We're All Good Liberals Here

Dear Editor,
    Chronicle writer Michael King needs to correct his multiple false statements on the citizen petitioned CodeNEXT review ordinance and on the ordinance sponsors.
    [In his "Point Austin" column,] King has repeatedly written the petitioned ordinance and its sponsors would stop all changes to the land development code. (King, 3/23, petition “intended to stop all changes”; 5/11 “petition against any and all changes to the code”; 5/18 Community Not Commodity leaders opposed to “revising the code.”)
    Either King hasn’t bothered to read the four paragraphs of the petitioned ordinance or CNC’s press statements, or he is completely happy to just lie about it – over and over.
    The petitioned ordinance does not block any Council-approved changes to the development code, much less “all” such changes. The petitioned ordinance says if the Council adopts a comprehensive rewrite to the code, then that comprehensive rewrite has a delay period and must be ratified by the voters before taking effect. If the Council shelves the 1,500-page mess of a draft CodeNEXT, it is entirely free to adopt targeted changes to the code without voter oversight. CNC has specifically called for this targeted approach in support of code revisions, and now so has the ZAP Commission and many others.
    King extended his false attacks to Council Member Alison Alter and a group of us citizens who have had the gall to point out that the mayor, a majority of City Council, and some members of the Planning Commission are violating the City Charter provision that limits developer and real estate representation on the commission. King cannot be bothered with the fact that this violation is undisputed and the Council majority is allowing it to continue. (Hey, we are all good liberals here, so why do we need to comply with the law?)
    The list is much longer. It seems King is incapable of responsible coverage of Austin development issues.