Author Archives: Bill Oakey

Unknown's avatar

About Bill Oakey

I am retired from the State of Texas as an accountant. I am now an artist in Austin, doing photographic art. I'm also a lifelong music fan and a computer geek.

CodeNEXT Takes Austin To Another Dimension – Do We Really Want To Go There?

4 Replies

By Bill Oakey – June 26, 2014, Revised on June 27, 2014

I happened to notice a City Council Resolution on the agenda for the June 26th meeting.  It pertained to a new partnership with ACC at Highland Mall.  One clause caught my attention:

“WHEREAS, the redevelopment of the mall presents a unique opportunity for the City to partner with ACC to further workforce development opportunities and showcase the high quality development that a form-based code can foster.”

You’re Traveling To Another Dimension – Called CodeNEXT

I scratched my head, wondering  what “form-based code” means.  A Google search took me to the Austin Chronicle.  They ran a story back in 2010 that addressed my question. You can read it here, “What Is Form-Based Code?”  It turns out that it is part of CodeNEXT, the project to revise Austin’s Land Development Code.

If you’ve ever read Brian Greene’s excellent books on astrophysics or contemplated the existence of parallel universes, you will appreciate what is happening here on earth in the City of Austin.  Let’s travel to another dimension, so you can peer into the “public realm” of form-based codes.  Trust me, it matters if you plan to stay in Austin.

First I’ll give you a snippet of the technical B.S.  Then I’ll tell you what it really means.  Here’s how the Chronicle article introduces it:

“Form-based codes foster predictable built results and a high-quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle. Not to be confused with design guidelines or general statements of policy, form-based codes are not merely advisory; they are adopted into city or county law as regulations. Form-based codes can be mandatory or optional/parallel.”

Now, What In The Heck Does All That Mean?

CodeNEXT is a plan is to effectively do away with old fashioned things like neighborhood zoning and building use restrictions.  Those are too complex and burdensome.  Now that Austin has become a “destination city,” we shouldn’t live in houses on blocks in neighborhoods.  Instead, we should be divided into “corridors,” “nodes” and “transit hubs.”  While this may work for designing certain sectors of undeveloped land, it should not be imposed on existing neighborhoods against their will.

That laid back tree-lined street that you used to live on may be transformed by the time you wake up in the morning.  You won’t have to worry about a McMansion going in next door.  It will be a McBuilding.  With cute little choreographed shrubs and “trendy” expensive shops on the ground floor.  You will be invited to an open house.  If you move in, they might even let you keep your pets.  In fact, the place I visited recently on East Riverside requires DNA testing for dogs.  So, if you find dog poop on your doorstep, the management will tell you who you can sue.

All of this is easier to understand if you think in terms of a Stephen King novel.  Austin has been taken over by a “presence” that most of you will never see.  The outsiders are dressed like humans and they identify themselves with the earth-like term “consultants.”  If you as an ordinary citizen walk into a room where the “presence” is in charge, you will learn.  You will adapt.  And, according to the Grand Plan, you will eventually become one of them.  You will conform.  This actually may be closer to George Orwell than Stephen King, but you get the picture.

For one more direct hit on what form-based coding is all about, this sums it up chillingly:

“A comprehensive planning process that uses codes to integrate the built environment into larger economic development strategies.”

What Is “Next” for You and Your Neighborhood?

You can go check out the CodeNEXT site here.  The “Listening to the Community Report” artfully speaks in the reverse.  You will see page after page of the same phrases, but not a single hint of public suggestions, public comments, or even any summaries of public likes and dislikes of any of the concepts mentioned.  There is a long roster of consultants and assorted private firms listed in these reports.  The City’s website lists 11 members of an advisory group that is working with these firms as part of CodeNEXT.  But nowhere will you find the backgrounds of the advisory group members, who they work for, or who appointed them.

This is most likely another consultant-driven process with pre-ordained results.  The level of trust that we can reasonably expect from it can be measured by the voting history of the City Council majority.  As a worst-case scenario, think about where Austin’s leadership is pointing the city.  Just think density.  Density.  And density.  They want you go to bed as a home-grown Austinite, but wake up in the same body as a “new urbanist.”  You might want to check the bushes by your bedroom window for a giant, eerie looking seed pod.  (You can rent “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” from Netflix).

