Austin Interfaith Victory Pages A newsletter on the successes of Austin Interfaith member institutions January 26, 2011 New Member Institution: Austin Interfaith proudly welcomes St. John’s Lutheran Church as our newest member institution. St. John's has both English and Spanish worship services, and is located just south of Ben White near S. 1st street. They join St. Ignatius, Wildflower Unitarian, Prince of Peace Lutheran, San Jose, and Travis Heights Elementary as part of our Southside cluster. We look forward to our collaboration. Leadership Development – During January-March of 2011 Austin Interfaith institutions will be focused on leadership development through house meetings, civic academies, and local trainings. So far in the past three weeks over 200 leaders attended trainings and civic academies…and 30 house meetings were held with 300 people. Below are some of the highlights: Education Organizing Institute – On Saturday, January 8, 40 leaders from Austin Interfaith congregations, AISD schools, and Education Austin attended the first Austin Interfaith Education Leadership Institute. The focus was on equipping a collective of parents, educators, and community members with the skills necessary to improve student achievement by addressing issues facing families and schools. Austin Police Commander Pedraza attends AI safety action in Dove Springs with 30 leaders – San Jose Catholic Church hosted small group “house meetings” with APD commander Pedraza and 10 other officers as well as a county deputy and constable and 30 members of the Dove Springs Community. This was in response to yet another vandalization of a San Jose parishioner’s car the previous week. The purpose was for APD and the county to hear stories of crime incidents in this southeast Austin neighborhood. A follow up meeting is set for February 3, at 6:30 pm at Widen Elementary School. Chamber of Commerce official speaks at San Jose Civic Academy on Scholarships – San Jose Catholic Church hosted a “Civic Academy” on college scholarships on January 10. Access and affordability to college was addressed this past year through a small group “house meeting” campaign at San Jose. Gilbert Zavala from the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce presented on financial aid availability. College affordability has been identified a pressing issue by several Austin Interfaith member congregations, many of which offer scholarship programs of their own from fundraisers. AISD Budget 101 workshop presented to AI leaders by top brass at school district – Fifteen leaders talked with Austin Independent School District Superintendent Meria Carstarphen and Assistant to Superintendent, Chief Human Capital Officer Michael Houser about the drastic budget reductions for 2011/2012. In the current proposal, full day pre-k is maintained, which was an item Austin Interfaith leaders have been advocating for. They also discussed next steps for the Innovation School project, a joint-initiative with Education Austin to partner with AISD schools. 40 leaders attend AI leadership training at St. Albert the Great Catholic Church – On December 18th, 40 leaders from Austin Interfaith institutions attended a leadership training focused on the scriptural basis for social justice and the elements of a Broad-Based Organization. We plan to offer these trainings on a monthly basis for new and experienced leaders. Next Steps: 1. AUSTIN INTERFAITH MONTHLY LEADERS MEETING – CHANGED TO 4TH THURSDAY OF EVERY MONTH. NEXT LEADERS MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 27TH AT 7pm AT SAN JOSE CATHOLIC CHURCH (2435 Oak Crest, Austin 78704) 2. AUSTIN INTERFAITH CLERGY CAUCUS – Thursday, January 27th, 12:00-1:30, St. David’s Episcopal Church (301 E. 8th Street, Austin 78701). Please RSVP to Austin Interfaith office as St. David’s will be providing lunch.

Camarena-Skeith and Malfaro: Who picks up the slack for city's incentives?
Minerva Camarena-Skeith and Louis Malfaro, Local Contributors
Published: 6:06 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 7, 2010

The American-Statesman article "Medical firm eyes a move to Austin" (Jan. 6) quotes Mayor Lee Leffingwell about a subsidy deal he is negotiating with Hanger Orthopedic Group Inc. of Bethesda, Md., to relocate to the Domain.

Leffingwell promises that the deal with Hanger will be "cash-positive" for the city. But any time a company is given substantial tax abatements, other taxpayers are forced to pick up the tab for increased city services like police, fire protection and infrastructure. If the jobs do not pay living wages, families are left dependent on public assistance at taxpayer expense.

Austin Interfaith believes that the city should encourage potential employers to locate in Central Texas using our quality of life, skilled work force, schools and institutions of higher learning as selling points — the factors that business leaders repeatedly mention when selecting a site for their business.

City officials should not subsidize private companies unless those companies agree in writing to pay high wages and benefits, hire locally and provide career advancement for their workers.

Between 2000 and 2007, the City of Austin gave $64 million in public tax subsidies to companies that created 1,400 jobs — about $46,000 per job. This is why we believe these jobs should pay living wages of at least $18 an hour ($37,000 a year) with benefits and a career ladder.

