WillCo #TXLEGE: Flannigan's a known liability...but GOL-LY James Talarico

"They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;
There is none who does good,
No, not one."
Psalm 14:3

James Talarico is a Democrat state rep from Round Rock who got swept in during the 2018 wave.  He's best known as a chump who took promises from Dennis Bonnen at face value.   Nevertheless, to this point, we've expected Talarico would win re-election fairly easily.

But this is insane:

Talarico disclosed the $2,500 donation in a June 3 post on Facebook, in which he also called on others to donate to Austin Justice Coalition and included a link to its website. Valdez commented, “It’s obvious that Rep. Talarico stands on the far left and opposes anything law enforcement does to protect the citizens of Williamson County and the citizens of our district.”

Asked his views on defunding the police, Talarico told Honest Austin, “Our system of policing is deeply broken. We must replace it with something new and something better.”

“As they have throughout our history, the voices in the street—particularly Black voices—are calling us to imagine a different world. We expect protestors to be nonviolent. But what if we expected our government to be nonviolent? What if we stopped bringing a gun to every emergency?”

Talarico continued, “What if we called a three-digit number to summon highly-trained crisis interventionists to address a problem in our neighborhood? What if we made rehabilitation, reconciliation, and restoration our operating principles?”

“We need to invest in community-based solutions that cure the societal ills that we ask the police to treat: poverty, homelessness, substance abuse, mental health disorders… We must empower our communities, not police them. Only then will we have true public safety.”

Besides donating to the Austin Justice Coalition, Rep. Talarico also made a $50 personal donation to the reelection campaign of Jimmy Flannigan, an Austin City Council member who helped lead the charge to slash $150 million from the city’s police budget.

Talarico explained that Flannigan, who chairs the Council’s Public Safety Committee, was “a long-time friend of mine and a selfless public servant,” noting that he supported Flannigan’s positions on transportation, affordable housing, and government transparency.

That's just such an astounding thing to read: A sitting state rep, in Williamson frickin' County, just endorsed the Austin city council's "send a social worker" approach to public safety.

Understand something: People move to Round Rock is to escape the jurisdiction of the Austin city council.   That's the only reason why Round Rock is a thing.  Pledging to bring the worst aspects of Austin's approach to public safety hardly seems promising in WillCo.

It's...quite something.

Furthermore, let's not overlook the whole Flanngan connection. We get it: They're friends (although that, in and of itself, is revealing). And James Talarico wants to support his friend. Still.

Like it or not, James Talarico's friend was a primary ringleader of Austin's policies related to police defunding and (let's not kid ourselves) homelessness.

Like Austin's homeless encampments?!? Vote James Talarico!!!

Bottom Line: This race just moved from "Leans D" to "Tossup."

#atxcouncil: Save Austin Now *MIGHT* have firepower for serious change

"[R]edeeming the time, because the days are evil."
Ephesians 5:16

Interesting:

A group that has opposed city policy changes allowing camping in many public spaces in Austin announced plans Monday to take camping rules to voters in November.

Matt Mackowiak, chair of the Travis County Republican Party and co-founder of the nonprofit, nonpartisan group Save Austin Now, said the group plans to bring a petition to the November ballot that would reinstate a ban on camping in public throughout the city, restore ordinances banning sitting and lying in public places, including the University of Texas campus, and bar panhandling overnight from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m.

....

By Monday, the online petition had more than 88,000 signatures. For the initiative from Save Austin Now to get onto the ballot, the group must get signatures from 5% or 20,000 of Austin’s voters, whichever number is smaller.

There are two relevant numbers: 289,450 and 88,000.  The first is the number of people who voted in the 2018 Mayoral election (assuming you trust Travis county's election results).  The second is the number of people who have signed the online version of the petition.  Obviously, 88,000 isn't enough to flip the city on its own.  But it's a pretty good start (and it's more than any of Adler's challengers got in '18).

That being said, there are a couple of other interesting #'s: 27,599 and 36,434. Those are the total number of voters in Districts 6 and 10 respectively in 2016. We don't know what will happen, but we guarantee you there's no way Jimmy Flannigan or Alison Alter want to run for re-election with the homelessness ordinance on the ballot.  That's pretty much the last issue those two will want to discuss.

