robolemmy

Inspiration: https://www.livescience.com/animals/land-mammals/unusual-beaver-die-off-in-utah-caused-by-rabbit-fever-which-can-also-infect-humans

Travis County District Court Judge Jessica Mangrum has ruled that the city of Austin and the developers of the Statesman Planned Unit Development may not move forward with funding of the development on Lady Bird Lake with $354 million in property taxes. The Save Our Springs Alliance, former state Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos, former Council Member Ora Houston and homeowner Faye Holland sued City Council for designating the area as blighted in order to create a tax increment reinvestment zone, or TIRZ.

Under state law, in order to create a TIRZ, the city must show that an area is blighted and that the property would not be developed without the use of public money. Under former Mayor Steve Adler, Council did just that, in spite of the fact that several outside attorneys told them it would be illegal.

Those attorneys included Bill Bunch of the Save Our Springs Alliance, Bill Aleshire and Fred Lewis.

Lewis told the Austin Monitor on Monday that the judge ruled that “they created a TIRZ illegally because they did not have evidence to support the statutory grounds to create the TIRZ and use public money on a private development.” He added, “The city was willing to give away $354 million at a minimum without any showing that the developer and the development needed the money. … Hopefully the City Council will learn from this and stop spending the public money on corporate welfare boondoggles.”

Aleshire said the decision is “a huge victory for taxpayers.” He noted that the decision could have statewide implications even though the ruling by a Travis County district judge does not apply in other jurisdictions. He said the TIRZ is being used illegally in other parts of the state, adding, “it’s about time the restrictions in the tax code were enforced.”

He added the law includes a requirement that an area would not develop without the assistance of property tax money. That was not the case with the waterfront property, which would clearly develop either way. “This decision protects property taxpayers from having to make up for” money the developer is not willing to spend, Aleshire said. He also noted that with a TIRZ, the city could issue bonds, which the city would then have to pay for.

When asked for a comment on the ruling, Meghan Riley, the city’s division chief of litigation, said, “We are disappointed in today’s ruling but very much appreciate the court’s careful consideration of this complex issue. We will review the specific implications of the decision in the coming days. That said, we do not believe this decision impacts the city’s ability to move forward with proposed zoning changes for the South Central Waterfront area.”

Two years ago, the Austin Monitor asked attorney Richard Suttle, who represents the property owners, what would happen if the TIRZ were eliminated. He said the developers understood that there was what he called “a gap” in funding for the project, thus the need for the tax money. He said his clients had underestimated the deficit and even though they were willing to absorb some of that cost, they expected the gap to be covered by the TIRZ.

“They underestimated the deficit and we are willing to absorb some of that underestimation,” Suttle said, but he added that if there was no TIF or TIRZ, the project would not work.

Kathie Tovo, who is currently running for mayor and was a City Council member when the TIRZ was approved, said Monday that she “supported the creation but not the funding of the TIRZ.”

“Our Council was assured by legal staff that a TIRZ was allowable, but I believed it was premature to move forward without a regulating plan that would require property owners to provide public benefits,” she said. “As the City moves forward after this decision, it should be a priority that this area of Austin redevelops in a manner that creates welcoming public spaces and housing for Austinites of different economic backgrounds. This is an opportunity for the City to redirect general fund dollars toward critical city services, like parks and income-restricted housing. The South Shore will develop without public subsidy.”

Mayor Kirk Watson and Council Member Zo Qadri were not on Council when the TIRZ was approved. However, they were named in the lawsuit as members of Council. José Velásquez, Ryan Alter were elected after the initial vote to create the TIRZ.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a class action lawsuit against Travis County for its failure to provide arrestees access to a court-appointed lawyer preceding their first hearing before a judge, known as counsel at first appearance, or CAFA.

CAFA is intended to assist jailed individuals who cannot afford a private lawyer for work before the magistration hearing, which is where a judge decides the appropriateness of arrest in the first place and sets bail.

Receiving CAFA upon arrest, the ACLU contends, is not simply reflective of positive outcomes or to be thought of as a social service: It is a constitutional right.

In Travis County, magistration sessions are currently conducted by videoconference in the basement of the jail, in a configuration that many have voiced is highly uncomfortable. As with the whole of the jail, CAFA attorneys are not permitted inside the room.

Multiple organizations have studied these hearings, finding that individuals – up to 29 percent, as found in one study – brought before a judge prior to meeting with an attorney are often pressured aggressively by a judge to bring forth self-incriminating information. This can damage their own case and allow for a host of consequences as their case moves to trial.

People are often burdened with extraordinary bail amounts at these hearings – another distinguishing feature of the county’s criminal justice system – and many people are behind bars for days before their magistration appointment with cases that would have been waved away pre-trial with the help of an attorney.

