City Council Elections 2009
Posted: February 26th, 2009, 2:26 am
I thought about first posting back in November when the basic line up was more or less set - even if they hadn't officially announced. I didn't want to wear people out, though, because it's a long march to May and the actual elections. What changed my mind was the video below which was too stupid not to share.
First the quick set-up: City Council is made up of 7 total seats - 6 council members and the mayor. 5 of those are ostensibly up for election this season (Randi Shade and Laura Morrison having just been elected last year are not up). In reality, Mike Martinez, Sheryl Cole and Bill Spellman (a former council member, a popular current professor at UT’s LBJ school of public administration and a brilliant but supposedly disorganized academic with a PhD from Harvard) are all running effectively or literally un-opposed. The two races to watch are Place 1 between Chris Riley and Perla Cavazos (where I am working on Chris' campaign) and the Mayoral race - which conventional wisdom says will go to a run-off election but eventually cut Lee Leffingwell's way.
Mayor's Race
Carole Keeton Strayhorn is running for mayor after her failed gubernatorial bid in '06. She was already mayor (first to be elected three times and first/only female mayor in Austin history) back in 1977. With a couple of party changes and a half-way-to-Elizabeth-Taylor marital history - she also became Texas Railroad Commissioner and State Comptroller (basically the secretary of the treasury of the state of Texas). As you might expect for someone 69 years old (a supporter referred to her as "even smelling old') and with that history - she has a lot of connections. Also her father was deeply connected to the UT Law School (Dean Keeton Blvd. is named after him) and her sons went on to prominent roles in Washington as Press Secretary under George W. Bush (Scott McClellan) and head of the FDA (Mark McClellan). She is seen as the potential spoiler because of her deep campaign pockets and connections - especially to the disaffected Republican minority in Austin.
That being said - she has hardly put in strong performances to date. For a former comptroller, she has been unfavorably fact-checked on some of her comments regarding the city's budget. There's also this video, the first part of her grand plan to cut city spending that she announced at her kick-off (http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase ... oid=725138). While it's hilarious to me to watch, maybe it's not for everyone. The summary is that she wants a 'strong mayor structure' while simultaneously cutting city council staff (total for 7 council members - 23 overworked, underpaid staffers that work more or less as surrogate representatives). She doesn't say what we should "significantly cut" them to but she says that these lay-offs are the key to stopping lay-offs in Austin - but won't commit to them until after elected. She also calls out the city's lobbying expense - to the state and federal government. In truth, we probably need to up it - or at least shift it to the right lobbying firms. Austin/CAMPO gets laughably little in the way of federal funding and gets painfully little traction on issues in the Lege. Houston gets more federal funding for transportation in a month than we do in a year. I'm not a big fan of how lobbying works presently - but no sense being foolish about how we operate.
Anyway - the best part is the end where she gets called out for being a no-show for the first, and, as yet, only candidate forum (from the Travis County Democratic Party/Texas Bar Association):
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiGGM4PG ... r_embedded[/youtube]
Beyond Strayhorn and a not -serious vlogger candidate - there are the two currently seated council members - Lee Leffingwell and Brewster McCracken (Texas Monthly publisher and Emergency services gadfly Mike Levy decided not to run because his constituencies overlap with Strayhorn's).
I really don't want Strayhorn - let's make that clear. On the others, I'm a little torn and have not declared for either (not that anyone is waiting with baited breath for my endorsement). I still want to see how they do in candidate forums - but I think most people consider them both known quantities and have already come out one way or the other. The forces that be, David Butts and Mark Nathan, have both backed Leffingwell, as have all the public safety unions - which basically makes him the candidate to beat. I'm not beyond bucking the system to endorse the unlikely candidate, though.
