On Sunday, thousands of people in Austin will get together & walk a 5K for a good cause. They will have raised money, or just registered to walk, to care for people in Austin living with HIV & AIDS. I'm still looking for more donations - will, right up to the very last minute - and you can give here at my AIDS Walk page.
Come woth me below the fold & I'll tell you what the donations do & there is (of course) a U2 video.
In a widely expected move the Austin Independent School District Board of Trustees has voted, unanimously, to move their elections to November. Board members cited the cost savings in holding an election jointly with ACC as well as taking advantage of increased turnout. The change would move not only the 2012 election date, but all future trustee elections to November of even numbered years. Terms for members in districts 2, 3, 5, & 8 will be extended by six months. Representing those districts are Sam Guzmán, Christine Brister, Mark Williams, and Annette LoVoi (at-large).
Board president Mark Williams stated the following in the Statesman.
"This will substantially increase voter turnout and significantly reduce cost for the district," Austin school board President Mark Williams said. "There's benefits in increasing access to voters, and part of a public school district is public involvement."
"If you look at the percentage of voters in May of even numbered years versus November of even numbered years, it's literally like ten percent or so on average for May versus fifty or sixty percent for November. I mean the more people you have involved and informed the better your process is going to be, so it was a very easy decision for me to make," Schneider told KUT News.
The move to November elections will save about $300,000 for the school district next year, while leaving the City of Austin as the sole entity holding and funding a May election to an estimated total of $1.25 million, not including another $500,000 for a June runoff. The current 2012 city budget only calls for spending $791,269 so additional funds are expected to be drawn from one of the city's emergency or reserve funds.
When asked about the increased cost to the City of Austin, councilmember Kathie Tovo, who voted to keep the May election date, stated the following in the Statesman.
"The city has held municipal elections without partners, for example this past spring," Council Member Kathie Tovo said in an interview.
Councilmember Tovo is referring to her own election this past spring, which included a runoff whose cost raised concerns by a number of her campaign's key supporters as well as herself in an interview with KXAN.
The cost of the runoff for taxpayers according to the city, $528,400, or $24 per expected vote.
"It certainly will cost the taxpayers a lot more than many of them would want to spend on a runoff election," Tovo said.
I had an opportunity to ask Councilmember Tovo about the costs during last week's council debate on the matter. She stated that she "never once raised a concern about the cost of having a runoff election." Our remarks begin at the 21:30 mark in the video below the fold.
They've met the minimum requirement -- so let's see how far we can stretch the anonymous donor's pursestrings! Please donate any amount today!
cross-posted at Daily Kos & Texas Kaos
Yes, this is yet another AIDS Walk Austin diary. Friday there is another matching opportunity - and it is really fantastic. If the Walk as a whole can raise $5,000 then all donations will be matched. So even if you can only give $5, Friday would be a great day to do that, because it'll magically turn into $10. I've got a nice diary written up - with a U2 video, but if you just want to donate, you can do so here: my AIDS Walk page
The Austin City Council has made discussion of whether to move the 2012 municipal elections to November very short. Since we have not had a chance to gage the broader public's input on this issue, I'm excited to be able to bring you news that a poll has been conducted to find out.
In short, 75% of city voters prefer holding the 2012 municipal elections in November. Support runs broadly across partisan and local ideological lines. If you cannot see the press release below, click here. The margin of error is +/- 5.13%. The script is available here. Crosstabs are available here.
Something extraordinary in Austin politics is unfolding before our eyes this week. What began as a slow simmer years ago and heated up in this spring's Place 3 election between Randi Shade and Kathie Tovo, has now reached a critical boiling point.
"Proponents of moving the election to November say putting the council on the general election ballot will be a guaranteed turnout booster. By implication, they say the council will better reflect the views of the community at large. Yeah, reply some of those who advocate the status quo, you'll get a bigger turnout - of uninformed voters.
"It's an elitist argument that betrays the entitlement mentality of the cadre of insiders who benefit politically from the city's notoriously low turnout. The argument neither needs subtitle nor translation, but here's one: "We know what's good for you."
"If that reasoning puts you off, let the council know about it."
Last week, in a 4-3 decision, Councilmembers Sheryl Cole, Bill Spelman, Laura Morrison, and Kathie Tovo voted (in the first of three readings) to hold the 2012 Austin municipal election in May, against the advice of the city's election administrator, the State of Texas, and a diverse array of community leaders. A number of rationales have been offered by these members defending their positions- from upholding their oath to the city charter, to not arbitrarily extending their terms by six months, to concern for uninformed November voters.