Bottom Line: Many things remain up in the air, but there's good reason to believe this will be the best anti-status quo cycle since 2014.

#atxcouncil: Flannigan claims to be "fiscally responsible"

"The truthful lip shall be established forever,
But a lying tongue is but for a moment."
Proverbs 12:19

NGL, we literally LOL'd when we read this:

Council Member Jimmy Flannigan likes to refer to himself as the “fiscally responsible progressive” on the Council dais, pushing for ambitious action supported by the operational discipline needed to make sure money isn’t wasted.

Is this a joke?!?

Off the top of our head, Flannigan:

• Supported burdening employers with the cost of a new municipal entitlement.

• Supported a massive tax giveaway to "major league" soccer.

• Supported more tax hikes than we can count.

Furthermore, while we haven't been following council particularly closely of late, there's nothing about their current homelessness policies that's remotely fiscally responsible.  Council's current homelessness policies create other, bigger, problems than their fiscal impact.  But, in addition to the other problems, $8 million for a hotel is also fiscal lunacy.

In the rest of the article, Flannigan whines about the voter control property tax bill the lege passed earlier this year.  That's dumb.  Council has record setting revenues on an annual basis, and will continue to do so as long as the national economy remains strong.

Flannigan also claims, laughably:

wants the work done in advance to make sure the new system can remain funded to keep it operating at the level residents need.

“I’m laser-focused that whatever we do on transit, that it be financially and operationally sustainable, and we don’t befall the mistakes that cities in other parts of the country have made, where they do a big, shiny investment and then underfund operations or maintenance, or they set up a government structure that is incentivized to fail,” he said.

Flannigan's been on council for three years and hasn't lifted a finger to pursue governance reforms at CapMetro.

[Note: Had Flannigan proposed doing something along those lines three years ago, this website would have strongly supported such an effort.]

So, LOL.

Bottom Line: Flannigan certainly claimed to be fiscally responsible during his campaigns.  One could even argue that he was relatively so during his first year on council.  Since 2018, however, any such claims from Jimmy Flannigan are preposterous.

#atxcouncil: Was Flannigan Electioneering on Taxpayer Dime?!?

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

Groovy:

Honestly, this is just sloppy.

Pick a local business and meet there.

That being said, it does illustrate a certain arrogance on Flannigan's part.  Not only does he expect us to pay for his agenda.  He expects us to pay to promote it.

It'll be interesting to see what mental gymnastics the city uses to get out of this one.

Bottom Line: It's the city.  So nothing will happen.  But kudos for forcing Flannigan to defend this nonsense.

#atxcouncil: Homelessness and the FASCINATING Political Geography of Abbott's Jurisdiction

"[R]edeeming the time, because the days are evil."
Ephesians 5:16

We've obviously said our piece about Greg Abbott and Austin homelessness.  We think Abbott's talked a lot more than he's acted.  Furthermore, the modest actions coming this week don't really solve anything.

Last night, however, we we discussing all of the above with a friend who lives in North Austin.  We explained why we think there's less to Abbott's announcements than meets the eye.  This person didn't disagree, but then said something we hadn't considered:

You're probably right...but if all Abbott does is use TxDOT to clean out the area under highway overpasses, it'll take care of everywhere [the homeless] congregate in my neighborhood.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

Not a bad point.

The primary place the State of Texas (and thus Abbott) has jurisdiction is highways.
Given that, consider how highways intersect Austin city council districts.  Specifically in North Austin:

• MoPac is entirely within district 10 and the most conservative parts of district 7.

• US-183 snakes through districts 7, 10, and 6.

• Even I-35 gets in on the act in district 7.

Districts 6 and 10 have elected Republicans in recent memory.  District 7 has never been seriously contested.  In the current climate, however, it really ought to be (*).

None of this, of course, is to say that TxDOT moving homeless individuals away from highway overpasses really solves the problem.

But it is to say that it could make a visible difference in the lives of the type of people who are swing voters in local elections.

