It would be hard to find a more qualified new council member than Chris Riley. Austin born and raised, congressional page for Jake Pickle, economics grad from Harvard University, UT law degree, attorney with Tx Supreme Court and private practice since.
He's chaired the Downtown Commission, the Planning Commission, co-founded the Alliance for Public Transportation and Austin CarShare. Founded the Downtown Neighborhood Association and is a member of the Parks Foundation Board. He's a lifelong progressive with a proven track record in Austin.
Perla - beautiful, committed and a compelling life story. Obviously, would represent an addition to the council's diversity (woman and Hispanic). Though, there is NOT a single mutual friend with whom I've spoken who doesn't agree there is NO comparison between the intellectual fire power between the two. Chris is very smart, experienced and knows the city's intricacies.
We need Chris Riley on the Austin City Council. He's shovel ready.
We are encouraged by the fact that regardless of whether Perla Cavazos or Chris Riley is elected to fill the remainder of Councilman Lee Leffingwell's term, the City of Austin will be in good hands. Judging from the split nature that the endorsements from across Austin have run in this race, voters are enjoying the opportunity to pick a side and vision that best fits their views (as well as doing so with a minimum of personal attacks or politics). Similar to the rest of Austin, our staff has supporters on both sides of this race.
The greatest challenge the city council has faced in recent years is its evolution into a mediocre, consensus driven body, often bereft of the passion, hope, and big-city vision which powers its citizens and creative economy on a daily basis. This is not to say that every member must be a champion or an advocate- it is just to say that an occasional clash of ideas based upon personal philosophy rather than personal politics would be nice.
The values expressed in that statement strongly guide our choice of Chris Riley over Perla Cavazos in this election. Our staff has met with and talked directly with the candidates on multiple occasions. We see how the candidates have reacted to questions in multiple forums. Those interactions and experiences lead us to the following conclusions.
Chris Riley wants, needs, and deserves to be on the city council. His passion for good city government is obvious. His vision for a model next-generation city that respects our environment is clear. His values are rooted in the Austin of old, the one he was born in raised in, while his education and lengthy public service give him the credibility to plan for the Austin of tomorrow. Chris Riley brings more than a new vote to the council, he brings a new perspective. He lives what he advocates.
The City Council we elect this year (combined with Randi Shade and Laura Morrison newly elected last year) has a high likelihood of governing Austin well into the next decade. Chris Riley's energy and enthusiasm for "what could be" is needed to create a working coalition that will turn the tide against mediocre, consensus driven policy bereft of imagination at city hall.
Call Chris Riley a geek, call him a nerd; either way we'd also like to call him "Councilman".
Members of the Burnt Orange Report staff employed by campaigns abstain from voting on those races. Endorsements are made based on a weighted consensus of the staff, which guides the type and tone of endorsement.
Today the University Democrats and the Central Austin Democrats, together the Austin Progressive Coalition, held their joint endorsement meeting. The results go as followed.
Central Austin Democrats Mayor: Lee Leffingwell
Place 1: Chris Riley
Place 2: Mike Martinez
Place 5: Bill Spelman
Place 6: Sheryl Cole
University Democrats Mayor: Lee Leffingwell
Place 1: Chris Riley
Place 2: Mike Martinez
Place 5: Bill Spelman
Place 6: No Endorsement
A few comments.
For every position except Place 6, the endorsements will be placed on thousands of yellow flyers that will be distributed door-to-door. Beyond claiming CAD and UDems endorsements, the candidates will be able to claim the endorsements of the Austin Progressive Coalition.
Second, Strayhorn was a no-show as was Mike Martinez's opponent.
Next, although Chris and Perla have been splitting the two endorsements, Chris managed to pull the entire coalition to his side. As Riley's extensive Austin experience is heavily concentrated in Central Austin, it comes as no surprise he won the CAD endorsement, but the UDems endorsement was no certainty; Perla still has a lot of strong support in the club.
Finally, the UDems' No Endorsement for Place 6 might come as a surprise to outside observers, mainly because the most active Democratic clubs haven given her an endorsement. She lost an endorsement from the activist students because, in my mind, she 1. had a mediocre performance today and 2. Even the most veteran University Democrats claimed that this was the first time they had ever seen her (anywhere, not just at club meetings). She'll still most likely win reelection, but that's simply due to the dearth of the competition. But hopefully she'll take the various No-Endorsements to heart and amp up her work on the council.
