Home

About
- Who We Are
- Community Guidelines
- Right to Respond
Advertising on BOR
- Advertise on BOR
- Buy on all Texas Blogs

Advertisements

Search




Advanced Search


Follow Burnt Orange Report on Twitter (@BOR) and Facebook.

Randi Shade Gets A Little Help from Her Toll Road Friends


by: Matt Glazer

Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 09:50 AM CST


You can tell a lot about a person by the people that supports them.  For example, getting James Leininger money, usually means they are a conservative or pro-voucher.  Grabbing a couple of bucks from Tom Craddick or one of his many shell PAC's... that's usually a bad sign. City politics is no difference.

It looks like Randi Shade's fundraisers are a who's who of pro-development types. Two days ago Shade had a fundraiser put on by what amounts to the toll road lobbyists in Austin, and includes Gary Farmer and Don Martin (main spokespeople for the Take on Traffic group that lobbied for the Phase 2 tollroads), Pete Winstead (worked on toll road projects for CTRMA and on another note he - his firm - hired Todd Baxter after he left the Legislature), Paul Bury, Brian Cassidy, Jody Hagemann, Tim Hendricks, Helen Jobes, Lowell Lebermann, Kirk Rudy, Mike Weaver (transportation engineer who has been one of the ring-leaders for toll roads throughout the state), and Jerry Winetroub.

Looking at Randi's finance reports, the pro-development connection is stronger. Austin folks may already be aware of the Endeavor Group.  This is the group that developed the Domain and as well as pushed to build a Wal-Mart over the Aquifer. It appears that every member of the Endeavor Group has given to Randi and supports her campaign for City Council.

In contrast, Jennifer Kim has a broad base of support from across the community that includes key progressive leaders such as Robin Rather, Brigid Shea, Ann Kitchen, Amy Simmons of Amy's Ice cream, Nelson Linder, Juan and Marta Cotera, Willie Mae and Saundra Kirk, Craig Smith, Jon Beal, Karen Hadden, Nilda de la Llata of El Sol Y La Luna.  In addition, she has the support of community groups like the Austin Neighborhoods Council, Austin Sierra Club, and the Central Labor Council.

Who should we trust, the Toll Road lobby or established Austin progressive leaders?

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Randi's friends, Jennifer's flip-flops (0.00 / 0)

Randi also has friends like Rosemary Lehmberg, Paul Begala, Liz Carpenter, Mark Nathan, Susan Rieff, Kelly White and MariBen Ramsey.  

Let' not forget that after Jennifer Kim was sworn in, one of the first things she tried to do was delay and stop the construction of Town Lake Park at the behest of the developers who donated to her first campaign.

At RECA's bidding, Jennifer Kim opposed the Riverside conversion in what is now Town Lake Park, arguing that it should wait until every redevelopment plan for the central Town Lake corridor was fully accounted for (and by that she meant the complete high-rise redevelopment of Riverside Drive between I-35 and South First, and whatever remains of Barton Springs Road).  Kim said that since Central Park has roads through it, Town Lake Park can, too.

She compared Town Lake Park to the Shoal Creek Bikeway conversion and claimed that stakeholder input in municipal projects leads to public backlash and discouraged citizen and stakeholder participation in municipal projects in general.

Thankfully, the rest of the council voted her down and we can now enjoy Town Lake Park today.

But then comes an election year, and suddenly she's the neighborhood's best friend and anti-toll road.

She is the ultimate finger in the wind politician.


Looks Like a Whole Lotta People Support Randi (0.00 / 0)
This is a damn impressive list with people from every part of the community.

Linda Aaker
Carol Adams
Mark Aitala
Jamil Alam
Paige Alam
Leeann Alexander
David Armbrust
Bob Armstrong
Kirk Ashy
Robbie Ausley
Tom Ausley
Linda Bailey
Randall Baker
Buddie Ballard
Julie Ballard
Noel Barnard
Jamie Barshop
Dana Baruch
JJ Baskin
Joy Baskin
Shermakaye Bass
Deborah Bauer
Hamilton Beazley
Diane Beckham
Jeff Beckham
Deaton Bednar
Sara Beechner
Paul Begala
Sherry Bell
Jeremy Bencken
Katie Bencken
Philip Berber
Matt Berg
Margaret Berry
Marti Bier
Terrell Blodgett
Bill Bock
Cathy Bonner
Doug Booth
Andrew Bowen
Cynthia Bren
Daniel Brennan
Elizabeth Brenner
Russell Bridges
Karen Brimble
Ray Brimble
Arie Brish
Etty Brish
Meg Brooks
Ari Brown
Garry Brown
Jeff Browning
Suzanne Bryant
Rick Burciaga
Channing Burke
Paul Bury
Catherine Butler
Stephanie Butler
Weston Butler
Woody Butler
Pat Campbell
Charles Cannon
Gayle Cannon
Lila Carl
Liz Carpenter
Brian Cassidy
Marcus Ceniceros
Barbara Chapman
Mark Chassay
Elizabeth Christian
Amy Chronis
Chris Churchill
Ann Ciccolella
Marion Cimbala
Nathan Cimbala
Brandi Clark
Susanna Cohen
Andra Cohn
Kevin Cole
Sophia Collier
Mike Cook
Judy Corder
Harvey Corn
Pam Corn
Susan Coulter
Jim Cousar
Catherine Crago
Hal Cromwell
Shellie Crow
Bill Cunningham
Robin Curle
John Daly
Katrina Daniel
Jessica D'Arcy
Paul D'Arcy
Bryan Davis
Ian Davis
Lynn Davis
Paige Davis
Stacy Davis
Valerie Davis
Cloteal Davis Haynes
Matt de Ferranti
Marianne DeLeon
Cybele Diamandopoulos
Sandy Dochen
James Dwyer
Deborah Edward
John Egan
Jodie Eldridge
Fred Ellis
James Michael Elrod
Susan Engelking
Marilyn Epstein
Mario Espinoza
Amy Everhart Davis
Rachel Fagan
Sanaz Faili
Gary Farmer
Julie Fergerson
Alejandra Fernández
Jimmy Flannigan
Rebecca Foletta
Denise Fraser
Rodney Frazier
Cindy Friedman
Elisabeth Gagel Anderson
Carolyn Gallagher
Charlie Galvin
Tim Garbutt
Ryan Garcia
Raul Garza
Jill George
Machree Gibson
Helen Gilbert
Rachel Glast
Cathy Glazener
Wesley Glazener
Adam Goldman
Jennifer Goldman
Bren Gorman
Chris Gossett
Kristin Gossett
Victoria Graham
Joel Granoff
Ryan Gravelle
Jim Gray
Joene Grissom
Cuatro Groos
Michael Guerra
Aruni Gunasegaram
Jody Hageman
Peter Hagerty
Larry Halford
Patti Halladay
Kay Hammer
John Harms
Sandi Hauser
Tim Hendricks
Lisa Henken
Jordan Herman
Sara Hickman
John Hildreth
Jan Hill
Bryant Hilton
Gina Hinajosa
Mike Hirsch
Annie Holand Miller
Diana Holford
Lisa Huddleson
Elizabeth Hummer
Nora Ibáñez Hancock
Bob Inman
Rashed Islam
Laura Jacks
Tommy Jacks
Dina Jackson
Shannon Janes
Helen Jobes
Gary Johnson
Greg Johnson
Tony Johnson
John Joseph
Scott Joslove
Kevin Jung
Dean Justice
Sharon Justice
Karen Kahan
Karen Kalergis
Andrea Kalmans
Walter Kalmans
Michael Kellerman
Randall Kempner
Christopher Kennedy
Margaret Keys
Doug Kissner
Chris Kloes
JP Kloninger
Gregg Knaupe
Julie Kneupper
David Komerofsky
Claire Korioth
Mike Krell
Heilla Lain
Jackie Lain
Ted Lain
Anna Land
John Lavorato
Waleska Lavorato
Lowell Lebermann
Jon Lebkowsky
Angie Lebovitz
Richard Lebovitz
Rosemary Lehmberg
Delores Lenzy
Don Levin
Georgia Levin
Ilan Levin
Herbert Levy
Lori Levy
Marcia Levy
Nancy Lewis
Lola Lin
Kathy Lindauer
Britt Lindelow
Jan Lindelow
Marc Lippincott
Jane Lippmann
Emily Little
Lew Little
Ben Livingston
Liz Lowenstein
Amy Lowrey
Craig Luthy
Sly Majid
Patti Maltz
Meredith Marks
Don Martin
James Mathis
Carmen Maverick
Erin Mayton Taylor
Jed McCuistion
Allison McDade
Chris McDade
Carla McDonald
Jack McDonald
Susan McDowell
JoAnn McKenzie
Bill McLellan
Michele McLendon
Staci Mellman
Margaret Menicucci
Laura Merritt
Lorri Michel
Laurie Miesch
Barbara Miller
Shannon Moody
Eleanor Moore
Amy Mosier
MP Mueller
Rachel Muir
Anne Nagelkirk
Robert Nash
Mark Nathan
Melissa Nathan
Adrian Neely
Harrietta Neely
Heather Neville
Jeff Newberg
Stuart Newberg
Suzanne Newberg
Val Newberg
Stacy Newcomer
Araseli Nieto
Howard Nirken
Julie Nordskog
MeriJayd O'Connor
Patrick O'Daniel
Kay Oder
Martha Oestreich
Cathy Olson Muth
Dawnita Onyejiaka
Eric Opiela
Jim Opre
Julee O'Quinn
Betty Otter-Nickerson
Darlene Owens
Mary Pape
Kelly Parker
Susan Parker
Kim Paschall
Andy Pastor
Elizabeth Pearsall Lippincott
Allyson Peerman
Janis Pinnelli
Joe Pinnelli
Jennifer Piskun Johnson
Douglas Plummer
Suzanne Plummer
Julie Pomerantz
Shelly Prant
Laura Lee Prather
Velva Price
Debbie Ramirez
MariBen Ramsey
Mando Rayo
Bill Reagan
Bev Reeves
Gracie Renbarger
Chula Reynolds
Jamie Rhodes
Ellen Richards
Carl Richie
Nan Richie
Kerry Anne Ridley
Susan Rieff
Lynda Rife
Chris Riley
Belinda Roberts
Wanda Robins
Marianne Rochelle
Roxanne Rouse
Benita Rubinett
Amy Rudy
Kirk Rudy
Tim Sabo
Margo Sack
Eddie Safady
Millie Salinas
Sherri Sanders
Gregory Sapire
John Scarborough
Michele Scherz Baylor
Brad Schlosser
Sanford Schulwolf
Eugene Sepulveda
Dave Shaw
Caleb Shei
Jenny Shepherd
Christopher Sherman
Lynn Sherman
Max Sherman
Jodi Shores
Becca Siegel
Darcie Siiteri
Marcia Silverberg
Thom Singer
Lynne Skinner
Kim Skotak
Martha Smiley
Jan Smith
Kevin Smith
Parc Smith
Russell Smith
Ted Smith
Suzanne Soares
Stephanie Sobotik
Jan Soifer
Gary Solka
Shelley Solka
Marilyn Stahl
Susan Stahl
Christopher Stapleton
Dave Steakley
Stephen Straus
Patti Summerville
Stephen Sunshine
Dave Swincher
Bill Swiss
Evan Taniguchi
Kerry Tate
Carmen Tawil
Steve Taylor
Lisa Thomas
Brenda Thompson
Trisa Thompson
John Thornton
Julie Thornton
Paul Tobias
Bruce Todd
Steven Tomlinson
Mical Trejo
Felice Trirogoff
Anita Tschurr
Larry Tucker
Brian Tuerff
Kevin Tuerff
Mike Turner
Kerry Ugarte
Alison Unger
Andrew Urban
Gary Valdez
Bev Vandegrift
Steve Vandegrift
Mark Vane
Jennifer Vane Melrose
Courtney Villalta
James Walker
Melissa Walker
Tammy Walters
Kelly Walton
Joe Bill Watkins
Mike Weaver
Lisa Webb
David Wenger
Glenn West
Elaine Wetmore
Michael Whellan
Kelly White
Ellen Williams Stapleton
Sharon Williamson
Dana Wills
Jamie Wills
Dana Winer
Jerry Winetroub
Marc Winkelman
Suzanne Winkelman
Pete Winstead
Chip Wolfe
Amy Wong Mok
Ellen Wood
Bob Wynn
Anne Wynne
Elyse Yates
Stacy Young
 