Maybe even enough to change turnout models...especially for December runoffs.

Bottom Line: Given where everything's located, even underwhelming changes could have an oversize impact.

-------

* - By Republicans AND sane Democrats.

#atxcouncil: Flannigan Abandons Pretenses to Fiscal Moderation

"For nothing is secret that will not be revealed, nor anything hidden that will not be known and come to light."
Luke 8:17

The things you see scrolling through Facebook:

These are the same rancid Texas Municipal League talking points to which we've grown accustomed.  So Flannigan's propagandizing for the taxpayer-funded lobbying industrial complex.  Congratulations Jimmy, you must be so proud.

But beyond the political implications of Flannigan aligning himself with rent-seekers over taxpayers, are the economic implications for our community.

Any serious advocate for middle class taxpayers understands automatic election triggers give taxpayers leverage.  If you oppose automatic election triggers, you oppose leverage for taxpayers.  It's that simple.

Jimmy Flannigan has always sold himself as a kinder, gentler, type of fiscal conservative.  By avoiding his predecessor's bombast, he could be a more effective advocate.  That characterization has always been a stretch (esp. since Flannigan started voting for soccer stadiums and tax hikes).

Bottom Line: To stand with taxpayer funded lobbyists over taxpayers speaks for itself....

#atxcouncil: Frank Ward's Great Austin Holiday Adventure

"In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He shall direct your paths."
Proverbs 3:6

From Frank Ward's Campaign:



Highlights:

• Greg Casar - "I just don't think that we are in the business of reducing congestion."

• Ann Kitchen - "That's not really our goal, to get rid of congestion."
• Note: It's not in the video, but in the original audio Jimmy Flannigan agrees with Kitchen.

• Ward - "Reducing congestion is not really their goal, you have got to be kidding me."

• Ward - "We have to do something about this traffic."

Bottom Line: Vote for Frank Ward if you value dissent and intellectual diversity.  Early voting runs through tonight (Friday) at 7pm.  Election Day Tuesday.

WillCo Democrats Import Hollywood Liberal

Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.”
1 Corinthians 15:33

Yesterday, Jimmy Flannigan tweeted:

I'm not one that gets star-struck but Natalie Portman is standing between my and @MayorAdler signs at the campaign office of @mjhegar @BucyForTexas @karltm

But @statesman - that office is in Austin #atxd6, not Cedar Park! https://t.co/lps8IyBTmo

— Jimmy Flannigan (@JimmyFlannigan) October 25, 2018

We had originally intended to rip on Jimmy for going to this event in the middle of the workday despite this ongoing water DEBACLE.  But clicking through the Statesman link, it doesn't appear that he was there.  So no harm, no foul, towards Jimmy (on this topic).

But this does beg another question: What the heck are the WillCo Democrats thinking?!?

It's not a secret that people can't stand being lectured about politics by celebrities.  Yet that's how WillCo D's choose to present themselves.  If you're wondering why John Carter will (probably) survive the midterm, this is a good example of why.

Y'all do realize this district includes Bell County, right?!?

Bottom Line: This is a good way to confirm every stereotype about Democrats in existence....

#atxcouncil adopts (yet ANOTHER) Record-Setting Budget; Flannigan voting Aye....

"But the former governors who were before me laid burdens on the people, and took from them bread and wine, besides forty shekels of silver. Yes, even their servants bore rule over the people, but I did not do so, because of the fear of God."
Nehemiah 5:15

The not surprising part:

The Austin City Council approved a $4.1 billion budget for the upcoming fiscal year, with more money going toward homelessness outreach and an increase in the minimum wage for city employees.

Council members on Tuesday voted to lower the rate at which Austin taxes homeowners, dropping it from 44.48 cents to 44.03 cents per $100. But because property taxes are calculated on the value of a home and that number continues to rise for most people, the owner of a median-priced home will see a property tax increase of roughly $67.

....

The tax rate is higher than the rate City Manager Spencer Cronk proposed last month. Council members raised the rate in order to pull in an additional $2 million to fund services.

With this council, with the votes available on this dais, this was expected.

