Regional Affordability Committee Meeting Transcript – 2/18/2016 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 2/18/2016 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 2/18/2016 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [2:10:47 PM] >> I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting to order of the Regional Affordability Committee. It's 2:10. We're in boards and commission I'm Delia Garza the Chair and we have a quorum. The first item is the approval of the minutes from September. Wow we haven't had a meeting since then. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes. >> Motion. >> Garza: Is there a second? That passes 7-0. I don't think we have any speakers. No, okay. No speakers for citizens communication. And our next item is 3, which is a presentation and discussion on interlocal agreements between participating taxing entities regarding programs and services provided across jurisdictions. I think we have a paper copy of it too. >> Good afternoon, committee members. My name is Robert Harris. I'm an assistant attorney with the city of Austin. Today I'm going to do a brief interview of interlocal agreements as we call them. Basically I plan to go over what an interlocal agreement is, what the requirements for interlocal agreements are, just answer any questions that you have. So an interlocal agreement is a contract or agreement with another state or local government agency or a federally recognized Indian tribe. Authority from the agreements come from chapter 791 of the Texas government code. Essentially what it is is just a contract between two government agencies. It doesn't matter what the agreement is called. I've seen sometimes a memorandum of understanding or cooperation agreement. If it meets the criteria of the interlocal agreement, it still needs to go through what [2:12:49 PM] those requirements are as far as what it contains and the way that it gets approved. So what can governmental agencies agree to when they come -- have a contract or an agreement? Two things essentially. Study the feasibility of the performance of a governmental function, or provide a governmental function or service that each party to the contract is authorized to perform individually. So essentially what that means is anything that the governmental agency is able to do, it can contract with another governmental agency to cooperate to do similar things, to support one another, that type of thing. The requirements are pretty basic. The one main difference between this type of contract, interlocal agreement, and other contracts that a governmental agency would have with other entities is that it has to be authorized by the governing body of each party to the agreement. So it doesn't matter there's no cost threshold, there's no specifics on what type of agreement it has to be. It has to be authorized by the governing body. The exception for that is for municipally owned utility. Another requirement is must state the purpose, the terms, the rights, duties of the parties. Just the basic things any Normal contract would require. It has to specify that payments are being made from current revenue. That would be the state constitutional requirement. And fairly compensate the performing party. So two of the keys for interlocal agreements, first of all there has to be a [2:14:51 PM] government function and these are defined in the state statute as a whole list of things many governmental agencies can do. Then it has that one thing at the end, anything else the parties have the authority to do so makes it very broad on what that governmental function is. The other thing for the purposes of I think this committee is the definition of local government. It's a county municipality, special district, junior college district, other political subdivision of this state or another state. So it doesn't have to be just with another agency located in this state. It can be with New York police department or a university in Washington or another city, something like that. Also transportation corporation, electrical purchasing cooperative or -- there's one thing missing, local workforce development board. And any combination listed above there. So those are the two keys. There's actually one more key. I didn't have room on the slide for the third key. That's each party must be authorized to perform individually. You can't go outside the scope what you are already authorized to do as a governmental agency. For example, the city can't enter into an interlocal agreement with the state to enforce something that is strictly enforced by the state. Or the county and the school district can't have an interlocal agreement to -- for the school district to enforce zoning regulations or something in the county. As a municipality here for the city of Austin, generally when we're looking at interlocal agreements, as a home rule city it's a little broader because the city has -- has [2:16:52 PM] authority outside of just what it's allowed to do in the state statutes, but we still look to see there's a purpose to spend city funds. There have to be controls in place, make sure the funds are spent properly and there has to be an equivalent value for what it is, any money that we're spending or services that are being provided. Some example agreements, this first one is -- this one was the amended conversation corps interlocal agreement. We added Travis county to this agreement. And it just kind of shows -- it doesn't have to be between two parties, it can be between multiple parties. Goes into the recitals where it starts to talk about the purpose and the background about why the parties are entering into this agreement. The next example would be a cooperative purchasing agreement so each governmental agency is able to do its own procurement. For the city we can enter into a contract for goods or services and as part of that contract we include a provision that says you may be asked to provide these same terms with another governmental agency. In this case it's the city of Fort Worth. We have them with Travis county, aid and some others so we can get into contracts that they have for the purchase of specific goods if those are similar to what the city needs and meet the city's requirements. The next example is an agreement between the city and the Travis county emergency services district number 6, it's in the western part of the county by lake Travis, basically for helping one another in the case of a fire or emergency that's taking place out in that area. Maybe if it abuts up against the boundaries, you know, or [2:18:52 PM] if maybe the smaller group, the fire rescue team out in lake Travis, they can call the city, the city will send crews out there. This agreement shows why it's important those previous requirements are met as par as being approved by the governing body that the structure is correct so if somebody were to go out there and there were a problem, damage to, you know, one of the workers, a firefighter, damage to equipment, the agreement would need to be in place and valid in order for -- in order for there to be proper management of what happens next if there are any problems. So those are some general examples, just the basic requirements. It's essentially, like I say, a contract between two governing agencies. There are a couple of specific requirements that make it different. I'm happy to answer any questions if there are any. >> I had a quick one. On page 4 you said something about each entity has to be able to do that themselves and I'm on the school board of Round Rock I.S.D. We have an agreement with Austin contributions and Travis county has one for juvenile justice education. So, of course, school districts we don't have anything like that, but I guess that's all within bounds. >> I guess the question would be what is the interlocal agreement providing. What is the service that's being provided between the two parties. You are right, the district may not have the authority to imprison somebody, but the purpose of the agreement may be for some other reason. And, you know, it's just an ancillary -- the fact that it's a jail or a juvenile [2:20:54 PM] detention facility, you know, is just something that's on the side. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Garza: I notice the examples you've provided. And I guess I was thinking -- I was wondering if there are interlocals -- I know we have a rough list for the city's interlocals, but are there anywhere, I guess, that save the city money because it's like a duplication of a service? So I see where we save money by contracting with Fort Worth and I'm assuming we save money because we buy in larger bulk, we buy whatever, widgets, so we buy with Fort Worth we get them cheaper that way. But are there any examples of like the city says they are going to provide an after-school care program and aid is doing the same thing so they come together which essentially saves them money. Are there examples of that? >> Specifically I can't opponent to one. One example, you know, if I look at something like that, I could see maybe aid providing the facility and the city providing after-school care staff or the city providing the facility at a recreational center or neighborhood, aid providing tutoring or something like that. So yeah, I think that there are where it benefits both parties, you know, because that's -- at the base level that's what we want. It's in the title of the act as the cooperation agreement. So the purpose is that kind of getting together and doing something as a group and sharing the resources so that it's not just one entity that's having to take more on those necessary. >> That's a great question and I -- I assume that's sort of our interest in interlocals is to try and find ways that we [2:22:54 PM] can find cooperate with our overlapping governmental entities to ultimately save money to the taxpayers and provide more efficient services. I think that that is a part of what's going on currently between the city and the school district, at least with aid. And I don't know if it's technically called a joint use of facilities. I don't know if it's under an interlocal agreement, but I know that the city and the school district are sharing parkland, for instance, and playground space. And I know there's several instances of that. I think that may be the extent of it, but the intention behind the effort which we pushed in the mid 90s when I was on the city council is to try to find opportunities for joint community recreation centers and school gyms. School pools and community pools. School libraries and community libraries. And I don't know that that effort got very far, but I do know that there are joint city parks and school district playground facilities. >> Yeah, so this was one of the goals of when creating this committee was to look at interlocals as commissioner Shea just said to see where the duplication was and to see if we could eliminate some of that duplication if it was possible. I know we have a rough list from the city. I think Paul has provided us with a list