fbpx
Home Blog Page 98

Charter Changes to Enhance Accountability

Charter Revision Commission’s Next Job: Tackle Plan for Geographic Representation

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—recommending 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

Four of the potential charter amendments were addressed in response to City Council resolutions, as follows:

Campaign contribution limits—The committee voted to table a council proposal that would increase the allowed individual campaign contribution limits for at-large seats (all members of the council are currently elected city-wide) to $700 per person per election, twice the current limit of $350.

The $350 limit on campaign contributions resulted from a charter amendment, Proposition 5, that was approved by 68 percent voters May 13, 2006. Proposition 5 raised the limit from $100  and provided for a cost of living adjustment.

Committee member Fred Cantu, a political consultant, objected to limiting campaign contributions because he said it puts candidates of modest means at a disadvantage when running against wealthy candidates who can pour large sums of their own money into a contest.

“People should be allowed to contribute what they want, with disclosure,” he said.

Actually, unlimited campaign contributions were allowed before the November 4, 1997, charter election. That’s when 72 percent of the 61,382 voters who cast ballots opted to limit campaign contributions to $100, in response to a citizen-driven petition

Fundraising to retire debt—The committee voted 9-5 to allow winning candidates to continue fundraising for 30 days after the election to retire campaign debt and fund officeholder accounts.

Article 3, Section 8(F)(4) of the charter already allows losing candidates to continue fundraising after an election until reimbursed.

But this provision for winning candidates was recommended only if new restrictions are placed on the purposes for which officeholder accounts could be used. Contributions to charities, nonprofit organizations, and payments for membership dues, advertising and newsletters would be prohibited.

The basic reasoning was that these kinds of expenditures are not related to the functions of running a council office but instead are used to build goodwill that more resembles campaigning. “These restrictions are not relevant to performing duties” of the office, said Ann Kitchen, a former state representative and vice chair of the committee.

Committee member Fred Lewis, an attorney with long experience in dealing with campaign finance issues, pointed out that the funds in officeholder accounts are, in fact, kept in the same bank account as campaign contributions.

Assistant City Attorney Sabine Romero, staff advisor to the committee, noted that the City Charter currently allows $20,000 to be kept in an officeholder account after an election; any excess over that amount must be given away, for example to a nonprofit or put in the city’s Fair Campaign Fund (provided for in City Code Section 2-2-61).

These excess funds cannot be contributed to a candidate, Lewis said. Kitchen noted that excess funds could also be returned to contributors.

Doubling officeholder accounts to $40,000—The committee voted with two opposed to recommend a charter amendment to allow officeholders to keep $40,000 in accounts to defray legitimate office expenses—but with a prohibition, added by committee member and campaign consultant David Butts, on converting those funds into campaign funds for reelection.

When running for reelection, an officeholder “should start on an equal footing with everyone else,” Butts said.

Runoff election contributions—Without voting, the committee accepted the working group recommendations not to include a charter amendment that campaign contributions for a runoff election may only be collected after the election day for the general election.

The working group’s recommendation stated that  Article 3, Section 8(F)2 of the City Charter and City Code Section 2-2-7 already address this concern.

Additional recommended changes

Five other proposals were strongly recommended by the working group as “key campaign finance and election reforms that are urgently needed and deserve the durable protection afforded by the City Charter,” as follows:

Give Ethics Review Commission more authority—Without discussion, the committee unanimously voted to recommend a charter amendment to explicitly state that the Ethics Review Commission has jurisdiction over all alleged city campaign finance and campaign disclosure violations.

This would clear the way for the council-appointed commission members to deal with such alleged violations in way that they have not been allowed within the city’s current legal guidance.

The recommendation includes giving the Ethics Review Commission, established by City Charter Article 2, Chapter 2-7, the authority to hire a special prosecutor at its discretion in cases where it believes such action is necessary, with funding provided by the city.

The recommendation would also require funding of all reasonable and necessary expenses of the commission to perform its assigned duties.

In addition, the recommendation would specifically prohibit future City Councils from weakening or limiting the powers of the commission by ordinance, but would give the council authority to strengthen the commission’s powers if desired.

