Friday, September 18, 2015

Aubrey council votes to pass 2015-16 budget | Denton Record Chronicle | News for Denton County, Texas

Aubrey council votes to pass 2015-16 budget | Denton Record Chronicle | News for Denton County, Texas

Email From Aubrey Citizen

Here is a very kind email from an Aubrey, TX citizen, with their permission, I am posting here-

I'm not sure how many are in these emails, and you are free to share this with them. I did show up to the meeting last night.  And I was less than impressed with my hometown city council. I was however highly impressed with you Mr Tillman. I sat there for 2 hours and 2 things struck me like a 2x4 upside the head. One was how you were the only nay vote on 90% of things. I don't remember every single item, and I'm not praising you just for voting nay.  I'm not sure how to describe what it is I'm trying to say, but I had the feeling, that with all these people that came before you guys, that they were simply just taking advantage of the councils ignorance.  I felt like the council was nothing more than a ceremonial head nod to whatever interest those people had. You were the only one to actually ask questions. The rest of the council were like zombies just saying yes to everything.  I'd much rather a councilman vote no than yes, if they don't know what their voting for.

The first 15 minutes of the meeting, I smelled agenda 21 all over the place. It truly saddened me. I texted a friend that I sensed it, but I may have been being overly sensitive. Then the key terms started being dropped. My friend mentioned in should expose it, but in was in now way going to do that at this meeting. Then the lady spoke up and had her material.  That lady was dead on 100% correct in what she was saying.  Those companies that are putting that stiff together are there to infiltrate towns, just like she said. I won't dive off into that too much, but that lady was right. It's scary stuff, and this could be innocent, but it felt creepy to me 

I was very pleased with the job you did. In today's America, of a representative government(supposed to be) at the level closest to me, at the local level of my small town, for the first time in many years, I actually felt represented.  For that I thank you. 

I am going to be in attendance at more meetings. I have a lot to learn, and that's my intention, to learn. You have my full support.

The corruption of government in this country is so pervasive, that even in our little small town, they don't realize it had happened to them.  Washington politics has behaved in such a way for so long (rather we have allowed them to)that it is the normal way of practicing politics even down to the smallest level.

I will spread the word more and more. I have been in this town my whole life, and I have quite the reputation among the natives here.  I will be using that to hopefully get them more involved.

Thank you for your sole stands last night, I know it isn't easy to stand alone the way you did.  Just know you got at least one behind you right here.

Monday, September 14, 2015

The Latest on Aubrey, TX Property Tax Rollback Rate

The Aubrey City council will vote on the 2016 proposed property tax rate on Tuesday September 15, 2015.  I have voiced my opposition to the manner in which we came up with the property tax rollback rate.  I felt by taking out additional debt solely to raise the rate was not ethical nor transparent.  However, it seems as though my definition of transparency and being ethical is not in the majority.  As this has unfolded, it has become more and more apparent that the lack of transparency was by design.  I have referred to this tactic as manipulation, gerrymandering, a loophole, and cooking the books; city staff referred this tactic as a tool and it was referred to as an accounting maneuver in the local paper.  Either way, I am extremely disappointed that this is the path we have chosen. 

When we were given the presentation on the budget by the city’s financial advisor, the subject of the $92,000.00 loan was brought up.  I specifically asked if we were taking out the loan to raise the rollback rate.  At this point the finance director for the city stood up and took over the presentation.  He presented this as a mechanism to pay off debt, which most on council support.  Even I was convinced that the main purpose of this loan was to pay off debt.  However, a discussion after the meeting confirmed that the rollback rate was indeed being artificially inflated.  No one would admit until they were pressed, that the sole purpose of the loan was to inflate the rollback property tax rate.  They were only transparent, when it was forced upon them.  And we wonder why no one trusts the government. 

It is also important to point out that we are not actually paying off any debt.  Taking out new debt to pay off old debt, nets the same amount of debt.  We did get better terms on the new debt, which will save some money in interest, but the main purpose of the debt was to raise the tax rate, which will net another $100.000.00 or so in property tax revenue.  Money saved by paying off older debt will be secondary to the raising of taxes.  No one can actually tell me how much money taking the new debt will save the taxpayers, but they know off the top of their heads how much the tax revenue will increase. 

