To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

Yes, I would have voted for HOME as passed. I also support City Council’s efforts to make land development in Austin less expensive and more predictable by:

• streamlining the land development code
• removing barriers to more variety of residential development
• reducing parking minimums
• actively seeking ways to improve efficiency and reduce approval timelines for Development Services and Permitting

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

I support the recently passed phase of ETOD, and implementation with fidelity will be key to reaping the full benefits. Additional areas where I think city investment of resources has been and will continue to be critical include:

• multimodal transportation, safer streets, and programs that promote both density and affordability of housing near employment centers, public transportation hubs, and transportation corridors.
• parks, pools, libraries, and other programs that make public spaces more accessible to our neighborhoods for community use, like the Living Streets Program.

Without improved multimodal linkages between the suburbs and the central city, car traffic into central Austin will continue to grow unabated, and we will miss an untapped opportunity to increase Red Line and express bus ridership from the suburbs, while improving quality of life for suburban Austinites and central city dwellers alike.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

While I absolutely support express bus service and safer options for people biking or walking, in District 6, we need to add transportation options before reducing car lanes. For example:

• Add express bus service from existing Park & Rides on 183 to downtown, the Domain, Kramer Red Line Station, so there is an option to escape 183 traffic other than driving on Jollyville Road, before considering eliminating a car lane on Jollyville Road.
• Add bus service between Lakeline Station and the new Children’s Hospital. – Add bus service to connect the swaths of multi-family near Lakeline Station and the new Children’s Hospital with retail services near HMart, Lakeline Mall, and the Alamo Draft House.
• Connect the apartments along the train track near Lakeline Station with each other and Lakeline Station via a hike/bike path at the backs of the complexes, so that the route is shorter and more pleasant than walking out the front of the complex and along 620.
• Improve connections between existing sidewalks and trails, so that people can walk and bike safely farther than they can now, whether that is from home to school, the library, the pool, neighborhood shopping, or transportation into the city.

It is also worth noting that District 6 has many roads that could accommodate improvements for the safety of people walking or biking without eliminating an entire lane of traffic, and by reducing the width of lanes, we would also positively impact speeding issues.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

Yes, we should use the bond money that voters have already approved for Project Connect as soon as possible, albeit at a reduced scale that takes into account increased costs in the Austin area during the pandemic. I actively support streamlining construction and safeguarding against additional delay but am not expert in these areas. Therefore, I would consider input from both city staff and outside professionals to identify specific steps.

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

In some areas of D6, connecting existing hike/bike trails across neighborhoods would have a positive impact, as would connecting these neighborhood hike/bike trails with Austin’s and Cedar Park’s more extensive network of hike/bike trails. I think we should consider ways to allow lower intensity mixed uses that support each other, so that a neighborhood with a park or a pool might also have an ice cream shop and a pizza place next to the park, and there are safe routes to walk or bike from the neighborhood to these community gathering places. We should also consider greater provision for live/work options, whether it’s a small business owner with a single employee or a solo yoga instructor, hair stylist, or dog groomer working from home. I also support allowing neighborhoods to more easily use streets for block parties or neighborhood events, especially in parts of the city where community gathering spaces are more limited.

To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

First and foremost, I have never (ever) voiced opposition to HOME. I’ve always made clear that I support this land use reform in theory, but it’s a whole another story in practice. I’ve been a cautious supporter of HOME because, as a certified urban planner, I know that upzoning land can contribute to displacement pressures, which must be mitigated to ensure equity.

If I was truly against HOME, I would be unabashed in taking that stance. Let me reiterate a portion of my public testimony I shared at the joint Planning Commission and Council meeting on October 26, 2024 – “I superficially support this initiative not because I think it will solve the affordable housing crisis our city is experiencing, but because I believe it could be a step in the right direction IF it is coupled with effective local policy – and I firmly believe we as Austinites are fully capable of crafting and enacting effective local policy.”

Fast forward to post-passage of HOME today and it’s clear to me that the City Council missed an opportunity to work with the community to relieve legitimate concerns about gentrification, which is most likely why there is not unanimous community support for HOME.

Nonetheless, I would have been inclined to vote for the final version of the HOME Initiative as passed, but with some important caveats. While the initiative’s intent to increase housing supply by allowing three homes per single-family lot and reducing the minimum lot size is a step in the right direction, my support hinges on the inclusion of robust anti-displacement measures. I believe these measures are crucial to ensure that the initiative does not inadvertently harm the very communities it aims to help, particularly low-income residents and historically marginalized neighborhoods.

