Prop. 2 WTF

[moonwick]

What's the compelling argument in favor of Prop. 2 in Austin?

I know we're a city full of hippies, and that everyone hates The Domain, but is there more to it that I'm missing? It seems like a terrible idea for a city to go back on commitments that it makes...

Comments

[roseneko]

From a cursory Google/Wiki search, it appears that Simon properties misled (or was accused of misleading) the city about the purpose/usage of The Domain in order to get $65 million in tax subsidies. That particular issue was settled out of court, part of the settlement allowing the City of Austin to back out of the deal with no penalties, and the "Stop Domain Subsidies" people are trying to keep the city from continuing or offering future retail subsidies, period (and the "Keep Austin's Word" folk are for the continuation of the status quo). So the Domain thing is a bit misleading; that particular case was resolved, but it became the symbol for retail subsidies in general

[moonwick]

I should've linked to something about it for the sake of the non-Austinites; sorry you had to Google to see WTF I was talking about. :)

All of the stuff I've read seems to suggest that the only argument against the Proposition is that "oh, we shouldn't have done it in the first place" and not about any sort of misdeeds done by the management of The Domain or the other property that received tax benefits.

[roseneko]

*laughs* It's okay. My Google-fu is mighty, especially when it comes to ferreting out ballot information. I hate the feeling of looking at a ballot and not having any idea of what something entails - it's like taking a test you forgot to study for. Plus, it gives me an idea whether I care enough to vote. :)

Just off the top of my head...

[pasketti]

If I lived in Austin, I'd vote for it.

Why?

If the whatever-it-is is such a great deal, and will generate all this extra money and create jobs and end hunger and create peace in the Middle East, then why do they need a subsidy? Can't it manage on its own without it? If not, then it's probably not such a good idea after all.

And what about all the other businesses in town? Don't they deserve the same treatment? They've been around the whole time without being subsidized. What makes this one place so special that it should get one while all the others don't?

local businesses are in favor of Prop 2, yes

[sheilagh]

Owners of businesses like Bicycle Sport Shop and Alamo Drafthouse speak up in this documentary on Prop 2.

Re: local businesses are in favor of Prop 2, yes

[moonwick]

Yeah, I can definitely see the original deal as being unfair to small businesses. It also looks like the circumstances surrounding its original passage were somewhat shady.

If that stuff bears out, then maybe I can see restructuring it. Still, I'm not sure what I think about going back on promises we've made...

Re: Just off the top of my head...

[moonwick]

Yeah, I can see that. The initial agreement seems like a pretty bad idea.

[ivo]

First of all, don't worry, it's not on your ballot anyway...

But I think I would be against Prop 2, or in favor of the subsidies, for a few reasons. Yeah, maybe it should have been negotiated differently a while back, but the subsidies are not just for retail, it will also help affordable housing around mixed-use development. And it might affect future mixed-use development subsidies as well, and I think mixed-use is very important for our Austin to not become another Dallas.

And the thing about lowering CoA's bond credit rating if they have to break the contract seems a reasonable argument, if it's true.

Oh, and the Chronicle endorses "no" for Prop 2, so not all hippies have their panties in a knot.

[chiefarcher]

See... I don''t like this because Prop... it should be 2 props..

#1. To renig on the contract with the domain (i would vote no)
#2. To prevent other contracts from being negotiated without a ballot (i would vote yes)

Anywho... my $0.02