Update by KT: Indeed this is a big win for Riley in Place 1. Most observers rated it as a toss up (more so in UDems than CAD) but it could have gone either way for either candidate and most of us expected a split endorsement (which would have resulted in being knocked off the thousands of yellow doorhangers). On top of that, the UDems endorsements match those of the Capital City Young Democrats which opens up the door to a second year of a joint youth mail piece which makes today's results even more meaningful for co-endorsed campaigns.
While Leffingwell was like 10-1 over McCracken in CAD, it was closer in UDems. Closer in fact than Place 1 ended up being! I've posted the UDems numbers in the extended entry, which are publicly requestable via a transparency clause we added into the constitution back when I was a member (mainly because everyone always asked anyways or tried to leak it and this way it just makes it fairer).
The Place 6 No Endorsement was a solid margin. I owe Mr. Suits an apology for cautioning his hope that UDems would wind up doing this. Color me surprised and maybe even a bit impressed.
Enough stuff to catch up on that I'm going to dump it all into this post.
Mayor's Race
Carole Strayhorn is apparently too busy to attend 3 forums this week with her opponents. Maybe she'll be too busy to attend City Council meetings as well if she's elected Mayor.
As McCracken has founded his own campaign on forward-looking technologies such as solar power, his adamant defense of the project was no surprise. And as Martinez is surmised to be Leffingwell's proxy on issues the candidate would rather not wade into at the moment, his fulsome call for caution shouldn't surprise either. Maybe most surprising was Lef fing well's virtual absence from the debate - as politicians take pains to appear cautious, they may not want to remain overly so.
Commissioner Sarah Eckhardt writes an unprompted explaining of her endorsement of Leffingwell on her website. Go read it, but also did anyone notice the URL of the post? "a-word-about-jennifer-gale"? I KNEW IT. Jennifer Gale is reaching out to us to endorse Lee Leffingwell from the world beyond.
Speaking of endorsements, Leffingwell is apparently rolling out 2 more groups and 6 more elected officials Friday at Noon at his campaign office. Could that be the turning point? Maybe if those officials start working their communities. I don't think we've seen anything like that in a municipal race in many years.
Mike Martinez unopposed. Iterated his support for Leffingwell during the University Democrats meeting yesterday which I sense is leaning more towards Lee now. That's important because Leffingwell is pretty much guaranteed to win the Central Austin Democrats endorsement meaning he'd get the Austin Progressive Coalition endorsement and 5000+ doorhangers in central Austin as a result.
Austin City Council, Place 5
Bill Spelman unopposed, though there is still a week and a half to file. Not that we want anyone to file since Bill would be excellent on the council.
Upcoming events include...
South Austin House Party (Oak Hill)
Saturday, March 7
2:00 - 4:00 p.m.
Home of Valerie & Brian Reis
6516 Rotan Drive, 78749
North Austin House Party
Thursday, March 12
5:30 - 7:30 p.m.
Home of Dawn & Fred Lewis
4509 Edgemont, 78731
Austin City Council, Place 6
Sheryl Cole still only faces Sam Osemene. Really. That's it. This race is even more boring than Place 2 & 5 and Cole actually has an opponent. Then again, the only question is if she wins by 20 points or 40.
(This is on at 8PM tonight for those that would like to tune in to listen. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
DJordan, DJosh and I will be dodging rhetorical bullets on Wednesday night as Austin City Council Place 1 candidates Perla Cavazos and Chris Riley rumble.
The two go head-to-head for the first time, on "Tons of Fun," hoping to win our hearts.
Purpose: 91.7FM KVRX Austin City Council Place 1 debate
Date: Wednesday, Feb18, 2009
Time: 8PM-830PM
Location: 91.7FM or http://www.listen.KVRX.org Details: Live, on-air
Call-in: 512.495.5879(KVRX)
Austin's been through a lot in the last few years. Got anything that's keeping your spirits down/lifting your spirits up? Stop Domain Subsidies vs. Keep Austin's Word? Live Music Task Force?
If you have any questions, please include them in a response to this blog posting, or you can call-in! 512.495.5879(KVRX).
Tons of Fun is a political free-form talk show on 91.7FM KVRX - UT-Austin's student-run radio station. ToF was awarded an Honorable Mention in Public Affairs radio from the Texas Intercollegiate Press Association in the spring of 2008.
Both Chris Riley and Perla Cavazos will have a difficult time labeling their opponent "Republican-lite" in this year's Austin City Council Place 1 race.
Both candidates' political contributions in state races are 100% Democratic, according to TEC online records.