If elected, I will champion the reforms below:

1. Strengthening anti-displacement measures – I will push for the city-wide implementation of anti-displacement policies to accompany the increased density allowed by HOME. The latter includes one-for-one replacement requirements for affordable housing units, tenant protections and right-to-return policies for displaced residents. The city needs to ensure that as more homes are built, the Austinites who are most at risk of being pushed out are proactively being protected.
2. Expanding deeply affordable housing requirements – I will advocate for stronger requirements for deeply affordable housing in new developments. The latter means ensuring that a significant portion of the new homes built in Austin are accessible to households earning at or below 50% of the median family income. I believe it’s crucial for deeply affordable housing to remain affordable through long-term mechanisms like deed restrictions.
3. Promoting non-market housing – I will champion the continued expansion of the city’s community land trust and support cooperative housing models to further diversify the types of homes available. I believe both approaches can provide long-term affordable housing options and give residents a stake in their communities while helping to prevent speculative price increases and displacement.
4. Enhancing zoning flexibility with inclusionary zoning – I will work to implement inclusionary zoning policies that require new developments to include a mix of housing types and affordability levels. I believe this would help ensure that the benefits of increased density are shared across income levels and that new developments contribute to the creation of inclusive, mixed-income neighborhoods.
5. Prioritizing equity and community engagement – I will push for ongoing community engagement to ensure that the voices of those most affected by these reforms are heard and integrated into the planning process. The latter includes establishing an Office of Community Engagement and implementing an Equity/Anti-Displacement Overlay to protect neighborhoods most at risk of displacement and ensure that any new zoning changes are designed to promote equitable and inclusive development.

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

Equity is at the heart of my approach as an urban planning professional. I will always work to ensure that underserved communities are prioritized in transportation planning and that their voices are central to the decision-making process. The latter is evident in my service on the Community Review Panel that helps guide the dispersal of millions of dollars of Community Initiated Solutions funding related to Project Connect’s Anti-Displacement initiative. As a former low-income and first generation college student, securing affordable housing was always on my mind, especially after I experienced indirect displacement while living in West Campus. Since 2018, I’ve relied on local policy (S.M.A.R.T. Housing) to remain in Austin.

I believe the future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on how effectively the city implements equitable transit-oriented development (eTOD). My vision for eTODs is to create inclusive and walkable neighborhoods where affordable housing is abundant near the planned light rail lines. The latter means increasing density but also ensuring that the benefits of transit-oriented growth reach all Austinites, especially those most reliant on public transportation.

It’s unfortunate that the city’s own data (page 10 of the City of Austin’s March 2023 post-mortem) on the Plaza Saltillo and MLK Station TODs paints a concerning picture of the impact these developments have had on historically BIPOC communities. The significant increase in white, high-income populations and the corresponding decrease in BIPOC presence highlight the displacement these communities face. This demographic shift not only exacerbates racial disparities but also undermines the very purpose of equitable transit-oriented developments (eTODs), which is meant to provide equitable and inclusive transit options for all residents.

Below is my approach to ensuring current efforts produce abundant (and affordable housing) near transit:

1. Comprehensive anti-Displacement measures – I will advocate for the inclusion and implementation of comprehensive anti-displacement policies such as rent stabilization, property tax relief for long-term residents and right-to-return provisions for displaced residents.
2. Increased deeply affordable/affordable housing requirements – I will support increasing the deeply affordable/affordable housing requirements for new developments within eTODs and will work to ensure that a significant portion of new units are deeply affordable and generally accessible to low-income families.
3. Community Benefit Agreements – I believe eTOD development projects should include community benefit agreements that are negotiated with local residents and stakeholders. I think CBAs can ensure that developments provide tangible benefits to existing communities, such as affordable housing, community spaces and job opportunities.
4. Ongoing monitoring and accountability – I believe that establishing mechanisms for ongoing monitoring and accountability of eTODs impacts is important. The latter can include regularly assessing demographic changes, displacement risks and the effectiveness of anti-displacement measures.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

I strongly support reducing car dependency in Austin by reallocating space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes and bus lanes. This shift is absolutely crucial for creating a more sustainable, accessible and safer city. I believe the city can make significant progress toward our goals of reducing vehicle pollution, enhancing street safety and providing affordable transportation options by prioritizing alternative modes of transportation.