Require reporting of last-minute contributions—The committee voted unanimously to recommend a charter amendment that would require timely disclosure of campaign contributions made within nine days of an election.

Currently such reporting is not required and the working group noted that some parties have exploited this loophole to prevent voters from learning the sources and amounts of major campaign contributions or expenditures until after ballots have been cast.

“Sometimes there’s cheating going on,” said attorney Fred Lewis. “The candidate knows the money is coming but we cannot prove it.”

These late contributions allow a candidate to put on a last-minute media blitz with surprise attacks with no notice of who paid the expenses until after the election is over.

Enhanced disclosure of independent expenditures—The committee voted unanimously to recommend a charter amendment to explicitly require the disclosure of independent expenditures and electioneering communications by all persons, including corporations, unions, 501(c) nonprofit organizations, unincorporated associations and individuals.

The recommendation addresses a problem that is likely to only get worse unless addressed, due to the Citizens United case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court that allows corporate and union funds to be used to exert greater influence over elections.

Entities that are not candidates or political action committees currently may avoid disclosure of independent expenditures and funding sources because state and city laws have not been updated to address the increasingly common practice of using nonprofit organizations, ad hoc groups, unions, corporations or others for political purposes.

Current city law does not require independent expenditures of more than $1,000 to be disclosed within seven business days or, if made in the last nine days before the election, within 48 hours.

Neither state law nor city law explicitly defines independent expenditures to require disclosure of electioneering communications such as sham ads, i.e., ads that do not expressly say to vote for or against a candidate but are clearly intended to influence an election.

The definition recommended would include both express advocacy—in which voters are urged to vote for or against a specific candidate—and electioneering communications.

The recommendation would mandate all independent expenditures and their sources of funding be reported within five business days if made more than 60 days before an election. If made between 60 days before and 10 days before an election, independent expenditures would have to be made within 48 hours. If made within nine days before an election, reporting would be required within 24 hours.

Also, “paid by” disclaimers on communications purchased by independent expenditures in City of Austin elections would be required to state the names of the five largest contributors within the preceding 12 months.

“Someone could raise unlimited contributions totaling $100,000 and run TV ads” for independent expenditures, attorney Fred Lewis said. But these new rules (established by the Supreme Court decision) “would not let you bash candidates and say it’s not electioneering.”

Require electronic filing of campaign finance and lobbying reports—The committee voted unanimously to recommend a charter amendment to require any entity that contributes, accepts, or expends funds related to a city election to file all required reports electronically and in a format that would be published by the city in a searchable, and downloadable, database.

At present, candidates who raise large amounts of money typically file campaign contribution reports on a compact disc in portable document format (pdf), City Clerk Shirley Brown told The Austin Bulldog, while less well funded candidates may file paper copies. In either case, the records are posted on the City Clerk’s website as pdfs to make them publicly available, but not in a user-friendly format that facilitates analysis.

The working group’s research noted that both the State of Texas and City of Houston already require electronic filing of these documents in a searchable database.

“For a city that prides itself on technological savvy, it is surprising that Austin does not facilitate meaningful public access to this information because it clings to a paper filing system,” states the working group’s recommendation.

If the City Council puts this item on the ballot and voters approve it, this charter amendment would require that the database be fully operational no later than six months after the election.

Require voter approval for revenue bonds of more than $50 million—The committee approved this recommendation by a vote of 11-3 with one member off the dais, but only after lengthy debate.

Article 7, Section 11 of the City Charter states, “All revenue bonds issued by the city shall first be authorized by a majority of the qualified electors voting at an election held for such purpose.”

This requirement has been ignored for decades based on the city’s legal advice citing a superceding state law that allows cities to issue revenue bonds without voter approval.

This was done, for example, in the years when the South Texas Nuclear Project was being built and incurred huge cost overruns. When this happened, the City Council headed by Mayor Ron Mullen issued bonds to cover the city’s increased share of the costs. The thinking at the time was the city had no choice in the matter and must meet its contractual obligations as part-owner.

The purpose of this charter amendment is to reassert the requirement to follow the City Charter regardless of what state law might allow.

