On February 6th and 7th, Steve Aldrich campaigned in the neighborhood of Castle Rock. He presented to the HOA and residents that he was there to listen to concerns regarding the upcoming zoning decision and many residents welcomed his political signs in their yards. In addition to media coverage, Aldrich was made aware of the concerns through the 100s of phone calls, emails, letters, and documents sent to the Planning and Zoning Committee, City Council, City Manager, and other offices. The residents of Castle Rock were battling to hold the developer, Wallace Phillips, to zoning restrictions placed in 2008. They expressed their opposition to the rezoning and Aldrich listened.
Four days later, at the public hearing, Councilman Aldrich demonstrated his intensions very early in the discussion. His leading questions directed the developer towards the residents opposition and suggested that developers had no responsibility to be forthcoming and that the consumer should do their own research on zoning, despite what they were told by the same developer. The applicant for the developer, Joe Schultz, stated that it was the real estate agents and home builders who were "grossly misleading" the homebuyers.
Aldrich further supported his single dissenting vote in stating that a moratorium could not be placed on "appropriate development". However, less than an hour later he voted against rezoning for the exact type of development. In this rezoning case, 2 miles from Castle Rock, it was the "overwhelming resident response" that lead him to his vote.
The next day, a Castle Rock resident, who had proudly displayed an Aldrich sign in her yard, emailed Aldrich, sharing her disappointment regarding his vote and campaign in the neighborhood. It was to the point and wished him well. His response was lengthily and described his vote by saying, "It was definitely not the politically expedient thing to do but I believe that it was the right thing to do". He ended by saying, "In the end, you and I both got what we wanted. The requested modification to the PDD was denied and the need to come up with an appropriate location for this type of development was emphasized. That is fine with me and I hope that it is fine with you.".
A few days later, the Eagle published the campaign contributions and the dots began to connect. Aldrich received a sizable donation from the developer, Wallace Phillips, but received nothing from the other developer who also requested rezoning. For future reference, Aldrich's past and present campaigns are largely supported by big developers.
In the days to follow, the seemingly insensitive and condescending email response from Aldrich reached 100s of College Station residents in the Castle Rock area. Among other places, it began with Aldrich sending the email to the Castle Rock HOA. His reasons for doing so are still unclear. As of last week and one week after his dissenting vote, Aldrich's new stance is that he should have voted down the Castle Rock proposal.
When you are choosing your elected officials, I encourage you to review their tract records and the basis for their decisions. It is not one decision, but the whole of decisions that mark integrity or lack there of. There must be a consistency between what officials SAY outside the voting chambers, to the voters, and what they DO inside the chambers, to effect voters.
It is our duty to question integrity when an official votes AGAINST a moratorium on development in one case and then votes FOR a moratorium on development in the next. If you believe a particular development to be APPROPRIATE and vote as such, there is not a "need to come up with an appropriate location" when addressing a citizen after your vote. Likewise, it is inconsistent to disregard overwhelming citizen opposition and then use it as the foundation for your next vote.
As citizens, we cannot always be apart of the decision process so we have to trust and rely on the character and integrity of our elected officials. We may not always agree but we must believe in their intensions. My definition of integrity of character is what you do when no one is watching and will you keep doing it if you don't get caught.
If you are looking for a County Commissioner who is filling his pockets and who's decisions are solely based on being elected into the next seat, Aldrich is your man.
However, if you prefer a candidate who has a longstanding record of being forthcoming and honest and stands by his decisions, agreeable or not, re-elect County Commissioner Lloyd Wasserman.