from the school district, and if I could ask commissioner Shea to get one from the county and I was just talking with my staff earlier, we're going to see if we can go through them and see where if there is duplication and it will be probably time intensive, but I think that's a good way to see -- maybe there's not. You know, the examples you provided seem very unique so [2:24:55 PM] maybe they are all very unique and there is no duplication, but -- >> I mean there may be some duplication, to be honest. A lot of them don't have [inaudible] Interlocal. There may be an opportunity to bring more entities, unlike the conversation corps, for example, just -- it may get bigger. And then there may be areas whereas the county population grows where there could be room. >> Garza: Does anybody else have any questions or -- >> Just more of a comment. I think not only is it important for us to look at duplication of services, but along the lines of making sure that we're all doing our part better to spend the taxpayer dollar. Also look at opportunities where there are gaps. Of taxpayer -- [inaudible] Identifying any potential gaps where there may be opportunities for us. >> I'm happy to ask for a list from the county. I know when this discussion first started a while back, we were thinking that the joint subcommittee list might be the most complete list, but I'll go back and check because it may be that there are some county interlocals [inaudible] Or something that [inaudible]. The kind of thing you are interested in, what is [inaudible] Agreements. So I'll request that from the county. [2:26:56 PM] >> Garza: We still have a joint [inaudible]. >> ... Municipal judges also. So there are more models there. >> Garza: Does anybody else have any? That segues to -- thank you. The next item is discussion and possible action regarding the strategic plan. I put out kind of an outline that we had discussed, discussed a couple [inaudible] And usually purchased through collaboration -- performed through collaboration. She has -- kind of facilitate the conversation. So we can come up with a strategic plan. Mr. King, did you want to speak on this item? >> Well, I can wait until after you have your discussion. >> Garza: Whichever you would prefer. >> I would like to hear your discussion. [Inaudible] There's no [2:28:57 PM] background material for this. >> Kitchen: Let me ask a question before you get started. I think we were inviting the livable city to come and give us a report. Did we get that on the calendar? >> [No mic on] >> Kitchen: So that's in April? >> Garza: April. >> Kitchen: Livable city is putting -- I forget what they are calling it. It's a report on affordability and ideas for affordability. And so we'll get their report in April. That will be interesting too. >> Garza: If you wanted that to inform our strategic plan. >> Kitchen: I think it can. >> Garza: We can have -- formalize it after that presentation. >> Kitchen: Yes, they may have additional ideas we think are interesting in one pursuit >> Garza: So I'll hand it over to Katherine. >> [Inaudible] That will work. So -- I know, I need a stand, but that's fine. So I'm going to help you guys through facilitation for your strategic plan. There is a document commissioner Garza handed off. These are ideas you talked about. I wanted to remind thaw the affordability committee provides an expanded opportunity for transparency, public input and collaboration between taxing jurisdictions and local leaders to improve how we serve the community. Just to reinforce that. We're going to focus on the goals right now and we're going to do short-term goals. Two or three, then long-term. By long-term the short-term [2:30:58 PM] will be one year and the longer terms two years. If you feel that the short-term will help you to a longer term goal that would be a two-year, we can talk about as well. I'll be using the dry board eraser that's right behind you guys so I'm sorry if I have to go behind you. Ground rules, we just listen to each other and share. >> [Inaudible]. >> If you all don't mind. I don't want to be behind you guys. So let's start with the short-term goals and like I say I allocated about 30 minutes. If you want to go over, that's okay. Let's go around the table and talk about the goals where you would be able to achieve in a 12-month period. The idea is also to prioritize and try to create a work flow in your mind. It doesn't have to be perfect and there's some reports that are going to come forward so this strategic plan will change a little bit over time, not obviously big changes, but the idea is get those short-term goals that will guide you throughout the upcoming months and meetings. Let's start with councilmember troxclair. And I won't be in the microphones but I'll be writing, okay? >> Garza: Do you want them to give one short-term and one [2:33:00 PM] long-term? >> Let's start with the short-term. We can just go around. >> Troxclair: I guess one of my short-term goals for this -- for the strategic plan or for the committee would be -- it may be kind of captured in the joint financial budget report, but really I imagine something that's more than a report but really try to come to a deeper understanding of the total -- total tax burden between all of our taxing entities, maybe talk before we start our budgeting process about what our goals might be as a whole and talk about where our different entities might be as far as our tax rates and what that means in total dollars. And try to have a broader community conversation about the total tax burden, not just, you know, city of Austin, county, it's confusing for people and I think this committee could help facilitate a little deeper understanding of the overall picture. And if possible try to hold each other -- each of our entities accountable for what our affordability goals are and understand in some years there might be certain needs or a bigger burden from one taxing entity and maybe we can -- the rest of us can work within that knowledge and try to be understanding and try to mitigate the impact that we have on our tax base. And vice versa. >> Just to summarize, this is a great example of a tax burden with taxing entities, the cost, community conversation, accountability for aaffordability. Do you have a time frame? If it's no, it's fine. >> Troxclair: I think as soon as possible, I guess. >> Okay. I'll put a checkmark if somebody wants to repeat one [2:35:00 PM] of the goals. Anything else? >> Troxclair: Not right now. >> Garza: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I'll start with just putting a checkmark right there. Thank you. But I'm also intrigued by -- I think this is short-term, it's certainly a longer term project too, but relates to affordable housing. So I think that, you know, the city is working towards a citywide housing plan, but I think that it would be useful to also look at the other -- the other entities in -- in the -- that we work with and see what roles there might be for all of us to work together so we're really looking at affordable housing approach for the entire community. I don't have anything specific beyond that, but those are things like identifying public lands that could be used. That's something that -- each body has their own needs with regard to land, but there are also a lot of public lands that perhaps could be through some kind of joint efforts could be used in a way that would support housing. >> Okay. So just to recap, affordable housing, looking at joint efforts. Broader communication, not only city but a communitywide regional and public -- that's good, we're narrowing it down to specifically -- >> Kitchen: I would say public lands and the other specific thing is when we get further along with the city in terms of the strategic housing plan, that we also -- that that housing plan, we've talked about that housing plan looking at the needs throughout the community. So I think it would be useful to also have some understanding about what could be -- what other entities could perhaps help with. >> Do you want to add -- [2:37:02 PM] housing or expand it or -- >> Kitchen: Housing affordability. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Kitchen: That's it for now. >> Call me Chad if you want or board member Chad. I agree taxing entities because that's something we as school boards we have to pass bonds on a regular basis and when we say as a school board it's just three dollars more a month, well, if ACC's and the the county, then it's 15, $20 a month. I think that's certainly identified. On the Williamson county appraisal district board -- I mean website there is a link it says how much your total tax burden is for each entity, 1.50 or 50 cents so that helps. Certainly transportation is an issue. We have a lot of people who live in Round Rock who commute downtown. And every day they have to get up earlier to leave to get here on time. One of the things that I think was passed in the last legislative session a year ago was some sort of flexible work time for government employees. I think it was vetoed by the governor at the time, but, you know, certainly -- I work in the semiconductor business, the software business in town, there's a lot of people I work with at Intel, Samsung, all of those companies and they have very flexible hours because they are working with people all over the world so they don't have to be there at 8:00. If there's a way to create some sort of flexible work shift, provide some sort of telecommuting, even city of Austin employees, they can work at home, come in a couple hours late a couple days a week as long as they are working and managers can oversee that, that might relieve some road congestion. It might ease up a little bit. We all know we need more highways, more roads, but those are hundreds of millions [2:39:04 PM] of dollars and many years away. So I think that's it for right now. >> Okay, so on this one just to recap, it will be transportation. I'll look at options such as flexible hours, work time and joint agreements with public and private and look at -- >> Kitchen: Could I add? A couple to add under transportation too. To look at this through the lens of affordability. There's definitely a nexus between affordability and transportation, but I can't point to anything in particular that's being done understanding that nexus. So that would be interesting if we looked at that. There also might be some synergistic opportunities between school districts and other bodies in terms of -- because school districts have to pay for all kinds of transportation, the buses and things. So I've always wondered, I haven't looked into this at all, but I've wondered if there is potential synergies or ways to help school districts with transportation issues. >> I think that would be great. We're going on this bus route discussion in Round Rock ISD and there's always construction in Round Rock. Takes longer for the buses if they plan a route. Another concern is day care. If a parent works downtown or has to get home by 6:00 or day care, if they get late, I don't know what