To put this in perspective, $18 an hour translates to $37,000 a year. It is below the average wage in Texas — $18.90 an hour.

A family of four becomes eligible for city social service assistance when it earns less than $21.20 an hour. We oppose using tax dollars to subsidize low-wage jobs.

The City Council approved a $508 million water treatment plant, wants to build a $32 million wastewater tunnel to service future luxury downtown condos and is considering a $600 million rail line to connect the downtown business district to the airport and the University of Texas.

While we are not against infrastructure spending per se, we are very concerned about the impact these decisions will have on poor and working families as well as small businesses. This burden is increased when new companies are given tax subsidies or abatements.

Economic pressures on families and on city, county, school district, Austin Community College and health district budgets are exacerbated during tough economic times like these. Austin's poverty rate — child and adult — is higher than the national average. Investing in education, effective work force development and good jobs are the best use of our tax dollars.

Any deal in which working families are asked to use their tax dollars to subsidize private businesses should be done judiciously, and only when companies guarantee that the jobs they bring are high-wage jobs that provide a true return on the public's investment.

In Fact Daily: (posted on web for subscribers only; text pasted below and attached)

Three companies scouting city as Council considers new rules for incentives

Three companies involved in the manufacturing of solar panels are interested in moving their operations to Austin, according to Mayor Lee Leffingwell. Though nothing has been put in writing, Leffingwell has met with representatives from those companies, and, he said Wednesday, “all three are very seriously considering Austin.”

According to the mayor, one of the companies would like to be operational by next summer, though the process would involve several months of lead time even after an agreement with the city was reached. That company, Leffingwell said, is interested in moving into a shell rather than erecting a building from the ground up.

The mayor said he is encouraged by the news: “I have said, ever since 2005, that targeted industries, like those in the renewable energy business, would be specifically the ones we would want to talk to about coming to Austin.”

So, any changes to the city’s economic incentives policy—such as those being considered at today’s City Council meeting—are not just an academic exercise.

The Council is expected to approve an ordinance establishing an enhanced economic incentive proposal review process. That would require a formal cost-benefit analysis as part of the city's evaluation process for economic incentive agreements including “direct and indirect costs of such proposals.” It would also implement a timeline of 13 days to allow citizens to review and comment on any economic-incentive proposals before the Council could take action on them.

The ordinance is the result of a February Council resolution directing the city manager to convene a stakeholders group – made up of members of the Austin Chamber of Commerce, Greater Austin Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Capital City African-American Chamber of Commerce, Liveable City, and Austin Interfaith – to consider elements of city policy concerning economic incentives. The group met on three occasions in March, April, and July to discuss the implementation of the cost-benefit analysis as well as a timeline for the city’s review process.

One issue the stakeholders group did not make a determination on concerns wages and benefits for workers employed by companies that receive tax incentives from the city. This is a concern for Austin Interfaith and other citizens’ organizations, which see the issue as vital to the economic and social future of the city. These groups want the Council to ensure that any companies receiving incentives from the city provide their employees with a living wage (no less than $18 an hour), health benefits, and clear paths to advancement within the company, and that those companies have a strategy to hire local workers.

According to Austin Interfaith Strategy Team member Minerva Camarena Skeith, these groups are concerned that economic incentives without built-in safeguards for local workers might cripple the economy. “We want to make sure,” she said, “that our tax dollars are being spent on bringing high-quality jobs to Texas, not just providing breaks for corporations. If companies are going to be profiting off our incentives, they should have to provide for the city and its citizens.”

“We have to ask ourselves: Is Austin is going to be a city of low-wage workers, or are we going to set a higher standard?”

According to Skeith, at accountability sessions Interfaith Austin held during this year’s elections, all current members of the City Council, including Leffingwell, made commitments to support worker protections in any economic-incentive legislation. “We’re confident,” says Skeith, “that the council members will honor their commitments.”

But one council member, Sheryl Cole, says she is concerned that such a proposal could have unintended consequences for the city. “I simply do not want us, in the interest of helping our work force earn more and receive more benefits,” Cole said, “to operate under a faulty premise and keep economic opportunities out of Austin for the most vulnerable members of our society.

“I certainly support living wages and health benefits. I am, however, concerned that we do not take any actions that have a negative impact on our unemployed and underemployed, such that we are not granting incentives to help those most in need of social-service assistance. I do, however, think that the ordinance can be drafted in such a way that we do not exclude any companies that have jobs that would be available to the most vulnerable members of our society but … that cannot pay the living wage or health benefits,”

Leffingwell, for his part, believes health benefits should be a necessary component of the city’s economic incentive agreements. “I don't see how the city could enter into an agreement with any company,” he said, “that did not provide the opportunity to have basic health insurance for its employees.”