You searched for domain - Page 2 of 6

Eckhardt and Shea Success

This page was posted for the 2014 primary election. We rarely endorse in primaries, but decided to support Sarah Eckhardt for Travis County Judge over Andy Brown. Some folks have asked us to keep the page live to show what we did and how. We thoroughly enjoyed supporting Sarah as well as Brigid Shea. We certainly do not claim that ChangeAustin.org won the primary for them, but we did our part. Both of these strong women will likely win the general election this November to then begin serving on the Travis County Commissioners Court in January 2015. Enjoy!

*******************

Welcome to our page for the primary election 2014 (early voting is Feb. 18-28), specifically dedicated to the hottest contest in Travis County — the Travis County Judge election. That’s the race between former County Commissioner, Sarah Eckhardt and former Travis County Democratic Party Chair, Andy Brown. In all likelihood, this critical race will be decided in the Democratic primary not the general election in November. (Don’t know what the Travis County Judge does? Click here to find out!) Need to check your voter registration? Go here. Click here to know where to vote early. (Note: on election day, March 4th, you can vote at any poll in the city!)

ChangeAustin.org has endorsed Sarah Eckhardt. In our view, Sarah may not exactly be Wonder Woman, but she’s damn close!

Please note that Texas has “open primaries” – you can vote on either side, but not both, in the first round.

Though ChangeAustin.org is a cross-partisan outfit (we work with all sides on issues that unite us — like stopping the Domain mall subsidies and passing 10-1) if you live in Travis County, we are urging you to vote this year in the Democratic primary on this critical race.

The Travis County Judge is the chief executive of the county in charge of a budget of over $850M and 5,000 employees. In other words, it’s ALL about affordability and tax equity and County Judge is, as Eckhardt has said, “not an entry level position.” Brown has never held public office before and is mainly a political operative (not just in our view!).

Here’s a few salient points about our beef in this important race. (Though, perhaps all you really need to know is in the real debate video on home page. Watch it and You Decide!)

Corporate Tax Hand-Outs: Brown played a critical role in sabotaging a popular effort to stop the Domain luxury shopping mall subsidies!

Party Mis-Management: Many Democrats in our circles are perplexed about why political big fish Kirk Watson and Lloyd Doggett are pushing Andy Brown. We cannot answer for them, but you — Travis County voters — certainly can! Here’s some poop from activists within Democratic Party ranks that we think is very instructive.

Tax Breaks for Millionaires: Andy Brown supports tax breaks for wealthy West Austin mansion owners, who hire consultants to dodge their property taxes, forcing YOU to may MORE.

Sarah Eckhardt has been one of the lone honest, intelligent and gutsy voices out there.

She has been outspoken against Formula 1 subsidies, who has worked to close loopholes in our historic preservation system that some mansion owners are gaming. She’s put this on her website and her votes are on record. We haven’t seen or heard anything from Brown about his position on these issues (we’d love to be corrected) and we know what he did to keep the public dollars flowing to the Domain Mall in 2008.

Over 4,000 people are moving to the Austin area every month. Corporate subsidies are on the uptick — these companies would likely come here anyway, folks! In our view, the race for Travis County Judge is all about the growth lobby (real estate and related industries) bringing people here too fast for the infrastructure to catch up AND offloading of the costs of growth onto current residents. The folks who advocate for this unsustainable growth have been lining up behind Brown.

Watch the real debate here.

Endorsing Sarah and a little truth telling on Andy Brown

Posted on January 29, 2014 by Linda Curtis • 0 Comments

We’re going to step on a few toes. We’re endorsing Sarah Eckhardt for Travis County Judge and we’re going to do a little truth telling on her opponent Andy Brown, a story which we’ve been sitting on since 2008.

This is the hottest race in Travis County and everyone knows this critical position will be decided in the Democratic primary. Moreover, we think Brown will bow to the same powerful interests donating to his campaign that seek tax subsidies, tax breaks, and special favors.Let us explain and please pardon the length of this message.

