Mark Littlefield, consultant, Lee Leffingwell campaign, email responses to PolitiFact Texas (excerpted)

Feb. 20, 2012, 3:01 pm

Yes, but that was not the claim on the mail piece.  The claim on the mail piece was that it would not necessitate a tax increase.  If we had authorized a lot more than $90 million, then that would have been more than the bond capacity allowed at that time and would have required a tax increase to pay off the bonds.

Do the authorized bonds ultimately get repaid from city revenue?

g.

W. Gardner Selby

Editor, PolitiFact Texas

Austin American-Statesman

Feb. 20, 2012, 4:21 pm

Why are you saying that alternative forms of transportation are not traffic fixes?  We can fix traffic two ways, right? We can build more lanes or we can get people out of their cars.  I think that was the best part about Prop 1 - it attempted to rethink traffic solutions.

On Feb 20, 2012, at 4:12 PM, Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin) wrote:

...

One of the Statesman’s pre-election stories on that bond vote says the bonds were divided, 57 percent for road work and 43 percent for alternative forms of transportation.

This mean that 57 percent were “traffic fixes?”

W. Gardner Selby