The surprising part:

The vote was 10-1, with Council Member Ellen Troxclair voting against it.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

In other words: Jimmy Flannigan voted AYE.

This is a dangerous move for Flannigan.  Jimmy Flannigan has carefully cultivated an image as fiscal moderate.  It allowed him to campaign in 2016 as a kinder, gentler version of Don Zimmerman.  With every record setting budget and tax increase that Jimmy Flannigan supports, his alleged fiscal moderation narrative unravels.

And that's before you get to the FACT that Jimmy Flannigan supported the "sick leave" entitlement (*) and the soccer stadium.

A pattern is emerging.

Bottom Line: With all due respect to District 6, Don Zimmerman told you so....

-------

[ * - In fairness to Flannigan, his vote for the "sick leave" entitlement might have been a blessing in disguise.  The deal that was cut to gain his support helped create the rushed process that doesn't comply with state law.  Flannigan's last minute switch strengthened the legal case.]

#atxcouncil: Flannigan throws District 6 under the bus

"And while He was still speaking, behold, a multitude; and he who was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them and drew near to Jesus to kiss Him."
Luke 22:47

[Note: Allison Alter did something similar in District 10, but she wasn't nearly as blatant about it.]

As we survey the wreckage from Thusday night's/Friday morning's debacle, there's one more element on which we need to comment: Jimmy Flannigan voted directly against the interests of his district.

As Austin adjusts to this new "sick leave" entitlement, a natural follow up question is emerging: Who's going to pay for it?!?  The answer, obviously, is people who've built successful companies.  And where do those people tend to live?!?  In the Northwestern part of the city.  That means District 6 (and, to a lesser degree, District 10).

Here's what makes Flannigan's vote so puzzling:  During the year and a half he's been on council, Jimmy Flannigan has previously voted his district on major things.  Sure, Jimmy Flannigan will pander to his socially liberal base, but on big ticket "dollars and cents" items he has previously represented District 6.  Jimmy Flannigan supported last year's "affordability road map."  Jimmy Flannigan voted against last year's budget.  Jimmy Flannigan supported re-allocating the hotel occupancy tax.  But no longer.  On Thursday night/Friday morning Jimmy Flannigan voted to invent a municipal entitlement, and it's his own voters who are going to be paying for it.

For those interested in his rationalization, we present Jimmy Flannigan in his own words (but we warn you, it's just a bunch of excuses):



To be clear: We like Jimmy Flannigan.  He's a nice guy.  Prior to Thursday night/Friday morning, he had complied a reasonably decent voting record (at least on big ticket items).  Furthermore, we're stuck with him for another two and a half years, so holding a grudge won't accomplish anything.  But Jimmy Flannigan took a really bad vote the other night.  Jimmy Flannigan's vote was terrible for all Austinites, but it was especially terrible for District 6 ("Disproportionate Impact" as the liberals would say).  Nice guy or not, under Jimmy Flannigan's representation District 6 is (once again) finishing last.

Bottom Line: How any representative from district 6 could vote to create a municipal entitlement, when it's their own voters who are going to be paying for it, is beyond us.

#atxcouncil: About this Cheap, Tawdry, SMEAR CAMPAIGN against Jimmy Flannigan

"He who is slow to wrath has great understanding,
But he who is impulsive exalts folly."
Proverbs 14:29

By now, we assume you've heard about the unflattering pictures that have been circulating around the internet for the past week.  If you haven't, you're welcome to search for them yourself.  No link here.

Unfortunately, the controversy refuses to die, and Flannigan was forced to issue a statement yesterday:

“For the last few days, I’ve been subjected to an online harassment campaign which include private photos of me,” Flannigan said. “These photos were taken before I became a public official. While I regret taking them, they were private. At no time were they publicly shared by me. They only became public through an anonymous twitter post. It is troubling that this private and personal matter is now being used for political purposes.”

That's fine; until we are given a good reason to do otherwise, we take Council Member Flannigan at his word.

We can think of three circumstances under which this incident could potentially be relevant to Flannigan's role as a public official:

• He sent the picture to someone who didn't want to receive it.

• He sent the picture to someone underage.

• He sent the picture on city time.