In past sessions of the Travis County Commissioners Court, especially relating to the plans for the new Diversion Center, commissioners have emphasized the potentially injurious effects of “even one day in jail,” citing its potential to disrupt medical treatment, income, employment, housing and custody of their children. Its failure to provide CAFA – potentially relegating this same class of individuals to weeks of confinement and congruent damages – has attracted years worth of criticism.

In 2022, the county created a pilot program for CAFA implementation in concert with Texas A&M University and the Capital Area Private Defender Service, supported by a $500,000 grant. Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez, frustrated by staffing issues, essentially rescinded her support for the program shortly after its implementation, offering to dedicate the pilot two eight-hour shifts per month. The program collapsed after nine days.

Now, officials are poised to implement a similar effort, raised from the grave – without the resources of a university and a $500,000 cash infusion. In a proposed plan, county officials will facilitate two eight-hour CAFA shifts providing legal services in partnership with the Capital Area Private Defender Service. The committee plans to offer legal services in a large auxiliary courtroom at the Blackwell-Thurman Criminal Justice Center, with adequate videoconferencing infrastructure still on hand.

Tony Carter lives in a two-bedroom apartment in South Austin. He was placed there in February through a rapid rehousing program.

Rapid rehousing programs in Austin provide up to 24 months of rental assistance and support services to people experiencing homelessness. But for some residents, it doesn’t close the affordability gap.

Carter said he receives assistance with his $1,700 monthly rent through the program, but his share of the rent is about to go up.

“I work two jobs, but I don’t make enough on both of them to even meet my monthly rent if I was to decide to stay in those apartments they’ve got me in,” Carter said.

The rapid rehousing program aims to help people transition into permanent, stable housing.

How it works is the program provides a certain amount of assistance with rent over time, with the renters’ share increasing slightly every few months. The idea is that at the end of the program, people who are enrolled will be able to afford their rent and take over the lease.

But many people who benefit from the program said that doesn’t always happen. Carter said he and his pregnant fiancé might end up back on the street if they can’t afford the $1,700 rent by the end of February 2025.

According to the Ending Community Homelessness Coalition, the program is working for about 60 percent of people enrolled in it. But Carter and several of his colleagues from the local advocacy group Vocal Texas said the help does not go far enough.

On Friday, Vocal Texas launched a campaign calling on the city to improve the system so more people benefit.

“While this program works for many people, we want this program to work for everyone who gets it,” said JJ Ramirez, an organizer with Vocal Texas. “There needs to be easier transitions into permanent housing. We need to stop these arbitrary time limits and we know the city can do this right now.”

A lot of them work multiple jobs – often at minimum wage – or are on fixed incomes due to disabilities and other factors. Others have found it hard to find a job because they have a criminal conviction that comes up in background checks.

Maria Cepeda said her rapid rehousing assistance ends in four months. When it runs out, she is not sure what she will do. She is not working right now after recovering from major knee surgery, and she is grappling with the loss of her mother. Cepeda said more months of assistance would go a long way.

“People have so much going on in their lives and people need time,” she said. “Every night, I think about what’s going to happen when my rapid rehousing runs out in August. … If it ends, I’ll end up back on the street. I appreciate what the city is doing for me, but I wish this rapid rehousing was for longer.”

Luz Moreno-Lozano/KUT News. Laura Ann Martinez said she was kicked out of the rapid rehousing program when she could not pay her portion of the rent.

Others said they wished they had more affordable options and had homes in good condition.

Matt Mollica, executive director for ECHO, acknowledged that the system isn’t perfect and faces challenges.

“Our vacancies in Austin are at all-time lows,” Mollica said. “Our housing costs, even though we’ve seen some relief over the last couple of months, are at all-time highs in terms of rent costs.”

That is also compounded by limited affordable and low-income housing options and high tenant criteria – like good credit, rental history and clean background checks – that many landlords require. Many landlords also refuse to accept housing vouchers or rental subsidies, Mollica said.

“In spite of that, the providers in the community that provide rapid rehousing have really done a great job of finding places for people,” Mollica said. “The providers are doing a really good job in a really difficult market.”

Vocal Texas advocates said Austin must find ways to keep people in their homes, including building and creating more affordable housing programs that offer support services and permanent solutions for people in need.

“As a community, we need to shore up these pitfalls and make sure that everyone is housed successfully,” Ramirez said. “Stop the clock. No one exiting a rapid rehousing program should be homeless again.”

As Austin prepares its budget for next year, Ramirez and others from Vocal Texas said they will urge council members to make better investments in these programs that support real people.

Austin and Travis County have been working for years to build and open more affordable housing and permanent supportive housing that gives people access to services like skills training and health care.

Around 1,000 units of permanent supportive housing are expected to be available by the end of 2025.