It is apparently illegal to rob Peter to pay Paul, so there has to be another step in this process.  So were not technically paying off debt, but rather putting this into the general fund an allocating to something else, and then taking funds that was allocated and paying off the older debt, which were not sure exactly what old debt we’re going to pay off.  If this sounds confusing, it is, and it is for a purpose.  Typically if can keep people confused about a subject, they are less likely to oppose it.  Their eyes glaze over and they nod their head. 

Right now the money from the new debt is slated to buy safety equipment for the Aubrey Fire Department.  It is being characterized that if we do not approve this property tax manipulation, then we can’t buy the safety equipment for the fire department.  This was even emphasized when the fire chief showed up to discuss how important this safety equipment was, and how badly needed it was, insinuating that if you voted against this, you were voting against getting this safety equipment for our firefighters.  Which is a very sleazy and undermining tactic.  The city council as a whole has always said that safety comes first, and so not matter what happens, the fire department will get their safety equipment.  If we needed to cut something, we would cut somewhere else, not the safety equipment. When I pressed them on this, they admitted that if the artificial tax increase did not pass, we would still get the required safety equipment.

I told them this it was very disingenuous to assert that voting against this, would endanger our fireman.  Of course they denied that this was done intentionally.  However, you would have to be a fool to think that this was just a coincidence, although, I’m sure some will be fooled.  Mayor Janet Meyers, went as far as to suggest that we would have to fire a police officer if we did not submit to her shenanigans.  I am sure that they will try to say I am against our police and fire department.  However, none of this is true, I made a commitment that I would not approve a budget that did not include a raise for our first responders.  After the manipulation, we can still only afford a 1% pay raise for them, which is a slap in the face.  They are the lowest paid in this area; this budget, nor this manipulation will change that.

The city has had a turn-around financially in the last couple of years, thanks to some fiscal responsibility.  However, I am not sure about the current administration, and don’t believe they have earned the right for me to give them more tax dollars.  Outside of the last couple of years this council has overwhelmingly shown they cannot be trusted with our tax dollars.  We did not get into the mess we are in by making good financial decisions, and I am certain that this council will not spend money wiser than the taxpayers. 

Each of us that holds public office takes an oath of office which in parts states that “will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and Laws of the United States and of this State”.  By adding debt and manipulating our property tax rollback rate, we are not fulfilling the commitments of the oath we took.  While this manipulation is not technically illegal, I am sure that the legislative intent of this law was not to allow this manipulation.  Therefore, at minimum we are not meeting the intent of this law. 

If we truly needed a few extra bucks from each household, we should have been more transparent.  We should have given the citizens the right to have a rollback election if they objected to the tax rate.  If we had done that, we would have asked our citizens for the additional funds.  The way we are going about it, we are taking it whether they approve of it or not.  Although we have had some discussion on this, it is clear that the hope was to get this passed without much attention.  Without my opposition to this, it is doubtful that anyone would have even known what was going on.   
If you should think that what I’m suggesting is not accurate you can listen to the meetings in their entirety on the city website at:

Whatever happens on September 15, 2015, I commit that I will continue this discussion, and hopefully we don’t continue to pull the wool over the Aubrey citizen’s eyes.  A government without transparency, is not a government of the people or for the people.  

Monday, August 24, 2015

Aubrey, TX Tax Rate Shenanigans

My first entrance into local government, was a former mayor telling me that I needed to go take out a loan every August, and repay it in October.  When I asked why, he said that was the only way to keep the tax rate high, otherwise you would be subject to a rollback election.  The rollback is the figure that local governments can raise taxes annually.  However, this process can be manipulated by accruing additional debt.  The debt and operational portions of the budget go into the tax formula.  New short term debt is usually enough to keep the rollback rate higher.   If the rate is higher than the rollback rate, there can be a petition drive, which could overturn the council's decision on the tax rate.

My thoughts on that discussion was, "why on earth would I want to manipulate the tax rate to charge higher taxes”?  That simply did not make good sense to me.  If there was a good enough reason to have the tax rate above the rollback rate, be open and honest with the public and let them decide.  However, transparent government appears to be a thing of the past, and now we are subject secret back room deals, from our local governments all the way to the top.  We should demand transparency in our government at all levels.  

I had thought that the days of seeing officials who are willing to manipulate the system to charge a higher tax rate were behind me.  Unfortunately, in my first budget process with Aubrey, TX, those old shenanigans are still being used.  On August 18, 2015 we had the first of many budget meetings.  This meeting was the one where we approved the proposed tax rate of the 2015/2016 budget. 