As far as we can tell, none of those conditions have been met.  In the event new information emerges, we reserve the right to change that view.  But that seems unlikely at this time.

Now, look, we have our issues with Jimmy Flannigan.  Jimmy Flannigan is a big fan of corporate welfare.  Jimmy Flannigan voted for the disgraceful MERCK deal the city passed in April.  Just last week, Jimmy Flannigan doubled down on support for the Domain subsidies.  We can only imagine what kind of godawful 'incentive' package [note: pun not intended] Jimmy Flannigan is going to push to attempt to lure Amazon.

But, unless and until one of the three conditions we listed above is violated, this website remains as uninterested in Council member Flannigan's personal life as we've always been.

Finally, we want to address the chatter we've been hearing about a recall election: This is one of the dumbest ideas we've heard in a long time.  Unless or until new information emerges, the voters won't care and such an effort would be a guaranteed loss.  This website will not participate in a fools errand over a single tacky photograph.

Bottom Line: This whole 'controversy' is stupid and we hope this is the last time we have to address it.

#TROXROX: Predictably terrible budget passes...but Troxclair KILLS SxSW SUBSIDIES!!!

"There is desirable treasure,
And oil in the dwelling of the wise,
But a foolish man squanders it.
Proverbs 21:20

Good for Ellen:



Highlights:

• $1 BILLION General Fund this year.

• "Taxpayers might be given the short end of the stick."
• Note: That's the understatement of a lifetime.

• Troxclair: At the rate city property taxes are going up, the average bill will double in nine years..."it's ABSOLUTELY unsustainable."

• Troxclair: "People's #1 complaint is the skyrocketing cost of living."

• Troxclair: Travis county has adopted the effective tax rate for the past three years.
• "That's exactly where the city of Austin should start."

• Troxclair: "When we're talking about gentrification and being economically segregated, this is one reason why; people who have lived in Austin for years cannot afford to keep paying the increases in their property taxes."

• Council only gets to determine $5 million out of the entire $4 BILLION budget.

More from this morning's Statesman:

Austin leaders on Wednesday night passed a $3.9 billion 2018 budget — a new record for the growing city — after days and months of City Council frustration over wanting to add social services money and feeling hemmed in by previous spending commitments.

The budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 includes a $1 billion general fund, which covers most city operations, plus self-sustaining funds for things like electricity, water and aviation. It raises tax revenue 7.9 percent, just under the 8 percent limit that could trigger a rollback election, for a tax rate of 44.48 cents per $100 of property value.

An owner of a median valued home of $305,510 will see a $151 increase in city taxes and other fees.

Both the budget and the tax rate passed 8-3, with Council Members Ellen Troxclair, Jimmy Flannigan and Ora Houston opposed. Those three raised concerns that the city was dipping into its 12 percent reserve fund buffer, even if only slightly, and they wanted to slightly lessen the tax increase.

The budget does not increase the city’s 8 percent homestead exemption — that ship sailed in July — but the city’s homestead exemption for senior and disabled residents to bumped up from $82,500 to $85,500. The exemption lowers the value of a home for taxation purposes.

....

Some tensions flared when Troxclair led a successful vote to have $1.2 million in hotel tax revenue pay for security at festivals, intending to follow that with a request to put the corresponding savings from the general fund toward tax relief. But Council Member Greg Casar preempted her with a motion to put $580,000 of it to various social services. That measure passed 7-4, with Troxclair, Flannigan, Houston and Alison Alter opposed.

....

The 2018 budget built in cost increases for things already approved, like $1.9 million and nine new employees to staff the new Central Library, set to open next month, and 2.5 percent pay increases for civilian city employees.

 From the Monitor:

Council also voted unanimously to use $1.2 million of Hotel Occupancy Tax revenue to cover security-related costs at South by Southwest, therefore liberating that much money from the General Fund for other uses.

Troxclair, who led the effort to free up those HOT funds by reducing funding for the Austin Convention Center and Visit Austin (formerly known as the Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau), celebrated the moment by thanking her colleagues and city staff for making the effort possible. “This is a big moment. This didn’t come easy,” she said, referencing a policy decision that Mayor Steve Adler had at first vigorously opposed.

