City Council Budget Work Session Transcript – 08/03/2016 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 8/3/2016 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 8/3/2016 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [9:31:45 AM] >> Mayor Adler: All righty then. We have a quorum so we're going to begin our budgets work session today. Today is Wednesday, August 3rd, 2016. The time is 9:31. We're going to do the budget piece. Councilmembers, kind of looking at lyingicly -- athletickicly what -- logistically what we deal with today. We have the community services aspect of the budget this morning. We also want to discuss the council budget concept menu and our process. We have an ordinance that would allow us to move things on or off the budget or to ask staff to spend the time to cost things out. But in order for us to be able to do that by vote rather than kind of -- last year we did it kind of by way of straw poll kind of informally. That created some ambiguity for people. So we wanted to see if we could formalize that just a little bit. But if we're going do that and not have public comment during our work sessions, then we have to pass an ordinance to enable us to do that. That's something for us to discuss in the concept menu. I do not anticipate us today moving anything off of the concept menu, so I'm not sure there are any votes today to be taken on the concept menu, but I think we should discuss that process. That's the second thing. We have the budget deal, we have that process, and then we also have the resolution adopting a maximum rate. We're not ready yet to do that. There's -- staff wanted to take another look at that, so we're going to push that back to the end of our agenda. And at that point, Ed, you [9:33:47 AM] will tell us whether or not we're ready to do something or if we should postpone that vote and make the corresponding calendar changes. So you'll guide us on that, but we won't call that up for discussion until toward the end of our discussion. And I think for planning purposes it's been suggested that we try to shoot for 12:15 for lunch, which we'll try to do here so that folks can kind of plan around that. >> Kitchen: I apologize, I should know that. But the ordinance you're referring to with regard to the concept menu, do we have that in front of us? >> Mayor Adler: It's short and in the backup. >> Mayor Adler: And there are copies being handed out as well. So we're going to go ahead and start. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and start, and we will start with the budget briefing. Ed? >> Thank you, mayor and good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and members of the council. My name is Ed van eenoo, deputy cfo and budget officer for the city. I have just one slide to get us started to just remind everybody what the plan is not only for today, but the plan for the work sessions that are going to occur throughout August. This is the calendar that we presented to council last week with only one change on it. The one change being that we had a scheduling conflict so we have moved the Austin water utility, that used to be on August 24th, and watershed protection used to be on August 10th. We just switched those two departments due to a scheduling conflict, but other than that the schedule and the plan for the four August work sessions stayed the same. We're here on August 3rd [9:35:47 AM] and the presentations we have in store for you today come from the animal services department, Austin code, Austin public library, health and human services, neighborhood housing and community development, and parks and recreation collectively our community services group of departments. So unless there's any questions or comments about the schedule, I'm going to just quickly pass it over to our deputy animal services officer, Leeann shenifell to take you through the animal services presentation. >> Mayor Adler: That would be great. Thank you. >> Thank you. During this past fiscal year the Austin animal center celebrated five years of sustaining a no-kill status, which means we have achieved live outcomes for more than 90% of the animals entering into the. In this past year we actually set a record high of 94%. Looking ahead to fy17, the budget includes an additional three animal protection officers, which accounts for the increase in the field services budget. The other allocation that shows a significant increase is the support services section. Previously support services had been included in the health and human services budget. [9:37:47 AM] But for fy17 those monies were moved out specifically to animal services, which accounts for that increase there. The budget break down includes the nine months of funding for what we're anticipating the animal protection officers' salaries would account for in fy17. We're anticipating filling those by January, which is where the nine months spending comes in. The one-time animal protection officer costs include items like trucks and modems, radios, uniforms and things. Which are those one-time costs. The other budget increases are for moving the remaining monies needed to move the heart worm treatment program completely out of the shelter's donation fund and into the general fund. That program was originally begun as a pilot because of the large number of heart worm positive dogs that we have at the shelter. Those treatments for heartworm can be financially prohibitive for adopters, so that program has helped us save additional animal lives. And then the second -- the third funding increase is for additional food and animal supplies. Our food contract is being rebid this month and so we're anticipating there will be an increase in costs associated with that contract change. The other thing that will allow us to do is to switch the animals to a diet that is better suited for being fed in the shelter, which should decrease some of [9:39:48 AM] the veterinary costs associated with sort of intestinal distress that animals go through when their diet is being switched. The only capital improvement project we have is associated with the kennel expansion and improvements to the campus infrastructure, which also includes parking and road improvements. Looking ahead, adding the additional animal protection officers will help us meet the ever increasing call volume. Since about 2012 we've been averaging an additional 2,000 calls for service per year. As of fy15 we had about 30,000 calls for service. And what's important to note about that is that does not include calls that cannot be resolved in one visit. So about a third of those require multiple visits by animal protection officers, which means that our call volume is actually higher than what's reflected in the 311 service request. Also, the animal services office was audited in April of 2015 and that audit reflected the number of staff able to serve the jurisdiction of our size with the population size living in Travis county. The audit found some inconsistent response times, an inability to meet some of our performance measures related to those response times. So having those additional officers should better enable us to meet those service needs. The additional importance of adding those officers is that we know that being able to connect residents to [9:41:50 AM] resources to be better able to keep their pets helps us to keep pets out of the shelters and in the homes where they belong, but the officers need the person power on the street to be able to link people with those resources. And that's it. If anyone has any questions, I can take them. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Zimmerman? >> Zimmerman: Can you back up to the 3.8 million capital and can you tell me a little bit more about this? How many extra kennels do we get for 3.8 million. >> This includes all of the infrastructure improvements, so I think the final count is 44 additional kennels, but someone from public works or someone more closely involved in that project could better give the details. >> Zimmerman: You're not exactly sure what all it encompasses. >> I'm not sure of all the numbers, but I think the 44 kennels, it includes parking lot improvements which are also important because we're typically maxed out in our parking. >> Zimmerman: Okay. >> Councilmember, Burt bum breast cancer as, assistant Lumbreras, assistant city manager. When we were designing the project we were looking at different concepts instead of just going in with a set number. We were trying to achieve as many kennels as we could. For example, you know, there may be a little bit larger area where you might be able to have more animals in a particular area versus just having one kennel dedicated per each animal. So we can get you the actual number, but I think Leeann is correct, I think that wasn't our initial target and what we were essentially trying to do was get more, but if I recall, [9:43:51 AM] Leeann, this is a project that the council approved and we're trying to combine that with some other improvements that were needed at the bedding at campus. >> Zimmerman: When you say the council approved. Which one, this council? >> The previous council. >> Zimmerman: The previous council. >> It was in their final year. It was last year, the last budget they adopted they approved the additional funding for the additional kennels. >> Mayor Adler: New further questions? Yes, Ms. Garza? >> Garza: We had some concerns from some citizens about the donation fund, how they thought it was not acted for and it's a pretty significant amount of money. Is that accounted for in revenue? And I see a no nod over there. If so why not? >> The donations funds are separate from the general fund operating budget. It's really a separate pot of money that animal services spends out of to supplement their programming. They don't use it to supplant their general fund core operations, but they use it as a course of funding for additional needs. >> So what are those additional needs? >> I think one of the things to keep in mind about the budget is we can't fund raise and the amount of money areas from year to year. One of the years we were hoping to move the heartworm prevention program out of the fund into the general fund is so we could rely on a set of amount of money for that program. So the donation funds are generally used for seed money for pilot programming. It's not a reliable source for sustaining programs. >> Councilmember, we -- [9:45:52 AM] health and human services budget and accounting staff worked on that fund and reconcile it and make sure that it's reconciled every month and we report to the animal advisory committee every month on the state of that fund. >> Garza: Okay. So you could provide the last four years of the donation fund? >> Absolutely. >> Garza: Okay. I'll submit that as a Q and a. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Any further comments on this section? Thank you very much. >> Good morning, mayor and council. Carl smart. >> Mayor Adler: Please proceed. >> Of course our mission in code is to provide quality education and enforcement, seeking that balance between the enforcement side and the compliance side in enforcing the codes for the owe for our citizens in Austin. We've noted just a few accomplishments, major accomplishments, and certainly we've been working diligently to enforce the short-term rental ordinance. We've implemented an enhanced enforcement program that's in conjunction with the amendments to the ordinance that this council passed late December 15. Also, we've increased a number of cases that are going to administrative [9:47:53 AM] hearing versus to municipal court. And the administrative hearing process has really been working well for us. That's been a welcome addition to the enforcement process, and we're showing an 88% increase in the number of cases that are going through administrative hearing process. And also working in conjunction with A.P.D. We've been able to enhance our enforcement of the waste hauler program, and that also is going well. You'll see our performance metrics listed on this slide, and we're certainly working to -- we've looked at massaging those metrics in order to improve the way that we were performing our code enforcement functions. The next slide shows uses and sources of funds. We're actually showing kind of a decrease in our overall budget from $20.1 million to 19.8. At this point we're recommending no change in the number of ftes. We're holding firmly at 117. You can see from our sources we still basically special revenue fund or enterprise fund we depend on the clean community fee, and approximately 91% of the funds are received through that process. We do not depend on funds from the general fund. Our other source of funds is from our license registration fees and we also realize penalties that are imposed by the building and standards commission. Just want to point out, you will see on the graph that actually the [9:49:55 AM] for fy17 there's an decrease this the investigation expenses and an increase in support services. I just want to ensure the council that we're not changing the boots on the ground, the actual staff that's in the field. That is a result of an accounting function where our costs are being centralized in the support services area versus the case investigation area. But it's not if affecting the number of officers that are actually doing the case investigation. I just wanted to point that out. Our budget highlights, we're working with the budget office and our assistant city manager. We have scrubbed our budget and actually reduced it so that we're not having -- we're not asking for an increase in the clean community fee. So we've actually -- you see how we've backed out the cost of -- one-time cost for equipment and supplies, 156,000. And then we also backed out replacement vehicles that was in the budget last year that we will not need to do in fy17. Then thirdly we've also done our budget to handle the other costs that are budget this year, commodities and our contractuals, we've scrubbed those to align them more, put them more in line with previous years. I do have to say that sometime it's difficult to predict what kind of a year we will have as far as incidents, whether or not there will be a flood or whether or not there will be a drought or whether or not there will be an increased number of demolitions, for example, or a vacant lot that might need to be cleared. Sometimes it's difficult to predict that. So we try our best to find that average. [9:51:56 AM] And in the last few years we've been able to realize some savings there. So with that savings we're able to control the -- manage the clean community fee or our portion of the clean community fee. Also you'll see vacancy rate here. We've actually seen an improvement on the vacancy rate. We do have attrition and promotions that sometimes are called vacancies. We certainly filled all the positions that were provided in last year's budget. Got those positions filled, but there's been some attrition and promotions that created other vacancies. So we're down to 5.1% right now. 5.1% vacancy rate with only one position that was vacant longer than six months and that position we do have an offer on the table to an individual. We've gone through the recruitment and selection process so position will be filled. Actually, we're doing pretty good with vacancies. Then lastly, the horizon issues and challenges is always a challenge for Austin code with new ordinances that might come up or amendments to ordinances that impact the load. Certainly we've had that situation come up in the past years. If we look at the short- term rental ordinance and the amendments, we've not adjusted our staff. We've done some reassignments of existing staff in order to handle the increased caseload that's brought by the short- term rental process. So that's something that we'll still need to address in Austin code, but we're not looking to do it at this particular budget. The repeat offender program dealing with [9:53:57 AM] substandard properties, particularly the multi-family properties that are substandard. That program is expanding. I know there was concern from the community and expressed by council, including more of those substandard multi-family properties into the program. And we're doing our -- certainly doing due diligence to include those. We're also looking at unregulated group homes and doing more with that program. This council passed the reasonable accommodations ordinance that allows us to deal more with the unregulated group homes and certainly we're setting up -- we have set up in order to be able to license annually and inspect those unregulated homes in order to make sure that health and safety of those persons living in those homes are protected. So as we get these new ordinances and amount the ordinances that impact the caseload, certainly it will be a challenge going forward to make sure that we've got the proper resources in order to handle those ordinances. There is an increased expectation -- one of the things we found out as we did more education and more public information about codes, people become more informed and we get more calls. We get -- we increase the expectation from the citizens. We're now -- last year we had approximately 20,000 complaints and we'll top 20,000 this year in complaints or calls for service coming in through 311. Right now as you know we also have the we've been audited, we have the audit, also we're working with the office of performance management to look at the code department and review our standard [9:55:57 AM] operating procedures and also look at -- review the organizational structure of the department. So we're focusing our energies on getting that done at this time. And once that is done we're looking at -- we're considering coming back to the council midyear and looking at adjustment maybe to our budget to make sure we have adequate resources to handle the expectations for the department. And so we just wanted to mention that to you so that you might be expecting us sometime in midyear, after wean taken care of our organizational issues that were brought up in in the audit and we're handling those issues. With that we'll certainly take any questions that the mayor and council may have. >> Mayor Adler: Before we take any questions, I want to thank you, Mr. Smart, for your service to the city of Austin. Your department, given all the political issues and the like in this city, may have been the most difficult job in the entire county U and your service has been real valuable to the city. You've taken us through real turbulent times with relevancements in the department. We wish you the best of luck and promotion to assistant city manager in Florida. Thank you for your service. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Comments? Yes. Ms. Pool? >> Pool: Thanks. I have a question, but before I do I want to congratulate you as well and let you know that I [9:57:58 AM] appreciated your steady demeanor in the turbulent issues and waters that the mayor discussed. So thank you and best of luck to you, which I know you'll be great. My question is just a general one. Group homes, does that definition include detox centers as well or do you know? Or maybe it's a legal question. I was just needing to know if detox centers, some of which are in district 7, come under the same compliance code rules that group homes do? >> Yes. And that probably is a legal question. So certainly I'll yield to our attorney to respond to it, but let me say generally with the reasonable accommodations ordinance being passed it allows the city to regulate pretty much any property where you've got seven or more people living together as a family unit. And that encompasses a lot of different types of situation,, like a regular rooming or boarding house, but it may be a sober home, but it may also include a detox type information. If there are seven or more they're living as a family unit in that particular property, then it could be regulated. But I will yield to Ann if she wants to add to that. >> >> I don't have anything to add, but we're happy to talk to you about whatever the issues are in your district with you. >> Pool: That would be great. Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Zimmerman. >> Zimmerman: Since >> Zimmerman: Since we just touched on legal issues, I wanted to ask what if anything we can say publicly about the str ordinances. Are they asking for a temporary restraining order to [9:59:58 AM] stop them from enforcing them or where are we on that? >> There was an an in junk active hearing. Our ordinance is still in place. There is litigation, it is long and comprehensive but I don't believe there's a trial date set. >> Zimmerman: I guess our official policy we would move forward until -- if a judge ordered otherwise, right? >> At this juncture, that's correct. >> Zimmerman: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: I also want to say congratulations and I want to really appreciate that the budget that you presented to us, you know. I know that we put a lot of pressure on your department in the past year, especially with all the ordinances that we passed regulating str's and the citizens of Austin, you know, coming out and demanding that we address that issue. And I want to thank you and your staff for being there and supporting us. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I echo those thanks and also add my appreciation and really your thanks for your commitment to making sure that everyone in this city has a safe and healthy place to live and over the last, I don't know, four or five years, I know that has been another issue that the previous council and certainly this council has continued that commitment. And it took some changes in your approach and really full strain of resources, but I really just -- in all of that it was really clear that you had at the forefront the health and safety of the individuals who are living in that substandard housing and I just appreciate all your work and again, like my colleagues, [10:01:59 AM] wish you well. >> Thank you much. >> Mayor Adler: Manager. >> Ott: I also want to led my voice to it. I had the opportunity to do that yesterday at our department head meeting. My history [inaudible] Ironically when I was a candidate for assistant city manager in Fort Worth as part of their process each of the candidates were taken out to lunch by a staff person and in my case it happened to end up to be Carl. It's funny how things come full circle and end up spending this time here. Carl has been in the business of code and code compliance for over 30 years and so that takes us back to the early days of when municipalities throughout the country were putting this kind of function, this mission in place on behalf of their citizens to enhance and keep safe the quality of life for everyone. I say that to say this, to the extent that, you know, best practices exist in this particular field, Carl has had a lot to do with helping to establish them in the various other cities that he's been in as well as right here in the city of Austin. So Carl, as I said yesterday, I say again today to you thank you for your commitment to Austin and the outstanding leadership that you brought to our city in regard to the mission of the code department. So thank you very much. >> Thank you, sir. >> Mayor Adler: So one quick substantive question. The projected number of days from when nuisance abatement complaints are reported until there's nonjudicial compliance project understand 2017 is significantly lower than the [10:04:00 AM] 2015 and 2016 numbers. Why do we think it's going to get that much better? I think it's on page 2. >> Page 2. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Yeah. Well, actually we are challenging ourselves to do better there. I think right now it's going to be difficult for us to attain that. Mainly because we've reassigned staff that were doing -- that were doing this process to short-term rental process. We created a team that -- that handles short-term rental enforcements and Friday, Friday night, Saturday, Saturday nights, even Sundays if we get complaints on Sunday we're going out on Sunday. We've had to shift folks over and that shifting has had an impact on reaching these kind of performance metrics. And I think that's probably why we may be coming back mid-year. We'll keep a close eye on this, Mr. Mayor, and we may be coming back mid-year if we see that we are just not getting -- not getting there. Right now I'm concerned about it. Right now I don't quite see that we're going to get it. We'll challenge ourselves and we're going to try and meet that demand. We're enhancing some of our I.T. Functions. Inity our ctm is working on if -- the interaction between 311 and Amanda. Right now 311 system doesn't talk to Amanda. You get an all into 311, they enter it into the system and they transfer it to customer service so they can enter it undesignated contracts Amanda and that takes two or three [10:06:02 AM] days itself. And that we've got to change. When the call comes into 311, it should be entered directly into the Amanda system. If we can get that done, ctm is assuring us that should be done soon. If that gets done that's going to help the response time. That means it gets to the inspectors sooner and we can get out there sooner. So partly technology issue and partly a resource issue as far as staffing to have enough staffing that they can get out there quickly and check the status of the situation. And certainly as a part of that and I think this came out too in the audit is looking at the prioritization. Taking another look at that. How do you prioritize cases so that the most dangerous cases rise to the top and those cases that have -- appear to have minor violations, you know, you take more time with those. But the average out, we still want to get that two days. The two days is kind of an industry standard across the country and certainly we want to -- we want to be up front in meeting that standard if we can. >> Mayor Adler: So do you control the data entry and the link to Amanda or is that out of your department's control and you are dependent on ctm to deliver that. >> We're depending on ctm to handle that. That's out of our control. That interaction between the 311 system and the Amanda system. In fact, some citizens say they call into 311, then they call back in a few days and 311 says we closed that out. They closed it in 311 but it's now in Amanda. So the case is not closed, it's now in Amanda and it's being handled. And so that causes confusion, if you will, in the community. So we need to take care of that. