#TXLEGE: Honestly, just ABOLISH the damn #atxcouncil

"Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?"

2 Corinthians 6:14

Widely expected, but still:

The Austin City Council unanimously approved a $4.1B budget on Thursday that includes up to $150 million in cuts to police budgets over the coming year, although only $20 million will be cut immediately, city officials said.

What else is there to even say?!?

This will, obviously, be a complete debacle. As someone who grew up in New York City, the phrase "Dinkinsesque" comes to mind. Consequences are completely predictable.

But there real question is what's next?!?

There are those who will say we need to vote out the current council. Sure. We absolutely should. Rah, rah, Mackenzie Kelly and all that.

But we've done that before, and while it certainly helped, we're still here.

There are those who will say we need the legislature to step in. We're not opposed. But there past few years have shown that that's an inconsistent solution.

If we're going to take this to the legislature, we need to stop playing defensive whack-a-mole.

The Texas legislature has the authority to revoke the City of Austin's charter. They should use it. It's (long past) time.

We've actually been looking into this for awhile. At some point, we explain everything in more details. But some quick hits on pracitical considerations:

•  All city ordinances would be null and void, we'd simply live under state law.
  

•  State law already covers the crimes that actually matter (eg. murder, rape, assault, financial/property crimes).
  

•  DPS could absorb APD (and their pension liabilities).
  

• The county already covers the important courts/criminal functions.
  

•  Besides public safety, the biggest item in the city's general fund is what's called "development services."  This basically means all of the land use/permitting/zoning restrictions that make it impossible to build anything in this town.  Adios.
  

•  Defaulting on the City of Austin's municipal debt sends a good message to Wall St.
  

•  Sell the soccer stadium/land parcel to the team at it's full assessed value at the time council approved their deal in 2018.
  

•  The biggest challenge is how to privatize Austin Energy/Water in an open and transparent manner.  Obviously, they go private.  But it's got to be done properly.  Otherwise, you're looking at what happened with the oligarchs circa 1992 in the former Soviet Union.

Bottom Line:  We've tried everything else.

Austin Water DEBACLE a textbook example of Why we need an Audit

"Therefore, putting away lying, 'Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,' for we are members of one another."
Ephesians 4:25

UPDATE: We haven't discussed this topic with Ellen Troxlair, but apparently great minds think alike....

-----

Seriously?!?

The City of Austin's water utility has issued a citywide boil-water notice as it struggles with the impact of debris from flooding on its water treatment capabilities. Austin Water advises customers to boil water for three minutes before consuming it and says that water filtration systems alone will not remove harmful bacteria.

The utility says there have been no positive tests for "bacterial infiltration" of the water system so far, but emphasizes that there is still a risk. Austin Water has also prohibited the use of water to irrigate lawns or foundations, fill pools, run fountains or ponds, and wash vehicles, pavement or other surfaces.

....

Restaurants have closed for the day because of water concerns and bottled water has sold out at grocery stores across the city.

"The high level of debris, silt and mud requires extended filtration that slows the process of getting treated water into the system," Austin Water said in a press release. "To provide necessary water pressure for fire protection, plants must distribute water at treatment levels not typical of the utility’s high standards for consumption."

....

Austin Water Director Greg Meszaros said last week's flooding washed untold volumes of soil, silt and debris into the river system. Austin Water says all three of its water treatment plants are currently running at a third to a quarter of the capacity they would normally run.

Normally, Austin Water is able to treat more than 300 million gallons a day, but the utility has been only able to process only a little more than 100 million gallons of water for the last two days.

"It's been a real struggle," Meszaros said. "We haven't had a violation yet but we believe one is probable, and we wanted to issue this boil-water notice ahead of all of that."

What a PATHETIC failure.

Newsflash: This is Central Texas.  Heavy rainfall happens from time to time.  Nothing that has happened in the past week is out of the ordinary.

But the real outrage is that Austin Water has a Billion dollar annual budget.  Yet they can't plan for heavy rain?!?  What are they doing?!?

Apparently, nothing good:

If you live in #Austin, remember this: Instead of improving its water infrastructure, @austintexasgov spent a bunch of money to embed an artist in the city's Watershed Protection Dept. Let that sink in. #txlege #atx #tcot @TPPF https://t.co/tXHyJYILin

— James Quintero (@JamesQuinteroTX) October 22, 201

Seriously, that "artist in residence" character sound like a real winner.