the going rate is but if you are late five minutes or ten minutes. >> A dollar a minute. >> So if you are 15 minutes late, that's $15 and for some people that's an hour's salary, hour rate. >> Kitchen: I'll give you one example on the transportation affordability [2:41:04 PM] that we started looking at and that was the ctrma and the cost of the tolls. Right now cap metro buses are exempted from that cost, but school buses are not. And so that's one thing we have asked the rma to look at is to -- is to come back to us and explain or, you know, to look into that because, you know, there's a cost for school districts too. Anyway, that's just one example of the kinds of things that we might identify. >> And this is what we need. You guys can keep adding. And so in this case I separated and I'll start pulling out some of the items, that's why I was emphasissing on housing itself and others. So we're talking, there was a mention of day cares which is good and transportation. It does tie with this one, but it seems like we're going back to other ways of addressing affordability. So I'll just guide over here. And example, the ctrma policy, the costs really of affordability and the nexus and other studies you guys may want to look into and school district approaches. Okay. Councilmember Garza. >> Garza: I would just add checks to the first two. Building on what Ellen had created -- councilmember troxclair had created the budget impact statement. And I didn't know Williamson county did that. That's what I thought we could do, like the example I thought of was when you go look up your voter id, it tells you these are the things you vote on. You vote in this, you vote in this. So I thought it could be the same and it sounds like you guys do that. >> I think there's a disclaimer on there that says it's not -- don't hold them -- because it could change, updated it. >> Garza: I thought that would be a good -- if the county could create something [2:43:04 PM] like that where you put in your -- you know, your address and it says -- because really that's what your voter registration does, it tells you your taxing entities. In that same -- somewhere on that same page this is what, you know, the tax rate for aid is, this is the tax rate for wherever you live. I thought that would be a good way to -- interactive way for folks to look on line. >> Anyway, I don't know if you can go to it, but right here it shows -- I don't know if it shows, but this is a property says Williamson county cad, .41 cents per hundred dollars and Williamson county another texting entity, .41 for Austin community college. Yeah, so the total tax rate for this piece of property right here is -- this is a neighbor we were looking at is $2.34. >> I think that's on every parcel of property now. If you look up in the central appraisal district, it tells you what the taxing entity is for that parcel of land. >> Garza: Does it tell you the rate? >> Because it tells you what your tax bill is for that parcel of land. >> Kitchen: It doesn't give like water rates. It's property tax. >> For every taxing entity. >> Garza: I guess it includes the different -- the different exemptions are calculated in there as well. >> Troxclair: But the difference between the information that was included in the taxpayer impact statement would be -- it's not necessarily specific to a piece of property, but has the different values so you can say my house is worth this much and here's the actual dollar amount not only the dollar amount that I'm going to owe or will owe this year if this tax rate is adopted, here's what the difference is from last year. $12 more, $15 less, whatever it is. [2:45:05 PM] And then it includes all of the utility fee -- all of the other city fees and utility bills as well. It's think it's a budgeting tool. Although that's great, people don't really look at that unless -- it's not really used as a tool in budgeting discussions or people wanting to kind of engage with the city during tax setting processes or something. You look at it if you are going to buy a house or, you know, if you are going to protest your property taxes or something. >> So there's a conversation right now about the work flow and the questions of what's in there and what's not. So now will be action items on this one. You all are talking about it which would be a presentation probably on what's included and then how it's done in other counties. So we'll probably -- this is an action item and we'll probably set up some kind of presentation for you guys. Okay? And -- >> Garza: We can have a presentation on what is available. >> What is available, uh-huh. >> Garza: What more we would want. The other -- the affordable housing, I think we passed out that Berkeley study. It was a tool kit to determine when gentrification is coming and at the very end, it's more of a case study for a specific area, but at the very end it says with regards to policy the way that we can address or policy that we can implement that would -- I want -- I don't want to say help gentrification, mitigate gentrification creating permanently available homeownership options is the recommendation that one report made. The pilot knob discussion has helped us look at the city's process and ways we can address that, but the housing bonds that the city has passed a very small percentage goes to homeownership. [2:47:06 PM] The majority are usually rental and home repair. So I think we need to look at different ways to invest our money for permanently affordable homeownership opportunities. And that's all I have. Oh, and the sale of public land. We're working on an ifc, an item from my office that will either interlocal agreement or M.O.U. Agreement. Right now it's my understanding that as a courtesy the state offers -- offers public land to the city first just as a courtesy. And my hope would be that we could have an M.O.U. Or some kind of agreement where we do that with each other. The city is thinking of selling a piece of land, formalize the process in which we offer it to each other first before we offer it on the private market. >> Kitchen: That's a great idea. >> Okay, so just to recap, we pointed out a little more information, councilmember Garza added some more input on affordable housing and would be the creation of permanent affordability. How do we get that, that's the big question. Home homeownership, bonds or whatever. Then number 5 the sale of public land, M.O.U. Or interlocal agreements. Okay. >> I agree with so far everything that we've talked about. Maybe elaborating a little bit more on the tax burden. I know that we talked about, and councilmember troxclair indicated the interest and I think we all agreed, I don't know that we've all prepared the tax impact statement the city has done. It would be good for us to all follow through and make sure that we do that. I know for us the budget schedule, making sure that we're clear on that. We've had conversation, one of our first meetings we shared our budget adoption schedule for the -- for aid this year [2:49:07 PM] we've actually moved up our budget adoption process. We'll actually adopt our budget on June 20th. So our fiscal year has changed to coincide with the school year. As a result of moving the process up we saved a little bit of money in doing so, but then there are some major assumptions unfortunately that we'll have to make that sort of are going to be sort of a learn as we go this year. There's a lot of anxiety in our board with moving up the budget adoption process so early, especially since we'll be adopting the budget before the actual tax rolls have certified. That hasn't happened until August. And then the other part of that is bond elections. Conversations that the various taxing entities are already starting to have conversations about future bond elections. I'm particularly interested in conversations if and when the various taxing entities starting having conversations about bond elections for new facilities. Is there an opportunity for there to be conversations about joint use facilities. There's no -- there's really no need for us to all build separate buildings if we could share those resources or somehow or another house them in the same building. So I think -- I know there are legal challenges associated with that potentially, but if we're going to be bold we really need to be bold and try to be creative as we can on that. The -- on the transportation, I certainly agree and I'm glad that councilmember kitchen raised the issue with ctrma. But I think also the quarter cent tax that cap metro collects also, unfortunately our school district is capped on the number of vouchers our students and families are allocated. If you are not within a two-mile radius, then you have to either walk to school or you have to take public transportation. We would like to see a similar agreement that the university of Texas has with U.T. Shuttle services with our school district. I think that would benefit the students and families, but I think that also would benefit the bus drivers themselves [2:51:08 PM] because our bus drivers are at the bottom of the totem pole for salary because they are capped on unpredictable schedules and number of hours they work per week. So I think that's certainly -- that certainly would help. I think somewhere too -- I don't know that we probably need to have a conversation about an affordability index and the variables that make up that index. I think maybe we all have different ideas what that may be, but if we're charged with trying to address issues around affordability, what are those variables. We know housing, we know transportation. What are the other things that perhaps might be missing from that conversation. So I think that would certainly help. Housing, of course, we talk about it all the time. I'm certainly a strong advocate for that. Our school district is having serious conversations about that, about what legally we can and cannot do. I was in a meeting earlier today where there's a potential for the urban land institute to come and provide us a technical assistance panel to help us address what we can and cannot do that would come up with case studies but more importantly recommendations for how and what role can aisd play in the development of affordable housing. We're having those conversations also at the joint subcommittee where we've actually identified a parcel of land owned by aid and could yield 35 to 40 houses, specifically targeting families at $100,000 or less, family household income. I think that entire project what I heard from staff was about $6 million to do that entire project. So that seems very feasible and tangible to do, but it's just a matter of the semantics. And when we get all our attorneys in the room it gets complicated. And then the other thing I wrote down that's associated with the affordability index I [2:53:08 PM] think is our code process. The codenext. There's ongoing conversations. Our appointee is Susan Moffett, making sure that the city's land and zoning and codes, all that because that also sometimes will impede our