Last Friday we published a lengthy story about the hearing conducted by District Judge Amy Clark Meacham. Her decision, based on the evidence presented in Birch v Central Health will determine whether the University of Texas at Austin, for Dell Medical School, will continue to receive $35 million a year from property taxes collected by Central Health to provide indigent healthcare services.
The hearing finally—more than six years after it was filed in October 2017—gave plaintiffs a day in court. During that time Central Health has transferred $210 million to UT. The total to date figure is $350 million. Another $35 million transfer is in Central Health’s budget for his calendar year. (Birch et al v. Central Health et al, Cause No. D-1-GN-17-005824)
Plaintiffs argued that because Dell Medical School has provided minimal, if any, healthcare services for Central Health patients earning less than 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level, the transferred funds constitute an illegal gift of public funds. They requested an injunction to bar future fund transfers but did not ask for past payments to be recouped.
Defendants argued that Central Health is entitled to sovereign immunity and cannot be sued by the three property taxpayer plaintiffs. They also asserted that the agency’s spending is within its constitutional and legal authority. They asked the lawsuit be dismissed.
Judge Meacham has not yet announced a decision, although after the hearing she requested the opposing attorneys to submit proposed orders.
The Bulldog is publishing two videos based on footage taken during the hearing with the judge’s permission:
The one immediately below is a video story covering the key points of statements made by attorneys for defendant Central Health, the plaintiffs, and Judge Meacham. It runs about 10 and a half minutes.
The second video, linked below, contains the entire raw footage of the hearing taken by videographer Erik Mauck. It runs an hour and 35 minutes.
Judge Meacham granted permission for the Bulldog to capture video on condition that the raw footage be made available to other media organizations that request it. None have done so.
Parties to the litigation are by definition not media and are not entitled to it.
It should be noted that most news organizations would never publish raw footage. In fact most news organizations would consider the raw footage to be proprietary information and would never release it unless under a court order to do so.
But the Bulldog is most definitely not like other news organization. We believe in complete transparency about how we do our reporting. We have always published documents gathered in our reporting along with the stories, so that anyone can refer to the source documents, read them, and decide for themselves whether the story accurately reflects the facts in the documents, or whether the information might have been cherry-picked or taken out of context.
The raw footage, in this case, serves the same purpose, to provide complete transparency about how we do the work of publishing credible journalism and building trust with our readers.
Trust indicators: This was Erik Mauck’s first assignment for the Bulldog. Editor Ken Martin has been doing investigative reporting in the three-county Austin metro area since 1981. See more on Ken on the About page. Email [email protected].
District Judge Amy Clark Meacham will decide—based on a two-hour hearing held in her court Thursday—whether Central Health can continue transferring $35 million of the property taxes it collects each year to the University of Texas at Austin for Dell Medical School.
The hearing stems from a lawsuit filed way back in October 2017 that seeks to stop Central Health from making those payments.
Central Health has so far transferred to UT Austin a total of $350 million and is scheduled to add another $35 million this year.
Judge Meacham did not announce a decision Thursday. She requested that the opposing attorneys submit proposed orders for her consideration in deciding the case.
Case overview
Plaintiffs are Rebecca Birch and Richard Franklin III, a married couple who live in far eastern Travis County, and Esther Govea, who lives in South Austin. All three are property taxpayers in Travis County and therefore help to fund Central Health through the taxes it levies. (Birch et al v. Central Health et al, Cause No. D-1-GN-17-005824)
Plaintiffs seek a temporary or permanent injunction to enjoin Central Health from expending funds for (1) anything not related to furnishing medical aid and hospital care to indigent and financially needy residents of Travis County, and (2) for any other purpose not expressly authorized in Chapter 61 of the Texas Health and Safety Code.
Defendant Central Health seeks to dismiss the lawsuit, stating the agency is protected by governmental immunity and asserting that its spending is within its constitutional and statutory authority.
The defendant’s presentation
Sinéad O’Carroll
Attorney Sinéad O’Carroll, a partner in the Austin law firm Reeves & Brightwell, represented defendant Central Health and presented key aspects of her client’s motion to dismiss the case.
“Plaintiffs are asking you (the judge) to micromanage Central Health’s expenditures,” she said.
“To deliver these types of services to its safety net population, Central Health must develop this infrastructure and partnerships,” she said. “This spending is expanding the healthcare infrastructure in Travis County and it’s benefiting Central Health patients.”
O’Carroll argued that services which may not fall specifically under the rubric of “clinical care” still lead to an expanded healthcare infrastructure that benefits low-income patients. She claimed that Central Health “payments are leading to expanded healthcare coverage and infrastructure.”
O’Carroll also stated that almost half of the graduates of the UT medical school have remained in Central Texas to practice medicine, which further aids in developing the healthcare infrastructure that can benefit low-income patients. She also emphasized that the 12-month waiting period to see an orthopedic specialist through the Medical Assistance Program (MAP) has been eliminated and access to prenatal care has improved.
“Medicine is a team sport,” she said. “Without the infrastructure created by the expenditure, Central Health would not be able to provide these services to their patients.”
At one point Judge Meacham interrupted O’Carroll during her presentation to ask about seemingly contradictory aims of the defense strategy. One being the merits of the healthcare provided by Central Health specifically benefitting lower income patients, the other regarding whether or not taxpayers are even allowed to bring these types of suits to court. “What does it matter, all of this, to your motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, that this isn’t the type of thing that they have jurisdiction to sue for?”