Troxclair’s delight quickly turned to outrage, however, after Adler recognized Casar, who introduced a motion to use $580,000 of that money to boost funding to many of the same programs that his previous motion had reduced funding for.

The mayor, said Troxclair, had told her that he was going to allow her to offer a motion to return the $1.2 million to taxpayers. Adler replied that she still could – after the vote on Casar’s motion. “If this passes I won’t have the opportunity to do that,” she argued, asking if she could offer a substitute motion. Adler denied her request, saying that the motion was not germane to what Casar was proposing.

The heated procedural debate between Adler and Troxclair became even more complex when Council Member Alison Alter chimed in from the other end of the dais with her own substitute motion to put the $580,000 in the city’s budget reserve. “Your difficulty is with what now?” asked the flummoxed mayor, who also rejected Alter’s motion.

After further back-and-forth over procedure, Council voted to approve Casar’s motion, with Troxclair, Alter, Flannigan and Houston in dissent.

Troxclair then motioned to essentially undo some of the prior committed spending and instead put $1 million toward reducing the property tax rate and $200,000 toward increasing the senior exemption.

Adler said that he wanted to keep taxes low but could not support the level that Troxclair proposed. Troxclair ridiculed the notion that $1 million out of a $1 billion budget was too much. “This is the absolute very least we can do,” she said, before she was joined by Flannigan, Houston, Alter and Council Member Ann Kitchen in support of her defeated motion.

TPPF also released a statement:

“Austin city government continues to make Central Texas’ affordability problem worse,” said James Quintero, who leads the Think Local Liberty project at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “The city’s mammoth $3.9 billion budget significantly increases taxes and fees for the average Austinite, making it that much more difficult for struggling families and businesses to make ends meet. It’s disingenuous for city officials to talk about Austin’s affordability problem while endlessly growing the burden of government.”

Thoughts:

• You GO Ellen Troxclair!!!

• Of the new members: Flannigan votes no while Alter votes yes.
• Once again, we find ourselves missing Sherri Gallo (also, lesson learned).

• We certainly have our disagreements with Ora Houston, but she has a recurring habit of voting the right way on big votes.

• Adler and Casar doing something shady together...imagine that.

• "$151 increase in city taxes and other fees...."
• One top of the increase last year, and the year before that, and the year before that....

• Even if Adler and Casar had to do something cute on re-allocating the money, for Troxclair to successfully kill the SxSW subsidy remains pretty huge!!!

• So, in the end, Adler faked 14% to make 8% sound reasonable; it still doesn't sound reasonable.

Bottom Line: We've been resigned to this happening for awhile.  But there's going to be some very interesting coalition opportunities in the coming months.  To quote Jonathan Stickland, #onward....

#atxcouncil: Late Breaking opportunity to curtail corporate welfare in budget?!?

"If we endure,
We shall also reign with Him.
If we deny Him,
He also will deny us."
2 Timothy 2:12

Sign us up:

Austin’s 2018 budget discussions are crawling to a close this week, and City Council members are looking for more cash.

Council Member Leslie Pool began the week’s talks Monday with a request for the city to revisit its economic development payments to the Domain — revitalizing a debate that’s been ongoing for at least a decade.

It wasn’t clear whether the suggestion had any support to move forward, and the council didn’t immediately return to it after an executive session to discuss legal matters behind closed doors. The council is expected to adopt the budget sometime this week. The fiscal year begins Oct. 1.

Austin in 2003 approved a $37 million tax break over 20 years for the Domain in exchange for the development creating jobs and affordable housing. Some buyers’ remorse settled in after that, and a push to revoke the Domain’s incentive package became a ballot proposal in 2008, but voters rejected it.

The city’s agreement with the Domain, which is in Pool’s North Austin District 7, includes a stipulation that any payments are subject to agreement from future councils. But Mayor Steve Adler and Council Member Jimmy Flannigan pushed back strongly against the city backing out of its end of the economic incentive agreement, saying it would be a terrible precedent to set. Austin needs to live up to its deals, they said.

