In Defense of Property Rights: Progressives For The Win?

Local politics are a different animal from what goes on in Washington D.C.  Nevertheless, you expect some basic dynamics to be constant.  When they don’t, it’s baffling. 

While the stalemate in Austin continues over property tax reduction, San Antonio is moving forward.  The city council recently voted unanimously to raise the general homestead exemption to 20%.  During the pre-vote discussion, an odd phenomenon took firmer hold.

Progressives are planting themselves on the frontline in the defense of property owners. 

Last year, despite our address to them suggesting they aim higher, the council settled on a 10% exemption.  It turned out to be a moot measure a couple months later when they voted 10-1 to raise property taxes. 

The lone vote against was cast by former District 1 Councilman Mario Bravo, whose feet are firmly planted on the left side of the political spectrum. 

In his last week on the dais, he noted that if rates were cut directly, all properties would benefit, including those housing renters.  Another progressive, District 2 Councilman Jalen Mckee-Rodriguez, chimed in to point out that “it’s not really relief if our revenue continues to grow.”

If those furthest to the left on the council are staking out this ground, what are the other members doing?  Making themselves comfortable in homeowners’ pockets, that’s what.  As evidenced on a recent podcast, lobbyists refer to these folks as “business-friendly.” 

The fact that “property” was mentioned sparingly in this hour-long chat points to an important misconception: being pro-business doesn’t necessarily equate to being pro-property rights. 

There are a couple different ways to look at these “moderates,” as the press likes to call them.  One, as pointed out in the podcast, is that they’re “open for business.”  While this is often couched in terms of economic-development, it also indicates that special-interest lobbyists are welcomed warmly. 

Oftentimes, this results in city contracts.  In the most blatant cases, those can be traced back directly to campaign donations “thrown” at officeholders.  Some, like new District 7 Councilwoman Marina Alderete Gavito, work their “tail off” for the money.

Another view of these “centrists” is that they’re in a tough position.  While they may be progressive at heart, they know the full-force of such an agenda would be detrimental to the community and the economy. 

So, knowing the enactment of some policies is inevitable, they offer “incentives” or “partner with the business community,” perhaps in an effort to maintain the stability of some employers.  If you can’t afford the access that only thousands in campaign contributions can buy, you’re at a disadvantage.

Further evidence of progressives seizing some of the subsequent high-ground was on display during the eminent domain controversy.

The only two votes against strongarming the owner of the Moses Rose Hideout out of his bar were those of Mr. McKee-Rodriguez and Bernie Sanders-endorsed District 5 Councilwoman Teri Castillo.    

Though Mr. Bravo appeared genuinely uncomfortable discussing his yes vote during a campaign debate, his opponent and now-councilwoman Sukh Kaur oddly praised the move as a “celebration of civil rights.”  The bar owner’s name is Vince Cantu.

While one of the podcast guests openly pined for the “real estate and business community to be given the respect they deserve,” what about small business owners like Mr. Cantu?  A quick look to see his name nowhere in political campaign contribution reports shows where he stands.

Why lobbyists donate so much to these “moderates,” particularly in the absence of serious progressive campaign challenges to their respective council seats, is bit of a mystery. 

Do their clients lack confidence in their own products or services?  Are they trying to suppress competition?  Are they looking to bank the certainty of the taxpayer gravy train?    

Citizens should wade through the smoke blown up their way during the exemption discussion, and pay attention to the upcoming budget meetings, townhalls, etc.  This will culminate in a vote in mid-September. 

Then they’ll see who’s really looking out for them, if anyone.