Seven other charter amendments recommended

On September 29, the committee approved seven other recommendations to go on the ballot for the next charter amendment election for voters to decide:

• Move City Council elections from May to November.

• Prohibit City Council members from switching places for the purpose of avoiding term limits.

• Require the same number of signatures for initiative and referendum petitions as are required for City Charter amendment petitions, i.e., five percent of the city’s qualified voters.

• Require the City Attorney to report to the City Council (instead of the City Manager) and allow the City Attorney to directly appoint deputy city attorneys.

• Allow City Council members to appoint their staff members.

• Allow the City Clerk to appoint deputy city clerks.

• Allow the City Auditor to appoint deputy auditors.

To see the details concerning the September 29 recommendations, click here.

Related stories:

Council Confirms November 2012 Election Date for Charter Amendments, November 3, 2011

Coalition Launching Petition Drive to Get on the Ballot for May 2012 Election, October 18, 2011

Broad Community Interest Focusing on How Mayor and Council Members Elected, October 4, 2011

Coalition Nearing Petition Launch for Grass-roots Council District Plan, August 24, 2011

Maps Prove Select Few Govern Austin: Forty Years of Election History Expose Extent of Disparity, August 4, 2011

City Council to Consider Proposal to Create Geographic Representation: Election Dates, Term Lengths, Redistricting and Other Charter Changes in Council Resolution, April 27, 2011

Petition Launch Imminent to Force Election for Geographic Representation in City Elections, March 7, 2011

This report was made possible by contributions to The Austin Bulldog, which operates as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to provide investigative reporting in the public interest. You can help sustain this kind of reporting by making a tax-deductible contribution.

Laura Pressley’s Campaign Kicks Off

Candidate Drew Big and Loud Crowd in Announcing Run for Austin City Council

Updated 10:10am Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Laura Pressley
Laura Pressley

A 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

“I want to focus on the health of Austin—environmental, individual, and economic—and how to keep jobs in Austin.”

Regarding economic health, Pressley cited examples of money spent on contracts for out-of-state companies, such as a $4 million contract she says was awarded to a Minnesota company to pick up large items for Austin Energy. She said software contracts have been awarded to California companies. “Why doesn’t the council buy local?”

On the topic of environmental health, Pressley said the Fayette Power Plant located in La Grange, east of Austin, is spewing sulfur dioxide and mercury that’s killing trees. “That plant needs to go,” she said. “We need clean energy programs—and no rate increases for us.”

Noting that the city gets a lot of its energy from the South Texas Project, a nuclear plant, Pressley said the possibility of an accident means questions need to be asked to make sure the plant is safe.

Individual health could be improved by creating more organic gardens and improving water quality. “Water is the most important thing we put in our bodies. Where’s our organic water? It’s not coming out of our taps,” she said, and claimed that chemicals in Austin’s tap water exceeds standards.

Pressley’s concern for clean water is not only personal but professional. In 2007 she co-founded Pure Rain LLC, an Austin-based company that sells bottled rain water. She travels extensively to market the water, which is sold locally at Whole Foods and Central Market, according to the Pure Rain website.

Another individual health issue is the airport scanners that she said operate on a microwave frequency. She recommends that passengers opt for a pat down inspection and not go through the scanners.

Pressley said no one on the current city council has a technological background, and water quality, energy, and pollution issues are technical. “We don’t have anybody on the council to ask hard questions,” she said. “That’s what I’ll do.”

Enthusiastic supporters

Several people warmed up the crowd before Pressley took the stage, including Neil Carman, longtime director of the state Sierra Club’s clean air program. Carman, who like Pressley holds a PhD in chemistry, said , “In the elections next spring we need to un-elect some of the people on the council,” drawing hoots and applause. “I can’t think of a better person I know to run.”

Harlan Deitrich, owner of Brave New Books, gave an energetic pitch, saying Pressley was incredibly intelligent, incredibly honest, and a very strong woman. “She has a fire in her belly and a passion for this,” he said. “She’s doing this to win.”

