BG Reads | News You Need to Know (November 16, 2021)
Downtown Austin
[AUSTIN METRO NEWS]
Property owners, city to present arguments in Austin's appeal over stalled land development code update (Community Impact)
More than a year and a half after Austin first appealed a judge's ruling against its process to rewrite its land development code, legal teams from the city and an opposition group of local property owners are set to lay out their arguments in court Nov. 17.
City officials and staff had worked for years to craft an update to Austin's aging development code covering what can be built and where around town. That work was stopped due to Travis County Judge Jan Soifer's March 2020 ruling in favor of the property owners amid the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic, and officials voted to appeal Soifer's decision weeks later.
The land code effort had been underway in various forms since the early 2010s, in part to modernize development rules first written in the 1980s and to address growing concerns related to Austin's housing supply and affordability. And while the development code rewrite would have affected zoning for properties throughout the city, the lawsuit centered on the city's process rather than any proposed changes.
When land is up for rezoning, Texas government code requires that cities notify nearby residents about relevant public zoning hearings and allow them to protest. If enough citizens end up contesting the potential change, city leaders are required to pass the rezoning by a higher margin.
During Austin's land code rewrite process, the city said its wholesale code update was not subject to those rezoning regulations and therefore did not individually notify all affected residents or allow any formal protests. Soifer disagreed with the city, holding Austin's process violated state rules and voiding council's initial approvals of the new code.Douglas Becker, a member of the legal team representing the property owners in the case, told Community Impact Newspaper on Nov. 12 that he still views the city's procedure as incorrect and will argue against Austin for its "violation" of state statute.
"The city ... told people, ‘Don’t bother to protest because we’re not going to pay any attention to them. You don’t get to protest this.’ And that’s what we think is wrong; that’s what the trial court thought was wrong," Becker said. "If they rezone one or two or a couple of hundred properties, they have to give individual notice, and they have to honor protests, but if they rezone hundreds of thousands they don’t? That just doesn't make sense."
A representative of the city's legal team did not respond to a request for comment. In written court filings, Austin officials have argued the state requirements are irrelevant given that code changes would evenly affect city property owners.
"The purpose of individual notice and protest is to protect property owners who will be uniquely affected by a zoning change to their specific property. They are inapplicable—a square peg—when every property citywide is affected equally," the city said in a July 2020 brief.
Both sides are set to present 15-minute arguments Nov. 17 before a three-justice panel of the 14th Court of Appeals in Houston. Oral arguments will be streamed live on YouTube.
Whether Austin ends up winning its appeal, city officials may not jump back into full-scale land development code deliberations anytime soon. Council members are planning to review a range of development and housing topics at a Nov. 30 work session that could result in officials considering individual policy changes, rather than a more comprehensive update, over the weeks and months ahead… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
Land use commissions face uphill battle to stay at City Hall (Austin Monitor)
When City Council approved plans for a new Permitting and Development Center in 2017, the idea was that all land use commissions would eventually hold meetings there as part of a “one-stop shop” for all things development. But now that the building is finished, the commissions don’t want to move.
In recent weeks, the Planning Commission, Zoning and Platting Commission, and Board of Adjustment have all expressed a strong preference to stay at City Hall. For one, they argue, holding meetings at the PDC is inequitable because it is not as centrally located and is less accessible by transit.
“It’s just much more transit friendly (at City Hall),” said ZAP Commissioner Jolene Kiolbassa, who noted that there seven rapid bus routes near City Hall versus just two (plus Red Line regional rail) near the PDC, which is located in the Highland Mall redevelopment at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive.
Commissioners also say that keeping all zoning cases at City Hall – where Council ultimately decides the final outcome of each case – might prevent confusion on the part of community members who want to participate. The planned move affects over a dozen land use commissions, boards and committees, who will all share a 5,000-square-foot, 351-person capacity meeting space that has ATXN streaming and hybrid meeting capabilities.
The Planning Commission, ZAP and BoA have pulled out all the procedural stops to halt the move, including resolutions, rules and bylaw changes, code amendments, and 2022 meeting calendars that stipulate City Hall as the meeting location.
In ZAP’s resolution, safety proved another salient consideration. “If we ever have another contentious case, it could be problematic,” Kiolbassa said. In the past, police have been called in to deescalate heated zoning hearings. While there will be a security guard at PDC meetings, there are no plans for metal detectors, unlike at City Hall. Kiolbassa added that the surrounding area is less active at night than downtown, making walking alone less safe.