A few key areas for transformation are Burnet Road, South Congress Avenue and South Lamar Boulevard – all are vibrant corridors that could greatly benefit from expanded bike lanes and improved pedestrian infrastructure. I believe doing so would not only enhance safety but also support local businesses by making it easier for people to access them without needing to drive. Also, I think it can help foster a vibrant street life that reflects the unique character of Austin.

Similarly, Guadalupe Street (specifically The Drag portion) near UT is ripe for redevelopment that prioritizes buses, cyclists and pedestrians. I believe this change would not only improve transit access for students and residents, but also encourage a shift away from single-occupancy vehicle use in one of Austin’s busiest corridors.

I think Rainey Street is an obvious example of a neighborhood street that could be pedestrianized. Considering its popularity as a nightlife destination, pedestrianizing Rainey Street would enhance safety, reduce traffic congestion and create a more enjoyable environment for residents and visitors alike.

Lastly, I would like to see more targeted improvements on East Riverside Drive, where dedicated bus lanes could significantly improve transit efficiency and reduce car reliance in a rapidly developing area. The city should prioritizes people over cars by reallocating road space in these and other key areas, which I believe will make Austin more livable, sustainable and inclusive for everyone.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

I strongly support moving forward with Project Connect as planned. I believe light rail is vital for Austin’s future as it will help address the city’s critical transportation, environmental and housing goals. The opposition from the state legislature and legal challenges from figures like AG Ken Paxton threaten not just the project, but the future of our city’s infrastructure.

Below are several key steps I think the the city/Austin Transit Partnership/CapMetro should take to safeguard and streamline Project Connect:

1. Robust legal defense and advocacy – vigorously defend Project Connect in court and continue advocating for it publicly, perhaps at the state level as well. I think building strategic alliances can strengthen our position against state interference.
2. Secure and diversify funding – explore alternative funding options, such as federal grants and public-private partnerships, to help ensure financial stability and reduce the risk posed by state-level opposition. I believe this approach can also shield the project from political volatility.
3. Engage the community – strong public support is paramount, therefore all entities should ramp up community engagement efforts and ensure that Austinites understand the benefits of Project Connect, such as reduced traffic congestion and increased housing accessibility. I strongly believe transparent communication will help build a broad coalition in favor of the project.

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

As someone deeply invested in urban planning and community development, I understand the critical role that vibrant, mixed-use neighborhoods play in fostering a connected, sustainable city. My lived experience with zoning policies in Austin, my advocacy work with the local nonprofit Texas Housers and my academic background in urban studies/planning inform my approach to creating more livable communities.

I support designating specific corridors within neighborhoods as commercial hubs and transforming them into vibrant centers of activity. These hubs would be informed by the Imagine Austin Plan and ideally support local businesses, create jobs while offering Austinites more opportunities to shop, work and socialize close to their home. Some sections of South Lamar or Burnet Road, for example, could benefit from more mixed-use development to help make these areas more dynamic and accessible.

I will work to tirelessly to promote pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods across District 7 and the city more broadly. I believe the latter would not only improve accessibility but also strengthens the sense of community.

I will also work to streamline the permitting process for small businesses and make it easier for local entrepreneurs to establish themselves within neighborhoods. To further support this vision, I will work to local craft policies like Site Plan Lite, which seek to reduce bureaucratic barriers and encourage the growth of vibrant and resilient neighborhoods.

These changes are about more than convenience – they’re about creating a more connected, sustainable and community-focused Austin. I believe empowering Austinites to actively participate in the planning and decision-making process is crucial for creating equitable and sustainable city. That’s why campaign slogan is “Empower Progress | Fuel Austin’s Future”

To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

I testified alongside fellow AURA members in support of HOME Phase 1 on three separate occasions and in support of HOME Phase 2 once. I absolutely would have voted in favor of both, as I believe they are very long overdue changes that can have a notable positive impact on our housing crisis.

I also personally believe in the value of “missing middle” housing as someone who has rented a townhouse that’s part of a triplex for the past five years. It was an affordable and attainable option for my Wife and I, and if we hadn’t found this particular unit we very likely couldn’t have lived in District 7 in the first place. It’s not just me either, District 7 is a majority renter district (53% according to HousingWorks Austin’s last scorecard).

