Why Kirk Watson is the Wrong Choice for Mayor
The Longtime Central Texas Dealmaker Should Stay Retired
By Nina Hernandez
Austin is at a turning point in its history. How the city addresses its interrelated affordability, housing, and transportation crises will impact generations to come. That’s why voters must elect a mayor this November who is inclusive, forward-thinking, and has a proven track record of making sound policy decisions.
That is not Kirk Watson.
Based on his exceptionally well-financed yet lackluster campaign, it’s reasonable to wonder if the veteran Central Texas political operative even knows why he wants the job or what he would do with the position were he to win.
Unfortunately, Watson’s record doesn’t inspire much confidence either. By the time he quit being mayor the first time in 2001 to run for Texas Attorney General, both he and Austin’s political class were more than ready to part ways. He got absolutely crushed by Greg Abbott in that race, and then went back into private law practice and business lobbying. His time in the Texas Senate is marked more by his ability to cozy up to Republicans than for any particular legislation.
He left that job in 2020 to take what was supposed to be a retirement gig with the University of Houston’s public policy school. But less than a year later, he quit that job, too. Then, in February, Watson announced he would run for Austin mayor once again – 21 years after he left the post the first time.
But would someone make a bad mayor just because they’re known for putting dealmaking over good policy, hanging out with conservatives, and leaving elected positions before the end of his term? Not necessarily. So why then would Kirk Watson be the worst person to lead Austin as mayor for the next two years?
Let us count the ways Kirk Watson is the wrong choice.
Laid the foundation for this region becoming one of the most economically segregated metros in the nation.
Watson's "Green Council" of the 1990s enacted the Smart Growth Initiative, which increased prosperity for some at the expense of Austinites of color, who were displaced in great numbers, and exacerbated urban sprawl. Which is, of course, the opposite of good for the environment. Austin is still trying to dig itself out of the mess Watson and the city's wealthy, white environmental lobby made in the name of "smart growth."
Advocated for the terrible plan to expand I-35.
Although Watson has acknowledged in the past that adding more lanes to the interstate will not solve our congestion problems, he has played a major role in selling the widely panned I-35 Capital Express Project. The expansion plan won’t solve the underlying congestion problems we face as a region and doesn’t attempt to address systemic inequity the highway perpetuates. It’s also disappointing that Watson’s initial transportation proposal for this mayoral race didn’t mention the highway he’s spent years working to expand.
Presided over a “backroom” era of City Hall politics.
Watson had a reputation as mayor for shutting out the average citizen and working with city insiders to get deals done by any means necessary. That might’ve worked for an Austin in which too few were allowed to participate, but this is a new 10-1 city. Even if it were the right thing to do, Watson’s old arm twisting strategy isn’t a sure bet to win consistently in this new dynamic.
Opposed much-needed land use reform.
Watson acknowledged an anti-CodeNEXT sign in his yard, telling the media that while he supported “many things” in the code rewrite, he couldn’t abide by the process. The campaign that sank the rewrite was run by a vocal minority of homeowners who won on a technicality. Siding with those interests over the city’s desperate housing need is simply inexcusable. We are already one of the most economically segregated metros in the country, and don’t need to further empower a segment of the city that already wields a disproportionate amount of political power, particularly when that has resulted in such disparate outcomes in the past.
Cobbled together an incoherent and incomplete set of policy proposals.
For someone who has been at least tangentially related to Austin politics for the past 20 years, it’s kind of shocking to see how little apparent thought Watson put into his campaign platform. His housing policy included a district-based zoning plan that his opponent called “a return to redlining.” (He would soon walk that policy point back.) His affordability platform is childishly vague and includes gems like "help more Austinites build local careers" and "minimize city tax and fee increases." Austin deserves a serious candidate – that’s clearly not Watson.
Didn’t appear to like the job the first time around.
Watson’s unfinished second term as mayor was marked by the open secret that were his ambitions of running for statewide office. He’s also previously compared Thursday City Council meetings to a state execution. Given all that, how can Austin voters trust that Watson won’t get a more attractive job offer elsewhere in the next term? Sadly, if elected, Watson losing interest midway through his term might be the best possible outcome for everybody.
Austin is at a pivotal moment, which is why the Hyde Parker Magazine has endorsed Celia Israel for mayor. To find out why we believe Celia Israel is the best choice for mayor, please read our endorsement article.
If you liked the article and want to help, please consider advertising with us by clicking “Advertise” or making a small one time or monthly contribution by clicking “Help Fund Us!” Advertising or any contribution amount, either one time or monthly, is vital for us to continue our independent journalism and advocacy.