John Maltabes, a visiting scholar at Hewlett Packard Laboratories, and a top fundraiser for SafePlace for many years, said he had known Pressley for 15 years. Of the campaign to come, he said, “We will go door-to-door and knock on every door in Austin.”

On a personal note, Pressley is married to Leif D. Allred, an engineering manager at Applied Materials. The couple owns a home at 2210 White Horse Trail, just a few doors down from Lamar Middle School in the Allandale neighborhood. Pressley said she has one daughter, 26, who lives in Seattle.

She told a compelling personal history as a survivor of domestic and sexual violence who came to Austin as a poor, single woman to pursue a graduate education at the University of Texas. She told a similarly moving story about the generations of women in her family who had suffered from abuse in a 2001 press conference video at the State Capitol that focused on funding for family violence services in Texas.

Pressley is a current steering committee member for Texans for Accountable Government, an Austin-based nonpartisan political action committee that focuses on safeguarding individual liberty, protecting personal privacy and property rights, election integrity, safe water, and electing representatives to office, according to its website.

She is also on the steering committee for Fluoride Free Austin and has served on the boards of several nonprofit organizations, including SafePlace, which operates a 24-hour hotline and an emergency shelter for women and children escaping domestic violence; Women’s Advocacy Project, which gives legal advice to victims of domestic violence; and served as volunteer Development and Fundraising Chair of the (updated 10:10am December 14, 2011) DiscoverHope Fund, which creates opportunities for women in poverty through microcredit, entrepreneurship and training.

Pressley’s campaign treasurer is Jason Wahoski, a product marketing manager at Applied Materials.

This report was made possible by contributions to The Austin Bulldog, which operates as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to provide investigative reporting in the public interest. You can help to sustain The Austin Bulldog’s reporting by making a tax-deductible contribution.

Brigid Shea Exploring Run for Mayor

Cites Differences in Vision and Leadership But No Specifics While Mulling Her Candidacy
 
Brigid Shea
Brigid Shea

Brigid 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 Leffingwell
Lee Leffingwell

Mayor 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

As a council member, along with Jackie Goodman of the Save Barton Creek Association, who also was elected to the council in 1993, the balance of power shifted enough to kill a $3 million contract already awarded and stop construction of a major sewer project that would have boosted capacity to serve areas over the environmentally sensitive aquifer.

In 1995, however, Shea was on the losing end of a battle to stop the extension of service over the aquifer to provide water to the Lantana tract owned by a Freeport-McMoRan subsidiary.

In 1995 while on the council, Shea and family moved into the Rainey Street neighborhood that is now home to a number of thriving bars, including one in the first home they lived in there, which they leased to the Clive Bar at Davis and Rainey streets. They own another residential rental property in the neighborhood at 73 Rainey St. They currently live at 2604 Geraghty in north central Austin. (To see the property records click here.)

After leaving the council in June 1996, Shea returned to the Save Our Springs Alliance as executive director. She gave birth to her second son, Charles, at age 44, and stepped down as director to become a part-time communications director. She left that job in September 1999 under the strain of having two young children and passion for a job that was making too many demands on her time.

Shortly after leaving the SOS Alliance Shea started an environmental consulting practice, Brigid Shea and Associates, a green consulting practice. She acted as a consultant to the city on its Austin Clean Water Program that lasted about seven years, a project triggered by EPA’s reaction to a massive sewage spill on Brushy Creek that contaminated well water and sickened some 1,400 people, Shea said, as well as almost daily spills in other parts of the city’s sewage system. She said she helped acquire $5 million in federal funding for the project that eventually won an EPA award.

Shea said she also worked for a mitigation plan for Green Mountain Energy’s offices near Barton Creek and a plan for Vignette Corporation, a software company, to complete a project like River Walk adjacent to its planned new offices on Waller Creek. That project was shelved after Vignette hit a slump. The building was never constructed and the company was subsequently acquired.

More recently She co-founded Carbon Shrinks LLC, a company that helped Texas Lehigh’s Cement Company’s kiln convert to eco-friendly fuels of wood chips and shredded tires that replaced coal and petroleum coke and radically lower carbon emissions that contribute to global warming.

