In Lubbock’s 2026 local election, city residents will be voting on council members for Districts 1, 3, and 5, as well as electing a mayor.
On April 15, Texas Tech Public Media and the Lubbock-Avalanche Journal hosted a forum discussion with all four of Lubbock's mayoral candidates for the 2026 local election:
- Peggy Bohmfalk
- Mark McBrayer
- Stephen Sanders
- G. Todd Winans
The forum consisted of a series of structured questions, followed by a selection of voter questions taken by survey from event attendants, along with listeners and readers of Texas Tech Public Media and the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal.
The discussion was moderated by Lubbock Avalanche-Journal reporter Mateo Rosiles and KTTZ reporter Brad Burt.
Early voting in Lubbock’s local elections runs April 20 through April 28. And Election Day is May 2.
The following transcript has been edited for clarity:
Adam Young: Thank you all for joining us for tonight's forum of candidates for the 2026 Lubbock mayoral election. I'm Adam Young, editor at the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal. This event is a collaboration of the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal and Texas Tech Public Media.
We are joined by all four candidates on the ballot this year: Peggy Bohmfalk, Mayor Mark McBrayer, Stephen Sanders, and G. Todd Winans. They will provide more detailed introductions in a moment.
Tonight will consist of a series of structured questions followed by a selection of voter questions taken by survey from listeners and readers of Texas Tech Public Media and the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal. After questions are over, feel free to meet and greet candidates and ask them your own questions. Our moderators for the panel tonight are reporters, Mateo Rosiles of the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, and Brad Burt with KTTZ. And at this point, I will turn it over to them.
Mateo Rosiles: Good evening, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Members of our panel tonight, we will start with one minute for opening statements before we get into questions, where each candidate will have one minute to answer. First Response will go to a new candidate, each time, rotating left to right.
Brad Burt: We'll start with Ms. Peggy Bohmfalk. Go ahead and introduce yourself.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Hello. My name is Peggy Bohmfalk. I'm a Christian conservative, a single mom, a disabled vet and a proud resident of Lubbock for over five years now, I grew up in a working class family in South Florida and joined the Army in 2000 where I served as a counterintelligence Special Agent in Russian linguist. After my military service, I returned to Texas and worked a variety of jobs. I hold a bachelor's degree in liberal arts with an elementary teaching certification.
I'm running because I love Lubbock. It's the best place I've ever lived, not just because of its affordability and design, but because of the character of its people. As Lubbock continues to grow rapidly, I want to make sure we protect what makes the city special. My three top priorities are public safety, economic – responsible economic growth and protecting affordability, especially for families in the neighborhoods served by LISD.
Public safety comes first. We need real, measurable action to reduce violent crime, organized crime, theft, burglary and homelessness across every district. Safer neighborhood, strength of communities attract investment and improve the quality of life for everyone. Moreover, we need responsible growth, which is just as important, I believe. The city should reinstate impact fees so new development pays its fair share. Without them, the financial burden falls on existing homeowners and renters. This affects every Lubbock resident, not just one district. Finally, we need to – we must grow smart. Too many long established neighborhoods inside Loop 289 are being left behind while resources are concentrated elsewhere. Strong cities invest in existing infrastructure, support infill development and ensure growth benefits all residents, not just a few, with thoughtful planning fiscal responsibility and fair leadership, Lubbock can grow without sacrificing its neighborhoods, schools, or affordability. Thank you for having me.
Brad Burt: Mr. Mark McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Alright, thank you. Yes, I've been the mayor for the past two years here in Lubbock. Before that I was two years on the city council. I've been a resident of Lubbock since I was four years old, a long time ago. My wife grew up here. We went to Monterey High School. Graduated from Texas Tech. I graduated from Texas Tech law school. My kids live here and my grandkids live here. So Lubbock is my home, it's so important to me, and I wanted to find a way to serve and make sure it continues to be the wonderful kind of community it has been.
I'm running again, because I feel like I've accomplished some things my first term that were important. I made some commitments to the public during my first term. I feel like I have kept those commitments during my first time. But there are other things accomplished. We need to continue to work on public safety by increasing the size of our police force, and we need to continue to move forward on development in our communities and our neighborhoods and downtown are very important to me as well. And that's it's an ongoing process. I want to see some things through, and I want to begin some other projects. So I'm looking forward to serving as mayor for another two years if the citizens elect me.
Brad Burt: Mr. Stephen Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yes. My name Stephen Sanders, I'm running for mayor here in Lubbock, because Lubbock deserves better than the status quo. The status quo has gotten us to where we are right now, in particularly right now - this last cycle, we pulled out about $11.8 million from our reserves, and we also issued another $106 million in debt, new debt. So we know we're continuing to build debt, and we've got to find a different way out. I created a plan. It's a $100 million plan. It's two phases, it's through festivals and through inland port. The 48 million will come from the festivals, although I'm projected to do three which could possibly be $150 million. And then the inland port, everywhere else I've seen it done, they create about $150 million in revenue. So I believe we do some really great things. We're in a deficit right now. We have been for a long time. And so I'm trying to make sure that we get out of debt so I don't have to raise your taxes. My money will keep your taxes low, so that's what I'm going to do. Thank you.
Brad Burt: Mr. G. Todd Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Thank you. My name is Gerald Todd Winans. My mother told everybody when I was born I would not be called Gerald. I would be called Todd. And so I go by Todd, my middle name, thus putting it on the ballot: G. Todd. Todd is what everyone calls me. My grandbaby, my five beautiful children, my wife, all my family live in Lubbock, Texas, minus my second son, who hopefully will come back when the new HEB comes into town.
The reason that I'm running for mayor is I'm just a citizen of Lubbock, Texas. I'm a dad, I'm a son, brother, I'm a grandpa, I'm a cousin. And my wife is here, my friends are here, and my friends tell me all the time all of the struggles and the things that they don't like about this town that we live in, that I love. And if you go back to the basics of what a mayor or a councilman or council members' position or role is, it's to be a public servant. So I'm here to be the one that gets what you want the citizens want done.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. And now we move on to prepared questions, starting with Mr. McBrayer. As mayor, what would your top three priorities for the city be?
Mark McBrayer: Well, a top priority last time and this time will be public safety. I think probably almost everybody will say that, but you have to have a plan for what you want to do with that. So my goal for the next two years is to add a significant number of new police officers to our police force. Last year, we had a significant decrease in crime across all areas. That was a good trend. We want to keep that up. But that was a trend that was also true across most of the country. And so there are certain kinds of crime though, that are unique to Lubbock, and you can only affect those crime rates by having patrol officers on the street, and that's where we need to increase the number of police force. A significant number would be somewhere around 25 police officers, because we only have about 20 to 25 on patrol at any given time to cover our city that's 145 square miles. So that's my first priority. And you have other priorities, but we have to be able to do that first. And I believe the police will come to us with a plan, and hopefully the council will vote for that plan. But the plan, as far as I understand it at the moment, will involve the increase that I'm looking for.