A lot of names (5.00 / 1)
I have to admit, there are a lot of people on that list, but I don't recognize a whole lot of them.

I did immediately recognize the development types supporting Randi, and that scares me.


[ Parent ]
If you were more familiar with Ausitn politics, (2.00 / 1)
then you'd recognize more of these names.  As a native Austinite, I'm excited to see so many good Austin liberals lining up behind Randi Shade.  These are folks who've known Randi for years, and it's exciting to see that her administration would bring so much talent into the city council world.  

Randi has the potential to be a great city councilwoman because she has the unique ability to bring so many different people together.  There are a lot of challenges facing our city over the next couple of decades, and we need to work together to solve these problems.  There are no easy solutions, and we need real leadership if we are to preserve our quality of life.  During her one term, Kim has proved to be a divisive bomb-thrower who's made lots of unnecessary enemies that have prevented her from getting things done in city hall.  Quite the opposite, Randi has built her whole career on consensus-building and getting results.

On this big list of Randi supporters, I'm particularly excited to work with Elyse Yates on this campaign.  She's a former Ann Richards alum and great Austin liberal.  Her dad is Jimmy Dale Gilmore, and I've been trying to recruit her to run for office herself.  Hopefully she'll catch the bug during Randi's race and throw her hat into the ring soon.


[ Parent ]
Slight Offense (3.00 / 1)
I know you don't mean anything by that, but from my time in Austin I have been highly involved.  I agree that Elyse Yates is a great person but a lot of that list are friends and family not community leaders like Robin Rather, Ann Kitchen, Lulu Flores, Katie Naranjo, Fidel Acevedo, etc. I would also think that working with me on many a campaign/project you would know my level involvement in making Austin a better place.

I got to know people on both supporter lists from working at Equality Texas, my service working on water quality, working at the capitol, countless campaigns ranging from Congressional to  the statehouse and during this primary cycle by working for local judicial candidates.  

I look forward to hearing from Randi supporters, but as I said in the past and told Randi on the phone, please engage our community.  While I support Jennifer Kim whole heartedly, we need her to come to BOR and explain why she is taking toll road/developer money.  She has to explain what her vision for Austin is.  

Randi is the one constantly going negative, and even here, Randi's supporters are attacking me and others for supporting Jennifer Kim for City Council... I hope we can all agree that we should what is in the best interest of Austin and not just tear people down.

The facts are clear.  Randi Shade had a fundraiser.  That fundraiser was sponsored by pro-development individuals who are directly involved with creating toll roads in Austin, paving over the Edwards Aquifer, and subsidizing the Domain.

Whether I support Jennifer or not, this is troubling and I posted it because these elections are just two months away  and Randi should address these concerns.

I hope you will agree that Austin deserves more than a city council member that will cave to her donors on development issues.


[ Parent ]
Not community leaders? (3.00 / 1)
I have nothing but respect for the community leaders who support Kim, but to imply that the folks who are supporting are not "community leaders" is in insult.  When did you become the arbiter of who's who in Austin?

I know that you've been highly involved in your time in Austin.  I never suggested that you're not making Austin a better place.  You're a pioneering Texas liberal, and I'm glad you're now calling Austin your home.

However, there are lots of activists in town that you may not know.  Personally, I grew up with lots of native Austinites who are active in their communities, but have not been actively engaged in city council politics.  Does that mean they're not "community leaders"?

Through Randi's career in public service, she's also developed a huge network of folks who are active in their respective communities.  Just because you don't recognize all their names doesn't mean they're somehow less important than Kim's supporters.  For you to insult not only Randi but also everyone on her list shows that the Kim campaign is becoming increasingly desperate.  

I'm glad that you look forward to hearing from Randi and her supporters.  You've used a lot of front page BOR space in promoting Kim, and now that the primary is over and the traditional city council season is starting, I hope you'll provide your readers with as much front-page love for Randi so that voters can make an informed decision.  The BOR community will be happy to know that Randi was already planning to submit an introductory journal next week, and she'll also be hosting a series of neighborhood coffees to meet voters.  Considering the the primary sucked all the oxygen of local politics, I'm puzzled that you seem to be faulting Randi for waiting to kick off her outreach until after the primary finished.

I'm not "attacking you for supporting Jennifer Kim."  You're taking offense were no offense was issued.  Just to be clear, I'm not attacking you personally, or attacking your support for Kim.  I'm simply pointing out that your front-page hit piece was not fair and painted a false choice.  You selectively called out Randi, and you completely failed to mention Kim's donations from the developer world.  That's misleading and you know it.  It's a classic opp research trick, but you've refused to even acknowledge the irony that Elliot McFadden, while working for Margot Clarke, used these exact same attacks against Kim.  The Kim campaign should look in the mirror before it issues attacks based on campaign donations.  

The hypocrisy is both alarming and humorous.  If Kim was the second coming of Al Gore, then your hit piece might have some merit.  But given that both candidates have support from both progressive and developers, your post is off the mark.


[ Parent ]
Out of Context (3.00 / 1)
I said:
community leaders like Robin Rather, Ann Kitchen, Lulu Flores, Katie Naranjo, Fidel Acevedo, etc.

I am not trying to mince words here, but my sentiment was Robin Rathers, Ann Kitchen, Lulu Flores, Katie Naranjo and Fidel Acevedo were community leaders... I didn't realize that was a disputed point.  If it is I am happy to call them formerly elected officials and neighborhood activists if you want? Those titles and tags are trivial to me, but if they are important to our readers, I am happy to clarify that as well.