Commissioners also seemed to be caught unawares about the move. “I consider myself a fairly savvy follower of doings at City Hall, and I didn’t know we were moving,” ZAP Commissioner Ann Denkler said.
Despite firm stances from commissioners and board members, city staff isn’t budging (Link to memo in full)… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
Public documents bolster case Samsung's leaning toward rural Taylor for $17B plant (Austin Business Journal)
Technology giant Samsung Electronics Co. has yet to announce a final decision about where it will put its $17 billion chipmaking plant, though there's new evidence the South Korea-based company may be crossing prospective cities off its list, including Austin.
An application originally filed in January for Chapter 313 incentives from Manor Independent School District — tied to a proposal to locate the factory near Samsung's existing facility in North Austin — has been removed from the state comptroller's website. Kevin Lyons, a spokesperson for the comptroller's office, confirmed that the application was withdrawn last week.
Samsung has been considering sites in Central Texas, Phoenix and upstate New York for its massive project, which will be one of the largest foreign investments in U.S. history. Executives have said incentives will play an important part in the decision.
Officials with the city of Austin and Travis County declined to comment on the status of discussions with Samsung, and Manor ISD leaders did not immediately return requests for comment. Michele Glaze, a spokesperson for Samsung, maintained that a final decision has not yet been made.
However, Samsung could soon secure the same kind of incentives from Taylor Independent School District. School district trustees are set to consider a Chapter 313 agreement with Samsung at their Nov. 15 meeting, according to the board agenda.
Glaze said in a statement that "Taylor ISD is approving their final contract of the Ch. 313, as the last step of their due diligence."
The Chapter 313 property tax abatement program allows a school district to cap a portion of property taxes paid for manufacturing and renewable energy projects. Samsung already has a Chapter 313 agreement in place with Manor ISD for its existing semiconductor plant in North Austin, where it has invested $17 billion over the past 25 years. The Chapter 313 program is slated to expire at the end of 2022.
Taylor, north of Austin, has in recent months been considered the frontrunner in Samsung's site search because it is the only locale to have publicly approved incentives agreements for the project. Taylor City Council and Williamson County Commissioners Court signed off on incentives back in September.
Samsung Electronics vice chairman Jay Y. Lee is reportedly visiting North America over the next few weeks, and international news reports suggest a decision could be imminent.
If built in Taylor, Samsung's factory stands to be the largest capital investment the area has ever seen. It would be transformative for the city, which had a population of 16,267 in 2020, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. There would be significant ripple effects, including billions of dollars in construction spending and thousands of construction jobs, not to mention the annual impact of the factory’s output and salaries for decades to come… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
Resilience hub initiative continues to evolve (Austin Monitor)
Winter Storm Uri, the extreme weather event that left an unknown number of Austin residents dead last February, inspired the initiative to create resilience hubs across the city that would act as a public resource in times of crisis. The initial idea of creating two centers independent of the energy grid to pilot the initiative has transformed into a more comprehensive, citywide network of facilities designed to serve the entire community equitably.
Representatives from the city’s Office of Sustainability and the Austin Independent School District briefed the city’s Public Health Committee last Tuesday on the project and its evolution. The hubs, which are being designed in collaboration with numerous local stakeholders and organizations, will use existing facilities that are already familiar and trustworthy to community members. The facilities will be retrofitted as either a 1) gathering hub, 2) relief hub or 3) sheltering hub. While all three tiers of resilience hubs are designed to help Austinites stay safe in times of crisis, gathering hubs will be a simpler operation, while sheltering hubs will be outfitted with many more resources. Relief hubs fall somewhere between the two.
Zach Baumer, the climate program manager at the Office of Sustainability, began the briefing by explaining how the committee has decided to put equity at the center of the program. Ideally, he said, everyone in town would be able to walk to a resilience hub within 15 minutes, which would require about 400 centers across town. Acknowledging that this is a lofty goal, he explained that they’re using the Centers for Disease Control’s Social Vulnerability Index, which measures a population’s sensitivity to natural hazards, to map out which parts of the city would benefit the most by having nearby resilience hubs. These areas, which Baumer said are mostly in East Austin, will be the committee’s first priority before expanding the network.
Gathering hubs would be a great resource for events like heat waves, Baumer explained. They’ll be equipped with electricity to charge up devices, free snacks and water, and trained staff to help navigate individual situations. Relief hubs, the next level up, will need more space to distribute water and food at a larger scale. They’ll also offer storage space, shower access and portable generators. Shelter hubs will be designed to handle the most extreme disasters and will have room to actually house people who need it. These facilities will have grid-independent power and a backup water system in the case existing infrastructure fails, like it did in Winter Storm Uri.