Now that both phases of HOME are in implementation, we must ensure that HOME is truly useful and actionable for property owners. Here are some of the following ways that I intend to address this on the dais:

Urgently simplifying and streamlining the subdivision process: To actually subdivide a lot requires a process that can take 1-2 years and tens of thousands of dollars, even if you begin with the specialized knowledge to do so. City staff is thankfully already paying attention to this, but we need to move very urgently to ensure that homeowners and small infill developers can actually create these smaller lots. Simply put, we should not subject smaller lots to the same process as large/neighborhood-sized subdivisions.

Education and awareness: We need to do more to educate property owners of how they can best utilize HOME. This isn’t just so that they know their property rights, but also so we can actively encourage the best practices that we know are most likely to result in more affordable and attainable housing units.

Monitor the effectiveness of the new setbacks and minimum lot sizes: When HOME Phase 2 was being considered at the Planning Commission and through City Council Amendments, the exact numbers for the new setback requirements and minimum lot sizes were very heavily debated. We should be open to exploring smaller lots and smaller setbacks if we’re seeing unintended limitations from the current numbers.

Finally, another reform that I strongly support outside of the HOME Initiative conversation is single stair reform. Many, many other areas of the world (and some other areas of the US) have successfully had single stair apartment buildings for generations without major issues. It’s a common sense reform that adds more units to our housing market without increasing the footprint of the land, and it’s also long overdue.

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

I fully agree that we cannot successfully build the rail and bus transit systems that we intend to without success Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (ETOD). It’s also clear to me that while the latest round of ETOD policy was a meaningful step forward, there’s a lot more work left to do.

A great example of this is the continued conversation around density bonuses that allow increased height for including a specific number of affordable housing units. The constant problem with this approach is that no policy is ever perfectly aligned to evolving market forces, oftentimes leading to low utilization of the density bonus (aka, less affordable housing units created).

I will pursue policy that is less focused on fixed numbers, and instead responsive to the changing year-to-year market forces with specific metrics that recalibrate the bonuses over time. The goal of this is to ensure a higher utilization of density bonuses, ultimately creating more affordable units (especially close to current and future transit lines within the ETOD framework). Our current “all or nothing” status quo of density bonus utilization is missing the mark.

Finally, I believe we need to tightly monitor compatibility standards to unlock as many housing units as possible near future Project Connect transit lines. It’s staggering to see the estimated tens of thousands of housing units that can now be created from the latest compatibility reforms, and I believe that we should keep pushing to unlock more housing opportunities through compatibility reform both within the ETOD framework and beyond.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

I strongly support the creation of truly safe sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes. In many instances where we need to create these options within our streets, we must also invest in traffic calming measures to ensure that those who are navigating an area outside of a car are truly protected from high-speed car traffic.

In District 7, we have many streets that consistently show up on the High Injury Network statistics for serious/fatal pedestrian and bike incidents, and even more that are in desperate need of pedestrian and bike infrastructure investments. I’m particularly focused on Burnet Road, Parmer Lane, North Lamar Blvd, Anderson Lane, Koenig Lane, and Metric Blvd as high priority “stroads” (street-road hybrids that accomplish neither task well) that must be urgently made safer to navigate. A constant difficulty on this front is that TxDOT has right of way control in many of these instances, meaning we have less locus of control as a city. That said, I’m committed to getting in the weeds and making improvements wherever possible.

I would also love to see many of the streets within the Domain permanently pedestrianized, especially streets like Rock Rose Avenue that experience a high level of foot traffic as a bar/entertainment area. Continuing with the Rock Rose example, this is a street that is already closed to pedestrian traffic only in some instances/timeframes with positive results, so we’ve seen that pedestrianization in the Domain can be very effective.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

I’m absolutely in favor of moving forward with Project Connect as planned. Our City has a long and complex history with rail; ranging from our streetcar system that existed from 1875-1940 all the way to the failed rail vote in 2000. Every time that we’ve decided against continuing or expanding rail in Austin, the price tag of building rail has gone up exponentially. I don’t even want to know how much Project Connect would cost if we have to vote again on it in 2030 or 2040.