In 1999 Shea was one of the leaders of the PIPE Coalition (Protecting Individuals, Protecting the Environment), which fought the Longhorn Pipeline that eventually won approval with stronger environmental safeguards to pump gasoline through large swaths of South Austin over the aquifer.

While off the council Shea stayed politically active. She was on the SOS Political Action Committee but resigned in  2000 over the board’s inability to muster a two-third’s majority to support the reelection of Mayor Kirk Watson.

Shea was in the forefront of two battles against giant retailer Walmart, first when a mega-store was proposed over the aquifer and again with Responsible Growth for Northcross, a group that resisted and won major downsizing of the new Walmart store built in the aging mall at Anderson Lane and Burnet Road.

Shea’s husband, John Umphress, works for Austin Energy now. But in the days before political contributions were vastly reduced by the 1997 passage of campaign finance rules, Umphress himself was a pipeline for huge sums of money from rock ’n’ roller Don Henley, who funneled major sums to environmental candidates for the Austin council. Henley gave $30,000 to Daryl Slusher’s 1994 attempt to unseat Mayor Bruce Todd’s re-election. In 1996 Henley gave Slusher $40,000 for his council race and Beverly Griffith $20,000 for hers. In 1997 he gave Bill Spelman $35,000 and Willie Lewis $25,000 to help their campaigns.

This report was made possible by contributions to The Austin Bulldog, which operates as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to provide investigative reporting in the public interest. You can help to sustain The Austin Bulldog’s reporting by making a tax-deductible contribution.

Background Investigation: Mayor Lee Leffingwell

Here’s What the Public Records Say About the City’s Highest Elected Official

Updated Wednesday, March 14, 2012 at 10:45am to include military service records
Lee Leffingwell
Lee Leffingwell

On 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

Unlike some of his fellow elected officials, Leffingwell does not have a significant amount of real estate or business connections. Based on The Austin Bulldog’s research, he owns an Austin home valued at $492,585, and a vacation home in Sherman County, Nebraska worth $20,705.

Leffingwell has the financial wherewithal to invest in his re-election campaign if necessary, although he still owes his last campaign $60,911, according to his latest officeholder report filed in July.

In addition to his council salary of $75,420, Leffingwell draws retirement of $10,000 to $20,000 each from Delta Air Lines and the military, and $20,000 to $50,000 each from social security and an Individual Retirement Account in which he has invested $400,000. (Financial statements provide for reporting in various financial categories, which indicate ranges of income and not exact amounts.)

He raised $279,833 for his first mayoral election campaign in 2009 and spent $336,399 in that contest, according to his campaign finance reports for that election cycle.

In his first mayoral election campaign Leffingwell attracted significant fundraising support from well-connected people who bundled contributions for him, including Armbrust & Brown PLLC lawyer-lobbyists Richard Suttle and David Armbrust, Rz Communications Chairman and CEO Andrew Ramirez, CAS Consulting CEO Channy Soeur (whose daughter now works in the mayor’s office), Reagan National Advertising President William Reagan II, Schlosser Development Corporation President Bradley Schlosser, and F5 Networks executive Mark McAfee. (Bundlers are individuals who solicit and obtain contributions of $200 or more from five or more individuals. The reporting of bundlers’ names in contribution reports is required by City Code Section 2-2-22, although this requirement does not apply to an individual who raises $5,000 or less for a candidate through a fundraising event held at the individual’s home.)

Leffingwell’s career and political background

Leffingwell served as an officer and pilot in the U.S. Navy and was on active duty during the Vietnam War. He worked as a commercial pilot with Delta Air Lines for 32 years. After retiring, he became a full-time volunteer focused on environmental issues.

Leffingwell got into politics as a member of the city’s environmental board in 1999 and was subsequently elected chair. Green issues have continued to be a top priority. As a council member and mayor, he led the charge in drafting plans to conserve water and advocating for a plastic-bag ban in the city’s grocery stores. Leffingwell, however, has received criticism from environmental activists for his push to continue construction of the $500 million Water Treatment Plant 4 and strong support for bringing the now-troubled Formula One race to Austin.

