Austin Prop A and Prop B

[Statalyzer]

Alright, who can give a good summary of how these actually work without resorting to partisan scare tactics? As near as I can tell, Prop A seems to think the problem with the police force is lack of funds, rather than poor administrative decisions, and seems to want to blindly throw sacks of money at the problem to fix it. It's funny that it's largely the conservatives behind this and the liberals against it, since the reverse is true when it comes to public education. That said, the idea that it's gonna just screw over EMS and parks and libraries doesn't seem correct either. Haven't looked much into B yet, but I suddenly realized I need to this weekend because Nov 2nd is coming up fast.

 

[Monahorns]

This is a complicated issue. Policing has multiple issues in the US. Funding could be one of those, but accountability to me is the biggest. Citizens have to trust that police will act responsibility and will be held accountable when they aren't. But they aren't.

 

[huisache]

Double what is spent is fine by me but the money has to come from existing programs or new revenues

the hotel tax is already astronomical but I am guessing it is among the ones that goes up

they could charge a fee for walking the nice trails but the yups would revolt

selling the homeless into slavery could solve some problems and they would at least have roofs and beds and three squares

 

[Mr. Deez]

I think this is a decent explanation on Prop. B.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Full disclosure, I'm not an Austin resident and can't vote on the measure. However, if I could, the most enticing part of Prop A is that every lunatic/crackpot Left group in Austin opposes it like there's no tomorrow.

However, is it actually necessary? I'm not entirely sure. Like a lot of big cities, Austin crapped its pants and went full retard on the police budget in 2020. However, my understanding is that a lot of that got restored in '21 after at least some of the idiots went back to sleep. How much of a new increase is necessary? Does the Prop go too far? It's a pretty big hike in the number of officers.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

However, is it actually necessary?

I haven't done deep diving research into this yet, but I can tell you the police presence in the city is a fraction of what it used to be. I rarely see APD vehicles anymore. My commute into Austin brings me down hwy 290 so coming off the toll road I usually drive 80 to where it merges into Koenig lane where I have to slow down. Before the city councils yet again moronic vote to tear apart the departments I would never have considered going over 65-70 because there was always someone there giving out tickets.

They can call it what they want but they defunded part of the department by eliminating city paid overtime and freezing hiring. Considering how understaffed they were before they needed that OT just to give basic coverage around the city and without being able to hire they are losing more through attrition.

 

[Statalyzer]

Thanks for the link on Prop B. Have looked up some more about it myself and this appears to sum it up well: "The tragedy is how East Austin is led to believe that their only way out is to give up something very precious for somebody else, when there is money and has been money in, in the reserve that we all vote(d) for, and paid for"

So really both A and B seem to be pretending we don't have the money to do something that we actually already do have money for.

Austin crapped its pants and went full retard on the police budget in 2020. However, my understanding is that a lot of that got restored in '21 after at least some of the idiots went back to sleep. How much of a new increase is necessary

After further research it turns out that Austin didn't actually defund the police. It was attempted, but failed. What they did do was move some of the sub-units into a different section of the budget. So, for example, "Forensics" is no longer a sub-category of "Police" in the budget (which means that the amount that counts as "Police" thus decreased by an amount equal to the "Forensics" amount), but we didn't cut the Forensics budget.

It'd be like if I split my family "Food" budget into two distinct parts, shopping for food and Restaurants, and continued to call the former "Food" and then called the later "Eating Out", and then somebody claimed that in doing so I had just cut my family's food budget.

But pretty much everyone I see arguing for A is saying stuff like "Restore the money to the Police that was taken from them". It's actually been tough to find an argument for it that's not using this falsification.

I can tell you the police presence in the city is a fraction of what it used to be. I rarely see APD vehicles anymore. My commute into Austin brings me down hwy 290 so coming off the toll road I usually drive 80 to where it merges into Koenig lane where I have to slow down. Before the city councils yet again moronic vote to tear apart the departments I would never have considered going over 65-70 because there was always someone there giving out tickets.