The team of people working to build out these resilience hubs plans to take on gathering hubs first. But before they begin the conversions, they have to decide where and what existing facilities will do the job. They’re looking at city buildings like libraries and recreation centers, AISD schools, community colleges and universities, local health clinics and more.
“The first step … which we started in the last week, is to do this baseline facility data collection,” Baumer said. “We’re taking all of these different types of facilities that are existing and entering them into this Google map with our draft of (gathering hubs, relief hubs and shelter hubs), sorting the facilities into those levels, and overlaying the social vulnerability index map to figure out where facilities are located with their existing kind of functionality.”
Doing that, Baumer said, will help them figure out where the gaps are and where they need to invest additional resources to ensure every Austinite has access to the resources they need.
“One of the things that I think is important that we talk about is the equity by design model,” said Matias Segura, AISD’s operations officer, who spoke at the meeting. “Really what we’re intending to do with this model is to really understand how our most underserved communities are being impacted (and) their lived experience. We have to be diligent in identifying where they are … and opportunities and ways to connect with them. And from there we can build out.”
Thanks to the American Rescue Plan Act, resilience hubs have $3 million in backing, which needs to be spent in the next couple of years. While the exact spending plan has yet to be nailed down, Baumer says they’ll spend the next few months continuing the data collection and mapping analysis… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
[TEXAS NEWS]
Beto O’Rourke enters 2022 a weaker candidate with a harder race (Texas Tribune)
Four years ago, a little-known Democratic congressman from El Paso named Beto O’Rourke announced he was running for U.S. Senate, challenging Republican incumbent Ted Cruz.
O’Rourke got started early, launching more than a year and a half before the general election. At the time, a majority of voters told pollsters they were unfamiliar with him. And perhaps for that reason, the incumbent virtually ignored him for 11 months, as O’Rourke began to tour all 254 counties in Texas, built an electrifying campaign that captured the nation’s attention and ultimately came within 3 percentage points of Cruz.
He had the wind at his back as the country delivered a blue wave in rebellion against President Donald Trump’s first two years in office.
And in the process, O’Rourke became the new star of a Texas Democratic Party that desperately needed one, smashing fundraising records, energizing young people and attracting a healthy amount of GOP defectors. Even his defeat was treated as a kind of victory by Democrats as the “Beto wave” swept their other candidates into office down the ballot.
This time, O’Rourke’s statewide campaign is starting in a completely different place.
His run against Gov. Greg Abbott, which he announced Monday, is starting 229 days later than his U.S. Senate campaign did in 2017. O’Rourke is now well known statewide — and polls show more Texas voters have a negative view of him than a positive one. And Abbott’s not giving him a pass, regularly rallying Republicans against him on the campaign trail and releasing videos attacking him.
This time, national politics will not play in his favor. Trump is out of office, President Joe Biden is deeply unpopular in Texas and Democrats are expecting to take a beating in the midterm elections nationwide… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
The newest Texans are not who you think they are (Texas Monthly)
Clay Jenkins filed for a fourth term as Dallas County’s top elected official on Saturday. Jenkins, a Democrat, has recently been responsible for the county’s COVID-19 response, and he told The Dallas Morning News Friday he hopes to continue that pandemic response if re-elected. “I’m going to finish this fight with COVID,” Jenkins said. “I think this COVID epidemic has shown it is important for everyone to have access to affordable health care.”
Jenkins said many of his priorities for a fourth term stem from the pandemic’s impact on the county. He said he’d work with school districts to address students’ learning gaps, with small-business owners who have been hit economically and with federal American Rescue Plan Act funding that the county is responsible for dispersing. “With ARPA we can do a lot with mental health and helping small businesses,” Jenkins said. “We’ve got some tremendous opportunities.” The county judge is the the county’s highest elected official and is a member of the Commissioners Court. The position is not part of the judicial system, but is an administrative role. Jenkins oversees the county government. Jenkins first took office in 2011 and won his most recent term in 2018 with 63% of the vote. His current term ends at the end of 2022. The primary election will be March 1, and the general election is Nov. 8. The candidate filing deadline for the March primary is Dec. 13… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
State Rep. Ryan Guillen switches to GOP in latest blow to South Texas Democrats (Texas Tribune)
Longtime Democratic state Rep. Ryan Guillen of Rio Grande City is switching parties as Republicans press to make new inroads in South Texas and after redistricting made his district much more favorable to the GOP.
