The stakes are high for Waco on Nov. 3 as Texas Senate District 22 changes hands for the first time in 16 years.
As Monday’s early voting kickoff nears, the candidates are making the case that they are best suited as a new voice for Greater Waco, the district’s largest population center.
Texas Rep. David Cook, R-Mansfield, is competing against Democrat Amy Martinez-Salas of Arlington, a political newcomer hoping to upset her well-connected and well-funded opponent.
The winner will replace Sen. Brian Birdwell, R-Granbury, who stepped down in May to become a U.S. assistant secretary of defense. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called a special election for Nov. 3 to fill out the rest of his term from November to January.
- Sam Shaw, The Waco Bridge
In the lead-up to election day, David Cook sat down with KWBU and The Waco Bridge.
Here is the transcript, edited lightly for clarity, from our conversation with Republican candidate, David Cook.
Molly-Jo Tilton, KWBU: So District 22 is a geographically large district. It encompasses a portion of the DFW metroplex, rural dairy counties like Erath and Hamilton Counties, but the bulk of the voting population is in McLennan County. How much stock are you putting in Waco and the Waco area versus the other portions of the district?
David Cook: That's a great question, but I've really just tried to be all in. Um, there's 12 counties in the district. As you said, it's really spread out and I mean as far as voters I mean, when you run a campaign like this, you know, you do allocate time and dollars based upon numbers of voters.
And so we really have spent a tremendous amount of time over the last 15 months being present in Waco just to learn the issues. And in order to represent a group of constituents, you must know what's important to them. And so that's what we've been able to do over the last 15 months. And so, um, W- Waco and McLennan County in general has been a big part of our campaign up to this point.
Sam Shaw, the Waco Bridge: So I was driving down from Fort Worth the other week, and I think I saw you on a billboard. You were next to President Trump, standing side by side. And then not long after the president came to town, US Senate candidate Ken Paxton said that Trump's appearance hurt his Senate campaign. Do you feel like the president's endorsement could turn off voters at this point?
Yeah, I mean, I'm very honored to have his endorsement and appreciate having it from the very beginning. And, you know, everybody's has their own opinions about each candidate and some folks like me and like what I do and, and appreciate how I conduct myself and I'm sure there are some that don't. And so I think it's like that for anybody.
And, uh, when you've been in office for quite some time and you have such a large responsibility, I mean, you're gonna have people that like what you do, and you're gonna have people that don't. And so, yeah, I mean, I'm honored to have his endorsement.
MJ T: With a district as large as District 22, you have to really work to understand the needs of everybody. And a big part of that is understanding the needs of McLennan County. So let's get into some of those Waco and McLennan County needs – specifically with some of the legislative priorities. Ashley Nystrom, who is the chief of staff for the city of Waco, in a recent described a climate in Austin where cities are kind of “persona non grata.” What sort of relationships are you building with our city leaders to make local needs and concerns are heard by the Senate?
Yeah, that's a great question, and one of the first leaders that I met here in Waco was Mayor Holmes. And I had an opportunity to sit down with him and just really hear about his experiences here locally. I've served as a mayor for a long time and, and so we had some of the same speak, you might say, and we were able to communicate very effectively and very natural, you might say, in our conversations.
And so I feel like, you know, it's out there. I think that some people do, uh, feel that way, and I think there's gonna be some elected officials, whether it's, you know, people in the House or the Senate that have those opinions. And, you know when you start talking about tax policies, you know it gets difficult. And so I think that, uh, responsible operating governments – they’re all gonna have the same rules. That what makes it difficult. In the perfect world, you could reward the good actors and punish the bad actors.
But when it comes to policy, it's very hard to do that. And so I think at the end of the day, in order for us to be effective in providing that representation, we have to know what the issues are. And so that's what I've tried to do, is get down here and, and meet with Judge Felton, meet with Mayor Holmes and incoming county judge Tullis. I'm looking forward to working with him.
It’s really about relationships so that when that issue is on the table, you can communicate with the elected leaders in each geographical area. And so that's what I've tried to do, is establish relationships. And for me, it was going into 11 new counties that I had not provided representation for previously and just sticking my hand out and meeting people and get an opportunity to really get to know them and what's important to not only to themselves, but also more importantly to their community.