“The merits and questions of jurisdiction overlap,” O’Carroll replied, drawing a sharp rebuttal from Judge Meacham: “Your conception of jurisdiction and mine may differ.”
Judge Meachum sought clarification, referencing the legal term ultra vires, which essentially means ‘beyond the limits of power’. Was the defense arguing that all the healthcare provided has benefited the poor, thereby satisfying the original intent of the 2012 bond, or were they saying that the plaintiffs do not have the standing to sue?
Meachum asked, “The issue comes down to, with your plea, that this isn’t the type of ultra vires case that a taxpayer can bring because it’s backward looking, not forward looking. Is that the nut or is it more this (the merits)?”
O’Carroll responded, “The nut is both, honestly.”
Judge Meachum described this as an ongoing legal issue that permeates her courtroom and beyond. “It just is a constant, never-ending conversation between the Travis County District Courts and the 3rd Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.”
The plaintiffs’ presentation
Manuel Quinto Pozo
Attorney Manuel Quinto-Pozos, a partner in the Austin firm of Deats Durst and Owen, took exception to how the defense described the services provided by Central Health. He claimed that only about 10 percent of the annual $35 million payments goes to clinical care and administration directly related to care.
The money is “supposed to provide healthcare for poor people, which it does do, but it goes beyond that—which is illegal.”
Quinto-Pozos cited Chapter 281 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, and stated Central Health is required to provide healthcare services for the needy, but cannot go beyond that mission. ‘When they go beyond, they are acting ultra vires,” he said. “That’s our beef,” added attorney Fred Lewis, who is also representing the plaintiffs. “We think, after getting $35 million, you can do better than that.”
Judge Meachum seemed to acknowledge some merit to the plaintiffs’ objections by stating, “If I had the power to right every political wrong in this court, my job would be vastly more fun than it is at times.” She then posed a question to their attorneys, “Why is your case a lawsuit and not a political argument?”
“It’s not one or the other,” Quinto-Pozos replied. “There have been efforts to implement safeguards via (Central Health’s) Board of Managers on how the money is to be spent, and those efforts have not been fruitful.”
Quinto-Pozos said that plaintiffs had asked Central Health for information about how the $35 million a year was being spent, adding, “They have spent money on documented things that are not healthcare. These are all fine things to have, but it’s not fine for taxpayer money that is provided only for healthcare for the poor, to pay for those things.”
He pointed out that plaintiffs were not seeking to undo any expenditures that have already been made, but only “prospective relief” to prevent future unlawful spending.
Otherwise, he added, “There’s no reason to think that their ultra vires actions will stop in future expenditures.”
Quinto-Pozos concluded by saying, “The case law and attorney general provisions are clear that the expenditures must be used only for the original intent.”
Defense rebuttal
O’Carroll said the fact that Central Health can terminate the affiliation agreement that requires payments of $35 million a year “signals adequate control.”
“Central Health is trying to get people in the door, so it’s all related. It’s not completely divorced.”
Plaintiffs’ request for injunction
Fred Lewis
Attorney Fred Lewis presented the plaintiffs’ case for granting an injunction that would halt the $35 million in annual payments.
“This is not about politics,” he said. “It’s about whether or not Central Health has the authority to fund a medical school and things that are not related to healthcare for poor people.”
“The whole purpose of the hospital district is to assume responsibility for healthcare for the poor,” Lewis said.
He said it was true that Central Health was providing a medical assistance program for many patients—but not for all, adding, “If they spent the money on what the attorney general said is their duty, they’d be able to cover everyone.”
Lewis said, “Nobody defines medical care as education or research—only treatment of a person, and it’s hard to say that education of a medical student is treatment or medical care for a poor person.”
“We’re only complaining about the money that’s not going to the poor,” he said. “Central Health has discretion to choose doctors, facilities, where to emphasize medical care—they do not have authority to redefine medical care. UT Medical School is not a licensed medical facility.”
Lewis said that only 10 percent of the $35 million a year that was given to UT for medical school was used to pay for clinical care. “Everything else was, by precise definition, not medical care.”
He criticized the Affiliation Agreement executed in 2014 that requires the annual payments of $35 million to UT for the medical school. “You can’t expand the government’s authority by agreement without legislative approval.”
“I don’t know how (Central Health) can say it has financial controls when it has no right to audit” how UT spends that money.
“This entity (Central Health) has one express purpose. It’s to establish a hospital system for healthcare for the indigent. There are no provisions for anything else,” Lewis said.
Defense rebuttal
Attorney O’Carroll replied to Lewis’s presentation, saying that the medical school was developing resources. “That’s the language that allows for spending outside of clinical care and clinical administration.”
She said there are more providers and services, not that UT has medical services and healthcare infrastructure.
“Central Health has multiple strategies for care. Plaintiffs have no evidence that you could get the same specialists to come to town without the medical school.”
O’Carroll said, “Plaintiffs seem to take the position that by getting rid of payments (to the medical school) that low-income residents would get better care, and that’s just not true. If the relationship between UT and Central Health were severed, low-income residents would suffer.”
Strong support for plaintiffs evident
About 20 people were present in court during the hearing in support of the litigation. Many of them have been active for years in trying to get Central Health to provide greater accountability for the $35 million a year that goes to fund Dell Medical School.
