Brigid Shea: 'A Proven Leader'
Brigid Shea sits down for a Q&A on a wide range of city topics
By Amy Smith, Fri., April 27, 2012
(Page 2 of 3)
AC: What would you do about it?
BS: I would work with the CTRMA [Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority] until they were sick of seeing me to try to find ways to get trucks off of I-35. We have this huge toll road to the east and half the time you can take a nap on it. Every time I've driven on it I'm practically the only car on it. So I want to do whatever it takes to get the trucks off of I-35 and shift them onto [State Highway] 130, so that would be a big relief right there. And then I'd work with TxDOT and whoever else I needed to to find ways to restripe I-35 and MoPac, using the shoulders, using areas where it's clearly wide enough for additional lane widths, and make that capacity available to everyone, not just people who can pay a toll, or who are willing to pay a toll.
And I've also met with folks at UT. We have one of the leading transportation think tanks in the country here – the Center for Transportation Research – and I found them because I was Googling what are called reversible flow lanes, where at rush hour you basically use your existing road capacity – they have these in Dallas and Houston and other large cities – and at rush hour you reverse the flow of the lanes. You have to mark it properly and do it in such a way that it's safe, but it gives you immediate additional capacity on your roadway without costing much money.
Anyway I met with these guys and they've got the real traffic data – it's not modeling, it's the actual traffic data – and they said they could do a study in a couple of months for $60,000 or $70,000 and be able to tell you exactly how much additional capacity you'd be able to get. These are just a few examples of the initiatives I would take on issues that have been vexing and where we haven't had sufficient leadership.
So on experience, on vision, on leadership – I am a proven leader. I'm not afraid to take a stand. and I have a track record for getting things done. I've got the right commitments to preserve quality of life, to keep Austin affordable, and I'm willing to ask tough questions. I want us to be known as a city where the mayor is a really sharp negotiator, and I'm afraid that now we're known as the place where we're pushovers. People can walk in and pretty much get whatever they want.
AC: Okay, what are the challenges that you see, that you're experiencing now in running against an incumbent who has served on the council for seven years?
BS: Well part of it is his ability to use the power of the mayor's office for publicity and frankly to take credit for all the good things that are happening in Austin. He doesn't want to take responsibility for the bad things. And honestly I don't think people are moving to Austin because of Lee. I also say that I believe in giving credit where it's due, and the Chamber of Commerce should get tremendous credit for having had a very effective recruitment plan to bring new businesses to town. They've done an excellent job. I'm a member of the Clean Energy Council and they've been very strategic about going after companies that will really add to our clean tech and clean energy cluster and grow our reputation in that arena. I've been saying for awhile we should declare ourselves the clean energy capital of the world, like we did the live music capital of the world, and then make it so.
And that's part of the vision that the Clean Energy Council has been pursuing, but it's been very strategic. They've worked closely with the state and it hasn't required much of the city. I think there have been small [incentive] packages, but they've been pretty small – not these big giveaways that cause people to say, "what are we doing, why are we paying all this money?"
Anyway, yesterday was a perfect example. Lee announced the plan to fix our leaking water pipes. I've been talking about that since I announced, saying we've got to be the most water wise city in the nation. And there's so much more we need to do and can do on water conservation, water reuse and fixing our leaking water pipes. So he announces it with much fanfare yesterday. The fact is, it had been in the budget for the utility. Paul Robbins did a study last year where he looked at what the city was doing about its aging infrastructure and how much are they fixing? They were fixing about four miles of water pipe a year. And then last September, in the budget for this fiscal year, they increased it to 14.5 miles per year. Well, at that rate it's going to take us 60 to 70 years to fix the pipes that we know now are a problem, and it doesn't include any of the pipes that are breaking because of the shifting ground because of the drought. So he's able to use that as a photo-op to say, "look what I'm doing."