Late last year, the city created an independent office to lead the homelessness response. It previously functioned under Austin Public Health. The city also recently launched a text message alert system to connect with people who are unhoused.

As he threatened to do at last week’s City Council meeting, Save Our Springs Alliance Executive Director Bill Bunch has sued the city, the mayor and Council for alleged violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act, the Austin City Charter and Council’s own procedures for allowing the public to speak. The suit was filed in Travis County District Court.

Bunch and SOS, which is dedicated to protecting Barton Springs and the Edwards Aquifer, sued the various defendants April 5 over alleged Open Meetings Act violations and amended the suit on Thursday to include allegations about the city’s regulations and the City Charter. He told the Austin Monitor on Thursday he is “trying to get an emergency hearing before next week’s meeting.” At such a hearing, Bunch would seek a temporary restraining order and a permanent injunction “to remedy defendants’ violations of law as to the April 4, 2024 consent agenda and to prohibit additional and future violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act and the Austin City Charter.”

At last week’s meeting, Bunch signed up to speak on four consent agenda items. When he started to speak, Bunch asked Mayor Kirk Watson whether he would have two minutes to speak on each of the items. In making the request, Bunch referred to the requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Watson refused his request and deducted the time Bunch had used in protesting the mayor’s interpretation of the rules. Bunch then had one minute and one second to address the four items he intended to speak on.

At the time, Bunch made clear that he intended to sue over Council’s interpretation of the Open Meetings Act. In the past, Council has allowed each speaker three minutes to speak on each item. He noted in a conversation with the Monitor that under the current rules, there would have been no all-night meeting in 1990on the Barton Creek PUD, Jim Bob Moffett’s failed attempt to develop and despoil Barton Springs. That meeting essentially launched the Save Our Springs movement.

Bunch’s lawsuit requests that the court grant injunctions prohibiting Council from restricting public speakers’ time, “regardless of the number of posted items that a speaker has registered to address and/or based on a practice that is not contained in a duly adopted ordinance of the City Council. For temporary relief, prior to Council acting by ordinance to correct its ongoing violations of the City Charter, the plaintiffs are requesting the court to order the Council to allow public speakers a minimum of three minutes to speak on each item for which the speaker has properly registered to speak to the Council.”

Plaintiffs contend that the defendants have been in violation of the City Charter since 2017.

A city spokesperson told the Monitor: “We believe the council is following the Texas Open Meetings Act by allowing the public to speak on all matters before the council acts. In addition to speaking at a council meeting, (either in person or by telephone), there are multiple ways for members of the public to make their opinion known to council: conversations with individual council members in person or by phone calls, and individual or group emails, letters.”

The lawsuit also requests that the court void all actions taken at the April 4 meeting that were on the consent agenda or the addendum to that agenda. “In the alternative plaintiffs request that the Council’s actions to approve Consent Agenda items 6, 23 and 43 be voided.” Item 6 was a $3 million contract with HDR Engineering Inc. for a study to determine where the water utility might locate an additional new pump station and reservoir. Bunch spoke against the item.

He opposed item 23, described as a contract for a land stewardship program with American YouthWorks for up to five years for a total contract amount not to exceed $13,482,000. He also opposed item 43, which set a public hearing to consider an ordinance amending the Land Development Code to “create a new zoning district for a density bonus … and establish boundaries for the new zoning district located in the vicinity commonly known as the South Central Waterfront.”

2024.04.11. COA TOMA. First Amended Petition with Attachments FINAL (Hosted by DocumentCloud)

To the surprise of practically no one in Austin, Mayor Kirk Watson announced on Wednesday that he will run for reelection this November. In an email to supporters, he outlined victories so far in his current two-year term.

“For example, we’ve adopted the most ambitious housing reforms in decades to create more affordability; we’ve made big new investments and brought a new approach to helping people experiencing homelessness; and we’ve taken meaningful steps to begin restoring police staffing and improve emergency response. We’ve also moved forward on job training, child care, and transportation,” Watson wrote.

In November, Watson will face former City Council Member Kathie Tovo, community organizer and activist Carmen Llanes Pulidoand the former executive director and lead organizer of Central Texas Interfaith, Doug Greco, for a four-year term. In 2021, voters decided to move the mayoral election so that it falls in presidential election years, ensuring more participants.

Eight of the 10 Council members who served with him have endorsed Watson, along with County Judge Andy Brown and three of the four Travis County commissioners, as well as local legislators and other well-known Austinites. Council Member Mackenzie Kelly, the only Republican on Council, is running for reelection. So regardless of how she might feel about Watson personally, it would be unwise for her to endorse him. Council Member Alison Alter stands out as the one member of Council to express her personal disdain for Watson, telling the Austin American-Statesman that he is a “bully.”