To be frank, the current attacks on Project Connect represent an undemocratic attempt by a small number of people to override the will of Austin voters. I intend to defend the will of Austinites in two main ways:

1. Representing District 7 at the legislative level by building relationships with allies to Project Connect, and publicly advocating against those who seek to destroy it. We saw this approach succeed in the last legislative session, and I intend to be an active part of it during the next one.
2. Supporting the timely and effective construction of Project Connect itself as an ally to the Austin Transit Partnership and CapMetro. This includes standing against I-35 expansion, a useless mega-project that is being forced on our city that will put a drain on the workforce we need to mobilize for Project Connect, if it moves forward. This also includes supporting the effective implementation of the newly created Austin Infrastructure Academy, which will be critical to providing a well-trained workforce that will build a wonderful rail system through Project Connect.

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

We need to urgently provide more commercial opportunities within residential areas, and residential opportunities within commercial areas. There are so many neighborhoods in District 7 that have solid sidewalk infrastructure, but aren’t useful for anything other than movement within the neighborhood because there simply isn’t anything exciting to walk to.

To get into specific policy, I intend to pursue expanded opportunities for “corner store lots” within neighborhoods and “Accessory Commercial Units” that provide small business owners more flexibility to utilize their property for their work. Allowing this type of commercial flexibility within residential areas can create so many truly walkable and bike-able third spaces throughout District 7.

We also need to redefine what “mixed use” looks like, as the current model of large storefronts on the bottom floor of apartments is not accessible to many small businesses, and frequently results in vacant storefronts that are useful to no one. I support policy that encourages smaller footprint areas for new small businesses to call home, which can greatly reduce the cost to lease for those small business owners and provide a much-needed stimulation to our struggling local business economy.

Finally, now that we’ve ended parking minimums city-wide (which I testified in support of alongside fellow AURA members) we need to be proactive about how to best maximize the massive amount of land used for strip mall parking lots. This includes adding flexibility for the creation of residential units on those previously unused, already paved-over land that is currently dedicated to perpetually empty parking spots.

To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

I was the Chair of the Planning Commission during the process of passing HOME Phase 1. Under my leadership, the Planning Commission worked together to craft a series of amendments that vastly improved the draft code and approved the amended code with a supermajority of 11-2 votes. We formed a working group that vastly improved the draft code to ensure it incentivized smaller homes closer in size. We included amendments that addressed commissioners’ concerns with short-term rentals, infrastructure, gentrification, and preservation. I supported HOME 1 and 2 as passed, which included directions to staff to address the concerns expressed during public hearings. My first priority to expand housing availability will be championing a new comprehensive land development code. Our comprehensive plan and later amendments, Strategic Housing Blueprint and Strategic Mobility Plan, cited replacing our 1984 land code as key to meeting our housing and transit goals. As chair of the Planning Commission, I have observed firsthand the toll that incrementally changing our land codes has on the public, city staff, volunteer boards, and commissions. I would also work to ensure measures to make residential subdivisions and site plans easier and less expensive, especially for missing middle housing surrounding major transit routes and centers. After reviewing the Harris/Walz plan for reducing housing costs, I will support taking full advantage of available federal funds to increase housing if their plans become law.

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

First and most apparent, I will consistently support expanding the map of the ETOD overlay wherever we add light rail and metro rapid bus lines as well as similar type density within the Imagine Austin Transit Corridors and Growth Centers. To ensure Austin is addressing equity within the overlay, I would consider incorporating the equity measures found into the Project Connect Equity Tool within the ETOD overlay rules to prevent displacement in areas experiencing gentrification as we expand its use. This could also include deeper levels of affordability for the density bonus for rent and for sale requirements. I am also a proponent of building the density bonus affordable units on-site and further dis-incentivizing the use of in-lieu-of provisions.

As stated in previous surveys, I support comprehensive land code changes instead of the current incremental approach. I would like to see additional design standards to ensure our ETODs include incentives for sustainability measures, such as multi-use trails, open spaces, and parks, water quality and drainage improvements, and energy and water conservation. These will be increasingly important as we build infrastructure that will be here for the next 25-50 years as climate events become more frequent.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

