. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recent Archives
-
May, 2006
-
October, 2003
-
March, 2003
-
October, 2002
-
August, 2002
-
July, 2002
-
February, 2002
-
August, 2001
-
September, 2000
-
May, 1990
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
|
179
(8 votes, average 4.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Friday, January 27, 2012 11:47am
Martinez’ Focus: Improving East Austin
Two-Term Incumbent Draws Strong
Support for Campaign Kickoff Event
by Rebecca LaFlure
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
 In front of an enthusiastic crowd Wednesday evening, City Council Member Mike Martinez described the side of Austin residents love to show outsiders: a lively music scene, quirky businesses, a booming high-tech industry, and beautiful parks and trails.
However, there is another side to Austin Martinez says people rarely talk about. The side where children go to sleep hungry, teenagers drop out of high school, and parents struggle to make ends meet on multiple minimum-wage jobs.
It’s this aspect of Austin that Martinez wants to focus on if elected to a third term to the Austin City Council, he said.
“We’re defined by our failures as much as our successes,” Martinez said. “It’s government’s job to do for those who cannot do for themselves.”
Martinez, 42, kicked off his re-election campaign at Nuevo Leon Restaurant on East Sixth Street Wednesday, saying more needs to be done to improve Austin’s east side.
Hundreds of Austin citizens—including fellow Council Members Bill Spelman, Kathie Tovo, Laura Morrison and Chris Riley—gathered to show their support as Martinez launched his re-election campaign.
Martinez did not mention his opponent, Laura Pressley, a business owner and member of Fluoride Free Austin, who announced Friday that she would challenge Martinez, the council’s only Latino, for the Place 2 spot.
Martinez said he moved to Austin in 1988 with $50 and a trumpet, hoping to make it as a musician. He eventually joined the Austin Fire Department, and worked at an East Austin fire station for 13 years. Martinez was elected president of the Austin Firefighters Association in 2003. In that position, he successfully fought to secure collective bargaining rights for firefighters, and a pay raise that made Austin firefighters among the highest paid in Texas.
Martinez was first elected to the City Council in 2006 on a platform of understanding the concerns of working-class minorities in East Austin. Martinez noted his efforts to ensure workers are paid on time and have rest breaks during the workday.
“This community has been historically underserved,” Martinez said of East Austin. “I am that champion.”
Martinez said, if elected to a third term, he would continue focusing on economic, transportation and equality issues. As chairman of the Capital Metro board, Martinez said he helped transform the agency over the past two years, noting the launch of the Red Line, a the Metrorail service that connects downtown Austin with the suburban areas including Wells Branch, Lakeline, and Leander.
He also plans to continue his support for Austin’s music community and work with musicians and neighborhood groups so that they coexist harmoniously.
Martinez alluded to his reputation as the council’s most outspoken member saying, “I don’t shy away from challenges. I take them head on. That’s my style.”
Gloria Aleman, an Austin resident and retired Travis County employee who was raised on the eastside, and Linda Ramirez, director of accounting at Rz Communications, were among those who came out to show their support for Martinez. (Andy Ramirez, CEO of Rz Communications, bundled campaign contributions for Martinez’s 2009 re-election campaign.)
“East Austin still has a lot to be done,” Aleman said. “His heart is in the right place, and I think he’s the only candidate who can make that happen. He cares about people.”
Ramirez said Martinez helped the nonprofit Bellas Artes Alliance raise money for the Pan Americana Festival—a free music festival scheduled for March 17 at the Emma S. Barrientos Mexican American Cultural Center. This is just one example of how Martinez has supported Austin’s Latino community, said Ramirez. Both she and Andy Ramirez are Bellas Artes Alliance board members.
Opponent has Latino support, too
|
178
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Wednesday, January 25, 2012 2:05am
Open Meetings Investigation a Year Old Today
County Attorney Says Investigation of Whether City
Council Violated Open Meetings Act Is Still Ongoing
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
 The Austin City Council of January 2011
A year ago today, The Austin Bulldog published an investigative report (“Open Meetings, Closed Minds”) about the years-long practice in which the mayor and council members held regularly scheduled, private, round-robin meetings preceding each scheduled council meeting.
 David EscamillaThat same day, The Austin Bulldog reported that County Attorney David Escamilla announced that he was conducting an inquiry into a possible violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, based on a complaint filed with his office by a citizen (later identified as civic activist Brian Rodgers, a key source in The Austin Bulldog’s investigation).
Now, one year later, the county attorney has not made a public statement about whether he thinks it was legal for the Austin City Council to regularly meet one-on-one and two-on-one in secret to discuss items on the city council’s upcoming agendas.
What has become of that investigation?
The Austin Bulldog asked County Attorney Escamilla.
“The investigation is still ongoing and we hope to complete it in the near future,” Escamilla said Tuesday. He declined to elaborate further.
That’s cold comfort for the seven members who were on the City Council when the story broke. With a statute of limitations of two years on the misdemeanor offenses they may have committed, they remain in legal limbo until Escamilla wraps up his investigation and determines how he will proceed.
 Randi ShadeFormer Council Member Randi Shade was on the City Council from June 2008 to June 2011. She regularly participated in those private meetings with the mayor and other council members. Shade is now a homemaker and she would like to find closure.
When informed of the county attorney’s statement, Shade told The Austin Bulldog, “He’s been saying the same thing for a year.”
Shade said she has been cooperating fully with the investigation and has submitted everything requested.
“They’ve gathered a ton of information. I haven’t heard anything (about the outcome of the investigation),” she said. “After a year, I don’t know how you define this as ‘speedy,’” as in speedy justice.
Mayor Lee Leffingwell and the other five council members who are also being investigated—Sheryl Cole, Mike Martinez, Laura Morrison, Chris Riley, and Bill Spelman—did not respond to an e-mail inviting comments for this story.
 Bill AleshireBill Aleshire of Austin-based Riggs Aleshire & Ray PC, is a longtime volunteer attorney for the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas media hotline. In addition, he is The Austin Bulldog’s attorney in two lawsuits against the city and council members concerning lack of responsiveness to requests filed under the Texas Public Information Act. He emphasized the importance of the issues involved in the county attorney’s investigation.
“The City Council’s actions, exposed by The Austin Bulldog, threaten the foundation of open government. If an entire city council can have secret face-to-face, round-robin discussions about the upcoming meeting agenda, then the Open Meetings Act is useless, and public council meetings are nothing but rehearsed Kabuki theatre giving the pretense of government operating in the sunshine.”
 Joseph LarsenOne of the most respected attorneys in Texas on the subject of the Open Meetings Act is Joe Larsen, special counsel in the Houston office of the international law firm Sedgwick LLP. The nonprofit Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas in 2010 awarded Larsen its prestigious James Madison Award, named for the fourth president of the United States and author of the Bill of Rights.