ability to create affordable housing opportunities for our families. And I think that's all I have. >> Kitchen: Could I chime in for a minute? The codenext, I would consider that -- that's a separate thing from the affordability index but I'm glad you brought that up because that has a big impact on the schools. Then the affordability index, a potential next step is have someone come and brief us on this. They have been done in other cities, California, for example, and it's very interesting potential tool for us. So maybe -- I could follow up and give you some potential names that could come and brief us on that. >> Do you want me to add a check on that? >> Kitchen: Yeah, yeah. >> Yeah, so that's a longer temperature thing because to put one together, but it's a very -- it could be something very good for the community. But I think having someone come and brief us on what those are and give us some examples from the other communities that have done that would be really useful. >> Commissioner Shea. >> I put checks on all I've identified so far. >> Kitchen: You are going to run out of room. >> I do want to especially underscore the housing issue and there are a couple of different specifics underneath this. And I think this might be a really useful thing for us to do to begin to start to get a sense of some of these -- not just metrics but the human [2:55:09 PM] side of it too. And I have asked for the next affordability meeting if we could have a briefing from attorneys who represent low-income people who are being E evacuated. And there is a -- evicted. There is a particular problem where I think we could solve it right away where people's belongings are being put out on the curb and there is no legal mechanism to protect them. So people are literally coming and looting the posessions of people already in misery because they've been ejected from their homes. I have asked a legal aid attorney who does a lot of work in this area and who identified in our discussions a new piece of legislation that allows cities to play a useful role in that regard. But I have no idea what the size of that problem is. I talked with a constable last night who said his constable area, which is mostly the urban area, does the least of all evictions and I think he said they do 50 a month. That's almost two a day. So what I'd love to do is for us to at least have some sense of the size of that problem. And that really speaks to what you had suggested which is some kind of an index or criteria or measurement so we have some idea. The C.A.N., for instance, puts out a dashboard and we see what happens to the rate of poverty in the area. And the mayor sort of funny but tragically says we improve on our poverty rate because people are literally being forced out of the community. Our poverty rate is going down because we're becoming even more unaffordable. I think the evictions issue would be a particular kind of spotlight and because it's such a human -- such a tragic situation for most people, it's easy to see this is a problem. And if there's a new -- a tool in state law that allows us to do something at least about people's posessions, that's one little way we could help. But I think if we look at that [2:57:12 PM] evictions problem broadly, it gives us some additional path way into understanding what is the size of the problem and how severe is it, how is it manifesting itself. That's one piece of it. I would love for us to -- and I don't know if it's a partnership or what, but the joint subcommittee, which is city-county school district, really, really put a fine point to the staff on our desire to work jointly to try and identify land and resources to build affordable housing for teachers, for our workforce, for our low-income families. So we've said to the staff we want this yesterday. And I think we're even having a special interim meeting before the next subcommittee which is I guess quarterly to get an update from the staff. So if there's some way we can partner with them on that. Then I was also really struck by the mayor's comment in his state of the city address, and I didn't jot it down, but I think I'm remembering he said there would be something like 64 or 65 million dollars put in the affordable housing trust fund from all the new development. >> No. He was -- well, okay. What he was talking about was the -- yeah, maybe you are right about that. But basically he was -- there's a lot of money, but it's over many, many years and it was the -- >> He did say over time so it wasn't clear what the time line was. >> Kitchen: It's over many, many years and it has to do with -- do you remember what -- we can get thaw information, but we're talking 10, 20 years. >> He talked about in the context of the building that's known as the jenga, the cantilevered highrise that broke ground the other day. At that ground breaking they said that building alone would general rate $18 million into the affordable housing trust fund. Again, I don't know if that's over a 30-year time frame. >> Kitchen: It is. >> 25-year time frame. But I would like to have a [2:59:13 PM] better understanding of that. And also for us to understand if and if not how we could encourage it, our housing corporations either work together or, you know, coordinate. Travis county has made its housing corporation more row bus and expanded the abilities of the corporation to do more affordable housing. But I don't have any sense with or how they coordinate with the city or the school district. So I would like to see better coordination and then to know what that coordination is among those housing efforts that are underway in our overlapping jurisdictions. I'd also really like for us to have a -- a clear relationship with the equity officer when the city fills that position. I think that person could be extremely helpful. I'd really like to see a focus on the tax swap idea that the mayor has talked about. I know of no other situation where $300 million, which is the number it was going to be in the next rev with the school district budget is literally stolen from taxpayers in our community, this is aid, by the state to cover their obligations where they are not even covering them adequately. But they are literally taking money out of our taxpayers' pockets and impoverishing our schools and our community. So I'm all for any kind of so I'm so I'm all for any creative tool we can use to offset the harm that's being done to to your community. If we can't get it fixed through the courts, which it seems like we keep winning in the courts, and then nothing happens, then I think we've got to get really creative, and I would really like for us to get more information about how a tax swap might work. As I understand it, it's essentially, since the State takes the money from the School District under this formula, if the if some of the costs are paid for by the other taxing jurisdictions, it's reduced by the same amount from the School District's tax burden on people, then that couldn't be taken away. It would actually go to the School District to help educate students in our community. [3:01:45] >> Kitchen: We just passed a resolution requesting that our staff >> City manager go and >> Kitchen: Yeah, move forward, so when that comes back to us, that information can be shared with everyone. >> Great. And as kind of a an agreement that we have at the joint subcommittee, we are trying to come up with a uniform way to talk about this so that people understand the severity of this in our community. Everybody talks about Robin Hood, and for most of us, that's a myth that sounds good, help out the poor by taking from the rich who don't need it. That's not how it worked in AISD. The only part of Robin Hood that's accurate is the first syllable, which is rob. So we're trying to find a uniform way to talk about it within the joint subcommittee and to communicate about it so the larger community really understands what's going on. So to me, that's really an important part of what can be done in this committee. And I'll stop there. >> If I can, I just wanted to I know as councilmembers you guys get a lot of questions that you are always only talking about Austin ISD, Austin ISD, and you guys have seven school districts within the city limits. 97% of our schools are in the city limits. We have 130 campuses and 127 are inside the City of Austin limits. That's almost 83,000 kids inside of Austin, and Councilmember Shea is correct, 35% of the tax bill that people pay goes to the state's general fund. And without chapter 41, we could actually lower our tax rate by 32 cents, saving the average homeowner at least a thousand dollars a year, without that. And so over the next four fiscal years, we will forfeit close to two billion dollars to the State of Texas, as a result of that, even though we're one of 600 schools, again, that are suing the State of Texas for the seventh or eighth time, I think we need to our only remedy is going to be looking at local resources. [3:03:45] >> Commissioner, just to recap, let me recap a little bit more. Commissioner Shea addressed affordability. I think it's also at other levels, tax swap, identify land for affordable housing, trust fund, and the relationship with the equity office. They all will branch off, so I'll go to the chart later and I'll put it together because you all have already identified a bigger goal that you want to address in two years, and these are branching off into little ones, so we'll do that when we end up >> Do you want to make sure the eviction gets captured? I think that's a spotlight >> Yeah, so the eviction with the index, that will be a short term and it goes under affordable housing. >> All that's been said resonates with me, particularly the pieces about affordable housing, in not only just creation of new, but, you know, we have existing, or a lot of existing that we could look at rehabbing. So I was curious, I'm new to the committee, is there a reason that health care affordability is not up there? >> No. >> If not, I'd like to add >> We can add it over here. >> I'd like to add it. It is a major issue for our kids going to school. If there's some way we can look at that I know there's some things we can't control, but there's some things I think we can look at to try to control some of the health care costs for our residents so I'd like toed a that piece up there, then you can check everything else for me. Okay? >> Uh huh. Sure. [3:05:15 PM] some of the health care costs for our residents so I'd like toed a that piece up there, then you can check everything else for me. Okay? >> Uh-huh. Sure. >> Actually, if I can -- trustee Teich brings up a good point with the health care. I think one of the things we should potentially go back and revisit is the health care that we provide for our employees. >> Yeah. >> And is there a way for the city, the county, other taxing entities to somehow leverage our investment for employees' health care, the portions that we pay, that would give us a better -- we all save money, most important our employees save money, because when we just