I think it is clear from my conversation with Randi and people that support Randi, I am not attacking her list of family, friends, and supporters but again, if it helps her campaign to imply I am a bias liberal blogger, I am happy to play the role.  I have gotten use to it over the years.

In other news, I talked to Randi back in January I think about how she should engage the online community because we will be focusing on city races.  It's March, and I am happy she has finally taken that advice.  I hope in her introductory jounral she will address very real issues about who is funding her campaign.  The same issues we have asked about Craddick D's, Mindy Montford, and others across the state who run for office.  This is not a hit piece, this a genuine question, and I am troubled that rather than answer why she is taking money from pro-toll and developers I am personally having my reputation called into question.

I invite you, Randi and anyone else to write journals.  Our history shows we are good about putting journals up from both sides, but it is hard to prove that in this race when nobody has taken up my offer for the past three months.

As for the false choice, then please explain Randi's very real connection to the people who wanted to develop Austin with a Wal-Mart over the aquifer and toll roads criss crossing the east side.

Rather than answering these questions, you group me with Elliott and iGnite.  That's ok, but I received the invitation and wrote about because I am opposed to paving over the aquifer and opposed to double taxation.  If Kim has a fundraiser sponsored by the same type of developers, I will write that post too.  However, she hasn't and I think that Randi should explain where she stands on the issues of small business, the environment, and toll roads.

Let's make this an issue oriented campaign.  I would like to hear Randi's stance on the issues.  If an issue oriented debate is a hit piece, then I will keep hammering away until our readers get answers.


[ Parent ]
Ken Weiss (0.00 / 0)

Ken Weiss for Place 3

Running for Place 3

Ken Weiss
Jennifer Kim
Randi Shade

weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
Forum's (0.00 / 0)

The funny thing in this post is that you state that Randi has the potential to be a  great city council women.

How can she have th potential to be a great city council women when she does not know anything on the issues?

Have you been to the forum's lately?

I have been to two and she does not have a clue on the issues and you state that you want to support her?

Please try and go to some of the forum's before making your decision on who to vote for  because I was once a Randi supporter but after going to the two forum's I am for Ken Weiss!

weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
thats ok Matt (3.00 / 1)
...most of them don't recognize your name either. ;-)

LettersFromTexas.com

[ Parent ]
Ken Weiss For Place 3 (0.00 / 0)

Ken Weiss for Place 3!

Running for Place 3

Ken Weiss
Jennifer Kim
Randi Shade

weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
Ken Weiss for Place 3 (0.00 / 0)

Ken Weiss for Place 3!

Running for Place 3

Ken Weiss
Jennifer Kim
Randi Shade

weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
Ken Weiss (0.00 / 0)

Ken Weiss for Place 3!

Running for Place 3

Ken Weiss
Jennifer Kim
Randi Shade

weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
Any one can put names on a list (0.00 / 0)

Any one can put supporters names on a list but does it really mean they are going to vote for that candidate?

No disrespect to Randi or any candidate but how do we know that any candidates list of supporters is real? I have seen candidates in the past put list of supports on their websites that were not even supporters of the candidate. I mean it does seem kind of funny that no one has brought this to any of the candidates attention.  


[ Parent ]
Randi's Supporters (0.00 / 0)
The two times I've seen a list broad were from Kirk Watson and John Fitzpatrick.  Randi's leadership and public service will be along the same lines.

Don't be so mean... (0.00 / 0)
I know Kirk's been a disappointment to a lot of people in Travis County, but that's no reason to apply the same kind of metric to Randi. Further, I think Kirk's going to pull out of this funk.

That being said, Matt makes an excellent point. Randi is EXTREMELY close, uncomfortably so, to toll road interests. Make no mistake, Phase 2 has been a tremendous pile of shit from under which even Kirk is only now starting to dig out. Brewster and Daugherty will never come up from it.

I'M a member of the business community and have been scratching my head as to why there are even the few that support the toll roads. This isn't good for Austin, especially when substantive changes are coming from the Lege and in the Trans Commission (don't even, for a minute, think Perry will stand in the way). We can put everything off for 18 months and get a cheaper alternative for Central Texas taxpayers. What's not to love?

So where DOES Randi stand on this? No prevarication, just a I'm for tolling or I'm against. It's simple. I know where Jennifer stands. Where's Randi?

I will state publicly that I'm a Kim supporter. City Councilmembers are almost uniformly fuckups. So am I. Odds are, you are as well. We're all human beings and we all, from time to time, suffer from hubris. However, Kim's humility on these issues has put her on par, in my mind, with Will in how he's handled some of his 'mishaps'.


[ Parent ]
Kirk a disappointment? (0.00 / 0)
Silly statement.

If a list of top all-time public servants in Austin was ever created, Kirk would be in the top five along with Lyndon Johnson and Jake Pickle.  


[ Parent ]
you mis-typed (0.00 / 0)
You accidentally called Kirk one of the top five public servants in Austin.

I think those slots are full. I'm not certain that the top 10 isn't pretty well set in stone.

Kirk still has time to take a stab at the top tier, but he ain't in exactly in the Ann Richards/Jake Pickle/LBJ ballpark just yet.


[ Parent ]
For once... (0.00 / 0)
I wholeheartedly agree with Colin.  

[ Parent ]
Not really... (0.00 / 0)
Kirk's been a disappointment to a lot of people who supported him. Obvs, you're either not hearing or you're ignoring it.

He'll get past it but that's just the environment right now. Saddling Shade with Kirk's baggage is kinda mean and really unnecessary.  


[ Parent ]
Ken Weiss (0.00 / 0)

Ken Weiss for Place 3!

Running for Place 3

Ken Weiss
Jennifer Kim
Randi Shade

weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
Short memories? (3.25 / 4)
(As a native Austinite, I'd like to share my 2 cents)...

I volunteered for Jennifer Kim and tried to defend her against these exact same attacks in 2005.  So it's rather ironic that the Kim supporters are now trying to turn the tables and argue that she's now the anti-developer candidate.  Are we living in the twilight zone?  I know 2005 was a long time ago, but let's not re-write history.  

I made the mistake of supporting Kim in 2005 over Margot Clarke.  It's not the first mistake I've made, and it certainly won't be the last.  Margot is a good Austin progressive, and she would have been a much better council member than Kim.  I won't make the same mistake in 2008, and that's why I'm supporting Randi Shade this cycle.  It's downright humorous that Kim's new campaign manager, Elliot McFadden (who worked for Margot Clarke), now appears to have dusted off the "Don't vote for the developer /toll road candidate!" playbook that he used AGAINST Kim in 2005.  Austin voters are smart, and they'll see right through this up-is-down line of attack.

Because this is important city council race, why don't we try something different in 2008?

Let's evaluate the city council candidates based on their own merits instead of making simplistic and misleading accucsations.  This Place 3 race won't fall along typical environment vs. developer/toll road lines because both candiates have supporters from both arenas.  Instead, this race is simply about leadership.  So let's talk about leadership.

Randi has been involved with Austin progressive community ever since she was student body President at UT.  She's a proud Longhorn who's committed to empowering young folks and training the next generation of activists.  She has the potential of being a truly great public servant in Austin who works hard even when it's not election time.  She made a career out of harnessing technology to help people get more involved with community service, and she is the type of person who puts the community's interests over her personal  interests.  She's full of innovative ideas, and she has the necessary people skills to bring folks together and actually get things done.  She is a leader within the local GLBT community, and she's mobilized her vast friends' network to help raise needed donations for good progressive groups like the Atticus Circle.  She's a regular down-to-earth mom who just wants Austin to be a great place to raise a family.

This Place 3 race is extremely important, and Austin voters should take the time to get to know each candidate and evaluate for yourselves who you think is a better leader and can actually get along with others and get real results.  

Make no mistake, when there's an election coming up, Kim is one of the hardest-working individuals out there.  In 2005, she hustled and dialed for dollars like no candidate I've ever seen.  She's got a huge incumbent advantage, and she's managed to convince some good Austin liberals that her developer donations somehow don't matter now.  Kim is extremely intelligent, and she's talented at telling you whatever you want to hear.  I saw her charm the socks of people in 2005, and she's now spinning voters again in 2008.

Without question, Randi has a lot of work to do to introduce herself to Austin voters, but she shouldn't have to defend herself against misleading accusations as suggested in this hit piece.  Matt, you're a great Texas liberal and I value your opinions, but I didn't see any disclaimer in your post that you are a Kim supporter.  It's your blog and you have every right to support whoever you want, but if you're going to report on city council politics, then you should be fair to your readers and let them know that you're not objective on this race.  

Please keep up the good work Matt, and thank you for at least shining a spotlight on this important local race.  We look forward to a lively campaign over the next couple of months as we debate which candidate can best lead our great city.


thanks for the comment Ian (3.00 / 1)
1) It will be valuable for new readers to have perspectives from the campaign 3 years ago. Your comment was great in that regard.