“I think it’s important that the investigation be completed as soon as reasonably possible so as to make a public record of the findings,” Larsen said, adding, “Far be it from me to say what resources are available” for the investigation.
“If a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act is found and publicized, it will act as a deterrent for all governmental bodies that might consider doing something similar,” he said.
Larsen noted that the city council has stopped holding the private meetings and said, “However bad this practice was, one should really commend the governmental body for doing the right thing.”
Council members still at risk of prosecution
|
177
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Sunday, January 22, 2012 9:30pm
Updated Friday, January 27, 2012 3:20pm
New Restrictions Proposed for Lobbyist Fundraising
Lobbyists Can Only Give Candidates $25 But
Can Collect Unlimited Contributions for Them
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
Why would city regulations prohibit a registered city lobbyist from contributing more than $25 to an officeholder or candidate for mayor or city council, but allow a lobbyist to solicit and bundle unlimited contributions on behalf of officeholders and candidates?
That was a question the 2012 Charter Revision Committee dealt with in its meeting last Thursday.
Based on the case presented by its five-member working group, the Committee voted 12-1 (with David Butts and Kathleen Vale absent) to approve a recommended change that would limit the amount of bundled contributions by registered city lobbyists to a maximum of $1,750 per candidate per election cycle for individual bundlers and $3,500 per candidate per election cycle for firms that bundle. This restriction would not apply to anyone who is not a registered city lobbyist.
This restriction would put a severe crimp in the kind of fundraising that some registered city lobbyists are doing for current officeholders.
The Austin Bulldog’s analysis of the most recent contribution reports filed by the four members of the City Council running for re-election—Mayor Lee Leffingwell, Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole, and Council Members Mike Martinez and Sheryl Cole—indicates that two registered city lobbyists bundled a total of $33,500 $44,470 in single reporting period for Leffingwell, Martinez, and Spelman. (Added Spelman’s bundled contributions to previous total January 27, 2012.)
In reality they bundled even more than that, but the contribution reports report filed by Cole and Spelman list lists only the names of bundlers and do does not identify the specific contributions these lobbyists solicited on their her behalf.
 David ArmbrustLawyer-lobbyist David Armbrust of Armbrust & Brown PLLC bundled 24 contributions totaling $8,400 for Leffingwell, and 29 contributions totaling $10,150 for Martinez, and 36 contributions totaling $11,200 for Spelman. According to the lobbyist registration information posted on the city’s website, Armbrust has 17 clients involved in building, real estate and real estate development, financial services, hotels, property management, energy, and waste disposal.
 Michael WhellanLawyer-lobbyist Michael Whellan of Graves Dougherty Hearon and Moody bundled 26 contributions totaling $8,050 for Leffingwell and 20 contributions totaling $6,900 for Martinez. City lobbyist registration records indicate Whellan has 13 clients, including property owners, real estate developers, taxi cabs, healthcare provider, and music.
The ambiguity of the current City Code regarding how to report bundled contributions was also addressed by the Charter Revision Committee. Members present voted unanimously to recommend more stringent and accessible disclosure of all bundled contributions.
With no discussion, the Charter Revision Committee also voted unanimously to recommend that Article X, Section 2 of the City Charter be clarified to indicate that ex-officio members of the Planning Commission are non-voting members whose attendance does not affect quorum requirements. Both the City Council and the Planning Commission had referred this matter to the Committee for consideration.
These recommendations will be forwarded to the Austin City Council, along with all the recommendations previously approved by the committee, for possible action.
What City Code requires
|
176
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
Posted Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:45 pm
Clarification posted January 22, 2012 1:30pm
It’s Pressley vs. Martinez
First-time Council Candidate to Oppose
City Council’s Only Hispanic Incumbent
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
 Laura Pressley kicked off her campaign December 10 vowing not to let the so-called “gentlemen’s agreement” that resulted in having one African American and one Latino on the council stop her from opposing a minority member of the City Council.
At Friday’s press conference she proved it. She announced she is targeting incumbent Mike Martinez, who was first elected in 2006 and is now seeking a third term.
Martinez did not return a request for comment left on his council office recorder. His campaign website provides no telephone number.
Martinez has raised $70,460 for his re-election bid and had $64,654 in the bank as of December 31. He has campaign kickoff fundraiser scheduled for Wednesday at Nuevo Leon Mexican Restaurant, 1501 E. Sixth St., starting at 5:30pm.
Pressley raised $3,100 and had $2,332 in the bank through December 31. She has not yet hired a consultant or campaign manager.
Pressley told The Austin Bulldog she had been advised she needed to raise $200,000 to $250,000 for the campaign. “That’s what we’re going to do,” she said. “We will easily have $40,000 to $50,000 by March.”
Unlike many of the winning candidates in recent council elections, she does not plan to loan her campaign money. “If people don’t support us we will not win,” Pressley said, adding, “I have a lot of donors waiting for us to declare against Martinez.”
In her press conference Pressley said there were concerns about her going against the gentlemen’s agreement from the 1970s but, “We’re not in the seventies anymore. Designating one seat (for a Latino) is a serious limitation.
“There should be two or three Latino seats if we get real geographic representation in this city. We really support the 10-1 plan.” She was referring to the proposal initiated by Austinites for Geographic Representation, a grass-roots citizens initiative to get on the ballot a proposition to establish a nonpartisan Independent Citizen Redistricting Commission that would draw 10 council districts that the Austin City Council would have no choice but to adopt. The group’s plan calls for only the mayor to continue being elected at-large.
“Over the years Mike Martinez has done very little to help the Hispanic community,” Pressley said. “We need a change at City Hall—regardless of skin color—and directly do what’s important for East Austin and all of Austin.”
About a dozen attended the press conference, many of which were Latinos. All said they’re fed up with Martinez, including long-time East Austin activists Marcelo Tafoya, Gavino Fernandez, Jose Quintero, Fidel Acevedo, and a younger Danny Perez. All professed strong support for Pressley and no concern about the fact that her victory would displace the council’s only Latino.
Interviews with some of them, before the press conference at the YMCA Learning Center at 2121 E. Sixth Street, revealed a deep resentment over what they perceive as Martinez’ lack of attention to problems.
“It doesn’t matter,” Quintero said of the idea a white woman might beat Martinez. “He’s not helping us.”
Tafoya agreed, saying, “We decided a while back to get rid of ‘Evil Knievel.’ We decided that the gentlemen’s agreement is BS. It hasn’t served the minority community at all.”
Tafoya, a former district director for District 12 of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), said the minority members of the council were “never elected by us, they never represented us, and never even considered us. They make token gestures and the council votes against us. We’re sick and tired of it.”
Pressley said she met with Latino community members in December and kept it quiet. “We would not do this without Hispanic support.”
