Austin-based businesses have joined together with community leaders and citizens to stop the City of Austin from giving $65+ million in tax subsidies to the Domain Mall in NW Austin.
Stop Domain Subsidies’ Claims Substantiated by Liveable City Report
“The Domain: Anatomy of a Bad Deal”
Liveable City, whose mission is to build a shared and sustainable vision for Austin’s future, released a report on economic development practices on Monday authored by economist Michael Oden, a professor in the Community and Regional Planning Department at the University of Texas at Austin. The report, entitled, “Building a More Sustainable Economy: Economic Development Strategy and Public Incentives in Austin”, systematically exposes the folly of the subsidies slated for The Domain luxury shopping mall, by concluding, “The Domain deal stands out among all the incentive packages supported by the city in the past ten years as a generally bad deal by most meaningful criteria.” The report was also most critical of the one week notice the Austin City Council gave to the public before passing the $65 million subsidy package the study referred to as “a bad deal”. The report goes on to substantiate claims made by Stop Domain Subsidies founder, Brian Rodgers, who has been working since 2003 to stop the taxpayer boondoggle, which led to a citizen’s petition drive to place the issue on the November ballot.
The report was commissioned for the purpose of reviewing the City of Austin’s policies and procedures related to tax incentives. The overall report gives a series of recommendations that will help safeguard that in the future the City’s taxpayers are protected. You can read the full report here. The Domain deal is discussed starting on page 62:
The Austin City Council is threatening to cut a deal with The Domain developer behind closed doors! On Thursday, they want to take the decision away from the voters and give Simon Malls the $65 million by making the agreement mandatory.
Please send a group email which goes to all members of the City Council.
Tell them:
* Leave the Domain decisions to the voters in November.
* Let democracy run its course.
* Stop giving away tax money to rich corporations.
* Stop hurting local business!
According to a little article in the Statesman, the Austin City Council is working against the people by hiding in Executive Session. Why Executive Session — out of the public eye? Whatever they are planning, needs to be done in public.
Check out the TV ad Jennifer Kim is running, if you haven’t seen it yet. It leads with stopping The Domain subsidies! This is a help to our cause, as thousands of Austinites have yet to hear about our issue:
Today we received a question from the Austin Chronicle asking what the tolls have to do with this (referring to our last release) and why we’re supporting Kim, when “she voted in December to honor the agreement”. Here’s our response:
Good question and glad you asked!
The tolls have nothing to do with this, except it explains to us why Kim is facing a well funded opponent backed now by the Statesman.
We don’t know if any of the council members understood in December how the Domain payments had been rendered voluntary by a lawsuit settlement between Brian Rodgers and Endeavor. Clearly, Kim now understands that the City can honorably set aside the Chapter 380 Agreement by taking advantage of the Kirk Rudy [of Endeavor Development] approved amendment to the contract.
The real deal is putting the issue forward for us, which Jennifer is doing in the face of an opponent (Shade) who opposes the SDS effort, and regardless of the charter amendment, won’t even oppose the subsidies.
Kim’s opponents are busy talking bad about her style. Frankly, we here at SDS don’t give a hoot about style — other than the great styles carried by our small businesses! For that we can go shopping.
Linda Curtis & Brian Rodgers StopDomainSubsidies.com
2153 S. Lamar #205
Austin, TX 78704
383-8484
PS Tomorrow’s the last day of early voting. Election day is Saturday. Please help us spread the word!
The Place 3 race for Council is soooo much more clear on why to vote FOR Jennifer Kim! Today’s Statesman endorsed her opponent, Shade, with, ”[Randi] Shade also opposes an initiative on the November ballot to prevent the city from granting tax incentives to retail projects.” Also, KVUE did a nasty little piece on Thursday talking about Kim’s office expenditures — truly absurd. Check out our response below. Jennifer has, in fact, been working with Stop Domain Subsidies, to aid our effort. (Besides, y’all remember when she voted against tolls!). Apparently, the downtown crowd told Jennifer to jump and she didn’t ask them how high. What can you do? Help us reach our supporters to get them to the polls! Early voting is underway through Tuesday, May 6, election day if Saturday, May 10. NOTE: You can also print a copy the stop sign above — for your car or shop windows (or we’ll bring you one). We know how to be thrifty, even though the City insiders apparently haven’t a clue! And, we need phone callers!!! Call us at 383-8484.PS Here’s the full Statesman editorial from today. Our release about KVUE’s coverage is below.