We need to stay awake and wake up our neighbors, before it is too late. Talk to the new Council candidates and warn them that they too could be “next.”

Nix CodeNEXT Before It Nixes Us!

Help Me Celebrate The 26th Anniversary!

1 Reply

By Bill Oakey – June 25, 2014

As some of you may know, I have been fighting various City Hall battles since the early 1980’s. If I could only pick one to have adopted as a reform in the 21st century, it would be one that I first attempted to bring forward in 1988.  So, if we could get it adopted this year it would call for a 28th anniversary celebration.  I might even take some cake down to City Hall if I thought it would pass.

In my early activist days, I was constantly frustrated by going to City Council meetings and having to wait up to six hours or longer to speak at public hearings and on other discussion items. I saw parents with small children, citizens with wheelchairs and crutches, and seniors with canes and walkers waiting sometimes until past midnight to speak passionately about issues that affected their daily lives.

In 1988 I drafted a “City Council Agenda Reform Proposal” to deal with this topic.  I found a Council Member to sponsor the proposal and place it on the agenda.  So I went down to City Hall and took a seat at the meeting.  I waited.  And then I waited some more.  After a few hours went by, I kept on waiting.  Finally, I stood at the speakers’ podium and delivered the proposal. Needless to say, nothing happened to change the process.  But the next morning, I opened the Austin American-Statesman and saw my picture, along with a headline that read, “Agenda Critic Kept Waiting.”

Now it is 2014 and I am still waiting!

Believe it or not, the issue has arisen again and this time there is actual talk about getting something done with this reform.  With your help, perhaps we can turn that talk into action.  A delightfully friendly new City Hall reporter for the American-Statesman, Lilly Rockwell, has placed the issue front and center with this article from today’s paper.  Here is a telling excerpt:

“The property tax proposals were only one of three hot-button topics the council was set to consider on the 6 p.m. portion of the agenda but didn’t get to until after 1 a.m. The more than 300 people who flooded City Hall earlier that evening to testify on garage apartments and a popular animal shelter had trickled out of City Council Chambers as the clock ticked on.”

According to the article, several flustered Council Members expressed words similar to my sentiments over the last 28 years:  This is a situation up with which we can no longer put!  (With all due apologies to my wonderful high school English teacher).

Once again I have asked for a City Council sponsor to place a reform proposal on the agenda. Hopefully, this time for action!  Here is a draft for them to consider, as they work towards a long-overdue solution:

City Council Agenda Reform Proposal – 26th Anniversary Edition

  1. Public hearings should not be posted for 4:00 PM, as is commonly done under the current system.  If the item is expected to draw a large number of speakers, it should be posted after normal business hours and after the City Council’s dinner break. 6:30 PM would be ideal, to allow citizens time to get through the traffic to City Hall.
  2. Discussion items with large numbers of citizens signed up to speak should also be posted on or after 6:30 PM.  These items should be posted with a labeled “Time Certain.”
  3. Public hearings of citywide interest, such as budget hearings, utility rate hearings etc. may require a separate City Council Meting to accommodate the large number of speakers.  When these hearings are added to a full agenda, with zoning cases and other lengthy discussion items, it can often be 11:00 PM, midnight, or even past 1:00 AM before all of the speakers for the public hearings can have their say.
  4. The City Council should make their best effort to arrange the time sequence of agenda items, so that they can be taken up in an orderly and efficient manner.  Whenever the time certain arrives for a public hearing or discussion item, that item should proceed on time.  Unfinished items should be postponed to later in the meeting, or until the next City Council Meeting.
  5. Consider holding zoning hearings on a separate day, if the agenda contains one or more items with large numbers of speakers anticipated.
  6. The City Council should make a realistic assessment of whether an agenda is so crowded with items that citizens would be inconvenienced unreasonably if they came down to speak.  In those cases, the Council should move some of the items to a different day, or to a subsequent meeting.  Citizens should not be expected to stay up past midnight to address the City Council.
  7. Whenever possible, public hearings and discussion items with large numbers of speakers should be scheduled ahead of other lengthy items.  Give the citizens an opportunity to come to City Hall and speak, and then go home to their families at a respectable hour.
  8. While the mayor chairs the meetings and calls the agenda items, the City Council should establish a procedure that allows the entire Council to consider the order in which the items are called, as well as which items will be assigned a “time certain.”  This determination of time sequencing could be taken up at the Tuesday work sessions.  But the Council should still allow the flexibility for any Council member to make a motion during a meeting to shift the times for the items, based on the need to accommodate the convenience of public speakers.

