Austin Mayoral Election 2024

[ILUVSAT]

I was curious as to who y'all think should be Austin's next mayor? As of now, the following have declared:

-Doug Greco
-Carmen Llanes Pulido
-Kathy Tovo
-Kirk Watson

Out of all those, I really hope that Kirk Watson gets re-elected. He's not only proven to be good for Austin, I feel he is solid bridge between the pro-business, pro-development community and those in the environmentalist realm. I cannot say that about any of the other current candidates.

In fact, I would (personally) be worried for Austin if any of the other three get elected.

Nonetheless, I think it will be down to Watson vs. Tovo (unless some super candidate decides to declare soon).

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

I was curious as to who y'all think should be Austin's next mayor? As of now, the following have declared:

-Doug Greco
-Carmen Llanes Pulido
-Kathy Tovo
-Kirk Watson

Out of all those, I really hope that Kirk Watson gets re-elected. He's not only proven to be good for Austin, I feel he is solid bridge between the pro-business, pro-development community and those in the environmentalist realm. I cannot say that about any of the other current candidates.

In fact, I would (personally) be worried for Austin if any of the other three get elected.

Nonetheless, I think it will be down to Watson vs. Tovo (unless some super candidate decides to declare soon).

I don't care for Watson, but he is the best choice by far IMO based on the field of candidates.

[austlar1]

Kirk Watson gets my vote.

[Lobotomizer]

Watson is by far the best candidate. The man's done a lot of good for Austin for a long time both as mayor, and in the legislature.

[ATXboom]

Watson. Tovo being the worst

[GoldenBoot]

Watson!!!

He's done far more for Austin than people realize over the past 30 years. It was his vision for Austin to have a "24-hour" downtown (the genesis of our CBD today) and was instrumental in getting the Air Force to give the city Bergstrom AFB for its new airport (instead of spending far more in developing one out by Manor).

[urbancore]

Watson. Easy choice.

[wwmiv]

I cannot fully disclose my vote choice without harming current job prospects, but I can definitely outline my thinking:

1. Watson has been a good mayor, but I would not describe him as transformational;
2. This is the first election held on the same ballot as the presidential--age, racial, and income demographics and turnout are going to be entirely different than they have been--easily more than double the number of ballots will be cast for this race than were cast in 2022, which was ALREADY a major change from before with demographics (125k more ballot cast than in 2018). And look how that affected the results: someone who wasn't a male, particularly a straight white male, came in first in the first round and within a few hundred votes of winning in the second round. That trendline is going to continue into 2024.
3. Austin's demographics are already not what they were when Watson was first elected;
4. Watson was held to a run-off in 2022, 34.95% in the first round, and came in 2nd position, and only narrowly won the run-off (50.39%) and he got 48.47% in 1997 when he won his first race. The 2000 election was not seriously contested, and is not a useful data point. He is not and has never been a "natural majority" candidate in Austin, even when the city was WAY more NHW;
5. Tovo appeals to the same demographics as Watson, and is not tarred and feathered in that demographic by the recent zoning changes;
6. Watson just said "screw you" to a large portion of his base thinking (a) he has to because of point 2 above and that (b) he can make up the difference with younger ethnic voters (that won't happen);