For Immediate Release April 26, 2008 They Fiddle While Austin Burns Stop Domain Subsidies, whose charter amendment will be on the November ballot to stop retail subsidies like those for The Domain shopping mall, has asked that KVUE, to give equal coverage to Jennifer Kim’s opposition to The Domain shopping mall subsidies. The group, which gathered 27,000 signatures to put their issue on the ballot next November, responded to what they called, “unfair and biased coverage just prior to the start of early voting”, of Jennifer Kim’s Council office spending on yesterday’s evening news segment. SDS leaders said KVUE skewered Ms. Kim, implying that the $260,000 expenditures for her office was being spent on books, glasses, etc. (all which remain with her office when she leaves), while leaving out that 86% of that money is for staff salaries, including her own! On top off that, SDS leaders point out KVUE ignored a $65 million taxpayer subsidy slated to start next October for The Domain luxury mall that only Kim has voiced opposition to, of 7 council members. Brian Rodgers, a local real estate investor and founder of the citizen’s charter amendment to stop these types of retail subsidies said, “We’re forced to quibble about pennies to Austin taxpayers while Simon Properties gets tens of millions of tax dollars, and those payments are optional! Let’s not stand here fiddling while Austin burns up in the economic crisis just beginning to hit Texas.” The Austin economy is feeling it and city budget discussions are underway. Rodgers continued, “The city’s budget shortfall is tens of millions, though we are being told there should be no problem meeting Austin’s needs. However, a hiring freeze appears on its way. What KVUE failed to say yesterday is really inexcusable and appeared to be favoring Kim’s opponents, as early voting starts on Monday.” Rodgers and Stop Domain Subsidies is asking for a “spending freeze, of substantial amounts”. According to them, starting with The Domain would be a serious start by the City, and a responsive start to Austin’s beleaguered home grown retailers and taxpayers.
Thanks! You helped get us on the ballot in November now you can help us spread the word. One way we’re spreading the word is by making a documentary and telling the stories of real Austin people who have worked hard for years building small businesses without any subsidies.
We’re working on a documentary about the Domain and we’ve gone viral with our video clips by submitting them to a couple of dozen video sharing sites like youtube.
If you have an interesting Domain story to tell or want to express your opinion about Austin’s $85 million subsidy to the Domain, get in touch with us and we’ll do a video interview with you.
Here are the places we’ve “gone viral” with the real life stories of Austinites affected by the Domain subsidies. You can help by watching these and leaving your comments and giving them grades. Click on as many of the links below as you can, sign up and leave comments in support of our cause!
So, visit and explore these video sharing sites (it’s not just a youtube world) watch as many as you can. Rate them on these sites. Leave comments on these sites. Your comments and ratings will help us decide which clips to use in this “user driven” documentary in the works and help create buzz about our Stop Domain Subsidies campaign. If you have a blog or website, feel free to “embed” our videos (you’ll find the code simple to copy and paste from most of these sites).
Send us your clip! Send us your ideas and comments.
Stop Domain Subsidies is in the final stages of getting the 18,433 petition signatures we need to get on the Austin ballot in May ‘08. Our filing deadline is no later than Friday, February 15th. That said, please get your friends and neighbors to sign (along with yourself, of course!) and either bring it to us or mail it to us at 209 E. Ben White Blvd., Ste. 201. You can call us at 383-8484 or 750-7314. We’re having a petition turn-in party at our headquarters on Saturday, Feb. 9 at 5 pm. Pizza and more for all!
Go to StopDomainSubsidies.com to print out the petition — make sure you attach the petition grid page to the amendment language itself — that’s two pages, folks!
Libertarians support “Stop Domain Subsidies” petition effort
AUSTIN - October 11, 2007 - The Travis County Libertarian Party (TCLP)
has adopted a resolution supporting the “Stop Domain Subsidies” (SDS)
petition effort. The SDS petition intends to amend the Austin City
Charter to prohibit tax subsidies to developers of retail complexes.
TCLP chair Wes Benedict commented, “We’re glad to see small businesses
standing up against these government tax subsidies to their larger
competitors. We have long opposed government policies that favor one
business class over another and prefer to see all businesses compete on
a level playing field.”
Pat Dixon, TCLP Executive Committee member and former Lago Vista City
Council member, said, “When I was on the Lago Vista City Council, I
voted against a tax subsidy for a new grocery store that would compete
against existing stores paying full tax rates. I was the only
Libertarian on the council and the only dissenting vote.”