“Every time, as a city, we talk about going back on a previous agreement, the next agreement becomes more expensive,” Flannigan said. “Every time we send a signal to the community that we’re not going to hold ourselves to agreements we make, the next negotiation becomes more expensive.”

....

Some council members have expressed frustration with the budget overall and want more funding for health and social programs.

 Thoughts:

• While the Statesman article says Pool is a longstanding opponent of corporate welfare, this is the first time we remember hearing her speak about it.  We will point out she voted for the Merck deal back in April.  Still, welcome to the fight!!!

• This actually builds on a recent experience of our own.  Last week, we attended an event where we were able to come to an agreement with several people with different views from our own to cut corporate welfare in order to create room for both tax relief and social services.  Thus, this might be an outline for a "grand bargain" on the city budget.

• Broadening the tax base allows you to lower the tax rate.

• Flannigan's argument is cute.  The opt out clause was part of the original deal to which the developer agreed.  Thus the city wouldn't be backing out of anything but merely executing authority it already has.

• Speaking of Flannigan, this is the biggest contrast with his predecessor during his time on the council to date.  If Flannigan really wants to make this a hill on which he's willing to die, we are absolutely willing to make this a campaign issue in 2020.  Remember, District 6 residents are the one's paying the higher property tax rates that are the natural results of this sort of carving up of the tax base.

• Speaking of which...have we mentioned that broadening the tax base allows you to lower the tax rate?!?

• Broad base, low rates.  Broad base, low rates.  Broad base, low rates.

Bottom Line: Anything that moves us away from special privileges for big players and towards clear and consistent rules for everyone is a trend we should encourage.

#ATXCouncil "indefinitely postpones" cost of living relief....

"Wealth gained by dishonesty will be diminished,
But he who gathers by labor will increase."
Proverbs 13:11

[Author's Note: The Statesman has a cynical, though plausible, analysis of the politics here.]

In what can only be described as a crying shame, on Thursday a 6 to 5 majority on the Austin City Council voted to "indefinitely postpone" council member Ellen Troxclair's proposed affordability action plan.  The vote doesn't kill the action outright (why would they have the guts to do that?!?), but it does take the planning process back to square one.  That being said, absent a public backlash, it's hard to see how this returns in anything resembling its current form.

The plan, in which Troxclair was joined by council members Flannigan, Houston, Kitchen, and Mayor Adler, had at least twenty components.  We'll include a PDF of the full proposal below this write up, but suffice to say that it reflected individual priorities voiced over the years by each of the five co-sponsors.  From our perspective, tangible metrics for aggressive housing construction, simplification of permitting, biennial performance reviews for all city departments (how are they not doing this already?!?), creation of a "no tax increase" option for council during budget season, creation of a similar "no rate or fee increase" option for city utilities, ensuring projects from the 2016 transportation bond are completed on time and on budget, and a fair regulatory environment for mobility service providers (ie. starting with, but not limited to, Uber and Lyft) packed the biggest punch.  As a team effort from five individual council members it wasn't perfect, and there were a few things in there that we're not crazy about, but it was nevertheless a significant step forward.

The initiative was supported by a diverse array of community partners, including the Independent Business Alliance, the NAACP, the Austin Tech Council, the Hispanic Contractors association, the Real Estate council, and Goodwill industries (yes, THAT Goodwill).  Not that we're always crazy about their priorities, but even the Austin Chamber of Commerce supported this approach.  When are the Independent Business Alliance and the NAACP ever on the same side of anything?!?

We didn't keep a tally during public testimony, but our informal guess is that it ran 2 to 1 in favor.  Space limitations make it impossible to catalog everything, but a few moments stood out.  The CEO of Kerby Lane cafe discussed how it's becoming prohibitively difficult to open restaurants in Austin because the majority of employees can only afford to live in (*shudder*) Williamson county.  The representative from Goodwill pointed out that, even if we don't agree on all the specifics, getting this diverse of a coalition to support a measure was significant in and of itself.  Personally, we were struck by a slide from a representative of the real estate industry that showed house prices have nearly tripled in the past decade.  From the opponents, we were struck by a gentleman named Gus Pena who protested that the plan didn't do enough for the homeless while overlooking that it would produce significantly more housing.