Sarah Eckhardt served 6 years on the Commissioner’s court with integrity, honesty and in the spirit of cross-partisanship. We may not agree with every vote Sarah’s ever taken – but she is not bought and paid for and she has stood firm while the rest wilted.

Watch the debate between Sarah and Andy. It’s very clear that Brown is not up to the job. He has no experience, unless you think that being a chair of a political party counts as the “experience” needed to be the chief executive of a county with an annual budget of $850 million. No matter how many times Brown says, “I’ve had 20 years experience bringing people together for progressive causes to get things done,” we remain unconvinced. (Again, watch the video on our home page, you’ll see for yourself.)

Here’s what we haven’t talked publicly about:

Brown played a particular role in defeating Proposition 2 in 2008, the effort to stop the Domain shopping mall subsidies supported by 26,000 signatures and 500 local businesses and all 4 political parties. Despite the overwhelming endorsement of the Travis County Democratic Party Executive Committee (by a 58 to 7 vote of the precinct chairs), Brown found various ways to sabotage the endorsement and prevent it from reaching the party’s enormous list of supporters. The precinct chairs had specifically asked Brown for an immediate press release of the endorsement, which he assured them would happen.

Instead, Brown stonewalled the promised press release for a month until early voting was almost over. He refused to allow Prop 2 literature at events and wouldn’t even allow a sign up with all the other endorsements at the headquarters building. Brown either participated in, or stood by and watched others create such confusion about the party’s endorsement, that many of the hundreds of volunteers that year who hit the streets and doors for Obama thought the party’s position was to defeat it. Many of these good people were at the early polls asking people to vote against Prop 2. It was defeated by just 2%.

Friends, we hope you will agree that Travis County Judge is not an entry-level position or suitable for political operatives. Next email we’re going to tell you more about where Andy’s money is coming from, so hold on to your hats.

ChangeAustin.org has our own campaign we’re running for Sarah. We’re going to run some inexpensive ads on the internet and, if we raise enough money, some sassy radio ads. If you can give, please do so!

We also encourage you volunteer directly with Sarah’s campaign — contact Sarah here. They need your help distributing literature and making phone calls — as usual!

Welcome to Austin But Pay Your Own Way by Brian Rodgers

Posted on October 16, 2013 by Linda Curtis • 5 Comments

The following opinion editorial was published in the Austin American-Statesman on Wednesday, October 16, 2013.

At the behest of previous City Councils, the Austin Water Utility has sold its water and wastewater taps to developers at huge losses for the past 15 years — selling far below cost and at a fraction of that charged by surrounding communities. Who picked up those losses? You, the ratepayer.
Another 175,000 people will move into the utility service area over the next 10 years. Are you willing to subsidize them, too?

On Thursday, the Austin City Council will vote on whether to keep selling taps at a loss or to finally begin recouping the full cost as allowed by state law. There are two main options on the table. Option 4i, favored by the Real Estate Council of Austin and the Downtown Austin Alliance, requires ratepayers to subsidize $165 million of future capacity costs. Option 5, recommended by the Water and Wastewater Commission, provides no subsidy; future capacity is paid by future development. Please tell the City Council that you prefer Option 5.

Texas is business-friendly, but even the state recognizes that ratepayers aren’t a bottomless piggy bank to pay for infrastructure required to serve new private development. Hence, in 1987 the Legislature allowed municipalities to recoup the cost of new infrastructure “necessitated by and attributable to new growth” by charging impact fees to future development. Thus growth pays for itself when growth-related capacity in water and sewer plants, major lines and other facilities is paid for by new development.

However, Austin has never charged what the state allows. How bad is it? We currently lose an average of $3,230 for every water/wastewater service unit we sell. (A service unit is the equivalent use of a 5/8-inch meter, or a typical household. Larger meters are charged proportionately more.)