Bottom Line: When you're getting over a Billion dollars a year and you fail to plan for an obvious and predictable occurrence, it might be time to let an outsider take a look at your books....

#atxcouncil likely to Rubber Stamp $150 MILLION (+) in Solar Energy contracts Thursday

"The crown of the wise is their riches,
But the foolishness of fools is folly."
Proverbs 14:24

The things you learn when you read the City Council agenda:

Oh good grief.

Obviously, the primary reason to oppose this contract is that the $10 to $12 million annual cost will be passed along to ratepayers.  That means higher electric bills.  Then there's also the fact that this contract will run for 15 years.

But what makes this particularly galling is the "climate change" hypocrisy we're likely to see from several NIMBY council members.  We'd expect Kathie Tovo, Alison Alter, and Leslie Pool to use this vote to bolster their environmentalist street cred.  But, when the subject returns to Code Next, those three council members will lead the charge for land use policies that lead to higher carbon emissions.

The same restrictive land-use policies that drive up housing costs and produce traffic also lead to higher carbon emissions.

Bottom Line: Tovo, Alter, and Pool will support for a meaningless mandate that will drive up everyone's electric bills without achieving their stated goals, but then they fight the only policy that can actually accomplish their stated goals...and all for the low, low cost of $150 million (in other people's money).

-------

Addendum: It's also worth pondering whose cronies are getting paid on this contract.

#TroxRox; aiming at Adler/Ott budget MONSTROSITY....

"An inheritance gained hastily at the beginning
Will not be blessed at the end."
Proverbs 20:21

Amen, from this morning's Statesman:

When voters sent the new 10-1 council to City Hall, they did so with a clear mandate to address the rapidly rising cost of living in Austin in order to slow gentrification, address economic segregation, keep long time Austinites in their homes, and protect seniors — and the rest of us, too — from losing their quality of life. Yet, as we enter our second budget cycle, “affordability” seems to be slipping further and further away.

In these next few weeks leading up to budget adoption, critical decisions about property taxes, utility bills and city programs will be made. This is when the difficult choices are supposed to happen. But the proposed budget takes the easy road at every turn.

It includes an increase to all utility bills and every major fee in the city, and it proposes adopting the maximum tax rate allowable under state law. General Fund spending is increasing a whopping $58 million, and an additional 437 new city employees are being added to the payroll.

....

The growth is certainly already contributing the city’s coffers. Property tax revenue from new construction is expected to increase by $10.2 million. Sales tax for the city is expected to increase by $8.5 million. Hotel occupancy taxes could rise by $11.2 million. Licensing, permitting, and inspection revenues could increase by $9.1 million. Charges for services other than utilities could increase by $2.4 million. Parking revenue could go up by $900,000. Other taxes, which includes alcohol tax is expected at $1.7 million.

This means that the city is already bringing in well over $40 million in additional revenue this year, and is still going to turn to you for more money.

The city must learn to live within reasonable means, set goals that have measurable outcomes, and scrutinize every program in order to become relentlessly efficient with taxpayer dollars.

....

Beyond that, the city could choose not to add any new positions until the over 1,000 existing vacant — but fully funded — positions are filled. Save the money allocated to these vacant positions as a credit to the next year’s budget. The city could limit the surprisingly large marketing budgets and significant transfers to other departments from Austin Energy, Austin Water, and Austin Resource Recovery.

Read the whole thing here.

#ATXCouncil Budget/Bond (bad) news and notes....

“For My people are foolish,
They have not known Me.
They are silly children,
And they have no understanding.
They are wise to do evil,
But to do good they have no knowledge.”
Jeremiah 4:22

The fiscal tea leaves from city hall do not look good.  We discussed the budget trainwreck last week.  The indefatigable Austin Affordability digs down deeper:

Before you even start reading this, get ready to think about what you can do to help. The proposed City Budget is moving like a freight train through City Hall. We don’t have much time to slow it down. What we face is a taxpayer, utility ratepayer and fee payer disaster on two major levels:

1. The budget raises property taxes by 8% above the effective rate, which is the highest allowed under Texas law, without triggering a rollback election.

2. Every utility charge and utility add-on fee is slated for increases – so high that the total dollar impact on the “typical” resident is 2.4 times higher than the record tax increase!

