Leave Our Trees Alone!!!!

[FueledByBlueBell]

Originally Posted by hillcountryheart

No, they aren't ordinary. And 24" is easy for some fast growing trash trees to reach, but not for live oaks. Having a quality urban canopy adds value to properties and provides energy savings via shade. You are not allowed to have a rusted-out jacked up car in your front yard; how is this different?

I have first-hand experience at protecting trees that are specimen trees, and believe me, it's very hard. If a developer really wants trees gone, all they have to do is take their time developing. Without extremely aggressive protection like that used at the Wildflower Center, the construction will kill the trees all on its own.

.

Great point on the shade. I found Bee Cave to be really hot, and love the slightly cooler temps the trees (all over- not just my yard) provide.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by steve78757

Everyone in town has a right to vote. Apathy is no one's fault but the citizen's. Now if you think our gerrymandered state house and senate districts are a better representation of the democratic process then you are the one who is delusional.

First of all, you are dragging a red herring into this discussion. Who said anything about state elections? But since you did, there is basically no difference between gerrymandering districts to preserve incumbents or maximize a party's percentage than there is is having elections purposely set to not be part of the general election and to have strange three year terms - both are abuses of power by the ruling majority to preserve their status and power.

Second, you think this map is representative of the totality of Austin, then the only possible explanation is that you are on the right side of the power disparity. When there isn't a single council member N of 51st or S of the river, it is impossible for enormous sections of the city to feel their interests are being represented. That is the reason 10-1 was supported by the strangest coalition of disparate interests I've ever seen in Austin. Wrong is wrong, and 10-1 passed for a reason.

Third, if you want to use "voter apathy" to defend the entrenched power, it isn't a long logical step to defending poll taxes and literacy tests. Our government is most legitimate when all voters feel their vote matters, that their voices are heard. It is this need to combat a sense of illegitimacy that brought together ALL sides on the winning side of 10-1 - from Peck Young and Gonzalo Barrientos to the Travis County Republican Party. That is a coalition you probably won't see repeated in your lifetime.

[steve78757]

Originally Posted by scm53

First of all, you are dragging a red herring into this discussion. Who said anything about state elections?

This thread is about state government intrusion into local affairs. When you claim that local government is undemocratic you welcome comparisons to the level of government YOU are defending. It's as simple as that.

Your quote - "If you think Austin city elections, prior to 10-1, were the result of the "democratic process", you are selectively delusional."

Do you really believe it makes sense defend state government while calling local government undemocratic, and then claim red herring when the "democratic process" of state government is questioned? Nah, I don't think so.

You aren't interested in having an honest discussion. You only want to "win" an internet debate.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Komeht, what's your occupation and your actual experience with these things? hillcountryheart seems to have an occupation and/or serious interest that means that they deal with this on a regular basis - how about you?

You don't even live in Austin do you?

[scm53]

Originally Posted by steve78757

You aren't interested in having an honest discussion. You only want to "win" an internet debate.

Let move that mirror for you.

You might not like the way they were drawn, or the shape of the districts, but the fact is, every representative voting on these bills was selected by and represents a discrete set of citizens. How can you possibly equate that to a process that results in ALL members of city council residing in five contigious zip codes out of the forty five scattered across the city? That results in an illegitimacy that permeates every act they take, unless it reflects a viewpoint one supports. I am almost certain that the 10-1 council will pass things I don't like. But even when they do, at least every vote will reflect ALL of the city.

Like the legislature does the state today.

[steve78757]

Originally Posted by scm53

Let move that mirror for you.

You might not like the way they were drawn, or the shape of the districts, but the fact is, every representative voting on these bills was selected by and represents a discrete set of citizens. How can you possibly equate that to a process that results in ALL members of city council residing in five contigious zip codes out of the forty five scattered across the city? That results in an illegitimacy that permeates every act they take, unless it reflects a viewpoint one supports. I am almost certain that the 10-1 council will pass things I don't like. But even when they do, at least every vote will reflect ALL of the city.

Like the legislature does the state today.