Heck, some of that may be a good thing. Driving faster than someone by passing them in the passing lane in good conditions isn't something you should be pulled over for, though I wish we actually pulled over for tailgating, blatant light-running, etc.

To the extent it's a bad thing, it looks like a conscious decisions by the leaders that would be done regardless, not something where their hand was forced by lack of money.

 

[nashhorn]

Coming back from Waco I got on 130 for the first time and was excited with the 80 mph speed limit sign - then I looked at my speed, I was hitting 90 and people were still passing me - holy s***.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

After further research it turns out that Austin didn't actually defund the police. It was attempted, but failed.

They didn't "defund" them but they cut their nuts off by eliminating OT and shutting down hiring. Can't possibly have enough cops on the streets as they quit then they can't let others work OT to cover the shifts. They are now hiring again but they are woefully under staffed.

 

[OUBubba]

Coming back from Waco I got on 130 for the first time and was excited with the 80 mph speed limit sign - then I looked at my speed, I was hitting 90 and people were still passing me - holy s***.

I swear I saw a 85 MPH limit on the turnpike bypassing Austin to get to San Antonio a few years back. I set the cruise at 89 and felt like an outlaw. Breaking the law! Breaking the law!

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

I swear I saw a 85 MPH limit on the turnpike bypassing Austin to get to San Antonio a few years back. I set the cruise at 89 and felt like an outlaw. Breaking the law! Breaking the law!

It's 75 & 80. I drive toll roads 130 and 45 daily.

 

[Statalyzer]

They didn't "defund" them but they cut their nuts off by eliminating OT and shutting down hiring. Can't possibly have enough cops on the streets as they quit then they can't let others work OT to cover the shifts.

Right, they had administrators who are inept (possibly deliberately), but they aren't low on funding.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Coming back from Waco I got on 130 for the first time and was excited with the 80 mph speed limit sign - then I looked at my speed, I was hitting 90 and people were still passing me - holy s***.

I swear I saw a 85 MPH limit on the turnpike bypassing Austin to get to San Antonio a few years back. I set the cruise at 89 and felt like an outlaw. Breaking the law! Breaking the law!

Slow pokes. About eight years ago, I was driving from the Black Forest to Wiesbaden, Germany on the A5 Autobahn. I had bought an older (from the late '90s) BMW 740i to drive until our cars showed up. It had a big *** V-8, and I took it up to 220 km/h (about 135 mph). Even though that car was about 18 years old and at a ridiculous speed, it was smooth like lotion.

 

[OUBubba]

It's 75 & 80. I drive toll roads 130 and 45 daily.

https://www.mysh130.com/about/#:~:t...highest legal speed,TollTag or Houston EZ TAG.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

https://www.mysh130.com/about/#:~:text=SH 130 segments 5 & 6 has the highest legal speed,TollTag or Houston EZ TAG.

Well that explains it. I haven't driven that portion to SA for a few years now. Wow, 85...guess I need to make a trip south.

 

[mb227]

Coming back from Waco I got on 130 for the first time and was excited with the 80 mph speed limit sign - then I looked at my speed, I was hitting 90 and people were still passing me - holy s***.

Slow poke! I was wondering who that was holding up traffic...

 

[mb227]

Well that explains it. I haven't driven that portion to SA for a few years now. Wow, 85...guess I need to make a trip south.

Side note...it was actually the increase of IH-10 to 80MPH that required a re-write of the provisions of the Code allowing for a defensive driving dismissal on a speeding ticket. It used to be that the offer was for anything that did not exceed 25MPH over the posted limit but now anything over 100MPH is supposed to be a dis-qualifier.

That said, nothing precludes the prosecutor from bringing the number down to a qualifying speed in excess of the limit. Out of State prosecutors have long done that to help someone avoid having the tickets show up on the driving record...