....

How Does the City Staff Rationalize These High Proposed Increases?

In Volume 1, Page 29 of the budget, you will find a cheerful note declaring that a “typical family” would only pay $324 per month for City taxes and fees. They state that this is only 4.8% of the median family income for our region. Well, just look at your utility bills and your property tax bills. Then, sit down with your neighbors and take a look at theirs. Ask each other how many of you would consider yourself “typical,” based on this chart in the Budget. If you live in anything larger than a small condo, your utility bills, fees and taxes are probably much higher.

But here’s the biggest flaw in the argument about City taxes and fees being “only a tiny portion” of your annual income. That doesn’t account for the long parade of other taxes from AISD, Travis County, Central Health and ACC. Of course you could isolate just one taxing entity on your total bill and claim that it isn’t really all that bad. But hey, we have to pay the entire bill! And it’s absurd to suggest that a “typical” family currently pays only $221 per month on their utility bills. The mere suggestion put forth in the City Manager’s proposed Budget that we the citizens don’t have a problem with these costs is outrageous, preposterous and insulting to our collective intelligence! 

.... 

How Could the City Council Easily Trim the Budget?

Last year I fought hard to convince them to apply cost of living pay increases on a sliding scale. The wealthy managers and executives at the top do not need the same percentage increase as the lowest paid grunt workers. Several City Council members spoke favorably of the idea and even floated various scenarios to make it happen. I pointed out that many times during my 35 year career as a State employee, the Legislature gave us flat dollar amounts as pay raises. This helped the lowest paid workers and held down the skewed impact of percentage increases.  But last year, the City Manager sent a screaming and crying letter to the City Council, complaining that the entire staff had been humiliated by the suggestion of more equitable pay increases. This caused the City Council to fold their tents and abandon the idea immediately.

Next, the potential transportation bond.  Sources have told us it's gotten worse since it went to the city manager.  We had planned to loop back to it next week, but the Statesman has some recent developments:

Austin Mayor Steve Adler’s unprecedentedly huge transportation bond proposal appears to have survived its summer vacation.

The Austin City Council, just back from a month off, had few discouraging words in an informal work session Tuesday as it discussed Adler’s $720 million proposal, which is largely focused on road improvements, and how it might go about putting the measure before voters in November. If the council wants to hold such an election, state law requires the council members vote to do so by Aug. 22.

The council likely will take that definitive vote Aug. 18, after hearing from the public at an Aug. 11 council meeting.

If approved, the bonds would trigger a property tax increase — phased in through about 2020 and in place for about 20 years after that — of just under $60 on a $250,000 home. 

....

[T]he council is focusing on the Adler plan, which is centered on overhauling up to eight key Austin arteries: North Lamar, Burnet Road, Airport Boulevard, East Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Guadalupe Street, East Riverside Drive, South Lamar and another South Austin corridor to be chosen later. Under the proposal, the city would spend about $482 million adding bike lanes, medians, better sidewalks, trees, street furniture, bus pullouts and intersections improvements to those roads.The council voted 8-3 on June 23 to ask city staffers to bring back an election proposal in August, and that handiwork was before the panel Tuesday.

Rather than the arguments from the spring about how large the plan would be (it is five times larger than any transportation bond proposition previously approved by Austin voters) or its makeup, the council is now focused on how to make the request of voters. Between now and Aug. 18 the council must decide how specific and lengthy to make the language that will appear on the ballot.

Read the original articles here and here.

There will be plenty of time for further comment, but we'll close (for now) with a suggestion: If Mayor Adler and the council majority are serious about passing a major transportation bond this fall, it would help their cause (and their credibility) to nip these Austin Energy "rate" and "fee" hikes (ie. tax increases) in the bud during the August budget season.

#ATXCouncil District 7: Natalie Gauldin's PROMISING Launch!!!

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

We recently attended Natalie Gauldin's campaign launch party for council district 7.  We followed that up with an extended telephone conversation.  We don't expect to agree with her on everything, but we have substantial overlap on the biggest issues Austin will face over the next few years.



The biggest issue where we agree is housing and land use.  The biggest reason why housing costs in Austin have exploded in recent years are NIMBY-style restrictions that prohibit construction in the urban core.  This restricts the supply of housing (which increases the cost) while simultaneously pushing what construction does occur to the perimeter (which, of course, begets traffic).