give the cost of living raise, it's pretty much trumped by the costs associated with health care. So I'm wondering if we could look at whether it makes sense for us to all purchase health care options for our employees together, rather than individual entities, and does that give us all a better return investment. >> Kitchen: Yeah. I think that would be a good thing to discuss. Also, because we can -- you know, we can then continue our conversations about access -- having health care access for part-time, temporary, and contract labor, which -- and those are the three biggies that often get left out. And so they are not -- the affordable care act covers some of those folks, but not all of them. So I think a conversation about who we all cover and who we don't, and then how we might leverage additional coverage and how we might leverage cost, through joint purchasing or some other kinds of arrangements. >> Anything else in commissioner Teich? Commissioner Mitchell. >> We are looking at the strategic plan right now, and although members have addressed kind of what their short-term goals would be for this year, it [3:07:16 PM] will be one year, and the locker long terms we're going to look afterward, which would be two-year. Anything else you'd like to add based on the information that's up there? >> We can which back to it. >> Or later? >> Not just yet. I'll just tell you -- I kind of have two hats. One, I'm on the capmetro board and one of them is transportation, and from a transportation perspective, as I educate myself in that area of our metropolitan area, it's interesting, you can do high frequency routes and get a lot of ridership and a lot of reimbursement, or a lot of payment for your services, or you can do low frequency and spread out and try to cover everyone, and then you end up with very low ridership. And the the one thing that I would add is, the single greatest thing we can do to help in some of these cases is make sure that we put affordable housing near alternative means of transportation, either they can walk, they can ride a bike, clique transit. But when somebody says, well, I'm going to do affordable, and there's nothing out there, I can tell you from the transit agency's perspective, we don't -- there's not a bank account with billions of dollars sitting there to say, oh, sure, we'll just go do that. We're trying to figure out with insufficient resources to serve every request that's being made, how do we best justify? There's advocates, you have consultants coming in that said you should abandon a lot of your low ridership lines and put your money into high ridership lines, you'll get a lot more ridership, et cetera, but what do you do about those people then? That's a really hard decision to make. So as you do affordability, I mean, it is -- you know, I try to give myself examples. I have a daughter that goes to school in Boston and she lives in a very expensive microapartment, but she doesn't have a car. So she's saving $600 a month walking ten minutes to class and ten minutes to her job. And it is a huge savings. [3:09:17 PM] We could not afford to put her in that apartment at that location and then pay for a car. And it is -- you know, it's not affordable in the affordable sense, but by example being putting somebody where there's frequent transit near their job, you know, on a whole other level in terms of planning our city, the single greatest thing we can do is put jobs where houses are and put houses where jobs are. And all of a sudden, we don't have -- we're giving people the option are not having to drive across town. But we -- you know, it's just something, when we start talking about affordability and how we're going to do it, really thinking about where it goes. That's as important as it being provided. If that makes any sense. >> Uh-huh. >> That's really all I have at this particular time. The other thing crossing through my mind, and this is my private hat, it's dawned on me through discussions at the city level about affordability, that there's really -- once again, [3:11:30] I'm a my day job is a developer, and the it's dawned on me that you can address affordability in one of two categories. One is you're asking a developer to include affordability in their project, and you can reach that if there's some additional density and you're allowed to make it smaller because a large portion of project costs are fixed. And so if you can spread it across more units, you can lower that cost. If you're but on the other side of that, if it's without that, what you're essentially what you're saying is, there's some sort of subsidy. It will either be from the developer, which may or may not work, because there may not be enough money to do that, if the investors say, can't do it, or if it's subsidized by affordable housing bonds, or the thing that's going on with Easton, that's another subsidy. But even every single tax credit project that you see that our good developers of the DyNa McKivers of the world, those are subsidized by the federal government, which means all of us in taxes pay a little bit more. So you're either going to have so increase density, incremental units, so the fixed costs are not being paid, and make it smaller and push it 2001, or it's being subsidized in some way, form, or fashion. There's only two options. [3:13:47] I can't think of another example. I'm asking everybody that saying give me that so I know. And that's something that we should think about. Because what I don't want to see, and I've only been exposed to one project where I was working on one and they said we want you to do X amount of affordability, on the whole project, and it was a pretty deep discount, and I couldn't the more I tried to add units, the more the gap got bigger, and I couldn't do it and I couldn't do it, and because in my situation, and it's whether it's a public company or once we get our projects approved, we go to the public you know, the markets and investors, and your pension funds, mutual funds, et cetera, invest in projects like us, couldn't reach the hurdles that they wanted us to hit, so I couldn't do it. So you don't want to you don't want to assume that it's going to happen. You have to, you know I would encourage you to think about, if it's this, then incremental units on top of it is a much easier way to reach that, if that makes any sense. So anyway, that's really all I have to say right now. >> Yeah. So it seems like we added in transportation, it would be the nexus between transportation, affordable housing, and the you can pitch in on this one. On the affordability index, I know it's a conversation of CodeNEXT, but it seems like you all have addressed on how land use and how other tools can become that. It's not necessarily an index, but you can analyze that? Is that right? Or am I wrong? [3:15:45] >> Kitchen: No. An affordability index is a separate tool. >> Separate? Okay? >> Kitchen: That many cities are using. It covers a lot. >> Okay. >> Kitchen: And so it is a you know, it's a it's a geographic mapping tool. >> Okay. >> Kitchen: Essentially is what it is. Or the way I've seen it, the way I've seen it done is as a geographic mapping tool. >> Uh huh. >> Kitchen: With different measures, so that when you so when you're Paul, you can speak to it, too, but so that you actually match map your community according to different measures that relate to affordability. >> Okay. >> Kitchen: So that then when you're thinking about policies, you have a better impact on you have a better understanding of the impact. [3:17:45] >> Okay. So these won't be tied. I want to make sure that >> Kitchen: They're two separate things. >> They're two separate, yeah. >> Kitchen: They have a relationship, of course, but they're two separate things. >> And that's one of the things, when talking about housing affordability, transportation, and the other affordable components, it seems like you all have addressed how the address, CodeNEXT, there's these different tools, so a briefing that's another tool, in each goal, you would have maybe some of these briefings happening on the way in order to create so you guys can create some policy based on the goal. Does that make sense? Okay. Yes. >> I wanted to mention real quick on you know, one thing that might be helpful for each of us to do as individual entities is to sort of do our own self assessment on the affordability variables that we can influence as governmental entities. We just had a conversation at our board about the demographic projections over the next ten years, and our declining enrollment, and all the demographers, including the city's demographer, indicated that the number one variable was issues associated with affordability. So then our boards have been talking about, okay, well, in the next of affordability variables, what is it that we can influence, what is it that we cannot? And that way, we focus on those things that we can influence. And then the other question I had, does the city still utilize the smart growth matrix? >> No [3:19:30] >> Smart housing, but there's the smart growth. >> Kitchen: I don't know if we still use that or not. You might know, Terry. >> I haven't heard it mentioned in several years so >> Okay. So what I was getting to, maybe it's time for 2.0 of smart growth that incorporates maybe and I can't remember what the A stood for in the original matrix of the smart growth, but I know we do have a smart housing matrix that's also utilized, so maybe part of the things that we do as the inventory is to go back and look at that and see if there's an opportunity, because again, that influences the development that's happening now and is it really smart in the direction that we're heading. >> Okay. So just to summarize, we're going to look at the long term goals, but it seems like you all have already addressed a lot of them. [Laughter] So we're just going to summarize over here in this flip chart. The ones that have, like have a lot of checks are first one has been the tax burden, and that seems to be one that you guys can achieve at a short term, and you all have already identified what the process is and what you all want to do with it, community conversation, accountability, and affordability. So being it's a short term goal, this could be achieved in one year. And if you all are comfortable with that, we can add already that into the strategic plan for this year. Is everybody okay? Okay. [3:21:45] >> I think we were just maybe going to separate the short term from the long term, and then we're going to wait for the presentation by livable cities to see if that informs because maybe there's something that they'll present that says no way you can do that, number two, in a year, but I don't know. So maybe >> Yeah. Correct. So right now we're going to identify today, and just to recap, there is that this is not set in stone. We still have another meeting where you all can come back and look at it all. The second one, when we talk about affordable, it seems that you all are talking about different layers of affordability or different ways to address affordability. So the affordability, others, number 4, that includes day care transportation, health care, and all of them, that is a bigger goal. So in order to obviously, you're a regional affordability committee, but it seems like all of those could be something that you address shortly. So the affordable housing has actually gotten a lot of check marks and then transportation. And I know there has been an interest for the health care and day care as well, but it seems like affordable housing is very complex, and transportation as well, so if you all feel comfortable with pulling those two out and making your goal number two and three for today, because we can look at them again, and then affordable housing, just looking at joint efforts, outreach, public land, and looking at all those, is that okay? >> Kitchen: Well, okay. My thought is that there are long term and short term under each of these areas? >> Yes. [3:23:45] >> Kitchen: So maybe the thing to do, rather than maybe I'm not understanding where we're going with this, but I would be thinking more in terms of each of these areas starting to make some progress this year on each of them. >> Sure. And so when we talk about affordable housing for a short term goal, that doesn't mean that your long term goal for next year will not also include affordable housing. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> You're not limited to only doing it as a short term goal. >> Kitchen: Okay. But I would want to do all of these things as a short term goal. I think there's short term things that can be done under all these. >> Okay. So let's talk about that then. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> So if we if you believe as a board that there are certain efforts that could be pulled out, and these how many are there? six efforts are overall your goal your long term goal, let's talk about which ones can we pull for short term in this year, if we want to go there. Okay? Okay. So is it okay if I pull the tax burden with taxing entities now? Okay. Let's do a number two, anybody who wants to pull another one? [3:25:47] >> I think the MOU with the public lands is a short term. The sale of public lands. >> Kitchen: And we're defining short term as, what, this calendar year? Is that >> Yes. Remember, the short term is one year, and long term would be two years. But you're right, we did talk there's a lot of long term there that let's pull out the ones that you feel you can achieve. >> Oh, the evictions >> I was just going to say, I think we can begin to get a better understanding of the size of the problem with evictions. So maybe in advance of the next meeting, we could ask of the constables to give us just their numbers on evictions from each constable precinct in the last year so all of them will have some sort of briefing so we'll time them afterwards. There will be evictions information, so you can have a better understanding of what it is. >> Not to spend too much time on this, but I could put in a request. Would it be useful for us to have, if they're able to tally this information I'm assuming they keep track of it year after year, so how much evictions have increased in the last five years. >> Sure. [3:27:45] >> Okay. I'll put in a request and see if they can provide us >> And we'll talk about who wants to take on anything after we fill this out. >> Sorry. It would be helpful, I think, to understand I don't know if they collect data about the reason for the eviction. Is it non payment? Is it for, you know, violating I don't know what the it would be helpful for me to understand what >> I'll ask if they have that. There's a legal process that is followed before someone is evicted, and I don't know, as part of that legal process, if the landlords have to prove cause, but I'll ask. >> Okay. Thanks. [3:28:45] >> Councilmember Kitchen? >> Kitchen: Under the affordable housing, the strategic housing plan >> Okay. >> Kitchen: for more of the latter part of the year, but it could be something that we could begin work on this year because the city's timeline to bring that back to our housing committee is May or so. >> Okay. And if you all want to add any timeline on any of these also, please do, because that way >> Kitchen: I would say for this committee, I would say, you know, summer or fall. >> Okay. Summer, and then we're talking about the evictions, commissioner Shea, in these upcoming months; right? It would be next month >> I think we're planning for the March >> March. Okay. Anything else? Yeah. Commissioner Kitchen. Councilmember Kitchen. >> Kitchen: Well, the affordability index would be something that, if it's something that we want to do, we should start it. >> Yeah. [3:29:45] >> Kitchen: You know, because it's a long process to put one together. And so I would want to be briefed right away, and then we could decide if we want to go down that road. >> Yeah. And again, these can overlap to next year so this one could be, again, it's the starting point and the timeline, really, is going to be for a longer term, so it would be a two year effort. >> And maybe sort of the prelude to that is doing the self assessment on the you know, what we can influence as relates to affordability. The variables which we can influence. >> So regarding this affordability index, kind of tied in with Austin ISD, I guess throughout the state, recently the state, a month or so ago, were talking about apartments, how close they were to top rated schools. Are you talking about something like that? So in this part of town, it's 20% more expensive, or are you talking about the affordability index of the tax burden and everything? >> Kitchen: No, not the tax burden, it's nor like >> What does it cost per square foot, essentially to build a home in Tarrytown versus central Austin? >> Kitchen: Paul, maybe you can give him I'm blanking right now on an example of the measures we've seen in affordability indexes. >> While he's thinking about that kind of tied to what commissioner Shea was about about the evictions I in our Round Rock School District, we get a weekly update on all of our schools. We have 52 campuses. [3:30:45] It lists how many students are enrolled. One thing we added a couple years ago, maybe two years, maybe just a year, is mobility rate. And it's been interesting to see that. So we see some of these schools, they have 700 kids, and we're looking at say, okay, 700 kids all year long, but in reality, some of our lower income schools, you get ten in a week, ten out a week. Ten in and at the end of the year, you can lose there can be a 25, 30% turnover, so that's a huge factor. And I think a lot of it has to do with the whole economy, the oil and gas, people are moving back in, doubling up, parents are bringing children, grandchildren back in, so it's kind of related to all that. And then, anyway, it's just kind of interesting to see that mobile. We have some that are ten times as much. Of course our high income neighborhoods, almost no turnover, nobody moves in, nobody moves out. And other ones are 80 to 90, economically disadvantaged schools, yeah, kids coming and going all the time. And we can't afford that I mean, we can't control that as ad Sue, we can't say, hey, there's been too much turnover this year. >> Yeah. We definitely track the mobility index. [3:31:57] It's very high because I would say 38% of the students reserve are immigrant students, and the mobility rate, particularly with that population, is very, very high. We've moved into doing a community schools model, like at Webb, at Reagan, and that's had an impact where we help stabilize the home situation so that the kids stay there, and that's having a very positive impact on the closing the achievement grade point average gap, graduation rate, all of those things. >> Yeah, if you can get families to stay a lot of times where they are, even if it's sometimes people say that's a tough school, if you can just get them to stay, help them find a way to, you know, kind of build some momentum an connections in that community, that's a huge value. One of the things I will I'm going to ask about is how many of our students are on mobility, how many come from and I don't know if we can ask that legally, just anecdotally, how many come from Austin ISD, Del Valle, from Georgetown, Round Rock, all our neighboring districts, then how many transfer within our district. I don't know if you have that within Austin ISD, where are they coming from. If they're in Austin ISD and move to another campus, that's a lot easier than if they come from a different part of the state where it might take a couple weeks to get them assessed. >> We just amended our transfer policy so even you go live in Austin, you can transfer your kid into Austin ISD. So I know we're tracking the kids coming in who don't live necessarily in the city or AISD, but they transfer into our schools. >> Okay. So we already we already pull some, so we're going to go through the list and identify short term or long term. Okay? And this is an on process because you're still going to get input. So let's go through real quick, just raise your hand or let me know. Again, tax burden with taxing entities would be short term? >> Short term. [3:32:45] >> Okay. There you go. Affordable housing, looking at joint efforts with housing corporations, and this one is different than public land, so these would be two different ones. So looking at joint efforts with several entities, would that be short term or long term? >> We should be able to do that short term. That's just gathering information. >> The evictions, I put that in short term. This is pretty much part of that one and the other one. So public lands. >> Short term. >> The strategic housing plan, needs throughout the community? >> Short term. >> But some will fall into long term; right? >> It will be this year [inaudible] >> Okay. Okay. [3:33:47] ransportation, looking at the lens of affordability, looking at the flexible work time, would that be the options on work time, like looking at different entities, private and public entities on how the flexible work time can influence the transportation part of it? Short term or long term? >> I'm just I'm wondering what the action would be on that one. >> I think that's you know, certainly with private entities, they're just going to have to make that decision. I think it's kind of self regulating, it's happening now because people can't get down here on time or it's getting more and more difficult. I'd love to see it short term but I think it's kind of a long term deal. >> So maybe like you said a briefing and understanding what could be done could be short term, and then the long term. >> Kitchen: There's a number of projects work on that. >> Uh huh. >> Kitchen: So the RMI project is working on that then there's some other initiatives working on that, but there may be a briefing on that that would make it clear what all the bodies can do to support. >> And that's okay. This could happen on several of these. Okay? >> I wonder if we could have like a short term, legislators, and that