Brad Burt: Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yes, my top three priorities are fiscal sanity. We've not been able to balance budget for quite some time, and so I want to change the city charter - or upgrade the city charter to force the council to balance the budget first before we do anything else or we try to take on any new debt or any new project, we have to balance the budget. Because, just like all of the citizens that live here in the city, their families have to balance the budget for their homes. So we should be balancing the budget for the city as well and living it within our means.
My second priority is public safety. You can't do public safety without money. It's going to take money, so we have to get our financials together. The third thing is my $100 million plan, which will help us be able to have the funding that we need. For example, if we bring some, if we bring people in for our music festival, which will be possibly 60,000 people, if they spend $800 over the weekend, that's $48 million. That money will hit the first - that will hit the small businesses first, and then we'll it'll come to us in two batches: our hotel occupancy tax and our sales tax, which will allow us to fix our streets, get more police, and do all the things that we need. We need about 30 to 50 police.
Brad Burt: Thank you. Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Number one priority for me is going to be the financial stability. We've gotta look at the budget, and I believe that if we incorporate citizens into the budget, we've gotta we've gotta be transparent. We gotta be open. We gotta let them see what we've what the city spend on, and what we haven't spent on, and where the money's going and where the money is not going, that is imperative.
Number two is public safety. I have spent a lot of time working construction jobs, being in construction, doing inspection for gigantic projects. Safety starts with the individual, so public safety needs to be revisited as a whole, to put it on everybody in the city, every citizen.
Number three is economic development, and we have to again, increase participation from citizens - citizens that own small businesses, citizens that own large businesses, citizens that don't own a business - so that we can increase the ideas to make it bigger and try new things.
Brad Burt: Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Yes, like everyone else, my top concern is public safety. I do support expanding the police force, and also we have to deal with homelessness. I mean, we're just kicking the can down the road. We have to find a way to make Lubbock inviting for new business growth is all about limiting crime, theft, burglary, all the different crimes and vagrancy. I mean, I don't see how we're how we're going to achieve my other two goals - which is balance, balance the budget, and infusing that growth into all of Lubbock - unless we deal with the crime. They're all related. We're not going to get the economic investment when nobody wants to move to Lubbock because there are homeless people everywhere, shootings, crime, and the schools are failing. We do need to - I mean, Lubbock has a great plan, the 2040 Plan. The only problem with it, it was written back in 2018 and we're not doing the plan.
Brad Burt: Thank you. For our next question: As the Hub City of the South Plains for a lot smaller surrounding communities. What do you see as Lubbock's obligation or opportunity to the greater West Texas community? We'll start with Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yes, that's a great question. My inland port, that I want to create here in Lubbock, will allow us to take advantage of the I-27 and the transportation market, so that we can bring in people to our city, and they're able to use our docks. So that money - unlike the first part of my plan in the festivals - it won't hit the small businesses or anything like that. That'll go directly to the city. That's direct funding that we can use. So an example of what that is is kind of like the Walmart distribution center. I said we would be that where the entire city and the entire West Texas, so that people could come to us and be able to get their supplies moved around and do all of that kind of stuff.
I also believe we're the medical hub, and so we need to expand the Medical District and make sure that we are giving everybody an opportunity to get medical care, top notch medical care from our wonderful UMC, Texas Tech.
Brad Burt: Thank you. Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Yes. I believe there are multiple opportunities in Lubbock, Texas - because of its location - to expand and bring in more business, bring in more tourism. We have festivals in Lubbock, and I don't think the city has expanded on those to totally utilize what we can get from them. As far as revenue for the city, we have empty entertainment facilities on the east side that aren't being used, so we need to increase the participation of the citizens to bring in talent to Lubbock and use what we already have.
Brad Burt: Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Absolutely, we are a hub of entertainment. And I mean, people come come here to go shopping because they don't have a mall. I mean, the great retail opportunities. See a show at the Buddy Holly Center – or Hall. For their medical care. I said shop and get deals, because they don't have a Walmart. It's actually – I see [unclear] place all the time. They come here to get what they can't, you know, back in their hometown. So we need to encourage them to stay and shop and staycation. And yes, it's a win-win for everybody.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Ms. Bohmfalk. Mr. Mayor.
Mark McBrayer: Well, in terms of responsibilities or obligations to other communities around us, Lubbock is a good neighbor to our surrounding communities. Recently, we worked out an arrangement with Wolfforth. Used to be, if you lived in Lubbock, you had to drive 10 miles to cotton fields to get to the next town, at least - or 20 - but now you just drive from one end to the other. If you're talking about Wolfforth, they had water - some serious water issues and sewer issues, and we worked with them to solve those problems for their citizens, because they're our neighbors. Lubbock is so good about being prepared for our water needs for the future with our 100-year water plan, that we actually have excess water that we can use to assist some cities. We're very cautious with how we use that, but we want to be good neighbors. Shallowater is facing some issues as well, and we're in conversations with them to help them deal with some of those issues. They have some serious water issues as well. So we'll continue to be a good neighbor. And the reason we can be a good neighbor is because we work so hard ourselves to be prepared in the area of water. Of course, there are other areas that we can serve, but I think that's probably the most important thing when you think about the communities around us, is water.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Our next question: With the public safety concerns like crime and stray animals, how do you respond to this perception of 'Lubbock isn't safe' from a tourism perspective, but also those who are looking to move here or come to school here at Texas Tech University or Lubbock Christian University. We'll start with Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Yes. Being in Lubbock for 28 years, 27 -almost 28 years, I lived on the South side of town. My vehicle was broken into. Things were stolen out multiple times, out of out of my driveway. So it is a concern and I do believe that we need more officers on the on the street, and we also need more citizens. We need citizens to be involved with policing their neighborhoods and being involved with being kind to one another. You know? If you you have a neighbor that you don't talk to, you don't know their needs. If they won't talk to you, then they don't know your needs. So we've got to start being kind to one another, and that will increase our presence as a people, along with the police officers.
Brad Burt: Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Yes, it's more than just a perception of crime. You can go online - I did before I moved here - and said it was like top in the nation for auto theft. I mean, a lot of it's true. There is crime, the only issue is to deal with it. We do need to expand the police force and we do need more community involvement. Yes and homelessness, we do need a place for homeless people to go. I passed two just on the way here. I mean, I was staying at the Elegante hotel, and I went to check out the park across the street and saw some homeless people kicking in an abandoned building door, and it's just not what you want people to see when they come. Yes, we just have to deal with it. We have to deal with the crime and the homelessness.