I support these measures to reduce car dependency with appropriate planning and prioritization. Austin has limited funds for these improvements, which means we need to prioritize projects that have the greatest opportunities to increase Austinite’s use of alternative modes of mobility and, thus, remove the most cars from our roads. The evolution of our roads and streets must align with our comprehensive plan priorities for increasing housing density along transit corridors and growth centers. When thinking of streets to be changed or pedestrianized, I prefer to reference areas along a street that are ready. For example, Guadalupe St. along the UT campus is a sure candidate. There are also segments of Lamar Blvd. and Burnet Rd. that are ready or will be prepared in the near future based on the planned mixed-use development.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

I support moving forward with Project Connect as planned and seeking funding for the Priority Extensions as soon as possible. Austin has seen so many of its initiatives to grow housing and improve mobility options end up in the courts. I do not think that the Project Connect lawsuits have any merit, but it isn’t easy to know, given recent court decisions. For future steps, and since the recent lawsuits seem to be politically motivated, I would engage with state leaders who approve our bonds and identify leaders who will champion our goals for expanded rail and rapid bus lines. Other steps would include ensuring the City obtains sound legal advice when seeking bond funding and providing the flexibility to address cost escalation.

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

My campaign platform for comprehensive land code changes would support the transition to these complete communities. These changes are also the most significant opportunity for public involvement and neighborhood planning, where community members identify the gaps and follow up with mapping these new commercial zones. One of my top priorities is working with our communities to transform our 50-year-old subdivisions into what is needed now in our urban core.

To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

Yes, I would have voted for HOME as passed.

To expand housing options, I will move forward on two tracks: (1) regulatory reform to decrease the cost of building infill housing; (2) financial measures to incentivize infill housing production, with a special focus on producing housing for working class and middle income residents.

1. To fulfill the promise of HOME, additional measures are needed on the policy and implementation side to reduce the time and expense of permitting, and to reduce the cost of subdivision. More broadly, we need regulatory reform that allows City staff to focus on advancing high priority goals including increased housing production, protecting and expanding the tree canopy, and protecting the watershed, while maintaining flexibility on a project-by-project basis. The City needs to internalize that projects that go unbuilt are a loss, including loss of housing opportunity, loss of density opportunity, and loss of new tax revenue.
2. I support ongoing efforts to use bond capacity, City land, state and federal incentives, public-private partnerships, and other finance strategies to build housing that is permanently affordable, housing that is designed to address homelessness (i.e., permanent supportive housing), and housing that is designed for key sectors of the workforce (i.e., teacher housing, workforce housing).

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

I support the goal of ETOD and would advocate for additional ETOD overlays as our transit system develops.

The goal in the present is to protect and implement Project Connect in the face of right-wing attacks. The City must make the strongest legal arguments available to defeat the lawsuit filed by local anti-growth activists, and ensure that the TX AG is not able to block the bond financing mechanism within Project Connect. We must also organize at the Texas Legislature to defeat any 2025 attempts to overturn the will of Austin voters.

Once Project Connect is assured (even, potentially, by winning a second election if legal or legislative decisions require that action), the goal should be to expand the rail and bus footprint and set in motion a truly transit-oriented City. Within District 7, that means we need a planned extension to Crestview Station, as well as extensions to the North Lamar bus depot and the Rundberg area.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

I absolutely support the goal of reducing car-dependency in Austin through a wide variety of tactics, including expansion of mass transit, encouraging telework, designing walkable and amenity-rich neighborhoods, and converting current car lanes for bus, bike, and pedestrian uses. We need more ‘complete streets’ that offer a variety of transportation modes aside from just cars.

Burnet Road is an easy example for me, as I’ve lived close to this street since I moved to Austin in 2013. My daughter’s middle school is on Burnet; my son’s elementary school is a few blocks off Burnet; my wife’s veterinary practice is on Burnet; and our home is just a few blocks into the Crestview neighborhood. Burnet is a fast-evolving part of District 7, that connects the older Allandale neighborhood at 45th with Q2 Stadium and the Domain to the north. And Burnet is a state highway, bringing cars barreling through increasingly dense neighborhoods. We need to slow down Burnet to get the safe, interconnected, vibrant community we deserve.

As it stands right now, my daughter bikes to school but has to risk her life when speeding cars ignore pedestrian crossings. And if I’m at Taco Deli in Crestview, I can’t cross the street to Black Pearl Books without considerable risk (or a long walk to a protected crossing). I’m in favor of a holistic re-imagining of this street that looks at the wide five lanes of traffic (including the middle turn lane), and balances the needs of children and families, seniors and shoppers, buses and bikes, as well as car commuters.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

Yes. As discussed above, we must move forward with Project Connect, not only its currently funded goals but with the expansions needed to develop the ridership and interconnectivity we need as a city. We need to be ready to conduct and win a second election if the legal challenge succeeds or the Texas Legislature intervenes through new legislation. Austin voters are counting on us to fulfill the promise of Project Connect.