As someone who has been involved in the elections of a supermajority of this current city council, I am admittedly part of the Austin Political Machine as described by Phillip Martin over two years ago. I don't deny it; it is true that this city's politics has been guided for many years by small group of insiders with occasional, minimal, variation. But because of my position and my role in helping to elect members on each side last week's vote, I feel obligated to break my silence.
It's time to put the truth on the table. This debate is about the balance of power between different factions of Austin's political establishment and it is driven by political self interest.
The defeat of Randi Shade by Kathie Tovo this spring saw the rise of a new coalition on the Austin City Council who were ostensibly united by their opposition to Water Treatment Plant 4, F1 subsidies, downtown parking hours, and long term development in urban neighborhoods. Surprisingly, on all of these issues considered by the council since the election, this 4-vote coalition has yet to materialize as an effective block of votes on any of these issues. In particular, support for halting construction of Water Treatment Plant 4, widely seen as "the" defining issue this past election, evaporated in a 7-0 vote to continue the project not weeks after Tovo's election. While Tovo, Morrison, and Spelman ideologically operate within the same spectrum, many saw the alliance with Cole as somewhat surprising. After all, she had historically been supported financially by the same business and development interests as Randi Shade.
So why is it on this issue of all issues- when to hold the 2012 election- that these four have finally come together to vote as a block? Political self-interest of the most disappointing kind.
It has been an open secret among city hall insiders that Sheryl Cole, Bill Spelman, and Laura Morrison have each expressed interest in becoming the next Mayor of Austin. It was expected that Mayor Leffingwell would retire after serving one term, having served his intended purpose in blocking former councilman Brewster McCracken's mayoral ambitions. But after seeing Austin successfully navigate the economic downturn, Leffingwell has decided to run for re-election. Additionally, Austin is set to vote in November of 2012 on a wide-ranging package of changes, including fundamental changes to how and when the council is elected. This package, pushed by Leffingwell, and ostensibly still supported by most councilmembers, is perceived as severely disrupting the influence of the traditional low-turnout electorate and the existing political machine.
Simply put, Cole, Spelman, Morrison, and Tovo advocate keeping next year's city election in May because they believe that it remains their last and best chance to defeat Mayor Leffingwell and his key ally Mike Martinez before the opportunity is lost forever. For all the rhetoric about the oaths to the charter (which both Cole and Spelman in particular have voted to break previously without issue) and concern for uninformed voters (who are regularly depended on to pass the council's preferred bond measures in high turnout November elections), this all boils down to defending a broken system for personal political gain.
How sad for Austin. How sad it is that liberal councilmembers are using their power to pick the smallest, most distorted electorate for themselves. How sad it is that we have to suffer through layers of rationalization and excuses to mask the naked political truth before us.
Today, the council will hold the 2nd reading on this issue in an nearly unprecedented rushing of the measure through the process to minimize public input or attention. This is because last Friday, at 5:37PM, well after city offices normally close, Councilmembers Spelman and Morrison placed this item on the agenda for this morning's Council Work Session, which is usually reserved for council discussion of items to be considered at their Thursday council meetings. There is no contemporary precedent for taking action on a contested, divisive issue at a work session; usually they are 7-0 votes involving last minute time sensitive permits for road races, like the October 8th NAMI Walk which is on today's agenda. (The last time a controversial item saw a 4-3 vote on reading in a work session was in the 1990's when a vote was held to issue RFPs seeking to privatize Austin Energy.) Work sessions are traditionally NOT for public input -- they are for council to work out agenda items before Thursday's vote. In fact, the top of the agenda even states as much.
In addition, an item has been added to authorize the city to spend up to $1.3 million (not including another half a million if there is a run-off) to purchase more voting machines in order to hold a single low-turnout May election on top of an already scheduled November election for the city. The council's own documents admit that "The County acknowledges that machines purchased under this Addendum will likely be sold or otherwise exchanged or returned to the current or other future voting equipment vendor" after the election. The city will have to cover most all of that cost because last night the ACC Board of Trustees voted to move their elections to November, a move which AISD is expected to follow. This leaves the City of Austin alone in paying for a special election in May against the provisions of SB 100, against the expert recommendations of the election administrator, in contradiction of our values, and wedged in between and overlapping with the party primaries and runoffs- all for the perceived political benefit to four people.
I urge the council to reconsider the path they are leading us down- it is not too late. I recognize, as do many others that are a part of it, that the current political establishment's influence must, and is, coming to an end. We must trust the people of Austin, as many as possible, in determining our city's future.