Brad Burt: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Alright. Well, I've kind of already addressed this a little bit with the plan to add significant patrol officers, because that's there's a specific kind of crime that is endemic in Lubbock that drives a lot of the crime that I think concerns us, and that's gang and drug related crime. Just a couple of months ago, we inaugurated, I was there for the ribbon cutting on our new TAG center, the Texas Anti-Gang Center, which is a coordinated effort between our police, our sheriff's department, our Department of Public Safety, and federal officers targeting gang violence. And they've had a lot of good success with that recently, rounding up a motorcycle gang, sex trafficking group here. So being able to identify that is a key, because that's where you drive it down. The kind of random crime that is, of course, a problem in any community is not something you can really solve with more police, but there is a certain kind you can, and we need to stay focused on that. I'm very interested in our police being able to utilize drone technology to be able to - we have these teen - mass gatherings of teens or adults that have developed into problems and shootings in the past, to be able to help our police understand what's going on in those situations. We have an excellent police chief. We have an excellent police force. They're well trained. We just need more of them. And I agree, homelessness become an increasingly difficult problem to deal with. I can talk about that later. I don't want to take up more time.
Brad Burt: Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yeah, so public safety has been an issue for us. Mr. McBrayer was saying that crime has gone down across the city earlier, and honestly, we got a D rating. Our city got a D rating, which is very unsafe. We're only safer than about 12% of the other cities in our state. And so how do we fix that? Well, it goes back to a really basic thing that a lot of my Conservative colleagues don't like to talk about, which is things - amenities for our children to do, our kids to do. When you don't have anything to do, you get mischievous. That's - I was a kid before. I know that's the way it is. But more importantly, if we're going to actually make a difference in our communities, we have to invest in the police. Right now, they're coming to drain our - they're doing a drain brain. They come and use our academy, and they take off to a bigger city. So we've got to be more attractive when it comes to our pay, so that the police will stay with us and we won't lose them. That's really one of the biggest problems that we have. They're not staying with us because our pay is not competitive, even though we have raised the pay. That's something that we have to look at again. But we need outside revenue to be able to do any of that, because our money is already tied up.
Brad Burt: Staying on the topic of public safety: As mayor, what would you do to ensure that police officers, firefighters, animal control officers are staying within the city, but also attract new people to these positions. We'll start with Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Well, I think, yeah, they are – police officers are overworked and underpaid, and it's a dangerous job, and it faces burnout. And probably one of the reasons they're burned out is because there's not enough of them. They're trying to deal with too large of a population and too many calls. I mean, they, you know – we should look at increasing the pay, to increase retention, but they need backup. They need more of them.
Brad Burt: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Well, we've had a great deal of success with the program we implemented last year was our lateral hire program, and this allows police officers to come from other cities. We've had them come from Colorado. We've had them come from Big Spring. Had them come from Amarillo. They come to Lubbock, and they maintain their rank, but the rank doesn't necessarily establish their pay. They fall wherever they fall within our system, but we've been very successful about that.
The advantage is you get an already trained officer in here, and you skip that upfront training cost. When you hire a new recruit, you’ve got to go through a long period of training before they ever even hit the street, to be effective. So this has been very effective in allowing us we don't really – we're not having to drain on our police force at the moment. Morale is higher than it's been a very long time with our under our chief. Our pay is very competitive at this point. But we're also in, as I mentioned earlier, the meet and confer program, which the city and the police association work together to figure out what they need and what we can do within terms of our budget. That will come to us in the budget cycle, we'll be able to discuss that and vote on that, and I believe that is a real significant way for us to be able to maintain the levels of policing that we need in the city.
Brad Burt: Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yeah, so right now we have a 454 – give or take – police on our staff currently, and they're responding to about 400,000 calls annually. It's actually a little bit more than that. So they're overrun, they're overworked. And so we've got to be more attractive. I think one of the ways that we can be more attractive is to make our city more attractive, in general terms. There's really not a whole lot for people to do when you come to Lubbock . And so that's why we can't keep the students here. That's why we can't keep anybody, because it's not a fun city. That's one thing I want to do to for our city, is to make our city, a fun city to be in, a safe city to be in, and also a financially stable city to be in.
So all of these things work hand in hand, but we have to work really hard at getting the budget set so that we can be able to allocate monies the way we need to. Right now, we're on a tight ship, every time we look up, we're borrowing money. So we have to stop borrowing money or we won't ever have the necessary police that we need. No matter where they come from, what program they're in, we're not going to be able to pay them, and we know that for a fact.
Brad Burt: Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: I'm in agreement with my three colleagues here. 11 years ago, I applied to be a police officer in the city of Lubbock. Passed the written test, flying colors. Went through the agility and the physical training portion, and I failed. And so I trained and I trained and I went back, you know, with the allotted time that the city gives, and I passed the second time around. I passed everything except for the run. I could not compete with the younger police officers, me being 38 at the time, to make it in the time. I ran, I ran alongside of them, but I wasn't able to compete. So we might need to adjust our standards for police officers, that might be able to give us a better platform or a better variety of officers. And not every officer needs to be able to run a mile and a half in three minutes flat. That's an exaggeration, but just an example.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. As a college town, Lubbock attracts a lot of fresh talent and ideas, but loses them once they graduate. What do you propose on ways Lubbock can keep these graduates here, besides the low cost of living. We'll start with Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Alright. Well, about two weeks ago, I sat down with the chancellor and the president of Texas Tech had dinner with them to talk about that very thing, to see how we can – Lubbock and Tech can work better together. We all understand how important Tech is to Lubbock. Lubbock looks to Tech for a lot of things. I want to kind of change that dynamic a little bit, to where we have a little bit more of a mutual relationship, so that the Tech also understands how important Lubbock is to it.
And to do that, some people have suggested some things, the quality of life here are things that students will look for. Job opportunities is the first thing. Students need to be able to come out, find a job, find a job that pays well enough they can stay here in Lubbock and have a job at a salary and live well because we have such a low cost of living here, for residences, rent, for groceries, everything else. So a better working relationship with Tech is something that I'm working on, and I think that's going to happen over the next year. It's a real commitment to mine.
But we're finding that more and more Tech students are staying here in Lubbock, or they will come back here after they left and gone someplace else, because they realize that Lubbock really was a pretty good place to be, something we've always known. So.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yes. So I don't know if many of you know, but the person who created Yeti, he went to Texas Tech. And he left. He left; he went away. And the problem is that – we need to incentivize these people to stay here, we're losing the next best thing every time people leave here. These young kids that are graduating are really intelligent people, and I think they will help us with economic development. But we have to be shovel ready. Each part – we need things in East Lubbock. We need things in North Lubbock. Let's give these kids an opportunity to create a business in those parts of town. But it has to be shovel ready. And not just southwest Lubbock, because it costs way more to open a business out there. And then, if we want them to go downtown, we need to incentivize them so that they'll stay with us.