So far though, the candidates have been a study in well-known contrasts: Leffingwell has zero flash but is a genuinely nice guy with a reputation as an earnest and honest dealer that has few political enemies despite several years on the dais and an entire lifetime in Austin. McCracken, on the other hand is all flash and little substance in the eyes of his detractors....and he has many. I know people who were in his wedding who bad mouth the guy as a "twit" and "opportunist". I know people on his campaign that say he's a surprisingly lazy campaigner despite his open ambition for the Mayor's mantle for years and years. I personally disagree with a lot of compromises McCracken's made over the years and while he's younger than Lee - he really doesn't have any more charisma. His campaign has sought to portray this as an Obama vs. McCain battle but that's not really the case. Lee did fly for the military in Vietnam and the candidates line up in age - but the comparisons end there. Both are dyed in the wool Democrats, Lee's in vigorous shape and both consider themselves environmentalists. McCracken hues towards green energy issues (proposing a Green Energy version of Sematech and championing the smart grid "Pecan St. Project"). Lee on the other hand is more of the conservation, water/air quality emphasis environmentalist. In the sorry system of our city council where other members defer to single council members who lead on an issue - Lee has become the default Parks guy. Brewster is the Green Energy and Vertical Mixed Use guy. He’s also trying to be the digital/art convergence guy although that’s been a little more rocky.
The reason I’m giving Brewster the benefit of the doubt is that I’ve been around the guy and he really does care deeply about this stuff – and many of his ideas are attractive to me and more visionary than keep-the-course Leffingwell. I saw Brewster's reading materials when I sat next to him on a plane to Vancouver last year and it was pretty wonkish – and I'm disinclined any more to call him ‘the poor man’s Thomas Friedman’ as he so often gets tagged with. I know good people who are supporting him….but I just can’t yet. There are those who say that power corrupts…but I’ve come to believe that power more often attracts the corruptible. Given the many personal accounts of backstabbery and opportunism, as well as the plain-to-see petty politicking – the burden of proof is on Brewster to prove that his goals and his ability to execute them for the city are so great that we should take a risk on his questionable history of operating.
Place 1
This is a very strange race. For starters – because this is the vacated seat of Lee Leffingwell who didn’t want to trigger an expensive special election and so had to wait until only 120 days out from the general election to avoid that under state law – the candidates had to announce for a seat that wasn’t technically open yet. The race has seen two candidates (Kathie Tovo, Rick Cofer) drop out before it ever got off its feet and the usual power brokers have not backed either of the two remaining candidates yet and may very well sit this one out in an unusual twist.
The other reason it’s an unusual race is the remaining candidates – neither of which cut the usual polished political figure. They’re both quirky in their own way – not a deal killer – but hardly a slam dunk when trying to build coalitions. It’s not like last year’s place 4 election that I was involved in where two visions for the city were bitterly pitted against each other with skilled organization builders. In this case – both candidates are nice, intelligent and so far complimentary folks. Cavazos is young and ambitious, which stirs fears in some of the recently ousted Jennifer Kim. 2 out of 4 big unions have supported Riley and while Cavazos is double dipping on the affinity groups (women and Hispanic), there isn’t much evidence that the latter vote straight tickets the same way some women will vote for the female candidate in races they're not familiar with such as those on the local level. If we were judging today on number of signs only – I haven’t really seen many Perla signs. Who knows, though. It’s votes, not signs that matter in the end.
For this race, as well as the mayoral race, I would strongly encourage people to get out to a meet & greet to see them live to make their own decision. There is one going on this evening for example for Perla at J. Black's - details on her site.
For me, I have been friends with Chris Riley for many years and am supporting his candidacy without any reservations (If you were at my birthday party you may have met him - he was at my place until the wee hours of the morning and bopped his head along to the Wu-Tang we were playing far too loudly). Perhaps closer to the election itself, I’ll write a little more on the topic of how deeply I respect the man and some other good reasons to get out and vote.