Benedict added, “When government subsidizes one group of businesses, the
tax burden shifts to other businesses, putting them at a competitive
disadvantage. That is fundamentally unfair. Politicians try to sell
these projects to the public by claiming they will increase the tax
base–implying that each individual’s taxes will go down. Has your tax
bill gone down?”
Benedict continued, “When the city council gives incentives to one
business that lobbies for favors, it sends the message to every other
business that lobbying for favors pays off. While business owners and
investors should be striving to find new ways to satisfy customers,
instead they are distracted by having to hire lobbyists to gain
influence with city councils. Remember Las Manitas? Government
incentives also encourage corruption.”
Stop Domain Subsidies is kicking off a citizen’s petition drive to place the issue of stopping retail subsidies, like the Domain, through an amendment to the City Charter. We will need approximately 20,000 signatures to place the issue on the May ‘08 ballot. Signatures must be filed by the end of January ‘08. Right now, we’re taking comments about the charter amendment, so please feel free to chime in or to call us at 535-0989. See below.
Proposed Charter Amendment
An amendment of Article XII of the City of Austin Charter to add new Section 13 to provide as follows:
§ 13 Prohibition on Special Benefits for Retail Projects
(a) Statement of Intention. The city is authorized by Tex. Loc. Gov’t. Code Chapter 380, and other applicable law to enter into economic development agreements to encourage or foster economic growth. Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is the intention of this section to restrict the use or expenditure of tax revenues or other resources of the city to provide subsidies, financial benefits or advantages for development of real property that includes one or more Retail Uses. It is the intention of this section to ensure fair and equal treatment as between operators of Retail Uses, and particularly to ensure that small retail businesses are not disadvantaged by subsidies and financial benefits given by the city to competing Retail Uses.
(b) Restriction. The city shall neither provide nor enter into an agreement to provide any Financial Incentive in connection with the development or re-development of any real property that includes one or more Retail Uses.
(c) Applicability. Upon adoption of this Section 13, the restriction provided in this Section 13 shall apply to any pending agreement for the payment of a Financial Incentive by the city in connection with any Retail Use if such agreement provides that the obligation to pay a Financial Incentive pursuant to such agreement is contingent on or subject to the city’s appropriation of funds for the payment of the Financial Incentive.
(d) Definitions. As used in this Section 13, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
(1) “Financial Incentive” means: (i) any payment or rebate of any general or special sales tax or ad valorem tax, whether assessed against property proposed to be developed or re-developed or resulting from taxable activity on such property; (ii) a donation of an interest in real property owned by the city; (iii) a special right of use, without fair compensation therefore, of any park land or undeveloped land owned by the city that is a right or use not provided for the benefit of all property located in the city; (iv) forgiveness or discharge of a loan or any part of a loan made by the city; or (v) a grant of funds.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following shall not constitute a Financial Incentive: (i) cost participation by the city in constructing street or utility improvements (as, for example, oversizing of utility improvements to accommodate future development) consistent with generally applicable city policies and practices, provided that the developer’s or owner’s share of such costs fairly and reasonably approximates the cost of construction of such improvements suitable to serve the improvements and uses intended by the developer or owner of a Retail Use benefited thereby; (ii) a grant or loan to a small business, whose principal office is in Austin, Texas, pursuant to a generally applicable local small business loan or grant program; (iii) an expenditure of funds (other than a tax abatement) pursuant to the Tax Increment Financing Act, Tex. Tax Code Chapter 311 or tax increment financing effected pursuant to Tex. Loc. Gov’t Code Chapter 374, as amended from time to time; (iv) subsidies or incentives given to promote efficient energy use, the use of renewable energy, or decreased water usage pursuant to a program adopted by the city for such purpose; (v) a grant of funds which are provided either by the State of Texas or by an agency of the federal government, whether directly to the city, or for the expenditure of which the city must give approval or authorization; (vi) an expenditure of funds charged by the city and paid by developers of real property for regional drainage detention, regional water quality facilities, or other public improvements; or (vii) an expenditure of funds pursuant to an economic development program adopted by the city council for the revitalization of economically distressed areas of the city or areas of the city experiencing high rates of unemployment for the development or redevelopment of a project with a total of not more than 25,000 square feet of habitable improvements.
(2) “Retail Use” and “Retail Uses” shall mean the use or proposed use of improvements to real property for the sale directly to the public of any commercial or consumer goods, including but not limited to the sale directly to the public of clothing, appliances, jewelry, furniture, pets, building materials, plants, drugs and personal hygiene goods, home accessories, household items, packaged or prepared food and beverages, recorded music, office supplies, and any other goods sold directly to the public. “Retail Uses” shall not include a wholesale or distribution center or manufacturing or assembly facility in which goods are stored, assembled, or manufactured for transport off-site for later sale; daycare services; medical, counseling, or nursing care facilities; any enterprise operated by a non-profit corporation or a governmental entity; public or private educational facilities; performing arts venues; museums; or libraries.