We don't give them any opportunities. We got all this red tape. We've got to cut the red tape. It's so hard to open a business here in Lubbock, you know, you gotta have an inspection for this, an inspection for that. You gotta pay this fee for this, and fee for this fee for that. There's so many fees that before you know it, you can't even make your first payment on your business, on the place that you're renting. So we've gotta cut the red tape. That's how we're going to keep them here. But right now, they don't – they can't stay here. They can go find it cheaper to do it somewhere else, in Dallas, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio. So we just have to give them an opportunity. And what I like to call that is the Silicon Prairie for the kids. We want to keep them here. We don't want them to go anywhere. So we have to incentivize them; keep them here. Show them some love. Show them the good West Texas, Lubbock love.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: I love Texas Tech and I just see more opportunity from what Mark said, you know, with conversations with Tech and the City, you know, using a mutual front to build up the city that Tech is in. It was Lubbock before it was Texas Tech. And so I believe it should be a mutual together love, you know, incorporating the students and the faculty at Tech that live in Lubbock, with Lubbock and the citizens of Lubbock to support Tech. I think that if we continue to pursue that, we'll get some participation from citizens and students at Tech.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Well, I'm not really sure that's a problem that City needs to address. It'll occur naturally. We need to just focus on keeping Lubbock affordable and in bringing new business into Lubbock so they have jobs to go into. I think that's the main reason they leave is because, you know, Dallas has a lot of big companies and corporations that we just, you know, are not here and can't be here because of the size. But we do need to focus just on bringing large businesses and more opportunities in, and that's going to, you know, help us get all kinds of tax revenue and keep Lubbock affordable.
Brad Burt: The trade of pools for splash pads, remains controversial among citizens. Would you consider a project to reopen or build new pools in the city. We'll start with Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yeah. So my conservative colleagues do not want a pool. Every time I talk about it, they get really upset. But you know who does want a pool? The citizens. The citizens want a pool. And that's what's going to set me apart from the other candidates. I understand that the conservatives don't want that to happen. But guess what? We have to think about everybody in the city, and that's what people want. We can't fall into the hands of the builders and the developers and all of those people who want us to do a certain thing. We need to do what the people want us to do.
My plan is very simple. It's a P3 plan: it's a private-public partnership. That way it's not on the city completely. So the way we do it very quickly: if you look at the football field, at the stadium that we have, there's ‘Plains National Bank’ up there. Well, they paid a pretty penny to be on, to be up there. So they'll do a partnership with us. They'll help us build it. We'll provide the land, because we have the land already, and then we'll work with a group like YWCA to get them to run the project so that it operates like a business every day. They'll get to keep some money from the income that comes in, and they'll be able to take care of the staff. That means the city is not paying for that staff. The staff is paid for through YWCA. So it won't hurt the city.
And then the second part is, how do we pay for that? How do we pay the electric bill? Well, we don't have any trees here in Lubbock. We never have. And so we're going to use solar power. We’ll cut our bills in half, and that's how we're going to be able to do that. That's going to be really important. But I am going to push as hard as I can to get a pool open, some kind of way with my colleagues, without – without hurting the city, and I promise that I want to get that done.
Brad Burt: Thank you. Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Yeah, I want to do what the citizens, you know, want. And the only way to accomplish that is to get participation from the citizens. They need to be – citizens need to get involved with what's going on in the City of Lubbock, with the city government, and tell us what we want. Because, I mean, that's my platform. I'm just an average person, you know, just like the average citizen of Lubbock, Texas, trying to do what the citizens of Lubbock, Texas want. Personal opinion: I want the pools back. I don't want splash pads. I want the pools. I like swimming. I like going to the pool and hanging out. But that's me. And you know, if there's a majority of people that – you know, citizens of Lubbock want that, then that's what we should do. Not what the council wants, or the mayor wants, what the citizens want.
Brad Burt: Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Well, I'd love to have a pool. I think most people would love to have a pool. I'd also [like to] have an expo center. I wish we could reopen Joyland. And I don't know. We want all these things, we just can't pay for these things. The city is broke. We're talking about, you know, not raising property tax and staying at the same growth, but we can't, I mean, how we're going to do a pool or pay for anything if we can't even fund our police? We are broke and it’s because we are subsidizing all this new infrastructure. We just can't afford it. We are broke and all the time, more bond funds and that's more debt to service that comes out of the general pool and all our funds. I mean, we’ve just got to balance our budget first, and then reconsider our pool and all these other things that I know the citizens want and would be a benefit.
Brad Burt: Thank you. Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Well, I don't think we're broke, but I do kind of agree with Ms. Bohmfalk. It's not something I believe we should try to do, at least not at this point. The splash pads have actually been very popular. Of course, they are popular with a younger group of people, but the fact of the matter is, when those kids are there and their parents are there, they're not causing problems.
A lot of people don't know why we closed our pools. There are a lot of reasons we closed our pools. They were old and we didn't take care of them. That's on the city, that's on our past councils. But they're very expensive to maintain. They never pay for themselves. They have never paid for themselves, any of them. We had leakage problems. We had equipment problems. We couldn't get lifeguards because lifeguards did not want to work at our pools, because the kids who show up at the pools are unruly and will not follow their instructions. It was just, it was a nightmare for us as a cit. And so when you start looking at ‘Okay, what can we do to provide a water opportunity for our citizens?’ The water – splash pads made perfect sense, because we don't have the problems. We don't need lifeguards for them. They're open five months out of the year, instead of just two months or two and a half months out of the year. They make much more economic sense for a city. And we were able to spread them around. They cost less, we can spread them around in different districts.
One of the questions I would ask Mr. Sanders or anybody else who wants to build a pool is, you know, towns around us spend, you know, about $4-5 million to build a small pool for like Levelland or someplace like that. Lubbock's pool would have to be much larger. Where are you going to put that pool that makes everybody happy? Are you going to build four or five, $10 million pools around the city? And where is that money going to come from?
Stephen Sanders: I just told you where it's going to come from.
Mark McBrayer: I don't believe you did tell me where it was going to come from.
Stephen Sanders: Well, actually, I did.
Mark McBrayer: You said ‘It’s going to pay for itself.’ And it’s not going to pay for itself.
Stephen Sanders: Public-private partnership. I did say that.
Brad Burt: Let's get this back on track.
Stephen Sanders: And you know we’ll find a place for that.
Brad Burt: Mr. Sanders. Mr. McBrayer.
Stephen Sanders: Just get what the people want.
Mateo Rosiles: Changing topics for a quick second to public health.
With growing health concerns in West Texas, like the rising sexual transmitted diseases and the measles outbreak that we witnessed last year, Lubbock’s Public Health Department has served as a hub for the wider area.
How would you support broader public health and awareness? We'll start with Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Well, you've got to communicate if you want to expand anything, and the only way to communicate properly is to have people gather so that you can communicate properly with them. You can always send mailers. You know, you make telephone recordings and send those to the citizens. But back in 2005, 2006 I was a part of a program that went from hospital to hospital, talking to physicians and nurses about how we identify bacterias and viruses. And so it was a good program, and it's no longer so if we could bring back some programs that pushed to advise people on stuff like that, that would be beneficial for the citizens.
Mateo Rosiles: Ms. Bohmfalk?
Peggy Bohmfalk: I really don't know how to answer that one. What was the question? How to control…
Mateo Rosiles: How would you support broader public health and awareness?