Option 4i will lose $1,140 for every service unit sold in the environmentally sensitive Drinking Water Protection Zone to the west, $3,800 for every service unit sold downtown, and $3,000 in the rest of the city. Overall, losses will total $165 million, which will be added to your water/sewer bill. Under Option 5, we will lose nothing.

Supporters of Option 4i say we need continued subsidies from ratepayers to meet the goals of Imagine Austin for a compact city. They want a 50 percent subsidy for their developments downtown, at the Domain, Mueller and the Riverside corridor. But these areas are on fire right now; developers are tripping over each other trying to build in these areas and don’t need our help. Yes, the impact fees will go up dramatically downtown, where developers previously enjoyed huge ratepayer subsidies. A million-dollar condo at the Austonian paid only $70 for its water tap under the old schedule. A condo at the 360 Condominiums paid only $58. That’s less than the price of a faucet in the guest bathroom. Under the ratepayer-preferred Option 5, the developer would pay $760 and $630 respectively – still a bargain.

Will Option 5 hurt affordable housing? No. Affordable housing is exempt from impact fees. Will Option 5 drive developers into outlying cities? No. The three fastest growing cities in the U.S. — San Marcos, Georgetown and Cedar Park — have been charging two to three times more than Austin with no effect on growth. Will Option 5 bump up homes prices? No. Prices are driven by supply and demand in the current hot market; the 42 percent increase in lot prices over the past three years is far more responsible for soaring home prices than a utility recoupment.

Please tell the council to vote for Option 5. Welcome to Austin, but pay your own way.

Brian Rodgers, an Austin real estate developer, serves on the Impact Fee Advisory Committee and served on the Joint Committee on Austin Water Utility’s Financial Plan.

Why Lack of Affordability Is Killing Austin

Posted on August 19, 2013 by Linda Curtis • 0 Comments

We first met our friend, Bill Oakey, back in 2009 when he just showed up to join us in testifying before the Travis County Commissioners Court about the unfair burden of property taxes on Austin residents. A version of this paper was recently printed in the Austin American-Statesman. Many thanks Bill, for all you do for Austin! Linda and Brian, ChangeAustin.org (ps LIKE and SHARE this y’all!)

By Bill Oakey, Austin, Texas
August 16, 2013

Austin is no longer a stepchild to Dallas or Houston. And its closer neighbor, San Antonio, barely registers on the national radar scene compared to Austin. The capital City now boasts F1, the X Games, South By Southwest, and a booming economy that appears unstoppable. But wait, can any City experience too much of a good thing? Could Austin somehow become a victim of its own success? Not only is such a scenario possible, but many observers find it to be frighteningly probable. By reviewing numerous published articles, editorials and data, both local and national, one can find compelling evidence that Austin is becoming so unaffordable so rapidly that we may be headed for another boom and bust cycle.

While that may sound like a strong statement to make, consider this. Austin has risen from the nation’s 17th largest city in 2000, to 11th this year, according to U.S. Census figures. The explosive growth has brought crushing demands on infrastructure and public services, along with a seller’s market for housing. Property taxes have risen 38% since 2003. Rents have risen 49%. The median sales price for a home has increased from $159,000 to $225,000 in the same period. These figures do not take into account that many Central Austin neighborhoods have seen home prices well above $300,000 or higher since the late 90’s. And yet, median income in Austin, adjusted for inflation, has stayed virtually flat since 2000. (Austin American-Statesman, August 10, 2013).

Both Forbes and Bloomberg have named Austin America’s current top boomtown. But boom and bust cycles are all too familiar to anyone who lived in Austin during the 1980’s savings and loan collapse and subsequent real estate crash. Residents who moved into suburban municipal utility districts, or MUD’s as they were called, found themselves in a financial quagmire. These MUD’s were legally chartered taxing entities. During the 1980’s heyday of speculative land-flipping, some lots were bought and sold more than once in the same day.