Watson served as Austin’s mayor from 1997-2001. He was elected to represent Travis and surrounding counties as a member of the Texas Senate from 2007 to April 2020, when he stepped down from his Senate seat to become the first dean of the University of Houston’s Hobby School of Public Affairs.

Watson was elected as mayor once again in 2022, defeating Democratic state Rep. Celia Israel by just 886 votes out of more than 114,000.

Watson has an experienced political team to help with his campaign, including Joe Cascino as his campaign manager, David Butts as an adviser and Mark Nathan to handle advertising. Watson hired Cascino last year to work in his office handling constituent services, following Cascino’s involvement in Watson’s 2022 campaign. Cascino recently left that post to lead the campaign. Cascino told the Austin Monitor on Wednesday that he does not expect to have a campaign kickoff party until late summer or early fall.

Meanwhile, Tovo and Llanes Pulido are making the rounds of political clubs, introducing themselves and talking about their plans. Tovo and Llanes Pulido both visited with members of the South Austin Democrats at their meeting Tuesday night. Tovo noted that the South Austin Democrats was the first political club that she joined years ago when she first ran for Council. She reminded the group of her past work, including a long effort to make the Sobering Center a reality and her support of environmental causes, such as Water Forward, the city’s long-term plan for better water use. She pointed out that the group had endorsed her in the past and expressed the hope that they would do so again.

Llanes Pulido said that although she does not live in South Austin, she has spent the last 12 years organizing south of Ben White Boulevard. “I grew up here in Austin, and I have friends and family south of the river,” she told the group. Llanes Pulido said she had been asked to run for mayor by a broad array of people and groups. She said she thought she should run because “I think we are at a critical turning point,” citing an affordability crisis in the community and the availability of money, including federal funds, to address climate change and affordability.

Greco is also working to get out the word that he is running. He recently put out a press release saying the city should take over the job of supporting University of Texas students who were depending on the diversity and equity programs that recently have been eliminated.

In a press release, Greco said, “Where the state has failed LGBTQ students at UT, the City of Austin needs to lead.” He noted that he is running to be Austin’s first openly gay mayor.

“University LGBTQ centers provide life-saving services and gathering spaces for LGBTQ students,” he wrote. “This closure is unacceptable. As mayor, I would call together leaders in the LGBTQ community as well as university officials, students, and local legislators to determine what the city and community can do to help replace these supports.”

The city is moving forward with plans to replace the Dougherty Arts Center with a new multiphased facility located in the Butler Shores Park area. The Parks and Recreation Department plans to begin the permitting process for the new arts center soon, while also conducting community engagement sessions and getting support from relevant boards and commissions, according to a recent memofrom PARD Director Kim McNeeley.

The memo also spells out the latest status of the construction plans for three other cultural centers: the Emma S. Barrientos Mexican American Cultural Center, the George Washington Carver Museum and Cultural Center and the Asian American Resource Center. Construction and expansion projects planned or underway for all four centers will be funded by money from recent city bond proposals.

City Council had in recent years directed staff to move forward with a new Dougherty to replace the deteriorating building on Barton Springs Road. The new center would total 45,000 square feet, featuring underground parking and sharing as much infrastructure as possible with nearby facilities such as the ZACH Theatre. Inflationary pressures and specifically the parking structure caused the projected cost of the project to grow to $61 million, far more than the roughly $28 million available in bond funding.

At a recent Council work session, McNeeley detailed the cost constraints for the new Dougherty and received tacit support for moving ahead with a new arts center with no underground parking that would be smaller and designed to accommodate future expansion.

The memo also noted that the second expansion phase of the MACC is proceeding according to plan, with construction scheduled to conclude by next summer. The expansion was designed to add roughly 68,500 square feet to the 36,000-square-foot facility, adding more classroom space and reconfiguring the center’s central zócalo gathering space to allow for better management of large crowds for music performances and other events.

The Carver center, which is currently undergoing renovation of the Boyd Vance Theatre, is preparing a request for quotes for conceptual design services and initial cost estimates for a future expansion that likely would be paid for with a future bond package. The theater renovation and other improvements currently underway are expected to conclude this spring.

At the Asian American Resource Center, work on a phase two expansion will continue this spring with conceptual design and possible programming itinerary for a new pavilion planned for the facility.

The memo also notes that the Austin Economic Development Corporation is still working to complete deals for creative spaces with the $5.1 million remaining from the 2018 bond package that brought in $12 million for creative space preservation. Those deals are expected to be completed in the next six months, with Anne Gatling Haynes, AEDC’s chief transaction officer, telling the Austin Monitor two or three deals are still possible using that money.

Gatling Haynes said the AEDC is working on additional deals using money from the city’s iconic venue funds, which were initially approved in the wave of Covid-19 relief programs.