What Can You Do to Help?

Email, tweet, and Facebook this blog posting to your friends.  Then contact all seven City Council Members here, and ask for action on this reform.

Speak Against The Urban Rail Plan On Thursday

1 Reply

By Bill Oakey – June 24, 2014

Citizens who have called for a chance to speak on the urban rail plan will get their wish this Thursday.  The City Council has set the time for 4:00 PM, with no limit on the number of speakers.  The good news is that this will not be a post-midnight meeting.  The Council has decided to hear three major topics that will draw speakers, with the urban rail plan being one of those.  After that they will most likely adjourn and finish the rest of the crowded agenda on Friday.  This scheduling update was provided by Council Member Kathie Tovo’s office.

You Can Sign Up Now To Speak Against Item #64

You can sign up at City Hall, 301 W. 2nd Street, anytime between now and whenever the item is called after 4:00 on Thursday.  Here are just a few of the reasons to oppose the current urban rail plan:

1. Many of us would like to support mass transit, but this is not the best plan for Austin.  The route from Highland Mall to East Riverside is not a densely populated area, and would do more to help land speculators and developers hoping to attract newcomers than current residents. The population patterns behind the 2000 urban rail route along Guadalupe and Lamar still make sense.  That ballot initiative passed within the City of Austin, and only failed at the polls because of opposition from outlying towns.

2. The $1 billion price tag would land you a property tax increase of $160 per year within five years on a $200,000 home.  That would come on top of a multitude of other tax increases between now and then.

3. The City Council is likely to bundle a 60 / 40 split for rail and roads into a single bond proposition for the November ballot.  The $1 billion cost would cover both.  Voters should not be forced to accept a questionable and highly unpopular rail plan in order to vote for road improvements. The hastily throw-together batch of mostly I-35 improvements was contrived only for the purpose of “sweetening” the rail vote, and citizens should reject that tactic outright.

4. Those who say “We have to start somewhere” should be informed that if the bonds pass in November, Project Connect plans to install permanent concrete dedicated bus lanes along the competing Lamar / Guadalupe route, closing it off forever to urban rail.

5. Project Connect has come up with a new humdinger of a deal to reduce the cost of the rail plan.  If you like paying your water and electric bills now, you will love this great idea!  They have decided to “share” the cost of relocation of utility lines along the rail route with the Austin Water Utility and Austin Energy.

A better sharing plan would be to email this blog posting to your friends and share it on Facebook and Twitter.

Can The People Take Control Under The New 10-1 City Council?

7 Replies

By Bill Oakey – June 23, 2014

We often hear that the City of Austin is at a crossroads.  Some call it a tipping point.  Water, traffic, and affordability have overwhelmed the community.  And unless we do something to change direction, the status quo threatens to put our neighborhoods and our very way of life at risk.

The new 10-1 district representation system for the Austin City Council offers an unprecedented opportunity for people at the grassroots level to take control of their destiny.  After all, the citizens are listed at the top of the City’s official organization chart.  But for far too long, we have been subjugated to the whims of special interests, most often with the assistance of their hand-picked outside consultants.

Austin maintains a council-manager form of government, rather than the strong-mayor type. Our mayor simply chairs the meetings, and has no more power than the other members.  However, most major decisions voted on by the City Council are filtered through the city staff at the behest of a very powerful city manager.  Our current city manager, Marc Ott, has often been depicted as a puppet of the powerful big business and real estate interests.  He manifests his control over the City in part by refusing to provide detailed responses to written questions from boards and commissions, or even to questions from our elected council members.