Peggy Bohmfalk: ‘Broader public health and awareness.’ I just… whew. I don’t know. I decline to answer.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: You know, it is a tough question to answer. You know, what role does public health play in your city? We have a great public health department. If you've been to our new building out on 50th Street and Avenue U; I think that was completed about two years ago, and it serves Lubbock and Lubbock County as well. And we also serve outside regions of our West Texas area too, to come in here for services. And we do that largely we're able to serve people who don't live in Lubbock because of grants we get from the federal government.
That was an issue that came up at about two council meetings ago. The question from one of our council people was ‘Why are we paying to serve people who don't live in Lubbock?’ And we were able to show – our health director was able to show that the money we get from the federal government to provide these services actually allows us to serve our citizens and serve other people and still put money into the bucket of what we need here for our health department. We actually, our health director recently won the top award in the state for being the best health director in the state. So I think we're in very good shape here in Lubbock for meeting the needs of our citizens, as far as public health goes. We do have problems with sexually transmitted diseases and other things like that, but I think our health department is doing a very good job with what they can.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yeah, it's no secret that we have an issue with STDs. With the nature of having a college here, it kind of goes with it, and so we've been dealing with that for many years. But I will agree with Mr. McBrayer, we have a wonderful health department who has been working really hard. I remember even back to Covid, how they were able to steer us through that process. So they got the messaging – they have a great foot and handprint on the messaging. They know how to get the message out.
But I would also push us to work more with Texas Tech and do more partnerships, letting them help us with getting the message out, because a lot of that is coming from the college. Not to say that we don't have any issues either. But we also have HIV in our community, and particularly in the Black community. And I want to – I want us as a city to work on trying to identify those people and help them through that process. Because people, they lose their hope and they and it makes people feel really secluded. And so I want us as a city to really reach out to them and give them hope and show them that they can make it through that process. And I think as a city, we should be doing all of that kind of stuff. Nobody likes to talk about that, because it's a hard thing to hear about.
Brad Burt: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Yes sir.
Brad Burt: Staying with public health. What is the city's role in supporting the mental health of our residents? We'll start with Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: City’s role in supporting the mental health? Probably just make it a good, safe, family friendly place to be. Which it pretty much is.
Brad Burt: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Well, again, our public health department does have some services that assist with that. We're not set up really well to deal with mental health as a big, a major issue as a city. That's mainly handled at the moment through our hospitals.
One thing that we have done, though recently again, opened up our – are fixing to open up our StarCare center. When we have people who are homeless or wandering our streets because of mental issues, formerly, the way we had to deal with them was we would arrest them and we’d take them to jail. Well, that's not a good place to take someone who's having mental health problems or alcohol problems, either. And so now this center, when it opens up, will be where those people are taken instead of to jail to find a temporary form of treatment before they can be moved on into the other areas of government that really deal with that issue more than we do, but it is a way for us to better deal with those helping get the need the help that they need immediately and in a setting, in a situation where they can be tended to properly. So I think that's going to be opening up in a month. And so I'm really looking forward to that facility.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. McBrayer. Mr. Sanders?
Stephen Sanders: Yeah, so my plan is – Ms. Bohmfalk talked about the homeless community, and a lot of the homeless people are dealing with mental issues, which is where a lot of those problems come from. And so one thing that I am excited about is Governor Abbott is going to be opening a mental facility here in the area that we'll be able to team up with and be able to get people to help that they need. So they won't be all necessarily on us as a city.
But I think as a city, we have got to empower places like Open Door, agencies like Open Door, who are serving our community already, and help them with some type of funding – and if not with the funding, at least get them to the table, because those agencies feel left out. I talk to them all the time, and I know how they feel. They don't get to have a say in what the plan is for our homeless community. During our recent time, we closed the libraries down when it was real cold, you know, we had to scramble to make a new plan. We need to be prepared. We need to really look at that. And so mental health has a lot to do with all of that, but that really affects our homeless community the most, and we need to be more proactive and not so reactive.
Brad Burt : Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Yeah. This is a difficult question for a candidate for mayor, because it's pointed pointedly at the mayor. You know, who – Mark, great answer, with your answer, because I didn't know. It was good information to get from you.
Mental health is an issue that we have to deal with on a daily basis. And I think that, you know, it starts at home. Let's teach our youth and our teenagers how to handle issues. Because if we don't start there and then get involved with these new programs like Greg Abbott's bringing and the programs that Mark talked about, those are, those are great programs, but let's see if we can combat it at first, at home with the kids.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Lubbock's prairie dogs have become a major issue in city parks and local school districts. How would you work with the school districts to address this issue? Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Figured a prairie dog question would come up. When I was a kid, you know, they were all located in one location, in Prairie Dog Town, and they have spread all over our city. I think there's more of them than there are people living in the city, and I think the city – they think the city belongs to them. They at least think our parks belong to them. Again, I met with our parks director today to talk about the prairie dog problem, and we're going park by park in our lake system to eliminate them. And one of the problems is, if there's an area, private area, or a public school area next door to the city property; we can treat the city's property, but we can't go on private property, a property that doesn't belong to the city.
First of all, there's different kinds of chemicals that can be used in a residential or home setting than what we can use. We have a lot of restrictions, so we have to limit our prairie dog elimination efforts to property that we own. And we can encourage other people, and we try to direct everybody that calls us to pest control companies and places like that, where they can find what can control the pests on their property. But we've tried a number of things over the years, but finally, they've developed a system going through our lake system, a park at a time, moving from North to South, to eliminate them, because you can't skip any area, because they will move quickly back in. We're slowly getting control of it, but it had got way out of hand. It is a concern of mine, because our parks are for our people. They're not for the prairie dogs.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. Sanders?
Stephen Sanders: The prairie dogs are predominantly in East Lubbock. That community has been trying to get help in this regard for quite some time, and quite frankly, there's so many prairie dogs over there that I'm afraid to put a campaign sign. I’m afraid that they'll just take my campaign sign. But we've got to address that. Mr. McBrayer touched on private property, which is definitely an issue; the city can't just go on someone's property and exterminate without the proper permission.
But we also have an issue with the animal community about the burrowing owls that supposedly use these holes, and so they get really upset. So we've got to be able to balance that. We've got to form a committee. I know there's some kind of committee already, but I think we need to expand that committee, and we've got to come to some kind of common ground. Because we don't want them to think we're killing animals, but they are rodents by the textbook, and so we need to make sure we take care of that. My wife stepped in a hole at the fairground and nearly broke her ankle, and so that's when it really hit me. I was like, ‘This is really bad.’ But East Lubbock really needs the most help in that regard, and I'm going to work on that with them.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. Winans?
G. Todd Winans: Yeah. Prairie dogs carry Yersinia pestis. Don't know if anyone knows what Yersinia pestis is: the Black Plague. So, you know, whatever efforts we can continue with that the city already has in place, I'm 100% for. And we need to have relationships with individuals that order the city land, if it's private land, then we can talk to them and ask them to coordinate with us, work with us, compromise with us to eliminate the issue. If there is an issue with prairie dogs on that fine line.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Ms. Bohmfalk?