All four candidates are impressive and qualified. This is going to be a highly contested race, just like last time, and is going to go to a run-off. And the only candidate I am comfortable saying will advance to the general is NOT Watson. It is Carmen. If this race had happened in a mid-term or before we moved to even numbered years, Watson and Tovo would be shoe-ins to make the run-off. I no longer think that is the case. Carmen will be able to coalesce ~35% of the vote in the first round as the candidate of the progressive, young, ethnic left. Period. She has a very small range of likely first-ballot outcomes, maybe as low as 30% and maybe as high as the 40% that Israel received. This places her as the shoe-in candidate for the general. Watson certainly has a floor, but his recent votes and Tovo announcing are neither good political strategy nor good developments for him. He should have hung his cap on these reforms and retired on a high note, because I could see him getting anywhere from 25% to 40% in the first round, depending on how well Tovo does. Tovo has a lower range, perhaps 15% to 30% in the first round, but there are definitely now realities where she ends up placing ahead of Watson depending on how adeptly she craters his support among anti-housing people in the Hills. Greco is perhaps the least likely to make it to the run-off, with projecting anywhere from 5% to 25% seeming reasonable at this point. One can easily imagine a reality where Carmen comes in first with 30% of the vote, Watson gets his floor at 25% because Tovo eats into his base (she gets 20%), which allows a Greco candidacy that catches fire (he's incredibly qualified and well connected) to eek out a few dozen more votes or so than Watson. One can also easily imagine a reality where Watson (40%) outmaneuvers Tovo (15%) and holds onto most but not all of his core voters and Greco never catches fire (5%), but that still leaves Carmen at 40%. There is zero eventuality where Carmen does not advance to the run-off, but there are circumstances where Watson does not.

As for my vote, could be anybody except Tovo (anti-housing) and Carmen (anti-freeways) and could even be someone who hasn't announced yet (if someone else impressive announces, that'll change my analysis -- particularly if they are in the mold of Carmen).

As for this forum, Watson will get most of your votes. And that's okay! It makes total sense: he appeals to people like urban development folks because of the revolution downtown he helped create. But he also appealed to a bunch of people who are decidedly NOT for more housing: the older school Austin environmental movement, for instance.

San Antonio's 2025 race is much easier to predict: Havrda and Palaez will advance to the run-off, and Courage will come in an admirable third.

[Geckos_Rule]

I don't necessarily have a horse in the race yet, but just based on a quick look at what their own websites and a few media blurbs (KVUE, Chronicle) say about each candidate, it looks like Watson has a much more concrete position on a lot of things I believe will be rather significant issues in this election. For example:

Carmen Llanes Pulido:

1. Pulido's policy/issues focus seems to be almost entirely on: (i) climate/utilities issues (though unsure quite how much impact the mayor can have rather than state-level change); and (ii) a combination of development/housing/tax issues that look to be centered around pushing for more affordable housing. The "priorities" section of her website and different blurbs about her elsewhere seem to mirror this, without pointing to anything further.

2. She was on the planning commission, appointed by Kathie Tovo (for better or worse).

3. It seems like the overall "vibe" she's going for is more progressive than Watson, albeit in quite a vague way. No information or even mentions of crime/policing, utilities/environmental issues, transportation/public transit, education, homelessness, etc.

Kathy Tovo
1. Tovo's main policies/issues focus seems largely similar to Pulido's in terms of the topics -- e.g., housing/development, and utilities/climate. There are a few brief blurbs or one-off references to transportation issues, and community development through funding for food/hunger initiatives, arts and music, and a small blurb about drug/alcohol rehabilitation in the context of homelessness.

2. Unsurprisingly from the descriptions of her policy viewpoints and experience, she takes much more of a NIMBY viewpoint to a lot of things in comparison to the other candidates. Though for the most part, none of her views seem to take a particularly concrete position beyond "I will do things Austinites support."

Doug Greco

1. Greco's own website lists out his credentials (which appear solid), though there aren't any references to what his position on any distinct issues are, save for implied views based on how he's described past accomplishments. For example, his views on homelessness are summed up by "here is what Central Texas Interfaith did while Doug was in charge," without more.

2. He claims the run for Mayor is to "stand up for working people and against big money at City Hall and unchecked corporate power in politics," though notably absent is information about what this entails, or positions on development/zoning, crime/policing, education, utilities/environmental issues, transportation/public transit, homelessness, etc.

----
Obviously as the incumbent people will inevitably have a much better idea on what Watson's approach is to a number of things, and Watson has a bit of an unfair advantage given that he is the incumbent and the only one able to say "as Mayor, I did this" regarding a specific issue or policy focus. but I think it's at least worth noting that his website (thus, presumably his campaign generally) highlights the following points in addition to what's covered by the others: (1) I-35's expansion and Austin's involvement in it; (2) Project Connect and anything else relating to public transit; (3) assistance/management of homelessness-related issues (beyond "funding" without more); and (4) policing and crime/the justice system generally.

