In our recent story about mayoral candidate Gene Locke and his ties to the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority, we sought some answers to some specific questions. How will he ease any perceptions of a conflict if a sports authority item comes up on the city council agenda? Will he recuse himself?

What measures will he take to separate himself from his friends at Andrews Kurth -- the firm at which he served as a partner as well as general counsel to the sports authority -- and the taxpayers of the city? What we received was a boilerplate response:

“When I am mayor every decision I make will be based solely on what is best for Houstonians. I am proud of the broad coalition of support I enjoy in this race, but when I am elected my only debt will be to the people of Houston.”

Disappointing, to be sure, from a guy who is smart and savvy. We cut the response up for publication in order to avoid the self-serving – and quite frankly, opportunistic – portion about his “broad coalition of support."

There are a number of potential answers to these questions that would ease voter perception of a conflict. A brief conversation about devotion to the position he is seeking and his wishes above all for a strong, well-operated sports authority and a stronger electorate, with the latter his utmost concern.

The city has some formidable power with regard to the authority, in that it appoints board members that shape its direction -- which, in turn, affects taxpayers when a situation such as the possible use of public money to cover a bond-related shortfall arises.

The story is a blue-skyer that we feel should be out there, akin to the items anyone should take into account before making a big decision. In this case, the voters can now add this to the list of "what ifs" before they make their final choice on Nov. 3.

For more on this issue, John Coby at Bay Area Houston and The Muse have a couple of great posts on this issue.