MJ T: What are some of the big issues that you're hearing from Mayor Holmes, from Judge Felton and, and incoming Judge Tullis?
Obviously, what's gonna happen with regard to property taxes? Are we gonna be able to, you know, conduct business? And, you know, it's a valid question.
And so, you know, I think that obviously as a taxpayer, like each of us are in this room, we all want to pay less in taxes. Um, as a elected official at county level or city level, you wanna know what the rules are, how's it gonna change? And you want some time to be able to adapt. And so communication is the key to any success.
And so what I've been able to do is to get some of those local elected officials, on calls with the governor's team and have conversations, productive conversations and, so that the local elected officials can express what their concerns are and really let the governor's team know, you know, if you do this, this is how it's gonna impact our city.
And so I know the governor has really been just a tremendous leader when it comes to economic development. So when you look at a city or a county's budget, you know, the first probably two-thirds of a local government's budget is gonna be public safety related.
You know, if you have to start prioritizing, you're not gonna cut – or you shouldn’t cut – from public safety. And then you get into roads and water, you know, infrastructure type needs. You're not gonna cut from those. And so when you get down the list, I mean, the things that's gonna be impacted the most, is going to be, you know, the optional stuff, which is where economic development comes in.
And as a former local elected official, you know, economic development it's not a necessity, but it's one of those things if it's done correctly, it can really boost a community. And so I know that economic development is very important to Governor Abbott. So we just need to be smart in that policy and make sure that we can continue to drive property taxes down, and we need to be able to do it in a big way. And I think that there are ways to do that.
In addition to spending limits, you could also look at the, the policy around valuations. And I think you'll see a lot of bills filed, including from myself, that will be in the valuation process. But that’s really the way that people have experienced maybe where their property taxes have doubled is because if you have a 10% increase year over year. Your house that used to be worth, you know, $250,000 is now worth $500,000, and you multiply that times the rate that's set at the local level, and, you know, you're paying a lot more property taxes. And so I think we have made some progress, but there's still a lot of progress to be made.
S S: I just wanted to quickly ask, do you plan on rappelling down the ALICO building with Mayor Holmes?
I have not been approached with that, but I’m not opposed to new experiences.
S S: So in that, in that same presentation, Nystrom described the governor's five-point tax plan as, quote, "An erosion of municipal authority and finance mechanisms." While it's easy to see the appeal of lower property taxes, it's also not fun to live in a city where basic services degrade.
I was hoping that you could talk about the governor's tax plan and sort of walk me through what you like about it and what you think could create unintended consequences for cities and their residents.
Sure. And, you know, and I guess before I jump too far into that, I would also point out, there's also a different plan in the Senate, which is more along the lines of what's been going on the last couple of sessions. And so I would say there's two very distinctly different plans that will be offered in the legislature. And, you know, to be determined which one of those you know is successful.
But with regard to your question and the governor's plan, I think that what you see is an opportunity to really control spending by the governor, because the thought process is obviously that it does no good to continue to push down you know, what someone is paying in property taxes if a city's just gonna continue to increase their spending.
And so, you know, a lot of people will say it's not just, you know, like at home with our own budgets, it's not, you know, it's not always an income problem, sometimes it's a spending problem. And, and the governor and his team, you know, strongly believe that it, you know, there are spending problems; not with every city. Not with every county. Not with every form of government, but there are some that are spending things on ridiculous items.
I would say some of the, you know, some of the things that I do like about the plan is, I do like that from a uh, taxpayer perspective, I do like the valuation process is very aggressive and in a good way, in my opinion. Most of us know that it's primarily composed of two things: not only the tax rate that's set at the local level, but also what is the value of our real estate.
And so if you have one without the other – if you have improvement with regard to rates but not with valuations – your net savings is gonna be very minimal. And so I think that I very much support the governor's idea in limiting how many, how often your home is gonna need to be valuated.
And so his proposal is once every five years with a 3% cap on how much it could go up. Right now, that's a 10% cap, and so you know the simple math would tell you that if you're only being valuated once every five years, then that's gonna significantly reduce how much your valuation can go up, which is one factor in determining how much you pay.