2) In terms of disclaimers, I have only asked and required staff to 'disclaim' anything if they are being paid by a campaign or essentially working for the campaign even if not in a paid capacity. Clearly, BOR writers support all kinds of candidates- this is a board heavily influenced by opinion, not just news, which is a distinction from the dead tree press.  

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.


[ Parent ]
Happy to say... (4.00 / 2)
I am supporting Kim and in large part to Randi's stronger and stronger development ties.  

I appreciate both your comments on the race and (of course) your strong praise toward the site. I didn't know I need to acknowledge all the campaigns I support, but I am happy to start if it makes my self proclaimed bias easier to notice.

My bias on this race though comes from my years of work protecting water rights across the globe. In 2005 I worked on water issues for the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance.  In 2007, we debated the ability for us to protect our ground water past 2010, and thanks to leaders in the environmental community and in the House and Senate Natural Resources comities, we have done that.  That is, unless we continue to pave over the Edwards like they want to do with Wal-mart and these countless condos popping up around town.

That scares me.  Our choices in Austin effect San Marcos, San Antonio, Fredricksburg, Del Rio, Uvalde, and countless other towns from here to the Texas Mexico border.

In my experience, the people give you money have a reason for that.  If developers are giving one candidate money disproportionately, maybe they have a special interest in getting that candidate elected.

Clearly Councilmember Kim has stood up to them too often or they wouldn't be rallying to get her out of office.  Clearly her stance against Wal-mart, domain subsidies, and the toll road has scared them into mobilizing against her.

I agree this is going to be a lively race, but I am too protective of our natural resources to take a risk on a developer backed candidate.


[ Parent ]
Thanks Matt (0.00 / 0)
I am really behind on this one.  Thanks for helping me catch up.

Logic and an open mind are more useful than common sense.

[ Parent ]
If Kim's whole argument is based on attacking Shade (2.50 / 2)
for exactly what Kim did in 2005, then this race won't be nearly as competitive as I originally thought.  If Kim wasn't AWOL in between election cycles, she'd actually have record of real results that she could run on.  Instead, she's making up for her lack of accomplishments by hurling misleading accusations that will backfire once voters get to know Randi.

You can report half-truths all you want, but pretending that Kim doesn't have developer support is dishonest and insulting to the voters of Austin.  Having seen the inside of the Kim campaign in 2005, it's highly amusing that she's now trying to fool voters into thinking she's 100% pure green.  I hope that Kim continues this desperate line of misleading attacks, because if this is the best she's got, then Randi might win this thing without a runoff.

Regarding disclaimers, it seems that BOR writers have a unique role in writing both op-ed pieces and reporting objective news.  Even if you're not paid by a campaign, it seems the most transparent thing to do is to state your bias when you're writing pieces that on the surface look like objective news.  We're all human, and it's natural for Matt's bias for Kim to affect the tone of his reporting.

For the record, I fully disclaim that I've got nothing but love for the BOR team.  Just a friendly disagreement on who can best lead Austin.  


[ Parent ]
I take issue with that... (0.00 / 0)
Ian, Kim's been around at things since her election. She's been at UDems a number of times, DFT and I've seen her at KAB a few times as a speaker and just as someone in the audience. She's been very involved with Democrats here and in the community as a whole.

I've not seen Shade at anything until recently. I didn't know she existed. Of course, I was never involved in the dotCom community.


[ Parent ]
Going to a few UDem/DFT/KAB meetings is par for the course (2.00 / 1)
I was referring to Jennifer's lack of real accomplishments in city hall.  Going to a few progressive meetings is the least you can do as an elected official.  I've also attended local meetings.  Does that make me city-council worthy?

So if you hadn't seen Randi until recently, does that mean she didn't "exist"?  Is it possible that you're not omnipresent and that Randi has a whole progressive network that you're not familiar with?


[ Parent ]
What are those networks? (0.00 / 0)
I am unfamiliar with them too.

[ Parent ]
Matt, when did you move to Austin? (0.00 / 0)

2006?

Weren't you working for the GEAA in San Antonio during Kim's first election?

It may be possible that Randi might know a lot of people you haven't met yet.


[ Parent ]
Answers and Question (0.00 / 0)
I moved here in 2006 but started working in Austin in 2004 after I moved back to Texas (when gas was a little over a buck and commuting wasn't that bad).

I have also been active in nearly every progressive/democratic club in Austin since moving here and I have still not seen Randi at any meeting.

I wasn't asking because I doubt she knows people or is involved, I am asking because I am curious. I have lived here for less than 5 years and I try to be at every event, grand opening, club meeting, and endorsement screening I can get to. I am sure a candidate for city council would try to do the same, and I am doing what Amy advised below, I am trying to get to know about Randi and her networks.

Again, no ill will in the questions, just curiosity.


[ Parent ]
K (0.00 / 0)
Let's not let this dissolve into some sort of marginalization of Matt. It's a waste of time.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

[ Parent ]
wtf (0.00 / 0)
does length of residency have to do with perspective?

let us just find the oldest s.o.b. in austin and let him tell everyone else what's what.

i don't really care if someone has never driven across the colorado, they're entitled to their opinion...hell, some might even be correct in their perspective!

also, i don't necessarily think that attendance at events is the only measurement, but it is a legitimate issue.

and i like trying to marginalize matt. it keeps him on his toes. boo to you, phillip martin...boo to you. i'll just go back to charging at windmills.


[ Parent ]
"let us just find the oldest s.o.b." (2.00 / 1)
He has a column in the Statesman, and his name is John Kelso. He wants a plate of beef brisket elected to city council.

:)

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.


[ Parent ]
Randi's Supporters (0.00 / 0)
If you're unfamiliar with Randi's supporters, you don't know Austin because it's comprehensive of every sector of Austin.

[ Parent ]
Not for many people... (0.00 / 0)
Kim's stayed involved and interested. There are more than a few electeds who frankly haven't. I'm sure Randi did exist, I certainly don't think she's some kind of pod person who was created in, well, a pod:)

I'm just saying I haven't seen her at the grassroots level or at fundraisers I've been to. Perhaps she was there and we weren't introduced. Who knows. Jennifer I have seen at a bunch of different events over the years.

What networks are you talking about? HRC? ET? I go to their events as well, hermano. Again, we may not have been introduced so I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. However, Kim has participated and been involved.

On the topic of being city council worthy, sure. Why not?  


[ Parent ]
Kim (0.00 / 0)
does not want toll roads because she shouldn't have to stand in line and wait.  Not only should her city official's badge allow her to skip the line, but it should entitle her to a free toll as well.  Furthermore, I think this badge should entitle her to security clearances to bypass check points as well as have access to nuclear secrets.

What is wrong with a little development?  Last time I checked it creates jobs, which generates tax revenue and also helps to strengthen our local economy.  Now, that seems like a pretty good gig to me.  I am not saying toll roads are the greatest thing ever and I understand the arguments both for and against them.  However, just because you don't like toll roads should not mean that you badly speak of all the "development types."


I like development... (0.00 / 0)
I just don't want it to strangle us which is what I see Randi being in favor of. We need development and I've heard nothing that would make me think either candidate is against it. However, Kim's stance on issues is far more pragmatic and rational for central Texas taxpayers.

You say you understand that arguments for and against tolls. However, I don't think you've really dug in enough to understand just how thin the 'FOR' is. I, for example, grew up in the Dallas area. The third limited access roadway I ever drove on was the Tollway. I LOVE tollways... when they make sense. What's being put in here isn't a tollway, it's taxpayer funded and insured privatization which is doing nothing but driving up costs for Central Texans.

When you're trying to get something done, you don't cave in and give the other side what they want if it means tying you down for an arbitrarily long time. Kim did that while many other CAMPO members didn't. That's why so many pro-toll folks are supporting Shade.


[ Parent ]
McBlogger, (0.00 / 0)
I completely agree with what you are saying.  I am just arguing that there is a difference in toll roads and then development as a whole.  They should be kept at different issues.  I think saying someone is pro-development is actually a compliment and is a rather lame attack.  Development, if done in a way that benefits the community, is a great thing to have.  

[ Parent ]
I'll go with you there... (0.00 / 0)
However, I think you have a bad read on Kim as far as her stance on development. However, that's beside the point. The post was about tollers and their support for Shade. Kim doesn't have that baggage.  

[ Parent ]
Supporting Proudly (0.00 / 0)
As someone dedicated to neighborhoods first, I am wholeheartedly supporting Jennifer Kim not only because of the work she did with our neighborhoods opposing the proposed Wal-mart at Northcross Mall, but she was also there fighting against the toll roads and against putting Water Treatment Plant 4 in an environmentally sensitive area.  Jennifer worked with Oak Hill residents and the Fix 290 Coalition to get strong protections for Williamson Creek and historic oak trees during road expansions, and helped the neighborhood organize against the tolling of expansions of Highways 71 and 290 in Oak Hill. She has also been a leader in securing agreements to provide affordable housing in new development in Austin, and the list goes on.