Critical of council decisions, offers ideas
|
175
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
Posted Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:40 pm
Bill Spelman’s Re-election Campaign Kickoff Draws an Appreciative Crowd
University of Texas Professor, Council MemberWants to Keep Austin Weird, and Explains Why
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
 Bill SpelmanCouncil Member Bill Spelman launched his campaign for a third term on the Austin City Council at Scholz Garten Tuesday evening to boost his campaign war chest beyond the $31,600 he had raised through December 31, according to the contribution report filed Tuesday.
Jim Wick, Spelman’s campaign manager, said in an e-mail the campaign would prefer not to give a figure of how much was raised at the event, “...but we were happy with the depth and breadth of the contributions (and contributors) we received last night and in the days since December 31.” He said 125 people attended. The audience was much smaller when Spelman spoke, as some supporters came by for brief visits and left to meet other commitments.
Spelman said he recently noted the camaraderie of Travis County Democrats at a recent annual dinner and attributed that spirit of cohesiveness to having a common enemy, like Governor Rick Perry.
Although elections to fill seats on the Austin City Council are nonpartisan, Spelman said the citizens of Austin need a common enemy too. He reeled off a list of the things that make Austin unique, and said, “I’m going to argue that our real enemy, our common enemy, is all the things that threaten that.”
“Every time someone tells me, ‘Austin is the only city in the country that doesn’t have this or doesn’t do that,’ a small part of me is just a little bit giddy. So long as we’re smart enough about it, keeping Austin weird is not just a semi-cool slogan, it’s a real means of survival in a brutal, difficult, and changing world.”
In listing some of the things accomplished in his current term, Spelman mentioned:
• Launching, with Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole, the Neighborhood Match Program that “gives neighborhoods a chance to decide for themselves what public works they need.”
• Pushing the Austin Water Utility to move forward as fast as possible on its water reclamation program. “In an unprecedented drought—one that climatologists tell us is going to last in some form or fashion for the rest of our lifetimes—it only makes sense to use water twice, not just once.”
• Enacting payday lending restrictions. “Congress has not yet dealt with the dramatic increase in payday lending, but 400 percent interest-rate charges pose an imminent threat to the well-being of thousands of Austinites, almost all of them of modest means. The Lege did not act. We did.”
• Regulating pregnancy counseling centers. Women “need to know there are significant limitations to the kind of help offered in the crisis pregnancy center. The State Legislature doesn't want to tell you. We did.”
• Helping Foundation Communities to open volunteer tax preparation centers that “over the past few years has put $29 million of tax refunds into the hands of poor and moderate-income Austinites.”
“All of this is really weird,” Spelman said. “Cities pick up trash, they sell potable water, and they answer 911 calls. They do not typically give neighborhoods choices, use water twice, regulate lenders and pregnancy centers, or help people save money. Some of them do. But that's what our changing world is calling for and that's what we need to do.
“Our continued ability to adapt, working within our Austin DNA, is critical to our surviving and thriving as a city in coming years. Weird isn't just a slogan. It's a way of life.”
Running unopposed at the moment
|
171
(4 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:25pm
Updated Friday, January 13, 2012 2:50pm
Background Investigation: Sheryl Cole
Here’s What the Public Records Say About
the Council Member Running for Reelection
by Rebecca LaFlure
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
 Sheryl ColeIn the nearly six years since Sheryl Cole was elected as the first African-American woman on the Austin City Council, she has championed a project aimed at spurring redevelopment along Waller Creek, advocated for increased housing options for low-income families, and voted in favor of the controversial $750,000 settlement in the police shooting death of teenager Nathaniel Sanders II.
Now, a month after Cole launched her campaign for a third term, The Austin Bulldog searched beyond the decisions made at council meetings and dug into Cole’s professional, political, and personal background.
We used an organized plan to find, copy, and publish public documents—including business, real estate, voting, criminal and court records—so citizens can form their own conclusions about their elected officials in the months leading to the May 2012 election.
We invite readers to study the documents and let us know if there are any important details we overlooked, or areas that warrant further investigation.
Strong real estate connections
|
170
(1 vote, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted 4:50pm Monday, January 9, 2012 4:50pm
Correction posted Tuesday, January 10, 2012 6am
Committee Debates How to Elect Council
Charter Revision Committee Divided
Over Pure Districts vs. Hybrid System
by Ken Martin
©The Austin Bulldog 2012
 Lee LeffingwellAustin Mayor Lee Leffingwell was the first of many people to address the 15-member Charter Revision Committee last Thursday, calling for unity in getting behind whatever recommendation is made concerning some form of geographic representation in the election of City Council members.
“What is important is that all of us who support geographic representation be on the same page,” Leffingwell said. “Otherwise whatever we propose will not pass.”
Leffingwell urged the committee to strike a compromise for a unified proposal that everyone who supports geographic representation could get behind and support with great enthusiasm.
“We may not get a chance to do this again for a very long time if what we put on the table fails,” he said.
It’s been a decade since the May 2002 election in which voters last rejected a proposal. Proposition 3 on that ballot was the sixth attempt to gain voter approval for some form of electing council members from districts. Like many previous attempts, the plan offered would have created eight geographic districts. But this time the measure added two council member slots to be elected at-large, along with the mayor at-large. The proposition failed 42 percent to 58 percent.
Although nearly every member of the current Charter Revision Committee favors some form of geographic representation in council elections, the mayor’s lofty goal of achieving unity in the committee’s recommendation appears difficult if not impossible to achieve.
At a three-plus-hour meeting January 5, individual committee members became more vocal than ever in taking a strong public stance about whether they favored the 10-1 proposal being petitioned for by Austinites for Geographic Representation or some hybrid plan that would allow citizens to cast ballots for some of the council members to be elected citywide in addition to establishing geographic districts.
The 10-1 plan petition includes a requirement to establish a nonpartisan Independent Citizen Redistricting Commission that would draw 10 council districts that the Austin City Council would have no choice but to adopt. Under this plan only the mayor would continue to be elected at-large.
Any other plan put on the ballot by the City Council may not have an independent districting commission. Committee Chair Gonzalo Barrientos, a former state senator, said the normal procedure is to appoint a commission that draws the lines with expert assistance from attorneys. Critics of that method say it allows the incumbents to draw boundaries that favor their reelection.
Ultimately the U.S. Department of Justice must approve any change in the election system for compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Advocates for the 10-1 plan
|
168
(1 vote, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Wednesday, December 14, 2011 1:50 pm
Thirteen Charter Changes and Counting
Charter Revision Committee’s Next Job:
Tackle Plan for Geographic Representation
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
The council-appointed 2012 Charter Revision Committee has now formulated a baker’s dozen recommendations that will be forwarded to the Austin City Council for the planned November 2012 charter amendment election.