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

I live in a residential neighborhood that has an internally-located shopping center that is extremely popular. In the Crestview neighborhood on Woodrow Ave we have a grocery store, cafe, popular restaurant (Little Deli), auto repair and more. This kind of small scale commercial, off the major corridors, should be an essential part of the urban landscape.

As we develop new infill neighborhoods (ideally, we’d be building one, two, three, many Muellers), we should build these types of amenities in, instead of the major corridor strip mall and suburban mall approaches to commercial uses.

In terms of adjusting the layout of existing neighborhoods, I would support planning processes that allow for new uses of currently-zoned residential land. The goal should be to facilitate development of “five minute neighborhoods” where residents don’t have to leave the area to meet their core needs.

To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

I would not have voted for HOME in the current format, however now that HOME is the law I will work to better the current format. For example, the city’s permitting process is in an incredibly perilous situation. The surge in fees for permitting, along with the onerous length of the permitting and inspection process, is going to dramatically hinder home building in our city which I fear in unison with this year’s decrease in home values may lead to a hammer and anvil hit to our developers. We’re already seeing some developers abandoning projects which is a huge cost to both the neighbors around developments and the city. We must work to allocate a different funding source for our permitting department.

Lastly, our city like many has a serious issue with Short Term Rentals (STRs). The once quant idea of being able to rent a home for a vacation has turned into an industry where corporations are buying up as many STRs as possible and running them for as much profit as possible. I have deep concerns regarding the very lax enforcement of fees that these corporations are finding ways to easily circumnavigate and safety concerns for the individuals that rent out STRs. The City of Austin’s reputation to visitors is being tarnished by terrible mangers of STRs and Austin needs to directly confront problem. This is also a particular burden for the local STR operators that follow the rules and pay into the HOT tax.

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

The current red line is a good example of why, if we are going to move forward with development of our light rail, we need to actually build a process that will allow for success. The red line started at a $35M project that grew into a $70M project that then expanded into a $140M+ project that has faced numerous issues, including ridership. None other than Mayor Watson (as a State Senator) passed a law that commissioned a review of CapMetro and our rail efforts back then: “From the beginning,” the report says, “Capital Metro rushed into commuter rail,” bringing voters a project “without sufficient planning, or contingency funding.” I have concerns that history has repeated with Project Connect and ETODs and instead of the Mayor being a watchdog, we have no one ensuring the project is set for success – from a mobility, housing, spending, and other perspectives. The challenge is that right now we have no one requesting the same level of due-diligence and accountability of CapMetro, the ATP, or Project Connect, aside from one or two people that sit on the ATP Board and actually ask tough questions about budgets and timelines. Regarding future initiatives, I would place emphasis on improving our permitting fees or building in incentives along these currently planned light rail lines, as well as analyzing the performance and development opportunities surrounding the BRT lines supposed to launch in 2025.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

Seeing as the goals are in place, developing systems that’ll reduce vehicle pollution and safer streets is absolutely a goal I can support. Specifically, I believe developing the West Campus for our UT students a highly pedestrian and transit-oriented community with vehicles directed to 24th, 29th and E. MLK as much as possible will reduce both noise and car pollution for the residents of said neighborhood, while also reducing the risk of vehicle / pedestrian incidents – which still happen too frequently.

Although there are grandiose visions for changing streets like Congress to a pedestrian oriented street, my experience in state politics leads me to believe that this would only bring the ire of Greg Abbott down upon the City of Austin. However, I do feel like we have missed some easy opportunities, like the Dillo bus that used to regularly serve the downtown area and if properly planned with more modern amenities could likely have solid ridership. And, again, monitoring the performance of the upcoming BRT may also give us insight into how to have a mix of pedestrian and transit options in the densest areas of Austin.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

My main focus as a member of the City Council will be to support the will of the voters and with that being said, I will work with my team to diligently protect the taxpayers’ dollars. Project Connect has gone significantly over cost and scaled back its original voter-approved vision, and I have concerns that pouring more money in the project will not lead to the results that have been promised. I will work with the plan in place to find cost saving ways to give the voters what they voted for. The BRT portion of Project Connect looks far more appealing from a cost, timeline, and disruption to local businesses and neighborhoods perspective – it is largely funded by the Federal government and will be deployed as soon as next year (unlike our first line which is scheduled to arrive in 2033 – if there are no delays).