In the meantime, you can find out more about all the candidates here:
Lee Leffingwell: http://draftleeformayor.com/
Brewster McCracken: http://www.brewstermccracken.com/
Carole Keeton Strayhorn: http://www.caroleforaustin.com/
Perla Cavazos: http://www.voteperla.com/
Chris Riley: http://www.chrisforaustin.com/
All the best,
Mike
First the quick set-up: City Council is made up of 7 total seats - 6 council members and the mayor. 5 of those are ostensibly up for election this season (Randi Shade and Laura Morrison having just been elected last year are not up). In reality, Mike Martinez, Sheryl Cole and Bill Spellman (a former council member, a popular current professor at UT’s LBJ school of public administration and a brilliant but supposedly disorganized academic with a PhD from Harvard) are all running effectively or literally un-opposed. The two races to watch are Place 1 between Chris Riley and Perla Cavazos (where I am working on Chris' campaign) and the Mayoral race - which conventional wisdom says will go to a run-off election but eventually cut Lee Leffingwell's way.
Mayor's Race
Carole Keeton Strayhorn is running for mayor after her failed gubernatorial bid in '06. She was already mayor (first to be elected three times and first/only female mayor in Austin history) back in 1977. With a couple of party changes and a half-way-to-Elizabeth-Taylor marital history - she also became Texas Railroad Commissioner and State Comptroller (basically the secretary of the treasury of the state of Texas). As you might expect for someone 69 years old (a supporter referred to her as "even smelling old') and with that history - she has a lot of connections. Also her father was deeply connected to the UT Law School (Dean Keeton Blvd. is named after him) and her sons went on to prominent roles in Washington as Press Secretary under George W. Bush (Scott McClellan) and head of the FDA (Mark McClellan). She is seen as the potential spoiler because of her deep campaign pockets and connections - especially to the disaffected Republican minority in Austin.
That being said - she has hardly put in strong performances to date. For a former comptroller, she has been unfavorably fact-checked on some of her comments regarding the city's budget. There's also this video, the first part of her grand plan to cut city spending that she announced at her kick-off (http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase ... oid=725138). While it's hilarious to me to watch, maybe it's not for everyone. The summary is that she wants a 'strong mayor structure' while simultaneously cutting city council staff (total for 7 council members - 23 overworked, underpaid staffers that work more or less as surrogate representatives). She doesn't say what we should "significantly cut" them to but she says that these lay-offs are the key to stopping lay-offs in Austin - but won't commit to them until after elected. She also calls out the city's lobbying expense - to the state and federal government. In truth, we probably need to up it - or at least shift it to the right lobbying firms. Austin/CAMPO gets laughably little in the way of federal funding and gets painfully little traction on issues in the Lege. Houston gets more federal funding for transportation in a month than we do in a year. I'm not a big fan of how lobbying works presently - but no sense being foolish about how we operate.
Anyway - the best part is the end where she gets called out for being a no-show for the first, and, as yet, only candidate forum (from the Travis County Democratic Party/Texas Bar Association):
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiGGM4PG ... r_embedded[/youtube]
Beyond Strayhorn and a not -serious vlogger candidate - there are the two currently seated council members - Lee Leffingwell and Brewster McCracken (Texas Monthly publisher and Emergency services gadfly Mike Levy decided not to run because his constituencies overlap with Strayhorn's).
I really don't want Strayhorn - let's make that clear. On the others, I'm a little torn and have not declared for either (not that anyone is waiting with baited breath for my endorsement). I still want to see how they do in candidate forums - but I think most people consider them both known quantities and have already come out one way or the other. The forces that be, David Butts and Mark Nathan, have both backed Leffingwell, as have all the public safety unions - which basically makes him the candidate to beat. I'm not beyond bucking the system to endorse the unlikely candidate, though.