Looking toward a future bond package expected to go before voters in 2026, McNeeley’s memo notes that AEDC’s initial list of possible projects totaling $300 million has been cut to a short list of preferred creative space projects totaling $75 million.

The short list total had initially stood at around $60 million, but Gatling Haynes said the new number reflects the reality of the current Austin real estate market.

“The pipeline of our projects hasn’t changed, and it’s the same pipeline. It was just an updated number (in the memo),” she said. “This is basically just taking a look at the things in our pipeline and what we could easily find. We could easily put projects on a future bond issue.”

Monday’s total solar eclipse did not bring the massive crowds and traffic that some thought the Austin area might see.

The cloudy weather might have been the reason, but it also could have been the monthslong preparation for the event. Several school districts canceled classes. Some businesses closed. And advice to stay home, or at least stay close to home, to experience the eclipse was heard.

For months, local officials warned residents to be prepared for an influx of people that could lead to road congestion and gridlock, overcrowded parks and strains on gas stations and grocery stores. It was estimated that Travis County’s population could double.

But no one knew exactly what was going to happen. The goal was to be prepared for anything.

Eric Carter, chief emergency management coordinator for Travis County, said that crowds and traffic were moderate.

“So that is the good news,” Carter said. “And as I’ve shared with my partners, if we had not prepared, what we did experience would have been a challenge.”

The city and county activated the emergency operations center on Sunday. More than 20 agencies across the region worked together to coordinate and put resources in place.

Lots of communication also went out on social media and was shared with several outlets warning of the event.

Hector Nieto, a spokesperson with Travis County said, “Monday was a good day.”

“We did everything we could leading up to that day, and if we did everything correctly, it would be a light day, and fortunately it was,” Nieto said.

In November, City Council passed a resolutionthat called for the creation of a plan for the eclipse that included all relevant city departments, including Parks and Recreation, the city’s tourism bureau and the Austin Independent School District.

In March, Travis County declared a local disaster, which would give first responders better control and coordination of traffic and other needs during the eclipse. The county also required reservations for day passes to several county parks and registration for events with 50 people or more.

Just last week, officials made last-minute pleas for people to be prepared, especially with the many events happening before Monday.

In addition to the eclipse, Austin hosted the Statesman Capitol 10K, the CMT Music Awards and a regularly scheduled soccer game at the Q2 stadium. All of these were expected to put further strain on roads and resources.

Austin wasn’t the only area not to see that large influx of people. Hays County and the Hill Country also reported seeing a lot of people, but not quite the overwhelming amount that was anticipated, Carter said.

County officials said they are still gathering data on traffic, crowd numbers and money generated from the eclipse. They also plan to gather feedback from people in attendance.

Still, there were a lot of people, and the traffic flow was good because of the regional coordination, Carter said.

Monday’s response was a regionwide effort, with plans that Carter said made it easy to communicate and coordinate.

“We are proud of the work that was done by everyone to step forward aggressively, look proactively at what was needed, put those resources into place, and then come together on game day,” Carter said. “Overall, everything flowed well.”

The once-again mayor is looking to earn another term. Kirk Watson formally announced today, April 10, his 2024 re-election bid.

If re-elected Watson will serve a full four-year term, meaning his reign at City Hall would have a January 2029 scheduled end date. In his campaign announcement, Watson trumpeted key accomplishments of his first, two-year term, such as passing ambitious housing reform and helping to initiate a “reset” of City Hall bureaucracy. “Working closely with this City Council and City Manager,” Watson wrote in a news release, “I’m proud to have helped us restore efficient, effective basic services while also helping put us on a new path to tackle some of Austin’s biggest long-term challenges.”

Whether or not Watson has indeed worked closely with Council, it is inarguable that the mayor has worked veryclosely with outgoing Interim City Manager (and longtime ally) Jesús Garza. The closeness of the latter relationship was a big part of what allowed Watson to forge ahead with controversial decisions without the input or support from his Council colleagues. Initiating a partnership with the Texas Department of Public Safety to patrol mostly Black and brown neighborhoods in East Austin, attempting to hire disgraced former Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, and even restarting negotiations with the Austin Police Association for a long-term labor contract under conditions set by the APA were all significant Garza decisions which Watson either endorsed or did not publicly oppose.

Watson’s ability to get things done at City Hall cannot be denied. Early into his tenure he helped initiate changes to the city’s permitting review process that are already showing results; he helped pass the kind of Land Development Code change that prior Councils could only dream of; and he helped stave off budget cuts at Integral Care, the largest provider of mental health care in Travis County and a key partner in addressing homelessness throughout the city.