Besides my own experiences working with Jennifer to get things done, I have spoken with long time community leaders all over the city who feel similarly.  That is why Jennifer has a tremendous amount of support from the progressive community that, in addition, also includes people like Cathy Echols, Heather Way, Niyanta Spelman, Jonny Limon, Dr. Mae Marion, Walter Timberlake, Cecilia Crossley, Clare Barry, Gloria Mata Pennington, Albert Black, and more.  These are people who have had a deep involvement and dedication to city issues over the years.

-paige


paige (0.00 / 0)

Are you Paige Hill, Jennifer Kim's campaign manager?

[ Parent ]
Campaign Managers (2.00 / 1)
Paige, at least disclose that you are getting paid to manage Jennifer's campaign. Many of you know that I managed JK's first campaign but chose not to support her this time around.

This whole staff do-si-do actually says a lot. I worked for Jennifer in 2005 but am now supporting Randi. Elliot worked against us in 2005 as Margot's campaign manager, and is now running Jennifer's using the same old playbook. You're now working for her because you became friends during the Wal-Mart fight. I hope your experience is more positive and rewarding than mine and Belinda's (another one of JK's former aides). Jennifer has a very strong personality (one that has brought her both success and failure) and with that, not everybody can possibly be compatible or work with her effectively.

Randi on the other hand, is someone who has the ability to listen to folks and bring people together. As soon as I met her, I was drawn in to her strengths and her genuine sense of self and the common good. People like her not just for that and for her vision of Austin, but also because she has the progressive bona fides to back it up. Her work straddles all three sectors: public, private and non-profit. She worked for Ann Richards, Teach for America, AmeriCorps and City Year. She helped start the Austin Clean Energy Initiative. She's active in the Texas Hillel Foundation. She's fought to get her neighbors what they need in Clarksville. She's a successful businessperson, having started CharityGift, which is an online site that helps folks donate to the community organizations of their choice. And, not to be ignored, she'd be the first member of the LGBT community to be elected to the Austin City Council.

In a year where people all over the country are rising above and rejecting traditional divisive politics, I think we have a great opportunity to elect someone here in Austin who transcends the fights of the past and looks to the future. Randi has the ability to work with folks of all ages, neighborhoods, status and perhaps most importantly, other elected officials.

I really hope that y'all will take the time to learn the issues and get to know both candidates now that the Obama/Clinton primary histeria has quieted down a bit. It will be worth your while.


[ Parent ]
Thought that was clear (0.00 / 0)
The fact that I am Jennifer's campaign manager has already been posted here on BOR, in the Chronicle, the Statesman, and is included in all my communication with the public.  I didn't think I needed to repeat myself but for clarity, I will say again - I put thorough consideration into and proudly support Jennifer as her campaign manager.  She is who we need on Council to get the right things done.  Community leaders know it and agree.

[ Parent ]
Good luck (0.00 / 0)
Having had the distinct pleasure of working for Kim on two different campaigns, I know how fun she is to have as a boss.  

[ Parent ]
There are 3 people running for Austin City Council Place 3 (0.00 / 0)

I hope that you know that there are not just two candidates running in place 3 there are 3.

Please make sure you know your facts before you post.

Running for place 3

Ken Weiss
Jennifer Kim
Randi Shade

I do like the fact that you do seem to be fair and want to hear the issues.

check out our website weissforplace3.com


[ Parent ]
Toll Lobby Supports Randi Shade.... (5.00 / 1)
The Texas Comptroller's investigative report found "Double Taxation Without Accountability" and "Favoritism And Self-Enrichment".

MOST of the toll lobby names above have gotten contracts from the toll authority (CTRMA). Some were even given NO BID contracts by their pals on the toll authority board (CTRMA) including Lowell Lebermann:
http://www.texastollparty.com/...

See Appendices, then Appendix 5.

When the report was done in 2005, all the dollars the CTRMA had were tax dollars. Contracts were paid for with State, County and City Taxes. This RMA Unaccountable bureaucracy was created to toll our freeways.

Below is only the NO BID CONTRACT LIST from inception to Spring 2005:

Prime Strategies (Mike Weaver) $620,407.44

Grier-Bankett (Stacy Dukes-Rhone) $32,116.00

HB Media (Manuel Zarate, Pete Peters) $259,704.40

Martin & Salinas Public Affairs (Don Martin, Trey Salinas) $120,027.75

Adelante Solutions (Paul Saldana) included in Martin Salinas above

Adisa Public Relations (Shuronda Robinson-Parks) $59,517.98

Nancy Ledbetter (Nancy Ledbetter) $109,105.87

Informative Efforts (Catherine Howell, Melinda Wheatley) $59,068.25

HDR Engineering (Russell Zapalac, Craig Stong) $1,350,153.98

Owen Consulting (Everett Owen) $61,050.00

Sheets & Crossfield (Charles Crossfield) $588,332.01

S.D. Kallman (Steven D. Kallman) $80,999.30

S.W. Hale Consulting (Stephanie Hale) $41,441.50

Pink Consulting (Bobbie J. Garza) $32,394.55

Smith, Robertson, Elliott & Glen (Alan Glen) $47,232.90

Cobb, Fendley & Associates (Allen Watson) $410,833.96

Crossland Acquisition (Jim Henry) Included in Sheets & Crossfield billings

Survey and Mapping (Michael Hatcher) $1,065,154.41

Crespo Consulting (L. Steven Stecher) $94,516.00


Special Interest Tollers Mega Search (5.00 / 1)
MEGA SEARCH: Almost 3 Years of Blog Articles on Special
Interest tollers here:
http://www.google.com/custom?h...

Thanks,
http://salcostello.blogspot.com/


[ Parent ]
Jennifer as City Council Member (3.00 / 1)

What would you say are the highlights of Kim's first term?

1.  Trying to delay the construction of Town Lake Park?

2.  Asking for a special pass for herself to the airport so she could skip the TSA security screeners and claiming "It's our airport."?

3.  Bringing her dog to City Hall in violation of city ordinances and having city employees clean up the dog poop?

4.  After getting stopped for speeding, asking the Austin police officer, "Do you know who I am?"

5.  Pushing for red light cameras that violate our civil rights as a means of revenue generation?

6.  Being named, "Princess Kim" by John Kelso and having a former staffer tell the media, "She just doesn't get it. She consistently exudes arrogance. She has a sense of entitlement"?

7.  Going through more staffers than Dora Olivo?

8.  Using Austin taxpayer money to maintain her campaign website?

9.  Filing incomplete and misleading campaign finance reports?

10.  Voting a 22% pay raise for City Council members?

11.  Her inability to work productively with the other City Council members or people from the community?


Trick question? (0.00 / 0)
You almost got me.  I will go with #12 - all of the above.

[ Parent ]
#10 (0.00 / 0)
That is my favorite one because she voted for it so her colleagues could get an increase and pay and did not take the increase for herself.  One of many reasons I support Jennifer Kim.

[ Parent ]
Here's some context on her "principled" stand... (0.00 / 0)
In describing her reasoning, Kim cited negative reaction to the raise, largely the Statesman's online topic forum, which diabolically combines all the obtuseness of old media with the unexpurgated vitriol of the Internet. "Going by the comments on message boards," said Kim, "I was looking at all those, and I thought, 'Wow - people are really mad.'" And yes, most of the Talk of Austin comes from a bunch of reactionary mouth-breathers who make Jeff Ward sound like William F. Buckley. But is this surprising - or moreover, is it actually representative of public sentiment? No, blogs and comments are a self-selecting fever swamp of pet issues and petty grievances. Drive-time talk doesn't do nuance either, and Kim's smart enough to see that. No, despite her assurances otherwise, it appears she's looking to re-election, and, judging by some of her previous missteps - most notably, the recent Crossings kerfuffle - maybe rightfully so. Makes sense to us, but maybe we're not the ones she needs to explain to. Not naming any names, Lee Leffingwell told the Statesman that to support a raise but not take it would be "political grandstanding," on his part. With Kim, maybe the buck should've stopped there.

http://www.austinchronicle.com...


[ Parent ]
Paradox (0.00 / 0)
So she responds to the community and that's a bad thing?

I am sorry but doesn't this show how much she cares to both work with council AND respond to the community?  She wanted her colleagues to have the pay raise they fought for.  Austin said that was a bad thing.  Kim listened to her constituents and decided not to take the raise.

I don't follow your logic on how this bad at all.  Seems like the system worked and Kim did what we asked her to do.  Yet another reason we should keep Jennifer Kim, she listens to Austin.


[ Parent ]
Another Kim flip-flop (0.00 / 0)
Lee Leffingwell was right.  It was clearly political grandstanding.

If Kim was truly "listening" to her supporters as you claim, she should have voted against the pay raise.  Period.  You either for it or against it.  This is another classic case of Kim trying to have it both ways and looking silly in the process.