The proposed tax rate last year, was at the rollback rate of $0.588482 per $100 valuation.  This year’s proposed rate was at the rollback rate of $.566997 per $100 valuation, a drop of $.02 per $100 valuation.  As this was being explained by the town's financial advisor, there was a discussing of moving $92,000.00 of debt around.  So we were essentially taking out some short term debt to pay off other short term debt.  Which as previously mentioned is a tactic to keep the rollback higher. 
I asked a direct question "are we taking out this debt to keep the rollback rate higher".  Although I asked a direct question, I did not get a direct answer.  The answer talked around the subject and led me to believe that this swapping around was actually retiring debt, which I support.  However, after the meeting, a former local official and Aubrey citizen spoke more in-depth with me about this and it appears as though the sole reason for taking out this debt was to manipulate the rollback rate; to keep taxes higher than is legally allowed without an election.  

I voted to support the proposed rate, with the assumption that what I was told was genuine.  Without the manipulation the rollback rate would be around $.54 per $100 valuation.  Therefore, this manipulation raises the property taxes on Aubrey citizens $.02 per $100 valuation.   

There will be a series of public hearings that will allow the public to weigh and also modify the proposed rate.  I will do everything in my power to not support the debt swap and keep the rollback rate at its genuine rate.  As previously mentioned, if there was a valid reason to keep the rate higher, this should have been clearly explained.  However, due to the manipulation, at this point, I will not support a higher rate than the legitimate tax rate under any circumstance.  If it came down to it, I would circulate a petition for a rollback election myself.

Frankly, it bothers me that we have to even be at the rollback rate, which the highest legal rate that we can charge without an election.  However, some of the previous leaders, left this town in a financial mess.  We have a debt obligation of over $600,000.00 this year.  So to provide basic services, we are forced to stay at the rollback rate.  If we did not, we are subject to be in much more vulnerable position financially. 

According to the Texas Local Government Code, the mayor is the budget officer for the city.  Specifically, Title 4, Subtitle A, Chapter 102 states:

Sec. 102.001.  BUDGET OFFICER.  (a)

The mayor of a municipality serves as the budget officer for the governing body of the municipality except as provided by Subsection (b).

(b)  If the municipality has the city manager form of government, the city manager serves as the budget officer.

The town of Aubrey does not have a city manager form of government, so the budget is solely the responsibility of the mayor.  I am not certain of who all participated in the development of the budget, or who came up the shenanigans, but it is the responsibility of the mayor.

I am thankful that a concerned citizen brought this to my attention, otherwise this scheme would have worked.  Unfortunately, most people are probably unaware that this loophole exists and if they are aware, they are naive and think that their officials would never do this.  Officials can't do things like this when the people are educated and involved. 

Again, I will do everything in my power to get this matter resolved.  I sincerely apologize for not catching this sooner.       

Saturday, August 22, 2015

My First "No" Vote.

On June 25, 2015 at a specially called meeting, I cast my first "No" vote since being elected for my second round of serving in local government.  This particular action item was to approve a Public Improvement District (PID), for a development 7 miles from Aubrey, which is now been annexed into the corporate limits of Aubrey.  Some people who I admire and respect spent a significant amount of time and energy working on this development, and I appreciate their efforts. Although, it is very likely that this will not be my last time to vote no on an item, I do feel compelled to explain the rationale behind this particular decision. 

In short here is the explanation of a PID -

Here is the law that governs a PID -

Essentially, if the majority of the property owners in a defined area agree, they can petition the municipality to create a PID.  The city can then sell bonds on behalf of the development, based on the assessment of the property to fund public improvements.   Which on the surface seems not only reasonable, but a practical way to improve certain neighborhoods or business districts, and the expenses are only the burden of those who directly benefit. However, this not the manner in which it is predominantly being used for here in Texas.  It is being used to install infrastructure for new developments.  This allows larger development with a smaller investment. It is easy to get the majority of the property owners to agree, since it may only be a few individuals or investors.  The money for the infrastructure is raised through the selling of bonds, so the developer are shielded from financial risk as well.

The PID is an alternative to "Special Districts" which essentially serve the same purpose, but are implemented without city involvement.  Special districts are created through the legislature.  There is also some differences in the amount of upfront money that the developer has to put up, as well as the total amount of money that can be raised by selling bonds.  Therefore, it is beneficial for the developer to work with the city and have a PID.  This arrangement can also be a good options for cities, particularly if the property included in the PID is located adjacent to the corporate limits of the city.  This allows the property to be annexed into the city and developed under the standards set forth by the city, as well as other concessions.  I am certainly no expert when it comes to these districts, and may have gotten some aspects of this off a little, but don’t miss the forest for the trees. 

