Bev,

I used to work for HL&P, and I did a lot of work at the W A Parish Plant. I’ve worked up an analysis on this effort to change our energy policy that I have not seen in any news articles. You may print this as something people should consider.

I have done a little research into the “Clean Energy” movement, and it’s false promises. The promise is that it will have little cost impact on you and I. The Bill in Congress is designed to either do away with coal fired generating plants, or make them so expensive, they’ll just have to shut down.

Just southwest of our area, is the largest coal fired electric generating plant in the US - W A Parish. It, and the South Texas Nuclear Plant, produce most of the power generated for the Houston area.

W A Parish has four coal fired units, producing 2,520 MW output. The largest modern windmill will produce up to 1.5 MW, if enough wind continues to drive it. Now that means it would take 1,680 windmills to equal the Parish Plant output. Each windmill has a diameter of 230 feet. Assuming it would take another 230 feet of separation to the next one, 1,680 windmills would stretch end to end, 159 miles. That would stretch from the Parish Plant to San Antonio.

All of this will be accomplished for “only $150 a year increase” in our electric bills. And all who believe that, I’ve got a lump of coal to help you keep warm this winter.

Don Braley

Missouri City

Dear Editor,

I rec’d two very similiarly worded responses to items I was selling on Craigslist. Broken English, etc. I spotted it for a scam and called SLPD. They referred me to HPD, whom I called. Left brief details and name/phone number. Never got a call back.

I still hold a UPS delivered check for $2350. I replied to one of the scammers that if they wanted their check back, they could get it at HPD. The other scammer’s e-mail was not functioning.

I called the 800 number of the Alabama bank that the check was written on. They verified it was fraudulent.

Thanks for warning the public!

Bill Dunavan

Beverly,

One thought for you, although I find it hard to believe that you have not had it also, why can’t our representatives, county wide, see the possibilities of utilizing some of the empty strip malls for office space etc.

I would think that the CAD would have a good list of these places and I feel sure that sub stations would be far better and less expensive for us taxpayers. It would also help to remove some of these blights in our cities.

Oh! Maybe it would make the CAD to accessible to the general taxpayer population etc.

Congratulations on 31 years.

C.W. Riley

*Editor’s Note: You give me far too much credit. You give our representatives far too much credit. I had never thought of your idea but I’ll admit it is a capital one. Let’s see what happens.-bkc

Mr. Elackatt,

I am writing you in hopes that you can help the residents of Plantation Park. I have been trying to get the FCCA to maintain their drainage reserve behind our subdivision for two years. This reserve is located between two subdivisions, ours and another located closer to Lexington Creek Elementary and in back of homes in the 4500 block of Connies Court.

Last year when Ms. Gibson saw the reserve her response was, atrocious, awful, and an insult to the neighbors who have to live close to it. The city had to force FCCA to mow and cut down weeds and FCCA promised to maintain it on an ongoing basis. It has not been mowed but the one time.

Everything that can be seen from Dulles is neatly manicured but when you get out of eyesight, it is weedy and deplorable. Standing water is the norm. We have excess mosquito activity due to the water. Before the election, Ms. Gibson and Mr. Mc Keever had spoken with the association and they had promised to clean the area but nothing has been done.

I would be most appreciative if you would visit this area and see for yourself. I have taken photos of this on my camera phone but you can’t see the true nature of the problem unless you see it first hand.

If we, the residents of both Missouri City and FCCA residents would keep our property just 10% this bad, we would be taken to court immediately. How can residents be asked to keep their property if the entities that oversee us can’t be held to the same standards. I have heard that FCCA residents in Missouri City are step children to both entities. This is a prime example of this accusation. If we lived in Sugar Land, this would never have occurred.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am forwarding this inquiry to our residents in a for their feedback and I encourage them to voice their concern to you also.

Dear Beverly,

I wanted to say that I truly enjoy reading your opinions! I’m glad someone in the county isn’t afriad to express them. After reading your article about the sheriff’s cars I thought I would write to you.