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. Further conversation, discussion? Mr. Smart, thank you very much, and again [10:08:03 AM] congratulations. >> Thank you, sir. >> Mayor Adler: Austin public library. >> Good morning, mayor Adler, mayor pro tem tovo and councilmembers. I'm Brenda branch, director of libraries. With me today is Victoria Reiger, the library's financial manager. The Austin public library is committed to providing easy access to books and information for all ages through responsible -- responsive professionals, engaging programs and state-of-the-art technology in a safe and friendly environment. The library's primary services include circulation much materials, reference and information services, youth services and the services of the Austin history center. I'm proud to share some of this year's accomplishments. Over the past year the library unveiled the city's first human powered bike mobile. Staff will cycle all over the city to supply books, resources and online information at nontraditional venues such as parks, community events and senior centers. The pop-up library offers a diverse array of library services such as materials to be checked out, library card registration and access to virtual library on mobile devices. The Austin public library launched a new online streaming service called hoopla during the past year. This service offers customers access to thousands of feature films, documentaries, music albums, audio books, e- books, comics and television shows. The content is always available and never a wait [10:10:04 AM] list, which appeals greatly to our customers. This digital service compliments our other digital services providing recorded books, magazines, music and Spanish and English e-books. Popularity of this service exploded over a thousand percent in just ten months making the Austin public library the highest user of this electronic content in the state. Attendance and participation at library programs continues to rise. In fact, a 38% increase in June for all -- for attendance at adult and youth programs compared to the previous year. Attendance and participation in the 15 -- in the summer -- youth summer reading program reached an all-time high with 15,600 youths taking part, which this program helps youth maintain their reading skills during the summer vacation. Projections for outcomes for our key performance measures are illustrated in the table. I'd like to point out that the materials expenditures per capita measures numbers. This is a standard key indicator in the library profession and it's published annually in the public library data service statistical report. At proposed funding levels, the fiscal year '17 projected amount of $4.02 per capita places the Austin public library well below the average of $8.65 per capita for our peer libraries. The library's main source of funding comes from the city's general fund. Our proposed budget for fiscal year 17 is 48.1 million, an increase of approximately 6.1 million over fiscal year 16. And here are some of the details of our proposed budget. Systemwide materials collection is proposed to receive a 3.5% inflationary [10:12:05 AM] increase, which translates into an increase of $133,331. This increase will benefit the entire library system and allows us to continue to grow our collection for Austin's rapidly rising population. Approximately 253,000 is proposed as an increase in technology hardware and software costs which continues to rise year after year. The remaining items that you see on this slide represent funding for the new central library. This coming year will bring excitement and opportunity as the new central library opens to the public. The fiscal year 2016-17 budget continues funding to support the new central library. If you recall, in order to military gate the impact on -- mitigate the impact on the city's budget, the library proposed to receive operating budget phased in over three years. Last year we funded -- you all funded 48.25 full-time equivalent positions and six months of operational costs including maintenance and utilities. The second phase this year is for 3.4 million which represents funding for 11 new ftes and the annualized funding for the ftes added last year. This request also includes operational funding for the new central library. And as you can see, our current vacancy rate of 14.1% has spiked this year solely because of the addition of the 48.25 new central library positions. These positions were loaded into the budget in October but we are just now hiring those positions so they appear to be vacant for most of the year. This slide presents highlights from the Austin public library capital budget. The Austin public library currently has a number of infrastructure renewal projects underway funded by voter approved proposition 18 of the 2012 bond election. [10:14:05 AM] University hills branch library parking expansion, this project will double the number of parking spaces provided at the increasingly busy university hills branch library. Pleasant hill branch library roof replacement and hvac upgrade, the design phase is well underway. Austin history center interior and exterior improvements. Restoration of this historical building will focus on ensuring the integrity of the building envelope and will be carried out in phases in order to keep Austin's only archival repository from being closed to customer for any extended period of time. Zaragosa warehouse fire sprinkler upgrade is now under engineering design. This project will replace the 1970 dry pipe sprinkler system at the library's only warehouse with a more dependable wet pipe system. Renovation of the will Hampton branch at oak hill is now nearing the end of the design project. The project will include the replacement of the roof and the hvac system along with all finishes, fixtures and equipment. The southeast Austin community branch library foundation and flat work repair project, the project will repair both the foundation and the sidewalks damaged by the movement of the clay soil at this site. And improve site drainage. So that the problem won't occur again. The project's construction contract is currently being negotiated and interim library service will be provided from a portable building at the woodane branch while the library is closed for repairs. Other capital improvement projects underway including the Windsor park renovation both now in design. The design of the is zapata [10:16:10 AM] branch and design of the little walnut creek Ada improvement projects. And here are the capital highlights of the new central library. While construction is progressing well, the anticipated substantial completion date for a finished building will be moved over the course -- has been moved over the course of the project from March to December of 2016. Resulting in the opening date of the new central library to be rescheduled to may of 2017. While the responsibility for the extended contract time issue is being investigated and determined, both the city of Austin and the construction manager at risk desire to proceed with completion of the project. Taking into account the current contract budget an additional appropriation of $5 million is required to complete the project and address multiple project change order requests and claims. It is the city's position that the consultants and the construction manager at risk are responsible for the delay and while it is anticipated that the city will recover and off set some of its costs, any such recovery will not occur in the time -- in time to postpone this requested funding action. Additionally, the appropriation will fund the city's finish-out of the lease space for the cafe. It is anticipated that 100% of the costs for the library cafe finish-out will be recaptured during the lease period. Looking to the future, these are our horizon issues. The first is building infrastructure needs. The most pressing challenge is [10:18:11 AM] maintaining our inventory of properties. As Austin has grown over the last several decades, so has the number and size of the municipal libraries. Since 1984 the library doubled the size of three existing branch libraries and has added 13 new city-owned branch libraries to its inventory. Over the -- the second critical issue is maintaining adequate staffing levels. Over the last ten years the library has found it necessary to use temporary positions to cover service provision gaps. According to the 2016plds, the Austin public library ranks 11 out of 13 peer libraries. Per service hour open. We typically use 20 to 30 temporary positions to provide basic service. Annually. In the future these temporary positions should be converted to regularly funded positions. Building and maintaining our collection is always at the forefront. The materials collection is the life blood of the library system. According to the 2016 public library service data statistical report the average materials expenditures per capita of our peer libraries is $8.65 per capita. We aspire to reach that average. The proposed budget for 2017 will raise this key measure to $4.02 per capita. We're making progress, but we still have a way to go. It's imperative that we keep abreast of upcoming technology to assure that the Austin public library meets the technological needs of our community. The library is a key [10:20:12 AM] participant in the city's digital inclusion program and we need to continue to be responsive to those who need our computers and our training and one-on-one assistance. The final Horry -- horizon issue is meeting Austin's needs within Austin's changing deem graph, challenging the library to provide new services and materials that meets the needs of a diverse community. The Austin public library helps support the aspirations of those who rely on the library to provide world language collections and continued education. Developing diverse programs and building a multicultural, multi-language collection will reap many rewards for this community. That concludes the library's presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. >> Mayor Adler: Thank. Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: I have -- I just wondered if you could explain to me, I know that the budget highlight that changes a total of 41,620 bucks, are you carrying over some money from last year's budget? If you are, how much will that be? >> General fund departments do not carry over funds. They don't maintain an ending balance. One thing to consider in that $6.1 million increase, when we're talking about the highlights on these department pages, we're not hitting some of the main cost increases which committee don't view as highlights. All these departments are seeing increases really to civilian wages, civilian markets, health insurance increases, workers coverage increases and we talked about those in the overview [10:22:12 AM] presentation. They are not in these presentations. The departments are talking about kind of more the of the highlights, spending more on this initiative or that program. But there's no carryover funds. Their budge he had is proposed to increase $6.1 million. >> Renteria: So there's not an increase on this year's request in the budget. Like through the general fund. The increase is -- is the total increase that -- is the 6.5 million? >> Oh, you are talking on the capital side. I'm sorry. Operating budget going up $6.1 million. On the capital slide the appropriations are $6.5 million, 5 million of which is related to completion of the new central library. >> Renteria: Okay. And didn't we approve that last -- this year or -- to increase it -- to add the $5 million to that? >> Was there a previous action? There was discussion I believe with council, but there was no action. This is the budgetary action to make that happen. >> Renteria: Okay. >> So councilmember, better Lumbreras. What you may be recalling in June there was a memo and subsequent item that went before city council on June 23 which had to do with an adjustment to the design contract which was the architect and the design piece. In there we did specify in the memo that we were going to be bringing forward an additional consideration on the construction side because we already knew at that time that there was claims and issues that we needed to resolve. You know, with a project of this magnitude and the time that we've actually been working on this project for many, many years there's been a lot of changes and so there will be a time, as Ms. Branch mentioned, excuse me, and we will have to work through and not only investigate but iron out all of those claims and changes that have occurred. But at the end of the day we need that additional funding [10:24:13 AM] to complete the project, get us to the completion and then resolve those issues at the end of the completion of the facility. So -- but you may be recalling that previous action on the design piece. This now would be the construction side. >> Renteria: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Zimmerman. >> Zimmerman: Thank you. With this additional $5 million on page 6, I guess it is, of nonvoter approved @%-debt, certificates of obligation, there's an additional 5 million. What does that bring the total up to roughly for the library? >> It would bring the project budget up to $125 million. >> Zimmerman: 125 million. Okay. Let me very briefly -- because does anybody remember the ballot language from the 2006 bond election? Let me read it quickly because it's brief. The issuance of 90 million in tax supported general obligation bonds and notes for constructing and equipping a new central library facility and acquiring land and interest and land and property necessary to do so. And the levy of a tax sufficient to pay for the bonds and notes. Do you see anywhere in that ballot language that the library is going to cost 125 million? Because I don't. And I think this is -- and this is not an isolated incident. We had the railroad bond that said we were going to build the red line from Leander to downtown. I think that was put on at 90 million. It's somewhere around 150 million. We had a bond for the waller creek tunnel that started around 25 million. Now it's over 150 million. So I'm not separating out the library and this seems to be what the city does as a habit [10:26:14 AM] around all the departments. So I'm very, very concerned about this. I'm going to be voting against this additional 5 million. We've got to be truthful with our voters on bonding and what it costs to do things. I don't know, I don't see a solution other than either to be truthful with what we're doing or just not put these on the ballot anymore. >> Ott: Mayor? Thank you. I was first not going to speak to it, because you raised the issue of the veracity of the staff, I think I do have to speak to it at this point in regard to your suggestion that we've been less than truthful, that simply isn't true. The ballot language did speak to $90 million. Subsequently with the change in scope the previous council did approve the additional funding that took this project to $120 million. And you just heard the rest of the story in terms of the 5 million to finish the construction and to deal with the cafe. So I object and reject the notion that staff or the council has been less than truthful about what was put in front of the people and they voted on in regard to the central library project. So we've been over this ground before, councilmember. I think you've said some other things in the past and so we'll just have to agree to disagree. >> Mayor Adler: Ed, with respect to the budget there was the funding of the positions anticipating the November opening got pushed -- we didn't fund those positions. What happened to the money that was in the budget for those positions but not spent? [10:28:24 AM] >> Mayor, Victoria reader, financial manager for the Austin public library. You are correct, we did have substantial savings from the positions that were not filled and we are filling most of those within the next couple of months. We committed to use some of that vacancy savings towards the new central library project and to pay for some of the architect fees that they needed at that time. >> So mayor, just to refresh the council's memory, when the item went before city council on the additional design piece, it was 1.3 million. So what staff decided to do is through the savings that we can achieve with the delay in the hiring of positions, take as much much that money as we can and basically push it towards that 1.3. So in effect the city council approved up to 1.3. It's going to be a lesser amount with that vacancy savings. We can get thaw exact amount in terms of what that number is, but that was a way for us to try to resolve that one particular issue. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. It would be good to see that. That would be helpful. And then I understand the -- the $4.02, the expenses per capita being substantially below bench mark cities. Could you provide us those bench mark cities and their numbers so I can use that when I talk about that? >> Right. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Other issues? Other questions on library budget? Yes. >> Pool: I'll just say thank you so much for the work you do. The library is a valued community asset throughout -- throughout the -- throughout Austin and I'm really looking forward to when we get to the celebration for opening the new library. I think it's going to be really fun and pretty spectacular so thank you. And please convey my appreciation along to all of your staff. They do go work every day. [10:30:25 AM] >> I will do that. Thank you. >> Pool: Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Great. Thank you very much. Ed, I think it's health and human services. >> Yes, sir. >> Good morning. Shannon Jones, director of austin-travis county health and human services. I'm joined this morning by miss Kimberly Maddux, our assistant director for administration as well as our other executive team joining me today. We're here to start off with our department overview. I want to emphasize that the mission of the austin-travis county health and human services department is to prevent disease and promote and protect the health and well-being of our entire community. We've had a very successful and very great year this past year. We were able to achieve accreditation being only one of three departments in the state to be an accredited health department. We were able to assist many victims to return to self-sufficiency after the floods over the last year. We've been able to develop communications community groups to address and begin to engage the issues are around inequities in our community which are significant challenges in Austin and Travis county. We were also declared by human rights foundation as having one of the few facilities in the nation that is lgbt friendly. Rbj health center. Along with that we've been [10:32:26 AM] able to do a lot of things regarding our contracts. I would just like to highlight some of those. Our social service basic needs contracts, 3,821 additional clients were served in fy 16. Over last year. Our behavioral health, 1100 additional clients served as a result of funding. Our youth early childhood, 15 children were able to access consistent, high-quality care for the past six months instead of being terminated. Some 666 additional unduplicated early childhood served in fy 16. An additional 8500 additional youth was served in fy 16. So there are a lot of individuals in your various constituencies who have been able to have been improved and have access to services as a result of the funding we received in '16. Around homelessness, 855 additional homeless individuals were served through social service contracts in '16. 75% of those receiving homeless services maintained or moved into housing in fy 16 over 15. Health equity solicitation, if you remember roughly over a million dollars were made available as part of our health department's funding last year. Of that all of those contracts have been put in place and we're in the process of operating. Just to remind you, maternal and infant health, roughly $390,000 were made to focus in on maternal and infant health communities. African-American disparities, we have sickle cell 224,000. With the alliance for African-American central Texas, roughly 112,000. Through our Austin outreach efforts a look at HIV and AIDS, we have 73,000. And through our services to the elderly, meals on wheels, [10:34:28 AM] $550,000. So a lot of those activities were actively engaged as a result of the fund made available. There were 37 additional new positions that were made available. Of those 37 new positions, all of them had been filled or are part of our operating budget for '16 as we go into '17. Let's look at use of funds over '16 over '17 in the proposed budget. In '16 there was amended budget was $85 million. The proposed budget was -- or is $99 million, roughly a $14 million increase. Let me tell you a little bit where that money is coming from. 1115 waiver, which is a federal funding that comes from the feds through the state tore for us to do a variety of initiatives, 9.5 million of that 14 million is that. 200,000 is increase of the federal fund we got from the refugee grant from the fed to address our refugee issues. Cost drivers, the things Ed talked about earlier such as cost of living increases and insurance and other things accounts for 2.5 million of those. In new spending, 1.5 million are things that we'll focus on in a few moments in terms of the new increases that we're doing. If you look at by division just brief over the department you see there have been slight increases in most all of our divisions and activities. I just highlight some of those. Six positions to replace lost federal funding. Four new positions recommended for surveillance and epidemiology programs such as Zika and. >> Bowl a la. As well as other issues. We have the third highest rate [10:36:28 AM] of HIV in the state and we need to focus our attention on monitoring those populations. Three new staff for teen pregnancy prevention were undertaken. We have one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in our state and those efforts are underway to begin to address those. And then one new additional position for our environmental health, one stop as the effort of the city to focus in on making customer user friendly at one stop, one additional position will focus on that. Additionally we had three staff to augment our health equity efforts. In addition to the funding we receive but also that staff will help us monitor, outreach and focus on those communities that have despair rate areas. In our social service areas, four nutates provide services at our neighborhood centers. Not only do we contract our services, we provide them in various centers within the city of Austin in which we provide social services, wrap- around services and the like. Three new staff to help is manage the large number of funding we have. We have to be accountable for the funds and we need to make sure we are managing those efficiently and those dollars are available as well. Some of the budget highlights for this additional money that we talked about earlier. So 600,000 of it is for housing first program to expand permanent supportive housing to reduce homelessness. As council has indicated, homelessness is a priority for this community and so these funds will begin to help us in terms of addressing some of those issues. Additional funding to support current social service contracts. $500,000 were made available to be able to augment what we're doing currently with our social service contracts. Originally we had talked about enhancing those services and this $500,000 goes towards that. The sobriety center social [10:38:28 AM] services contract was a center 245 will be able to provide services that will reduce the use of police officers while providing for sobriety center. $380,000 made available in this proposal to address those. The conversion of the vital records assistance to permanent position. We currently are getting funding revenue to cover that so most of that will be covered as part of that. Additionally the two additional environmental health officers will to be funded by the developmental services department will be able to expedite a lot of the activities we're doing with regards to environmental health. Services set up and operations at the one-stop center. We look at our vacancy rate, we want to emphasize that last year it was 6%. This year at 4.1%. We're quite proud of that. Our staff has worked diligently to be able to keep our vacancy rate low and we are quite proud of one of the lowest vacancy rates within the city in terms of our efforts. Our capital highlights, our key projects particularly are the womens and children's health - - women and children's center veneration expansion. The 2012 bond program included $3.8 million for the activity and we're underway in those efforts as well. Most recent cost estimate requiring additional 2.8 million of appropriations being able to complete that effort which we are part of the certificates of obligation bonds that we discussed. And montopolis recreation center which is a joint effort with pard is underway and we are looking forward to that opening. We will be coming back to council in September for approval of construction bids of those efforts. [10:40:30 AM] Finally, finally we look at our horizon and challenges. Health and human services have, like most of the departments, have significant issues in horizon. The first again is homelessness. We continue to have the challenges of homelessness in our community. We're working with our partners to address the issue and how do we strategically plan to be able to address homelessness. Health equity. We continue to have issues particularly around disparities. Whereas the -- continues to go down, the gap or the difference between populations of color, poor socioeconomic conditions still exist, although we're making progress we still have gaps. Infectious doses, chronic diseases particularly continue to be a burden. Not only for populations of color but for our community as a whole. Heart disease, cancer and diabetes are the leading causes of death along with stroke. Cancer being the leading one but we still have convergence of disease particularly heart disease in communities of color so efforts to address those issues are underway. Public health preparedness around Zika. We've had the first transmission in this nation of transmission within the borders of the country. As that occur in Florida, we most likely will see it occur in Texas and ultimately probably here in austin-travis county. We need to be prepared to address the issues in terms of prior to the onset of this disease as opposed to upon its arrival. So those are the types of issues that we are facing in terms of public health. We are grateful for the efforts council have shown in [10:42:31 AM] supporting us. We'll definitely need to continue the efforts we've begun in 2014. I'll be happy to answer any questions. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Questions? From council? Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: I'm glad that you are working with the parks department on that new center in montopolis, but I didn't catch the date that you are saying that you are -- completion and/or ground breaking. Can you give us -- I heard you all mention it but I just didn't hear it. >> Kimberly Maddux, assistant director of health and human services. The center is currently in the design phase so our next step would be sometimes next spring to come to council to -- or to solicit bids for the construction. The current opening date is estimated to be late 2019. >> Renteria: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Ms. Garza. >> Garza: I just wanted to first say that it's wonderful to hear all the additional services we've been able to provide and congratulations on the accreditation. Thank you for asking me to be part of that. It was a really neat process. I know it was an intense process so congratulations on that. My question is more for the city manager but he's walked out so maybe I could ask -- unless you want to defer. This -- this council and the previous council put a priority on spending and the need to increase spending, investment in our health and human services because there was studies done that showed we don't invest how other peer cities invest, we are the most economically segregated city, there could be a connection there because of that. I absolutely understand the [10:44:33 AM] charter and it's is city management's prerogative what to put on that. But I was concerned when we had the retreat because I feel there were discussions that were had there that created priorities and during that whole discussion I was concerned because I thought we've set our priorities by the resolutions. The resolutions that advocates are involved in, that community stakeholders have, you know, a huge process and come together and create these resolutions and so the previous council did that. We did that this time. There was all this input done and I feel like when I saw the initial budget binder and it said council priorities from the retreat, I was a little concerned because I was afraid that would be the situation. Granted, there are some health and human services issues addressed through the priorities that happened from the retreat. I'm just wondering why with what I believe was so much support from the council with regards to policy pushing increased funding why we didn't see that in this budget? >> Councilmember, that's an excellent question and I think that's a big challenge for staff as a whole. Everything you've described is a huge challenge because without a doubt the previous council and even this council has adopted a number of resolutions and it's always a tough task on staff to determine, you know, how are we going to take all of that and with a very finite and in this case even in this budget extremely challenging budget, how do you then come up with a set of recommendations. And I can tell you that I'm sure, you know, if we were to speak to individual councilmembers, everybody will have different takes and perspectives on it. What I can tell you is I think we are certainly open to talking to council. I mean this is our -- this is the city manager's first, you know, recommendation, but ultimately we always understand that this council has a prerogative to decide, you know, where you want funding or if you, you know, [10:46:35 AM] want us to look further. It became even more challenging because in order for us to give you some funding, we actually asked the departments to cut. So instead of going forward and coming up with a whole long list of recommendations based on available funding, we kind of had to challenge the departments. So I know the city manager will probably echo a lot of what I will say, but I can assure you we tried real hard to try to address what we believe are some issues and there's a whole lot more. Similar to what we deal with social services because any time we do a request for applications or request for proposals and I believe the mayor pro tem will agree with me on this, any time we do any type of process, we have more than twice as many requests than what we have even available in the pot of money for social services. So we know right off the bat that we're going to be extremely, extremely challenged and the council is going to have a tough call with that. So I'm very sympathetic because this is my area that I oversee. I wish we had the available resources to do it, but I just don't see how we can do it with the many needs that we have out there and the very, very finite number of dollars that we have available. And I don't know if I directly addressed your question, but I think that's my best shot at trying to tell you that it's a tough call. >> Garza: Okay. And I guess my point is I understand, I absolutely understand there are many needs. We get meetings all the time asking for funding and help, but it would be interesting to see that the resolutions that the council passed in this past year and where they weighed in on the budget and that's something that I can ask my staff to look into, but this was -- I feel like this was a priority, I believe it was a 5-2 vote from the previous council, 8-2 vote, so I don't believe it's just me. [10:48:39 AM] I believe I have seven other colleagues that supported increase in this funding. I don't know if it made it on this concept list because I think we submitted it after 2:30 and 2:30 was the cutoff date. But I will be asking for -- to see if we can find just one percent in the public safety budget. I believe this is a public safety issue and if we can find one percent in there and that would fully -- be able to fully fund the increase -- the promise that the previous council and this council has made to our community. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I have some -- some questions related to specific -- specific things that are in and not in. First of all, I want to say I'm really pleased to see the sobriety center in there. I'm really glad that we'll be able to move forward with that. One question I have, you talked about -- I see in the budget that one grant position is being transferred into the general fund, but I thought I heard in the presentation references to several. So I wonder if you can tell me how many positions are transferring over from grant funding and what kinds of programs they are working on, if those are programs that we want to continue. >> Yes, council -- >> We are in the process of identifying a variety because federal reductions are occurring. We are having to pick up. Kim will talk specifically about the specific ones. >> In fy 16 there were five grant-funded positions that the grant was ending and so those five positions were picked up in the general fund in '16. In '17 we have one grant position that's being transition transitioned into the general fund. >> Tovo: What is the program? >> I believe it's in our youth development area so in our Austin healthy adolescent. We have several grants in there and those grant funding levels are coming down so [10:50:40 AM] we're moving one position out of the grant. >> Tovo: I can ask for questions through the Q and a, but I mean it certainly sounds and what I remember it sounds like a program we want to consider but I would like to kind of hear about that in part because the needs, as the discussion with councilmember Garza just indicated, the needs are so pressing that, you know, I hate to be in a position of balancing one priority program against another. But I do think we need to get some more information about that. Can you help me remember what the one-time -- why the one-time funding for passages is being removed? I thought I remembered in the highlights last week that we were going to continue our financial investment in that program. >> It is in this budget. >> I can speak to that. >> Tovo: I'm looking at -- yeah, could you help me, Ed? >> In the budget document -- >> Tovo: Says it's being removed. >> Our budget happens in different phases so the first thing we do is budget staff is to remove anything that was one- time funded and that got down of done. That's why you see the removal of the one-time funding that was approved. Many months later in the budget process the decision is made to incorporate funding into the ongoing budget. That was done, should have been highlighted as a significant change offsetting the one-time drop, but it is in the budget and apologize for that confusion that it looks like it's being removed. >> Tovo: No, thank you, that makes sense. And it was a highlight that you -- you all highlighted last week or the week before. I just couldn't find tonight the budget document. I couldn't find the add on and I wanted to make sure that was going to continue and that was the child program at the Salvation Army shelter. Surveying children who are in the shelter. Thanks. So job fairs. I see that they are -- can you help me understand what job fairs are being supported [10:52:40 AM] through health and human services funding? Yeah, we'll start there. >> So councilmember, job fairs, we participate in many job fairs to recruit, for instance our nursing staff, our social work staff. We have difficulty recruiting some of those medical professional positions and so we participate in many job fairs in order to recruit those licensed vocational nurses, registered nurses, doctors, nurse practitioners, social workers. Those are all very hard to recruit positions for the city so we do a lot of recruitment at job fairs in order to encourage folks to come to the city. >> Tovo: That sounds like -- that sounds very important, but just let me clarify here. It says in addition six job fairs will be provided for underserved and hard to reach residents. Are we talking about the same job fairs? >> No, ma'am. I misunderstood your question. Our neighborhood programs and some others do job fairs to help clients and sponsor job fairs in our facilities to help clients see what's out there, help employers connect with our clients and so we do actually provide some job fairs in our basic needs area. >> Tovo: So we provide -- okay, so I'll ask some followup questions through the Q and a process, but we do job fairs, H.R. Does jobbers take and we have other job fairs going on around the city and I wonder if there could be show economic efficiency in joining forces or having some of those other departments help with our responsibility of doing job fairs. And so I will ask -- I'll ask some more followup questions on those. I understand the location is really important to bring those job fairs to the neighborhood centers. I'm wondering about whether we have resources somewhere else in the budget had help support those. >> We do work with other agencies. One of the challenges we have is getting a diverse workforce [10:54:41 AM] and part of the job fair is educate, involve and engage individuals in various communities be part of those efforts. That's why we do some focused areas. Certainly economys of scale, we can do those kind of things and will continue to do some of those as well. That's why we primarily focus on doing them ourselves. >> Tovo: Okay. Again, I'll ask some followup. I hope all of our job fairs are really trying to reach underserved, hard to reach individuals. So perhaps some of those job fairs would benefit by that collaboration. >> We do have challenges in trying to recruit particularly diverse populations. In certain of our job areas. So not only is part of the recruitment, also the encouraging, educating folks to get into those careers. Those are part of our efforts. >> Tovo: Okay. Thank you. We've had discussions at health and human services and my office and councilmember Casar's office have focused on lot of attention over the last year on thinking about how the city of Austin could participate in the work that the prep clinic here in Austin is doing. And I wondered -- I think we've submitted this question through the budget, but I wanted to ask you if you know whether the funding that we've provided for -- with regard to HIV prevention and education and treatment includes any money or any financial support for prep or for the work that the clinic is doing. >> This -- this budget does not, no. We have been in contact and we have been working, we've been communicating with individuals from the volunteer to talk how we can support their efforts. We have ongoing meetings with them to develop that. This budget does not. Certainly with our HIV outreach efforts, we refer to, we provide information about that this budget does not have that in. >> Tovo: Okay. Thanks. And I think we either have some questions submitted or have some enroute to see whether there are ways the city can participate more [10:56:42 AM] fully and that probably will be something we bring forward either as a separate resolution or through the concept menu. But just as a heads up, the work they are doing is really critical and I know you all have said as much in the meetings that we've had at health and human services and I hope the city can be a more formal partner in that work. Now turning to -- well, not quite yet. Caseworkers for the host program. Is there any funding within your budget at this point for any of the caseworking or other support for the host program? >> No. >> Tovo: Okay. And then I think lastly I wanted to talk about toilets for a bit. [Laughter] So we did approve moving forward with securing some temporary toilets, some temporary restrooms for downtown and then also initiating the process of getting a permanent restroom in the downtown area. And as I understand that is currently unfunded in next year's budget and I guess I wondered a little bit and maybe this is a question for the city manager, since we did initiate that in the current budget why that wasn't moving forward, why that isn't moving forward. You know, when we had the discussion it wasn't clear to me that that would not be considered until the subsequent budget and then as I understand it's not in this budget so we'll have to find -- find a way to fund either of those efforts. And thank you very much, Ms. Hayden. I know you talk with Shannon on my staff about restrooms two and three times a week. >> Deputy director health and human services. As a part of the work that we [10:58:42 AM] were doing for the public toilets in our research, we've really looked at how the pilot is going to roll out. And for a draft time line, it really will take through next fiscal year to roll out that pilot, get the research that we need. So if there was something that was going to come forward for the permanent loo it will be next physical year. >> Tovo: About the -- about the temporary. We were really eager and I thought had - - were positioned to move forward with the temporary solution more rapidly. >> With the temporary solution public works and health and human services are having conversations with our budget office because that price has significantly decreased. We initially was recommending that it was going to be about 272. We're roughly around the 160 range in which we're looking at their could be some reductions with that. So we are so we are having some discussions with our budget office, Diane siler. >> Tovo: Okay. So we'll continue to talk and figure out, but it sounds like am I right in thinking then that there's no way we can move forward within this budget cycle in getting those temporary restrooms, or is that still a possibility? >> Mayor pro tem, I think what we will do is because this project has been somewhat still fluid in terms of the number, we can sit down with the budget office and -- I didn't mean that. >> It's very hard in this subject. [Laughter]. >> I said it and I kind of connected it afterwards. [Laughter]. So anyway, so we will certainly sit down with the budget office once [11:00:42 AM] staff finishes the numbers and gets to land on an actual number. And then it may have to be something that we have to present to the council and look to see how we might need to address that. I don't recall the specifics of the resolution, but I do recall that project and it is something we do need to give you an answer on. >> Tovo: I hope we can -- one, I want to say I appreciate tinted look at the cost because -- the continued look at the cost because that is really critical and we don't want to spend a bunch of money especially on the pilot, especially if we know we're moving forward with a more permanent solution. But I do think it's a matter of some -- we taught move forward as quickly as we can -- we ought to move forward as quickly as we can on it. I know it wasn't a unanimous decision, but we did have a decision by the council to move forward with both of those pieces of the project and it's something that's such -- really important for multiple reasons. Maybe I'll hit those after councilmember Zimmerman talks. >> Mayor Adler: I think councilmember kitchen was next. >> Kitchen: I wanted to echo the concerns that councilmember Garza raised in terms of our council's interest in the priority for health and human. And I'm just trying to get through how it is -- I can certainly understand your response with regard to why that didn't end up in the budget, but I'm also trying to think of what is our path to actually implementing those priorities because we did pass, as councilmember Garza said, we did pass -- it may have been more than one resolution, and it is in the concept menu now from the ifc, the additional three percent I think or whatever it [11:02:44 AM] is. So at this point I'm not sure what path is other than to find areas such as senators is doing. The -- -- such as senators is doing. -- Such as councilmember Garza is doing. As a councilmember when we pass those resolutions we need some kind of path to get there. So I understand there are policy decisions that we need to make as a council and not for staff to make. We need y'all's help in terms of well, if we were to actually shift like that, what should we be looking at in terms of funding to do that. So I don't expect you to answer it today, but I would like some kind of thinking for us, but other than it just falling back on us to have to go back and find places that we think that there may be funding. So I don't expect an answer today, but I guess I'm asking as a request when we have that kind of policy direction -- that kind of policy direction, and obviously we have issues, you know, in terms of available resources, you need to understand what our path to getting there other than just us having toll look into the budget and finding where the dollars are. We can have a conversation later, but I would like for you guys to think about how that path might be and how you might be able to help us with that. >> I think I'll speak to it a little bit now. We certainly recognize when the significance of when council passes a resolution in regard to the budget, this council has done that and previous councils have done that. And we, I, take that under advisement. But ultimately it is possible that those issues may not be reflected in my budget recommends as is the case at hand now, once you've made the recommendation you have [11:04:44 AM] the prerogative. You have the prerogative now. >> Kitchen: What I'm hearing is from y'all's -- your perspective, this is not enough of a priority given what you've looked at in the entire -- you know, in the work that you have to do in looking at the whole budget that it's not enough of a priority for you to bring forward to us some suggested ways to reach it. >> Ott: No, that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying in crafting our budget recommendation just like the council has to in regard to considering our recommendation, we weigh a lot of factors in crafting our recommendation, and in this particular case with regard to health and human services we funded it at the level we did believing it was adequate and the best we could do. All priorities across the budget being taken into account. In terms of whether or not we're in the position to offer alternatives or options for the council to consider when funding something at a higher level that isn't in this budget recommendation, we're certainly happy to accommodate that kind of request. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Zimmerman. >> Zimmerman: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did vote against the Portland loo, but on the flip side I believe it is my colleagues's prerogative to vote for it. I thought when council passed something it was not a suggestion, it was not a recommendation, it was a directive to put it in the budget. But I don't support the Portland loo so I'm happy it's not there. But be that as it may, on a lighter subject I've given some considerable thought to this. As most of you know, I have the pleasure of having the corner office and I overlook the Willie Nelson statue there. [11:06:44 AM] And there is some open space and I wonder if we could put the Portland loo right next to Willie. Show it off, innovative thing that we're doing. Out of respect for Willie I think we should be playing his music in the Portland potty. Blue eyes crying in the rain might be good when you're in the Portland loo. And finally, we've had some controversy about the gun-free zone here at city council. We have a metal detector out here and a sign that says no guns allowed. So I suggest that we move the metal detector and the gun-free zone signs to the Portland loo and we also put in a sign that says no gambling allowed. So if it's a gun-free zone and a gambling-free zone there will be no excuse for people going in there to shoot craps. [Laughter]. >> Mayor Adler: Any other comments? Mr. Renteria? >> Renteria: I'm not going to shoot any crap here. On a temporary food permit here on page 113, volume 1, I was noticing that you are expecting a decrease -- a decrease in rehabilitative for temporary food permits. Is that because the reason is because we raised the cost? And if we are not going to get that revenue are we going to eliminate a position in the department? >> No, we don't anticipate eliminating, we're going to maintain it where we're currently at. >> Renteria: But it seemed like you're not going to have as many inspections because it seems like you're decreasing that budget by $143,000? >> That is correct. So what was the question, I'm sorry? [11:08:45 AM] >> Well, your temporary food permit revenue is expected to decrease and my assumption is because we've raised the price up so high to 95 or $98, and a lot of these small groups have have the small or temporary events for one or two days or a lot of the wine tasting, it's so expensive for these groups to have these events anymore, it seems to me now that based on the revenue of $95 per event that you're not going to have a need for a person -- you don't have to go out there and inspect these locations anymore. >> Not really. We still have inspections to do in our area. So those will continue to go on. So I don't see a reduction -- I don't see a reduction there. >> You're not doing as many -- you're not issuing as many permits now. >> Yes, we are. We actually are. Do you want to speak to this? >> Councilmember, the original production was based on the new fee schedule that was rolled back so the projection you're seeing that's higher was based on the 98-dollar fee, and that was rolled back to the old original fees, which is $35. >> Renteria: And this is just a small group. >> There's more permits being issued, but the original revenue was based on a higher fee that didn't materialize or that was reversed. So technically there is a revenue reduction on the paper, but we never realized that $98 for a full year. >> Renteria: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Can you comment real fast on the projected incidents of please he wills [11:10:47 AM] and -- measles and mumps, those illnesses doubling, estimated to double over this next year? >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Mayor Adler: Can you turn on your mic? >> Dr. Phil huang, medical director. We have outbreaks all the time. We have pertussis going on, different vaccine preventable illnesses. That figure is actually based on -- I think it's about 300 -- like 28 per 100,000 would be about 336 cases per year. And in 2013-2014 we had over 300 cases alone. So that's -- it's in the ballpark. We're trying to prevent -- these are vaccine preventable diseases and those are specific outcomes that we expect to see a decrease as a result of our immunization efforts across the community, but again, when we get one outbreak we can get a very large increase in that number. >> Mayor Adler: So someone looking at the numbers and seeing roughly 15 -- two years ago, roughly 15 last year and seeing a prediction of almost 30 this year is -- that's not out of the ordinary, that's within the Normal ebbs and flows of that number per thousand people? >> And we may talk to Dr. John about this, but I think the numbers show our performance in these last two years so that we've actually been doing well these couple of years, doing better than what we might expect otherwise. >> Mayor Adler: That's what I meant, there's nothing we need to be concerned about the number, it's within the Normal range of what we would expect numbers to be on an ongoing basis? >> But I think it's a good point that we are certainly in the range of having increases if we're not successful in [11:12:48 AM] our immunization efforts. >> Mayor Adler: You spoke about getting out ahead of the Zika issue so that we're anticipating or ready for it rather than waiting for it to happen and react to it. Would you describe what that means? What does it mean to be pro testify and ready for -- proactive for it and ready for it rather than waiting for it? >> A couple of things. One is that as part of the getting ready, it's educate the community about actually mosquito infected borne disease, whether it be Zika, whether it be west nile or whatever. So we have as part of our efforts been involved in the community in terms of going out, doing an assessment of various communities, specifically in terms of what the residence looks like, what the communities are engaged in, what are the risks in those communities specifically, giving education about the types of preventive efforts that the individuals can and should do with homeowner's associations and other groups. We've done those in targeted areas within our community. Dr. Huang can speak specifically about the examples of the Casper that we've undertaken, not the ghost, I'm talking about community health assessment. And can you speak more to that? >> Well, specifically the Casper was one of our efforts, several weeks ago we did a sampling of 30 sites across the county to be representative for the county and did actually household surveys of citizens to assess their current knowledge regarding Zika, where they -- where they get their information, health information, what are their trusted sources of health information, what is their preparedness efforts and that's part of our planning efforts to again determine the level of knowledge currently regarding Zika. What are the gaps in knowledge? How can we get some of those information pieces to them. But that's part of really of our comprehensive approach that we are trying to get ahead of this because we have looked at this issue since we had our first cases several months ago to try to prepare for what [11:14:49 AM] we're seeing now before the mosquito season is getting worse, as we expected. We've been working with our state and federal partners, the state health department, the CDC. We've developed a Zika action plan. We've participated in some of the federal meetings. We were just down in McAllen working with other communities on how do we respond if there's that first local transmission case. And that's again what we've seen in Florida so that how are we going to work with the health department to determine where is the -- where you draw the circle around where there's local transmission, because there's implications for the blood supply, there's implications for recommending pregnant women to come to Austin and Travis county. We've been working with multiple city departments. We convened Austin code, Austin research recovery, parks and rec, Austin energy, Austin water, to try to get everyone to be looking for reducing the sources where there's standing water and try to -- because that's the preventive efforts that we really proactively really need to do. The big things are doing that, eliminating places where mosquitos breed, larvae siting and those things so we're not spraying at the back end of these. >> Mayor Adler: Got you. Last year the council made a significantly greater investment in health and human services. Would you generally describe what we got for the money -- the additional priority and emphasis we put under there? >> We particularly as we've said several times, are most appreciative of that. Most of the funding was related primarily to our positions that we were provided. Those positions became effective as of January the 1st of 2016, which means they were not available to be hired until that time. [11:16:50 AM] Proactively reengaged in an effort to try to recruit and as a result we were able to as I said earlier to be able to hire individuals and have all 37 positions filled and in place now. So in terms of building the infrastructure we've already done that, we've gotten our staff on board. We've gotten them hired and they're underway. Obviously the results of such a short turnaround would not be reflected this year, but as we go into 2017 we'll see those. In terms of the contracts for social services, we've increased those based upon their funding that was made available so we've contracted out roughly a six percent across the board increase through our social service providers and that's underway. We've also had a million dollars' worth of health equity funding that was made available. Those contracts are now in place. I saw all that because keeping in mind the process of initiating and giving these things in place takes quite a lot of time. So they don't automatically turn obviously on a dime. So we feel quite comfortable within the time frame we've had of the funding available that we've gotten the positions in place, we've got the contracts in place and we're underway in terms of achieving those goals that were identified as part of that funding. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. And I was real supportive of that and the leadership from councilmember Garza and supportive of her efforts this year to keep that going. As I look at it, one of the items that you've indicated is one of the budget increases this year is the annualization of some of the things that we started last year. So part of what we put a lot of money against last year were for part of the year. This coming year will be the first year that they're throughout the year. So the decision we made a year ago has resulted in necessarily increased costs as we start off this year. It's almost like some of the things we did last year require like a two-year phase in in order to be normalized in the budget. Most specifically with respect to the personnel positions that were funded halfway through the year. Am I reading that [11:18:51 AM] correctly? >> That's correct. >> Mayor Adler: Okay, thank you. Yes, Mr. Lumbreras? >> Mayor, if I could just hit on an issue that councilmember Garza brought up earlier. Shannon is probably not going to say too much about it, but the public accreditation that the department had achieved, we're actually one of three departments in the whole state that has achieved that standard within our public health department. And I'm extremely proud of the work. This has been an effort that is -- that started like back in 2009, so it's taken about six or seven years for us to actually get to this point. I know that Shannon and his staff and a lot of folks behind the scenes have worked extremely, extremely hard to achieve that goal. And extremely proud of the work they did. So I just wanted to highlight that to city council because that is no small undertaking. It's a huge effort. So I'm really proud of the work that they did. >> Mayor Adler: And cautions on that result. -- And congratulations on that result. Anything else. >> Zimmerman: One quick question. I haven't heard a single word about Travis county central health. And Travis county central health advertises themselves and they say that a lot of their mission sounds identical to the city's health and human services department. For instance, doesn't central health do vaccinations? >> For clients who are -- for the client load, yes, they do provide those, but those are only -- >> Zimmerman: Sorry, go ahead. >> Those are only those who are part of their client base. >> Zimmerman: So you're saying there's no overlap between Travis county central health and the city of Austin? Because it seems like there is, a lot of duplication of service. >> Well, in terms of service delivery area, public health involves all activities so we don't focus in on client services, we focus in on prevention. As Dr. Huang said earlier, whether you're a client of central health, whether a client [11:20:52 AM] of your private physician or whomever, we provide those services. We serve as a safety net to make sure our community is protected in terms of service. We don't provide basic health care, and there is a difference. So when you're talking about central health, they are a health care agency, their primary function is to provide health care for those 200,000 residents within Travis county that do not have health care. Our function is to provide preventive services to those clients, the population who may have access and may not have access to health care providers as well as other things. >> Zimmerman: I'm sorry, but the point of Travis county central health, of taxpayer subsidized health care, is for preventive measures. We hear that all the time, that we're going to -- the reason we have to pay -- how much is it now? 70, 80 million that Travis county central health charges our taxpayers? And their mission is to prevent illness from progressing by providing for subsidized health care. So how is there not an overlap between central health and what your department does? >> I don't see -- let me -- >> I don't see the distinction here. >> Let me see if I can say it a different way. Travis county central health provides health care for the indigent population. Approximately in Travis county that's roughly 200,000 residents. The rest of the population in terms of being able to access may or may not be part of that -- is not part of that population so they have their own private providers. They may have no health care at all. So for health services that public health provides, which is the prevention of spread of disease, we are the provider of care for the general population. So things that are transferable such as tuberculosis, immunizations, HIV and other stis. [11:22:52 AM] We are the avant garde to make sure they are not spread to the population. We have a different population base who central health provides. There are some that overlap, that is correct, but there are a larger number who are not. There are private providers who also have clients who choose not to go to there. So we are the population-based health provider for the community. Beyond just health care we do other things as well, but in terms of health care, those are the functions we do, those are the functions they do. They are primary care. They provide -- they are the doctor for the poor, the indigent so they can be able to have health care services on a routine basis whether they're sick or whether they're not sick to maintain their health. >> Pool: Mayor? I think that's one of the roles of the city, isn't it? , That help ensure the safety of the residents and visitors to the city. Isn't that basically your mission? >> That is correct. And it is joined just the health care -- it is beyond just the health care peace of it. We do partner with our other partners and it's more than just central health. There's Seton's, St. David's, others. Those are health care providers, but we're the public agency to provide the health and public health activity. >> Pool: And the city also provides leadership in this network and the safety net for these -- and social services that are really important for healthy community and also to make sure if there is an epidemic, if there is a vector that could create an epidemic we have systems in place to make sure of its containment and elimination. I wanted to tell you how appreciative Andrew Harris district 7 residents are -- I and district 7 residents are of the long time work you've done in the community. And I think providing [11:24:52 AM] health services is in a way kind of a civil right and it underpins the importance of a healthy community. So thank you. It's not easy the work that you do. >> Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Garza? >> Garza: I don't mean to beat a dead horse. And he's walked out again so I'm sorry the people sitting there are getting this. But I have to say how incredibly frustrating it is to hear what I heard a response of -- you know, it's council's prerogative to figure it out after the budget is presented. For these kinds of services the people that these services help are people that won't be able to be here for a meeting, for a lot of things. And we're their voice. We get elected, we tell them we're going to speak for them, and most of these people might not have voted, but we're their voice. So for the person who has to go to the restroom on the street, I don't -- I'm confused on what the strategy should be going forward on placing priorities on issues that are important to us because we've heard loud and clear, we've gone through an extremely intense process with stakeholder groups with advocate to try to -- with advocates to try to make this -- I feel like what I'm hearing is you get to deal with it at the budget. That's your turn, that's when you get to deal with it. And what's the process? Do we not do anything all year long, but wait to do it at budget time and that's where the slicing and dicing gets done? I really hope -- I really hope to get a better understanding of how we articulate priorities for our city. >> I'll take another shot at it. >> Garza: You don't have to respond. I think I understand. [11:26:53 AM] I understand there's need throughout the city. It's a frustrating response to hear, do it at budget time. >> And what we're cast with as we go through because you all are certainly the manager and the management team, look at what when you give us that. There's no way we would ignore that. However, when you're giving us those priorities it's off budget cycle so we know you're not taking the full breadth of the budget needs when you're doing that. So the manager is tasked with doing the full spectrum and doing all the things you've told them through the year and crafting a recommendation with all that in mind. So I understand your frustration. I think it's important for us as councilmember kitchen asked earlier, how do we then accomplish that? If you all give us direction to say we want that included in the budget, we'll go back now and say okay, this is as path for you to do that. But he's taking that all into account, not just the one thing, but the 30 things, and he can probably give you a running total of the things that you've told us throughout the year, and all the other needs in trying to balance the budget going forward. ,. >> I'd like to just build on what assistant city manager Goode said. When we're crafting a recommendation to council, one of the starting points we have to begin with is a budget that council approved for fiscal year 16. So in fiscal year 16 extensive discussion about staffing levels. The council chose to staff below what was recommended. But when we look at your direction we are looking at staffing direction as the starting point, that you you want to continue funding the positions you said in fiscal year 16, we want to continue those into 17. Council looked at fire staffing levels and added a fire station at shady holly in 16, but only funded it for the final two months. [11:28:53 AM] Before we start looking at the ifcs, we have to look at that cost. The same thing with the E.M.S. 42 hour work week. We had to look at that and the overtime for police for south by southwest. We had to address that. We put all those things into the base budget and then step back and look at the ifc's from council collectively and right now they're in excess of $20 million. And try to figure out how do we address all the fy16 budget cost increases, how do we stay within the state defined roll back rate. Right now a decision was made to increase the general homestead exemption which reduced our revenues by almost four million dollars. So we have to take all that into account. The budget we're proposing is at the maximum tax rate, which we know from listening to council at the policy work session this wasn't an ifc, but we know from listening to council at the policy work session it was not your desire to have a budget at the maximum tax rate, but we're at the ma rate in order to fund the things in motion in fiscal year 16 and do the best we could in regards to the various ifcs that were put out out there. And the policy work sessions and policy retreat were hugely important to staff because we heard the importance you placed on health and human services, affordability issues, homelessness, although it's not everything that council desired to see, there are increases in health and human services, half a-million- dollar increase for social service contract, 600,000-dollar increase for homelessness programs, increases more than doubling of the transfer to the housing trust fund and a proposed increase in the senior exception. So that's the full dynamic of what we're trying to do when we present a budget that is responsible and responsive to council priorities, but I think it's also indicative of the fact that we are [11:30:54 AM] challenged with the same thing you are challenged with. How do we fit it all in and I think the one thought I got from what the city manager was saying, I think what you heard is right. He did say it is absolutely council's prerogative to change the budget, but I don't think he would want and I don't think staff certainly wants you to think that that's something you have to do on your own. We're here to help you figure out how to reshape this budget in a manner that you would like to see it. And we can absolutely do that if we hear from the council as a body that you would like to see recommendations for areas we might reduce in order to fund more hear, we can do that work. And I believe I'm speaking correctly for the manager that we will do that work on your behalf. >> I absolutely appreciate that response. And that's owe that's one I wish I would have heard and I heard a different one, but thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar. >> Casar: I'm chiming in here largely to echo councilmember Garza's last point, which is that I appreciate how hard it is to do this and now I'm interested in if a majority of us structurally want to get to a certain higher level of funding and achieving the resolution, and in particular interest of me of getting to our goals on health and human services and getting to the goals on the housing trust fund end, the second one being important because if we can't house on lower income people in the city, then the services may not have -- in a short time there may not be enough people to give the services to, which would be very sad. So I think both of those things are challenging goals for us to achieve. And what I'm interested is better than last year figuring out how we work more with the staff who have been working so hard through every line item to figure out how we achieve it rather than us in the last few [11:32:57 AM] weeks scrambling to make the adjustments. So perhaps through the concept menu process we can have a discussion maybe at our next budget work session where we think through how we communicate that to the staff with enough time that we're provided the sorts of options to make those choices if we can make -- if we can make some sort of coherent direction that we want that to be done. >> Mayor Adler: I think it goes back to the question that councilmember kitchen asked, we need help identifying what the best paths would be, recognizing that they were passed, they were considered and not put into the manager's budget, what are the best paths if the council wants to do that. And that's the help that I think the council is asking for. I have one last question. In the horizon issues you indicated that the department lacked the capacity to sustain public health emergency response. And I wanted to understand better what that meant. >> Well, presently a sizeable part -- a significant portion of our public health response is funded by the state. Meaning the epidemiologist staff, a variety of support staff, surveillance staff and the like. So as those funds dry up we're going to be in a less tenable position to be able to maintain that type of responsiveness. And so what we have built in with some of the capacity last year is the ability to do that. Over time those funding depend on federal policy, they may change. And our ability to respond will be directly impacted with those changes. So that's what we're alluding to there. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: My question is on neighborhood service. You know, there's a lot of neighborhood centers as we discussed during the year and last year that are gentrified now and, you know, when we first built these [11:34:58 AM] neighborhood centers they were basically in the core area, urban area. So we want to know if you're actually looking into maybe expanding in some of the services up to the north of Austin and west -- east Austin, northeast Austin where there's a big population now and southeast Austin where a lot of low income people are having to move out there and just wondering if you're looking to see if maybe you're responding the service and maybe expanding some of the part of the neighborhood centers. >> Yes, councilmember, we exactly are. We've been looking at this for quite some time. As part of our strategic effort for this year is looking at lease space, especially on the northside, primarily in the rundberg, north Lamar area for the possibility of a leasing space as an interim plan for a long-term plan. We're also looking particularly at colony park, which is the northeast part of the community, where there are absolutely no facilities at health and human services, neighborhood centers or the like. And of course dove springs, which is an area that we have significant needs as identified. So those particular areas we would call the eastern crescent of the city and county we're looking at the development of facilities. On a short-term plan lease space or joint efforts. We're talking with the district, central health and Travis county about the possibility of joint location and joint developments to be able to have comprehensive services in the area so that to ensure people have one stop. So yes, that's part of our strategy that we've incorporated and that's where we're moving currently. >> Renteria: And I hope that in the future y'all would bring us, if there's a need for funding to accomplish that -- I'm pretty sure that won't happen until about 2016 because I looked at the budget and I'd see how tight it is [11:36:59 AM] because we also -- you know, -- we passed a resolution that E.M.S. People should have 42 hour work week, which was very costly when I was looking through the public safety budget, but it's required and it's taken a lot of our general fund money also besides the homestead exemption. I hope you would come and let us know early when you are executing that plan to maybe creative enough to maybe sell or give that land to another department -- the buildings that you're using if do you consolidate some of these neighborhood centers, you could lease that and use some of that funding for the expansion in the eastern crescent. >> Well, we agree with you, councilmember. We're looking at that, we have a strategy. And all of those components are part of that strategy. >> Mayor pro tem, did you have a comment? >> I have two or three quick -- very super quick questions. The 600,000 that's being allocated for the housing first permanent supportive housing, is that what we contemplated last year for the itcic program -- the project on oak springs? Or is this actually more general funding. >> Yes, it is. >> It is more general funding. I think what we recognize is because of some of the ongoing efforts with the host teams, the outreach teams that this would help to try to help look towards getting some placements for some individuals so I think it was much more general. We felt like that might be a way to get there. >> Tovo: I see such a range of responses in the audience. Okay. I think it's good news. So it's not tied to a particular project. It's just general funding. [11:38:59 AM] Great. I'm glad to hear that. When is the women and children's shelter out at Tannehill renovations going to be completed? >> 2018, 2019, somewhere in that time frame. >> My goodness. That seems to be quite a bit later than we had anticipated. In fact, I think I had sponsored a resolution to expedite that early on. But this is really -- I can't remember now what we thought our end date was, but this seems considerably later. >> Yes, ma'am, it is considerably later than we projected. We are trying to cut time wherever we can. We do-- we are bringing the bid award to the council. I believe it's coming in September. That would be the next major milestone. Part of the issue with the timing is we can't shut the shelter down while construction is happening so trying to phase that construction where the shelter can still operate mostly the way -- it will still have to lower in capacity for a short time, but to be able to operate it semi Normal while we're still doing construction. So that makes the construction phase longer than it normally would have been but we have had delays in the process to this point. >> Tovo: Can you give us a general sense of what the delays have been? >> We've had some delays with the lease with the county and salvation Army purchased a portion of that land for their building projects. So there was an easement issues that had to be worked out legally. So we had some legal issues that had to be worked out. It just took longer than we anticipated. >> Tovo: Was that the [11:40:59 AM] primary delay? >> Yes, that was the primary delay. >> Tovo: That's unfortunate. Thanks for your continued work on that. What was my third question? Well, I'll submit it through the Q and a. Thanks. Oh, I know what it was, I just remembered. The senior -- this actually gets back to what you were saying, Mr. Van eenoo. There's a council resolution to look at the impacts of increasing the senior exemption and I saw it I believe on the concept menu. So there is not an increase for the senior exemption that is built into the recommended budget. That would be a concept menu item and I believe it's just under a million dollars. Is that right? >> Mayor Adler: No. >> The resolution on that item asked us to identify the increase in the exemption that would be necessary to keep the median senior tax bill level from fiscal year 16 to '17. That would be an 11,000-dollar increase taking it from 80,000 to $91,000 a year. And in this budget staff is proposing a 5,000-dollar increase, which does have revenue implications. What is contemplated is the of thousand dollar increase that would be needed to get to the full amount, the full amount expressed in the resolution. It's another one of those resolutions where in looking at everything staff made an attempt to move in that direction, but given all the other constraints and priorities tried to find a way to get the full amount? >> Tovo: I apologize, would you mind going to that again and showing us where the additional option is on the concept menu. I just want to really understand -- >> Should be under the first blue tab, fees and revenues. It's 3.01 -- no, that's not the right one. [11:43:02 AM] >> So that is increasing it to 91,000. So increasing it to 91,000 is the 950,000. So what is it in the recommended budget? I know you just relayed it to us. >> It has council approving an increase from 80 to 85,000. If you were not to approve that increase then there would be roughly 80 or nine thousand of additional revenue that could be allocated to other priorities, which reflect on the concept menu is to increase it beyond staff's recommendation to 91,000. >> >> Tovo:. So in the recommended budget it's an increase to 85,000. On the concept menu is the cost of increasing it to 950,000. >> To 91,000. >> Tovo: 91,000. >> Which would result in a revenue reduction of 950,000. >> Tovo: Thanks for that explanation. >> Kitchen: I have a follow-up question. So I just want to confirm just so I'm sueding, but the -- taking it from 80 to 91,000 is what is necessary to keep seniors at the same -- I'm probably going to use the wrong terms, the same level they're at right now. >> Their tax bill. For a median, it varies from home to home, but the median senior home as reported by tcad you would need an 11,000-dollar increase on a fixed exemption in order to keep them level. >> Kitchen: To keep their tacks from going up -- taxes from going up from what it was last year. >> That's correct. >> Kitchen: So the 80 to 85 helps to some extent, but there's still an increase in the seniors' taxes unless it goes to 91, if I'm understanding correctly. >> You're right. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Mr. Casar, your light is on. >> Casar: And that's in consideration of the homestead exemption. >> It's also in consideration of the homestead exemption. It's in consideration of [11:45:03 AM] rising property values, a dropping tax rate, increased general homestead exemption, all of it you would need an 11,000-dollar increase in the senior exemption to keep that median senior at the same tax bill in fy'17 as they pay in fy16. >> Casar: And my question might be at what value home, given staff's recommendation, does the seniors' tax bill stay flat? And I imagine it is somewhat lower than the median value home, this increase actually does keep it flat, if that's correct. Does that make sense? Because it is a median I would assume that at the median family home there is an increase, but at a lower home there would not be. >> Kitchen: That's a good question. I wouldn't think that would be the case. >> Casar: It would have to do with the appraisal increase. >> It really is -- at some point in time when the value of the home becomes low enough where after the homestead exemption and everything you don't get any more. If your taxable value is already at 80,000, increasing it to 85 doesn't change your tax bill at all. >> Casar: Thank you. I forgot this one is flat. I assume the calculation is different. >> Mayor Adler: All right. I think we're ready to move on to the next topic. Thank you very much. That gets us up to the neighborhood housing and community development. I think there's one more after this. [11:47:12 AM] Parks. >> Good morning. My name is la Tisha brown. I am the acting assistant director for neighborhood housing and community development. I have joining me. >> [Inaudible]. >> Mayor Adler: Can you turn on your microphone. >> I am [indiscernible], chief administrative officer for the department. >> We're here to present our proposed budget for 2017, neighborhood is housing and community development. We provide housing, community development, small business development to eligible citizens in Austin. Our goal is that housing is liveable and people are self-sufficient. Some of the accomplishments I would like to mention today, number 1 is the draft Austin strategic housing plan. In that plan it will include numerical goals, timelines and strategies to maintain and create affordable housing. In the plan it states that we need 75,000 affordable units -- not affordable units, but 75,000 units in the next 10 years, 35,000 being affordable. The next thing is our ghhi partnership, that's green and healthy homes initiative. We have seven non-profit organizations that participate in that initiative with us along with several other city departments. The whole goal of that program is to have streamlined application services, which we refer to as no wrong door. And we want to make sure that we share data and that our properties consume less water and energy, produces less waste and does not contain health and safety threats. That's the goal of green and healthy homes. The other accomplishment I would like to mention is the density bonus [11:49:12 AM] program report that was produced by staff. In that report there is discussion about affordable housing goals and gaps, overview of current density bonus programs in other cities, cost of constructing, preserving, buying -- and buying down affordable housing. How other cities structure density bonus policies is one of the centers. And then staff made some recommendations on that. Those are the accomplishments. The next thing I'd like to refer to is slide number -- this is the slide I'm referring to. Doesn't have a number on it. But basically we're looking at the first column, it mentions all of the services. And there was a decrease in the service from fy16 to 17. The second column relates to housing related services. There was an increase there. Third column is affordable rental. There was some decrease there. And I have an explanation for that later. Repair services, there was an increase in repair services. And then there was a decrease in the housing department serving clients that were 30% median family income and lower. The next slide is operating budget. The bar chart depicts uses of program funds, housing absorbs the majority of our funding. The sources of funds that we have, we have grant funds, housing trust funds, general funds, and the break down is shown above for you. The total number of ftes that we presently have is 54, and we have [11:51:15 AM] five vacancies. Moving on to the next slide, the vacancies, the positions we want to fill, one is for records management, one for community land trust, one for the healthy homes initiative and one for smart housing. That shows the different positions and the amounts on that slide includes benefits. We have a vacancy rate for 2016 at eight percent. So in our spending plan a few projects that we're investing in, Guadalupe Jeremiah housing project, we plan to produce 35 units. Door development, 33 ownership units. Permanent supportive housing, 50 units. And then under the general obligation home repair program, 119 units is what we plan to produce for fy2016. >> Horizon issues. We have some challenges in the area. We're always questioning whether or not funds from the federal government will be decreased or moved. We have to address affordable housing gaps. We have produced a number of documents where we've done research, explore what other cities do and then our technology challenges that we have. Under technology we do plan to bring on an edom system for records management, and a database for multi-family units. So we're open to any questions that you may have. >> May questions? Mayor pro tem. -- Any questions? [11:53:16 AM] Mayor pro tem? >> Tovo:. >> Councilmember Casar referred to something on my mind too and that is that we have made several changes that are going to affect the money flowing to that fund. So I understand the perspective that it may have been hard to achieve that in this fiscal year. So -- but I am still interested to know whether we can achieve that. But my question really relates to understanding how the numbers are captured on page 139 of volume I. And I apologize. I know not everybody has that. >> What number? >> Tovo: It's not on your slide. It's in the budget documents. I'll just describe what I see and maybe or maybe we can put it up on the board. I apologize if I don't understand this. It has to do with the requirements and the transfers in and I just need you to help me understand what of that is a balance, but thank you, councilmember Zimmerman. >> I think we go through this every year and by the time it comes out I've forgotten how that information gets captured. Here's Mr. Van eenoo. >> I'm sorry, I didn't hear the question. >> Tovo: I'm trying to figure out what is proposed in terms of the transfers in, so it's the 1.96 number. So we're reflecting the [11:55:17 AM] anticipated increase in transfers to the affordable housing trust fund based in part on some of the changes we made this year. Help me understand if you could that bottom line and whether that reflects kind of an ongoing balance in that fund. >> You're looking in the budget document? >> I am. 139? >> I'm looking specifically at the housing trust fund, the general housing trust fund, not the uno. >> Is housing trust fund, the general fund in fy16 we're increasing to two million dollars in fy17. >> Tovo: Right. And the bottom line there, does that reflect an ongoing balance? >> Yes. I'm with you now. So the fact that they're spending more than what's coming in is the fact that that is a separate fund so it will have a beginning balance. >> Tovo: So what's the bottom line? How much is that fund going to have after we do the transfers? Does it have -- am I to understand this information to mean that the trust fund currently has a three-million-dollar balance -- >> It may have more. I'm thumbing through my fund summaries and I'll give you the answer -- why is it not there? >> Tovo: Do you know what? I can submit this through the Q and a. That might be an easier means. I'll go ahead and do that, Mr. Van eenoo. No problem. >> I'm pretty sure I can find it. If you want to go to the next question -- >> Is that basically the requirement -- in this context is that what requirements mean? It's what is budgeted. In adopting the budget the council authorizes appropriations. It means there's $2.8 million of appropriations coming out of that fund anticipated spending. Out of the housing trust fund. >> Tovo: So those are [11:57:19 AM] commitments. >> Planned spending. >> Tovo: For this next upcoming fiscal year. >> That's correct. >> Tovo: I wasn't sure if it meant something different in the context of the housing trust fund. So then I guess we do need to know what the funding balance -- what the current balance is so that we'll know kind of how much flexibility there is in that fund for this year. >> I found it. It was not -- >> Could you turn your mic on? >> It is on. >> Get closer? So the beginning balance for fiscal year 17 is '81 thousand 478. So they are projecting they will end the current year with $831,000 of unexpended funds. Roughly two million dollars of a transfer from the general fund puts you with the total available funds and they are proposing to appropriate all of that, $2.6 million to housing programs, $229,000 to support service programs. And they may be able to speak more about details of what they are. I mean, sometimes this funding source allows them to kind of stockpile funds if needed, sometimes if they're doing project related work and there's a project that's going to be three or four million dollars, they might build up an ending balance and then when that project happens they will draw it down. But they do fund some staff out of this fund as well. >> Tovo: Thanks. And again, I can ask for the detail through the Q and a process, but I thought I had asked the question generally of staff whether that -- whether the expected transfer in had already been allocated into -- had already been allocated for particular projects. And I thought I got the answer no. So I am real interested in what kinds of components are under those planned requirements, whether there are specific projects in find or just kind -- in mind or just general categories of spending. I think we do have some -- >> We'll track that down. >> Tovo: Some important things on the [11:59:19 AM] horizon we will need to fund and I'm trying to determine if this is a source for it basically. >> We'll able to do that for you. >> Mayor Adler: Any other questions? Thank you very much. It is noon. The last one we have is parks. We talked about going to 12:15. Should we go ahead and start? Let's go ahead and start. It's our last one of the day and then we have a couple matters we need to address. We need to talk about the concept menu process, whether we want to pass that ordinance to let us do something other than straw votes. And then Ed is going to talk to us about the -- setting the maximum rate and whether or not that's something we should be doing today or not. >> Good morning. >> I'm sorry. Can I ask a quick question about the previous question? I tried to catch them on the way out but she don't know the answer. For the previous department the description of new positions, four of the five say they are grant funded. Why is there fiscal -- I guess, well, impacts the budget is because we're accepting the grant money and expending the grant money? Does that make sense? >> Councilmember, even with grant-funded positions, the council does have to authorize those through the creation of the position so that may be the reason why it's noted in there, but formally we have to get approval to authorize those to create the position and then when the funding gets in as well. That may be the purpose for that. But we can get you a more specific answer on that. >> Troxclair: But they are always going to be listed as basically a budget expenditure or that there's a negative impact to the budget rather [12:01:20 PM] than zero -- rather than an offset. >> I see what you are saying, are we showing only the expenditure and not the revenue to off set it. >> If you flip to slide 3 on that on your slide deck, the page before in that pie chart on the right, you can see neighborhood housing, their primary source of revenue, more than half their sources of funds for delivering their programs come from various grants. Posely from hud grants, but 55% of the money comes from grants and so these four positions would be funded out of that grant portion of their budget. Even though they are grants, it gets treated as revenue coming in and expenditures going out. Congress has to authorize the expenditure in order to fund the grant positions. >> I think your specific question do we always show them on the cost side and why wouldn't we show them on the zero side. >> Troxclair: Yeah, because if you slip to slide 4 it's shown as an expenditure instead of zero. >> It's shown as expenditure because even the budget we're showing when we talk about health and human services budget being -- I'm sorry, neighborhood housing budget being $19.5 million, that's inclusive of all their grant funds. If we were showing a general fund piece of the budget we would have to say it's a zero impact to the general fund but what we're presenting here is their total budget using all sources of funding. >> Troxclair: Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Great. >> It is a cost, but -- >> Good morning, Sara Hensley, director of parks and recreation. I'm going to run through these slides and not spend a lot of time on specific things. Our mission is listed there. Obviously we provide, protect and preserve premier park system and we do our best to promote quality recreational cultural and out tore experiences for residents and [12:03:21 PM] visitors. Some of our major accomplishments we're proud of, too many to list but these are the ones we wanted to highlight this year that doesn't always get a lot of attention is our Austin nature and science center. It has a plethora of programs and serves hundreds, thousands of young people and adults. We received a $20,000 grant. He was a Disney and ESPN grant for a climbing tower that will certainly be used by children and adults alike. We are currently in the process of the national league of cities planning for children and nature which many of you have been involved or know about and received the $20,000 there and we matched that with 20 and we are in the running right now for an additional $50,000. This is an extensive process that brings in stakeholders not only internally with the city but externally with nonprofits and the school district to look at where the gaps are when it comes to serving young people and families in regards to nature. We ranked in the top outdoor -- as an outdoor activity in Austin for the nature science center and two other things, the asian-american resource center was the first city to have a smithsonian exhibit. And then our carver geneology center was awarded a partnership award through the university of Texas. And we're proud of all of those things, plus many other accomplishments, our wonderful staff provides to our residents and visitors. I'm not going to walk through each performance standout but I want to highlight two. One is the citizen satisfaction. We hope to do the same percentage next year. You may ask why did we dip from fiscal year 15 to fiscal year estimate on capital improvement program and our spending plan and that is merely because we are in '16 is a heavy planning and design and permitting year and when [12:05:21 PM] that happens, it is a lot -- it takes a lot longer to move through it from an internal process as a department that's not necessarily with other departments and so you see it going right back up next year so we can move forward. We have stayed fairly consistent with our park score which is a national score, trust for public land. We want to get out of the 50s and we sort of dropped one point this year, this is out of 100, but we're working diligently and providing the resources, amenities and obviously the land acquisition for areas that are gap service. I've got to turn around my -- on our uses and source of funds, our amended budget is 87.2 million. And we propose -- the proposal is a $94.9 million budget. In this budget we have two ftes that are requested to be added, a ground specialist and one is a maintenance worker 2. Here you see our forces -- sources of funds. Two areas I'll highlight, one is the special events fund and that is directly related to the events and the ticket -- dollar per ticket or three dollar per ticket that goes into a separate fund so we can be completely transparent on the money going in and the money going out. In addition our expense refunds at 4%. That is primarily cip reimbursements to other departments. And then the other -- you have your golf fund 8.5% and obviously we continue to try to obtain grants so that we can have other programs like the children and nature. Our money in our different divisions, as you can see, have gone up slightly in community services. Our parks, planning and development support services and, of course, our transfers, and that is, again, our transfers to other city departments for services. [12:07:21 PM] Some of the highlights, changes which I've already mentioned, there is the one about the operational expenses into the special events fund. That is the money that we get through the events. And then the one-time funding for parking enhancements, this is where we have put and placed parking meters in areas and we're shoring that up through the budget office so that money -- obviously after we paid the transportation department for the meters and for the service of monitoring, then there's a certain amount of money that can go to the department to take care of for maintenance purposes in the area for which is money is generated. We've increased contractual commodities just a little bit based on new or renovated facilities in the queue and then I mentioned the two positions there, which is nine months funding. It takes us that long to hire that position. Our vacancy rate has stayed fairly consistent from '15 to '16 and part of that attributes to the fact we had to do a very, very heavily focused recruitment of our summer seasonal employees and lifeguards which we're very much appreciative for the funds. Other than that we stayed consistent. In our capital program there's a lot to mention, but just to give you highlights, the amount of money that's being appropriated for this next year is about 13 million. But we're going to spend about 22.8 million, which is money carried over from previous bonds and money that we'll be putting in the queue. We have a wonderful partnership with the downtown Austin alliance and the Austin parks foundation to redevelop republic square and that is underway. Many of you were in attendance for that press conference. We are in design for the onion creek metropolitan park improvements. We will be kicking off some of the master plan for the Pease [12:09:25 PM] park. Ponciana park neighborhood development, it's an undeveloped park and that will be beginning in fall of this year. And then something right here downtown across from dick Mathias shores is the alliance children's garden that will begin this fall and has been a a long time coming. Other items of -- that are noteworthy, we are right now in the design, draft design almost a final design for the new joint facility with our health and human services partners to develop a community facility that will serve not only young people and families in the area of recreation and cultural activities, but will also work to help provide through melt melt the much needed services. -- Health and human services. We've been working hard with the renovations to govalle and Shiite pool and have had quite a bit of attendance including some comments about restrooms and other facilities that are needed. We have completed the highland park master plan. And now we'll get ready in September of this year to kick off the Walter E. Long metro master plan, metro park master plan that we were given the funding from last year. We were fortunate to complete and get council support on the parkland dedication ordinance and working diligently on the operating procedure manual. As we look beyond this year and into the future, there are some areas, as you have heard from many other departments, we're facing the same thing that other departments are, an aging infrastructure. In order for us to achieve the goals of providing safe and accessible parks, particularly in the area of meeting the needs of people with special [12:11:26 PM] needs, Americans with disabilities, we have decisions down the road to make. Not necessarily this year but we will have a report by the end of the year that looks at our facilities in regards to its accessibility and so that will be something we'll have to look at. Our safety of our patrons, we've remained, if you look at the work that was done through the budget office with the community engagement, we rank fairly -- we're doing pretty good when it comes to safety for our patrons. We can always do a better job and we're working on that and this year funding is helping us with some automatic defibrillators at our sites which will help us staying up to speed. But overall the facilities themselves and the structural issues are something that we worry about, swimming pools and our recreation community centers. The good news for us when it comes to programs is that for the first time in a long time most of our recreation centers were completely at capacity for after school and summer camp programs. That's the good news. The bad news is there's a long waiting list. And so -- and if you have children and you've tried to get in like myself, we weren't able to get in because they are so popular. That goes to Kimberly and her staff in keeping the programs full. And then finally our acquiring sufficient parkland. As the city grows, so does the need for more parks and more amenities. And we have not been able to keep pace with acquisition of property. Cost of the property is exorbitant, but even then we're working with aid and other sister departments to try to find land that are located in the gap areas but that's something just to bring to your attention that we'll have to keep looking at. And that concludes the presentation. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Ms. Pool. >> Pool: Thanks for the report. Appreciate it. Can you give us a really quick [12:13:26 PM] update on the status of the swim 512, the aquatics master plan? I think you touched on it here and that will be something we will be looking at as a horizon issue. >> Yes. >> Kimberly Mcnealy, assistant director parks and recreation. So the swim 512 is a master planning process where the parks and recreation department is spending time within the community to determine what a future aquatic system should look like. How it should be funded, how can we make it more sustainable, how can it be more sustainable environmentally, how can it be sustainable fiscally, how can we make sure we are more responsible how we operate that system. We've got in 2014 we completed a aquatics assessment which told us about the infrastructure and the actual mechanics and the problems with all the mechanics. In the summer of 2015 we were physically out at swimming pools getting feedback from community members regarding what they would like to see within their aquatic system. Right now we've had a series of meetings that started in February with brand setter Carroll as our contractor and we began asking based on all the information that we gathered up to this point we began asking very targeted questions about what facility -- what a system should look like. Aen the most recent exercise that we went through is talking about defining the types of pools that could be within a system and how many of those would be desirable by the community and what kind of -- what kind of facility would be -- I'm sorry, what kind of system would be sustainable. And so we've collected that data. So the next step is in the fall is to report back here's what we heard to talk about [12:15:26 PM] the criteria of when a pool reaches a certain point and it's failing and we've defined what failing looks like, what's the criteria for the department to move forward in either closing that swimming pool, renovating that swimming pool, decommissioning it so we can be sustainable. To be frank, the hard part is about to happen because we know that we have a community of folks that really like their swimming pools and they really like the -- their opportunity to use those and so when we're making the criteria decisions, this will be the part that I think will be most uncomfortable for everybody, but we're hoping that we have really great exercises and really great conversations that will bring us to a point that we will deliver our master plan for council to review and approve sometime in late 2016 or early 2017. >> Pool: That's great. Some of the things I hear is people would like the pools to open earlier and stay open later than they do. And with our climate heating up the way it is uniformly, it sort of makes sense to be able to have the pools available for longer amounts of time, but I recognize too the challenge that you all have in recruiting the lifeguards and I want to thank you for the additional efforts that you put forward this year and would like to engage the conversation further as we get through the budget to see if we are able to convert some of the lifeguards into full-time sustained positions so we have a core there that can help with maybe keep things open longer. And I think some of our older maybe retirees could help with that as well as I know you went into the school districts to bring some younger -- to recruit the younger kids and have that be an element of the pe requirement. Thanks for being creative in how you were addressing all this and I do agree there's still a lot to work on, but it [12:17:27 PM] I feels like the community is getting engaged and looking at what's needed. And so I thank you for those sustained efforts. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Garza. >> Garza: Related to that, I'm sorry. Did -- I'm just wondering if we have a plan in place for starting recruitment of lifeguards earlier. >> Right now our recruitment campaign begins in November of every year. And our challenge has been up to this point that we don't have an indoor facility in which to train individuals. And even working with our partners, the ymca and the depth of their pool is not adequate for us to actually host our training because their training standards under the ymca and our training standards under the American red cross are different so we need at least a 7-foot pool, a depth of 7 feet and they don't have that. Even though we start recruitment efforts in November, the number of students who are interested in hopping in the water in December and January and February is minimal. So we don't start getting folks who register for classes until March or April and the big time frame is may. So we are working very closely to determine how can we incentivize people to want to get into swimming pools when the weather is not exactly as comfortable as it could be and we have an entire process improvement plan in place where we're working with our actual city's office of performance management to take a look at all of our systems, our recruiting system, our hiring system and so it's our hope that starting in October and I don't know if any of you listen to -- excuse me -- NPR, [12:19:28 PM] but I was on there saying if you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got and I made a commitment publicly that we would be doing something different this year. And so I don't have that plan complete, but I would be happy to provide the details of that once it is complete. But I can confirm to you that we will be looking at recruitment and looking at differently and figure how to incentivize people to get in the pool or find other partners that might have the right depth to start something indoors. >> Garza: And I anticipated the response because I thought of the time line, even if you started recruiting in December it would be getting into the cold pool. Have you thought about U.T.? They have an amazing facility. >> They are certainly a partner we can talk to. At this point in time there hasn't been any agreement, but it's certainly someone who is a partner of ours and U.T. Is part of our swim 512 task force and so those conversations are not out of the question. There's just nothing that I can report to you. >> Garza: That would be a good opportunity and spend your winter in the pool. A marketing thing for high schools. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: Yes, and I also want to say that if -- we're not the first but we are the second in the smithsonian at the mac we have the 50-year anniversary of the farm workers here in Texas in the United States. It's an excellent exhibit and I've been there and it's just beautiful and I want to thank you all for bringing that to the mac. One question is there's just an additional $1.3 million to the communication and technology management and support service. And -- off set -- it's going to be a decrease in worker's [12:21:31 PM] comp. Is that something that -- how did you all work that out or in the budget there? It's on the first -- >> The transfers to ctm and support services are based upon two factors. One being the cost of those functions and then they get allocated out to the departments that they support. And those costs typically, you know, rise about on par with the general fund, 5 or 6% per year just for all the typical cost drivers. But they can also fluctuate substantially based upon the metrics that are used to allocate the costs out. So for example the city clerk's funds will allocate those out to departments based upon the number of agenda items. And so if you have a lot of agenda items go to council one year, you are going to a bigger allocation of that piece. And so there's that fluctuation. I think the 1.3 million is a large increase for pard and it's reflective of just the usage statistics for the last year. What was your other question? Oh, and the reduction in the workers worker's comp, that's an allocation based upon experience and so the experience has been better, they are going to have a lower number of for the year. >> Renteria: And I also notice on the budget there that your revenue source for the golf fund is 8.5. Is that a little over $8 million? For that revenue. >> It does, and I would just -- I would mention that the $8.5 million is inclusive, this we're we're doing a transfer from the general fund to the golf enterprise fund of $500,000. That is a fund that for the last couple years has struggled to keep its revenues in alignment with expenditures and so they are carrying a negative ending balance and so that is part of our budget recommendation is to do a general fund transfer to the golf enterprise fund in fiscal [12:23:33 PM] year 17. >> Renteria: I mean this doesn't reflect the revenue that we're actually making. >> The $8.5 million, it does reflect that. That's the total revenue. It's mostly from green fees and the fees that they charge, but there is that 500,000-dollar transfers that gets reflected as revenue this the golf enterprise. >> Renteria: I thought maybe there were some extra funds. >> I wish. [Laughter] >> We're hoping to get the golf enterprise back to even. >> Renteria: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: What's projected in that, the delta is it a 500 -- I know you are making a $500,000 transfer. Or subsidy. It looks like for 16, 17 what's proposed is -- how do we read those numbers? There's a revenue number and a requirement number. Does that -- do those two tell us what the negative is? >> Yes, good morning, Angela means, division manager of financial services this the parks and recreation department. For the golf fund the total revenue is $8 million. That does include -- like Ed said all the revenue that's generated through golf operations including the $500,000 transfer and the requirements is at 8.2. So even with the revenue that we're proposing to generate and the requirements, we still show an ending fund balance for 2017 of $185,000. >> Mayor Adler: Got it. Thank you. Yes, Ms. Troxclair. >> Troxclair: Can you explain and I'm sorry if you did and I missed it the accounting change to show grounds maintenance and special events and a new special events fund, [12:25:34 PM] $9.1 million. >> Yes. In the past those funds were budgeted in our grounds maintenance area and for this next fiscal year in order to ensure that we're very transparent with the revenue that we generate and those expenses, we have established a new special revenue fund for all special events. Right now what you are seeing, the revenue is proposed at 1.8 and so although every year it changes based upon the special events that we host and their attendance information and how successful those events are, that is what we're projecting for 2017. >> And it's off set by revenue. That's why we wanted to make sure we got that accounting change in there. This isn't a new expense or an expense increase, it's just about how we account for it given the tech know jargon. We used to do I will as -- thissist an expense that just netted out to zero because we would reimburse or selves from those fees and this proposal is to budget as a separate fund. You will see the flow of revenues into the fund and the flow of expenditures out. I think it accomplishes what the task force or commission wanted, increased transparency of those funds. >> That's correct. >> Troxclair: And I guess that's reflective or this is partly reflective of the impact that our parks have on our tourists and visitors aen people coming to Austin. I know that, of course, the parks are here primaryly for existing -- for permanent residents to enjoy, but do you track -- do you track the number of tourists and visitors who are using our parks and cultural centers or the impact the parks have on kind of the tourist economy or the sales revenue that we get? >> Not completely. We're working on that. Actually we're working on some measures to do that. But we do that when it comes to our cultural facilities [12:27:36 PM] like the o'henry, this is -- that keep good records at the zilker bow taken ial gardens, the ney museum. When it comes to a park, let's say Mathias shores, zilker park, we do our best to get a handle on the total number of attendance but it's hard to ascertain if they are visitors or residents. And so we rely on let's say the Austin c3 with the Austin city limits, they are able to say very clearly how many folks who attend come from outside and who are residents and south by south does as well. For those that are more smaller types of events, reggae festival and others, we rely on them to give us that information and so it's there. It is not tracked as well. >> Troxclair: So you don't have an estimate of the, like, total economic impact from nonresidents? >> We do not have that -- >> Troxclair: Specifically coming to events at parks. >> We have a guesstimate but not a very good estimate I would say because we're putting together our numbers, numbers from other event organizers and then a total number. But it's not -- it is not by any way an accurate number. >> Troxclair: And I guess that probably depends on the type of event as well, I'm guessing some of the larger events draw a bigger crowd from outside the city where some of the smaller events -- >> The Austin city limits and sxsw they know exactly how many outside folks are coming visitors. The smaller events that are not advertised so much nationally where are the ones we had the most difficulty with, but we do track for our programs, like I said, for Suzanna Dickinson and oh. Henry and others we do know those. >> Troxclair: But year not currently using hotel occupancy taxes to support any [12:29:38 PM] of those activities or events. >> No. >> Troxclair: Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: But it is, and this is actually a question for our attorney who is maybe able to chime in, but it isn't allowable. It's my understanding that we could use hotel-motel taxes to support events if they have -- if they -- well, I'll ask that question. >> If they meet certain criteria, but I'll refer to the law department here. >> So in general for the hotel occupancy test it has to meet two tests. One is you have to document that the thing that you are doing puts heads in beds and that's the first test. But the second thing is it also has to fit into the eight categories that are allowable expenses. It cannot be for things the city pays for with general revenue. And if it's entertainment, arts and things of that nature, we're capped at 15%. So if you meet those tests and you meet that criteria, could theoretically some of the parks programs be funded out of the 15% that is currently going for the cultural arts programming through the grant program, that's a possibility, but it's something that council would have to decide on as a policy matter whether they want to shift that funding and also then those programs would have to very specifically meet that requirement. And in the past when we've looked at this because of the difficulties and because the events that most need help are often -- are not targeted towards outside visitors, it hasn't necessarily been the best fit. >> Tovo: And I would say and I think we talked about this last year too, thank you for that and I think -- I think we have a host of questions in the past Q and a that relate [12:31:38 PM] to this and one year we explored the possibility of using hotel-motel funding and got some figures on how much -- how much of their budgets would fit some of those criteria. That's all in past budget. Q and a's. >> Yes. >> Tovo: Do you know how close we are to that cap? >> We are at it. >> Tovo: We are at it right now. >> Yes, right now under the city code that 15% is dedicated towards the cultural arts grants. >> Tovo: Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Any other questions with respect to parks? Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ed, do you need more time to come back to us with advice on the -- setting the maximum rate? >> I could do that now. >> Mayor Adler: I'm not sure these last two items will take much time so I don't know if you want to try and deal with these two things and that way we don't have to come back after lunch. Let's see if we can do that. Ed, do you want to talk about the maximum rate issue? >> Sure, so item number 5 would be council action approve a resolution adopting a maximum property tax rate. It's something that's required by state law under truth in taxation. It's not setting the tax rate, it's just setting the maximum tax rate that you and a council will consider as you go through the budget process. Once you set the maximum, you would not be allowed to exceed that maximum tax rate. For that reason staff always recommends that council set the maximum at the rollback tax rate so you retain as much flexibility in regard to the tax rate you would ultimately approve as you continue through the budget process. Based on the certified -- for the appraisal districts that roll back tax rate is 44.11. [12:33:41 PM] Cents per hundred dollars of taxable value. That's also what the proposed budget was proposed at. We received notice from tcad, Travis travel aappraisal district at 9:00 A.M. That their vendor has identified an error in the calculations, not of the certificate tax roll for this year, the certification for this year will stand. The error is in regards how they treated the increase in the general homestead exemption. From 6 to 8% which triggers adjustments to the -- to the prior year tax roll. It will all go into the calculations. Based upon those adjustments I anticipate the true rollback rate two tenths of a penny higher and that would -- ultimately if council went to that higher rollback rate it would be 2 to $3 million of additional revenue that you could youth lies as you go through the budget process. The decision for council today you can set the maximum at the 44.11 based upon the certified tax roll that we had or set it lower if you chose. If you wish to set it at the true rollback rate which has been staff's recommendation we would never to defer this action until Monday or Tuesday of next week. That's where we are with that. >> Mayor Adler: Is there a motion to defer -- we don't have to defer -- actually we do because we adopted the budget calendar. Do we have to formally pass a resolution to reset the calendar to bring up this item on Monday or Tuesday of next week? Do we have to do that? >> What I would recommend is that you postpone this item until staff can bring it back and then we can bring the back along with whatever adjustment [12:35:42 PM] to the calendar that needs to be made. We're hopeful that the calendar will not be -- need to be adjusted much. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is there a motion to postpone -- Mr. Zimmerman. >> Zimmerman: I'll make that motion to postpone but what was the date? >> Items 4 and 5. And I think initially Ed was saying possibly Monday or Tuesday, but I want them to make sure that that number works with all of the districts before we send out the notice again and set it up. But hopefully early next week. >> Mayor Adler: Let's just postpone -- >> Zimmerman: Make a motion to postpone until Tuesday and if we need to move it again. >> Mayor Adler: Do we have to postpone -- can we say just postpone subject to setting by -- subject to be reset. >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: Staff will come to us and say this is when it needs to be reset for. >> Wouldn't we postpone it to our next meeting? Are you talking about a meeting we don't have set yet? >> No, no, it would be a meeting you have set. However, just want to make sure that they are all on board with the numbers and the counting of the days before we -- >> Zimmerman: If it's not ready, we can postpone it and get a check on Tuesday. I would like to make a motion to postpone until Tuesday. >> Pool: And I would amend that, a friendly amendment just to say we'll postpone it until we have the information that's ready for us. >> Mayor Adler: What about a posting requirement? Do we have to post this? >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: So you are just going to start posting this for all our subsequent meetings so whenever it's ready it's posted? >> My hope is not to do that for more than one meeting. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Do you have a preference as to whether we say postpone until Tuesday or postpone until you think it's ready? >> And you do have a meeting on Monday as well. Austin energy rate meeting, I believe. >> Mayor Adler: We could also do it potentially on [12:37:44 PM] Monday. >> I think the language of use postponing it due to the soonest meeting where staff is ready to come forward with the numbers would probably be the -- we would like to bring it forward Monday if we're ready, you know, but that way we have the flexibility. >> Mayor Adler: Are you okay with that, Mr. Zimmerman? >> Zimmerman: Well, I didn't hear a second anyway. I'd rather give a date and try to meet it, you know. I don't like indefinite pinpoints. >> I think, mayor, it sounds like staff thinks it may be ready Monday and if not Monday it's Tuesday. My motion would be to postpone until staff has the needed information ready to go and it could be Monday, could be Tuesday. >> Ott: Getting the information isn't entirely in our control. >> That's right on. >> Ott: There needs to be a degree of flexibility in terms of when we come back. If you pick a hard date we may or may not have the information. >> Mayor Adler: As noted there wasn't a second to Mr. Zimmerman's motion. Councilmember pool moves to postpone this until staff is ready to bring it back to us. >> Pool: Right. >> Mayor Adler: Is there a second to that motion? Mr. Renteria seconds. Discussion? Ms. Garza. >> Garza: Goes number 4 require -- does the setting of the public hearing know when we set it when it's going to happen. Can we set the public hearing for August 18? >> Unfortunately as the agenda compiled it came in backwards. You have to actually set the maximum tax rate above a certain amount and then the legal requirement to hold the hearing kicks in. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved and seconded. Further discussion? >> Yes, 4 and 5. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved and seconded to postpone 4 and 5 until staff is ready to bring it back. >> Zimmerman: One question. I would ask that we come back with a number that would represent revenue neutral. In other words, for the same tax levy as last year to this [12:39:45 PM] year. What would that tax rate be if we could remain revenue neutral? In other words, we don't do 56 million in spending increases. There will be some tax rate that would be much lower if we didn't increase our spending so I would like to know what that number is. >> Mayor Adler: And I think it's one of the concept items to determine what the impact would be of going to the effective rate. That doesn't have to be part of this motion. It will be handled as part of the concept menu. >> Pool: Don't we normally have those numbers when we have this conversation? >> Tovo: It's like 35 million. 35.7 million. It didn't have a corresponding tax rate, but 39 million. >> Mayor Adler: And it may change as these change. Any further discussion on the motion. It's been moved and seconded. Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed? Zimmerman votes no. The others voting aye. Gallo and Ms. Houston not on the dais. The last item, which is the conversation about concept menu. As you recall, we changed it up this year in response to some staff concerns. We're following that now. One of the things we talked about and set up was the ability to be able to tend to this list with a vote of six people to take something off the list if we know that we're not going to do it. We also have the concept of if there's something on it that looks like it's going to take a significant amount of staff time to cost something out, that it would take a vote of five people on the council to ask staff to invest the time to cost something out. If we take -- last year we didn't take those votes. We said we were going to kind of get a feel for what it is. [12:41:47 PM] The reason is because if we take a vote, then we have to open it up for public hearing unless we say those kinds of decisions done at a work session don't require public comment. So if we want to do more than just a straw vote and actually be able to take those votes we have to pass an ordinance that says those particular votes during work session are not going to be subject to public comment as indicated by legal. Legal has prepared by an ordinance that would allow us to actually effect the practice that we talked about doing and that is set for today in a vote. Does anybody want to discuss this? Ms. Kitchen. >> Kitchen: I have a question. You know, our completions are -- -- our public hearings -- first part says we have a public hearing process so that handles our ability to get public input. But the problem is the first public hearing is August 18 and we have two work sessions before then, August 10th and August 17th. And so I -- my inclination would be not to vote on items on the concept menu on August 10th and 17th before we even had any opportunity for public input. Because to me that sort of counters -- I mean the reason we're doing this ordinance is because we don't need the public input at the work session because we have other mechanisms for doing so if I'm understanding the ordinance correct. So I would want to amend this to say -- instead of voting during budget work sessions, I would want to say during budget work sessions on or after August 18th or some kind of language that acknowledges we're not going to vote on the 10th and 17th before the public has an opportunity to weigh in. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Pool. [12:43:48 PM] >> Pool: In order for me to -- in order for me to know how I feel about that, I need to understand one of the concept -- one of the statements that is on the budget development process message board posting. And it is the fifth bullet. It says a vote of five at each work session will vote to move concepts forward. You were talking just a minute ago the five would be needed if there were significant work that staff needs to put in on a particular concept in order for us to more fully develop the information itself. So what I'm thinking is we're not actually voting to put an item on to the budget for sure, we're just voting to get additional information about it in case it isn't already provided so that that is not in fact a final vote on that item being included in the budget. It's merely a vote to continue to discuss it and get additional information. That's where I need some clarification. >> Mayor Adler: I think the wording to say move forward was ambiguous. If you look at the -- the description of this process as was contained in the PDF that we all considered I think back in June, what it said was exactly what I just said, that it would take a vote of five to request staff to provide budget implication of a listed concept. That's what was meant by moving it forward. Clearly we are not taking any votes to actually put into the budget until -- until we work. Now, what gave -- I just point out what gave rise to this to start off with were two things. Staff came to us looking at last year's process and made two observations they asked us to address -- actually more than that, but relevant to this there were two. And the two were, first, that [12:45:50 PM] there were sometimes things would show up on the budget concept list that the belief was is that there were not very many people on the council that were supportive of it, but it was causing consternation in the community just having it continue to live on the concept menu and it required -- and consternation among community and the staff and they wanted us to have a vehicle to be able to consider by a vote of some number, we said six, to be able to tend to that list so as to avoid that measure of public and staff consternation. The second thing was is that staff also said that they were being -- there were lots of things showing up on the concept menu, all of which they were expected to provide cost implications of. It was taking a lot of work and they felt that the volume was so great that they were not calculating, they did not have the band width to do the best job they wanted to be able to do in costing those things out. So with respect to items that would be costed out, they wanted -- they asked us to consider whether or not there should be a critical mass of councilmembers that would say we do want to have these things costed out. Those were the two things that we were trying to address by what we did. >> Pool: What I would follow you to say that also gives us the additional information necessary for the public to know what is involved in the particular budget item that is being discussed. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Kitchen. >> Kitchen: For clarification, my statement related to the bullet above that where it says a vote of six is needed to remove a listed concept. So this ordinance that we're passing, am I understanding correctly we are not talking [12:47:51 PM] about votes to remove during work session. Is that correct? >> Mayor Adler: Well, we had set up a concept -- I mean the plan that we had set up that I worked through with the mayor pro tem and with staff envisioned us being able to tend that list prior to the 18th. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: And with a vote of six people to move things off the concept menu if there was a critical mass of people that said, you know, we're just not going to do this and there's no reason for staff or the public to get excited about it. >> Kitchen: Let my clarify. I think we need to be more specific in this ordinance. We're basically talking about in work session two kinds of votes. Either six votes to remove a listed concept or this five votes to move something forward. So we're talking about both kinds of voting. I think that needs to be reflected in the ordinance. Or at least clearly understood that we're talking about both kinds because I didn't understand that from the ordinance language. The second concern I have is I really have a concern about a voting of five to move a concept forward. And I know we discussed this in June but we never voted in June. The reason I'm -- there's a disconnect for me because, you know, we said it's Gooding to take four to put something on the -- which makes sense to concept menu. We've got four people putting it on and five that are effectively preventing it from being put on. By not, you know, so -- by not moving it forward. Seems to me if you put it on, you ought to be able to move it forward. I'm not seeing why we're differentiating between the four to put it on and then it takes five to move it forward, particularly since it's very, very subjective on -- I mean what we just said was that if it took a lot of staff resources to move it forward, [12:49:52 PM] what does that mean? We don't know exactly -- that's a really subjective decision to be made and who is going to make that decision and when does it come to us? So now I'm very appreciative of the concerns staff has and I think -- I hope we solved that with it taking four to put an item on the concept menu. So I really have -- I think we need to talk about that a little bit more, that five. I definitely want to solve the problem and I don't want to be raising problem for staff, but I also -- but I'm also very concerned about the disconnect between four to put it on, five to move it forward, so really if you put it on you are not necessarily moving it forward and you don't know because there's not -- I mean we don't have clarity about whether we're going to understand whether something takes more staff team. >> Mayor Adler: Just to respond, I think the thought was if something was put on the concept menu and staff -- sometimes it's uncertain, but it's easy for staff to be able to put in that number, they can put in that number. What we had talked about doing was the people who had determined whether it takes too much staff time would actually be staff. Staff would then be coming to us as items were being put on and they would say, you know, we're going to put numbers to all these things except for numbers -- except for these eight things which are going to take us a significant period of time. Is there critical mass of people that really want to spend that much. To answer your first question the process was envisioned [12:51:54 PM] where there would be staff saying this is going to take too much time. >> Kitchen: When? >> Mayor Adler: At whatever that next meeting was. And we could -- you know, we're meeting multiple times and I would be fine with putting at the end of every meeting we have the opportunity for staff to report back to us as we're, you know, tending that. So I would say put an item on every agenda that says tending to the concept menu so that at its earliest opportunity staff would come back and say give us direction. This one is going to take a lot of time. Do you really want us to do that? >> Kitchen: My concern is there's like seven days between work sessions. If I was putting something on -- >> Mayor Adler: I don't mean work sessions, I mean the Austin energy meetings, council meetings. I think we're meeting like four times a week. >> Kitchen: Because my concern is if I have four people and we put something on, I would want to know if they put it on rather than finding out days later -- and please understand I'm not - - I'm really not criticizing you all's process. You guys do a great job. I'm just trying to protect the process and the input. >> Ott: Sometimes it takes time to assess how much effort it's going to take to respond, you know, to a concept. So we might not be able to respond instantaneously with we can or we can't. I guess we would also remind that there are lots of other things that the staff is doing even now from one budget work session to the next. They are the ones dealing with the Q and a system and rather than responding to these concepts put before us. [12:53:56 PM] I thought before in terms of whether you move forward is reason why the number is five is because we're saying before that level of engagement it merits a higher level of scrutiny from the council. You know, and given that higher level of scrutiny from the council, they say move it forward, then we move it forward and then we do that work. I thought that was the difference between four and five members. >> Mayor Adler: The other way we looked at it it would take seven people to stop something from going under that initial scrutiny. >> Kitchen: No, that's not right. >> Mayor Adler: Seven because if there were six that didn't want it to undergo that scrutiny, the remaining five could still say we hear the six but we still want to go through, we still want to get the work. So it really takes seven people to prevent you from getting a vote of five to cost it out. But again, you are absolutely right that we didn't discuss those numbers because we didn't get to it at our last work session in June to do it. So this is a conversation that we have not had yet. >> Kitchen: It's also the timing too because, you know, I'm not going to want to throw stuff off the menu early on in the process because often what we're thinking about as we're weighing things together, you know, so -- and I just think it's very important that we have an open discussion about what our ideas are. So that's why I'm concerned about that. But if you want to -- I mean we can talk some more about that. That's kind of different than the ordinance. If you want to move the ordinance forward, I would just -- what I wanted to say in the ordinance is -- was just my first point being about when we start taking these votes vis-a-vis when the public has the opportunity to provide input. So that's a different question than what we're talking about now in terms of the five. [12:55:58 PM] So if -- you know, because we may need more time to talk about that. If you want to focus on the ordinance we can go back to that. >> Mayor Adler: The ordinance would let us actually take votes in a work session without public comment. That's what the ordinance does. >> Kitchen: But part 2 says the right of the public to participate and speak is therefore not abridged by the action. That's really not accurate if they can't speak until after we've taken the action. So if we can take action on August 10th and August 17th and the public doesn't speak until August 18th, then we have impacted. I don't know if it's abridged or not, but we have impacted. >> Mayor Adler: Here's the push-pull. Staff has asked us to set up a mechanism that enables us to tend to the list so as to deal with public consternation and stamp consternation. We have a forced choice. We can either do that or not. And that's the choice that we make. If we do that and we don't want to have public comment at all of our work sessions, then we very well might be taking tending issues. Recognizing that there's nothing final about that. So it could be that the public would come back to us on the 18th or the 27th and say, hey, you guys took this off. We want to you bring it back and actually put it on the budget. So there's no final action being taken and the public could still come in and urge us to undo something that we did. But I think we do as a collective body have to make a choice as to whether or not we want to have a vehicle to tend to the list or not tend to the list prior to. >> Kitchen: I would just say and I'll be quiet and let others speak, I'm happy to have that vehicle. I think it's a good vehicle. But I don't see why it can't start on the 24th because that still leaves us -- it leaves us additional meetings to, you know, to tend to the list without tending to the list before we hear from [12:57:59 PM] people. So that would be my preference. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I have a couple -- it sounds like we have two questions before us. One is the timing of the voting and the other is the four versus five. Let me just ask, is there anything to prevent us from having a discussion on August 11 from putting an item on the council agenda, not one of our required by public -- by state law public hearings, but have an item where members of the public could come and talk with us about the concept menu items? To get to that point? >> I am concerned about waiting until the 18th or the 24th before we make some -- I mean some of these would have enormous consequences across the budget that we would need time to deal with. If for example we decided to adopt the budget a the the effective rate and then need to cut $38 million, we're looking at, I don't know, shutting down a couple departments, for example. But that is one of the consents on there. So I just think -- I think some of the concepts on there, it would be good to know if they were in or out earlier or if, again, I think as the their said nothing prevents any of us from bringing concepts back later in the process if they have been eliminated early on and we have the support to do so. And some of these concepts I think could be successful if we had more discussion around them, but if we're really just kind of narrowing our focus on them, of course it doesn't keep us from talking about in between here and there. But I think having some -- taking some pulse and maybe we go back to the straw pulse, but taking some pulse of the council I think is wise given the amount of work we have ahead of us and the number of really important things on that concept list that I and others want to see funded, and at this point lack of ideas on [1:00:03 PM] there for cutting expenses. You know, we have a lot of important things to fund and haven't identified a lot of places to cut. As I see it we have a lot of work ahead of us and getting, you know, jumping into that fray quickly would make sense. But if we can kind off we can get the public feedback on the 11th that might address the issue that you raised, which I think is important, that we get feedback from the public sooner. And I have something to say about the four versus five. Is there anything to prevent us from having a discussion on the 11th, inviting the public to comment on the concept menu as it is? >> The 11th is a regular council meeting. There's nothing that prevents you from that. There's also nothing that prevents you if you have -- this is drafted envisioning you having a confession without necessarily hearing from the public, but if you have an action item like adopting the tax rate, public comment is allowed. There is also nothing that could prevent you from deciding we want to hear from the public as we talk through the concept menu so we don't want to pass this ordinance, we just want to have public comment on the concept menu during the work session. You have a lot of flexibility. >> Tovo: If we pass this today, but agree to put an item on the council agenda, a place for people to talk next week, then we would have that -- we would invite the public to come talk to us next week about the concept menu, but we would have the ability in our budget work sessions to make -- to take action. Is that right? >> Mayor Adler: My only concern about doing that is we're not actually doing this budget until September. And we've built in a lot more time for the public to be able to talk about it. In fact, we talked about no more things being put on the concept menu after August 22nd. So it also going tab a long time. So we've sped up the process and now I'm concerned about the meeting on August 11th [1:02:04 PM] with everything on the meeting on August 11th having what would be a third public hearing because everyone is going to want to show us because that will be their first opportunity to really talk about the budget. And I'm not sure that that's the best use of our time or the public's time. >> And that's a good point that you've made about speeding up. And we have a cutoff date that's earlier than last year. I think that's good. So I don't see any problem with waiting in the the 24th or the 21st to start taking action. I mean why do we have to -- >> I don't feel real strongly on it anyway, but the staff was asking us to not have three weeks' worth of time when something really big and disruptive was hanging out, without the ability to be able to reassure the public that there was a critical mass of the council not headed that way. Ed, what do you think about the discussion? , I can give one example that mayor pro tem has already talked about is the concept is actually worded for the city manager to propose a budget at the effective tax rate. I can tell you that would be a monumental undertaking if we were to start today. If we were to wait until the 21st to come back within a week with a responsive recommendation to the council to say here's what we would recommend for a 38-million-dollar lower budget. I don't know how we could get it done. Again, it would be an extreme challenge for us to do that if we wanted to start today, if council wanted to move forward. Waiting until the 21st, I don't know how we could comply with that concept. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Garza and then Ms. Pool. >> Garza: I kind of feel like we're making this really complicated and it doesn't have to be. The concern I understood was that something being on the concept list and just like we just talked about the effective tax rate and how that would be monumental. And what we did last time was there were things that we never took off. Nothing ever happened to [1:04:07 PM] them. And that's why when we were talking about this in June I said then it should be harder to put something on. And then I guess I would suggest we don't worry about taking it off. For example, if we do what we always do with ifcs, we can have other people -- and everybody has put up to the deadline what they could put on as a solo councilmember. And we set a date two weeks from now or something that says after this date for anything to move forward it takes five, which is usually what has to be done for an ifc, and then leave it there. Then we don't have to worry about getting it off. It's there, it's five. Those are the tough decisions we have to make. At some point somebody is going to move that during the budget discussion or what happened last time is the mayor would bring it up and I guess the mayor kind of moved most stuff and we had votes on it. To me it feels like after a few weeks you have other co- sponsors you met the threshold for the question, so -- I don't know. It's just an idea. It's a little bit more complicated with what to put on and what to take off. I don't know why we don't have what to put on to move forward and then next time. We didn't take stuff off. At that point it eliminates those things that were concerning. Like the issues where we only knew two or three councilmembers were going to vote for that. I think that might take away that. I think that's happened last time. >> Pool: I think to take items off the concept list if there's not support from a majority of members is also an important piece [1:06:09 PM] of information that signals to the community if they have a concern about something, they support it or oppose it, they have indicated where it is to the lineup for us. And as the mayor mentioned, if the community wants something put back on the concept menu, we will hear from them. But if it is off then that takes away the need and responsibility for them to come and speak against it, for example. And they know it's not on the list of things being contemplated. So I am -- I would prefer that we have a clear process for input from the community to people know what it is that we are going to be spending our time thinking about. I think we absolutely have to have the ability to take items off of the list sooner than we did last year. I agree that that was a concern for many, including with staff. And it was also a concern for me because I didn't know in the end if we were going to grapple with it a week from now or if we were really going to ignore it. I would rather have clarity around that question this year. >> Garza: That built off of what I was saying. I just want to say that my suggestion effectively does take things off. For example, for example, if I can't get the councilmembers to support concept a, it's gone. So-- that's what I'm suggesting. >> Tovo: What's the mechanism? >> Just the way you do ifcs. I go to your office and say will you support me on concept a? Will you support me? And then I present here -- the way we've had these concept things, here was my concept thing, a. I have four councilmembers now. This stays on the concept list. And then anything that's not able to get those effectively is off the concept list moving [1:08:10 PM] forward. >> Tovo: I guess I wonder if we could -- can we merge that into -- one of the things when we were talking about the process, one of the things I pointed out is that it looks like we'll be in meetings four out of five work days out of every week for the next month. So the amount of time that we and our staff have to run around and get sponsors is really, really limited. Could we do what we're suggesting in - - I think the votes are sort of doing what we're doing in the context of our meetings. And I don't care if we talk about it as voting to get things off or having five to stay on, but if we could merge that into our work sessions that would be helpful. Just quickly, vote, vote, vote. And that gets us back to the question of when do we start -- that doesn't get us around the question that councilmember kitchen brought up around when we do that. >> Kitchen: There's a lot of questions here. If we focused on the one question first, which is the public input, then maybe we can resolve the ordinance. Does that make sense? >> Mayor Adler: It does. I think the two questions that mayor pro tem put forward, let's focus first on whether or not we want to be able to take action between now and the 22nd at our work sessions without a public input, without having a public hearing. >> Kitchen: Can I ask a question? >> Mayor Adler: Without being required to have a public hearing. It doesn't stop the council from saying we want people to talk or we want -- [lapse in audio]. >> Kitchen: I didn't understand what you said. Did you say we can have people talk at work sessions? Can people give input at work sessions? >> It's my understanding that you've set up a process for invited [1:10:14 PM] testimony, but -- >> It's up to us. >> Mayor Adler: I think the answer is we can do whatever we want to at a work session, but we're not required to have a public opportunity if we're not taking,. If we're taking action at a work session, then by ordinance we're required to open it up for public discussion. That's what this ordinance goes to. Whether or not we want to have a legal requirement for us to be required to have -- is there anyone in the public that wants to talk about this in these situations where we want to take a vote to prune the list. Mr. Casar? >> Casar: So after -- especially an exchange related to health and human services and how we would get those dollars, I am actually -- I connected that to the potential hopeful wisdom of doing this. Which is that I would like to be able to focus the staff's attention on helping us achieve especially the challenging goals that we have associated with the budget. And the earlier we can focus the staff and ourselves and let the community know what the big issues are we are tackling, that I think actually would be better for public input because they know what it is that we're up to and what it is that they should be commenting on. And I think that it's not like we're taking action that the public can't be involved in because the concept menu isn't real. The concept menu is just a fabrication of ours that is useful for people to see what it is we're thinking about, but it's not like on the day of the budget we have prerogative under the law to say "I want to buy a thousand more desks and I'm going to price them at this and put in the budget." We can do that. The concept menu is a way of organizing ourselves through a balancing big vote and letting the public know what it is that we're thinking and talking about given the open meetings act. So I think that if we can -- especially if we're looking for seven million dollars on [1:12:17 PM] health and human services, housing and ISD, that's going to take some real work and instead of us pulling the rabbit out of the hat, and not by taking votes that have an actual implication under the law because we're not setting the budget, but essentially taking straw votes, but there's some sequence to it before we started raising our hands for everything when we realized there was no consequence when we voted for all the concepts. But this time actually take the time in August to let staff know and the community know and each other know what is really important on and what we want to focus on. That would be helpful. And then -- but how it is we are doing based on what they think is actually going on, but otherwise you wind up with a very scattered public input process because they're not really sure what they're up to partly because we don't really know what we're up to yet until the very end. This is a good way of us communicating it in a more structure and formal way and my hope is that we can really focus on some of the different issues that I raised with more of the staff's help because we've through vote directed our attention to those items. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Troxclair? >> Troxclair: I guess I'm going to read my notes because there are so many different issues. The term that the mayor was using is a critical mass, and for me I think six votes to basically staff a conversation on any issue, I think that to me represents a critical mass. So I'm really uncomfortable with putting a process in place, especially if it's before the public hearings that we're taking -- that only six votes with basically completely stifle a conversation on a -- on a councilmember's suggestion. I understand the interest in being respectful of staff's time and the consternation of the community, but I just hope that the council will keep in mind the number of concepts that [1:14:18 PM] cause that consternation, I mean, I think probably one last year and there's one this year. So I want to be really cautious about setting up a process for a really small, limited number of concepts that could potentially shut down the voice of dissent before we really get get into discussions about the budget. Under what we're looking at here we could potentially, yeah, get to August 18th and have every idea of dissenting councilmembers removed before we even have any public discussion. So I just -- I'm not sure that that's the best thing to do from a public process standpoint. But and I think four councilmembers to put something on to begin with addresses -- partially addresses the issues that staff had raised last year. And councilmember Garza's idea seemed a little more as I remember than this. I'm not comfortable with what has been discussed so far. >> Mayor Adler: Let me ask a question. Should the manager be developing a budget at the effective rate? It's on the concept menu? And if he shouldn't, how does the council must be be -- communicate to the manager you don't have to do that, other than the manager looking at it and saying I'm not going to do that. >> Zimmerman: That wasn't a rhetorical question, was it? >> Mayor Adler: No, it's a real question. >> Zimmerman: Can I make a comment on that question? It's very likely, if not probable, that there wouldn't be a majority vote on the council to do that, but the information that could be provided to the public is very useful. There's not 20% of [1:16:20 PM] Austin or merely 20% of Austin that would agree with my idea that we should look at a radical idea like that of holding spending constant. There's probably 30, 40% of the city that's fiscally conservative. They're very concerned about the rising cost of government and they would like to see what that looks like, even if there wasn't a majority of council support, that information would be useful to them. And also as far as the numbers go, votes are informed by information. I understand the city staff time, Mr. Van eenoo's time is very, very valuable. We learned a remarkable amount about how the city works for budget items that failed that still informed us as to how city government works. It was very, very useful for the education of our constituents and councilmembers for what was going on. Just because something doesn't have the votes to pass doesn't mean it's not important. It's still important for people to know. And that we make informed votes. So I want to back up councilmember kitchen on the idea that if we have four councilmembers that put something out there, that's critical mass to ask the staff to investigate it. It doesn't mean it's going to pass, but four councilmembers in my view is critical pass to move something forward and have it carefully research. >> Mayor Adler: So we could adopt this ordinance and move from five to four the number and achieve that, that would be one possible scenario. I'll recognize the manager. >> Ott: When it comes to any council request we often have to make a judgment about it whether or not -- you know, we were responding appropriately relative to council's right of inquiry. And there are some requests that are made that, again, based on judgment that go beyond that because it entails, you know -- [lapse in audio] -- And pulling together information, et cetera. But it becomes -- it meets the definition, [1:18:20 PM] for lack of a better description, of a project and requires some aspects of an original effort to create something that doesn't exist over a period of time to create it. And those instances of judgment has told us that we need to get some direction from council in order to carry that out because more often than not we're reallocating resources for changing priorities, all those kinds of things. And this is like that. So the council using the one concept relative to going back to the effective rate, I would not be prepared to undertake that without getting direction from the council. It would be a monumental task to go back and redesign this budget to accommodate $38 million less in revenue. It simply would be. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. The mayor pro tem, Ms. Troxclair and then Mr. Casar. >> Tovo: I didn't have a chance -- first I have a question. Councilmember Zimmerman, did you put that on the concept menu or was it councilmember Gallo? It looks like it's attributed to councilmember Gallo presenting -- >> Zimmerman: Do you want to show me which page? >> Tovo: Page 5. >> Tovo: But I wanted to talk about the four and the five. As I recall some of that -- some of arriving at that number had to do with trying to make it more consistent with what happens during the year. And I think when we were talking about budget potential processes for budget, I mentioned the example of my bringing forward a resolution -- the planning committee asked for data about density bonuses and we didn't get that data back and they said it would be more involved and requires an act of the entire council, ie six votes. Which was fine. I brought a resolution, we did it, we got the six votes, got tremendous report back last Monday. So the five was an attempt to be a little [1:20:21 PM] bit beyond the four that gets it on there, but less than the six you would need if you brought a resolution during the year. So if you have a concept. Concept, public restrooms, and for example, typically we flesh that out and do through resolutions. We adapt our process a little bit during the budget, but I think we still need to make sure all the steps go through and we're giving each other the rationale we would give in a resolution and we're looking at the cost as carefully as we would during the regular year. So as I remember our discussion, not our council discussion, but the discussion that I was having with my staff about where that number should be, it was an attempt to strike a balance between what you would need in the rest of the year to get your resolution passed to get the staffing to do that extra work and what it takes to get a concept on the list. So again, if the will of the group is to change that, that's fine, but we're -- if there's not the will to pass the ordinance, then I'm not sure that -- we don't have to continue the discussion. >> Mayor Adler: Again, we have the two discussions. The first is whether or not we'll pass the ordinance to allow us to tend the list without public comment. If that passes the second vote will be on what the number needs to be. Ms. Troxclair? >> Troxclair: Just to your original question of -- about the specific concept -- about presenting the budget at the effective tax rate. Again we thought we may be making it more difficult than it would be. If I was the city manager I would call the financial office, just call councilmember Gallo's office and say hey, this is going to require this much staff time. I don't think that it's possible. Could we do something more simple like I would suggest -- last year we had already -- the city manager had already put [1:22:22 PM] together some kind of five percent across the board thing so you could -- I mean, the response could be something as simple as I would recommend a five percent cut across all departments. And that would take, you know, a limited amount of staff time to put that in there. So I just hate to -- I would be interested in seeing specific ideas that would maybe come from that discussion and it's hard because councilmember Gallo wasn't here to give her thoughts on the subject, but I don't think her adding one thing, you know, to this concept menu, I don't think she expected we would sit here and then create a whole process that would be incredibly complicated not only for us, but for the public and is going to lead to, like I said, potentially not -- some councilmembers potentially not being able to discuss at least somewhat viable things that might not have overwhelming support at this time, but might as we get closer towards the process. So I understand how it's worded to present a budget sounds like a big overwhelming task, but I think a simple conversation, when the issues come up, should reach out to the councilmembers and have a conversation about the level of -- the level of work involved. I think we're all generally role people and understand the constraints of the staff time and the constraints of our own time and ability to consider a huge number of requests. >> Mayor Adler: And I misspoke because I don't think it would be fair for me to ask for a vote on the ordinance and then a vote on the number because I think some people's vote potentially for the ordinance has been part dependent on what the number would be. My sense from listening to the council is there's not a critical mass of the council in support of five. My sense is that if this ordinance passes at all it would be four. And -- but we could check that. But I think that's the first decision that we should make, whether it's five or four. And then have the [1:24:24 PM] ordinance vote. >> Casar: Mayor? I think I was next up in the queue. >> Mayor Adler: You were. >> Casar: So I would be interested and open to ideas about five or four. I think that the higher number of votes I hope might produce -- show that heightened level of interest from us. Because the idea -- I didn't mean requiring a higher level of votes. I meant if there was seven or eight votes on the council to investigate something I hope that would be indicative to our staff that there's a heightened interest to that. As councilmember troxclair mentioned there might be a thin level of work for a very serious issue that might be done quickly, as I mentioned before I would really like that deeper level of work for what it is most likely that we are going to do. So in the end it takes a majority of council to ask our staff to do substantial real work. So I would teaspoon as we go through this we work as a team to figure out what it is that we want to -- where we want our staff to direct most of their energy because lots of little pieces of energy directed are necessarily subtracting from other work. And then I did want to address the point about stifling conversation during the budget, again because the concept menu is a fabrication and just a structure we made up. During the deliberations on the budget, anyone can bring up anything. So the concept menu again is just a way for us to structure our conversation about what it is we want the staff to work on and what we want to talk to each other about, but nobody is stifled from bringing up any idea and making any motion when we're voting on the budget. And if I could get as much press as councilmember Zimmerman, then I feel like I would sound way less stifled. >> Troxclair: I understand that it's just a consent menu, [1:26:27 PM] but -- concept menu, but during the budget process last time there were very few things that ultimately made it into the budget that didn't start from the concept menu. So although it's not real and yes, we can bring up anything at any time, it is a real tool that we used effectively to craft the budget. So it's hard to kind of say on one hand that it doesn't -- it's hard to say that it's just concept and it doesn't matter -- if as a tool. Either it matters and we're going to do it or it doesn't matter and we're not going to do it. >> Casar: I'm saying it's not constraining speech on any given item. It just means that it indicates to the public that only one or two of us is interested in talking about something, but any earn person is allowed to talk as much as they want. >> Kitchen: We're talking four, not one or two of us by this approach. >> Casar: Exactly. I understand. You could still talk about it. The question is there's limited amounts of staff resources and time and limited amounts of councilmember attention. And I would really love to know what it is we're really going to get serious about as early as possible. And that's just my position and I'll support us moving on the ordinance. >> Renteria: Mayor, I'll be supporting the ordinance and I can see the five because -- I hope we don't go to last year when we say give us a report back if we cut the budget three percent. And then all these departments are having to go out there and identify where they would be able to put. And then we get all these employees upset or concerned [lapse in audio]. [1:28:41 PM] [Audio interference]. >> Renteria: There's a lot of -- especially in the quality of life that I put in there and, like, my colleague Ora Houston, you can see that [lapse in audio]. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Ms. Garza? >> Garza: I understand the reason for this. I guess my biggest concern in trying to propose something different where we didn't have do something like this is the optics of stifling the public's voice. So if -- councilmember Casar is absolutely right. We can raise anything -- we're creating an ordinance to specifically address the concept list, and the concept list to me isn't really -- we're not taking hard and fast votes. When we vote on the concept list we're not taking votes on like to me real votes. That's why I'm concerned about an ordinance that says -- I understand our law wanting to be more conservative. >> Mayor Adler: I think your point is very well taken and I think that's true. I had argued that what we were doing with the concept menu was not really taking vote. That we were having work session conversations and what made this one different is this was a work session that took place over four weeks as opposed to work session [1:30:42 PM] that just took place one day and that it really wasn't a vote because we weren't really deciding budget items until we got to the end. I'm comfortable doing this ordinance this way for two reasons. One is because legal is saying, I hear you, Steve, but it looks to us like you're taking votes. Which is why last time we did this more amorphous thing. And I'm comfortable doing this in the ordinance because this is a one-off situation. It's saying look, we're just addressing what I believe to be, I apologize, a hypertechnical, and not you, but a really strict interpretation of what it is. And this just allows us to have a more rolling work session deal. So the reason to do this is so that -- because it's an atypical situation, it's really a work session, not really taking a vote on anything because nothing we do determines anything or limits anybody's ability under the old system of saying this is what I want to do. This is why I'm comfortable doing it because it gets us past the legal technicality where what we're doing looks like a vote. And in order for us to be able to move forward here today I'm fine with doing four and then we'll see how this works with four at the end of this and then determine next year whether it looks like we really should have five. But if four votes gives us the critical mass to be able to do this and move forward, I would suggest that we do that. >> Garza: So with that being said I can support this with the understanding that these are votes that -- this public comment is specifically for concept issues and this does not prohibit the public from speaking about anything at any point regardless if it's on the concept list. >> Mayor Adler: That's my understanding too. Are you okay with that? [1:32:42 PM] >> Kitchen: Yes. And just to make sure I'm understanding, we're talking about four. And I concur with what councilmember Garza said. I'm not going to try to repeat it. >> Mayor Adler: It takes a vote of six to take something off the list. It takes a vote of four to instruct the staff to say this is something -- the will of the council really wants to have researched. >> Casar: Mayor, what happens if both happen? I would suggest that a a vote of six, but that's just me. >> Mayor Adler: And a vote of six will override a vote of four. >> Casar: Six of us don't even passed in the budget why would we spend time on it. >> Zimmerman: I wanted to speak to that six. >> Mayor Adler: In all fairness, if we've set four as what the threshold is to get the work done, then those four people ought to do it not because it keeps it on the concept menu, but because they have the ability to be able to resurrect it on the day we're voting for the budget. So I would say if four people are asking staff to actually take a look at it, then staff should look at it. >> Zimmerman: I want to talk about the number of six. I think we've maybe settled on a number of four. Let me talk about the number of six. Six is the absolute bare minimum for defeating something. I don't understand why that was ever referred to as critical mass. It's an absolute bare minimum of six people. If you want to squash something, a critical mass would like more like nine votes or eight votes to kill something. >> Mayor Adler: I was saying that because -- well -- >> Zimmerman: I can't support six to kill something. >> Kitchen: This is hard. I think we're all trying to do the right thing here. And I just want to share what I haven't said that's in my mind. You know, we've all been on the losing end of votes before and we're not always all in the majority. So put your hat on that you've got something you really want to do and you're not in the majority. We have to have -- we [1:34:44 PM] have to carve out enough space. To me that's not the stuff -- it's not the stuff that only one person wants and we know we're not going to go there. That's the stuff that at least four of us think is really worth talking about and thinking about. We have to have the space to do that. So to my mind that's what's really important to me here. >> Mayor Adler: So you're suggesting we go to seven to take something off? >> Kitchen: [Inaudible]. >> Gallo: [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Gallo: We landed on six because that is a majority of the council and that is -- Ann, excuse me. That's a majority of council and that is under our Normal process and procedure and long-standing with the council is a majority has the ability to act. So I think what we have said is that four gets an item fleshed out to the level of detail that is necessary, and then if after -- and that trumps taking it off. And then if the six have -- after having seen the details, still want to take it off, that's the vote that can happen after that. So I think the question was which trumps which? I think from what I'm hearing the mayor is say, and I agree, that if four people want the detail, staff will do the detail. Once they have the detail and we review it, if there are six people that want to take it off, that majority does rule. I don't know if you want to call it a critical mass. If you do I would say that's the critical mass? That's what it takes to remove an item from consideration. I think otherwise we will find ourselves with a more chaotic budget process than last year and I'm hoping that won't happen. >> Mayor Adler: Discussion on this? >> Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor, when it comes to the concept menu and the ideas, concept menu is different from the crunch time when we have to vote on the budget. [1:36:44 PM] When we have to vote on the budget, absolutely, we can have six-five votes. That makes sense because we have to get the business done. But we're early. This is in the concept stage. I don't know why a bare minimum of six votes can kill something in the concept stage. I understand and agree completely when it's time to finally vote we'll have to make those tough decisions, we'll have six-five votes. That's fine. But this is early, concept time. It shouldn't be merely six votes. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem? >> Tovo: I would say again that I think it's helpful to consider this in the context of how we do business the rest of the year. Typically we have higher bar for the kind of information you have to bring forward before council for your colleagues to consider for the amount of time we have for each other and the public to review it. I just -- I think that having-- I think the balance we need to effect here is between keeping our process as consistent as it is with the rest of the year as possible and still recognizing that because we're talking about the budget for the next year there are going to be ideas that come up for the first time now in July. >> Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor, would it be possible -- >> Tovo: I think we need to strike that balance and I think we're getting there with the numbers we just talked about because we need to be able to work effectively. And as Casar said W he need to be able to work on the issues that will have the majority support in the end. >> Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on one second. >> Tovo: I keep losing my train of thought because you keep interrupting. We need to allow people to present their case even though it may not be obvious at the outset that there's majority support. I'm in favor of that. But we need a process that kind of moves us forward. >> Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor, would you be in favor of six votes to knock things off the items from council agenda? Right now we can have [1:38:45 PM] four councilmembers put something on the agenda, the direction you seem to be going is that, well, six people could say, you know what, I don't want to hear that on a city council agenda and we can have six people and get together and knock it off the agenda so it's never heard. Do we want to go there too? Because that's kind of a logical progression, the majority rule. We're not going to vote for your item that only has four councilmembers so we're not going to allow it to be heard on the dais. Let's kick it off and not waste our time. >> Mayor Adler: My sense of this is again, we're developing a process for a three- week period of time. It's new to us. We can't predict how this would turn out. I would err in favor of keeping something on than taking it off because we haven't done it before. For the same reason we just went from five to four. I would go from six to seven where it takes seven people to take something off. That means four people -- it will take more than four people to keep something on the agenda. So I would recommend to my colleagues that we have a vote of four required to have staff spend time and at the concept stage a vote of seven to take something off. That enables us to move the conversation. It gives us a critical mass. We're trying something new. We're seeing how it works over the next few weeks and I would urge us to do that. >> Renteria: I would second that. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Ms. Troxclair? >> Troxclair: I'm confused as to why we even need -- if four people getting something on the concept menu and continuing the idea enough to allow staff to give us the responsive information, why do we need the second part? Why do we need the seven people to remove something? If you are going to do that, we're still saying even four people isn't enough to keep it on the concept menu. I think we're way overcorrecting for any issues that we had last [1:40:48 PM] year. It's like we're already setting a higher threshold of seven people. I don't understand that. You could still have four people really interested in having that discussion. >> Mayor Adler: I would answer the question by saying it's a super majority. My sense is there could be people that wouldn't vote to take it off the agenda even if they disagreed with it because it's important to have the thing discussed. But if it rose to the level of seven people wanting to take something off the agenda for all the reasons that we have and staff has asked us to have that ability to be able to do that in certain instances, I would go ahead and do that. I think as a group we're all colleagues and peers here and we have to be able we don't abuse people's abilities to be able to put something up for discussion and have it debated. It doesn't stop the public from being able to -- it doesn't stop any councilmember and it enables us to move past this discussion at a quarter to 2:00. So the motion is to give us the freedom under the ordinance. It takes four people to put something on, have staff spend time. If something comes off the concept menu, which doesn't mean it is killed, it can still be studied by staff and put on by the public, that number is seven. Seven to take something off, four people to ask the staff to cost it out. >> Are you amending the ordinance as written or leaving it as is? >> Mayor Adler: I think amending the ordinance because none of those numbers are in there. >> The numbers are not in here. >> Mayor Adler: So the ordinance would allow us to do it, but we have adopted this internal rule for ourselves on how we'll treat votes. >> So we'll leave the ordinance as it is? >> Mayor Adler: Just leave the ordinance as it is. Any further discussion? Those in favor please raise your hand? Those opposed? Zimmerman votes no, troxclair votes no, the others voting aye. Houston is gone. It passes. [1:42:49 PM] 8-3 -- 8-2-1, it passes. And let's see how this works. And undoubtedly we'll change it for next year. Any further discussion? Then we stand adjourned.