In this particular instance, the development is Jackson Ridge, and it is located seven miles to the Southeast of Aubrey, but has annexed into the city.  This development will consist of 1,394 homes, which is actually more homes than currently exist in Aubrey, so this will more than double the population of the town. 

There were many questions that I had regarding the PID, I knew that the bond debt would be issued by the city, but was not sure how much liability the city would have.  As it turns out, the previous council did a good job of shielding the city of liability.  The city's only obligation will be to issue the debt and perform foreclosure proceedings.  If the development goes according to plans the city should also see some increased tax revenue for the community.  As part of the agreement, the developer deeded the city 23 acres of land, and will turn a portion of this into athletic fields, which will be maintained by the homeowner's association.  There are other things in the agreement, which is the size of an encyclopedia, so I cannot realistically go through everything, but if you wish to read it, you can go to the city for a copy.  In theory this should not impact the current Aubrey residents through higher taxes. 

With all of these perks, you might ask what is not like about this development?  Why would I vote “no” for something on the surface looks so beneficial to the city?  As I explained to those in attendance, I am fundamentally opposed to this kind of development.  Quasi-governmental entities and public/private partnerships get some of the privileges of government with none of transparency requirements.  Also, this limits the ability of traditional developers to stay in business.  It becomes more about getting the district approved by the state or local government and less about developing the land in a quality manner and building a good product. 

When this development began, I was under the impression that the city would have to issue around $10,000,000.00 of bond debt for this development, which I believe to be excessive to "offset" development costs for a development this size.  So when the final numbers came out to be $ 55,000,000.00 in bond debt, this was simply more than I could support.  To put that number into perspective, with 1394 lots being developed, that is around $ 40,000.00 of debt per lot, which technically is more than each will likely sell for.  So the developer will not make his money selling lots, he will make money by the city issuing bonds and turning the money over to him.  It is not the developer's business model that will make this development successful, but rather the ability to get politicians to approve this massive debt.  I made a commitment to not approve any debt that would raise the Aubrey citizen’s taxes. 

Having served in local government during the 2008 downturn, I saw firsthand that developers will pull the plug and file bankruptcy the moment things do not look good.  This protects them from deep losses, and this will be the same should we have another downturn.  However, in this case Aubrey will be the ones that will have to do the foreclosure proceedings. 

Everyone is also acting as though this is free money.  However, history has told us there is no such thing as a free lunch.   Each of the 1394 lots will be assessed with an approximately $ 40,000.00 fee, so by the time it is all said and done each person that buys a home in this development will pay around $ 50,000.00 above the original selling price of the home.  This does not include any home owner's association fees, etc.  So the homeowner's in this development will pay for ball fields and infrastructure; it is not free money. If the economy turns south, the developers and investors, walk away, the bond holders are holding the bag, and the city will be doing a lot of foreclosure proceedings.      

The person who buys a home in this development will be notified at closing of the assessment. Not sure what that looks like and whether it is clear or obscure how much extra they will have to pay for their home.  Frankly that would not change my opinion either way.

It seems that whenever you take exception to something or ask questions, everyone triggers that you’re "anti" something.  Therefore, it has been suggested that I am "anti" growth, and that is simply inaccurate.  I moved to Aubrey for the same reason that everyone else did; the small town feel and good schools.  However, growth is coming, and you can either both plan and be a part of the growth, or you can deal with the outcome of the growth. We absolutely need quality growth, which makes this community stronger.  It is very difficult to run a city on property taxes alone, you need sales tax.
One reason commonly given for cities to become part of developments like this is that if they are part of the city, they have to meet the city's construction standards.  The argument is that if they develop outside of the city they may have shoddy building standards that will drive down property values, increase crime, etc.  Which could be true if the development was adjacent to the city's corporate limits; however, in this case the development is 7 miles from the city center, and it is doubtful that most people in Aubrey even know where this development is, much less being impacted one way or the other by the development.  Furthermore, there will also be zero impact to the Aubrey business community from this population growth.    

Another aspect to this is that the number of rooftops will more than double in Aubrey. Once this development is completed, the demographics of Aubrey will change considerably. Also, in 10 years it is likely the controlling votes of this community will be 7 miles from the actual city center.  The legacy Aubrey citizen may be along for the ride at that point.  Which may be good or it bad, history will be the judge of that. 

