Thread by @knaas

Richard Suttle, January 17, 2018 at 6:21:46 PM

"So I guess no May election if needed. We will need to have a conversation with the City about reasonable business deadlines for this to work."

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @EyeonAustin view original on Twitter

1 week later.

"​We are disappointed because our city leaders are backing down as a result of pressure from a vocal minority, some of whom are from Columbus, Ohio, and who have the obvious motive of killing this move to Austin."

"In a city of more than 1 million people, it’s unfair that a few hundred people may ruin this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bring major league sports to Austin"

"The whole city owns downtown. Why should just a select few be able to dictate how land downtown is utilized? This is about making downtown Austin welcoming to everyone who lives here."

"Polling data tells us the vast majority of Austinites want a Major League Soccer team."

June 21, 2018 "While Greeley acknowledges that the respondent numbers are more “fishing where the fish are” than a representative sample of all Austinites
Read more at fourfourtwo.com/us/features/ta…"

mls2atx.com/frequently-ask… "Austin City Council is voting on two key resolutions related to McKalla Place. Our resolution is #64, and a majority “yes” vote by council members will mean MLS2ATX can enter into negotiations with the City. "

"There is also another resolution (#60) which is meant to impose a [PFP] process, which would delay our ability to move forward until months from now, effectively ending our community’s chance to have a Major League Soccer club in Austin. We want a no vote on #60."

mls2atx.com/GetTheFacts/

"Fact ... The city will have no ongoing financial obligation or risk for the site."

Not fact. Estimated Debt Interest is close to $10 million.

mls2atx.com/GetTheFacts/
"Fact: ... The proposed stadium and surrounding park will also host concerts, sporting events, and cultural and community-oriented events, on top of providing public access to parks and green space 52 weeks a year in a park-deficient area of the city."
...

"Fact: ... Upon completion of the stadium construction, the City of Austin will own the stadium and will continue to own the surrounding land. "

Hold on, one more of these.

"Fact: ... The proposed stadium and surrounding park will also host concerts, sporting events, and cultural and community-oriented events, on top of providing public access to parks and green space 52 weeks a year in a park-deficient area of the city."

austintexas.gov/department/cit…

"Item 30 - August 2, 2012
Approve an ordinance placing a charter amendment on the November 2012 ballot to provide conditions under which the city council may sell or lease a utility facility or lease parkland."

ORDINANCE NO. 20120802-030 Passed 6-0 austintexas.gov/edims/document…

" council shall have no power to, and shall not...a)Sell, convey, lease, mortgage, or otherwise alienate any land which is now, or shall hereafter be, dedicated for park purposes, unless "...

"(1) the qualified voters of the city shall authorize such act by adopting in a
general or special election a proposition submitting the question and setting forth the terms and conditions under which such sale, conveyance, lease, mortgage, or other alienation is to be made" ...

"(2) a lease is to an independent school district, as defined by state law, for a
purpose that two-thirds of the council find is a park purpose"

Does the city council (which voted 6-0 in August 2012) to block both current & future parkland from being sold/leased without voter approval vote do exactly that this week? Suttle, clearly didn't want that election to happen back on January, 17 2018.

Fact: It is a city owned utility facility.
Fact: McKalla Place was purchased by Austin Water (a utility).
Fact: PSV proposes using this as future parkland.
Fact: PSV wants to lease the land.

Who gets to decide this?
The City Council, in violation of its own ordinance?