(e) Enforcement. Any resident of the City of Austin shall have standing to assert a claim for declaratory or injunctive relief in any court of competent jurisdiction arising out of a violation of this Section 13.
Thanks to the now nearly 300 businesses who’ve signed on to this effort!
Also a special thanks to Michael Parker at Opal Divine’s — and the many of you who offered your store or restaurant — we will hold our press conference this coming Tuesday, Sept. 11, at 2 pm at Opal Devine’s on 6th Street (700 W. 6th). Michael was also nice enough to provide some of those devine Divine appetizers!
Please come — or, if you’re a too busy business owner, send someone to represent you at this event. Although the City of Austin seems to be listening more, we are still planning to initiate a citizen’s petition to place a Stop Domain Subsidies charter amendment on the ballot in May ‘08. We want your input before we start the petition drive — that is the real purpose of this event. You are needed to share with us and the press your opinions.
Please RSVP by sending a note to Linda at ljcurtis@indytexans.org or call Linda at 535-0989.
This issue is much bigger than Austin — and it’s bringing Austin in to the not-so-good limelight. Check out the article below our signatures from the Wall Street Journal, reprinted on Wednesday in the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram!
Hope to see you next Tuesday at 2 pm!
Sincerely,
Linda Curtis & Brian Rodgers
Stop Domain Subsidies
512-535-0989
Luxury sellers flock to Austin
TERI AGINS The Wall Street Journal
AUSTIN - This is the year high-end retail discovered Austin. Although Dallas and Houston have long tended toward gowns and spangles, this intellectual hub has had a jeans-and-T-shirt reputation. But now, as new technology wealth comes to town and the local charity-gala circuit booms, Austin has become one of dozens of U.S. cities undergoing a fashion and luxury-goods makeover.
This year, some 30 high-end retailers have opened boutiques in Austin, including Tiffany & Co., Michael Kors, Ralph Lauren, David Yurman, Louis Vuitton and Burberry. These names - the vast majority represented in Austin for the first time - are among the retail tenants of a $250 million shopping and residential complex, Domain, that Indianapolis-based developer Simon Property Group opened in March. Neiman Marcus, which has exclusive rights to sell Chanel and other labels in Austin, is the anchor tenant.
As the U.S. gets richer, more people outside the traditional fashion strongholds of New York and Los Angeles are lining up for designer labels and accessories. The country’s affluent have traditionally splurged on homes, cars or jets, but only recently have wealthy Americans developed enough of a taste for pricey fashions to support a coast-to-coast industry.
“We consider the U.S. the biggest emerging market for luxury goods,” says Andrea Guerra, chief executive of eyewear giant Luxottica Group SpA. This month, the company is launching a chain of boutiques in the U.S.
For luxury companies, such expansion carries risk. Many luxury-goods marketers have already blanketed the big cities, so they have little choice but to seek growth in smaller markets. But by doing so, they may erode the impressions of exclusivity and scarcity that have been responsible for much of their allure.
Austin typifies the newest preening of America. As high-tech jobs have brought in money and wealthy transplants from other parts of the country, the city’s society scene has been supercharged. Where there were a few black-tie events each year in the 1990s, now there are scores.
Earlier this decade, the city added two monthly society magazines, Brilliant and Tribeza, that document balls, fund-raisers and other society events with color photos.
As Austinites pay more attention to what they wear for the cameras, retailers are paying more attention to Austinites. “Cities that come up on our radar have many black-tie events,” says Karen Katz, president of Neiman Marcus Stores, a division of Neiman Marcus Group Inc.
Andrea McWilliams, 35, is seeing people dress up like never before. For years, fashion-minded Austinites shopped at By George, a boutique that carried some European and U.S. designers, and at Last Call, a Neiman Marcus outlet, where they bought marked-down designer labels. McWilliams says she did most of her shopping on business trips to Dallas.
Simon Property Group, which operates six other malls in the Austin metropolitan area, targeted this city for its Domain project for its wealth and high-fashion spending, says Richard Sokolov, Simon’s chief operating officer. The city of Austin also granted tax incentives totaling about $37 million, including sales- and property-tax rebates, over 20 years.