Gauldin wants to expand 'opportunities and options' for land use.  She wants to lower housing costs by increasing property rights.   As one example, she wants to lift lot-size restrictions that incentivize building McMansions instead of multi-unit residences in the urban core.  She has recently led an effort to secure new construction in central Austin and also helped reduce restrictions on 'granny flats.'  In other words, her record includes tangible steps in the right direction.

Gauldin's priorities on council will be affordability and transportation...which segued into our discussion of technological regulation.  Council's actions over the last year related to Uber/Lyft and Short Term rentals were a distraction from her priorities.  Gauldin opposes both.  As future cases emerge, she would need to see meaningful public demand for regulation and data that proves the regulations in question would achieve their intended purpose before she would consider it.  This is a remarkably refreshing perspective for a member of the Austin city council.

In discussing taxes, without prompting she brought up the fact that 'fees' on Austin energy bills are actually hidden taxes.  She didn't know it when she brought it up, but that's actually one of our gigantic pet peeves in local governance.  On property taxes, she is unenthusiastic about expanding a homestead exemption that ignores the hidden tax burden on renters, but she wants to discuss more meaningful reductions in the tax rate.

We also discussed various scenarios for reforming the city bureaucracy.  We were pleased to learn she believes the city staff should serve the priorities set by the elected council, not the other way around.  This stands in contrast to an incumbent who has been a rubber stamp for the bureaucracy and voted to give the city manager a raise.

Speaking of the incumbent, did we mention that Natalie Gauldin is challenging Leslie Pool?!?  That, by itself, should tell readers everything the need to know.  We'd rather discuss the challenger's positives than the incumbent's negatives, but we can go there as necessary.

That's not to say we agree with Natalie Gauldin universally.  She has a higher opinion of the viability of bike trails and rail than this website.  That being said, her views on issues like bike trails and rail make her a better fit for the district.

Bottom Line: Housing costs and land use regulation are the biggest issue council must confront in coming years.  We cannot address Austin's affordability challenges unless we tackle housing.  While we do not expect do agree with her across the board, the early signs on the most important issues are highly encouraging.

Troxclair Discovers $3 Million in City Budget

"And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart."
Galatians 6:9

Well, well, well:

According to information provided to the American-Statesman on Tuesday, the city has 32 full-time equivalent staff positions that have been vacant longer than 12 months, amounting to about $2.9 million in salary and retirement costs. City spokesman Bryce Bencivengo said the city has offers pending on 13 of those jobs.

“For transparency’s sake, I think a lot of people would be surprised to know, just like I was, that we have positions that have been vacant since 2005,” Troxclair said, adding that it was the council’s responsibility to “ask questions about what that money is being used for and whether or not we need to continue funding a position that has not been filled.”

Troxclair’s proposed resolution, slated to come before the council Thursday, would direct the city manager to bring a budget amendment to every regular City Council meeting that would “de-appropriate” funds allocated to rank-and-file city jobs that have been vacant at least 12 months. But Troxclair said Tuesday her intent was to have the council informed about vacancies and given the option to eliminate those vacancies based on what department directors say about why the jobs have gone unfilled.

She said she plans to change the resolution so that the council would be updated less frequently, perhaps a midyear check-in rather than at every regular City Council meeting.

Her resolution is co-sponsored by Council Members Ora Houston, Don Zimmerman, Sheri Gallo and Ann Kitchen.

....

“There is so much more information that Ms. Troxclair and the other sponsors need to know,” Oakey wrote in an email, suggesting the council impose a limit on the number of vacant positions and request an accounting of what happens to those dollars.

Of all city departments, Austin Energy has the most longtime vacancies, with 13 positions that have been open for 12 months, accounting for about $1.3 million worth of salary, health care and retirement costs. These vacant positions include highly specialized jobs such as power system engineers and distribution electricians.

Read the whole thing here.

-----

Bottom Line: This website is grateful for Councilmember Troxclair's faithful diligence.

Austin City Council: Conservative/Libertarian Voter Guide

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

Author's Note: Readers can find their Austin City Council District here; readers can find TCRP's endorsement spreadsheet here.