[ Parent ]
Oh, on #11... (0.00 / 0)
Let's see, she signed on with Lee and Mike on the change to the city manager/city attorney relationship.


[ Parent ]
Austin needs a bridge-builder (3.00 / 1)
I left a stable job at a national non-profit organization to manage Randi Shade's run for City Council because I truly believe Randi to be the strong, experienced, progressive leader that Austin needs to make a difference for our city.

As I have seen in candidates like Barack Obama, it takes someone that can truly and easily work with all kinds of people to be a real leader that can get things done. As displayed in her lists (and Matt's criticism), Randi's supporters come from all over the political and social spectrum. She is the kind of person that has always had the remarkable ability to bring different groups of people together and build bridges, which I don't think should ever be tagged as a negative.

The more I have gotten to know her, the more I have grown to admire her astonishing ability to reach-out, listen and gain the respect of people from all parts of the community. This trait in a public servant can only make our City stronger. That is just one reason I believe Randi Shade is different, and the best candidate for Place 3 to represent all of Austin and get things done on our City Council.

Randi's just posted many of her stances on the issues facing our city to her website www.RandiShade.com. I want to encourage people in and outside of the BOR community to get involved with the campaign, to learn more about the issues, and have an open and honest debate leading up to May.  I look forward to meeting them and earning their support.


#13 (3.00 / 2)

How could I forget this one?

13.  Voted to give a forgivable loan involving taxpayer dollars to Las Manitas because she likes to eat there.


THAT'S (4.00 / 2)
Why I'll vote for her.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

[ Parent ]
The Great Toll Stalking Horse (2.33 / 3)
I continue to be amazed at how many well-meaning people are getting duped by people like salsal and McBlogger.

Folks, suburbanites don't oppose toll roads because they are anti-development; they don't oppose them because of 'fairness' or 'double-tax' or because they love the environment or because of a fear of privatization.

They hate them because the business as usual method of highway construction here (the 'old way') is a huge subsidy from urban residents (both drivers and non-drivers) to suburbanites. Not only did urban drivers have to send their gas taxes out to the suburbs (since comparatively few lane-miles of gas-tax-eligible roadways - that meaning signed and numbered state highways -  exist in the urban core), at the end of the old regime, huge 'donations' of sales and property taxes were also extorted, again disproportionately falling on the urbanites (that's where the money is). And in that latter case, even non-drivers were paying so Patio Man could keep tooling around the Hill Country in his SUV.

You hear them complain about how these tolls will hurt the poor - BULL. Poor people don't drive Explorers 20,000 miles a year like your typical Circle C resident. They ride the bus. They bike. They walk. And when they drive at all, they're more likely to be driving short distances into the city from the east - not from the southwest; not AROUND the city; and not on highways either.

Don't buy this nonsense - if the gas tax ever did get raised, they'd be the first ones out in front of the bandwagon for a huge investment in sprawl-inducing 'free'ways. The fact that the progressives and environmentalists got so easily swindled into an alliance with these troglodytes has even now not lost its capacity to amaze me - given the otherwise otherworldly ability those folks have to sniff out the taint of 'developer' and other such types.


What a cogent post (0.00 / 0)
Finally, someone gets it.

Tolls are a commuter tax.  Central city progressives who have complained for years about being strangled by suburban traffic and subjugated at the lege by suburban political influence should be happy to see those folks forking over a few bucks to get to the airport.  Me?  I'll take the free access road, which will be less congested thanks to the land yacht migration to the new tolled lanes.

And privatization?  Red herring.  Not gonna happen.  The lege is almost 100% united against that now.  Toll roads, on the other hand, are still very much in play.  They'll just be run by the state/RMAs, rather than private concerns.  Even in the much-maligned (and often misrepresented and misunderstood Phase II plan, which looks a lot like what Kirk Watson produced no matter what he and McCracken call the new plan), the one proposed privatized road, Loop 360, was excised from the plan before it was first approved during the summer of 2004.  Hell, absent all the hysteria and some political cowardice, we'd be driving on new lanes by now.


[ Parent ]
a couple of points (3.00 / 1)
yes, a commuter tax on existing roads into Austin would be effective in disincentivizing suburban living, or at least long-distance single car commuting.  But the tolling plans discussed all increase suburban-urban road capacity and will actually increase sprawl development more than the current situation.  None of the suburban dwellers at my former office cared about the measly buck or two they have to pay to get from Round Rock to North Austin -- they welcome the reduced traffic.

Privatization.  It most certainly would have happened if it wasn't for the backlash of anti-toll citizens and their allies.  Loop 360 was removed because the Penny Backer bridge would have had to of been removed/modified in order to accommodate tolling lanes.  That would have been a battle to watch.


[ Parent ]
A commuter tax? (0.00 / 0)
WOW. And, just for an example, how do you think people in even CENTRAL AUSTIN get to work? You'd like everyone to think this is a tax just on the mooks who bought into the sprawl in RR, Hutto and North Hays Co. IT'S NOT. It's all of us. Even people who don't drive will pay higher prices because of increased transportation costs created by more expensive tolls.

The reason privatization isn't going to happen is because thousands of people like me threw holy hell about it. Even now, it's not been completely stopped. TTC35 is still under contract to Cintra/Zachry. SH 121 was almost sold to them last year. 130 has already been privatized. But then, you don't use it, right? You only use the 'free' roads that someone who lived in Round Rock and drives an Expedition paid for with his gas taxes.


[ Parent ]
Central Austin to Work (0.00 / 0)
Uh, no, if I worked downtown, I'd drive down Lamar, Guadalupe, and Congress (or I'd take the bus). None of those roads get one lousy dollar from the gas tax; yet I pay when I drive on them. And when I do drive to my crappy suburban office, I likewise spend most of my time on city-maintained arterials which get zero dollars and zero cents from the gas tax. I do get on Mopac for precisely one exit worth.  

[ Parent ]
So even you... (0.00 / 0)
Get some use out of state funded transport. Obviously, you also consume food shipped into Austin via 35, 290 or 183 so there's that was well.

You are simply WRONG about the impact tolls will have on all of us and our cost of living. It WILL impact everyone in Texas, urbanite, suburbanite and even those in rural areas will all feel the pinch. My point is that despite your attempts to create some kind of conflict between those who live in the city and those who live in the suburbs, we're all in this together.

What is it about you that has to make everything them vs. us?  


[ Parent ]
Efficiency (0.00 / 0)
So if I use one product sent in on a road that gets gas tax funded roadways, I should support a system which subsidizes suburban sprawl and the wealthy at the expense of the non-drivers and the poor?

That's absurd. It's just bad rhetoric - there are efficiency arguments either way on the funding issue, but clearly Texas goes way too far in this way - creating perverse economic incentives to develop land in ways that are the most expensive to serve later on.

Tolls are a far more efficient way to ration access to a scarce and expensive commodity (roadway space). Better still would be tolls that varied by time of day, of course, but a fixed toll is better than the current funding regime in what it incents and disincents. Funding with a combination of the gas tax and the ridiculous "urban areas get to voluntarily screw themselves even more by dumping the general fund into the pot" is just a move back to the Soviet model of market-clearing - get the people with the money to pay (whether or not they use the service or how much), and then ration access via long lines.


[ Parent ]
politics makes strange bedfellows (2.00 / 1)
If it was up to me, I'd bulldoze Circle C and relocate Sal to a condo downtown. :)  But barring complete dictatorial control over Austin, I am happy to join forces with the anti-toll and  neighborhood folk to keep SH45 from being built over sensitive aquifer land and to minimize the negative effects of any "enhancement" of 290 (such as turning Williamson creek into a concrete drainage ditch).  Privatized toll-road construction and operation isn't just a matter of ideology, it's a matter of substance as well.  The road warriors like this approach because they can build roads faster with lesser accountability.  If it wasn't for the anti-toll forces the last four years, most of these roads would be built by now (as Mr. Juice acknowledges above) and that would mean more environmental destruction, more sprawl-inducement, and less demand for alternative transportation.  I'm quite happy that this hasn't happened and I believe anyone opposed to sprawl development should be as well.

[ Parent ]
one other thing (3.00 / 1)
Mike, I'm confused about the whole "swindled" thing.  We've lost nothing by helping to kill (or reduce) this toll-road package.  If the state lege were to raise the gas tax during the session, most environmental folk would be ecstatic, even if that meant that some of these roads got built (something about disincentivizing gas consumption).  It's likely that they're going to get built through tolling or gas tax once TxDOT finds all the money they've said they lost (or decides to use the bond authority the state gave them last year).  What we've done is delay that by at least 5 years (from 2004), allowing more density to be built in the center city, more public transportation to be built (yes, I know commuter rail sucks, but this new push could turn out ok), and more aquifer land to be purchased and indefinitely removed from development consideration.  Sounds like a victory to me.