The most important task assigned to the committee—recommendingwer whether council members should be elected from geographic districts and if so under what plan—will be taken up at a meeting scheduled for January 5.
That’s when the committee will discuss the pros and cons of the current all-at-large system vis-à-vis hybrid (some geographic districts plus some council members at-large) and single-member systems (in which all but the mayor would represent geographic districts).
At that same meeting the committee will discuss the pros and cons of several different plans under consideration (a 6-2-1 plan proposed by Mayor Lee Leffingwell, an 8-4-1 plan advocated by two citizens, and a 10-1 plan advocated by Austinites for Geographic Representation, a broad coalition of organizations and individuals that is petitioning to get this plan on the ballot).
The committee will not vote on these matters until a later meeting, scheduled for January 19.
In its September 29 meeting the committee approved seven recommendations for charter changes (more about that later).
At the December 8 meeting the committee considered nine proposals and voted to recommend that the City Council put six of these on the ballot for voters to decide, as follows:
• To permit fundraising by election winners to retire campaign debt.
• To raise the maximum funds that may be held in an officeholder’s account to $40,000.
• To give the city’s Ethics Review Commission more power to address campaign finance and campaign disclosure violations.
• To require reporting of last-minute campaign contributions.
• To require electronic filing of campaign finance and lobbying reports.
• To require voter approval before issuing revenue bonds of more than $50 million.
These decisions were based on the recommendations formulated by the committee’s five-member working group. The committee discussions and recommendations are detailed below.
Responses to City Council resolutions
|
167
(2 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Monday, December 12, 2011 9:20pm
Updated 10:10am Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Laura Pressley’s Campaign Kicks Off
Candidate Drew Big and Loud Crowd
in Announcing Run for Austin City Council
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
 Laura PressleyA newcomer to Austin politics got off to a noisy start at the venerable Scholz Garten on Saturday, drawing about 125 people to hear her announce her candidacy.
Laura Pressley previously gained local media exposure by crusading against the addition of fluoride in Austin’s drinking water and talking about the health dangers she says are posed by the airport security scanners. She said she is qualified to address the scientific issues involved, based on her PhD in chemistry from the University of Texas at Austin. Her pleas to the Austin City Council regarding these issues went unheeded, triggering her decision to run.
Pressley won’t say which council seat she will seek. Three incumbents, in addition to Mayor Lee Leffingwell, are running for reelection: Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole and Council Members Mike Martinez and Bill Spelman.
“I’m leaving open which seat I will run for,” she told the crowd. But she vowed not to let the so-called “gentlemen’s agreement,” which sets aside seats for an African American and Latino, stand in her way. “I don’t have any trouble going into that sandbox,” she said. “I have no fear of going against that—no fear at all.”
She said she is taking feedback and will probably decide which seat to run for in late January. Candidates cannot file for a place on the ballot before February 6. The deadline to file is March 6.
Pressley said she wants to run ads on TV and do radio interviews and is a “big fan of alternative media.”
“I've spent hour after hour watching the council ignore people, not only us but their own commissioners,” Pressley said, referring to a recommendation by the Airport Advisory Commission not to install the scanners now in use at the airport.
Focusing on health
|
166
(6 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Tuesday, December 6, 2011 6pm
Brigid Shea Exploring Run for Mayor
Cites Differences in Vision and Leadership
But No Specifics While Mulling Her Candidacy
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
 Brigid SheaBrigid Shea served a tumultuous three years on the Austin City Council ending in June 1996, a period marked by Mayor Bruce Todd’s push to sell the city’s electric utility amid the nascent legislative restructuring of the electric industry in Texas and the birth of her first son, Eamon Brennan Umphress, on December 18, 1995, when Shea was 41.
Now Shea is considering challenging Mayor Lee Leffingwell, who announced his reelection bid November 16.
“I’m telling people this is a discussion worth having,” Shea told The Austin Bulldog. “The community is capable of having competing visions and that’s what I’m exploring.”
Leffingwell campaign spokesman Mark Littlefield said, “I think Brigid Shea’s been a stellar advocate and stakeholder and we look forward to hearing from her on the campaign trail.”
Shea declined to get into specifics about her differences with Mayor Leffingwell, saying, “I don’t want to get into the campaign until I've made a decision, but there’s a very sharp contrast in our leadership and vision.”
Shea filed a statement with the city clerk’s office late yesterday to appoint Danette Chimenti as her treasurer. Chimenti supported Kathie Tovo’s campaign that unseated Council Member Randi Shade this year, as well as the re-election campaign of Council Member Laura Morrison.
The Austin Chronicle posted a report online this afternoon about a poll conducted last night that included questions asking respondents to compare Shea, Leffingwell, and Council Members Bill Spelman and Sheryl Cole. The latter two were at one time considered possible mayoral candidates but they have since declined to run for mayor and are running for reelection.
Shea told The Austin Bulldog that she was “not confirming or denying” that she commissioned the poll.
Pollster Jeff Smith, owner of Opinion Analysts, said his company conducted the poll but he was not at liberty to disclose who paid for without permission, and he had not obtained it yet.
Shea’s treasurer, Chimenti, cofounded Logical Information Machines Inc., a company that grew out of the Austin Technology Incubator initiative of the University of Texas. The company was to be sold to Morningstar Inc., a leading provider of independent investment research, for a reported $51.5 million, according to a PRNewswire report of December 11, 2009. At the time of the sale the company’s largest office was in Austin and employed about 80 people, the article stated, with locations in Austin, Houston, Chicago, New York and London.
Chimenti is past president of the Austin Neighborhoods Council and has served on the city’s Parks and Recreation Board. She is currently a member of the city’s Planning Commission, to which she was appointed by Council Member Bill Spelman in July 2009.
Shea, who turns 57 on January 9, won her political spurs as founding director of the Save Our Springs Coalition formed in 1991. The Coalition successfully petitioned to get the SOS Ordinance on the ballot and won voter approval in 1992 by a two-to-one margin.
During the run-up to the SOS Ordinance election in 1992 Shea often traded barbs with Freeport-McMoRan Inc. CEO Jim Bob Moffett, who was threatening to bankrupt the city with litigation of the SOS Ordinance passed.
She also crossed swords with Circle C developer Gary Bradley during the SOS Ordinance campaign. One memorable videotape of Shea and Bradley in a cramped radio studio showed an obviously angry Bradley trying to debate the proposed ordinance. The Austin American-Statesman published a lengthy feature article October 23 noting that Shea and Bradley had quit fighting, something emblematic of the maturing of both these individuals and the environmental movement.
Shea won her council seat in 1993 in a runoff election against incumbent Bob Larson, who had been part of the narrow 4-3 council majority that opposed the SOS Ordinance.