Marisa Perales
In addition, on the morning of the hearing, attorney Marisa Perales of the Austin firm Perales Allmon & Ice filed a 10-page amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs. The brief was filed on behalf of Health for Travis County (HTC), a community based coalition focused on healthcare justice.
“HTC has appeared numerous times over the years before the Central Health Board of Managers to request that Central Health discontinue the transfer of public funds to the Dell Medical School in order to appropriately spend this annual $35 million on patient care for the poor. Those efforts have been unsuccessful,” the brief states.
The brief states that about 300,000 people in Travis County are without health insurance and that Latinos make up more than 39 percent of those uninsured. It further notes that lack of coverage results in increased mortality.
“HTC’s primary concern is that Central Health is not serving its targeted population,” the brief states. “Central Health has diverted public funds to Dell Medical School without any accountability to serve the poverty and indigent healthcare population, as it is legally required to do.”
Comments after the hearing
In response to the judge implying that this perhaps should be a political fight and not a legal one, Fred Lewis told the Bulldog, “We tried the legislature, we tried the City Council, we tried Central Health, we tried the county. Nobody was interested in taking on the University of Texas.
“I think the hearing went well,” Lewis added.“We got our day in court. The judge listened carefully and we’re hopefully optimistic.”
Manuel Quinto-Pozos told the Bulldog, “We were pleased with how the argument went. We did all we could to bring to the court’s attention the legal restrictions under which Central Health has to function. And how the evidence we obtained via the litigation shows that Central Health is not complying with its mandate to provide healthcare for poor inhabitants of Travis County.”
Erik Mauck
Trust indicators: This is Erik Mauck’s first assignment for the Bulldog. Editor Ken Martin has been doing investigative reporting in the three-county Austin metro area since 1981. See more on Ken on the About page. Email [email protected].
There is no such thing as a nonpartisan election in Travis County, Texas
Sure, sure, I know. Elections in Travis County for city councils, school boards, and even the board of directors of the Travis Central Appraisal District are technically nonpartisan.
In reality, political party DNA was front and center in efforts to turn out the vote in favor of endorsed candidates. And as usual in deep-blue Travis County, the Democrats clobbered Republican and Libertarian opponents.
Making this election even more partisan than usual is that the chair of the Travis County Republican Party, Matt Mackowiak, and the treasurer of the Travis County Libertarian Party, Jonathan Patschke, were on the ballot.
Partisan pitches for support
Both parties blasted out email appeals to urge people to vote in what was to be a predictably low-turnout election. In all, 55,991 of 895,663 registered voters cast ballots, for an anemic 6.25 percent.
Lloyd Dogett
U.S. Representative Lloyd Doggett, Travis County Commissioner Brigid Shea, and near-miss 2022 Austin mayoral candidate Celia Israel all emailed appeals for Democrats to get up and go vote.
Cleo Patricek, a Democrat who cofounded Save Austin Now with Mackowiak, emailed appeals April 29th and 30th and May 2nd urging voters to elect the organization’s three endorsed candidates (who happened all be Republicans, despite the organization’s self-proclaimed nonpartisan nature).
Republicans presented themselves as “taxpayer advocates” (as if Democrats were not?). Democrats returned the favor by casting the Republicans as “anti-tax.”
Shea, for example, warned of electing “those with anti-tax views to influence our central appraisal district.”
Israel predicted the Republicans would bring “extreme, anti-tax veto power to the board.” She was referring to the fact that the enabling legislation for this election allows any two of the three elected board members to veto appointments to the Travis Appraisal Review Board (ARB). The ARB conducts formal hearings of property valuations set by the appraisal district.
In reality it’s inconceivable that partisan politics will play much of role in how the ARB’s formal hearings are conducted. That procedure is strictly governed by state law. And the ARB employs lawyers who provide training before hearings begin each year and ongoing advice when need.
Israel’s pitch is somewhat more pertinent, however, as she will herself be on the board. She is running unopposed for Travis County tax assessor-collector. By law, once elected she will become an ex-officio member of TCAD’s board, following the November general election and January swearing in.
And the results are
All three Democrats on the TCAD ballot—all attorneys, by the way—pulled around 70 percent of the 50,000-plus votes cast in this first-ever opportunity for citizens to elect a few members of TCAD’s board.
The candidates self-selected one of the three at-large positions on the ballot for which they would compete.
Jett Hanna
Place 1—Democrat Jett Hanna, 64, netted 69.46 percent to defeat Republican Don Zimmerman, 63, a former Austin City Council member and perennial candidate for any position that provides an opportunity to be on the ballot.
Zimmerman drew his best support in far west and far east areas of the county, while Hanna was strongest everywhere else. (To see results on the Place 1 map. click here.)
Daniel Wang
Place 2—Democrat Shenghao “Daniel” Wang, 29, pulled 67.73 percent of the votes to beat Republican Mackowiak, 44, and Libertarian Patschke, also 44.
Mackowiak drew strong support mainly in western Travis County, while Wang dominated everywhere else except for a small pocket in southeast county that Patschke won. (To see results on the Place 2 map. click here.)
Dick Lavine
Place 3—Democrat Dick Lavine, 76, grabbed 73.03 percent of the ballots cast to beat Republican Bill May, also 76. Lavine previously served on TCAD’s board for 21 years as an Austin ISD appointee.