I’ve wondered for a while now how (Deputy) Sheriff Brady was able to afford the 5 cars parked in his driveway. Now I know it’s because he didn’t pay for them. The taxpayers did. Also, since you ran the article about the new Dodge Chargers, his black one has not been in the driveway. What a coincidence?

Well, today’s the day!! When I got home... I looked over at the sheriff’s driveway and what did I see.....a new silver/white Dodge Charger parked in the driveway. I guess they had already put the order in before they went to commissioners court.

Keep up the good work Bev and next sheriff’s election should be fun!

Please withhold my name. Several of his neighbors have had problems with him. Our concern is that he will have us pulled over every time we leave our homes. My husband says there is nothing you can do because of how the “buddy” system is here in Fort Bend.

(Naturally)
Name withheld

Dear Bev,

I enjoy reading the Star, to help keep me current on local Ft. Bend happenings, but I must admit, one of the first things I read is your column. I like the way you scorch people on Bev’s Burner.

I am a former teacher & current tax-payer in FBISD. We own a home and live in this district, but in my opinion, we need this new $26 Mil. Science Center, about as much as I need another navel.

I would be very interested on your ‘take’ about the rush to build a 26 million dollar science center for FBISD. AND the fact that there will be NO tax increase. This must be some kind of magic, no? Who ARE these “public-private partnerships” through which the purported financing will occur, and what do THEY have to gain?

Also I would be very interested in finding out EXACTLY how the FBISD faculty voted when this “study” was done. The report states that,...”the proposed science and tech center got high marks from the local business community and from FBISD teachers.” There is also a somewhat contradictory statement in the article which says...”A bond election isn’t a consideration since ‘the clear message the feasibility committee heard repeatedly is the public has no current appetite to fund this initiative’ with more taxes.”

It seems to me, that the most enthusiastic endorsement to build, comes from the CEO of Wallace Bajjali Development Partners. If THEY think this is such a grand idea, I propose they build it, privatize it, and then rent out the facilities to FBISD on an ‘as needed’ basis.

Thanks for lending me an ear, keep up the pit-bull journalism.

Sincerely,

Name withheld by request

Dear Beverly,

I am currently more interested in a quote from David Wallace’s report that I read in The “Star” today that says there is enough bond money from previous issues to fund the center in its entirety. If that’s true why don’t they use the money to replace the AC systems in older schools instead of telling us we have to wait 1 or 2 more years? I have been at ----- Elementary for 23 years and the AC system is in bad shape. Many mornings we don’t have air and they have to jump start it or some such thing.

You probably shouldn’t use my name or my school’s name because I don’t want the school to have to wait 5 more years in retaliation and my principal doesn’t know I’m writing this.

Name withheld by request

Dear Editor,

A true leader would have been forthright in firing an employee, not tape the termination letter to the underside of a glass table.

Healey’s moral compass is not set on true north but on R for reelection at any cost.

His actions might be laughable if they weren’t a bad joke, one that is being perpetrated against the citizens of Fort Bend County.

It’s time for the citizens to send Healey out the same door that he sent Elliott.

Hopefully a new district attorney would truly believe in the concept of justice that Healey espouses but which he and his staff disregard in the “get-a-conviction-at-any-cost” mentality that pervades the office.

Norma Corbitt - Missouri City

Reader seeks ALS awareness
and support for MDA

Ms. Skinner,

Your statement of “was not required of us by Federal or State law. Nor, did it require anything that was not already a goal of our department” is a bunch of hog-wash that we get from your type.

I might be mistaken, but the federal law was approved in year ~2000 and Fort Bend County is just now getting around to implementing it and I know why there is a lot of feet dragging.

Within a very few years, the Hispanic vote is going to be the majority vote and we will replace most state and local offices where the real political power exist.

And I know that’s where your fears are coming from. I would also fear if I was in your shoes because there is going to be a lot of “pay-back time” involved.

