CodeNEXT
Library Commission Debates Petitioning Rights
Library Commission Debates Petitioning Rights
Petitioners appeal for access to library properties,
library director and attorney adamantly opposed
By Joey Gidseg
© The Austin Bulldog 2018
Posted Friday March 2, 2018 2:06pm
Corrected Saturday March 3, 2018 12:20pm re: branch library where Debbie Russell was petitioning
On February 17, IndyAustin volunteer Scott Royder received a “trespass notice” from the Austin Police Department, for refusing a library employee’s request to leave library property where he had been gathering signatures for a petition to bring CodeNEXT to a public vote. The Austin Bulldog’s coverage of that incident triggered a discussion of the Library Use Rules at the February 26, 2018, meeting of the City’s Library Commission at the Pleasant Hill Branch. The discussion addressed whether citizens can distribute materials, including petitions for signatures, on Austin Public Library property. Several people spoke during citizens communication, including IndyAustin volunteers who shared their experiences and concerns about being asked to leave multiple branch libraries where they were petitioning the same day as Royder.Petitioners speak their minds
Debbie Russell had petitioned outside of the Hampton Branch at Oak Hill [not the Howson Branch as originally published] from 2:30pm to 4:15pm. She said that “an embarrassed and nervous staff member” had told her that she “wasn’t supposed to be there,” but that she had declined to leave. Russell said she told the staffer she would take her chances with the police if they were called. None arrived during the additional hour Russell spent petitioning. “I wasn’t harassing anybody. I wasn’t blocking the sidewalk. I was standing on the grass part of the area, about 100 feet from the entrance, and no one indicated they were annoyed with me.”No CodeNEXT Election in May
No CodeNEXT Election in May
Four weeks after saying petitions would be
filed by mid-January, IndyAustin is punting
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2018
Posted Thursday January 18, 2018 7:33pm
Corrected January 18, 2018 9:31pm to remove
Robin Rather's name from list of sponsors per her request
Though still fired up about forcing an election that would give voters a loud voice in whether—or when—a major revision of Austin’s land development law could go into effect, petitioners are backing off the statement made December 21 that petitions would be filed with the City Clerk by mid-January to force a May 5 election.
IndyAustin petition organizer Linda Curtis said in an email today that the decision has been made to instead shoot for a November election.
Curtis provided three reasons for shifting the election to November:
First, the group wants to avoid costing the City an estimated $800,000 to have a May election when nothing else would be on the ballot and the City would have to bear the entire financial burden.
Second, Curtis said, there will be a far larger turnout for a November general election. That’s when U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, all U.S. representatives, Governor Greg Abbott, and many other elected officials will be on the ballot—including Austin Mayor Steve Adler and Council Members Ora Houston, Sabino “Pio” Renteria, Ann Kitchen, Ellen Troxclair, and Kathie Tovo, all of whom are up for reelection.
Push for CodeNEXT Election May 5
Push for CodeNEXT Election May 5
Petitioners aim to file with City Clerk
by mid-January to trigger public vote
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2017
Posted 12:05pm Tuesday December 26, 2017
Corrected 11:15am Wednesday December 27, 2017 (to attribute statement to Michael Lavigne that was misattrubted to Chris Allen)
The Austin Bulldog reported IndyAustin’s launch of three petition drives September 12. Now organizers say they’re on track to file petitions with the Austin City Clerk in a few weeks to force an election on one of them: CodeNEXT, a complete overhaul of Austin’s Land Development Code that’s costing the City about $8.5 million.
The other two petitions, to restore the power of referendum and provide a new billboard ordinance, will be timed for the November 2018 election.
If the petition is successful in bringing about an election and voters approve its language, it would require both a waiting period and voter approval before CodeNEXT or any subsequent comprehensive revisions of the City’s land development laws become legally effective.
“This waiting period is to ensure voters can learn about the proposed comprehensive revisions and elect council members with sufficient time to amend or reject the prior council’s adopted comprehensive revisions before these laws go into effect,” the petition states.
Would require unprecedented level of public acceptance
CodeNEXT Opposition Organizing in Earnest
CodeNEXT Opposition Organizing in Earnest
Neighborhood activists launching efforts to
drum up support and raise campaign funds
By Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2017
Posted Tuesday October 10, 2017 7:13am
Central city residents are up in arms over perceptions that the work in progress called CodeNEXT, a complete overhaul of the City of Austin’s Land Development Code, will wreak havoc on their neighborhoods and way of life.
The Austin Bulldog previously reported on the three petition drives launched by IndyAustin, one of which if approved by voters would slow down CodeNEXT and put the matter to a public vote before it could be implemented.
The first get-together to rally support against CodeNEXT was held October 3 at the home of Charlotte Herzele, where several speakers addressed what they said are shortcomings in the plan that will have an undesirable impact on how the city is redeveloped.
Carmen Llanes Pulido, executive director of Go Austin/Vamos Austin and the host’s daughter, said CodeNEXT is based on the false premise that, “If we open the doors of development it will take care of the problems of East Austin, but I don’t believe the growth machine is so easily satiated.”
She said that density is not bringing affordability to East Austin and policy changes are needed to provide truly affordable housing.
“If we cannot ameliorate the effects of rapid growth we should not accelerate growth,” said Pulido, who was a member of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission that drew the boundaries of the 10 geographic City Council districts implemented in the 2014 elections.
Former council member opposed
