Today's #atxcouncil Agenda: The merely modestly bad....

"Prepare your outside work,
Make it fit for yourself in the field;
And afterward build your house."
Proverbs 24:27

[Note: You can view the full agenda here.]

We're about to head in to tonight's dumpster fire of a council meeting.  Today's agenda has one modestly good item [item 100], two awful items [item 52 and 55], and four additional items that are bad but not super consequential.  We'll have a longer write up of the first three items tomorrow, but here's a rundown of the modestly bad:

18.	Approve a resolution ratifying the collective bargaining agreement between the City and the Austin Firefighters Association relating to wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment for Austin firefighters.

This would pour more money into the status quo with the firefighters union; keep in mind, this is the same firefighters union that is getting the city sued due to illegal subsidies in the current contract.

20.

Approve a resolution consenting to the issuance of Multi-family Private Activity Bonds, by Austin Affordable PFC, Inc., an affiliate of the Housing Authority of the City of Austin, in an amount not to exceed $38,000,000 to finance, in part, the development and new construction of an affordable multi-family rental development located at the southwest corner of Dessau Road and Howard Lane.(District 7)

This is a bad idea for the same reason that subsidized housing is always a bad idea: Subsidized housing always and forever raises the cost of housing for eveyone who doesn't get a subsidized unit and that's the vast majority of people.

27.

Authorize negotiation and execution of an 84-month lease for approximately 59,494 square feet of office space for the Development Services Department and Austin Energy, at 5202 East Ben White Boulevard, in Austin, Travis County, Texas, from 5204 BEN WHITE 2017, LP, A TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, in an  amount not to exceed $10,936,187.34 (District 3).

Remember, 5 weeks ago, when "development services" got $122 million for a new building?!?  Well, now they're getting a seven year extension of the status quo.  Either the city didn't level with us about the building they approved last month, or our longstanding complaint about the city's inability to complete projects in a remotely timely manner applies; most likely both, but neither is good.

99.	Conduct a public hearing and consider an ordinance amending City Code Section 25-2-355 relating to voting requirements applicable to zoning recommendations by the Historic Landmark Commission.

We discussed this issue in relation to a bill the legislature considered in April.  This item would weaken the existing protections for property owners, but wouldn't gut them entirely.  Still, not good.

Bottom Line: Honestly, we need a hug.