Of course, when that time comes, we will have double labels in Spanish & English on all cans of corn.

Basta, galleta! - Juan

Juan,

That was not MY statement, but the statement of the elections administrator of Fort Bend County.

My commentary on Spanish stands. I would like to know how you construed that I have “fears” pertaining to Spanish speaking individuals. I have a lot of Hispanic friends and associates who I admire and respect. Their attitude is like mine .. so please refrain from putting a label on me. I made that clear in my article.

So, your plan to take back the Alamo, with an attitude, is apparently not shared by all Spanish speaking or Mexican-Americans in this great country.

I would also like to know exactly what you mean when you say, and I quote:

“I would also fear if I was in your shoes because there is going to be a lot of “pay-back time” involved.”

Believe me when I say “fear” long since disappeared from my vocabulary.

Thank you for your feedback. I am forwarding your letter to our

Editor for publication.

Cheryl

Dear Editor:

The World Health Organization has just ratcheted up the threat alert for the swine flu epidemic to Phase 4 (out of 6). Along with the avian flu of a decade ago, the Hong Kong flu of 1968, and the Asian flu of 1957, swine flu has been traced to animal waste in a factory farm. Its H1N1 type virus is nearly identical to that of the Spanish flu, which killed more than 50 million people in 1918-19.

Today’s factory farms constantly expose sick, crowded, highly stressed animals to contaminated feces, urine, and other secretions. They provide ideal breeding grounds for the replication and mutation of viruses and bacteria into more lethal forms.

In fact, Wikipedia lists more than 70 human diseases that are developed and transmitted by animals, frequently through confinement and crowding. Among these are such infamous killers as AIDS, bubonic plague, cholera, diphtheria, Ebola and dengue fever, measles, SARS, smallpox, West Nile virus, and yellow fever (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoonotic_diseases).

Every one of us can help prevent the development and spread of these killer diseases by replacing animal products in our diet with healthful vegetables, fresh fruits, and whole grains. These foods don’t carry deadly microbes (unless contaminated by animal waste), are touted by every major health advocacy organization, and were the recommended fare in the Garden of Eden.

Sincerely,

Stanley Stryker
Stafford

Bev,

I read with interest and some amazement Michael Fjetland’s comments and your PS- also noting that he managed to get in a plug for a local eatery! Amazement that such a supposedly intelligent and well connected person would so obviously miss the point.

The Tea Parties expressed the outrage that people feel against CONGRESS and the political classes, irrespective of party affiliations, who have for decades, misspent trillions of our tax dollars .

There were some anti Obamans at the Sugar Land rally, which I attended, entitled to express their opinion, but for most of the “party goers” - their frustration and anger was directed at the system as a whole, and Congress in particular. Rep. Pete Olsen’s anti-Democratic comments were met with tepid applause, whereas Dr Neil Frank’s concise explanation of the Global Warming phenomenon was loudly endorsed.

It does seem from the mainstream media’s dismissal and ridicule of this “grass roots” movement, that when it is a Democratic movement it is lauded, but anything else is either ridiculous, stupid, misdirected or downright anti-American.

(Mrs) Lee Chapman

Sugar Land

Dear Editor;
Contrary to the opinion of Mr. Dick Tate, one of the attorneys for Fulshear Mayor Jamie Roberts, I still have my moral compass. It is my conscience that guides my professional life. The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure admonishes every prosecutor “to see that justice is done.” This grave responsibility guides me as I work with the 44 prosecutors of my office in examining approximately 11,000 cases annually for consideration of criminal prosecution. Additionally, almost all major decisions are discussed and analyzed by myself, key personnel, and or chief prosecutors, prior to their implementation.