Of course, I wouldn't imagine this is news to any of the people closely involved in this race. But for the rest of us, I thought I would take a look and see what kind of candidates Riley and Cavazos had contributed to in the past.
Chris Riley contributed to the following Democratic campaigns and groups:
Travis County Democratic Party, Neighbor to Neighhbor PAC, Valinda Bolton, Donna Howard, Texas League of Conservation Voters, Rose Spector, Chris Bell, Juan Garcia, Eddie Rodriguez, Annie's List, Kirk Watson, Bree Buchanan, Stephen Yelenosky, Elliot Naishtat, Mark Strama, Jim Sharp, Jim Sylvester, Glen Maxey.
Perla Cavazos contributed to the following Democratic campaigns and groups:
Gisela Triana, Annie's List, Travis County Democratic Party, Capitol Area Democratic Women PAC, Orlinda Naranjo, Chris Bell, Valinda Bolton, Donna Howard, NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, Diane Henson, Mina Brees, Eddie Lucio, Mark Strama, Diana Maldonado.
Due to the Democratic nominance in the city, in Austin's current city council at-large system, it is nearly an impossible for a Republican to get elected.
Had either candidate had contributions to Republican candidates, it likely would have become a topic at Democratic club meetings and perhaps even been used in campaign mailers.
Remember last year's race when Laura Morrison brought up Cid Galindo's Republican voting and contribution history? It definitely was part of what helped her achieve a comfortable runoff victory. But that shouldn't be an issue this year in Place 1.
Should City Council races have Democratic Primary-like partisan litmus tests? Whether we like it or not, in Austin they certainly do.
You're invited to Perla's campaign kick-off on Tuesday, February 3rd from 5:30pm-8:00pm at Nuevo Leon, located at 1501 E. 6th Street.
As I've disclosed before, I am supporting Perla in this race, though Austin is lucky to have two (and before Rick Cofer dropped out, three) excellent candidates. Hope to see some of you tonight at Nuevo Leon.
In statements released to BOR, both Chris Riley and Perla Cavazos emphasized their support for single-member districts and their desire to bring the issue before Austin voters within the next two years.
Here are the candidates' unedited thoughts on single-member districts in Austin.
"I think we've learned this past election cycle the power of grassroots politics and how it helps rebuild communities. That's what single — member districts are all about — bringing government closer to the people and getting the people more involved in creating change. More than contribution limits, single member districts take the money and special interest influence out of city council politics. They encourage increased access and accountability.
Right now, because Austin is the 14th largest city in the nation, each one of us is forced to go on TV to communicate to the city at-large. Those will be 30 second commercials, not engaged, back and forth conversations about the direction of our city.
If a hybrid system is what it takes to make the transition, I support it. But it's time we realize that forgotten neighborhoods, where voter turnout may be low and easy to ignore, has an economic and opportunity cost for the entire city.
This is about making government work, and that's why I'd like to invite my fellow candidates to join me in a pledge that whoever is elected, that we work together to educate the community, and bring this issue back before the voters within two years."
I support a move towards a hybrid system of single-member districts and at-large council members. The 2010 census will be a good reason to move forward on the issue, with newer, more precise data about where people live in our city. Above all, I support putting this issue before the voters, because no major change to our democratic system of government should be made without the consent of the people whom it will impact.
Given the size of our city in terms of both geography and population, some combination of at-large and single-member districts would provide a way of ensuring more accountability at city hall and more responsiveness to people across the whole city. Right now, many Austin residents don't know who to contact on the council about an issue in their neighborhood. If each area had its own direct representative, there would be no doubt about who to call.
One way I will address this in the short-term is by holding weekly open office hours at City Hall, when any Austin resident can come speak to me in person and share their concerns. It's important that our city government be engaged with and responsive to the real, daily concerns of the people who live here.
In drawing these districts, the City of Austin would need to be very careful to craft proportional and representational districts. We would need to factor in both geography and precinct layout, as well as voter history and turnout. Single-member districts could potentially increase turnout in under-represented areas, which would also be a great benefit to our city.
There are many other issues to consider as part of this process. Single-member districts would vastly decrease the cost necessary to mount a city council campaign. Currently, candidates who can't manage to raise sufficient funds have difficulty competing city-wide, and that isn't necessarily fair to our democratic processes. However, I do not favor an all-single-member-district council. We should have some at-large members to ensure that we keep a city-wide perspective on the council as well.
It is clear from reading their statements that both candidates have given a lot of thought to issue. For those interested, former place 1 candidate Rick Cofer also favored a hyrbid SMD system.