The savings and loans would lend to almost anybody who came through the door. So, new subdivisions sprang up around Austin like mushrooms after a spring rain. The assumption for the homebuyers was that a large number of newcomers would populate the subdivision, making the individual tax burden sustainable. But once the market crash occurred, it was no longer the land that got flipped. The homebuyers found themselves upside down on their mortgages, meaning their homes were worth much less than their outstanding loans. The solution for multitudes of new residents was to simply march into the loan office and lay their house keys on the table. Then they just walked away. It took until the mid 90’s for Austin to recover.

Fast forward to the Great Recession of 2008. We all know what happened, and we all know that he bankers and brokers learned nothing form the crash of the 1980’s. Today you can go online and do a search for “bogus assignee.” Actual mortgage papers were filed with county clerk’s offices, with forged signatures. In some cases the words “Bogus Assignee” even appear on the documents. The CBS program “60 Minutes” aired a segment where a fictitious person named “Linda Green” signed thousands of mortgage documents in a warehouse. The young students who forged her name were paid by the hour, most likely with incentive quotas.

But all of that is behind us now, right? The economic recovery is well underway. Home values are on the rise for the first time in several years. And no place on earth is riding the real estate boom faster than Austin, Texas. Estimates of the number of new people moving here every single day vary. But the figure of 100 per day marks the low end of the estimation scale, with 158 per day at the high end.

So, what’s not to like about being the fastest growing city in the USA? Wouldn’t any city salivate at the chance to own that crown? Well, yes, it is safe to say that business is booming in Austin. If one phrase could be used to describe the new urbanites in Austin, it would be “young and hip.” While not all of the young professionals work in the high tech industry, they are indeed tech savvy. Austin venture capital firms have spawned the growth of innovative startup companies in a broad range of fields. Generous tax incentives to Apple, Samsung, and even a high-end outdoor shopping complex, The Domain, have lured a steady stream of businesses to town. The shopping center incentives drew loud protests and an unsuccessful ballot initiative to have them repealed. The City then followed up with a healthy round of fee waivers for a downtown convention center hotel. Again, the protestors clamored for an explanation as to why a hotel chain would need an incentive to build in the hottest city in the country. At the same time the Texas Legislature delivered severe cuts to local school districts, then added to the districts’ pain by awarding a basket of school tax exemptions to incoming businesses. Some admire the incentives; others call it “corporate welfare.”

What about the large segments of the population who were here before the big boom happened? In the shadows of the newfound glitz and glamour that has charmed the downtown corridors of Austin are the leftover “regular people.” Retired school teachers and state retirees have not received a cost of living pay increase since 2001. Those people, along with tens of thousands of other low to moderate-income residents face skyrocketing property taxes, escalating tax assessments on their modest homes, and rapidly rising utility bills. Of course, the story of local displacement in a growing, prosperous city is nothing new. Gentrification has happened in San Francisco, Portland and lots of other places. And yet there is something stunning about the rapid pace at which the Austin transition is occurring. The Great Recession may have slowed things down slightly in Austin, but only very slightly. The effort to pay for the growth has pushed both City of Austin and Travis County property tax rates up a full 25% between 2008 and 2012.

The voters of Austin, historically proud of their clean and attractive city’s stellar reputation, have willingly ponied up to support bond propositions for the schools, as well as bonds to pay for City and County capital projects. But a couple of years ago, a new watchword found its way into the local political lexicon. Affordability. A person cannot attend a civic function or a political campaign forum without hearing “affordability” mentioned countless times. The annual budget hearings for the City and County, which once drew large interest groups asking for more money for this and that pet project have all but disappeared. The lineup of speakers these days delivers the same message in multiple-part harmony. “Don’t raise our taxes any higher. We just can’t afford it!”

And so what many predicted would happen fairly soon did happen in the spring of 2013, when two out of four bond propositions for the Austin Independent School District failed at the ballot box. It was the first time that had happened since 1989. Between now and November of 2014, local voters will be asked to approve half a billion dollars for Austin Community College building expansion and renovation, upwards of $343 million for a downtown skyscraper to house Travis County’s civil and family courts, and another $275 million for the first phase of Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell’s proposed urban rail project.