 

[Monahorns]

I am more interested in Texas Constitution Amendments. #3 in theory should prevent the State or local governments to restrict religious services during a pandemic type event. That already violates the current Texas Bill of Rights but the more explicit restrictions the better. #6 allows families to designate a family member to visit an elder in a nursing home or hospital. Probably too narrow, but better than what we have today.

I didn't feel as strongly on the others. Mostly they are about granting more control to state committees or allowing sub-state level groups to spend more money.

 

[mb227]

I am more interested in Texas Constitution Amendments. #3 in theory should prevent the State or local governments to restrict religious services during a pandemic type event. That already violates the current Texas Bill of Rights but the more explicit restrictions the better. #6 allows families to designate a family member to visit an elder in a nursing home or hospital. Probably too narrow, but better than what we have today.

I didn't feel as strongly on the others. Mostly they are about granting more control to state committees or allowing sub-state level groups to spend more money.

I paid some attention to the ones limiting property taxes upon death. When dad passed, the County reassessed the valuation on the house as though it was a new purchase. That is messed up because it allowed them to backdoor increases otherwise precluded by the per-annum caps...I could see that being something that causes some to HAVE to sell following the death of a spouse.

 

[Monahorns]

I paid some attention to the ones limiting property taxes upon death. When dad passed, the County reassessed the valuation on the house as though it was a new purchase. That is messed up because it allowed them to backdoor increases otherwise precluded by the per-annum caps...I could see that being something that causes some to HAVE to sell following the death of a spouse.

I could go either way on that one. Sorry. I agree with you that what you describe shouldn't happen. My problem with the amendments was that it and the other one are too narrow. It allows the Texas government to claim they did something about property taxes when they didn't do anything for the vast majority of people. We need an overall reduction, or a rate cap, or abolishment, not this.

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

I paid some attention to the ones limiting property taxes upon death. When dad passed, the County reassessed the valuation on the house as though it was a new purchase. That is messed up because it allowed them to backdoor increases otherwise precluded by the per-annum caps...I could see that being something that causes some to HAVE to sell following the death of a spouse.

It might be that the surviving spouse would not be subject to reassessment, but generational transfers of property would.

 

[Horn2RunAgain]

Meanwhile, in Southlake, racism took a hit

NBC tries to frame the winner (conservative) as a "diversity plan opponent". Keep on with the incorrect characterizations, please. People see right thru that nonsense

Diversity plan opponents win control of school board in Southlake, Texas

 

[UTChE96]

On a related note, I found the results of the "Replace the Police" proposition in Minneapolis to be very disturbing. While the MSM continues to report that voters "rejected" this measure, they gloss over the fact that 44% of the residents essentially voted to move towards anarchy. Its clear that a fairly large segment of the left wing does not believe that law enforcement (and incarceration) should be the primary way to handle violent crime.

 

[Mr. Deez]

On a related note, I found the results of the "Replace the Police" proposition in Minneapolis to be very disturbing. While the MSM continues to report that voters "rejected" this measure, they gloss over the fact that 44% of the residents essentially voted to move towards anarchy. Its clear that a fairly large segment of the left wing does not believe that law enforcement (and incarceration) should be the primary way to handle violent crime.

Ultimately, it's mistrust. If you think about the ballot measure, it simply replaces the police department with a new agency. What's the big deal? The big deal is that everyone knows it would be rebuilt by radicals with screwed up priorities. Woke ideology would be put ahead of protecting the public and stopping crime.

And it's a stupid conclusion. This started with George Floyd being killed. One can certainly argue that the cop was wrong and even malicious. However, that's not even close to the issue presented by this proposal. It's using Floyd's death to question whether a cop should have been involved at all and should be involved in comparable incidents, and that's crazy. Floyd did a bad thing that was illegal. It was a form of theft. He was a bad man trying to harm good people. He should have been arrested by a cop. He should have been charged. He should have gone to jail. Others who do what he did should also face that outcome. I think voters in Minneapolis rejected the insane premise that they shouldn't.