Lee LeffingwellMayor Leffingwell has environmental credentials, too, having served on the city’s environmental board for five years before being elected to the city council in 2005. He served as a council member till he was elected mayor in 2009.
But the mayor has angered many in the environmental community for pushing construction of half-billion-dollar Water Treatment Plant 4 that the SOS Alliance and others said was unnecessary, and for supporting the Formula One race track.
To see The Austin Bulldog’s background investigation on Leffingwell published December 2, click here.
Shea’s council term and later work
|
|
165
(8 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Friday, December 2, 2011 12:48pm
Background Investigation: Mayor Lee Leffingwell
Here’s What the Public Records Say
About the City’s Highest Elected Official
by Rebecca LaFlure
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
Lee LeffingwellOn the morning of September 19, 2009, an Austin police officer pulled over Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell on a state highway and issued him a speeding ticket. Leffingwell later pled no contest, paid a $110 fee, and completed a driving safety course.
The traffic citation, listed on the city’s municipal court database, is indicative of Leffingwell’s otherwise squeaky-clean background—just one of many areas The Austin Bulldog researched as a part of a series of background investigations on the mayor and city council members.
In an effort to educate Austin residents about their elected officials in the months leading to the May 2012 election, The Austin Bulldog searched public databases, filed open records requests, and scanned news archives to uncover business, real estate and court documents, voting records and criminal history.
The results will be published individually for each officeholder with the goal of making these documents easily accessible to the public.
The Austin Bulldog’s investigation into Mayor Leffingwell, who announced his bid for re-election November 16, confirmed much of what has already been reported about the retired pilot and long-time Austin resident. Not surprisingly, Travis County voting records show he is a loyal Democrat, having voted in Democratic primaries dating back to 1992.
Leffingwell has no searchable criminal or bankruptcy history in Texas and does not owe overdue property taxes in Travis County. Based on searches of Travis County and district court records, he has only been sued in his capacity as a city official.
Our research found a complaint was filed with the Texas Ethics Commission alleging that Leffingwell violated the Texas election code by accepting corporate contributions and failing to properly report political contributions and expenditures in multiple campaign finance reports.
A July 4 article in the Austin American-Statesman said six Houston-area Tea Party members filed the complaints against Leffingwell and each council member after the Austin council decided to end city business with Arizona, in protest of the state’s controversial immigration law.
The commission cleared the mayor of many of the allegations August 11, but determined Leffingwell did not sufficiently disclose the names of two contributors donating a total of $700 to his May 2009 campaign. He also failed to disclose in other documents the full names of 11 supporters who donated $1,570 as well as the payee for $16,000 worth of campaign expenses. The commission ordered Leffingwell, who has filed corrected reports, to pay a $500 civil penalty.
Strong financials bode ill for challengers
|
163
(1 vote, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 4:20pm
Appraisal District To End Records Suppression
New Policy Will Give Property Owners
45 Days to Qualify for Confidentiality
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
The Board of Directors of the Travis Central Appraisal District last night picked a new chief appraiser and adopted a new policy to end the longstanding practice of suppressing public records in TCAD’s online searchable appraisal roll for anyone who asked.
 Dick Lavine“The board opted for maximum transparency,” Board Chairman Dick Lavine said today, in a follow-up interview. “It’s the appraisal district’s job to evaluate property and its records should be open to anyone to see how their own property and any other property is valued for tax purposes.”
The Austin Bulldog’s November 18 investigative report included spreadsheets listing nearly 1,400 properties that have been purged from the TCAD website at the request of owners who do not appear to qualify for confidentiality. Some two dozen of these properties are owned by businesses and 34 are commercial properties. The Austin Bulldog obtained the data through a Texas Public Information Act request.
By the end of this month the property owners listed in the spreadsheet should receive a letter inviting them to apply for confidentiality under Tax Code Section 20.025. Property owners will have until mid-January to reply. Those who do not apply or do not qualify will have their property records integrated into the searchable appraisal roll by the end of January.
Tax Code Section 20.025 offers to protect certain home address information for judges, police, victims of family violence and others who apply and qualify for confidentiality. Appraisal records for those who qualify under Section 20.025 are not listed on the TCAD website and will not be provided in response to a request filed under the Texas Public Information Act.
Billionaire Michael Dell, actress Sandra Bullock, U.S. Senator John Cornyn, and Tax Assessor-Collector Nelda Wells Spears are among the property owners whose records have been suppressed on the website but who do not qualify for confidentiality.
Crigler picked as new chief appraiser
|
162
(4 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Friday, November 18, 2011, 3:30pm
Updated 4pm November 18, 2011
Appraisal Records Hidden From Public View
Agencies Suppressing Online Records
the Law Doesn’t Deem Confidential
Investigative Report by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
Billionaire Michael Dell does it. Actress Sandra Bullock does it. U.S. Senator John Cornyn does it. And so do a large number of high-wealth individuals, trust funds, and ordinary homeowners. Even Tax Assessor-Collector Nelda Wells Spears does it.
These individuals—plus some two-dozen business organizations—have taken advantage of a standing offer available to any Travis County property owner to have their appraisal records removed from the Travis Central Appraisal District’s online searchable appraisal roll.Actually, the standing offer, posted in the agency’s Frequently Asked Questions, offers only to remove the names of property owners. But in actual practice the entire record is removed.
While Texas Law provides confidentiality of the home addresses for specified individuals, none of these suppressed records fit the criteria. These public records are being hidden, without legal justification, from a public online database. (This paragraph added at 4pm November 18.)
Nearly 1,400 records of properties located in Travis County have been purged from the website for owners who do not qualify for confidentiality. While the numbers of records being suppressed now make up only a tiny fraction of the records maintained by the agency, the numbers would no doubt be far higher if more property owners were aware of this option.
Were enough people to opt for the same privilege, it would seriously undermine the usefulness of the appraisal district’s website.
The searchable records on appraisal district websites are critical resources for property owners to use in finding comparable properties when protesting the valuations set by appraisal districts. The work of fee appraisers, mortgage companies, real estate companies, and tax agents is also impeded when public records are suppressed.
Dan Birchman, owner and senior appraiser for BAS/Austin Appraiser, said he has been doing appraisals in Austin since 1983. The company provides a variety of appraisal services in seven Central Texas counties.
“Everyone doing appraisals has learned pretty much to use Travis Central Appraisal District or other appraisal district websites to confirm the owner, legal description and address, and determine which lot it is. I do that online. I use it as a preliminary source of data to start the research,” Birchman said.
“I happen to value privacy from a personal standpoint,” he said, “but we would prefer to have easier and more accurate access to information.”
 Michael DellDell Inc. Chairman and CEO Michael Dell, who clocks in as the 18th richest American on the Forbes 400 list, and wife Susan Dell have 18 properties valued at a total of $29.5 million that do not appear on the TCAD website.
