City Council Meeting Transcript - 8/16/2012 >> Mayor Leffingwell: Morning. I'm austin mayor lee leffingwell. The invocation today will be gordon s jones, pastor, alpha seventh day adventist. Please rise. >> Oh father in heaven, we pause this moment to acknowledge your sovereign authority over all. And also, lord, we stop to rec your bountiful [10:06:04] blessings that you have bestowed on us. We thank you for city officials that you've honored with wisdom, governing authority so that they can provide community with peace, justice and order. We pray for our mayor this morning, we pray for the city officials at every level, especially for this council assembled today. Father today address the agenda items before them, would you grant them wisdom that they would govern with a sense of community stewardship, a sincere desire for inclusion and a passion for personal responsibility. When they have finished your tasks, father, we pray that each would be granted a personal sense of peace recognizing that they've done well according to your will, and your service has been be fittingly beneficial to all in our community, we pray in jesus name, amen. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you, pastor. Please be seated. Before we begin the meeting today, I'd like to take a minute of personal privilege to talk about a new, but temporary feature of our city council meeting. If I could -- there's -- are the slides ready? We fully expect councilmember bill spelman to rejoin us soon, but i think it's important that he know how things are going at city hall in his absence. So I've asked my staff to do every statistical analysis of how the business of the [10:08:00] city is going in your absence, bill. I hope you're watching and i hope this is helpful. First slide. [Laughter]. Tie votes. Tie votes have risen significantly, as you can see from this chart. Before we had none. And now we have some. I think this tells you something about the impact that you have on the dais here that we really never noticed before. The number of special called meetings you can see is way up. [Laughter]. I guess you can always assume we get things done without you, but it's a compliment to you that we're going to need further analysis on this one. Next slide. This slide is very interesting. As you can see we seem to be more appreciative of your opinions why you're sitting at home versus when you're actually sitting here on the dias. [Laughter]. And I'm sure -- not exactly sure what this means either, but I'm sure it's complimentary. We'll do some more analysis on this also. Next slide. [Laughter]. This slide is the most interesting to me. It represents a huge shift in the way we've done business. It's my first powerpoint at a city council meeting. You've inspired me. And hopefully there will be more in the future, maybe hopefully there will be no more in the future. In summary, tie votes are up, takes longer to get things done, people are finally interested in your opinions. [Laughter]. And I know how to do a powerpoint presentation. [Applause] best wishes to you, bill. So a quorum is present now, so I'll call this meeting of the austin city council to [10:10:00] order. >> Cole: Mayor? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Mayor pro tem. >> Cole: I also would like to take a moment of personal privilege, but it's directly related to item number 20. And also, councilmember spelman, who we all dearly miss. I know that when we signed up for public service we signed up for a lot of sacrifices, and as you have pointed out on the slide, we have done that with many special called meetings. However, my first born is headed to college, and i have changed my plans once at considerable expense, and I cannot and I will not do so again. I will not be at the special called meeting scheduled for saturday or sunday. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you for that information, mayor pro tem. So now a quorum is present, so we'll call this meeting of the austin city council to order on thursday, august 16th, 2012. , we're meeting in the austin council chambers, 301 west second street, austin, texas. First we'll go to the changes and recollections to today's agenda. Items number 17, 18 and 19 are withdrawn. Item number 42 is withdrawn. Item number 54 is postponed until september 27th, 2012. Item number 55 is postponed UNTIL AUGUST 23rd, 2012. Item number 58 is withdrawn. Item number 86 at its time , this [10:12:00] item will be withdrawn. And item 88 at its time , this item, there will be a motion to postpone this item until september 27th. So our time certain items 30 we'll have a briefing on our annual update on the city of austin and the lcra water partnership. At noon we'll have our general citizens communications. 00 we'll take up our zoning matters. At 4:00 public hearings. 30 we'll have live music and proclamations. The featured musician for tonight, special occasion, is mayor gus garcia. So items for consent are items 1 through he 64 plus item 89. There will be items pulled off consent which I will go over in a minute, but i.r.s. I want to read into the record appointments to our boards and commissions. This is item 53. It will remain on consent. To the african-american resource advisory commission, sherri cherry is councilmember spelman's nomination. Greg smith is nominated by mayor pro tem cole. To ant mall advisory commission -- to the animal advisory commission, emily phelps, councilmember spelman's nominee and larry tucker, councilmember morrison's nominee. To the arts commission, scott dagle, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the airport advisory commission, george barris, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the board of adjustment and sign review board, bryan king is councilmember tovo's nominee. To the bond oversight committee, moses garcia is councilmember spelman's nominee. [10:14:01] To the building and fire code board of appeals, frank haught is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the building and standards commission, charles clotman is councilmember morrison's nominee. To the commission for women, julia cuba is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the community development commission, john lamone is mayor leffingwell's nominee and cassandra taylor, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the construction advisory committee, eddie hertz junior, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the design commission, hope hasbrooke, councilmember spelman's nominee. And james shee, mayor leffingwell's nominee. To the downtown austin community court advisory committee, tim miles nominated by councilmember spelman. To the downtown commission, tina fernandez nominated by councilmember spelman. And joel is here, nominated by mayor pro tem cole. Early childhood council, aadvice wallace is councilmember cole's nominee. To the electric board christian wagner is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the environmental board, robin gary is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the ethics review commission, james sasson, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the historic landmark commission, dan leery, mayor leffingwell's nominee. To the human rights commission, tom davis is nominee -- excuse me, to the human rights commission, tom davis is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the impact fee advisory committee, dick callerman is councilmember spelman's nominee. The lake austin taskforce, william more arrestty is the [10:16:01] water and wastewater commission representative. To the library commission, olga wise is councilmember spelman's nominee. and small business enterprise procurement advisory committee, anne heratunian is councilmember spelman's nominee and andy ramirez, mayor leffingwell's nominee. To the mechanical, plumbing and solar board, paul hovey, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the metropolitan cultural center advisory board, juan (indiscernible) is mayor leffingwell's nominee. To the parks and recreation board, jeff rancel, councilmember spelman's nominee. To the planning commission, might ron smith, nominated by councilmember morrison. To the public safety commission, kim rosmo, councilmember spelman's nominee. Resource management commission, shaun kelly, councilmember spelman's nominee. Tony kipton martin, nominated by mayor pro tem cole. To the urban forestry board, tom hays is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the urban transportation commission, sheila holbrook white is councilmember spelman's nominee. To the waterfront planning advisory board, robert pilgrim nominated by councilmember spelman. To the zoning and platting commission, patricia seeinger also nominated by councilmember spelman. Waivers for our board members, first approve a waiver of the residency 21 of the code for melvin white's service on the austin community technology and telecommunications commission. And approve a waiver of residency requirements under section 21 of the code for the service of calvin williams and eddie hertz [10:18:02] junior on the construction advisory committee. Approve a waiver of the residencery requirement at 21 of the code for ronnie williams' service on the electric board. Approve a waiver of the residency requirement in 21 of the code for anne heratunian's service on the advisory committee. Approve a waiver of the residencery requirement in 21 of the code for the service of thomas combs and paul hovey on the mechanical, plumbing and solar board. And approve a waiver of simultaneous service on more than one city established board as provided in section 21-21 of the city code for bryan rourk's service. Those are the nominees for board and commissions, item 53. The following items have been pulled off the consent agenda. Item 11 is pulled by councilmember morrison. Item 16 will be pulled for presentation by the law department. Items 56 is pulled by councilmember tovo. Going back to item 52 is pulled by councilmember morrison and item 57 pulled by councilmember morrison. The following item is pulled off of consent due to speakers and that would be item 20. We have several speakers who have signed up to speak on various items. And some of these I'm going to pull at this time because we have late signers up. I'm going to pull item [10:20:00] number 4 -- 4 and 5 together. And that's it. We do have several speakers who are signed up to speak gus pena. You have three minutes to speak on any of the items on consent. >> Mayor and councilmembers, city manager, gus pena, proud east austinite. Proud marine corps veteran I'm here to speak on item 15 and it's approving accepting grant funds in the amount of 1,256,000 etcetera, and I'll make it brief, central health care district is a concern we have in the community. I know they just passed their budget. I think it was last night. One of the things that we found out, we have been fighting this issue for many years, even back when camille barnett was city manager. And then jesus garza when he was city manager, but also when mayor bruce todd was the mayor at that time in the 1990's. The application process for card is very difficult, very lengthy, and I would ask that this council, as I did to the commissioners' court court and judge biscoe, look at this and the process because this is a lengthy process. A person needs a clinic card in order to get preventive health care issues taken care of, they could die, they could pass away. [10:22:00] I would ask you along with this item number to look at that issue. Mayor pro tem cole, when you were first running for office I brought up this issue along with the homeless issue. I asked every one of y'all to dialogue with the central health care district and see if we can streamline the process and be enrolled quickly. Thank you very much. Have a good day. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. will McCloudy. >> Good morning, mayor, council. Will mccleod. My condolences go out to councilmember spelman who is not here today. Unfortunately gus spoke earlier and he said something to do with the m.a.p. program. This doesn't have to do with the m.a.p. program. This has to do with obama care. And I want you to see this video real quick. >> [Inaudible] .. doesn't get into much trouble, but on monday trouble found her. >> Jolly rancher. It was green. >> She was eating lunch at brazos elementary in orchard, a friend gave her a piece of hard candy. Then she got busted. >> They just took it away before I got to eat it. >> She never gets in trouble, so when she got in trouble she got upset. >> Imagine her parents surprise when she came home with this, a week's detention, why? Candy at the lunch table. >> I think it's stupid, really. I mean, to give a kid a week's detention for a piece of candy. >> We reached out to the school's principal and superintendent. Neither would talk to us on camera. But they did tell us they were simply following a state law that limited junk [10:24:01] food in schools. School officials told fuss they didn't follow that code they could lose federal funding. >> Pause that. Pause that, please. All right. They will lose federal funding. And what federal funding is this? This is the centers for for-- >> I've got your time paused here. You were speaking on items that were on the consent agenda. So please -- have a relationship with what you're talking about with an item on the consent agenda. >> Yes, it is. It has to do with healthy eating, active living, and obama care. Basically also knowns the patient protection and affordable housing care act of 2010. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Is that on the agenda? >> Item 15. All right. Do you want, ladies and gentlemen, do you want that for your children? Do you want these nanny states? I don't. I don't want the government telling me that I can't smoke inside my own home or my own apartment or what light bulbs to use. That's what this funding grant is about. And we're getting sick and tired of it. Obama care will be repealed. And let me ask who is going to pay for this? There's a lot of people that are working under the table. Who is going to pay for this? You can't expect everyone to pay for this. It cost us $20 trillion in debt. That's unacceptable. Thank you. [ Buzzer sounds ] >> Mayor Leffingwell: Next speaker is michael (indiscernible). Please correct me if i mispronounced your name. >> That's close. I am here on items 28, 32 [10:26:00] and 42. Thank you, capital metro, for putting bike stations in that will help some riders from north austin that will be riding more with it. And the palmer events center and the solar lighting, not everybody can afford to do it in their homes, but it's good to at least do in some public places. And 42 is bikes for public works. Chris riley may not be alone in driving to work on his bike, but anyway, thank you. Have a good day. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. Those are all the speakers that I have signed up to speak on the consent agenda. I'll entertain a motion to approve? Councilmember martinez moves to approve the consent agenda. Seconded by councilmember riley. >> Morrison: Mayor? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: I'd like to make one very brief comment on item number 22. It's a terrific item about our library book sales program. And I just have a request for the city manager. Concern was raised about why this didn't come through the library commission. And so I would just like to ask that we give some thought and maybe have a future conversation about when things do or don't -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember, our procedures are if we have comments to pull it off of consent. So if you don't mind I'll pull item 22 off of consent. >> Morrison: I'll leave it on. >> Mayor Leffingwell: You want to leave it on? >> Morrison: Yes. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye? Opposed say no? It passes on a vote of six to zero with councilmember spelman off the dais. [10:28:19] 30, council, we'll go directly to our 30 briefing, and we'll pick up after that with our consent agenda. We need to get you turned on there. >> Greg musarus with austin 30 briefing. Can we start up the presentation? While he's starting it up, by way of introduction, in 2007 the city of austin and lcra signed a water partnership agreement. The agreement settled all open disputes between the two agencies and set up a management structure by which the two agencies collaborate on a regular basis. As a part of that agreement there is a requirement that the city council have at least one annual update in person per year, and we're a little behind schedule. This got postponed a bit, but this is the 2011 update for you today. It will be fairly brief and I'll answer any questions that you have. >> Mayor Leffingwell: You could do the 2012 report at the same time if you would like. >> Almost. The partnership was created to work jointly to evaluate, plan and implement strategies for future water supplies for austin. We have secured long-term water supplies so the actual planning of new supplies for austin many years into the future, but the partnership also works to cooperatively manage and optimize existing water supplies. We take into account overall [10:30:01] base and need in terms of quality of water in the highland lakes and the river system. At the heart of the partnership is a cooperative management structure that allows the two staffs to work closely together. Executive management committee that is formed with two senior executives from the city of austin, myself and acm robert goode, as well as two senior executives from lcra. Currently that's kyle jenson and henry ebee. In the past becky motel served on that and it's been a nice linkage to their leadership team. There are various committees that advise and support the committee, including an outside stakeholder committee consisting the representatives throughout the basin. That committee is approved and I eyepoint bid both the lcra as well as the city council. In 2012 a few of -- in 2011 a few of our key activities was working on the lcra revisions to the water management plan. That's the plan that governs how highland lake water is released, particularly for interruptible downstream we collaborated closely on the drought that occurred in 2011, worked to develop approaches and share thoughts on potential pro rata curtailment and collaborate on water conservation. We work with them on a long-term demand projection. Every few years we do demand projections through the texas region k process. That's about a 50 year projection window for lcra. We included a longer term window which also included steam electric, water demand projections as well as received input from the stakeholder committee review on those projections. Various technical discussions on water issues as well as again a meeting with our basin wide stakeholder committee. In 2012 activities that we are working on and will continue to work on, we are jointly filing and have filed an application to tceq seeking water rights to our reuse water. There's two types of reuse water, direct reuse water that we take before it [10:32:01] enters the river out of the wastewater plants and then once it enters the river what we call beds and banks, austin agreed to partner with lcra on a joint application for that water in the future. We'll continue to monitor the progress of the approval of the water management plan at tceq as well as the standard work on drought pro rata and additional water right issues that may come up. And so that's it. And we'd be happy to answer any questions on this annual update. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Questions, council? Thank you very much. It is. Without objection, council, I'd like to go to item number 57 because I know we have a number of people signed up to speak, but i will be suggesting a change to this resolution to delete the part about providing five additional days for use of auditorium shores. That was a staff request and based on the need to have more folks using auditorium shores who would be at the same time required to make improvements in return for using the facility, I just want to let you know I will be making that proposal for an amendment to that resolution. So we're going to go to the speakers, I guess. Michael sitsenevansa. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: While the speakers are coming up, may I ask for a clarification. I assume that's the paragraph -- I know we have speakers who probably want [10:34:00] to speak to this, so that's why I'm asking for clarification now. So that would be are you going to suggest cutting the clause be it further resolved the city manager 17 courage with the redevelopment of the turf area at auditorium shores to identify a reasonable number of additional rental days not to exceed five, you're going to propose eliminating that whole clause? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Yes. >> Tovo: Okay. Thank you very much for that clarification. >> It's good you're adding a second weekend and I hope we will have may some more one-day passes. A lot of people participate and it's just hard to go for three days when you may only go one day. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. Cindy collins? You have three minutes. >> Thank you, mayor and council. I appreciate that that language will be withdrawn from number 57. Bouldin creek neighborhood association was opposed to that language. First and foremost the language in there was not jermaine to the acl and the zilker extension. That was in the language in that particular resolution. And as well that we felt that the city manager should not only consider turf redevelopment in looking at additional event days there. We are seeking an urgent analysis of event at zilker and town lake parkland that have impacts on parking traffic and also mass transit. And we hope that council will consider that. >> Mayor Leffingwell: All right. Thank you. We will be looking at all of that, including this clause, we'll just study it over a longer period of time to see how it will be handled. Next speaker is susan moffett. Jamie grant? [10:36:05] >> Good morning. I work at the long center for the performing arts and I guess I'm here to support the mayor's recommendation or change as it relates to auditorium shores. It is imperative that there be some sort of long-term study that contemplates how all of these things -- the palmer events center, long center and auditorium shores can work together. I don't believe everything that I read in the newspaper, but if I only believe half of it, my guess is that the palmer events center needs to be busier in the future, not less busy. I know the long center needs to be busier, not less busy. And auditorium shores is a great place to do wonderful events and we need to look at how all of these things fit together. So with the mayor's amendment accepted, we support that. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Leffingwell: I do want to mention another driving especially fetus for the five days is the fact that waterloo park in northeast central downtown austin will be closed for a period of time due to tunnel construction. Events are held there and we would like to have some outlet, some replacement venue for these events, but we'll be looking at all of those in the near future. Melissa hawthorne? >> Good morning, mayor, councilmembers. I'm here on behalf of the barton hills neighborhood association. We have been in good faith discussing with c3 their plans for the event and we're a little concerned with the added language. And I am glad to see that it has been removed. In the area of town we've seen a lot of growth and multi-family structures down the corridor, which is where [10:38:00] we want them. But all of those people are now geared towards these parks. And we're talking about more and more events. Blues on the green has now become a very large event of 20 to 30,000 people where it started off very small. We're just concerned that the parks aren't growing in the urban core. They need to be maintained. And that passive spaces that has a great benefit. I thank you for your time. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. Those are all the speakers that we have signed up to speak. I'll entertain a discussion or a motion from council. Councilmember martinez. >> Martinez: Thanks, mayor. I just want to make a brief comment that I'm certainly supportive of some of the concerns that are being raised of the neighbors around auditorium shores, but when we look at planning events for our park system, we need to look at it from a holistic standpoint because if you don't expand the ability to have events at one park, they're simply going to request another park in a neighborhood, and more specifically I'm speaking about fiesta gardens. Fiesta gardens, which historically had two events a year, cinco de mayo and deiz y seis, now has multiple events. I think the neighborhood welcomes them, we enjoy the activity, but we need to look at it this from a holistic standpoint of our park system and not just one park in central austin because it will have to be balanced. Events are going to happen, austin is going to continue to grow. So I don't want us just to look at this from the standpoint of auditorium shores. We need to look we need to look at it from the entire park system standpoint. So that's just the comments I'll leave to the city [10:40:01] manager. >> Councilmember morrison? >> Morrison: I appreciate the comments of councilmember martinez and i wanted to comment that over the past couple of weeks, obviously there have been a lot of community dialogue and confessions about the parks on lady bird lake. And I think a lot of very important issues have arisen that really need to be captured and put into a dialogue between staff and the community, and such as the issue of looking at things holistically, but also I think as the representative from the long center mentioned, we need to be looking at the capacity of our parks and the trade-offs and where investments in our parks are going to be. So I would certainly look forward to a really thoughtful conversation. Not to mention that the 25-day limit was the product of a thoughtful conversation. So I think to honor that it's important that we evolve with an additional community engagement to figure out what's right for this city. So I'm certainly going to support the item when an amendment is made to remove that one line. And I want to thank the representatives from c3 for their very diligent and thoughtful efforts in engaging the community in their discussions on the extra weekend and they're willingness to invest in this community. >> Mayor Leffingwell: And I want to comment also that technically this is strictly an administrative decision and would not come before council, but because of the importance and the interest of citizens around this area, we decided it would be good to bring it before the city council so that there would be opportunity for discussion on it. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: I have a few [10:42:00] small amendments to propose, but I was going to wait until someone makes a motion, one of the sponsors. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember martinez moves approval. And I'll second. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Thanks very much. >> Mayor Leffingwell: That's of the amended, correct, councilmember martinez? >> Tovo: Great. And impassing down a few very small -- I am passing down a few very small additional amendments. And I too want to extend my appreciation to c3, who has been working really diligently with the stakeholders and I think it's a very good dialogue and a very productive one. And I look forward to hearing the successful outcome of that. The amendments that you see before you are those that i have talked with stakeholders about as well as c3 presents, and they have no concerns about them. It would add an additional whereas clause just to recognize that the ongoing -- that there are ongoing negotiations with stakeholders and then a further resolved, be it further -- I'll read it aloud for those who don't have copies. Whereas c 3 presents has been working with community groups and neighborhood associations to collaborate on solutions for mitigating the impacts of the austin city limits music festival on surrounding residents and businesses. And then a companion be it resolved clause just saying that the director of the parks department and the city manager will ensure that any resulting agreement reflects stakeholders' input to the greatest extent practicable. Again just to recognize that there is ongoing -- there are ongoing negotiations and that those will be reflected in the eventual agreement. And I know that is c3's commitment and I have every expectation that those will be good and very productive negotiations. And then the additional amendment would be one that encourages the city manager to work with c 3 presents to see if the farmers market -- to keep the farmers market open during those two [10:44:00] weekends of acl. This is something that some of the vendors at the farmers market mentioned to me was a concern to them because when the market is closed they don't have and so extending that to two weekends would really be a hardship on them and their business. And we want our small businesses and our vendors at the farmers market to continue to be successful. So I know that again that c3 is committed to working with them to talk about solutions that would provide better access for their vendors and for their market customers. And again, this amendment just recognizes that ongoing commitment and that those discussions need to happen. So I'd like to propose all three of those as friendly amendments, please. >> Martinez: Mayor and councilmember tovo, i appreciate the amendments, and the context of the amendments, but I can't accept them as friendly because this is a negotiated item between the city manager. And when I read language such as ensure, that doesn't leave room for negotiations. That pretty much says city manager, you will put into this agreement whatever the stakeholders tell to, and i don't think that gives him the ability to negotiate, or staff. That's why we chose the language, and actually the language that we put in this resolution was provided to us by law, and that's why we used like encourage because that tells the city manager this is a policy value of ours and we're strongly encouraging you, but to tell the city manager you shall doesn't leave him room for negotiations. And so I'm happy to entertain this language. There is more, a neutral tone to it, as opposed to being directive -- to me ensure and encourage is very [10:46:01] similar to the terms shall and may in a directive. And this to me seems like a shall and not a may. >> Tovo: I appreciate that comment and that was why i think the clause you're probably looking at -- i guess -- in the first be is resolved that ensure stakeholders input to the greatest extent practicable. I was trying to build in that understanding that some of the suggestions and some of the concerns may not be practical or logistical or things that anybody has control over. But I'm certainly open if you've got a synonym you would prefer. Will work toward ensuring or will -- >> for me it doesn't need to even be said. I think the whole point of negotiations is that the city manager and staff are trying to meet all of the stakeholders' concerns. But if you wanted it in there, I'm okay with that. It just needs to be where it allows for those negotiations to take place. >> Tovo: And if I may just provide a little context for this. We did hear some concerns from stakeholders that the negotiations are ongoing. And that it might be more appropriate today instead of negotiating -- instead of encouraging negotiation and implementation, to just encourage ongoing negotiation. And so this is -- after talking with c3 presents, they would like the existing language of negotiating and recommending to remain in the resolution, but I am trying to give voice to the stakeholders who are saying we're still in the process of discussing. We want to be sure that the agreement reflects the discussions. Again, I'm certainly open to tweaking the language. I know that c 3 will continue their dialogue, but I think to have a resolution -- please, if you have a suggestion, mayor. [10:48:00] >> Mayor Leffingwell: As councilmember martinez says, the language is very carefully constructed because this is an administrative manner. It's really not under the purview of the council. That's why we're using the word encourage instead of directed. First of all, in the first resolve you need to strike director of the parks department because the director of the parks department works for the city manager and he will encourage her. We don't need to be encouraging the director of the parks department. If we just said the city manager is encouraged to ensure that any existing agreement reflect stakeholder input to the greatest extent practical. >> Tovo: Would you read that one more time, please? The city manager will? >> Mayor Leffingwell: The city manager is encouraged to ensure that any resulting agreement reflects stakeholders input to the greatest extent practical. Practicable. Councilmember martinez may have something to say about that too. And on the second one the same word, instead of city manager is directed, the city manager is encouraged. >> Tovo: With all due respect I'm not sure why we can't say direct the city manager because we do frequently in resolutions. I was going to propose the city manager is directed to work with c3 presents on strategies that would permit the sustainable food centers austin, blah, blah, blah, that would basically that would -- to work with c 3 presents on strategies that would permit the farmers market to remain open and to explore strategies. And I think that's pretty -- it's not assuring that -- it's directing -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: It would be consistent if we used encourage throughout [10:50:00] the document. And I don't know if there would be any potential charter conflict, but i don't see any use in getting into that discussion if we don't have to. Councilmember martinez. >> Martinez: Again, i absolutely am supportive of negotiations going on and trying to keep the farmers market open during acl fest. I don't oppose that. I'm supportive of that. So as long as we can continue to encourage the city manager that those are policy values of ours and leave it up to the city manager to negotiate that, I'm fine with it. I just want it to be -- we don't even have to change the language. I just want it to record that I don't want this being a directive that the city manager will do something in a negotiated process that hadn't taken place? Taken place. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Are you willing to change your language? >> Tovo: I think that's fine. I think everybody understands the intent, which is to try to keep the farmers market on. I think the staying holders understands that intent and I think c 3 does. And so if that makes the maker and seconder more comfortable, I'm happy to adjust it in that way. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So it's friendly to the maker, councilmember martinez, and to myself, with the edited or revised additions on this piece of paper that is incorporated into the motion. >> Tovo: Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Further discussion? All in favor say aye? Opposed say no. It passes on a vote of five-zero -- six-zero, councilmember martinez? Six to zero with councilmember spelman off the dais. [10:52:01] Let's go now to item 16, which is the law department ready on this? >> My name is chris copollo, I'm with the law department and here to recommend a settlement in the ronnie r esparza during the city of austin, who has claims against the city, including a claim for worker's comp retaliation. If the council does approve this settlement, it will also settle a similar other lawsuit ronnie esparza versus city of austin, which is a worker's compensation lawsuit. As was discussed in an executive session on AUGUST 2nd, 2012, THE Settlement agreement generally contains the the city esparza and his attorney the gross amount of $104,200. This amount will be paid from the city's liability reserve fund. The third party administrator for the city's worker's compensation claims will pay approximately $15,520 to resolve this separate worker's compensation appeal filed by mr. esparza. In exchange for those esparza will dismiss both of his lawsuits against the city with prejudice to refiling. The parties will mutually release one another from any claims that could or would have been asserted in those lawsuits. The lawsuit department therefore recommends that council approve payment of settlement in the amount of esparza under those terms. If you have any questions i would be happy to answer them. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Questions? Mayor pro tem? >> Cole: I move approval. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Mayor pro tem cole moves. Seconded by councilmember morrison. All in favor say aye? Six to zero, councilmember [10:54:00] spelman off the dais. Number 11 pulled by councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: Thank you, mayor. This is an item that addresses our plans to do an aquatic facility strategy and master plan which I'm very excited about. I think we've had some very visible discussions over the past year about various issues concerning pools and where they should be and which ones should be shut or stay open, which one should remain free. So this is going to be a great way to move forward. In fact, councilmember martinez and I did a resolution awhile ago which the council approved, which I appreciate, setting forth a request to move forward on this with some very specific key goals and thoughts in mind. And I'm very comfortable with the selection of this -- of this particular organization. The thing that I would like to do, though, is be able to -- I have had some great conversations with staff over the past few days about what exactly is going to be in the scope of work and what's going to be covered by staff versus what's covered by the consultants. And also it appeared that we were able to come to terms and understand what each other was saying, but there was some confusion and clarification needed about what the different goals of the plan were in the first place. So what I would like to do is request that -- suggest that at this point we just authorize negotiation that would allow us to continue those plans and clarification, things on the table, and then come back to approve execution. So that's going to be my [10:56:00] motion and I wonder if staff could speak to -- if you think that that's going to cause any trouble at all in terms of the timing and the timeline of your plans for moving this forward. >> No, that shouldn't impact the project. >> Morrison: Great. Thank you very much. I appreciate your work on this and I'm looking forward to the effort. So mayor, I move that we approve number 11 with the amendment that it's only to authorize the negotiation, but not the execution of the professional services agreement. And we would expect to see it back for execution. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Motion by councilmember morrison. Negotiation and execution will be at a later date. Second? All in favor say aye? Opposed say no? It passes on a vote of six to zero with councilmember spelman off the dais. And 52 pulled by councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: Thank you, mayor. I wonder if we could get staff to talk a little bit about this item. It is an item for -- for us to approve a resolution indicating the city's consent to the issuance of bonds for a particular private school in town. And I wonder if staff could talk about what we're doing here and what the meaning is. >> Arnold (indiscernible), city treasurer. This is occasionally something that comes up for approval, nonprofits that want to access the tax exempt market for lower borrowing cost. It's in the city's boundaries. And there is no recourse to the city, no liability. It's not part of the city's debtor the city's bond [10:58:02] capacity. >> Morrison: Great. I appreciate the absences we got to the questions on it. And one my questions is why is this each part of the framework of issuing these bonds? I wondered why the city was involved. And the answers were -- and I appreciate the answers. Number one, to give notice to residents where the proposed project is located, an opportunity to voice their opinion. And there was a public hearing although nobody showed up and nobody made any comments. And second to give the local government input on whether it's being financed with tax so could you tell us what -- I know it's a simple question, what it means to be financed with tax exempt debt? >> Yes. Tax exempt debt, they're obviously going to get a lower borrowing cost since it's a nonprofit, the regents school. They're able to lower the borrowing costs, which will in turn create lower for the students -- what's the word I'm looking for? Their tuition can be lowered. So this particular loan is to build this school with improvements to the surrounding area as well. There were some flood control issues that went before the watershed protection committee. >> Morrison: There were some cases already. So on the other hand it will lower their costs, but where does that money come from? >> From tuitions that they -- >> Morrison: No, I mean where does -- the bottom line for me that I'm trying to get at is it's -- yeah, they're selling tax exempt bonds, which mean people can buy those bonds and not have to pay tax on that. >> Correct. >> Morrison: So that's sort of the logic that I've been following as I've been wrestling with this issue, and that is that in essence what it means is that there is a tax impact, decreased revenue and taxes on the federal level. And to the benefit of a private school. And where I've come to on this, we have such amazing public education finance problem that I'm concerned about being part of the process where our taxpayers are in essence subsidizing a private school. I think that we really need to be beefing up as much as possible taxes that would be available for public schools. So this is -- therefore this is not an item that I can support. And I'd like to make a motion that we deny our consent. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Motion by councilmember morrison. Is there a second? >> Tovo: I'll second. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Seconded by councilmember tovo. Mayor pro tem cole. >> Cole: Elaine, you might want to come forward also. Tax -- I would like someone to explain what tax exempt bonds are exactly. And by that I mean individuals may hold tax exempt bonds in their retirement accounts. I'm sure that the city holds tax exempt bonds in its retirement accounts. So can you explain what that means in terms of the taxes -- just what is a tax exempt bond? >> Jerry kyle with andrews kurth. My partner is handling this transaction so I am here to answer a few questions. Just to clarify, the subsidy for this kind of financing comes from the federal government. So the bonds are issued on a tax exempt basis. And that's really the -- where the economic benefit is is derived from the tax exemption on the bonds. And that flows from the federal government. The city's approval is required under the internal revenue code as a procedural matter to ensure that the temporary rancel hearing was held and to have the city give its approval. >> Cole: So we have no obligation when it comes to giving our consent, is that correct? >> Yes, ma'am, that's correct. >> Cole: Do we hold any tax exempt bonds as a city? >> Yes, we do. >> Cole: Okay. And I don't think we've made it clear that when you go to the market and you're actually purchasing tax exempt bonds, you are paying a lower interest rate to the governmental entity. And why those type of bonds are issued. >> Well, those type of bonds are issued for many reasons. Obviously the tax exempt market is lower than the taxable market, so in any instance where you can access the tax exempt market, we chose to do that. There's a time that the city has tax exempt bonds so we're not under the i.r.s. Regulations. >> Cole: So it works both ways. We hold tax exempt bonds and also we as an entity also issue tax exempt bonds. And one of the main reasons is my understanding for that is because of the safety. Factor. >> Depending on who the issuing body is, yes. >> Cole: And when I say the safety factor, over the past years the market has been so bad that we have not wanted to take our pensions, our firefighter pensions, our police pensions, and we have moved more and more of them into tax exempt holdings so that we did not risk default. Is that correct? >> Correct. So you're talking now about equity markets versus tax exempt bonds? >> Cole: Exactly. I wanted to make clear, a, that this did not mean any obligation to the city. And two, they are very common. And three, it's something that the federal government is only asking us to issue consent on. And that we wouldn't want to get crosswise with the federal government absent a good reason. And it doesn't mean that we would necessarily not be supporting our schools. >> In general these type of transactions have been on formality, just a technical calty of the i.r.s. Regulations. >> Cole: Mayor, I'll move approval. >> Mayor Leffingwell: There's a motion. You have a substitute motion to approve. >> Cole: I'll make a substitute motion to approve. >> Mayor Leffingwell: That's by mayor pro tem and I'll second that. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: I have some additional questions. And I appreciate the questions and also councilmember morrison's comments. But just to get back to the issue you were just talking about, it is a formality, but how could we get crosswise with the federal -- I guess I'm not understanding how we could get crosswise? You've express it had as a formality, but it does say in our backup materials that it's the cultural education facilities finance corporation acts permits a nonprofit corporation acting on behalf of a city or county to sell bonds, make loans or enter into leases to finance or refinance cultural and community facilities. So in essence when a municipality gives an endorsement of it, you're saying that they are acting on behalf of a city or county to do so. >> My understanding historically when we've done these type of transactions is not so much the concern is we don't want some extremist school, for example, so that's what the council would be looking for. Other than the formalities that they hold their public hearing, that they meet all their requirements. Now, I don't know the ramifications of if we don't approve it. I don't know what happens there. >> Martinez: One further clarification, the issuer in this case is a conduit created by a different minety. >> So the on behalf characteristic in this case is not the city of austin. It's the other instrumentality. >> Tovo: Could you move closetory the microphone? I'm having trouble hearing you. >> The issuer in this case is a instrumentality of another city. So the on behalf of nature of the transaction does not relate to the city of austin. It's just by virtue of the fact that the facility is located in austin that the tefra approval is required. So the city of newark's conduit issuer is the actual issuer of the bonds in this case. >> Tovo: So you're saying that in terms of the clause, the legal clause I just read, they are acting -- newark is -- they are acting -- they are acting on behalf of the city of newark? We're saying that this school is acting on behalf of the city of newark? >> No, the corporation that's issuing the bonds is acting on behalf of the city of newark. >> Tovo: Okay. So -- and I understand that we've done -- that the city has agreed to this in the past, but it is also discretionary, I assume. And so what is -- since it was mentioned, it's my understanding that the school would still have a mechanism for obtaining financing. They would just not be able to obtain tax exempt financing. >> That's correct, yes. >> Tovo: This is a question for the staff rather than the representatives, but can you give me some examples where the city has done this in the past? >> Yes. We've done san gabriel school, we've done ymca recently. I can't recall the others. I know we did a few in 2010 and we did a couple in 2011. andrew's academy as well. >> Tovo: But it is always discretionary. >> Correct. >> Tovo: Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Could I ask the applicant a question. If you could explain a little bit to us about the status of the school and what they do and what they're planning to do with these bond monies? >> Yes, mayor. Michelle lynch with metcalf, wolf, stewart, williams. We are representing regents. We have worked with them in the last couple of years on obtaining additional permitting to expand their school. Also we had to do some variances for some floodplain modifications due to the fema floodplain map changes, so that was also very extensive cost to the school as well. Majority of the bonds is to fund that effort. And as a natural course of being a nonprofit they're seeking the practical tax exempt bond as have other schools in the past. And as the staff mentioned that the city has approved recently such as st. Andrew's or america can. Nothing out of order or unusual of what's been brought to you before, i think it's just that everyone is a little confused about why those federal tax act is making us get this blessing if you will, but there's nothing unusual. The school is just trying to further their mission as have other schools in the past. >> Mayor Leffingwell: It's a nonprofit institutional institution, fully certified by whatever authorities need to certify it as an educational institution. >> Correct. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: I want to be real clear that this is not a request from the federal government. So it's not about getting cross wides with the federal government. It's a requirement of the if the applicant wants to do this that we s off. >> Correct. It's a requirement of the i.r.s. >> Morrison: So I guess i am still in my original position because for me if there's a penny on the table and we're talking about that penny, either going to decrease the cost of a private school education versus a penny that can go into the federal tax could haver, I would rather that it for go into the federal tax coffer so that it could eventually be supporting public education. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Obviously I'm going to support the substitute motion. I think it's an opportunity to do good work, to get some remedial work done for water quality protection. It's for a good cause, albeit I'm as much a supporter of the public schools and anyone, but this is an education institution which will go do good work and it's not costing us anything. All in favor of the subsitute motion which is to approve, say aye. Opposed say no. It passes on a vote of four-two with councilmember tovo and morrison voting no. Councilmember spelman off indict as. As -- councilmember spelman off the dias. Item number 56, we do have one speaker. It was pulled by councilmember tovo. And do you want to hear the speaker first? Mike conwell. >> Good morning, mayor, council. Thank you for letting me speak. My name is mike conwell. I've been an election judge to city and county elections for 14 years now. As such I've dealt with maybe one out of four voters that comes to my polling places has issues with they're at the wrong location, thought they had updated their address, they're in the wrong county, thought they had updated their address. So after observing this for awhile I started getting involved in voter registration as well about six years ago. In 2008 I registered 653 voters in the space of about three months. And did that a couple of locations in front of businesses, but also at zilker park during public events. In doing those appearances, I would usually touch base with the event organizer and would get a shrugging approval to do the registration. To my knowledge nobody has ever complained about my presence there, but after an incident with another voter registrar, I worked with the event organizer to get all the way up to the top to find out the approval. If you could do the next slide. This is typically the crowd that I would be registering voters at. And I don't interfere with people. I walk around with a sign that says voter tuneup. And allow people to stop me. One out of three they actually chase me down and bring me back to their blanket. And I register about 12 voters an hour. After speaking with one event organizer and waiting for two or three months -- or two or three weeks, I'm sorry, for a formal way for them to allow me to register voters, I was placed in a free speech zone. [Laughter]. This is new to me. I think this started in 2000. And a couple of down sides to it. One is I'm on the way to the event and everybody is carrying lawn chairs, beer coolers. And so they're really not in a mood to stop. But here I would get more on the average of one voter per hour registered to vote. So as an efficiency guy, I'm definitely impacted by that. The next slide and I'll close. So these are public spaces. To my knowledge nobody has ever complained about my presence there. In contrast they chase me down, give me food, water. They've offered beer and even pot. I have taken one beer at night. [Laughter]. [ Buzzer sounds ] and I would like your support in this measure. Thank you. >> Is only a result of me wanting clarification after an incident with a retired couple forcibly rejected by security. It was after that event that was not related to me that i went to find who exactly was in charge. That's what they came up with that method. >> The incident that you mentioned, was that a paid or free event. >> Public event. >> When you say public event. >> Well, they likely paid y'all for the use of the facility. >> Tovo: But there was not an admission charge. >> Correct. >> Tovo: Okay. 1. >> Thanks, that's very helpful. I wonder if we could get staff to answer some questions. I did submit some questions through the q and a process about this item. We did -- because it was an item from council, we got in response to that. What I'm trying to get a sense of is what the state of the law is in terms of redge centering -- voters on parkland and maybe some of the sponsors -- >> I think we have some help coming from you. >> All right. Thanks. 1 I appreciate very much the resolution, whether this resolution will indeed address the issues that those out in the field have noticed, literally in the field. >> Don steinner. >> If you are a deputy registrar, out at a public events, what are your rights? Do you need to secure permission if you're on parkland, do you have free rein of walking around? >> Traditionally, thoroughfares and common areas are full purpose -- full purpose forums for speech. So that means sidewalks, byways, open parkland, free for people to engage in speak. They can say what they want. Carry a sign that says wt they believe and -- and register voters. Subject to reasonable time place and manner restrictions that the city may have, such as not blocking a thoroughfare or -- or causing erosion or keeping the grass from growing, things of that nature. If -- if a public space is rented, by a private party, then -- then for the purposes of the rental, that becomes sort of the -- of the private party's controlled space. And if it's a ticketed event, which someone has to pay admission to get in, then they can certainly restrict admission to people who have bought a ticket and they could -- they could within reason control what activities go on in the event that -- so the event would be consistent with their -- so that what -- so the event would be -- for example, if you rented a park space for a wedding, you certainly wouldn't have to let volunteer registrars register people at your wedding. So within the -- within the controlled area that someone has paid rental for, they can control ingress and they can to some extent control what goes on it. With respect to an open public space that's not restricted, even if there's an event going on, people will subject to -- fully engage in first amendment protected activities, including voter registration. One caveat is that the city can't or no government can prefer one kind of speech over another. So -- so the city can't, for example, prefer non-partisan speech over partisan speech. So if people are allowed to engage in non-partisan speech, they are also allowed to engage in pars zahn speech. >> Right. So if I understand it then, if it's a saturday down at zilker park, there's no restrictions. >> No. >> Somebody can walk around register voters. >> Absolutely. >> If there's a festival going on and that festival promoter has rented the space, then there is an issue because that space and I say director hensley -- i see director hensley here, maybe she can shed light on that. The person who has rented that space for a public festival, has the right to say certain people can't be through including deputy registrars? Director hensley, if I rent the zilker park and have a public festival, open to anybody not a ticketed event, can I -- can I -- do I have the ability to -- to eject somebody for freedom of speech issue? >> No. If it's not a ticketed event, if it's open to the public, then any member of the public can be there and do anything they could normally do, again, subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions so that couldn't block people's way and engage in other unlawful activity, even if they were doing that in the course of also engaging in some first amendment activity. But -- but open park space is a traditional, full purpose public forum, for both partisan and non-partisan speech. >> It sounds like it was not a ticketed event where the registrars were forcibly ejected, right? >> Right. >> Tovo: So it sounds like that event promoter was not ace r aware of the law and the person's right to be there. >> It appears to be a training issue. >> Did you have another comment? >> The only comment is that -- that ejection seemed to be started from the security, not the event organizers. >> Tovo: Thanks for that clarification. >> Then the event organizer got involved afterwards. >> Tovo: So it was the security in that case who was maybe not aware as they should have been that allowed that person to be there performing that activity. >> Sarah hensley, director of parks and recreation. That's why this will be helpful to us. We will take this and make sure we do through our event rentals with the city team, primarily of course in parks, is to make sure that we let these groups know that there is a responsibility when it's a public event and open to the public, that these opportunities will remain open for them to be able to do this. This won't happen again. >> Tovo: Great. I assume that's part of the group that is referenced here with the term stakeholders. Okay. Thanks very much, i appreciate all of the information. Mayor, I move approval of this item. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember tovo moves approval. Seconded by councilmember martinez. >> Tovo: I'm going to second his motion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. Councilmember martinez moves approval, seconded by councilmember tovo. I was the co-sponsor, but you can go ahead and -- [laughter] >> I was also. >> Tovo: I withdraw my second. >> Mayor Leffingwell: No, no, councilmember tovo is the second. All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Cole: I was a co-sponsor, too. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no, passes on a vote of 6-0 with councilmember spelman off the dais. 4 and 5 together. We'll consider them separately but we're going to hear questions and answers that are related and hear speakers on both items at the same time. So this is pulled for speakers only. So we will go to the speaker, jennifer walker. Welcome, you have three minutes. >> Good morning, council. My name is jennifer walker, I'm with the lone star chapter of the sierra club. I just want to follow-up on our comments from the meeting a couple of weeks ago. We met with conservation staff and discussed our comments this past monday and we appreciate the staff making time for the meeting and we are really glad leo dealman from the rmc was there as well. I want to specifically comment on two of the issues that we brought up. On the 140 gpcd issue, after discussion with conservation staff, it was lee -- with leo from rmc, we feel that confident that austin water and rmc are looking for strategies to meet the 140 gpcd goal. We will hopefully see that reflected in the update of the conservation plan and in other plans from the staff, but the conservation plan is due in 2014. One of the other requests that we had was that the utility consider meterological conditions. And in addition to the standard triggers of total water supply and treatment capacity. We believe that there exists considerable potential for confusion among the public and additional risks to our water supply when we are in a meterological drought and no additional measures to reduce water use are put in place. I understand that this concept is complex and likely needs further study and development prior to inclusion in the city code. And the drought contingency plan. I have asked that this item be given strong consideration in the next update of the city's drought contingency plan which is due in 2014. I would like to see the utility study this concept and work with stakeholders to develop a methodology that incorporates meterological conditions in the trigger mechanisms for different drought stages in the next drought contingency plan. Just makes sense to consider actual and possible predicted meterological conditions when evaluating the need for action on drought stages. That's my comments. Thank you. >> Mayor pro tem? >> Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: Thank, we're so well trained. Thank you, jennifer, can you give me a real simple example of the difference between a meteorological drought and another kind of drought? >> Well, generally what -- what cities look at is their water supply or their treatment capacity to -- to go into drought -- to consider whether they are going to go to different drought stage triggers. What we are asking is that they also look at meteorological conditions which that needs to be settled on what that is exactly. We suggested to look at the drought monitor, even the maps that we keep seeing last year that kept going redder, redder, redder, drought monitor map, done by an as county basis, you can look and see what drought stages we are in. There's five drought stages. If travis county or austin was in extreme drought but we had not yet reached a trigger to -- to go to the next drought stage, that's an incident where we might consider that. For example, last summer that happened. We didn't go into drought stage 2 under the end of the summer, but all summer long we were in a meteorological drought that was on the front page of the paper and stuff, but we weren't taking additional action to reflect that. >> Morrison: Does that sort of also look at -- at variables like what the projection for main is for the next two months or the long term? Because I would think that if we have enough water, in reserve right now, but we think that it's not going to rain for the next three months, that might also impact when we go into stricter restrictions. >> Yes. There -- there are -- it depends on how -- how you format a program to look at this. That's why I've -- you know, I've requested that we look at this closer and develop some methodology. What we had suggested, there is a -- noaa, the national oceanic atmospheric -- >> administration or something. >> Noaa, thank you. They do three month and six month outlooks for, you know, above chance, above normal, below normal rainfall, there's a bunch of forecasts like standard forecasts done by our weather organizations in the country. >> And the -- your point is that you've asked that we entertain these kind of discussions for our updates two years from now; is that correct? >> Yeah, I think, you know, we need to start the discussion sooner, obviously. And, you know, I hate to say like a stakeholder process. I think that that's, you know, we have enough of those going on. >> Morrison: Right. >> But to seriously consider that and to develop some methodology and maybe, you know, share with some people that are thinking about these kinds of -- because i think different cities are starting to look at this. The lcra water management plan, proposed management plan, actually incorporates some of these kinds of strategies in the plan. It's a very complicated plan. I'll give you that. But our water supply situation is getting more and more complicated all of the time. I think it merits that kind of thought going into triggers. >> That's interesting. It also, I think, some consistency in a protest between the lcra and the city, it would pay to actually look at that. Could I ask staff if there's someone that we could -- hello, mr. lazaro. I imagine that you have engaged in these conversations with in walker, is this something that you are thinking would be part of your work in the next couple of years to actually look at these possibilities? >> Yes. We're always examining the appropriate amount of risk and adaptation for managing drought. Not sure what jennifer was referring to when she says it's in the current water management plan. I participated in that process and although it was discussed, we did not at that time add it to the water management plan. Meteorological data, although it was discussed as a possible forefront issue that we would examine when we do the next water management plan. So maybe I have to compare notes with her a little bit on that. But yes, I think there is some emerging interest here. But as jennifer indicated, it's complex, it needs some additional thought to -- to kind of puzzle out. But certainly we are open to those kind of discussions as we update not only future water management plans to lcra, but our own drought contingency plans. >> Great, I appreciate you working on that because it sounds like just globally, probably, this whole arena is evolving and getting more sophisticated, so we certainly want to be able to keep up with -- with what there is to offer. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: And I would just say yes, i agree, we ought to continue to have these discussions, but I think we ought to ensure, also, that they are regional discussions. That's a big part of what you need to do. If we're in one media area, for example, here in austin, it makes a lot of sense, to be able to ed -- the education process, you know, what stage are you in, what's the outlook, so forth, everybody sort of being on the same page. And have sort of -- obviously there are going to be isolated differences. Like I noticed yesterday that florence, texas, went to stage 5 because their water well motor went out. That's a different kind of thing. That's a localized thing. Generally just due to drought and weather conditions, I think that ought to be coordinated throughout the region. >> I would certainly agree with that. You know, we have the central texas water efficiency network where a lot of the water providers in central texas are meeting monthly and sharing concepts and stuff, and this is something that we are definitely discussing in that venue and we -- we the sierra club will be bringing up not just with austin, but with -- with different communities as well that are considering their drought contingency plans. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you, jennifer. -- Roy whalely. >> Howdy, y'all, my name is roy whalely, I'm the co-chair of the austin regional group of conservation committee. And I want to echo what ms. walker just said. We certainly agree with all of that. Also, I want to thank the folks at austin water utility, [indiscernible] gross and her team, for the good work that they did last winter in leading an outstanding open house, series of open houses for a lot of different people with a lot of different viewpoints came together, had a discussion, found common ground and found ways to continue to disagree with each other, also. And we also have an excellent meeting on monday and came out of that with -- with -- with continued disagreements. And we -- we agree with the -- with the idea of everything that we put in the sierra club letter and then there was a coalition group letter that was sent to you recently, the only change that we see in that on the triggers, et cetera, with the 10-acres instead of having annual inspections, came out of that meeting on monday with the idea that it should be every two years. I do want to talk about the concept of -- of leadership. And -- and something that i heard recently that -- that if we set a very high goal, then regionally, if people can't keep up with us, then they stop trying. I disagree with that. To paraphrase nelson mandela in his acceptance speech: Who are we to say that we are not brilliant and wonderful? Who are we to say that and then he said who are we not to say that? Do not hide your brilliance, your light, under a basket. Let it shine, let it be a beacon and we have a lot of political influence sitting right on this dais and so let's use that influence, that leadership to set a high bar. Let's use that leadership on a state level to make it, not just a regional discussion, but a state-wide discussion and let it start here in austin and let it move forward. Every -- every drop of water is precious. And the idea that if we don't use, someone else will, well, as we enter into the budget season, I hope y'all don't take that same attitude towards city money because we want to conserve our money just as well as we do our water. We are -- we are animals. We are higher primates, but we are still animals, like all animals, we are a combination of instinct and learning. We learn our behaviors [beeping] to wrap up very succinctly, the concept of negative reinforcement intermittent negative reinforcement as we move in and out of the stages, we screw up the learning of the citizens of austin on when to conserve. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you, very profound today, mr. whalely. Paul robbins? >> Council, a group of environmentalists sent a letter to the water utility with five -- to the council. About -- we had five comments that -- that addressed the drought plan and the conservation programs. I don't know that -- I don't know that -- you can debate some of these either way, but not lowering the drought trigger is something that -- that you can't really be flexible with this. You can't argue with the drought. Staff sent a response memo to the meeting that roy whalely and jennifer walker attended. Some of this is outrightly especial shows. They say it reinforces and triggers support of the code revision process, only 19% of attend yes at the january public meeting believed drought triggers should deviate from lcra. I was at the january meeting. I was in the stakeholder's alleged stakeholder's process. Many people didn't even have time to evaluate what they were being told to rate and comment on. Know. I was there. They say that, well, 48% of the water relief is for agricultural use and this is a justification not to lower drought triggers. Well, we're in a new phase right now. And as you know, agricultural use was outrightly banned this year. I simply do not know how you can justify having a stage 3 trigger of 600,000-acre feet that was established based on the 1950s when we had four times the population in austin that we had in the 1950s. I realize that a stage 3 event is not going to happen very often. But this is a matter of public safety. It is not something that you can argue with. It is not something that you can be flexible with. I urge council to set a stage 3 cap at 700,000-acre feet and that it not be lifted until we obtain at least 800,000-acre feet. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Those are all of the speakers that we have signed up to speak. So we will -- again, we will consider items 4 and 5 separately. Any questions? Councilmember martinez? Okay. You move approval of item no. 4? >> [Indiscernible] >> Mayor Leffingwell: Seconded by the mayor pro tem. All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no, passes on a vote of 6-0 on all three readings with councilmember spelman off the dais. 5 is the accompanying resolution to adopt the new drought contingency plan. Councilmember martinez moves approval. Mayor pro tem cole seconds. All in favor say aye? >> Aye. Opposed say no. Passes 6-0 with councilmember spelman off the dais. Thank you. The only item that we have remaining on the morning agenda is item no. 20. We're not going to be able to finish it, but we can go ahead and start taking speakers now and at 12 noon we will go to our citizens communication and we'll lay 20 on the table and finish it after -- after -- after citizen communications and executive session. First speaker signed up is past smith. Pat smith is not here. Janet buer. Janet buer? Okay. You have three minutes. >> Hello, I'm janet barkley buer, a member of the southeast combined neighborhood plan contact team, that's what I'm here to speak on behalf of. And I did speak to the council some time ago, but because of the newspaper article yesterday we thought it best to appear again. .. we're here to ask that the city provide proactive support to the rapidly expanding community of 78744, which is also known as dove springs, which lies -- which is an area of almost 50,000 residents that live along one of the major pathways to the austin airport. Since 2000, local government support has been somewhat wanting to that area. And in that time, since 2000, the population has increased 38%, that's almost 4 people for what was there -- one person that was there in 2000. We have over 800 lower income moderate income multi-family unit apartments that have been built. , austin police department department, pulled out its store front around 2000 and of course during that time with all of those changes, crime increased 61%. People are afraid to go out. The neighborhood comprehensive plan that was built in 2002 recommended a 5 million expansion of the dove springs recreation center that has never been funded to make it a comprehensive center. 78744 Also has the highest juvenile obesity rate in the city of austin. And in the meantime, the clinic and the community health clinics were moved out of the heart of the area. Further away from those low income housing units. So what we're asking is the city and -- and the city council help us improve 78744 by adequately funding the expansion of the dove springs recreation center, as I understand it today, it currently is in the bond 75 million and we thank you for that. But we also ask that you consider in all -- if at all possible by raising by 5 million in to make it a more comprehensive center to put the services next to the people who need it. We also ask that the store front of the police station or embedded police be put back in the existing dove springs recreation center so that we can get a handle, along with the community, on reducing crime, that 61% increase in crime is awful. And we ask for the city's help in helping the community to work with other governmental entities to appropriately place services so it meets the needs of the community and the area. We know you've got many tough choices. And what to include in this bond issue, but this is a very needed [beeping] needy area. And this decade, given what has happened in the last decade, this community cannot afford to wait another five to seven years for another opportunity to expand the services. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all very much. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Question for you. A. >> Actually not a question. Just a request of our city manager that he report back on the item that you mentioned about the substation, at the police department, what kind of focus our police -- have in this area and whether there are any plans to bring that substation back. >> Thank you, we really appreciate the help, we really do. And thank you all for your service. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Another question, janet. Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: Thank you. I want to ask staff if they can point for me, another item in the bond package, i know that you mentioned it was in there, I couldn't find it. I am wondering if staff can let me know where it is, if it's there, if it did not make it through to the final package. trimble is in the audience, I don't think that it's in there. I think this is in reference to the police a.p.d. Substation, I think part of that conversation included councilmember expressing an interest in the possibility of a substation being in dove springs, is that correct, mike? >> That's correct. What -- what's in the package, we were talking about dove springs for the recreational -- recreation center improvements is in district parks, ongoing program improvements, it's in that district parks, I'm sorry, neighborhood plan parks, I take that back. >> Okay. Great. So it's -- it's specifically sort of contemplated as part of that, so the money is there? >> It's part of the money there for the improvements. >> Top level of our chart? Okay. Great. And I wanted to mention that we had a great conversation the other day with you and some of your neighbors and one of the exciting things that's going on in dove springs is the coalition that's formed and it's funded by a delavan grant and it's for example -- dell grant focusing on physical activity and nutrition, one of the things that I've talked to the city manager about is the idea of bringing city resources to the table in terms of, you know, bigger picture issues that will align with that, like the built environment and doing that through the concept of a -- of an update to the neighborhood plan. So I think we're going to be able to -- the city manager thought we would be able to do that. But I also wanted to mention after the discussion I got a conversation going with -- with the police chief and some of the folks that are over that area and we are planning, because I wanted to come up to date specifically with -- with the -- with what does the police department think they are doing and what's their perspective on the situation and I think that -- if we can have this comprehensive conversation that's going on already, and really understand that public safety underlies and is a foundation of any kind of evolution and improvement in that community, that I think that -- that we really have an opportunity to bring everybody to the table and I'm very hopeful and excited about all of the energy that's going on down there. Of so thank you for your work. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. >> Thank you all. >> Tovo: Sorry, I have a follow-up question now after councilmember morrison's question. I have a follow-up question for mr. trimble. In the neighborhood plan parks, so the budget and the task force recommendation is I believe about a million dollars different from the city manager's recommendation for that line item. I think that's correct. I need to bring up those numbers. When you say that there's money contemplated for the dove springs, will it -- how does the difference between the task force recommendation for the higher amount potentially impact that project? If we're -- if our starting place is the city manager's bond proposal, we have less money in that category for neighborhood parks, acquisition and improvement. So how will that impact this project? >> My understanding is that based on, there would have to be reprioritization obviously with more limited dollars. But my understanding is that even in the city manager's $385 million recommendation, there is money in there for those improvements. >> It is a million dollar difference, but that should not -- there's a million dollar -- a million dollars more in the task force recommendation for neighborhood plan park improvements? >> Actually, it's the same amount contemplated in both amounts. For the -- yeah, for dove springs. >> For dove springs there is, but there is a million dollar differential between those two budgets. But it should not impact dove springs project will not be exacted. >> No. The same amount is contemplate understand that reduced amount? >> What projects will be impacted by that million dollar differential? If you want to get back to you later in our discussion -- >> I might have to get back to you on that one. There was reprioritization but I'm not sure exactly which ones. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Councilmember martinez? >> Yep. Just for the record, I was the councilmember that was interested in getting a police substation in dove springs and unfortunately it did not make it into -- into the proposals. But it's -- it's certainly an area that I'm still interested in, I will still look towards our budget deliberations, I believe it's something that could -- could drastically improve response and safety in that community. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> [Indiscernible], welcome, you have three minutes. I understand -- excuse me, i understand pat smith is here? Pat smith came back? No, you will be next after this. Go ahead, sorry. >> We came to you late in the process with a cry out to address the emergency situation of homeless women in austin and you heard our cry. I'm here for -- first of all to thank you and to support you very strongly in remaining vigilant and -- and committed. Early -- early last week, a young woman with five week old baby showed up at trinity center at 3:00 p.m. Fleeing domestic violence: Safe place was full. It was over 100-degrees outside. I stopped everything that i was doing to advocate on that baby with foundation for the homeless and the salvation army. They were both at capacity, yet the salvation army took her in on a sofa and son we crossed the street, i watched mom and babe come in. I knew that I could sleep that night. For short-term solutions to the nameness homeless women in austin, we are approaching churches to use their facilities for women after the model of the cold weather shelter and the model of the interfaith hospitality network. david's church successfully recruiting volunteers for the first two weeks, the first week of september and the first week of october in trinity center and st. David's being that emergency safe place for women. They -- they agreed to -- to come on board. Approaching either churches that are considering this. I believe that you are entertaining possibly helping us with the cost of security for this. We thank you for that. The short term solution will not be sustainable in the long term, I'm here today to ask you to please keep your commitment to including this very important issue as part of the bond as you have done as late as we can, you really did pay attention to -- to -- to the need that we need to address. Because it is a life -- it is a life -- life threatening situation for those women. Please remain our partner in this effort and thank you so much for doing so thus far. >> Thank you, I want you to know that -- that I have requested a -- city management to work with you on the security issue. And the assistant city managers are doing that and I know that you have seen the resolution today sponsored jointly with councilmember morrison and chris -- >> I sponsored that mayor pro tem cole and you were a co-sponsor. >> Right i, along with councilmember martinez. >> A lot of people are trying to help you out on up here. >> You know, we usually come here to -- to ask and demand and request and once in a while one has an opportunity to come and say thank you. Just keep with us. We are finding the solutions. There's no solution that doesn't have budget attached to it. And I don't know how many will take the time. I happen to be the last to speak usually. last time. Now it's -- now it's -- there goes the morning. We are working our hearts off on this. We find partners in you. I have done political work for a million years as you can tell and it's rare that we find that kind of -- kind of working on it together thank you very much. >> Thank you, we are. >> Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: I want to thank you not just for the tremendous work that you do every day but also for raising this issue to me and also to my colleagues because -- because, you know, really very glad that we were able to get a resolution. Passed this morning. That will begin those dialogues with travis county about -- about whether there's a feasibility for expanding that shelter and that's an idea that came directly from you and the other service providers who work on this critical issue every day. I'm very hopeful that we will continue to be supportive of the two million. I certainly will be. I think it's -- I think it's a very, very critical need for our communities. Thank you very much. >> We are changing the city, we are changing the -- we are changing the -- really difficult plight of the poorest of the poor of the women in the city. >> Thank you. >> Pat smith. >> Very necessary, tha you. Sometime the president of the southwest contact planning team, I'm very proud of the community in southeast austin and their engagement and the process with the bond issue. And -- I am here to speak -- I am here to speak on behalf community, the contact team, what has compelled in he to action is the high population of young children in dove springs and my deep and sincere concern for their future if -- if the safety of the community is not addressed and of course the -- the educational success of those young children. We do have several -- several different schools that have opened up recently that offer broader opportunities for -- for education. But the -- but the safety continues to be a grave concern. The community did have what's called a police store front which is a very small sort of office in the community, that model was 10 years ago. We understand that a substation is a massive facility. That the budget would not allow. We definitely need a store front and we also very much would like to be awarded the 5 million in our 2002 neighborhood plan to expand the recreation center and our ultimate goal is to -- for the recreation center to evolve into a multi-purpose center. So we could house the health office, offer health and recreation and also a police store front. So I won't take up any more of your time, but I -- i would appreciate very much your attention to our community. Thank you. >> Thank you. Stewart hersch? >> Thank you, mayor, members of the council, like most in austin, I am solely responsible for the content of this message. I support affordable housing funding so that my brothers and sisters who cannot afford housing in the marketplace have greater access to housing that is safe, located in mixed income neighborhoods, accessible to people with disabilities, reasonably priced and transit oriented. Safe mixed income, accessible, reasonably priced and transit oriented, what we call smart housing, not just the opposite of dumb housing. I support mexic-arte museum's request for $5 million so that my sisters and brothers, young and old who have been served and will be served by the museum can enjoy this experience in in a new icon nick museum in the fewer. Today you couldn't find funding for mexic-arte, today I suggest that you reduce the affordable housing amount that you approved yesterday by $5 million to fund mexic-arte while actually increasing your proposed investment in affordable housing over the next six years. In 2000, the council created the housing trust fund with a million dollars funding approved a 40% set aside of certain property tax revenue and the urban core from sites that weren't on the tax rolls in '97. This funding was supposed to .. your investment in general obligations with voter approval and the housing trust funds would be at least one million dollars greater than what was adopted yesterday and what is currently proposed in the city manager's budget. This is only true if you require housing trust fund dollars for affordable housing not for $557,000 in staffing costs that are currently proposed. Next year's million dollars could go for home repair, which could free up $400,000 in community block grant funds for permanent supportive housing in very high and high opportunity neighborhoods, thus promoting the geographic dispersion and housing preservation we are all seeking. This is a win for affordable housing, a win for mexic-arte museum, a $557,000 staff funding challenge, 600,000 for housing planning and initiatives and other housing needs identified but not proposed for funding currently can also be addressed if there are answers to the open records request that I filed on march the 2nd this year, of potential budget windfalls, I have attached a copy for your review. I received zero response to date and your first public hearing on that is next week. So I ask you to get us the information we need to help build a win for the museum. A win for affordable housing and do well for these two public benefits. Thank you so much for your consideration. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you, stewart. [ Applause ] I want to compliment you on your community spirit and willingness to work toward solving problems, not just for yourself but for others, thank you very much. With that, council, I would like to lay this item on the table. It's time for citizens communication, we are not finished, we have a lot of spares to go. A lot of speakers to go. We will go to our citizens communications. First speaker is pat valls-trelles. Topic is animal issues. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. My name is pat valls-trelles. And I am a former member of the austin animal advisory commission. I'm a current member and co-founder of travis county animal advocates. I fully support the city's no-kill goal and thank you for passing that. Our group, travis county animal advocates came to you on may 24th with issues regarding the city contract with austin pets alive for the town lake animal center facility. You heard our concern, concerns, you incorporated those issues into -- in creating that contract. Thank you. Today, we bring your request that's related to the ongoing concerns we raised ON MAY 24th. We have a request to city council to strengthen the monitoring enforcement of the city contract with austin pets alive for the operation of the town lake animal center facility. We believe that there are a few issues that you should address. One, are some public safety issues have come up. And we have another member of travis county animal advocates, tara stermer who will be speaking to these momentarily. We have a concern about compliance with spay-neuter requirements in state law and the health and safety of the sheltered pets. For this we ask you to consider adding three positions to the austin animal center budget to address these. On public safety, as i mentioned, tara stermer will be addressing the fact that we have seep some aggressive dogs being adopted out and we would like you to strengthen the screening processes for potential adopters and for the dogs that rescue partners are adopting out. We believe that is a very important thing that needs to be addressed immediately. Secondly, spay-neuter compliance, we would like the is it he to assure that all pets adopted or transferred to rescue partners are spayed or neutered in a timely manner. We completely concur with the rush to save animals lives and to move them out of the shelter as quickly as possible. However, if we forego spay-neuter, we will only be pushing the problem down the road and we will be having to kill animals later if we don't address the need to spay and neuter them right now. We think that you need to have someone who is completely and fully in support of spay neuter monitoring that all rescue partners are spaying and neutering their animals .. third, we have a concern about the health and safety of the sheltered pets. That facility in town lake i understand currently houses 490 pets and we know that that's not a safe number at that facility? We would like you to either appoint a veterinarian to the animal advisory commission or contract with an independent veterinarian to do spot checks and walk throughs and ensure that not only spay-neuter compliance, but also the health and safety of the animals at that facility as being monitored. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. >> May I pass this out. >> Mayor Leffingwell: You may, pass it to mayor pro tem and she'll pass it down. Next speaker is will mcleod, his topic is london calling. >> Good afterring noon, mayor and, will mcleod, i have got a video today, i think we should play the video first and then let's talk about london calling. London has called. They are asking you. >> Somebody along the line. You need some help. >> Great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody help to create this >> what we have heard is just alarming. By the time my three kids are my age, I'm 40, they are five, six, eight years old, they say that the path we are on before passing this bill, the tax rate on that generation by the time they are 40 years old will be the 10% bracket goes up to 25%, middle income taxpayers pay an income tax rate of 63%, the top rate of the small businesses pay will be 88%. This is the legacy we're leaving the next generation. Mr. speaker? >> We can do better. It doesn't have to be this way. This is not democracy. This is not -- this not -- >> this is not good government. >> By the way, london called, they want our tax dollars back that we spent on formula one. It may not seem like a lot of money, but $6,000 can do a whole lot of things in the city of austin. I don't think that the city of austin should be spending money anywhere else outside of austin city limits. Furthermore is residency requirements should not be waived. That's why we have them. I'm sick of hearing well we're going to waive residency requirements. If we're going to waive registry -- residency requirements, we shouldn't have them in the first place. Thank you. >> Next speaker is tara stermer. Tara stermer's topic is animal shelter. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers, my name is tara stermer, I'm a day nine aggression and behavior specialist, member of travis county animal advocates. We are here today on behalf of them. We would like to recommend that council direct the city shelter director abigale smith to strengthen the oversight and enforcement of the contract between apa and the city in order to be certain that the guidelines are being followed. One major concern we have is regarding the out of area pets being housed as the old facility. A related concern is about the health and safety of the pets already in the facility. We recommend that the city add three staff members to the budget to help with the monitoring. And we also would like to see council through the animal advisory commission assign a work group of professionals to help with that monitoring of the contract to make sure that the guidelines are being followed. According to june -- june's report, apa took in over 700 pets, only adopted out 173. This is directly from the apa's reports. With the amount of cases being returned to apa, 93 in june only, we would like to avoid this circling back to hurt the city's no kill numbers, by filling up cage, foster homes, adopters that our city pets could have. With over a thousand dogs in their inventory, only 173 adoptions in june, we are extremely concerned about the months ahead. According to their june report, they are housing 490 pets in the old facility deemed unsafe to house this many. It is imperative that we monitor the health and the conditions of the pets in that facility. To avoid potential outbreaks of sickness in our population, and that the pets in that facility are safe. In the last month in my own private business I have seen an increase of confident aggressive dogs being placed in unknowing households by apa with no guidance or warning about the aggression issues. The public has a right to know if there's any past or potential aggression in a pet that they are considering adopting. Being an advocate for -- for no kill and my behavior challenged dogs, I do believe that these dogs can be helped and rehomed. If -- if it's done in a proper manner. Full disclosure, proper screening of a potential adopter, guidance of a behavior program they can follow if a dog leaves any rescue partners group. We are required that ata is required to take these cases, if they do they have the same outcome that they would in the city facility if they are dangerous they should not be adopted out. We feel they must give full disclosure to the potential adopter regarding any past or potential aggression issues and follow state regulation if a bite occurs, a 10 day quarantine at the city shelter where a staff from the city shelter can monitor the dog's behavior. 72 Of the 93 pets returned were dogs. We ask that the city recommend an explanation of why. >> Thank you, ma'am. Gavino fernandez, jr. The topic is austin city council accelerates the genocide of mexico american african-american people from east austin through their increase of property taxes and change in zoning land use policy. Don't mess with 10-1 district plan. >> I'm speaking to you as coordinator of el concilio, the coalition of mexican-american associations. I just want to educate you and inform you that I have began the process of writing to the special -- let me get his title. Office of the special advisor on the prevention of again no sides with the u.n. Because of the -- because of the ongoing changes of zoning, the ongoing increases of taxes, what this government has done, unintentionally is you people say that it's -- it's gentrification. It's not gentrification. It's genocide. I challenge your staff members, if not you, to go to the un website you will see all of the ingredients that equal genocide and talks about displacement of people through government policies, increase in zoning, no access, being disenfranchised politically, which we are currently today. I'm going to bring up a prime example. Rainy streets, neighborhood plan business, all of this a catalyst to our people. More recently another attack, 1111 montopolis, dolores catholic church, traditional holds a festival for over 50 years on their grounds. Code enforcement based on the complaint, went and cited and informed the catholic church they could no longer hold festivals because it's in a zone sf 3 and that if they continue to do that, they will be cited. So I called greg guernsey, i tried to get ahold of karlst smart because code enforcement is the one that did this. I have not contacted carlos rivera. But I have contacted karl smart and after two weeks, not a return call nor email. Not a return call. I'm a taxpayer. This issue is going to affect all churches that are zoned sf 3 throughout the city, all schools that are zoned sf 3 throughout the city that holds their festivals on their grounds, so if anything, for any reason, if you don't -- if you don't care about our protection, it's coming to your neighborhoods. It's coming to your folks. Because from what i understand, from what code enforcement told me, is that -- that the health department has been -- health department has been informed anyone who pulls a food permit for any festival zoned in sf 3, they will not be issued a food permit. So -- so we have plenty -- we have many festivals that are coming just around the corner. And I would ask this government to please meet with us, discuss with us, because it's -- it's going to become an issue in the future and then we need to take care of it because right now the right hand within the city does not know what the left hand is doing. I call to -- to do the rezoning that greg suggested when staff told me you don't have to, gavino. So there's a lot of misunderstanding. So I hope that you will understands this issue and -- that you will address this issue and bring some resolution to you. >> Thank you, alan roddy. Alan roddy's topic is the deferred comp 457 plan. >> Good afternoon, I'm here to talk about ing's management deferred comp plan for deferred employees. 3 Minutes isn't enough time, but in my opinion ing put their own interests above the interests of the planned participants. Since this problem solves city employees I hope the city council will look into this issue. The plan's board of directors have been trying to get ing to correct but they refuse to do what's right. Normally I'm not in favor of the city council sticking its nose into other independent board, but this is one occasion that I think city council members should work with the 457 board. Currently there are three investment options in the 457 plan. We invest in mutual funds, austin fixed fund, the velo city credit union. For years one of the major selling points of the 457 plan has been that members can manage their own funds and transfer our funds when we want to. Unfortunately this is not true for people invest understand the austin fix fund. Ing does not allow direct transfers from the fixed fund to the credit union because they claim that the credit union competes with the fixed fund. Ing requires a 90 day wash period that requires funds to be transferred to a mutual fund before they go into the credit union. Ing says this is an industry standard to prevent participants from shopping around from higher interest rates. Two problems with the reasonings. First of all the credit union pays a lower credit rate, number two why don't they want us to have a higher rate of return on you are on investments? Isn't this where the free enterprise system is all about. Will ing controls and makes money from the fixed fund, they would rather put pars pants at a disadvantage than allow us to control our own funds. Why is their standard more important than doing right by the investors? I ng generates additional fees by requiring us to buy mutual funds for 90 days. I have been playing the wall street rollercoaster for the past 35 years, I no longer trust wall streets industry standards. Wall street industry standards include ken lay, enron, bernie maydoff, 36 people convicted of insider trading is their standard ... is there standards the -- the interest rate fraud is their standards, illegal trading with terrorist nations like cuban and iran. Like most americans I have lost faith in wall street and the companies that put their own interests above the interests of their clients and our country, city employees work hard for their money, ing is supposed to work for us, we don't work for ing. I request that our city council members take the time to call the 457 board president and get the details of this issue, work to protect our city's employees, I suggest that all plans participants contract the board and ing about this bogus 90 day wash period. In order to protect my money from the unreasonable 90 day wash period I have withdrawn my funds from the 457 plan, how is that good for the 457 plan. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> John koohyum kim. Your topic is austin [indiscernible] homeland security of protection citizens. >> Great day to all of you. Do I look like an american? Do I sound like america? I'm here to appreciate and praise american government, texas state government, travis county county and austin city government. Today the topic is american citizens home and security here in austin. But my topic is austin as the best city ever, thanks to mayor lee leffingwell. And the councilmembers. Austin city [indiscernible] america, texas, austin city, are better than heaven, greater than kingdom of god. I was there, but there was no ladies, only two boys, god and the jesus christ. It's boring to stay there, so I came down to america to teach american government, american government is better than heaven, greater than kingdom of god. [Indiscernible] officials of your city remember me. For today, austin city council, create all of the [indiscernible] resolution or recommendation for austin community college president, telephone 512-223-7596 today to protect the austin city residents that the john koohyum kim homeland security to continue college teaching of american democracy and american government at a.c.c. Kim's student evaluated their professor john kim as a very good professor at a.c.c. president in 2006 violated democracy, a.c.c. Undemocratically terminated his college teaching appointment there in 2006. It was there, too, [indiscernible] reason such as classroom observations by government department [indiscernible] alone and must not have used the classroom of the -- classroom observations as a termination reason of any college and teaching appointment there according to a.c.c. board policy. used four lawyers from two law firms, they lied to me, to the government, until today. >> Thank you, professor. Next speaker is jose quintero. Topic is agenda 21, gentrification and a.p.d. Profiling minority groups. >> Good afternoon, I'm jose quintero with the greater east austin neighborhood association. A long-time residents of east austin, I've seen the gentrification taking place. It's official, but this has been addressed since mayor kirk watson came into office and this was the plan of the city government. Mayor, I challenge you, it's up to you. To look up this -- this gentrification agenda 21. The united nations, that it's though longer an america, but a government that -- that has become a bunch of zombies to obey a world system that is affecting a bunch of our residents, especially east austin. So I challenge you, mayor. And I challenge the city attorney, marc ott. This is an issue regarding that you set up these comprehensive plans and i ask you to address this issue to the neighborhood plans and ask them to study agenda 21. These people were willing to give up their property rights. These people do for the speak for me -- do not speak for me or a lot that residents that don't attend the meetings. Therefore you, you initially funded these people. So they can do your agenda. So I am challenging you for that reason and I challenge all of the people from the comprehensive plan contact teams to look into this. The other issue that we're facing is gentrification and police profiling in our neighborhood. I try to contact chief acevedo twice, I met him here one day, I said you are profiling our neighborhood and the minorities. The minorities are not supposed to be participant in agenda 21. I call sergeant carter, assistant chief carter, he did not respond to my call. If you are moving into east austin and you've never been in east austin, you're going to have a bypass by the police department. It is the approximate 'em that are addressing it's us, the code enforcement, it's all based on what you cannot do. Because your tongues are tied. You are not leaders. You're just users. Of those that want to lead you. So this is an issue that I'm -- we're facing. Councilmember riley, in the past two months, I almost ran over two bicyclists. Because why? They're not going to get tickets. They're exempt. We latinos, we have a bike. We're going to get a ticket. If we drink a beer out there, people want to drink a beer, they're going to get a ticket. If people that moved in, drinking out in the public park, they're not going to get tickets. This is where you got your revenue, but you're not going to do that. That's why margaret frasier studied this issue. And you know about it. And just puts pressure on our people to pay fines, because the rest of the people that moved in there, they're exempt. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. >> Rae nadler-olenick. Speaking on water fluorideization. >> Good afternoon, a year AGO ON AUGUST 2nd, MAYOR Leffingwell asked why i stood at this body up, why fluoride free austin doesn't simply follow the formal citizens referendum process to bring our issue to the ballot for a public vote. My response at the time was that any such attempt would instantly unleash a torrent of slick, expensive, pro fluoride pr funded by the powerful special interests with deep pockets that keep water fluoridation in place. We would be grossly outspent where money talks loudest. But just last week, you the council gave us still another reason. You took advantage of an under the radar work session to vote on to next november's ballot an 8 to 1 redistricting plan which directly competes with the 10-one plan austinites for geographical representation via petition drive had successfully labored to place on that same ballot. You let agr invest end for miscellaneous time, energy, resources and then stepped in to undermine it. This hurtful action flies in the face of your own charter revision committee's decision. To change the subject, fluoride free houston founded in june have already found an ally on the houston city council. Jack christie, a chiropractic physician who just might know something about health. A chiropractor's rigorous educational program, particularly emphasized the musculoskeletal system, including bone and bone as we know is outstandingly vulnerable to damage by fluoride, which accumulates over time causing brittleness and arthritis-like joint pain. On august 7, six fluoride free houston wyatts appeared before council including one a whole foods employee to the effect that great numbers of savvy houston nights have already abandoned tap water for better options. If people aren't drinking the fluoride, anyway, why continue to pay for it. A refreshing approach that would apply in houston. Here it would seem you don't care whether people drink or dodge it, as long as the city continues to implement it. The houston city council listened with an attentiveness and respect rarely seen here and fluoride free houston members vowed to return and speak regularly for as long as it takes. I have posted a video on the fluoride free houston com website front page. Please take a few minutes to see what a medically trained member of the houston city council has to say. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> joseph iley? Yellow cab permits and their failure to comply with city code after five months. And you have three minutes. >> I will make that part brief. First off, thank you for finally taking action after waiting five months. Actually, I have something more important that I would prefer to take up a matter on. The purpose of this visit now is for me is to request that the city define what an owner-operator is. Twice in the ground transportation city ordinance, other thanner operator is referred to, yet if I go and look into the definitions of ground transportation there is no beginnings for owner-operator, so I don't know how you have owner-operator in the city ordinance. Secondly as an independent contract driver, the city ordinance denies other cab drivers like me from being true owner-operators because it constantly leases all of the permits to companies rather than drivers. The companies pay $450 a year for those permits and a driver turns around and pays anywhere from $12,220 to $15,600 per year to use that permit just for his terminal fees. If this city really is being fair to the drivers who wish to be true owner-operators, no I don't think so. The driver who owns cabs incur all of the costs, they pay for the car, they pay for the maintenance, they pay for the gas, but at any time a franchise can take that permit away, in which case in that driver went out and spent anywhere from five to $30,000 on a car, that car is useless as a cab because without a permanent, that cab is not a cab. It just a car with -- full of holes. It has a hole in the roof, a hole in the trunk maybe because yellow cab puts a sign back on it. And it has holes in the dash. As -- if this business is supposed to be competitive in the market, then the drivers should control the permits and contract with the cab companies, dispatching service. That's true competition. And I sent you all an email, I think that I addressed it a little funny because i addressed it to the mayor and city council, about a lawsuit taking place in the city of kansas city, missouri. That lawsuit is the same thing that's happening in this city. You guys have created a mop monopoly within a monopoly is what you have done. You gave all of the permits to the companies and we incur the cost and we shouldn't have to incur the costs at the risk factors that you are making. riley makes the thing about drivers wanting to -- >> thank you, thank you, thank you, mr. iley. >> Do you think as a driver -- [. >> Cole: Thank you, your time is up, your time is up, thank you. >> Tovo: Mayor pro tem cole? I do have a question mr. mr. Iley's topic as it was written on our agenda, [one moment please for change in captioners] >> I got a complaint from an ex-cab driver who told me during south by southwest when he went down to the market on guadalupe drag that he had rode in three yellow cabs. He didn't tell me which cab numbers. I didn't think that was necessarily important, because the fact of the matter is the company by not setting the meter properly they allowed that to happen. no e and I both with the tdia filed a complaint not once, but twice, and then a third time and then I finally filed it on the fourth time with the city transportation office to find out if they were actually going to take action. Now, my problem is that you've honored yellow cab by giving them six wheelchair permits. Before they even complied. And I find that to be kind of fishy. >> Tovo: I agree and i didn't support that. And I am concerned about their noncompliance with this issue. Thanks for raising it. >> Because they are finally, my understanding, is they're being fined now and they are getting their act in gear. >> Tovo: Well, we have transportation staff here spillar, if you might come up and address this issue. I know my office has reached out to your staff and you provided us with information in the past, but can you tell us where yellow cab is in terms of their compliance on this issue? And it's my understanding based on the information that we gathered this week that there have been about 64 citations issued since AUGUST 2nd? >> Yes, ma'am. Councilmember tovo, robert spillar with the transportation department. If you will remember, we sent a memo back in may to you all indicating that we had been informed by yellow cab that there was a holdup in terms of converting their meters because apparently several other cities were also looking for the same kind of equipment. So they were having trouble getting the equipment. At that time we had agreed to go ahead and allow them to start charging the surcharge between nine and in the morning, at night and four a.m. in the morning. I think that's the times. With the understanding that by august that they would be compliant. On august 1st we met with them and reminded them of this commitment, and on august 2nd we began with our normal routine evaluations of cabs, spot checks of cabs and began ticketing for these owe vents. As of yesterday we have issued 66 tickets to yellow cab. We're issuing those to the company, not to the driver, since the company is responsible for the machines. I will also say we've also found that austin cab has a problem with at least several of their cabs. We've issued three tickets to them. And lone star cab has received two tickets since we started enforcing it. Again, our intent in providing that lean gent si at the beginning is because -- lenient si at the beginning is because we understand that there was a problem getting the actual machines available to do that. So as of today we are fully ticketing. >> Tovo: And just to emphasize something that you said, you are ticketing the cab companies, not the drivers. >> That's what we are doing is providing the tickets to the cab companies. Those tickets are exactly $168 per violation. >> Tovo: It seems like -- >> sorry, excuse me. 133. There was one other issue about the additional handicapped taxi permits that was asked. We do not intend to issue those until we have compliance. So yes, council has authorized those. Of course the department typically takes the route that when a change occurs once the cab company is fully ready to go, then we'll issue those permits. Again, with the surcharges we tried to be a little bit lenient to benefit the drivers, but that period of leniency I think has passed and we're now enforcing that, but we will hold the six permits until they're compliant. >> Tovo: Thank you for clarifying on the additional permits that those won't be released. That is an important clarification. Just to get back -- I don't want to belabor this because I know we need to move on. What will happen in the interim? Are the drivers -- as you know, we received concerns and complaints from drivers about this. Are the drivers -- are they still able to collect that surcharge? >> If their meters have the appropriate converted button, the extra button, if you will, it's a mechanical piece, they are able to charge those. The way the current ordinance is is that they're not allowed to charge it if the meter is not able to lock out that surcharge during the off times. And again, if a vehicle charges, we have no other option but to issue a ticket. And as I said, it's to the company. And I do believe this is incentivized all the companies to push on getting the manufacturer to send them the equipment and bring their full fleets up to speed on it. >> Tovo: But it is in essence putting the drivers in the difficult choice of they either have to forego what this council has said is a good incentive for getting drivers out on the street. They either have to forego that extra money or they run the risk of getting their company a ticket. >> Yes, ma'am. The only way I can explain it, yes. >> Tovo: So I want you to refresh my memory. I think you mentioned this in your memo. You did meet with the cab or your staff met with cab companies before this surcharge, before the surcharge resolution was passed by the council. And they did feel that they could get the equipment, they did equipment to getting the equipment that would enable the surcharge to happen. >> Yes, ma'am. Before this piece of the ordinance change, there was communication back from the cab companies that they thought that they wou be able to acquire the necessary equipment. I will tell you that austin cab and lone star have by far acquired the appropriate equipment. We believe that austin cab is having trouble on just three cabs getting that actual equipment in and they're caught in the same backlog of equipment, we believe. And we believe that lone star only has one cab that is still being modified for the appropriate thing. When yellow cab indicated to us that they were having trouble getting the equipment, they actually suggested the august 1 deadline. So we feel we were negotiating in good faith with them. >> Tovo: I'll go back to that memo for the dates, but as I recall there was appropriate notification before the surcharge was -- passed and whatnot. And I just want to say that I think it's -- I think this is a distressing situation to me that we're putting -- the cab companies are putting drivers in that situation of it not being easy for them to collect a surcharge that I think is appropriate for driving during that period. So thank you for the information. >> Thank you. >> Cole: The next speaker is paul robbins. >> Ready? When does the timer start? >> Cole: As soon as you start talking. >> Council, if I have any message or question to leave -- to leave you with, it would be why does austin water utility get a walk? Council, you dealt with austin energy's electric rate case for over six months. You held at least 15 work sessions and at least three public hearings. But consider the contrast. Austin energy's rate increase was the first one in 18 years and rates went up only seven percent overall. Austin water has increased rates almost every year since 2000 and rates have doubled since then. There's another increase coming this year. Yet there's not been one work session to find out why. Is the half billion dollar budget they have not worth the scrutiny? Austin energy is not anywhere close to being the highest utility in texas. Austin water utility has the highest water cost of the top 10 cities in texas. Again, there's not then a major effort to discover why, let alone what can be done about it. Austin's water conservation program has had major problems in management and effectiveness since the middle of 2008, and yet three and a half years later the problem still persists despite a greater budget and more staff. Regarding the greater budget, staff seems to be having trouble spending its allocated funding, which given the poor way some funds are spent, might be a blessing in disguise. The council has made one of the most irresponsible decisions in years when it lifted drought restrictions when the lakes were still half full and headed lower. This typifies an attitude of negligence of public safety of the water supply and yet the decision goes without comment. Are we proud of having the highest water rates? Of the top 10 texas cities? Are we proud of having an underaachieving conservation program? Why are we ignoring the drought when the lakes are 47% full? Why does austin water utility get a walk? [Applause] >> Mayor Leffingwell: Those are all the speakers that we have. So the city council will go into closed session now to take up five items. Pursuant to section 55 one, .71 of the texas government code the council will discuss the following items. Item 66, issues related to open government matters. Item 67, legal issues related to chapter 245 of the local government code and related providings of city code chapter 251 article 12. Item 68, legal issues related to the november 6, 2012 election. Item 69, legal issues related to the soah docket application of jeremiah ventures lp for a new tlap permit. And pursuant to section 074 of the government code the council will discuss the following item: Item 70 to evaluate the performance of and consider compensation and benefits for the city manager. Is there any objection to going into executive session? For these items? Hearing none the council will now go into executive session. For your information, if you're out there waiting for -- anticipating the time that we'll come back, it will be, I will say at least two hours. Of course no guarantees. >> >>> is that. >>> >> test test test this is a test, abcdefg, >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> we are out of closed session, in closed session we discussed legal items related to 66, 67, 68, 69, personnel matters related to item 70. So I believe the first thing we need to do, we have an item that was to be -- to be postponed? Or -- or set for a time certain? 86, is there a motion to withdraw this item? Motion by councilmember morrison. Seconded by the mayor pro tem. >> Mayor, I have a comment. >> Mayor pro tem. >> Cole: Yes, I also wanted to make a comment 70, the compensation and benefits for the -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: Can we get through this item first. >> Cole: You're going to do that, okay. >> Mayor Leffingwell: All if in favor of withdrawing item 86 say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed say no? Passes on a vote of 6-0 with councilmember spelman off the dais. Also, now we can postpone 88 until september 27th. So -- so motion by the mayor pro tem to postpone. And I will second. All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no. Passes on a vote of 6-0 with councilmember spelman off the dais. So now we will go to our -- excuse me, I will recognize the mayor pro tem for a brief comment. >> Cole: Yes, mayor. I just wanted to say that we did in executive session 70, with respect to the compensation and benefits of the city manager and we look forward to his continued service. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Yes. And I said that when i brought us out that we did discuss item 70. >> Cole: I just wanted to -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: So now we'll call up our zoning cases. >>> Thank you, mayor and 00 zoning and plan amendments, public hearings, that are open and possible action. 71 and 72 because that's a discussion postponement. 73 NPA-2012-0013.02 - 900 South 1St street - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 020523-32, the Bouldin Creek Combined Neighborhood Plan, an element of the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, to change the land use designation on the future land use map (FLUM) on property locally known as 900, 904 and 908 South 2nd Street, and 1000 and 1002 South 2nd Street, 705 Christopher Street a >>> >>> unaddressed Christopher Street (Lots 4-7, Block 2, ordinance amending Chapter 25-2 of the Austin City Code by rezoning property locally known as 900-908 South 2nd Street and unaddressed Christopher Street (Lots 4-7, Block 2, Oak Cliff Addition, 0.553 acres) (East -- Staff is requesting a postponement of these items to your september 27th meeting. 75, C14-2012-0033 - 900 S. 1st (Part 2) - Conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending Chapter 25-2 of the Austin City Code by rezoning property locally known as 1000-1002 South 2nd Street and 705 Christopher Street, staff is requesting a postponement to your september 27th agenda. 76. NPA-2012-0019.04 - Austin Vintage Guitars - Conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 20040826-056, the Central Austin Combined Neighborhood Plan, an element of the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, to change the land use designation on the future land use map (FLUM) on property locally known as 4306 Red River Street (Waller Creek Watershed) from Mixed Use/Office land use to Neighborhood Mixed Use land use. To designate the property to Neighborhood Mixed Use land use. Planning Commission Recommendation: To grant Neighborhood Mixed Use land Use. Ready for consent approval on all three readings. 77. C14-2012-0065 - Austin Vintage Guitars - Conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending Chapter 25-2 of the Austin City Code by rezoning property locally known as 4306 Red River Street (Waller Creek Watershed) from limited office-mixed use-neighborhood plan (LO-MU-NP) combining district zoning to neighborhood commercial-mixed use-neighborhood plan (LR-MU-NP) combining district zoning. Staff Recommendation: To grant neighborhood commercial-mixed use-conditional overlay-neighborhood plan (LR-MU-CO-NP) combining district zoning. Planning Commission Recommendation: To grant neighborhood commercial-mixed use-conditional overlay-neighborhood plan (LR-MU-CO-NP) combining District zoning. This is ready for consent approval on all th readings. 78. C14-2012-0062 - the marchesa hall & theater - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 6404 north ih-35 service road southbound, suite 3100 -- to zone the property to commercial liquor sales sales-neighborhood plan (cs-1-np) combining district staff to grant commercial liquor sales-conditional overlay-neighborhood plan (cs-1-co-np) combining district zoning. This is ready for consent approval on all three readings. 