In his November 16 re-election kickoff speech at his childhood school, Becker Elementary, Leffingwell said he wants to continue his emphasis on renewable energy by beginning a community dialogue about how to make Austin coal-free.

“The global energy market is changing and we need to change with it.  Right now wind prices are competitive with fossil fuels, and that is critical,” Leffingwell said in his speech. “As we begin the work to make Austin a coal-free city, we absolutely must, and will, do it in a way that keeps electric rates competitive and low for our customers.”

Leffingwell is also heavily involved in transportation issues as a Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) executive committee member. The Statesman reported November 4 that Leffingwell revived a group first created in 2007 to examine a proposed urban rail plan. The group, led by Leffingwell, aims to form a “more concrete regional blueprint” by May, with the goal of putting the first phase of an urban rail system before voters in a November 2012 bond election.

In addition, the mayor laid out a proposal earlier this year aimed at encouraging more residents to vote in city elections. He hopes to create City Council districts—currently the mayor and six council members represent the entire city—move city elections from May to November, reform campaign finance laws, and increase the length of council terms.

“Over the past few decades, I believe that our political process in Austin has become increasingly—and dangerously—disconnected from the vast majority of our citizens,” Leffingwell said, noting the May 2011 election’s 7.4 percent voter turnout. “(These proposals) would increase voter turnout and save money.”

Open meetings investigation

David EscamillaLeffingwell said in his re-election speech he wants to continue his focus on maintaining a “transparent, accountable city government.” Yet, Travis County Attorney David Escamilla announced in January that his office is investigating a complaint that Leffingwell and city council members engaged in private, one-on-one and two-on-one meetings to deliberate city business—a possible violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act.

A violation if proven would constitute a criminal offense under Section 551.143 of the Act, a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $100 and not more than $500, confinement in the county jail for not less than one month or more than six months, or both the fine and confinement.

The Austin Bulldog broke the story on January 25 about the private meetings being held in which every council member met with every other council member to discuss city business right before each council meeting. Each council member was involved in hundreds of these meetings in 2010 alone, a fact documented in the calendars four council members published with the story.

A month later, thousands of e-mail exchanges between Leffingwell and other council members were released in response to open records requests filed by The Austin Bulldog and Austin American-Statesman. Many of these e-mails were sent while on the dais in council meetings and contained unflattering remarks about both city staff members as well as citizens.

On March 1 The Austin Bulldog sued Leffingwell, each council member, and the City of Austin in March for not releasing all e-mail exchanges requested under the Texas Public Information Act.

The lawsuit stemmed from The Austin Bulldog’s open records requests of January 19 and 27 for e-mails, letters, memoranda, notes, or other forms of written communication from the mayor and each council member to any council member or the mayor from January 1, 2010 to January 27, 2011. The city took the position that it would not turn over e-mails about city business these elected officials sent or received on personal e-mail accounts. As a result of the lawsuit, the mayor and council members eventually released varying amounts of these e-mails.

The Austin Bulldog’s July 6 story about e-mails exchanged in 2009 exposed the private deliberations and political maneuvering that council members were engaged in regarding highly sensitive matters of city business such as the $500 million Water Treatment Plant 4, a $250 million purchased power agreement for a solar project, and the proposed $750,000 settlement over the police shooting death of teenager Nathaniel Sanders II.

Many of these e-mail exchanges were conducted through their personal e-mail accounts, possibly for the purpose of trying to conceal these deliberations. Some of the 2,400 pages of 2009 e-mails published by The Austin Bulldog showed that council members communicated among themselves about city business in numbers equaling or exceeding a quorum, a possible violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act.

The lawsuit and county attorney’s investigation are ongoing and may reemerge as campaign issues in the months leading to the May 2012 election.

The data

Mayor Shelly Lee Leffingwell

Age: 72

Current Office: Mayor since June 2009

Office sought: Mayor of Austin

Previous Office: Council member June 2005 to June 2009

Office salary: $75,420 a year plus a $5,400 annual car allowance

Office e-mail: [email protected]

Office telephone: 512-974-2250

Education:

Bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Texas at Austin (1961)

Naval Aviation Officer Candidate School in Pensacola, Fla.

