The People Are Not Feeling Sweet About The Suite Deal Jerry Jones Gave Arlington City Officials

A few days ago I blogged about the Suite Deal Jerry Jones and the Dallas Cowboys have given the City of Arlington officials who had helped abuse eminent domain to take Arlington citizen's homes, apartments and businesses, for the new Dallas Cowboy Stadium.

Lately I have made note of the fact that I'm not the only one in these parts who is detecting that there are ever growing numbers of Texans who see the unethical, corrupt, just plain wrong, stuff that goes on in this location, and are becoming ever more disgusted and willing to be vocal about it.

I see this as an extremely positive thing and an excellent example of how that good ol' American concept known as Free Speech is supposed to work and why it was ingrained in our Founding Documents by our Founding Fathers.

Even the Fort Worth Star-Telegram seems to be getting onboard and is seeming to be less of a mouthpiece for the Ruling Oligarchy and more like a legitimate newspaper. Of late that newspaper seems to have skewed more toward facts, regarding the Barnett Shale pollution, than the gas industry propaganda the newspaper had been previously spewing.

The Star-Telegram was quite feisty in its expose of the obviously improper free Cowboy Stadium Suite that Jerry Jones gave City of Arlington officials.

And now in this morning's Star-Telegram there are several Letters to the Editor verbalizing righteous indignation over the "Suite Deal." My favorite of the letter writers suggests that each game day, or other event, a lottery take place. For instance, Dallas Cowboy game, a lottery of the Arlington residents who are helping pay for the stadium, is held, the winners go to a game and get all the perks. Another lottery for those who's homes were taken. Well, you get the idea. And I think it's a good one.

And now the letters....

The Suite Deal

Just when I thought the hypocrisy of politicians had reached its zenith, I read the Sunday report on the stadium "perks" received by Arlington's mayor and council members. I was dismayed but not surprised at their attempt to put as good a face as possible on what amounts to corruption in the eyes of ordinary residents. They argued that the wealth the stadium was going to bring to Arlington coupled with the insignificance of the personal benefit to themselves (i.e., the seats were not the best, they were there primarily to conduct business for Arlington, some made limited use of the perks, some use was for charities, etc.) justified the perks.

No suggestion was made that legal research had confirmed the perks did not violate the city charter limits on their compensation, that tax research absolved the city of responsibility to report these perks as income for tax purposes, or that there was no conflict of interest when fire code violations were not imposed at the Cowboys opening game against the Giants.

This reminds me of my grandfather's response after a church service when a fellow member rose to give testimony to his attainment of sinless perfection. Grandpa left church as soon as the service was over, went home and locked his chicken house. Arlington missed its chance for that when the majority voted for the stadium in 2004.

-- Terry Witt, Arlington

So, Arlington officials can't see how being bought and paid for by Jerry Jones is unethical?

Perhaps they should have their eyesight checked.

-- Bill Youngblood, North Richland Hills

We have the following suggestions in response to the ethical issues raised by the city's free suite at Cowboys Stadium:

1. Reserve at least one game each season for which some seats at the suite would be allocated by a lottery in which all city employees would be eligible to participate.

2. Reserve one game each season for which some seats would be allocated by a lottery to those households whose homes and neighborhoods were demolished to make room for the stadium.

3. Reserve some seats each game at the suite to be allocated to the city's employee(s) of the month.

This would not address all the ethical issues raised by the article, but it at least would provide a few opportunities for some who might never be able to afford to attend a Cowboys game the opportunity to see what their city has bought. It would relieve the mayor and council from some of the burdensome responsibility they apparently find comes from using this perk (or, as one councilperson called it, a "workday" experience) and it would give the mayor and council another opportunity to mingle with the folks whose sacrifices made possible this "gift" that the Cowboys gave the city.

-- Norma and Richard Cole, Arlington

Arlington City Councilman Mel LeBlanc's remarks concerning the large bouquet of perks for the council's Cowboys Stadium effort really hit the mark. I know it was really rough on them having to take private property away from their constituents to build the stadium. But as a reminder, there is still a lot of low-hanging fruit to be had. After all, in Arlington, economic development and eminent domain go hand-in-hand.

-- Ron Tovar, River Oaks

Once again our Arlington City Council members are taking advantage of their job with perks for being elected by the residents of Arlington.

For example, in six months Kathryn Wilemon obtained benefits of between $6,000 and $11,167 from the Dallas (Arlington) Cowboys in the form of tickets, parking, food, etc. Does she claim this as income on her federal taxes?

I am retired and would love to see a Cowboys game or shows at the stadium, but I cannot afford tickets, parking and food. Oh well, I am only helping to pay the city's $325 million portion of the stadium's cost.

I do not buy the idea of promoting Arlington by going to the games and shows with family or friends. I only hope that when election time comes up, the voters remember this and the extra benefits that our elected officials receive.

-- John Feuling, Arlington

It breaks my heart to see City Council members take advantage of the perks offered just because of the position they hold. I am a registered nurse of 15 years and I, along with my colleagues, can do more in a 12-hour shift for this city than some council members do in an entire term. What do we get? Self-satisfaction! That should be enough for the council members.

Give up this unethical means of self-pleasure and give back to the city. The money wasted on that suite could go to our local schools, churches, etc.

It's unbelievable how this is being justified as a legitimate gift. Anything can be considered legit if enough heads turn the other way. To try to justify the perk because other suite holders "stop by" is ridiculous. The "substantial things" that Mayor Robert Cluck says occur because of the "discussions in the suite" could have as easily occurred with talks in the office or over the phone.

-- Denise Kubat, Arlington