How a petition drive aims to put CodeNext’s fate in voters’ hands


Veteran activists are behind CodeNext petition that would put the zoning code overhaul on the ballot.

Billboard backers with SignOnAustin have given money to political action committee behind three petitions.

Some critics of the CodeNext petition see it as a way to keep the status quo.

The flashing LEDs of digital billboards and the rewriting of Austin’s land use code might not seem related. But a recent petition effort to put both measures before Austin voters next year has made the two strange bedfellows.

Billy Reagan, the head of the Austin billboard company Reagan National Advertising, paid longtime activist Linda Curtis $5,000 in August to create a petition effort seeking to change local billboard laws. Curtis, with Reagan’s blessing, in turn took that money to create IndyAustin, a special political action committee that is now promoting changing local billboard ordinances and placing CodeNext on the ballot in 2018.

READ: Central Austin dominates CodeNext discussion as second draft looms

Through a spokesman’s statement, Reagan said he supports all of IndyAustin’s efforts, including a third petition drive that would make it easier for voters to challenge the Austin City Council’s actions.

“Billy Reagan has chosen to support IndyAustin for 2 reasons,” the statement said. “First both he and IndyAustin agree that City Hall should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. Second, local voters deserve a greater voice when it comes to neighborhood redevelopment, sign regulations and other issues that impact them on a daily basis.”

IndyAustin is one of two political action committees angling to give voters the final say on CodeNext, an overhaul of the complex development code spilling across more than 1,300 pages. Before there was talk of a petition drive, the City Council aimed to take its final vote in April on CodeNext, approving the rules that spell out what kind of development can go where and what the city will look like decades from now.

The plan would allow more housing to be developed along major corridors and in the central city, but critics fear those more dense developments could bring worse traffic congestion and change the feel of established neighborhoods.

Members of Evolve Austin, a coalition of development interests and nonprofits pushing for more affordable housing, oppose the petition drive. Some say the effort is designed to delay and even kill CodeNext, preventing Austin from making the changes needed to accommodate growth.

“It’s going to turn out to be a change versus status quo vote,” said Jo Kathryn Quinn, executive director of Caritas of Austin and a representative of One Voice Central Texas who volunteers with Evolve Austin.

To put any of Curtis’ three items on the March 6 ballot, organizers would need to gather roughly 15,000 signatures for each cause by mid-January.

The CodeNext petition would give voters a simple up or down vote on whether the city should adopt the code it will spend more than $6 million creating.

The billboard petition would alter a moratorium on billboards in Austin, allowing companies to replace exiting billboards with digital LED signs, which are currently prohibited in Austin.

The third petition Curtis is pushing would make it easier for Austin residents to petition and force a vote on any action undertaken by the Austin City Council.

Another political action committee is also promoting a referendum on CodeNext.

Attorney Fred Lewis, the head of a group highly critical of CodeNext known as Community Not Commodity, has started a political action committee called Let Us Vote Austin. That group is only promoting the CodeNext petition and has no ties to the billboard petition or the third measure to allow more referendums.

Both Curtis and Lewis have been successful in forcing referendums with petitions. Lewis was one of the main organizers of the successful referendum to change the City Council from seven officials elected citywide to 10 district-based representatives and a citywide mayor, a system known as 10-1. Curtis was the leader behind a 2007 petition to remove subsidies to the Domain; the item made it to the ballot, but voters opted to keep the subsidies in place.

“These folks are really good at organizing on the front end of a petition,” said Mark Littlefield, a local lobbyist and political strategist. “They are really good about doing it on shoestring budgets. They are really good at telling people who they should be afraid of and who to blame. That is what 90 percent of politics is about these days.”

For Community Not Commodity, that target is Evolve Austin.

“One ugly reality is that the pro-CodeNext campaign is a front for the largest real-estate development scheme our city has ever seen,” said a Sept. 15 statement from Community Not Commodity that named Evolve Austin specifically for its ties to real estate business groups.

Evolve Austin came about before CodeNext existed to explore how to implement the 2012 comprehensive growth plan Imagine Austin, but it has focused on the land-use code rewrite in recent months. Beyond the business organizations such as the Austin Board of Realtors, the Austin Chamber of Commerce and the Real Estate Council of Austin that Evolve Austin counts as partners, the group has many nonprofit organizations involved, including Caritas of Austin, the Austin Justice Coalition and Habitat for Humanity.

The Austin Board of Realtors is the group’s No. 1 donor, a spokeswoman for Evolve Austin said. The organization, which is a nonprofit but not a political action committee, would not provide specific information about how much money it has received.

Internal Revenue Service filings show relatively little money spent by the nonprofit in recent years. It has no staff, but staffers from many of its partner organizations often perform in-kind work for Evolve Austin, the organization said.

The group has focused in recent months on how to create low-income housing in Austin’s central core. Bringing in developers and Realtors involves the subject matter experts to create affordable housing, Quinn said.

Quinn said that CodeNext should not be an “either/or” proposition and that people on both sides of development issues need to be willing to compromise to avoid becoming entrenched and heading down a “path of no return.”

Otherwise, Quinn said, “we will become San Francisco.”

Curtis has not weighed in on the merits of creating denser growth in Austin. She said she only wants Austin voters, not the City Council, to decide the merits of CodeNext.

Lewis’ organization is far more critical of CodeNext and has been largely in favor of slowing the process.

Neither Curtis nor Lewis would say how many petition signatures they had gathered. But both said Friday that their efforts were going well.

“It is starting to hum and starting to get out into neighborhoods,” Lewis said.

Reader Comments ...

Next Up in Politics

Trump cracks down on crime, but not on the police who fight it
Trump cracks down on crime, but not on the police who fight it

Six years ago, a police officer in this city in eastern Washington was convicted of beating a disabled man to death and trying to cover it up. After other alarming episodes involving Spokane officers came to light, the city asked federal officials to suggest changes to the Police Department as part of an Obama-era policing program.  Ever since...
As her last day with the Fed nears, Janet Yellen looks back on her first
As her last day with the Fed nears, Janet Yellen looks back on her first

Janet Yellen, the Federal Reserve chairwoman, made a relaxed appearance at New York University on Tuesday night, answering questions about her life in economics and her time at the Fed one day after she announced plans to leave the central bank next year.  Yellen said nothing new about the Fed’s policy plans for the coming months, leaving...
Second judge blocks Trump’s transgender ban in the military
Second judge blocks Trump’s transgender ban in the military

A second federal judge blocked the Trump administration’s proposed ban on transgender troops Tuesday, saying President Donald Trump’s announcement of the ban in a series of tweets this summer was “capricious, arbitrary, and unqualified.”  In a preliminary injunction, Judge Marvin J. Garbis of the U.S. District Court for...
What you need to know about a repeal of net neutrality
What you need to know about a repeal of net neutrality

For you and me, the Federal Communications Commission’s plan to repeal net neutrality rules can be boiled down to two questions: What might happen? And whom do you trust?  Here’s our guide for internet users looking for answers.    The net neutrality rules were passed in 2015 during the Obama administration when Democrats...
“Hi Drumstick.” Trump pardons a turkey, and likes it.
“Hi Drumstick.” Trump pardons a turkey, and likes it.

It began with a familiar pledge: President Donald Trump’s audience, he promised, was going to be very proud of him.  “Hi, Drumstick,” Trump called out Tuesday, preparing to exercise his least controversial executive authority. “Oh, Drumstick, I think, is going to be very happy.”  It ended with characteristic...
More Stories