Peggy Bohmfalk: Yes. I mean, they are an issue, they are destructive, and it is a safety issue. I’ve almost broken my leg in a hole. And they do come up and eat through asphalt and everything. So yes, education and work with private citizens to help control the problem.
Brad Burt: Impact fees were originally proposed as a way to bring the benefits of development from the outer edges of the city back to the older parts of Lubbock. The system was met with significant pushback from developers before it was eventually reduced to zero last year. As mayor, how would you make sure a whole city sees the benefits of Lubbock's growth? We'll start with Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: You know, impact fees are really important, and at a very simple level, I think that question is, that's a high level question, but I want us to explain it to the people at a level where they can understand it. We shouldn't have gotten rid of the impact fees in the first place, we should have leveled the playing ground. I think that it’s a multifaceted thing that the citizens need to help pay for the infrastructure, and the developers need to help pay for the infrastructure. It shouldn't all be on the taxpayer. And they should pay their fair share, because they're going to make millions of dollars after this infrastructure is complete, and this business is up and running. And so it's not fair for the taxpayer to be carrying the bill whenever they're going to be millionaires. We're trying to save the taxpayer money. We're not trying to gouge them, and that's what I'm saying when – if we sell out to the developers and the builders, this is what happens. They are not going to want any impact fees, but we have to have impact fees for things to be fair. We were also able to really get the infrastructure, some infrastructure projects done and in place. Because of those impact fees that we had. It was building up. It was building up. We cut it out before we could really see what it can do and so, but I'm a big advocate for it. I think we can bring it back.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. Sanders. Mr. Winans?
G. Todd Winans: I'm not a politician. I'm just an average, everyday guy that works and goes home and tries to spend time with my family. Impact fees. Does everyone know what an impact fee is? You know what an impact fee is? The ladies in front know what an impact fee is.
Stephen Sanders: They’re smart though.
G. Todd Winans: Right?
Stephen Sanders: They’ve been around. They know.
G. Todd Winans: Okay, what about bonds? Road bonds? Where does that hit us. In our pocketbook? You know, it comes out of our money to build the roads.So it for me when, when I learned about impact fees versus road bonds, it was a no brainer. I don't want to vote on a bond that's going to take money out of my pocket. I would rather vote on impact fees, because impact fees are more communal. It's with the small businesses or the contractors, you know, yeah, they might be citizens, but it's coming from them, not all of the citizens.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. Winans. Ms. Bohmfalk?
Peggy Bohmfalk: I see impact fees as an absolute necessity. I mean, because of the tremendous cost of infrastructure, I think it costs, like, a million dollars to pave one mile of road. And impact fees, I think we're allowed to charge up to 25% of that new infrastructure, by state law – don't quote me on that – for the cost of the roads, for these new housing developments, and water sewer lines. I mean, I'm pro. I mean, I think it's a necessity because of the rapid growth. We cannot support millions and millions and millions and millions of the upfront cost to break ground on these new developments, and the 50,000 new residents, and the roads and sewer lines and water lines to pay for all that over the next 50 years. That is a ridiculous amount, and we do not want to bond fund all of that.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Alright. Well, I guess I'm the outlier here. I voted against impact fees, and it wasn't because of the developers. Anybody who knows me and looked at my financial statements knows there wasn’t a single developer in Lubbock that gave any money to me, so it wasn't out of a favor to them. I made the commitment or stated on the record early on, even before I ran, or as I was running, that I didn't favor impact fees. And there's a couple of reasons for it.
First of all, people keep talking about the developers paying the impact fees. The developers do not pay the impact fees. The home owners, people who buy those new homes, the people who start those new businesses, they pay the fee. The developer collects it, yes, but it's paid for by the people who live there. It's another form of tax. Another thing about impact fees are, if you collect impact fee in a certain part of town, you can only use it in that part of town. People talk about like it's somehow dividing our town against each other, and everybody's building roads out in South Lubbock. The money that's collected in South Lubbock, and a specific district cannot be used in East Lubbock or North Lubbock. It can only be used there. So it's not a way to balance the need for roads. And frankly, most of the new roads, new construction in Lubbock is needed in South Lubbock. I believe bonds are a better way to pay for that. It's transparent.
I appreciate Mr. Winans saying, ‘Who understands impact fees?’ You really have to have a lot of faith in that system. It's an incredibly complicated system, a formula that they charge to a business or a home, the business has a drive through, how many seats it has. You have to have a lot of faith and belief that that's accurate, and it would spread that cost around. I just don't think it's a transparent way to do it. I would rather the citizens decide where they want the roads and to build the roads. Bond fees also kind of puts you in the pocket of the developer, because they're contributing some of that cost. You'll build the roads where they want you to build them, rather than the citizens deciding where we need a road. We may decide we need a road, not where the developer wants them, and you can always have developed developer agreements with developers anyway to build roads. That's another option that we have. I just don't believe in that.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Now on to our audience questions. The economic impact of data centers are often touted temporary benefits from the large influx of construction jobs. While the long term benefits appear to be limited to fewer, higher paying jobs, but a lot seems uncertain at this point with these data centers. The Texas Legislature is even looking at a potential pause on their constructions across the state. Would you consider a similar pause on the development proposals to the city while more information is being gathered about the impact of these projects? Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: Absolutely, I believe that we, as citizens, need to come up with a really good plan for data centers, AI centers. Let's make sure that they're not – we’ve got to weigh the pros and cons, and the citizens need to be involved in that decision. You know, is water an issue? I don't know. We need to talk to the contractors, the developers of these data centers, with the citizens, so that citizens can ask questions about the pros and cons that they have, to make a valid decision on whether it's a good idea or a bad idea for our city.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Ms. Bohmfalk?
Peggy Bohmfalk: Agreed. We just need absolute transparency. I mean, I'm concerned. Water is a scarce resource. And the recent proposal, they didn't provide any facts and figures, so citizens have every right to be skeptical.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. McBrayer?
Mark McBrayer: Yeah, I think I not only speak for myself, I think I can almost speak for our current council. We are very cautious about data centers. We have a lot that come to Lubbock and want to locate here. We probably have five or six, at the moment, that are trying to get their foot in the door here. And we have told LEDA, which is the Lubbock Economic Development Association, which is where they usually start with them, that we've got a number of things that have to be checked off before we are interested in talking to them.
First thing is water usage. There are a lot of different kinds of data centers use different technology to cool themselves. Some are heavy water users. Some recirculate the water that they use. Some use air cooling, different things like that. So we're only interested in a data center that would be a low water use, that would recirculate it or use air cooling. We're not going to be providing them with a steady stream of water.
We're also looking at what kind of energy needs and utility needs they have. We’d prefer them to have on site development of some part or all of it. We don't want them to come to us for a bunch of incentives, for a handout from us. That's the third thing.