May polled well in in far east and west portions of the county while Lavine buried him everywhere else. (To see results on the Place 3 map, click here.)
Those elected will take office July 1st and serve terms ending December 31, 2026. An election is to be held in November 2026 for these three board seats. Winners of that election will be sworn in January 1, 2027, for four-year terms.
Although these three winners will soon be sitting on TCAD’s board, they will be outnumbered by the five board members appointed by the taxing entities whose tax rolls are prepared by the agency.
Election a big deal, otherwise TCAD ignored
While the enabling legislation provides for elected representation on TCAD’s board for the first time since appraisal districts were created by legislation in 1979, public attention is rarely drawn to its meetings, which are broadcast on the Internet via Zoom.
Press coverage, except for the Bulldog, is virtually non-existent. The board met only eight times in all of 2023 and has met only three times so far in 2024.
The board’s chief responsibilities are to hire and supervise the chief appraiser, approve the agency’s internal policies, and approve annual budgets that are funded by the taxing entities it serves. And, due to the legislation that permitted this election of board members, TCAD’s board will approve appointments to the Travis Appraisal Review Board.
Trust indicators: Ken Martin has been covering local government and politics in the Austin area since 1981 and investigating and reporting on Travis Central Appraisal District since 2011. Email [email protected].
Douglas Jeffrey Greco, 53, is one of four candidates (so far) who’s campaigning to be Austin’s mayor in 2025.
Carmen PulidoKathie TovoKirk Watson
Greco trying to unseat incumbent Mayor Kirk Preston Watson, 66, who raised and spent $2 million to win his third term in 2022. He was first elected mayor in 1997, was reelected in 2020, and resigned in 2021 to run for Texas attorney general.
He’s also running against two other challengers:
Carmen Dolores Llanes Pulido, 39, is a native Austinite, second-generation activist, and longtime organizer with multiple community organizations.
Kathryne Beth Tovo, 54, won election to the City Council three times and served for more than 11 years ending in 2022. Tovo appointed a campaign treasurer to run for mayor in 2022 but then chose not do so.
Detailed profiles about the other three mayoral candidates will be published later, in alphabetical order.
Leaving activism for shot at making policy
To compete with his better known opponents Greco will draw on his long experience as an organizer for multiple organizations, including the nonprofits Austin Interfaith and Austin Interfaith Sponsoring Committee.
To get his campaign underway, in late January Greco resigned from those organizations, which in 2022 paid him a combined salary of more than $144,000, plus more than $10,000 in “other compensation,” according to the latest publicly available tax returns.
Greco told the Bulldog he has lived in Austin off and on since 1997. He arrived a few years after graduating from Brown University with a bachelor’s degree in economics and began teaching at Johnston High School (later renamed Eastside Early College High School).
He taught at Johnson for five years ending in 2002, an era in which the school went through seven principals, a claim substantiated by his campaign treasurer, Claudia Kramer Santamaria (more about her later). “It was kind of a crisis at a time with high turnover, and challenging,” Greco said. “What sustained me was getting involved in community organizing to build stable engagement in school.”
He left teaching to be an organizer with Austin Interfaith. In late 2003 he moved to San Antonio to work as senior organizer with Communities Organized for Public Service (COPS). (Austin Interfaith, Austin Interfaith Sponsoring Committee, and COPS are all partners with the Industrial Areas Foundation, a network of religious congregations, civic organizations, unions, and nonprofits that work to achieve lasting change in the world.)
Greco returned to Austin in 2007 to work as lead organizer and executive director of Austin Interfaith, which he helped to expand and change its name to Central Texas Interfaith (although its tax returns are filed under the organization’s original name). He left in 2012 to earn a master’s degree in public policy from Princeton University, where he graduated in 2013, he said.
After Princeton he relocated to California (more about that later), then moved back to Austin to serve as chief of staff for State Representative Gina Hinojosa (D-Austin) during the 2017 regular and special-called legislative sessions.
That was the year big battles were fought over the so-called “bathroom bills” pushed by Republicans to restrict the rights of transgender individuals and deny them access to public facilities. Those bills were ultimately defeated and haven’t resurfaced.
“Doug Greco was a hard-working and conscientious chief of staff for my first session in the House,” Hinojosa told the Bulldog. “I knew him from my prior volunteer organizing days at Austin Interfaith. I have the utmost respect for him and gratitude for his contribution to our community and to my development as a leader in Austin.”
Issues central to Greco’s campaign
Greco intends, if elected, to challenge Governor Greg Abbott’s attacks on local decisions.
He wants to focus on affordability—the lack of which is pushing working people out of Austin. Affordability is a political buzzword on every candidate’s lips, but what would Greco actually do to help?
“My priority is affordability through workforce development, education, and living wages. We need to train people and help them get jobs that are already here and commit to living wages, over $20 an hour.
“We need to address affordable housing, rental assistance, and homeless issues. We need to pay police, fire, and EMS… I’m big on thinking about how folks are earning enough to stay in Austin, compete for jobs here, and not move out of the city.”
In addition, Greco wants to prevent institutional investors from gobbling up single-family homes so that people who will actually want to live here have a chance to compete with offers. To that end, his former boss, Representative Hinojosa, filed two bills aimed at fixing that problem for the 2023 legislative session.