So far though, the candidates have been a study in well-known contrasts: Leffingwell has zero flash but is a genuinely nice guy with a reputation as an earnest and honest dealer that has few political enemies despite several years on the dais and an entire lifetime in Austin. McCracken, on the other hand is all flash and little substance in the eyes of his detractors....and he has many. I know people who were in his wedding who bad mouth the guy as a "twit" and "opportunist". I know people on his campaign that say he's a surprisingly lazy campaigner despite his open ambition for the Mayor's mantle for years and years. I personally disagree with a lot of compromises McCracken's made over the years and while he's younger than Lee - he really doesn't have any more charisma. His campaign has sought to portray this as an Obama vs. McCain battle but that's not really the case. Lee did fly for the military in Vietnam and the candidates line up in age - but the comparisons end there. Both are dyed in the wool Democrats, Lee's in vigorous shape and both consider themselves environmentalists. McCracken hues towards green energy issues (proposing a Green Energy version of Sematech and championing the smart grid "Pecan St. Project"). Lee on the other hand is more of the conservation, water/air quality emphasis environmentalist. In the sorry system of our city council where other members defer to single council members who lead on an issue - Lee has become the default Parks guy. Brewster is the Green Energy and Vertical Mixed Use guy. He’s also trying to be the digital/art convergence guy although that’s been a little more rocky.
The reason I’m giving Brewster the benefit of the doubt is that I’ve been around the guy and he really does care deeply about this stuff – and many of his ideas are attractive to me and more visionary than keep-the-course Leffingwell. I saw Brewster's reading materials when I sat next to him on a plane to Vancouver last year and it was pretty wonkish – and I'm disinclined any more to call him ‘the poor man’s Thomas Friedman’ as he so often gets tagged with. I know good people who are supporting him….but I just can’t yet. There are those who say that power corrupts…but I’ve come to believe that power more often attracts the corruptible. Given the many personal accounts of backstabbery and opportunism, as well as the plain-to-see petty politicking – the burden of proof is on Brewster to prove that his goals and his ability to execute them for the city are so great that we should take a risk on his questionable history of operating.
Place 1
This is a very strange race. For starters – because this is the vacated seat of Lee Leffingwell who didn’t want to trigger an expensive special election and so had to wait until only 120 days out from the general election to avoid that under state law – the candidates had to announce for a seat that wasn’t technically open yet. The race has seen two candidates (Kathie Tovo, Rick Cofer) drop out before it ever got off its feet and the usual power brokers have not backed either of the two remaining candidates yet and may very well sit this one out in an unusual twist.
The other reason it’s an unusual race is the remaining candidates – neither of which cut the usual polished political figure. They’re both quirky in their own way – not a deal killer – but hardly a slam dunk when trying to build coalitions. It’s not like last year’s place 4 election that I was involved in where two visions for the city were bitterly pitted against each other with skilled organization builders. In this case – both candidates are nice, intelligent and so far complimentary folks. Cavazos is young and ambitious, which stirs fears in some of the recently ousted Jennifer Kim. 2 out of 4 big unions have supported Riley and while Cavazos is double dipping on the affinity groups (women and Hispanic), there isn’t much evidence that the latter vote straight tickets the same way some women will vote for the female candidate in races they're not familiar with such as those on the local level. If we were judging today on number of signs only – I haven’t really seen many Perla signs. Who knows, though. It’s votes, not signs that matter in the end.
For this race, as well as the mayoral race, I would strongly encourage people to get out to a meet & greet to see them live to make their own decision. There is one going on this evening for example for Perla at J. Black's - details on her site.
For me, I have been friends with Chris Riley for many years and am supporting his candidacy without any reservations (If you were at my birthday party you may have met him - he was at my place until the wee hours of the morning and bopped his head along to the Wu-Tang we were playing far too loudly). Perhaps closer to the election itself, I’ll write a little more on the topic of how deeply I respect the man and some other good reasons to get out and vote.
In the meantime, you can find out more about all the candidates here:
Lee Leffingwell: http://draftleeformayor.com/
Brewster McCracken: http://www.brewstermccracken.com/
Carole Keeton Strayhorn: http://www.caroleforaustin.com/
Perla Cavazos: http://www.voteperla.com/
Chris Riley: http://www.chrisforaustin.com/
All the best,
Mike