Immediately after the meeting, I was asked by a local reporter if we should expect to see more votes on principle? My answer, was of course yes.  If we do not have a set of principles that we act by, then eventually nothing matters.  I am sure that there will be an occasion when I will hold my nose and vote yes on an item, but I will always make principled decisions.  What you believe in should be something deeper than a political speech.      

In defense of those who did support this, I understand their point of view.  One of the reasons I ran for office again, was the weak financial situation that the city was in.  We have a massive debt per capita, and our income simply can’t support the things that need to be done in this community.  The good ole’ boys (and girls) that have run this town for so long has mismanaged basically every aspect of the local government.  So there was a feeling that something needed to be done immediately to get the city out of the ditch we were in.  And if the economy in this area continues down the same path, the city will benefit financially from this.  So although I can’t support this, I understand why others did.  

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Back in The Game.

I know I'm a little late in writing this.

When I moved from DISH, TX to Aubrey, TX in the spring of 2011, the last thing that I wanted to do
was run for elected office again. After serving 6 years as a local elected official, frankly I was worn
out. Serving as an elected official in a small town is a voluntary position. In DISH, we had such a
small budget, that we had no full time staff, so although we had a very talented staff, they only
worked a couple of days a week. Therefore, I performed basically all of the functions of the local
government. On top of that, we were leading the battle for responsible oil and gas development. So
after two years as a town commissioner and four years as mayor, working full time, etc, I was was in
need of a break.

Wherever I traveled and wherever I went, there were always people asking me what was next? I
never went completely off the radar, but I certainly put more attention to my family and my career. As part of my public speaking circuits, one of the things that I constantly encouraged people to do is to  run for public office. I believe deep down, that the only way we can take our country back, is to have more common people serving as elected officials. People who are honest and not interested in
money or power, and remember where they came from. Unfortunately, many that migrate to elected
positions, have something to gain from their service, and work to increase their own net worth, as
opposed to truly serving their communities and constituents. The voter turnout is typically so low,
that they often get away with it.

Many expected me to seek a higher office than local government. Unfortunately, statewide or
national campaigns are time consuming and expensive. So without finding some special interest
sugar daddy, most normal working class people simply can't afford to run for those offices. Even
some of the local offices in the bigger cities can fit into this category. However, in the smaller towns it is affordable and practical to run for office. This is also a place where you can really make a
difference if you want to. We can take our country back one small town at a time.

When we decided to move from DISH, our first choice was another small town in Denton County,
Aubrey. Aubrey was located in the same general area, but 15-20 miles from any active oil and gas
development. Aubrey is also home to numerous large horse farms, so we had always liked the area.
Both of our children played sports in Aubrey, and it was our first choice to move.

I have continued to work on property rights issues, mainly the overuse and abuse of eminent domain.
One aspect of this was to have local governments pass resolutions or ordinances that rejects the use
of eminent domain for economic development. This took me to the Aubrey City Hall, in order to see if the local officials would be interested in passing this resolution, which they did. This led to me getting know my local elected officials and also the issues they were facing, and it also gave me the itch to serve again. Several current and former local officials encouraged me to run again for local office.

We all have busy lives and the thought of voluntarily taking on an additional task is more than many
can bear. Most of us are busy with the hustle and bustle and simply trying to make ends meat.
Therefore, it is understandable that many people want to be left alone. However, I think it is
imperative for us common folk to get involved and stay involved. So I would encourage everyone out
there to get involved in the political process in some manner.

After consulting with my close friends and family, I decided to run for local office again here in Aubrey, TX. There were three vacant positions that were up for election in May of 2015, and strangely enough all three were vacant; mayor and two council seats. Although several people encouraged me to run for mayor, a sitting councilwoman had already announced the she would running for mayor. Although, she did not support me during this election, I chose not to seek the mayor's seat, but rather support her as mayor. Therefore, I ran for a city council seat.

The seat that I was running for was the only contested seat, so I had to run a campaign. I sat down
and talked with my opponent and found him to be a very nice and intelligent person. I likely would
have supported him if he had not run against me. He was also a gentleman during the campaign.
Hopefully he will continue to stay involved, and consider a run in the future.