How Can the People Wrest Control Away From the Special Interests?

Step one has already been laid in front of us with the November election of council members from neighborhood districts.  Once these grassroots candidates are elected, we should insist that they hold some neighborhood forums to introduce us to candidates for a new city manager.  If the current City Council does not appoint an interim city manager from within the existing executive team, then the new City Council should do that early next year.  Then, they should seek community input on the selection of a permanent city manager who will be accountable to all the people.

How Can the District Council Members Best Represent the Interests of the People?

We should consider establishing formal lines of communication between council members and neighborhood leaders and other interested citizens from within each district.  Status quo communication is very haphazard and disorganized.  Have you ever tried to obtain a time-certain from a Council member on when a particular City Council agenda item might come up for discussion?  The rule of thumb is that you alert your friends and neighbors of a critical issue posted for action in the upcoming week.  Then you try to organize speakers to go to the council meeting.  You could wait as long as from 10:00 AM on Thursday morning until the meeting adjourns as late as 3:30 AM on Friday morning.

Under a new system of people-centric governance, the communication between district neighbors and their council member would not have to wait until the regular council meeting.  A website or Facebook page could be used to facilitate the communication.  Liaisons within each district could communicate through newsletters and listservs about pending issues that affect their area or the City at large.  District Council Members should hold regular meetings and forums right in their districts, as well as at City Hall.  Under the current system, a typical citizen is lucky to get a Council member or a policy aide to return a phone call or email.  There is no worthwhile process for the people to be effectively heard.

The Two Biggest Projects That Will Shape Our Future

There are two huge projects that directly affect affordability and the prospect of existing residents to survive Austin’s current transformation.

1. The Urban Rail Plan – The massively expensive plan to install electric streetcars from Highland Mall through U.T.’s new Medical District and across Lady Bird Lake to East Riverside is a dream scenario for land speculators and developers in the northeastern and southeastern sectors.  It would do little to help transportation for the heavy concentration of existing residents in North, Central, and West Austin.  The important thing to keep in mind here is that most of the route for urban rail was pre-ordained in 2008 by a consultant study.  See a 2008 Austin Chronicle report here.  For an eye-opening view of the gentrification and affordability issues with Washington D.C.’s new urban rail system, click here.

Those who say that “We have to start somewhere” should be aware that if the rail bonds pass, the other competing rail route along Lamar and Guadalupe would be removed from future consideration.  Project Connect has already planned to lay permanent concrete dedicated bus lanes along that route after the bond election.  For all of these reasons, we should vote no on the bonds and let the new City Council work with the entire community on an inclusive plan that earns broad based citizen support.

2. The Revision of the Land Development Code

You have probably heard about CodeNEXT.  This was sold to us as an opportunity to streamline and modernize our outdated land development code.  It was supposed to make it cheaper and less time consuming to remodel your home or expand or remodel an existing local business. But once again, it has been commandeered by the special interests and a very clever consulting team.

Just take a look at one report that has come out of the “community involvement” process.  Click here to see the “Listening to the Community Report.”  You will see lots of charts, graphs, and categories of significant issues raised by the citizens who attended the public meetings.  But notice the carefully and skillfully designed format of the report.  You can search every line on every page and you will see no summaries of public opinions of any kind whatsoever!

Yes, all of the prevailing issues are there: affordability, walkability, compatibility.  The word “density” is sprinkled generously throughout the pages.  But absolutely nowhere will you see a gauge of public opinion on maintaining compatibility in neighborhoods, limiting density, or even a clue as to what types of changes, if any, that the neighborhood participants would like to see. All one has to do, however, is read between the lines and look around to areas of Austin that have already been transformed.  What you will see is gentrification and high density, vertical mixed use (VMU) developments, nearly all of which contain luxury-priced living units.  Expect these buildings to arrive soon at a neighborhood near you.

Even more disturbing is another CodeNEXT report, called the “Land Development Code Diagnosis.”  On Page 30 you will find a pronouncement that individual neighborhood plans are “too restrictive” and “too complex,” compared to the envisioned scenario of a one-size-fits-all system, where anybody can build anything anywhere without too many burdensome regulations!

