| Key Point: The lesson from "The Unforeseen" I took away was that we have to learn how to work in harmony, think in long-term plans, and appropriately envision how to protect our open/green spaces. Politically speaking, that includes taking measures to prevent developers from going to the Legislature with enough leverage/energy to trample the S.O.S. ordinance -- which was Shade's point, and why I agree with her.
I begin this journal by saying that I love Barton Springs as much as anyone, and I'm about as anti-development as they come. I want Showdown to stay, I think it's crap that Las Manitas is being replaced, and I've signed more S.O.S. petitions than I can count. I've got a painting of Barton Springs hanging on my wall in my Boston apartment -- so respect where I'm coming from when I say that I agree with Randi Shade on Barton Springs. Earlier, our writer Mark Duncan wrote a journal titled, "Shade Proclaims Austin Should Negotiate Away Barton Springs." I was alarmed, astonished -- until I read what she actually said, and how grossly (re: politically) her remarks have been interpreted: What I told him was how sad it made me to see it result in legislative action. That the will of the citizens was ... of Austin was basically taken by legislative process. And that there wasn't a better compromise that made everybody a winner. Because really when you saw the original proposal less land would have been developed than what ultimately did get developed. And I just ... You know I think that was what I was talking about, the importance of compromise. It was in the context of the Domain subsidies discussion that we were having." Those remarks sound like she's lamenting the fact that legislative action took place -- and I agree. In the comments to Mark's post I remarked that a good political leader will anticipate the next move of their "opponent." So when the law gutting the S.O.S. ordinance was passed then vetoed by Governor Richards in 1993, what happened? Because that exact same bill passed two years later -- and in those two years, knowing that it still lived there, any number of things could have been done to seek a compromise. We need crusaders for a cause -- they are absolutely necessary, and I'm one of them when it comes to Barton Springs Pool. But I can't see every political reality out there, and that's where I trust my City Council Members to look out for what is a reality. And the reality is that, if something is in the Legislature, one city isn't going to stop it -- and unless the Speaker of the House is from Austin, you're very unlikely to build enough partners in the Legislature to save your cause. What needed to happen from Richards' veto in 1993 and Bush's signature in 1995 was a compromise, pure and simple -- and we needed the City Council to figure out how to make that happen. Why I Trust Randi Shade There's never been anything that has given me the impression that Shade doesn't appreciate Barton Springs. She speaks openly and publicly about it, and about protecting it. From the Clean Water Action / Texas Vote Environment Questionairre: In general, I believe we should continue buying as much land as possible over the Edwards Aquifer and unfailingly rotect what we already have. I will be an advocate for strict enforcement of the SOS rdinance and will work to advance policies that result in the reduction of pollutants flowing nto the Barton Springs watershed and other urban watersheds. Additionally, there is her answer to the Sierra Club Questionnaire: Question: Despite a lot of talk, water quality in Barton Springs has deteriorated significantly in the past ten ears. What will you do to protect Barton Springs?
Shade: If elected to the City Council I will be a consistent advocate for the strict enforcement of the SOS ordinance and will work with the rest of the City Council and the community at large to advance policies that result in the net reduction of pollutants flowing into the Barton Springs watershed. Barton Springs Pool is the “soul of the city,” and the fight to protect the quality of water in the Barton Springs watershed is representative of the larger fight to protect and improve water quality everywhere. I'm not going to find someone who's perfect to run for City Council. But Shade has done numerous things that has impressed me and allowed me to trust her throughout her campaign: - She's open and honest with the community. Find her controversial at times, disagree with her, but you know where she is. Her blogging here at BOR has impressed me, and if I at least know what a City Council member is thinking then I know that I need to change his/her mind. I never knew what Kim might do, so Shade is an improvement over Kim.
- She understands partnering with adversaries. Partnering with adversaries doesn't mean caving, it doesn't mean selling out, and it doesn't mean kowtowing to their wishes. Partnering with adversaries has the same positive benefit as being open with the community --- you know what "the other" is thinking/saying, so you aren't blindsided by it and can manage their needs and hungers.
Does Shade have more developer friends/supporters than Kim? Maybe. Matt says so, and I fully trust Matt. But is that inherently bad? If the candidate demonstrates a pattern of being out of touch with the community, yes. But Shade has shown no signs of such aloofness (unlike Kim), and I think there is value in having a City Council Member that understands all the factions in the system. - She understands the roles we play. Shade knows there are diehards -- like many of you, and like me -- on things like Barton Springs, and she knows she's got to be responsive to those voices. When asked the question in the audience (provided Mark's report was correct, and I trust that it is), she answered the question in a context, and didn't take it personally. Beyond someone who can manage others in a group system, leaders must be able to control their own passions and act as a lighting rod for the community -- and then, once the storm passes, focus on the real adaptive work that needs to be done. Kim has never shown to be much a leader (more of a follower) on a lot of issues, which doesn't impress me.
Shade would be closely watched if/when she is elected to the Austin City Council. I've never read or heard anything from her that suggests political scheming. Her remarks -- which Mark and others have found so offensive -- weren't a reflection of someone who was out to "negotiate away" Barton Springs. Her remarks were a reflection of an honest politician, discussing how difficult the tradeoffs can be in the highly charged political world, and how sad it is when the soul of the city --- her words, not mine --- comes under threat from development. |