Given Watson’s two-year track record as mayor with his reputation as a vindictive leader, it’s no surprise that he has already secured the endorsement of eight-of-10 Council members. These colleagues “want a partner in the mayor’s office who is open-minded, forward-thinking,” Watson said in the news release, which is likely true – they may also see no benefit in not endorsing an incumbent mayor whose challengers, as of today, are longshots. Former CM Kathie Tovo, land-use activist Carmen Llanes Pulido, and Central Texas Interfaith organizer and pastor Doug Greco have all announced mayoral campaigns, though none of them have launched aggressive ad campaigns or made frequent public appearances since announcing.

CM Alison Alter, who endorsed Watson in 2022, is one of the two CMs (Mackenzie Kelly being the other) not endorsing Watson today. “I have learned when someone shows who they are, believe them,” Alter, who is not seeking re-election this year, told the Chronicle. “Watson has acted as a bully and prevented real policy deliberation by members of the Council and of the public.”

The mayoral and Council elections are set for Nov. 5

Even though their party affiliations will not be on the ballot, three Democrats, three Republicans and a Libertarian are running for three seats on the Travis Central Appraisal District Board of Directors. That election on May 4 will be the first such election since passage of a law requiring that three of those directors be elected.

The three who are elected next month will join five appointed members. A new state law dictates that at least two of the three elected members of the TCAD Board of Directors agree on all Appraisal Review Board (ARB) appointments. Travis County Democrats are concerned that this low-key election could result in the election of Republicans who will try to influence decisions that could end up hurting school districts in particular by appointing people who want to lower property values.

The Travis County Democratic Party has endorsed the three Democrats in the race: Jett Hanna, Shenghao “Daniel” Wang and Dick Lavine – in Places 1, 2 and 3, respectively.

Two well-known Republicans – Travis County Republican Party Chair Matt Mackowiak and former Austin City Council Member Don Zimmerman – and a lesser-known candidate, Bill May, are also vying for the three seats. In addition, software engineer Jonathan Craig Patschke, who is listed online as the treasurer of the Travis County Libertarian Party, is running against Wang and Mackowiak for Place 2.

As Democrats explain, if an appraisal review board undervalues properties, local school districts will get less funding. The Texas comptroller is required to study property values every two years and determine whether the appraised values are correct. If properties are undervalued, the district can be forced to pay more of its base budget and get less funding from the state. For example, for Conroe ISD, among others, that determination could result in a loss of millions of dollars in state funds.

The Austin Monitor asked each of the candidates for a statement about their candidacy and got responses from Hanna, Wang, Lavine, May and Zimmerman.

PLACE 1: HANNA VS. ZIMMERMAN

Attorney Jett Hanna served on the TCAD Board of Directors as an appointed member back in the 1980s. In a previous job, he notes he was board certified in commercial real estate law. He is currently serving on the Texas Supreme Court Professional Ethics Committee. Hanna said, “I have no real estate interests except my house, and I have a child who rents an apartment here in Austin.”

Hanna is among those concerned about the impact elected members could have on the appraisal board. He told the* Monitor* via email, “A majority of the 3 elected members must agree to each ARB member. Essentially, 2 elected members can either stall ARB appointments or force appointment of ARB members who aren’t acceptable to the rest of the board.

“Giving the elected members this power creates some direct accountability to voters for the ARB appointments, but also creates a potential to introduce politics into what should be a technical process. The elected members should not try to introduce a tax cutting agenda, a public school defending agenda or a wealth redistribution agenda to the appraisal process. The places for having those arguments are in the legislature, which sets the tax structure and in the local governments, which set the tax rates.”

Don Zimmerman directed the Monitor to the League of Women Voters for a statement on his candidacy, but it couldn’t be located. When asked for it directly, Zimmerman told the Monitor via text message: “Not sure I’m going to bother – it’s a county wide election and for 22 years I’ve seen Travis county vote for unlimited government and taxation with precious few exceptions (voting down Sarah Eckhart’s downtown courthouse boondoggle in 2015 was one rare instance, but I had the visibility on D6 council seat which helped). I stand for the opposite and many voters already know that. The partisan Democrat organizations are already beating the drums that ‘anti-government Republican extremists’ are on the ballot to defend taxpayers – have you seen their emails?”

“The religion of the Progressives is evident everywhere.  The incredibly famous prophecy of Isaiah 9:7, speaking of Christ the Messiah, says ‘of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end’. Progressives see almighty government as Messiah, so they to see no end to the increase of almighty government power, which comes from confiscatory taxation and unlimited, arbitrary legislation freed from the shackles of ‘God given rights and liberties’. But that tyrannical government is from hell, so the absence of peace – and  escalation of conflict – never ends.” Zimmerman added later: “Everything is partisan for the extremist partisan Democrats, whose god is almighty government, and whose altar is political power.”

PLACE 2: WANG, MACKOWIAK AND PATSCHKE

The very first thing you will see when you go to Daniel Wang’s website is the statement, “Daniel is a proud Democrat running against the Republican Party Chair of Travis County.” However, right after that he provides a lengthy statement about the need for property appraisal to “be kept separate from the political considerations that school boards, city councils and county commissioners weigh in setting the tax rate applied to property values.”