Here again, we need the new City Council to revisit the entire concept of rewriting the land development code.  But the involvement of the community and the format of the reports need to reflect what the people really want, as opposed to the pre-ordained whims of national consultants and the local special interests who control them like puppets on a string.

The Waller Creek Debacle – Why Can’t The City Talk To State Officials?

3 Replies

By Bill Oakey – June 18, 2014

This morning we awoke to this cheerful news from the Austin American-Statesman, regarding the botched location of the Waller Creek intake facility:

“A major design flaw in the city of Austin’s $149 million Waller Creek Tunnel project could cost between $15 million and $45 million to fix and delay part of the project by one to four years.”

A few weeks ago the City Council was informed that this facility was being constructed in a corridor that blocks a view of the State Capitol building that is prohibited by State law.  Their initial reaction was to issue a legal contract for up to $1.8 million, under the bizarre assumption that the City could possibly blame this problem on the engineers and contractors working on the project.  And they assumed the worse case scenario on correcting the problem – that the facility would have to be redesigned.

This morning the Statesman reported that the City’s Planning Commission saw no conflict with the Capitol view restrictions at a 2011 meeting when the facility was being permitted.  And it turns out there is already an existing State building and a tree that blocks the Capitol view in question.   None of this information was presented to the City Council, at least not in public session, when they sprang for the $1.8 million legal contract.

Now It’s Time for the City to Work With State Officials

It shouldn’t seem like too much of a stretch that the City and State officials could get together quickly and sort out this fiasco.  We were told when this first came up that waiting until January for the Legislature to convene was not a good option.  Well, would waiting one to four years and spending between $15 million and $45 million to redesign the intake facility be a better plan?

Perhaps it would in the view or our current City Manager.  But now the City Council has an opportunity to step in and take control of the situation.  Perhaps even a few of us citizens could write to our State Representatives and our State Senator and ask them for some help.  This thing should have never been allowed to get so far out of hand.  If the State Library and Archives building and a big oak tree are already in the same Capitol view corridor, then isn’t there some way that State officials could help our dysfunctional City staff here?

It will be interesting to see what the City Council does next.  Here’s a question.  Why wasn’t the City Planning Commission advised of the Capitol view obstruction during the permitting process?  And even last month when the City Council heard about it, why did they hire expensive lawyers instead of trying to work things out with a few phone calls and a couple of meetings with State officials?  If Legislative approval is required for an exemption, why not discuss the possibility and assess the situation before incurring millions of dollars of taxpayer expense?

Where’s The City Council Public Hearing On Urban Rail?

2 Replies

By Bill Oakey – June 17, 2014

On Thursday June 26, the Austin City Council is set to make one of the biggest decisions in modern Austin history.  They will vote on a resolution to approve the “Project Connect” urban rail plan, including the Riverside to Highland Mall route and the proposed funding.  The actual wording of the November bond proposition will come in a separate vote in August.

But there is one crucial omission in this process – a public hearing.

The City Council and the Capital Metro Board met this morning in a joint session to discuss the final urban rail plan.  This meeting will be broadcast on the City’s cable channel at 2:00 PM today, and a video of the meeting will be posted soon to the City of Austin’s website.

Many voters may not be aware of what exactly constitutes “Project Connect.”  It is a group of representatives from local governing bodies and their staffs that has been working on an all-encompassing mass transportation plan for the Austin area.  It includes rapid buses, commuter rail, and regional rail, in addition to the proposed urban rail project.  If you happen to belong to a community organization that hosted a Project Connect open house, or if you knew who they were and went to their website or Facebook page, then you might have a better idea of what is at stake in this major transportation initiative.

Unfortunately though, the urban rail project has not been communicated well enough yet for the average person on the street to understand what the proposal entails.  Just yesterday at the grocery store, a person mentioned that he had heard about the plan but did not know much about it.  “Does it go to the airport?” he asked me.  Nope.