In the matter of Mayor Roberts, he, his defense team, and political pundits have suggested that the goal of my office was to force his resignation. This assertion is false and not supported by my relationship with Mayor Roberts. In fact, before Mayor Roberts’ actions pertaining to this case, I was pleased that he was Fulshear’s mayor as well as a friend and supporter of mine. He allowed his name to be used in support of my re-election efforts. He called me during the investigation by the sheriff’s office into his alleged theft of two carports. We spoke cordially several times after he was indicted and shook hands even during his trial.

I was aware that bringing charges against a popular public figure was politically unwise. But no citizen is above the law, and so the Judicial Process was followed. A police investigation took place. The Grand Jury heard from over thirty witnesses including Jamie himself. Mayor Roberts was indicted and a trial was conducted.

Many criminal matters result in negotiated settlements, just like in civil cases. But when the sides to a criminal lawsuit can not resolve the issue, a full trial is frequently had. When negotiations failed in the Roberts case, the choice was to either try the case involving alleged misuse of tax dollars or to drop the matter. The latter choice would send a clear message that the District Attorney’s Office allows similar actions to go unchallenged.

Important facts on which the state based its decision to seek indictments of Mayor Roberts were as follows:

In October, of 2006, the late Jim Gibson reported that two of his carports had been taken from an easement. This easement was not on property owned by the city of Fulshear, nor Jamie Roberts, nor Metro. It was on private land.

In September of 2006, a man named David Rabius approached Roberts about two carports located on property set back from the intersection of FM 359 and FM 1093. Roberts told Rabius that if Rabius moved one of the carports to Roberts’ property, then Rabius could have the second carport. Roberts told Rabius which carport he wanted and where to take it. The second carport was subsequently attached to Rabius’ garage.

In a sworn statement, given on October 11, 2006, Roberts stated:

1.) David had inquired as to two carports on the property located at the south east corner of FM 1093 and FM 359.

2.) The carports were abandoned.

3.) David took carports and delivered one to my place.

4.) I had no knowledge that the carports belonged to any individual.

Yet, in another sworn statement dated 2/5/07, Mayor Roberts stated:

1.) They (the carports) belong to a gentleman, and I called him on his cell phone, Jesse.

2.) And I asked Jesse what do you want to do with these (the carports).

3.) And he said : have him (the carport mover, Rabius) put one of them at the barn, but the other one he can just have.

Roberts had completely contradicted his earlier sworn statement that the carports were abandoned and unowned!

Roberts’ sworn statement mentioned several times that Roberts had called Jesse on the day he and Rabius went to the location of the carports. Roberts said that he called from his cell phone, and he gave its number, yet a subsequent check of Roberts’ cell phone records showed that no call had been made to Jesse’s cell phone for the month of September 2006.

Roberts claimed in this statement, that in his October 11, 2006 statement, that he had told the Sheriff’s Department detective that Jesse had been the owner of the carports, but that the detective chose to omit it from Roberts’ October 11, 2006 statement. Under oath at trial, the detective denied this assertion.

Ultimately, the cases regarding the alleged theft of the carports could not be pursued because the law requires that for a theft conviction, it must be proven that the owner did not give his consent to the taking of his property. The death of the owner made a conviction unlikely, so they were dismissed. The most serious case for which Roberts was tried consisted of Roberts’ alleged use of taxpayers’ money to pay for a survey, allegedly used in defending himself in his carport case and not for the city’s business.

Trial evidence showed:

1.) Mayor Roberts claimed the survey showed the location of the carports at the time they were moved by Rabius.

2.) Mayor Roberts under oath on September 17, 2007 told multiple stories as to the reason he ordered the survey.

3.) The survey was ordered approximately three weeks prior to its presentation to authorities.

4.) Roberts under oath on September 17, 2007 said that the purpose of the survey was for mowing and beautification, yet this statement indicated that mowing had been going on for approximately a year prior to the survey being ordered.

5.) Mayor Roberts knew that the city was to be charged for the survey he ordered.

6.) The city paid this bill of over $1,100.00.