Guillen made the announcement Monday morning at a news conference here where he was joined by Gov. Greg Abbott and House Speaker Dade Phelan, R-Beaumont.
"Friends, something is happening in South Texas, and many of us are waking up to the fact that the values of those in Washington, D.C., are not our values, not the values of most Texans," Guillen said. "The ideology of defunding the police, of destroying the oil and gas industry and the chaos at our border is disastrous for those of us who live here in South Texas."
Guillen’s decision to run for reelection under the GOP banner is a boon for Republicans who have been working to show new strength in South Texas after President Joe Biden underperformed there in 2020. The decision also comes after the GOP-led redistricting process turned Guillen’s district, already Republican-leaning, into a solidly red one.
The last state lawmaker to change parties was Rep. J.M. Lozano, R-Kingsville, in 2012. He was also a South Texas Democrat who made the decision to join the GOP after redistricting.
Democrats said Guillen was caving to Republicans who redrew his district.
“Republicans cynically gutted Rep. Guillen’s district in the redistricting process, showing complete disrespect for both him and his constituents," the head of the House Democratic Caucus, state Rep. Chris Turner, said in a statement. "Usually, people in Ryan’s position would choose to fight. Instead, he has chosen to join them."… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
Alex Jones loses Sandy Hook lawsuits in Connecticut after similar loss in Texas (Austin American-Statesman)
Infowars host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones was found liable Monday for damages in Connecticut lawsuits brought by parents of children killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting over claims that the massacre was a hoax. Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis took the rare step of defaulting Jones in the defamation lawsuits for his and his companies' "failure to produce critical material information that the plaintiffs needed to prove their claims." The judgment means the judge found in favor of the parents and will hold a hearing on how much money Jones should pay. The Connecticut ruling came 6½ weeks after an Austin judge came to the same conclusion, ruling that Jones displayed a pattern of bad faith in dealing with four lawsuits by parents of two children killed in the 2012 mass shooting.
State District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble of Austin said the rarely granted default judgment was appropriate because prior sanctions, including $150,000 in court-ordered penalties, failed to change Jones' pattern of withholding evidence the parents had a right to see as they pursued lawsuits seeking damages for defamation and emotional distress. Most recently, lawyers for the parents asked Guerra Gamble to impose additional fines and other sanctions against Jones, including an order blocking him from conducting pretrial discovery for the next phase of the lawsuits — a trial, probably next year, to determine how much money Jones and his companies owe the parents for broadcasts that called the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., a hoax. The judge has not yet ruled on the request. In the Connecticut lawsuits, lawyers for the parents claimed Jones and his companies, including Infowars and Free Speech Systems, violated court rules by failing to turn over documents, including internal company documents showing how, and whether, Jones and Infowars profited from talking about the school shooting and other mass shootings.
"Their pattern of defying and ignoring court orders to produce responsive information is well established," lawyers for the family wrote in a court brief in July. Jones' lawyers have denied violating court rules on document disclosure and have asked that Bellis be removed from the case, alleging she has not been impartial. The shooting killed 20 first graders and six educators. Jones has since said that he does not believe the massacre was a hoax… (LINK TO FULL STORY)
[NATIONAL NEWS]
Biden signs $1 trillion infrastructure bill into law (The Hill)
President Biden on Monday signed into law a $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill at a boisterous ceremony outside the White House, sealing a major accomplishment of his first term.
Weeks of talks and two trips to the Capitol from Biden culminated earlier this month in a bipartisan vote, with the House passing the bill 228-206. Thirteen Republicans crossed the aisle to support the measure, and six progressive Democrats bucked Biden and party leaders to oppose it.
Biden welcomed lawmakers from both parties, from Congress and from state and local governments, to celebrate the passage of the bill and tout what he said were the transformational ways it would improve day-to-day life for many Americans.
“My message to the American people is this: America is moving again and your life is going to change for the better,” Biden said in prepared remarks, highlighting provisions for replacing lead pipes, implementing broadband and improving public transit.
Biden used the bill signing to highlight a rare instance of bipartisanship at a polarized time in U.S. politics, even as former President Trump and other conservatives suggested that House Republicans who voted for the bill should be challenged in primaries or stripped of committee assignments.
“I ran for president because the only way to move our country forward, in my view, is through compromise and consensus,” Biden said. “That’s how our system works. That’s American democracy. And I am going to be signing a law that is truly consequential, because we made our democracy deliver for the people. We compromised. We reached a consensus. That’s necessary.”… (LINK TO FULL STORY)