His website further explains that the job of the appraisal district “is to set fair and accurate property values throughout Travis County, as required by the Texas Constitution.” As Wang explains, the appraisal district does not set property taxes but provides taxing authorities – including cities, counties and school districts – with information about the value of each property.

“Property owners can protest the appraisal set by TCAD through appeals to the Appraisal Review Board (ARB) – citizens appointed by the Board of Directors to impartially weigh evidence brought by the taxpayer disputing their valuation. In choosing members of the ARB, directors should look for fair-minded people who can listen to both sides and accurately apply the rules governing valuation. Appraisals are controlled by professional standards, state law and oversight by the state comptroller. The ARB has no role in setting tax rates.”

He told The Austin Chronicle, “The GOP wants to defund local government. Screwing up the appraisal process is one way they could achieve that goal.”

Although Matt Mackowiak did not respond to the Monitor’s request for comments, he told The Austin Bulldog, “I’m not anti-government, but people in Austin are really concerned about the massive and unsustainable increases in property taxes. The legislature took some steps to address that problem with the 3.5 percent rollback requirement,” citing a state law that requires an election if a taxing authority wants to raise taxes by more than that.

Mackowiak is also one of the founders of Save Austin Now, the group that sponsored a ballot initiative to enforce restrictions on homeless camping. That fight continues.

According to his LinkedIn page, Jonathan Patschke is a software developer who graduated from Rice University in 2001. He currently works for twentyAI, which describes itself as providing “augmented intelligence enabled talent solutions across the UK, Europe and USA.” He is listed as the treasurer of the Travis County Libertarian Party.

Patschke did not respond to the Monitor’srequest for comments, but told the Bulldog via email, “I see this as a great opportunity for public oversight of a government agency with which homeowners have direct interaction.”

“Prior to filing to be on the ballot, I’d heard that no one else had done so and it seemed a shame that no one else was willing to put in the effort for a position that might make a small difference for all of us in Travis County,” he said. “Through the limited scope of the board position I hope to improve the fairness and efficiency of the appraisal process.”

PLACE 3: LAVINE VS. MAY

Dick Lavine, a licensed attorney, has served as senior fiscal analyst with the nonprofit Every Texan for the past 30 years. He also serves on the board of trustees of the city of Austin’s Employee Retirement System. Lavine was a member of the TCAD Board of Directors from 1997 to 2018. He told the* Monitor* he was disappointed when he wasn’t reappointed by the Austin ISD board. Now, he has the opportunity to serve again. Lavine said it would be the board’s job to “appoint people who would give property owners a fair hearing and arrive at an accurate result.” He called appraisal “really a technical process. … That’s all it should be, the best estimate of real market value.” He said he was committed to keeping political considerations out of the appraisal process.

Bill May told the* Monitor* via email, “My family moved to Austin when I was 3 years old, (76 now) and I have seen the changes that have affected the lives of many people that call Austin home. After my father became ill if I had not been doing very well in my commercial construction company and helping them out financially there would have not been any way for them to remain in the home they built in 1957. One of the most important ways of tackling affordability in area of the state of Texas is making sure there is a fair and understandable method to determine the valuation of real estate. I currently own the home that sits on .87 acres and the taxes for last year were over $11,000 as it’s not homesteaded, as my daughter is renting it. For older citizens of Austin it is becoming harder each year to stay here, with no relief in site. I have always tried to get involved to KEEP AUSTIN a great place for all to live and being retired I feel that I will have time to commit to the position.”

Election day is May 4, with early voting running April 22-30.

TCAD spokesperson Cynthia Martinez told the* Monitor* that TCAD hopes to release 2024 appraisal values by the end of this week. Any property owner who believes his or her property has been overvalued will have the opportunity to appeal that appraisal to the review board, which is appointed by the TCAD Board of Directors. Their website notes: “If your property value increased $1,000 or less, a notice of appraised value will not be mailed. Property values are available on the TCAD website after notices have been mailed.”

The second phase of the HOME initiative reemerges in the public spotlight this week, accompanied by a series of other proposed revisions to the Land Development Code.

On Thursday, City Council and the Planning Commission will hold a joint hearing to receive public testimony on proposed changes relating to:

1. Properties zoned single-family, including flag lots (HOME)
2. Height and compatibility standards for properties within a half-mile radius of a planned Project Connect station, also known as the Equitable Transit-Oriented Development overlay (ETOD)
3. Citywide compatibility standards
4. Electric vehicle charging use

While the ETOD component of the revisions has captured a large share of proponents and detractors, the HOME initiative – also known as the Home Options for Middle-Income Empowerment ordinance – is considered the mother of the raft of code revisions that Council will vote on at its May 16 meeting. The Planning Commission will deliver its final vote April 23.