could [3:34:45] >> Okay. I'll put >> On the city level, I mean, I don't know exactly what the metrics are that have been met, but I know that the mayor and the city manager have been working to kind of reach goals to incorporate more options and work hours for city employees who have the ability to do that. So I know that I think there are there have been some decreases in the number of people who are commuting, but >> I think there's a pilot program going on. >> So yeah. So a briefing and then, like you said, just a question mark on what could be done. Affordable housing next to transportation, short term, long term? That one is a strange one. >> Kitchen: Well, some of that's a planning thing so it's part of the strategic housing plan that should be discussed so that one >> So this one could be discussed with that one. Right? >> It's also part of CodeNEXT. It's also and >> That's just part of the ongoing conversation when we're approving affordable housing projects. >> It's probably part of the affordability index also. >> Uh huh. >> What is the city's housing the timeline on the city's strategic housing plan? >> It's coming back to our housing committee in, I think it's May. >> So might there be some short term actions coming out of that, or [3:35:23] >> Yeah. We've got it >> They're already over there, and it's in summer. We have that one on the short term. Okay. This is the same. Nexus studies, then the School District and other bodies, like bus routes and just looking at other lens of affordability, would that be short term or long term? >> The RMI policies on bus is short term. >> Okay. >> So part of that, we could consider if there's other I would put it short term. >> Okay. >> There's two different things but they're related. >> Okay. >> And certainly in Round Rock, we don't have nearly as much toll and things like that as probably you do here. >> Yeah. But there might be oh, that could be helpful to you. >> It will be growing later on so it would be good to know that. >> So the affordability others, looking at day care, transportation we already addressed that down there, so less cross that one out. Day care, health care, pretty much other other affordability. >> I would say health care this year because you can talk about that as part of the budget process. >> Okay. >> Well, it's actually short term and long term. I think that the coverage for, you know, contract temporary and part time employees is short term, but joint efforts is long term. >> Yeah. I think this one you can okay. The sale of public land, you already talked about that one. That would be short term. And the affordability index, which will be starting >> I do need to say on the MOU on the sale of land and it being offered to the other governmental entities, the County has already committed and identified certain properties where the sale of those properties, the revenue would go toward any future courthouse construction, so I don't know if that would preclude partnering with another entity, but it they have identified it as sources of additional revenue to offset the tax burden for a new court facility, whatever it is. [3:36:45] >> So we may need a briefing on that to understand what has been done? Is that something >> Committed to by the court. >> Committed to. So that's an action item over here. >> And our School District is doing that, too. Our superintendent has identified surplus land that, if we decide to sell, could then go towards closing the budget gap. >> Yeah. See, that's that is exactly the issue that we have to talk about, as a community, because perhaps there's other ways that other bodies could help you with that, where we could still take the advantage of the land. We had that conversation at CapMetro, too, because CapMetro has issues related to land, but then also has issues related to its budget. So >> So under that, we did have entities, right, the conversation between entities, and identifying these type of efforts. The tax swap was brought up as well, short term, long term? >> I presume what, did y'all give direction to staff to come back within a certain time frame? >> Yes, we did. >> What's the time frame? >> I don't remember. >> April or May. >> It's this spring. I don't remember.>> So we'll be talking about a briefing and possible action in the future? >> I think that would be great. >> Okay. >> We could put that short term and get clarification on the timeline. >> In the sense of this year, yeah. >> Identify affordable housing through trust funds, joint efforts, public land, that stuff, that will be included there. Then the relationship with equity office, short term, long term? >> I think that would be short term. I think they're doing they're supposed to be doing stakeholder groups and deciding how what that office will cover, and so I think that would be a good part of that discussion should be how are we factoring in the affordability conversation, which is part of equity. >> Uh huh. Okay. So as confusing as it may seem >> You're not done yet. You didn't get to CodeNEXT. >> Sorry. CodeNEXT, how it applies, is it separate? Does it look at public schools? Zoning land use, how to create affordability and the density. >> Well, CodeNEXT will come back to us next year, but the code is being written now. >> Uh huh. >> So I think that it's part of a short term/long term thing. [3:37:57] >> Okay. >> I suspect that these relationships that we talked about are already being accounted for, but possibly not, and so the short term is just to understand how affordability is being considered in the CodeNEXT process. And actually, CodeNEXT, one of the things they're doing now is they're doing a series I'll call them white papers, for lack of a better word, but throughout the year, and those papers are going to cover certain topics, policy topics. >> Okay. >> One of them is affordability. >> So maybe a briefing and, again, possible action >> Yeah. I think the briefing should happen soon, very soon. >> Okay. So we'll get this one >> I think they're working on the affordability paper now. >> Yeah, they are. >> Okay. So we'll get that one. And then the last one, which is an interesting okay, sorry, the bus drivers, hours and schedules, we had already addressed over here, just to cover that. And then smart growth matrix, that was brought up at some point, and so if we want if y'all want a CodeNEXT briefing, do you want to go ahead and just get a briefing on where that was, what it was, and if it applies? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. >> Since Terry is here, Mr. Mitchell is here from CapMetro, I wanted to reiterate and make sure, because a quarter sent tax specifically applies to CapMetro in that right now AISD, there's a cap on the number of vouchers we receive for our students. >> Uh huh. >> Who rely on CapMetro to get to and from school. So we had like to pursue conversations about similar agreements that CapMetro has with the UT shuttle service and see what we can do with AISD. >> Yes. Three CapMetro board members sitting here, so I think we'd all be interested in that, huh? >> Who's the third? >> So that one would be short term, and again probably >> Can we call the CapMetro board meeting? >> I'd love >> Make some decisions. Short term to have that conversation. >> Short term to have that conversation, and then possible action. Okay. So the idea right now I know this looks like I'll put that together in a very neat little chart. >> Okay. That's great. >> The idea today was really to brainstorm and kind of pull items for short term and long term. But these are going to be associated with a timeline and where you want to see them at throughout the year. >> Okay. >> Okay? So since we're going to you guys are going to have another briefing, we'll do a follow up on let's look at this and you'll have a document similar with what Councilmember Garza just shared with you all, and that will be just narrowed down. Okay? >> Thank you, Catherine. >> One more quick question. I didn't think to put that in there, you all saw this about the Radisson a couple weeks ago, the downtown sold for a hundred this is kind of stuff and I know you went to the TED conference last year. Right? I saw you there. and that's going to be in Dallas I'm going to go to that because I'm on the appraisal board for Williamson County. This is a big factor affecting and I know you all have a law suit against the appraisal district and this is long term and nobody wants to touch this. But every year this is going to get more and more of a burden on homeowners. [3:38:45 PM] and so I applaud you for doing what you're doing and Austin city council for trying something. Chief appraiser Alvin Langford and I have done five presentations. Fort Worth, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin and Corpus Christi. We've talked to other trustees across the state, we've talked about this, the evaluation of oil and gas, that's fluctuating, that's a huge factor. So we're tied into this world economy, people are losing jobs. But when companies get away with this, at the sell for 130 million and they're on the tax roll for 54 million. And it happens, all these sky scrapers down here. >> We've been raising that issue for several years now at tax time and holding forums because people are furious when they get their appraisal notices and see how much the values of their homes have gone up. What we've been trying to make clear to people, the appraisal process is broken and the legislature has the ability to correct it. They have a number of recommendations from their own legislative analysis team to correct it and refuse to take action, and what is really frightening about this situation is the lieutenant governor has made clear -- and the way he phrased it was, the property tax vote in the last -- >> November. >> November election, made clear that people want property tax relief and we're going to give it to them by putting limits on these bad local governments that keep raising your taxes. So he's portraying it as though we're spending like drunken sailors and we have to be controlled with a tax cap or a rate cap, which does nothing to fix these broken and inequitable appraisal process, it just strangles us and hurts our ability to provide basic services. >> And you guys -- >> So we've got to be organized to have a clear message to the legislature -- >> You have it harder, it's harder in Austin than we do, but it's going to get us all. >> Maybe we should do a briefing [3:40:45 PM] at some point on the status of the lawsuit. >> That would be great. >> That would be great. I'd like to hear that, yeah. >> That would be really good. >> I guess just a general, because we couldn't go in executive session. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I don't need to entertain any motions on this plan because it's a plan going forward to see what -- >> Did we have speakers? >> We did. Mr. King. >> Thank you very much, and, gosh, I'm glad I listened to that briefing. Y'all have a monumental task. That's the hardest thing that any city -- you know, any regional planning group could tackle, affordability. Goodness. And you know, listening to the conversation, it seeps to me that the, you know, the policies that we're talking about, they would -- affordability means different things to different people. If you're a high- income family, you look at affordability through that lens. If you're a moderate income family, you look at it through that lens, and low income family. So, you know, I think it's important that when we're talking about policies and strategies that we're able to target those policies and strategies at those different groups in our community so that we can make sure that we're trying to impact that specific group with these specific strategies. So, you know, and part of the -- I mean, you know, the affordability problem is a combination of costs, expenses, and incomes. It's really -- you know, that's the way I look at it. I've got income coming in, I've got -- I spend money. I've got expenses. So I think we need to be looking at both, you know, sides of that equation there, and I understand you guys are looking at the big picture here, so I would suggest that we look at some other goals for establishing a minimum level [3:42:47 PM] entities in this regional planning area so we can lift incomes up that way, and look at projects, infrastructure projects that could be funded to help create jobs, the kinds of jobs that really will target the folks that need jobs in our city. And then if we're going to give any kind of economic development incentive, that those be targeted at small local businesses that agree to train existing residents, low income folks, folks that are hard to employ, I mean hard to -- you know, it's hard for them to get jobs, chronically unemployed, those areas of our community to help lift them out of the affordability problems here. And also, it would our infrastructure. The specific strategies that I would suggest we consider is free bus and toll passes at 60% mfi or below. Just give them that it's only fair because, you know, not that we willfully or wanted this to happen, but we have pushed many of these folks out of our city through did you understand, trying to do our best to manage our city here. We're not trying to directly displace these citizens, that's not what we really want to do, yet that's what's happening. So we need to be looking at strategies to keep the displacement from happening in the first place, and our land use policies, codenext being discussed her, I think that's critical, that's key, that's fundamental for our future here. And one of the things I keep going back to is, you know, we look at density as a strategy to help us out with some of these issues, but, you know, report after report that I've seen has shown that increased density does not help with affordability. In fact, all the large cities in the world that have used -- implemented these urban containments, sprawl came to strategies, to urbanize and densify their core, they've gotten less affordable. And what has happened is what's happening here. [Buzzer sounding] Families are getting displaced out to the suburbs. And that's what's happening here. I'm not saying that we're [3:44:49 PM] willfully trying to create -- make that happen, but we need to look at -- that's what's happening, and what can we do to try to stop that, so my last thought -- thank you for giving me a few extra seconds here, but my -- you know, just -- incentivize development where the developer agrees to -- if residents are going to get displaced, if they get first -- they get the opportunity to remain on that site, that they're not displaced off from where they live. So we have these big development sites in the city that come to the council fairly regularly. Can we look at those projects and say if you develop this part of the project first, and those residents that would be displaced get first choice, living there, then can we do that, let's try to create our -- structure our project so we can do that, and avoid displacement in the first place. Then one other idea, I know we've got these tncs, transportation network companies, you guys are working really hard on it, I appreciate the good work you're doing that, but why couldn't we say, hey, let's use some of these companies to take over some low volume bus lines? Why not? And pay for that. We would subsidize that. We would say if you use that as a strategy to get to your job and back, we will subsidize that. That seems like a way to help to say companies but also help the low income families who are in these areas that -- where there's not a lot of ridership, and yet -- and maybe help cost for capital metro as well, focusing on high volume areas. Just different ideas like that I could go on and on. I'm going to stop now. Thank you for your good work here and for listening to my comments. >> Thank you. I do think the page issue is something we could add to our strategic plan. Thank you for -- that's a good addition. >> Kitchen: Let's be sure and add that. >> We can get through the next one pretty quickly, there are no speakers signed up. The next one is approval of the calendar. I know it's hard for you folks to get here. I really appreciate everyone coming and being part of this [3:46:49 PM] conversation. So we moved it to every other month so it's not as big a burden on everyone's calendar. So -- >> Before we take action on it, I did notice the -- and I appreciate that every other month -- I think that is helpful. But I notice the next one, March 21st, would be the first Monday after spring break. Break. >> Okay. >> And I'm assuming -- we're going to be out for spring break. I don't know -- some city staff will be, but I think it might be a little harder to have data collection or preparation during that week. >> Uh-huh. >> If we have the meeting the Monday right after it. So I wonder if it would be possible to move it to March 28th, which is the following Monday. >> Staff? >> [Off mic] >> Okay. We can just contact all the members if that's -- so why don't I take March 21st off right now, and we can approve the remainder dates, and then we'll get back to everyone with the March date? Does that sound okay? So I'll entertain a motion to delete the March date, but leave the rest the same? >> Yeah. >> I have another question. So we've got them all at city hall except for the may one. Do we want to try to do at least one other one at another location? >> Sure, and that was -- we discussed that I think at one of the first meetings and everyone seemed to be okay with city hall. >> Oh, okay. >> Is everyone still okay with city hall? >> It works for me. >> We could have the -- could we have the may one closer to you? Since you're the one -- you seem to come furthest? >> That's fine. I mean, we could even have it -- it's a long trip for everybody else, unless there's a long trip up north, 183, mopac area, just to be different, but it's not that difficult, in the middle of the day it's okay to get down here. >> We can check with our performing arts center, plenty of space and parking, and. >> Beautiful spot. [3:48:49 PM] >> And it's a theater so I can check with our staff and so -- and we do have the ability to broadcast, too, I think from there. >> Check on that for the may -- >> Will do. >> Okay. Can I get a motion to approve the calendar? >> I move approval. >> Okay. By commissioner Shea, seconded by councilmember troxclair, we are taking the March one off, leaving all the other ones the same, and we'll get back with that March date. All those in favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> Any opposed? Passes 7-0. And the last one is the future agenda items. I have the livable cities report, the presentation on the evictions that commissioner Shea has suggested. >> Could I just get a little bit of guidance on the eviction one? I do have an offer from the legal aid attorney who has helped people with evictions and who's referenced the law in particular that at least provides a little bit of a solution on that, a problem of people's possessions just being dumped on the curb and then looted. There are also, I think, constables who might be willing to come and talk. I don't want to load us down or take up too much time, so if there's any kind of guidance on that, I've also asked our staff if there's any aware that that data is collected now on he I don't have the answer to it now but if we had a presentation from a legal aid attorney and from a constable who is involved in -- >> Okay. Evictions. >> Is that useful or -- >> Sure. I have potential legislative revenue will be presented by Robert Doggett from Texas Rio grande legal aid. [3:50:50 PM] Can you confirm with him and take care of the constables? >> Yes. >> I had a report from economic -- spirit of east Austin, I think somebody requested that, but staff hadn't finalized it yet. That's also on future agenda items. We might not -- because we also added a bunch today, too. So we're going to talk again about the strategic plan. >> Yeah. >> To see how to see how the livable cities presentation informs it. Other things I wrote down in the discussion which wouldn't necessarily be next meeting, but future meetings, a briefing on an affordability index. >> Yeah. >> Briefing on our affordable housing trust fund. See exactly what's in there, what should be in there, how long it's going to take. Go ahead. >> I don't want to blur the trust fund update, but I have no idea if our -- I think our housing corporation staff are in discussions with city affordable housing staff, but I don't know how we cooperate, if we are even able to, so to me that's a big unknown. >> We can ask. I can ask my staff to coordinate with the county and see if they could do maybe, I don't know, giant presentation, if they do coordinate -- the do a joint presentation if they coordinate. And then I have the tax briefing, and a briefing on the status of the lawsuit with the appraisal district. >> My suggestion would be, if -- you'll have to work out the timing and stuff, but if it works, it might be helpful to have the affordability index briefing on -- in the March meeting. >> Okay. >> Also. Because that's one where -- I think the sequence is briefing so we can all understand what we're talking about. >> Uh-huh. >> And then deciding whether it's worth pursuing. It'll take a while to pursue, so the sooner we have a briefing on that. [3:52:50 PM] >> Do you have, I guess, a recommendation -- >> As soon as we can nail down that March date, we can make it easier to coordinate with the speakers. >> Yeah. >> We'll also have to make sure that the move and the date works for the livable city presentation, which it should, but -- >> Could we look at the calendar and have the e-mail out by tomorrow? Okay. We'll let you know by tomorrow. >> Thank you. >> Does anybody else have anything? >> This was great. Really good discussion. >> Thank you for being here, like I said. I know you had a busy schedule. If anybody is link to our meeting in the back, don't forget early voting is going on right now and you can vote in city hall until 5 o'clock. Thank you. We're adjourned as of 3:52 p.m.