We must recognize that fighting over where and when to have one final battle in a war over the past is a victory for no one.
"A city that loves to think of itself as forever in blue jeans has grown up. The Comprehensive Plan is far from the final answer, but it is worth a good, hard look by a circle larger than the City Hall hangers-on this type of conversation tends to attract. It begs a serious conversation about how to manage the city's future."
(Please support Becky's efforts today! - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
cross-posted at Daily Kos & Texas Kaos
Well if we've met you know I have 2 big passions besides electing more & better Democrats - AIDS Walk Austin (for which I was the biggest non-board member fundraiser last year) and the Hill Country Ride for AIDS, which I'll be participating in next April. I have a crazy big fundraising goal this year - $5,000. I know that's insane in this economy but the agencies that benefit from this event serve people who really, truly need help. And this morning, the first 25 donations of $100 or more are being matched. Come with me below the fold for more information -- and a song. You'll never guess who the song is by.
There's a match challenge this morning. The first 25 donations of $100 or more will be matched by Walgreen's Pharmacy, one of the sponsors. The information I have from the Walk office doesn't mention a cap; so the first 25 wanting to donate $100, $250, $500 ++, would automatically be contributing $200, $500 or even $1000 ++ to helping people with AIDS. You can donate right here at my Walk page
(Tremendous initiative by State Senator Kirk Watson. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
Earlier today, I delivered a speech declaring that it’s time for a medical school, teaching hospital and research institute in Austin. I also outlined the process I’m proposing to finally get it done after all these years, as well as the group I’ve put together to lead the effort.
Below, you'll see the text of the first part of the speech, along with links to other sections of it (for a full version, go here).
This is going to be a long effort involving a whole lot of people. But the economic and quality-of-life payoff, for Austin and all of Central Texas, would be enormous. I hope you’ll keep an eye on it, help with it, and join this community effort to make this long-sought vision a reality.
I know that most charity in Austin right now is aimed at helping the many, many people affected by the fires and that is as it should be. Over 1,400 people have lost their homes and they need massive amounts of help, right now. Here are 2 pages with places you can donate for that:
and the Committee on Relief of the United Methodist Church is already on the ground, helping - 100% of donations go to fire relief: http://new.gbgm-umc.org/umcor/...
In Austin, we have several events coming up raising awareness and funds for organizations serving those affected by HIV & AIDS. Austin Red Week includes my city's hosting of a segment of the Quilt, and also events like Dining For Life and AIDS Walk Austin.
On September 12 & 13, restaurants all across Austin will be doing something very generous, donating a portion of their proceeds to AIDS Services of Austin. You can find a full list of participating restaurants here but follow me below the fold and I'll tell you more.
A growing coalition of Austin-area environmental groups believe the City should postpone construction of Water Treatment Plant #4.
The project began construction some months ago and will require several years to complete. According to one coalition spokesman, there are numerous examples in business and municipal history of entities quitting large construction projects after a project is deemed unwise. Downtown Austin's infamous Intel building* comes to mind, as does the recent postponement of a nearby coal plant's expansion* due to water shortage fears among governmental leaders.
Coalition leader Bill Bunch says roughly $150M of a $508M budget has been spent on the project so far. Note that much of that money has been spent on land acquisition. "Actual construction is less than 15 percent completed," he says, adding that the City's construction contracts specifically allow for termination at will, and payment only for work done and reasonable demobilization costs.
The coalition is asking Mayor Leffingwell and City Council to put WTP4's construction on hold for 90 days. This period would give the City Auditor and other local leaders time to review a cost of postponement study, secure outside bids for mothballing the plant, and make more informed decisions about the true costs of postponing the build. The coalition includes Austin Sierra Club, Save Our Springs Alliance, Environment Texas, Clean Water Action, Responsible Water Austin, and Stop the Shaft.
The Coalition states:
Benefits of Postponing
City to save over $14 million per year (on interest, operation & maintenance)
City to maintain "option" value - to adopt better, less expensive technology/design in the future
City to gain time for complete audit & water planning process
Costs of Postponing
Tie down and demobilization costs (industry standard = 5 to 10% of project cost)
In addition, an item has been added to authorize the city to spend up to $1.3 million (not including another half a million if there is a run-off) to purchase more voting machines in order to hold a single low-turnout May election on top of an already scheduled November election for the city. The council's own documents admit that "The County acknowledges that machines purchased under this Addendum will likely be sold or otherwise exchanged or returned to the current or other future voting equipment vendor" after the election. The city will have to cover most all of that cost because last night the 