Top Stories
Austin City Manager: Dallas discard vs Austin retread
Will lawsuit blow up Project Connect train tracks?
Latest articles
Loud Rally Follows Final Council Vote For 8-2-1
AGR Cries Foul Over Work Session Votes for Hybrid;
Mayor Leffingwell Said Votes Driven by Ballot Deadline
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
Posted Tuesday, August 7, 2012 9:07pm
A high-noon rally by a loud crowd of Austinites for Geographic Representation (AGR) pulled no punches in criticizing the Austin City Council for casting a final vote today to put the 8-2-1 plan for electing council members on the same ballot as the 10-1 plan the group got on the ballot through petition.
AGR’s main complaints are that there was no groundswell of support for the 8-2-1 plan; that it goes against the recommendations of the council-appointed 2012 Charter Revision Committee, which recommended the 10-1 plan; and that it adds confusion and competition for voter approval of any form of geographic representation. Previous opportunities to enact some form of geographic representation have been voted down six times between 1973 and 2002.
A secondary issue for AGR is that only the first reading of the ordinance to put the 8-2-1 plan on the ballot was voted on in a regular City Council meeting, while the last two readings were voted on in council work sessions.
Two hours before the press conference, during the morning portion of today’s council work session, Mayor Lee Leffingwell announced that the votes taken in work session were driven by the deadline to approve measures to go on the ballot.
Council Backers of 8-2-1 Plan Accused of Self-Interest
But Facts Don’t Seem to Substantiate Such a Claim, as
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
Posted Monday, August 6, 2012 9:15 pm
At the August 2 City Council meeting, what was expected to be a pro-forma exercise in putting on the November 6 ballot a proposition qualified by citizen petition drive was sidetracked by some heated words aimed at Mayor Lee Leffingwell.
But where there is heat there is sometimes also light.
The light was shed on the question of whether the five City Council members who favor the 8-2-1 plan (Mike Martinez and Bill Spelman opposed) are acting out of self-interest to increase their chances of staying in office.
The reality is that a separate proposed charter amendment—which the council already approved to go on the November ballot—if approved by voters would disqualify all but one incumbent from running for reelection (more about that later).
City Manager’s Annual Review Postponed
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
Posted Thursday, August 2, 2012 8:43pm
Austin City Manager Marc Ott didn’t get his annual performance review today as scheduled.
Shortly after noon, Mayor Lee Leffingwell read the agenda items to be discussed in a closed-door executive session. The council meeting agenda was posted for the executive session to include Ott’s performance. But Leffingwell announced that Ott’s review was being postponed at the request of Council Member Bill Spelman.
Spelman had arrived in council chambers and took his seat on the dais shortly after 10:30am, about 20 minutes after the meeting started. And Spelman was present preceding the mayor’s announcement of the postponement.
City Manager Faces Crucial Annual Review
8-2-1 Plan Certain to Go on Ballot
8-2-1 Plan Near-Certain to Go on Ballot
City Council Votes on Second Reading
to Put Competing Election Plan on Ballot
by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog 2012
Posted July 31, 2012 2:35pm
The Austin City Council in today’s work session voted 5-2 (Council Members Mike Martinez and Bill Spelman opposed) to put the 8-2-1 plan for electing council members on the November ballot.
A five-vote majority is sufficient to pass any measure on the council’s agenda on all three readings for final approval, and dispense with further consideration. Today, at Mayor Pro Tem Sheryl Cole’s request, the vote was limited to second reading only.
It now appears to be a foregone conclusion that at least four votes in favor of the 8-2-1 plan will be cast on third reading, which Mayor Lee Leffingwell said he anticipated would be scheduled for an August 7 work session.
That will set up head-to-head competition on the November ballot between the 8-2-1 plan and the 10-1 plan, which already garnered sufficient signatures to go on the ballot.
Investigative Reports
For more than a decade the Bulldog has published hard-hitting, in-depth investigative reports that have shaped civic discourse and public policy, resulted in criminal prosecutions, and enlightened voters about candidates' records. Here are a few samples of our work:
About us
The Austin Bulldog is the premiere investigative journalism outfit in Central Texas. Established in 2009, the Bulldog has become a trusted independent voice for government accountability, known for its incisive, in-depth coverage of local elections and local governments.
Newsletter
Keep up with the best investigative reporting in Austin.
Follow us
Bulldog Team
Ken Martin
Founder and EditorOur critical accountability journalism wouldn't be possible without the generous donations of hundreds of Austinites. Join them and become a supporter today!
Areas of Coverage
Austin City Manager: Dallas discard vs Austin retread
Are tax subsidies for luxury development legal?
Lame duck council set to vote on 20-year sweetheart tax deal for developer
Environmentalists assail plan for lakeside high rises
Urbanists vie to replace council member Kathie Tovo
First-ever opportunity to elect appraisal board members
District 10 Council candidates jump in early
Announcing the Government Accountability Project
Central Health launches search for new CEO
First-ever opportunity to elect appraisal board members
Announcing the Government Accountability Project
Project Connect
Lawmakers weigh axing Project Connect’s ‘blank check’ loophole
Project Connect scope drastically scaled back
Austin Transit Partnership gears up for key decisions on light rail design
Become a Bulldog supporter
The Bulldog is funded by its readers. We're not affiliated with any political party or interest group. We're not paid by corporate sponsors. Support us today so we can continue to be a trusted voice for government accountability.