Austin City Coucil Takes a Conservative Stance?

The Austin City Council, widely accepted as being very liberal thinking when devising policies, made a surprise decision recently. A proposal that would consolidate the 2012 elections to November was voted down 4-3. Proponents for keeping the Council elections in May hid behind the mandates of the city charter, among a veiled humility that extending current terms 6 more months wasn't within their purview. This article in the Austin American Statesman outlines the story Austin City Council.
I struggle understanding why such liberal elected officials would use such conservative reasoning for thier stance. The cost difference in consolidated elections in November versus Council elections in May then all the rest in November is half a million dollars. The recession has created such a huge city deficit that it seems unreasonable to throw away money unnecessarily. This, however, isn't their true motivation.
May elections occur roughly in conjuction with final exams, making it difficult for students to be active participants. And, even if able to vote in an election, should a run-off occur, voters have to wait to cast another ballot in June. Most students chose to return home for the summer, leaving an abysmally low turnout. On the other hand, the activists who remain in Austin consistently show up for every election. This has the air of protecting their Council seat as incumbants rather than the "my hands are tied" argument.
There is also a division in the City Council, where more practical liberals such as Mayor Leffingwell and Councilman Martinez are at odds with the very liberal Kathie Tovo and Sheryl Cole. When an election occurs in a wide electorate, candidates whose views are closer to the middle of the road fare better than those who hold to the extreme. With the 4-3 advantage in votes currently, the very liberal can work to keep the electorate small in hopes of keeping the majority of votes needed to pursue their agenda.
Austin has taken the course, through its elected officials, of being this enrgy conservative, bike riding, city of the future. So, why in a city that\s trying to ban plastic bags in grocery stores, is the City Council taking such a cnservative stance against the greater good?

Harsh Rhetoric in the Texas Liberal

First off, I want to state that I'm not politically active. I've never voted, never been to a political rally, don't follow politics at all unless the Colbert Report happens to be on Comedy Central when I'm bored. That being said, it's hard to ignore the Republican presidential candidate race now that Rick Perry has decided to throw his hat in. So, since I'm being inundated with the news coverage anyway, I've decided to become more informed.
The debate over national healthcare, known sarcastically as "Obamacare", sits at the center stage of most of the Republican debates, along with the economy. Personally having no problem with all Americans being allowed access to insurance, I guess that the issue for Republicans is in the recipe for this, not the actual result. Oh well, to each their own.
However,this article on Texas Liberal, a blog written by Neil Aquino, seems dead set in chastising Mitt Romney for not claiming something he didn't want to claim in the first place (Visit Texas Liberal).
Aquino writes how newly obtained White House records indicate that senior Obama adminstration officials used the Massachusetts health-care law as a model for the national one. The article also says that some of the same health-care advisors and experts that aided Romney (who enacted this health-care law as Governor of Massachusetts) were also used. Big deal. What the article doesn't say is that Romney himself never advised the White House.
I realize, of course, that the Texas Liberal is written for exactly that: the liberal. But that doesn't excuse Aquino's railing of Romney for not supporting an idea that isn't his. Romney is on the record as saying that the health-care law of Massachusetts isn't a "one-size-fits-all" model to be used for the entire United States. Saying that Romney is "sick" for refusing to endorse Obama's Health Care Reform thereby preventing millions of Americans of becoming insured isn't just off base, it's a flat out lie.
Aquino finishes up by writing that he isn't surprised though, since " Republican primary voters get their kicks by cheering executions, cheering uninsured people dying, and booing gay Iraq combat veterans." And, at last, we reach what I believe to be the foundation of Aquino's whole article. He hates Republicans. Period.
The sad truth is that extremity, on any view taken, creates a bias that can blind logic. So, Mr. Aquino, follow President Obama to wherever he aims to take you. But, by the looks of things currently, don't expect it to be a job interview.