HB 1056 would have required financial institutions or investment firms that own and offer a dwelling for lease to register the number of dwellings owned in each county with the Texas Comptroller. The comptroller would have been required to publish a searchable registry on its website.
HB 1057 would have barred investment firms from entering a contract to purchase a single-family home listed for sale before the 30th day after the date the home is listed.
Both bills were referred to the Business and Industry Committee, where no action was taken. Those bills are dead. The issues are not.
The Texas Tribunereported March 15th that Governor Greg Abbott has weighed in: “I strongly support free markets,” Abbott wrote on the social media site X… “But this corporate large-scale buying of residential homes seems to be distorting the market and making it harder for the average Texan to purchase a home. This must be added to the legislative agenda to protect Texas families.”
Unless Abbott calls a special session that can’t be considered before the 2025 session.
Meanwhile, Greco would like to the city to make grants or loans to home owners so they could make improvements or build additional dwelling units. “I also support mortgage and rental assistance programs for similar reasons,” he said.
As the Bulldogreported, Kirk Watson spent $2 million in his 2022 mayoral campaign. The opponent he narrowly defeated in a runoff, Celia Israel, spent more than $707,000.
Greco said his fundraising goal is “more along the lines of Celia’s. I don’t need million and a half.”
He said his goal for the July 15th campaign finance report, which will show fundraising through June 30th, is to hit “six figures” and afterwards “scale up from there.”
Greco has some personal experience in fundraising, but not the kind that’s necessary in retail politics. He founded Ground Strategies LLC in January 2022, according to records maintained by the Texas Secretary of State. Under a “small contract” he said he raised foundation money for the Organizing Institute of Southwest Industrial Areas Foundation.
Greco recently returned from a fundraising event in Sarasota, Florida, where family and friends turned out to show support.
Left to right, brother Joseph Greco III, mother Candace Greco, Doug Greco, and father Joseph Greco Jr., at fundraiser in Sarasota, Florida.
Greco said he will be focused on using any money he raises mainly for door-knocking and mailing campaign literature. “Big money stuff costs more but is not as efficient.
Greco recently hired Mariana Krueger to manage his campaign. He said that she most recently served as organizing director for District Attorney Jose Garza’s primary campaign. Krueger is well connected through her appointments to city commissions by three council members. She is Jose Velasquez’s appointee to the Environmental Commission, Zo Qadri’s appointee to the LGBTQ Quality of Life Advisory Commission, and Paige Ellis’s appointee to the Human Rights Commission.
He said he has not hired a campaign consultant, but instead is relying on “advice from those who have run campaigns. I spent more than 15 years with the Industrial Areas Foundation. I need folks who have run the mechanics of a campaign. I have a big circle of colleagues.”
“I have taken the fair campaign pledge,” Greco said, referring to the Code of Fair Campaign Practices, by which candidates are encouraged to follow the basic principles of decency, honesty, and fair play.
He has also signed the Candidate Contract, which, per Austin City Code Section 2-2-12, limits a mayoral candidate from making expenditures that exceed $120,000, plus an additional $80,000 in a runoff. That would qualify him for a share of whatever funds are in the Austin Fair Campaign Fund, should he make it into a runoff. Plus, if even one other mayoral candidate does not sign the Campaign Contract, that releases him from the limitations. All three of his opponents have not signed a Candidate Contract, according to their websites.
Making it into a runoff is what he’s shooting for. And a runoff could very well be needed in a mayoral election with four viable candidates.
In Kirk Watson’s May 6, 2000, mayoral reelection victory, he thumped three opponents by getting 84 percent of the votes. However, none of his opponents were viable candidates. His bid for reelection in 2024 seems to promise an entirely different scenario.
Criticizes Mayor Watson
Greco faults the incumbent mayor for failing to stand up for the civil rights of some 60 University of Texas employees who were terminated because their jobs involved diversity, equity and inclusion. In an April 3rd press release, Greco stated, “ Austin Mayor Kirk Watson should immediately convene community leaders, UT students, local nonprofits, local legislators, and public entities to determine how our community can replace some of the student resources and programs UT has cut in response to Texas’ new anti-DEI law.”
The release mentioned that on February 21st Greco had called on the city to step up. “Where the state has failed LGBTQ students at UT, the City of Austin needs to lead.”
On April 24th, via Watson’s campaign website, the Bulldog asked the mayor to comment on these criticisms. No response has been received.
In addition to pushing these issues through criticism, Greco’s campaign will stress that he is intent on maintaining a “seat at the table” in politics to protect LGBT rights.
“I want to be a mayor that creates space for LGBT rights, civil rights, and immigrant rights. I want to open up the process for others, with everyone at the table to address long-term issues,” he said.
Legislative victories
Greco is a novice at running for elective office but he’s no stranger to political battles. In addition to his year as a chief of staff for Representative Hinojosa, his website claims that he “led efforts with (Central Texas Interfaith’s) Texas (industrial Areas Foundation) Network to kill the state’s largest corporate welfare program, Chapter 313, which took over $1 billion a year in potential school funding and instead gave it to multinational oil and gas companies.”
At the Bulldog’s request, he backed up that claim with proof.
TheIntercept published a detailed article about this issue: “We thought it would be a victory if the two-year reauthorization passed so we could organize in (the) interim,” said Doug Greco, the lead organizer for Central Texas Interfaith.” Then, time ran out and the bill never came up.