With early voting set to commence in Austin's historic 10-1 election, the 78 candidates currently running can be intimidating.  Here at Cahnman's Musings, we've been studying these races for months.  We endorse the following candidates:

District 1 -- (Far Northeast Austin): Michael Cargill

Texas Firearms Celebrity Michael Cargill was the first federally licensed firearms dealer to accept BITCOIN in his store.  That, by itself, should tell you everything you need to know about him.  In a city where entrenched special interests are abusing the political process to preserve their status, Cargill's actions illustrate his commitment to genuine innovation.

Cargill has been a fixture in local politics for some time.  In 2012, he ran against an incumbent Travis County constable who had previously accepted money from drug cartels.  Unfortunately, a la Rosemary Lehmberg, the Democrat machine rallied around their incumbent.  In 2013, Cargill was a critical presence in the successful campaign against the Austin ISD bond.  He has a documented history of taking on petty tyrants.

Cargill is running on a platform of fiscal responsibility and reducing traffic.  He has signed the Citizens for Tax Relif NOW pledge.  He has also been endorsed by Texans for Accountable Government (TAG). Specifically, he has proposed widening 183 as a free road and relocating City of Austin offices from downtown to the outskirts of the city.   Cargill will also protect our second amendment rights from gun grabbing politicians at the local level.

Avoid: DeWayne Lofton -- Supports the rail bond.

District 2 -- (Southeast Austin): They All Suck.

District 3 -- (Central East Austin): Kent Philips

A former regional coordinator for Debra Medina, Kent Phillips is running to lower Austin's cost of living by eliminating wasteful spending and burdensome regulations.  Kent intends to audit the city budget, implement zero-based budgeting, and pass budgets at the effective tax rate.  Kent understands that the root cause of Austin's current affordability challenges is a City Council (and County and School District) that regulates too much, spends too much, and taxes too much.

Endorsed by TAG, Kent is a regular attendee at Liberty on the Rocks and other liberty themed events around Austin.

As a rapidly gentrifying part of town, affordability challenges are especially poignant in District 3.  We should know, this is our home district.  We intend to vote for Kent Philips and you should as well.

Avoid: Susana Almanza -- Supports $15 hr minimum wage; remember, this one's personal.

District 4 -- (North Central Austin): Laura Pressley

The best prepared and most knowledgeable candidate in this district, Laura Pressley is the clear choice in District 4.  A 26 year Austin resident, Laura was instrumental in passing 10-1.  She has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Laura ran against Mike Martinez in 2012.  She supports a 20% homestead exemption and reduction (Author's note: preferably elimination) of corporate subsidies.  She has spoken previously about cost saving measures at Austin Energy.

Laura has previously supported Ron Paul and has earned the endorsement of TAG.  She intends to curb the "we're rich" culture of spending at City Hall. Pressley is the candidate in district 4 most clearly committed to the fiscal pruning City Hall desperately needs.

Avoid: Gregorio Casar -- A Leftist Demagogue in the mold of Julian Castro and Hugo Chavez who has raised serious money.

District 5 (South Central Austin): Mike Rodriguez

Another longtime 10-1 advocate, Mike Rodriguez knows the City of Austin's budget in more detail than anyone this author has ever met.  He's been studying the City of Austin's culture of overspending for decades.  And it shows.

Mike wants lower cost of living by reducing burdensome regulations.  He specifically cites Project Connect, Code Next, and Imagine Austin.  He has been endorsed by Texans for Fiscal Responsibility (TFR) and has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Mike says it best on his website: "Rather than always thinking of what more government can do, Mike will stay focused on the need to limit any added burden on our taxpayers and renters."

District 6 (Far Northwest Austin): Jay Wiley

Jay Wiley got in this race over a year ago.  He's raised more money than all the other candidates combined.  He's been endorsed by TFR and was the first candidate in the race to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.  While there are other fantastic candidates in this district, this isn't their time or race.  Don't try to get cute.  If conservative voters are smart, this can be an easy win.  Vote with your head, not your heart.



District 7 (North Austin): Ed English

In a race full of career bureaucrats, Ed English is the only candidate in District 7 to have worked in the real world.  A successful businessman, Ed led the fight to pass 10-1.  As a leader of Austinites for Geographic Representation, he donated "several thousand hours" over a "two year period".