[ Parent ]
You're very very naive (0.00 / 0)
The most likely scenario in the long-run is that we raise the gas tax a little bit, and then raise the local "contributions" to 'free'ways by an order of magnitude more than the previous 'business as usual'. Meaning that the same roads get built, but they get built in ways which encourage sprawl even more than toll roads supposedly do; and they screw urbanites and the poor even more than the old model did.

There is zero chance that Sal Costello's ilk is going to support a large ENOUGH rise in the gas tax to pay for these roads. Rather than being eager for a dollar/gallon gas tax (which is what it would take to pay for all these new roads plus all the existing unfunded stuff that they pass off to us urbanites), they're slavering at the chance to grab a chunk of sales tax from Capital Metro and a huge chunk of property taxes from the city/county general fund - like we did back in the bad old days.


[ Parent ]
You know... (0.00 / 0)
what pisses me off most about this is supposedly intelligent people like yourself using the talking points of the infinitely corrupt TXDOT and the Republicans who run it. $1.00 per gallon is only necessary if we we want to build out enough capacity so that there are NO HEAVY TRAFFIC areas or jamups for the next fifty years. And we want to have it all complete in the next five years.

Obviously, that's not really needed. That number is wrong, you know it and using it is incredibly disingenuous.


[ Parent ]
Read more carefully (0.00 / 0)
A buck a gallon is what it would take to fund all major arterial roadways from the gas tax (what suburbanites think we already do, in other words).

[ Parent ]
long-run (0.00 / 0)
you can't raid CapMetro's budget when there's no money in the cookie jar.  They're broke, and that doesn't look likely to change anytime soon as the commuter rail comes in and they likely have to operate whatever system CAMPO decides to build this year.  You seem to be ignoring the fact that even our dense regional leaders are not going to make the same decisions on transportation at $4/gallon that we made at $1.50/gallon (hell, even Krusee now sings the praises of new urbanism).  

CAMPO et. al will have to up its local contribution to build some roads.  But it's certainly not going to have an easy time raising property taxes, or as easy as it would have been able to raise private financing in 2004.  That leads one to the reasonable conclusion that the road building program will progress at a much slower pace than it otherwise would have (it's already been delayed by 4+ years).  Hell, just look at the 2004 vs. the 2007 plan to see how it shrunk.


[ Parent ]
Cap Metro cookie jar (0.00 / 0)
Gerald Daugherty can get together a coalition of suburbanites to take back 1/4 to 1/2 cent of their money in about three seconds if you guys succeed in getting tolls off the table.

And the reason the local contributions have been minimal in the last 5 years is precisely because of roads. We floated HUGE bond packages in the 1996-2001 timeframe as explicit donations for right-of-way purchases for state and federal highways; we could easily do so again. We haven't had to have the conversation lately because of tolls - not because the politicians wouldn't roll over in a second and do it again if it became necessary.


[ Parent ]
I guess you missed... (0.00 / 0)
the plans to toll MoPac and 35, not to mention changing over 183/71. Bottom line is that this affects all of us, including those who, like me, LIVE IN AUSTIN.

As far as the effect on the poor, we have two choices. We spread the burden evenly and cheaply to all consumers in Texas. OR, we spread it evenly and expensively to all consumers in Texas. Whether you've realized it or not, there isn't a part of this state that isn't being considered for tolling.

Troglodytes? Hey, you don't respect me and I certainly don't respect you. But name calling? Really? Is this where you want to go knowing how nasty I can get?


[ Parent ]
Suburban (0.00 / 0)
"suburban" can mean "in Austin". Circle C residents are "in Austin" and simultaneously "suburban".

The effect on the poor of tolls is minimal. Most poor people don't live in Circle C - they live in areas where routes exist into the city which aren't and will never be tolled. It's the Round Rock / Pflugerville / Circle C crowd that's going to be hit hard - and they SHOULD be hit hard; they've been living high on the hog on the ill-gotten gains from urban drivers and non-drivers for decades.

There is no equity argument against tolls which doesn't look like a hill of beans next to the much larger equity argument FOR them - considering the fact that the urban of all economic classes today are tremendously subsidizing the driving of the suburban and rural middle-class and rich. Far more poor are urban than suburban or rural.  


[ Parent ]
You're wrong... (0.00 / 0)
The 'poor' are not only composed of the working class in East Austin who don't own cars. Many of them do. Many of the work at jobs all over Central Texas and they depend on roads to get them too and from work.

At least they do until a comprehensive mass transit option is available. That I will wholeheartedly support.

Trust me, I buy loans originated all over Central
Texas. Many of the people I finance outside of Austin are not wealthy and they aren't moving to the Land of Lennar because they LOVE an hour long commute and have to have a giant backyard. They're there because it's all they can afford.

Again, you're ignoring the plans to toll roadways IN AUSTIN as well as the fact that STUFF is shipped in everyday to Austin via the very roads you don't want to see improved. Food, clothes, medicine and the alcohol I need to survive and put up with self-important wannabe snobs like yourself. When those roads are tolled, do you really think the manufacturers and the shipping companies are just going to eat those costs? Hell no, they'll pass them on to all of us.


[ Parent ]
Prices are already way up without toll roads (0.00 / 0)
That talking point has left the gate McBlogger.  Mike is right, it is high time the suburbs start paying their own way.  Let's also tax Williamson County for the disproportionate number of state prisoners it creates too.  Actions should have consequences.  Circe C sucks BTW.

[ Parent ]
Key difference (0.00 / 0)
Your definition of 'poor' includes people buying a new home today. I'd argue that's an overly inclusive definition of the term. The real poor are living in houses their family bought a long time ago at much cheaper prices through East Austin (or are renting, obviously).

[ Parent ]
Kim's Environmental Record Not so Clear (0.00 / 0)
I am not so sure if Jennifer Kim is always on the right side of environmental issues.  She is certainly not a Daryl Slusher; wow do I ever miss him!

She doesn't seem to fight against putting ANOTHER landfill in the Austin area.  The proposal for another landfill and water treatment plant is on a tract of land in Eastern Travis County- SHOCKER! The tract of land is near the Colorado River and the Gilliland Creek; oh did I mention it is also an historical property once owned by Webber?

Where is Kim on this proposal?  For it!

As though we are not collecting trash from enough municipalities; I understand currently Travis County is taking trash from over 20 different municipalities/areas, including San Antonio!

If Kim was truly behind zero waste for Austin then she would be fighting another proposed landfill, which will only enable us to continue our current bad habits. Not to mention the environmental concerns and health concerns that come with a landfill in our backyard! It is time to contract with another municpality on a short term basis to transport our trash to their communities for once as we work toward our zero waste goal for the future.


Interesting... (0.00 / 0)
It is time to contract with another municpality on a short term basis to transport our trash to their communities for once as we work toward our zero waste goal for the future.

That's essentially what the Webberville site is for -- exporting our trash to another community.  It's a ways from East Austin (another 5-10 miles or so East).  AFAIK, Martinez is the only one solidly opposed to it (and gave a great speech on it at the last Council meeting during the Villa Muse deliberations), though I haven't polled all of council.

ps.  I haven't decided on a candidate in this race yet (still waiting for my TED Questionnaires to be returned), but currently CM Kim is the only person consistently listening and voting for us on council.  The Webberville site is on the questionnaire.


[ Parent ]
Exportation of Trash (3.00 / 1)
I do not consider exporting trash 5 miles from the municipality(if that)within the same county as really exporting trash. The Webberville site is a bad idea as pointed out in my last post.

If this is Kim's idea of zero waste, I can not back her.


[ Parent ]
ok (0.00 / 0)
so what community to you want to send our trash to?

[ Parent ]
Fantastic (5.00 / 1)
Good to know that the geniuses who had the insight and leadership to solve Austin's traffic gridlock with toll roads are hard at work for us again.  Man, count me in.  

And now that I know this candidate knows so many people... whew - say no more.


Why Kim vs Shade? (0.00 / 0)
Let me be upfront about my personal bias.  I have spent the last two years of my life fighting TxDOT's proposal for two megahighways (290 and 71)through my Oak Hill neighborhood and into the rapidly vanishing beauty of the Texas Hill Country. With other neighbors I started a little grassroots group called the Fix290 Coalition.  We had no money and no political power, but Jennifer Kim was the one public official who was consistently willing to talk to us and help to bring our case before CAMPO. She stood with us against the Greater Austin Chamber, RECA, and Kirk Watson and finally voted against a highway package that we knew would be an environmental and financial disaster - even when it directly threatened her political future. I call that political courage.

Now Randi Shade is a very charming person and I admire the work that she has done in giving nonprofit organizations a presence on the Internet.  But I cannot help wonder why she chose to run for Place 3 rather than the vacant Place 4.  And why she made that decision so close on the heels of the toll road battle in CAMPO. The fact that she is supported by the group of contractors, engineers, and development attorneys who organized the Take On Traffic Campaign confirms my suspicion that Jennifer has been targeted for elimination because she won't dance to their tune.


the answer (0.00 / 0)
she gave at our SBCA meeting is that she switched from Place 4 to Place 3 because she didn't want to be pegged as "the business candidate" in Place 4.  She thought running against Kim (who has courted and had some business support in the past) would make that a non-issue, though it doesn't seem to be working out that way so far.  I'm sure the people she has helping her probably thought it would be easier to beat a wounded Kim than to defeat some pretty strong candidates vying for place 4.