Long before the trial, efforts were made by my office to resolve the matter. Mr. Tate has claimed that “the D.A. told the mayor’s first lawyer the charges would be dropped if Roberts would resign. There was no effort to get the property back.” This statement by Mr. Tate is factually inaccurate. After becoming aware of the evidence regarding the carports, I had the following offer conveyed to Mr. Roberts’ first attorney: That the mayor should, to avoid prosecution, pay full restitution to the owner of the carports, make a public statement in which he accepted responsibility for their taking, and resign from office.

Public officials who have run afoul of the legal system have frequently been expected by the public and prosecutors to resign their office to avoid prosecution. The Mayor’s attorney responded that he thought that the Mayor may be agreeable to the offer, except that he would not resign his office. I believe that my offer was conveyed to the mayor, because attorneys have an ethical responsibility to convey offers to their clients.

Mr. Tate and I met a few weeks before trial. By this time the owner of the carports had died and we had conveyed that fact to Mayor Roberts’ legal team. We were focusing on the charge involving the misuse of taxpayer money. Mr. Tate asked if there was any way that they could avoid the Mayor’s resignation. “What if we paid restitution?” Mr. Tate inquired. I felt the public had a right to expect restitution, (now to the estate of the carport owner and to the city of Fulshear) and an explanation and resignation. I declined Mr. Tate’s suggestion. He promptly said “Then we’ll go to trial.” And we did.

Multiple trials occur almost every week in the Fort Bent County Courthouse and our office wins the majority. Both the accused and state place the facts before a jury. To prevail, the state must prove its case “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Mr. Roberts’ acquittal meant that the jury was not convinced of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

My office accepts and respects the jury’s verdict. We have convicted murderers, child molesters, robbers, drivers driving while intoxicated, thiefs, burglars, and drug dealers to name a few. I can assure you that before, during, and after the Roberts case, I listened to, and will continue to listen to, that voice inside of me that seeks to do JUSTICE.

John Healey

District Attorney
Fort Bend County

Reader tells Bev she should have
bashed county auditor in her “Burner”

Bev,

Wake up - I can’t believe you allowed a page 1 story about the county auditor to slide by without at least pointing out the absurdity of his position in your column!!

His comments harken back to Enron - we can keep our future liabilities off the balance sheet - you don’t need to know what’s fixin to happen to you. Or perhaps, the similarity to the AIG mess is more apt - we can sell the credit default swap now and not worry about the risk of default and loss unless it actually happens later - well it happened to AIG and will happen to the county in the future.

For example, with the county’s worker’s compensation program, while the actuary may not know the precise amount the county will have to pay, we know we will have to pay something for officers and employees already injured (indeed even Sturdivant admits that) with on-going care needs. The actuary’s estimate is just that, but insurers and others routinely rely on those very same types of estimates to establish their financial reserves and stability. Sturdivant’s attitude will lead to the county to over spend by ignoring incurred liabilities payable in future years.

It is interesting to note that Ed Sturdivant didn’t significantly question the accuracy of the actuary’s methodology, only that people were being told how much the county would have to pay in the future. Would your banker accept a fiancial statement that didn’t include your known future year liabilities (like the lease on your plant??).

This is dangerous, especially if the commissioners are too dumb to understand they are being sold down the river!!!

Name Withheld

It has now been two months since the jury’s swift not guilty verdict in the Jamie Roberts trial. Many of the thoughts contained in this letter were written on the night of the jury’s verdict. I have waited until now to finalize this letter to ensure that I did not simply react to the emotion of the moment, but that my comments could stand the test of deliberate reflection upon the facts.

At the outset, I disclose that I was a member of his defense team assisting lead lawyer Rusty Hardin, Mr. Hardin’s partner Andy Drumheller and Mr. Hardin’s investigator Jim Yarborough. They were an extraordinary defense team whose skills became absolutely necessary due to the prosecution’s total obsession with obtaining Mr. Roberts’ resignation as Mayor or a conviction that would force his resignation.