6D Ranch Ltd., a Dell-controlled entity, owns another eight properties valued at a total of $81.5 million, that are not listed on the searchable appraisal roll.
 Sandra BullockActress Bullock has starred in dozens of movies including the popular Speed and Miss Congeniality series, The Proposal, and the locally shot Hope Floats. She won a Best-Actress Oscar in 2010 for her performance in The Blind Side. Bullock owns a $1.67 million home located on Spyglass Drive, near the Barton Creek Greenbelt Trail.
 John CornynSenator Cornyn, when not attending to the demanding duties of a high official in the nation’s capital, and here enjoying a respite in our own state capital, can stay in a cozy condominium that he owns in the upscale Austonian high-rise at Second and Congress. You won’t find that property listed on the TCAD website.
There is no provision in law for confidentiality of appraisal records based on holding elective office. The appraisal records for most every other public official checked in this project, except for Spears, were available online.
 Nelda SpearsLongtime Travis County Tax Assessor-Collector Spears, who also happens to be a member of the Board of Directors of the Travis Central Appraisal District, owns a house on Amaranth Lane in northeast Austin that is not listed on the publicly accessible website.
In fact, the appraisal records for 34 commercial properties have been purged from the website, including apartments, industrial property, offices, and retail properties. Eleven of those properties are owned by businesses, three are held by trustees, the rest are owned by individuals.
Dozens of doctors, lawyers, and investors, as well as many hundreds of other property owners, also have their appraisal records suppressed on the TCAD website.
The Austin Bulldog obtained a spreadsheet listing all appraisal records suppressed by TCAD through an open records request. To access a spreadsheet listing these suppressed properties:
Sorted by owner’s names, click here.
Sorted by property type, click here.
Sorted by market value, click here.
 Patrick BrownIn a phone interview yesterday, TCAD Chief Appraiser Patrick Brown said the policy of suppressing appraisal records was established by his predecessor, Art Cory. Brown, who started as chief appraiser January 1, 2008, and who will be leaving the job in mid-January, said he has not been intimately involved in carrying out the policy of suppressing appraisal records on the TCAD website. He said he has talked to only one property owner who wanted to have this done.
“My only interaction with this in last four years was a gentlemen who came in and asked that his property be withheld from the Internet. I wasn't aware of our policy. ... He said he had served a prison term and he was concerned. That's been my only interaction. I did not suppress his records.”
Brown said he has not talked with any tax agents or other property owners who wanted to withhold records from the website. The suppression process is normally initiated when property owners submit a request that goes to the agency’s records management officer. An e-mail link and mailing address are provided in the website’s Frequently Asked Questions (See: “How do I remove my name from the TCAD website?)
What happens if TCAD receives hundreds, or even thousands, more requests to suppress records on the website? “I think ultimately in the big scheme of almost 400,000 parcels, we would have to look into it,” Brown said.
Asked why website records are being suppressed for commercial properties and for other properties owned by businesses, Brown said, “I cannot answer that. In my opinion that doesn't make any sense. It would be my recommendation to the board that we not do that.”
Brown agreed it would be helpful for TCAD to post a disclaimer on the TCAD website’s searchable appraisal roll to state the reasons that the records listed there are not complete.
Brown noted that some rural appraisal districts do not have websites and added, “I would remind you that that a public information request for the appraisal roll, or access to the records of the appraisal district, is still available. To my knowledge, we are not in violation of the Public Information Act but there is a question of what one can expect to get on our website.
“We want to be transparent and provide as much information as we can, so we need to look at our policy on publishing information on our website, and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.”
As a result of the interview, Brown said he will post an agenda item for Monday’s TCAD Board of Director’s meeting to discuss whether the policy of suppressing records on the website needs to be changed.
Some appraisal districts suppress records ...
|
161
(2 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Thursday, November 3, 2011 1:40pm
Council Confirms November 2012
Election Date for Charter Amendments
Resolution Ensures Citizens Initiative
Won’t Force May 2012 Charter Election
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
 Laura Morrison“It’s a kumbaya moment to celebrate,” Council Member Laura Morrison told The Austin Bulldog shortly before a press conference this morning at City Hall. “Usually we just talk about things we disagree on.”
Morrison, Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole, and Council Member Mike Martinez sponsored a council resolution on today’s agenda to confirm that the council intends to hold an election to amend the Austin City Charter in November 2012.
That assurance was sought by Austinites for Geographic Representation, which since late February has been building a broad citizens coalition to initiate a petition drive for a charter change that would establish a nonpartisan Independent Citizen Redistricting Commission that would draw 10 council districts that the Austin City Council would have no choice but to adopt. The group’s plan calls for only the mayor to continue being elected at-large. The petition drive launched with a rally October 22 that drew about a hundred people.
Striking an agreement on the charter election date was essential. If the petition drive were to trigger a May 2012 charter election, the City Council would have been forced to either put its own charter amendments on the May ballot, or be frozen out for two years if the citizens initiative got voter approval. Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution states that “no city charter shall be altered, amended or repealed oftener than every two years.”
The press conference was attended by Morrison and Cole, as well as NAACP Austin President Nelson Linder and Austinites for Geographic Representation members Roger Borgelt, Charlie Jackson, and Daniel Llanes.
Sheryl ColeIn separately answering The Austin Bulldog’s question, both Morrison and Cole said that sponsoring the resolution for a November 2012 charter election was designed to reassure the citizens group and should not be viewed as an endorsement of the plan being pushed by Austinites for Geographic Representation. “I’m waiting to see what the Charter Revision Committee recommends,” Cole said.
NAACP Austin President Linder, a member of the 2012 Charter Revision Committee that is studying what form of geographic representation to recommend to the City Council, told The Austin Bulldog he favors the citizens initiative. “I think it’s the best plan out there,” he said.
The need for geographic representation was laid bare by maps constructed by The Austin Bulldog and published August 4 that pinpoint the residential location of every mayor and council member elected over the last four decades. The unalterable fact that emerges is that large parts of Austin are not represented—or are grossly underrepresented—because of the at-large system of elections established by the Austin City Charter.
Seven charter recommendations, so far
|
160
(1 vote, average 5.00 out of 5)
Posted Thursday, October 27, 2011 7:03pm
City of Austin Moving, Slowly, Toward Greater Transparency in Electronic Communication
New System for Board and Commission
Members Targeted for First Quarter 2012
By Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
Maybe you're a neighborhood resident trying to figure out what developers are telling board and commission members outside open meetings via e-mail. Or perhaps you’re a developer trying to figure out what the neighborhood representatives are saying about your project in e-mails to board and commission members. If so, you would like to think you can get those e-mails by filing an open records request.
Maybe you can, maybe not.