And he's done that on many, many things and I just think that the media hasn't been attuned enough to make sure that people are aware that this is happening in the context of a campaign. People need to be skeptical about all these photo-ops. So I think that that's a challenge but I also think it raises questions about how he's using the mayor's office as a campaign tool. I am astonished that he has the security detail escort him to all of his campaign events. I'd like to know how much he's spending on that and if he's paying for it out of his campaign.
AC: Have you raised that question?
BS: I haven't asked him but I've been struck that at every campaign event, his security detail shows up, sits through the meeting, stays the whole time, then drives him to his next event.
AC: How large is this detail?
One person with him at all the time. I don't know exactly what happens when he's not on the campaign trail but it's my understanding that detail is there all day long at his council office.
AC: Have other mayors had details?
BS: Not that I'm aware of. Maybe there's some Homeland Security, Orange Alert, to explain it, but people found out what it was costing taxpayers of Texas for Rick Perry to have that kind of security while he campaigned. I think people would be interested to know what it's costing them.
The other part is, just how they're packing the Democratic club endorsement groups and I think if you compared membership you'd see probably a good 60 percent overlap. Michael [King] was writing about that in his piece. A good 60 percent overlap for most of the clubs. There are some that are geographic or demographic, like Young Democrats have to be a certain age, or UT Democrats have to be a current student.
AC: Okay, you've talked about your chief differences with the mayor, just in these last few minutes. are those all of them?
BS: On the other differences I would really say it's on a willingness to ask the hard questions, because I think a lot of these deals need to be scrutinized, more than they have been. [Former County Judge Bill Aleshire] was at a forum, and Lee said we were fully informed on Apple and we had all the facts, and Aleshire asked him, did you call the mayor of Phoenix, and Lee said no. But all we heard on the news was that we were competing with Phoenix and we had to hurry up. Well then the Statesman writes that the mayor and the people of Phoenix weren't even aware they were being considered. That's not a sign to me of someone who is fully informed, or who's asking the necessary questions.
And then on listening, I would say that if you disagree with Lee, he is not only unwilling to listen, has has thrown people out of the council chambers. I don't know of any mayor who has thrown as many people out as he has.
AC: Bruce Todd threw out a few people.
BS: As many as Lee?
AC: I don't know, but let's talk about incentives. You opposed incentives for the Marriott and then when Apple came along you were first quoted as saying that this is the kind of business that Austin needs to be attracting. And then after the deal was done, you said it wasn't negotiated well, so there's a sense that you want it both ways.
BS: Well I do distinguish. And what I say on my piece on affordability, I say we've got to spend smart, because we don't have an unlimited supply of money. And I do support strategic incentives to attract the kinds of industry that will be beneficial for us in the long term and that will produce good-paying jobs. So it's not a blanket all or nothing.
I do think we've got to be discerning and that we have to spend people's money wisely, and that's really the differentiator on the Marriott deal. And on the Apple deal, when the reporter called me, I said you know, I don't have all the facts but this is the kind of industry we'd want to attract so I'd certainly want to look at it and work with them. But I said to him I'd also like to know what Phoenix is doing. And I never saw what he quoted me as saying, but I did say to him both those bookends – I want to know more about it, I want to know what Phoenix is doing, but this is certainly the kind of industry we want to attract.
What I've said to people is that when Apple came in, I would say to them guys, we love you – great company, great products, great paying jobs, but let's have a really honest conversation. It will not go over well in the community for you or for us if the company that's sitting on a greater cash reserves than most of the nations on the planet asks us for a big tax giveaway. It's not the way we want to welcome companies to town, to have you be hated and us be hated because of the nature of our partnership. So let's find a better way to partner. Let's see if we can come up with a better way to partner that benefits both of us where we're not going to be hated by the citizens. I think it was a terrible way to welcome Apple to town to have them be trashed on the radio talk shows and trashed on the news blogs and have people actively resenting that we gave this money to the company that's literally got the largest cash reserves of any corporation outside of banks in the history of the planet.
Got something to say on the subject? Send a letter to the editor.