Austin Prop 13: Clean Water and Open Space
The city of Austin wants to raise $30 million for water preservation measures. Photo by KUT NewsAudio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Austin voters will decide seven bond propositions in the November elections. KUT News is taking a look at each of them as Election Day approaches. Proposition 13 would borrow money for open space and watershed protection.
According to the city, the $30 million bond would “preserve water quality” by funding the purchase of land in the Barton Springs watershed where water flows into the Edwards Aquifer. So what does that mean?
“It’s preserving the lands, keeping it from urbanization, which inevitably leads to some degradation of water quality,” said Michael Personett, assistant director for the city’s watershed protection program.
The bond would also “preserve open space” by funding the purchase of land conservation easements in the Barton Springs zone. These are agreements between the city and landowners that prevent development. The owner gets some extra cash, and the city gets to regulate water quality and quantity on the property.
Supporters say the bond will go a long way in not only keeping the water clean but also protecting the green space that distinguishes Austin from other fast-growing cities.
“Everybody in Austin, if you’re been here a while, everybody gets it, that open space is part of the fabric, part of the quality of life here,” said George Cofer, director of Hill Country Conservancy, a nonprofit land trust that works in land and water conservation. “It’s just as important as music and housing and transportation and everything else.”
City officials say that Austin voters have approved similar bonds totaling $128.4 million on three occasions since 1998. If voters approve Proposition 13, it will not increase property taxes.
Podcast: Download (2.2MB)
The intentions are good, that is for sure. But, $128.4 MILLION dollars in the past 14 years and now another $30 MILLION dollars!?!
Call me an old fashioned fuddy duddy but that is A LOT of MONEY!
I am in the area green belts and green spaces quite a bit and have been for many years. I do not see where this BIG money is being $pent. I do see the small improvements and appreciate them. Again, my old fashioned values are out of touch with the costs of a park bench or a rustic stairway built in the green spaces. But if you are telling me they co$t $128 million dollars then I just have to ask for a summary breakdown of expenses. Exactly WHO is getting this big money?
The acquisition of new land surrounding the existing green belts is noble but at what cost? Saying that the current land owners would not treat the property correctly is a little condescending. My property backs up to a city owned preserve and I love it, respect it and treat it right.