So I'm very, very big supporter of that. Something else that the governor's plan does is a rollback election where 15% of the people can call for a rollback election.
S S: Do you think that threshold is too low or too high, or just right?
I think that's pretty low. I understand probably where it comes from because it's, it's sad how few people are active in local elections. It’s not uncommon for 5%, 7%, less than 10% of the people determine who your mayor is or who your city council members are, who your school board officials are.
So I understand why it's low. I mean it seems like a very low number, but it's based on, you know, the lack of turnout in local elections, and so I understand it from that perspective. The other thing that where I do have concerns is having it where there's a higher threshold instead of just having a simple majority vote, where it's been pushed up to a two-thirds super majority vote.
I think our foundation is primarily based on majority rules. We hear that all of our lives that, you know, majority rules. And I think that if a majority of the people vote one way, then that's probably a better way to do it.
But again, that's just, that's one component out of the governor's plan thatI would want to hear more reasoning on. And the most important thing is to make sure that we're having conversations and having those conversations now, and that's why I really have tried to get some of those conversations started with local elected officials and the governor's team now so that they can factor those suggestions in.
MJ T: Sticking on that topic of city funding, an interim hearing last week in Austin explored the possibility to further regulate or even prohibit city contracts with nonprofits. As I'm sure you're aware, the city of Waco has a pretty robust nonprofit system that they rely on for specialized and, and essential services.
Is a prohibition on nonprofit contracts or grants something that you'd oppose given that?
As far as just having a blanket [prohibition], I would have major concerns with that. You know, I think that, again, you have some local elected leaders in cities that are getting involved in things they shouldn't be getting involved in.And so when you take bad actors like that, it sometimes has a negative impact on people that are trying to do the right thing with regard to maybe housing or something like that.
And so, you know, and if you look at a city that's trying to get involved in providing money to bail people out of jail or something, that is not an essential city service. It's not something that a city should be doing, and even if they're doing it under the guise of a nonprofit, I mean, hard stop, shouldn't be happening. And, you know, the question is, is how do you, eliminate something like that without, having a negative impact on something that's worthwhile?
And so I think it's, you know, I don't wanna just say yes or no one way or the other. It’s like a lot of these things, the details are in the bill, and you have to read the bill, and you have to understand it. And so I think that it'll be my decision on something like that would be based upon what the specific bill says.
S S: I mean, do you think it's, it's the legislature's role to determine whether that is or is not a reasonable use of city funds if the city council's determined it to be so?
Yeah, I mean, because where do, where do the cities go if they do bankrupt themselves, you know? Like, if you have a, for example, you have cities that make bad decisions with regards to one part of their budget and then they're coming to the state and saying, "Oh, hey, guess what? You know, our public safety law enforcement retirement plan is, is busted. It's, we're upside down." Well, that's probably because you had poor economic planning, you know, in o- in other areas. And so obviously no one wants a law enforcement officer to work, you know, his or her full career and then not have what they were promised that they would have.
And so again I think that it's, yes, there are times where the state does have to step in and make those types of decisions that apply across the state. I’m a firm believer in local control, but not without any restrictions.
You gotta have the ability, from the state's perspective, to make those types of decisions because it's policy. All of this that we're talking about, you know, when we're talking about property taxes, it's not just a revenue problem or a revenue issue, it also is spending. And so that's why I think the legislature must be involved from that perspective.
S S: Earlier on, you mentioned mental health being a big priority and something you heard about as a local need. Well, Waco continues to seek state support for a dedicated mental health facility after the closure of the DePaul Center. It's something, uh, current House, House Rep Pat Curry pursued his first term. Is that something you'll strive to deliver as well as a state senator?
Yes, absolutely. Representative Curry and Representative Orr, the three of us have talked about that need, and we certainly want to work together to address it.
And you know, the district in my opinion, will benefit from Representative Orr's leadership on the appropriations side in the House. She's definitely a leader when it comes to the budget and we definitely have agreed to make a $10 million request just for that specific issue. And so we will definitely be working together and trying to make that a priority for this local community.