“The lapse in authorization coincided with three other groundbreaking blows to oil and gas corporations,” TheIntercept article states: “A Dutch court ruled that Shell Oil is liable for its climate impacts and must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Exxon Mobil shareholders booted out two members of the corporation’s board of directors for its failures on the climate crisis. And Chevron shareholders voted to force the company to cut its emissions.”
Locally, the battle continued into the 2023 legislative session. The end result was a replacement for Chapter 313 that “is a much more accountable program in terms of increasing wages and job requirements, cutting the tax abatement from 100 percent to 50 percent, and eliminating ‘kickbacks’ (side payments) to school boards and school districts to induce them to give the tax break,” Greco told the Bulldog.
“This was by far my most significant legislative work with Central Texas Interfaith and our state network and Texas Industrial Areas Foundation, and one in which I coordinated organizing efforts. We fought the largest business interests in the state for three years (oil and gas companies, manufacturers, and Texas Association of Business), brought them to the table after killing Chapter 313, and ensured its replacement was…a much more accountable program.
“I think the Mayor of Austin needs to have the ability to stand up and take on big money interests locally and at the state level, and those that represent them,” Greco said.
Could Austin elect a gay mayor?
Greco is a single, openly gay man, who says he does not have a domestic partner.
But how does a person’s sexuality matter in politics, if at all?
In the Texas Legislature it seems to matter a great deal. The Texas Tribune reported in March 2023 that the Texas Legislature includes nine lawmakers who are openly LGBTQ, all Democrats. Still, that’s not a big number, given that Democrat Glen Maxey was the first openly gay candidate to win election to the Texas House of Representatives. That was in 1991—32 years ago.
Today the Texas Legislature is dominated by Republicans, who generally are less than accommodating about sexual preferences. The Tribune in June 2023 reported that the Legislature banned puberty blockers and hormone therapy for trans kids, restricted college sports teams that trans athletes can join, and took a swipe at drag shows, too.
Notwithstanding the wishes of conservatives, sexual orientation hasn’t much mattered in metropolitan municipal elections in Texas.
In Austin, for example, voters have a long tradition of upholding gay rights at the ballot box. In January 1982, a solid majority of voters soundly rejected an amendment to the city’s Fair Housing Ordinance. The amendment would have allowed denial of housing on the basis of sexual orientation. The measure got on the ballot through petitioning by Austin Citizens for Decency, the group about which I wrote pre-election coverage for Third Coast magazine.
Annise Parker
More recently in Houston, Annise Parker, a Democrat, became the first lesbian mayor of a major U.S. city when elected in 2009, and served from 2010 through 2016.
Openly gay Jimmy Flannigan was elected to the Austin City Council in 2016 to represent District 6.
And in Austin’s 2022 mayoral election voters demonstrated the majority do not care about a candidate’s sexual preference. They very nearly elected Celia Israel, a married lesbian, instead of Kirk Watson. With 114,188 votes cast, Watson’s margin of victory was 942 votes.
Like Parker and Israel, Greco is a Democrat. Since coming back from California and voting in Travis County since 2017, he has voted in six Democratic and no GOP primaries. This according to voting history records published by the Travis County Tax Office.
But LBGTQ+ bashing still exists
Aside from the heated legislative battles fought over the defeated “bathroom bills” in 2017, there is an element outside the Texas Legislature that continues to push back against anything involving the rights of people who are not unambiguously heterosexual.
Greco’s sexuality and activism on these issues came under blistering attack in 2022.
The Virginia-based Lepanto Institute used Greco’s identity to go after his employer, the Austin Interfaith Sponsoring Committee (AISC). The article was triggered when the AISC was awarded a $60,000 “Economic Justice” grant by the Diocese of Austin, which is overseen by Bishop Joe Vasquez.
Doug Greco faces camera (wearing white glove) in photo of his softball team, Austin Ball’rz.
A nine-page article published by the Lepanto Institute begins with, “At issue with this (grant) is the fact that Austin Interfaith, and its leader, is openly promoting transgender and homosexual ideologies.”
The article even slammed Greco for being on a gay softball team, the Austin Ball’rz, which he says has made it to the Gay Softball World Series the last four years running.
The article concludes with, “Austin Interfaith is led by an LGBT activist who has clearly used his position in a CCHD-funded (Catholic Campaign for Human Development) organization to promote transgender and homosexual ideologies. His history of support for same-sex ‘marriage’ and the genital mutilation of children [which Greco said he is not in favor of, though he does support gender-affirming care] makes him a clear danger to sound morals and the Catholic faith at the very least.
“Outside of the Catholic faith, he is a menace to the common good. Given this, no Catholic could ever, in good conscience, ever give to Austin Interfaith.”
Greco takes the attack in stride, calling it a “badge of honor.” But he emphasizes that he did not use his position with Interfaith to advocate on LBGT issues. “All that advocacy work was outside my job or when I was not with Interfaith.”
Strong advocate for equality
Make no mistake though, Greco is very much an outspoken advocate for LGBT rights.
In April 2015 he became director of programs for Equality California, which bills itself as “the largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization in California.” (This position was listed in his application to be Representative Hinojosa’s chief of staff, which the Bulldog obtained with a public information request.)