During dais discussion, Council member Garza passed the buck to Austin ISD and the state over robin hood; she's not exactly wrong, but her point is irrelevant as long as the city refuses to take care of business in its' own area of jurisdiction.  Pio Renteria offered hyperbole about laying off police officers while similarly refusing to accept the city's share of responsibility.  Greg Casar at least had the courage of his convictions to advocate for a housing bond and "workforce development programs" for "low and moderate wage workers."  On the one hand, we appreciate Council member Casar advocating an alternative policy; on the other hand, we've taken this approach for decades, and
the results seem meager.  If the last billion dollars didn't accomplish your goal, and if the billion before that didn't accomplish your goal (to say nothing of all of the untold previous billions going back to the 1930's)...why is the next billion is going to be different?!?  Furthermore, the city has had record revenues at its disposal every year of the 10-1 council and the idea that widespread budget cuts are coming anytime soon seems...far fetched.  In a city where the median income is less than $33,000 and the median city employee makes around $60,000 lightening the burden on the people paying the bills doesn't seem unreasonable.

[Note: You can read a press release from the council members who opposed the plan here.]

But (no surprise here) the cake was taken by Kathie Tovo.  Tovo spoke about all of the allegedly wonderful work council has done on affordability since she campaigned on the issue in her first (2011) campaign.  Unfortunately, by whatever metric you choose (housing costs, property taxes, utility rates) affordability has gotten worse over the past six years.  Perhaps the time has come to try a new approach?!?  To be honest, Tovo sounded a lot like UT Football fans making excuses for Charlie Strong in that she just "needed more time."  Well, similarly to Charlie Strong, there comes a time when you have to stop grading on intentions and start grading on outcomes.  What did Einstein say about trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?!?

Bottom Line: Any serious attempt to translate "affordability" from a vague buzzword into tangible relief requires addressing housing costs, city spending/taxes, and utility rates/fees.  Thursday's proposal, while far from perfect, would have represented a significant step forward on all three.  Unfortunately, the council majority chose to protect privileged bureaucrats at the expense of struggling renters, local businesses, and homeowners.  Total missed opportunity.  It's a damn shame....

-----

Our testimony:



Full public testimony/dais discussion:



-----

The full proposal:

Troxclair Affordability Roadmap by Cahnman on Scribd

#TROXROX: #ATXCouncil considering Troxclair's Affordability Plan TOMORROW!!!

"Wealth gained by dishonesty will be diminished,
But he who gathers by labor will increase."
Proverbs 13:11

Ellen Troxclair sent out the following action alert last night:

This Thursday, I am bringing the Affordability Action Plan resolution to Council. This plan provides a roadmap to tackle rising taxes and fees, reform city budgeting practices, address our housing supply, and provide opportunities for our locally-owned, small businesses to thrive, among many other initiatives. I am grateful to have a diverse group of Council Members and community organizations already on board, but this may be a close vote.

....

It's no secret that we are at a critical point in our city when it comes to affordability. You gave Council a clear mandate to address the rapidly rising cost of living in Austin. In light of this, it's critical to make a pact with you and others in the community about how dedicated this Council is, and will continue to be, to addressing affordability.

....

If you can not make it Thursday, please email Council your support for the Affordability Action Plan by clicking here. Special thanks to Mayor Adler, Council Member Flannigan, Council Member Houston, and Council Member Kitchen for their co-sponsorship and invaluable help in this effort!

I will try to have this item addressed as close to 2 PM as possible, but items don't always come up in the planned order. If you need a time update, please call my office Thursday at 512-978-2108.

Read the whole thing here.

This is fantastic; any serious effort to address affordability needs to begin by understanding that surging housing costs and property taxes both drive the problem (and that there's no conflict between fixing both).

We will also confess a bit of amusement that among the five co-sponsors are four of the council members up in 2018....

...which begs the follow up question: Where are you, Pio Renteria and Kathie Tovo?!?  [Author's Note: That's a rhetorical question re: Tovo]

Bottom Line: We'll be there.