Will They Leave Leffingwell Alone?
City Councilman Lee Leffingwell isn’t subtle about his hope to be elected Mayor over expected opponent Brewster McCracken in May 2009. Some say they’ve even spotted him sneaking into the office late at night to sketch plans for arranging the furniture once he gets there. Fung shui is fundamental, you know. Especially at Austin’s City Hall.
Before Leffingwell moves up, however, he’s going to have to get re-elected next May. And he just might. Despite a perception that Leffingwell is in a weak position (and rumors of poll numbers that back that up), no one has yet emerged to challenge him.
The same can’t be said for the other two council seats on the ballot next spring. Leffingwell’s colleague Jennifer Kim has drawn a vigorous challenge from Internet entrepreneur Randi Shade. The race to replace the retiring Betty Dunkerley has drawn two declared candidates — neighborhood activist Laura Morrison and ex-City Hall staffer Robin Cravey — with at least two other credible candidates supposedly looking at it.
But several people mentioned as possibilities in recent months have taken a pass at the chance to take on Leffingwell. Jason Meeker, often mentioned as the leading prospect, has his hands full as spokesman for RG4N in the group’s ongoing court case against the planned Wal-Mart at Northcross Mall.
Posted on November 18, 2007 – 12:42 pm by APR
15 Responses to “Will They Leave Leffingwell Alone?”
This site doesn’t hide its pro-mccracken stance. He certainly has mapped out his office, what intern he wants to sleep with and his eyes on state senate.
By jamesscott on Nov 18, 2007
James, don’t forget that Jackie Goodman and Bill Spelman have also indicated that they are going to run. Perhaps APR is biased towards one of them.
As for Leffingwell, he doesn’t seem to inspire much passion (positive or negative) in anybody, which probably bodes well for his council race as an incumbent but poor for the mayoral race when he’ll be just one of a crowd of candidates.
By Kedron Jerome Touvell on Nov 18, 2007
who is bill spellman???
jackie goodmans time is long past.
By jamesscott on Nov 19, 2007
Leffingwell vs. Meeker = ROUT.
By BeatrixKiddo on Nov 19, 2007
Every incumbent should have a challenger, every time. Its just good for democracy. Once a public official starts feeling like their re-election is no sweat, they consciously or unconsciously start feeling like the office belongs to them personally.
By Public debate is necessary on Nov 19, 2007
I agree with you about challenging incumbency, but you have to find a citizen crazy enough to give up a year of his/her life to challenge an entrenched incumbent in a long-shot for a job that doesn’t pay well compared to the private sector. It’s a hell of a sacrifice and a hard sell for most qualified people.
By Kedron Jerome Touvell on Nov 19, 2007
I don’t detect any bias on APR and surely not toward McCracken, thank goodness. Basically, I agree about challenging incumbents, though, especially Leffingwell and Kim.
By Willis on Nov 19, 2007
I have never been more disappointed with an office holder than I am with Lee Leffingwell. He seems to have no back bone of any kind. This guy will never be mayor of Austin. Heck, he practically cowers in the presence of Futrell. Why is it that, in a city with as many brilliant, creative people as we have living here from all political points of view, we have a city council as bad as this one? This is the single most undistinguished group of elected officials I have ever seen. You could literally pick seven people at random waiting for their bags at the Continental luggage kiosk at Barbara Jordan and get a better, more democratic, more intelligent group to represent the city.
No wonder the developers are running circles around them. Austin deserves much better than this.
More power to Jason Meeker and Bill Spellman if they want to run. At least both of them have shown some courage and creativity — and neither one of them seems to be in the pocket of the Chamber or the developers.
By Steve Speir on Nov 20, 2007
Jason Meeker has proven to be a leader. He stood up for his neighbors and for democracy. Leffingwell sat by stupefied and pretending to be shocked and surprised that a Wal-Mart the size of Texas Stadium was to be built in the center of Austin. Either he’s incompetent or he was in on the whole scam along with Richard Suttle. Take your pick. And he showed no leadership at all in trying to find a solution that would satisfy the developer and the neighbors. None. He abandoned his constituents and there will be a reckoning in May. From the Northcross Wal-Mart scam to the $750,000 Las Manitas giveaway, Leffingwell has given Austin voters ample reason to look forward to Jason Meeker running against him, so they can entrust a real leader with Place One.
By Tyler Durden on Dec 6, 2007
Tyler, Leffingwell voted AGAINST the Las Manitas giveaway. He also has accomplished more even prior to serving on City Council than goofy Jason Meeker will in his lifetime. I’d love to see Meeker run, and get creamed.
By BeatrixKiddo on Dec 6, 2007
Don’t call Meeker names that aren’t remotely appropriate. He is a fine upstanding member of his community and respected by thousands of residents in Austin for his stance. And I would hope Leffingwell accomplished a thing or two prior to council. He’s almost 70 years old! Meeker is only 40-ish, yet an accomplished businessman.
You’re, of course, right about Leffingwell’s vote. Let me be more clear… From the Statesman:
“Leffingwell said the letter should not be perceived as a threat. Instead, he said, it is meant to advise the companies to seek a solution in order to avoid a bruising public battle. “We’re trying to find some way for both parties to come together and make an agreement to preserve three iconic business on Congress Avenue,” Leffingwell said.”
Wouldn’t it have been nice if he had shown some sort of leadership on the Northcross issue? He did not, and people should ask him why not if he is supposedly leadership material.
You, however, should look up the meaning of rout. From your earlier post, it means Meeker prevails.
By Tyler Durden on Dec 6, 2007
Tyler Durden is not Jason Meeker. Neither am I.
By Not Jason Meeker on Dec 7, 2007
Besides this one issue, what qualifications does Meeker have for this office? And what record of successs does he have on even his signature issue?
By BeatrixKiddo on Dec 7, 2007
You’ll see.
By Tyler Durden on Dec 9, 2007