79. C14-2012-0028 - 3rd & colorado - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 301 and 311 colorado street and 114 west 3rd street (town lake watershed) from central business district-central urban redevelopment district (cbd-cure) combining district zoning to central business district-central urban redevelopment district (cbd-cure) combining district zoning, to change a staff to grant -- staff offer for consent approval. The applicants asked for two additional -- modifications under cure. One to reduce the number of off street loading spaces from three to two. And to allow a curb cut for the garbage access to be a width of 36 feet instead of 30 feet. Originally they proposed two 30-foot driveways. The planning commission recommendation was to grant the cbd cure zoning as a condition of zoning, but they did not consider the two items that I just read into the record. But we would offer this for consent approval only on first reading. At this time. And I offer that as a consent item. Item no. 80. Is a related restrictive covenant for this property. C14-2008-0159(rca) - 3rd & colorado - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 301 and 311 colorado street, and 114 west 3rd street (town lake watershed) to amend a portion of the restrictive covenant as it relates to certain uses and development his standards. Staff is requesting a postponement of this item to your october 11th agenda and at that time we would bring back the related zoning cases. Red into the record for second and third reading. 81. C14-2012-0074 - zilk's - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 1807 west slaughter lane (slaughter creek watershed) from community commercial (gr) district zoning to limited industrial service staff to grant limited industrial service-conditional overlay (li-co) combining district zoning and platting commission recommendation: To approve limited industrial services-conditional overlay combining (li-co) district bb -- zoning, ready for consent approval on all three readings. 82. ben white zoning change - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 2104 west ben white boulevard westbou the applicant requested a postponement of this item to your november 8th meeting. 83 skies sh(rca) - shire's court - conduct a public hearing to amend a restrictive covenant for the property locally known as 1910 ½½ wickshire lane (country club east creek staff requesting a postponement of this item to your september 27th agenda. C14-2012-005- lot 2, block y circle c phase b section nineteen - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 10407-½½ dahlgreen avenue. This is to zone the property to community commercial-mixed use-conditional overlay (gr-mu-co) combining district zoning to community commercial-mixed -- to change the condition of zoning. The zoning and platting recommendation was to grant community commercial-mixed use-conditional overlay (gr-mu-co) combining district zoning, to change a condition of zoning, ready for consent approval on all three readings. I will note on your dais you have a revised map to clarify the tract number and it's yellow, it's in yellow. So with that I can offer it for consent approval on all three readings. 85. C14-2012-0063 - christian life austin - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 4700 west gate boulevard and 4701 sunset trail this is a christian life austin zoning case. One of the applicants that would be coming down to present had a medical emergency and was not able to be here tonight, so they've respectfully asked for postponement of this item. To your september 27th agenda. And so that concludes the item that I can offer for consent approval or postponement of -- this evening. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. So the consent agenda is to postpone items 73, 74, 75, UNTIL SEPTEMBER 27th. To [indiscernible] public hearing and approve on all three readings, item 76, 77, 78, close the public hearing and approve on first reading only, items 79 and 80. Close the public hearing approve on all three read, -- >> mayor, on item 80 there's a postponement request to OCTOBER 11th. >> 80. >> 80. Number 80. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay, correction. 80 Postpone until october 11th. And to -- to close the public hearing and approve on all three readings item 81, postpone item 82 UNTIL NOVEMBER 8th. Postpone item 83 until SEPTEMBER 27th. To close the public hearing and approve on all three readings -- readings item 84, and to postpone item 85 UNTIL SEPTEMBER 27th. So that's -- that's the consent agenda. Entertain a motion. Ment councilmember morrison moves approval. Seconded by the mayor pro tem. >> Discussion? >> Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Mayor, I need to recuse myself from items 73, 74 and 75. >> Mayor Leffingwell: 73, 74, 75. Okay. All in favor of the motion say aye. >> Aye. >> Mayor Leffingwell: All opposed say no? Passes on a vote of 6-0, councilmember spelman off the dais and councilmember tovo recused on 73, 74, 75. So that brings us to -- is this a quick discussion on 77, 78? Not -- >> 71, 72. >> 71, 72. 71. 01 - 603 west johanna street - conduct a 1 public hearing and approve an ordinance amending 020523-32, the bouldin creek neighborhood plan, an element of the imagine austin comprehensive plan. The zoning -- item 72, 72. C14-2012-0021 - polvo's parking offsite - conduct a public hearing and approve an ordinance amending chapter 25-2 of the austin city code by rezoning property locally known as 603 west johanna street (east bouldin creek watershed) from family residence-neighborhood plan (sf-3-np) combining district zoning to neighborhood office-mixed use-neighborhood plan (no-mu-np) combining district zoning. The applicant has requested a postponement to the september 27th meeting for both items 71 and 72. They are list -- their listed reason was that they -- it was at the advice of their legal counsel to postpone those items. Previously, this item came before you, the applicant i believe requested a postponement to your august 2nd agenda. The neighborhood came back and then asked that the case be postponed to the august 16th agenda. The agent at the time agreed to the postponement today. But is seeking a postponement today to the 27th. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Was there any opposition to the request? >> I believe that you have neighbors that are here that would like to speak to having the case heard today. Their representative, mr. Moncatta that was here earlier to speak on the applicant's behalf has left. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. So can we have three minutes for neighborhood representative to -- to -- or the agent to talk about why you oppose? >> Hi, mayor, council, david hartman, submit robertson law firm representing the adjacent landowner most affected by this applicant's request. There are leadership members of the bouldin creek neighborhood association here to speak as well should you so desire. This case was filed february of this year. Planning commission unanimously recommended against the applicant's request on may 22nd and as indicated the -- the postponement at the june 28th council the applicant made a request that we feel like the applicant had that request [indiscernible] my client requested a postponement to a day that my client was out of the country. He travels internationally for a major employer out of round rock. He will be out of the country for the next several weeks as well. We are all here ready to speak and the applicant didn't come in until about 45 minutes ago. Nobody was present for the applicant's representative or present until about 45 minutes ago. I just feel like it's the applicant manipulating the process to not get to the merits of the case. [Indiscernible] I would be happy to answer any questions. >> For clarification, do you have a question of -- I was just goingo ask so there's been one request for postponement by the applicant and one by the opposition. >> I think the last time that this was before you, there was a request by the applicant to postpone this UNTIL AUGUST 2nd. The neighborhood, it may have been also this adjacent property owner, said that they would like it postponed UNTIL THE 16th. Council granted the request to postponement this to the 16th. And so it brings us to where we are today. The -- the agent, mr. Moncotta indicated to me and rusthoven that he would like an additional postponement to september 27th. At the advice of legal counsel and then he left. >> Has the applicant been granted a postponement? >> I think at the last meeting the applicant asked for a postponement to the 2nd. The neighborhood asked for the 16th and there was a postponement granted. The applicant did agree to the postponement to today. That was made to the -- to the -- that was requested by the neighborhood. So, yes, the applicant received a postponement. The neighborhood received a postponement. But what council agreed to was a postponement date that the neighborhood requested -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: Two different postponements? >> There was a postponement made by the applicant. The neighborhood asked for IT TO BE THE 16th, BECAUSE They wouldn't be here on the 2nd so the council granted TO TODAY, THE 16th. >> Mayor Leffingwell: One postponement, has been granted to the applicant? Gotcha. All right. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: In fact, if i understood your chronology, it gave him more time than he originally asked for because he had requested a postponement to the 2nd and here we are on the 16th. So we had a -- he had a couple more weeks, in essence. >> Two more weeks, yes. >> Tovo: And he was here today. >> He was here earlier and left. >> Tovo: And the only reason he was requesting it was -- it wasn't a matter of not being able to attend because he had attended. So there wasn't a scheduling conflict. >> To be more specific on june 18th we received a letter from the applicant to postpone the hearing on june 28th to august 2nd. On june 28th we received a request from the barton creek neighborhood association to postpone the case that was on that day to AUGUST 16th. Bouldin creek. >> Bouldin creek, I'm sorry. >> ON JUNE 28th, THE CITY Council decided to postpone TO AUGUST 16th, IN OTHER Words they sided with the neighborhood for the longer request. But basically they both requested a postponement on JUNE 28th, THERE WAS A Difference in the dates. In the end the applicant said he was okay with the neighborhood's date of the 16th which is why we're here today. That's where we are. >>> Okay. 1. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Where we are now council, entertain a motion on the postponement, if the postponement is denied, we'll hear the case tonight, probably be much later tonight because we're going to have to recess here in a couple of minutes for live music and proclamations. So is there a motion? Councilmember martinez? >> Martinez: Since we don't have anybody here representing the applicant, I mean, I would hate to hear a case with them not here. I realize they understood it was on this agenda. >> The applicant has left. .. >> The applicant is here. So are you making a motion to grant the postponement, councilmember? >> They -- jerry, did they say what date they would like it to be postponed? >> YES, TO SEPTEMBER 27th. >> Oh, good -- I will move to postpone it until next week. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember martinez moves to postpone it until august 23rd. Is there a second for that motion? Seconded by councilmember riley. And I'll just say that I'm going to support that. This time only. If the applicant is not here ON THE 23rd, I AM GOING TO Support going ahead and hearing the case without the applicant. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: I don't know if we have other people signed in to speak to the postponement request. Are there other people here -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: We traditional allow only one. >> Tovo: Only hear one. May I ask a question of somebody in the audience. cathcart if you are will, are you expressing that you have a conflict in being here next week? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Please up come to the microphone to answer. We need to get you on record with your answer. >> Thank you, I'm sorry. Mayor pro tem, courage, my name is mark cathcart, i live at 605 west jo hannah street. I am the senior technical integration executive for a 4 billion acquisition being made. I am not here next week. I will be in canada. I have australia, china, russia, israel, germany and a whole bunch of others to do. We have been sent here today, we were here on time. The applicant didn't show up until after 4:00. If you would have been on time, which I understand that you couldn't be, they would have missed the hearing anyway. So I cannot be here next 4 billion -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: When could you be here? >> I can't say, sir. I honestly can't say. I will be here the week of labor day, both the week before and the week after on THE 7th. I know that you will be in beyond that, i really don't know. It's -- you know, this has been a major thorn in my side for the last five years. So I -- you know, I would ask you to hear this today. >> Mayor Leffingwell: The next council meeting would BE THE 27th. After -- that's after august 23rd would be the 27th is that correct? >> That's correct, mayor. >> You know, again, I would just point out, you know, last time we were here we 30 for the planning and zoning. I am paying for attorney's fees for this. You know, I'm not the applicant. I have paid for my attorney's fees again for another five hours, david is as good as he is, but, you know, they wouldn't have been here if you had been able to start on schedule. I don't see why you can't go ahead anyway. They hadn't requested a 00 when this was due to be heard, i don't understand. I couldn't run my business like this. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Well, we were in closed session until about 12:30. >> I do understand that. I'm not blaming you for this. >> I wouldn't -- trying to find a time when you both would be here. >> Tovo: Let me ask another, if I may, ask another question. Not necessarily of mr. Cathcart. I see some representatives from the neighborhood association here today. Are you also opposed to the postponement request? >> Thank you, brad patterson from the bouldin creek neighborhood association. Yeah, we are opposed to the request. As volunteers we've been sitting here today, and two and a half hours after the hearing is scheduled we're asked for a postponement, you know, as volunteers that's a difficult thing to do. I took off from work to be here today. At the same time, we had originally set this date so that the affected neighbor would come back from out of the country in order to be here. On a date that would work. So -- so, you know, whenever it gets postponed I'll have to come back. I mean if you hear it later tonight, I won't be here because I have other engagements tonight, too. None of that is your fault. So, yeah, we're opposed to it. This has been going on, the neighborhood planning hearings, planning commission, as far as I can tell, there's no changes, there's nothing new, they just want more time. So, yeah, we are opposed. >> Tovo: Thanks. guernsey, I want to clarify one point that you brought up. Or one point that was raised by the -- by the folks who came down here today. So the -- so the item is scheduled for 2:00 today. >> That's correct. >> And what time did you receive the request for postponement? >> I spoke to him verbally -- >> about an hour ago. >> Tovo:00 time frame. >> Probably about maybe 30 minutes before that, I spoke to the applicant on the phone and he indicated that he wanted a postponement. >> Tovo: Yeah, I would say that -- I mean, there are -- the request was made back in june, they've known for a good almost month and a half now that the hearing was happening today. We have got citizens who came down took off work to be here, it was scheduled for a date when one of the most affected property owners could be here. To me it's -- we haven't heard a good reason or any kind of pressing conflict that would enable -- that would prevent the representative for the applicant to be here. And frankly I -- I don't hear -- I haven't heard any good re postponing it. We have the people here today who would need to be part of that discussion as affected neighbors and affected neighborhood association. Since we have to break for live music anyway, that would give the staff a moncata and say please come down and speak to it. So I will not be supporting the motion. I think we should hear it tonight. >> Cole: Mayor, I have a question. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember morrison first. >> Morrison: Thank you, mayor. With this very tortious process that -- torturous process that we put people through, I won't support the motion, either. But if we can go forward and hear the neighbor, we have the option of ruling, postponing the item to the next meeting date. We have the option of closing the public hearing or not. And then asking folks if -- if it comes up on another date. So I think the in deference and respect to the folks here, I'm really, really concerned about -- about what I perceive to be an applicant just presupposing that automatically they're going to get a postponement in a situation like this. So I would prefer that we move so because I won't be able to support your motion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: I think that I said that was concerning to me, also, I'm just not going to make that judgment on my own, although I did say if it happens again. >> Morrison: Well, that's why I'm looking for a way to be able to respect the time of the take, that are here today and -- the time of the folks that are here today and the gentleman who won't be here next time. >> Mayor Leffingwell: I understand, there's a motion on the table, if that motion -- if the motion fails, then we will hear the case. Mayor pro tem? >> Cole: I would like to -- how many neighbors are here? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Just raise your hands. >> [Indiscernible] >> Cole: Because I really think that we need to recognize our responsibility and we're not on time and that creates problems for the neighbors and the applicant. And I know y'all didn't make that, but we just wants to make that absolutely clear and that's why it's difficult for me to make this decision because part of is if someone is really expecting us to be here at 00, that they should know we run longer, but still. I wanted to ask mr. Guernsey, is it possible for us to hear the testimony of the people that are here and -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: Let me answer that. I can answer that myself. The answer is we have a motion on the table, we have to act on that motion. If that motion fails, then we can hear from the public. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: If I might just add as councilmember morrison was saying, we could hear the testimony and decide at that point to postpone and wait for the applicant's representative to come next week. >> Mayor Leffingwell: If the motion -- if the motion to postpone fails we will hear the case and then we could, you are right, decide to postpone after that. And so before we vote on the motion, councilmember martinez, I think that you just heard from the applicant that he could not BE HERE ON AUGUST 23rd. The next available date is SEPTEMBER 27th. I just wanted to bring that to your attention. >> Martinez: No. That -- I don't think that was the applicant. That was the neighbor. >> Mayor Leffingwell: I meant the neighbor, sorry. >> Martinez: You know, we can hear it tonight, we're not going to hear it for several more hours. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Right. >> Mayor Leffingwell: But there is a motion on the table. So all in favor of the motion to postpone until AUGUST 23rd, SAY AYE. >> Aye. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no. >> No. >> Motion fails. On a vote of 2 to 4 with councilmember riley, tovo, morrison and mayor pro tem all voting no. So we will hear the case later tonight and -- and right now without objection we are going into recess for li proclamations. Signal so welcome to live music at the austin city council meeting. It's our great privilege to have a good group here tonight led by mayor gus garcia. [ Applause ] mayor garcia, served on the council for nine years, and he served as mayor from 2001 to 2003. He was the first hispanic elected to the austin school board. And was chosen by the greater austin hispanic chamber of commerce as their first ever lifetime achievement award recipient. He has a lot of things named for him. Garcia middle school, is named in his honor and gustavo gus l garcia park was named in his honor by the stay with us, we're very proud of that. He is embracing his inner sinatra by performing [laughter] with the music outreach volunteer entertainers or move. Move is a part of central texas association accordion association and has a mission to promote accordion music performances in and around austin. Organized in 2001, the members play once or twice a week, in a variety of places, and friends, relatives and club members join in to create a happy mixture of popular songs and mayor garcia adds a strong singing voice, stage presence and sense of humor to the ensemble. Please help me welcome gus garcia and the band! [ Applause ] >> thank you, mayor. The song we're going to sing is -- was written in the early part of the 20th century by one of the most famous mexican composer and song writerrers. Lorenzo [indiscernible] we will be singing the two of us, [indiscernible] is also a vocalist and I guess that you would call that for lack of a better term. So we're very happy to be here and we'll sing el rancho grande. [ ♪♪ Music playing ♪♪♪♪ ] >> put the cd, we're going to be recording one in the middle part of september and we'll get you one for the city records. City files. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Excellent. It will be ready september? >> Ready by mid september. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. So -- so we probably need about seven copies of that. >> Yes. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. And for anybody out there who would like to buy one, I'm sure that you'll be happy to make one for them. >> $15 Plus sales tax. >> Mayor Leffingwell: $15 and shipping an handling. [Laughter] well, I know a lot of you probably thought that mayor garcia was only up here singing because he's a famous man in austin and has a big nape. But now we saw that he also has a great voice, right? Let's give him one more big hand. [ Applause ] and I know you've seen these before, this is a proclamation. But this time it's in your honor, says be it known that whereas the city of austin is blessed with many creative musicians, whose talent extends to virtually every musical genre and whereas our music scene thrives because austin audiences support good music, produced by legends, local favorites and newcomers alike and whereas we are pleased to showcase and support our local artists, now there ever i lee leffingwell, mayor of the city of austin, texas, the live music capital of the world, do hereby PROCLAIM AUGUST 16th, 2012, Is gus garcia day in austin, texas. Congratulations, mayor! [ Applause ] >> thank you. A. >> Mayor Leffingwell: We're out of recess. And we will take back off the table the item number 20. We've begun to take public comment on this item. We'll continue with that. And I'll call the speakers out in order, in the order that they signed up. The next speaker is edward craig. Is edward craig here? Laura presley. Donating time is jose conter row. You have up to six minutes. >> First I want to say thank you for supporting the women's shelter. 24 Years ago I was a resident after women's shelter in houston with my two-year-old daughter, and it warms my heart that you're going to support that. So thank you. The next compliments are not going to be so -- the next comments are not going to be so complimentary, so bear with me on this one. Regarding the bond proposals on deck for our november 2012 elections, i want to bring up a few issues related to how we have historically managed and allocated our bond money. We as voters approved bond funds in 1998, 2006, 2010. And right now there remains over $350 million in unspent funds. This was brought up by councilmember spelman a few months ago, and I really appreciate the openness that you guys have dealt with on this. But if you look back from 1998 and 2000, there's about $62 million that's over 12 years old that we have not spent. And out of that 350 million that we have not spent, if you look at -- there's parks, open space, sidewalks, pools and street improvements that are included in that. Since these issues have been discussed in work sessions and also in bond committees, there is a rush to issue over $130 million in bonds next week that's on the agenda. As a voter, this is not acceptable to have approved critical funds and then to have city staff and council not held themselves accountable for implementing what we approved. And I would give a bye to councilmember tovo for this one for being on the dais for a year, I would hope that the others, rest of you, are a little more accountable for this. You know, inflation is 24% if look back over the last 10 years. And with that kind of -- the consequence of us holding $62 million that's 12 years old, we've lost at least 24 to 25% of that bond value. That's a big deal. What I want to ask you guys is that you know, you were probably caught off guard by this and I want to give you a little leeway on it, but 350 million has gone unspent. My question is what systems and policies are you guys putting into place for yourselves and for the staff to be accountable so that we use and apply these bond funds and we as voters have approved. I spent 17 years in private industry, and if this had happened in the business groups that I've worked in, we would realize that something different needs to happen. There needs to be a system in place to review this stuff on a periodic basis. And we need your leadership on this. We need your policy setting on this. And I'd like to pose the question of what's going to be done going forward because I think we need some help. Thank you. Next speaker is susana almanza. >> Good afternoon mayor and city councilmembers. I'm susana almanza with poder and also with the montopolis neighborhood association. And I'm here today to support putting the bond initiative on the november 6, 2012 election. I also want to let you know that we're supporting the bond funding for the new montopolis recreation center, which supports the funding for dove springs and also for the affordable housing. The other issue I would like to address is the whole social equity issue. We also believe that (indiscernible) also should be funded. It's only four of the museums in the whole united states that addresses the mexican-american arts and culture and the history. It has a very rich value in our communities, bringing art and education and the cultural experience. And so when we look at the whole issue of the bond issues dating back to its inception, we all know that people of color in east austin have not received its fair share of bond funding money. Traditionally that's been set aside for other things because traditionally we're supposed to get all the federal funds. And I ask you to look back -- I see that there are two studies totaling almost seven million that can probably be postponed, and some of that funding used. I know that the universities are very capable in their different programs that they have to do a lot of studies that we should explore those alternatives. A lot of times the studies are done and then the actual implementation is not done until many years later. So I am offering a suggestion that you fund mexicarte museum and that you look at possibly transforming those fundings from those studies to make that happen. Thank you so much for your time. >> Tovo: Mayor? Just a quick one. Thanks, ms. almanza. Which were the line items that you were talking about? >> I saw one with the bridge study and I think that was three million. And then there was another study for design for four million. >> >> Tovo: And do you happen to remember which project that was? >> It was a group design project and it was -- >> Tovo: I think it was new design. I know which category you're talking about now, new design, something like that. Thank you for those suggestions. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Next speaker is lucky lamoe. >> Good evening, mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. Yes, my name really is lucky lamoe. I'm her in two capacities, one as friends of the dougherty arts center as well as a mother of a six-year-old boy whose life was transformed by the dougherty in the preschool arts program. So passionate about both. I'm here today to ask for the councils continued commitment to support the four million dollars allocated in the upcoming bond election to support the rebuilding of the dougherty arts center. You know, it's not really a question of value or love. I think the city is well aware that the dougherty arts center has been a mainstay of this community and the arts community for over 40 years. It's unique because it is community-based and it does provide affordable and accessible arts programs and services to all austinites, children and adults. It serves over 200,000 customers a year. So the value isn't the question. And the need isn't really a question. The building is over 65 years old and I'm not minuting words when I say it's decrepit. Pipes are actually falling into the landfill, it's built over a former landfill. There are rats and you can smell the rat feces and urine when the air conditioning system goes out, which is frequently. Holes to the outside of the building. And there was an assessment done in 2010 which documents this. So I can't understate how bad the building is in disrepair. It's not a question of value or need, but it is a question of funding. And I will say that I asked the council to continue their commitment for the four million dollars in the bond election package of the nine million it's going to take. The friends of the dougherty arts center does have the capacity. We are a group of citizens gaining strength everyday who are committed to gaining funds and opportunities for funding to make this a reality. And just in closing I need to say that I've been here all day and I've let somebody else take care of my six-year-old son. If I wasn't passionate about this and see what a difference it has made in my son's life. My son was four and he didn't care about art, markers, scissors, took him to the preschool program because I could afford it and he was there and he transformed overnight. And the light bulb went off. He lives art and drama. He draws all the time, burns up markers. We go through so much paper and tape in my house, you can't believe the and I'm standing here today because I really believe in the dougherty arts center and I'm not the only one in love that loves this beloved institution. I really do ask council and appreciate your consideration for the four million dollars, the funding to rebuild the center because it canned take any more band-aids. It needs help. I thank you very much for your support and I'll entertain any questions. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. (Indiscernible) cavasas. >> Good evening, mayor and councilmembers. My name is perla cavasas. And I want to first thank you for your service and for doing this hard work. There's so many just great projects and I know it's a really tough decision to make to decide which of the items will be put on the ballot in november. I'm here specifically to speak about -- in support of a few, I want to ask for your support. First is the housing bond. Just think so much for adding that to the package and for adding it at a level that's higher than the last bond elections. I also wanted to briefly state that I support also the project at dove springs and montopolis. I want to also add that I'm asking for your support for the mexicarte museum. I know that it was not included in the vote yesterday, but I just really want to ask that you give it careful consideration. It's not just a museum to me. It's something that I'm very -- I take great pride in. As a member of the latino community, mexicarte has been around for nearly 30 years, and it's been just a fantastic vessel for sociocultural advancements of the latino community. It's played such a large role over the years in creating just a better appreciation and understanding for the contributions of latinos to our communities. And honestly, it's also played a large role in improving our quality of life. And decreasing prejudice against latinos. As an example, I think about the della des mortes and how fantastic that's been with people coming from all over to celebrate this cultural tradition. And it's bridging east austin to downtown. You may be aware people gather up and they walk across about a mile from plaza saltillo to downtown and thousands of people come and enjoy and celebrate that. Soy really do think that it has more than just the value of an everyday museum. And in this day when latino communities are associated with high teen pregnancy and juvenile delinquency, and unfortunately I can't stand to hear all that stuff, but mexicarte is a positive for our community. And it's something that we can be proud of and I just ask for your support for mexicarte and putting it on the bond for november. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Thank you. Octavio hinojosa. >> Good evening, mayor, good evening, mayor pro tem, city councilmembers. I'm honored, delighted to have this opportunity to speak on behalf of mexicarte museum. Let me first start off by saying a few words of thanks and appreciation for your service and dedication to austin. City councilmembers, I am a new austinite. I recently moved here to austin from san antonio, but I would like to say that i came from washington, d.c. I was attracted to austin for a number of reasons. The quality of life, economic opportunities, its diverse culture, and I'm here to give a few words of support and appreciation for this important institution which I have benefitted and so have not only members of my family, but a key group of citizens in our community. And I'm speaking of students, the future labor force of austin. I'm honored to head up an organization called the hispanic scholarship consortium, a nonprofit organization which provides scholarship, mentorship support to students who are of hispanic heritage here in austin and travis county. I'm delighted to share with you that over80% of our students go on to graduate from college. The reason why I bring this up is because recently our organization held a reception in honor of our students who have received their scholarships and it was held at mexicarte museum. And I was aston initialed to learn that for the majority of them who are here locally, it was the first time visiting this museum. It says a lot when a community is proud to share its diversity, its heritage. And when we have students who are not seeing themselves reflected in our institutes of art, culture and education, I consider that as a red flag. I would like to ask for your consideration in supporting mexicarte and this bond for think of the positive economic impact this will have on the local community. If you each have had the opportunity to visit in spain, the guggenheim there, you would learn and come to appreciate that this museum was built at a moment when this particular city was in distress. There was great leaders, great visionary and they put together this amazing museum which immediately led to a positive economic impact to the city. The museum cost 87 million euros to build and within its first year it generated directly 100 million euros in tax revenues. Austin needs a guggenheim effect to take place here. We see folks coming in from all parts of the state, all parts of the country, and internationally to come visit austin. As I said, I am a new austinite. And I'm delighted to share with my family and friends who come visit me the downtown experience. And particularly those prepareds and family who visit me from abroad. It is a pleasure to be able to walk down the street of congress and not only show them the capitol, the historic district, but point out here is a museum that reflect the cultural heritage of 35%. One out of three austinites. Again, I encourage your support and appreciate this opportunity. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Elizabeth baskin. Ken howard. Ken howard. [One moment, please, for change in captioners] .. to plug in his nebulizer. He said, you know, our car didn't have an electricity plug. We need affordable housing. We need permanent supportive housing. And we're here and we'll be here until your work is done. So if you have any questions, there's folks in the room that will help you answer them. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Paul scott? Following paul will be frank fernandez. 123450 Good evening, mayor, mayor pro tem, and city council members, my name is paul scott. I'm executive director of aids services of austin, but aim here primarily as vice chair of one voice central texas, which is our community's organization of health and human services organizations representing over 63 organizations. Ranging from workforce development to basic needs to health literacy to specialized care in our community. And I wanted to -- to state that we met in our membership meeting today and unanimously approved our support of the affordable housing component of the bond initiative. And we know how important affordable housing is. In serving the community and making sure that the people that we serve have access to public transportation, which is centered into -- the center part of our city. And we know how critical it is, affordable housing is to maintaining people in health care, maintaining them in their employment and maintaining a really vibrant city. You should have a copy of the letter approved by the membership. I would like to read it to you now. Dear mayor leffingwell and city council members, and you you finalize the bond package, one voice central texas and its members, we understand that you have a difficult decision to make. But we strongly urge you to 8 for affordable housing. We view this am as the minimum -- amount as the minimum acceptable amendment for safe and stable housing for the elderly, disabled, other populations needing support. Our letter to you of april 9th advocated for 110 million, then our letter to you of july 16th urged support for 100 million. 8 must be preserved for affordable housing. With looming federal and state cuts, this bond offers a unique opportunity for our community to provide affordable housing and home repair. Affordable housing is at the core of providing disability to the vulnerable nature of the clients we serve and to leveraging the success of the many resources our agencies commit to this population. We urge you to maintain at 8 million for affordable housing, signed john mcnabb, chairne voice of central texas. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Frank fernandez. >> I'm sarah andre, frank is on his way, may we switch places in the queue. >> Are you mandy? >> No. >> Sarah. >> Yes, sir. >> My name is sarah andre, i am a long-term advocate and practitioner in housing, since 1994. I have worked to increase affordable housing here in austin. For those of you who don't know me, I specialize in housing finance. In the past eight years i have worked on about 650 million in projects. I remember when being an affordable housing housing advocate in austin was something like being a communist in the mccarthy era, there were lots of secret meetings in basements and you whispered and you were very unpopular. But today the majority of our voters polled say that they support, they are concerned about affordable housing and that same majority says that they support bonds for affordable housing. I know you have many competing interests. And there are many ways to spend our tax dollars, all of which are important, but today I you to think about the following things. I encourage you to vote for parks and open space. And without affordable housing people will need to camp there. I encourage you to vote for a hospital and without decent safe housing, more people will need to go there for their primary care. I encourage you to vote for roads and when our workforce moves to buda, kyle, dripping springs and san marcos, we will need more roads. I left out our neighbors to the north because they are all working on moratoriums against multi-family housing which is the primary source of affordable housing. 8 Is a small price to pay to inoculate austin against the plagues that an unaffordable city will bring on itself. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Isabel headrick. Following isabel will be bob nix. >> Mayor leffingwell and councilmembers, good evening. My name is isabel headrick, I'm speaking to you as a member of the choda round table and a private citizen. I'm no longer with black land community development corporation, but much of what I have to say with you tonight is formed by my experience with the homeless and very low income folks who benefited from the services of black land community development corporation. I am asking you tonight to maintain your support for 8 million in affordable housing bonds. Affordable housing as we know needs more -- much more than that. It needs $2 billion just to take care of the needs of people who are earning -- households earning under $20,000 a year. If we took into account everybody else, we would be talking more like $5.6 billion. So the needs are vast. They are huge. And in the context of these deep federal cuts, we really need all of the dollars that we can to work on this problem. The affordable housing bonds address housing needs across the spectrum. Home ownership, rental, permanent supportive housing and home repair. Housing trust fund dollars are not a substitute for affordable housing go bonds. They serve very important purposes, but they do not substitute from one another. Housing trust funds provides flexible funding for attend-based rental assistance and down payment assistant. Go bonds do not do this. Go bonds are used for acquisition and development. And serve purposes that htf also doesn't do. Also, housing trust fund has historically not been reliably funded at the levels we need it to be funded at. So that is why I ask you to maintain your support. The 2006 go bonds have been an incredible success. There's less than a million dollar remaining. We constructed nearly 3400 developed units and really stuck with our core values that we had established at the beginning. So I'm asking you to continue the support for building on that success. Finally, I want to say thank you guys very much. I know this has been a grueling process for all of you and I really appreciate all of the work you're putting into it. Thanks a lot, have a good evening. >> Following bob nix will be ed McHorse on the other side. Welcome. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers, thank you for your time, inreallifully requesting that the council continue to work towards finding a way to put the 360 area fire station back in the bond package. The 360 area fire station will be located just south of the colorado river. This is a high wildland risk area on all of the windland risk maps that we have seen. A recent one came out about a month ago from texas forest service in travis county. In fact I consider it the epicenter of whilefire land risk in austin. Simply drive through the area and see for yourself, all along 360 you will see beautiful trees and rolling landscapes, I see fuel and access issues, an area where all of the conditions exist for a massive wildfire. Sounds like fear mongering, I guess it is to an extent, but it's a real risk and we've been talking about it for years and we need to deal with it in some real way. Given high fuel load, high density of homes, hilly topography, long emergency response times this is the perfect setting for a future massive fire. This area is currently underserved with regards to initial response and also the time it takes to assemble an effective firefighting force. These studies have been done by internal firefighter staffers, not by myself, some of them have been provided to you, most of the councilmembers that I have spoken to agree that the risk is great, but the question quickly becomes where does the money come from? The current bond package stands right now at $380 million the way I understand it. The 360 area fire station funding would be 7 million, the funding level for the 360 area fire 2% of the $3.8 million package. Earlier this week, I thought we were able to identify funding for that stay. There was an attempt -- for that station. There was an attempt to lower the funding on the police substation, the thought was, at least i thought, that some of that money would go to fund this fire station. That money was quickly reallocated to other areas. I'm very respectful and appreciative of the work that council does and the duty you have to balance the city's many competing needs. However the 360 fire station 2% of the back and the need is great and everybody seems to agree to that. Please, let's roll up our sleeves and find a way to place the station back on the ballot. Begin, councilmembers, thank you -- again, councilmembers thank you for your time, any questions. >> Martinez: Bob, just a point of reference, we are actually at 385, just under 385 million. If we were at 380 I think we could find the votes to get the fire station put back in pretty easy. So it's subtle but it's a major difference. >> 385. >> We are at -- just under 385. 384.89 Something like that. >> That would lower the percentage then, closer to one percent. >> Martinez: But we will work on this here shortly once we get to the end of the public discussion. >> I appreciate your consideration, thank you. >> Morrison: Mayor? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember morrison? >> Morrison: I do have a question. Could you walk through the numbers with me that you're talking about in terms of how much is needed and what that's actually going to cover? >> I'm sorry, can you repeat that? >> Morrison: The numbers that we're looking at, how much is needed and what's that actually going to cover in terms of acquisition, design, all of that? >> The numbers needed in terms of dollars on the bond package? >> Morrison: Uh-huh. >> That's a lowered amount 3 for the land acquisition design. The total buildout of the station. What we're asking now in an attempt to compromise and bring the panel down is 7 million which would be for land acquisition and design. >> Morrison: How does that break down. >> Pardon me? >> How does that break down. >> I will get that number for you, but I don't have that available here. >> Morrison: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember tovo? >> Air and council, assistant cheer of the austin fire department. I actually have the breakdown here with me. The cost that we have through the public works spreadsheet comes down to 5 million, that's -- that's land and design. Doesn't include infrastructure. That's just to get us started. >> Mayor Leffingwell: How much of that is land and do you have a specific piece of land identified? >> Land would be about 2.3. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Do you have a specific site located? >> We have a general area. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So you are just estimating that cost. >> That is correct. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. >> Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: Thanks for that information, I appreciate it and I wonder if you could tell me how far this station would be from the closest? I know we spoke about it the other day and I had that nix, too, perhaps between the two of you -- >> looking at our desired location of where we would put a loop 360 fire station, the distance, approximate distance from station 32, which is addressed off of mount bellless o road, about a mile away from barton 9 miles, 6 miles away. Mount bonnell road. Station 31 addressed off of 2222 near the county line, we're looking at 5.5 miles. >> Tovo: Okay, thanks. >> You're welcome. >> Mayor Leffingwell: [Indiscernible] following spence surduran on the other side. >> Good evening, mayor pro tem, councilmembers, my name IS ed McHorse, I'm here on behalf of board chair for echo and also as the chair of your permanent supportive housing leadership finance committee. We may need to rename that by the way because I have trouble with that. You all know where we are on this. You know that from supportive housing is the key element of the affordable housing package, we have talked about numbers before, why this is important. 8 number is a number that allows it all to come together. Thank you for getting to that number and I'm hopeful that you will stay at that number in two more votes and we can then be talking about how we in the affordable housing community can make that a reality, both in terms of passage and of the construction. But I wanted to remind you of that, but also just make sure that if there were any questions about how permanent supportive housing fits into this, I am available and would be available to answer those. >> Mayor Leffingwell: A question for you maybe here, councilmember riley. >> Riley: I do have one question on that last point that you mentioned about how [indiscernible] meet our permanent supportive housing 8 number. Would that allow us to stay on track of the 350 permanent supportive housing units. >> Yeah, we believe it would. We've had conversations within the housing community about where that breakout is. I'm very comfortable that 8 numbers allow for affordable housing -- permanent supportive housing to be built within that range, to meet that goal, 2014 will also allow it to continue to be a part of the process and building to continue. >> Thanks for all of your efforts. >> Martinez: I wanted to know if you knew within that 70 plus million allocation, I was given the anecdotal information that 350 units would consume probably 50 to 55 million to build those units. I just want to know if you guys talked about that and knowing that if we did all 350 units in this bond package, there would be very little, maybe a third of that remaining for other affordable housing. >> Right. >> That's a good question. The best source that I can give you on that, if you go back to your report from the phs leadership council, it talks about the funding to get to the remainder of the 350. Whereas about 228 right now, and if you look at the chart, we do not expect that the city bond would fund 100% of any units. So the numbers are probably correct in terms that you have been hearing in terms of 55 million that would be necessary to build 350. The go bonds are a small part of that. [Indiscernible] private financing, the package comes together, that's the way those two numbers come together. >> Thank you. >> Cole: I have a question. MR. McHORSE WE TALKED About the fact that the 350 units are just until 2014. What are -- has there been any estimates about past that date? >> There have. When the city council requested analysis of the p [indiscernible] need back in late 2009 or early 2010, the need is just slightly under 2,000. Since that time, we as a community have got 248 that are in the pipeline in process, so the need like for most of these projects is huge. The idea is that -- that we would get to 2014 and we would have some infrastructure in place, some proven track records in place to be able to continue to fund and continue the success that psh does provide. >> Cole: I know that we are only talking right now about the capital side. One of the things that we want to make sure happens when we approve bonding for permanent supportive housing is that we are also able to secure the support services. Can you talk a little bit about some of the plans for that. >> Sure. There's two components to that. One is the rental support and a lot of the rental support comes from vouchers , or housing authority under the plan that we have adopted or recommended, rather. So that's the -- that's the -- the case management, the mental health, substance abuse is a mix. Right now we are -- we are very dependent upon some 1115 waiver money. That process is still kind of in -- in -- being defined on the federal level, but we're working with central health and with the hospital and with -- with integral care to help design some programs to try to pull down some of that match money that can then be used to address some of these needs. The total amount for the 350 units, the total amount on an annual basis for the -- for the services is -- is 4 million. So it's a manageable number that between about 2 million on the -- on the medicaid waiver side and then the other sources we have it's very manageable. >> So our approval of these bonds would coordinate with what central health is trying to do with this bond election as far as the permanent supportive housing is concerned? >> I think they play well together because health care is such an important part of resolving the homeless issues, especially the chronic homelessness. I'm not sure that I can say that medical -- [indiscernible] but it is really important because it says that we understand the importance of health care to the community and to the civility of the system and i do think that, this is just me personally, I do think that you will see an increase in the ability to provide those services if you've got something like the medical school here driving the medical community. >> Cole: Thank you, mr. McHORSE. >> Thank you all. >> Cole: Our next speaker is spencer durant. >> Thank you. I want to thank you all for your continued work on making sure that any affordable housing package that moves forward does reserve a place for low income people in our city. You know, as you guys take the crucial next steps for this, please keep in mind that -- as we do grow and prosper, we are actually pricing people out of their homes. I get many, many phone calls every day of people that are not only looking for affordable housing, but also housing that is physically accessible. Something that you just don't find in the regular housing market. Affordable housing and accessible housing is kind of the specialty of the non-profit affordable housing community. And the context of this bond package is really important as well. Nhcd is looking at having 40% of their home funds slashed. And the current city budget as presented doesn't come in and make nhcd whole. So we are having to shift money around on the local level all the while low income people with disables continue to languish on long waiting list and all that we basically too is refuse around to one -- do is refer around to one another, have you called them, have you called them? People are just completely at a loss of what this he do. At the community development corporation meeting, the austin tenant's council mentioned that a recent survey of theirs found that 95% of all for-profit rental housing providers don't even accept section 8 vouchers. It's time for the non-profit affordable housing development community and also for-profit folks that could put down affordable units to step in and to bridge that gap and actually put down some units that people can afford. And as a local industry, we're ready. We have the capacity, it's been demonstrated in our membership. The need is there. We need funding. These funds perform in a way that -- that not a lot of other funding streams can. These go bonds can be used for sticks and bricks and things that could actually, you know, build and develop housing and they can also be used for home repair and a lot of other things. It's the most flexible funding source we have. It's been crucial. In 2006 it was instrumental in bringing in $4 of outside investment for every one dollar in go bond. So this is something that's not as, you know, not just the right thing to do, for some of our neighbors, but it's an economic development activity. And I just hope all of you all keep that in mind as we move forward in the next couple of days in making a final decision. >> Cole: Thank you. Edwin jordan and after that will be will mcleod. Edwin jordan. >> Good evening, mayor, who is missing and honorable my name is ed jordan, I'm a native austinite. I grew up here, fourth generation texan, et cetera, et cetera. I am an artist. I am speaking for mexic-arte museum. I have been volunteering down there for oh, 10, 15 years. Doing everything from fundraising to emptying trash sacks and what have you. It is a building that needs to be worked on. It is just -- we can't use the upper floors. There's nothing historic about it. I understand there is a wall somewhere in it that somebody historical. But nobody knows where it is. The new building designed by the architect is, if it to comes to fruition, is going to be an incredible iconic destination place for austin. It's the f 1 of art museums if you want to say. I made that up. Gets to go be wonderful, you all have seen pictures of it. What else do I have to say? I can't read my notes. I have bad handwriting even though I'm an artist. It should be economically very sound eventually for austin because we're going to get more tourists here. I've had enough with residents, we near more tourists, people who come and go. I don't mean that .. Take it as you will. .. austin is a fantastic place, I've lived here all of my life. I love it and I'm in the same house that I grew up in. I have the same telephone number my daddy got in 1913 when he came here from fredericksburg. So I'm not a fly by night. I'm not going to be leaving tomorrow without help. So please help us support mexic-arte. It would be a good investment dollar for you, i think, in the long run. And it's needed in austin, that museum really needs us. Needs money and needs more people, you all need to come down there more often, too. We have wonderful shows, wonderful programs, the outreach to the schools is absolutely amazing. We didn't have anything like that when I was at pease or allan or austin high. But the stream of school children coming in through the museum, seeing the various exhibits is just really, really wonderful. We need more of that in austin. And I can't think of anything else, okay. Thank you all very much for your time. >> Cole: Thank you, mr. Jordan. >> Tovo: Can I ask one quick economy, please. I have a quick question for you. It's not related to your testimony. I appreciate your being here and thank you for your testimony about the museum. Did I hear you say that your telephone number is 100 -- almost 100 years old? >> Next year. >> That is amazing, very interesting. Someone should write a story about that. >> The jordans go to somewhere and stay there. They went to fredericksburg and stayed a long, long time, from 1846 until dad came here in 1913, I'm here, I have lots of family here. >> Tovo: Very neat, thanks again for your testimony about the museum. >> Thank you. >> Cole: Thank you, mr. Will mcleod. Is that well, for the record, I've had any phone number since 1997 and v forwarded it through numerous carriers. Still a san antonio area code. Let's see, where was I going to say, about the pond panel, we have $350 million in the previous bond package. It's not being spent. How is that money going to be spent? Actually, I take that back, 89 million or something like that. We need an answer. I urge voters not to vote for this proposal unless all of the previous money is spent, preferably on sidewalks and accessibility. Parks are a want. Mobility is a need. Oh, and by the way, john eastman of public works told me that there is not any resources to finish sidewalks. Maybe it's time he be shown the door. We are 350 plus million in bond money you do have the resources. Some of these projects on the bond package need -- to not be spent as we have private and non-profit entities that can help out. Like for example mexic-arte. Several museums rely on donations, such as the witty museum in san antonio. Knowing that I oppose such public taxpayer support. We need our streets repaired and more sidewalks. Any date on exactly when are we going to make sidewalks on all arterial streets? We need a deadline. Some of the bond money could also be used to help [indiscernible] capital metro bus routes operational without a service cut. Two of you councilmembers serve on capital metro board. Please don't sell us out. Councilmember morrison, you saw the video, my lacking compliance street known as murdo circle, how are we going to fix this mobility problem, are we going to fix this mobility problem and if so when? I would like some form of answer tonight? Any takers on that one? And also someone mentioned about housing needs. I support a housing voucher program. For ssi and ssdi recipients as well as tanf as well. $100 Million can give a lot of supplemental money to cover the high cost of rent versus only build 300 low income housing where who knows where they would be, what bus line they would be on if they would be on the bus line, thank you very much. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Frank fernandez. >> Good evening, thank you for letting me switch places. I want to say thank you for all of the work that you guys have been doing. Having been part of the task force I know the task that you have before you. First I want to express my support for the package that you all came up with yesterday in terms of trying to balance the different competing needs because i think that I mentioned before you try to find some final agreement, you are not all going to be happy but trying to get all of these competing needs. Second I want to also express the support for the housing, affordable housing bonds that you are proposing. I think again it's trying to strike that right balance. I think what we need in the community is as I've tried to express before, I think some of the other speakers expressed to you, one of the biggest challenges is the income inequality and asset inequality we are seeing that is growing, affordable housing is one of the main main mechanisms that we have as a city to try to address that. It dictates where you live. That really dictates what kinds of opportunities that you have access to. I can't understate the importance of the affordable housing bonds in addressing that particular issue. Then the last thing that i w encourage you all to do, as part of this process you guys can be contemplating different community based projects, there are a lot of great community based projects. One of the things that we tried to do as a task force is really make it as apples to apples as we could relative to the other projects that we were considering, which meant trying to run it through the same due diligence process. We had staff do that for us as we were considering the various projects that were before us. As you consider those projects, I would encourage you to get staff feedback on that because we did get a lot of good information that I think would be helpful in the decision making process that you guys are going through, thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: That's all of the speakers that we have, councilmember martinez? >> Martinez: Thanks, mayor. I assume that we're going to -- some folks are going to try to make some amendments tonight. I'm going to go ahead and move approval on second reading what was adopted yesterday on first reading but I do have two amendments that I'm going to pitch as well. >> Cole: I'll second that motion for discussion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Motion by councilmember martinez. Seconded by mayor pro tem cole. And councilmember do you want to offer your suggestions. >> Martinez: I will say that we'll just follow the same procedure that we did during work session, just for those in the audience, when an amendment is offered, I will ask if there's any objection to that. If there is, we will vote on the amendment. If there's no objection, it will just be incorporated. >> Martinez: I want to be real brief because I know everybody has been here a long time today. But as frank just said as many have said, there's a lot of competing interests. Not everything is going to make it in. But there are some that -- some of us feel like we just need to try so we're going to try on second and we're going to try on third and we're going to eventually get to a package that we're all going to get behind and pass in november because there are many good things in here. The ones that happen to get left out this round we will go right back to work in trying to figure out a way to support those projects either in a subsequent bond package down the line or even through our general fund if possible. So my first amendment is to -- by the way, these amendments will maintain the exact 385, I will not be making motions to take us above that. So it will be to reduce the recreation facilities line item by 3 million, and reduce the parks land acquisition line item -- before I make this motion, i need to check my figures. By two million. Creating a debt capacity of 5 million that I move would be directed towards mexic-arte museum. >> A neutral amendment to reduce recreational facility by 3 million, park acquisition by 2 million, add 5 million for mexic-arte museum. Is there objection? >> Mayor, I will not -- i will not do a friendly amendment -- I guess that i will say I will not be supporting the reduction to the parkland acquisition. >> Mayor Leffingwell: All right. So we will have a vote on that item. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: I would like to ask question. I will not be supporting this motion. I do want to get some information from staff. About the recreational facilities. That could be included withing that bond item. If I'm looking at the right line item for recreational facilities we do have $10 million, that takes us down almost about a third, wonder if you could give us some sense of the recreational facilities that have been discussed by the task force, also if you have the number ready, if not I'll find it in my list what the needs assessment for this area was. Actually, I just found the needs assessment. I think the needs assessment was somewhere in the neighborhood of $15 million, I will point out to my colleagues this was an item that was supported at $10 million -- $10 million recommendation by the task force and a $10 million recommendation by the city manager, there was no -- there was no difference in terms of the recommendations, they were both consistent and -- in their recommendation that we needed at least 10 million in that budget or line item. >> Mayor council, good evening, marty stump, parks and recreation department, office of cip, the line item is intended to be a program fund budget for aquatics facilities, renovation playscape, play area, children play renovation as well as sports field and sports courts, so this is the program budget that would be applied department-wide to address the needs that we have throughout the department. >> Can you give us some sense of the geographic scope. These are as I understand the backup information and -- both the parks acquisition as well as the recreational facilities. These would go city-wide in terms of filling needs. >> That's correct, these two program budgets apply city-wide, whereas the other program under metropolitan parks, district park, have named projects very specifically located. But these particular items, recreation facilities and land acquisition do apply city-wide. >> Tovo: And land acquisition, this is the parks acquisition line. >> That is correct for parkland. >> Can you remind me where we started in terms of a recommendation on that? >> The original needs assessment started at 7 million. Through the work of the committee reduced to 4 million. There's been a lot of discussion on the land acquisition fund certainly that would apply city wide and particularly to infill land acquisition to -- to -- in response to the work of the urban park work group, infill park development needed particularly in the urban core. >> Tovo: So this is $4 million of measure on the table would cut that by 50% down to two million? Okay, all right, thanks, these are -- you know, i hate to -- I hate to consider these issues together. I think -- I would like to find some opportunities and I know that I've got at least one suggestion, but i will like to find some opportunities to find some funding for mexic-arte museum, but I think these are two very important categories of funding. They will aid people city-wide. There are areas of our city that have lots of, you know, enormous growth in the number of children and families with children, some of our older apartment complex, these are neighborhoods that are exploding and they don't have a safe park within certainly within walking distance, sometimes not even any kind of close proximity, I think these are really important bodies of money to preserve. And I hope we can work collectively to try to identify some other funds that might be available for mexic-arte. >> Cole: I also want to support for mexic-arte museum. I know that it is a wonderful board, a lot of wonderful people pushing this project and supporting, I support the museum, also, I know that you received bond funding in 2006 and are having some challenges with the city and actually getting that taken care of. I plan on bringing a resolution next week to help that process. But I am also like councilmember tovo just torn with not wanting to make the cuts to the other recreation department or to parkland acquisition. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember martinez. >> Morrison: I just wants to briefly -- >> Martinez: I want to briefly state why I have chosen these line items because that's critical at well. The $10 million is really for what I believe is ongoing o and m, so we should be fundness it out of our budget not out of bonds because it is repair and upgrades, maintenance, would he do this in bond package, I'm not being critical, we have to take care of our facilities as well. But we continue down this habit of funding o and m costs through bonds and i believe and I think many folks would agree that's really not what bonds are intended for. The other, parks acquisition space, again, no specific identified acquisition is denied by reducing this fund and it doesn't mean we can't make up other acquisitions through cos, which is something we normally do on a regular basis when an opportunity comes up. That's the only reason that I identified these two as areas where we could create a little bit of debt capacity. Signal just let me say assuming that's true, that this is $10 million for o and m, I agree with councilmember martinez, i don't think that's the purpose of bonds. I realize there's a great need there, number one. And number two, if there are not identified tracks to be bought, as something presents itself, to do that in the future, I would just add -- probably it would have to be a great opportunity for me to support acquisition of additional parkland given the fact that we're not doing a good job of taking care of what we have right now. I think that should be the first priority in the budget. Taking care of the property that we have right now. Councilmember morrison? >> Morrison: Yeah, I just want to chime in briefly. I think that it's important to keep in mind that we as a council have adopted a -- a park resolution, a parkland resolution that said that we want everyone within the central area to be within a quarter of a mile and everyone within -- anywhere in austin to be within a half mile of a park. So I think that that sort of act sent waits the need -- accentuates the need because it is working towards a policy. I also would like to, I'm a little concerned about having this suggestion we're using bond funds for o and m. I wonder maybe mr. trimble. I know that maybe sometimes there's difficult lines to draw, I wonder if you could just comment on that, mr. Trimble. >> Mike trimble, capital planning officer. So my understanding, as a matter of fact I was just talking to marty about this, is that improvement that are contemplated under the recreational facilities program are a little more extensive than the typical repairs that you could do under your operating budget. These are more extensive renov to the pools, play scapes, some of the other items than what marty was mentioning, I think that's important to note. Yeah, we would definitely be using capital dollars to work for capital needs. >> Mayor Leffingwell: And I just have to respond to the previous comment about the council resolution. I'm certainly aware of that, I supported it at the time. I still support I however there's no time table affixed to that, I think we have to slow that process down a bit until we are able to take care of what we have, which we are not able to do right now. Any other comments before we vote. >> Martinez: I just wants to affirm that it is o and m expenditures, they may be extensive. You can add the word extensive to the end of it, but it's still repair and upgrades of existing facilities. That's my whole point of this. With making this statement. I realize that we have needs. I get it, marty. I know that you need way more than 10 million bucks. But again, we're trying to squeeze everything we possibly can into this envelope and I'm just trying to get creative. >> Understood. To echo what mike said, in terms of playscape, you know, this is wholesale replacement of existing facilities. We have equipment that is aging, non-compliant, not in keeping with new and innovative philosophy and design in play scapes, this isn't a coat of paint, isn't replacements of nuts and bolts, wholesale replacements of entire play environment, I did want to reiterate that. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So all in favor of incorporating the amendment say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed say no. >> [Indiscernible] >> motion fails on a vote of 3-3 with -- with councilmember tovo, councilmember morrison and mayor pro tem cole votin no. >> Martinez: All right. The second one is to take the exact same two lines, since we wouldn't allocate them to mexic-arte and we 7 instead of 5 million, I guess, keep the land acquisition at 2.3. 7 and apply it to the acquisition and design of the fire station on 360, which I believe is also sorely needed. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Could you give me your downs, your minuses. >> 3 Million on rec facility, 2 point, what 7 on land acquisition. >> Mayor Leffingwell: For the fire station? >> Martinez: Correct. >> Mayor Leffingwell: 360 area. Anyone object to that? >> Tovo: Yeah. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember morrison objects. So councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: I want to see us fund the fire station or the land acquisition and design, I want us to get some money pegged for mexic-arte as a priority program. I'm trying to use the language that we've discussed. I would like us to do it outside of these two line items, which are really critical. You know, we're talking about I mean these may sound like extras, but when we've got facilities throughout our city, our parks facilities, and we receive, you know, regular feedback from our citizens that they are in disrepair, they need substantial work, we are also being asked, I'm always being asked by the public why are we not maintaining and keeping up with some of our city facilities within the parks department. We often bemoan the lack of money available in our parks budget, we have the opportunity here to give them a little boost. I think that it's critical. We are also, you know, again taking a third of one budget and a substantial portion of another one. I'm going to make an amendment a little bit later that I'll just mention now that we take some funding out of the design of new projects line item to partially fund some of the fire station land acquisition and design and also some money that would leave over some money for mexic-arte and also that we move some money from the barton springs bath house to fund the remainder of the fire station. I'll give you my rationale later. But I'm going to vote against this motion that is because I believe we can find funding for the fire station land acquisition and design and some funding for mexic-arte from different line items, I think that we need to preserve these programs. Again the money in these line items they serve people throughout our city, many of whom really need the kind of programs and opportunities they get through our neighborhood parks. Through our parks recreational facilities. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. In favor? Chris riley. >> Riley: I will say I'm not going to be supporting this item. As we discussed the other day I'm very aware of the fire risk that we face, we've had extensive discussions about the creation of a while land division through our regular budget process. I'm committed to pursuing that goal and getting a wild land division in place as part of a budget process. But I think that's -- that should be a first priority before establishing that -- that the fire station on 360, so I will -- I'll be, i won't be supporting this item. >> Mayor Leffingwell: In favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no. >> No. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Fails on a vote of 2-4, with councilmember riley, tovo, morrison, mayor pro tem cole voting no. Anything else? Councilmember morrison? >> Morrison: Thank you, mayor, I am also very interested in finding funding for both the fire station and mexic-arte museum but as I mentioned before, I'm also looking to bring a little bit more balance back in from the task force and I try -- from the task force recommendations and at 400 million and how it differents. And I tried to really narrow down the ones that -- that a couple of million dollars in adjustments that I would like to focus on. And the first one is the -- is the item for neighborhood parks. Ment because neighborhood parks was -- is at only as it stands right now 20% of its needs assessment. It's at $3 million. And it was -- its needs assessment was 15 million to start. So I'll get to where it's coming from in a minute. I would like to add a million dollars there. The second one that I would like to add a million dollars to is the neighborhood plan parks projects. We heard a little bit about that this afternoon or earlier today when we were talking about the dove springs rec center because that's one of the items that will be contemplated was within that buck of money. Bucket of money. One of the reasons that this line item I feel is so important and at this point it's only funded at a -- at a one third of its needs assessment is because these are items that came out of the neighborhood plan. This is the first time we have the opportunity to fund in our bond package ideas that came out of the neighborhood plans because that wasn't done in 2006. And it was sort of -- but in fact neighborhood plans were created in part to help inform that. So I would like to add another million dollars to the neighborhood plans parks to make it $8 million. So where can the money come from? Well, we all know arnold, mary arnold who has been talking to us about the bridge, the bridge at red bud, she sent me additional information which I started studying which got me very concerned about moving forward even thinking about design at this point. Because she -- she dug through, you know, she's an amazing researcher. She dug through and i believe that we have really not done due diligence to even be thinking about replacing a bridge yet. She mentions the 2025 austin metropolitan area transportation plan, that replacing the bridge would likely be inconsistent with. It's listed as an existing minor two lane arterial with a high vital sensitivity rating and there are no changes shown between now and 2025. It's -- there's also a recommendation about ensuring compliance with u.s. fish and wildlife. There are no changes for the bridge shown in the 2035 campo plan. It appears, you know, she's very familiar with the brackenridge development agreement, it appears that this would require negotiation with the university of texas. Which I don't think that was done yet. Interestingly, the -- let me see if I can find it. Interestingly, the waterfront overlay district and subdistrict development regulations actually also address regulations for public rights of way that come into play here, which is interesting. It says in fact that they need to be any public rights of way adjustments need to be done, they must be compatible with the development of adjacent parkland and consistent with the town lake park plan. So -- so to me, we don't have it in any of our plans, it's been foreseen that it would be existing and stay there. It appears that it needs to be compatible with several things and we would need to negotiate with folks. So my sense is that we have got the cart way ahead of the horse as they say, i arnold for the historic knowledge that she has. What I would like to suggest, it also mentions in the town lake plan, I should mention, that -- that -- that we need to get recommendations from the parks and rec board and all sorts of other boards. What I would like to suggest is that we really scale back the funding right here and really --, allocate half a million with the understanding that it's a very, very early step where we're just going to have to begin to figure out what we're even doing, because this is way beyond anything foreseen in any of the plans that we have. My motion is to -- to reduce the shelton bridge from 3 million to .5 million. To add one million to the neighborhood plan. To add one million to the neighborhood parks improvements project. That's two million and then to add a half a million to start some allocations towards mexic-arte. >> Mayor Leffingwell: What's the reduction on the bridge project. 5, Them the addition, leaves the half a million to do just initial outreach and investigation. It's adding a million to neighborhood parks, adding a million to neighborhood planned parks and then mexic-arte. For half a million. >> Mayor Leffingwell: First of all, I will object to that. It's my understanding during the briefing that we got the other day that one of the reasons for upgrading this bridge was increased traffic, number one, and also increased heavy truck traffic going from the water plant back towards city area and that to me that might present a safety issue. So I -- so I -- again, i think that it's a high priority project. We've already reduced it once. By quite a bit. And to -- down to the minimum or start the design process. So I won't be supporting it. Councilmember riley. >> Riley: Mayor, I would lake to ask a question or tw lazarus. I know that we talked about this at the work session. Can you remind us about the condition of this bridge compared with other bridges in the austin area? >> Howard lazarus public works department. There are 425 brings rated within the city data that are the they's responsibility. 426 Are rated as good or better. The one that is rated as fair is the shelton bridge. The bridge is beyond its useful design life. In 2008 I'm sorry 1998 there was a prong to upgrade it -- project to upgrade it with the intent of getting about 10 more years out of it. That was four years ago. The bridge was built in 1940s, it wasn't built to the design standards necessary for the current traffic. The current loading. So -- >> Riley: If I could. >> The bring as it stands now is funct obsolete. Doesn't serve its purpose. In addition to ongoing structural concerns there are issues with safety, not only with vehicles but also with pedestrians and bicyclists who use the bridge. >> Howard, we know we don't have a fully developed plan at this point. We haven't worked with all of the partners that councilmember morrison mentioned, we haven't integrated any improvements into the campo 2035 plan. We know that we are some distance from actually being ready to move forward with construction of a new bridge. So what would be wrong with just setting aside half a million to do preliminary planning with the expectation that that would keep the process moving forward and we would be able to do additional planning and design in the future, why -- why -- what would we be getting with 3 million that we couldn't get for just half a million? >> We're at the stage where there's a preliminary design that was done and that is the design that raises the bridge out of the level of the floodplain. It does require a new in order to proceed now to a bring that would be both functional and acceptable to the community, we are going to have to engage with outside consultants and pay for internal staff time. Because you know the public works department gets no general fund dollars. So the only way we can move forward with this project is to have a way to staff to manage and be involved with the design. It's our estimate at this point that providing $3 million to proceed will give us enough of a -- of -- money to get through any environmental work that we have to do, any outreach work that we have to do and as well as engaging any outside resources to start along the design path. I think that will cost more than half a million. The 3 million was an estimate of about 20% of the total project costs so that we could get through the process to where we could move through and be able to proceed in a reasonably timely manner, given that we know that it's going to take a long time to get through those stages, so that's our best guess right now as to what it will take us to get through all of the up front work and design work that we need to do. >> Riley: Okay, thanks, howard. [One moment please for change in captioners] >> it's a city-owned bridge, so we're responsible for it. It's hard to say right now when we have projects in the works. There are probably some residual funds and some other bond programs, but i can't guarantee what those are, or state what they are. As projects come in and they finish, there's always -- you could call it the change that falls between the cushions of the couch kind of, but I don't know how much that is and can't really project. I think what I do want to state is that it's better to proceed with the plans to design and replace the bridge before it becomes an emergency and that we can do it in a more structured, rational approach, and not have to prematurely close or restrict traffic on the bridge. >> Tovo: I think certainly I would agree that we don't want it to get to an emergency situation, but it does sound like there's a fair amount of planning and design that would need to take place. And I would just say that 500,000 would at least allow that to begin. And it seems to me this would certainly be a project eligible for funding in a future transportation bond. Would you say that's true, that this project could be rolled into a future transportation bond? >> I think it's eligible as a capital expense for any bond program. >> Tovo: Okay. Thank you. >> Cole: Mayor? >> Mayor Leffingwell: I don't want to put words in your mouth, but did you just say this is the worst bridge in the city? >> It's the only bridge in the city that's not rated as good or better. >> Cole: Mayor? >> Mayor Leffingwell: And -- okay. Mayor pro tem cole. >> Cole: I just had a has wreath because I know when i use this bridge mainly the reason I'm using it is because I'm trying to head to the lake. So I want you to give us some feel for the amount of austinites that might work downtown and actually -- or in east austin and actually live in west austin or westlake and would be crossing this bridge. >> All I can tell you is we've done traffic counts and there are 12,000 crossings a day. There are people who access -- who live in austin in the west part of the city who use the bridge for access, but there's really no way for me to give you a factual number of how many of those crossings are by people who live within the city. >> Cole: Well, let's talk about the estimate that you did. You said you did a traffic count of 12,000. Can you tell me how that works? Is that per day, twice a day? >> That's per day. >> Cole: 12,000 Per day. And that's ingress and e-cigarettes over the bridge or is that just one way. >> That's crossing, so both ways. >> Cole: Crossing both ways. Okay. Thank you, mayor. I will just say that I don't know if I highly respect mary arnold and I know a lot about her research and ability, but I'm very concerned that we don't create a safety hazard. And for citizens who live outside of austin and, of course, citizens who live inside of austin -- and i know I cross that bridge frequently when my kids were young to go to westlake beach. So I will not be supporting this motion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Any other comments? All those in favor of the proposed amendment say aye? Opposed say no. It fails on a vote of two-four with councilmember riley, martinez, myself, mayor pro tem cole voting no. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: I wanted to propose an amendment to move funding -- I might need staff to verify that I'm using the last batch of numbers. trimble, can you confirm that we currently have in the proposed bond package $5 million allocated under the category of design for new projects? Is that still the figure we're working with? >> You actually are working with the figure of four million. >> Tovo: Okay. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Four million for what? >> For design of new projects. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Transportation projects? >> Tovo: No, that's under public works. >> It's in the transportation. It's in the transportation. >> Tovo: I'd like to propose that we move 5 million of that for -- into one million for 5 allocated for the fire -- for land acquisition -- toward land acquisition and design for the fire station. I know that doesn't get us 7, but I will get closer on a subsequent amendment if this one is successful. So that is doesn't for new projects and it is a total of four million dollars. I'm proposing reducing that to 3.5 million. That still allows some of the south lamar improvements to happen, and I think that is a high priority. I would suggest that one million be allocated to 5 to the fire station land acquisition and design. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So that's reducing transportation projects for design by three and a half million, adding one million to mexicarte, two and a half million to the 360 fire station. To testify yes. And I think we've heard from colleagues about both of those projects, so I won't really add to that at this point. >> Mayor Leffingwell: And I'll object to that. We discussed transportation and in my opinion it's the most important problem that we have, the most dire problem we have in the city. I'm not going to support reducing transportation by three and a half million. It's very important that we continue to make progress and have projects ready to go that are designed and engineered when funds become available. And I don't think one million is going to help mexicarte or fix that situation. And although I'd like to find some funding for the fire station near 360, i think that can wait a little while since no land is yet identified, but I do again join councilmember martinez in supporting establishment of wild lands fire division in the budget. So I'll object to that. Any other comments? >> Martinez: Mayor, the only comment I'll make is what I think I heard councilmember tovo say is this is a motion, but it's somewhat coupled to a subsequent motion because she said she's going to try a second motion to allocate each more money. And I really can't support this not knowing what that subsequent motion is. >> Tovo: I'll be glad to talk about that next one if you'd like. And I would just say with regard to the amount for mexicarte, the taskforce recommended one million, so I fully understand that's not what we're hearing from community members they would like to see in this bond proposal, it's closer to five million, but taskforce recommendation is one, and we may find some other funding along the way that we could couple that with. But one million is a good start when you're starting at zero, which is what we have right now discussed in the bond proposal. And again I understand that 7, which is what would be required for a fire station, but two may allow part of that to happen. In fact, I believe we talked earlier that land acquisition might be about half of that, is that correct? I mean, two million would get us somewhere down the road on that. >> Councilmember tovo, robert orr, assistant chief. The land acquisition itself would be about 2.2. >> Tovo: So we're not fully there, but it's a help. The second amendment I'm going to propose is that we move the two million dollars we discussed yesterday, and that was voted on yesterday for the barton springs bathhouse, to the fire station land acquisition and design. And these are really tough discussions. And I just want to say I am a fan of barton springs. I think it's going to be terrific to have some improvements out there. But we did get a recommendation from the staff suggesting that -- and we know that it wasn't -- that the taskforce worked through that recommendation. It wasn't one of their highest priorities. All of these are good projects. All of these needs are important. But some rise higher than others, and I do think while transportation is a pressing issue and it is among those that are critical to quality of life here in austin, i also hear from lots of citizens that they are concerned about fire and especially in either that mr. nix talked about. So I think there is -- if we can manage it in this bond proposal, I think allocating some funds for land acquisition and design make sense, and for me that does rise to a higher level of importance than the springs bathhouse right now. I wish it were different, that we had money enough for all of these projects, but that's what I'm going to propose, that we move money 5 for the design of new projects into fire station land acquisition and design, and also to mexicarte, and then the second motion I'm going to make is to move the money from the barton springs bathhouse into land acquisition and design. >> Mayor Leffingwell: You just made a motion to reduce transportation design projects by three and a half million, zero out the barton springs bathhouse, reduce that to zero, reducing two million. And adding one million to mexicarte and four and a half million to the fire station. Total, four and a half. >> Cole: Mayor, can you do that one more time? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Reducing transportation design projects by three and a half million. Reducing the barton springs bathhouse by two million for a total reduction of five and a half million. Increasing mexicarte to one million. And increasing the fire station by four and a half million for a total of five and a half million. And I object to that. Councilmember riley. >> Riley: Mayor, as i mentioned before, it's a item on design of new projects is particularly important currently, in the current environment we face. And we've seen again and again in campo funds -- federal funds have become available through the state that have a short time frail and they are only available for projects that are designed and ready to go. And if we don't have the projects that are designed and ready to go for that federal funding, we are going to miss out on the -- on very scarce federal funding. And we all know that we have very serious transportation needs in austin. And I fear that cutting back on this design new projects item would really undermine our ability to respond to the transportation needs that we have. So I'm not going to be able to support the item. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember, I'm glad you mentioned that because we have a concrete example. Just a couple of months ago we found out that we will have with this area about two hundred million dollars stp, the funds for a shovel ready project. There was only one -- there was only one, and we were able to take advantage of that. If it hadn't been shovel ready, that two hundred million dollars would have gone to the dallas area. >> Cole: Thank you, mayor. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Mayor pro tem. >> Cole: I sit on campo with you and you actually appointed me to the committee that negotiated that stmpp project with the rma. So -- did I say that right, chris? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Stpmm. >> Cole: It's late. Yeah. And at any rate, so I will not be supporting this motion to take the funding from the design for new projects, but I would like to offer a subsitute motion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: That's not the word -- we're doing amendments right now. You will have an opportunity later. We've got to vote on this one first. Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: Thank you. I just want to comment that I am going to support this. I think clearly as much as money as we can have to leverage as much as we can, that's an important thing, but to put together something that would work to actually get us -- get us on the road to a fire station, that is a significant step that I think really outweighs then the opportunity -- obviously we'll be keeping our eyes open to all sorts of opportunity, but to be able to take that concrete step i think is really significant. And as councilmember tovo mentioned, to be able to at least show some support for mexicarte is also important. >> Mayor Leffingwell: All in favor of that say aye? Opposed say no. That fails on a vote of two-four. Councilmember riley, martinez, myself and mayor pro tem cole voting no. Mayor pro tem cole. >> Cole: I would like to make an amendment that we take one million dollars from the barton springs bathhouse and allocate that one million to mexicarte in accordance with the taskforce recommendation to mexicarte, and given that we gave the bathhouse two million additional. So minus one million on the barton springs bathhouse -- I'm going to object to that because then you probably can't do either one of those projects, so I'll just vote no. Any other comments? Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: I'm going to support it. It's clear for one million dollars-- I don't think anybody is contemplating that one million dollars is going to get a fully funded, brand new-- I think I'll stop there. One million dollars is seed money for these organizations and I respect the taskforce's proposal. And I think that this is a good balancing of their recommendation with some of the needs we've heard from the community. So I will be supporting that shift in funding. >> Any other comments? All in favor say aye? Opposed say no. That fails on a vote of three-three, with councilmember riley, martinez and myself voting no. Councilmember morrison. There's endless possibility of combinations. >> Morrison: There are many permutations on this. I don't know if this will shift anybody's thinking one way or the other, but this would be the concern that one million wouldn't get us anywhere for the bath house and concerns about what it would mean for mexicarte. My amendment that I'm just going to throw out here is to move the two million from barton springs bath house to land acquisition for fire and fire house. And we know that's not quite enough, but hopefully it's something that we would be able to fill in. So that's my motion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So zeroing out the bath house, minus two million on the bath house and plus two million on the 360 fusion. I object. 360 Fire station. I object. Any other comments? I just think that the bath house is a high priority for me and for a lot of other people. All in favor of that proposal say aye. Opposed say no. It fails on a vote of four-two with councilmember riley, myself, martinez, mayor pro tem cole voting no. Councilmember martinez. >> Martinez: All right. One last stab. [Laughter]. So let me line out the rationale for 30 seconds. So we all agree that we need to do something about protecting our citizens in the western part of the city, and the dangers that we face. But we also have 30 million additional dollars in open space acquisition coupled with the millions and millions we've already spent on open space, many of which is in the western part of our town. So the rationale is we have to protect that as well. If we create a wild land management division within the department that's that much more protection, but you will need a station and firefighters out there. So I'm going to propose that we reduce the 30 million open space fund by 7 million, and apply it to a fire station that's going to protect that open space and those firefighters that will protect that open space. I believe there's some rationale for that. Why do we keep spending tens and hundreds of millions on open space, but not investing in the people and equipment that we need to maintain and protect it? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember riley. >> Riley: I just have a question about that. I'm not familiar with the service area for fire stations as my colleague, so I just wanted to get -- see if he can provide any insights about that. My impression is that the open space lands that we would be likely to acquire with that $30 million are not exactly that close to the location that we've talked about for the 360 fire station. And in fact, I would imagine that there may well be other fire stations that are located much closer that would be serving those open space areas. So could I ask you to address that? >> Martinez: Yeah. I think my rationale is that we already have open space and protected lands in that area of 360, 2222, bcp lands, other lands that we protect, and we have partnering agreements with other fire departments. But as we continue to annex and as the city continues to grow we will have to provide that service as opposed to mutual aid agreements. And so if we're going to continue investing in open space acquisitions, I think we should at least take a portion of that and invest in protection of that open space. >> Riley: Mayor, if I may respond. I absolute agree that we need to be very conscious about the need to protect the open spaces that we already have and that we may be acquiring. And I think that's the reason why we need to get serious about establishing a wild land division within the fire department. And that is -- I think that would be a more effective way to provide protection over a wide area of open space. And to provide a great degree of protection from wildfires. So I think that's where our first priority ought to be in terms of dealing with the wildfire threat as opposed to taking steps to establish one fire station on 360. >> Cole: Mayor? >> Mayor Leffingwell: I haven't heard objections. Is that an objection? That's an objection. Okay. Mayor pro tem? >> Cole: I certainly appreciate the need to protect our citizens in west austin, but I also recognize that we just issued co's for a helicopter to help with wildfires. And I know this is not enough and it doesn't answer all the needs that could be provided by a fire station, but I think with this package we are taking balanced, incremental steps to keep the city on track. So I will not be supporting this motion. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Well, I feel really bad because now I'm going to be forced four times to vote against the 360 fire station. >> Martinez: I don't think you will have to vote. I didn't get a second. >> Mayor Leffingwell: You don't need a second. This is a special procedure that we're using. >> Martinez: Then let's just pass it without voting? [Laughter]. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember! I just want to give my reasons for this. Open space acquisition has long been a priority in bond packages. It has just a long a history, longer history than affordable housing. And I just want to give you a couple of comparisons. In 2006 the last bond package affordable housing housing was 55 million. You can do the percentages for yourself. It sounds like that's about eight percent, though. Something like that. That was out of 567 million. In 2006 open space was $50 million out of that same 567. This year in 2012 we're now at $77 million for affordable housing out of 385 million, which is about 20%. Open space on the other hand is 30. So it has not kept pace proportionately. And to take it one step further, where we normally have -- where we have been acquiring open space is in the barton springs zone, which is a long ways from the 360 fire station. I do know -- not identifying anything, but I do know there are very attractive opportunities that are going to be available to us that have already -- those opportunities have been diminished by reducing from 44 down to 30, reducing it another five million dollars almost is going to make them further and further out of reach since they're really great opportunities. So I will not be supporting this either. Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: Yeah, I agree with you completely. And I appreciate your run down of the history and the importance of it and I think it's actually growing in importance as we move into the future because there's less open space to acquire. So now's not the time to cut back on it, but I do want to tip my hat to councilmember martinez for coming up with a creative connection and suggestion. [Laughter]. >> Mayor Leffingwell: All right. So no more comments, we'll vote on this proposal. In favor say aye. >> Aye! [Laughter]. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no. And that fails on a vote of two-four with councilmember tovo, myself, councilmember morrison, mayor pro tem voting no. Oh, you voted no also? Okay. So it fails on a vote of 1-5. And add councilmember riley to the list of no's. So seeing that there are no more amendments to be offered and so we have a motion on the table to pass essentially the version that we passed yesterday on second and third readings. All in favor say aye. >> Cole: Mayor, I have a comment. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Opposed say no? So it passes on second reading only -- >> Cole: Wait a minute. Oh, man, I was going to make a motion to do it on all three. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Well, we've already done one. This is on second and third, but since we didn't get five votes we can't do that. We got four votes with councilmember tovo and morrison voting no. So we have third reading to go. That means we'll have our special -- another special meeting tomorrow at two p.m. >> Riley: For those of you who are interested, will public input be allowed at the meeting tomorrow? >> Mayor Leffingwell: I'm going to say it is not a public hearing. It is kind of ironic that when we don't have a public hearing we had more public input than we do at a public hearing, but -- because there's no public hearing to close. So I'm going to suggest that we limit comment to 30 minutes tomorrow and if we can do that. Hopefully we can address it in a fairly quick manner. Mayor pro tem cole. >> Cole: I would like to make a motion to reconsider to simply discuss whether we can go on second and third. I know we have voted already, but I would just like to make a plea that we consider that and in light of the amendments that we made tonight or if we want to take a recess and come back to make -- to have more discussion about amendments as opposed to having to come back tomorrow. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Well, you did vote on the prevailing side, so technically it's legal for you to make a motion to reconsider. Is there a second to the motion to reconsider? Is there a second to the motion to reconsider? That motion dies for lack of a second. So we will see you tomorrow. That brings us to our zoning cases. Mr. guernsey. We'll hear items 71 and 72 together. >> Let me introduce them. Item 71 is case npa-2012-0013.01. This is a property located at 603 west johanna street located in the bouldin creek neighborhood planning area. This is an amendment to their future land use map to go to a mixed use land use designation. The planning commission's recommendation was to deny the mixed land use designation. The related zoning case is item number 72, case c-14-2012-0021, again for the same property at 603 west johanna street. This is a rezoning request to neighborhood office mixed use neighborhood plan or no-mu-np combining district zoning. The planning commission's recommendation was to deny the rezoning request to no-mu-np. The property itself is only about 723 square feet and it is the rear portion of an existing single-family lot. There's an existing home on front. There's an existing restaurant which is polvo's to the east. Another restaurant to the north and commercial zoning. And to the south is another gr -- lr zoned piece of land where the parking lot is proposed. That would actually connect to the restaurant. Properties to the west are zoned residential and developed with single-family homes. Staff did not recommend the neighborhood plan amendment, nor the zoning change. It's not supported by the neighborhood planning contact team. The request is only for a very small portion. As you can see on the aerial photo, that would just link the tract to the south, which is the parking lot to the existing restaurant. I did speak to the attorney represent the owner this evening. He indicated to me that he would not be here, nor would phil moncada, the agent for the owner. If you have any questions for staff, I'll be happy to answer them, I believe. You have at least three people from the neighborhood that are here this evening to speak in opposition to the request. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Councilmember morrison. >> Morrison: guernsey, did I hear you say earlier that there was a reason given that he said he was leaving? >> Earlier this evening moncada indicated to me that it was because of legal counsel he was advised not to. >> Morrison: And do you have any contact -- >> actually, not to stay, but to postpone the request. >> Morrison: And there's no contacts beyond that. It was just those words. You don't know what kind of legal? >> No. aaron terrier this evening who is representing the owner, he indicated to me that both he phil moncada would not be present this evening. >> Morrison: Okay. Thank you. >> I would rather just stop at that point. >> Morrison: Right. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. There's no one to speak, no one here to speak for applicant. There are no speakers signed up in favor. So we'll go to -- we'll go to those signed up against. The first speaker is cindy collins. Cindy collins. Mark casscart. Not here -- >> he's here. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Gary hyatt. >> Tovo: Mayor, I think there's been some discussion -- >> Mayor Leffingwell: I'm just calling names. It's a public hearing. I have to call the names. >> Tovo: Got it. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Bradford patterson. So there's no one here to speak against. >> I'm here, sir,. I spoke earlier. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. When we spoke earlier, we were talking only about the merits of the postponement. >> Yes, sir. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Now you can talk about the merits of the case if you would like. And you have three minutes. >> Okay. I have -- if you can put it up. >> Where's gary hyatt. >> He donated time. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So you have six minutes. >> Okay. Not to address the legal issues. I thought I would give you a visual representation of why this is not about the parking on the street. So if you could go to the second slide, it's about the systematic parking extension. Restaurant. It's about them being fair, legal and a good neighbor, none of which they are. And it's about the city's inability to take any meaningful action to correct it. Next slide. So I have a series of pictures. What you can see from this is taken from google street view today. You can actually walk down this online. What you can see on the left-hand side of this picture is a load of empty spaces in the polvo's parking lot. What you can see down the 600 and 700 block of west johanne ha in a is all the public parking taken. The restaurant do need this parking, but it won't affect the 6 and 700 blocks of west johanna. We have la mexicana bakery, bouldin creek bakery shop. We have a pizzeria operating out of a trailer. This is the restaurant trying to get more preferential parking for their customers. It's not about the street parking. I didn't move in next to a restaurant with an empty lot. I moved in to a double fenced, tree-lined house that was between mine and the restaurant. Next slide. What you can see here, this was taken in 2006. What you can see here is the backyard of 063 west johanna, which is full of trees. There were two buildings behind that. It was all double fenced off. Next slide, please. This is what it looks like today. They've done this without any approval, any application. It's been like this for two years. It's a complete strip mall. It exceeds impervious cover. They use it for commercial parking. Next slide. Whatever they put on the planning application, this is what they will do. This is taken from my bedroom window. Whatever they put on the application they will put more tables and seats in. Next slide, please. You can see that at the moment they put chairs in for people to climb over the fence. You can see people there. The ones that won't climb over the fence walk through a residential driveway that isn't fenced off from my driveway. I've sat on my front porch and I have to put up with that. Next slide, please. You can see here taken in march the parking, the roof on the right-hand side is my master bedroom. This is what happens device twice a week before 7:30. They reverse a laundry truck down through that whole lot with the beeping noise into an sf-3 property. They unload laundry. They do deliveries in a residential sf-3 lot. This is simply not about the parking. If you were to approve this, all this behavior will continue and get worse. And you are letting them drive cars within 30 feet of my master bedroom and living room. Next slide. These are the things that I've given up complaining about. Right? In this picture you can see they're washing grills in the backyard of the restaurant -- from the restaurant in the backward of an sf-3 house. It drains down the driveway, into the street and goes straight into town lake. I've given up complaining about this. I've tried to be tolerant of their behavior. I've given them some latitude. Next slide. This is it going down the gutters into town lake. Next slide. So my request to you is both reject this, please, and find a way to get staff to get that residential lot fenced off, separated, not used for commercial storage, not used for commercial access, not used to pollute town lake and so on. So I really -- I really find myself, you know, I've submitted endless 311 calls about this. I'm at a loss to decide what to do next. I spent more than $12,000 on attorney's fees to try to get a reasonable circum vince of this behavior of this applicant. Thank you. >> Mayor Leffingwell: One more speaker, david hartman. And again, this is the public hearing for item 71 and 72 together. >> Thanks, mayor and councilmembers. David hartman, I represent mark cath deep cart, the most immediate adjacent landowner from the applicant's request. My presentation, basically the brief history is that the applicant came before the neighborhood planning SUBCOMMITTEE MAY 18th 2003 Recommending an -- that that body initiated an out of cycle deed applications. That committee minutes recommended that they basically talked with the neighbors and come up with a workable solution. The that applicant never -- can you flip my powerpoint. Second page. You can see the applicant never discussed the matter with the neighbors and filed these applications in the cycle on february 2012. Next slide. Basically this application to zone 723 square foot, 12-foot strip no mystifies me. It violates the land development code requirements for no zoning. And the last bullet, it doesn't meet the no district definition for access collector street. The bouldin creek neighborhood plan, I'll direct your attention to basically that second, third bullet under no properties located within the interior of the neighborhood that are zoned single-family shall remain single-family. That last bullet basically confirms that the recurring theme of that plan is to control problems with commercial parking, especially at this exact intersection. And again, kind of the second bullet point says with regards to the -- this team is seeking to prevent encroachment of commercial use into the residential parts of the neighborhood. And that very last slide, the maximum enforcement of current regulations at the intersection of south first and johanna, which is this intersection. Parking variance request within this area should be given maximum scrutiny. So in summary, I would just kind of reiterate the bullet points and the last slide, kind of reiterate what we've discussed. Zoning staff recommendation said that the proposed zoning would constitute a grant of special privilege without consideration for the intent of the proposed zoning district or the existing single-family residential to the west. I direct your attention to page 7 of the agenda item 71 on the neighborhood plan amendment where stewart hampton, chair of the bouldin creek neighborhood plan contact team on behalf of the executive committee recommends disapproval. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Questions? Is there anyone else that would like to speak in this public hearing? On item 71 or 72. Normally this would be time for rebuttal by the applicant, but there's no one here to represent the applicant. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: Mayor, I'd like to move denial of this request. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. >> Tovo: Do we want to take them one at a time? >> Mayor Leffingwell: Let me just -- just to be on the safe side, let's make that a motion to close the public hearing and deny item number 71, which is amending the flum. Seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there any discussion? Councilmember morrison? We're just taking them separate. >> Morrison: I just want to say that it's really unfortunate that the applicant chose not to be here, bonder this is such an egregious encroachment that is in violation and contra tracts everything that we know about, all the documents and all, that i think it's safe to go forward today. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Okay. All in favor of the motion to deny say aye? Opposed say no -- [laughter]. Say no. All right. That it passes on a vote of six to zero with councilmember spelman off the dais. And councilmember tovo moves to close the public hearing and deny the zoning change request as well. Seconded by the mayor pro tem. Discussion? All in favor say aye? Opposed say no? It passes on a vote of six to zero with councilmember spelman off the dais. And that brings us to what i believe to be the last item on our agenda, which is item 87. >> Thank you, mayor, council. The last item on the agenda today is a floodplain variance request for 200 heartwood drive in the williamson creek watershed. Heartwood drive runs to the top of the screen there. You can see the 100 year floodplain on williamson creek in color and the 25 year floodplain in the dark blue color. The house has been in its existing location since 1977. And currently the house -- finished floor elevation of the house is approximately three feet below the 100 year floodplain elevation. There are two pictures of the existing house. As you can see it's a two-story house, garage on the back side. The garage itself fronts on to heartwood drive. The owner of the house has submit add residential building application to partially convert a portion of the garage to condition space for the house, so existing conditions such as a two car garage they're proposal is to essentially cut that space in half and the back half of the garage would be converted into an extra bedroom, an existing three-bedroom house. It will be a four bedroom house and then some area for the kitchen as well. It will be a little bit of conditioned area of the first floor of the house. Because of the development application, we compare what's being proposed to the floodplain regulations and these are the four variances that are being requested tonight. The first one being that it's a violation of the floodplain regulations to alter a structure to increase its nonconformity and staff considers when you add conditioned space to a house that is nonconforming, in so much as it's three feet below the 100 year floodplain and it does not have access out of the floodplain, it's increasing the nonconformity of that structure. In addition, either that they are converting is three feet below the 100 year floodplain elevation. And there's no safe access in other words from the house itself to a location that's out of the floodplain. There's no safe access out of the house. The last variance request is the variance to the drainage easement requirement inasmuch as just excluding the house footprint from the drainage easement itself. Just real quickly to touch on the nonconforming use and the safe access criteria, again, the nonconforming use criteria, basically if we have a structure that is nonconforming, our goal is to not increase its conform five-zero -- because in doing so we could be doing several things. We could be -- it could increase flood hazards if there's a flood at the house. In addition increasing the nonconformity inasmuch as the safe access rule. We have additional occupancy inside the house that doesn't have safe access. This proposed development as I said increases the conditioned area in the house. Without the safe access and it's below the floodplain elevation. As far as the safe access criteria again I talked about that. That rule basically says you need to walk from a house that's above the floodplain to a point that's out of the floodplain. We don't want people essentially building on an island. We want people to be able to walk out of the floodplain, and that's obviously a benefit for the owners or the occupants of that structure in addition to their first responders. Since the house itself sits three feet below the 100 year floodplain elevation, obviously safe access doesn't exist in this case. Just a quick summary of the findings. So again, the proposed development internal remodel so there's no effect on the floodplain he will vagues of woman creek at all. It's all internal to the existing house. The finished floor elevation of the house is about three feet below the 100 year floodplain. They are increasing occupancy within the floodplain with the additional space of the conditioned area. No safe access for the house exists. And as far as the hardship condition, there are findings that there's no hardship condition for this property. There's an existing house on the lot. It's a usable house and it's being used today. In addition, it is a two-story house and there's -- if they -- they could maybe consider putting some of this area on the second floor of the house. We did discuss that with the applicant and their comment to us was that this additional bedroom is to be used for I believe they said for an he would -- their elderly mother who couldn't walk up the steps. So that's why they needed the room on the first floor of the house itself. There is a draft ordinance in the back of your packets. I wanted to bring it to your attention the two conditions that we did put on that ordinance if council will find to approve the variance. One of those conditions is for the drainage easement document. And we would require the drainage easement with the exception of excluding the footprint of the house itself prior to certificate of occupancy. And the second condition is for the elevation certificate. We actually have an elevation certificate that they supplied to us. There are just two numbers that need to be fixed on there. No additional survey required. It's just a minor change that the surveyor would need to make, so that should be a pretty easy fix for themselves. That's all I have. If you have any questions, i would be happy to answer. >> Mayor Leffingwell: I have a question. Williamson creek, just refresh me on that. It seems like it has been a major flood hazard creek in the city of austin, one of the two most -- one of the handfuls, most problematic, and we have been working on a number of ways to mitigate that for a lot of years, including buyouts, including engineering solutions. Is all that correct? >> That's correct. Williamson creek is -- has a significant number of flood hazards, a lot of flooded structures, especially in this fairview neighborhood. The corps of engineers study that we did several years ago did look at some engineering options to cut the channel. And they also looked at some buy out options. All those options were not feasible and so the corps of engineers essentially closed the study. >> Mayor Leffingwell: So in other floodplain areas we've already begun this process. We've been dealing with this for years and trying to get matching money, matching funds from the federal government doing buyouts on onion creek in particular. And I think that's the way it goes is that when you buy these properties out, it has to be somewhat related to the size and value of the house. So it's just hard for me to look at this and see that we're adding to the living space of a house that we might have to turn around and buy at some point. This meets none of the criteria. Finished floor area is three feet below. Did you say the 25? >> Three feet below the 100 year. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Below the 100 year floodplain. The access is also half a foot to three feet below, which is much more than our -- criteria we like to have, which I believe is a foot and a half for fire vehicles, fire fighting vehicles. Which imposes potential hazards on our personnel, which might have to go in there for a rescue, whether it be e.m.s. or fire. And there's no hardship. That has been identified at least at this point. I won't be able to support this set of variances. Support this ordinance. Councilmember martinez. >> Martinez: Yeah. I'm not going to support the request either, but just by way of reference, this is the neighborhood where we approved multiple floodplain variances, but they were approved after the fact, after the structure had already been -- >> grandfathered. >> Martinez: Yeah. So we already have multiple variances and structures, nonconforming structures in a floodplain that we've granted variances on. So it only exacerbates the problem in my mind to continue to do this. If there's no identified hardship, I think adding to what exists there is not appropriate. I make a motion to deny the variance request. >> Mayor Leffingwell: Motion by councilmember martinez to deny. Seconded by councilmember morrison. Is there any further discussion? All in favor say aye? Oppose said no? -- Opposed say no? We closed the public hearing and denied. Of course that's hard to see how we would have a public hearing when an item doesn't exist anymore, but nevertheless, we've set it. So that passes on a vote of six to zero with councilmember spelman off the dais. Thank you very much. And those are all the items that we have on our agenda. Somebody have another item they wanted to bring up? So without objection, we stand adjourned at 8:53 p.m. See you tomorrow at 2:00.