Voter registration application and voter history

Business records: None located

Campaign finance reports:

2008 campaign for city council (191 pages)

2009 campaign for mayor (463 pages)

Military service records (7 pages)

Personal financial statements:

2008 through 2010 and 2011 mid-year update (City Code)

2006 through 2010 (State law, Chapter 145)

Property records:

Homes owned in Austin, Texas and Loup City, Nebraska

Travis County Grantee Records (property acquired,34 pages)

Travis County Grantor Records (property sold,50 pages)

Probate records:

Dorothy Corine Leffingwell (mother, 30 pages)

Mary Lou McLain (second wife, 30 pages)

Speeding ticket record

Texas Ethics Commission Order and Agreed Resolution

Leffingwell e-mails:

2009 city e-mail account (176 pages)

2009 personal e-mail accounts (137 pages)

2010 and January 2011 initial release (95 pages)

2010 and January 2011 personal e-mail accounts (116 pages)

Re-election speech

Current boards:

Austin Area Comprehensive HIV Planning Council

Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) executive committee member

Mayor’s Fitness Council

Past board: City of Austin Environmental Board, 1999-2004

Council committee: Judicial committee

City staff:

Andy Mormon, chief of staff

Nancy Williams, executive assistant

Amy Everhart, policy director

Sly Majid, chief service officer

Michelle Soeur, constituent liaison

Campaign staff:

Campaign manager: Jonathon “JD” Gins, who led Leffingwell’s 2009 effort and worked as a field director for President Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

Field director: Joe Deshotel, son of State Representative Joe Deshotel (D-Beaumont)

Treasurer: Kathryn “Kitty” Clark

Spouses: Court records show that Leffingwell has been married twice in Texas.

He married Margaret Clampitt in 1960 and got divorced in 1990, according to court records.

He married Mary Lou McLain, a registered nurse, that same year. Their marriage came to a tragic end when she died on April 22, 2005, in the midst of his first campaign for City Council.

Leffingwell is now married to Julie Ann Byers, a registered nurse who retired this year from Seton Northwest Hospital.

Web pages:

Blog: http://www.mayorleffingwell.com/index.asp

City biography: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/mayor/default.htm

City Website: http://www.mayorleffingwell.com/welcome.asp

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lee-Leffingwell/46089482841

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/lee-leffingwell/8/65b/225 (badly outdated)

Re-election campaign: http://www.leffingwellformayor.com/

Statesman PolitiFact: http://www.politifact.com/personalities/lee-leffingwell/

Twitter:

http://twitter.com/#!/TheLeeTeam

http://twitter.com/#!/TheLeeTeam2012

Stories involving Leffingwell

Links to stories (most recent first). Note: Most, but not all, Austin American-Statesman articles are linked here through the Austin Public Library online databases. Access is free but requires a library card number to view. You must log in on the library site for these links to work. Or, alternatively, Statesman articles can be accessed by searching the newspaper’s online archives and creating a user account.

Mayor’s district plan for City Council getting little support from committee, November 27, 2011  (On the free Austin American-Statesman site now)

Mayor’s second term seems likely, November 22, 2011 Daily Texan

Lee Leffingwell announces re-election campaign, November 17, 2011 Burnt Orange Report

Austin’s mayor launches re-election campaign, November 16, 2011 (On the free Statesman site now)

Rejuvenated transit group to draft regional plan for urban rail system, November 4, 2011(Archived Statesman story)

Next act, major drama, October 28, 2011 The Austin Chronicle

Council visits in-progress plant as mayor seeks to keep building, August 11, 2011 (Archived Statesman story)

Council weighs plastic bags ban, August 5, 2011(Archived Statesman story)

Austin City Council’s pay raises fly under the public radar, July 22, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

E-mails exchanged by council members expose private deliberations and political maneuvering: More than 2,400 pages of 2009 e-mails published here in a searchable format, July 6, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Activists’ hunt for payback nets small fines, July 4, 2011 (Archived Statesman story)