Here’s the bottom line. The Travis County Budget increased a whopping 93.6% in the 10 years from 2003 to 2013, going from $303.8 million to $588.1 million. The Austin City Budget has skyrocketed 73.7% from 2004 to the proposed 2014 budget, going from $1.9 billion to $3.3 billion. How many friends do you have whose paychecks have gone up by those percentages?

The Austin City Council routinely sets their annual budget target using the maximum property tax increase allowed by law. Then they publicize an additional “budget shortfall” amount to the media. Everyone clamors for them to whittle down the shortfall. But when they do, they have only reduced it back down to where they started – which generates the highest property tax increase they can get. Just close your eyes and try to imagine if our community could sustain another 10 years of budget increases of the same magnitude. Could you sustain it with your paycheck? Or would you just be looking at Austin in your rear view mirror?

Here is an outline of topics and relevant data from newspaper articles and radio and TV websites.

1.“Policy Group Finds Austin Most Expensive City in Texas.” Austin Business Journal, July 10, 2013

2.“Austin Named Most Expensive City for Families.” KVUE-TV News, July 1, 2013

3.“Through the Roof – Cost of Living in Austin Is ‘Out of Reach’ for Most Renters.” Austin Chronicle, March 23, 2012. This article includes an interesting discussion of the displacement of low-income families from a historically affordable neighborhood along East Riverside Drive. A single City zoning change led to a snowball effect that changed the lives of a large number of residents. A valuable segment of Austin’s dwindling supply of affordable housing was wiped out. One can only hope that voters will approve a badly needed program for affordable housing in the fall.

4.“Where Have Austin’s Urban Children Gone?” Austin American-Statesman, April 24, 2011
The “Big Picture” of Austin’s growth reveals a disturbing pattern of outward migration by families with children. Many young families who transfer here to start a new job try to find a home in a Central City neighborhood. But those who locate to a close-in neighborhood find that the convenience of avoiding a long commute comes with a hefty price tag. So much so, that it doesn’t take long for them to join the rapidly increasing migration to the outer reaches of the City or County. This phenomenon depresses the population of children in the inner city schools. The next refrain in that particular song is announced school closings, followed by hollering neighborhood protests.

5.“Austin: Second Fasting Growing City for Suburban Poverty (In the Nation),” KUT News, May 20, 2013. “Poverty Takes Root in Austin’s Suburbs,” Austin American-Statesman, May 19, 2013. “More Than One in Five Austinites Live in Poverty,” Austin American-Statesman, Sept. 22, 2011. “Crime and Homeless Drop in Austin, but Poverty Is on the Rise,” Austin American-Statesman, May 23, 2013

6.“FY 2013-2014 City of Austin Community Needs Assessment,” A comprehensive demographic study of population trends including ethnic breakdowns, age breakdowns, unemployment data, income levels, etc.

7.“Pre-Seniors Are Booming and Austin Leads the Pack,” Austin Business Journal, July 31, 2013. Discussion of a Brookings Institution Report that states Austin has the fastest growing percentage of people ages 55 to 64 in the United States. “Growing Senior Population May Bring Problems to Austin Area,” Community Impact Newspaper, October 25, 2012. These reports led to Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell’s Task Force on Aging.

8.“5 Must-Do’s As Age Wave Bears Down on USA.” USA Today & The National Council on Aging, August 2, 2013.

9.“Austin Housing Prices A Concern for Employers,” Austin American-Statesman, August 1, 2013.

10.“Austin Property Taxes Jump 38% Over Past Decade,” Editorial Board, Austin American-Statesman, June 23, 2012

11.“Central Texans Deserve Truth About Their Taxes,” Editorial Board, Austin American-Statesman, August 25, 2012

12.“Austin City Council’s Budget Does Not Address Affordability,” Editorial Board, Austin American-Statesman, September 15, 2012

13.“Pull Back Now on Rapid Tax Increases,” Editorial Board, Austin American-Statesman, July 7, 2012

14.“Texas Business Incentives Highest in Nation,” New York Times, December 2, 2012. Discussion of tradeoffs between “business Incentives” vs. “corporate welfare.”