There are two interesting things that I just learned about the plan within the past few days.  One is that Project Connect only decided towards the end of the planning process to include a tunnel at the north end of route near Hancock Center.  Somebody realized that there are other railroad tracks in that neighborhood, and that a new rail system would have to get over, under or around them somehow.  The other is that Project Connect’s plan includes constructing two permanent, dedicated bus lanes along the rapid bus route on Guadalupe / Lamar.  So, if anyone was looking at this fall’s bond election as “We have to start somewhere,” while assuming that more urban rail would soon be coming to a neighborhood near you, then keep these facts in mind.

Now, we are only days away from a City Council resolution that will set in stone the route and the funding plans for one of the biggest projects that Austin voters have encountered in at least 14 years.  (Since the last urban rail vote in 2000).  But the Council is planning to consider that resolution without a public hearing.

If you think a public hearing would be helpful, please use this link to contact all of the City Council members and ask for one to be scheduled at or before their June 26th meeting.

Let’s Support Eliza May For City Council District 8

Leave a reply

By Bill Oakey – June 16, 2014

As many of you may know, I am privileged to serve as the Campaign Treasurer for Eliza May, who is running for Austin City Council in District 8. We need Eliza May on Council. Here is why I am asking you to support Eliza.

Eliza has a distinguished history of public service, dating back over 25 years to her days as a Legislative Aide.  She is the person who helped me the most on the Over-65 School Tax Freeze and the Truth In Taxation bills that passed in the Legislature.  I have always admired her ability to tackle complex affordability issues with dedication and attention to details.

Over the years since then, she has continued to serve in many positions with integrity and distinction, including her stint as President of the Greater Austin Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. She chaired the A.I.S.D. Bond Oversight Committee where she ensured that the money approved was spent on projects approved by the voters.

With our new 10-1 City Council structure, we are going to need candidates with the experience and vision to hit the ground running next January.  Eliza has committed to supporting several important affordability reforms, including the ones below followed by her thoughtful comments.

– A general homestead exemption for Austin homeowners.  “A homestead exemption would provide immediate tax relief.  We need to take action as soon as possible to help allow people to stay in their homes.  The City Council has the same authority as the County to provide a homestead exemption.  It can be phased in over a few years, to ease the transition for the City Budget.”

– A comprehensive audit of all City Departments.  “We need to find ways to make City offices run more efficiently.   And we can learn from other Texas cities how to make improvements.  My goal is to put more resources where we need them and cut back in areas where there is waste or duplication.”

– Better transparency and accountability for the taxpayers.  “The public deserves to know what the City is adding to the budget and how much it will cost.  It’s time to stop hiding behind the tax rate when tax appraisals are rising.  We need to inform taxpayers what the true percentage of a tax increase would be, and lower the rate when necessary to keep Austin more affordability.”

-Make City Hall more open for citizen participation.  “Citizens should not have to wait up to 6 hours to speak on agenda items and public hearings.  We must find a way to schedule topics closer to the actual time they will be heard, and allow people to come and speak after normal working hours.”

I encourage you to do three things to help elect Eliza:

1. Join her campaign and learn more about Eliza May on the website.

2. Spread the word to your friends in District 8 and on Facebook and Twitter that Eliza May needs our support!

3. DONATE to the campaign. Your early investment will make it possible to for our campaign to not only have the necessary resources to deliver our message of change and engage the residents in our community, but also to provide the support needed to address the issues our community faces. Austin is changing rapidly and these changes will affect the quality of life in District 8.

Thank you for your action in supporting Eliza May today.

Sincerely,

Bill Oakey, Treasurer

Eliza May for Austin City Council, District 8

@Elizamaydist8  Facebook.com/Elizamayforaustin elizamayforaustin.com

Victory At City Hall For Water Utility Ratepayers!

2 Replies

By Bill Oakey – June 12, 2014

Today the City Council voted unanimously not to give away $1.4 million in fee waivers that would have impacted the Water Utility.  This is excellent news, and it shows that grass roots action can make a difference.

Thanks to all of you who helped by sending emails to the City Council.  Our voices were heard!

We still have a lot of work ahead of us on the affordability battlefront.