I am a civil lawyer. The Roberts trial was the first criminal trial in which I have been involved. Though I have not practiced criminal law, I have been privileged to work with and against many of the finest trial lawyers in Texas. I recognize competent, ethical trial tactics and conduct. I recognize unfair, unethical trial tactics and conduct. I recognize the difference between the two. To my great disappointment, I witnessed an abusive, result-oriented prosecution, and an incompetent and tunnel-visioned investigation by a sheriff’s detective, combine to almost destroy the life of a good man. As soon as the verdict was read, one of Jamie’s friends and fellow church members who sat through the trial said, “Thank God.” Another ran up to Jamie and said, “God is good.” To which Jamie responded, “God is indeed good.” Typical of Jamie’s tendency to see the good in everything.

Throughout the trial, just when I thought the prosecution had reached a new low in its abusive tactics, another abusive tactic emerged. The number of abusive tactics are too many to cover in one letter. I will focus only on the first, the prosecution’s decision to initiate a criminal case. The case started with a charge that Mr. Roberts, acting in his official capacity as Mayor of Fulshear, stole two metal carports from Jim Gibson. The crime charged was a specific intent crime. That is, if Mayor Roberts did not intend to deprive Mr. Gibson of Mr. Gibson’s property, then he could not have committed the crime.

The carports in question were two carports of questionable value, whose ownership was seriously in question, that Mr. Roberts believed were located on a Metro Right of Way, on which the City of Fulshear had a license from Metro and had the right to clean and beautify. The carports were an eyesore and had long been the subject of numerous complaints by citizens of Fulshear. The Mayor believed he was simply carrying out his responsibilities and acting within his authority as Mayor to have the carports removed and beautify the City.

Against this backdrop, the dispute should have been nothing more than a civil dispute. Even if the carports belonged to Mr. Gibson and had been taken improperly, the DA knew exactly where they were. One of the carports was in Wharton on the property of the man who moved them. That man has never offered to return the carport and the DA has never asked him to do so. Interestingly he was one of the DA’s star witnesses against Mr. Roberts. The other carport is in the possession of Jessie Montes, the man the Mayor believed to be the owner of the carports at the time they were moved. Mr. Montes offered to give that carport to Mr. Gibson but neither Mr. Gibson nor the DA were interested. Instead, the DA also indicted Mr. Montes. Both carports could have been easily returned, ending the matter. After all, if Mr. Gibson had gotten the carports back, he would have suffered no damage.

However, it became apparent from the outset that the case was not about allegedly stolen carports but all about an attempt by the DA’s office to accomplish for Mr. Roberts’ political enemies what those enemies could not accomplish at the ballot box–getting Mayor Roberts out of office. Shortly after the charges were filed the DA told the Mayor’s first lawyer that the charges would be dropped if Mr. Roberts would resign. What is wrong with this picture? There is no effort to get the property back but only to get the Mayor to resign! When the Mayor refused to resign, the DA assigned not only Mike Elliott, one of his most experienced prosecutors but also 11 year veteran Mark Hanna to conduct the prosecution. And, apparently that was not enough firepower, so the DA’s First Assistant, Fred Felcman, joined in a relentless triple team cross examination of Mr. Roberts during his second grand jury appearance.

As if a top heavy prosecution team of Senior Assistant District Attorneys was not enough, Mr. Roberts also had to face an incompetent, tunnel-visioned investigation by a detective who rushed to judgment and ignored incredibly relevant evidence that Mr. Roberts was just doing his job as Mayor, that he had no intent to violate the law, that the carports did not belong to Mr. Gibson and were not located on Mr. Gibson’s land. At trial, Chief Deputy Craig Brady of the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Department testified that in his opinion the investigation demonstrated “gross incompetence” and was “an embarrassment” to him as Chief Deputy and to the Fort Bend Sheriff’s Department as a whole. Unlike the DA, the Sheriff’s office recognized the injustices of the investigation and demoted the investigator.