 

[mb227]

On a related note, I found the results of the "Replace the Police" proposition in Minneapolis to be very disturbing. While the MSM continues to report that voters "rejected" this measure, they gloss over the fact that 44% of the residents essentially voted to move towards anarchy. Its clear that a fairly large segment of the left wing does not believe that law enforcement (and incarceration) should be the primary way to handle violent crime.

I prefer to take solace in the fact that roughly three of five told Ilhan Omar to take a hike. Sadly, it seems that the City of Austin residents have no interest in a fully staffed police force...I had hope for them after they voted the Adler-towns removed.

 

[Monahorns]

Welp. Texans voted to make Constitutional changes which will increase the tax burden and hand more power over to bureaucrats to decide who gets to be judge in Texas.

Either we Texans are really stupid or the vote date/turnout was manipulated to get the voters which those in power wanted to vote to the polls and avoid others.

 

[mb227]

Welp. Texans voted to make Constitutional changes which will increase the tax burden and hand more power over to bureaucrats to decide who gets to be judge in Texas.

Either we Texans are really stupid or the vote date/turnout was manipulated to get the voters which those in power wanted to vote to the polls and avoid others.

Sadly, some of the vote breakdowns told me people had no clue what they were voting on. Too few people READ the available information before an election and that number drops on a Constitutional election.

I was appalled that there were fewer than 18K who voted in my local school district races (four positions, with the incumbents being challenged in three and a complete open race with six in the other slot). There are more than 53K students in the district, so you figure that SHOULD leave about 100K parents plus those like me who have no kids in the district but show up to vote anyhow.

However, the district is not one that has been overly controversial in the past year...they banned CRT-related crap a few years ago.

 

[bystander]

Alright, who can give a good summary of how these actually work without resorting to partisan scare tactics? As near as I can tell, Prop A seems to think the problem with the police force is lack of funds, rather than poor administrative decisions, and seems to want to blindly throw sacks of money at the problem to fix it. It's funny that it's largely the conservatives behind this and the liberals against it, since the reverse is true when it comes to public education. That said, the idea that it's gonna just screw over EMS and parks and libraries doesn't seem correct either. Haven't looked much into B yet, but I suddenly realized I need to this weekend because Nov 2nd is coming up fast.

Is the problem that a referendum makes law while the AFA and EMS folks will be stuck with collective bargaining where they could possibly run into the wall of budget constraints due in part to the law governing AFA compensation and staffing levels?

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

I almost laughed out loud at my boss today. Austin is in major trouble due to lack of police. He said "due to no cadet classes last year we have a spiraling shortage of officers". Yeah you liberal jackass, we all know the city council cut their balls off and wouldn't allow them to hire nor train officers and wouldn't allow OT.

The stat he threw out that floored me was that for every 70 officers that come out of the academy then finishes other training over 150 officers retire or quit. Gee, who knew there would be officer attrition while not allowing any type of hiring? Yeah, the city council. They didn't defund the police but they made sure there would be no cops on the streets.

As a result we have hired "elite trained" private armed officers who will patrol our properties and also have armored vehicles patrolling properties from 11p to 11am daily based off the property volatility. Sounds to me Austin is headed toward skyrocketing crime rates.

It sounds so cool to liberals being on those trendy and edgy ideas like defund the police but they never really think through the real ramifications of their actions then blame someone else when it falls apart.

 

[Monahorns]

People don't need police departments. People need safety and security. Police don't protect your house. They show up after something bad has happened.

Our society needs to rewire our thinking to quit equating one for the other.

The problem is that the City of Austin forcibly takes a large amount of money from you not what pittance they hand back. You have less money to protect you and your family because of municipalities like the City of Austin.

Systems of protection can be set up on multiple layers: personal, family, HOA, neighborhood, business, business district, etc. Let's take back life from the state. Let's make our own decisions and stop walking down the road to serfdom.