During my campaign, I knocked on around 800 doors here in Aubrey. Many seemed to appreciate the
fact that I would come and talk to them and listen to their concerns, while others seemed bothered by
it. It disappointed me that when given the opportunity to talk to the person that would vote on their
property tax rate, decide whether their road gets repair and determine the future of the city, they
chose not to. My goal over the next two years, will be to get more and more people involved in the
community and hopefully get a larger number of to vote. We had around 14% voter turnout in this
election, which actually wasn't bad for this area.

I am extremely appreciative of the people of Aubrey, TX for giving me the opportunity to serve them
for this two year term. I commit to do my best to make decisions that will benefit the community as a
whole. Hopefully, there will be greater attendance and involvement in the council meetings. I
committed to making my around knocking on doors and establishing an email list. I will do this in the
coming weeks and months. Should you wish to join this email list, just send me an email at Together we bargain, divided we beg.

Friday, May 15, 2015

SB 474 Texas House Committee Hearing

I wanted to let you know that we have finally gotten a house hearing on SB 474, which would level the playing field for those who are subjected to eminent domain.  Please take a moment and call the members of this committee.  The hearing is on Monday May 18, 2015, and we must get out of committee on Monday if it has a chance to become law.  We have never been this close before, so please urge the chairman to put it up for a vote on Monday. 

Land and Resource Management Committee-
Position                 Member
Chair:                       Rep. Joe Deshotel - (512) 463-0662
Vice Chair:               Rep. Ed Thompson - (512) 463-0707
Members:                 Rep. Cecil Bell - (512) 463-0650
                                Rep. John Cyrier - (512) 463-0682
                                Rep. Matt Krause - (512) 463-0562
                                Rep. Eddie Lucio III - (512) 463-0606
                                Rep. Scott Sanford - (512) 463-0356

Monday, May 11, 2015

Election Results Aubrey, TX City Council Place 4

I want to thank everyone for their support, the results are in and I received almost 63% of the votes cast.  I should take office on May 19, 2015.  I expected this race to be much closer, but the overwhelming support gives me confidence in moving Aubrey forward.  As I discussed with you, I will send out agendas when they are posted (at least 72 hours prior to the meeting) so that you can keep up with the latest happenings.  Again, I sincerely appreciate the support, I am honored. 

Monday, April 27, 2015

Don’t Forget to Vote

Don’t Forget to Vote

Early Voting Has Started:

Monday - Saturday - April 27–May 2, 8am – 5pm

Monday – Tuesday - May 4–5, 7am-7pm

Local Early Voting Location:
Steven E Copeland Government Center - 1400 FM 424, Cross Roads, TX

For more information on early voting locations go to

Election Day is May 9, 2015 and the Aubrey election will be held at the:
 Aubrey Library/Community Center –
226 Countryside Dr., Aubrey, TX

It is imperative that we get out the vote, please make every effort to take a few minutes and vote. 

Saturday, April 4, 2015

Respect for Police Officers

Although I have been critical of Police Departments in the past, I want to make sure that it is understood that this criticism was directed specifically at the Northeast Police Department of Krugerville and Crossroads, TX, not police in general.  The real intent of the criticism was not even directed at the police department or officers, but rather the elected officials that formed this department, which they report to.  The elected officials are the ones who encourage the predatory activities they participate in.   

I have the utmost respect for our police that serve and protect us across the nation every day.  I do believe that police officers should be held accountable for crimes they commit, but we should not let a few bad apples taint our opinion of police officers as a whole.  For the most part officers serve and protect us, risking their lives for far too little compensation.  

Already in Texas, there has been almost 300 deaths in traffic accidents in 2015.  We all have been subject to idiot drivers, which obviously has something more important to be doing that the rest of us.  They drive recklessly and put the rest of us in danger.  These drivers are the reason we need laws, police, and air bags for that matter.  Therefore it is clear that traffic laws are in place for a reason, and they must be enforced.

I particularly respect our hometown police force here in Aubrey, TX.  From my home office, I can see them drive through our neighborhood a couple of times a day checking things over in my neighborhood.  We have a very low crime rate and our local officers are the reason for that.  Beyond that, from my exposure to the Aubrey Police, they are generally nice and courteous people, who care about the community that they work in.  This is not just business for the Aubrey Police Department.  What you don't see here, is them operating a predatory speed trap or some other "gotcha" practices.  I am sure the Aubrey Police do bring in some revenue for the city, but am also certain that revenue is not their main purpose or intent. 

They Aubrey Police Department is what you want for your hometown police department, and I thank them for their service.