While many of the boards and commissions are only advisory and perform due diligence to assist the City Council’s decision-making, 15 of them are “sovereign” bodies that can take an official government action, such as issuing a permit or granting a variance, even if that action can be appealed
Some sovereign boards have the power to issue subpoenas and compel testimony. Decisions made by many of the sovereign bodies can be appealed to the City Council, while decisions made by some sovereign boards and commissions may only be appealed through the courts, according to City Code Chapter 2-1.
At present, the city’s web pages for boards and commissions lists each appointed member’s personal e-mail address. The city is therefore actively encouraging communication about city business through a system that may not be fully responsive to open records requests filed under the Texas Public Information Act.
 Shirley GentryThe City Council directed the City Clerk to make recommendations about how to correct this situation as part of an April 7 resolution. City Clerk Shirley Gentry responded in a May 16 e-mail with three options and recommended one of them. The council has not acted on that information.
Gentry and the city’s Communications and Technology Management staff have continued to refine the earlier recommendations. On Tuesday, Gentry and Teri Pennington, deputy chief information officer for Communications and Technology Management, briefed the city council’s Audit and Finance Committee members in a meeting at City Hall.
Committee Chair Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole and Council Members Laura Morrison, Bill Spelman and Kathie Tovo were present and participated in the briefing.
If approved by the City Council when final recommendations are made, when implemented in the first quarter of 2012 as projected, the proposed system would assign city e-mail addresses to the 350 citizen volunteers who are appointed by the city council to serve on the city’s 55 boards and commissions.
The new system is designed to ensure that the city could find and provide e-mail messages that are responsive to open records requests, as required by the Texas Public Information Act.
The new system also envisions using technological methods that would prevent board and commission members from inadvertently violating the Texas Open Meetings Act by engaging in a discussion of city business among a quorum of members.
The planned system would enable anyone wishing to communicate with board or commission members about city business to send e-mails via the Internet to all members of a board or commission or to individual members. It would work the same way that e-mails may be sent to the entire City Council or to individual members via the city’s website at http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/site/city_hall_portal.htm.
Board and commission members would be licensed to use Microsoft’s Outlook Web App to access these messages via the Internet by logging in and using their personal communications devices, Pennington said. To see an illustration showing how this system would function, click here.
Gentry said the system would allow replies to be sent only to the sender and would prevent replying in such a manner that other board or commission members are brought into the dialogue.
All e-mails sent or received using this system would be captured on city servers. “If there was a public information request, we could just pull the e-mails out like we normally do," Pennington told the committee.
Required to stop using personal accounts
|
159
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9am
Coalition Launching Petition Drive to
Get on Ballot for May 2012 Election
Austinites for Geographic Representation
Needs 20,000 Signatures by Mid-January
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
What we want? Council districts!
When do we want them? Now!
How will we get them? Petition!
When do we start? Now!
Such might be the chants of members of Austinites for Geographic Representation if they were to take to the streets like the protestors of Occupy Wall Street and Occupy Austin.
But you won’t be hearing chants from the members of this grass-roots citizens initiative to get on the ballot a proposition to establish a nonpartisan Independent Citizen Redistricting Commission that would draw 10 council districts that the Austin City Council would have no choice but to adopt. The group’s plan calls for only the mayor to continue being elected at-large.
Austin is the most populous city in the United States to elect its entire city council at-large, and the only major metropolitan city in Texas to do so, according to a report produced last month by City Demographer Ryan Robinson. Austin voters, however, have voted down propositions for some form of council districts six times between 1973 and 2002.
Austinites for Geographic Representation has scheduled a press conference for noon tomorrow at City Hall and a campaign kickoff rally 3-5pm Saturday at Mexitas Restaurant, 1109 N. I-35. The group has leased an office at 7901 Cameron Road and formed a Specific Purpose Political Action Committee whose treasurer, Stacy Suits, ran two unsuccessful campaigns for geographic representation in 1985 and 1988.
 Linda CurtisThe petition drive is being organized by Linda Curtis of ChangeAustin.org. Curtis has previously led four successful petition drives to get measures before Austin voters. This petition campaign is not employing paid signature gatherers but instead has formed a broad coalition of community organizations that will actively circulate petitions. This initiative has been endorsed by a number of organizations including ChangeAustin.org, Del Valle Community Coalition, El Concilio, Gray Panthers of Austin, LULAC District 7, LULAC District 12, NAACP Austin, Texans for Accountable Government, Travis County Green Party, and University of Texas at Austin Student Government.The League of Women Voters Austin Area is meeting tonight to consider endorsing the initiative, said chapter president Stewart Snider. The Austin Neighborhoods Council may consider an endorsement at its October 26 meeting. (To see a complete list of organizations and individuals endorsing this initiative, click here.) The petition drive has a Facebook page and will soon publish petition forms online.
The petition drive, if successful, would force the city council to put its own proposed charter amendments on the May ballot as well. Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution states that “no city charter shall be altered, amended or repealed oftener than every two years.” To prepare for that possibility, the 2012 Charter Revision Committee has a January 31 deadline to submit its recommendations for council consideration.
Charter committee backs seven changes
|
158
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted October 4, 2011 6:54pm
Broad Community Interest Focusing on
How Mayor and Council Members Elected
Community Coalition, Austin Neighborhoods Council
and Charter Revision Committee All Working on Issues
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
There's a showdown coming in a Austin City Council meeting scheduled for Thursday and a special-called council meeting on Friday.
The result will decide whether the next election for a mayor and three council members will be held in May or November 2012. Both options are on the table as the sole items posted for action in the Friday meeting scheduled to begin at 1:30pm.
Council proponents of the May 2012 election were ready to vote on second reading at today’s work session and third and final reading at Thursday’s regular meeting.
But discussion today reminded council members that the rules they adopted March 2 preclude taking action during a work session. That triggered the posting of a special-called meeting on Friday.
Assuming none of the four council members who previously voted for a May 12 council election changes their position (Sheryl Cole, Laura Morrison, Bill Spelman and Kathie Tovo), the Friday meeting will give final approval for that date.
An item on Thursday’s council agenda would authorize $500,464 for Travis County to purchase electronic voting machines to support the May election.
Mayor Lee Leffingwell asked County Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir and City Clerk Shirley Gentry to provide the council with the total estimated cost to be incurred in holding a May 2012 election. He noted that whatever that cost is, it will be in addition to the cost of a November 2012 election that is likely to be held to vote on other matters.
While the next election for a mayor and three council members may be seven months away, a host of factors affecting the outcome of that election are very much in play, including a possible petition drive for a charter amendment to change the way council members are elected.