And the fourth thing, we would like to have the owner occupy, not a spec build. We're not interested in people who are just building a data center hoping somebody's going to come in and occupy it. We want people who are building it for their own use. So if they can get through all those for us, we'll talk to them. So that's how we're handling it right at the moment.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. Sanders?
Stephen Sanders: We don't need data centers. We don't need AI data centers right now. It's just not a good idea. Nobody wants that. If you're keeping a tone on the city, the citizens do not want that. And I'm not going to do that. Here's the reason why: we don't want to put any extra strain on the aquifer. I don't care how much water it is, that's not a good reason to do it. And then we just moved to ERCOT, and we don't need to be jamming up the grid. If I – the last time it was cold, I think it was in 2022 or 2024, parts of our grid was going off during the coldest time of our year, during the storm. Why would we bring a data center in that can drain energy and lock up our grid whenever we don't even need to do that?
The other part of that is this, the one that came down that presented to the city council first, the one that we knew about, the transparent one that we knew about, was 935 acres in Northeast Lubbock. Those people don't need an AI data center. They need development. They need businesses and jobs and things like that. So that's not how you do that. We don't need data centers. I don't want them.
I commit to that right here publicly, and I'll tell everybody here, everybody online, on camera. We will not – I will not ever vote for an AI data center. It only creates about 30 jobs for the one that was 935 acres. Where's the ROI on that? There's no return on investment. We don't need that. That's a bad deal. And they're listening with their money ears. They're listening to tax money, but it's not going to create enough tax money to cover what it’s going to take from us.
Brad Burt: Thank you. The next one: As Lubbock continues to grow, do you have plans to improve public transportation, to better connect residents to jobs and help employers access a broader workforce? Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Again, it comes down to funding. No doubt it's needed, the connectivity. We do need, yes. On the east side, especially, you know to the other parts of town. Connectivity is an issue, and we should study it and maybe redo the routes. Like I said, I don't know how we get the funding to provide more buses, but it is an issue and it does need to be addressed.
Brad Burt: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Yeah, I think a lot of people sometimes forget Lubbock is a very large city, it’s 145 square miles. So public transport would be an extremely expensive proposition, if we're trying to connect every part of the city. What we've tried to do – and I think an analysis was done about two years ago and has been implemented this last year, it's being rolled out anyway – they did an analysis of where the usage was, and trying to connect where the jobs, where people were going to and improve that route. I attended the session. When the guy rolled it out, made some major improvements in it, also the connectivity to our buses, with the pickups and vans and things like that that direct people to that. We work very hard on trying to improve that system, but it's a difficult thing to do without a major expense of money. But I believe that what we're doing right at the moment, is a vast improvement over what it was, and we'll continue to work on that system. A lot of that money does come from the federal government, fortunately, but the city does participate as well in that, and so we're conscious of it and trying to find the best way to connect people to jobs, which is the main thing we're trying to do.
Brad Burt: Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: I would partly agree with Mr. McBrayer. Citibus is funded – it's also funded federally as well. Money comes in that way as well. And so I think we have an opportunity to see if we can obtain more funding, I know that's not always easy to do. But that's something that we have to look at. And I'm willing to beg for my city. I'm willing to beg anybody for my city, because I love my city, and so I'll do whatever it takes to make sure that we can make the improvements.
I know, we did an analysis of – the campaign has done an analysis – and people who are elderly trying to get to the Medical District, need these routes really bad, because they need to be able to get their wheelchairs, and they need the handicap accessible amenities to be able to get where they need to get. And the routes have changed recently. I don't know if you know that a lot of the routes are being put out there, as Mr. McBrayer kind of alluded to, out southwest, because there are more jobs out there, but I want to create more jobs in all parts of the city, and once we have more revenue coming in, we'll be able to adjust those routes. But I think we can make some improvements as best as we can. It'll take a lot of work, though.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. Sanders. Mr. Winans?
G. Todd Winans: Yeah, I really want to break down the budget and look at things deep within the budget so that we can identify majors and minors that, you know, over time those ideas change. What is a major issue? Is transportation a major issue? Is transportation a minor issue?
You know, is it a major issue for getting people to work? Is it a major issue for getting the older generation to medical care? Those are majors in my mind. So how can we identify what routes or where funds are going to come from in order to produce public transportation and that's got to be number one priority. How are we going to pay for it? And getting grants, asking the state for funds. Those things, in my opinion, have to happen with participation from the citizens. So we know where – the public servants know where the citizens want us to take public transportation.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. How do you feel about offering tax abatements to businesses on the vacant lots in East Lubbock and North Lubbock to bring better development? Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Well, we already do offer forms of tax abatements to businesses who locate here in Lubbock, usually that comes through LEDA [Lubbock Economic Development Alliance]. If it's a large enough business that will provide enough jobs to the city and good paying jobs, and it fits some of the criteria that we have for our city, then we're very careful about that. And actually this council is dialed back a little bit on the incentive part of it that LEDA has been giving out because we don't want to give away the total tax base, because that's what a new business actually brings to your community, is a new tax base. And that's what you need, is new businesses with new property taxes to relieve the burden on homeowners for their property taxes. That's where the new money comes to do the things that we've all been talking about here, that we want to do. So if you don't have new businesses, you won't have that.
We do offer abatements. It's a good program. We've gone back from a 10 year, more to a five year abatement period. We also offer incentives based on how many jobs they can create. So we already do do that. And I’ll be frank, a lot of the businesses looking at Lubbock are looking at East Lubbock at the moment.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Mr. Sanders?
Stephen Sanders: That is true. They are offering some abatements to businesses currently, but I think this is a great opportunity to look at opportunity zones that was passed from the federal all the way down to us, something that President Trump brought to the forefront, and we're not really taking advantage of that.
And I also think that LEDA picks winners and losers, I don't think they divvy out the money the right way. And I don't care if they get mad at me for saying that, but I know it's true, because you can tell by who gets the funding. If you go look at all of the paperwork, which I've gone through it, you go and look at the race of those people who are getting businesses, or what their connection or their affiliation is to the city – if they're not an insider, it's harder for them, and this is something we've been dealing with for a long time. LEDA is out of control.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. Sanders.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. Winans?
G. Todd Winans: Yeah, I'm going to go back to the you know, we have to get participation from businesses, from citizens that own businesses. There's got to be a cooperation, right? So how do we know who to give a break to and who not to if we're not having good conversations with people. You know, business owners that want to come to East Lubbock or North Lubbock or Northeast Lubbock. If we don't know what's going on, the citizens don't know what's going on behind doors with businesses that are coming to Lubbock and what kind of tax breaks the city's offering them for land in these areas. How can we make a decision on that as citizens of Lubbock, Texas, if we don't know? So I'm not opposed to tax abatement, but I definitely think that it needs to be transparent and communicated and presented to the citizens when that's an option.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. Winans. Ms. Bohmfalk?
