LOBV & ANC Issue Endorsements

ANC is a group of bullies - limousine liberals who are astonishingly well organized. (0.00 / 0)

ANC endorsements are NOT pro-environment based on their public battle against anti-sprawl ordinance.  ANC does NOT support rail.  ANC does NOT support cyclists.

Leffingwell, Morrisson, Martinez have an agenda to benefit their constituents - not the benefit of our city.

---

by: PedalPowerATX @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 12:55:35 PM UTC

I got news for ya, pal - (0.00 / 0)

pretty much every political organization in Austin is composed of activists, NIMBYs, greener-than-thous, 'limousine liberals', and other associated busy-bodies. (And if this complaint is Carol or Brewster's new meme, then they've defintiely got the gun to their heads now).

Really, I'd cool my jets. These endorsements don't really equate to whole lot of votes, though they probably carry a bit more weight in a city election than they would in, say, last year's Democratic primary. They can give you a vague sense of what narrow issue groups each candidate appeals to, but that's about it.

Btw, outside of Austin's central core of singles and unencumbered couples (y'know, most of the city), bikes aren't a really viable transportation option, and rail has it's obvious limitations given the way our city has developed. The vast majority of families who live and work in Austin have to drive to go about their daily lives, they will for the forseeable future, and they have far more votes than bicycle commuters. Just something to think about.

I find it curious that you equate support for the "anti-sprawl ordinance", cyclists and rail as being in the city's 'best interest', while you fail to define Leffingwell, Morrison & Martinez' 'constituents'. Might some of them be - oh, I dunno - other Austinites, who vote and have a different opinion on what their transportation, energy and zoning needs are?

In any case, until you have single-member districts, Central-West Austin activism (in all it's forms) will continue to dominate Austin's policy debates and city elections. And that means the loud and proud bike and rail advocates as well.  

---

by: Robert Ryland @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 16:00:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cool your own jets, with all due respect of course. (0.00 / 0)

Robert, if you've traveled to Portland or Vancouver you would see that bicycles and rail are PRIMARY modes of travel.  Austin should aspire to be the best city it can be.  

With all due respect, the vast majority of families in Austin use a car BECAUSE that is the only option at the moment.

Typical ANC attitude - fear change, all change is bad, and insult those that want it.

---

by: PedalPowerATX @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 16:37:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think I insulted anyone (0.00 / 0)

and the reactionary tone is unnecessary. I don't live in Austin and I'm not involved with ANC or any other neighborhood organization in Austin, for that matter. Nor do I ascribe to their agenda. My point was that all of these organizations who endorse in these races carry very few actual voters with their backing, and their endorsement of one candidate over another may have zero to do with how progressive a candidate is or even whether or not they would make solid public servants  - and I think Lee, Chris, Perla, Mike, Bill and Sheryl would all be good for the city, regardless of who endorses them.

In short, I wouldn't read too much into it. \

But to the point about your pet issues: anyone who thinks Austin can be transformed into Portland, Vancouver, SF, or NY-on-the-Colorado is kidding themselves. And no, most of the families who don't live in the Bubble aren't up in arms about making the city more bike-friendly or getting more rail service, because neither would do the vast majority of them any good. I'm all for making Austin more bike-friendly, and if a commuter train comes to Elgin I'll be the first one on it, but it's presumptuous to foist these initiatives on the rest of the city simply because YOU think they're "progressive". Had Austin taken the rail initiative up back in, say, the 1970s, you might see a very different city today.

But they didn't, and working families aren't clamoring for more condos and apartments in the Bubble so they can move back to the middle of town. That's by and large a market for singles, young childless couples and empty-nesters looking to reduce their carbon footprint or somesuch. So don't pretend like densification does much if any good for working folks with kids. They want the same thing they've always wanted: a decent, affordable home with a yard in a decent neighborhood with decent schools. They can't find that value set in central Austin and haven't been able to for a long time. "Anti-sprawl" ordinances (a debatable name, btw), more rail lines and bike lanes won't change any of that for them.  

---

by: Robert Ryland @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 20:36:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's not accurate (1.00 / 1)

Robert,

There are plenty of families living in Central Austin, and a fair number of us dads (and some moms) commute by bike when we can. For many years, my daily routine involved walking the kids to the local elementary school, hopping on my bike, and going to work at UT. Now it's more often driving the carpool to a distant middle school or high school and then driving to work :-(

You're right that Austin doesn't have the transportation grid of Portland, but in a couple of decades it could. That's not our most pressing public issue, but it's something to shoot for.