What are your thoughts on single-member districts in Austin?
Note: I have made small contributions to the campaigns of Perla Cavazos and former candidate Rick Cofer.
Update 6:45pm by David: Former (and perhaps future?) council candidate Kedron Touvell has an insightful breakdown of SMD support among council members in the comments that is definitely worth reading.
Brewster and Sheryl Cole have always been the strongest opponents of moving to a SMD or even a hybrid system. Brewster talks about "wardism" and Sheryl rightly or wrongly is worried about dilution of the AA vote.
Here's where we stand now:
Supporters of SMD Mayor: Wynn (although, supposedly he was the one who killed last year's effort to put up a charter item) Place 1: Leffingwell Place 2: Mike Martinez (strong, driving most of the effort) Place 4: Laura Morrison
Strong Opponent of SMD Place 5: Brewster Place 6: Sheryl
Swing Vote Place 3: Randi Shade
Of course, that's enough votes to get something passed, but the issue is that there has to be a charter referendum in order for the change to be made. And given the lukewarm reception by the public to the Charter Revision process that studied the issue the last two years, not enough members were willing to risk another failed vote (there have been 6 failed SMD amendment votes in the last 30+ years).
If Lee wins the Mayoral race, Spelman wins place 5, and one of Chris/Perla wins place 1, then there will be only one strong opponent of SMD left, Sheryl. Then, the issue will almost certainly go before the voters, but not until Nov. 2010 at the earliest.
No, this isn't a ra-ra post about Place 1 candidate Chris Riley. At least not in the traditional sense. I want to share a story with you.
Last night, I apparently thought it would be a good idea to trek across town on my Trek 3700 bike in the 35 degree weather to a Texas Environmental Democrats Austin meeting. Now, I've had the bike since fall of 2004, so about four and a half years as my primary mode of transportation other than busses and walking. I've had to replace the tires once because of running over some thorns, and also replace the bike seat and headlights as they were stolen during the county convention when I had it tied up outside the TCDP headquarters overnight. In sum, along with the original cost of the bike, less than $600 since I've owned it.
Well, as I cross Ann Richard's Bridge on Congress, I noticed things are going a little slow, and roundabout Riverside and Barton Springs the back tire is getting pretty flabby. I must have run over something or gotten a rock stuck in the air nozzle (the cap of which was lost months ago). I was able to limp my way to the meeting at Vinny's on Barton Springs but it was clear that a return trip would be impossible without new air or assistance if it was a full on flat.
Of course, my saving grace of the day, was that candidate Chris Riley was there. Clearly I should have figured that it being election season and it being an environmental meeting there would be candidates galore, and I happened to end up at the right one to attract the man who also doesn't have a car.
After the meeting, we braved the cold, and with the help of Riley's bike pump, re-inflated the back tire which it kept, allowing me to get back home without freezing my way through an hour's walk.
Awesome. I love Austin politics and our candidates. If there is one thing about politics in this city that is often overlooked it is that candidates and campaigns are way more open and accessible than people suppose when they think about politics. For as much as people will complain about insiders, backroom deals, or such, I don't think they understand that relative to other cities our size, the system is a lot more accessible. I tell people, just show up and show up regularly and you'll meet more people than you imagine.
Matt and I realized that we have some of the best IM conversations. Maybe we should start printing our stunningly brilliant political insight. Edited slightly for taste... very slightly.
Matt Glazer: I'm not going to lie, the pictures of Chris Riley's event are pretty stunning
Karl-Thomas: yeah, and in other conversations I've had, there is a sense of "where is Cofer, where is Perla" going on
Karl-Thomas: i feel it to
Karl-Thomas: Cofer's done nothing publicly
Matt Glazer: I know
Karl-Thomas: and Riley is eating up energy
Matt Glazer: I completely agree
Karl-Thomas: I think I'm going to post on that publicly
Karl-Thomas: maybe it will goad them into action.
Matt Glazer: but even then, Chris is campaigning like a machine
Matt Glazer: Cofer's asset is his perceived youth and freshness
Matt Glazer: yet Chris is campaigning with that meme
Karl-Thomas: yeah, isn't that funny?
Karl-Thomas: Chris is like, how old?
Matt Glazer: like 50
Karl-Thomas: that's hilarious
Matt Glazer: yet he seems like the most youthful candidate
Karl-Thomas: you know, that is actually an incredibly insightful statement
Matt Glazer: sometimes I think we should just post our IM conversations