Ed is running to eliminate wasteful spending and give hard working taxpayers "real relief."  He understand that excessive regulation, excessive spending, and excessive taxation are the root cause of Austin's affordability challenges.  He also opposed boondoggles like water treatment plant #4 and the biomass plant.

Finally, Ed is the only district 7 candidate who lives north of 183.  This is an important advantage, considering that two thirds of the district is north of 183.  He has also signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

District 8 (Southwest Austin): Ellen Troxclair

Ellen Troxclair has been called "a spending hawk."  She's also been called "a suburban pit bull."  We have another title for the list: Ellen Troxclair is a femme fatale for bloated government.

Considering the demographics of the district and her issue positions relative to the other candidates, supporting Ellen is the easiest decision in the city.  District 8 is a 50/50 district, and Ellen is the only conservative candidate in the race.  In addition to working as a realtor, Ellen is a former chief of staff to State Rep Jason Isaac and has been endorsed by TFR and has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Traffic congestion is, easily and by far, the biggest problem in district 8.  Ellen has pledged to start with "with improving our road system....Money spent on transportation solutions should focus on getting the greatest number of people to the most in-demand locations. To help with the congestion, we must increase our road capacity, improve our bus service to the region, and allow for innovate transportation options such as Lyft and Uber."

District 9 (Central Austin): Erin McGann

Erin McGann is the only candidate running in district 9 who isn't an incumbent.  That should tell you everything you need to know.  She's been endorsed by TFR and has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Erin is the only candidate in district 9 to oppose the current rail boondoggle.  Erin supports cost effective traffic solutions like traffic-light synchronization and expanded bus service.  She also opposes corporate-welfare masquerading as "business incentives."

Regarding affordability and the central premise of her campaign, Erin writes: "Current City Council doesn’t seem to understand the correlation between increased taxes and affordability. When Council approves more spending, higher utilities or taxes, the level of affordability decreases, and yet Council continues to pay lip service to affordability while increasing spending.  We need prioritize the basic needs of Austin – fix our roads and sidewalks, encourage and improve middle-income apartments and condos, the increase the number of multi-bedroom units for families, keep utility rates low, fund our first responders and end corporate subsidies."

Avoid: Riley and Tovo are both AWFUL!!!

District 10 (West Austin): Bill Worsham

While there are several candidates with a Republican voting history in district 10, Bill is the most solidly conservative.  He's been endorsed by TFR and TAG and was the first candidate in district 10 to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.  As a civil engineer, Bill's professional background leaves him uniquely suited to understand the technical details of Austin's transportation challenges.

On transportation, Bill supports expanding our road and highway network.  He supports ridesharing and cost effective solutions like traffic light synchronization.  He does not support the current rail proposal.

Bill understands how regulation and taxation indirectly inflates housing costs.  He is specifically committed to reducing red tape for restaurant owners.  He's the candidate best positioned to give the Austin City Council the radical course correction it needs next January.

Avoid: Robert Thomas -- Claims to be a fiscal conservative but brags about sitting on the Austin ISD bond committee on his campaign website.

Mayor (Citywide): Todd Phelps

With Adler virtually guaranteed to make the runoff, there's no reason not to swing for the fences in the first round of the mayoral race.  Unlike the "big three," Todd Phelps opposes the current urban rail boondoggle.  He was the first mayoral candidate to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Avoid: Mike Martinez -- The worst member of the current council.








Bond Initiatives -- Vote AGAINST all:

• Prop. 1 City of Austin (Urban Rail)
• Prop. 1 ACC
• Prop. 2 ACC
• Prop. 1 State of Texas ("Transportation")

Lame-Duck City Council shuts out public to raise electric rates

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

Good grief, you leave town for two days and while you're gone:

The Austin American-Statesman reports that Austin’s city council decided that it doesn’t want to hear from anyone who opposes its policies, and doesn’t care about Texas open meetings laws.

Here’s what happened, according to the report. The Austin city council has been interested in imposing some harsh new environmental standards on Austin Energy. Austin Energy, the city-owned electric company, opposes those regulations because it believes that they will force energy prices to hike, by a whole lot. That will hurt the city’s thriving economy and take money out of residents’ pocketbooks. Businesses generally oppose the regulations, while the Sierra Club and other environmental interests support them.