Stay tuned…

New Fee Waiver Would Cost Water Utility $1.4 Million! – What Is The City Council Thinking??

Leave a reply

By Bill Oakey – June 10, 2014

Just as we begin to catch our breath from one wasteful move by the City Council, here comes another one!  Item #63 on this Thursday’s agenda would give away $2.5 million of your money and mine in fee waivers to the new Seton Teaching Hospital.   This is appalling when you consider that we just got stock with an unprecedented property tax increase from Central Health that was supposed to cover the new U.T. medical school and this teaching hospital.

But here’s the most outrageous part of the deal on this new fee waiver.  $1.4 million of it would take revenue away from the Water Utility.  (To see the breakdown of the entire $2.5 million in fee waivers, go to the City Council agenda, click on Item #63, and then click on the fiscal note).

This financial hit to the Water Utility comes just after the new Fitch Bond Rating Service report that reduced the rating outlook for some of our Water Utility bonds from stable to negative. And it comes right on top of the news that we could face a 30% base rate increase in water rates under the new budget…PLUS a new drought fee!

A special Joint Committee on Water Utility Finance has been pouring over the books for several weeks, trying to find cost savings to help reduce the upcoming rate increase.  And now we are faced with this bone-headed fee waiver.  I can just hear somebody from the City saying, “Oh, but the $1.4 million in fees from Seton was not anticipated in the budget, so the waiver will have a neutral impact.”  I don’t know if it was in the budget or not, but we have heard statements along those lines before.  It’s only money after all, so what does it matter?

The bottom line from this City Council is becoming very clear.  They don’t understand the frustration of the taxpayers.  We know for certain that Mayor Lee Leffingwell and Mayor Pro-Tem Sheryl Cole are in favor of this latest fee waiver because they are both co-sponsors of the item on Thursday.  In fact, Leffingwell told the Statesman that the City has a “moral obligation” to do the fee waiver.

But where is the “moral obligation” to the taxpayers and ratepayers???

This week it’s a total of $2.5 million in fee giveaways, plus $30 to $40 million in wasteful spending by Austin Energy to build a new building, when they could buy a bigger space for less than half the price.  How much more in bad funding decisions will we see next week?  And the week after that?

Our only chance is to let our voices be heard, loud and clear!

Send an email to all the City Council members using this link.

Who Do You Know That Supports The Highland Mall To Riverside Rail Plan?

4 Replies

By Bill Oakey – June 6, 2014

Quick question – How many friends, neighbors and acquaintances do you know that plan to vote for the Highland Mall to Riverside urban rail bonds in November?

What was that…say again…?

Try asking that question the next time you are at a restaurant, a backyard gathering, a party, or a civic function.  The first thing you might hear is that they haven’t really thought enough about it.  Or, you might hear that they need to wait and see what the City Council decides to put on the ballot.

What you probably will not hear is a resounding chorus of support for the proposed rail plan and the staggering stair steps of annual property tax increases that come along with it.  (The Austin American-Statesman reported that the tax bite could raise our property taxes by 15% over the next six years).

I’ve been to enough public events over the past year to know that the kind of broad support needed to pass the rail bonds is simply not there.  The core voters who turn out for every Austin election do not have the “yes word” on their lips when the subject comes up.

What’s even more telling is how seldom the subject comes up at all.

We all hear a lot about traffic and transportation, and how Austin needs to find a way to deal with it.  But in all my discussions with various City Council candidates for the districts and the mayor’s race, not a single one has voluntarily brought up the Highland Mall to Riverside rail plan or told me that they were clamoring for it to pass.

And I will go another step further.  I’ve had numerous appointments with current City Council members on affordability issues since last year.  Not a single one of them has urged me to support the urban rail plan.  This tells me that at least some of them probably dread the fact that they are up against an August deadline to make a decision on what to put on the November ballot.  I strongly suspect that several Council members toss and turn at night, wishing that the issue would simply go away.  With the possible exception of Mayor Lee Leffingwell.

So, Where Does That Leave Austin After The Rail Bonds Fail?

That will be the subject of my blog posting on Monday.  You might be very surprised at the positive outcome that I will predict.