Taxpayers footing big bills to correct City of Austin’s open government issues, June 24, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Treasure trove of public documents made available in searchable format, May 12, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Austin City Council adopts policy to improve compliance with Texas Public Information Act, April 15, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

City of Austin’s records retention undermined by lack of controls over deletion of e-mails, April 6, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

The Austin Bulldog files civil complaint against City of Austin and council members, March 23, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Expired: The Austin Bulldog’s offer to settle its lawsuit with city, mayor and council members: Does that mean these elected officials want to continue to violate state laws?, March 18, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Council e-mails prompt ethics complaint lawsuit, March 11, 2011 The Austin Chronicle

The Austin Bulldog files lawsuit to compel compliance with the law: Mayor and city council members not in compliance with statutes for public information, records retention, March 2, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Council releases revealing e-mails: Communications show hard feelings, harsh words; raise questions on open meetings, February 26, 2011 (Archived Statesman story)

Mayor claims lawyers okayed private meetings but city won’t release proof: City pledges cooperation with county attorney’s inquiry but is withholding these key documents, February 13, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

County attorney asks City of Austin for records related to open meetings complaint, February 9, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Well I said come on over baby, whole lot of meetin’ goin’ on, January 30, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Braced for the gathering storm, January 28, 2011 (Archived Statesman story)

Open meetings, closed minds: Private meetings to discuss public business shows Austin City Council may be violating Open Meetings Act, January 25, 2011 The Austin Bulldog

Mayor backs council districts, January 24, 2011 (Archived Statesman story)

Gosh, incoming mayor is bland … and that’s OK, May 15, 2009 (Archived Statesman story)

Leffingwell called reserved but dedicated to the city, April 15, 2009 (Archived Statesman story)

Pro-union voice joins Cap Metro, October 2, 2006 (Archived Statesman story)

Eldercare leader fought for people, hospital district, April 23, 2005 (Archived Statesman story)

This report was made possible by contributions to The Austin Bulldog, which operates as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to provide investigative reporting in the public interest. You can help to sustain The Austin Bulldog’s reporting by making a tax-deductible contribution.

Appraisal District To End Records Suppression

New Policy Will Give Property Owners 45 Days to Qualify for Confidentiality

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
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
Marya Crigler
Marya Crigler

In other action the TCAD Board of Directors named Marya Crigler to succeed Patrick Brown as TCAD’s chief appraiser. Brown, who became chief appraiser in January 2008, last night told The Austin Bulldog he will be leaving the job in six weeks.

“I’m very pleased the board chose Crigler as our new chief appraiser,” said Lavine, who’s been a board member for a dozen years and chairman since January. “She has a lot of experience in the district and a lot of support on the staff. We’re looking for her to move the district ahead with greater efficiency and more accurate appraisals.”

Crigler said she has been employed by TCAD since she graduated from the University of Texas at Austin in 1989. She currently holds the position of IT director and deputy chief of operations.

Crigler is a graduate of the Texas Association of Appraisal District’s Chief Appraiser Institute, Class of 2009, and has served on numerous committees for the organization.

Crigler’s salary was $118,100 as of March 2011, according to the Texas Tribune’s database, which lists Brown’s salary as $129,000 on that date. Crigler told The Austin Bulldog she would be negotiating her compensation.

TCAD currently has 130 employees and an annual budget of $12.9 million. Funding to run the district’s operations is provided by the taxing entities for which TCAD provides appraisal services.

The district’s primary responsibility is to develop an annual appraisal roll for use by taxing units in imposing ad valorem taxes on property in the district. The Travis Central Appraisal District appraises property in all of Travis County, an area of 990.2 square miles according to U.S. Census data. TCAD is currently responsible for 395,692 tax accounts, according to a TCAD report dated November 21.

Related story:
Appraisal Records Hidden From Public View: Agencies Suppressing Online Records the Law Doesn’t Deem Confidential, November 18, 2011

This report was made possible by contributions to The Austin Bulldog, which operates as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to provide investigative reporting in the public interest. You can help to sustain The Austin Bulldog’s reporting by making a tax-deductible contribution.