, and multiple kinds of cats.
Election talk
Place 3: Last time we said that, barring any wild cards, Alyssa Garza would be running unopposed. There was no wild card. There was a very mild card – someone filed to run as a write-in candidate – and then that person withdrew, so even the mild card went away. So Alyssa is back to running unopposed.
Remember: Alyssa is just one progressive vote! Until we get her some teammates up on council, all she can do is gently nudge other councilmembers towards decency.
Place 4: So Shane Scott vs Atom Von Arndt is the only election to cover, and there’s nothing much to say yet. Shane has a huge encumbancy advantage.
This was a very short meeting! Some weeks are like that. Let’s hop to it.
Hours 0:00 – 1:26: In which we talk about Leah Avenue and Rattler Road. We worry about flooding in Hills of Hays, and the low water level in the river. And some property taxes and public transit.
Some election talk:
Place 3: Alyssa Garza is the incumbent. There’s currently no one running against her. Griffin Spell had filed to run against her, but he withdrew his candidacy.
Vote for Alyssa! She is great, and she’s your only choice! Win-win.
Place 4: Shane Scott is the encumbent. Adam “Atom Von” Arndt is running against him.
Preliminary thoughts: Shane is basically your standard libertarian. He likes businesses, he does not like authority, and he really does not like council discussions that exceed his attention span.
Adam “Atom Von” Arndt is very green. Or at least, he was when he ran against Saul Gonzalez last year. I’m curious to know what he’s done in the past year to grow as a candidate. (If he wants to learn city politics, may I politely recommend this very blog?)
If Atom wants to have a prayer against Shane, he needs to get out there and shake a lot of hands. Shane is very well known at this point, and I don’t think many people have any idea who Atom is. Lots of signs help too, but shaking hands and meeting voters one at a time is how this town still functions.
August 21st is the last day to file to run, so we’ll know by Monday night if there’s any wild cards. But my guess is that this is it.
The San Marxist 