Issue: Land Use
Q
For Austin City Council District 8: Do you support a scaled-back version of the proposed Oak Hill Y highway expansion, as recommended by the Fix 290 coalition, so as to protect adjacent businesses and neighborhoods in Oak Hill while increasing highway capacity? If so, what will you do to make sure TxDOT pursues this preferred alternative?
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
Do you agree that increasing housing supply is only one side of the supply-demand equation for beating back Austin’s affordability crisis, and that Austin should refrain from subsidizing growth during times of rapid growth so as to reduce demand growth to levels that can be met with new supply? If so, in the Candidate Response section below, please tell us your ideas for ways to make Austin’s growth pay for itself. (Hint: You can refer to any of the materials parked on this page from the years of work conducted by local developers, Brian Rodgers and Ed Wendler, Jr., especially the power point at the bottom of the page Total Accounting and Impact Fees.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
Will you pledge to immediately reconvene the Charter Revision Commission to revisit its recommendations and to discuss how to ensure its most important recommendations are placed on the next available city ballot? (Note: This helpful article in the Austin Bullldog explains how Council inaction put the kibosh on major reforms that should have been on the November ballot. The most egregious omission to us at IndyAustin was Recommendation 4 – which would close a loophole currently preventing petitions to repeal controversial Council decisions like the Precourt Soccer Stadium or the 2008 $2.3B biomass boondoggle – aka Voter Referendum. Read our Referendum page here.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
Will you defend the right to petition for a public vote on publicly owned property outside the facilities so long as petitioners are conducting themselves in an orderly, legal, and peaceful manner to secure signatures? (Note: In 2017-2018, the Austin Public Libraries and the Palmer Events Center began barring petitioners from petitioning on city property outside the facilities. Petitioners were forced to threaten suit. The issue pending. The San Antonio Firefighters recently filed a federal lawsuit for similar practices by the San Antonio Public Library.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
Do you agree that the ballot language proposed for two ballot petitions – the CodeNEXT petition and the Austin Efficiency Audit – was misleading to the voters of Austin and if so, will you help clarify to voters what these measures really mean – regardless of how you might vote on them? (Note: This article in the Austin Bullldog is a helpful review. Also note: the Texas Supreme Court ruled on August 27 th , in favor of the city of Austin – see KUT report here.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
Do you support the right of Austin voters to vote on the sale, lease, or conveyance of any City-owned land that will be used as a sports and/or entertainment stadium? (Note: We recommend this Statesman commentary by UT Professor, Nathen Jenson, for context to this question.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
Do you support Austin voters securing their right to vote on CodeNEXT or any comprehensive development code overhaul — Proposition J on the November ballot? (Note: Passage of Proposition J does not mean that all code changes come to a public vote – only a comprehensive code overhaul, whether it’s called CodeNEXT or something else.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.
Asked by IndyAustin
Q
The Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint, adopted in April 2017, identified a need for 20,000 housing units affordable at 30% MFI and Below over ten years, including Permanent Supportive Housing & Home Repair. Funding mechanisms and tools currently used by the city are unable to meet this need at this affordability level. The Blueprint calls for “new funding, new regulations, new programs, new and deeper partnerships and collaborations with non-profit organizations, legislative changes, land development code changes, and participation from the private sector” in order to meet the growing need. What ideas do you envision to reach significant progress with the goals identified in the Blueprint?
Asked by Affordable Housing Forum