MJ T: One of the other big issues that this community specifically has always focused on is water. In the 88th session, you voted in favor of House Bill 2827, which would've changed the type of permits that are required for dairy farms in the North Bosque watershed.
The bill passed the House but died in Senate committee, which was chaired by your predecessor, Brian Birdwell. Critics of the bill, including City of Waco, said that had this bill passed, that it could have led to disastrous outcomes, like the odor issues and the water quality issues we had with Lake Waco in the early 2000s.
If you're elected and a bill like this were to come up again, where would you stand on this issue?
Yeah, I mean, I would definitely come here to Waco. I know that they're spending a lot of time and money on research and I think when you're dealing with a problem like that, you're wanting to look at the most recent technology.
And so I know that there's been a lot of productive conversations between the dairymen and their representation and locally here in the Waco-McLennan County area. So I think it's one of those things where we have to find the best crafted solution we possibly can.
15 months ago when I sat down with the mayor, it was the first topic we talked about.
MJ T: You’d represent both Erath County and Hamilton County, where a lot of those dairies are and Waco-McLennan County where this has been an issue. How do you balance representing both of those areas in a bill like this?
Yeah. Quality water is essential, and so that's where my decision will come down on. And so, like I said, technology is better today than it was yesterday and that's where the answer lies is what is the best available technology? What's the best available plan that we need to take?
I have been made aware that there are a lot of positive conversations happening between the two, and that they're both rowing in the same direction, so to speak.
S S: I think you're ready for this one. Data centers. We're still talking about them. This week we inter- interviewed our county commissioner candidates, and they both said counties need more authority to decide where and how they're built. Do you think counties should be empowered to make those calls? And if so, what concrete steps in the legislature will you take to make that happen?
Yes.
The, the example I've been giving is a little bit of a sports reference, but right now I feel like county commissioners are stepping into the batter's box with no bat, so they have no ability to take a swing at this issue.
That doesn't mean give them carte blanche authority. There are protections, there's freedoms that people have that live in the county. That's the reason they move out to the counties. And so we have to make sure that we're protective of those freedoms. And if I could just say, you know, one thing is that regardless of what we're talking about, you know, one neighbor needs to be a good neighbor to his or her neighbor.
And whether you're talking about two residential properties side by side, if you're talking about one residential and one commercial, or one residential and one industrial, you have to be a good neighbor.
Right now, the average commissioner out there has no authority. There are a couple exceptions. Hood County, there was some specific authority given to those commissioners way back, you know, in the late '90s, and so that's why I paused a little bit. But generally speaking, they have no authority. So yes, they need to have some specific authority and the authorities and I've committed to filing legislation around this issue, and I made this in writing back in February.
But, the things that, that I've talked about is setting up a process that's similar to the zoning process that cities have locally. Not, I wanna make sure I say, we're not gonna give county commissioners zoning authority. No one wants, you know, no one wants to see something like that.
But, but I do think county commissioners need to be able to have public hearings so that the local citizens can come in and express their concerns, give their suggestions, make their opinions known so that those, opinions can be crafted into potential solutions. Make sure that there's public notice requirements that are had. Make sure that there's transparency with regard to water and power.
And then, a little bit off your question, but I'm very thankful that Governor Abbott made the decision that he made recently to pause all permits with regard to data centers. And the main reason, as I understand it is because we don't have the information that we need in order to make good decisions with regard to data centers. So we need to have a full-blown accounting audit system, whatever you wanna call it. We need to know how many requested sites are there, how much water is this site gonna need, how much water is that site gonna need, and make them commit to what they're gonna use and require them to use closed-loop water systems.
I mean, all the things that we-we've been talking about for several months, those are things that must be crafted into legislation so that, when it's decided where these data centers are gonna go, I know that people, don't want them to go anywhere, but, the’re gonna happen. They already, they already exist all throughout Texas. But, but these are different. These are hyper-scale data centers, and so it's different than what we've been dealing with.
And so that, with that being said, uh, county commissioners do need to be empowered so that they can respond, and I certainly want to gather information from county commissioners. I know some of them are very resistant to that. They wanna make sure that those freedoms are protected. And so there will definitely not be support from me to have unfettered zoning authority in the county. But that's the reason people often move to the county is because they want that freedom.