At the city council meeting Thursday night, those regulations were on the agenda. The city council sent everyone home who had come to speak on the issue, which included many who opposed it, with the assurance that the regulations would not be taken up in that meeting. The council said that the regulations would come up in its Friday meeting instead.

So they cleared the room of everyone who opposed the regulations. Which they’re not supposed to do.

And then they reversed course and put the regulations on the agenda, and passed them. Representatives from Austin Energy had left the meeting, and were at a restaurant when the vote took place.

The new council CANNOT take office quickly enough; read the whole thing here.

"Fee" Increases: Austin Energy thinks you're stupid

"nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."
1 Corinthians 6:10 [Emphasis added]

Via Austin Affordability:

When Austin gets embroiled in a formal Austin Energy rate case, it brings on tons of media attention and large crowds of customers at public meetings. The rate hearings can last for several months. What you may not realize though is that about 35% of your electric bill comes from the fuel charge. The bureaucratic name for it on your bill is the “power supply adjustment charge.”

Well, that charge is set to go up in a few months by 4.4%, which is on top of the 4.6% increase that we got last year. So, we’re talking about a 9% increase over a two-year period. Like so many City regulations and policies these days, the Austin Energy fuel charge needs a good thorough public review and much better transparency. It’s like one of those Facebook relationship status deals, where somebody says “It’s complicated.”

Supposedly, the fuel charges are passed through to the customer at no more than what it costs the utility. But when we hear that natural gas prices have fallen like a rock over the last several years, why would Austin Energy be jacking up the cost? And why would the increases compound themselves instead of leveling off? This is where I think Austin Energy has a lot of explaining to do.

Read the whole thing here.

Austin Urban Rail: Opponents detail the next great swindle

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

Opponents of the Austin Rail boondoggle held their first press conference this morning.  To our knowledge, KEYE, KXAN, and Time Warner were present.  Cahnman's Musings presents the entirety of the prepared remarks.

Jim Skaggs; COST AUSTIN:


Highlights:

• Rail will dramatically increase congestion.

• Forms a barrier wall in the middle of central Austin.

• Only 6,500 new transit trips per day out of 8 million total in Austin roadways.

• 99% of all trips in the region will continue to be by road.

• MoPac expansion, 290, and 183A move 500,000 people per day for same cost.

• Any rail/road combination will place roads 2nd.

• Vote against ANY proposal that includes rail.

Roger Falk; Travis County Taxpayers Union:

Highlights:

• Misleaders are out again.

• This $1.4 billion only covers a small section on a long term plan.

• "Our taxes are pricing people out of their homes now."

• "This silly little trolley" won't help "if you're sitting in traffic on 360."

• Take the lights off of 360 and 183.

• There's no Federal dollars committed.

• If the GOP takes over the U.S. Senate this fall, the Federal $ could dry up.
• Personal Note: Roger doesn't know this, but your humble author has already held preliminary discussions with staff members from Texas' Congressional delegation about cutting off Federal Funding for this project.

Bill Oakley; AustinAffordability.com:



Highlights:

• Rail for Sale -- Sold to various special interests and paid for by taxpayers.
• Sweetheart real estate deals on East Riverside.

• Gigantic Boondoggle for UT
• Massive Taxpayer expenditure to help Med School employees commute.

• Money laundering costs thru Austin Energy and Austin Water Utility.

Austin Energy's latest $40 Million Swindle

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

Are you kidding?!?

If you owned a business that needed more space, what choice would you make on this deal. Would you build a brand new building for $67 million, or would you buy a bigger building with plenty of parking right next door for less than half the price?

Well, guess what…Austin Energy not only wants to spend $67 million for the new building, but on June 12th they will ask the City Council for an additional $9 million to develop the PLANS for it! The bureaucracy is alive and well, but this time we can’t let them get away with it.

Brian Rodgers, who is well-known for exposing the commercial tax appraisal inequities several years ago, sent out an alert this morning on the Austin Energy building boondoggle. A broker friend of his advised him that the huge 48 acre campus formerly owned by AMD is available for sale for $25 million. The address is 5900 East Ben White. It is located just a few feet away from the spot where Austin Energy wants to build their boondoggle. The price tag for AE’s dream building comes in at $375 per square foot, which is higher than the going rate for many downtown buildings. There is also another building nearby that should be evaluated for cost.

Read the whole thing, including Austin Energy's nauseatingly arrogant response, here.