---

PedalPower,

Leffingwell, Morrison and Martinez do have an agenda to suit their constituents, as do the rest of the Council. That's a good thing since, with at-large voting, "constituents" means "all of us".  

---

by: LSadun @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 21:08:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Your ignorance is shocking (1.00 / 1)

So far you've told us that you believe ANC carries few votes, that there are only singles in central Austin, that density is not good for "working" folks.

Your pessimism is as annoying as your ignorance, Austin can - MUST - strive to become a more sustainable city.

I'm glad you live in Elgin.  It's voters like you who scare the crap out of me.

---

by: PedalPowerATX @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 22:18:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That'll win 'em over. (5.00 / 1)

Have you ever lived south of Stassney or north of Koenig?

Explain to me how those people benefit from more bike lanes or where you would locate rail lines that would be useful to them. Then calculate the cost.

It's just not there yet, dude. It's not that it wouldn't be a 'good thing' for Austin, it's that the critical mass for such infrastructure changes doesn't exist outside the bubble. And make no mistake - these are major overhauls we're talking about, because a piecemeal strategy won't alter the development patterns very much.

And I live in Elgin because I couldn't afford to keep my family in a decent house, in a decent neighborhood with decent schools in Austin, with a household income of around 70K a year. More condos and upscale apartments in Clarksville or Tarrytown or West Campus wouldn't have changed that. Fewer Californians (or a mass exodus of them) might have, but the way the city and it's economy is now geared and the way it markets itself pretty much makes that impossible. Saddens me somewhat since I grew up in South Austin and my family goes back 5 generations there.

What you call "anti-sprawl" (and turn your nose up at those who disagree with your idea of it's consequences) has amounted to little more than a way for developers to seize land in the central city, drive up it's value quickly, and bring in more high-end buyers to occupy it, which drives working class families out of town. The end result is about as much sprawl as you would have had without it. I don't know who's in the ANC or what their zoning preferences are, but just because someone's not anxious to let developers plunder their neighborhood and turn everything into condos doesn't make them evil and ignorant. It means your interests differ from theirs.  

---

by: Robert Ryland @ Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 15:03:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The ANC's interests (0.00 / 0)

Are narrow - their own property values, in the short-term. It rules pretty much everything they do - keep people and development out of the center-city so their enclaves are undisturbed and expensive.

Also see CityHallHustle's tweet for some entertainment:

Pretty sure Jeff Jack wrote all the questions for Chris Riley. 'So, when did you stop upzoning your wife?'

Basically, these people want to freeze the clock back to just when they moved in - which a heck of a lot of other people also want to do, but for some reason the ANC is given a free pass on it by 'progressives' while suburbanites largely are mocked for it by the same group (rightly so, in my opinion).

Hint: A strategy which forces people to live farther out from the city and drive a lot more isn't progressive by any definition of the term of which I'm aware. You can't have affordable housing or transportation without densification - they are fundamentally linked.

The ANC aren't progressives; they're conservatives pretending to be. Their agenda will keep central Austin exclusive and expensive (and we'll all suffer for it).

---

by: m1ek @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 16:44:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hope to see everybody tonight! (0.00 / 0)

You're invited to Bill Spelman's final fundraiser tonight at Nuevo Leon at 5:30pm.  Featuring live music with local legend, Johnny Degollado.

Thanks for everyone's support on this campaign!  Bill looks forward to serving the good people of Austin, and please feel free to share your policy ideas online.  

---

by: Ian @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 13:31:19 PM UTC

CORRECTION (0.00 / 0)

ANC didn't endorse Sheryl Cole, it was no endorsement. I'm trying to figure out how to edit the post which isn't working now that the new code is running hah.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 13:44:13 PM UTC

ANC Non-Endorsement (0.00 / 0)

I found the Place 6 non-endorsement to be unfortunate.  Was the ANC sending a message here?  Spell it out please.

---

by: badmcghee @ Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 11:46:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It was fortunate (0.00 / 0)

I just hope they were sending a real message to the incumbent about her position on retaining Ay-Large elections.

---

by: ssuits @ Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 14:32:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]