Given the different issues floating around both local/nationwide news along with what my own peers mention when talking about the city's wellbeing, I'm surprised at the near-total lack of any concrete information from the other candidates about those issues. For all of these, there didn't seem to be much on whether any candidates see this as an important topic, how they'd handle a certain issue any differently than Watson would, or anything better than "I will fight on behalf of Austinites to deal with that." And without knowing any information on these, I'd question whether many people would gravitate away from Watson unless they don't view these are particularly important, or unless they really dislike how Watson handled it in the past.

[goodag]

Agree. Watson is by far the most balanced candidate that does not get caught up in all the social justice non-sense. Watson is a fairly conservative option which puts him at risk of losing when you look at what Austin citizens would typically support in political candidates.

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

I was curious as to who y'all think should be Austin's next mayor? As of now, the following have declared:

-Doug Greco
-Carmen Llanes Pulido
-Kathy Tovo
-Kirk Watson

Out of all those, I really hope that Kirk Watson gets re-elected. He's not only proven to be good for Austin, I feel he is solid bridge between the pro-business, pro-development community and those in the environmentalist realm. I cannot say that about any of the other current candidates.

In fact, I would (personally) be worried for Austin if any of the other three get elected.

Nonetheless, I think it will be down to Watson vs. Tovo (unless some super candidate decides to declare soon).

[Syndic]

I'm actually decently in favor of Tovo. She's not nearly the NIMBY she once was. In fact, she's gone pretty far in the other direction and she's pretty pro-development these days. She knows downtown Austin, having represented it for 13 years straight, and I feel like she can manage all of the personalities and stakeholders better than anyone.

I don't want a more conservative guy leading our city. That's not who we are.

[urbancore]

Watson is the same man he’s always been. Hasn’t changed with the times, or adopted the newest popular position.

I have been a “yimby” for my entire adult life, now 30 years. It’s apart of my personal ethos. Make room for others. Increase density. Etc etc. I’ve lived this myself, building multigenerational homes for my family over the last 20 years, something that council fought me on. Below is a video Aura made with my wife advocating granny flats. 10 years ago.

https://youtu.be/CFTNCr4Jbr4?si=9UuK-Mwh2WNEfvts

I can't, and will never trust politicians who say whatever needs to be said to be elected.

I rather have polarizing figures who I can trust actually believe what they stand for.

Tovo, a landlord herself, fought against small developers/landlords for years. She’s the worst type of hypocrite. I’ve met her, when advocating a neighbor to be able to add a garage door to her carport. She came across as dismissive, self absorbed, and vapid. Zero ethos, it’s no wonder she’s gotten with the times. I might be wrong, but I believe she sees the Mayor (which she probably would have won easily, if Watson had not ran years ago) as a stepping stone in a long career.

Watson is Austin through and through, with just the one short stint in Houston, he’s been advocating to grow our fair city responsibly for decades.

[wwmiv]

I mean… Watson is the obvious choice for anyone who cares about high quality policy—and one can hope nobody else announces.

[Lobotomizer]

As a lifelong Austinite, and supporter of this city's continued success Tovo over Watson is madness.

[LiveattheOasis]

Watson, yes please.

[ATXboom]

Tovo would send us backward 40 years. She would bow to the squeaky minority of the population that shows up at city hall. Housing and infrastructure would never get done.

[papertowelroll]

I feel like Watson has done an excellent job in his second stint and I will be very happy to vote for him again.

[drummer]

If I lived in Austin proper and had a vote, it would go to Watson.

[MichaelB]

Watson: Not only is he obvious for all the Business reasons sighted by most... But he is old school pro Arts. I have been with him at fundraisers for the Arts. Hard to find someone who sees both sides of the equation.