Again, I have no preferred candidate at this point.  The two keys for me are 1) seeing how fast Randi can learn about city issues (she admits that she has a lot to learn, as all new candidates do) and seeing what positions she stakes out and 2) trying to figure out whether CM Kim is the Kim of the last year or the Kim of her first two years.  CM Kim of the last year I can live with.


[ Parent ]
"CM Kim of the last year I can live with." (0.00 / 0)
You'd rather have a city councilmember who is either idiotically misinformed about the legal responsibilities of the city or will publically lie about them just to win votes? (referring to Wal-Mart/Northcross here, obviously)?

I'd rather have Ronnie Reynolds or Bruce Todd's sad-ass council than one that tries to pander to neighborhoods and in the process gets us spanked in HUGE court cases against developers trying to exercise what are clearly and unambiguously legal rights.


[ Parent ]
I'm not saying (0.00 / 0)
I agree with everything she's done over the last year.  As I've stated many times before, I disagreed with RG4N's lawsuit.  But she's at least shown some energy, a commodity sorely lacking among the remaining non-Martinez non-McCracken council.

[ Parent ]
Ken Weiss Running for Place 3 (0.00 / 0)

Did you know?

Ken Weiss has lived in Austin for over 38 years! Jennifer Kim and Randi Shade combined have not live in Austin longer than Ken Weiss has!

He has operated two small family businesses right here in Austin for over 20 years! Jennifer Kim and Randi Shade can talk about their dot coms all day long but have not operated two small family businesses right here in Austin!

Ken has never left the Austin area to get his education. Ken attended Pflugerville School District, ACC, Concordia University, and is working on his Masters in buisness.

Ken has served in the Texas National Guard as an officer for over 5 years, right here in the Austin area.

Ken helped during Katrina. He was over all the shelters in San Antonio. Ken Weiss helped over 65,000 victims find shelter, food, clothes, medical attention, and future housing after the shelters closed. Where was Jennifer Kim and Randi Shade during this time when our neighbor's need help?

What Ken will do for Austin?

Ken is working hard to protect the enviroment. He knows the challenges that small businesses face and wants to help them succeed in Austin. He will make sure that Austin remains safe by providing the equipment and personnel the city's protective services need including EMS, fire and Police. He will make sure that Austin's highways are free and don't become toll roads. Ken will eliminate waste from the city budge and by doing so will save you tax dollars!

Ken Weiss loves Austin! It is where Ken grew up, he went to school here, and he lives here. If you love Austin as much as Ken does, then you'll help Ken win Place 3, where he can make the decisions that are best for Austin, its' citizens, and its' neighborhoods. You can help right now by making a contribution to our campaign fund and volunteering. Then on May 10th, 2008 you can help by voting for Ken Weiss. With the help of concerned citizens like yourself, we can make Austin truly a better place for all to live.

"The citizens of Austin don't want or need another politician to run for Austin. What Austin needs is someone with the proven business sense and leadership skills that Ken Weiss has show to get the job done efficiently, eddectively, and economically."

Let's cahnge city government and make it responsible to the citizens of Austin! If you like these ideas, tell your friends, famiily, co-workers, and neighbors about Ken Weiss running for Austin City Council Place 3 against Jennifer Kim and Randi Shade!

Please vist the website @ wessforplace3.com


Ken Weiss Web site (0.00 / 0)

I made a mistake on the website address:

weissforplace3.com


Randi Shade Supports Toll Roads (0.00 / 0)
Randi supports toll roads that have already been paid for by tax payers dollars.

What was she thinking? I guess she doesn't speak with the citizens or neighborhoods around the 290, 360, and 183. If Randi was to speak with these neighborhoods she would know that toll roads are not wanted in these neighborhoods!

How is it that Randi preaches for community imput and then drops the ball? Is this the kind of City Council member you would want addressing your neighborhood issues?

I am voting for Ken Weiss the best candidate who opposes toll roads that have already been paid for by tax payers dollars!

I suggest if you don't want toll roads in your neighborhoods to vote for Ken Weiss for Austin City Council Place 3.

weissforplace3.com



Ken Weiss Running for Austin City Council Place 3 against Jennifer Kim (0.00 / 0)

Ken's Positions on Toll Roads

I will work extremely hard to keep Austin's highways FREE for everyone. Although, Ken doesn't oppose toll roads, he does oppose the use of tax-paid right-of-way. The reason for toll roads is generally because the road is build with no or very little state or federal funding. The tolls are used to pay for the acquisition cost of right-of-way and to pay for and/or supplement the cost of construction. This does not happen when you use tax paid for right-of-way and take away a precious free roadway. We need more major roadways and those should not be tolled. Austin does need some viable solution to it's traffic problems now as it will only get worse in the future.

We need to make sure that existing toll roads are reworked to allow for just as easy access for free highway user not wanting to use the toll road. Take these intersections for example, State Highway 130 / US Highway 71 and State Highway 130 / US Highway 290. There are now more lights to congest traffic at these locations while, eventually there will be easy access on and off ramps for the toll road while the users wanting to use US 71 or US 290 will have to wait for lights.

No managed lanes on MOPAC (Loop 1). Managed is another word for toll and we  don't need to lose existing free roads to toll roads. However, a H.O.V. (High Occupancy Vehicle) lane might help, if it is added as a forth lane of traffic. But, to take away an existing lane would be ridiculous.



Burnt Orange Reader

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Poll
Who would you vote for in the Democratic Primary for Ag Commission?
Kinky Friedman
Hank Gilbert

Results

Advertisement

Best of Texas Left
- (Complete Directory)
- A Capitol Blog
- As the Island Floats
- B & B
- Bay Area Houston
- Blue Bloggin
- Bluedaze
- Brains and Eggs
- Capitol Annex
- Collin County Democrats
- Collin County Observer
- Community Forum
- Dog Canyon
- Dos Centavos
- Easter Lemming Liberal
- Eye on Williamson County
- Feet to the Fire
- Greg's Opinion
- Grits for Breakfast
- Half Empty
- Houtopia
- In the Pink Texas
- Kiss My Big Blue Butt
- Letters from Texas
- McBlogger
- Mean Rachel
- Musings
- North Texas Liberal
- Off the Kuff
- Panhandle Truth Squad
- Para Justicia y Libertad!
- Pink Dome
- San Antonio Mayor
- South Texas Chisme
- StoudDemBlog
- Texas Clover Leaf
- Texas Kaos
- The Caucus Blog
- There..Already
- Three Wise Men
Best of Texas Right
- Blogs of War
- BlogHouston
- Boots and Sabers
- Lone Star Times
- Publius TX
- Rick Perry vs the World
- Safety for Dummies
- Slightly Rough
- Urban Grounds
Other Texas Reads
- Burka Blog
- D Magazine
- DOT Show
- Statesman Elections
- Strong Political Analysis
- Texas Monthly
- Texas Observer
- The Texas Blue
- Quorum Report Daily Buzz
Around Austin
- Austin Bloggers
- Austin Chronicle
- Austin Contrarian
- Austin Metblogs
- Austin on Two Wheels
- Austin Real Estate Blog
- Austin Statesman
- Austin Texas Bike Shit Stuff
- Austin Towers
- Austinist
- Capital MetroBlog
- Daily Texan
- Do512
- Downtown Austin Blog
- East Austinite
- Elise Hu
-
Flash Mob Austin
- Keep Austin Blue
- M1EK
- Travis County Democrats
- University Democrats
TX Progressive Orgs
- ACLU Legislative Blog
- Atticus Circle
- Criminal Justice Coalition
- Equality Texas
- Latinos for Texas
- NOW Texas
- PFAW Texas
- Public Citizen
- SEIU Texas
- Tejano Insider
- Texas AFT
- Texas HDCC
- Texas Watch
- TFN
- TSTA
- TSEU
- Texas Young Democrats
- United Ways of Texas
TX Elections/Returns
- TX Returns 1992-present
- TX Media/Candidate List

- Bexar County
- Collin County
- Dallas county
- Denton County
- El Paso County
- Fort Bend County
- Harris County
- Jefferson County
- Tarrant County
- Travis County

- CNN 1998 Returns
- CNN 2000 Returns
- CNN 2002 Returns
- CNN 2004 Returns
- CNN 2006 Returns
- CNN 2008 Returns
Traffic Ratings
- Alexa Rating
- Quantcast Ratings
-
Syndication

Burnt Orange Reporters
Publisher - Karl-Thomas M.
Editor-in-Chief - Matt G.
Staff Writer - David M.
Staff Writer - Katherine H.
Staff Writer - Michael H.
Staff Writer - Todd H.
Man of Mystery - Phillip M.
Founder - Byron L.

Powered by: SoapBlox