In June 2015, while Greco worked with Equality California, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. That was hugely important nationwide but perhaps even more so in California where voters in 2008 had amended the state constitution to ban the practice.
Greco’s application also shows that in the latter half of 2016 he worked in California as senior organizer for One LA, “a broad-based organization, made up of member congregations, schools, and nonprofits who shape the organization’s agenda and teach their constituents how to be effective public people.” One LA is also affiliated with the Industrial Areas Foundation.
A scholarly approach to civil rights
Greco’s application to work for Hinojosa states that he earned a master’s degree in public policy from Princeton University. He said he got a second master’s degree in creative writing from the University of Southern California.
Furthering his work in civil rights, he wrote a small book that explores the civil rights movement both nationally and internationally: To Find a Killer: The Homophobic Murders of Norma and Maria Hurtado and the LGBT Rights Movement (Histria Books 2023, 134 pages).
Greco’s impetus for writing the book was the April 2011 murder of Norma Hurtado, a 24-year-old lesbian who had once been his student in a ninth-grade geography class back at Johnston High School.
Jose Aviles, the father of Norma Hutado’s girlfriend, objected to the relationship. He killed Norma Hurtado by firing 15 rounds into her body, and one more into her mother, Maria Hurtado. Both died instantly. Aviles fled but was caught, tried, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison without parole.
Hurtado’s murder, Greco said, “got me thinking about being a gay man and how to integrate my IAF experience with my interest in the LGBTQ movement.”
Although the book begins and ends with these murders, it covers a range of issues related to LGBT rights. Chapter 5 details LGBT history in political organizing. Examples include José Sarria, whose New York Times obituary published in 2003 states, “many historians contend (he) was the first openly gay person to campaign for public office in the United States, when he ran for San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors in 1961.”
Sarria blazed the trail for Harvey Milk, who in 1977 won a seat on that same Board of Supervisors. Only to be shot and killed in 1978 along with Mayor George Moscone, in scenes vividly reenacted in the 2008 movie, Milk.
I profiled Austin’s first openly gay mayoral candidate, Eric Silvernale, for my In Fact newsletter November 15, 1995.
Holding politicians accountable
Interfaith, where Greco got his start in organizing more than two decades ago, hosts candidate forums unlike any other. Interfaith calls these public events “Accountability Sessions.” Candidates are invited to hear stories about issues that are hurting families and communities. Then the candidates are asked “straight questions” about where they stand on those issues.
To generate interest in elections, Interfaith’s member institutions let the public know how the candidates responded to Interfaith’s issues. Member institutions include congregations, unions, and nonprofits that collectively turn out many hundreds of volunteers to block walk, sign up supporters, and get out the vote.
But Interfaith’s work doesn’t end there. When candidates are elected, Interfaith leaders watch and work to hold them accountable.
Watson launched with massive support
Mayor Watson on April 10th launched his campaign by announcing endorsements from 55 elected or former elected officials from all over central Texas. The list included former Austin Mayors Lee Cooke, Lee Leffingwell, Ron Mullen, and Will Wynn, plus seven of the nine current Austin council members.
Noticeably absent from the list of endorsing council members were Mackenzie Kelly, who is running for reelection in District 6 and did not want to comment, and District 10’s Alison Alter. Alter told the Bulldog, “Unlike in 2022, in 2024 I will not be endorsing Kirk Watson for mayor because I have learned that when someone shows you who they are, (you should) believe them.
“Watson has acted as a bully and prevented real policy deliberation by members of the council and the public,” Alter said.
People who know Greco
Greco can’t compete with Watson’s two score and 15 high-profile endorsements. But he does have character references and initial supporters.
The Reverend Miles Brandon II, clergy leader of St. Julian of Norwich Episcopal Church in Round Rock, is on the board of Central Texas Interfaith. That’s where Greco worked as lead organizer until resigning in late January to run for mayor.
In describing Interfaith’s volunteer efforts in block-walking, Brandon said, “We focus particularly on districts with low voter turnout. In post-election reviews we find that after working in those districts, people vote at the same level or higher than traditional high-turnout districts.”
“As a leader in Central Texas Interfaith,” Brandon said, “it’s important to say that as community organizers we do not have political parties. We do not endorse candidates. We have issues to work on in the community and in this election cycle we will be working with everyone running for mayor without partiality.
“Doug was a good leader for us but now as a person running for office he will be treated like all candidates.”
In describing Greco’s character, Brandon said, “He’s a person of deep faith, active in the Episcopal Church, and really cares about people. He genuinely wants everyone to flourish, especially those who are underrepresented.”
The vicar went on to say that “Doug is fiery and passionate about the things he believes in deeply. He has a really good political acumen, understands political nuances, and how to deduce policy to make change and get people to work together. He is very well organized and has already been thinking about some of the most important issues, including eradicating homelessness, economic development, and affordability in housing.”
Back when Greco was teaching at Johnston High, Claudia Kramer Santamaria, PhD, was principal at another Austin ISD school. She said she saw Greco speaking at Austin Interfaith’s Accountability Sessions and was impressed.
“I kept running into Doug and found him to be person of high integrity. He loved teaching at Johnston, and was a leader there, trusted. I got to know him and worked with him.
“Later he became a paid organizer at Austin Interfaith and I did too. He used to work on funding for schools, leadership, after-school programs, and integration issues.