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

Although most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses, there are places where we can adjust this model such as the Mueller neighborhood. These developments are wonderful for the people who desire to live in them and are a great tax base for the City. There are plenty of places along major arteries in this city where communities like these can be developed with the input of the people who live in or around the planned developments. In fact, the Imagine Austin plan calls for Regional Centers (like the Domain), Town Centers, and Neighborhood Centers as part of its Growth Concept Map. If we truly want a connected city that also has a mix of housing types and options, including mixed use, these types of centers connected by transit seem far more appealing and effective than upzoning the entire city with no plan or coordination.

To allow for the building of more attainable homes, Austin’s HOME initiative legalized three homes per single-family lot and reduced the minimum lot size needed for one home. Would you have voted for HOME as passed? What new reforms would you champion during your term to build upon HOME and to further expand the types of homes available to Austinites?

I would have gladly voted for HOME and when elected will continue to fight for the HOME initiative. I will always champion diverse housing options at every rung of the socioeconomic ladder. More mixed use development that will draw folks from other areas of the city and even new people coming to Austin.

Austin City Council recently passed the first phase of equitable transit-oriented development (ETOD) to allow for more homes and a walkable, transit-supportive environment near our planned light rail line. The future of high-quality rail and bus transit in Austin depends on successful ETOD. What is your vision for further ETOD initiatives, and how would you ensure our current efforts produce abundant housing near transit?

I strongly support transit oriented development and ensuring that it is equitably distributed not just demographically but also geographically across Austin. When I was a teacher at Mathews Elementary, in close proximity to the urban core but serving downtown, West Austin, and transient residents alike, I saw many families in my classroom struggle with transportation to and from school. I hope we can look at not only expanding transit options but ensuring that development opportunities are prioritized in proximity to increased multi-modal transportation options and also that we increase public awareness, communication, and incentivization of the opportunities that already exist.

Austin has set goals to provide affordable alternatives to driving, reduce vehicle pollution, and create safer streets. To what extent do you support reducing car-dependency in Austin by using space currently dedicated to cars for new sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus lanes on arterial roads and neighborhood streets? Could you give examples of streets you’d like to see changed or pedestrianized?

I support the initiatives that Austin has put in place, such as ATX Walk Bike Roll, and as we move away from a car centric culture in Austin, we know that fatalities and accidents will naturally decline, but we must match these efforts with equal efforts to build up alternative modes of transportation. We must encourage protected bus/bike lanes, urban pedestrian trails and other areas where citizens can move about without fear of vehicles.

One of Austin’s key infrastructure projects over the next few decades is the construction of a light rail line as part of Project Connect. Project Connect is intimately tied to our sustainability, environmental, transportation, and housing goals. However, Project Connect and its funding have been threatened at the state legislature and by legal action from AG Ken Paxton, Bill Aleshire, and others. Do you support moving forward with Project Connect as planned? What steps would you have the city take to safeguard and streamline the construction of light rail?

I support moving forward with Project Connect as planned and seeking funding for the Priority Extensions as soon as possible. Austin has seen so many of its initiatives to grow housing and improve mobility options end up in the courts. I do not think that the Project Connect lawsuits have any merit, but it isn’t easy to know, given recent court decisions. For future steps, and since the recent lawsuits seem to be politically motivated, I would engage with state leaders who approve our bonds and identify leaders who will champion our goals for expanded rail and rapid bus lines. Other steps would include ensuring the City obtains sound legal advice when seeking bond funding and providing the flexibility to address cost escalation.

Most residential land in Austin is zoned to disallow commercial uses. What changes would you champion to give Austinites places to shop, play, and work in their neighborhoods, within walking or biking distance of home?

My campaign platform for comprehensive land code changes would support the transition to these complete communities. These changes are also the most significant opportunity for public involvement and neighborhood planning, where community members identify the gaps and follow up with mapping these new commercial zones. One of my top priorities is working with our communities to transform our 50-year-old subdivisions into what is needed now in our urban core.