Petition could force May charter election
|
157
(2 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:00 am
Council Members Don’t Punch the Clock
But Their Calendars Tell Citizens a Lot
Or Not, in the Case of Council Member
Martinez, Who Redacts Hundreds of Entries
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
 The 2011 Austin City Council: (L-R) Mayor Lee Leffingwell and Council Members Laura Morrison, Chris Riley, Bill Spelman, Mike Martinez, Sheryl Cole, Kathie Tovo
Elected officials do a variety of things to carry out their official duties but more than anything else they go to meetings—lots and lots of meetings.
They attend City Council meetings. City committee meetings. Meetings with city staff. Meetings with lobbyists. Meetings with citizens. Meetings with journalists. Meetings of other government agencies where individual council members represent the City of Austin, like Capital Metro, Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, Clean Air Coalition, and Capital Area Council of Governments.
The mayor and all Austin City Council members except Kathie Tovo, who took office in late June, have also been involved in a number of meetings critical to their political futures, dealing with the Travis County Attorney David Escamilla’s ongoing investigation of possible open meetings violations.
These and other events are self-reported in the official calendars maintained by their council offices and, as such, are public records.
When The Austin Bulldog broke the January 25 story about Austin City Council members possibly violating the Texas Open Meetings Act, that investigative report was based, in part, on the calendars published on the city website by four council members.
Those calendars documented the fact that the mayor and each council member participated in hundreds of private meetings in calendar year 2010 to deliberate city business. The calendars showed that that a regularly scheduled series of meetings were held with each other in days preceding posted council meetings.
Today, only two council members publish their official calendars online: Laura Morrison and Bill Spelman. Council Member Randi Shade was defeated in the June 18 runoff election by Kathie Tovo. Council Member Chris Riley—who participated in 256 private meetings with other council members in 2010, as The Austin Bulldog reported January 30—no longer updates his calendar online.
There is no legal requirement for elected officials to publish their calendars online. Doing so provides a high degree of transparency and accountability.
What’s in the calendars?
|
156
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
|
Posted Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:31pm
Employee E-Communication Policy Drafts
Show Each Revision Weakened Rules
Policy That Was Near Fully Compliant
on First Draft Crippled by Changes
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
A policy to ensure the City of Austin’s 12,000 employees comply with state law for retention of public records went from being a fully compliant initial proposal to an implemented policy that falls woefully short of compliance, say experts in the state's open government laws.
 Marc OttThe Austin Bulldog reported August 10 on the new policy established by Austin City Manager Marc Ott to guide city employees in how to handle electronic communications about city business. The policy states if circumstances require communicating about city business on a personal communication device or account, that correspondence should be forwarded to a city account.
Flaws in the policy include not stating that the correspondence should be forwarded promptly and leaving it to the discretion of each employee to decide whether the correspondence needs to be forwarded for retention. The policy lacks any means of preventing unlawful deletion of public records or auditing compliance.
Through an open records request The Austin Bulldog obtained two draft versions of the Administrative Bulletin that was ultimately issued August 4 by the city manager. The drafts, dated June 1 and June 15, when compared to each other and the bulletin issued, show how the proposed policy was gutted.
Four experts in the state’s open government laws who are volunteer hotline attorneys with the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas reviewed the two drafts and the Administrative Bulletin provided by The Austin Bulldog.
“This is a drastic watering down of a policy that was originally intended to comply with the law and provide transparency in government,” said Joel White of the Austin law firm Joel R. White and Associates. He is a past president of the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas and has represented a wide range of media clients for more than two decades.
 Thomas GregorThomas Gregor of the Houston law firm of Ogden, Gibson, Broocks, Longoria and Hall LLP, said in an e-mail, “As originally drafted, the policy better adheres to the tenets and the spirit of open government. Unfortunately, the policy that was ultimately issued was diminished to the point that, while paying lip service to open government, does not ensure or verify the retention of any public information that is generated on a personal device.
“The end result is that there remains a significant gap in the City’s compliance with the open government laws,” Gregor said.
Joe LarsenJoe Larsen, special counsel to the Houston-based international law firm of Sedgwick, Detert, Moran and Arnold LLP, said in an e-mail, “I think the policy has been significantly weakened by giving department directors complete latitude to determine how the policy is communicated and not requiring documentation that each employee has received and has access to the information in the bulletin. This will have two likely results:
“First, instead of a formal meeting where the importance of the policy is explained and underscored, any manner of delivery is envisioned. Without a formal setting, the importance of the policy will not be conveyed.
“Second, without a roster or verification, there will be no incentive to insure that the policy is timely communicated and no way of verifying if it has. An employee is very likely to state that he/she was unaware of the policy.
“It is this very issue—claims of lack of knowledge of proper policy—that led to the implementation of required training for public information officers of governmental bodies on the Public Information Act. These officers must have a certificate indicating that they took the required training.
“By requiring employees to forward their administrative value communications to a City account, the City has effectively made each employee the public information officer for his/her personal communication device accounts, and the communication of this policy should also be in a formal setting and it should be documented.”
Strong policy draft weakened by changes
|
155
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)
Posted Thursday, September 1, 2011 4:15pm
Updated 9:52pm September 1, 2011
Updated 10:55am September 2, 2011, to link Plaintiff's First Supplemental Petition
The Austin Bulldog Files Second LawsuitAgainst City of Austin for Withholding Records
City Not Responsive to Open Records Request
Concerning Water Treatment Plant Construction
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2011
Today The Austin Bulldog filed its second lawsuit against the City of Austin in state district court for failure to promptly respond to The Austin Bulldog’s request filed under the Texas Public Information Act (TPIA), Chapter 552 of the Government Code.
The first lawsuit filed March 1, 2011, addressed similar issues. The Austin Bulldog today also filed a supplement to that lawsuit to address unresolved issues still pending and add related issues (more about that later).
The new lawsuit, The Austin Bulldog v. City of Austin, pertains to The Austin Bulldog’s open records request filed July 27 for copies of bids, contracts, scoring evaluations, correspondence, and invoices involving MWH Constructors, the firm hired by the city to oversee construction of Water Treatment Plant 4. Electronic copies of the records (pdf format) were requested on a computer disk.
Thirty-five days have elapsed since this request was filed and the city has provided none of the 4,700 pages of documents it estimated were responsive to this request.
The lawsuit asks the court to issue a writ of mandamus requiring the City of Austin to “promptly” provide copies of the requested records to The Austin Bulldog pursuant to the terms of the Texas Public Information Act. (A writ of mandamus is a judicial order directing a government official to perform a duty that is not subject to the official’s discretion.) The lawsuit also seeks reasonable and necessary attorney fees and cost to plaintiff.
“After many months of being under scrutiny over transparency issues and after a couple of weak attempts to deal with these issues, the Austin City government still has a fundamental problem: Austin officials have a bad attitude about letting the public see what they are doing,” said Bill Aleshire of Riggs Aleshire and Ray PC, who represents The Austin Bulldog.
Water Treatment Plant records withheld
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 5 |
|