“A lot of families are undocumented and didn’t feel safe coming to school meetings,” she said. “I saw Doug with neighborhood people, helping them to ask questions so could advocate for themselves.”
Santamaria is not only Greco’s campaign treasurer but also volunteers to help boost his chances as a candidate.
Santamaria said her reasons for supporting Greco’s mayoral bid go far beyond specific issues, “It’s about people being impacted by issues and organizing to make changes. He understands what people of lesser incomes and resources are experiencing. He ‘gets it.’ ”
She notes that Greco was raised by a single mom, although he told the Bulldog, “My dad was still a strong presence in my life.” Greco’s blog, “Yellow Pig,” documents much of his family’s life and ancestors, and what it was like to grow up in the Coal Region town of Mt. Carmel, Pennsylvania.
The only elected or former elected officials who have so far been announced to endorse Greco are Austin ISD Trustee Ofelia Zapata, a longtime leader at Austin Interfaith, and former AISD trustee Ann Teich, a community organizer and union member.
Trust indicators: Ken Martin has been reporting on elections in Austin and adjacent Williamson and Hays counties since 1981.
A Travis County court issued a ruling to halt the use of future property taxes to subsidize luxury development of 118 acres of land within the South Center Waterfront District.
Jessica Magnum
District Judge Jessica Mangrum last Friday issued a Summary Judgment Final Order in favor of plaintiffs. The lawsuit to stop those subsidies was filed almost exactly a year ago, April 24, 2023. (Taxpayers Against Giveaways, et al, v. City of Austin Mayor Kirk Watson, et al, Cause No. D-1-GN-23-002238.)
The plan approved by the City Council was to divert $354 million in property taxes for infrastructure improvements on that land so that it would develop in the manner the council desires. To that end, the council established Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 19, the SCWF-TIRZ.
Lawyer-lobbyist Richard Suttle of Austin law firm Armbrust & Brown represented developer Endeavor Real Estate Group in gaining City Council approval of the SCWF-TIRZ.
Richard Suttle
As the Bulldogreported, when at one point it looked like the Council might not approve the TIRZ, Suttle told the Council, “I’ll tell you what: we won’t build the plan if there’s no TIRZ. It just doesn’t work.”
Suttle has not returned a call left with his office this afternoon for comment on the judge’s ruling.
Meghan Riley
Meghan Riley, the Law Department’s litigation division chief, issued this statement at 5:37pm: “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.”
Plaintiffs’ attorneys comment
Plaintiffs attorneys Bill Aleshire, Bill Bunch, and Fred Lewis.
Plaintiff attorneys in the lawsuit were Bill Aleshire, William G. “Bill” Bunch of the Save Our Springs Alliance; and Fred Lewis.
Lewis emailed this statement: “Travis County District Judge Jessica Mangrum held today the City Council violated state law by creating the South Central Waterfront TIRZ and agreeing to transfer $354 million in local property taxes to pay to develop an $8 billion private luxury development on Lady Bird Lake.
“It would be nice if the city learned from this.”
In a telephone interview, Aleshire was more pointed.
“It’s a huge victory for taxpayers that could eventually lead to an end of the abuse of TIRZ throughout the state of Texas.”
Creating a TIRZ “means all the other taxpayers have to make up for the loss of revenue for the general operation of the city, while the TIRZ property owners pay their usual taxes but in this case got 46 percent of their taxes kicked back for the special benefit of their development. That’s not equal and uniform taxation.”
Aleshire said, “Bill Bunch went to City Council meetings several times and warned them that they would be sued if they approved this TIRZ, because that land is not blighted and would develop without this kickback. He presented a letter that promised they would be sued. City Council members should be ashamed for approving this as a matter of policy—especially now that we have shown it is illegal through this summary judgment.”
Summary judgment means there are no material factual issues remaining and the case can be decided as a matter of law.
“City attorneys made even easier for us about how to interpret that section of the tax code,” Aleshire added. “To create TIRZ they must meet the ‘but-for’ test. City attorneys argued the development would occur quicker or better with a TIRZ. That is not in the tax code. The implication of that argument is there would no limit about where a TIRZ is applied. They could always argue that would be better development or it would happen quicker.”
Aleshire added that before the council approved the TIRZ, “I was emailing council members to tell them that instead of creating a TIRZ they should establish a PID (Public Improvement District), in which property owners pay extra to get the extra benefits. That would have been ethical and legal way to do it.”
(Disclosure: Bill Aleshire has twice represented the Bulldog in successful lawsuits against the City of Austin for failure to supply information under the Texas Public Information Act. He also assists the Bulldog in filing public information requests.)
In a statement issued by plaintiffs’ attorneys at 6:10pm today, Bunch stated, “The City is legally required to show that the land is blighted and would not develop without public subsidies. The City failed to present any evidence that public funds were needed for the land to develop.”
Bunch further noted that “Judge Mangrum’s decision means that the $354 million in city property taxes can remain in the city’s general fund and go for real public needs, such as public safety, parks, streets, and other resident needs—and not to subsidize corporate welfare for wealthy, private developers.”
Trust indicators: Ken Martin has been doing investigative reporting in the three-county Austin metro area since 1981. Email [email protected].
Trust indicators: Ken Martin has been doing investigative reporting in the three-county Austin metro area since 1981. Email 