The districts for Austin were INTENTIONALLY drawn to take away the voting power of our citizens. I see that as much worse than the fact that our at-large city council members happen to reside more near the center of town. For what it's worth I voted for 10-1 while knowing it was not in my best interests, because I believe it is more democratic. It fits right in with the philosophy of bringing government closer to the governed and reducing centralized control.

[ImOnFiya]

Good news from the Capitol Building according to KUT. All of the Austin bashing bills are dead! Here are the formal list (there were even more than most realized):

#1. HB 1858, Rep. Paul Workman (R-Austin)

The bill would ban cities from restricting the removal of trees if a developer or land owner deems the tree to be a fire hazard. Opponents worry the bill provides a work-around the city’s Heritage Tree Ordinance, and point to an additional piece of Workman legislation, HB 3087, as creating additional development loopholes for removing trees.

HB 1858 is scheduled to receive a public hearing in the Business & Industry committee today, upon adjournment of the House.

#2. HB 3091, Workman

As the Austin City Council considers repealing their Project Duration Ordinance – following a recent opinion from Attorney General Greg Abbott arguing Austin's ordinance does not match state code – Rep. Workman has filed a bill that would leave them without a choice.

The city’s Project Duration Ordinance gives expiration dates to building permits, but Workman's bill would remove exemptions that make that possible. Moreover, it would hold cities like Austin liable for damages and penalties if they enforced such an ordinance. HB 1377, Rep. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham)

This measure that would limit a city’s ability to regulate cutting down trees on private property.

If passed, the bill would drastically affect Austin’s heritage tree ordinance, which requires a city review if a tree’s trunk measures more than 4 and a half feet in circumference. The city ordinance also requires developers to pay varying mitigation fees for removing older trees. But Rep. Kolkhorst's bill stipulates that the penalty for taking down a tree “may not exceed $100 per inch of girth of the mature tree removed.”

#3. HB 2416, Rep. Drew Springer (R- Muenster)

The so-called “Shopping Bag Freedom Act” would kill Austin’s new disposable bag ban.

Springer said “nanny-state” policy allows government to intervene in a free market transaction. Springer also cited potential safety hazards like E-Coli, and even excess water usage from washing the bags as additional concerns.

#4. HB 14, Rep. Jim Pitts (R-Waxahachie)

Right now, the Austin City Council can engage in bond spending without taking them to the polls every election. It’s done by issuing Certificates of Obligation, which are primarily used to cover capital funding (one-time construction costs).

HB 14 would regulate a city’s bond issuing power, and allow voters to overturn a CO bond issuance through a petition gathering five percent of the population that voted in the last gubernatorial election. It would also prohibit CO spending on proposals that were put to voters as General Obligation bonds in the last three years and failed – meaning in HB 14 passes, the council could not build an affordable housing project with CO bonds, since Austin voters rejected an affordable housing bond in November 2012.

#5 & 6. HB 2170 and HB 2171, (Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin)

Neither bill necessarily bashes Austin, but they do wrest away an aspect of local control.

In November, the City of Austin annexed over 1,000 acres in Travis County, including the Formula 1-hosting Circuit of the Americas racetrack. The bills from Rep. Rodriguez – who has partnered with the council in the past – would capture some of the new tax dollars Austin receives from the annexation, and redirect it to funding a firefighting service district in the area.

“I don’t view this as an instance of Austin bashing at all,” Council Member Mike Martinez tells KUT News. “But I think it does create some cautions as it related to annexations for any municipal government going forward. … It does create some concern, because it is somewhat unprecedented.”

Are you glad Austin missed these bullets?

[FueledByBlueBell]

Originally Posted by ImOnFiya

Good news from the Capitol Building according to KUT. All of the Austin bashing bills are dead! Here are the formal list (there were even more than most realized):



Are you glad Austin missed these bullets?

Woo-hoo!

[scm53]

Not trying to pick this scab, but the arborist that maintains our trees did a nice job of trying to find some middle ground between the Kilkhorst bill and the current Austin ordinance.