Peggy Bohmfalk: Well, I think if we can fix crime and homelessness on the east side, the problem will fix itself. And also, if we quit subsidizing new development and actually bring impact fees back to outside the loop, maybe the incentive is just not to charge impact fees for new growth and development there, but we just have to fix the condition, so we can get more investment into that area, residential and commercial. But I think it's totally crime and homelessness and so resident – I mean, tourists and you know, people just don't go shop there. When the demand is there, people will build because it is cheaper and there’s a lot of sites available.
Brad Burt: Thank you. Would you consider stiffer penalties for people who are releasing dogs or caught releasing dogs? Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: Absolutely. There's only one way that we can really fix this problem, which is a really bad problem, is to be more aggressive. I've been keeping up with the council. They had discussed this. This was a discussion about raising the fines and being more, a little stricter in that regard, but the truth is, is that we have to shut the faucet off first. What do I mean by that? We have to stop them from breeding, the ones that are out, we have to stop the animals from breeding. And once we stop the animals from breeding, then I feel like we can start to control situations like this.
And people who are dumping animals should face a very, very high penalty. It's a crime, and it's a crime against humanity. I love animals and I love people all in the same and that shouldn't be happening. And so the city has animals – the city and the county are normally kind of back and forth with each other. The county’s like ‘Those dogs came from y’all.’ The city’s like, ‘No, those dogs came from you.’ You know, this is what we're dealing with. So we can't really find the common ground on that. But I'm going to shut the faucet off first, stop the breeding, and then I'm going to get everything under control.
We don't need to expand the Animal Control Center. We need to stop the growth, make people [get a] permit to breed. If you don't have a permit and you're breeding, you're going to get in trouble, because that's the only way to save our city. I've seen it done in San Antonio, I've seen it done in other cities where they had an overpopulation issue with animals.
Brad Burt: Thank you, Mr. Sanders. Mr. Winans?
G. Todd Winans: Yes, I agreed on stiffer penalties for individuals that dump dogs. It's not right, it's a crime. And if they're caught, I mean, yeah, I don't want, as a dog owner, I don't want to face that, you know? If you put stronger penalties on the action, not only will it teach that person that gets caught dumping animals, it's also going to teach me, ‘Hey, yeah, I need to, you know, I've got a female dog, I want to make sure that, you know, I don't have an accidental breeding because then I'm going to have to be faced with that if, if it comes down to, I gotta get rid of these dogs.’ It's a deterrent. And that's where it needs to be, is stiff penalties for illegal dumping.
Brad Burt: Ms. Bohmfalk.
Peggy Bohmfalk: Absolutely in favor of stiff penalties. I hate when people do that. That is nothing more than animal abuse. And if we enforce the stiffer penalties, people that are not doing it just taking care of the animals because it's the right thing to do, will consider spaying or neutering or just not getting in first place. Yes.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Well, of course, the loose dog problem is an issue, and it's one we get constantly, and it has to be addressed in several different ways. One is with the spay and neutering. We have a voucher program that people can get vouchers to help them get their animals spayed and neutered. Our own facility does a lot of spaying and neutering.
But under Texas law, animals are property and people have property rights, so we're limited in what we can actually do with an animal. The state law doesn't allow us to just take an animal without due process from somebody, so we have to follow the law when we do that, sometimes it's a very long program, or process to try to get the animal taken out of the home, euthanized if necessary, if it's a dangerous dog. We recently raised the liability insurance level to 1 million from $250,000 on that. That's one way we can address it. We have a program to help people build fences and repair fences to keep the dogs from running loose. They can, the city will assist with that. And we recently added a couple of new patrol officers, Animal Services officers, for the beat to go out and collect animals. But it's a growing problem. Our main concern is dangerous dogs, though. Loose dogs are more of a nuisance; the dangerous dogs are what we're trying to focus on right at the moment.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Is there a city that you look to as a model city for city services such as Midland for revenue generation or Amarillo for water management or transportation? Mr. Winans.
G. Todd Winans: You know, being in the South Plains for 27 years, traveling all over for various careers that I've had, Amarillo has has 40 going through it, and they utilize that main thoroughfare – much like Mr. Sanders was talking about: an inland port – and I do see that. Working in Midland, Odessa, big money oil patch. You know, they have some things that I think that this city could learn from, but none of it makes any sense if you don't have support. How did Amarillo start to have success with these things? How did Midland start to have – Was it just the idea of the city council and the mayor? No, it was the citizens saying, ‘Hey, this is what we want for our city.’ And so the main focus has to be on getting citizens involved, and their involvement is what's going to make the change happen.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. Ms. Bohmfalk?
Peggy Bohmfalk: I'd have to say I'm just a fan of Lubbock in its design. I love the grid, grid structure and the loop and the parks. I think we’re doing okay.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. McBrayer.
Mark McBrayer: Well, that’s kind of like asking the married man if he has an ideal woman, he's going to say, ‘The woman I’m married to.’
Stephen Sanders: That’s right.
Mark McBrayer: The city I live in. I think when you consider everything the city has to do. And you have to consider each city is different. We don't have an oil patch here in Lubbock. That money is not available, so we can't drag it up here. We don't have I-40, we can't drag it down here. We don't have the ranching industry, the old ranching industry with all that money that Amarillo has.
We are Lubbock with our own characteristics. Cotton farmers just aren't as rich as oil people or ranchers. We have to do what is right for Lubbock and is consistent with the character of this city. And I think Lubbock does an extremely good job given the kind of people here, what is important to us, what we value, we balance that, I think, very well in meeting the needs of people. There is no perfect city. There's no perfect spouse. I'm certainly not one, but I'm happy with Lubbock. I feel myself very lucky to live in Lubbock and I hear that. I hear from people in Amarillo all the time talking about how they love Lubbock. They wish Amarillo was like Lubbock, that's just, that's a common thing people do. I think Lubbock actually handles its issues really, pretty dang well.
Mateo Rosiles: Mr. Sanders.
Stephen Sanders: I'd agree. I love Lubbock. I'm not going to answer that some city is better than my city. That’s just the bottom line. But what we can do is be better. That’s right. I want our city to be the best city in America. I want us to operate the best. I want people to look to us and say, ‘Man, they are squared away.’ And that's what it takes.
And I'll share this with you. My brother broke his neck playing high school football here at Dunbar, many, many years ago. He's passed on since the last few years. But the city came to my rescue and my family's rescue, and they helped us. White people, Black people, Hispanic people, all kinds of people helped me. And this is why I love this city so much, because people came to our rescue. And so this is the best city in the world, in my eyes. I just feel like we can be better. We should always be striving to be better in every regard. So.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you. That's a great way to wrap up our conversation that concludes all of our questions for this evening. Thank you again for our candidates and to everyone who submitted questions tonight. And thank you all for coming out.
Brad Burt: Early voting in Lubbock's local elections, will run April 20 through the 28 and Election Day is May 2. Thank you very much.
Mateo Rosiles: Thank you.