Central to the second phase of the HOME initiative is a reduction in the minimum lot size for single-family zoned properties, which, if approved, would drop to the staff-proposed size of 2,000 square feet from the current 5,750 square feet; increase impervious cover limits from 40 percent to 45 percent; and allow for a variety of attached and detached housing types such as row houses and townhomes. The stated goal of these changes is to increase and diversify Austin’s housing stock.

To recap HOME’s journey, the initiative’s focus on single-family zoning and lot size ignited fervent debate when it was rolled out last summer. The proposal drew praise from density enthusiasts and backing from AURA and real estate and labor groups – and encountered staunch opposition from homeowners and groups such as Community Not Commodity. By most accounts, there has been little change in the positions of the two sides.

Council approved the code amendments in December to begin implementation of phase one of HOME, permitting up to three housing units per lot.

The program officially launched in early February when the Development Services Department began accepting applications for residential building permits. To date, DSD has received 39 applications that are either in review or have been approved, according to a department spokesperson.

That’s evidence that department staff are making progress on the first phase of HOME, said Council Member Leslie Pool, the lead sponsor of the resolution.

“These statistics affirm that the City is moving in the right direction with HOME and that it’s working as intended,” she said in a statement to the Austin Monitor. “On Thursday, I look forward to hearing from the public, and I deeply appreciate the hard work so many are investing in making needed, important changes to our zoning rules.”

In the meantime, the two sides – mainly AURA and Community Not Commodity – are urging their members and supporters to send emails to Council stating their respective position and to register to speak at Thursday’s hearing, which begins at 9 a.m. at City Hall.

Prior to Council’s May 16 vote on the revisions, the city will host an in-person open house from 6 to 8 p.m. April 17 at Austin Central Library and a virtual session from 10 a.m. to noon April 20. For more information on the proposed changes and to learn how to attend the virtual open house, visit SpeakUpAustin.org/LDCupdates.

A new study calls into question the feasibility of proposals to use the Nash Hernandez Building in East Austin as an activity center for older people and young children.

The report on the legal and financial realities of the intergenerational resource and activity center (IRAC) has caused staff from the Austin Public Health Department and the Parks and Recreation Department to reconsider the scope of the proposed center and where it may eventually be located.

A recent memo from APH Director Adrienne Sturrup outlines a number of requirements that would limit the array of services that could be offered at the Nash Hernandez Building if it were to remain the preferred location for the IRAC. The building is centered in the Holly Shores/Edward Rendon Sr. Metropolitan Park at Festival Beach.

One of the concerns is that state law would prohibit the city from offering health care services, which caused the city Law Department to advise against providing physical or mental health services at the IRAC as had been planned.

The desire for a child care center in the now-vacant Nash Hernandez property would also prove problematic because an economically successful business built to serve 68 children ages 4 and younger would need more than 6,200 square feet of indoor space plus 2,250 square feet of outdoor space.

That footprint would leave less than 3,000 square feet for programming for older adults, intergenerational activities, offices and space needed for movement around the facility.

The costs for the child care center are estimated to total $894,000 annually for 18 full- and part-time staff, plus about $600,000 in startup funding for furnishings, toys, outdoor play equipment and other necessities. It is estimated the center would need $1 million per year in operational support for two years until it reaches its expected full enrollment in its third year.

State licensing requirements for child care facilities would also create logistical issues with the intergenerational component of the center because of the requirement that anyone older than 13 who is “regularly or frequently present” at the child care operation would need to undergo a background check.

The Nash Hernandez facility has been the favored location for an IRAC since 2022, with stakeholders for older people and families arguing East Austin needs services for both age groups. City Council passed a resolution late that year calling for a plan to create an IRAC at one of four locations, with Rudy Mendez Recreation Center, George Morales Dove Springs Recreation Center and Dittmar Recreation Center as the other three possible sites.

The new study notes that of the four proposed sites, three qualify as a desert for subsidized, quality child care, with Dittmar found to have adequate offerings near its South Austin location.

Locating an IRAC on any of the proposed PARD properties would also require the bureaucratic step of City Council approving a use beyond those typically designated for parks sites.

There has been significant objection to the possibility of the Nash Hernandez Building being converted into a center focused specifically on older people and children. The memo notes that the IRAC is in conflict with the uses designated in the Holly Shores/Edward Rendon Sr. Vision Plan, which was completed in 2015 after substantial community engagement.

PARD staff have also called into question whether an IRAC would be the best use for the Nash Hernandez Building. A 2022 memo that preceded the Council resolution noted the budgetary challenges that would stand in the way of the IRAC conversion, and instead supported using the building for an expansion of PARD offices.