Mayor & Council,
I leave it to you to decide whether it is fiscally prudent to move the 2012 city election from May to November. However, I do wish to say that I am deeply dismayed by some of the arguments against a possible November election if that is what is best for the taxpayers and community.As a point of reference, the city’s last 3 bond elections have been held in even numbered years in November. The light rail and commuter rail elections were also both held in even numbered years in Nov. Why do we believe these Nov. voters are wise and informed enough to decide on major infrastructure projects that raise our taxes and literally build and preserve our city, but are too distracted and ill-informed to choose their city leaders? It’s their city!
I was around in 1998 when the first bond election was held in Nov. It was supposed to be help in September, which used to be a uniform election date popular for bond elections and absolutely dismal for turnout. These exact same arguments were made, and some local entities still make them. However, there was no way the bond was going to make it in September so it was decided that it would be in Nov. So the election was held, campaigns were waged, spirited debates ensued and the bonds passed. They’ve been held in November of even numbered years ever since.
So again, if these voters were smart and engaged enough to decide our future in 1998, 2000, 2004, 2006 & 2010, what makes these masses so unwashed & uninterested to decide your fates in 2012?
As a coda I would point out that May voters tend to be, on average, whiter, wealthier, older, and more likely to own property than November voters. The Council, on average, is also whiter, wealthier, older and more likely to own property than the average Austinite. I guess that makes sense.
Thank you for your time and interest.Mike Blizzard