15.“Austin Could Seek $275 Million In Bonds for Initial Urban Rail Line,” Austin American-Statesman, May 22, 2012

16.“Start Now to Make Austin Affordable Again,” Brigid Shea, Austin American-Statesman, October 24, 2012.

17.“Taxpayers May Be Asked to Share $250 Million Cost of Replacing Austin’s Public Hospital,” Austin American-Statesman, Jan. 27, 2012.

18.“Local Entities Join Forces to Sync Myriad Bond, Tax Proposals – Average Homeowner Would See $1,000 Increase In Taxes in Next 5 Years Under Some Scenarios,” Austin American-Statesman, July 11, 2012.

19.“Austin City Council Approves Brand New Vision for Downtown ($350 Million), Austin American-Statesman, Dec. 8, 2011

20.“Travis County’s Downtown Plan Calls for More Than $1 Billion In Spending,” Austin American-Statesman, December 23, 2012

21.“U.T. Gets New Medical School Thanks to Tax Increase,” Houston Chronicle, Nov. 7, 2012. “Central Health Defends Tax Hike of 5 Cents, Or 63%,” Austin American-Statesman, August 18, 2012

22.”As Debt Rises, Travis County Considers New Downtown Office Building,” Austin American-Statesman, April 29, 2013. The County’s non-voter-approved bond debt has tripled since 2005, from $68.8 million to $226 million.

22.“Will New Travis County Civil Courthouse Rise 66 Stories?” Austin American-Statesman, October 11, 2011. “Travis County Commissioners Approve Building Method for New Courthouse ($312 Million),” July 23, 2013

23.”Austin Community College Weighs $499 Million Bond Proposition,” Community Impact Newspaper, July 25, 2013

24.”Big Increase In Next Year’s Proposed (City) Budget,” MyFox Austin, August 1, 2013. New taxes and fees totaling $14.39 per month for the average Austin family. This does not include Travis County, Central Health, ACC, or the school district.

25.”Austin To Tackle Affordability Question in Building Rules,” Austin American-Statesman, August 10, 2013.

26.”How to Keep Up With 158 People Moving to Austin Per Day,” Realty Austin, May 17, 2013

27. “Austin Ranked Best for Everything and Everyone,” Austin Business Journal, June 20, 2012

28.”America’s Fastest Growing Cities,” (Austin is #1, for Third Year In a Row), Forbes Magazine, Jan. 23, 2013.

29.“How Austin Energy’s Rate Increase Will Affect You,“ Austin American-Statesman,” June 16, 2012. “State Report: Austin Energy Rate Increase Too High,” Austin American-Statesman, February 14, 2013. “Austin Energy Wins Round One,” Austin Chronicle, March 8, 2013.

30. “Critics Tie Proposed Plant to Rise In Austin Water Rates,” Austin American-Statesman, August 26, 2010. Rates to rise 35% by 2015. “Higher Water Fees Coming for Austin Customers,” Austin American-Statesman, July 15, 2012. Water conservation leads to lower revenues, so rates must go up.

31.”Cost of Infrastructure to Serve New Residential Development,” Fodor & Associates, Jan. 2011. Austin only collects two of the four types of impact fees allowed under Texas law. Their water and wastewater impact fees only recover 38% of the full cost. The rest is paid by all City ratepayers. Austin’s growth is not paying for itself.

Holidays are the time to keep giving to Austin (and partying!)

Posted on November 30, 2011 by Linda Curtis • 0 Comments

City Charter Revision Committee Meeting: Thurs. (tomorrow), Dec. 1, 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm, Carver Library, 1161 Angelina.

