Have you ever thought about how people know where “good schools” are? Like really thought about it. With the exception of people like me and my wife who can not only tell you which programs each school has, but also how their test scores rack up relative to other schools. Most people aren’t like that, though. At best they might which of the 4 rankings the TEA hands out their school has obtained. And then there are plenty of schools that have the best rankings from the TEA that “people have heard have challenges”.

So how do we find “good schools”.  Take a minute and think about areas around you. How do you know they have good schools? What are the features of the communities?

I’ll bet you came up with something very suburban. Single-family homes with large green lawns. Homes on cul-de-sacs. New homes being built all the time. Ultimately these places do frequently have better schools by keeping out everyone without a college education, or parents rich enough to help with the down payment.

But this is ultimately the zoning of discrimination. It allows racism and segregation to persist in the guise of an obtainable dream. But the down payments and housing prices can always be set just a bit higher to ensure the right sort of neighbors.

We see this in Austin. Super-high end suburbia in the city ringed by apartment complexes. But what if we knocked out the suburbia entirely?

Seattle’s doing something very interesting about this. A Seattle committee recommends replacing “single-family zones” with “low-density residential zones”.  Every neighborhood right now that has single-family homes could add row houses, duplexes, and triplexes. This is something I’d really like to see happen in Austin. What do you think? Would you be willing to give up a suburban single family neighborhood to help out people who rent? If you rent would you be willing to fight for this change?

Recently there have been several Austin posts suggesting taking back the word NIMBY as a point of pride. That’s a horrible idea. Please don’t be a NIMBY.

It’s Intellectually Lazy

Sure, being a NIMBY can seem great. You are assured that no matter what happens, you didn’t suggest the wrong answer. And you can always blame other people if something goes wrong. What a great moral position to take.

It supports decay

With the recent kerfuffle over the off-leash area at Auditorium Shores. The NIMBYs took great pride in standing tall and insisting the park was fine and nothing needed to be done. But only the most disingenuous person could say nothing needed to be done. Clearly there were erosion control problems that needed to be dealt with.

anti-NIMBY != pro-developer

There are many middle ground positions you could take. Come into meetings with ideas. Steer the conversation towards solutions you find palatable. Accept compromise to get what you want.

Don’t accept all input

It is important to identify suggestions that are meant to kill a project. We waste a lot of time in Austin trying to accommodate points of view that are meant to be poison pills, and are not offered seriously.

Be direct

Ask point blank what is required for support of a project. If a person in your conversation suggests that they will not support a project you can safely exclude them from further discussions.

Let’s Go!

Together I think those of us who are not NIMBYs can make Austin a better place. We can get the kind of development we want rather than taking an all or nothing approach. We can maintain our parks without bulldozing the way people currently use them.

Let’s say no to NIMBY-ism and come together as a community!

I did a new spreadsheet with what happens to your City of Austin tax rate with the two homestead exemptions currently on the table if your home continues to increase in value at 10%/year (as mine is currently doing). Note that your City of Austin taxes are only about 1/5 of your tax rate, so that’s why the numbers below may look low to you.

Currently Steve Adler is proposing a full 20% exemption at a cost of over $36,000,000 to taxpayers. That’s the entire City of Austin library budget to put things in perspective.

Kathy Tovo is proposing a flat rate $5,000 (it can only be $5,000 due to the trick being used to get the flat rate which are technically not allowed in Texas).

I have to say I don’t see much value in punching a hole in the budget for either of these cuts. What do you think?

Like the rest of the US I’ve been thinking a lot about race and racism in the past few days. I’ve also been thinking a lot about the Bechdel Test. We just finished writing a play that revolves around six women, technology, and heavy metal. I think it’s awesome.

But I’m going to let you in on a secret. It was also hard to write. It wasn’t hard to write because writing for women is hard. Writing good female characters is easy. It was hard to write because the default kept coming back “men”. Every time we needed a new character for some reason a man showed up. Plot lines twisted around to being about men. Boyfriends were called in to kneecap bad guys. And this was in a show that we had intentionally set out be women focused. It’s no wonder that when not thinking about writing for women, men dominate our stages. Changing this requires intentional action. It can’t just be a magical, mysterical, more just world that shows up because we’ve better educated our children that everyone is equal and has value. It requires intentional work.

So what does this have to do with race?

Same thing. We wring our hands and hope that we can create a more just world, but how exactly is that going to happen when a black man has become shorthand code in our media and literature? I don’t even need to fill you in. If you see a black man on the screen with no dialog you know why he’s there. He’s a default. A placeholder. Is it any wonder that our society just pulls up that same default, and walks away quickly, pulls him over, shoots him thinking he has a gun?

So here’s my challenge. I’m not saying don’t write any more bad guys who are black. I’m saying be intentional. Is there a reason for your bad guy to be a person of color (or a man for that matter)? Then change it. Shake things up. Be intentional.

You’re being a lazy writer. And propping up a racist society at the same time. So this is my challenge to you. Writers – let’s stop this shit.

I don’t completely understand geographic representation. Why are we giving so much credence to where people live? Most of us spend almost as much time where we work as where we live.

I don’t live, work, and shop entirely in SE Austin never crossing IH-35. I commute to NW Austin, I create theater in North East Austin, I visit my mom in South Central Austin, and I shop in South West Austin. Why is it more fair for me to have a huge say in the neighborhood where I own a home, and little say in other areas of town?

The municipal park 1/4 mile from my home has a skate park. Why does where my house is located mean that I’ll have more say over skateboarding related issues? I know NOTHING about skateboarding. That seems somewhat silly to me.

After a long hiatus, the Loaded Gun Theory blogs are back. This should be interesting…