S S: But are there alternative concrete powers, besides zoning authority, things that might infringe on rural property rights or at least the norm that you would pursue for counties?
I mean, you talked a little bit about kind of participatory processes, ways for folks to air grievances and communicate with stakeholders on one of these projects or proposals. But in case I missed it, could you just reiterate what, what those powers might be?
I mean, whether they're statewide or at the county level, I think that things that must be part of the solution is going to be like a declaration by each.
So basically it would be the same as if an applicant is coming forward wanting to locate a data center on a specific location, they're going to be transparent in putting forth how much power they need for that location, how much water they need, what their usage is gonna be. So that, one, we can use that for planning purposes, but two, so that we can hold them to it.
And, you know, from a planning perspective, we have water right now that's available for, say, 30 years out. But if, you know, if you start sucking up a lot of that water with data centers, then that number's gonna change.
And so those are the types of things that we need to make sure that information is being provided and enforced. As far as land use I think that there's gonna have to be decisions on where they're located. And so I think the people that are best able to make that decision are at the local level.
And so right now we have that in cities. But that doesn't exist in, in the counties because if a specific right hasn't been given to a county commissioner then they don't have it at that level. So the state must give them those powers in order for them to act. And so, yeah, I think as far as the process, it needs to be set up at the state level, and it needs to be applied across the state.
MJ T: In the last legislature, there was some funding set aside to incentivize community colleges to get more students on paths to employment, specifically on career-related paths. But that fund ran out when colleges exceeded their expectations, and more students graduated with those certificates.
McLennan Community College was one of them and had to raise their tax rates to deal with that $3.1 million state funding shortfall. What do you plan to do about that, um, in the next session?
Well, first thing I would say is I have a meeting set up out at MCC, as far as just meeting with all of those that are similarly impacted. And so I've got a meeting set up with presidents of a lot of the community colleges and, and so I wanna hear what recommendations they have.
I think that if they could all be under the same funding formula as TSTC, that would be great. And I don't know if y'all are familiar with that, but it's where TSTC, they get, they get their funding after their students are put into the job market it's kind of a look back to see not only did they get employed, but how much are they making and things like that. And so that's a purely performance-based funding, and obviously that's not the way our universities are set up at this time.
I think that it was a great program that was set up, but has been shorted on funding. And so I think what we're finding out and, and I'm glad for students that want an alternative that a four-year college degree is not for everyone. And so the last thing I want for someone is to go spend, $150,000 on a college degree and either they don't finish it or they don't use it in their end job. And so I think having good options at the community colleges and technical trade schools like TSTC is what we need more of. And I believe that there's a lot of people in the legislature that feel the same way and that's why you're seeing a lot of programs that are being set up in conjunction with TSTC because they have a great model right now.
They have a great road to success and I think that what was set up with regard to the community colleges is, is not the same, but it's similar and we need to do more of that and make sure it's fully funded.
S S: So just so I understand this correctly, you agree that MCC should be made whole if it's excelling according to the criteria that it's already being judged on as far as student success?
If not, then you get rid of the program, you know what I'm saying? Like, if we're setting up that type of program, then that's what we should follow.
And so I think when the state, when we set out a program, then we should stick to it. If it's not working, obviously we go back to the drawing board and come up with something different. But if that's the program that's in place, which it is, and it's, in my opinion, it's a good program, it's a good practical program, then yes, they should be paid according to the formula that the legislature set up.
MJ T: Do you think it was just an issue of the legislature not anticipating as many colleges performing that well that fast? I mean, MCC was doing similar things for years before that program was in place, and I know other community colleges were as well.
Well, they've got a great president out there, very experienced, and yeah, I think that's exactly right.
I mean, I think the community colleges have overperformed what was projected, which is a good. If you're not rolling with changes and making necessary adjustments to the programs, you're gonna have negative outcomes.
And so, I think this is a good example of one of those where we need to, like we're doing with TSTC and, specifically, we need to continue. Because I want to, like I said, from my perspective, I want to encourage students to find the program that matches their path the best. And, and you know, I think community colleges is a great path for a lot of people.