Party #1: Tomorrow! Thurs., Dec. 1, 6-9 pm, Victory Grill. Stop by after the meeting at the Carver. This is a funraiser for our friend, Richard Franklin, in his bid for Travis County Commission, Precinct 1. Though we have not yet endorsed in this race, we love competitive elections and the incumbent voted for the Domain subsidies and the extending FM 812 to accommodate Formula 1. Details here, includes link to send $.

Party #2:
TheAustinBullDog.org: This Sat., Dec. 3, 5-9 pm, the hungry, feisty online publication by ace investigative reporter, Ken Martin, needs cash to stuff its stocking. The best part (besides the Cajun cuisine to be served) is that your contribution is doubled! Details here.

Reception:

League of Women Voters-Austin area,

invites you to a reception with area officials on Wed., Dec. 7, 5:30-7:30 pm, City Hall Atrium, 301 West Second Street, Free Parking in the City Hall Garage. Refreshments are provided.

Party #3: Mark Your Calendars!

Austinites for Geographic Representation

Christmas Change Party! (bring petitions and/or your shopping change!)

Saturday, December 17th, 2:30 – 4:30 (date changed!)

Scholz Garten, 1607 San Jacinto

(click here for the petition for the Citizens Districting 10-1 Plan)

No time to rest on Tovo victory, Contact the council NOW – postpone the F1 vote!

Posted on June 20, 2011 by Linda Curtis • 8 Comments

Congratulations to Kathie Tovo and Austin voters. We don’t have time to rest on this victory folks! The Austin City Council is rushing the Formula 1 vote without allowing the public to see the documents.“It’s done in a week’s time to avoid public scrutiny, and that’s exactly the opposite of what would be in the public’s interest.” Bill Spelman criticizing the 2003 rushed Domain Mall subsidy voteCity staff is playing hide-and-seek with the Formula 1 contract and economic projections.ChangeAustin.org has called Austin City Council members to postpone a vote on Formula 1 this Thursday. The vote is only 72 hours away. We can’t honestly tell you what and how much City money is still involved in this deal. There’s no reason to rush a decision that would — regardless — trigger a $25MM per year for 10 years taxpayer subsidy by the state of Texas that the Comptroller continues to push.

Read our press release below. Then please either call the Council at 974-2000 (ask for each by name, Mayor Leffingwell and Council members Martinez, Cole, Shade, Morrison, Spelman and Riley OR email them all here.

Watch the news tomorrow on Formula 1 for additional news!

Message to City Council

Postpone the Vote, Let Tovo deliberate, Respect the Voters!

Richard Viktorin, of Audits in the Public Interest in Austin, Texas, is a CPA and a former director at Texas Department of Commerce who worked in economic development. Vitktorin offered critical and well documented testimony to the Austin City Council on June 9. Viktorin’s points were that State Comptroller Susan Combs “gamed” the numbers to justify the plan for the state to subsidize Formula 1 racing and did it in violation of the spirit of transparency in government. Viktorin is now joiningChangeaustin.org‘s call upon the Austin City Council to delay Thursday’s vote on Formula 1 until newly elected member, Kathie Tovo, takes her seat on the Council in late July.

Viktorin’s point is, “The public has not yet seen the F1 contract nor F1’s economic impact study which was promised no later than last week. Council may vote this Thursday to allow the City Manager to both negotiate and execute the contract with F1. Once the city signs a deal, this will trigger $25MM per year for 10 years from the state of Texas, with the possibility of amounts much higher than $25MM going to F1 annually. City Council is ducking the issue and passing the buck to the City Manager. They are dodging their obligation to the citizens of Austin. Delay the vote. This will also respect Saturday night’s election results and allow Kathie Tovo to deliberate on this important issue.”

ChaChangeAustin.org founder, Brian Rodgers, broke the story last Spring on the City Council’s open meetings violations, one reason for Randi Shade’s defeat last Saturday. Rodgers said, “If Formula 1 is such a good deal, surely it can withstand a thorough review by its critics. Let’s allow Kathie Tovo a chance to deliberate on this, out of respect to the voters of Austin.”