So, at the outset the DA was evaluating a charge of theft, requiring specific intent, against a highly respected man, a strong family man of impeccable reputation in the community, with a long history of dedicated service as Mayor of Fulshear and President of the Lamar CISD School Board, active and highly respected in his church. The property supposedly stolen were two carports of questionable value, questionable ownership and questionable location, readily available to be returned with no harm to Mr. Gibson. The DA (if he had correctly read the appropriate Metro licensing agreements) should have realized that the City of Fulshear had the right to remove the carports from the Metro right of way and, until a survey was subsequently done, no one could say for sure that the carports were or were not on the Metro right of way. A reasonable DA would have simply arranged for the return of the carports and moved on to matters that deserved the attention of his office. However, Mr. Healey chose not to do so, choosing instead to mount a misguided all out assault to obtain the Mayor’s resignation. When the DA could not get Mr. Roberts to resign, he chose to assign his top three prosecutors to the task of bringing Mr. Roberts down no matter what the cost to the taxpayers (and that cost was enormous), no matter what the cost to Mr. Roberts (once again enormous), no matter what the danger to Mr. Roberts health ( he suffered a heart attack following the indictments), no matter what the impact upon his family (how does one eradicate from the minds of his grandchildren the trauma of his arrest and the humiliation they suffered at their schools) and no matter what the damage to his good name (where does he go to restore his good name?).

In closing, I also disclose that I was President of the Fort Bend County Bar Association at the time that Mr. Healey was appointed by visiting Judge Jim Clawson to replace Jack Stern who was removed from office. Ironically, Mr. Hardin represented Fort Bend County in the removal action upon the request of then County Attorney Bud Childers. After Mr. Hardin successfully obtained a verdict requiring Mr. Stern’s removal, Judge Clawson asked both Mr. Hardin, in his capacity as the county’s lawyer in the matter, and me, in my capacity as Bar Association President, to recommend a replacement District Attorney. After conferring with my executive committee, I gave Judge Clawson three names for his consideration, one of whom was John Healey. Mr. Hardin also recommended Mr. Healey. During the ensuing 16 years I have remained a friend of John Healey despite many situations where his judgment has been questionable. However, having now observed his conduct and that of his office during the grand jury and the trial phases of Jamie Roberts’ case; and, having now observed not only his refusal to apologize to Mr. Roberts and his family, but his desperate attempt to justify this groundless prosecution, I regretfully conclude that Mr. Healey has lost his moral compass and, in my opinion, is no longer professionally or ethically deserving to hold the office of District Attorney.

Respectfully,

Dick Tate

Dear Comm: James Patterson, Andy Meyers, Grady Prestage, Richard Morrison,

It has come to my attention that you have decided to use a mandatory mail order pharmacy for county employees and families. This means I can no longer fill prescriptions for long-time customers.

What a slap in the face for all Fort Bend pharmacies, especially locally owned and operated. In your desire to achieve a perceived cost reduction, you have overlooked a few details.

In the pharmacy business it is a well-known fact that mail order prescriptions do not save you, the employer, any money. It moves these dollars out of the county and out of the state.

Does your mail order pharmacy live in Fort Bend County?

Does your mail order pharmacy hire employees in Fort Bend County? ( I have 15)

Does your mail order pharmacy shop locally for other goods and services in Fort Bend County?

Does your mail order pharmacy pay taxes in Fort Bend County? ( I do, personal and business)

I have an example of money lost by me and the county for just one family that I can no longer service.

For 2008 this one family had a total cost of drugs $9,131.35 plus copays of $1,834.03 for a total of $ 10,965.38. This will be gone for me and for dollars turned in Fort Bend County to generate our economy.

Please review your decision and notice how it affects the total community. I am available at most any time to talk to you or hear your explanation.

Sincerely,

Ed Sziy

Ed’s Pharmacy

*Editor’s Note: Ed, I don’t know what you expect from a bunch of men who have named the India Herald as their official county newspaper. The India Herald is not even published in Fort Bend County. BKC