City Council Regular Meeting Transcript –8/31/2017 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 8/31/2017 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 8/31/2017 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [10:54:00AM] Today is August 31st, 2017. We are in city council chambers at 301 west second street. The time is 10:54. We have a quorum. Council, let's take a look at the consent agenda. Consent agenda is items 1 through 69, plus items 101-103. We have some items that have been pulled by speakers and by councilmembers and we have some changes and corrections. Changes and corrections, item 3, authorize issuance of residential rebates to 1806 east fourth for the installation of solar electric system for an amount not to exceed $3,292 per year over a ten-year period. [10:55:15 AM] And over has been added. Items 15 and 33 have been withdrawn. 15 and 33 have been withdrawn. I think there were some speakers signed up to speak on 15. Are you okay not speaking since this item has been withdrawn? Does anyone need to speak on 15? Okay. That then gets us to item number 40, contracts with baker and Taylor, LLC, Ingram services LLC and LLC had been left out. Item number 41, it's Gallagher benefit services and not Gallagher benefit benefit. Item number 55 is being postponed to September 28th of 2017. That's being postponed. Item number 69 is being suggested date and time for the postponement of 69 -- there's been a request to postpone. Does council have to act on the postponement? >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Right. The question is listed for a time certain on September 28th. This is the juvenile curfew issue. I just don't know what the 4:00 P.M. Is amending. >> I think it was just left out of the posting. >> Mayor Adler: Oh, okay, was 69 setting a future public hearing? 69 setting a future public hearing and it's being set for 4:00 P.M. On September 28th. I understand now. Thank you. We have some items that have been pulled by councilmembers. Number 18 has been pulled by councilmember Garza. [10:57:21 AM] >> Garza: I'm just asking for a postponement on that so FYI. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. We'll handle that one first when we get done. Item number 54 is being pulled by councilmember Casar. Item number 60 is being pulled by councilmembers troxclair and the mayor pro tem setting it for a 4:00 P.M. Time certain. 101 will also be set for a 4:00 P.M. Time certain. Anticipated that we'll take that matter up and then we'll take up the public hearings that are set at 4:00 P.M. Item number 68 has been pulled by councilmember Flannigan. And item number 102, there's been a request for a 6:30 time certain on item 102. Okay? >> Pool: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Ms. Pool. >> Pool: I have a question for you on the time certains for the two items at 4:00, 60 and 101, and I would assume we would take them sequentially. >> Mayor Adler: I would anticipate taking this the same way we've always taken these items. >> Pool: The reason I'm bringing this up and requesting we have a conversation about taking them sequentially is because we have already found there's tremendous confusion and misunderstanding and maybe some misinformation that's in the community because we're not able to draw bright lines between the intentions of both of those two items and to draw bright lines between what one does and the other does or what one does not do and the other one does not do. [10:59:25 AM] So for clarity sake and to aid in comprehension on some pretty extensive and complicated matters, I would urge that we take them -- possibly bring them up at the same time but bring them sequentially. >> Mayor Adler: My concern with that is that I recognize that there is a discussion or dispute as to whether or not 60 could impact 101. I think there's probably the confusion you are talking about. I think that some of the people who want to debate that question want to weigh in on that issue on whether 60 is different than 101 or whether it could impact that. I have an amendment which I'll pass out which might obviate this. >> Pool: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: And I'm still working with some people on it to whether or not that's an avenue. But if people want to discuss whether or not 60 impacts 101 and they signed up for 101 and we're discussing 60, I want to make sure that they have the opportunity to be able to address that before we would take a vote on 60 so they have a chance to debate that issue. I recognize there's a difference on that issue but I don't want to decide the debate by how we set those. >> Pool: So the specific point that I would reiterate is there isn't anything in 60 that would preclude us also considering 101. 101 has additional complications and extensive details and mechanisms that has not been sufficiently -- that the community doesn't completely understand and I think that we can move and vote on 60 without harming in any way item 101. >> Mayor Adler: And I know you think that. There are people that want to debate otherwise. But in any event, let's pull now 101 and 60 and let's do the consent agenda and then come back and discuss the timing. [11:01:29 AM] Yes. >> Tovo: Mayor, I'll just say I agree, I think they should be taken up separately and perhaps the best way to resolve that is just a vote whether they should be combined. We typically don't link things that are integralry related and I understand that's a point of dispute as to whether or not they are linked, but I agree that -- you know, I think the best thing we can do for the community and I'll talk to this later is try to make sure both our processes and our discussions about these resolutions help clarify the issue rather than confuse it. And taking them all up at the same time in my mind does the latter. So I'm going to support a motion to take the speakers on each separately so that people can focus on what's before them and what the actual proposal is and not -- not con flight the two issues. >> Mayor Adler: -- Conflate. >> Mayor Adler: We're going to continue with the consent agenda. We have pulled item -- 15 was withdrawn. 17 has been pulled. 18 has been pulled. 29 has been pulled by speakers. 57 -- I'm sorry, 33 is withdrawn. 57 -- 54 was pulled by councilmember Casar. Is that right? 54 by Casar. 57 has been pulled by speakers. I think 56 the timing was second speaker was signed up after 9:45 so we're going to call that on consent. So 68 was pulled by Flannigan. To the ones I have being pulled again are 17, 18, 29, 54, 57, and 68. [11:03:30 AM] We have some people that have signed up to -- to speak on consent and I'll call them now to speak. >> Houston: Mayor, I have a couple that I would like to have pulled. Item 53 for a staff question. Did you say 55 was postponed? >> Mayor Adler: 5 was postponed, that's correct. >> Houston: I'd like to pull 56 for clarification. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Houston: And please show me with councilmember Flannigan on 68. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. 103 was also pulled for speakers. Whether there was a question. >> Pool: Mayor -- >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Pool: I'm sorry. I wanted to confirm 57 is also pulled. It looks like 11 speakers at this time. >> Mayor Adler: 57 has been pulled by speakers. >>. >> Alter: I would like to be added for the fee waivers for 14, add another 250 for Umlauf and for the -- 500. >> Mayor Adler: Anything else before we go to speakers? Gus peña. >> Good morning, councilmembers. Gus peña, first and foremost our prayers and thoughts go to the victims of the hurricane and I wanted to say this, we met with ten veterans organizations, we're there to help out in any way we can. I have a lot of family in Houston also that suffered through this hurricane also, but our prayers and anything that we -- our military organization can do to help out, we're there for you all whether you are a veteran or not. [11:05:44 AM] Number 18, mayor and councilmembers, and quickly approving orders amending city code chapter 2, municipal court revising and adding provisions regarding indigent Sitzman. I was also a court bailiff and our presiding judge at that time was Harriet Murphy. And I love judge Pam Lancaster, assistant preside ING judge. The reason I mention these names is because all these judges had the same idea for how to deal with indigency at court. They call it laying out at the county jail until their time was met and paid back whatever fine they had incurred for whatever offense. I know it's very important, I know you all postponed this, but I wanted to give a shout out and thank you to presiding judge Harriet stetman. I mentioned that to her when I helped a nephew of mine over there. Kudos to her and her leadership at municipal court very much. Number 28, health services, as much as we can help out the poor and indigent, whether they be students or community is very important. Item 29, item 29, mayor, no? Yes? 29. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> And just mention museum 212,000, anything we can help out to prevent juvenile delinquency is appreciated. Already mentioned 29. Anyway, last item 103 is approve a resolution directing city manager to provide additional information and recommendation for creating a dedicated funding stream for capital operating expenditures related to the needs of -- mayor, I ask everybody, I ask everybody to look at your conscience in dealing with the homeless. [11:07:56 AM] Maybe 5% want to be homeless, but there are good people out there homeless and I see them every day at the library, the arch. I walk around, I love walking, but this is a crisis situation here in Austin. You need to wake up. Being homeless is not good. You see kids, you see moms, it's not good. Anyway, anything we can do to help out -- [buzzer sounding] -- And combat homelessness we're there for them. Thank you, mayor and pray for the victims of the hurricane. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Is Jay Allen here? Is David king here? You're good. Is Stuart Hirsch here? >> Mayor, members of the council, my name is Stuart Harry Hirsch and I want to briefly commend staff for extraordinary work that moves to approval, item number 67. In the last century we used to make it easier for homeowners and owners and rental property and small businesses to get repairs done, and the adoption hopefully next month of the international existing building code annual permit provisions will restore that assistance to people who I know you've talked about in work session. What I've done in anticipation of that next month is provide development services and also you the kind of checklist we used in the last century under minimum standards permits that made it much more efficient for people to get permits instead of taking three weeks, which is what it takes now when I go to the permit center. It could take a day and that really if done electronically could be done soor.so I gave you a checklist, it's one we use to use also for people when they suffered flooding and fires and I'm hoping this kind of checklist will allow us to assist our brothers and sisters around the state who will be going back to their houses and their businesses and their rental property in need of repairs and hopefully be able to rapidly comply with the FEMA standards that they have to follow so that at the end of the day their housed sooner rather than later. [11:10:26 AM] It's one page so it should be simple and electronic submittal credit card payment could sure reduce the volume of people having to show up at our locations. And finally, I think it creates the opportunity for what I hope to see eventually which I call permit taco trucks where we do it like early voting and people can go to locations in northeast and southeast and southwest and more centrally located, they don't all have to go to 505 Barton springs or high land, they could go to someplace just a few miles from where they live, do their business with the city and leave. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Nick molinay. >> Thank you, mayor. My name is Nick molinay, current chair of the real estate council of Austin. We had thought we had enough signatures to have this pulled from consent, but I think we missed some of the timing on the sign-in. I'm here to state our opposition to councilmember alter's appointment to the 2018 charter review commission. Her appointment is in direct violation of the lobbying ordinance so many of us worked together to craft and support. As a former registered lobbyist, councilmember alter's appointment is specifically restricted from serving on any board or commission for a period of three years after that expiration. What is more troubling is that this individual should know better. For more than a year this appointment, jack gullhorn, Stewart sample and myself as representatives of nine organizations and thousands of members worked together with councilmember pool and the mayor to create an ordinance and create the ordinance that is currently in effect. His nomination to this board, which by description makes recommendations to the council to ensure that the city charter is aligned with changes to municipal ordinances and to improve enhanced transparency and the general functions of city government is even more troubling. [11:12:39 AM] The importance of this commission cannot be understated. And councilmember alter's appointment flies in the face of the commission's core objective to increase and enhance government transparency. It is also my understanding that item 56 or was my understanding item 56 would be postponed to allow for the actual stakeholder conversation to address the service of lobbyists on boards and commissions. Outside of the legal ramifications of this appointment, the political ramifications cannot be understated. I would ask that the nomination of Fred Lewis was councilmember alter be withdrawn because of the clear violation of the city's lobbying ordinance. Thank you again for your time. >> Mayor Adler: [Inaudible] So we have a speaker system that lets people sign up on the list that we look at summary pages only showed one speaker, but when you go to the detail it has two speakers so it would have been pulled had we seen that, but you both get an opportunity to be able to talk now. We can discuss this on the dais. >> Thank you, mayor, city councilmembers. Jeffrey twala vice president of policy and government affairs for the real estate council of Austin and I would echo the sentiments made by our board chair and specifically to item 56 again it was our understanding and the coalition's understanding that 56 was going to be postponed to allow for an actual stakeholder process to take place in developing the more permanent solution in regards to boards and commissions. So we would again ask that again not only should Mr. Lewis' appointment be withdrawn, but also that 56 should be postponed for allow for an actual stakeholder process to take place. Thank you. [11:14:44 AM] >> Mayor Adler: So with respect to 56, I think we're going to postpone that maintaining the status quo. Is that right, councilmember pool? >> Pool: My understanding we were going to push the September 1 date to November 1, I believe is what you and I and our staffs had discussed. >> Mayor Adler: Those were all the speakers -- Ms. Davis, is Ms. Davis here to speak on something? Mrs. Davis. I don't have a number with that. Okay, I think those are all the speaks I have. Is anyone else here to speak on an item that's been pulled? >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Davis, come on down. What number are you speaking on? >> 23. So I am Mrs. Davis. I'm speaking on agenda items number 23, 24, 25, 26 and 28 and this will be very brief. What I want to encourage you to do before you accept any funds from anybody for the city of Austin police department to add any programs or projects to the work that they do is to really investigate that department and to those of you that represent areas that perhaps are in east Austin and northeast Austin, perhaps families that have lost the lives of their children because they had been shot by police officers and are killed, teenaged males, young people, people labeled or diagnosed with a mental illness, most recently Morgan renkin from 2016. [11:16:45 AM] That was an alumni of Austin ISD high school and the historically black college and university Houston, huston-tillotson. Before you consider accepting any money for projects I encourage to you hold them accountable for what they have done to the community here in Austin. I've been in Austin for about three years and when I found out that Morgan Rankin was murdered by a police officer, which is something that happens frequently in the African-American and hispanic community, it's very concerning so many of us are still grieving her loss. She was educated in Austin so I'm here to support that family and support you as councilmembers to say please look into the city of Austin police department and what they are doing to people, they harass, they arrest, they detain, they shoot, they kill. I worked extensively in human services as a master's level professional and if I'm trying to help people and counseling or therapy or coaching and they can't be trusting their communities with the police, who can help them. And that would be you. You can help them -- I'm going to stop there. Her name was Morgan Rankin. She was killed in 2016. Psychology major. Very intelligent, very strong African-American female that survived being in a household without a father and went on to educate herself, being a empowered woman like my estancia. Estancia. Escarpment and was murdered and she's not here anymore so I'm here to speak up for her and the family and look into the Austin police department before you take any money for them to add any more projects or programs because people are not projects and programs. People are human lives and human lives matter and black lives matter. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [11:18:46 AM] [Applause] We are now back up to the dais. Ms. Houston. >> Houston: I know it's not time, but I just want to signal for everybody that at the 2:00 zoning I'll be asked to -- be asking to postpone item number 86. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. I'd like to ask council, the question was raised about the legal issue on the appointment. Do you have an opinion as to the legality of this individual being appointed to this position? >> We have looked into it. Lynn Carter has done the research on it. I think the requirements are met that Fred Lewis could serve on the committee. Not a legal prohibition. If you have anything to add, you can go ahead, but otherwise -- >> Just to clarify that the charter review commission would be a task force under the city code. Because it is appointed for a city purpose it does not fall under the city board definition and ends once its purpose is completed. It's not a permanent board of the city. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Back up to the dais. Does anybody make a motion to approve the consent agenda? Ms. Garza. Is there a second to that motion? Ms. Kitchen seconds that motion. One last time the items I have being pulled are -- well, 15 is withdrawn, 17 and 18 are both pulled, 29 is pulled, 33 is withdrawn, 54 is pulled, 55 withdrawn, 56 has been pulled, 57 has been pulled, 68 has been pulled, and 101, 102 and 103 have been pulled. [11:20:58 AM] Yes. >> Alter: You said 55 was withdrawn. Is it postponed or withdrawn? >> Mayor Adler: Postponed, I'm sorry. >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: And did you pull 53, Ms. Houston? >> Houston: I pulled 53. And with the clarification on 56 I don't need to pull that again. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is 56 in a form to -- >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: It has the date change in 56 so that properly postpones it to November 1st. Okay. With that said, we don't need to pull 56. That's now part of the consent agenda. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: Yes, thanks. As is my usual practice, I'm going to abstain on the portion of 29 that includes creative action because I have a long past financial relationship with creative action through my spouse. I have a current financial relationship because my kids go to creative action. I typically abstain so I'm going to do so today. I would like the record to reflect my vote no on 61. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Tovo: I'll offer by way of explanation on that vote no, you know, in my perspective this was a case that went through a deliberative process, the boards and commissions, it came with a staff recommendation that the council supported. The applicant at that point proceeded forward with the case and has now decided that that deliberative process has ended to go back and ask for -- for a change that would allow a different zoning classification. [11:23:03 AM] I feel it had due process it went through so I'm going to vote no on that. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved and seconded on the consent agenda. Anything further? >> Troxclair: I want to be shown voting no on items 3, 4, 10 and 16 and abstaining on items 2, 11, 13, 46, 62 and 63. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. Ms. Houston. >> Houston: Show me abstaining on 14, 53, 62 and 63. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anything else? Those in favor of consent agenda please raise your hand. Those opposed? Passes unanimously with the notations made. Ms. Garza, did you have something that was quick on 18. >> Garza: That was just a request for postponement. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is there any objection to postponing item number 18? Is staff here want to speak to any prejudice that might be from postponing 18? >> Garza: They may not have come because I signalled at work session I was going to ask for postponement. >> Mayor Adler: Was this being postponed to a time certain, to a day? >> Garza: Our next council meeting is not for like a month. >> Mayor Adler: End of September? >> Garza: Yes. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved to postpone item 18 to September 28th. Seconded by Ms. Pool. Any discussion? Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed? Unanimous on the dais with Ms. Kitchen off. That item is postponed. Let's talk about item number 17. [11:25:03 AM] This is the special events ordinance. I'm sorry. If everybody could please be quiet as you are exiting, we would appreciate that. We have number 17. We have six people signed up to speak on this item. Does someone want to make a motion on this item? Ms. Pool? 17. Ms. Houston? Ms. Houston. >> Pool: Would make a motion we approve it on second reading only. I think there are some comments that we need to hear from the community. >> Mayor Adler: Hang on one second. When you are ready, Ms. Houston raised her hand. I called on her so she has the floor. Ms. Houston. >> Houston: What councilmember pool said. [Laughter] >> Mayor Adler: Sometimes process is important. The motion is to approve this on second reading only. By Ms. Pool -- Ms. Houston and Ms. Pool seconds that. We are -- we have the motion, we have some people to speak on this motion to approve it on second reading only. Mr. King, do you want to come talk to us? Kaitlin wittington is on deck. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. Yes, I'm for this item and I hope that we can get this ordinance on the books as soon as possible. I wish it were going to be on both readings today or second and third readings today. We've been working on this for several years and I think the time is now to pass this. And, you know, I think it's an important step forward in how we do events in our city. [11:27:09 AM] I think it's going to be very beneficial to all stakeholders. Speaking of stakeholders, you know, there was a very robust stakeholder process at the beginning of this whole process, but now I understand changes are being made with only a few stakeholders involved in that process. And that doesn't include neighborhoods and other stakeholders that may be affected by those changes. So I would ask that if we're going to allow this additional time to consider this that the other stakeholders be brought into the process and be updated on what changes have been made to the ordinance. The last broad stakeholder process was done. I hope that you will ask that that will be done to make sure the neighborhoods and other affected stakeholders are aware of changes and have time to provide input before it comes back for your consideration. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. And then on deck in this will be -- sorry. Mr. Whalen was on deck. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers, Brad spuse with sxsw. While we very much appreciate staff's endurance in trying to pass this ordinance, we respectfully ask that you pass this item on second reading only and direct staff to do a final round of stakeholder input and to be open to that input. This proposed ordinance has been around for a long time. The last time there was stakeholder input on this item was three years ago. A lot of things have changed in that time. The landscape for events has changed drastically as parking lots which once hosted events have been developed and event spaces have proliferated downtown. Neighborhoods have grown increasingly frustrated with the bureaucracy to host even a simple block party. [11:29:14 AM] The music census has shown Austin's music and creative communities which are in critical shape rely disproportionately on event works to pay the bills. And in the absence of this ordinance ace itself has evolved its processes and procedures. Because this has been such a long process, we want the end result to be positive. A final round of stakeholder discussion will hopefully allow staff to communicate and refine the three biggest question marks that the community has about this issue. The first of which is the process. This ordinance is only part of the special event process. Many other permits are still required. Each with their own bureaucracies, and there are a lot of questions from the community about how these parts fit together. These questions have not been discussed in over three years even though so much about ace and about events in Austin have changed. And to remember the purpose of this ordinance to begin with was to streamline the permitting process. This is a 30-page of page ordinance that only covers a portion of the process. Speaking of a portion, the second big question mark is the rules. Much of the meat of this ordinance has been deferred rules that have no one been written, things like the entire notification process, approval criteria, amounts of insurance required, and the interdepartmental review process which is critical in this instance since this ordinance makes ace the accountable official and not a singular person. These rules directly impact the group's ability to produce events big or small and costs associated. This is compounded when so many I go issues are pushed to the rules. With big event lie south by and small events like a black party it is critical to get the rules right. The third question mark are policy changes. There are several policy changes in this proposed ordinance that have not been transparently vetted. [11:31:17 AM] From things like changing the nature of the appeal process to not having any recourse from interested parties, aka the neighbors. To new green events guidelines and new requirements to indemnify the city. Some of these policy changes are so burden some -- [buzzer sounding] -- Sorry, I think Mr. Wittington donated his time to me. >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> I'm almost done. Some of these policy changes are some burden some to staff that arr has just said they will require an additional fte just to fulfill them. That was in the late backup. Thank you for your contribution on this critical issue for music, create I was and the neighbors of Austin. We sincerely hope you will give direction for staff and city legal to do a final round of stakeholder input to be open to that input and to return in January after a more meaningful discussion with all stakeholders occurs and we can all work towards consensus. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: [Inaudible] Mr. Whalen is up next and then Brad -- then Mr. Wittington donated his time to spies and Neal Maris will be up after Mr. Whalen. >> Michael Whalen on behalf of sxsw. I want to raise three points that will in the end greatly assist the city with other items on your agenda related to the hotel occupancy tax. Getting the special events ordinance right will encourage rather than discourage special events from coming to the city and generating the positive economic activity that will enhance the opportunities that you are specifically looking for as we look for ways to provide various funding for services throughout our community. Here are the three things I would encourage you do. One I think you've already done, passing this on second reading only so that further work can be undertaken to a serious stakeholder process. [11:33:22 AM] David king is correct, there have been meaningful changes that impact the neighborhoods and I think it wouldn't hurt, especially since it's been shelved for three years, for us to take another look and have a few more stakeholders meeting. Two, request staff publish prior to third reading to allow for a meaning constitutional discussion with the likely possibility of a consensus result. The special events ordinance is currently drafted pushes meaningful policy items to the rules. I just want to be clear, the current special events ordinance as drafted does not, it does not specify any policy associated with many of the items. When almost all of the areas where the rules will be drafted are absent of any sort of policy direction in the ordinance, I find it discouraging for our city attorney's office to suggest that the rules cannot be drafted prior to obtaining policy direction from the city council. Brad spies just mentioned one of them. There's absolutely no direction in the ordinance concerning notice, when it should happen, who should get it, and that's in 4-19-33. Other examples through the number of permits that may be issued in a special event area in 4-19-25. What constitutes good cause is not defined and additional requirements for tier 4 organizers. I have ten other examples. I just wanted to give you some meaningful ones up front. The third thing, we would request city staff work with event organizers and the neighborhoods and those event organizers include people who are organizing things related to sports, civic activities, music and neighborhood functions just to meet a few more times to work on the rules and ordinance so we can achieve a consensus document in the ordinance and consensus document in the rules for your review in January. There's no emergency here. Several years ago a diverse group of events stakeholders feed feedback to the forecast. [11:35:24 AM] And minimal contact with city staff over the years this year south by again provided a detailed list of suggestions and revisions and questions for city staff and requested a followup meeting. That meeting invitation has not been accepted. My hope is that a meaningful stakeholder process will achieve the consensus you would expect from all of us. [Buzzer sounding] Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Next speaker is Ms. Maris. >> I think -- I kind of feel similar to what David said. I think one of the things at least for me is telling people no, they can't do that. Without having the rules in the actual ordinance is kind of scary for me just because I don't know moving forward what I can tell people they can do or can't do or how to effectively make things safer. I think that working with fire, police and right-of-way it's fairly clear what we can and cannot do and I hope moving forward that's what this ordinance will help us to be able to tell clients or that are unaware of what actually is done. I will say I think the Austin resource recovery has done a lot of good in this ordinance and hopefully we can get something to where this gets passed so that they can actually start making a difference on the impact of the [inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, Mr. Maris. Cindy Lowe. >> Good morning, mayor and city council. Cindy Lowe and I'm an owner of red velvet events, a creative events agencies that started in Austin 2002. We currently employ 25 full-time people and we were tied to more than 100 events in Austin last year in 2016 and we paid out more than $10 million to local Austin businesses. [11:37:28 AM] We're a growing company and I want to express my concerns as a business owner in the special events industry of some of the finer details of the special events ordinance. First I'm very curious as to why it's taken so long to fine tune this document as I first reviewed this document with the team three years ago. I support the need of this ordinance and the formation of the Austin center of events but it keeps getting postponed and we continue to welcome corporate groups to Austin and that's part of my job. I find there are some of the details in the current ordinance that need to be addressed and one primary concern is the fact you can revoke a permit within days of the event and that's not out corporate works. I suggest we roll out a supply demand pay scale. I've been suggesting since day one, if a corporate client wants to do an event and it's rushed we charge a premium and if it gets denied ace gets to keep the money. Also there's multiple things in 41932 that I would to address. One of the reasons I think so many companies open office in Austin is because their executives had such a great time experiencing events in Austin. So let's make sure Austin continues to be a working place and please consider meeting with us professionals so we can fine tune details so we can get on track of opening the application process for all corporate groups. Thank you for all the special events industry in Austin. >> Mayor Adler: Those are all the speakers we have. We're now back up to the dais. It's been moved and second to do approve this item on second reading only. Ms. Pool. Do you want to say anything? >> Pool: I look forward to the stakeholders being able to work with our staff to work through some of the conflicts in the text and the disagreements and what we've written on the rules and it would be helpful I think for the dais to see the rules before it comes back for third reading. I would like to see that happen. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. [11:39:28 AM] >> Tovo: Also part just doing on second reading today because we've got a lot on our agenda and I want a chance to look at it more carefully too, but I want to say having been on this dais for a while, I mean this was on our council agenda for approval three years ago. I mean we were that close to approving it and the stakeholders didn't agree and wanted more time to work with staff and here we are three years later and with all due respect, I have a lot of respect for our speakers who came here today, but I think there are points of disagreement that aren't going to get resolved with more time. I'm happy for there to be more conversations but it is in the best interest of the city to move forward with this ordinance and I hope we'll be able to do that in a a realtimely fashion. Is it your expectation that it's coming back at our next meeting? >> Pool: You know, I did not have a date on that, but I would be open to recommendations from the dais so we can give staff and stakeholders clear direction what our expectations are. >> Tovo: I do not want to see -- when it was postponed three years ago, it took a long time to come back. I want to see it back on. I would propose it come back on September 28. There will never be full agreement on the special events ordinance, but we need to make progress on this and I would suggest that we pass it on the 28th. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Houston. >> Houston: And mayor pro tem, I understand that but that's really quick to get stakeholders together. When this was first reviewed in 2013 we weren't in districts so I would like to look at the list of stakeholders and where those stakeholders come from and I have stakeholders interested in special events in district 1 that may or may not be on that. So I would prefer we give them a little additional time rather than the end of September because people have lives. I know there is our lives but regular folks have real lives and trying to rush them to do stuff they didn't sign up to do is not something I'm willing to support. [11:41:31 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: I would second that [inaudible] I would support that. You know, what we have right now is broken and I even have and I have a lot of -- especially in east Austin we do at love events and it's very hard to have these events because it's so costly and the rules that we have now, you know, the cost of just having a three-hour event in your neighborhood, a neighborhood party would cost you over a thousand dollars just for the [inaudible] Plus all the security that you need. And what basically we in my neighborhood, in my area do we have these events and just say stay off the street and people just walk on the streets, it's very hazardous and dangerous. I hope that we can do something really quickly with this because it is very urgent. We have Halloween block parties that we have and we can't close the street because it's too expensive to have a little party. We have over 5,000 kids that come through our streets in the block party and it's just very hazardous. We have to tell people to put all the games they have in their yards and the kids always walk through the street. We have to have three or four people on each corner just to escort the cars that come through there and make sure they go very slow and no one gets hurtment I hope we do something about this women because, you know, there's -- quick because, you know, it is a dangerous time. Especially during -- at night, Halloween events, events like that. You know, we're putting kids' lives in danger if we're not allowing -- a lot of neighborhoods can't afford to pay these kind of fees that's required now. [11:43:43 AM] >> Mayor Adler: My sense is there's a desire for speed to get this done as quickly as we can which I think is right. My sense is that the concern is that without seeing the rules we don't know what they are going to be. Staff has indicated that they will do the rules after the ordinance is passed, but that doesn't obviate the concern that the ordinance itself is drafted so broadly that there's not enough direction for the rules and people don't know then what the rules are going to say. So one option is to -- is to tighten down the ordinance rules before we pass it so that the direction is more clear in policy. The other way to do it would be to have staff rough out rules for us so that people can see the rules so that they can see how staff would be interpreting this ordinance in the way that it actually -- when the rubber meets the road so people could either be comfortable with the broader language that's in the ordinance or they could change the ordinance when they see what the rules -- what the rules are going to be. It seems to me those are the two options. Either we strengthen the ordinance so as to remove the uncertainty that exists or we pass it on second reading only and ask staff to come back with the rules so people can see how it would be applied. If we ask to see the rules first or a draft of the rules, how long would it take to get that done? >> I don't want to speak for the ace department, but typically the rules are the administrative side of the house, on the manager's side of the house. When you pass the ordinance there are 30 days I believe that the rules have to be drafted and the public gets to speak to the rules. That process will have a 30- day stakeholder process once the rules are drafted. So I think it will prolong the time because you are asking for people to do the stakeholder process and once the rules are drafted after the final ordinance is passed you'll have another rule making process. [11:45:49 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: So I'm just to reiterate, there were several years of work that got to the council three years ago with this ordinance and it's been on our agenda several times, most recently in June when we postponed it to this meeting. The provisions are going to help our smaller organizations trying to have events within a framework that is really geared towards bigger events. Can we brainstorm what allows us to move forward today without or moves forward in some fashion today and that the -- at the latest date come back if September 28 is too fast, the next meeting October 6. But I sure don't want to wait for the rules to be drafted and go through that process before we finalize this ordinance. >> Mayor Adler: Do we want to -- it's 11:46. Do we want to hold this and have conversations over lunch and see if there is a resolution rather than trying to fashion that on the dais? >> Alter: I did have a question. I would -- not having been here three years ago when this first came up, can you speak a little bit about what caused the delay? You very rarely see items that have their first reading multiple years ago come before us. >> After [inaudible] When it was approved on first reading, the council at that time wanted to create a council committee to get further input on it. Then they decided not to do that council committee. We continued the process, continued talking with stakeholders. [11:47:56 AM] The short-term rental issue took a lot of staff time away from this so that delayed it, and it was just a lot of continued conversations with certain stakeholders and trying to work through the process. But -- and then from January through March of each year staff at Austin center for events has no time to work on anything but spring festival and sxsw, it's that busy those three months. Those three months of every year there's not a whole lot of time to work on other items. Those are a few things. >> Alter: Thank you. Can you describe the rule making process normally works? We pass an ordinance and you make the rules and then there's an opportunity for the public to speak on the rules and then they get promulgated, they don't normally come back to council? Just trying to understand the lay of the land with the Normal processes, I think this is what Ms. Morgan was speaking to, but I want to make sure we have clear what the Normal approach is before we suggest deviations. >>> In city code the process is for council to pass the ordinance and staff drafts the rules, they post the rules, there's a 30-day comment period. After that staff is required to respond, they can make changes to the rules at that time if necessary, and then the rules are signed off by the director of the appropriate department. Then there's an appeals process to the city manager as well as the stakeholders would be able to utilize as well. >> Alter: And how often do we deviate from that process? >> For a -- a true administrative rule we follow the code. There are some rules that are adopted by council, but they would -- wouldn't necessarily meet the definition of being an administrative rule because they are not handled by staff. [11:50:01 AM] >> Alter: Thank you for the clarification. >> Mayor Adler: Let's leave this item number 17, we'll pick that up after lunch. Any other items on consent we think would go quickly? Item number 53, Ms. Houston, you pulled that one. >> Houston: Hold on just a minute. >> Houston: That should go fairly quickly, mayor. I have just a question for staff. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. [Lapse in audio] >> Houston: It's about the fee waiver for Austin habitat for humanity in November of 2015. I'm just curious as to why that took so long to get back to us. >> Mayor Adler: We have someone coming down. She just happened to be moving. Kind of out of her department. >> Sorry, mayor. That's an item from council. Mr. Renteria's item. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Renteria's is an item from council? >> Houston: I think my question is why did it take so long for staff to realize they had fees that needed to be waived to come back to us in 2017. There must have been a break in the process I'm thinking. It's two years coming back to us and that's what I'm not understanding how did that occur and how many of those things happen. It could be a typo, I don't know, but it -- we're waiving fees from November 21, 2015. [11:52:08 AM] So let's -- >> Mayor Adler: Should we bring that back after lunch? Let's bring that back after lunch. We have eight minutes. You pulled one workforce homelessness issue, Mr. Casar, 54, will that take a while? >> Casar: If they are acceptable, yes, if not I couldn't predict the length of the discussion. >> Mayor Adler: Let's hold that so people can take a look at that. Flannigan. >> Flannigan: Do you think we might deal with 68 quickly? [Inaudible] I can say for my piece on 68 there are four annexation being set to public hearing. The only one I'm concerned about today is the entrada annexation which we debated earlier this year and decided to postpone it indefinitely and staff has set the public hearing despite the fact we did not take action and decided through indefinite postponement we were not going to proceed with the entrada annexation. At this moment we can proceed with the other three and debate entrada after lunch or deal with all of them right now. >> Houston: My motion is going to be just to approve item 68 without the inclusion of entrada. They are still working on their public improvement district with the county. I've gotten a lot of issues about continuing to annex property so far with no willingness for capital metro to provide transit to those areas. So I'm against it, period, but I'm willing to have the other the other annexations go forward, but not this one. >> Flannigan: So can we make a motion to approve the other three, but not intrada, unless the other councilmembers want to -- [11:54:15 AM] >> Mayor Adler: We can certainly do that. Is staff here to speak to the annexation? If we don't approve the entrada annexation today, don't set the public hearing for today, we would be effectively deciding to -- we would be effectively deciding not to annex entrada, is that correct? >> That's correct. Also it would be under the new regulations that have been set by the legislature that go into effect on 1st. Staff brought these back to you and we had delayed action either by staff recommendation or by action of council because of circumstances as they came up last year. >> Mayor Adler: Let's do this. I'm going to divide the question so we don't necessarily decide the entrada issue, but is there a motion to approve the public hearing setting on the ones other than entrada? Mr. Flannigan makes that motion. Ms. Houston seconds that motion. Is there any objection to that? Then we'll go ahead and set all the public hearings except for entrada and then we can raise the entrada question after lunch if someone wants to push forward on entrada. We also have item number 29 that was pulled by speakers. Which is mexicarte. Gus mean in a is not here. Jay Allen is not here. Mr. King, do you want to speak on this? He's fine. Is there a motion to approve this item number 29 for mexicarte? Ms. Garza makes that motion. Is there a second to that? Mr. Casar seconds that. Any discussion? Those in favor please raise your hand? Those opposed? 29 passes. >> Tovo: Mayor, just as I noted before, I'm abstaining on the creative action piece. [11:56:15 AM] I said my spiel before. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. The record so notes. Okay. Item number 57 is hymeadow issue. That will be a longer issue as a lot of people signed up. That's all we have. We have another two minutes and then I'm going to call the citizens communication. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: I thought I was doing my math wrong and I thought we had 10 minutes. I was going to suggest if any of the people were going to have to leave for some of the other speakers if we could let them speak, but I don't think we have time for that. >> Mayor Adler: 103 we could take. That was taken up. There were three speakers on that. Gus Pena is not here. Jay Allen is not here. Ann Howard? Is she here to speak? Mayor pro tem do you want to make a motion on item 103? >> I would like to move approval of this item? >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Pool seconds this item. This is asking staff to try and find as many different dedicated streams of income as we can for homelessness. >> Tovo: Yes. And I just want to say a few specific words about it. Last spring we passed a resolution that you sponsored, mayor, and I co-sponsored and was passed by the full council asking our staff to look at various funding options, the waller creek tif, some other possibilities, including the convention center expansion, and come to us with some suggestions on how to create a dedicated revenue stream for homelessness to meet the needs of those experiencing homelessness. And we had an opportunity on Tuesday to begin that discussion looking at that work that the staff have been undertaking and I believe we'll have an opportunity later to talk a little bit more about that. [11:58:28 AM] However, the original resolution does ask them to identify other reasonable financial strategies, and at this point we've really heard information about the strategies that were specifically identified rather than some others that I believe might exist out there. So since a lot of the discussion has revolved around how we might really look to create that dedicated funding stream for housing and homelessness, I would like to ask the staff to take another look at that and consider some -- what other options might be out there. >> Mayor Adler: I certainly support us finding as many different funding streams as we can to help with homelessness so I'm supporting this. Any discussion? Those in favor of this item 103 please raise your hand? Those opposed? It's unanimoused on the dais with Mr. Renteria off and Ms. Garza off. That gets us to citizens communication. Is bree here or someone here to do the legislative briefing? And bree doesn't have to come back. Sorry. >> Good morning, mayor and council, bree here to give you an update on the special session that occurred in July. As many of you know, after we completed the regular session the sunset bill regarding the Texas medical board and other medical and so the governor called a special session which lasts for 30 days, and as part of his call he did a call that included 20 items that you see before you now. His statement was that we should take best use of this time and to do additional work that I felt was not taken -- he felt was not taken care of during the regular session. [12:00:30 PM] As it relates to the city items, as you can see here, there were a number of items that related to city issues they were largely bills that would have preempted city authority related to these issues. Revenue caps I know you guys are familiar with which you're looking at your budgets right now, right now you're allowed to go up to the eight percent. The proposals out of the house came to six percent. The senate was somewhere between five to four. That bill did not pass. As Mr. Guernsey just stated to you, the annexation bill did pass, which will take effect in December. And that will now fundamentally change and change how annexation is done in Texas. It used to be that Texas gave cities broad authority for annexation because the property tax is the base for cities and counties to use for revenue. Now the areas being annexed will have to be approved by the residents and property owners in those areas. If there's more than 200 people living in the area. If there's less than 200 we will have to get approval through a petition. So that is a fundamental change to how cities can manage growth and manage their property tax base. The other issues are also in green because there was not -- either the bills did not pass related to those issues or, for instance, on the tree legislation, the only bill that passed was related to mitigation fees that did not affect the city of Austin's ordinance in a substantial manner. I'm willing to answer any questions on any of these bills if you would like to discuss them in more detail. Please feel free to interrupt me at any time. And just to summarize, so out of the total 20 items, the items in bold on this slide are the ones that did pass. There wasn't on teacher salary they did pass some funding for trs care. There wasn't a school finance bill as the house had happened, but there was a school finance commission that was established that will look into it. [12:02:38 PM] As I've already discussed, annexation and trees were the main bills that passed regarding cities and then there were a number of bills related to abortion, do not resuscitate orders, mail ballot fraud, and they did pass the sunset bill ultimately. I want to thank the entire city, I want to thank all of you for your assistance with this session and the regular session. I can't do it without you all. I want to thank the city manager and the cmo team, my office. I want to thank all the departments that I work with on this. This is a team effort. It takes a multitude of resources and people. And I appreciate everyone's patience with me when I'm working under the gun and asking for information very quickly. Even if I'm short and curt at the moment. But I appreciate everyone's work for what ultimately I would say is a successful session considering how under the gun we are. And if there are any questions I would be happy to answer them. >> Mayor Adler: You and your staff and the team did a great job of organizing a relatively large group of other outside third-party consultants. You didn't get a lot of sleep for six months. But I felt like we were in the center of a lot of things. I think you used the council and others to leverage well, so thank you. >> Alter: I wanted to say similar things and thank you and your staff for all the hard work. I know several of my constituents were working hand in hand with you on issues that were of great concern to them and I know that it was really beneficial for them to benefit from your expertise as they were working through their issues as well, which were relevant for the city. So thank you and your staff. We very much appreciate it. Thank you. [12:04:44 PM] >> Pool: I wanted to say thank you to you and your awesome staff and the folks that you brought on externally with contract to help us up at the capitol. I think we had the most organized, maybe from the outside it looked chaotic, right, in order to address all of the manner -- and there were more bills and a tougher session than I can remember in the long years that I've lived here in Austin. I am just so grateful that you are part of our team here in Austin and that you brought all of your tremendous skill set, built a good team both internally and externally. It was a joy to work with you and your staff. And thanks for bringing us to the end of the session and the special session so successfully. We really owe you a tremendous debt of gratitude. Thanks. >> I consider it an honor. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Let's go to citizens communication. The first person speaking to us in citizens communication is Raul Alvarez. On deck is samueler win. -- Samueler win. >> Good morning,/afternoon, mayor and council, city manager, and thank you for this opportunity. I am Raul Alvarez, executive director for the community advancement network and here to share some information about community needs and issues. But really this being our 25th anniversary I'm kind of going to all our Harns to just say thank you for your support of C.A.N. Throughout the entirety of those 25 years being one of the founding partners, and having seen it evolve just incredibly over those 25 years. I'm sharing the latest draft of the dashboard report which has a new look. [12:06:48 PM] There's a lot of information in that dashboard report and we tried to make it so that it's a little easier to digest and it includes the dashboard to pages three and four and an equity analysis that looks at issues by race, ethnicity and income on pages five through eight. And you can -- the public, y'all can look at this information and a lot more information on the website, c.a.n.atx.org. There's a lot more on the drill downs there for those who think a 28 page report isn't enough information to look at. The other thing I wanted to share is our language access work group final report. It's in draft format, but there's some very exciting recommendations there about how we can address the language needs of our community. And there is no executive summary of the report so the powerpoint on top is meant to be the executive summary. Really on page 3 of that handout you see the key finding is the community is best served in terms of language needs through collaboration because any entity that receives federal funding is required to provide meaningful access to language services. And so in the collection of data, in terms of the availability of translation interpretation services, you know, we need more local interpreters that are certified so we don't have to constantly rely on language line that is probably used more than it should be. We want to have consistent standards. We want to have training for bilingual staff that serve as interpreters, perhaps stipends for interpretation. And really the very last bullet or bubble on that kind of graph on page 4 is that we need a structure for interagency collaboration because if each agency tries to do it alone, you're not going to be as effective as us trying to develop systems and resources that can be used by all the agencies that are required to provide meaningful access to language services. But really I'm happy to come back and talk more about those individually or at a council meeting, but I wanted to share a couple of these products that are possible because of your support and your continued involvement with the community advancement network. [12:09:02 PM] So thanks for the work you do and your commitment to our community. And I look forward to working with you to address some of these many challenges that are before us. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. And thank you for that report. That report at this point has become one of the institutions in this community and a resource that everyone waits for. So thank you and your organization. Yes. >> Flannigan: As I looked at the report I was just curious how much you are analyzing regionally versus focusing on Travis county. Obviously one of the concerns for my district is that the people moving from Travis to Williamson because of affordability issues and my concern is that we might be missing some of the challenges or some of the opportunities that might lay outside of the county line? >> I think most of our analysis that we do is focused on Travis county, but resources, we're trying to create sort of a language connections website, let's say. We'll have a broader applicability I think in terms of other counties being able to kind of use that as a resource for how do I get language services regardless of where I live or what agency I'm working with. So that's kind of what we're trying to with work towards is kind much some universal resources that can help folks very quickly figure out how can I get access to health services or access to the courts in an effective way or to education, what are my rights in terms of education and language access. >> Flannigan: Well, if your organization thinks about doing more analysis on the wilco side know you have a friend in my office and we'll make that happen. >> Sure. Appreciate it. Happy to do that. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. The next speaker is Samuel Erwin. And then Spencer nutting. Spencer nutting. Sarah black? [12:11:08 PM] Carlos Leon is on deck. >> Thank you for letting me speak today. I was going to speak on solving the downtown puzzle, but I feel that the city council has always had the answer to that question to that puzzle. Let me read from Matthew 25. When the sudden man comes in his glory and all the angels with him he will sit on his glorious throne, all the nations will be gathered before him and he will separate the people one from another as a is shepherd separates his sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on the right and the goats on the left. Verse 41. Then he will say to those on his left, depart from me, you are who cursed into the internal fire prepare for the devil and his angels for I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink. I was a stranger and you did not invite me in. And 45, he will tell you whatever you did not do for one of the least of these you do not do unto me. Well, of course we all know that on August the 15th the city of Austin started their plan where they were going to stop sheltering homeless in and around the arch area, the homeless are either staying in the alvation army or the Austin resource center for the homeless, but the funny thing is that on April the 20th, echo released their report showing that from their point in time count, and it showed that 178 people were unsheltered in and around the arch because the shelters were full. It says right here -- I have it right here in front of me. It says 832 in shelters and safe havens. [12:13:10 PM] Shelters are usually full every night. Some use a lottery system because more people want shelter than there is space for them. People staying in the shelters often sleep on the floor and have to return to the streets for their belongings. And page 5 of their report that was released again April the 20th says Austin's homeless population's most visibly concentrated downtown. 472 people sleep at the arch and the salvation Army while 178 persons sleep in the surrounding streets. So the city decided to take away the food from the people who were not staying in the shelters. The kpan report from that day of your news conference, it says caritas of Austin provides free meals to around 300 people a day. Under their current policy caritas doesn't turn anyone away, but that changed Tuesday August the 15th when caritas moved their food services to the arch and Ann Howard of echo gave me the numbers from the first four days -- [buzzer sounds] So caritas went from serving 300 to 31 people. That's starvation, that's inhumane. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. The next person to speak is Carlos Leon? And Tony farmer is on deck. >> Carlos Leon, Austin, Texas, August 31st, 2017, to speak what's right. [Speaking foreign language]. First and foremost, gracias adios for letting me fight evil and praise good. [12:15:11 PM] Responding to the access to language left and protesters instigated in charlotteville to illegally deny protesters their institutionally protected rights to assemble and speak. UT president fenves wrongly removed confederate statues from campus without public warning or due process, under darkness in the middle of the night, just like how Nazis and the stazi disappeared, human political enemies in Germany and east Germany. University-free speech Zones actually define the rest of campus where the first amendment is illegally denied because our constitution makes the entire country a free speech zone. Even Berkeley refused to protect free speech last week, allowing fascists and tifa to again physically attack American rally-goers who disagreed with their anti-american world view. That's insane and ass backwards. Solution: Immediately cut off all state and federal funding to higher Ed institutions until they follow institutional law to the letter. To protect -- protecting peaceful assembly and free speech for all speakers and rally Goers throughout their campuses. Arrest, charge, try, convict and imprison, and tifa members who illegally attack free speech and speakers. In contrast, all those god-fearing, lord-praising, make America great again, blue collar, steel toe wearing men, saving and helping families and neighbors in flooded Houston and surrounding communities. [12:17:24 PM] How deplorable and irredeemable do they look to you now? What have american-hating and tifa or black lives matter done to help those in Houston? President trump came here to show his support and praise Texas and Texans for helping each other. Have you seen crooked Hillary around or herman-hating feminist followers doing anything to help us? [Buzzer sounds] Bottom line, we need to praise god, follow god's word, do what's right, in Jesus' name I pray, amen. Thank you, lord. God bless Texas and the United States of America constitutional law and truth. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Next speaker is Tony farmer. And then Michelle Degrate. >> Thank you for your time and the opportunity to speak today. I'm not here to talk about a new issue, but to discuss a familiar issue with which I have new information on that I don't believe any of you besides Dr. Tovo has seen. The data that I'll share disputes claims made by city officials in the press. Since 2014 the city of Austin has used taxpayer dollars to pay off-duty police officers to direct traffic in front of Austin energy's building on Barton springs road. The initiative spends about $60,000 a year. That's more than a quarter of a million dollars if you play it out over the course of four years. This budget allocation is inappropriate and I believe that money would be better served spent suppressing electricity costs in a city where gentrification has made it difficult for many of our citizens to pay the bills. What's most troubling about this budget allocation, however, is that city officials claim this is a public safety issue and that this money is keeping us safe. The data that I have suggests nothing could be further from the truth. [12:19:27 PM] In other words, city officials are either lying to us or they're grossly misinformed. Hopefully you agree with me that either of those scenarios are unacceptable and that austinites deserve better. We deserve data-driven decisions. Earlier this year on the January 6th "Austin american-statesman" a city spokesman claimed that having police stationed outside Austin energy helped protect pedestrians and improve safety. Sometimes in politics and government using fear can pacify citizens that would not otherwise want to pay for something. I fear that may be what's happening here, inadvertently Ora Houston not. The section of road in front of Austin energy isn't unsafe. I requested all crash data from txdot involving vehicles and pedestrians since 2010 on this section of road in question. The data revealed that in the last seven years there have only been four incidents on this chunk of road, no fatalities, no incapacitating injuries. Furthermore, one of the four incidents that I mentioned took place after Austin energy was closed. And I don't have any evidence that the other three incidents had anything to do with someone pulling into or out of Austin energy. I intend to find out, however. If you're wondering if this area is so safe because of the budget allocation, please consider that from 2010 to 2013 the three years without a police presence at the location, there was only one incident in the three years. Of course, no fatalities, no incapacitating or non-incapacitating injuries. No matter how you slice the data, this is not an unsafe area for Austin energy employees or austinites. I often walk my dog past this area and I've asked several of the officers why their presence is necessary? Is this a particularly unsafe area, I asked? And no matter which officer is working I always get the same response. No, it's just really hard to pull in and out of, they say. So if the police say it's not safe and the data says it's not unsafe and the eyeball test says that it's not unsafe, I think we need to stop talking about this budget allocation as a safety issue and call it what it is, it's a convenience issue for a small group of employees at Austin energy. [12:21:34 PM] [Buzzer sounds] And lastly, I would just propose that if you don't agree with me completely, this doesn't have to be an all or nothing thing where we cut the budget line or not, can it be reduced? Do we need them out there at 2:30 P.M., which is not a high traffic time at all? Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Tony -- thank you. And then Karen sironi. James puttnam Burris is on deck. >> Hi. My name is Michelle Degrate. I am the newest member of the leadership team at African- American youth harvest foundation. And I come on behalf of the organization to first say thank you for your support over the last year. We continue to do the work in the northeast quarter of the city with the children and families that live in that area, and continue to partner with the Austin ISD to better serve and address the behavioral and emotional mental health needs of our community. We want to more than anything just kind of give you the highlights. I have an end of the year report that's available electronically. The information that is in front of you is really just kind of a higher level view of our current partnerships, our current programming that we're offering, as well as my contact information, because I would love to get plugged in and meet all of you all individually and better speak about kind of the direction that I see the organization moving in the future. But just to summarize the highlights over the last year, we served over 9,000 youth and family in the city of Austin. We continue to really target in on the behavioral and emotional and mental health modifications and wellness of our youth in our area and we continue to provide over 350 youth mentoring through various programs such as jj Lamar at barredner bets. [12:23:52 PM] At schools, heavily targeted schools in Austin ISD providing them inschool aversion, suspension aversion programming where we can finding that 90% of the youth that participate in our program are not reoffending and not being sent back to in-school suspension. They're staying in the classroom and they're being able to really get access to education that we ultimately want them to be able to access in our community. Additionally, we continue to work with haca, the housing authority here, in supporting four of their sites. We provide employment services, we provide re-entry to employment services for those that were previously incarcerated and struggling to get back into the workforce. We really do believe that healthy families make healthy community and we can't do it by ourselves. And so we do two things really well. We provide community-based culturally competent relationship management. We have strong relationships with our families. They trust us. They -- we do what it takes to really communicate to them in a culturally and relevant way, but we know that it's about community partnerships. We really leverage our relationships throughout the community to provide that comprehensive scope of services. And we want to continue to do that -- [buzzer sounds] So we're here today just really asking for that continued support as you guys go through the budget. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Houston: Mayor? Ms. Degrate, if you would stay after this is over because I used to be a Degrate at one point in my life and I would like to talk to you. >> Sure. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Karen sironi, and James Burris. >> Mayor, councilmembers, my name is Karen sironi. I am here to talk about speed-mitigation devices that cause pain in people with disabilities. I have met with the mayor's commission for people with disabilities and the Austin transportation department prior to bringing this to you. [12:25:55 PM] We have not been able to resolve any of the issues presented. The Austin transportation department has ordered the flat top inexperts to be added to the current speed cushions on far west boulevard for traffic logic. This will not resolve the jolt to the body and the vehicle they cause as the design is the same. Robert spillar has recently changed the policy to include better communications with the community, but not the system nor the approval of devices. His statement on record is: We should be able to tolerate them and that we should be able to traverse them at 30 miles per hour. We cannot. Does the city of Austin have a certified A.D.A. Coordinator on staff? I don't know the answer to that. Any vertical device will cause harm to people with disabilities. This has been well documented. It is I will throw cause harm to another person -- it is illegal to cause harm to another person. It is not legal to prevent access to our homes. With speed mitigation programs, local governments are taking existing accessible facilities, altering them and making them inaccessible. There must be a moratorium on all speed cushions until such time that Austin can fully evaluate how their decisions are affecting the disabled community. It is important to remember that the context of A.D.A. Disability is a legal term rather than a medical one. I want to show you some pictures. The city is planning on installing 600 of these. This is what they look like. If you look at this picture here, it's supposed to have a quarter-inch lip. If you put the whole area that's vertical it's actually an inch and a quarter. This is a Normal cervical spine. This is mine. There are a lot more problems here than I'm going to tell you about, but this is what I have. [12:27:58 PM] This is what nothing can be done about. So as you see, this is Normal and this is me. What you're being told my staff just is not true. We don't have any resolution. And I also want to add that far west boulevard is on Austin fire department emergency response route. There should be no speed mitigation devices on that street. Thank you for your time. Please address this at some point. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Alter: Ms. Sironi, thank you for coming today and we appreciate the conversations that we have. I spoke with Mr. Spillar the other night and we have several staff members who are in the back of the room. We have the assistant director and we also have David ondynamic, the city's A.D.A. Officer, so I want you to please go talk to them. I know one of your concerns is not being able to be heard. And I think that they're here to give you an opportunity to do that directly with them, so I'd invite you to do that. And I have staff over there if you guys decide that you need to go somewhere else if you have time. >> Is Mr. Ondyke a certified A.D.A. -- >> Alter: He's the city's A.D.A. Officer. I don't know all of his credentials, but I'm sure that he will be happy to share them with you. I understand he's the person that the city consults first in these kinds of questions. >> Right. And one of the biggest problems we've come across is we're told what we should be able to tolerate, what we should be able to do, and we really can't. So the knowledge about people with spinal injuries, that needs to be addressed. >> Alter: Well, I think that will be something that is appropriate to address with Mr. Ondyke and the folks with APD. [12:30:01 PM] And I will remind you we are putting in the flat tops to see if it resolves the issue and there will be a continued conversation if we need to. That is the plan. >> And I appreciate the effort to put in the flat top, but that doesn't change the vertical part of that cushion. >> Alter: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay, thank you. The next speaker is James Burris. James puttnam Burris, junior. Anyone else to speak? Okay. Then it is 12:30. We're going to take our lunch recess. Do you want to come back at 1:30? 1:45? People have a preference? We'll come back at 1:30 and recess until then? >> Flannigan: Mayor, can I ask that we take up item 57 when we come back. I want to give my folks in district 6 a chance to speak their piece before traffic starts back up. >> Mayor Adler: That's fine. >> Flannigan: Thank you. [1:50:54 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Council, are we ready? Are we ready to gear this back up? So we're going to pick back up the agenda. Relative to the 60 and the 101 discussion in attempt to -- I was going to say that the main reason that I started in on this was to try to find money for the -- it's on. Hello? You know, I started this with an intent to try to raise money for the homelessness in and around the arch, and that was one of the initial reasons to do the puzzle. We've been looking for a way to fund homelessness with a dedicated income stream for a long time. Haven't been able to find one. I appreciate the mayor pro tem's motion on this to try to find other funding streams. I'm all in favor of that because I'd like to find as many different funding streams as we can to deal with that. But we have found at least one way that staff and a citizens group recommending to find another income stream that can do that. So the issue before us today on these issues is whether 60 will have an impact on that ability to raise the money for the homelessness through the puzzle. I will say that there are at least two different ways why I think that 60 could have that impact. And the first way is that it imperils the tpid which funds the homelessness element. [1:52:59 PM] If we're looking at a 32% cut in the tpid share for homelessness, that we're not going to get 40% of the -- a 32% cut or significant cut in the visit Austin budget will not leave us with the ability to get 40% of the tpid. I also think that if we try to do the money differently so that we pay off the debt more quickly -- or less quickly, that we are putting at risk the ability to get to the 8 million or $9 million for homelessness as quickly as we might have otherwise gotten there. We asked staff to look at those questions and if Greg is here I would like to call him up in a second to ask him whether or not that is something that can happen. But I wanted the council to know before we get into that that I'm going to be offering an amendment that I want people to think about as perhaps a way for us to proceed. And that would say -- it would recognize that all of us, or most all of us if not all of us, want to get to 15% for historic preservation out of the H.O.T. Money as immediately or quickly as we can. But I gather that people want to do that also in a way that doesn't mess up the ability to do the downtown puzzle. And that we want to see that in a timely way so it can impact our budget decisions. So with respect to that, I'm going to bring an amendment that takes 60 and substitutes for the resolve clauses something that would ask the manager to get back to us with options to achieve immediately or as quickly as possible 15% for the full allocation for homestead -- for historic preservation, that she would present us those options within time for us to be able to do that while we do our budget. [1:55:11 PM] >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Let me finish. I'm almost done. >> Kitchen: Did you call this item up? This item is a 4:00 item. >> Mayor Adler: I'm telling you what I'm doing in case people want to discuss what goes first or doesn't. I don't understand, people get to talk on this die dais, I go to work sessions, unlike anybody on the council in the three years I've been here. I just don't understand this. I'm going to offer an amendment to the -- to the 60 that seeks to see whether or not -- seeks to have the manager come back to us with ways to get to the full component of historic preservation in a way that does not impact the puzzle. And asking him to come back to us, asking her to come back to us while we're still in this budget process to tell us whether or not there's -- what is the best way to get that done. And I just want to lay that out for people to know the amendment that -- that I'm going to offer. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor, with all due respect, I didn't mean to interrupt. Itself just trying to understand what we're doing right now because I didn't hear you call that one up and I thought that if we were going to debate it and talk about it, that that wasn't going to happen until 4:00. So I appreciate that you are trying to let us know what you are going to be doing. I thought you were about to call up Mr. Canally and start the discussion on that. If that's what we're doing we all need to understand what we're doing and I thought we couldn't do that because we were set for a time certain at 4:00. >> Mayor Adler: I'm not going to call any witnesses. The purpose was just to let the dais know what I intended to. And as it's drafted so folks can see it. >> Kitchen: There are other people going to bring amendments forward and if you are going to talk about that it's only fair for the whole dais to understand what other amendments are being brought forward. [1:57:16 PM] >> Mayor Adler: If anybody wants tie letter the dais, we haven't stopped anybody from doing that at any time. Ms. Troxclair. >> Troxclair: I will take the opportunity and let the dais know after talking with the co-sponsors and in response to your concern about the level of cuts for the convention center and acvb we decided the more prudent thing to do would be to not necessarily dictate, prescribe what the level of cuts should be to those two entities, but to rather say we intend to create the bucket, put 15% towards -- towards historic preservation and allow the city manager and the respective -- and the convention center and acvb to decide amongst themselves where the best allocation of that 15% should come from. So I hope that that will help to clear up some of your concerns. I know that there was also an amendment that councilmember Houston had put on the message board and wanted to make sure she saw my response that that's acceptable and friendly to me to have us look at the Travis county expo center. And that's -- and it looks like councilmember alter is wanting to speak as well. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: I just wanted to mention that I have an amendment to the whereas that would indicate that what we would be doing in 60 should it pass would not preclude us from implementing other elements of the visitor impact task force as well as would not implicate our ability to expand the convention center. And I don't have that language down here because I was not expecting to talk until 4:00, but I will have it before then. As well. >> Mayor Adler: So what I've handed out on the dais is just the points that we're giving to legal and asking them to draft an amendment for us. [1:59:19 PM] But it will show you what the intent was or the direction of what I would be filing. Nickels -- anything else? Ms. Troxclair. >> Troxclair: One important point I forgot to mention is not only give the manager discretion as to where those funds come from between the acvb and convention center but the direction we don't want any staff positions affected by these changes, which based on our, I guess, evaluation of the budget, won't be necessary. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Let's continue on with the pulled items. I don't know if we're ready to do the special events issue yet. Let's do -- we said we would do 57. Let's do that. Item 57, hymeadow. Yes. >> What we're doing is rescinding the action we took at the previous council meeting at a zoning case in my district. We're not deciding the zoning case, we are just undoing the decision we made at a previous council meeting. And the reason I brought this item to council and will hear from folks from the community is because it was decided with a lack of six votes on either side, there were neither six yays, there were not six nays, and furthermore the nays were even in the minority of the vote total. So I did not feel it was an appropriate way to move forward on a zoning case. We've gotten substantive zoning device that rescinding is totally within the power of the council to do on any item and that in this case because the zoning was denied it is still allowable to do. Like I said, this case, if we approve the rescinding today, the case will come back at a future council meeting. [2:01:25 PM] It will not require district staff time as if unlike a total rezoning application which would have to go through boards and commissions, it would be the same cases we had before, and in addition the and in addition the property owners said they would cover all the costs associated with rezoning the neighborhood. I'm looking forward to hear from the community that's made the long trek from district 6 that have been here all morning, and thank you for being patient. I've had the fortunate opportunity to meet with several of you in advance, even though we don't agree on the merits of the case, I have enjoyed the very respectful and calm debate that we've had. It's one of the things that I love about our district is that we can do that. Again, like I said, what we're deciding today is just the rescinding so we can talk about the merits of the case. I'm sure that some of you will. But remember that if the rescinding occurs we will be back in this chamber to talk about the merits later. So I think with that I'd like to hear from the community. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. We have people signed up on this. Let's talk to them. First person is Brad parsons. Is Mr. Parsons here? >> He has asked me to speak. He's given me his time. >> Mayor Adler: You can come down to the clerk and sign in. >> I've already signed in. >> Mayor Adler: You can speak, but someone who is not here cannot give you time, but certainly you will be allowed to speak. The next speaker is Linda Finley. And then Kathie medal is on deck. >> Mayor Adler and councilmembers, one thing I'm wondering is why should this particular zoning case receive such special treatment by the council. [2:03:34 PM] Mr. Ferguson purchased this property on June the 1st, this year, and filed to rezone it for a liquor store on June 9th. He clearly wanted no delay in getting it rezoned and instructed his agent to not accept any postponement according to his agent's testimony at the zap commission hearing on July 18th. We met councilmember Flannigan on August eighth and he told us two members of the council would be absent on August '10 and all other zoning cases would be postponed. We asked if we should postpone, but Mr. Flannigan said that's not necessary. Of course, you would do what you want to, but I would not postpone. And now Mr. Flannigan is planning to rescind the decision in this case because Mr. Ferguson deserves to have it heard by full council? At the council hearing on August 10th with two members missing from the dais, a postponement would have been -- could have been requested by council or any of the other parties to the case, however, Mr. Ferguson was adamant that the case be heard that day. He was there and could have requested a postponement, but he clearly wanted the council's decision that day. The hearing proceeded according to established legal rules and rezoning was denied. And now why is it that everyone seems intent on granting Mr. Ferguson a rehearing with the excuse the full council was not present to hear his case? In 16 years experience with zoning cases I have never seen a council decision canceled because members were absent and one of the parties did not like the outcome. [2:05:36 PM] Passing this resolution is not wise. It will set a precedent that leads to uncertainty about future council decisions and will result in those decisions being questioned and held in low regard. Thank you for your consideration of this information. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: [Inaudible]. >> Mayor Adler, mayor pro tem tovo, councilmembers, thank you so much for hearing us this afternoon. And Jimmy, thank you for letting us come earlier. This started out as a simple zoning case with two opposing viewpoints. It has grown into a situation in which council has asked to rescind their action and allow the case to be heard again. What is so special about this zoning case? As I contacted city staff about the rescind action and the procedures and how to move forward getting information about it, no one could answer my questions because apparently this has not been done before or not done very frequently. So again, I ask why this case? There is an expectation of confidence for decisions that are made by council. When decisions are reached after review and discussion, these decisions are binding and the community may rely on the decisions and move forward. Bypassing this resolution you send a message to the community that decisions are tentative, that application is not final and approval or rejection of a zoning application can be brought back to council at any time. This circumvents and underminds the 18 month waiting period already in place for zoning cases in this circumstance. If council wishes to establish new rules for bringing cases back for a redo or a second review and decision, it should be done as a separate measure, not applied to a case that has already been decided. [2:07:44 PM] Having worked on zoning cases with naswic for a long time back to the Bettie baker days at zap, I question how this would work with the zoning cases that participate in this process. When a neighborhood is involved in future zoning cases, whether in support or opposition, a procedure that enables a case to be brought back multiple times places a burden upon the neighborhood associations to continue fighting or supporting these cases. In conclusion, I believe that no matter how tightly you write the reasons and rules for resending this action of council, passing this resolution will open the door for many cases to come forward with similar demands. Previous cases and future ones. I respectfully ask that you not approve this resolution. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. The next speaker is Brian Finley. Is he not here? Mr. Finley, come on up. Christopher McDonald will be the next speaker speaking. You will be at the other podium. Yes, sir. >> This one? >> Mayor Adler: Either one. >> Okay. Mayor Adler, councilmembers, this rezoning case was legally resolved on August the 10th and resolved in the neighbohood's favor. The owner of the property who lives and conducts his business in Houston, Texas purchased it on June the 1st, 2017 and filed on June the 9th for a rezoning as a liquor store. The neighborhood asked for a postponement at the zap commission hearing, and the owner refused. And his agent did not ask for a postponement before the August 10th council meeting. We asked councilmember Flannigan on June the 8th at a meeting in his office if the neighborhood should request a postponement, and he said it's not necessary. [2:09:53 PM] All parties, knowing full well that two members of the council would be absent. After a thorough question and answer period by the city council and consulting with the city legal staff, and zoning was denied. The ruling was that this cannot be rescheduled for the rezoning for 18 months. I want to thank the councilmembers that have the interest of the neighborhood associations in front of them. The four that voted for us was Ms. Hudson, mayor pro tem Kathie tovo, Leslie pool and Alison alter. We want to thank them very much for their consideration about the neighborhood associations and for the well- being of the neighborhood. It's very refreshing. We used to have this with the city council for the last 16 years or so and all of a sudden it's changed. Now as to a resolution to undo this ruling is being pushed forward by our own councilmember Flannigan. Are Mr. Flannigan and the city council trying to set a new policy that will put future zoning of property up for grabs by any property owner who does not get his way the first time? That's what it all looks like. That's exactly what it looks like. It's my understanding that the ability to rescind a council proceeding was designed to correct an illegal decision or to correct when some gross circumstance came to light after the fact. The proceeding was legally conducted on August the 10th and the circumstances should remain the same. [2:11:57 PM] Council needs to consider the ramification of setting a precedent for an easy recall. This will create a solution, a situation where council decisions cannot be counted on. [Buzzer sounds] In all honesty you need to ask yourselves if this is really an ethical thing to do for the community and for the council and everybody in concern. I thank you very much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. Christopher McDonald and then Dan knight would be at the other podium. Dan knight. Sir. >> Howdy. Thanks for your time today. Mayor, mayor pro tem, council, I'm here. I'm not a member of the neighborhood association, but I do live in the area of district 6. This came to my attention and I just want to bring a little bit of common sense to the idea here that you don't put a liquor store 600 yards away from the highest crime in the district. You just don't do it. And I don't know -- I'm not an expert in all this procedure and all that jazz, but you just don't do it and I'd just like to say it's been 83 days since the swat team was called to the heat index apartments that will be six hundred feet from this place where we're getting the wheels rolling on pushing this through. And it just stinks to high heaven. And it depose to you, Mr. Flannigan, which I met you on national night out. I know we've got to bring more tax dollars on the district and that's always a concern. This isn't the way to do it. We will find a place, somebody will move in that area and we'll go from there. And if -- you don't have to take my word for it. You don't have to ask the Williamson county sheriffs. Putting a liquor store is not good for the area. You can look at crime online and there's a dark red spot and these are not traffic pictures. I want you to put the legal mumbo jumbo aside and do what's right for this situation, not only for the neighborhood, but for the children of the neighborhood that fill up the local elementary school there that their parents and the people around them that can now just walk to this place, I just want you to consider that. [2:14:13 PM] Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Aleta banks, you will be up next. >> My name is Dan knight. Here as a district 6 /the city/constituent. Regarding this action, it was my understanding that it was made with under the rules and procedures at the time. Legal was consulted and I's were dotted and T's were crossed. As an example, as you know some of our political districts are likely to be found invalid, but even those elections that were held under possibly invalid districts, I doubt if losing candidates in propositions will be looking for a doover. And even though members found that the -- these procedures and rules were not the best and possibly would like to change them, that seems like -- I have a hard time connecting the dots between why this action needs to be rescinded before new better policies and procedures can be put in place. I just can't make that connection. So thank you for your time and I appreciate any future thoughtful consideration of this item. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Phyllis Lowe will be on deck. You will be at that one. Ma'am, please come. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers, thank you for having me. I am opposed to this resolution also because of where this property is. It is right next to where people live, where the residential area is. [2:16:16 PM] You have this [indiscernible] Studio with families living there and next to the studio is this huge apartment complex with over 500 units. And lots of children playing outside in -- they have two swimming pools and the playground. I used to live in that apartment with my kids so I know it is like having a liquor store on your doorstep. And we really shouldn't have children so close to an environment with easy access to hard liquor. Many studies in the U.S. And around the world show a direct link between a liquor snore the neighborhood and the number of crimes that occur nearby. And I have never come across any independent studies that say anything different from the fact that neighborhood liquor stores attract crimes. So the zoning for this property should say the same as -- should stay the same as the rest of the businesses there, as family friendly. We shouldn't change it. So I'm asking you not to pass this resolution, but ultimately not to change the rezoning, not to approve the rezoning when it's come up again. Please don't change it. Our neighborhood's future is in your hands. Thank you so much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. So after ma'am, you go and then Mac [indiscernible]. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers. My name is Phyllis Lowe, and I'm taking a little bit of a different approach because I was part of the establishment of the neighborhood association in 1994. I was the original in the mid to late '90s chair of the zoning committee. Kathie Mandell was on my team. And we were responsible for the biggest majority of all the zoning that's done on the edge of our family neighborhood association. [2:18:24 PM] So I have a lot of history here. Cathy and Linda Finley have graciously moved forward the zoning and kept up with it and have done a fabulous job and I really commend them for the good work that they have done. We work closely with David wallgrin and also with Kirk Watson and the councilmembers at that time. They were acutely aware of the value of keeping the integrity of neighborhoods that would be affected by zoning and codes around our neighborhoods. I hope that the parties involved in these two proposals would not assume that we would either be naive or inexperienced to notice that the major changes in the Normal procedure have occurred and doing the zoning. The way the zoning code change request has been handled on mymeadow is not only inappropriate by city of Austin standards, but also by courtesies previously established by developers and property sales agents towards established neighborhoods and particularly our association. Item number 57 raises many red flags and gives outside appearance that influences are improperly being applied to end run the standard procedure. That's my view from the outside. Both our neighborhood and the commercial businesses around it have very low turnover and very low vacancies. And I believe that it is primarily the reason why we have kept our neighborhood neighborhood friendly that has enabled this to occur. Passing this resolution could negatively effect the city of Austin neighborhoods by setting the precedents and I know you're hearing some of this multiple times by changing the zoning codes with little or no input from the neighborhoods and creating the appearance of voting until you get the result you want. [2:20:34 PM] My opinion. Also, the reference was made from the liquor store to another living facility, large living facility was -6z hundred yards, 200 feet behind the liquor store is cross road extended living. [Buzzer sounds] In closing, this is a shameful action to put commercial business and development help of well-being of a neighborhood where the business is not compatible and I strongly oppose the two proposals and I thank you very much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause]. Matt Sheridan and the last speaker will be Julie Reese. >> Hello, mayor and city councilmembers. I have -- don't want to bore you with repeating some of the opposition to this amendment to rescind and I just want to encourage you to have transparency in everything that you do. And knowing most of you know that the neighborhood association of southwestern Williamson county has a reputation with not only this council, but previous councils that we work for the betterment of our neighborhood. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler:. Thank you. Does anyone have a question? Brad parsons, do you want to speak? >> I was going to donate time when I heard [indiscernible]. >> Mayor Adler: All right, thank you. Those are all the speakers that indicated they wanted to speak. A couple of people said they didn't need to speak. That gets us back up to the dais. Mr. Flannigan. >> Flannigan: Again, I want to thank all of you for making the trip down. [2:22:37 PM] I'm a former member of your neighborhood association. I have lived back there for many years. I still live near nazwic. I'm more on the hunter's chase side of Anderson mill. I want to be clear what it means to set a precedent in this case. What we're talking about is a zoning case that filed. When a zoning case succeeds, when you actually affirm a zoning change there's no rescinding. So we're only talking about cases in which the zoning fails us to occur. And if you look -- I'm just thinking about the eight months that I've been on council, it's very rare that we out right deny a zoning case. 99% of the times it seems we're tweaking, changing, negotiating, we're compromising and the zoning occurs. There's no undoing those. We're really just talking about zoning cases that fail completely that there's no zoning change at all. And even more specifically we're talking about zoning cases that fail to get six votes, either for or against. And I could find practically no examples of that as well. The postponement issue is one that I have talked about many times on this dais. I don't like postponements. I think nine times out of 10 we generally know enough merits to cast our votes, but I think the absence of councilmembers is what partially makes this case unique. But I appreciate the reasoned conversation that we've been able to have. It is one of the best things about representing district 6 is that even when we disagree, we can be respectful. If the rescinding occurs and we will revisit this zoning case, I'm happy to meet with the neighborhood folks and you all again and show you some of the data that I have, some of the background that is specific about the impact of liquor stores on neighborhoods. [2:24:40 PM] But as far as the conversation today, I'm hoping my colleagues will respect the process, respect democracy, respect that six votes should be required to take action and approve the rescinding. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Further discussion on the dais? Ms. Houston? >> Houston: Thank you, mayor. I think part of last year and some parts of this year we've been talking about strategic priorities. And one of those strategic priorities that I think that we all should hold dear is a government that works, a government that works for everybody, not special people, but all people. And by taking this action today to rescind a valid vote in August, regardless of the number of people who are here, as many have said, there was an opportunity for this to be postponed and that was the owner's choice so that the remedy, one of the remedies could have been a postponement. He chose not to exercise that. One of the remedies is to bring it back in 18 months. That's still available to him. So I'm not going to be able to support this resolution because I think it -- whether it sets a legal precedence or not, it sets a perception in the minds of the people who are doing this workday in and day out without benefit of any agent to be there to tell them how things should go. The government doesn't work for them. So I won't be able to support the resolution. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Houston, this is a hard one for me and I look at the same provision that you look at in terms of government that works. [2:26:42 PM] I don't have a view as to the merits -- I don't have a view as to the merits of this case except for some really good time I had with a couple of neighbors, I haven't had a chance to look at the merits of the case at all. And I recognize that either way that I end up voting on this is going to set a bad precedent at some level. Because I think it ought to be done and we don't revisit them. At the same time one of the things that I'm particularly proud of in this 10-1 council over the last three years is the way we've had debate, and the way that -- even when there were procedural things that one side or the other could use to gain strategic advantage by and large in almost every case we've had we played it straight down the middle and really fair. And so that all views are represented and so that ultimately at the end of the day on any vote that we take the will of the community is done. And the will of the community represented by the 10-1 council. So when something passes over half of the council have said that they wanted to pass. If something is defeated it's because the representatives of the city have said that it shouldn't bass. I think there's a really bad precedent to set from having something that happens in the city with only five votes for it in a situation where there's not a time pressure involved or some exigent circumstance where everyone in the city can vote. And I'm concerned that the more harm of the precedent that we could set would be being on the dais and saying we're okay with decisions being made by less than half of the city in a situation where most of the city might not want that. [2:28:58 PM] And I hear the arguments about the agent could have done something different, but quite frankly, I want to give that power to that agenda or to any agent to be able to control that more basic underlying deal. That if there's a chance that most of the city would vote a different way, I think that's what a motion like this is intended for. I think it would be real rarely used. We just have not had any other decisions that have been decided by five votes on our council before. And when that situation ever arose, I think that someone on this council could say hey, I would like for the whole council to be able to vote on it. So if you make that motion, I will second it. >> Houston: And mayor, just to respond to your comments. I agree with that in many respects because we also have a practice on this council that if the member of council, if somebody is missing, they can postpone because there's not a full complement on the dais. That didn't happen either. So there was another remedy where councilmember Flannigan could have said, you know, I'm going to ask for a postponement. I can. Not putting it on the agent, because you're right, not not their responsibility, but I have in fact said -- and we've had other people say that there are two people missing, this is somebody else's district, and so let's postpone until they're back or until a full complement of our peers were back. So that was another option that was missed. >> Mayor Adler: Further discussion? Ms. Pool? >> Pool: Mayor, you said that the only way to know -- you said most of the city wants to pass this zoning case -- [2:31:05 PM] >> Mayor Adler: I did not. I said we don't know that. >> Pool: Well, what we do know is that members who live -- residents who live in this district and who are directly affected by a liquor store at this location have not only come here today to speak in opposition, but they were here when we took it up the first time when it could have been postponed. They've come down to city hall twice, they have been down in the interim to meet with your office and with my office and with others on the council. So, I mean, if the only way to know what the entire city or most of the city wants in a zoning case would be to actually put it to a vote of the city because we do represent our districts, but we are also representing what our neighbors are asking us to do. And I'm seeing the significant number of people coming down from district 6 saying please don't okay a liquor store near a large apartment complex where a lot of children are playing and it has two swimming pools, which is a community gathering place. And I really wish that this zoning case was about something other than an alcohol permit. I wish -- and adult entertainment. I wish it was something like a grocery store or something that we could all get behind. And I have voted to allow -- to permit liquor stores in different specific places around this city under certain circumstances and against them under other circumstances, particularly where they are near residential areas and where there are other opportunities for liquor stores. So this is a no brainer procedurally. We took a valid vote. It didn't go the way the author wanted it to go. If this passes today, you can bet your bottom dollar that should a development zoning vote not pass, there's going to be distinct pressure on this council and on future councils to rescind that vote and do it over again. [2:33:20 PM] We do have the ability to bring a zoning case back. You've got an 18 month layout period. And development community understands that. Those are the rules that have been in place for a really long time. I take exception to changing -- moving the goal posts in this case and especially because it's to put a liquor store in, which just blows my mind. So I am absolutely against not only the zoning case, but specifically here rescinding the action that happened. I'm sorry that two councilmembers weren't here, but we roll the dice and we play the board how it lays and we have options and opportunities to hold back or to move forward. There were a number of times last year where I would have been thrilled to postpone a vote or I wished others weren't here so I could gain a vote. [Laughter]. But I haven't ever done that. I've played the board the way I understand it and the way procedure and past protocol and process has laid it out. I cannot say yes to a change of this magnitude to our processes. [Applause]. >> Renteria: I co-sponsored this resolution here and just for the mere fact of listening to the folks because I was gone and I wanted to hear -- when Jimmy came and [indiscernible] Came I told them I wasn't going to vote for it, but I told him that I was going to bring it back up so we could have a discussion about it. And I know that in the past especially when the last council that when there were some members gone to a conference that there was a lot of amendments and resolutions and all kinds of items that died because we didn't have the majority vote on it. [2:35:32 PM] And when we got back we came back and brought all those items back up. So that was a courtesy call. And that's all we did we just wanted to rehear. I told Jimmy, I'm not supporting that liquor store there, but I would give him the courtesy to bring this back up. >> Mayor Adler: Further discussion? Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: So this was a challenging piece of that council meeting when we had two members absent, but I just want to draw a distinction what happened on that council day where we had two -- I think actually three members off the dais and multiple measures were defeated because of that. Remember also, though, the motions to postpone were also being defeated. So it was not just a matter of not securing enough votes to pass measures for which there was a majority support, we couldn't get the courtesy of postponements. And had I been asked to vote for a postponement I certainly would have. I think it's significant that because of that incident and that particular day I'm always really looking forward to see what people we have out on particular days to see if we'll have that challenge again. It sounds like the neighbors themselves were looking at that and noting that two members were going to be off the dais and they did raise that question of postponement. And certainly the applicant's representative is really familiar with city hall and the way decisions get made, and the impact that two missing members could have on the ability to move forward. So based on -- on all of those considerations I'm not going to be able to support this resolution either. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter, were you raising your hand? >> Alter: I was, but councilmember Flannigan had his hand up first. [2:37:36 PM] >> Flannigan: I want to clarify a couple of things. The zoning case was denied by four votes. It was the four no's that prevailed over the five yes's. So it is even more instinctively wrong that you would allow minority of those present to prevail over the majority of those present, which further makes me feel strongly that if we're going to decide cases -- we're going to decide anything we should decide them with six votes for or against. And I think, you know, councilmember pool, I struggle and have failed to find any examples of zoning cases that failed to get six votes on either side. And if we were in a situation that a zoning case failed to get six votes on either side, then I think it's right to consider bringing that back. You will find as you know, as we all know, it is extraordinarily rare for a zoning case to just fail. And legally we can't bring back -- we can't rescind a zoning case that passes. So it is a very, very narrow space around which we're talking. It is the last of six votes yes or no and it is also the case where four votes prevailed over five. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Kitchen? >> Kitchen: This is a -- a difficult decision and I think it's incumbent on me to explain why I'm going to support the rescinding. And I know that that's something that many of my colleagues and those of you in the audience do not support, but I am separating in my mind the rescind from the merit of the case because what's working for us is rescinding, not the case. It troubles me deeply not on to rescind an action that was passed on a procedural -- it was a procedural issue of four to five vote that block this when two people were not here? [2:39:53 PM] Now, I could say that councilmember Flannigan should have known what was going on. He should have acted quicker, he should have postponed. But do you know what? I want to extend the courtesy to him that he didn't think about that soon enough and I don't want to hold him as a colleague to someone that should have thought about that sooner so that he could lose something on a four to five vote. To me that is what is not fair here. I might think differently if it was a five to four vote, but it's not. It was a four to five vote. So I think it's appropriate to rescind. And then -- and then if it comes back to us to consider the zoning, then I will consider what the neighbors have to say and I'll consider what's being proposed here for a zoning matter and we'll deal with that at this time. My vote here represents what I think was an unfair procedural process that this vote occurred by, and I don't want to do what feels to me like a colleague getting caught into a procedural issue that, yeah, maybe he should have foreseen it, but he didn't. He's only been on the council X number of numbers. I'm not sure that I would have realized what was going on. So I don't think -- so that's why I'm voting the way that I am. And if this comes back to us, which we don't know -- all we're doing is rescinding, but if and when it comes back to us then I'll consider the merits of whether or not I want to approve a liquor store at that location. Mr. Casar? >> Casar: I want to echo what has been said so I'll stand between those two statements. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: So I voted no on this when we vote odd it earlier in August, and I will vote against the rescinding of it. [2:41:59 PM] I'm really struggling to understand why this case merits the energy and attention that it has received. The only communication I have received on this has been in opposition. I have not seen a single person supporting this item other than councilmember Flannigan. And on the original zoning case when we talked about it, even the commercial neighbors came in against the zoning change. I really do not understand why this case warrants the amount of effort to put in a liquor store. We have been told this is procedurally what to do, but it does not make it the right thing to do. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Any further discussion on the dais? Councilmember Garza. >> Garza: I feel like everyone is explaining their vote and I wanted to chime in in that I'm with -- I'm where councilmember kitchen is. I don't think it's -- I respect everyone's opinion. I don't think it's fair to say councilmember Flannigan could have simply asked for a postponement because there was also that same how we could get that postponement. If one of the prevailing votes, one of the prevailing votes also could have asked for it to be reconsidered, they didn't have to vote for the postponement, they could have asked for it to be reconsidered and then it could have gotten postponed that way. So I think if we're going to -- for someone to make a motion to reconsider and someone to postpone, then we wouldn't be here. So I'm supporting this on the procedural aspect of it. [2:44:04 PM] >> Casar: My understanding is a five-four vote for postponement the majority prevails. You don't need a quorum vote to postpone. So a five-four vote for postponement that day would have postponed the case. >> Houston: I was here that day and I don't remember that conversation. I remember the vote to reconsider and the four people who vented against it to reconsider, but I don't remember anything about a postponement. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Flannigan, did you want to make a motion? >> Alter: Can I make one comment? I wanted to point out another option that is available to any councilmember if they want when a zoning case is denied is they can bring a zoning case forward to council. And this is just another one of the procedural options that could have been exercised in this case rather than rescinding this. >> Flannigan: It's my understanding that it's the city's responsibility when -- this is the action we decided to go with because as we said in the resolution the applicant is still responsible for any ongoing costs related to the zoning case. But I will take this opportunity to make a motion to approve the item. >> Mayor Adler: Anybody have discussion after that. It's been moved. Is there a second to the Flannigan motion? I'll second it. Any further discussion? Let's take a vote -- >> Alter: I just want to make a comment. In the flasher lane case didn't we just say that the applicant was paying for it. Thrasher lane. >> In that case it was a different action. It was waiving the 18 month requirement. [2:46:09 PM] >> Alter: Wasn't that an option that we could have waived the 18 month requirement and do that as well. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Those in favor of the motion to rescind please raise your hands. Those opposed? Please raise your hands? The mayor pro tem voting no. Pool, Houston and alter. It passes six-five, the matter is rescinded six-five. Was it seven-four? Yeah, seven-four. I apologize. How did you vote, Mr. Renteria? To rescind. Seven-four. Thank you. We'll now move to the next item. Thank you all for coming down. 53. Mr. Casar, where are we on 53? Do you have an amendment to make on that? I mean 54. >> Casar: I'll pass my amendments out. Sorry. >> Mayor Adler: While this is being handed out, Ms. Houston, did you get the information you were looking for on that habitat waiver or do we still have to ask for that? >> Houston: Hmm... I saw the -- >> Mayor Adler: I remember now. We'll come back to it. >> Houston: I saw the chief here and I was going to be getting some information. >> Mayor Adler: Yeah. [2:48:11 PM] Let's do now item number 44. >> Troxclair: Since this is my item I'll go through it quickly. This asks the staff to look at a very successful program from New Mexico that aims to reduce panhandling and homelessness by giving -- by allowing -- by offering those people day jobs that can help to beautify the city anything from litter clean up to walking dogs at the animal shelter or grafitti removal and the idea is that they get the dignity of work, they get to go home at the end of the day, having been fed a healthy lunch and also have cash in their pockets to then hopefully break the cycle of poverty. So as I mentioned in Albuquerque they started a pilot program there about two years ago and it's just been incredibly successful. They've I think quadrupled the budget of the program. They've also been able to raise money from private contributions because of the success that they've had with it. So it seems like it would be something that could be hugely helpful in Austin considering our issues with panhandling and homelessness and ultimately those people are also one of the benefits is that by partnering with a non-profit and giving people kind of the access to not only work, but people who can connect them to services that hopefully we can have a part in connecting those people to city programs that they might not know are available to help them and ultimately connect them with permanent jobs and permanent housing. [2:50:36 PM] So that-- I'm excited about the potential. It's kind of a weird time and since we're going into budget, so what we decided to do was to just ask staff to look at a pilot program and then come back for approval of that pilot program in January. I included a budget of up to $120,000 just because I think that's a rough estimate of what it might cost. The Albuquerque program started with $50,000 for a six-month program. I'm hoping to do a one-year pilot program. And they also already had a van that they were going to repurpose for that job, and I just don't know if the city already has that vehicle that we could use for this. So if the resolution passes today, I intend on listing this as a budget concept and then just trying to get more information from staff about whether or not this is something that we need to find money for during this budget cycle or if it's something that they can incorporate into their existing programming. So thanks to my co-sponsors for the support. >> Mayor Adler: Comments? Mr. Casar? Do you want to get a motion down first? >> Casar: I'll wait for a motion and then make my amendment motion. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Troxclair makes the motion for passage of this item. Is there a second to that motion? Councilmember Flannigan seconds that. Mr. Casar? >> Casar: I'd like to move the amendment I just handed out and will explain it if I get a second. >> Mayor Adler: Is this acceptable? Is there any objection to this amendment? >> Casar: I think there may be some discussion about some of the wording. >> Mayor Adler: So let's have a second. Is there a second? Mr. Renteria seconds it. >> Casar: So I said my amendment has three parts, but it actually has four. I will do my best to explain the four different amendments. I'll start off my saying that I'm definitely supportive of looking into a program like this. [2:52:40 PM] And hope that we can add these four things. The first amendment is the whereas clause is on the front page and the big added be it further resolved on the last page. And what this does is I think it's important for us to both look at a city, a non-profit, and private funded program for creating jobs, but also there may be ways that we create employment opportunities by removing regulatory barriers that the city has in place, in particular as that relates to small scale streets and mobile vending. There have been prior council resolutions that have been pushed forward to remove barriers to mobile vending so that folks that maybe can't afford their own storefront or run their own small business often times have in many other cities have been successful at getting those folks to be able to sell things that they create or find on the straight. So just the -- asking the city manager to explore additional opportunities for folks that are experiencing homelessness or who are very poor who have barriers that we have actually put up to small scale street and mobile vending so that they could actually create an income stream for themselves which I think would be a good thing. So that's the first amendment. The second one is the striking of the very last line on the back of the first page. Currently -- I would have it read that the city manager should have a public messaging campaign to raise awareness of the program and calls to 311 can refer the mobile units to specific locations. It would take out the section that says the public messaging campaign should include education of the public that panhandling is not the best way to assist individuals. I just don't want to prescribe that the city of Austin would be telling folks specifically whether or not to be giving folks money. [2:54:45 PM] I think that that's ultimately the choice of individuals and not something that I would feel comfortable telling the city manager to be telling folks in the community. I think that there are some reasons why some folks may not want to give folks money on the street and there are some reasons why folks would want to give people money on the street. And I don't want to be endorsing telling people what to do in that situation. And then on the third part of my amendment is to add that when this program is -- as the city manager researches this program that I would like for such workers to earn the city's living wage as a minimum. I think that that's a value and I think one reason that folks experience homelessness and poverty is because of low wages. And I think that if we aspire to the best program we can create, I would like the city's living wage to be paid to these individuals. And then the very last strike -- the fourth part is striking asking the city manager to identify $120,000 in this year's budget because will city manager has already identified five million dollars in this year's budget, I know has worked really hard to identify that funding, and as councilmember troxclair said, somebody can put up a budget concept in this budget for whatever amount they want. So I just don't want to be directing the city manager on the city council meeting before the budget reading to ask the city manager to identify more funding since I do trust and believe that she has already identified as much as she currently can. So of course I would be supportive of and happy to co-sponsor budget concept items to try and see if we can get that in this year's budget. So those are the four amendments and I'd be happy to elaborate on any of them. I'd be happy to explain them briefly. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Troxclair? >> Troxclair: So I think I'm okay, unless anybody else has a different opinion, I think I'm okay with the last portion that you mentioned. [2:56:48 PM] It gets this to the same place as far as just removing the direction to identify up to $120,000. I'm not sure exactly how much this is going to cost so I wanted to give them like some range of what I think it might cost. But it's better to have that conversation during the budget. I'm okay with that. So that part I would accept as friendly. I would suggest on the living wage that maybe we could instead of saying ensure, maybe provide an option that such workers would earn the city's living wage. I assume that when it came back in January that I know that it's something that it's important to at least one of my co- sponsors, but I also wanted to understand -- for example, I have a question -- if you earn less than $600 you don't pay taxes on that money. So I have some questions about whether or not we would be paying these people more than full-time city employees. And I also just want to understand based on the budget that I guess the staff comes up with is it what kind of difference is it S that we can help more people at a lower pay range or we can help fewer people with a broader -- so I would be interested in seeing the options, but I understand that the council has had an interest in the living wage issue. If you're okay with providing an option that such workers would earn the city's living wage, I'm okay with that as well. >> Casar: And what about the rest? I'll respond to that one and then [inaudible]. >> Troxclair: And the striking to educate the public, the panhandling is not the best way to assist individuals, I don't think that giving money to panhandlers is the best way, but I think there's another item on our agenda today that has -- that councilmember kitchen is carrying that has to do with a public awareness campaign about how people can best contribute money to non-profits and other organizations that support the homeless. [2:59:00 PM] That's not an issue to me either. Then the last issue on the vending, I would be interested to know what the dais thinks of that issue. I ei've had conversations with people like Allen graham from mobile loaves and fishes who is a big advocate for removing barriers to vending and might not have anybody who can't earn money other way to sell sodas or flowers or whatever they want to on the street, but I also know that that's a bigger conversation. So this I thought was going to be a relatively easy -- we have a template of how it's working in other cities, so I don't -- I guess I just want to hear from my colleagues whether or not that's something that they want to explore, and if so if this is the right place to do it. If not, I would be happy to work with councilmember Casar on a separate resolution that deals with vending. I just think that we might get a little -- it's possible that if we pass this -- like this today that we might get some people in the community who are upset about not having notice that we were going to discuss this issue. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go to Ms. Kitchen, then back to Mr. Casar. >> Kitchen: I agree with councilmember troxclair's statements on all of these. The -- the paragraph related to the small scale street mobile vendors, I have no problem with including it, but it is introducing a new topic and so I would just want to make sure, as councilmember troxclair said, that that was all right with the rest of our colleagues because I wouldn't want that to cause this resolution not to go forward. So -- >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar. >> Casar: To dispose of the ones that are not the mobile vending, I appreciate what councilmember troxclair was trying to do with 120,000 here but procedurely appreciate sounds like folks are okay with striking that. [3:01:09 PM] And then -- and again I also understand what we were saying on the panhandling, not the best way, it's hard to interpret where we're saying it's bad or good. That seems better addressed through the resolution passed through councilmember kitchen. If we could have the living wage language between somewhere between what I said and councilmember troxclair said and say to provide an option that includes such workers -- sorry, excuse me. To provide an option with a strong -- to provide options with a strong preference for a program where workers would learn the city's living wage. My personal preference is let the city manager know that's what I would like the programs to be, but ultimately if she provides a voter of options but knows the council has a strong preference so they really look into it, that's sort of where I would like to be on that. And on the vending, you know, we could come up with another resolution, but for efficiency sake if the majority of council is fine moving forward with it, it's not like we're changing any laws, we're just asking the city manager to take a look at it. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: Let me say I'm real supportive of this. I think this is a great idea and I know councilmember Houston had talked about it in the past too and I think it's just a really -- I think it's a really good idea and especially proceeding in the way you suggested which is to look to our social service providers, some of whom have work programs within their operations and see, you know, how we can -- perhaps there's a way of supporting their efforts and integrating something rather than the city coming up with a whole new program. So I guess -- you know, if the individuals who are hired are working on city projects, I would have a real concern if they are not getting paid a living wage as we are striving to do for all other city employees. So, you know, I can -- I could go with your language, but I would also support the language that you -- I can go with your compromise language but would also support the language as you've amended it. [3:03:21 PM] With regard to the vending, I'm real interested in the answer to this question. When I met with Alan graham and he was talking about some of the vending opportunities that they are pursuing and, you know, based on our initial research it didn't seem there are any barriers to them doing some of what they are discussing doing at least in the downtown area and I think it has something to do with being affiliated with a nonprofit. I'm interested in the research that could come back from this. Bit of work, you know, and so one option would be to just ask them to -- to look at it and to report back on whether barriers exist and if so what those are. Rather than then identifying all of the changes that would have to come as well as kind of best practices in other cities, successful implementation, there's about five steps and maybe we should start with the first one, but that's just a suggestion there. >> Mayor Adler: Is there any objection to the change in the last paragraph which says during the concept menu? Hearing none that amendment is accepted. In the first be it resolved clause, any objection to the striking of the words in red down at the bottom? Hearing none, that amendment is made as well. That gets us to the vending issue and the -- the living wage issue. >> Houston: Mayor, could I ask a question? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Houston: It was not my understanding the individuals who would be employed would be city employees. That it would be more like -- when I saw the spot on Sunday morning a couple years ago, it was more like day laborer jobs. And so they get paid in cash, you know, they probably could come back again, but I didn't understand these to be city employees. [3:05:25 PM] And somebody on that side used the term city employees. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I think it was likely me. No, I wasn't suggesting -- thanks for asking for that clarification. If I said it, I didn't mean to. What I spended -- intending to say if we were asking them to do work say work on graffiti issues or in our parks, I would want them to be paid at the same level as a city employee would be paid which would be the living wage. Though I know we have differential wages based on whether or not you are temporary. I see there's. >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: So I read this, I think it says -- >> Tovo: That's my thought process. >> Mayor Adler: Develop program that would offer temporary work opportunities with the city of Austin. If we were to expand it so that the manager was also taking a look at ways to have temporary work opportunities either with the city of Austin or within the city of Austin so that would not necessarily be city employees, I mean if we're going to be looking at this, maybe there are things that can be done with some of the organizations in town where they wouldn't be city of Austin employees working. I guess what I would like to do, I would ask the city staff to look at both jobs with the city of Austin and not necessarily with the city of Austin. And if I was going to be making that change so that it would be both with and without the city of Austin, then I would go with the language that Greg proposed which was to provide options with a strong preference for a living wage because we're not requiring a living wage of some of the service provider organizations. Hopefully we can get them there. In my perfect world, I would take that language, I would say with or within the city of Austin, and I would agree to Greg's change at the end so that the manager could come back with options that had both with and without a living wage but with an emphasis on those that did. [3:07:45 PM] Yes. >> Troxclair: I'm okay with the language that Greg -- the last language that Greg proposed. So I don't have -- >> Mayor Adler: To provide options with a strong preference for living wage. >> Troxclair: That's fine. I do want to say at least in Albuquerque that it is city doing -- doing city duties. And so if we were going to expand it beyond that, I don't know, I just think there is more of an interest in using city dollars to contribute to city duties and so if we're going to look at other things that are not within the purview of the city, I just would have more questions about that. So my preference would be first to like let's look at the model we already know is working before we try to get too crazy. Maybe we can't improve on it, but I would like to get this in place. >> Mayor Adler: My only thought if you were working with a service provider it might be they would say we can really do this if you would pay for half the salary of the person involved. It might be you could grant somebody -- so the city's resources were still helping to make it work. That was just what I was thinking. That it might not always be -- since this wasn't prescriptive and just identifying stuff at this point, that wouldn't preclude them from saying hey, there's this option too. But it's your resolution and I think it was good the way it was so I'll go either -- I'm not going to insist on that. It was just to broaden it. Yes. >> Kitchen: I just want to point out just a procedural deal, that the yellow paper that councilmember Casar passed out is on the older version, and there's a slight change in the backup. And that slight change is in the next to the last be it further resolved because it acknowledging you may be able to identify services for workers of all abilities. So the language should read the city manager should identify services for which workers of all abilities may be reasonably placed. [3:09:52 PM] So that was to account for some people with disabilities on the streets so that all of our jobs didn't have to be, you know, someone who was -- >> Mayor Adler: Lest there be any question we'll add that. >> Kitchen: It's in the backup. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar. >> Casar: And now I want to be agreeable to that compromise language, but I would just state some potential real discomfort with it because if it is just city projects, we don't pay anyone that does any city projects less than 13.50 an hour be they with a private company or any employees. If it was noncity work, that's the one place we wife on that, I just -- waiver on that, I would not want to potentially create a discriminatory impact where the only case we were paying people less is because they are homeless. And so if it is specifically city work, I mean -- if it's city work, we have policies in place, where if it's contract they make the living wage, if they are temporary they make a living wage, if they are permanent. Now that I understand it more, I think my original language is what I would stick with. >> Mayor Adler: And it's not prescriptive at this point so if the manager is going to come back to us with a menu or a memo, councilmember troxclair, I don't know if you want to consider making it broad in both places so that you get to see -- we all get to see what the range of options are. >> Troxclair: Sure. >> Mayor Adler: So that then would change the language to be in the first resolve clause offer temporary work opportunities with or within the city of Austin and that would then have Mr. Casar's original language that had to provide options with a strong preference such that workers would earn a living wage. [3:11:57 PM] Any objection to those two changes? >> Alter: I'm not following where you are. >> Mayor Adler: In the first resolve clause, third line or the end of the second line, it would be to develop a pilot program that would offer temporary work opportunities with or within the city of Austin. Adding the words or within. That would be the first change. And the second change would be in the second to last be it resolved clause, originally proposed by Mr. Casar, where it would say managing or evenly implementing various provisions of the program to provide options with a strong preference that such workers would earn the city's living wage. Okay? Any objection to those two changes? Hearing none, they are included. Any further discussion? >> Casar: The reason that I had an objection that if it is specifically for city work, I will still not vote for anything that [inaudible] And -- [inaudible]. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. So do we have people that signed up to speak publicly on this? >> I did, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Come on down, sir. >> Mayor, councilmembers, Gus peña, proud native east austinite, proud Marine Corps veteran. We were taught to kill, we were taught to kill, to detect, recon, first and third, first -- helicopter gunner. The reason I'm here to speak on this issue and I want to thank everybody that has had some input. There are many barriers, and I'm going to talk about veterans that are homeless and then veterans as a whole. Many, many barriers to being a veteran that has been recognized as having PTSD. [3:14:06 PM] I visit the mental health clinic at the V.A. Clinic, there's a department out there, and I'll be honest with you, a lot of those veterans that have been treated for PTSD and rated as PTSD really are good people. A lot of the good people out there in the streets are good people. They just get angry because they are not given the opportunity. They don't have a home, they don't have an apartment. So it's difficult. I respect them when they come talk to me, they call me Mr. Big stuff. I said you need to go to city council, I mean no disrespect but clean up and speak. They don't want to. They are sick and tired of business as usual. I want to thank councilmember troxclair and Casar for bringing these issues forward for the homeless. You go to the library, you talk to them, talk to them the first time, get away from me, fool. But once they get to know you, they tell you so many stuff that you wouldn't even think is -- you know, they have to fight. I'm not scared to fight. I'm a deadly fighter. I know every kind of self-defense tactic. I don't care if you are 6'6", I don't care, come in my face. The issue is we're trained to kill, to hurt, but you got to come to the mental health clinic and we'll triage you and I'll be there for you. I've done that many times at the V.A. Clinic. One of the things that I -- is very important for those that are homeless is somewhere to stay, something stable. Not -- I'm sorry, it ain't the arch because there are a lot of problems out there and it ain't the other organizations out there that they will go to, they will take a shower. There are a lot of barriers. They want to be self-sufficient. [3:16:07 PM] They don't want to be labeled as a has been. It hurts me. It hurts me for somebody to say that. You know what, I've known homelessness. Mayor Adler, you know what I told you. The issue is this you how do we do it? Get a good plan like y'all are doing right now. I know it's a resolution, but darn it, these people are veterans. [Buzzer sounding] All I need is for you to understand they just want a job, a place to be clean. You are on the right track and again, councilmembers, thank you very much. Troxclair, I love you for doing that and anybody else that support it. Not just talk. Action speaks louder than words. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor and councilmembers. I commend you on the thinking that goes in behind this kind of thought process of changing the way we do things, how we approach the dandelions. This is the dandelion project. And you are watering the dandelions with this project. The reality is I'm hoping we can have the same mind set as you look at the budget, how do you change the way we look at each other, deal with each other, give people back self-esteem and hope. Right now we have the fact we have a hurricane, we're going to be moving people in. Moving people out to the med center at del valle. We're looking to have a bunch of people that are going to need hope and hope comes in the form of money so we can create something. Create jobs and opportunities for those people, along with the people who are already out there. The downward pressure on the infrastructure in del valle is going to be huge with this and we're going to need a lot of help and these are kind of things that need to happen. You got to continue to water the dandelions. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Scott Johnson here? Is -- Scott Johnson is not here. [3:18:08 PM] Those are all the speakers. We're back up to the dais. Ms. Troxclair. David king, did you want to speak on this? 54. >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Troxclair. Were you -- >> Troxclair: Before I forget, I do, number one, want to thank councilmember Houston. She actually brought this up in a health and human services committee awhile ago, a year or two ago and inspired me to look more into the program so I appreciate her bringing the issue up and being a co-sponsor. And I also want to thank the community stakeholders that are supporting this resolution. One voice central Texas, echo, caritas and the salvation Army. If there's no other comments on the vending piece of this, I -- I don't know, are you making -- I thought there was someone making another suggestion on vending. >> I was. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: Sorry. I was wool gathering. Thank you councilmember Casar. As I said, I think this is important -- I'm looking at your amendment, the amendment under the be it further resolved regarding looking at other obstacles to vending. In light of the consideration, I think councilmember troxclair brought up about, you know, this is sort of a new -- a new area, but also trying to combine that with the interest and trying to figure out whether there are barriers and what those are. But having an understanding of that before we -- before we launch into asking for a set of specific recommendations about how to change those, I would propose the following changes. In the third line, I would strike including removing so that it reads the city manager should explore additional options to overcoming homelessness and obstacles to employment for difficult to employ populations. I would substitute in and should report back on potential barriers or on any barriers. [3:20:15 PM] And then picks up the regular language, to small scale street and/or mobile vendors within the city limits. The city manager should include information about provisions of existing city code that may limit or prevent such options as well as related permitting costs -- options and costs to city or resident to said vendors to operate. And then I would leave those next two sentences for after we get a report back. So that allows us to get some information from the city manager about whether there are any barriers, obstacles, what those are, the fees are and report back and go from there as to how much more research we want to do once we have ad inning what some of those ordinances might be. >> Mayor Adler: Make sure I have the changes. In that be it resolved clause on the third line you are recommending remove the words including removing and substitute in their place and should report back on any. >> Tovo: Correct. >> Mayor Adler: And then in the second sentence you're saying -- and this is the one I'm afraid mayor pro tem I did not get. >> Tovo: Sure. And actually there's one more in that same line. I also struck to operate for easily. But it doesn't matter, we can leave it in. Any barriers. It just didn't make sense grammatically. Then the city manager should and here replacing, explore and identify any changes to with include information about provisions of. >> Mayor Adler: Include -- >> Tovo: Include information about provisions of. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Tovo: Then it picks up existing city code, et cetera, et cetera. Then at the end of that sentence after options -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on one section. The include information about provisions of would substitute for explore and identify any changes to? >> Tovo: Correct. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [3:22:15 PM] >> Tovo: And then after prevent, at the end of that sentence which ends with -- no, sorry. At the end of that line after options it would say strike any and say as well as and then picks up related permitting options changes or to end. And then ends the sentence at operate. So that would read, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, that may limit or prevent such options as well as related permitting costs and options for said vendors to operate. >> Mayor Adler: And then deleting the balance. Mr. Casar, does anybody have objections to those changes? Hearing none, those changes are added. Further discussion in ready to take a vote? Those in favor raise your hand. Those opposed? Passes unanimously. Good work. >> Mayor pro tem, do you have your exact language written down? Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: And then those changes included, by the way, the whereas clause changes on the front page. Is that right? Are people okay with those? So the vote included the changes to the whereas clauses on the front page. There was a question earlier on the record about the vote we did when we divided up the annexation. I asked if there were any objections. I said hearing none, our divided question with only those three annexations passed, but I'm not sure everybody heard that so I'm now repeating that count of the vote. So in the annexation we passed what we considered in the divided question to those three. It did not include the one that was left out. That then gets us then to our next item-can we handle some of those zoning consent? [3:24:20 PM] Let some people go? >> I'll go through the 2:00 items under zoning that we can offer for consent. Item number 76 we could offer for consent on second and third readings. 77 consent. Item 78 and 79 are discussion items. 312 east Cesar Chavez so I will not offer those two for consent. Item 80 is for a staff postponement to September 28. Item 81 postponement to September 28. 82 postponement to September 28. Item 83 postponement to September 28. 84 and 85 during the work session it was offered, there's a question about offering it for consent that I understand from my staff that a councilmember wants to pull 84 and 85. >> Mayor Adler: Who is pulling them? >> Councilmember Flannigan. 86 is a postponement by council to September 28th. Item 87 is for consent approval on first reading. [3:26:22 PM] Item 88, mayor, I know you have people signed up, but I know the applicant is requesting postponement of this item to October 5th. Item 89 will be a discussion item. >> Mayor Adler: Are the people signed up O 88 -- do theyeed to spe if this is going to get postponed to October? They are in support. That's what I'm saying. It's being postponed. So no one needs to speak to that that signed up. Thank you. >> We're signed up as the applicant. [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Right. There are people that have -- yes. So you don't need to speak today because it's being postponed. >> It's my understanding the applicant requested postponement. >> Mayor Adler: So no one needs to speak on it. >> Item 89 is a discussion item. There are people signed up on this item. Item 90 is a staff postponement to September September 28th item 91 is consent for all three readings. >> Houston: Excuse me. I'd like to pull that. >> Pull 91? >> 93 would be consent approval on all three readings. 94 is a staff postponement to November 2. 95 is consent for three readings. >> Mayor Adler: What was 76? >> 76 and 77 are consent for second and third readings. 76 and 77. >> Mayor Adler: 78 and 79? >> Discussion, you have many speakers. [3:28:25 PM] >> I'm going to recuse on items 77 and 94. I filed affidavit with the court. So the consent agenda is items 76, 77, 80, 81, 82, 83, 86, 87, 88, 90, 93, 94 and 95. Sorry? Yes. I'll say it again. I'll do it slower. The consent items are items 76 and 77. Also 80, 81, 82, and 83. Also 86 and 87 and 88. Also 90. Also 93, 94 and 95. The ones that have been pulled are 78, 79, 84, 85, 89, 91 and 92. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Mr. Rent. Is there a second? Ms. Troxclair will second. Discussion? Those in favor? Those opposed? It's unanimous on the dais with recusals noted. Let's see if we can handle some more things on this agenda. Number 53, are we ready to do that? If there was a delay -- >> Houston: Yes, sir, and I still don't have any answer to that so why don't we go ahead -- the delay was on the police department not sending an invoice and I talked to chief Manley and he said he was going to check down the chain of command and I haven't seen him back. [3:30:41 PM] He was here earlier, but I don't see him now. >> Mayor Adler: This is a late invoice. >> Houston: Go ahead and take a vote. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead and take a vote. >> Houston: It's a concern staff is not sending out invoices in a timely manner so this would not come back up. >> Mayor Adler: Let's take that vote then. A motion to approve item 54? Mr. Renteria. Mayor pro tem seconds. Any discussion in? Those in favor? Those opposed. >> Houston: I abstain. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Houston abstains. The others voting aye, 10-0-1. Okay. Are we ready to pick up the special events ordinance? Let's call up number 17. The motion was made on this to approve on second reading only. Was there a second? I think there was at the time. We are now in discussion of the motion to approve this on second reading only. Further discussion? Ms. Pool. >> Pool: Mayor, I wanted also to signal that we would like to have third reading in October, possibly the 19th. I think that -- we have a meeting on October 19th so I would -- to give our stakeholders and staff enough time to do the work necessary for third reading. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [3:32:49 PM] And the intent is ask staff to take a look how the ordinance would be interpreted. Further discussion in those in favor of this item 17 please raise your hand. Those opposed? It's unanimous on the dais with Mr. Renteria gone and Ms. Garza gone. That takes care of 17. I think that takes us up to those items we can't do. 70 is a budget concept menu. We're not going to call that. Let's go to some of the zoning matters that then have been held. What about 84 and 85? Mr. Flannigan, you pulled those. >> Flannigan: Just a couple questions. >> She's not here. >> I understand that the applicant and other stakeholders have reached a compromise around which they agree. I'm not looking to disrupt the whole case, I just wanted to ask a few questions that seemed weird to me. As I looked at this, it seemed on the date I'm looking at -- pull it up here -- we're approving mf-2 zoning, but sf-3 immaterial preserve use and building restrictions. >> Greg Guernsey. Item 84 and 85, 85 what you are spoking to on the zoning. >> Flannigan: That's right. >> A recommendation was to grant mf-2 comp which is a multi-family district with the sf-3 development regulations. Site development regulations. That includes the 45% maxim pervious cover, 40% -- maximum height of 35 feet. [3:34:56 PM] >> Flannigan: Again, if I have this information incorrect please let me know, but I'm looking at information that says that the site currently has 51% building coverage. >> Yes, it's my understanding that the site has more impervious cover, precisely not sure of the amount of building coverage that is on the property. >> Flannigan: So is what is built there more than what would be allowed under our proposed zoning? >> Correct. It would then be considered -- right now it's zoned sf-3 and it is considered legal nonconforming. It would remain legal nonconforming with respect to that impervious cover -- or illegal not applying. If the zoning was denied or approved, that condition exists either way. >> Flannigan: What changes with the zoning? >> The change would be it actually acknowledges the use, there are two duplex dwellings on the property so four units. That would make the use multi-family allowed on this property, which is not permitted today. >> Flannigan: Even though the building is still nonconforming, even the use is nonconforming, that's the technical thing we're trying to fix with this? >> That's correct. That's what the owner has agreed to with the neighborhood. >> Flannigan: I think generally it seems odd to pass the zoning but the building remain noncompliant but I'm going to leave it at that. >> Mayor Adler: Is there a motion to approve items 78 -- sorry, 84 and 85? >> And close the public hearing. >> Houston: And close the public hearing. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. How often makes that makes -- Houston. Ms. Pool seconds. Any discussion? Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed? Flannigan votes no. [3:36:57 PM] We have troxclair and the mayor pro tem -- she's here, just not in her seat. Mayor pro tem is off the dais and so is councilmember Renteria. Otherwise it passes unanimously. That takes care of 84 and -- with Mr. Flannigan's no vote. Thank you. What about item number 89? What was the deal on that one? >> Case c14-2017 -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on. We just did 84 and 85 so those are taken care of. What about 91 and 92? Ms. Houston pulled those. >> Houston: Hold on. Don't anybody make a motion. >> Houston: I have a couple of questions for the applicant. >> Mr. Richard suttle is making his way into the room. >> Houston: Don't run. Don't run. Thank you, Mr. Suttle. >> Richard suttle I hope I'm here on behalf of the applicant. >> Houston: Thank you. And I hope you didn't have much damage in port aransas. >> Whatever damage is down there, it's a first world problem compared to what everybody else is dealing with. >> Houston: We're glad you are back. >> Thank you. >> Houston: I have a couple of questions on 91 and 92. As we talked regarding the capital view corridors when you all came and talked to us about this zoning change, you indicated to me that -- tell me what I said to me about the current capital view corridor and then the one that has been proposed. [3:39:05 PM] >> Yes, ma'am. So these tracts are affected by current capitol view corridor and we completely understand what the rules are on that. In fact, when velocity credit union started this they got a determination from the city in October of last year what the view corridors were and those are set and not to be violated. When the discussions came about the new view corridors, we started looking and it could affect -- the ones that were proposed could affect the project, and along with those we went ahead and filed a fair notice site plan to keep the process going. And what we've talked about would be a commitment that as those move forward and you get those settled, that we would at the site plan stage look and see what we could do to comply with those. And it's just impossible to say that we'll comply with anything right now not knowing what we're agreeing to. >> Houston: And we certainly understand that and we have gotten a memo recently there was going to be some delay in getting awful those worked out. And then we're working with development services -- am I in the right department or planning and zoning? >> About four different departments. >> Houston: We're working with four different departments trying to see if we can come up with a win- win situation for all of the properties that are being redeveloped in that area. >> Yes, ma'am, and we look forward to being a part of that discussion. >> Houston: Thank you so much. With that I move approval of item 91 and 92. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Houston moves approval of 91 and 92. Ms. Houston moves -- hello? Ms. Houston moves approval of items 91 and 92. Is there a second to that? Mr. Renteria seconds that. [3:41:05 PM] Any discussion in those in favor raise your hands? Those opposed? It's unanimous on the dais. >> Knowing that is closing the public hearing and approving all three readings. >> Mayor Adler: Approval on all three readings and close the public hearing. That takes care of 91 and 92. Okay. Let's pull up number 89. Did we do that one yet? >> Yes, thank you, case c14-2017-0048 at 1800 Scofield ridge park way at west Howard lane. It was recommended to you by the zoning and platting commission. They recommended staff recommendation for cs-1. Zoning they recommended this on a split vote. Right now the property is under the -- undeveloped and the proposal is to develop a liquor store. The applicant is proposing to rezone a footprint for a suite within a retail shopping center at this intersection. I think I'll pause. I think you have eight speakers that might be signed up to speak. >> Mayor Adler: We do. >> Mr. Nash Gonzalez is here should you have any questions and make his presentations. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go ahead and bring this up. Let's bring up the applicant first. Make a presentation. We're going to give you five minutes, sir. >> Mayor, councilmembers, Nash Gonzalez. I'm the agent for the property owner in this case. And he owns 2.2 acres at the intersection of Howard lane and Scofield ridge parkway. [3:43:16 PM] Northwest corner of the two intersections and he is surrounded by LI zoning. 6,000 square feet. He's proposing a 1500 square foot spot for a liquor store. And the liquor store itself would be a first class liquor store. It's not a little self-standing store, what have you. I know there's been some concerns about too many liquor stores in the area so I went out and walked, drove and what have you. The closest liquor store I found was 1.4 miles away. To the east I went all the way to 35, almost a mile, and there was two C stores, no liquor stores. Drove south all the way to Parmer lane, came back around through the commercial site, big strip center, and there was no liquor stores. So the intersection as it stands to get into the Scofield subdivision, you would have to go east about a quarter of a mile or west about a quarter of a mile to get into the subdivision so there's no direct traffic coming out of this business into Scofield. And there's no schools, there's no nurseries or other businesses that would prohibit the use in this intersection so I think that pretty much concludes my presentation. If you have any questions, I would be more than happy to answer any questions that you have. >> Mayor Adler: I think that's it for now. Thank you. Next speaker is martin denstall. >> Mayor Adler, mayor pro tem and the rest of the council, thank you so much for taking the time to hear us out. My name is martin denstool and I serve as a board member on our homeowners association. [3:45:18 PM] Much like you I'm in a ejected position and my fellow neighbors are essentially my constituents. We hold board meetings on a monthly basis and we have received several concerns both having people show up at our meetings and send us emails. They are very concerned about the fact that is going to be a liquor store that's going to be this close to our neighborhood. I am familiar with the area that Mr. Gonzalez -- excuse me, has identified. And one of the things that bothers me the most is not -- not just -- I'm not just here representing the rest of the neighborhood, I'm also a resident myself. As I drive, my route to work every day takes me right by that area. And that area has a lot of foot traffic where a lot of the children in the neighborhood walk to the elementary school on one side, the junior high on the other side. And it's just somewhat concerning to me that the children would -- could possibly be exposed to any of the types of elements that would be hanging out around that type of establishment. Again, I do understand that the zoning committees have gone forward with their recommendations, however, I did feel it was pertinent that I at least be heard and I do thank you for that and I yield the balance of my time to Mr. Steven Williams. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Williams, Steven Williams. >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: You are? Is Dolores Lopez here? So you have -- she's donating time. You're donating time so you have six minutes. You have six minutes. Three of yours and three of donated time. Chrissy Riche? [3:47:21 PM] You are on deck. >> Mayor Adler and councilmembers, I'm a homeowner in the area where trying to be established, and one of the things that I wanted to point out that you can consider not allowing this particular establishment within our neighborhood is the fact that at the intersection of highway I-35 and Howard lane -- can I click? There is a large homeless earn campment underneath that freeway where a lot of people hang out and panhandle and sleep under that bridge each and every evening. And so less than a mile away is where this particular liquor store is actually slated to be and developed. So it's easy access to -- for those individuals who actually hang out there and sleep there and I see them consume alcoholic beverages there. Very, very easy for them to get there. And it's just less than a mile away and what we've seen from research is that most of the time that alcohol that is bought at a liquor store is consumed very close to that actual establishment. So I'm thinking that those -- that those particular individuals probably will not travel back to I-35 and Howard to consume their alcoholic beverages that they may purchase at this particular location. There is quite a bit of undeveloped land between where this liquor store is going to be developed. There's a lot of wooded area there and in the past we have had a lot of problems with homeless being in that particular environment, setting up camps there, drinking there, leaving all types of trash in that particular area. And also the one where the Orange one is where Connally high school is. [3:49:24 PM] It backs right up to Connally high school. So individuals could be living there and could also be consuming alcoholic beverages there while high school students are going around. Also I did also want to point out one thing is that last year late in December there was a homicide investigation there. There was an individual who lost their life and -- in that wooded area very close to where this liquor store is. That particular individual was homeless. And that on-I'm very concerned additional crime is going to happen in that area, that if we allow this establishment there, easy access for who may come there to drink. And also, of course, for homeless people we know that there is a lot of substance abuse there that this may provide them access to alcohol, and then also of course they may commit violent acts in this particular area. And we just don't want to see the increase of crime or any types of murders in our area related to this particular store. So we are vehemently against it. We are afraid that there may be additional crime there and that this would, of course, be an access point for people who may already suffer from substance abuse. So thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Chrisry Riche. Is Mariano Lopez here? You've donated time so you have six minutes. Ma'am. >> Mr. Mayor and council, my name is chrisry Riche, I am president of the ridge of Scofield farms hoa. We are 701 homes with families, numerous children. We have -- can we bring that back? [3:51:28 PM] There are actually three liquor stores within 1.5 miles of this location. There is an elementary school, a charter school, churches, Conly high school and a middle school. I don't know where you got your information, sir, but it's on Google maps. We are concerned about the safety of our neighborhood. We are concerned about our people that walk up and down Scofield ridge parkway and bike with their families to have the introduction of more traffic, more liquor from these people. I'm upset with Ferguson's comment that very few zonings are denied. [Lapse in audio] We have a green area across the street from this area where our people come and they picnic and they have family time together. So I would ask that the council deeply consider not approving this liquor store and approve the zoning change. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [Applause] Joe lean kirkle and Elizabeth goaler. >> Good afternoon, honorable mayor Adler and honorable city councilmembers. My name is Jolene kirkle, I've lived in the ridge at Scofield farms almost ten years. I'm here today to respectfully encourage all of you to please reject the proposed liquor store at the intersection of Howard lane and Scofield ridge parkway. Let me preface my remarks by saying and assuring you I am neither a tea totler and I like my glass of wine and occasional bloody Mary as much as the next person. [3:53:45 PM] I have two points. First I'm concerned about the negative effect on my and my neighbors' property values. The proximity of this particular liquor store is likely to precipitate. I second all of the comments of the previous speakers with respect to this issue. Due to the well documented increase in crime that surrounds most liquor stores that was also brought up with the hymeadow issue, few if any properties suspect I have home buyers direct their real estate agents to search for a home near a liquor store. Furthermore, there has previously been noted at least four liquor stores within a five-minute drive of my home. These liquor purveyors already provide more than enough alcohol near my family oriented neighborhood. My second point concerns Scofield ridge parkway itself which bisects our neighborhood. There is little doubt about the increase in vehicular traffic that would be generated by a liquor store in addition to the convenience store now under construction at this intersection. There's also the peril of increased number of in inebriated drivers after purchase of liquor from the proposed store. This is particularly worrisome for pedestrians such as dog walkers, myself, joggers, parents strolling babies and others trying to cross Scofield ridge parkway. More vehicles and drunk drivers will only exacerbate the current dangers on the park way. Specifically the high proportion of speeding vehicles on the road, the inadequate number of traffic control lights presently available, and the almost universal ignorance of drivers with respect to stopping for people waiting to cross at the crosswalks. The new convenience store at the intersection of Howard lane and Scofield ridge parkway can and almost certainly will sell beer and wine. [3:55:47 PM] This is more than enough alcohol immediately adjacent to the ridge at Scofield farms neighborhood. Please reject this proposed liquor store at this same location. I thank you for your time and attention and consideration in this matter. [Applause] >> Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. Elizabeth Galer, I'm a homeowner owner and software developer who is taking time off work to speak with you. I live with my husband and daughter arrest mother who is also a resident of the neighborhood. My mother lives near the popular playground on the other side of Scofield from us. In the past we've enjoyed walking as a family. Liquor sales down the street is not going to make that any safer, that's for sure. I think it's obviously by this point the surrounding neighborhood doesn't want liquor sales at this location. We are not the target demographic. You know who is the target demographic, the folks without homes to congregate under the I-35 bridge and B the computers who speed along Scofield dodge being the local. I'm not going to demonize the homeless folks, but I am going to demonize those commuters because they don't need to be picking up a spare bottle of jack Daniels on their way home. I good ethics commission the liquor sales would bring in tax dollars. Owners, I get you want to make a buck. I'll tell you what, instead of selling liquor, sell diapers, sell formula. Sell milk. [Applause] Have you seen the lines at the gas pumps outside Costco and HEB? The city of Austin will get its revenue that way. The owners can still make a profit and the neighborhood will actually appreciate the store's presence and support it. And the commuters avoiding tolls I promise you a lot of them also need diapers. Thank you very much for your time. [3:57:48 PM] [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Susan pelvin. >> My name is Susan pelvin. Mayor Adler, mayor pro tem and councilmembers, thank you for letting us talk today. I appreciate your time. I love my neighbor's passion. And everything else that my neighbor said I totally agree with. I was a former member of the neighborhood watch association and I have seen crime go up incrementally over the 20 years that my husband and I have lived in the neighborhood. Most recently we have had three mailboxes broken into, our twice with a crowbar, and then we've had a slew of vehicular burglaries including on my street in my driveway to my friend's car when she was visiting. Thankfully we got it on our newly installed cameras and there is an ongoing investigation and there are fingerprints. So I submit to you all and I've given you information on this that liquor stores do bring in more crime. I'm a proponent of small business and capitalism, but we do not want this liquor store in our neighborhood and I think when you see eight of us, and I believe all eight are against this liquor store, I believe that counts, if I'm not mistaken, what someone calls in to -- to capital, councilmembers, whoever, I think it counts for about a thousand votes apiece. So think of this as maybe 7,000 people. Maybe I'm -- amending that but I'd like to see it that way. Please do not zone this in favor of a liquor store. Thank you so much. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you [3:59:50 PM] [applause]. >> Mayor Adler: That gets us back here to the dais on item number 89. Yes, Ms. Pool? >> Pool: This is in district 7 and thanks everybody for coming down and giving us the benefit of your thoughts and asking us to -- not to approve this. I have an item I would like to put up on the overhead but I can make a motion first if you would like that, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Pool: My motion would be to deny the application to put a liquor store at this spot on Scofield parkway. >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved to deny the application. Mr. Renteria seconds it. Discussion? Any discussion on the dais? Then we'll take a vote. Those in favor -- I'm sorry? Actually, I want to give the applicant the opportunity to close, which I did not do and should have done. >> Pool: And as he's coming up, we've got the overhead piece here and it just reiterates the location of the different liquor stores and they're either convenience stores, gas stations, supermarkets and actual liquor stores. And this grayed out area is a two-mile circumference around the star in the middle, which is the proposed location. >> I'd like to clarify one thing real quick just in case I said it the wrong way. When I said that we were not next to any school, I meant the distance that would prohibit the use of a liquor store. So the operating hours of a liquor store is from 10:00 in the morning until 9:00 at night. And they're closed on Sundays. [4:01:51 PM] And also this is a package store. Also drinking is not allowed on the spot. This is not a tavern, bar, nothing like that. People go get their liquor and take off. The other thing is they're not allowed to open anything on the premises, bottles or what have you and so on and do any drinking on-site. That's a very hefty fine on the property owners. Other than that I think we meet everything for the liquor store and we're not into the neighborhood. I'm outside mostly an industrial park. So hopefully I can get a favorable recommendation from you guys. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: What is the zap's recommend nation and the planning and development recommendation? >> The applicant did state it is adjacent to an industrial area, along a major arterial. This type of use is appropriate along an arterial at an intersection. It does abut residential area that is across the roadway, it's a major roadway, and doesn't have a direct connection, but the adjacent use is being industrial and warehousing to the north, which was on a lesser street. We felt would be appropriate. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. What was the recommendation of the zap? >> The recommendation by the zoning and platting commission was 6-2 with two abstaining. So it was 6-2-2. 6 in favor, 2 opposes and 2 abstaining. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Any discussion on the dais. Motion is to deny the application. Are people ready to vote? Let's vote. [4:03:51 PM] Those in favor of denying the application, please raise your hand? The mayor pro tem, Mr. Renteria, Ms. Pool. That looked like five. We're going to hold for a second, let Ms. Houston come back and participate in this vote. Are you familiar with this? The motion is to deny the application. Those in favor of denying please raise your hand? It is -- those opposed raise your hand? Those voting no are troxclair, Garza, Flannigan, Casar and myself. It is denied 6-5. [Applause]. Okay. >> Pool: Thanks, everyone. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Mayor pro tem, we're going to postpone item number 98. Was there a time you were postponing that too? >> Tovo: Thank you. I appreciate that. I would like to postpone that to our next meeting, which is >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to postponing this to September 28th? This is item number 98, historic landmark commission. Then this matter without objection is postponed to September 28th. [4:05:52 PM] Staff, did you want to do something on item number 99? >> Yes, chuck Lesniak, city officer. We're asking a postponement of this item to October 19th to allow us additional time to work with aid. They're still working on their calculations for their other school campuses. >> Mayor Adler: So what action? >> Postpone to October 19th. >> Mayor Adler: Postponed to October 19th. Any objection to that? Then that's postponed until the 19th. Okay. That gets us to items 69 and also 101. Do we want to have a conversation about whether these are to be called up together? I would have everybody speak once rather than letting people speak twice on these issues. >> Houston: Excuse me, mayor. Is there anyone signed up for 100? >> Mayor Adler: Two people. >> Alter: Mayor, could we still confirm what we still have left -- would it be possible to confirm what we still have left on the agenda because we've been bouncing all over. >> Mayor Adler: That's fine. We have item number 60, we have 78 and 79 that we said we would hear after dinner. We have 96 and 97, which are the public hearings on the budget and the tax rate. And we have item 101 and 102, which is set for no earlier than 6:30. >> Houston: What about 100? >> Mayor Adler: 100 we could do -- it has two people. [4:07:56 PM] Do you want to try to do that one quickly? >> Houston: Yeah. >> Mayor Adler: Let's do 100. Is staff here to take us through 100? >> Houston: I just saw Mr. Guernsey sitting right there. >> Mayor Adler: 100 is wingstop. >> Houston: There he is. You thought you were getting away. >> Mayor, it's our development services staff and I'll go find them right now. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. It's the staff. Let's go ahead and call the other item up. >> Houston: Which items? >> Mayor Adler: I would call up 60 and 100 at this point. >> Houston: Oooh, that's going to be a long time. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor, I think that's going to take awhile. If the staff is almost here... >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Houston: It's two people. >> Mayor Adler: Let's call the people 100 for the people to talk while staff gets here. Two people to speak. David king, do you want to speak on this, item 100? Then Rodney Bennett, you are the second speaker. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers. [4:09:57 PM] I'm against this item. I don't think we should be approving any zoning that would allow alcohol sales within 300 feet of our schools. As I understand, ISD opposes this as well. I hope we would consider expanding that distance to 1,000 feet as allowed by state law. I hope that -- I would be happy ticket-to- work with any of you -- I'd be happy to work with any of you in initiating a code amendment for that. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Sir? Before you start, is the applicant here? >> Mr. Mayor, I am the applicant. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. You have five minutes. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and councilmembers. I'm Rodney Bennett with Bennett consult consulting here to request the request for an alcoholic beverage waiver for the wingstop located at 7112 Ed gluestein. This tenant is a a very large shopping center by 183 and manor road. In your backup you will see a letter from aisd objecting to the waiver. It has been their policy to object to waivers for awhile now. We feel that the sale of beer and wine in an established restaurant that serves the neighborhood will have no effect to the conduciveness and positivity of the school's safe learning environment. The reason? There's an existing H.E.B. And liquor store in the same center. If the sale of alcohol is as the school claims interfering with the safe, positive and conducive environment, then it would have happened many years ago. [4:12:02 PM] The school is still open as well as the two stores. The distance from the liquor store door to the school property is 311 feet. The distance from the H.E.B. Door to the school property is 414 feet. The distance from the wingstop door to the school property is 177 feet. That is essentially a straight line from the door across the street to the street property. However there's a chain-link fence that separates the school from the traffic on manor road. This barrier should be taken into consideration as it prevents pedestrians from accessing the school property. Furthermore, we feel that the sale of beer and wine from wing stop would not be of an impact because it is for on-site consumption at a restaurant where employees must be changed from tabc to serve and monitor customers. There is no way for an employee of the H.E.B. Or liquor store to stop a person from consuming alcohol to point of impairment in the parking lot after it is purchased from them. Wing stop has proven to be a valuable commodity to the available and it is shown in 125 signatures in support of the waiver. I'm available should you have any questions. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. We're now back up to the dais on this item number 100. Is there a motion? On this case. >> Houston: Mayor, I would like to move that we deny the application for a variance? >> Mayor Adler: It's been moved to deny the application for a variance. Seconded by Ms. Pool. >> Pool: And I have a question. What district is this in? >> Houston: One. >> Pool: Okay, thank you. >> Houston: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Can staff tell us what the recommendation was? Staff's recommendation and the planning commission recommendation? [4:14:05 PM] >> Excuse me, good afternoon. Andy lien high 17, development services. Based on a letter received from the Austin independent school district objecting to this case, staff has recommended denial. When we send these out to the school district and when we get these if they're within the boundaries, staff tends to follow those recommendations from the school district as our recommendation to you. >> Mayor Adler: What was the recommendation? >> They objected to the waiver based on the distance to the school. Staff's recommendation is to support aid and deny the application. >> Mayor Adler: I understand staff's recommendation. The commission has also recommended to deny the application? Or is this just a waiver to so it doesn't go -- >> Yes, sir, it's a waiver. >> Mayor Adler: Got it. Thank you. >> Houston: And mayor, since we don't have a map up there to kind of describe where it is, this is when montessori -- this is Wynn montessori school, just this year. And you should have also received a letter from Ed Gordon, the trustee of district 1, not wanting this liquor store across the street. Wing stop is directly across the playground at Wynn montessori school and there's a bus stop right there where people can cross over to catch the bus to go home, and people who perhaps use wingstop to get their supper and have a drink, could if they were not driving, also catch the bus. So it's a lot different because they can consume alcohol. Tom's liquor store is I think the one the agent was -- the applicant was describing. Tom's has been there about 30 years and, as somebody said earlier, it is against state law to drink alcohol on the site after package store. And so I see this very differently than I do some other things that were said because all they have to do is walk across the street and there are kids on the bus stop waiting to go home and the playground is right there. [4:16:16 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Yes, Mr. Flannigan. >> Flannigan: I think the rule about distance to the schools is a good one. It's simple, it's clear, it's predictable. I'm going to agree with my colleagues and deny the sale of liquor in this case. It's precisely the type of zoning that makes sense to me. We set up a rule, we apply equally to everyone. It's not complicated. The property owner knew in advance what they were getting into. It seems to be very straightforward. The addition of the multiple outlets in the same location is also in line with the studies about when liquor becomes a problem. It's about the density of the sale of liquor, not a single outlet, in this case you have the liquor store, you have the H.E.B., now you'll have this. It seems to hit all the right moments for me to deny the rule in this case -- to deny the waiver. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Any further discussion? Ms. Pool? >> Pool: I was curious about the petition that the applicant brought to us. It doesn't show us addresses, so it's hard for us to know are these people who were customers at the wing stop? >> Those were customers from wingstop. >> Pool: So they were basically saying that they ate there and they wanted to have beer available? >> Correct. >> Pool: Usually with petitions we want to see that they're residents and that they're located close by and so forth. So thank you for that. >> I don't think this wingstop is a destination point. It serves the neighborhood and that shopping center. >> Pool: Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Any further discussion? We can vote. The motion is to deny the waiver. Those in favor of denying the waiver please raise your hand? Those opposed? It's unanimous on the dais, the waiver is denied. [Applause]. Okay. I'm now going to call up item 60 and 101. [4:18:17 PM] We want to discuss these on the dais? Ms. Troxclair, do you want to go first? >> >> Troxclair: Do you want me to lay out item 60? >> This is an item that I first became interested in, probably two years ago during our budget cycle when I realized that the city of Austin was paying a subsidy to south by southwest out of property tax funds to the tune of $1.5 million. And instead of using hotel occupancy taxes to fund this expense, which is exactly what this fund is designed for. So it is, as my colleagues have learned, an incredibly complicated topic and it has taken a couple of years to really fine tune all the details and understand how we could apply as existing state law to make better, more efficient use of these resources and ultimately I'm excited to be coming forward with item number 60 today. I think that there's a couple of things that I want to go over really quickly before we hear from the speakers? First of all, this item is about the best investment of our current resources, and aligning our investment of tourist dollars with the things that drive tourism. This does not deal with convention center expansion. It does not contemplate an increase in the hotel occupancy tax. I think that those are important and valid discussions for this council to have, but I also think it's important that we be able -- that we're able to demonstrate to the community before we take a vote on those important issues that we could use our existing revenue in a fiscally responsible way. So this pot of money is growing really fast. It's doubled in about four years since 2012. [4:20:23 PM] It was about $150 million in 2012. It's more than that today. There's no surprise that there's interest in this money and interest in the decisions that are before us today. But when it came to my attention that we could be spending up to 15% of that money on parks and preservation in our community, but are such an important part of why tourists come to visit our city. I felt like it was incumbent upon us to do what we could to maximize that spending. For those of you who aren't as familiar with the issue, we can spend up to 15% to cultural arts which we already do, and we can spend another 15% on parks and historic preservation, which we currently spend almost no money doing. So of course if we're going to increase funding to parks and preservation it has to come from somewhere and in this case it does require a small cut to the convention center budgets and the visit Austin budget. There is no question in my mind that the convention center is a vital economic development tool for our city. We're a hopler destination for -- popular destination for conventions. The conventions we have here help to fill hotel rooms during the week and provide that vibrant downtown that is so important to our community and the people who are coming here for conventions are spending money going out to eat and shopping, et cetera. But when you look at the data about two percent of tourists are coming for convention and the rest of the tourists in Austin are coming for something else. They're coming for our parks, they're coming for our live music scene. They're coming as homework tourists. They're coming for our dining scene or a vast array of other things. So when you look at the fact that a small percentage of tourists are -- a small, but very important percentage of tourists are coming for conventions and contrast that with the fact that the convention center and acvb are receiving up to 85% of our hotel occupancy tax allocation, I think that it's incumbent upon us to coupled to -- to have a discussion about whether or not it's appropriate for us to spend some much that money on the other things that bring tourists to our beautiful city and that are so valuable to our community. [4:23:05 PM] So this does just that, it allows -- it creates a new bucket of spending for parks and preservation that will allow us to fund things like zilker park, fiesta gardens, tejano walking trails and a whole host of projects that are outlined in the resolution. It will also allow us to solve the spring festival safety issue by moving this expense over to the convention center and having the $1.5 million in public safety costs paid for out of public safety taxes instead -- of hotel taxes instead of property tax payers. The issue of short-term rental revenue has come up and as I stated earlier this week we decided to remove that from our handy exhibit because there is no guarantee that we will be able to get that half this year, but if we are successful in collecting unremitted hotel occupancy taxes from unregistered short-term rentals then that will increase the funding of all of the buckets that are outlined in the proposal. I know that it -- I know, unfortunately, this issue has been I think convoluted with the mayor's downtown puzzle, which again I think is a really interesting and unique idea that deserves the full attention of council when the plan is fully baked. This is not something that -- I just wanted to assure the mayor and the speakers that this is not something that I ever intended to bring forward as an alternative to this plan. This is truly something that my staff and I have been working on for years, and it is something that I know that mayor pro tem tovo has been working on even before I was on council. [4:25:11 PM] So I hope that as we enter into this discussion today that we can keep in mind that our resolution deals with the existing pot of money, while item number 101 deals with contemplation of a future increase in that pot and how that money would be spent. Ultimately if the council decides to move forward with both, that could mean more fun for all -- for a lot of the stakeholders that are involved. But from my perspective this is a step that we can take right now today to increase the investment in our city resources, in our parks and historic preservation, in our local businesses that are currently not seeing almost no investment from the tourists who are coming here. This is about having tourism pay for itself. And ultimately making sure that the money -- the taxes that tourists are paying when they come to visit our city are going to cover the costs of the wear and tear on the things that they're coming to visit and helping us to reenvest in our community so that we continue to have tourists here for many years to come. So I appreciate everybody's input and I look forward to the discussion. [Applause]. There's been a motion on item number 60. Is there a second to that motion? Councilmember Houston seconds that. I'm going offer an amendment a and if there's a second I'll speak to it. I would lay out the amendment that I've handed out. It's bright yellow paper. It says amendment number 60, amendment number 1 -- >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor, I have a question first, please. When we were laying this out we had two other councilmembers who have amendments. I would like to take their amendments first. [4:27:13 PM] They were part of laying this out. I know councilmember Houston and councilmember alter have an amendment. And to stay within the order in which we discussed this before, I think it would be helpful if we took their first. >> Mayor Adler: I appreciate your suggestion, but I'm laying out this amendment now. Is there a second to this amendment? Mr. Casar seconds the amendment. We can lay out all the other amendments as well. This is difficult because my sense is that we're all trying to get to the same place, but I tell you that honestly I'm not entirely convinced of that. For me this began with trying to find a dedicated funding stream for homelessness in this city, which is something that we have sought for a long time and haven't been able to find. The work that came out from the task force, which was an eight-month group that the council asked for when it made its motion, a long vetted process, staff was involved, lots of different stakeholders were involved, presented an opportunity to be able to have a dedicated income stream for homelessness. Now, you get there because you can't use any of the hot tax money for homelessness. In order to have a dedicated income stream you have to get to an instrument that the tourist public improvement district or a P pid. And in order to get to the tpid you have to do certain things to get to that step. That's why it was called a puzzle because there were pieces. And the puzzle is not complete until you get to the very end and you have the very last piece and you can lay it down and it's a dedicated income stream to be able to deal with homelessness. [4:29:13 PM] My problem with item number 60 as it's laid out is that I think that it could prejudice the ability to be able to get that income stream for homelessness in our city. I think our staff -- we have a question for them. I fear that it's going to have at least two effects. The initial item number 60, which first and a couple of weeks ago had a cut to the convention center budget and to visit Austin budget of a combined about seven million dollars. At this point it's now gone up to an impact on their budget that looks to be $11 million plus a requirement for $2 million, so $13 million, so over 20% cut on how the current budgets are for those two agencies, the convention center, visit Austin. And I'm concerned that with cuts that are that large, the last proposal had a 32% cut in a visit Austin budget when it was segregated, but that's changed. It changed two days ago and changed again today. My concern is that it's very unlikely that the tpid share for homelessness would be maintained at 40%. The second concern is that if you start trying to move money around in order to be able to save the tpid piece and there are things that you could potentially do, I guess, one of those would be to extend the period of time -- not pay down as much the note that the plan that came from the task force came back with where they're trying to pay down a note that's due in 2029, but to pay it down in 2021, which opens up the possibility of doing things like the expo center sooner perhaps, but in any event if you do that and extend that time period, then at the very least even if you're able to maintain the tpid, the tpid starts at 40% of one personnel that note is paid off an then it's two percent. [4:31:36 PM] So we don't get to the eight or nine million dollars for homelessness until that's paid off. So I'm concerned that the way that we would come up with the money to be able to do that would impact either the amount or the timeliness of this income stream that we've developed. The other drop I have with 60 is a process issue. Because there's been no process on item number 60. The task force -- we had a task force that took a look at these issues. They met lots of different people in the community altogether worked for an eight month period of time. They had hearings, people could go to those hearings and watch those hearings and had a report that was laid out for two months for people to ask questions about and to vet. Our chance had a staff to vet it. Lots of different stakeholders participated in it. And they came up with a product that now refined by our staff as laid out earlier this week could use a convention center as a tool to unlock a door to get $162 million for historic preservation over the next 10 years. Dedicated income stream. Dedicated income stream from music of $36 million a -- $36 million over a 10-year period of time for local music industry. Homelessness initiatives of between 60 and $70 million over a 10-year period of time. Not including tif monies that would happen. Plus other projects that could be part of the convention center project, project like the mac or mexicarte or sixth street, historic sixth street or the cultural center at 11th and red river, ninth and red river. [4:33:43 PM] My concern is that without a process, without the vetting, without the community discussion, we can't know whether or not that puts in danger what is a plan or a proposal that when it was laid out to the community has been laid out very slowly so that the community could comment on it. It's laid out now where it will come back to this council for us to discuss it at the end of September. I've been told that item number 60 is not intended to impact the ability to be able to do those puzzles and get the monies, and I would like to believe that that is true. So my amendment is an attempt to try to find a way that we can join together on this and to make sure that whatever we do we try to accomplish two things. We try to get to the place where we actually get the full component of the 15%, up to 15% for historic preservation, and at the same time we do it in a way that doesn't prejudice the puzzle. So the amendment that I have -- and clerk, can you put that on the overhead, please? It begins by having the council -- it replaces the resolve clause in councilmember troxclair's resolution. And it directs the city manager to come back to council with options to achieve immediately or as quickly as possible the full 15% allotment of the hotel tax for historic preservation. It says historic preservation activities that attract tourism is required by the law in all areas of the city with an emphasis on project and activities in communities most at risk of losing their historical integrity. [4:35:54 PM] It also asks the manager to provide those within a short enough period of time so that we can take into account the assessments during our budget process that we're in right now. There's a blank there right now, but I'll need staff to tell us what the appropriate days would be. It says such historic preservation activities shall be in areas such as, but not limited to Barton springs, zilker clubhouse, zilker botanical garden, Umlauf sculpture garden, the victory grill, montopolis Negro school, historic swimming pools and the water E long park. Not limited to those, but certainly including those kinds of things. But then it also says importantly that the options presented by the manager must indicate to the council how each of the options identified might or might not prejudice the city's ability to, number one, obtain the maximum non-hotel occupancy tax dedicated income stream for activity related to homelessness in the area proximate to the arch. Lay out options for us, but tell us if it's going to impact, then tell us it's going to impact that so that we know the impact of the choice we're making. Second, obtain a dedicated income stream to support the local music industry independent of current cultural arts funding. You will recall the plan that came out from the task force and it's considered a puzzle actually has a dedicated income stream for music. The plan in number 60 purports to have $3.2 million for music, but there's no funding associated with that. There was a conversation at one point about charging a ticket to everyone that a five dollar surcharge on everyone who bought a ticket to anything at the convention center, but we can't do that under law. [4:37:55 PM] And even if we could, it would be something that was being charged to people who lived here, as opposed to leveraging and maximizing tourist money. The third one is we want to make sure that it allows us being able to proceed with a development of the waller creek chain of parks. It says as part of this we want to know if there's going to be an impact on the ability to develop capital funding and annual income stream to enable investments in facilities or locations that could be eligible for hot funding, but not limited to palm school, the sixth street cultural district, red river district, mexicarte museum and the Barrientos mexican-american cultural center. It further provides that we want to know what we're doing here is going to impact the ability to invest in improvements related to the Travis county exposition center. It concludes with the options should maximize the use of funds derived from sources other than local property taxes to the fullest extent possible, though this does not prohibit options otherwise. I guess what I'm asking for in this amendment is for us not to make such a substantial cut of effectively over 20% to the tourist industry in this city. Until we've had the opportunity for staff to be able to come back and tell us whether or not this in fact doesn't impact the elements that were listed or not so that we know and have information related to that question. And I have a question for staff. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor, before you bring up staff, and I really appreciate you on -- I know you wanted to lay this out and read through it and provide some all of the information, some of which miss interprets and miss informs and misstates what item 60 is. [4:39:57 PM] But before you bring up staff I think it's only fair to allow the other two councilmembers who have had amendments to lay their amendments out and then we can all ask questions of staff. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: They can make amendments to amendments that I have, but there's an amendment on the floor right now, but certainly I would let them describe the amendment that they want to bring. >> Kitchen: I also just -- for the record, I think it's -- well, I think it might have been more appropriate -- >> Mayor Adler: In a second I'm going to ask you what I've said that misrepresents the proposition because in most instances I just said other than the dollar amounts, which we can talk about, I've said I just want us to be able to examine whether or not that impacts the ability to do these other elements. >> Kitchen: I would just like my fellow colleagues who are co-sponsors on item 60 to present their amendments. >> Mayor Adler: I don't have a problem with that. Does anybody else want to explain an amendment that they want to be able to make later or intend to make later? Ms. Houston. >> Houston: We've been talking for a long time about the convention center and in district 1 we've been talking for a long time about the Travis county exposition center. And mayor, I thank you for adding that to your amendment that was passed out a little while ago. I would like to move this amendment to item number 60. It's a be it further resolved prior to the last before the be it further resolved, page 405, it would be the first be it further resolved. That the city manager is directed to collaborate with Travis county to explore and evaluate opportunities to include the Travis county exposition center as a venue funded with hotel occupancy tax revenue or other revenues and include a report on the documents provided to the council by September 28th, 2017. [4:42:05 PM] >> Mayor Adler: When we get there we'll allow you to lay out that amendment. Does anybody else want to talk about amendments they plan to bring? Ms. Alter? >> Alter: Thank you. I do have an amendment but I wanted to clarify if I'm working off the right version of the resolution for item 60 councilmember troxclair. I know there were some changes you were talking about earlier which I don't think our guests in the chambers saw and I'm not sure I have the most up to date resolution off of which to make my amendment. Were there changes to the resolution or just to chart? >> Troxclair: There were no changes to the resolution, but thank you for that reminder. I did pass out an updated chart just based on our conversation at work session the other day where I think it was suggested that it might be more -- might be better to allow the city manager to direct the allocation as she sees fit in the convention and visit Austin instead of prescribing the level of funding for both of those entities. So -- and I couldn't let councilmember Flannigan not do me on the chart side so I had to print out a giant one as well. So that's what you'll see in that blue line, the proposal that we're contemplating in this resolution is just that its convention center and acvb combined will receive more than 70% of the hotel occupancy tax funding. >> Alter: Thank you. So the motion I wanted to add is a whereas clause that clarifies what I think was the intention behind this resolution, and it would be adding whereas clause that this would not be the last whereas clause, and it's the light yellow sheet if you're looking for it. I don't know if I got stopped halfway. And says whereas approval on this item does not preclude the opportunity to implement other visitor impact task force recommendations or to expand the Austin convention center at a future time. [4:44:14 PM] So there are many other recommendations within the task force report that the council might wish to pursue and I do not believe that what is in this resolution is precluding those. And I also wanted to owe foe it to be very clear in the resolution itself that the intention was not to preclude an expansion of the convention center. That is not a discussion that we have fully had at this time. I also think this is important to recognize the effort of the task force and the work that they on this and if we move forward we would be choosing to make a decision on a certain portion of it as part of this year's budget process, which is kind of the decision we had before us at the moment. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Do any other councilmembers want to indicate amendments that they might bring? You're not limited, but if anybody wants to bring it up they certainly can. Ms. Pool? >> Pool: I have a question that I'd just like to toss out there to give staff an opportunity to prepare to answer it. Would this be a good time or would you like me to wait? >> Mayor Adler: Let me call up staff and you could ask them the questions. >> Pool: Well, I have a procedural question. When will we hear from the public? >> Mayor Adler: As soon as we lay out some of the facts I want the public to react to. >> Pool: The question I have for staff, and it has not been clarified even though we have tried really, really, really hard for a couple of months to get a complete handle on the revenues coming in from the hotel occupancy tax inch R. Every year, how much the operations are, and then over what period of time have we been building reserves and what is that dollar figure. I have information that I've pulled from the cafer and from audits and from past budgets. So I think I have a sense of what they are, but I need to hear it from staff because we have asked repeatedly for information on reserves, and the building of them, the stockpiling of them. [4:46:24 PM] So I would like to have that clarified publicly so that everybody understands the various amounts of money that are currently available from the hotel occupancy tax that have not been spent over the last few years and which significantly affect and support the elements of item 60 when we say that we are not diminishing their budgets, that there is money to be shifted around and moved and that there is a good amount of access. There's a good amount of money to be accessed. So if you could when you come up to tell us how much hotel occupancy revenue comes in each year, how much is put into operations and then what flows into reserves. >> Mayor Adler: So manager, this would be a question I have and you can answer them or tell us if there's someone else that can. I am a big proponent as I think many of us are in using the hot tax in order to be able to leverage the 15% for preservation and the 15% for the arts as much as we can. And we have to do things to be able to get hot tax money, but the hot tax money is money towards pay. If we can access all of that in these two budgets without impacting the ability to do the other things or impact operations, then I want to be able to support it. So my question is really simple. Does item number 60, which takes 11 million '91 thousand dollars out of the convention center budget and the visit Austin budget and in addition to that dictates how or directs how two million dollars are to be spent. [4:48:27 PM] So what would appear to be a 13-million-dollar impact on their budgets, can we do that now and not impact the plan that the task force had been laying out or the alternative scenarios that were laid out to us this week? >> Mayor, in response to a resolution earlier in the year that had 14 different points, we've been working for a number of months on the downtown puzzle and different scenarios. Those are the only scenarios that we have worked on. The proposal put forth in resolution 60 would change the revenue stream that was available and we have not had time to run that scenario. We do not have new numbers yet for that scenario or any other options that we might choose. I heard today that we're changing this to be not specific to reduction numbers for the convention center and the visitors bureau, but that you would direct me to determine that allocation. So there would be multiple scenarios that we would run pairing this change in the revenue stream for our convention center with the scenarios that we had presented relative to the downtown puzzle that we have been studying for a few months. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Does anybody want to say anything before we bring the public in to speak? Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I have a question for the city manager and then I do have some things I wanted to say before we start our public dialogue. It looks like there are some other questions. I'll ask my question quickly. We have an amendment before us, city manager, that asked you to do things like determine how number 60 impacts the development of the waller creek chain of parks. [4:50:32 PM] So I guess if we're pulling you on -- how -- is there any direct impact between the reallocation of our hotel-motel tax and our ability to move forward with the waller creek tif, which is entirely independent and was being considered Longley before it was immersed in this puzzle. >> That particular one change in the hot tax does not affect because the tif was set up independent of that revenue stream. >> Tovo: Thank you. Ic I have some sort of direct points to this that I want to address before we go to the public but I'll yield for any other questions my colleagues have. Anything else? Ms. Pool? >> Pool: Because staff was not able to get built, I am looking at the current allocation fiscal year '16-'17 from our current allocation and I add up to 91 million. I see a debt payment of 20 million, convention center 45 million, visit Austin budget 15 million. Cultural arts 10 million, 11 million and historic preservation one million. We have estimated total hotel tax revenue is 95 million based on the city manager's proposed budget. So there is a delta between the two. I can add up the numbers for the proposed budget for the fiscal year to get closer to the 95, but I realize that we have a lag in the collection of the tax revenue that come in a year later where the monies that we collected are collected in the past year. So in advancing the ball for staff that we do have the information on from the city manager's proposed budget, what the estimated total hotel tax revenue is for this year, which is a little bit over $95 million and we have what is proposed for thisser year and what was allocated for last year. [4:52:47 PM] So my remaining question will be there is a delta, a positive delta. The monies that have been shifted that have not been spent over the last few years have been shifted into a reserve fund in anticipation of expanding the conference center. And we know that to be the case because when the conference center board went out to higher the new head of the -- the convention center, sorry, in his contract, the visit Austin contract, the element -- a part of the job application and expectations were that the hiree would lobby the city council in order to get approval to pass bonds for expansion of the convention center. So we know this has been in place for some time. We know that there are monies that have been designated reserves and not been spent in order to create a cash down payment tamofen R. Move forward with the expansion of the convention center. Those are the funds that I understand folks don't want to talk about or look at because they have been set aside. Base accountability and transparency is important, especially with taxpayer money, whether they come from tourists or residents, it is important that we lay all of these numbers out on the table and have a clear conservation about where they came from and what they are anticipated for. So I would just stand by saying that we are not looking at significant cuts to the convention center or the visit Austin budget by creating a 15% set aside, whether we fund it to the full 15% or not is something that we can take up in budget. Item 60 specifically wants to create the ability to put 15% into that bucket for historical and preservation activities that would match what we have for cultural arts, which is allowed by state law. [4:54:49 PM] And we just have never done it in the past. So when staff comes up to talk to us about budgets and dollar figures, we now have it laid out on the table what the estimated total hotel tax revenue is for this year and what the expenses have been. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Troxclair? >> Troxclair: Councilmember pool touched on one of the questions that I had, which was for the city manager. This proposal creates that bucket and says that we can put -- and creates expectation that we will fund parks and preservation up to 15%. But -- and this resolution has been public for two weeks and I have not -- I haven't seen the data that tells us that it would prevent us from moving forward with any other plan or that the cuts would be so significant that it would cause operation a issues. However, if that does become -- if that data does come forward and the council does decide that they don't want to allocate the full 15% in this budget cycle will we have the opportunity to do that during budget adoption here in a couple of weeks? >> You would have that option. You always have options to amend the budget. Any sizeable adjustment of that kind. We typically would provide council with an analysis of the impact on the operations, which we have not had a chance to complete that work yet. In past cases where we had a reallocation -- I'll give you an example. Economic development department was at one time funded 100% by Austin energy. In response to a rate challenge we changed that allocation to include the general fund and a couple of other funds. [4:56:50 PM] We had a transition plan of three or four years to reach the goal of the new allocation. Another example where we had a reallocation was a sustainability fund was created in 2001 and again in about 2012 we decided it was no longer appropriate. And so over a two or three year period we had a transition plan to zero out that funding from our enterprise funds. So that would be one option that we would look at. We would look at the proposal of the full 15% and then possibly a transitional plan and give you the impact on both organizations. Our convention center as well as the convention bureau, we would have to get that data from them to get from them. That is the kind of information I would bring back for council consideration. And we would have to run those alternatives, kind of book ends of a full transition year one or a partial transition each year or however long and bring those options, see what that cash flow difference does with the downtown puzzle scenarios that we had presented. That's the only way that I can tell you that it doesn't impact the scenarios that we presented on Tuesday. And the Tuesday presentation at work session did include the reserve information. >> Troxclair: But to my question about if the cocil decides today that it is a priority for us to fund the full 15% for parks and preservation, and we get new data within the next two weeks that we feel is critical and we would like to restore some additional funding to the convention center or to acvb, we have opportunity to do that in the budget. >> You always have that opportunity, but as your manager I need to tell you what the impact of your decisions are on our operations. [4:58:50 PM] >> Troxclair: Sure, thank you. Castle, >> Troxclair: Sure, thank you. I guess one mover comment before I assume maybe before we go to the speakers. First of all, I appreciate councilmember Houston and councilmember alter bringing forward those resolutions. I -- or those amendments. I am very -- I think that it's important that we have a conversation about what we can do with the Travis county expo center, so I think that that is an important area to address. And to councilmember alter, I appreciate you putting into writing in the whereas clause that the intent is not to preclude any opportunity to adopt other recommendations from the task force or to expand the convention center at a future time. So both of those would be acceptable to me. You know, to the point on the process, this has been something that the council has been talking about for a long time. We had an extensive conversation last year during the budget about our allocation of hotel occupancy taxes and we decide for the first time ever to set aside I believe $2 million, mayor pro tem, from the acbv budget and ultimately ended up allocating almost a million dollars to the Barton springs bath house. That was the first time -- that was the first time that the council had made the decision to take advantage of the opportunity to invest in parks and preservation through that 15% bucket. And multiple times during the past year -- I mean, multiple times when agenda items have come before us, other councilmembers and myself have made a note, this is something we could fund through hotel occupancy taxes. This is something we're going to approve at this time because it's on our agenda and we don't want to delay construction or delay operations, but make a note, this is a project that could have been funded out of hotel occupancy taxes instead out of the general fund or instead of owed of C I have P funding -- cip funding. [5:01:02 PM] Like I said I brought it up two years ago when talking about south by southwest police funding. I think it's been before council for a while now and I appreciate that -- the timing of the mayor bringing forward the downtown puzzle, but I just ask -- and I really do appreciate your enthusiasm and your dedication to trying to come up with a unique option for the city to consider, but I just ask for the respect in return to not -- to allow us to have an honest dialogue about what we can do with without arguing over -- over -- over kind of these key words in the community like homelessness. I mean, if -- if we are able to pass this resolution today, if we are able to fund legally allowed projects for parks and preservation through maintenance -- and maintenance and operations, we will be able to fund -- to have general fund revenue that can be spent on community priorities like homelessness. So, I think it's really unfortunate that we have gotten to this place that I think we're about to hear from -- from members of the community who, in my opinion, based on the feedback that I've been -- that I've gotten have just been given complete misinformation about what we're trying to do here. I think it really detracts from our ability to have an honest conversation about it with each other about what is the right thing for the future of our city. And so I guess I would ask that, moving forward, that we do our best to really focus on whether or not -- to the mayor pro tem tovo's point earlier this week, I think there's two questions. [5:03:08 PM] Number 1, do we believe that there should be a bucket for parks and preservation that we fund through hotel occupancy taxes. And, if so, what is the level of funding that we think is appropriate? The cosponsors of this resolution believe that we should absolutely be creating that bucket and that we should fund it to the fullest extent possible. While still investing the vast majority, 70% of hotel occupancy taxes into the convention center and accv. I feel like this is such a win-win situation for they need it's so unfortunate -- for everybody that it's so unfortunate that we're in this indication, that the two ideas have been pitted against each other when really they could be working together, but I will leave it to I guess the speakers to hear what they have to say, and we can see where the votes are. >> Casar: Mayor >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar >> Casar: So I'm still trying to get answers on some of the baseline questions that were brought up in our work session and still sound like they're in dispute now. I think I heard this answer from the city manager, but I just want some clarity. So from the city staff's perspective, we still don't know whether or not -- or the city staff can't provide a solid answer on whether or not moving forward by going to this 70% or 15 and 15 would preclude our options on 101? That's -- what I heard was that you guys still have to analyze that scenario for you to be able to provide us your answers on that. >> That's correct. >> Casar: That was sort of my first question during work session the other day. I just -- I've heard my colleagues on either side argue really vigorously that they know that it precludes that or they know that it doesn't. [5:05:13 PM] I don't know the answer there's, and the fact that our staff doesn't have that analysis there seems to me to indicate that maybe, since this isn't the budget right now and we don't have to -- but we need -- I need more information, and it sounds like our staff needs to dig up some more information because while I believe both of y'all -- or all of you generally believe in your position, I'm having trouble squaring the fact that we all seem so sure that the truth is the opposite of what each other is saying. [ Laughter ] So I would really like some time to -- I think, you know, we work together all the time, and I would rather us have to weigh the pros and cons of a variety of decisions other than have to believe one side of the dais or the other about what is true and what is not. I think if we can find some way to get our staff to analyze it and maybe authenticator, maybe they're wrong, maybe we disagree with what they come up with, maybe they can't easily come up with the answer but I think when I see something like this it seems like there's basic facts in dispute. The second question I asked during work session was whether or not there had been analysis on exhibit a, whether or not exhibit a could offset the 12 to $15 million in general fund revenue but I don't know in the most recent motion exhibit a is gone, if that's correct, right? There's some general outlines, but the specific items that would be offset are removed or are they still there? >> Tovo: Councilmember, there were never specific offsets noted, and it would be a combination of offset. There are some items within the general fund -- the proposed general fund budget that we believe would be offset and then there would likely also be some new spending. So but that's something that we're still -- as cosponsors working through with our staff to identify which would fall into either of those categories. But I don't think the original had -- it identifies some potential projects, and it still does in that solution. [5:07:17 PM] >> Casar: That would be really helpful. I know one of the pages attached during the work session said the reason we should vote for this is because there will be 12 or 13 or $15 million worth of general fund offsets, which if we had, you know, that would be great, not just for homelessness but also for providing working class housing, affordable care and all the other things on the budget concept list. So it sounds like we still don't have the answer to that clearly either, whether or not -- how much of this can actually be offset because I would really want to know, if we're having to make a significant change in the way we're budgeting, how much general fund revenue we're generating to be able to address communities. And it sounds like that's still something the cosponsors are working on and something I'd like staff to work on. So if we can find a way of getting through today in a way that answer what's I feel like are really core questions, if we move hot tax funding, how much money can we generate to address community needs? And if we move this hot tax funding, does it impact 101 or not? I would really like to get to those answers because it would help me understand the decisions I'm making. So thank you all. >> Mayor Adler: I think it would be fair to say that in the two and a half years we've been looking at that we haven't been able to identify in a way that we can articulate to the public any offsets out of our general fund budget that we could use. And if we've identified any offsets out of the general fund budget we can use, I'd like to know what they were. Ms. Kitchen. >> Kitchen: If you're looking for a particular answer to your question, I'd turn to the mayor pro tem. I have a different comment to make. And I would ask mayor pro tem -- I'll go ahead with my other comment. And this is a follow-up on the question. You know, I think that the question that we've been asking our city manager is not really the appropriate question. [5:09:17 PM] I mean, the question we ask is whether item 60 precludes item 101. That's not the question. The question is whether we can dedicate 15% of hot tax to historical and preservation bucket and still expand the convention center. So I cannot image with all the money that we have that we cannot expand the convention center, that by taking a relatively -- and I'll back up from using hyperboles since that's really what's getting us in trouble. What I consider to be a relatively small 15% out of a huge bucket of money, if that -- I think it's about $8 million or so that's the difference from the previous year. If we can't spend $8 million on historic and preservation and that means we can't build a new convention center, that makes no sense to me. [ Applause ] I think that -- and I'm not going to ask the city manager that question because we're putting her in a horrible spot but I think it's appropriate for me to say that with all the money that's on the table, it may not look exactly like what's in 101 but it doesn't need to to accomplish the goal. And the goals are a convention center expansion, homelessness dedicated funds, the other kinds of things that we are trying to do in the downtown puzzle, which, by the way, I'm very intrigued by and I appreciate -- really do appreciate bringing forward that idea. But I'm just amazed that we're in a position today where we're pitting creating a bucket for historical and preservation against our ability to expand the convention center and have money for homelessness. [5:11:25 PM] That is just not true. We -- this can be a win-win for all of us, and what I'm looking to do today is to make a statement that we want to create that 15% bucket. And that is the difference between what 60 says today and the mayor's amendment. The mayor's amendment doesn't make that statement today. It kicks the can down the road. I think we can make that statement today, that we want 15% in the historical and preservation bucket and then we can continue to work very hard on the downtown puzzle, which I think is an intriguing idea that I think that we can move forward with. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Any other comments from the dais? Mayor pro tem -- Mr. Renteria. >> Renteria: Yes. You know, growing up in Austin, and I really did worry about -- worry about people saying trust me, it's there, and I don't have the facts. You know, it usually means that, well, yeah, it's there, but it's -- by the time it gets around to you in east Austin, it's going to be gone. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: I wanted to ask if I could have that document that I submitted earlier. So I attempted to clarify number 60 on the message board. So I would refer those of you who are here to that post on the council message board. It's available from the city of Austin site. This is a real messy document. Because I'm a pack rat I have all of my notes from past budget years and this is from last year. I think it might help answer the question about whether or not there's been process on this item. Councilmember troxclair has talked about this a little bit, but, you know, I've served since 2011 and beginning in about 2013 in earnest I started looking at the hotel-motel tax. Probably in previous years we did too. As many of you may know it is extremely restricted. [5:13:26 PM] We can use it on only those things that are attractive conventioneers or peeling to tourists. My first proposal is to fund the cultural center, carver, the mac, transfer those so they could be paid for with hotel-motel tax. The answer was no because those aren't -- those do not appeal enough to tourists. And I want to highlight that because I know the mac figures in some of these discussions and I think it's extremely important that we really, really talk about that requirement before moving much further on this. And really understand what using hotel-motel tax dollars carries with it in terms of expectations about use. But what you see before us, after several attempts, unsuccessful ones at using hotel-motel taxes for city needs, we were successful last year. As you may know, the hotel-motel taxes have been going up year after year after year. We commit a certain number to the convention center. This year their portion will be I think $47.5 million for the hotel-motel tax dollars. 15% is earmarked for cultural arts. That goes to our cultural contracts, which I'm very supportive of. Nothing in what is before you changes that equation. And I say that because some people have told me that they've heard in the lead up to today that they were being told this proposal cuts funding for arts groups. It does not. It does nothing to the 15% allocation. But under state law we also have the ability to do 15% of our hotel-motel taxes for historic preservation. We have not even gotten close. As long as I have been on council I have gotten emails and questions and requests from members of the preservation community that I really look into it, that I see how much we're spending on historic preservation and that I try to do what I can to advocate to get that number up. [5:15:36 PM] We have never been successful. In some years, the heritage grants program, which is usually allocated about $200,000, there were years where it was well under $200,000. Last year, as a council, we allocated, in the end, $500,000. We asked acvb to spend about $500,000, up from 200, on their heritage grants program and they did. And for the first time we have a list of projects that were funded around town that are not the same ones, that had been successful in that process the last several years. When the budget came to us this year, the funding had dropped down to 200,000 again. So one of the points I'd like to emphasize is that we as a council I think have a responsibility to put in place something that will last over the years so that we're not doing this -- we're not doing this kind of battling year after year. But, again, just the overall principle here is, we get the hotel-motel tax dollars, it's our job as a council to allocate them in the budget process and determine what percent is going to go cultural arts which, again, I've said there are no proposals to make any changes there, to the convention center, some of which we can't -- much of which we can't tinker with because it's involved in debt repayment, and then a portion to the acvb. Year after year after year, city councils allocated any increase to the acvb. There was never any discussion about whether or not we should reserve some of that for other kinds of needs at the city. And I -- you know, again, after several unsuccessful attempts, this is the work of last year, these are just my notes. I can't tell you what the final numbers ended up. Councilmember troxclair told you in -- in the budget process actually we allocated -- we held back any increase. We held back $2 million. A majority of the council decided 1 million of that should go back to the acvb so we had $1 million, almost $1 million for purposes within our -- within our city, and we -- and our parks department allocated them to different city facilities. [5:17:46 PM] It is exactly what I hope you as a taxpayer would want us to do. We have aging historic facilities that are eligible for this funding. We've got a list of projects that the staff have put together that many of which, like fiesta gardens, don't have estimates next to them, they don't have estimates yet. But even of those of that estimates the total amounts to $28.5 million. That's just the numbers they were able to come up with right away last year because we had that discussion about hotel-motel tax dollars in the budget we were able to fund improvements at the oakwood chapel, Elizabeth may, o'henry, Mayfield, and these don't need to come out of your general fund or taxpayer dollars, don't need to come out of cip funds, they were able to be done completely in accordance with the law with hotel-motel tax dollars. And so I am more than happy to have conversations with any of you. As I look around the room there are many, many of you I've worked with in a lot of capacities and I've gotten emails from you expressing concerns. I'm not sure how much else we can -- we need to continue to talk about this issue, certainly, and I think there's a conversation to be had about the amount, but there is not, in this item before you, number 60, there's not a plan for homelessness, there's nothing about the well-being tif. It doesn't -- waller creek tif. It doesn't include those elements. What we're doing in essence is what we did last year. Last year, upon this budget direction that I brought forward, at that point the public hearing was closed. I brought it forward. We had a council dialogue and then we voted to make this allocation. This time councilmember troxclair is proposing we reserve more of that but we're doing it in a resolution. So it's -- it is, again, I think just important to understand that context. Every year, in our budget, we make allocations of the hotel-motel tax dollars. We just don't typically do it on a council agenda, and it typically hasn't happened -- there haven't been discussions about it because it's just been -- we followed the same procedure year after year. [5:19:53 PM] So I would say, you know, I concur with my colleagues that I think we -- I don't see anything in this resolution that will prevent us from doing any of those elements in the downtown puzzle. I would say I am concerned that it's on our agenda today because I think if you watched our almost seven hours of work session on Tuesday that we have lots to talk about within those elements. I think -- I think those of you I recognize in the room know that I am extremely committed to finding a dedicated revenue stream for affordable housing and for resources related to those experiencing homelessness. In fact I brought forward an agenda item today asking our staff to look again at what other financial strategies we can use. So I'll reserve my comments about 101 for when we take that issue up but I really want to encourage -- I really just want to make it clear that I'm concerned about the -- the way that these items have been conflated because to me this is really just the next step of what we did last year, which is to say we have hotel-motel tax dollars, we have a large number of city needs, and we need to look at using some of those hotel-motel tax dollars to meet some of those city needs. So thank you all for being here and for your participation in this issue. >> Mayor Adler: So I think we're really close, best as I can tell, because everybody wants to fund historic preservation. But, mayor pro tem, you said that really the only issue is how much we spend in that direction. And I think that is the crux of the issue. I'm in favor of spending as much as we can possibly spend on historic preservation. I just want to know that, if we direct the manager to allocate 15% in the first year of the hot tax to that, whether or not we put at risk the work of the task force and the presentations that were made to us earlier in the week. [5:22:02 PM] That's what I want to know. And I will not put my judgment of that question ahead of our finance department and our manager. I've expressed the concerns I have that it's -- that it looks like it's a really big part of the budget to me. From what I've seen, it looks like either they have to delay payments or they have to let people off, one of those two. And I think that there are repercussions to the plan if that happens. But I am not asking for this because I know those things to be true. Those are the concerns I have. And that's what I've told people, that I have concerns that mandating the 15% allocation could have that impact. The amendment that is before us now is one that says we want to get to the 15% allocation and we're asking for staff to give us options on how to do it. If they come back and say we can do it all this year, then we'll be done. I'm just uncomfortable passing a resolution today that allocates the 15% before we know what the impact is going to be, especially since the rewards of that task force work and what we saw earlier this week in terms of total dollars is just so great to the community. >> Tovo: Mayor, I'd simply say that just as last year was a two-step process and after we passed the initial decision, we came back and made an adjustment to that number. The same is true right now. We're not allocating money today because we're not making final decisions on the budget and we won't for another week and a half. But as councilmember kitchen articulated, setting that as the going for our staff -- and I would welcome or staffer to comment on this -- what we're asking -- we're saying this is our goal of 15%. We are no longer saying how that should be allocated between the acvb and the convention center. [5:24:03 PM] Come back to us. And as councilmember troxclair said earlier in the conversation, earlier today in the conversation, there is a very explicit statement on the revision to exhibit a that indicates it is our -- thank you. The city manager shall present options to divide the 70% allocation between the convention center and visit Austin in a way that does not require any staff reductions from fiscal year 2016-2017. So that is part of the assumptions that are undergirding this and we will have an opportunity in the next week and a half for the staff to come forward and say whether or not they were able to achieve that. >> Mayor Adler: If that's where we are, then I'm not sure there's a dispute. If all we're saying is we want the staff to go away and come back to us in the budget process and tell us if they can do that or tell us what the ramifications would be of doing that, then that's all that I want, too. The line that says that -- the line in the resolution says "The city manager is directed to allocate." That was the language that I pulled up and I said I can -- is there different language we can use in there? Can we say we want them -- well, then I drafted -- I was put in the position to draft an amendment that basically says is directed to present council options to achieve immediately or as quickly as possible the 15% allotment of the hot tax. If that's all we're saying, then we're in exactly the same place. If we're trying to make that decision before we have that information, then we're not in the same place. Ms. Kitchen? >> Kitchen: I just want to say that it's way past time that we -- that as a council we committed to 15% in historic. [5:26:09 PM] You know, there's a subtle difference, mayor, in what you're saying with your amendment. Yes, we're close. And if we're so close then we can just go with the language in 60 because the language in your amendment is, like, well maybe we'll get to 15% but maybe that's not all that high a priority for us, just as it hasn't been over the years, as mayor pro tem mentioned. And I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm just saying that that's the effect of it. I think it's time for us to say that we need to make a commitment to historical and preservation in our community, and we need to do that so that we -- you know, it's the same thing as what we've said many times, that we -- that we're -- have all our focus downtown, that we're not focusing on the rest of our community. We're not focusing on the historic preservation throughout our city and it's time that we said -- [ applause ] That that is a priority. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, councilmember alter. >> Alter: Thank you. I wanted to maybe get some clarity from the cosponsors on some numbers. I think that, you know, if we take 15% and we put it in historic preservation and we commit to retaining the 15% in cultural arts, which I just want to clarify it's my understanding of the intention, which I don't think it's been said, essentially what we're doing is taking $11 million from the convention center and visit Austin and I think that the concern about the convention center is whether there's enough funds then to do what they were planning with the expansion. And I'm just trying to make sense of some of the numbers and I'd like to know if I'm misreading certain things. So on Tuesday we saw some scenarios that assumed that -- when we would be adding the extra two cents that we would have 15% in historic preservation. [5:28:11 PM] So that model has 15% but it it has 15% on the nine cents not 15% on the seven cents. Is that correct? So the model that we're being presented right now has 15% in it. Is that correct? Okay. The other thing that's been very exciting over the last couple weeks we've seen with the convention center is a move to the 3p partnership. And as part of that approach, which comes out of the visitor task force we're now estimating that instead of costing $560 million for a convention center it's going to cost $400 million. Well, that's $160 million we don't have to plan for with our capital. Is that correct? Okay. 1 of our budget, for amended for 2016-17 it says the transfer to the convention center cip fund was expected when we passed the budget last year to be 16,427,000. The estimate as of now for the end of this fiscal year is 27 million, which is an $11 million difference, which was not in their plan before, which they only know now that they have. So if we wanted to cover all of it, just for this year, it would be the $11 million that wouldn't go into C.I.P., which we need less of if we're going to do this other model which we think is better for the city. Is that correct? >> Troxclair: Yes. Thank you for laying that out so clearly. >> Alter: Then on top of it and part of the reason I had my amendment is there's supposedly as revealed in the visitor impact task force another $6 million of hot tax that we haven't got in our coffers because it's coming from strs that are not registered. If we were to figure out the solution to that we'd also have that other $6 million which could go into this pot and council could decide maybe we want to make up the difference for the consequence and visit Austin if -- convention center and visit Austin if we were able to allocate that. That's also a decision that we would be free to make. Is that correct? >> Troxclair: Right, correct. >> Alter: Okay. [5:30:12 PM] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Any further discussion? Yes, mistroxclair? >> Troxclair: Well, I'm -- I mean, if we are really that close, mayor, then I'm -- if there's any chance that you would agree to -- well, here, I'll tell you that my impression of the difference between my resolution and your amendment. In mine we're committing -- we're directing staff to go ahead and make that change and absent a vote during the budget cycle to change those allocations, parks and preservation bucket would receive 15%. In your amendment, we don't know what the percentage would be. We want to get to 15%, I understand, but it would take another one of these conversations to fight about what the percentage is and to take an affirmative vote to go ahead and make that transfer. So given the choice, I would rather make the strong policy direction that this is what we want to go ahead and do, knowing we can always change it in the future. So if that -- if that is -- if that is the difference -- if that is the only difference in your amendment and my resolution, I would just maybe consider -- yeah, I guess consider my commitment that if there is a clear and serious problem once -- if there's numbers that we are not apparent to us today and we need to make a change, then I -- then I will work with you in making that change. But I also -- I think that one important contextual situation to understand is that for those of us who have been through this discussion before, if you'll remember last year, I mean, there is no department who is going to be excited about cutting their funding. [5:32:16 PM] It was a big conversation that we had with acvb last carrier. I mean, it was $2 million, you know, additional that they were getting from an increase in the hotel occupancy taxes and I think that's where mayor pro tem ultimately started, but in the -- first started. In the end, we gave a million dollars of that back and we were down to a million dollars. And we heard from them that this was going to be catastrophic, that it was going to cause cuts. I mean, it's really hard, if you're asking -- if we go into the conversation asking the convention center and acvb to make an argument that it's going to be catastrophic, otherwise we're going to cut their funding, that is the argument we're going to get. I do not blame them for it. That is absolutely their job, to depend the department that they've -- and the industry that they feel passionately about. But that is -- I mean, I think that part of -- one reason we have that difference in approach is that just for those of us who have been working on this issue for a long time, that is kind of the constant brick wall we have come up against. So this is -- I think we have amassed enough information and support at this point to make a strong policy directive without having to just -- to take on this battle yet again. And I feel confident looking at the numbers that councilmember alter just so clearly laid out that it absolutely is -- it is difficult. It's always difficult when you're talking about allocating -- reallocating money from one department to another, but I do think that it is possible without detrimentally harming acvb or the convention center. And so my default, my strong preference, is to default on the side of making that policy statement now, and if there is something we need to address later, we reserve the ability to do that. [5:34:23 PM] >> Mayor Adler: I think we are that close. But I think that the -- the issue here is, first, I'm not asking the convention center or the visitors bureau to come back to us and tell us whether they want their budget cut. I'm suggesting that we ask our city manager and our finance department to look at these numbers themselves and then come back to this council with a recommendation. I am -- I'm still surprised that we're considering making an allocation of this magnitude with a two-week notice for staff to try and look at these elements staff was proceeding with the information they gave to us from the large group of people in the community that participated in the task force. There was a lot of work done there. That's what they were working on. We wouldn't make this kind of cut in any department in the city this rapidly at this rate. And I don't know why we would do that -- why we would do that here I would like the presumption to be we want to get 15% of the historic preservation but I would like the prescription also to be that we're not going to do anything that would preclude us being able to get $169 million over ten years. Or a dedicated income stream for homelessness that we've never been able to achieve. That ought to be the presumption, that we're not going to do anything that interferes with that or the presumption being we're not going to do anything with interfering with getting a dedicated stream for music, which this doesn't do. [5:36:24 PM] All those things that we say that we want to do, I recognize that we're not asking to approve or not approve the puzzle or any elements of it tonight, but I think the presumption ought to be that we don't want to do anything that would make it so that we couldn't do those things. So if there was a way for us to craft language -- I mean, I think that this is an elevated issue. You know, what we did last year was we -- we asked how much could be taken out of the budget to be spent on historic preservation and there were some other things, cultural marketing, I think, and other things that were done. And the answer that we got at the beginning of the budget process was that we could do 1 million. There was a request on the council to put aside another 1 million. But we didn't designate it for historic preservation. We kept it aside. And we said we're not going to designate this money until later in the month. And then at the end of that month we came back and that's when we designated those funds. And it was real important last year when we were setting it up that we didn't designate those funds. My problem here is that it is designating that funding before we can answer the questions about does -- what impact does it have? We wouldn't be doing this in any department. I don't know why we're doing this here. And the stakes are really high in terms of being able to actually get dedicated funding stream for those other elements. So maybe there's language that we can come up, with but that's my -- that's my concern. I want there to be a presumption we'll do all of these things, but at this point you'll not ready to pick one over the other because if I have to pick, my presumption is let's make sure that whatever we do we can get a dedicated stream for the homelessness. Because I believe that we'll be able to get the dedicated stream and need to get the dedicated stream for historic preservation because that's the most direct route for us because that's what the hot tax money can most easily be used for. [5:38:30 PM] The more difficult part that requires the pieces to operate with each other is the homeless part, and that's why I'd focus there. And the answer to the question I think it was Ms. Kitchen -- there's no question but that you can do a convention center if you do 60. That's not the issue. The issue for me -- well, it's not the issue for me. The issue for me is whether or not you can still do all the pieces of the puzzle. >> Kitchen: Well, Mr. Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: That's what I said, as you recall. I mentioned both the convention center and homeless and the other things. I just that I we need to -- there's always going to be a reason why we can't make the policy decision to put 15% in the historical and preservation bucket. So I just will reiterate I think what councilmember troxclair said, let's make that statement today and then we can continue -- have the analysis that we're having, we can, you know, make further adjustments later if we need to, but we need to -- that's what we've been doing. That's what we always do. We always say that we're noted going to dedicate it to some parts of town or we're not going to do it for this bucket or that, it's always the last priority. So I think it's time to move past that, and I think -- I think pitting historical and preservation against homeless is a false dichotomy. I've been working very hard on homeless funding, as has mayor pro tem and you have and others have. I do not think that we need to pit the two of them against each other. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Anybody want to say anything before we go to the public? Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: Yeah I just wanted to say, again, that we are -- it would be foolish for us to do so because we cannot use hotel-motel tax dollars to pay for housing, to pay for resources, to pay for services be -- services for homelessness. [5:40:30 PM] We'll have an opportunity to talk about the downtown puzzle. It was a choice of the mayor's to link those different things. It is -- that's one alternative. We can also talk about them separate, and the elements that are separate are the pieces of that to do with homelessness. And so, you know, I'm extremely committed to seeing those pieces move forward. There are peases embedded within it I think require more discussion and the convention center expansion is one of them. Again, it is my contention that nothing we're doing today is going to make imfeasible the waller creek tif, we learned on Tuesday than we initially thought. There are lots of conversations to be, had but, again, what we're doing is an allocation appropriately done during the budget process, and so I hope the conversation can be about -- about how it impacts convention center revenue, which is the piece that relates to the hotel-motel tax. >> Mayor Adler: Why is it -- why is it that, as we've been on the dais, whenever anyone over the last month and a half or two months has come up with something that would be a determination for the budget we've said we're not going to handle that by resolution, we're going to handle that during the budget process? And if we were to do that here, as we've done on all the other issues, hopefully staff would be able to come back and have the time to tell us whether or not this impacts those other elements. And you're right, it is the homelessness piece and the suggestion that we can find the money for that in the general fund, I just don't have the confidence on that. So we have a piece that can do it. I just want to make sure we don't prejudice it and I don't know why we're trying to decide this item by resolution instead of at the budget process. Mr. Renteria. [5:42:31 PM] >> Renteria: Yes, mayor. I just wanted to inform that you it is 5:42. Are we going to do away with the music. [ Laughter ] >> Mayor Adler: We are. [ Laughter ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Laughter ] So one of the magical things about this city is that by uninterrupted custom we break for live music during council meetings when we break for dinner. Do we have both those tonight? We do, I hope. Okay. So you're welcome to -- and encouraged to stay with us for live music. We'll do live music, and we'll do proclamations, we'll also eat dinner. It is 5:43. My guess is we'll be done with those programs a little after 6:30 do we want to try to come back at 6:45? We'll take then a recess at 6:45. Thank you for coming out tonight. [5:53:43 PM] >> Item number 2, okay, yeah. Check yours out. That's too much? Down just a little. Let me hear yours. >> Check, one, two. Check, one, two. Probably a little less on three, too. Maybe a click down. >> All right. >> Little bit more. Little bit more. Hey, that's cool. Thanks. >> One is too quiet. I need a little bit more on one. >> Up on one. >> Little more on one. Little bit more. That sounds good, thanks. >> Okay. >> We're happy. >> You might change your way halfway through. We won't. [ Laughter ] [ ♪ Music ♪ ] >> Mayor adler:so this is actually my favorite part of city council meetings. [ Applause ] And I'm sure y'all know why. [ Laughter ] But, you know, this is what Austin is. You know, there is not another city council in the country that breaks for live music, and we do it religiously here in Austin. And it gives us a chance to bring in some great musicians, to showcase some of Austin's talent and make us all feel just a little bit better. [5:55:53 PM] So today we have -- and let me introduce dickie Lee Erwin. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Yes! [ Cheers & applause ] >> Mayor Adler: So he's a singer songwriter, instrument list,ist D he he -- he has self-released eight albums over the last 28 years and all were recorded with Austin musicians. Austin engineers. Austin studios. And Austin singers. Dickie, yes. [ Applause ] And he has an ongoing Tuesday night residency at the iconic skylark lounge. Please join me in welcoming dickie Lee Erwin. >> Thank you so much, mayor. Appreciate it. We're going to do a song here real quick. Name of the song is no regrets. I wrote it with Mr. Chris hienz and my brother Ron Erwin. I want to introduce Jennifer Jackson and bran Gonzales who are going to help out on this, all right? >> Kick it off. [ ♪ Music ♪ ] [ Music playing ]. [5:59:42 PM] [Applause]. Thank you so much. It's such a pleasure. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. That was great. That was great. So if folks are out here watching you or on TV watching you and want to find you, do you have like a website? >> I have a website. It's dickylee ear Irwin music.com. >> Mayor Adler: On got it. And if folks want to get your music and they want to find those eight albums, how would they go about doing that? >> Waterloo records or dickey Lee Erwin music. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. And if they want to come hear you play, the Tuesday night residency at the sky lark? >> Yes, sir. And also we're playing the art of the brew festival here this Saturday. Here in Austin. We go on at 530 or something like that. So that's our next show coming up. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. I have a proclamation. Be it known that whereas the city of Austin, Texas is blessed with many creative musicians whose talents extend to virtually every musical genre and whereas our music scene thrives because Austin audiences support good music produced by local legends, newcomers alike. And whereas we are pleased to showcase and support our local artists, now therefore I, Steve Adler, mayor of the live music capitol, do here my proclaim August 31st of 2017 as dickie Lee Erwin day. Congratulations. [Applause]. >> Thank y'all folks! [Applause]. [6:02:35 PM] >> Thank you, folks, bye. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: I have a proclamation. This is for the ywca greater Austin day. I'm going to read it and then I get to present it to Angela Joe touza Medina. Whereas the ywca greater Austin has been dedicated to eliminating racism and empowering women in the greater Austin community for 110 years, it is ever the new radicals who make history through courage, connection and change. And whereas the ywca greater Austin is not only the first, but also the longest serving agency in central Texas to work to eliminate racism and empower women by promoting the health and safety of women and girls their economic empowerment and advancement of racial justice and civil rights. And whereas the ywca greater Austin has served hundreds of thousands of austinites since its incorporation in 1907 with a legacy that includes opening Austin's first international institute to facilitate immigrant integration in the 1920s, actively working in civil, generaller and labor right movements through the 20th century and being the cornerstone of many of Austin's most well-known organizations including lifeworks, American youth works, Austin community gardens and our at youth, among others. [6:05:16 PM] Now therefore I, Steve Adler, mayor of the city of Austin, Texas, do hereby proclaim August 31st of the year 2017 as ywca greater Austin day. Congratulations, Angela. Do you want to say something? [Cheers and applause] Thank you. So thank you to the city of Austin for recognizing the legacy of work that the ywca has done in this community to eliminate racism and empower women. And we would be delighted if you all would join us for our 110th anniversary celebration on September 15th at spider house ballroom where we are going to be celebrating Austin's most fabulous people, people that embody our legacy and our mission. Thanks. [Applause]. >> Tovo: Good evening, I'm mayor pro tem Kathie tovo and I represent council district 9 and I have the fun honor this evening of presenting a proclamation to a very special district 9 business, the Austin pediatric clinic and to Dr. Bear and Dr. Louis and the nurses and the other -- their other colleagues at the Austin pediatric clinic. I have found my way to the Austin pediatric clinic as a new parent nine years ago and so I can really attest to this amazing -- to the amazing way that this group of medical professionals cares for its families and I know we have at least one other family here today to celebrate with the Austin pediatric clinic. [6:07:21 PM] Based on what I've seen in my years of parenting, pediatricians and nurses and the many others who work with them have a pretty challenging job. Not only do they have expertise about a wide array of medical conditions, they also have to be able to diagnose and communicate with small people, some of whom aren't yet communicating. And of course they often field late night calls from stressed and weepy parents and conduct office visits with lots and lots of scared and often screaming babies. And I want to say that Dr. Louis and Dr. Bear are really masters at their work. Soothing their patients and parents with their calm demeanor and of course with their significant medical experience. Dr. Louis and Dr. Bear are both also UT grads and interestingly they both played on varsity teams. Dr. Louis was a three-year Letterman on the UT basketball team. Dr. Bear was a three-year Letterman to the UT football team. In addition to their practice, both doctors have contributed to the Austin community in a variety of ways. Dr. Louis served as chief of staff on the children's hospital of hospital, which was the predecessor to Dell children's and as a former member of the rise school of Austin, which is a school dedicated to the education of children with special needs. Dr. Baird has served as the pediatric chief of staff for Seton medical center and as an assistant clinical professor and preaccepter for the Austin pediatric residency training program and he has volunteered at caritas for 30 years. After 30 years ever practice, Dr. Louis and Dr. Baird are retiring and today was, I believe, the last day of operations at the Austin pediatric clinic. And so on behalf of the thousands of Austin families who have benefited from the fine care of Dr. Louis and Dr. Baird and their staff at the Austin pediatric clinic, it's really my privilege to present the following proclamation on behalf of mayor Adler and our entire city council. Be it known that whereas Dr. Mike bear and Dr. Mike Louis founded the Austin pediatric clinic in Austin of 1980. [6:09:27 PM] And whereas they have provided excellent care to Austin 13 for more than 37 years and in doing so has made a significant contribution to the city of Austin. And whereas Dr. Bear and Dr. Louis have each seen more than 3,000 newborns and have each had more than 20,000 patient visits, and whereas many of those patients once grown have returned to entrust the care of their own children to Dr. Louis and Dr. Bear. And whereas Austin pediatric clinic has helped keep thousands of Austin's children healthy with compassionate and kind care. Now therefore I, Kathie tovo on behalf of Steve Adler, mayor of the city of Austin, Texas, do hereby proclaim August 31st, 2017 as Austin pediatric clinic day in Austin, Texas. Congratulations. [Applause]. And I'd like to invite Dr. Louis to say a few words? >> Thank you, mayor pro tem and thank you, mayor Adler. It has been a true pleasure and an honor to practice pediatrics in Austin this last 37 years. Austin has changed a tremendous amount in so many ways. Some of it visible as you drive down the highway and see the skyline. Other not so obvious. The medical community has expanded tremendously. The care of children that we can now provide in conjunction with Dell children's hospital and certainly the new medical school has made things so much brighter for children here in Austin. Thank you very much. I would just like to recognize a couple of people who are in the audience, our wives, my wife Jane and my partner's wife Beverly. Being the spouse of a doctor is often challenging and involves sacrifice and thank you both of you so very much. I'd also like to recognize our staff, many of whom are here with us. If there is a better staff in an office in Austin, Texas, you're going to have to prove it to me. [6:11:32 PM] [Applause]. You know, we've always worked as a team. I think the experience parents have, the experience patients have in a pediatrician's office is so dependent upon the entire team. Our nurses, our office, our front office people,. I've done a wonderful job and we couldn't have done our job without them, so thank you very much. [6:13:36 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. We have a proclamation. This is for the Austin co-working day. After I read the proclamation I'm going to give Shelly delane the opportunity to speak to you. The proclamation: Be it known that whereas we will celebrate the first annual Austin co-working day on September 27th of 2017 to welcome Austin's entrepreneurs and location independent workers to experience the benefits of co-working at spaces across the city. And whereas Austin values and supports locally owned independent co-working spaces for providing convenient, flexible, professional work spaces and business resources. Resources while supporting social fabric of our community and allowing companies of all sizes to incorporate flexible and remote work. And whereas we recognize that the 27th of September is a great opportunity to honor the new Austin co-working alliance and all of our co- working spaces to reaffirm our economic development growth, connecting communities, reducing traffic connection through changing work patterns. Now therefore I Steve Adler mayor of the city of Austin, Texas, do here by proclaim September 27 of 2017 as Austin co-working day. Congratulations. >> Thank you so much, mayor Adler. This is such an exciting day for all of us and I'm beyond thrilled to be here. Austin has been at the forefront of co-working since co-working emerged as an idea in the world. Partly because Austin has a unique entrepreneurial and creative spirit, partly because there's a genuine willingness to collaborate and desire to connect. [6:15:44 PM] So Austin co-working is unique in the world and we have people here who are thought leaders in the world of co-working. We have Liz elamb who founded one of the oldest co-working spaces here in town and the global co-working conference. Laura shook who co-founded the largest running co-working space in Austin, and he is not with us, but Josh bear founded capital factory which was transformative to the Austin start-up ecosystem. So these are the places in the community where entrepreneurs come together to share their energy and help support each other. So we are excited to have the Austin co- working alliance now. And to have our very first Austin co-working day where we will open our days citywide at places including atx factory, capital factory, createscape, ham let co-working, impact hub, launch pad wellness, link co-working, Orange co-working, patchwork co-working, soul healing and wellness center, the breeze and vessel co-working. This day represents the Austin community really coming together and forging new alliances in the community. We are so lucky to also have the Texas freelance association, the executive director, shell honor Kerr is also here. The small business festival, mir in a king is here representing them, and the freelance conference which is upcoming. And so many others including the Austin small business development center which is so supportive of co-working. And we are grateful for all of them. So thank you for this official recognition of our first co-working day and we'll see you all on September 27th. [Applause]. [6:19:11 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Not because my daughter is free-lancing, but it doesn't hurt. We have a proclamation about freelance business day. It's going to be -- let present the proclamation. Be it known that whereas through the ongoing partnership with the city's economic development department and the freelance conference, we're going to celebrate the third annual freelance conference from September 8th to 9th of the year 2017. And whereas the numerous activities planned include seasoned solopreneurs and business owners from all industries who are excited to share their business knowledge with others and the enthusiastic participation of community partners hosting free events, classes and entrepreneurial sessions for our small business community. And whereas Austin's entrepreneurial environment continues to be exciting and vibrant with small business growth out pacing all other U.S. Cities in 2016. That's impressive. And whereas Austin values and supports its local freelance businesses because they support the entire small business ecosystem. They contribute to the local tax base and they create a unique personality that attracts hundreds of thousands of visitors annually. The second weekend of September is a grand opportunity to honor our freelance businesses and to reaffirm our commitment to fostering economic growth. Now therefore I, Steve Adler, mayor of the city of Austin, Texas, do hereby proclaim September 8th of the year 2017 as freelance business day. Congratulations. [6:21:12 PM] >> This is exciting. I don't know if you guys realized it or not, but we don't have a day for freelancers anywhere in the country, so thank you so much for helping me make this become the first ever. Austin has done quite a few firsts for freelancers and freelance business owners. We are the first to create an association for freelancers, a non-profit called the Texas freelance association. We are the first to have a freelance conference dedicated only to the business of being a freelance business owner. And now we have a day that we can call our own. Thank you so very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause]. [6:59:56 PM] >> Mayor adler:all right, council. It is 6:59. We are now back. We're going to do a couple things here real fast. First, police chief needs to get to Houston. We're loaning him out. They have a police chief there that needs a little bit of help in Houston. So we're sending in someone to help him. We're sending in the cavalry to help that guy out. In order for him to be able to do that that's 102-0032. 102 has a lot of speakers but they've agreed to limit it to speak quickly and limit it to five or six so I'll call them. That way the chief gets to leave, okay? Greg, you want to lay that out? Call folks up and -- >> Casar: Yeah. You want me to call the list of people. >> Mayor Adler: That would be fine. >> Casar: Bob liable. He might still be coming in through the melt detector. Ville via Martinez, Sophia Casini. There's Sylvia. >> Mayor Adler: Couple minutes each speaker. >> Good evening. Good evening, mayor Adler and councilmembers. My name is Sylvia Martinez. First on behalf of pbo members, my family and all community, we want to thank the city of Austin for joining the lawsuit against sb4. My story is, like, one of many others, is that I came to this country to provide a better life for my family. We are here to give -- we are here to give our kids a future and we are hard- working people. The law terrorized our community for months, but we never stopped fighting. I am the end of some pdl [7:01:56 PM] [indiscernible] And all the kids there fight for their families. To represent the voice of their parents. And spent hours testifying and talking to officers. Today we feel happy. We celebrate because our work [indiscernible]. We know that this -- we know that this legal battle is not over. We know that our elected officials have fought for our community, and we ask that you continue to do more. Is not over. Thank you again for all your hard work. We are so proud of you. Gracias. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Casar: Is Sophia here? Sophia? You're up. You have two minutes. >> Good evening, everybody. My name is Sophia Casini, the coordinator of [indiscernible]. This is a deportation crisis hot line that we have running by volunteers 9:00 A.M. To 9:00 P.M. Seven days a week. During the ice raids that happened in February we received over a thousand phone calls over those few days. I'm here to say that we are very much celebrating the victory that happened and everybody in the community. We all recognize the roles that you guys played in it and that now we can keep these strong policies that we have locally. I also want to say there are pieces of sb4 that still allow for the racial profiling to happen. I will tell you from the calls on the lines, the police in Austin can and do ask for immigration status at stops. [7:03:58 PM] We hear over and over again of people who -- things like rolling through stoplights, driving without a license, who yet brought into the jail and in some of those stops what is to stop the police officer from asking about immigration and feeding that into a deportation machine? As things currently stand, even if this injunction holds and we move forward exactly as it is, which we're all hoping for, as this stands, it still leaves our community wide open for that to continue happening. What we're asking for is, city council has power here where, if a police officer is going to ask for immigration status, they need to document why. Why would they ask for it? Is there any reason they can ask which isn't racial profiling? If there is, they need to document it very, very clearly, not on a person's accent, last name, those are all racial profiling. What we'd like to see from the city council is continue funding these incredible legal services. We are referring people left, right, and center. [ Buzzer sounding ] But also make sure the police officers have to document and be held accountable when they do ask immigration status why and make sure this is not racial profiling. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Casar: Joe hey [indiscernible]. >> Casar: Jose. >> Good evening, my name is Joe hey [indiscernible], I'm the executive director of workers defense project, and for over ten years workers defense has been fighting side by side with our members to build power for working families across the state. Over the last eight months, workers defense has been fighting side by side with our members to defeat sb4. While we have a long fight ahead of us, Texas families won yesterday. [7:05:59 PM] They won in part because of you. They won because you had the courage to stand up and do what was right, because you had the courage to and does up to governor Abbott. Undocumented workers and their families are the backbone of the state's economy. They are a necessary part of a vibrate community in our state. They have economic power. They have political power. They have people power, and they will continue to fight against sb4 and racist anti-immigrant attacks. Workers defense is going to continue our fight. We are going to continue with increased intensity, know your rights trainings here in our community in Austin and across the state. Our fight is not over, and this will not be the last time that you are called upon to show courage and to do what is right. And we have full faith and confidence that when the time comes again, we will be able to count on you to do just that. We'll be able to count on you to fund services for immigrants and to adopt policies that protect all Texas families, especially the most verbal among us. We are grateful for you, and we look forward to continuing to fight alongside you. [ Applause ] >> Casar: Alejandro. Julio -- oh, there he is. >> My name is Alejandra Casis, immigration organizer with grass roots leadership. I think I know most of y'all up there. We just had a celebration outside. [7:08:00 PM] I think we were very happy with the victory we won. We celebrated because our policy specifically around detainers in the jail was protected. We showed after several years against all odds to implement this policy in Travis county, this decision reinforced the fact that our policy is a moral policy, our policy is a constitutional policy and honestly the policy is the best policy for us locally. We still would love and would need support preventing the police from class C, last year were still 17% of discretionary arrested last year. This is what is leading arrests and deportations locally and we want to make sure the black and brown folks are not being arrested by the cops, poor folks aren't being put into jails and deportation proceedings. We thank you for the work that you've done and we ask you to help us do that too. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Casar: Bob libel back? And then Julio [indiscernible] Is last, if you want to come up to the mic. >> Thank you so much. My name is lob libel, the executive director of grass roots leadership and we're one of the many organizations that's been fighting to make our community a more immigrant friendly community and reduce the number of deportations here in Austin and in Travis county. And we want to extend a big thank you to city council for your role in the sb4 litigation victory and we also want to extend a big thank you to the city staff who worked so hard to implement this litigation. It's incredibly appreciated. We want to note the deportation crisis did not start and end with sb4. Even if we win a full injunction and we win ultimately in the courts, we know that particularly in this administration that we need to do more as a community, as a city council, as a county commission, local law enforcement to ensure immigrant communities are not vulnerable to deportation. [7:10:15 PM] We're asking city council to implement a series of policies that will help to reduce the number of deportations in our community. First we'd like city council and city staff to assess and ultimately eliminate collaboration with customs enforcement that may lead to deportation, including a collaboration that may occur with Austin police department. Secondly, we would like the city council to invest resources and deportation defense and public defenders and police transparency that we believe will lead to fewer deportations. Finally because interaction with local law enforcement is so often the first line to the deportation machine, we believe that it is direly important that this council take action to reduce and ultimately eliminate the discretionary arrests that are -- that make up 17% of all arrests here in Travis county. So we really thank you for your -- we really thank you for your efforts here. [Buzzer sounding] And we're looking forward to doing more to work with you in the future. [ Applause ] >> Hello, city council, my name is [ saying name ]. I am part of united [indiscernible] The first and largest immigrant youth organization. We have almost 800,000 youth that have been benefited by the organization. In these moments when there's so much uncertainty I first of all want to thank each of you for stepping up to the moment we're in, for saying no to sb4, for saying yes to supporting folks who are coming in after Harvey, that has been a horrible disaster for our entire state, for coming out even in -- I don't remember it was Monday, Tuesday night when we went to the shelter to make sure folks were okay. It really shows your leadership, and we hope that you continue fighting with us. As Bob has mentioned and the other speakers have mentioned, we know this is not a one-day fight. We know this decision is good, is great. [7:12:16 PM] But we know the way you have shown -- we hope you continue to do it, to continue to say that immigrants and refugees are welcome in this city, to ensure our community feels free, thrives that, doesn't have to be scared of deportation agents. So we are committed to you to continue to be committed to our community. Thank you so much. [ Applause ] >> Casar: Mayor, I'd like to ask the police chief a few clarifying questions? I think this will be helpful for the community to hear. Hi, chief. Hope you have a safe trip to Houston. Thank you for going. So I have a list of quick questions about policing policy, but I think it's important for folks to hear about what, if anything, changes tomorrow, which my understanding is it doesn't. But first the police department, it's our practice to not stop arrests or prolong detentions. That's our policy of an individual based on their immigration status, right? >> Yes, sir. >> Casar: That will remain tomorrow even though it's September 1? >> Yes, it will. >> Casar: Second, our city resources are dedicated to criminal enforcement and not dedicated to ice operations for civil immigration enforcement, correct? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Casar: And that will continue tomorrow given the injunction and even though it's September 1? >> Yes, it will. >> Casar: Thank you so much. I really appreciate that, and, finally, you -- I know you were here listening to the speakers. Some folks brought up questions about discretionary arrests, racial profiling, those sorts of issues, and I expect and understand and know that you will be able to work with us to continue to work on those issues as we try to figure out what the best path forward is for the department and for the council and the community, right? >> Yes, we will. >> Casar: Thank you so much. I want -- I appreciate you just laying that out for us so clearly because I think there's just a lot of concern and confusion and people, you know, aren't going to read the whole nine four-page decision and I don't even know what it all means so I think just asking that level of clarity is really powerful and I want to thank you for your advocacy on the sb4 issue and for standing up for what's right on that issue. [7:14:30 PM] Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Chief -- [ applause ] >> Mayor Adler: I wanted to say cities, big cities, metropolitan areas in the state, in the country, I want you -- I want to say thank you and thank the force for their efforts. I want to thank you for the hours you spent up at the legislature this past session, educating the length laters on why it is here safe here and why that has to do with trust relationships. I want to thank you for your helping during the litigation. Your affidavit was mentioned numerous times in the opinion by the in its -- by the court in its ruling. Thank you for what you do. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Casar: Mayor, I also want to take this moment to thank folks that will never turn up in the newspapers, our -- on this issue but were critical to it, our city manager Elaine hart, our city attorney Ann Morgan, the head of litigation, Megan Reilly and the new attorneys I know worked day and night, Michael Segel and Chris copola, I think everybody should give them a round of applause. [ Applause ] >> Casar: With that, mayor, I'm going to withdraw item 102 for now because of last night's virtually, you know, major injunction of all the central portions, I think most critical portions of sb4. Number 1, there still is some legal analysis that needs to be done to see if we can indeed, and I believe from what some of the speakers said that we can use judge Garcia's opinion to continue to push further ahead with policies that protect folks' constitutional rights in this community. [7:16:39 PM] So that's one. Two, there is a chance that the court after peels or the supreme court could lift this injunction and in either of those two cases I think it's important for us to bring an item like item 102 back to the dais for the council's consideration. But I'm glad -- we planned for the worst and I, you know, sat up with nightmares multiple nights experiencing what it would be like to lose the case. I hadn't had the chance to experience until yesterday what it was like to have such a great result. If either of those two things happened I think we will have to come back here and potentially take a vote. I want to share a few thoughts before withdrawing the item. I've tried to be relatively quiet during the council meeting so I could take a little time during the meeting. Yesterday we had a big victory. >> Woo. >> Casar: A big part was a huge relief for people across our state. It was yesterday I was fielding a phone call from a constituent who needed help to sell his family's house in the month of September, afraid he might be deported and would not get the chance to sell his house. There are lots of people in the month of August asking for help finding lawyers for the month of September. There was a lot of fear about September 1 that I think has been lifted off of a lot of people's shoulders, and so that's really critically important. But I think there's an even more significant achievement from yesterday. Yesterday brought me and I think many of us in the community renewed hope about the possibility of organizing and coming together for collective action for justice even in this state. And even if those moments of hope can be fleeting and dim, I think we need to capture those and use those to energize ourselves in these really dark times. [7:18:40 PM] We need to keep that feeling of hope burning and alive. We need that hope for the road ahead. Because I think the greater challenge we face is not just sb4 or continuing to fight that law in the courts, our greater challenge is what's at the roots of laws like sb4. Judge Garcia rightly struck down this law as being against the constitution and federal law almost entirely. But the laws as they currently stand are deeply unjust. They must be changed just as the prejudices as those laws foundations and our collective minds must be changed. Think about this. There are thousands and thousands of people fleeing from rockport and from Houston and from Port Arthur who will receive zero FEMA payments because our culture and our government calls them undocumented or calls them illegal. Even though many have lived here for decades, paid taxes, held a job, sent their kids to school, even if they lived in Houston longer than I have been alive they may not be given those payments. The reason for that is because our dominant culture has named them illegal, criminal, dangerous and passed laws in order to treat them as such. 800,000 young people across this country, most of them younger than me, only have a scrap of paper between them and facing deportation. That piece of paper is called DACA. The news is reporting DACA could be thrown away by the president tomorrow or challenged by our attorney general here in Texas. Our government is going to out of its way to shatter the dreams and directly assault the lives of 800,000 people who moved here as children and call this their home. For what? Because our culture has named their parents as illegal, criminal. So much time and energy has been spent over who has the right to use what bathroom because there's airfare tough of fear and danger around trans people and a culture of division has pushed and fueled calling those folks, too, dangerous or criminals. [7:20:49 PM] They are continue to push to pass laws to make their everyday existence an illegal act. Based on current trends around one in three black men in this country will serve time in prison in their lifetime. We have more people incarcerated in this country than anywhere else in the world and we have not changed course because so many of those communities, especially black folks, have been labeled as dangerous, as criminal, as less than. And labelling whole communities as criminals blinds us from being able to recognize one another's common humanity and doing so allows forces of oppression to break our solidarity with one another. This movement, the movement of people here and across the state and across this country says that no one is illegal. Isn't just about the immigrants rights movement. That's not just about sb4. It's a Moto for fighting against yes, I amization and dehumanization of people. We have all seen the incredible work done by people across the country to get past all this stuff and recognize one another's common humanity. Once the storm passes we must remember that we don't have to put ourselves back into the dividing lines we're used to. We don't have to keep believing the lie that there are some groups of people who are less than, criminal or bad. But to recognize that everyone has real feelings just like you and I can feel joy and desperation, fear. That we're all just folks. So let's not forget about that as we continue our collective action to fight against sb4, to fight against every incarnation of the bathroom bill, to fight against mass incarceration and fight for DACA, fight for comprehensive immigration. Last night's vote shows us [speaking non-english language], yes, we can. [ Cheers & applause ] [7:23:04 PM] >> Mayor adler:item 102 is withdrawn. [ Laughter ] Congratulations everyone. >> Casar: Never been happier to not pass an item. [ Laughter ] >> Mayor Adler: The next thing I'm going to do is call out of turn item 96, public hearing on the budget for folks that we want to get back into transportation early. So we're going to give them a chance to speak to the budget. Four people. They know that they're coming in last. They would have been not within the first 20 of the budget hearing so they're each going to take one minute each. The first one will be Jennifer mcveil. Albert metz is on deck. >> I'm Jennifer with adaptive Texas. I just want to speak briefly about the need to address the issue of figuring out whether or not the bond money is allowed to be used to create both new construction of sidewalks and repair of sidewalks. That's a big issue. If you're going to tear up whole areas you need to make sure to make the entire path accessible, regardless of whether or not it needs new construction of gap in sidewalk or repair. The next thing I want to address is the parks and rec department budget. You may not be aware but there was a lawsuit, settlement agreement between us and the city of Austin because the parks department's inventory of items -- parks and rec and everything throughout the system has been found to have problems in it in terms of accessibility. And you've done a lot of great things recently in the courts, as you just eloquently have spoken about,. [Buzzer sounding] But people with disabilities are left out throughout this community and all throughout the parks system, and I'm the plaintiff from the lawsuit and I really don't want to take you to court. [7:25:05 PM] I want you to be able to use your resources for all the good things you're doing but I promise you if I have to I will because I promised to make the little train for people at zilker park accessible, and we want that to happen. We want people to use butler trail without tipping over sideways. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Thank you very much. Albert metz and [indiscernible] Is on deck. >> Albert metz? Is he here? >> Yeah he's right here. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, I'm sorry. >> Mayor Adler: And [ saying name ] Is next. >> Good evening, my name is Albert metz. I'm also with adaptive Texas. Sidewalks need to be made accessible. I think you're saying sidewalks is okay as long as they're accessible? >> Okay. He's saying sidewalks are okay as long as they're accessible. But it's not okay if they're not accessible. >> Huh? [7:27:10 PM] >> It doesn't make sense to put in sidewalks if they're not all made accessible. Thank you. >> And the parks, the same way. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. So [ saying name ] And then Keith laufton. >> Good evening, my name is [ saying name ] With adaptive Texas. In addition to what Jennifer just said, we also need to make sure in the budget we have money for affordable [ no audio ] For the H.U.D. Budget are enormous. He proposes to take away home funding and also funding for people that have housing vouchers. Whether it be a section 8 voucher, whether it be a veterans voucher. Taking away other types of housing, resources that we need. Now, also with the devastation of hurricane Harvey, people coming into the city, we also need to -- in terms of housing, make sure that housing, whether it be temporary or permanent, whether it be a temporary or permanent move, be accessible for all people with disabilities in the city and coming into the city. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: And then the last speaker is Keith laufton, Keith laufton. [7:29:17 PM] Keith laufton? Sir. Yes. Your turn. >> Mayor Adler: You can go to either podium. There you are. >> It's on, I guess. >> Mayor Adler: It is. >> My name is Keith laufton. I go to adapt and pac, and I'd like to say that improving the sidewalks that we have now need to be upgraded to where people can walk on them and make new ones. Because I go places such as -- and then I have to walk out on the street and get chased by a car, and that's no fun. So please improve the sidewalks. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. We're now going to get back to item number 60. We're going to call speakers to speak on item number 60. First speaker to speak would be bill bunch. Is Mr. Bunch here? Mr. Bunch has donated time from David king and Lauren ice. Is Lauren here? Thank you. You have three minutes. Each of the donated times are two minutes each so you have seven minutes. And that's three of the first 20 people. Mr. Bunch. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers. First, thank you all so much for your leadership in defending both our people and our local control from the attacks from our state government and our federal administration. [7:31:25 PM] So important what you've been doing. Keep doing it. And it's greatly appreciated. It's the right thing for our people, and it's the right thing for our economy. Unfortunately, it's a horrible contrast to the world of trump and alternative facts that have been taken over around this issue of the convention center and our hot tax. I'm here on behalf of save our springs alliance to speak in favor of agenda item 60 and against vehemently item 101. Just to be clear, on item 11 and to ask some of the questions that have been asked first, this would move about $15 million from convention center allocations -- and they got about $75 million of the 90 million this last year. It would take about 15 million over to historic preservation, music, and local business promotion. We haven't talked much about the 3.2 million for music and for -- 500,000 for local business promotion, but we shouldn't forget about that. That is -- that is additional money in tourism promotion. It's very critical. Acvb has wholly failed to market our live music, our local business. We need to fund this directly to the music community and the local business community from tourism promotions so it doesn't touch the 15% arts and cultures grant. That's critical. Then we've got the 11 million for the historic preservation fund to be allocated later for a range of important things. I just want to say right here, to me, personally, the important stuff is mostly on the east side that we could miss out in saving right now. [7:33:27 PM] [ Cheers & applause ] And at the top of that list for me is the montopolis Negro school and the historic victory butte grill. I'm not that interested in money for the Barton springs bath house or visitor center because none of that will save the water. It won't help prevent flooding in onion creek, prevent pollution of the springs or provide us with important native species habitats. Unfortunately, the city manager in the bond package is only recommending $20 million for those critical needs. While you have before new 101 of $230 million package for 34 acres. Of gold plating for the waller creek park. Does that make sense? I'll get back to the puzzle in a second. But on the first part, total of 15 million. You have the convention center department sitting on, as of last year, $119 million in cash and cash equalities straight out of your financial report. The most recent numbers you've been giving, a bunch of that is excess capital reserves and then 22 million in operating reserves. Why are we sitting on that money when we have urgent needs? Our musicians are leaving. They can't afford to live here. Our local businesses are going out of business because they can't afford to stay in business. Our venues are suffering, our arts community is suffering. We need to spend that money now. And to say somehow that we're going to hurt our tourism industry if we don't just keep hoarding that money makes no sense at all. And that gets to the nub of this business. From the beginning, last year, a lot of the groups who are on board with the downtown puzzle were on board with the exact same deal last year, before the visitors task force even started. [7:35:41 PM] And they were on board with the misinformation that, unfortunately, mayor, you sort of added fuel to the fire tonight by equating the convention center to our tourism industry. These are two different things. The facts are that the convention center has been consuming 85% of our tourism hot tax while generating 2% of our visitors. That is facts straight from the convention center department. Now, it's also true that probably convention center visitors rent a few more hotel rooms than the other 90% of visitors so maybe when you look at that lens it's a little bit higher, but it's not much. When I asked to file a public information request saying show me your evidence that the convention center is actually generating a significantly higher percentage of hotel rooms rather than just the 2% of visitors, I got a single sheet of paper that said noing. So if they've got evidence, they violated the public information act because what they gave me does not support the thesis. Where's the business case? There's none. We're wasting 85% of our tourism dollars on a failing convention center business. It's failing for a simple reason. The whole industry is flat nationally. Last 15 years, it's only grown a total of 3%. While convention center space nationally has expanded by 40%. So you have everybody -- it's a race to the bottom. They have to give away the space for free. To get them to fill those rooms. And that's why we're losing money hand over fist. Now, they said, oh, well, that's our model. We never meant to make any money. [7:37:42 PM] Well, the projections when we expanded in '98 were that, yeah, we lose three to $4 million a year, but not 24, 30, $50 million a year. But that's what we're doing, and that's what would happen and we'd lock in with the convention center expansion. If you look at our competitors in the long-range master plan for the convention center, page 61, they compare us to four other convention centers, Denver, Nashville, San Diego, all of those are basically breaking even. We lost $24.3 million as reported last year by the convention center. And if you actually counted it honestly, because there's another seven to 10 million over in the convention visitors bureau pocket, it would have been more of a 30 million or so loss. There's no due diligence here. Nobody has provided you with the background and the facts, and I think if the arts community, the music community, everybody else had the facts, they would see that we should be investing our tourism dollars. [Buzzer sounding] And those people, those places, those activities that make visitors excited to come here and make Austin a great place to live and that we're losing rapidly. It's time to put our facts and our priorities where our mouths are and not delay any further. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Bill, bill, before you leave, I have been promising myself all day today when you came up I wouldn't ask you questions, but you called out my name so I want to. And you know how much I respect you in so many ways and the battles that you have fought for the city. But I don't equate the convention center with tourism in this conversation. [7:39:43 PM] What I -- >> That's what people heard tonight. >> Mayor Adler: What I equate the convention center with is being able to access $15 million for arts and $15 million for historic preservation. And we never have to do a convention center. We never had to do this convention center. But if we didn't do those projects, then by law we wouldn't be able to access $15 million -- up to $15 million for arts and up to $15 million for historic preservation. So the link is not convention center to tourists. It is -- convention center -- the legislature said if you build a convention center, we'll let you get 30% of that money for arts and historic preservation. Now, if you don't do a convention center, you can't get it. So that's the link that I make. >> I fundamentally disagree. I think that's a misstatement of the law. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. The other thing that you see in the letter I think is you say that -- that you've sent out, you say to people that we give 70 or 85% of the hot money to the convention center and only 15% or 30% to these other projects, and you asked the question, wouldn't it be nice if that was flipped? You know, why don't we give 30% to a convention center and 70 or 85% to historic preservation and to the arts? And the reason that we can't do that is because the law is very specific in what you can do. And, again, you said a moment ago that we differed on what that law was, but that split of 70/30 -- you used 85/15 in your note. Unfortunately, if there was a way we could change, that boy, we could change that in a heartbeat -- [7:41:46 PM] >> You don't have to change it. There's other categories you're ignoring. Tourism promotion. We can give money to our film community, arts community, arts community, local business, which this would happen under the tourism promotion category and not under either of those two limited. Tourism promotion is unlimited. We can do transportation that benefits tourists but also benefits locals. That's unlimited. >> Mayor Adler: But you would agree with me under chapter 334 you can't access the money without doing a convention venue and you would agree with me under 351 we can't do it now without a convention center expansion? >> No. We can put some money into the Travis county expo center. >> Mayor Adler: That would be -- >> To me that would be a priority over the convention center. >> Mayor Adler: We have to do a venue -- in other words we can't say we want to spend all 70% in tourism promotion. >> Right. >> Mayor Adler: Because the law doesn't allow us to do that. It has to be built around a venue. >> It allows us to use all of it up to the seven cents. If we go above seven cents that's where you run into those restrictions where it has to be for the convention center or an expo center or venue. But that term "Venue" is incredibly broad and we can do a range of really good things under that venue label that is not expanding the convention center downtown. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker we have is forest priest. >> Tovo: Mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Tovo: This is something we need to confirm. I'd like to confirm this with our staff too maybe outside of the context of this meeting but I think what I heard our staff say on Tuesday is we can also access it with a renovation of the existing convention center, though as they said they expect -- the expected revenues would have to pencil out. I think that bears more discussion but that was the answer I took away from Mr. Canally's response to that question, that it is accessible with a renovation, not just an expansion. [7:43:49 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Donating time to Mr. Priest is Thomas shears. Is Thomas here? >> I don't know that much time. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> I'm speaking tonight in opposition to item 60. It negates the work of the impact task force that occupied 50 hours over six months from 18 civic leaders from all matter of political persuasions and interest in all those hours. That's from December last year to may this year. Representatives of these includes are included just for the record environmental community, arts community, special events industry, hotel industry, public safety, preservation community, the parks community, convention center, tourism industry, music community, restaurant industry, and public works was in there in an ex officio capacity. Now, obviously you've had a lot of years to do things there on a parallel track evidently. I wish that had been folded into this downtown puzzle, the final solution. It was a carefully negotiated thing. It's a miracle that it all fits together and works. The mayor Eastman, downtown puzzle is an opportunity that helps all the things we talked about, mexican-american cultural center, Pease park preservation, expanded convention center, music industry, the arts community. All these people agreed on it. I am a visit Austin board councilmember valley Austin board member and I believe item 60 would be detrimental to our industries. Although it sounds like maybe we're coming to some kind of conclusion here where we can get some kind of compromise, but I'd ask that you give the mayor's downtown plan the puzzle a chance. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. MARIA Isabel Lopez. Is she still here? Is Jill Ramirez here? [7:45:55 PM] Cynthia Valdez is on deck. Is she here? >> Good evening, dear mayor, councilmembers. First of all, thank you so much for the work you do and also for allowing me to speak. My name is [ saying name ] And I am here as the chair of the Latino quality of life. I'd like to report to you that our last meeting, on Wednesday, August 23, our commission voted unanimously to support the mayor's proposal also known as the puzzle for the following reasons. It will provide long-term source of funding for completion of the mac and preserve palm school. These are two important landmarks to the Latino community. Historically Latinos have not been allowed to sit at the table to advocate for equitable distribution of funds so, therefore, we have been unable to complete the mac. We have been waiting since 2006 for the next phase of completion although we are almost 40% of the Austin population and contribute greatly to the cultural richness of our city. Our contributions have long been ignored. Our programs have historically been unfunded and 101 does incorporate our needs and what is important to our community. 101 does what item 60 does not. Our concerns are also that people may lose their jobs in a reduction being proposed for the convention center. A lot of the people that might be impacted by the reduction in workforce live in the eastern crescent of the city and we know that they're our neighbors and a lot of them are brown and black African-Americans. For those reasons tonight, we feel that we don't have enough information on item 60. I think that the only information we got was in the media. [7:47:57 PM] We haven't really had any committees, it has not been vetted properly the way 101 has been, and so that is a big concern for us, the process of how that's happened. I think that you can make it happen and see if we can come to some kind of common ground, and we're here to support -- at this point we support 101. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Next speaker is Cynthia Valdez. Is she here? What about Fred Lewis? Is Fred here? Fred has some donated time from Monica Allen. Is Monica here, Allen? And from Larry acres. Larry here? >> The good news is I won't need it. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Well, you have five minutes if you do. >> First of all, happy to be here. I want you to know I am not a registered lobbyist and I haven't been paid to lobby today or any time recently. I heard y'all heard something about that earlier. I wanted to say that I think the public as best I can tell wants a statement that their needs are going to be taken care of and not just the downtown boys. [ Applause ] We have a lot of needs that are not addressed in this town. We have pools that are closed and decrepit, that are historic, we have parks, museums, all sorts of things that need to be taken care of, and I think the public is tired of waiting. So I think, councilmembers, that you're right, there needs to be a statement that the home folk, as it overlaps with tourists, that they matter, that it isn't just the downtown crowd that matters. [7:49:57 PM] I also wanted to say that there really needs to be, as bill bunch said, an emphasis on historic preservation on the east side. We are losing a lot of people, which is unfortunate. It would be also unfortunate if we lost all of our history. And we have not completed the east Austin historic assessment. We talk about it. We never fund it. That could be funded. We have rosewood courts, we have the Negro -- montopolis Negro school. We have all sorts of things that could be funded and that need to be funded. I also want to say, about the convention center, the expansion by people at the legislature was put in chapter 351 instead of chapter 334 so that we could not vote. I resent that. It is our city. We should be allowed to vote. And in fact you can allow us to vote. And if the convention center is so popular and needed, I suspect the public will vote for it. I also speculate the reason we aren't allowed to vote is they sort of realize that we may not want it, that we have higher needs and that we really don't want a downtown park for $200 million. 110 in tax dollars and 90 from the private sector. Of course I don't think they're going to raise the 90 million so I think we're going to get stuck with $200 million for a 4534-acre park downtown when we don't take care of the parks for people outside downtown with real needs. [ Applause ] And let me say this as well. I worked 15 years ago to get the arts downtown. Wasn't very popular, but with mayor Watson and others, we won. [7:51:59 PM] The homeless is a problem that we need to address, but that doesn't mean that the only way to address it is the downtown puzzle. I suggest you put a task force together and review all the funding ways to figure out how we can fund it, and I promise you I'll be there to help. And, lastly, I wanted to thank councilmember troxclair in particular and the other sponsors. It was nice to see you walk -- work across the usual divides, to think about the people that don't live downtown and to do something for the home folk. I think you're reading the public mood correctly. I think people are sort of tired when they don't have swimming pools, the libraries are short, and their roads have cracks. We have all sorts of infrastructure problem and yet for some reason we can't think about what the public wants. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: It's okay. Take your time. >> [Off mic] >> Mayor Adler: You got it. >> Hello, my name is dawn Lewis, and I'm here. I am lucky to be a member of the parks board, and I'm going to be very brief. I'm just going to really am in favor of. And I want to focus on the swimming pools. Being on the parks board right now we're spending a lot of time talking about the aquatic master plan and I'm not going to go into all that but I have learned through that experience that our pools are old, and I think at least 23 of them are 50 years or older, and they are a really integral iconic part of our community that a lot of people use and take advantage of and depend on and use to build community and they are also, believe it or not, targets for tourists. [7:54:07 PM] I actually did my own anecdotal tour of peoples to tube people about the plan and met people from all over the state hanging out and enjoying the pool in this extreme heat. I want to bring up the fact that they are historic, we need to value that, and I think 60 does that and so I want to ask your support for that particular part of 60. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Bobby lavinski. Is Virginia -- >> I don't need extra time. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. You have three minutes. >> Hello, mayor and council. Thanks offend Fred Lewis, I think I should disclose that I am a registered lobbyist. I work for the safer springs alliance. Quite frankly, I would be here regardless from my own personal capacity because item 60 is the right thing to do. I can't remember a time that we addressed the budget in my pasthat we haven't tried to tackle the issue of the hot tax and dedicate more resources to historic preservation. There's been a lot of talk that item 60 somehow relates to the downtown puzzle. In my view it doesn't. In fact the only puzzle that I think we have before us today is how we have councilmember troxclair and bill bunch speaking in unison. [ Laughter ] [ Applause ] I think if we solve that problem, we might be able to solve a lot more problems. So the answer to that is actually kind of simple. It's common sense. Item 60 is both something that is responsible as a use for our tax dollars and it prioritizes our local artists, our community, our musicians, our historic resources. It's a win-win. Over the last half decade or so, our hot tax revenue has skyrocketed. We aren't talking about cuts to a budget that is cutting programs. [7:56:12 PM] We are talking about what we do with an increasing revenue source. What's been driving this? The convention industry has been flat. What's driving it is Austin. It's -- what's driving it is red river, it's deep Eddie, it's Barton springs, it's our local businesses, it's our historic and multicultural resources. That's where we should be dedicating our funds. State law allows us the opportunity to dedicate those funds to support those economic drivers, and I think we should be pursuing the statutory maximum. That is actually a recommendation in the visitor impact task force too, to pursue the statutory maximum for historic preservation. Why wouldn't we take a chance on Austin instead of the convention center industry? Item 60 is an important step forward but I also want to remind you that it is setting forth a budget process. It is setting forth a resolution that will come back to you so you can make allocations based off of the recommendations from staff, based off the analysis from staff. Today is not the day that you're making that allocation. I think this item has gotten a little unnecessarily complicated. It's simply setting forth a scenario and we're asking you to explore that scenario. I want to -- I wasn't sure if 101 is getting wrapped up into this so I'll say one quick point on that. I also have concerned about elements of the downtown puzzle. The waller creek tif does potentially tie our hands, that is general fund revenue that we can use for other activities. And the -- to the extent that the tpid does have landowner buy in it mind limit our ability to do a more expanded P.I.D. That brings in more landowners. So thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Is Cindy lo here? With time donated Jim rice. [7:58:15 PM] Is Jim here? I don't see Jim. >> That's okay. I think I can get done. >> Mayor Adler: Three minutes. >> Good evening, mayor Adler, city council. My name is Cindy, as we met earlier this morning and I'm the he owner of red velvet events that started in Austin in 2002. We're turning 15 years old this year. We currently employ 25 full-time people here in Austin and in 2016 alone we were tied to more than 100 corporate events here in Austin. We are forecasted to experience steady growth over the next five years. We're a Austin women-owned minority business that has grown and thrived while Austin has expanded their convention business here in downtown. Should you pass item 60 you essentially put my business at risk because I would have to lay off employees but you put our entire hospitality population at risk. And what's called a tpid and there's no mention of a convention center expansion. This won't happen. No convention center expansion means no tpid and no tpid means no new dedicated funding stream for the homeless. My understanding is that the troxclair plan assumes council will approve certain budget line items from offset general fund spending and the tax plan threatens the tourism industry which generates sales tax revenue. All this will result in us having less revenue which means small to medium-sized businesses can't grow. That's not what I want nor do any of city council, please seriously vote no to item 60 and vote for item 101. I vote for 101 because it lays the groundwork for the downtown puzzle plan and has the important to do so much for our community as a whole. It recognizes the hard work of the citizen pointed task force which met for months poring over months of data, research and testimony before forming its recommendation. It has the impact on the city, current uses of the hotel occupancy tax and how best to use the hot funds moving forward. [8:00:21 PM] The group's recommendation does include an expansion of the convention center as an economic engineer that could produce funds for important community initiatives that include addressing the homelessness, creating new revenue stream for the music, arts, historical preservation, parks and open space. Those are not to be left out. Specifically it's been projected that this proposal could generate six to $10 million annually that could be used for commercial music, historic preservation and parks and community needs. To the earlier comments, convention business is not flat in Austin. I am a living proof of that. We grew, we doubled in size the last five years. And I bought a building on north Lamar to house our employees. We are not dead. Austin is extremely popular. And as I stated earlier is that I truly believe the reason why more businesses want to open up an office Austin office is because their executives have such a great time hosting their events here and want to come back to Austin. So that is why. Thanks on behalf of the 125,000 friends and neighbors in the hospitality services in Austin. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Susana Almanza. Is Anita here. And Monica Allen? You have Stephen minutes if you want to take them. >> I won't need that many. Good evening, mayor and city councilmembers. I'm Susana Almanza and I'm president of montopolis neighborhood association and also the director of poder. And I support and we support allocating the hot taxes in item number 60. We believe setting the 15% is definitely a very important thing to do. I think we can work out the details later. I think we need to pass this. When we look at montopolis, the community I'm from, our children can't afford to go to private pools or go across or pay fees, and yet every year our pools are open and in jeopardy of closing down and all the east Austin pools are facing the same thing. [8:02:33 PM] And so when you look at a low income community, what is the most important asset is our children. Our future generations. And that's what we need to be doing is on parks and preservation. I also want to say it's very important that we preserve the Negro school in montopolis. That's very important to us to be able to preserve it, to have the tourism. I can tell you that along with preserving the Negro school, the burger cemetery, a couple of the oldest churches there in montopolis that people would come in as a tour to that. I can tell you every year I give tours to hundreds of people just on environmental justice, just showing them the polluting facilities that Austin put in east Austin and the people who live around there. People want to come and see these things. So people are very much interested in east Austin and I think that trying to put it later to do a resolution and seeing what the city manager thinks about all these projects is not the way to go because I can tell you I come every year and you pass these resolutions and they get lost in the hole somewhere. I don't know where they go, but they don't come back and they don't pass. So I think that 101 is not the one that we need to be looking at, that we need to be looking at item 60. That the details can be worked out later, but that we need to do something. We need to make sure that we get some of this money. That east Austin, that low income and communities of color, that we look at the needs, the basic needs of the people. And not just about those that already have a lot of money, the people downtown, that can fend for themselves. And let's not tie the homeless when we already know that this particular pot of money cannot be used for the homeless. So let's not try to mix things up so that people in our communities -- because we support the homelessness. [8:04:35 PM] What you don't count is most of our communities are homeless. When we have two or three families living, those other families are homeless, but in our culture we don't count that as homeless because we've always been supportive if somebody doesn't have a place they move in. But legally they are homeless because they don't have a home. So when you look at that, that's something that we definitely look at and support, but I definitely think that we need to make sure that we allocate that 15% and that item 60 covers all of that. And not to hold us hostage and say then the mac won't get the money because some people say if you don't go for that one you won't get the mac. That's not necessarily true. I don't want our community to be held hostage to say we need to support this because we won't get the money because we should be getting that money. Thank you very much. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: The next speaker is Stephanie Warner. Is Stephanie Warner here? Is Mike conetti here? >> Greetings council, my name is Mike conetti with the Barton springs conservancy. Approaching this task somewhat generalgerly because there are a lot of supporters for our parks and other benefits that I think everyone is trying to find the right result for here. And I would like some of the recommendations working on and Kathie tovo and getting parks money into last year's budget and I really think that the proposal in item 60 has a lot going for it. I think it's on the right path, but I'm afraid it doesn't go far enough down the path. That's good about it is $11 million. [8:06:35 PM] It's a lot more money that we put into historic preservation before and I think it's tremendous. I think it was a 2-million-dollars a year before. I think you went down the right path of benefiting parks because you really can't fund parks with park money per se, but you can fund it indirectly with historic preservation. I've been looking at this from the venue of how can we get the most money from this process for our parks and other community benefits. And I will not pretend to know the inside workings of the city budget process but as I listened to what was going on at the visitor task force, impact task force meetings over the many months, it was fun, they came up with a proposal that would be allocating somewhere between six and 10 million bucks to go to historic preservation and also music, commercial music with the final recommendation. But in addition to that annual allocation, something that has been mentioned today and and I think it was in the proposal. There's $50 million of excess bond capacity that could also be used not only for parks by going to historic projects, but also something for the visitor information center or visitor welcome center. This might be a shortcoming of item 60. It's a nice way to provide benefits to our community that aren't necessarily historic, but maybe they're doing a good service like educating the public about our environmental values. So I'm concerned that item 160 Saturday changes our parts in terms of the amount of money that could come out. I'm also a little bit concerned that the premise of funding operations and maintenance first if I understand the last proposal if you're going to fund o&m first and then go to capital, that's a little troubling -- I don't want to put the capital projects at risk. [8:08:35 PM] There's a lot of historic capital projects that are needed to be done. And I know when I'm with the Barton springs conservancy and we're doing fund-raising, they always want to know does the city have some skin in the game? When we're asking them for capital donations they want to make sure the city is participating as well. I think it's important to -- I would love to see that change with item 60 and maybe have capital improvements be part of what's emphasized. I'm a little concerned that -- [buzzer sounds] Ran out of time. >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. >> I would just encourage you to give space to consider the marriage proposal of growing the pie as big as we can. I'd like to see more benefits for our community, even above the very generous number that I think you've identified in item 60. Thank you. >> Pool: Mayor, I want to for Mr. Conetti's benefit, you mentioned a visitors sister, welcome sister, and you said that's not contemplated in the language in item 60. That is because visitor information centers are part of what is already permitted within the hotel occupancy tax funding structure. We emphasized that the list of items were all comprehensive or even exclusive of everything. And I think you and I have had this conversation, that was mid?ing that visitor information centers are absolutely contemplated without any contortions or anything. It is part and parcel of what is permitted under the two sections of the statute that we are guided by. So I just wanted to emphasize that and also to make that clear for anybody else who may be concerned about whether we can fund a visitor information center like the one at the Barton springs conservancy has been fund-raising around. That is absolutely permitted. >> Okay, thank you. [8:11:09 PM] >> Thank you, council. Up during the visitor impact task force and have been thinking about it for some time. We do not have a sustainable tourism plan. With the visitor impact task force did is valuable and it needs to be considered and the plan that can be launched through the working group of the joint sustainability committee is something that's about to start. I'm concerned that these what is in the future may not have the look of an extremely well rounded approach of what can we do to look at what a mobile criteria for sustainable tourism -- there's 37 different voluntary standards. One of them were overarching categories or sustained cultural and natural resources while not harming the natural environment, also ensuring tourism meets its potential as a tool to eliminate poverty, maximizing social and economic benefits and these are things that we all think about. Sometimes we think about them in isolation. This working group that is just about to start, my hope is that in a period of six months or less we can develop an outline that would be used by the city, hopefully the city would welcome that and then to use staff and perhaps to hire some outside resources to put together a sustainable tourism plan that would connect more directly with local businesses, as all of us want, and protect what we have, but do it in a comprehensive way and look. Can you please queue the slide, please? Top top. So the first paragraph is -- so the first paragraph is something written by one of the task force members and it talks about the heritage fund being transferred to another entity, being a change from what was presented. [8:13:11 PM] The second paragraph was the most relevant one in wat I'm saying is the minority report of the visitor impact task force lists some of these items, meaning a and B, and there's some additional ones, I'll read them. A special consideration for the allocation of hot funds to recipients who are requesting funds for the first time. Hopefully those are people of lesser means or businesses of lesser means or non-profits of lesser means, of color. People that are not right now connected to the process because they don't understand the process, it's not as open and transparent as perhaps it could be. And second to inject into the tourism conversation the idea of a caring capacity for hard and soft infrastructure. My belief is that the convention center should be redesigned and repurposed, maybe building up. Building up may be extremely costly and I realize that might not be an option, but expanding it where we take taxable land off of the tax rolls is challenging in my opinion. [Buzzer sounds] I hope when the working group comes back with a recommendation that you will consider what we have to say through the joint sustainability committee. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Council, pulling aside here for one quick second, there's an agreement for a joint postponement on item 78 and 79. The applicant and neighborhood are asking for it to be postponed to September 28th. Is there any objection to that being postponed until September 28th? Hearing none that matter is postponed. Okay. Next speaker. >> Mr. Mayor, was that both items, 78 and 79. >> Mayor Adler: 78 and 79 both postponed. >> Mayor Adler: John Howard, he had to leave? What about Rebecca Reynolds, Rebecca Reynolds here? [8:15:14 PM] >> Good evening mayor and mayor pro tem and councilmembers. My name is Rebecca Reynolds and I serve as the president at a music venue alliance in Austin. Our venue members are all over the city so they aren't just downtown. I was in the audience for the entirety of the visitor impact task force process and I heard six months of testimony from impacted stakeholders. The task force unanimously voted on a comprehensive plan that would use the expansion of the convention center as a means of growing available tourist dollars to be reinvested and a primary driver of tourism to Austin, which is music. This comprehensive plan would also address our city's most dire concern, which is homelessness, through the creation of a tpid which can only be created as a supplement to the convention center expansion. Tonight we've been told that item 60 does not jeopardize the comprehensive plan and that it -- is not meant to be an alternative. However, I am concerned that adoption of item 60 would in effect achieve the result of removing a load-bearing piece of the puzzle. In fact, I think it's telling that we haven't heard yet from anybody that supports both item 60 and item 101. We are grateful that the task force is in agreement that funds are able to stale lies the industries that our city is known for and we have not asked for funds outside of this comprehensive plan and we haven't actually been talked to about alternatives to this. Item 60 states that funding for music would have to come from some other unidentified source. It may be tempting to support any plan that guarantees financial support despite the vehicle or timeline, but we recognize that we are all part of a community and it isn't just about us. Item 1, the mayor's downtown puzzle which adopts the task force proposal identifies a means of supporting our needs as well as the mac, the palm school, parks, historic preservation, cultural arts and homelessness. We believe that item 101 is a sound and equitable plan and therefore we are in support of the visitor impact task force recommendation in item 101 as a whole and we ask that council adopt the proposal in total. [8:17:29 PM] Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor? Ma'am? Thank you very much for your testimony. I really appreciate that. I just wanted to let you know as just a point of information that I am a co-sponsor for both 60 and 101. And I'm not the only person on this dais that is very interested in the mayor's downtown puzzle. And as I've said before, I do not believe these are in conflict. That's okay. I just wanted to let you know as a piece of information because you may not have known that. >> I understand you are a co-sponsor on both and I like everybody here have gotten conflicting information on the timeline of how those things happened. And I want to say my source of confusion and I think a lot of people here come from the S.O.S. Letter which said that item 60 was a good alternative to the puzzle, and I'm not sure whether that was accurate or not. I understand that people have strong feelings on both sides of that issue. I'm not calling anybody out, but I haven't heard from anybody who said they felt strongly in support of both items. >> Kitchen: I think we're working to do the best we can with all these pieces and it's a timing issue. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. The next person, Rebecca mallison. >> Thank you, mayor and council, I'm the executive director of the Austin independent business alliance. And I'm here to advocate in support of item 60. So while we've heard a little bit of information about the two percent of the visitors Austin sees that come to the convention center, great, but I want to talk about the other 98%. So why do they come here? Well, I can tell you and I think everyone in this room would agree they come here for Austin. [8:19:30 PM] They come here for the music and the arts and the restaurants and the food and the parks and the local businesses that so well express our culture. So let's talk about that 98% and look at what that really does to our community. These are the businesses that really do make Austin, Austin. Our small local businesses really reflect our culture and they express everyday the eclectic nature that people come here for and what we're known for. These are also the same businesses that pay the lion's share of taxes. The local businesses put three times the money in our local community goods when money is spent at a local business versus a chain store. That was established in the landmark study that abia did in 2002 and has since been duplicated all across the country. So where people spend their money when they come here does make a difference. These are the same businesses that represent 80% of the job growth in Austin. We hear big headlines when a big business comes here and hires 1,000 people. Nobody notices when local business hires 1,000 people. Because it's day-to-day business. But council /after/of a council, year after year, resolution after resolution, local businesses ignored. Break that train today. Vote for this item and give some resolute notice to local business. And what they contribute to our community. This resolution uses a community asset, the hot tax money to support other important community assets. Music, parks, local business, all the things we've been talking about. All of these things not only do they bring tourists to our city, they support our local community too. It's not an either/or option. [8:21:32 PM] We can do both. This resolution by investing in all of the things that we're talking about including local business invest in all parts of Austin, not just downtown. Nothing at all against downtown. Lots of local businesses downtown, but there's a whole world of Austin outside of downtown. This resolution by investing in the things that really attract tourist, that attract the other 98% of tourists who come here can increase tourism -- [buzzer sounds] -- Not just a little tiny bit, but a huge amount. In closing, I would say what you should be asking yourselves is not what happens to tourism in Austin if we don't grow our conventions or even if we lose a few conventions. You should be asking yourself what happens to tourism in Austin if we lose our local businesses and our sole. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: The next speaker is John Dorgan. >> John had to leave. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. What about John Kuntz. Come on up? You're our last speaker with three minutes. >> Hello, I'm John Kuntz from Waterloo records and video. And I hate to correct Rebecca, but I was part of that landmark study with book people and it was three and a half times the money spent at a local business versus shopping at a chain store. So I just wanted to get that in there. Let's see -- you know, when someone lands at the airport they see a sign that says welcome to the live music capitol of the world and as someone that's both a live music venue and a record in and video store I'm definitely in favor of 60 with its emphasis on the music industry as well as its emphasis on the independent businesses. [8:23:43 PM] And you know the airport also has all of the wonder of the restaurants and stores in it and it was people sitting on this dais 20 years ago that decided they wanted it to be uniquely Austin at the airport. Consistently our airport is rated one of the highest in the country for I think in many cases that reason alone. If you decide not to go with 60, I think perhaps you should also consider being consistent and maybe change what was done over 20 years ago. You could kick book people out, brings Barnes and noble them. Kick thunder cloud out, bring subway in. Lose Austin java. There's plenty of Starbucks. Maudie's? Come on, how about taco bell. Hoover's, I'd rather have cracker barrel. Mrs. Johnson's donuts? Krispy kreme. Amy's, yeah, try getting a crushin at Baskin rob ins. And this one really hurts to say but Waterloo store shares a space with Austin city limits program, but that could become American idol. [Laughter]. If anyone knows about what attracts and appeals to tourists, I think it's the people that write guide books to Austin. I did a quick survey with my buddy Steve Burke at book people. There are 10 travel guides just about Austin, not counting the ones that also include San Antonio and the hill country. For your information there are 1704 -- 1604 pages talking about all the great things to do in Austin, all the restaurants, shops, clubs, et cetera. [8:25:44 PM] Of course, Walmart, best Buy, McDonald's aren't mentioned there because they're the same everywhere. There is two mentions in one of the travel books on the convention center. One says it's big, the other one says roller derby is there. Thank you. [Laughter]. >> Mayor Adler: All right. Next speaker -- [applause]. Next speaker, is Keith Miller here? >> [Inaudible]. >> Mayor Adler: What about Laurie turner? What about David Dubois? What about penecki gosh? Zenobia Joseph? Come on down. Is Fred Mcghee here? Why don't you come down to the next podium. We're in the one minute round. Is Michael new man here? Okay. You will have two minutes, Fred. But you will be the second speaker up. My Joseph is the first speaker up. Thank you. >> Mayor, I donated time to Fred. >> Mayor Adler: Got it. Thank you. One minute, Ms. Joseph. >> Thank you, mayor, councilmembers, I'm Zenobia Joseph. I want you to particularly look at transportation. If you look at the paper I five gave you it's on the tax code. Specifically I wanted to know whether or not the 5.8-million-dollar airport route that's in councilmember Garza's district can be funded with the hotel occupancy taxes and if not I would specifically ask you to ask capital metro to create a route that could be funded with that money. [8:27:45 PM] I actually wanted to ask you to speak specifically about the cultural funding and I do recognize, Ms. Pool, that you're looking at visitor centers, however you have not mentioned the dedistrict Hamilton house. I came to council on February 9th, 2014 and then I went to the visitor task force. I spoke to them until may 23rd, 2017. Specifically I've asked you to fund a book project because if you go into the little lemon house next to Franklin's barbecue, that's our house. I wanted to share one last thing, mayor. That is there is only one book in the library that specifically talks about the freedman's town that was here in Austin and it's called and grace will lead us home. And I hope that grace will lead you home tonight and you will do the right thing. Thank you so much. [Applause]. >> Good evening. Thank you very much for the opportunity to address you tonight. My name is Fred Mcghee. I'm a local archeologist and historian and I'm here to speak in support of item number 60. I find myself in a curious position. I'm normally a don quioxote standing up in front of boards and commissions and absorbing hammer blows from the dais over the segregated school for the deaf in 2008 and 29. Over rosewood courts in 2016 and 2017. And most recently the montopolis school for Negro children which unfortunately has the misfortune of not being located downtown, which gets me to my first point. All austinites in all parts of our city have an equal right to an equal quality of life. History, heritage, historic preservation, these are things for me that are at my professional core. [8:29:52 PM] I'm one of the first African-Americans to obtain a ph.d in archeology. At the time that I did in 2000 from our esteemed university here, the university of Texas, I was perhaps the fifth or the sixth ever, ever, to do that. So for me the historic preservation of the downtrodden, of the poor and pig meanted, in particular in Austin, is of deep professional concern as well as professional concern. And in that regard, councilmember troxclair, I salute you. I find myself making common cause with you and your co- sponsors. I find that to bed thing especially in the political times in which we live. A couple of other points that I would like to bring to your attention. Number 2, the hot tax revenue can be used in a very flexible way. You've heard already people talk about small businesses -- that's it? >> Mayor Adler: Hold on. Is Michael [indiscernible] Here and Susan Litman here? >> Am I going to get the two minutes? >> I will donate my time. >> Mayor Adler: You have -- Mr. Mcghee you have one more minute. >> So hot tax funding can be used for small businesses such as mine. I've been in operation since 2002. Homelessness. Austin is home for the most historic public housing in America. Want to do something about homelessness. I could spend 169, $160 million tomorrow. Easily fixing up our public housing that would do something in terms of historic preservation and homelessness as it was originally init tended to do. Also this can be a job growth thing in other parts of town, parts that need heritage based community development, not downtownism. Also, this body has a duty to perform public education about our city's unique history and culture. That is important and that's what historic preservation provides. [8:31:55 PM] You can't experience what slavery was like from a book. You have to go see it. You have to experience it. You have dog to these places. -- You have to go to these places. Learn from us. We stand ready to work with you the minute you take this vote, which I hope will be in the affirmative. Thank you for your kind attention. [Applause]. >> A Lynn Reardon here? What about Scott joslove. Is Steven sternion here? >> Mayor and councilmembers, my name is Scott. I am president of the Texas hotel and lodging association and a board member of the Austin hotel association. We are here in opposition to item number 60. We support the effort to achieve 15% funding in local hotel occupancy tax for historical restoration and preservation. Our concern just how you get there. The approach under item 6 we are concerned would result in a reduction of of funding, a substantial reduction of funding for the Austin cvb and the Austin convention center. It's difficult to imagine $11 million coming out of whether the cbv or the convention center in funding and not think it would affect staff or social services. If we protect the staff of the cbv we'll still have the the tourism. The cbv funding is already at 40 to 50% of its competitive set. We would be the lowest in the nation as far as the funding levels for the Austin cvb if we provide further cuts to their funding. [Buzzer sounds] Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Tovo: I wondered if I could ask you a couple of quick questions. I was looking back -- I've been reading a lot more about tpid since I think you and I met last spring. [8:34:00 PM] And one of the things I was seeing is that more cities in Texas have been exploring these, but I was looking at some of the publications nationally and it looks like under other names tourism business improvement districts that are also popping up. And one of the articles I was looking at specifically said that they were appealing to those in the hotel industry in part because it offers hotelliers more control over the allocation of those funds. So I wondered if you could just speak for a few minutes in looking back through some historical documents. I see that it was your organization as well as the Austin hotel association approached the city council and asked to go to the legislature and allow this to happen in Austin. It seems to me that creating a tpid has been a long-term interest of those in your industry and I wonder if you could speak for a few minutes about that and confirm that it is true, that the tpid has been an interest in the hotel community for awhile. >> Yes, I would be glad to and thank you for the question. We got legislation originally to allow Dallas to become a tourism public improvement district, to authorize a tourism public improvement district back about six years ago. That district has been so successful. It doubled the rate for conventions in that city to 40 percent of the bids they put out. It increased occupancy citywide as well as adr and it produced about $26 in room nights for every dollar they spent in incentives to bring conventions, group meetings and other transient business to Dallas, because of that success we came back to the legislature, got permission from the Austin city council to include Austin. We also included fort Worth, Arlington and San Antonio in authorization to also allow a city council to approve a tourism public improvement district if it received a petition of over district% of the interested business owners and that would be the hotelliers that would be subject to the assessments. [8:36:09 PM] So we've talked to the city council on numerous occasions about the importance of tourism district. To do a tourism district you have to get the approximate petitions, you have to get city council approval and you have to set out a service plan that outlines how you would expend the money. Typically in Texas cities they expend it on incentives to bring new conventions and tourism. They spend it on marketing, to market the destination as a tourism destination. And the theory is you take whatever the city is doing now and it's to augment. It's not to replace or to make an entity whole. It is basically to bump it up. And the only way I can usually get my hotel industry to support, the signing of the petitions to show how it's going to be a net positive increase and that we're going to increase the assessment and ultimately the fees against our guests by showing whatever our level of tourism we can take it to a whole new level of hotel activity and convention activity and tourism by investing in the marketing and the incentives. We also do additional programs for individual hotels. You know, people keep talking about funding for the downtown hotels or priority for downtown. Actually, 75% of our hotels in Austin are outside of downtown. Only 25 are in the downtown sector. A tourism public improvement district and the downtown expansion% are supported by the hotel industry citywide. >> Tovo: Thank you. And in Dallas where you set one up in 2012 that I assume was not related to a convention center expansion because it looks from the information as if we were considering one now, but hadn't had an expansion since about 2002. Is that roughly accurate? >> When we did the Dallas tourism public improvement district we had negotiations with the city council and the city management letting them know that we would support different propositions. And part of the issues that we discussed was we understood a convention center expansion would be on down the road. [8:38:10 PM] I think they've had a more recent convention center on owe they're capacity is not quite as Austin's in booking events. I think they want to do expansion of the convention center in Dallas, but it was not made conditional for that because I don't think they had the same capacity issue that we had here in Austin. >> Tovo: Things. I was trying to ferret out where if any where they were linked to a convention center expansion. And I didn't see that to be the case in Dallas. Thanks for confirming that. Thanks very much. >> Alter: Did you have a question? >> Mayor Adler: Either one. Councilmember alter. >> Alter: Thank you. I was wondering in the case of Dallas who controls the money from the tpid for the advertising that lead to such great results for the booking conventions? >> The hotelliers who know where their market is, the low season is, it's a board of hotelliers from every part of the city that's geographically diverse, ethnically diverse, brand diverse, geographically diverse that represents and looks like the city of Dallas. That board of hotelliers, they're all stakeholders in the district. They come up with a plan that they approve that's recommended by the convention and visitors bureau and it's to augment what they're doing. If they're spending 10 million in advertising and they have an additional five million they will do through the pid they know what they're doing with the 10 million and the five million and how can we get the most bang for the buck. What can we do that we wouldn't do before? >> Alter: Thank you. I think there are a couple of tpids that are in existence with the hoteliers. What percentage in those cities are they giving back to the city for the city to do city-related investments? >> I'd be glad to answer that. Dallas we provided about a 10% concession to the city. Seven and a half percent went to the arts because Dallas doesn't currently invest any of the hotel occupancy tax in the arts. [8:40:18 PM] So in our city we put seven percent into the arts events and we came up with formulas on how to do that. Another two and a half percent went to additional marketing for the convention center which they freed up some money for the city to also do some convention center improvements. That was in Dallas 10%. In Fort Worth we just got that approved. I testified just two nights ago at the fort Worth city council and they just approved the tourism public improvement district for Fort Worth. That involved a seven and a half percent concession again to the arts because like Dallas they don't spend the 15% of the arts. There is no automatic allocation or reservation for the arts. So we did that for the arts in Fort Worth. So the total concession there was seven and a half percent. In article ton the city did not ask for any incentive. They were asking for marketing and to promote the activity and there was zero percent concession. The only other cities that are authorized are San Antonio and Austin and that's what we're here working with. >> Alter: And do you have a sense of what we might think about for Austin? >> I think the mayor has talked about a 40% concession. I think that's 20 percent from direct funding for the tourism public improvement district and 20 percent that comes via a roundabout way with the convention center whereas we provide incentives for conventions, in other words, we buy-down the cost of the convention center, that's for new business that wasn't there before. That money would then be allocated up to the point where it reaches 20% that when it's 20% that we provide as a pure concession straight for the city as authorized by the pid law and another 20% match would be secured from the convention center receipt of tpid funds for convention buy-downs in order to bring the convention to Austin. So that total is 40%, but that's how it's presented. [8:42:22 PM] 20% from the P pid and 2,021st from the ti bids from buy-downs. If you're bringing Avon here to Austin and they say we could go to Dallas, we can go to Austin, they're willing to cover all our convention center space in Dallas. We would say all right, we'll go ahead and cover your space in Austin if you'll go ahead and come here instead of coming to Dallas. That cost may be 1,000 or 150,000 for their four-day event. So by using the tpid funds for that, the city is left whole and what the convention center costs are and then that funding goes to the convention center and they can then determine those are no longer dedicated funds they can use like hotel tax, it's revenues of the convention center and they could be used as part of that puzzle towards under the mayor's plan anyway, as I understand. Now I would defer to your budget office and also your convention center staff on how that all works, but that's my understanding. >> Alter: And why are you willing to do so much more in Austin than the other? >> We love you more than Dallas. [Applause]. [Laughter]. I will tell you honestly, the only reason we would even give -- even more than 10% -- our initial negotiations were under no means would we go above the 10%. And the only reason we went above the 10% is the convention expansion was that important. It was the only city in Texas that we're aware of. The only city in tnc that we're aware of that we are losing over half the business that we could poshly get. People get talking about is convention center business being flat. It's not flat in Texas, it's not flat nationally. I think one of our speakers on 101 is going to talk about what the meaning is of the convention center business to Austin hotels. Et cetera huge. It's huge not to downtown. It's huge citywide. We went above and beyond what we have ever done. It sets a precedent we're very concerned about. [8:44:22 PM] I've got to -- I worked with all the ownership groups across the state in each of these cities to get approval from the hotel ownership and it was very hard to get it at 10% concession, at seven and a half percent concession. To get it at 20% concession and arguably 40% when you include the other match is going to be tough, but it would be if we could get a convention center expansion, there would be a flow of money -- we want to see the 15% for hotel occupancy tax for historical too. These are not mutually exclusive for our priorities. Without a convention center expansion we don't know what we would do in terms of a tourism pid because we do we convince folks that that revenue flow would no longer be able to be justified and it was hard to convince them to do it otherwise. >> Alter: Okay. Thank you. >> Kitchen: I have a quick follow-up question. Sir, thank you so much for -- I need to hear it one more time because I'm not sure I'm understanding how the 20% works with the convention center center. Can you say that one more time? >> I'm going to give my best understanding of it but I don't work at the convention center. >> Kitchen: You said it well, I just didn't hear it. >> As I understand it, we give a certain amount of money from the tourism public improvement district to buy-down the cost of conventions at the convention center. >> Kitchen: Like discounts to the convention center. >> Right. Or buying down the room rates. Let's say the convention center is doing half a-million-dollar in buy-downs annually in order to make sure that we get business to the convention center. Because typically to come to Austin if you don't comp the convention center space they'll go to 100 other destinations that will. So if they're doing half a million right now, then the theory of the pid is we may make available another half a million dollars for buy-downs for other meetings that wouldn't have come otherwise for the available dates and for the expansion, et cetera. And so if we can do that, that cash flow then can be refunnelled back towards homeless services and other services in that type of category because it's part of the convention center. [8:46:33 PM] It doesn't fall under the venue tax of 351. It's a different pool. But again I would defer to your city legal on that. >> Kitchen: Okay, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Flannigan. >> Flannigan: I think you accurately covered my questions. I don't have to keep talking. >> Mayor Adler: Further questions? Yes, Ms. Pool? >> Pool: So 10% would come to the city, 10% would go to -- >> 20. >> Pool: 20% would come to the city. 20% would go to the convention center that then could be used for homelessness. Is that what you were saying? >> It could be used for for homelessness through the convention center, but the 20% that we give directly to the city has to fit under one of the categories under chapter 372 of the local government code. [Overlapping speakers]. >> Health and human services, affordable housing, that could be whatever category was of interest to most of the city that's an eligible category. We also show that that category has some sort of direct relationship to the lodging industry because every expenditure, every assessment under a tourism district, if we provide a million dollars assessment against the omni hotel downtown from the tourism pid, from the fees they charge, they have to show a million dollars in value to that hotel. >> Pool: Okay, I got that. Thank you. So that's 40 and then who gets the bulk of the money, the 60 percent. If 20 goes to the city for programs like homelessness, 20 goes to the convention center to offset the expansion of the convention center, that's 40%, who gets the other 20%? >> 20 goes to the city as a concession. >> Pool: We've stipulated 20 to the city and to the convention center. The 60%. >> I'll be glad to answer. The remaining 80% goes to program. If I can express it this way. 20% goes on a concession. The remaining 80% will go to primarily marketing and to incentives. [8:48:36 PM] Of the portion to incentives usually it's split very evenly. 45% on marketing, 45% on incentives, five percent on research and five percent on administration. >> Pool: Did you mean 60% because you're saying 80%? >> I mean what I say. 80% would go to these other purposes. Of that portion, that 45% on incentives, that incentive -- a lot of those incentives would go to the convention center to pay down the cost of meetings. That's where that 20% is generated that would be the match that equals the 40%. So I understand about the money that the hotel and lodging tpid entity would concede or give as a concession to the city and to the convention center. I'm curious how the 60% of the revenue -- >> Okay, thank you. Your -- >> Pool: Which would go to the tpid entity and how that would be spent. What happens with that? >> The way it's typically spent, we don't have a service plan yet in Austin, but I would anticipate the service plan would follow the same plan we just adopted in fort Worth and Dallas and in Arlington. Which as I said a moment ago, 45% typically is spent on marketing, about that same percentage is spent on incentives, about five percent is spent on administration, five percent is spent on research. So it's almost split evenly. The majority of it between marketing and supplemental marketing. So if you used to spend five million on marketing that would be above what you're already spending on marketing to try to ramp up what you're doing. Same thing on incentives. If you're already spending five million on incentives for the cvb it would ramp up what you're able to spend on incentives for the cvb. That is overseen by a board of directors I said in Dallas, Arlington and soon to be Fort Worth. Part of the reason I think they're so successful is it's a board that everybody has a stake and has great knowledge in what might be most effective. [8:50:41 PM] >> Pool: Thank you. >> It's a confusing topic, I understand. >> Pool: No, I understand it completely. The majority of it would go to the tpid and to T for the uses you've identified. >> Yes. >> Pool: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Any conversations that we've had indirectly or directly, 40% of that go to homelessness in the city, is that correct? >> My understanding is it would be whatever purposes the city council wants to use them for and that the intent was to address homeless needs in Austin. And we were especially proud of that. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. And thank you for that -- treating that differently. [Applause]. Hello, sir. And before you start speaking let call up the next group. Is Kathie -- Kathie Castillo here? Yes, Fred. Sir. >> My name is Steve sternshine, president of the red river merchant association. The managing partner of empire chrome and garage and I also served on the visitor impact task force for the past seems like a very long time, eight months. [Laughter]. And I'm here today to speak against item 60 to the extent that it jeopardizes item 101 and the downtown puzzle and the compromise plan that we put together at the visitor impact task force to address a diverse group of needs in our community as well as the interests and the needs of the folks in the hotel industry that are providing that revenue opportunity for us. I will say that I'm a little bit confused even after eight months of looking at these issues because it's very complicated the way that the -- [buzzer sounds] Do you mind if I finish my thought? [8:52:42 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. >> But you know, my instinct is that allocating 15% of the hotel occupancy tax to historic preservation would upset the delicate balance of the overall plan that we put together over the past few months. Thank you very much for your time. >> Houston: Mayor, may I ask a quick question? Sir, can you tell me when did the visitors impact task force start? What was the date that you all started your work? >> I believe it was in the fall of last year when we first started meeting. >> Houston: Okay, thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Is Angela Valenzuela here? Is Marta terra here? You will speak at this podium. Go ahead. >> Good evening mayor and council. My name is Kathie. I serve as the mayor's appointee of the advisory board of the mexican-american cultural center which we refer to as the mac. My comments today are as a private citizen of Austin for the past 36 years, currently a district 5 homeowner at the reserve and south park meadows. My earnest advocacy is first of all to get on the record one thing that no one has mentioned as attracting visitors to Austin and that is tacos. So let's get that in the record. [Laughter]. And let's move on from there! Building on that point, I am very concerned and feel strongly that funding equity for the macc needs to remain part of the final decision from this highly confusing issue unfolding this evening between the downtown puzzle and councilmember troxclair's -- [8:54:56 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. It was a minute. >> Okay. Well, that was three minutes? Wow. >> Mayor Adler: No, we've gone to one minute. >> Okay. Well, I would say we need to keep in mind that the mac is on Rainey street and it has the potential to be a world class attraction for visitors and on par with similar venues in San Francisco and Chicago. And this whole dialogue this evening has been very confusing to me and it has to be confusing for many people, not city hall insiders or other particular experts. And I ask for it to be explained on a much more reasonable level for austinites, those who are not here everyday needing and wanting to get this. As it stands now, only 101 line items, the mac for priority funding, and for that reason alone I stand here in support of 101. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Good evening, mayor, councilmembers. First of all, thank you so much for your awesome support of our immigrant community. My name is Martha cotero. On the issue of item 60 my proposal is that it be postponed until there is an opportunity for more representation from the Latino business, arts and culture, music and even event venues representatives to be at the table, either going to be any reorganizing or reallocation priorities for the hotel tax. [8:57:02 PM] We agreed that Austin has become number one in tourism dollars, but it is largely due to the blood, sweat and tears of those workers at the very bottom that can't even afford housing and that have to live eight to a room in Austin to be near their workplace. And I think that based on that and the fact that -- [buzzer sounds] -- We have a business community that is extremely engaged, we should not approve any item that requires greater deliberation, transparency and more actionable specifics with regards to diversity populations. And I'm going to recommend that -- and I will submit a list to you of Latino business, res restaurant t4 organizations and entrepreneur organizations, the Austin hispanic chamber of commerce wants to be involved with this, and that we do not move forward in this proposal nor in incorporating it to 101 without our being at the table. It will not be done. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. The next speaker is Mike Levine. Is Mike Levine here? Is -- while he's coming down, is Kimberly Sydney here? Would you please come to the next podium. Mr. Levine? >> Thank you, mayor and council. I appreciate the opportunity. I will be quick. I think most of my points have been said, but the only thing that hasn't been brought up is the fact that a lot of the arts groups and stuff that are here to support 101 against 60 are under the false impression that the cultural arts session is going to be on. It's also important to note that a lot of the projections from the money you're promising them only happen if everything goes according to all expectations, which has never happened in the history of our convention center. So in that case talking about like imaginary water falls of money like actual dollars which 60 provides immediately. So thank you very much for your deep thought on this issue. [8:59:02 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Is cookie Ruiz here? Is [indiscernible] Here? Is >> Mayor Adler: So you have one minute and you have three minutes. Go ahead. >> Thank you. I'm a member of one of those arts organizations that was previously discussed as associate director of development at Zach theater. Thank you for the opportunity to express support for the process initiated by the council to appoint the visitors impact task force and subsequent recommendations. And my concern is that item 60 does not acknowledge or adhere to the process that acknowledges the priorities of such a diverse group of stakeholders and constituents. Respect the views, dedication to our city of those who sponsored item 60, however, it lacks the important community and input by the stakeholders that were involved. Additional discussion is needed, and further analysis is also required. Let's slow down and make sure that all stakeholders are represented. Please protect Austin's public process so we can further the shared values and goals of all stakeholders. It is for these reasons I encourage councilmembers to vote no on item 60. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Before Ms. Are you Ruiz talks, is Jay Stewart here? You'll be at this podium. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. I start by also thanking you for your service. There's been some differences tonight but some great things that are happening in our city and we thank you. I want to talk a little bit about process because process was created for the visitor impact task force. It began in earnest in about December. It went all the way through may. You all placed 18 people with really desperate views on the convention center. It was an amazing process but one that was geographically very difficult for the folks that we represent to attend. [9:01:02 PM] And by that, I mean it was very expensive in terms of if you had a car and you needed to get there, it was a very expensive process, something like 20 to $50 a month by the time we got to the end of this. Further, this is a task force open to the open -- subject to open meetings, so I was thrilled when I first got there and saw a camera, but the camera actually was a TV camera. Ultimately it was about two or three meetings into it when I realized there wouldn't really be any sort of record for those that we represent. Ultimately I was told that it would be done by audio files but there were no mics in the room. So ultimately, we got the mics. Ultimately we were able to come together. But the colleagues I represent are working artists, many of whom have two and three jobs to make a living and to try and get by, while their homes and their workplaces are slowly being gentrified away from them. This process is important because their livelihoods and our livelihoods as an arts community were hanging in the balance. And it's easy for us to say that it's safe but for the last 12 years, 15 years or 20 years, we've often been under the gun. Why did we go through this process? Because you asked us to. Because you created a public process and you put people with district views together, and you asked them to come together and work through. It is amazing what they did. I have been through a lot of public processes, but one was really stunning because at the beginning they couldn't agree on the day of the week, and in the end they ultimately came all the way through a process, respecting their differences, and came to a time where they found their way to crafted solutions that highly compromised. All of these were outside of the visitors impact task force that we believe would be studied in detail through the downtown puzzle. We ask that you not disregard this time and effort spent by so many citizens, that you asked to be part of the public process. [9:03:05 PM] This was a task force you created. And you chose the people to be a part of it. So what we are having trouble understanding is that there are really great ideas, perhaps -- really great ideas we believe to be explored in the downtown puzzle, but we do not understand the process that comes to a conclusion, has results, but the results don't seem to have been studied yet. [Buzzer sounds] We ask you to respect the work of the vivers impact task force and the public process you created, and we ask that that happen during the exploration of the downtown puzzle. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: You'll be next at this podium. >> [Off mic] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. You have two minutes. >> Mr. Mayor, councilmembers, for the record my name is Jay Stewart. I'm wearing three volunteer hats here tonight. One is a boomer board member of the symphony, one board member of the opera, and also as registered agent of the Austin arts coalition. That was a group we put together for advocacy to ensure that the portion of the H. O. T. Monies that Austin receives is respected for the cultural arts coalition. As Ms. Ruiz testified, she has quite a few years of experience, even though I think she's getting into her 20s now, but she has quite a few years of experience with the H. O. T. Battles. Those were hard fought battles that were settled with the city. I was reading the work papers of your Tuesday meeting, and I was concerned because there was an exchange between councilmember kitchen and councilmember troxclair where money was being removed from the cultural arts percentage. I am so thankful for the assurances of mayor pro tem tovo tonight that those percentages are assured. The main goal of our group is to ensure that we continue to positively use this violates money to the cultural arts groups in Austin. [9:05:14 PM] Not just the mainly ones, but all the way down. There -- the percentage of these budgets of these groups can be significantly impacted by a cut in those percentages. Please understand that there is some reliance on that. We are excited Austin is so great a city that it -- the pot of money continues to grow. So we hope that that percentage will be respected, and I thank you, Ms. Tovo, thank you, council, for respecting that 15%. I'm going to put my last little hat on, as a lawyer hat. I've heard a lot of discussions of the parts -- [buzzer sounds] -- And historic preservation. Parks is not referenced in the 351, 101, unless you're a coastal municipality. The Normal operating expenses of a city to maintain their parks is not something that the H. O. T. Program was intended. I understand the hook. The hook is the historic preservation, so you're going to have to establish these sites as historic, and Ms. Troxclair did so, I believe, very well on the whereas section of her motion, but I think there's maybe some confusion that there's an unlimited pot of money here to clean municipal pools or to mow grass and those kinds of things. I don't -- as an attorney, I don't believe that's true. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Kitchen. >> Kitchen: I hope there wasn't any confusion. I don't think I was in that were sponsors of this ever had any amount taken away from the cultural arts. So if that did not come across correctly, we apologize for that. But I certainly didn't, and I know that councilmember troxclair didn't, either. We all have kept the 15% the entire time. >> Thank you, councilmember. I was just referring to some of the transcript where there's some monies being removed, but I certainly understand that clarification. [9:07:15 PM] >> Kitchen: That's all right. I understand that it can be confusing, as many have said, so I just wanted to clarify. >> Thank you, councilmember. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: We're going to do another minute or two diversion here. We have someone to speak to us one minute on the budget so he can get transportation. Jeremy cane. >> [Off mic] >> Okay. I'm not sure of his name, but, okay, he wants, like, wheelchairs, yellow signs for safety, the crosswalk because some vehicles almost hit me. So we flip. Correct the signs of the sidewalks. [9:09:19 PM] Sidewalks -- sidewalks are is he thin in some areas and correct the rampway for safety. Remove the trees or bush on the sidewalk -- I don't know -- wheelchair people can -- cannot access outside the walks. [Buzzer sounds] [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Is jornay Coleman here? Is jornay Coleman? Is that a "Yes"? Jornay Coleman? That's good. Come on down. We're going to do this so kids can get to bed and go to school. A little budget testimony for us. >> How much time do I have? Okay. Hi. My name is jornay Coleman. I'm 13, I live in district 1, and I'm a member of ccu, communities of color united. Before I begin, I want to acknowledge the people who are suffering the aftermath of Harvey. [9:11:24 PM] My family experienced the 2013 flood in Austin and lost everything as well. Two weeks ago, at the budget hearing, over 50 members of ccu came out to show our priorities. We organized rides, food, and child care so members could be here and some could testify. We, the youth, even planned, shot, and edited a video. All of this work is volunteer work for everyone. Ccu is not part of anyone's job, but people want to be involved because then we feel strongly about what our city needs to fix the problems that started hundreds of years ago. Today, I'm the only ccu speaker. We know there are many others who are here to speak tonight, so we don't want to take up more room. But we want to remind you of what we said last time. Of the people who shared their stories with you, and make sure that you take all of this into account when you decide on the budget. When you make decisions about the city's budget, you show what you prioritize and you show if equity and racial justice are important to you. You have the opportunity to do what's right and not just talk about it. The chance to put your money where your mouth is. At ccu we have been asking for years that the city become more equitable for communities of color and other vulnerable folks. We strongly recommend that you take these three actions in this budget. Begun: Increase funding of the equity office by $500,000 to provide, number one, equity training to city staff, number two, develop a community advisory accountability body, and number three, hire staff needed to begin applying the equity tool for city departments and budget allocations. Two: Increase funding for the health department to a comparable level to peer cities. This would mean a $9 million increase in this year's budget for Austin public health, with a focus on allocating funding towards the health equity initiative. [9:13:25 PM] Three: Freeze the Austin police department budget so that the city can have enough for these two major increases. And we don't want more money going to policing. Not even community policing. More policing will not make us safer or healthier. This is a fact that has been proven by research. Currently A.P.D. Makes up 40.8% of the overall budget and Austin public health makes up only 6.6%. What does this tell us about your priorities? Please listen. There are hundreds of us involved in ccu who feel this way. To end, I want to ask you that when you're making your decisions, to remember -- [buzzer sounds] -- Our three priorities. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] [Cheers and applause] >> Mayor Adler: Jornay, before y'all walkway -- jornay, I have a question. Good job, and you don't quite get out that fast. >> I just wanted to say one more thing, you started your remarks by saying you didn't want to take up more space, and I wanted to encourage you to not worry about that and take up as much space as you think you need. >> Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Next speaker is Adam Cahn. Is Adam Cahn here? Then Carmen livanos. >> That's a tough act to follow. [Laughter]. Hi. My name is Adam Cahn. I blog the website Cahn man's musings. [9:15:27 PM] I'm in favor of 60, opposed to 101, but I'll focus on 60 in limited time. I think item 60 is a very tangible step that can be taken in the right direction in terms of funneling existing funds into core services for current city residents. I think it's -- the beauty of it is, frankly, its simplicity. One of the things that I frequently find very frustrating coming out of this council is that you seem to have a lot of grandiose ideas and you don't always have the follow-through to execute them. So I like seeing something, I've testified until the past, keep it simple. Do small, tangible things. Use that to build trust in the community, to then tackle some of the bigger issues, so I like that a lot. [Buzzer sounds] I also just want to say that in all the years I've been doing this, mayor pro tem, I think this is the first time we have ever been on the same side of an issue. [Laughter]. And while I was going to make a joke about how this is a giant kumbaya session, I actually think the councilmember from district 9 whose district has in it, is very significant so I encourage the council to support 60 and oppose 101. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Craig nezor here? Carmen, you come down. Go ahead, please. >> Thank you. I'm Carmen -- good evening. >> Mayor Adler: What I'm doing is I'm putting people at each podium. >> Yes. We're both Carmen and I got confused. Sorry. [Laughter]. >> Okay. Good evening. I'm Carmen and I'm here as a member of the Zach board of directors. On Tuesday, the Zach board unanimously approved a resolution which you should have in front of you that is -- that supports the visitor impact task force's unanimous recommendations to support expansion of the convention center and corresponding expansion of hot revenue. [9:17:39 PM] The Zach board of trustees urgency the city council to support the public process it initiated by establishing the task force and not to adopt any resolution which is inconsistent with the recommendations in the task force. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Craig nezor will come down here. Go ahead. >> Okay. So I'll keep it very brief. I know you all have a difficult deliberation in front of you, a lot of math and a lot of legalities to are can. I'm Carmen, I'm the vice chair of the Latino advisory resource commission, I just wanted to offer a point of calculator. It was mentioned we had voted unanimously as a commission in our last meeting on the downtown puzzle, and I wanted to offer a point of clarity, which is that our unanimous vote was around ensuring that funds are equitably spent from the hotel occupancy tax, with regard to the Mexican American cultural center, but also, all of the variety of needs that we are advocating for. And so we were not debating item 60 and 101. I want to be very clear about that. Because there are a lot of nuances here and there are a lot of things to consider. We're talking about making funds available for a lot of different areas where we could establish more equity. And so I understand that you all have to work within the confines of the language and I just want to offer that point of clarity. [Buzzer sounds] We were not for or against 60. And I urge you to make the right decision on it. Good luck. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Hello. My name is Craig nazor. Hello, city council and mayor Adler. I specifically want to say that you've been a great mayor for this city, and I support many things you do. But I think I disagree on this one. My -- and there's so much to say, and little time. [9:19:41 PM] One experience. I volunteered for many years at the zilker botanical gardens. I was horticulture consultant for the prehistoric garden. That was a $1.5 million gift to the city, and the city never really met up to its agreements with the hartmans. Because of that, I volunteered over 3,000 hours of my time to make sure that garden looked good because the money that was promised to put in there was never put in. There's also the tannagucci garden, which is a whole other story in 1990, at the bottom of the au garden, I looked at that and I cried, it was so beautiful. [Buzzer sounds] These are the be kinds of things that we lose in Austin if you don't take money dedicated for what it's supposed to be and give it to that source. Let's please do that first, and then whatever else you want to do with the money, I'm sure we'll all support. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I'm going to call two more people out of order here, two more students who want to get to school. Hailey jesteez here, and is Diego Macias here? Speaking on the budget, on 96. >> Hello. My name is Hailey -- >> Mayor Adler: We'll give each a minute. >> Is this good? Episcopal school and budget co-chair and district 8 representative. This is Diego Macias, my co-chair and district 7 representative. The Austin youth council would like the opportunity to participate in the budgeting process for fiscal year 2018. The Austin youth council budget committee is interested in participatory funding and requests $250,000 to -- excuse me -- to have a decision where funding will be placed. [9:21:49 PM] The youth council represents over 211,000 youth across the city of Austin and 27 high schools across the city. If you have any questions, Diego can answer them. [Laughter]. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: There are several other cities that do this. >> Yes, sir. >> Mayor Adler: If you could give us the cities, I imagine you may have looked at those other cities. If you can get us that research, send it to my office, I would appreciate that. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Houston. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Macias, do you have anything you would like to share? >> I wouldn't think so. She said pretty much anything that we need to convey so far, but, yeah, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. Mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: We have to ask you a question since you were the designated answerer. Can you give us some sense -- I think that's a real nifty idea, as the mayor said, there are other cities doing a participatory budgeting with a small amount of money relative to the budget. Do you have a sense what some of the priorities would be with respect to the youth council? >> Yes. Sorry. Yes, we have -- prioritizing, we're prioritizing mental health, and we have English as second language, and possibly sexual education. >> Tovo: Thank you. >> Uh-huh. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Pool: And, mayor, if you are going to send the information to the mayor, be sure to send it on all of us so we can see it. He's not responsible for copying us, so you can send to us directly. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. All right. Next witness. We're now back up to -- thank you both. [9:23:51 PM] [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: ING you get tired, you go back to your old habits. James Casey. Is James Casey here? Then Roy Whaley, if you'd come down to the other podium. You each have one minute. >> Thank you, council. Mayor. My name is James Casey. I live in district 5. And I'm really happy to see that you're working on funding these priorities for the long term, and thank you, mayor for your work on that and the task force, work on that. However, there are some things that really need to be funded now. And one of those -- I don't have much time so I'll just speak to this one of the things is to basically prevent the imminent destruction of the montopolis Negro school, and item 60 would provide some funds to prevent that imminent destruction. So I hope you will consider that there are some priorities that really may not be able to wait another six months. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Before Mr. Whaley speaks, the speaker after him is Ted sift. Is Mr. Sift still here? Okay. Mr. Whaley, you're up. One minute. >> Howdy, y'all. My name's Roy Whaley. I am the chair of the Austin regional group conservation committee. Year after year I see the park folks come down here and say, we'll take your scraps. We'll take your pocket change. And they are told again and again, maybe next time. It's next time. Now then, right now, we're looking at -- and I don't know which one is taller, this mountain of money that we've got squirreled away or this mountain of B.S. That we've heard laid down this evening. [9:25:58 PM] What we need to do is do it now. Not next year. And let's remind ourselves that there are other parts of Austin that have historic sites, that have parks, that have needs. Ask anyone on the east side of I-35 if if they wouldn't like for us to take one shovel full of that mountain of money and spread it around. Not move the whole mountain, but let's move it to the different areas that have been ignored and overlooked in the past. [Buzzer sounds] You know what I'm talking about, councilmember Houston. You know what I'm talking about, councilmember Casar. Certainly you know what we're talking about here -- pardon me -- councilmember Garza. Let's put this money back to the people. Welcome to Austin, visitors. Now go spend some money in some of our underserved districts. Thank you very much. Councilmember, appreciate you being the lead on this. >> Mayor Adler: Ted sift. Before Mr. Sift speaks, Tina cannon. Is she here? Go ahead. >> Thank you, mayor. My name is Ted sift. I signed up against item 60 and for 101, but I want to acknowledge councilmember kitchen, who is the one among you who is seeing a clear path to be for both of these items. And I'm going to just make some observations that suggest that all of you can be for both of these items. Many of you have actually said that sometime during this evening. The vast majority of you, if not all of you, want to allocate at least up to 15% for historic preservation. And the majority, if not all of you, have said tonight that you want to do this in a way that does not impact our ability to achieve the goals of 101, or at least not impact the ability to expand the convention center. [9:27:59 PM] So a humble suggestion, with regard to the troxclair resolution, as I understand it, it now resolves -- [buzzer sounds] -- To direct the city manager to directly allocate 15% of the hot revenue for historic preservation. If you simply set that as a goal, rather than a mandate, suggests that up to 15% rather than an absolute directive, perhaps all of you could support that and support 60 without impacting negatively the goals of item 101. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Akers here? What about Allison Mcghee? You're our last speaker. >> Folks, I'm Tina cannon with the Austin chamber of commerce. Comprised of over 3,000 businesses, 85% of which are small businesses, asking you to vote against item 60 today as written. There is no doubt that all of you on the dais want to do the best you can for as many as you can. Item 60, whether you are for it or against it this evening, is really a matter of timing, process, and data. At the core, this is a budget item that you are discussion in a resolution form, one that one could argue should be taken up during budget deliberations. We ask you consider moving this item to the budget, which you'll hear in just a few short days, and allow staff time to run the numbers. There is no urgent need to pass this item tonight. Let's learn more and give deference to the recommendations of the visitor impact task force. Here's one fact I do know. If you take action on this item today, as a result of the deep cuts, people will lose their jobs. Hard-working people, folks who are watching this evening, and wondering if their job will be eliminated when you raise your hand tonight. Let's pause for them for just a few more days -- [buzzer sounds] -- Because I know that the folks who are sweeping the convention center tonight would ask that you take a breath, analyze the figures, and make an informed decision. [9:30:06 PM] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Mcghee. [Applause] >> Good evening. My name's Allison Mcghee -- >> Alter: Mayor, I'm sorry to interrupt you, just before you start, Tina, I appreciate your testimony. I just wanted to make sure that you saw that it explicitly states in the exhibit that the 70% allocation made to convention center and visit Austin should be done in a way that does not require any staff reduction. So I don't want that to be used -- I don't want that to even be a thing that we're putting out there because there's no one on this dais that is supporting that, and there is specific direction to the city manager to implement this without -- >> Thank you. And thank you for that clarification. I hope city staff and convention center staff will have a chance to talk about exactly what those cuts would be. Enhancing. >> Good evening, council and mayor. My name's Allison Mcghee, and I served on the visitor impact task force representing the historic preservation community. In doing so was really as amazing an experience as cookie Ruiz described. As you make decisions tonight, I really hope that you'll keep a few things -- a few considerations in mind. One is that the visitor impact task force actually recommended allocation for 2018 of acdb funds towards the heritage grant program at the same level as 2017, so that there wouldn't be any additional cuts to programs. We weren't competing against each other. I'm very concerned about direct allocation to pard that could result in an offset, so a reduction in the general funds. That was actually mentioned here on the dais this evening, and I think that having pard end up with the same amount of funding as they currently have is not really a goal. [Buzzer sounds] Just real quickly, hope that you'll consider allowing for equitable funding of culturally significant historic sites that have been underrepresented and are located beyond the boundaries of downtown. [9:32:13 PM] I think the grant program, funding of a grant program is the best way to do that. And it's really very important that you prioritize making changes to the heritage grant program because the funds, if they're increased, they're not going to be distributed effectively or efficiently without significant changes to the criteria. We worked as a really collaborative group, preservation likes to work with our partners, and we hope that you'll continue to have discussions with all of our partners so that we can come to decisions and conclusions that are beneficial to everybody. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: Thank you for your testimony. I want to clarify, because I know there's confusion and I'm just trying to clarify. Our discussions around 60 have not involved cutting the pard budget, so we're not talking about cutting the pard budget so I want to make that clear. >> It was mentioned, though, that that could be a possibility, if funds go to pard, that then general funds could be -- some of their general funds could be used for other things. >> Kitchen: No. I apologize if it came across that way, but that was not the intention of what we were saying. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: I think that's everybody that we had speaking. Councilmember troxclair, earlier in this, when we started this morning, or it felt like this morning, you had said that if we could keep the present direction as we enter into the budget process of the 15% as the default, that -- my sense was that you would agree that we would still have the opportunity to get additional information so that we could make the decision. So what I would propose doing, if it was something that was acceptable to you, is, I would withdraw my amendment which replaced yours, let yours go, but add an additional resolved clause that says that the city manager is directed to present an analysis of this allocation and other options to achieve hot allocations for historical preservation, considering relevant factors, including, but not limited to, budgetary, legal, and project impacts, prior to the adoption of the 2017-2018 budget, so that we would have information before we made our final budget decisions. [9:34:44 PM] Is that something that you would accept? >> Troxclair: Okay. I'll be interested to hear from my co-sponsors, but to me, this is exactly what my resolution already says, so I'm not sure what the difference is. >> Mayor Adler: I just -- if it means the same thing, then I'd appreciate you obliging me if it's the same thing, only because I don't necessarily read it that way. So if this says the same thing, then I would appreciate you accepting it. >> Troxclair: Okay. Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Troxclair: Great. I'm happy that you were able to come around and that we could all get on the same page. I feel that it was unfortunate that we gutted the community against each other in this way, when ultimately, I think that adopting item number 60 is the right thing for our community and that it doesn't preclude the adoption of the -- of any future plan. So thank you for acknowledging that. I really appreciate our ability to come together. >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to substituting one amendment for the other one? Hearing none, those two are substituted. Discussion on the measure? Yes. Ms. Pool? >> Pool: I'd like to ask the city manager if this gives her all of the latitude that we like to give to our professional administrative staff to do the kind of -- to bring back to us the information that we -- that we need in order to make a really good, well-considered decision, during budget. >> Councilmember pool, I believe this is broad enough that I can bring you the information that you can make a decision based on for our adoption of the budget. >> Pool: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Yes. >> Just to confirm, city manager, there's nothing by adopting this amendment, that we're still creating a new bucket for historic preservation, and -- with the direction to fund it fully up to 15%. [9:36:53 PM] >> With the discussion I've heard on the dais and this amendment, I think we know what our challenge is and we'll be bringing you back options to get the 15% or a phased approach that you could choose multiple options, so we won't bring you just one option, we'll bring you several if that's what you'd like. If you just want the 15, we'll bring you that and the impacts. >> Troxclair: Okay. Thank you. And I want to make sure that -- I think that there were -- I don't ever think that we voted on the two amendments from the councilmembers across the dais so I want to make sure we get the opportunity before we forget. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Does anyone want to make an additional amendment? Ms. Kitchen? >> Kitchen: I just wanted to suggest that the other two amendments, if they're acceptable to councilmember troxclair, she could just accept them, just like she just accepted the mayor's. >> Alter: I don't know if the community heard them. >> Mayor? Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Tovo: Before we move much beyond the mayor's amendment, city manager, just to circle back again, since the direction is to fund that at 15%, I want to be clear that that -- I certainly would anticipate that that would be one of the options coming back to us. >> Oh, yes. Yes. >> Tovo: Okay. Just checking. Thanks very much. >> Mayor Adler: I think the important thing is just to make sure that we have -- we know what the ramifications are of doing that before we pass the budget in the final form. Want to make an amendment? So the two amendments have been made. The first one is, let's do councilmember Houston's amendment. You want to read it? >> Houston: Be it resolved by the city council of the city of Austin, the city manager is directed to collaborate with Travis county to explore and evaluate opportunities to include the Travis county exposition center as a venue funded with the local -- with hotel occupancy tax revenues or other revenues and include a report on those in the documents provided to the council by September 28th. [9:39:07 PM] And I offer this because we received a letter from the commissioners court on the 31st, and I don't even remember what today is. It's, I guess, today. [Laughter]. 31st, right, that talks about that the Travis county commissioners court unanimously favors and has requested that with the city council on one or more projects to be funded with hotel taxes. We're particularly interested in investments in eastern Travis county, including the Travis county expo center and adjacent properties, as well as other possibilities. This will just get them to have the conversation, and Ms. Fireside is already trying to start those conversations as we speak. >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to this being included? Hearing none, it's included as well. Ms. Alter? >> Alter: Thank you. So my amendment is to add a whereas clause that reads -- the last whereas clause at the end of that section. It would read: Whereas approval of this item does not preclude the opportunity to implement other visitor impact task force recommendations or to expand the Austin convention center at a future time, now, therefore. So I think this clause clarifies what was the intention of the resolution, was to make a decision to create a bucket, which we will then decide on the final allocation of 15% in our budget process, and it does not exempt us from having to move forward with other parts of the visitor impact task force report, such as the equity recommendations or the money that is not collected at this time and the many other things that were included in that report that this resolution is not at this time tackling. To this being included? Yes, Mr. Flannigan. [9:41:10 PM] >> Flannigan: I'm just -- I don't know the whereas clause is worth it that much, but I think it predetermines the outcome of the mayor's amendment, so it's -- I don't think its an appropriate whereas. Because we don't know -- because we haven't gotten the staff analysis, we don't know what opportunities it may or may not preclude. That's my only comment. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar. >> Casar: Mayor, upon first reading of this whereas clause, I was thinking similar things to councilmember Flannigan, but actually approval of this item does not actually change anything in the budget so actually approval of this item does not actually preclude the options. It would be if -- if this was actually us changing the budget, then it would do so. So approval of this item is just asking the city manager ultimately to prepare those things for the budget, which I know is what everybody was talking about at the beginning, and I'm glad that we've all landed there. And so it seems clear that approval of this item doesn't change anything in the budget, so it doesn't actually preclude any options. It would be in the budget phase where we would have to figure out what the pros and cons of any decision would be. And I'm glad that we're looking into something that's really important to everybody. >> Mayor Adler: Any objections to this being included? Hearing none, it's included. Okay. Let's take a vote then on this item number 60. Any discussion before we vote? Then let's take a vote. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Those opposed? It's unanimous on the dais. >> Thank you, Jesus. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: We have some people here that are signed up to speak on 101. I don't know if anyone wants to. [Laughter] But if someone does, I'm going to give them the opportunity to be able to do that. Is there anyone here that wants to speak on 101? Okay. Then I'm going to call some names. Hold on. Hold on. [9:43:11 PM] >> Troxclair: And mayor, before we move on to the next item, I want to give a quick shout out to Michael and the staff members of all the co-sponsors, they have really put in endless hours of time and energy into this item and really digging into the details and trying to come up with a consequences of what's the best thing within the law, and I just am so grateful for his help and his expertise and the collaboration between my co-sponsors and their staffs. So thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: I'm going to give people -- people the chance to speak. Is Gus peña here? Is George Cofer here? Is David king here? You want to speak on 101? Is Anita vialobos here? She donated time. No? Is Michael Joe Newman here? You have three minutes. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. Thank you for passing item 60. I appreciated working on it, I appreciate councilmember kitchen's approach that these -- both of these items can be considered. They're not mutually exclusive and I think there's value in both of these. I do want to point out that, you know, we're talking about in item 101, establishing this tourist public improvement district, and -- for the good night hotels and I'm just wondering is there some way to make sure if we take this step forward, those hotels can start paying their employees living wages, are they going to benefit from this? You know, I think it's important. And, you know, those hotels in downtown are using our unfair commercial property tax appraisal system to get big reductions in their commercial property tax appraisals. And in 2016, 11 downtown hotels received a total reduction of more than $225 million in appraised value. [9:45:12 PM] That equates to over 5 million in unrealized commercial property tax revenue for aid, the city of Austin, Travis county, and central health and ACC. And in 2017, 19 downtown hotels received a total reduction of more than $246 million in appraised value for the hotels. That equates to over 5.5 million in unrealized commercial property tax revenue for aid, the city of Austin, Travis county, central health, and ACC. And we know how badly these entities need this money. So they get to take advantage of this unfair system. So how are they going to come back and help our community? What are they going to do? How is this money -- how is this investment, how is this program going to help them? I'm just asking that if they're going to be part of this, they step up and help us solve these problems in our community, that they pay living wages to their employees. The hotel -- hotel maids and housekeeping, cleaners, earn a mean hourly wage of $9.66 in Texas. The poverty wage in Austin, Texas is $11 an hour. The living wage for a family of four is $25.93. So what are we going to do? What are they going toed to help solve that problem, with their own employees? And did they help us out when we needed support for the linkage fees in the legislature? Did they help us out when we needed the support for the workers defense better standard for hotels? Where were they? I'm not saying they weren't but I'm asking they step up, do their part, and they help our community solve these problems. If we're going to help them out with this pid, this tourism improvement district, then they need to step up and help us out, too. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: George Cofer. Girard Kinney is on deck. Three minutes. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem, council, city manager. [9:47:12 PM] I'm George Cofer. I'm here tonight as a citizen, not representing any group or organization. I attended, I believe, all but one of the visitor impact task force meetings. I, too, extend my grateful thanks to you for creating that good process and to the folks who served on that task force for the good work they did. I support 101. I am blessed -- this is is a dangerous thing to say, not to be an attorney, but nevertheless, I have worked really hard to understand everything that was being said and presented by city legal and city finance at those task force meetings. I visited with many of the stakeholders, 101, and I am convinced that the way this works best is through the downtown puzzle, and the way we serve as many -- the most citizens and interest groups in making good things happen, is through the downtown puzzle and 101. I am not speaking against item 60. I am saying I think 101 is the better way forward. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Before Mr. Kinney talks, is forest priest here? Is Joe Catherine Quinn here? Is Scott Blaylock here? Okay. You had some donated time from Robert Watson. Is he here? No. So you'll of us have three just have three minutes. Three minutes. >> Three minutes. Thank you, sir. Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers. Thank you for the really earnest effort you're making with all of this. I really do appreciate it. I've been here since 4 o'clock, and I -- I'm amazed at the depth that you've -- that you've -- that you've taken this -- taken this to, so I appreciate it. [9:49:18 PM] And I appreciate -- I really appreciate what Ted sift said about the fact that -- I think we're all trying to get the same place, and mayor, I know you are, and mayor pro tem, I believe you are as well. So I'm a lifelong austinite, architect. I was very involved in the placement of the convention center, where it is now, as opposed to where it was going to be placed west of congress avenue, which would have been pretty much of a disaster. And the proposal to expand the convention center, the arguments against it were all made back then for the first convention center, too, and they -- they have no more merit now than they were then. We need to expand our convention center for some very obvious reasons, and certainly the visitors task force which I also attended and testified before, came to that same conclusion. But as an architect and planner, the way that we do it is very important. No one has spoken about that, so let me just make a few very basic points. I serve on the pedestrian advisory council. We talk about pedestrianism all over the city. But downtown is very -- it's congested, it's -- which is a good thing for a downtown to be, but for the pedestrian, it's very, very important that the buildings that we build are pedestrian-oriented buildings. The convention center that we have, although it's well-placed, is not designed to be pedestrian-friendly. It does not have uses at the ground floor that are retail uses. As the visitors task force deliberated, I think they came around to some of the things that -- some of the things the citizens were saying, which is that this convention center needs to be an Austin convention center, very much different than just about any convention center in the United States. [9:51:26 PM] The streets themselves need to be the paths between the various spaces in the convention center, and those streets need to have businesses along them that are local businesses and that are pedestrian- oriented. And I think that second street and third street can go through, perhaps -- perhaps as shared streets, and it's an exciting opportunity if we do it right. [Buzzer sounds] And by the way, with ground leases, we don't have to give up the taxes on the property, as someone suggested we did. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. You have three minutes, I think. And then is Jay Allen here? J. J. Allen? Ann Howard? You have three minutes. Sir. >> Good evening, mayor Adler and city council members. My name's Scott Blaylock, manager. J. With Marriott down here. I also work for white lodging. We manage 23 hotels around downtown Austin, north and south, and out by the airport. So there's been a lot of talk recently and over the last few years about what is the impact of the convention center, what does it do for hotels outside of downtown and businesses outside of downtown. So because we manage 23 hotels around Austin, I thought I would share some of our observations and findings of what we know. I asked our revenue management team to do a deep dive on the data with me. So we've done that, and looked at this. So we took some averages of the -- of our hotels and our numbers to determine what the impact of the convention center is for our white lodging property, citywide. I'd like to note that 25% of our hotels are downtown, and the other 75% are, you know, north, south, and other parts of town. [9:53:30 PM] So in our office, we maintain a calendar of events, and it shows us what is happening at the convention center, so we took any day where we knew the convention center was busy and had a you mean can of groups that averaged a thousand rooms on peak for the night or greater. So we compared the days. There's 114 days of the year that there was a thousand-room peak group or more at the convention center. So of those 114 days in 2016, our collective portfolio of hotels ran 82.7% occupancy. When we looked at the same portfolio on days that there wasn't something happening at the convention center, our collective average occupancy was 73.8. From so when the convention center is busy, we have a 13.8 premium in occupancy points, compared to dates when there's nothing happening at the convention center. So if you take those 571 extra rooms, which is what that 13 points adds up to, in our portfolio, times 114 days annually, the convention center being busy adds another $12.7 million, just to the revenues of our portfolio. Now, our portfolio of hotels represents about 12% of all the rooms in Austin. So if you take this methodology and compared it to the other 88% of the hotels that we don't manage, and we did that and took -- you know, there's a quarter of those hotels that are downtown. This is of all 36,000 rooms in Austin. A quarter of the hotels are downtown. Three-fourths of them are outside of downtown. And we took the rates typically that are our out of downtown hotels run and applied that to 75% of the rooms outside of downtown, and then of the 25% of the hotels downtown, we took our rate of the hotels that we operate downtown. And when we did that, it comes to 548,000 more room nights on those 148 -- in those 114 days because the convention center is busy. [9:55:37 PM] [Buzzer sounds] And when you take that in revenue across the year, it's 90 million more dollars when that convention center is busy that is generated to the market of all the hotels in Austin. So, now -- and that's only 114 days where it's really busy. There's other dates where there's not -- where the convention center is busy, but they may not have a thousand-room group in that convention center. So this idea of the convention center being only good for downtown, you can see by what it does to our portfolio of hotels -- because we've got the data to show it, and again, this doesn't include tax impact or alcohol tax, property tax, and all the other things that go with visitors coming in, to not just downtown, but to the rest of Austin. So the impact of our convention center is powerful, all over Austin. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Houston: Mayor, may I ask Mr. Blaylock a question? It was very interesting when you described the number of hotels that you have in downtown and then the 75% that are outside of downtown. And if I remember correctly, you said 75% is in other parts of Austin southwest and north. You completely left out east Austin. I've got super 8 on east 12th street and super 8 on 51st and 183. That's all the hotels I have in district 1. So next time you're planning one, even a micro one, think about east Austin. >> It's a good point. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Hang on one second. Is Caitlin Whittington here? You'll be at the other podium. >> I'm Ann Howard, executive director of the home homelessness coalition. From the bottom of my heart I want to thank each of you for the good work you've done today. [9:57:38 PM] We've had a works program passed to help folks get off the street who might be panhandling or just need a job that are experiencing homelessnessness. We also -- you passed another initiative to get the city looking at how do we engage the public, the broader group folks, to engage them in ending homelessness. And today you've really struggled with how to find a dedicated funding stream. So I thank each of you. I know that mayor pro tem has been working with us, if not daily, weekly, I've been out, in councilmember kitchen's district with her, with meetings with all kinds of folks. And before he was elected, mayor Adler came to our office and said, if I was the mayor, what could I do to help Austin end homelessness? So, mayor, we thank you. And we're all in this to find that dedicated funding stream. And I look forward to the budget discussions. I'm sharing my time with Susan Mcdow. >> Thank you. I'm Susan Mcdow, I'm executive director of life works. Our piece in this mission is working with vulnerable transition age youth who are facing homelessness. And I too want to thank you, especially for your support of 103 and the incredible innovation you're considering in front of you that is incredibly complex. Obviously, we are here to be the voice of the need for the dedicated funding stream for homelessness. And by way of encouraging some momentum on that, I would just like to -- to impress upon you that despite the fact that homelessness is one of our community's most pressing humanitarian and economic issues, it is also an issue where we are seeing incredible momentum and potential in our impact. Together, Mcdow, together we work to end veterans homelessness. Together we are creating momentum that is getting national attention on to ending youth homelessness. [9:59:40 PM] We know what works. We know what works on the level of helping individual people, and we know what works on the systems level to solving problems. And making -- bringing a dedicated funding stream to fruition will help us. We have the knowledge. We have the leadership alignment at -- both at the ground level and the systems level. This will help us build the systems and capacity. Again, not just to serve more people, but to solve this problem for Austin. So I thank you for your hard work on this. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Cheers & applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Is drew Mcquade here? What about Peter mullock? And then -- there's Peter. Go ahead, sir. >> Mayor, members of the council, thank you for your time this evening. And I'd like to thank you all for your efforts to further tourism and the tourism -- apologies, cat linwoodington, workforce a member of the visitor task force representing the music industry, I'm an event producer and stakeholder in Austin's tourism economy here. Thank you for your efforts to further tourism and the industries that drive tourism. A couple numbers about that industry, 120,000 people according to the chamber of commerce working in the hospitality industry here in Austin. While the hot tax did double over the last five years according to the revenue from the hospitality sector has seen a 150% growth over that same period, that's sales tax to the general fund. Our time with the task force we worked and created a balanced set of recommendations that helped to address the needs of all the stakeholders that were at the table. They presented a path forward that fulfilled a critical need for scalability for tourism here in Austin. My hope is that we continue to support the robust leisure and hospitality sector that encompasses 12% of Austin's workforce. [10:01:45 PM] Our recommendations were created to facilitate legal use that's in way that makes sense for Austin's tourism. Representation that's sought to create sustainable funding mechanismses for commercial music and historic preservation. Our findings were that the only way to find new funding for Austin commercial music sector from the hotel occupancy taxes is by leaving the additional 351 occupancy taxes set forth in the task force recommendations. I do not see anyway forward under the proposed item number 60 today to find that same funding for commercial music. Under existing hotel occupancy taxes. The proposed uses set forth in the mayor's downtown plan do encompass all of these recommendations of the task force. In addition by working with the hotels to establish a tourism public improvement district it also creates a framework to help address the issues of homelessness that we have here in Austin. In summary there are four needs that the proposed 101 -- this proposal item 101 seeks to address in a legal way in alignment with the recommendations of the task force. Continuing to fully fund cultural arts, visit Austin, and the convention center to ensure their good work continues into the future, accessibility the debt service on the convention center in order to realize new opportunities for expansion in the near term, create much needed sustainable legal funding for historic preservation and commercial music in Austin and create funding opportunities for the mexican-american cultural center palm school all recommendations of the task force. I thank you for your continued commitment to Austin tourism and the cultural elements that make Austin a great place to live and visit and your continued attention to this nuanced conversation. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Is Mr. -- Is Denise oldsman here? [10:03:47 PM] Is Thompson Shure here? You have six minutes. >> I don't think I'll need all six but thank you. Good evening, my name is Jim Mcquade, thank you so much for the opportunity to be here and to speak before you on this incredibly important topic, and I'm not used to being up this late, so thank you for that, too, as well. I am speaking in my association role this evening though. The hotel community followed closely the work of the visitor impact task force. I myself was asked to speak at a panel at one of the meetings, one of the task force meetings. And I really want to thank the members for their hard work and commitment to tackling a very complicated, complex set of issues. It certainly was not an easy task. But I think the result of the task force was well worth their work. The task force recommendations much of our community significantly. Passage of this item lays the grok for the solution to the downtown puzzle and our hotelliers stand ready to do our part in helping fulfill this plan. The group recommendations do include an expansion of the convention center as an economic platform which would result in increased hotel tax revenues in future years, producing funds for community initiatives that include addressing homelessness. At the end of the day, though, our industry is about creating jobs and generating much needed tax revenues for the city. The tourism industry in Austin alone employs approximately 125,000 of our citizens, that's family, friends, neighbors. Our industry offers jobs up and down the employment ladder as well as excellent opportunities for career advancement, and that's in all sections of the city. I myself started in this industry washing dishes, and then bussing tables, and eventually moving to the front desk, that led me to management positions and career growth from there. So in closing I and our entire association fully support item 101. We believe that it best helps achieve those overall goals and recommendations of the visitor impact task force as well as creating new revenues for other important community initiatives. [10:05:59 PM] I think it has the support of a broad coalition of community advocates, a long list, as well as strong support from many in of the arts business, hotel and music communities. So for these reasons we are supportive of 101. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Council, it's after 10:00. Without objection, we're going to extend. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Mullin, you have time donated by Melissa aiella and John rigden. You have seven minutes. >> I won't take it all, I promise. My name is Peter Mullin, the CEO of the waller creek conservancy. We are the city's nonprofit partner in the restoration, revitalization and long-term maintenance and subtenants of weak chain of parks from the lake to 15th street. I know many of you are familiar with the project and are long-time supports of the project so thank you very much for that support. I know we're going to get the chance to talk about 101 at greater length so I don't want to get into too much detail. I look forward to those conversations. I think it obviously -- it represents a game changer for waller creek simply. You know, we've been working on waller creek in the city for a long, long time. There have been a series of plans, and the current plan is the evolution of those plans. And I think we have the opportunity to do something to get this done now, and it's potentially a remarkable achievement for the city, and I really hope we have the opportunity to fulfill that opportunity. There's a second reason why I'm excited about 101, is that it's not just about waller creek. It's about how it fits into a much more diverse set of community needs which actually are remarkably aligned despite their appears to the contrary at first blush. You know, the homeless situation in the city has reached a crisis point. [10:07:59 PM] I really admire this council for taking on the challenge of trying to solve that crisis and address it. I think the initiatives to support the cultural arts, red river cultural district, the mac, palm school, the list goes on and on, all those reinforce one another and I think this is a case where the whole is really greater than the sum of its parts so I really am excited to get into it. I really appreciate the council's interest and willingness to take on something of this complexity. I think that the rewards for the city and community could be enormous and I look forward to it. So thank you. [ Applause ] >> Houston: Excuse me, mayor. So we don't have a chance to vote on the -- going past 10:00? >> Mayor Adler: If there was an objection on the dais, we could call a vote. Otherwise there was a quorum present and no one objected. So I'm going to proceed. Does someone want a motion? All right. We'll do a motion. Anyone want to move to extend the time? Moved by Mr. Flannigan. Councilmember Houston seconds. Any discussion? Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed. It's unanimous on the dais with mayor pro tem off. >> I'm abstaining because we have a budget hearing but otherwise I don't think we shoulding doing work. >> Mayor Adler: So noted. It passes. We're going to keep going. You guys have been here for a long time. Steven sturchin? What about reverend Dickenson? What about Jill Ramirez? Come on down? What about Cynthia Valdez? [10:10:01 PM] No. Isabel Lopez? No. Cindy Lowe? John Howard, Tina cannon. Stephanie Warner. Stephanie -- Warner? Mike canati? Bobby lavinski. You'll come up in a second. >> First of all, thank you for allowing us to speak and for extending the time so that we could finish speaking. Yes, I am here, as mentioned earlier, chair of the Latino quality of life. And we did pass this resolution based on of course thinking that it would be tied to equity. And the reasons we felt strongly that the puzzle would address equity is because we know that it would grow the pie that we would have a lot more money to address a lot of the issues in our community, especially funding for the mac, funding for palm school. It addresses serious social issues. It produces community benefits, including historic preservation. And all of this without affecting our local taxes because it uses a hotel tax. So but I do want to thank you all for spending so much time really working on this issue and trying to find common ground. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Mr. Canati. >> Hello again, Mike canati. As I said I was at the task force meetings and just wanted to assure you watching them deliberate they really worked very hard in attempting to craft and grow the pie strategy. [10:12:02 PM] They focused on historic preservation, is it a legal way to benefit parks and other projects outside of downtown, but rather than set up a scrum between the different stakeholders where historic tried to claw funds out of the music or the tourism industry, they found a way to raise all votes. So it may not be the time for water analogies, but I'm going to borrow one from the mayor's state of the union a little while ago. He said if Austin is a river flowing and even growing with our many visitors, now is a time to harness the growth from the hot tax to power solutions and significant community benefits through the increased hot fund. That could go to our general tourism and community assets like live music, historic preservation, Barton springs and anything else y'all can fit in there. Thank you is. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] Geez. Sorry. [ Laughter ] I think we called Rebecca Reynolds, Natalie Kennedy, Jeff Travillion, Scott [indiscernible]. You have three minutes. Then Sergio Vella, is he here? You have three minutes. Before you start, Dan welas, you'll be next. >> Thank you, I'm Scott Joslin, still president of the hotel association. I'm here in support of item 101. In our estimates it's the best approach to implement the visitor task force recommendations. We think it creates a long-term win-win provision and scenario for the city for all the interest groups that were comprised on that task force including arts, historical, parks, music, public safety, lodging and all the other visitor task force representatives. Under 101 and those task force recommendations we would be able to fully fund historical restoration at 15% of the total hotel tax I believe within one year implementation of a convention center financing concept. [10:14:06 PM] We would have a larger yield for arts, larger yield for historical preservation because you're taking 15% of a 9% pool as opposed to 15% of a 7% pool. You would also accomplish all of the goals of that task force including stabilization of funding for services for the homeless, long-term funding for key projects such as [indiscernible] And other facility improvements, higher yield for the arts, historical, viability for the hotel industry marketing efforts, viability for the convention center and expansion of the convention center to allow more economic activity. Thank you for your consideration and all your hours of input. I hope that we can end up creating a win-win that accomplishes everyone's goals on the dais. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: After Mr. Welas, Kathy [indiscernible]. >> I'm donate be my time to [indiscernible]. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Alice Mcgee, Steven stout, Ralph Webster, Rick Hernandez. Mr. Welas. >> Mayor Adler and members of the council, my name is Dan welas. I'm a business attorney. And I'm speaking on behalf of myself, but I'm also carrying messages from Gary Keller, who y'all have all heard has decided the best that he can to take popular music under his wing and help it recover from a number of years of decline. The Austin music census revealed that decline, and he took it upon himself to begin helping ham Sims, the Austin music foundation, and black forget with some of their overhead expenses so the dollars they raise can more effectively help the musicians in Austin. [10:16:22 PM] He rescued a venue, but as he pointed out in a meeting with mayor Adler, he can't -- he can't rescue all the venues. He can't do that. And so he asked that the city have skin in the game with respect to music. And I believe that part of the mayor's puzzle is that skin in the game, to begin providing forthright and reliable assistance for popular music citywide. Gary took the time to get himself educated. One of the things that he knew is that there was a -- there was much about music that he didn't know and much about the problems in Austin that he didn't understand, so he interviewed many, many scores of people, musicians, venue operators, business people, political leaders about this problem. And at the top of everyone's discussion was the impact of homelessness. But amazingly, they weren't selfish in their discussion about homelessness. They were genuinely moved at the unbelievably depraved condition that the homeless live in in Austin, Texas. And the incredible human tragedy that it is everyday, and it is worsening every day. There are criminals that pray upon the homeless and those criminals are impacting the downtown. And it is truly an emergency. The mayor's puzzle is the only strategy, the first and the only real strategy to comprehensively deal with that very, very entrenched problem. And we commend it to you. We believe that the spirit is the spirit of Austin throughout 101. [10:18:25 PM] It represents the very spirit that each of you exercises in your role as representatives for this town. [Buzzer sounding] Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] After Rick Hernandez is Susan Mcdow here? Drew Mcquade? What about Adam Kahn? What about Heather pots? Ted siff? You'll be up next. Oops, okay, hang on. Adam is coming in. >> Three minutes? >> Mayor Adler: Three minutes -- actually, you have six minutes. >> I got six minutes. Won't take that long. Mayor Adler, councilmembers, my name is Rick Hernandez. While I sit as the chair of the advisory board at the mac I'm addressing you as a concerned citizen. Thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank you tore your arduous work on this issue. I come to encourage you to support the downtown puzzle item 101. As you know over the last two years the mac developed a master plan for its completion. The public aspect of the plan is underway, being conducted by architects. Next spring the process will be complete and the next step will be the development of schematic drawings. To that end it's important to identify the resources for the macc's completion. I believe it is imperative you look at new, alternative ways of supporting the completion of this landmark facility. It is my opinion that the proposed increase in the hotel-motel tax is a reasonable and practical way of accomplishing this task. Joseph pine's assertion about the experience economy continue to ring true in Austin. On any given day our city is filled with visitors from every corner of the globe due to the amenities and experiences we have created for our guests. [10:20:28 PM] The expansion of the convention center and the continued development of cultural attractions such as the mac, waller creek and hopefully the palm school are a must if we are going to continue to make Austin a prime destination. Similarly, there needs to be investment in resolving homeless issues so our visitors are safe and feel comfortable walking our streets. My primary concern is the completion of the mac and possibly a coordinated venture to develop the palm school into a companion cultural facility. Imagine for a moment the Rainey street historical district with an anchor tenant on each end, the mac on one side, palm school on the other? The mchas the potential to be a primary heritage tourism attraction and destination. The Latino arts residency program is producing high quality award winning work. The mac and Austin can be on par with the Mexican museum in San Francisco's mission district, a 54,000 square foot facility that has created 43 story condo tower above, the New York museum that draws 54 -- that attracts hundreds of thousands of visitors each year and the cultural center in San Antonio, a multidistrict cultural arts facility that presents an international accordion festival, an international book fair, an international film festival and draws thousands of visitors from throughout the world, making it one of the city's five major cultural organizations. The palm school can become an educational facility that houses an arts academy, multiple museums that serve as a gateway to the Rainey street historic district, celebrating the cultural history of the area and our city. The collective education programs can foster individuals who eventually move out -- move on and become cultural ambassadors for Austin and the facilities in which their dreams and aspirations came true. [10:22:38 PM] One might ask why this is important? The notion of belonging to a specific territory forms a major component of collective identity. While the Rainey street of old no longer exists the area is still deeply interdivined with ethnic specific identities, identities that favor trust and civic and moral commitment among the Latino community. Thanks to identification to a common shared space. The mac plays an important role in strengthening horizontal networks resulting in productive and socially conscious citizens. We have within our grasp the opportunity to make Austin a true ar tick tis cultural and heritage tourism destination. It can only happen with vision and leadership. It's time to meet the challenges of the future by finding innovative ways to resource this. I believe the downtown puzzle plan is an appropriate beginning. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Siff and then Mr. Kahn. Mr. Siff. >> Mayor, council, it's my privilege to follow Dan welas and his representation of support of commercial music by the private sector. The presentation you just heard about the creative nonprofit leverage that can be achieved in the visitor impact task force recommendation with regard to completion of the mac master plan. I'm privileged to stand before you as board chair of the shoal creek converge, one of 12 conservancies, parks and historic preservation organization that's as a coalition made presentations to the visitor impact task force and happily achieved our goals with regard to the visitor impact task force recommendations. There's so much leverage that can be gained by at least considering and hopefully adopting the majority if not all of the visitor impact task force recommendations that I just wanted to bring that -- highlight that aspect that maybe hasn't been dwelt on that much. [10:24:56 PM] There's not just the public sector money through increased tax revenue that can be generated, but the private sector leverage for many areas of the community that can also be leveraged as a result of your deep consideration after you pass the fiscal '18 budget and maybe hopefully get a breather before September 28. Thank you for your consideration, and I'm happy if you have them to answer any questions. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] Is Larry acres here? Is Charlie BETTs here? Is Roy Whaley here? I think you're our last speaker, Mr. Kahn. >> Thank you. Adam Kahn, musings testifying in opposition to item number 101. I have a number of things that worry me about this plan. I'll kind of run through them. In the hotel occupancy taxes, we just had a long discussion on the last item that we considered about impact on tourism. I don't know that this will necessarily have a hugely fatal impact on our tourism industry by increasing the cost of staying in Austin if you're traveling from out of town, but it's not going to help. So that's item number 1. Item number 2, I don't think we need to expand the convention center. I think that this is a -- expanding the convention center is a fool's errand. You've heard a lot of testimony and people have spoken already about how convention businesses nationwide are essentially flat and cities all around the country are throwing more and more and more money at convention centers. So that's my concern there. I mean, Vegas is apparently going to build a football stadium adjoining their convention center. [10:26:59 PM] So please don't do that. We already have a football stadium in Austin. And -- but, you know, that's where things are going. So who is to say that we get this done and then all of a sudden five to seven years from now we're not looking at, hey, we need to expand the convention center all over again. And finally I have to comment on tax increment financing. Tax increment financing taxes everyone to give subsidies to the politically favored. This is a wildly unfair process. Frankly, I think we need to abolish the practice in its entirety at the state level, but that's obviously another conversation for another day. But I really would -- don't want to see tax increment financing expanded at the municipal level here in Austin, and those are my concerns with the issue. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor, I'm Charles BETTs. I'm serving this year as the chair of the Austin history center association. And on behalf of that board, I wanted to simply express our -- we were very favorably impressed with the report of your task force, and we felt that the item 101 pretty much embodied most of those recommendations. So we therefore even though our specific interest is more in historic preservation, we think the possibility of substantial community benefits that are extremely important gives us a real opportunity to enhance those funds available for those purposes. I simply wanted to inform you of our support of 101, and I compliment the council for deliberating further. We would -- it would be a wonderful thing to see an 11-0 vote. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [10:29:02 PM] I think those are all the speakers that we had signed up. Council, as I told you earlier, I wasn't going to be asking for a vote on 101 today. We'll set that for a meeting in September. I want to make sure that everybody gets all the information they need if you're lacking or can't get information on this that you think would be helpful in your deliberations, your consideration, if you could let me know by message post, I'll make sure that you have that information in order for you to be able to deliberate at the end of September. Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: So, mature, we had a very long work session the other day, and as I mentioned earlier, nearly seven hours were spent talking with our staff about those different financial options. So -- and some of the questions reraised I think they need to provide us additional information with. So, yeah, I absolutely think we're going to need to have more conversation. I'm not sure what the best mechanism. Are you saying that you intend to bring it for vote and we only have one meeting scheduled on September 28. >> Mayor Adler: That's correct. >> Tovo: Your intention, to bring it on that date? Because then I would suggest we try to have a council conversation between now and then or something along those lines. For the public's benefit, I think it's fair to say if you didn't watch those seven hours, you know, there are lots of questions. I mean, some of you have participated in the visitor task force. I know the mayor has worked with staff and has perhaps a better understanding of some of these financial options, but there were some things that come up on Tuesday that the waller creek tif piece that we had hoped would fund homelessness is more restrictive than I think some of us thought and it doesn't sound as if it necessarily can fund housing. It may only be able to fund temporary shelter. There are certain ways that I believe we can fund the macc, but I think we need to really understand what that means and does that fit the mission of how the mac moves forward into the future. [10:31:11 PM] It certainly may, but I think we -- we absolutely need -- you know, I've probably spent, you know, as much time on some of these issues as anybody up here, and I can tell you I have -- I have a slew of questions about them. So I'm not sure that me asking questions of you on the message board is really going to get to it. I really need some significant time with the staff and I would just ask that, if my colleagues feel the same way, that we really schedule a work session or something along those lines to have an opportunity to really spend some significant time on them. These are very complicated financial tools, and we've only had one -- one substantive discussion about those. >> Pool: Mayor. >> Mayor Adler: To be clear, I wasn't suggesting at all that you would just ask me questions and I'd be able to give you answers. Mostly I was saying if there was a need for information I would help make sure those answers, however they're obtained are obtained. I think having a work session on this makes perfect sense. Yes, Ms. Pool. >> Pool: One of the things I wanted to make a point of before we leave tonight and to carry this forward in our continuing deliberations about the convention center and the hotel occupancy tax funding the various mechanisms that have been raised and discussed and specifically the visitor impact task force and the report that was written and submitted, I wanted to make it really clear, we did receive a briefing on the visitor impact -- visitor impact task force, and we have the report, which unfortunately it isn't also on the website, so I hope staff will upload it to the website so it can be with all the other documents from the task force. But it's not -- we didn't approve it or adopt it. And that's not unusual. We had the Austin energy update to the generation and climate plan, and I chair that council committee, and we brought that report forward from a task force, work group, that had done similar, very complicated work over similar period of time and there were strong supporting -- there was a strong community in support of that report as well. [10:33:25 PM] We didn't adopt that either. We did move forward on some of the recommendations, and then we added to them to strengthen them. So I don't think that -- I don't want to leave the impression that when we do a citizen commission task force work group that it automatically means that everything that is recommended will always be adopted. It gives us a template and choices and additional direction. Sometimes we want to dig into things more than we already have. Some things are feasible. Some things are not feasible. But a recommendation in a report is another starting place for additional conversation. So we often take up the recommendations from task forces, but they're not -- that's not a lead pipe certainty. And I did want to and hopefully the report will be posted -- I couldn't find it on the website for the visitor impact task force, although it had a lot of other good information on it, but this report isn't. And I just wanted to commend this report, especially the first few pages executive summary, because there's a comprehensive litigation of all the recommendations. And there are a lot of recommendations in here that we haven't talked about tonight. The ones that you've heard are a short list of all that are in here. There's a lot more. And I don't want us, through our deliberations here, to say the only recommendations that we might take up for additional consideration are the ones that we've talked about tonight. So I would ask the community to go and look at this and see everything else that's in here. And think about it. We also really have to dig into the financing mechanisms for a tourist public improvement district. It's not clear to me how that mechanism would really function, and we've heard a couple of different estimates for how money would be collected and dispersed and I don't think there's any clarity around that either. [10:35:27 PM] But entering into that kind of a complicated endeavor, that kind of a financing mechanism will take considerable amount of thought, I think, for all of us to be sure that we're doing the right thing opinion so I say all of that, and then I say thank you, everybody who has been here tonight for all of your dedication, all of the effort and the thought and the inspiration that you put into all of your testimony, and that goes out also to the folks that have had to go home. I think we all wanting to home, too. So I'll just close by saying we really, really do appreciate every ounce of energy and effort that you bring to this chamber every week when we have meetings. It matters a lot to us and it helps us to find the best solution to really complicated -- complicated issues at the beginning of the evening tonight it looked like we were at opposite ends of a continuum and we ended up aligned, and that was a very strong vote really proud of that. And y'all helped us get there. And I thank the mayor for helping bring that alignment to this dais as well as and also to his staff. Councilmember troxclair's staff has also been extraordinarily helpful to those of us who worked diligent -- yeah you know what I'm trying to say with her as well. So thank you all. We're not done. We'll be working on this some more. But I think in the end we'll have the right solution and the right outcome. For everybody in our community. >> Renteria: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Renteria: I also want to thank everyone for coming out and staying late with us, and I really want to thank the mayor for bringing this resolution up. You know, we have -- we have an opportunity here to -- you know, depending on the percentage of -- that we -- if it's allocated, either 15 or zero, we have an opportunity here to raise $65.9 million for homeless. [10:37:40 PM] We have an ability to raise $36.3 million for art on top of what we already give them. You know, if we -- there's two different scenarios, there's a B and C. If we do C, we have an ability to raise $162 million for historic preservation. So there's a lot of opportunity here that money these projects that we just have been looking at and we have -- have done all type of studies, and they're just sitting on the shelf because of lack of funding. And we have an ability now to, you know, raise anywhere between $228 million or $323.5 million, depending on the percentage. So this is one of these great opportunities that, you know, I really want to thank you for bringing this up, mayor. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor? >> Kitchen: I was just going to close our conversation on this. And so we'll look forward to setting a work session. I think that's what I heard, right? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Do you have a script for this? [Off mic] 101 to the September meeting. Is there any objection? Ms. Kitchen seconds that. Any objection? It's postponed until the September 28 meeting. Okay. That gets us now to -- thank you, everyone. And you don't have to leave us if you don't want to. [ Laughter ] [10:39:40 PM] All right. This is item -- agenda item 96, which is the second hearing to receive public comment on the budget. We're going to take up this item 96 to receive public comment on the Austin's 2017-18 public budget. We will close the public comment at the end of this meeting. We are scheduled to adopt the budget on September 11, 2017, if we do not adopt the budget on September 11 we'll continue the budget adoption portion of the hearing to September 12-13, if needed. We will now call speakers to the podium to speak to us on the budget. >> Kitchen: Mr. Mayor, I have a quick question. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: It looks like -- and maybe I've got this wrong, but it looks like maybe 97 just has three speakers? Maybe we should let them go? >> Mayor Adler: They've all been sitting here waiting. Any one person has been waiting as long as everybody else. >> Kitchen: Just pointing that out. >> Mayor Adler: Bob batland will be the first person to speak. Is Dorothy Doolittle here? You're donating time. You're going to have then five minutes. Is J. Ana Guiterrez here? You'll be at the other podium if you'd come forward please? You'll have three minutes to speak. >> Mayor, council, I am Bob batland, leader with Austin interfaith, and I am a congregant at temple Beth shalom. A few years ago I had a discussion with rabbi Freeman. He asked me how I endured the frustration that comes from leading temple efforts in [indiscernible], which means repairing the world. I said I relied on the [indiscernible] Which tells us we're not required to finish the work but we're required to try. Repairing the world is a tall order. Austin interfaith taught me it is best to work locally and to do it one issue at a time. [10:41:43 PM] We have worked for living wages, and we have seen steady progress and allowing those who work for the city permanent, contract, part-time and temporary workers be able to afford to live in the city. We work to ensure that the city will not intentionally contribute to economic segregation and the displacement of residents by paying poverty wages. The city manager's proposal is not reasonable. It helps only eight permanent employees, leaving hundreds of temporary employees behind. It does not make progress towards achieving even a 2014 living wage by 2020. The budget goal for fy18 should be to pay at least $15 per hour to permanent -- to all workers. We've made significant progress towards repairing this corner of the world. Now is not the time to reverse course. There are thousands of unfilled jobs in health care, I.T., trades that offer good wages and career paths. Employers want to source their workforce locally. But need to fill the positions somehow. The jobs identified require associate-level degrees and/or carefully selected certifications. Capital idea has succeeded in the past and continues to succeed to place men and women living at or below 200% of poverty into skilled employment. Capital idea's strategic plan is to grow by a factor of ten by 2020. The proposed budget does not include the city's share of the funding meed to succeed. Capital idea is an exceptional record of moving people out of poverty into great careers, especially in nursing and I.T. It is currently serving a diverse group of 756 students. [10:43:47 PM] We have residents from every district, but especially the traditionally neglected people of the eastern crescent. Our students come into the program averaging under $11,000 per year. They leave with starting salaries averaging almost $41,000 in careers that offer outstanding earnings growth opportunities. Capital idea observes scholarships and wrap Ann support, the support starts before the first class and continues until the student is placed in a great job that helps address Austin's workforce needs. Capital idea's growing, despite flat funding from the city since fy16. The costs per successful student is falling. The city benefits by an improved tax base. Capital idea offers the best model to make progress towards the workforce master plan goal, placing 10,000 residents living at or below 200% of poverty into middle skill jobs by 2021. Perhaps someone can invent a bigger, better, cheaper program. Many have tried and failed. If there is a better program, invest in it now. Otherwise, please support our workforce plans with an additional 700,000 for capital idea. Now that would be a solid step towards [indiscernible]. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Melinda [indiscernible] Is Kevin foster here? Okay. Is -- you've had donated time from Kathy Mitchell. Is she here? Here? Kathy is here? Got you. Thank you. Sorry. Is Charles Moore here, chases Moore? Got it. You donated time as well. [10:45:47 PM] So you'll be at this podium in a moment. Please. >> Good evening, mayor, council. My name is J.J. Guiterrez, and you may recall that I was a 26 year city employee and I served proudly and greatly. I now serve as a board member of capital idea. I'd like to thank you for your continued support for capital idea. And request that you increase the budget amount so that the program can be expanded. Capital idea moves Austin area men and women from poverty into high paying jobs. We focus exclusively on specific degrees and certification that's allow residents to qualify for high-paying jobs and offer career growth opportunities. Our areas of focus are aligned with our regional workforce master plan. The recently released community workforce master plan identified the need for 750 new registered nurses per year, as well as the need for workers in the information technology arena. Increasing the scale of capital idea's processes can help fill that need. Our success is no accident. Capital idea has a process that recruits residents living at below -- at or below 200% poverty, evaluate their career choice, and help them adjust as needed. We test them for college readiness. We help them by offering an intense college help academy for those not ready. We also evaluate their needs for child care and transportation. We also provide a wrap-around support throughout their educational experience and we require a commitment from them as well. This upfront effort is then followed through services throughout the program -- throughout the time they're on our program. [10:47:48 PM] The services are tuned to the needs of our individuals, of each individual, and last until they are an appropriate job. Our students come from every district, but we more heavily support the traditionally underserved demographics. We are requesting an increase in budget dollars so that we can scale our program to meet the growing needs in our community. A recent study shows that every dollar invested in capital idea participants, taxpayers will see a five times greater return over the long run. Increasing the budget for capital idea not only helps more Austin residents become financially independent, also helps their families, but it also helps our community. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Before Mr. Foster speaks, is letie Ann wallford here? You'll be up next at this other podium. Sir. >> Good evening, my name is Kevin Michael foster. I'm a family member at the university of Texas, resident of the Mueller neighborhood and executive district of the institute for community and school partnerships are awakening. In a climate of economic uncertainty we look to see where and how municipal monies are spent and we make decisions. Austinites are awakening, and this is a beautiful thing because as austinites awaken to the fiscal process that's shape our city we set the conditions of possibility by which you can build the budget, build a better budget, but more important for the long run you can reform key aspects of the budget process that trap you in bad decisions. I'll focus on one area that is critical to restoring good fiscal practice. Specifically, the city should end the meet and confer process by which the police contract is developed. [10:49:54 PM] So what are the problems with the current process? I believe that you're aware of them, but also that we need to put them squarely in the public eye. Problem one, the starting point for the new contract is an already set sweetheart deal that has evolved over 20 years of meet and confer. The contract built upon with each new cycle costs the city dealer and includes precious little police accountability. Problem two, the meet and confer process is engaged between ostensibly buddies on the same side of the issue, with our assistant city manager, police chief and Austin police association, basically offering variations of the same perspective. Police there's are well represented effectively on both sides of the negotiating table. This is deeply problematic and ridiculously favors the police. The voices of citizens that we've heard year after year after year, including voices that led to this meet and confer process are discounted, be they from performance groups, thoughtful citizens or task force, they're simply not meaningfully represented. Problem number 3, although the negotiated contract must be approved by council, councilmembers are not automatically in a strong position to take a sound fiscal position and to establish police accountability. Thankfully, we are reaching a point of sanity in our city where no one lobby group dominates. I think it's interesting and important to note that we now have councilmembers who were elected without the endorsement of the Austin police association, just as others have won with that endorsement. What do I mean when I say the contract with our police costs us dearly? The most obvious examples are routine cash settlements following instances of gross misconduct. In a recent five-year period city payouts to cover misconduct amounted to more than a million dollars each year. [10:52:01 PM] This year a settlement as I understand it have grown to more than $4 million. >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. >> It's only August. I think I have donated time. >> Mayor Adler: Oh, 44 minutes. >> Thank you. In addition to large cash settlements there are everyday negotiated benefits that are outliers with the rest of the state and outliers with the nation in terms of police wages and benefits. For example, Austin police received multiple hours of overtime pay for times they go to court for as little as one hour. As much as six times their hourly wage for one hour of work in court outside their shift. For purposes of computing overtime, paid leave counts as hours worked. Officers accrue longest pay after only one year on the job. Something that would be wonderful if we looked over at aid that we could get give to our teachers that is simply not available to them. Officers have incredibly gracious vacation and leave. These benefits, while wonderful, we could pay for some of them, but, unfortunately, Austin police also have built-in protections, shielding them from gross misconduct, which then costs us millions. A problem that we see meet and confer has utterly failed to address. The process is so sweet for the police association that for every watered-down reform we layer an exchange -- in exchanges incentives one upon another in a way that is simply put fiscally irresponsible. There are other ways to spend dollars on public safety. That are well established, that are effective, and that are popular with austinites. In fact we heard many of them tonight. Mental health resources, diversionery programs to avoid arrest, prosecution and jail for youth offenders, drug offenders, veteran offenders, more camps, afterschool programs, youth employment programs, extended pool hours. [10:54:05 PM] All measures that keep youth productively engaged in out of school time, including the summertime. More safe spaces for potential victims to escape domestic violence. Many of these programs exist, are popular, and are as yet underfunded. We need to stand for fiscal responsibility and public safety. We need to listen to austinites in their desire for their vision of public safety. We need to end the meet and confer process. We need to revert to state code and start from scratch. As a start to the restoration of fiscal sanity end meet and confer. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor? Mr. Foster -- >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: Mr. Foster, I just wanted to ask if you did have a copy of your remarks, if you could send them to my office, please. >> Absolutely. >> Alter: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: You should probably send them to the other offices, too, because -- [ laughter ] Councilmember alter isn't responsible for copying us. [ Laughter ] >> Alter: I'm only speaking for myself. >> Mayor Adler: Collin Wallace, is he here? Collin? >> I think I might be first. >> Mayor Adler: You will be. I'm going to fill that podium here. >> He would be here if he didn't have pneumonia. He really wanted to be here. >> Mayor Adler: Oh, no. Tell him we're thinking about him. Is Kara carbon? You'll be at the next podium. Please proceed. >> Mayor Adler, mayor pro tem tovo, members of the city council, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is lady Ann wallford, chief mission officer for Austin parks foundation. [10:56:05 PM] Tonight I'm here to represent a broad alliance of park stakeholders from across the city and to urge you to invest in our parks. I'd like to start out by thanking councilmember alter, councilmember Houston, councilmember pool, councilmember Garza, and mayor Adler for your sponsorship and enforcement of - - endorsement of park priorities on the concept menu. Tonight we're here to express our strong support of the $3.4 million in park priority items on that concept menu. This includes funding for our pools, for grounds maintenance, for Ada compliance, for programming, for lighting, and more. We have several people here tonight who are going to share with you a little bit about why it is so important to fund these items. But first I would like to say that parks are a part of what makes Austin such an incredible city to live in. They really, truly do bring visitors from all over the world. Businesses who are looking for a home look to our parks for the quality of life they provide for their employees, but, most importantly, the people of Austin, our children, our seniors, residents of all ages and all backgrounds rely and depend on our parks each and every day for physical activity, for recreational programming, for educational programming, for afterschool care, and so, so much more. Our parks are a place where we learn valuable life skills, like how to swim. They're a place where new parents like myself find much needed camaraderie by meeting other parents in the neighborhood. They're a place where we can connect with nature. They're a place where we can build community. They're a place where we celebrate birthdays. [10:58:05 PM] They're a place where we can play. The benefits of our parks are so diverse and so broad that if you were to ask 100 different people across Austin why they love and how they use our parks, you might get 100 different answers. So, please, do not take our parks for granted. Please invest in what is so important to so many. Our parks. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Before Ms. Carbon speaks, is Jennifer potter Miller here? You'll be at that podium. Go ahead. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem, and council. My name is Cada carbon. I'm here to support the request that lady Ann just described to increase pard's budget by 3.4 million, specifically to fund the items provided by the alliance of interested parties. Parks & rec provides an essential public service towards facilities, programs, and personnel, provide recreational enrichment well beyond what most parents can provide for their children, especially single parents of limited means, which was my parenting experience. So I'm speaking from that perspective. With work and school all week long, families are often disconnected from the natural world, but weekends at the park, playground, and pool, flying kites and throwing frisbees allows us to reconnect with nature and each other. Pard's after school programs and summer campus enable us to hold full-time jobs while our children learn to swim, play tennis, engage in cultural activities, team sports and so. We are deeply grateful to pard for providing our families with opportunities to contribute to youth development. In today's digital age, pard's outreach to parents is much more critical. [11:00:07 PM] There is no digital substitute for swimming like a fish or feeling the wind tugging your kite. Adequate funding will unable pard to provide exceptional recreational resources to Austin's children. Please increase their funding. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Before Ms. Miller speaks, is Cynthia Rodriguez there? Okay. Then you have some donated time from Allison Watkins. Okay. So you'll be there next. >> Good evening. My name is Jennifer potter Miller and I live in the cherrywood neighborhood in district 9. I'm part of an alliance of doctors and Oranges across the city, speaking with one voice on the importance of investing in Austin parks, trails, and green spaces in the city of Austin's 2018 budget. I support 3.4 million in pard concept menu items outlined by the Austin parks foundation in partnership with many other key Austin parks stakeholder groups. In particular, I support funds for playground safety and maintenance. Until this spring, the playground of Patterson park had a rubberized pour-in placed flooring had degraded terribly over many years. It reached a point where there were chunks missing throughout, creating serious trip hazards and exposing the concrete subflooring. Pard was aware of the problem and had gotten a quote from a contractor for replacing the flooring with wood chips, which is the new standard flooring, but at $60,000 it was outside of their budget. We were informed that we would probably have to wait for a parks bond for funds to replace the flooring, and this seems five to ten years out, and untenable. Then this winter a crew came to replace a broken panel on the toddler playscape and realized there were 8 feet of exposed concrete at the base. They told me they would either have to close off that part of the playscape or replace the flooring, and thank goodness a supervisor got two crews to do the work instead of contracting it out. [11:02:19 PM] We're so incredibly grateful to have a new floor that is up to current safety standards. I think that with the additional staffing for playgrounds, problems like these at other parks will be caught and addressed before they become so severe. We recognize that pard is doing the best they can with limited resources, but they would be better able to serve our city's 300 parks with additional support. My neighbor said it perfectly after her five-year-old broke his arm at a private playground. Not a city playground. Playground safety and maintenance is important to me because I want my kids to feel happy, care-free and safe when they play at the park. Now that they have experienced the break, they worry about it happening again. When I can show them all the ways that the city works to keep our parks safe, it reassures them and lets them play and have fun, as kids should. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Okay. You'll have six minutes. Before you speak, is jera Keith? And then you have donated time from Brian Mcgivern. Is he here. >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. What about Rachel manning? You have seven minutes. Yes. Go ahead. >> Thank you. I will be using my time to present a video from two park adopters that are part of the go Austin vamos Austin coalition. [Speaking Spanish] [11:07:11 PM] >> We have experienced fires, sexual activity and drug use in the evenings when it pitch back in our park area. As we take back our park for school and community activities, events, for funding, lighting is key to our success. The friends of cunning ham park group has been working in conjunction with other park teams who also face the same critical concern for park lighting. We support the broadly sponsored concept menu with items totals 3.4 million for Austin parks & rec, in the fiscal year 2018, city of Austin budget. Supporting this menu of budget priorities for parks will instill confidence that our city supports park improvements and healthy living, and some of our long overlooked parks can be rejuvenated. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts for including $500,000 in the concept menu for lighting in our parks. Good evening. And thank you. [End of video.] [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. Is Elizabeth covin here? What about Walter Murrow? Karen rezne? Mandy Blott? Is Dr. Sterling lands here? >> He can make it. >> Mayor Adler: Sorry? >> He couldn't make it. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is Debra alemo here? >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: All right. Take your time. Take your time. Someone donated you time. Bethany Carson, is Bethany here? No? You'll have -- got Ya. [11:09:14 PM] You'll have six minutes in just a second. Ms. Keith. >> Good evening. We have to make this more accessible. This is pretty bad. I mean, your constituents could not make it out at 10:30 at night. My name is Keith, I live district 1, I'm the founder of black sovereign nation. I have to say it's truly demeaning to have to come before council and make a plea for my life based on funding allocation. I invite this council to offer an explanation as to why any community needs to incentivize adequate representation. Councilmember Houston, I'm interested in better understanding why district 1 has to walk into this room and beg for the protection of our interests when we have you as our representative. Before I dive into commentary on the allocation of funds, I want to be very clear. My life is worth more than any dollar amount you can pull from A.P.D., or more specifically, the meet and confer process. Morgan Rankin's life was more than any amount of money available for reallocation. David Joseph's life was worth more. And no dollar amount can fix what happened to brionne king. I would say that I hope that you all are ashamed. I would say that I hope that this council understands how heartless it is to force residents of this city to demonstrate that protecting their lives and ensuring their safety will save the city money before you take action. I would say that I hope that the testimony you hear today influences to you reevaluate your priorities. I would say all of that, but I've lost hope in both this council and this system of government. Fortunately, for you, my confidence or lack thereof in you is not all that matters. Your constituents and their opinion of you are most significant. [11:11:15 PM] Unfortunately for you, your constituents are paying more attention. Unfortunately for you, it's not only members of plaque sovereign nation or communities of color united or Austin justice coalition or grass roots leadership or counterbalance atx who have noticed your complete disregard, not only for black and brown lives, but the needs of the city. No. Residents in districts 1-10 have taken note as well. They've noticed that the city somehow doesn't have money for their basic needs, but has $6 million to spend on meet and confer. And so that everyone in this room understands, that $6 million does not make up the police budget in its entirety. No. That's just what we spend on the process that is supposed to result in police accountability, but never does. $6 million is the reward for failure. $6 million is what we offer the police after they profile, brutalize, and murder residents of Austin. And yet the city doesn't have the money to fund affordable housing. [Buzzer sounds] And yet the city is cutting the Austin public health budget by $1.5 million. I don't understand. Stop prioritizing exorbitant bonuses for A.P.D., get affordable housing, public health programs for marginalized residents of Austin. Meet and confer doesn't address the needs of your constituents. We're here to stay. I can't say the members of council. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you -- >> If you refuse to stop funding a.p.d.'s corruption, you will be held responsible for the bloodshed that results. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Donald Dallas here? [Applause] Is Donald Dallas here? Donald Dallas? What about Tora chill? Okay. You'll be next. [11:13:16 PM] Please. >> Yeah. Sorry about that. Dallas had to go home because he has children to attend to, and this is not accessible at all for fathers or parents in general. So good evening. My name is Devora. I live in district 1 and I'm a member of black sovereign nation. Essentially our demand is an end to meet and confer process because higher police budgets and a $6 million negotiation process does not make us safe or safer. Since the introduction of meet and confer, instead of increased measures to ensure proper and appropriate police conduct, meet and confer has continued to result in benefits for Austin police department, and millions of wasted taxpayer dollars. For decades, elected officials have stripped funds from mental health services, housing subsidies, youth programs, food benefit programs, while pouring money into police forces, military grade weapons, high tech surveillance, jails and prisons. These investment choices have not made us safer and have devastated black and brown low income communities. Austin needs to invest in our communities and divest from punitive systems that have historically existed to terrorize and murder my people. Austin police have murdered countless members of the local community, including Sofia king, Daniel Rocha, Larry Jackson, Jr., Richard Monroe, David Joseph, Mike adjuster and Morgan Rankins. The budget corks however, invest more in housing developments, a robust immigrant defense fund, public transportation, sanitation services, the equity office, homeless services, health departments. The list goes on and on. [11:15:17 PM] There is abundant evidence that police and jails do not make communities safe. And in many cases, actually undermine safety. Yet at the local, state, and national levels, significant portions of public money are dedicated to policing and incarceration, while comparatively minuscule amounts are dedicated to the services, resources, and infrastructure needed to keep communities healthy and safe. Have a good night. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Is Cada [indiscernible] Keith here? >> He's not here. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. What about Jarvis Kelly? >> Here. >> Mayor Adler: You'll be up next, sir. You have three minutes. >> My name is terra chill and I'm a concerned citizen from district 8. I'm here today because groups like black sovereign nation, counterbalance atx, Austin coalition and grass roots leadership have been mobilizing in my community and a safety concern. Mayor Adler stated earlier and I concur that Austin is safe. It's existing and impressive safety record is very important to me as a citizen of Austin. It's part of where I moved here from Dallas. It's part of why I encourage my sister and her son to move here. It's what I brag about to my in-laws in Tennessee. We are safe here and that is good. So when I hear that $6 million that could be used to maintain our safety in crucial ways are being wasted on ineffectual meet and confer process, I'm bothered. Our safety isn't jeopardized by crime, it's jeopardized by health and human services concerns like we need education programs that eradicate our severe drunk driving crisis. We have public transit concerns that could be fixed by pedestrian bridges that would cease the deaths of people trying to run across our traffic-jammed streets. [11:17:17 PM] To fight those ways in a way comparable cities do, we need at least 9 million more dollars in this budget. Clearly, allocating the 6 million you throw away on meet and confer is the bare minimum you could do, as still more would need to come from elsewhere. I ask that you congratulate yourselves and the Austin police department on a job well done. Austin is safe and crime is low. But safety means more than arrests. Public transit and health and human services desperately need the $6 million squandered on meet and confer. To keep our people safe and to support our police in ways meet and confer never could, by allowing the police to focus on what matters and not dealing with tragic and easily preventable vehicular deaths or crimes occurring in our parks due to ineffective lighting or other safety concerns. I would like to second the two women before me who spoke on how incredibly unacceptable and inaccessible these meetings are. We don't need to spend as much time as we do listening to healthy people talking about how they need to move their money around. We need to address the needs of our underserved communities. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Is Amanda Lewis here? Is Aja gare here? Okay. Hang on one second. You'll be up next. Sir. >> Thank you guys for having me here tonight. I am not nearly as eloquent as those who came before me right now, so please bear with me. My name is Jarvis. I'm with black sovereign nation, and I am with them on needing to defund the meet and confer process. That $6 million could be used on any other amount of things that our underprivileged citizens here in Austin need, such as a more humane bus -- transportation system, you know, better health care systems for our people here, you know. [11:19:38 PM] A lot. I don't have them all. But yeah. That's all I have to say. Thanks. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: You'll be up next. >> Hi. I'd like to start off by thanking councilmember Casar, alter, and kitchen for your sponsorship and leadership to prioritize therapeutic and case management services for victims of assault. I sit on the commission for women and I want to make sure I talk about why we made these recommendations and how they relate to the other recommendations we've made around the sexual assault and why they're so important and central to our purpose of amplifying the needs of women in Austin. Sexual assault disproportionately impacts women. There's a lot of sigma attached to this crime. So, so few people report it, so 9%. And yet two out of five women experience sexual violence. So it's special and it requires special attention. We've been meeting with community partners to understand the local processes that survivors have to go through in order to report what's happened to them, and we've been able to highlight the needed changes, such as counseling services and others, and more people will be able to speak about this today. We will -- we look forward to continuing to partner with these community members and advocate to improve system responses, and we ask that you continue to seek input and find ways to improve the safety of women in Austin. Thank you again. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Hold on one second. Hang on one second. Let me fill this other podium. Is marina Connor here? [11:21:40 PM] What about Kristen linnow? You'll be at this practicum. >> Thank you. My name is Asia Guerra. I live in district 3. I'm here in support of the recommendations made by the Austin commission for women to prioritize the needs of sexual assault survivors in our community. We operate Elouise house where survivors can go for free sexual assault forensic exams and related advocacy, including connection to local resources such as those you're considering today. As of this afternoon, our forensic nursing and advocacy team has served 73 sexual assault survivors in the month of August alone. This is more people than we have ever served in a single month, and indicates the problem of sexual assault in our community is as serious as ever. Despite having 20 full-time therapists, our wait list for individual counseling regularly runs at a three- to five-month wait. With safe A.P.D. Victim services and other local agencies running with extensive wait lists, we will not be prepared to give survivors whose cases are reopened due to backlog testing the prompt support that they deserve. We must fund the commissioner for women's budget items at this unparalleled and crucial time. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Go ahead. You have three minutes, and the next speakers now have one minute. Is bill bunch here? Is David roach here? You have one minute. Go ahead. >> Good evening. My name is Kristen. I live in district 5. I'm here tonight to speak in support of F 6 and F 19 to fund training for local private therapists in exchange for them taking on survivors of sexual assault pro Bono, as well as an increased capacity for victim services. [11:23:45 PM] So I want to talk mainly about victim services. This is a group of social workers and counselors that are housed in the police department. Some of them respond to crises in the field 24 hours a day when there has been a rape, a homicide, or a child abuse situation. The others provide ongoing case management and support the needs of survivors, emotionally and logistically throughout their entire journey in the criminal justice system. They provide assistance to citizens, look for safe housing options and resources in the community. They provide advocacy on crime victims' rights. They provide transportation and fill out crime victims' compensation applications. And there's a critical need to staff this area. Without it, victims and families have to wait for support and assistance when no one is available to help them, and only the most urgent cases receive the kind of attention that they need. Each counselor can work between 350 and 400 cases a year. Right now, there are three full-time staff dedicated to working our sex crimes, and there are far, far more cases than they can handle. Sex -- sexual assault cases last multiple years and they require an immense amount of support. And as cases from our backlog begin to be tested and survivors are contacted after long periods of silence, our community is not prepared to handle the influx of need. Supporting these positions would double the current capacity of the counselors working sexual assaults and provide some critical support to underserved portions of our population that don't have access to these services otherwise. So thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Before Mr. Roach speaks, is Justin waters here? >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. You'll have two minutes, Mr. Roach. Is Travis Wesley here? You'll be up next, speaking at this podium. Mr. Roach, two minutes. >> Thank you, mayor, thank you, mayor pro tem, thank you, councilmembers. [11:25:49 PM] I'm David roach, president of the greater Austin crime commission. I want to call your attention to the fact that our 911 response times are now at a ten-year high. As you know, calls to 911 did not always involve crime. They can be automobile accidents, missing family members, medical emergencies, and even thumps in the night. But all require an A.P.D. Response. This year's budget does not provide for any additional officers. Given increase in our population, you are now asking the same number of officers to respond to a larger volume of 911 calls. This can only lead to one outcome: Longer response times. Two years ago, you authorized the hiring of an outside consultant, the matrix consulting group to audit the Austin police department. Last summer at this time matrix presented their findings to you. As part of that presentation, Dr. Richard Brady, author of the matrix report testified to council in August of 2017 -- of 2016, and a transcript of his testimony includes the notable quote. Quote: This level of pro activity, also known as community engagement time, is the lowest we've ever seen, and we do this quite a lot. Said differently, the Austin police department is being operated with a - - with way too few officers, according to your consultant. Per this report, and take into account the 12 officers this year's budget defunds from last year, A.P.D. Is now 140 officers short of the matrix recommended total. This is approaching 10% of the force. Running a department this lean leaves no slack in the system for emergencies or extraordinary items. Take this weekend, for example. We're hosting approximately 7,000 evacuees from Houston to our shelters. Our new guests will need a police presence, both in and around each of our facilities. [11:27:51 PM] [Buzzer sounds] Additionally, we have a home football game where A.P.D. Will provide crowd control and control, and on top of these two events, the department is without the 400 Ford SUVs. True cars are being used for patrol, but not near as many as being taken away. The council approved credentials of the matrix consulting group almost two years ago. Matrix was paid $200,000 of taxpayer funds to audit our department. >> Mayor Adler: You can go ahead and conclude. You you need to finish your thought. >> Thank you, sir. You have the result of matrix for a year now and it's time to follow the recommendations and move our police department to the minimum of 35% community engagement time, which is the standard for the department all over the country. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Wesley, you'll speak in just a second. You have one minute. Is George Cofer here? You'll be up at this podium. Sir. >> Hello, council and mayor Adler. My name is Travis Wesley and I live in district 5. I'm a native austinite and I love my city. I've spoken here before on what I think is right. I'm not here to tell you how to do your job but it's clear from the past studies that you, the council, have asked for showing that we need more police officers. From recent -- from a recent greater Austin crime commission survey of your constituents, that austinites overwhelmingly want more police officers on our street. It's a no-brainer, especially for one of the fastest growing cities in the country. At some point, you're going to be asking the men and women that hold the line day in and day out for too much. They can't do it all, even though that's what we ask them to do every single day. Don't fall into the trap of listening to the vocal minority. Listen to the silent majority that wants what's right and what keeps them safe at night. Vote for a 35% community engagement time for officers and more important for our citizens. [Buzzer sounds] Vote for the 12 officers that weren't funded from last year's budget and vote for a quicker response time, which has reached a ten-year high. [11:29:58 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. You can go ahead and conclude. >> Okay. You have inherited a safe city and I don't want you to squander that. You are in control now and people are watching. Please keep our cities safe because people are waking up to the fact that this council is moving further and further away from making public safety a priority. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: After Mr. Cofer it's Robert telamas. Is Robert here? Corby jastro? Ryan Spencer? You'll be at this podium. Sir. >> Good evening, everyone. I'm George Cofer, executive director of hill country conservancy speaking this time at the microphone on behalf of the board and staff and stakeholders of hill country conservancy. We are a member of the coalition that Ms. Wilford mentioned in support of the request for $3.4 million for the parks department. What I will add to that conversation -- and I hope all of you know this -- is that the members of that coalition, the organizations in that coalition, bring tens of millions of dollars to the park department, the trail department, so when we stand before you asking you to consider an additional 3.4 million of public funding, just know that that -- those monies are very well leveraged, with the expertise and the money we bring to the table. [Buzzer sounds] Hill country conservancy alone has just finished raising more than $7 million that we will spend on building a trail, and that's just one example. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Hayden brooks here? Hayden brooks? What about David king? You'll be at this next podium, David. Go ahead. >> Good evening. [11:31:59 PM] My name is Ryan Spencer. I'm director of children and nature collaborative of Austin outdoor discovery center. Today I stand with my colleagues in support of the $3.4 million in pard concept menu items outlined by Austin parks foundation. Funding for parks and green space in Austin is more important today than it has ever been. Today, the average child spends roughly seven minutes a day in unstructured play. And seven hours a day engaged with electronic media. Access to safe, beautiful, and natural areas for this type of play are critical to their health and well-being. For decades, Austin has been a leader and innovator in the conservation movement and this council most recently stepped into that role by unanimously adopting the Austin children's outdoor bill of rights. Our commitment to acquiring, protecting, and activating these spaces must be unwavering as our city continues to see record growth in order to ensure that every child has the ability to climb a tree, play in a creek, and look out into the stars. [Buzzer sounds] I don't know if there's a way to give you guys these, but I brought really cool magnets, so you're welcome to have them. They're for your fridges and stuff. >> Mayor Adler: Is suki steinhouser here? Is Rhonda Rutledge here? Oh. Sorry. Go ahead, David. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. I'm here to ask you to please enact a moral, humane, and equitable budget. Please increase funding for health and human services for low income families, increase funding to help low income families pay utility bills, transportation costs, rent, mortgage payments. Increase funding for immigration housing and defense services. Increase funding to ensure that our public facilities are Ada compliant. Increase funding for parks, pools, recreation facilities and recreational lighting. And increase funding for the office of equity. Also increase funding for homeless people and provide restrooms for homeless people in downtown Austin. [11:34:02 PM] Expand and make permanent prime time after-school programs. Fund parent support specialists in our public schools. Fund the capital idea regional workforce initiatives. Enact a $17 per hour minimum wage for all part-time and full-time city employees by 2020. Rebalance the budget for public safety services so they consume a lower percentage of the total budget. And direct the Austin police department to end meet and confer as recommended by the Austin justice coalition. Thank you. [Applause] >> Is it all right if [indiscernible] Goes first? >> Mayor Adler: That's fine. >> Do I have extra time? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. Is Joanne here? Jo Catherine, I don't see her. But you have -- you have two minutes. >> Two? Okay. Hi. Good evening. I know we're all exhausted. I'm Rhonda Rutledge, executive director of the sustainable fee center and chair of one voice of central Texas. You guys all know who one voice is so we'll just skip right to it. We'd like the council to consider public safety in a broader context and understand the role that our members play in addressing public safety and reducing the cost to some of the more expensive parts of the system. You've already heard these talking points. I gave them two weeks ago. And we passed them out, but we're representing over a hundred health and human services organizations that want you to make sure -- that want to make sure you understand these points. Human service investments decrease the burden on other parts of the city budget, like public safety. 35% of A.P.D. Arrests and 34% of traffic will fatalities are alcohol or drug related. Effective substance abuse intervention can reduce these numbers. Diverting youth transitioning out of foster care from the criminal justice system saves 2.5 million in incarceration, arrest, and other costs. [11:36:04 PM] In 2010, it cost 6.7 million in local ems, er, hospital and jail expenses. For the 100 -- for 100 homeless individuals in Austin, it would cost 2.4 million -- again, compared to 6.7 -- to house and provide supportive services to that same group of people. We're asking councilmembers to follow through on your resolution passed in 2016 to invest almost $12 million in additional funding for social service contracts and 10 million additional dollars for the Austin public health department. Within two to four years, to close the gaps in service provision. At a bare minimum, we would like to see a cost of living for existing contracts, which this year would be approximately $1.3 million. This was a resolution that you passed, and we're asking for your commitment. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Is Elicia Michael here? You'll be at this podium. >> Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. >> I have to read my name, it's so late. I'm suki steinhouser with community and schools, a member of one voice of central Texas. I'd like to put a little color on Rhonda's remarks. One voice members reduce the community's need for public safety spending and strengthen our city's social service safety net. Two very recent examples illustrates how that might work. Yesterday we got a call at cis that 20 americorps members that would be coming to nurse schools would be redeployed from schools they were about to go to to perform disaster response on a temporary basis. Today the city's public health department surveyed many one voice members as to how many qualified case managers and licensed social workers we could offer part-time for disaster response and recovery. [11:38:07 PM] One voice members partner with their communities, with each other, but also with the city of Austin for the health and good of the community. It's to our entire community's benefit to keep our sector strong so we can help austinites not only survive, but to thrive. [Buzzer sounds] And I urge you to follow through with the commitment to increase the city's investment in public health and social services. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. >> Hello, everyone. My name's Elicia, I'm a resident of district 1 and a survivor of sexual assault, here to speak in support of concept menu items S 6 and S 19. By providing the opportunity for private counselors to offer pro Bono consulting to survivors like me, we're providing much needed access to mental health and by restaffing victim services to the numbers that we had in 2006 in A.P.D., which was when the city is much smaller than it is now, we're providing survivors like me with rides, helping apply for compensation, and afford to get back on their fetus. This is not just a woman's rights issue or a mental health issue, this is not just a public safety issue, this is an economic justice issue, and by helping folks like me afford piece peace of mind, we're helping to restore us to productive members of society. So not only will the community benefit but our economy will benefit. But I have to say I'm not a commodity and I hope that's not the argument that sways you. I hope you can look at me and tell me I'm worth it. So please make victim services whole again and please make sexual survivors in Austin whole again. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Carmen pido. [11:40:11 PM] Nakia Winfield? Tod Davy? Kathy young? Susan reed? Louis Granger? Is Kelly white here? You'll be up next. You have some sometime donated to you, Ms. White. Antoine martin. You have three minutes. You have one minute. Oneminute. >> Thank you for listening to us and considering our comments. I'm here to speak in support of funding for the Austin police department. I'm Susan reed. I live in district 6 and I'm representing the citizen Austin safety partnership. We work with neighborhoods on crime prevention by teaching them neighborhood watch practices and skills. For the past five years, this council -- the council, not you, the council, has not provided needed funding for police staffing while response rates and population have both increased. But the council has funded multiple taxpayer-financed studies which show the need for more officers. The public safety commission recommended funding for A.P.D. To implement the recent community policing report recommendations and the greater crime commission asks for the funding of the 12 officer positions already approved, and the plan to increase community engagement time. We concur and point out that chief manning -- [buzzer sounds] -- Has already taken positive steps to establish an effective community policing program. We urge your support by voting to include funds for at least 12 police positions and the program to increase community engagement time. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Ms. White, you're going to have three minutes. Is Stanley bacon here? Is Nicki Voigt here? [11:42:12 PM] What about John Woodley? You'll be there. >> My name is Kelly white. I am the CEO of the safe alliance, a merger of Austin children's shelter and safe place. Safe stands for stop abuse for everyone. I've been here a long time, not as long as you all, but I've been listening to -- I've been hearing about lighting, tourism, racial justice, homelessness, immigration, a whole lot about safety. And it's all connected. At safe, we believe we can make Austin a safe community for everyone. Tonight, I'm here to speak for sexual assault survivors. And ask that you support -- that you approve Austin commission for women's proposal to prioritize the needs of sexual assault survivors. As you know, safe operates Elouise house, the primary program in the city of Austin providing forensic nursing programs and advocacy in the immediate aftermath of a sexual assault. We have provided services for 440 rape survivors in 2017. That's a lot. The Austin women's commission -- the Austin women commission's proposal will go far toward better serving these survivors. These recommendations will also serve to enhance the city's critical job of investigating sexual assaults and helping with the prosecution of rapists. It's very hard to remove rapists from the streets without the support of the survivor. These are notoriously difficult cases to prosecute, and what we know is that support on the front end increases the likelihood that a survivor will participate in the criminal justice process. We are grateful for all that the city and the county are currently doing to try to address the DNA kit backlog and address the problems with the DNA lab. Y'all have really stepped forward. In the meantime, we are dealing with countless new assaults and we must be prepared to wrap survivors with the support and resources that they need. [11:44:19 PM] Again, 440 survivors our nurses have seen so far in 2017. As you heard, 73 in August, and it's still August, isn't it? Yes. So -- it is. I heard from a mom earlier this month, and her daughter was one of those 73 that we just talked about. The mom said to me: You took care of my daughter on Saturday night/sunday morning. She was visiting town for the weekend for a group of young women for a bachelorette trip. Thank you and bless you for all you did to help her. That isn't what we want our tourism in Austin to be. That isn't what we want Austin to be known for. I think that Austin can do better. And we must. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Is Monica Guzman here? You'll be up here. You have one minute. >> Hello. I'm John Woodley. I'm an advocate for disability access and I would like to support to make sure we get priority funding for disability access in sidewalks and recreation facilities. I would like to ask for funding for the disability chamber of commerce to provide resources to the disadvantaged population to become fully employed or become business owners. Disability [indiscernible] Represents all people, especially people with disabilities. Why do we need a disability chamber of commerce? Texas is the second largest number of individuals with disabilities in all states, for four million persons, large population of the persons in Texas with disabilities. Texas ranked last in all states in people with disabilities. The chamber of commerce is seeking to gain a million members and has opened up a free enrollment to anyone to join the chamber. You can join by going to DCC texas.org. That's DCC texas.org. [11:46:22 PM] [Buzzer sounds] I would also like to mention that the sexual assault victims fall into the disability act. I'd also like to say we need a fund to support sexual assaults, get the DNA kit, get the criminals a on of the streets and prevent more people from being assaulted by the same person. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you had. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Before Ms. Guzman talks, is Jennifer Bristol here? You'll be at this podium. You have one minute. >> Thank you. As a district 4 resident I live at the north end of another one crescent. My work is for the benefit of south and southeast Austin residents, the south end of the eastern crescent. I asked you to work the budget in an equitable manner. It was never a "Should" it was always a "Must." Eastern crescent residents must have access to healthy food. We must have access to recreational spaces. There must be safe and healthy housing for the homeless, persons at or below 60% mfi, and residents of standard housing. Provide increased availability of and access to opportunities for eastern crescent resident participation in codenext. Housing, transportation, and more, with interpretation and translation services. Shuttles. Child care, and refreshments. You must invest in the community. Thank you. [Buzzer sounds] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Is Christy tingle here? >> My name is -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on just one second. Is Christy tingle here? What about Carly Hathcock? Jeremy Hendricks? Bow Delp? [11:48:25 PM] Ms. Salazar? Chris Kaiser? You have time donated by Michael -- is he still here? You have two minutes. Ma'am, one minute. >> Good evening. My name is Jennifer Bristol and I'm the director for Texas children and nature. I'm also on the downtown commission but tonight I'm here as a citizen of Austin. I'd like to just share my support of the $3.4 million in the park concept menu. In particular, I'm supporting the children -- cities connecting children to nature portion of that. Parks are no longer a nice to have, they're a need to have. They are a matter of our public health, as well as our public safety and well-being. Research showswhen children and family spend pour time in nature, learning and player, they are healthier, happier, and smarter. They achieve better in school. They're more creative. They're better problem-solvers, and I think we owe it to our children of the city of Austin, as well as our own families that are here today and future generations. I think the $3.4 million -- [buzzer sounds] -- Is a great start, and I hope that we can do more in the future. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Is Frances Acuna here? Frances Acuna? Or Emily leblanc? And you have some donated time from julienitch, is she here? You have one minute. I think you had two minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. My name is Chris Kaiser. I'm director of policy for the Texas association against sexual assault. I'm also district 1 constituent who's here. As someone who sees an opportunity for the city to institutionalize some very important supports for sexual assault survivors. [11:50:27 PM] Specifically, I'm asking you to adopt concept menu items s6 and s19 to support victim services in A.P.D. And provide more counseling for sexual assault survivors in the city. I'd also like to thank at the outset, councilmembers kitchen, Casar, and alter for sponsoring those items. I'm going to echo something you just heard a little bit from Kelly white on. Sexual assault cases have among the lowest reporting rates and highest victim attrition rates of any crime there is. And one of the major reasons for that is that the criminal justice process is extremely arduous for somebody who's in the throes of trauma. And what I want you to understand, what that means for you as policy makers, is that supporting survivors in the criminal justice process, when they choose -- when they choose to engage in that system, is nothing less than a necessary condition for offender accountability and public safety. And so the current level of just three sex crimes case managers at A.P.D. Is wholly inadequate for the size of the city we have and the number of survivors in our community. But you have before you an opportunity to fix that, and I respectfully ask you to adopt those two amendments. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Is -- that's you? Sorry about that. Haley Easley? Haley here? What about Michael yang? What about Casandra champion? Louis Conway? Teresa radnial? David Glenn? You'll be up at this podium. [11:52:29 PM] Please, Emily. >> Good evening. My name is Emily leblanc and I'm co-chair of sexual assault response and resource team. It's often my job to bring to your attention ways in of the criminal justice system is broken. Tonight I'm here instead to tell you about a bright spot. A.P.D. Victim service counselors excel at when they do and often the only reason survivors feel comfortable staying engaged with the system, something we need them to do if we want to make our community safe. We owe it to thousands of survivors who will soon be notified about their rape kits to make sure resources are available. I'm also a licensed therapist and I've worked with more than a thousand survivors, many of whom first got help from a therapist who was not trained or equipped to treat the trauma caused by sexual assaults and ended up making that trauma worse. The agency specializing specialty assault have long wait lists and survivors cannot afford to delay healing. We need help from community therapists and make sure they are properly trained. Thank you for prioritizing services for sexual assault survivors with S 6 and S 19. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Harris, you had time donated to you. Holly Kirby. >> Didn't you call me. >> Mayor Adler: You'll be up next. Is holly Kirby here? Yes. Is Kate -- >> Yep. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. So you'll have three minutes. Go ahead. >> Thank you, councilmembers and mayor for this opportunity to comment on the city's budget, specifically the development services budget and proposed fee schedule for the upcoming year. I'm David Glenn, director of government affairs. The hba supports the initiatives to reduce wait times and we're encouraged to hear 80, of those additions to staff will be reducing wait times. Many of the city's departmental policies and procedures create inefficiencies which create duplicative work for the opportunity, more staff to process. While the hba agrees that reasonable quality checks and reviews are to be expected, many of the city's regulations do not make more safe or affordable home. [11:54:40 PM] Fees should be accompanied by increased accountability, reported metrics for improvement, something the budget does not address. Given dramatic increase in cost of home with backdrop of codenext, one of the most important discussions of housing affordable care act the city has taken in decades, we oppose the fee schedules and request a revised proposal that includes only corresponding fees to provide accountability. The hba worked closely with ds did and appreciate the opportunity to hear our concerns. We want to work together to create community with all people's lives can live and thrive. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Jeffrey. What about Andra [indiscernible]? Please proceed. >> Three minutes? >> Mayor Adler: You have three minutes. >> Hello. My name is Chris Harris. I'm from district 1. The following video which you go a clip of the union president from the August 8th meeting negotiation section underscores why we cannot negotiate with the police union under current conditions and must end the meet and confer process, currently included in the police contract, this rule, one of many acceptable provisions in the contract provided any discipline for the officers that brutalized Mr. King because six months passed before someone with a conscience found out. [Video playing.] [11:58:24 PM] >> That's it. Thanks. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Andre [indiscernible] Here? What about Susana Almanza? Letrice cook? Mike [indiscernible] >> [Off mic] >> Mayor Adler: Carol Guthrie? You'll be up next. You have one minute. >> One minute? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers, my name is Jeffrey, I'm the vp of government affairs with the real estate council and we would echo the sentiments made by the homebuilders association and in the support we have for Rodney and everything his team have been doing in development services, however, we still have a lot of concern, especially in regards to seeing significant improvement within the permitting process as it pertains to other departments that touch the development process, specifically this includes departments such as Austin water utility, transportation, watershed protection, which are often the biggest contributors to the delays and regulatory hurdles that our industry faces. These delays are often due to conflicting code requirements, outdated procedures and often unwillingness to work with other departments to develop innovative solutions so we will recommend specific fee reductions as well as eliminating certain positions within the proposed budget and fee schedule. We believe it is vital that all departments work together with development services to improve the existing processes fusser and then as we gain the efficiencies and improve process we can then reevaluate in terms of resources and future positions. [12:00:24 AM] [Buzzer sounding] Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Carol gunk "Ry you have time donated I think by Christy o'brian. You have two minutes. >> Good evening, mayor Adler, and councilmembers. I'm letrice cook, I'm executive director for [indiscernible] Center. We assist those persons that have previously been incarcerated and their families. We are the only person -- we're a sole source provider of actionable services for people that have gone to prison and their families. I am here tonight and asking specifically for an extension, a requested extension of our current contract to the end of this year. This request is based on the fact of our inability to spend the remaining funds by the end of September 2017. The center shares the city of Austin's vision to make the city of Austin the most livable city in the country, and the center is able to help Austin accomplish this through service to a community who is undervalued, underserved, and unseen. And as you're aware, the objective grounds for the extension of this contract is that the center did not receive the contract after we were awarded funds December 1, 2016, two months aft funds were awarded and the first funds were not dispersed until December 23 of 2016. We didn't even receive a contract manager for the funds until we were notified that the department that our funds went into, that the contract manager was hired may 25, 2017, several months after the funding was awarded. We had a contract amendment. This has been a reimbursement contract so literally everything that we did we had to be reimbursed for. [12:02:27 AM] Funds were held. It has just been really difficult situation for us, and so that is why I'm standing tonight not necessarily to speak about the row of galleries of injustices that have happened to people that have previously been incarcerated and felons but basically to ask for an extension to our contract because there's no way we can spend the remained of these funds in 29 days. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. >> Any questions? Can you check on that? >> I think we submitted a later. Did you all get the letter? We submitted a letter to -- to council and its attorney. Thank you. I just didn't know if y'all had gotten that. So. . . >> Ma'am, can you leave some information with the clerk so I can get in touch with you? >> Absolutely. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Franklin, you're going to be up next on this next podium. >> Mayor Adler and the council, I wanted to say this real quick. Many of my staff members and everybody has left, but those persons were supported by several of the organizations, Austin justice coalition, measure Austin, and many of the other organizations, and I just wanted to thank my staff members for staying as long as they have. And thank you all for supporting our center and bringing this unique service that is needed for the population of Austin. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Franklin, you'll be up. Go ahead, Ms. Guthrie. You have two minutes. >> Okay. Good morning, everyone. My name is Carol Guthrie, and I am with asme, and I know you've all been here for a very long time and heard a whole lot of stories. I just wanted to bring to your attention in this budget if -- and I know it's very tight and I know you have a lot of competing interests that you're dealing with right now. [12:04:35 AM] It would be -- we would really like to see the pay raise either bumped up a half a percent or at least move the start date back into October, when the employees used to get their pay raise effective in October, when the beginning of the fiscal year happened. And if you can't go back that far, it would really be good if you could at least get there before Thanksgiving. I think that would be helpful, especially since many employees are not going to be able to have a second job anymore, so their pay is going to matter a lot. Because the city is moving towards a new policy that could -- well, I mean, there's, like, as many different departments as you have, there's that many different policies on whether or not employees can have secondary employment. And we know that many of our members do because that's how they live. So I hope that you all will maybe find the money to try to move this pay back, and I hope that we can have some further discussion on secondary employment. Thank you so much. And have a good evening. Bye-bye. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you Mr. Franklin, before you begin, at the next podium is berelle steel. What about Debra white? What about Ben weatherman? >> Here. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Mr. Weatherman. Mr. Franklin, you had donated -- I'm sorry? I see that up here now. Brian richster, is he here? You have two minutes, sir. >> Good morning, Mr. Mayor, councilmembers. I am Richard Franklin, the president of youth unlimited and also [indiscernible] For the great panthers of Texas. [12:06:42 AM] As I was standing for the call for more police I wanted to note just as we cannot bomb or way to peace, we can not arrest our way to being a safe and prosperous community. That being said I served on the undo racism task force this year. In March we turned in a report. During that time frame we determined that the rfp process you had was determined to be racism disguised as process. Presently, besides being just very tired, I'm also very hurt and angry by the fact that we're, again, talking about the sexiness of addressing homelessness to the tune of multi millions of dollars yet the quality of life commissions can't even get a budget of $9 million total. I just had the same conversation with central health yesterday about pitting the needy against the even more needy. If you're going to change the quality of life of the global majority here in Austin, it's going to require investment. I said during our work and I reiterate that here, if we are to undo the effects of racism -- if we are to undo the effects of racism, we have to be specific and intentional. I'd also like it noted that the rfp process or the process as it were is oftentimes used to tell those who need, this is why you can't have what you need. That being said, you, the councilmembers, set up and pick the quality of life customers so you -- the reality is I know you don't -- you don't think you should take their recommendations or you don't necessarily take them as gospel but if they were to give you recommendations on how to undo racism I would assume that's what we're here for, to undo the racism but the qualify of life is to improve the qualify of life, you must take the recommendations, fund those recommendations and then allow them to fund the organizations they have determined will improve the qualify of life of the global majority. [12:08:46 AM] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Emily garrick here? Joey gitsack? Is Adam here? Darren huff? You'll be at the next podium. You have one minute sir. >> I'm actually here just to read a statement from Mandy block because she couldn't be here because of injury. My name is Mandy, psychologist here in Austin and I'm a member of the Austin justice coalition. I've written a statement because I'm deeply concerned with about the city renewing its meet and confer with the police unit. As I understand it the city of Austin the citizens can improve accountability and oversights -- but while the officers have received their end of the deal we're not receiving ours. As it stands an officer can be guilty of extreme misconduct but if the evidence emerges six months after the incident no action can be taken. An officer can be guilty of extreme misconduct and can be promoted without taking that into account. That misconduct may never be investigated and the affected citizen sun able to provide a written complaint in person. People can't afford to take time off work and people with mobility impairments like myself. These are a few examples of why the contract is inadequate. >> Mayor Adler: You can finish your thought. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Otherwise I think she might be disappointed in my job here. Consider our recommendations seriously. We believe these are necessary changes to make the contract serve its intended purposes and if we can't get what we signed up for please free up that money to serve our citizens more effectively. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. [ Applause ] Is [ saying name ] Here? You'll be at this podium. Sir, you have one minute. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem, and councilmembers, for inviting me to speak with you today. [12:10:47 AM] My name is Darren huff, live in district 7 and represented by member pool. I'm here because eastern Austin and Travis county desperately need help and the Austin justice coalition and Richard Franklin who just spoke have at least temporarily awoken me from privileged slumber. I hear exasperation, exhaustion over the same issues. Lack of access to healthy food, lack of access to health care, quality public education, meaningful bussing, and respectful policing. Specifically, as we've discussed earlier this evening, preserving and incorporating all past officer misconduct and not limiting new incident information to within six months. I want to see meaningful measurable, sustained progress that is confirmed by the Austin justice coalition and Richard Franklin and I will continue to monitor how member pool and the council and mayor and mayor pro tem work together to direct resources. [Buzzer sounding] -- To direct resources to undoing the effect of racism in our city and county. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is [ saying name ] Here? No, she's gone. Shane Johnson? What abouter Rick belle? Okay,er Rick belle, do you want to come on down here? Is Debra green here? So you just have one minute then. Please proceed. >> I'm here to tell you to end the meet and confer process. $6 million so that cops who kill people, innocent people like that video we just watched, all of you were touched and hurt by that because you have humanity and the seats you're in makes you lose your heart, makes you lose your sense of humanity for some reason and think that money matters more. [12:12:50 AM] Money does not matter right now. People's lives matter. People are drowning in Houston. People are dying. People are losing their homes. And people are talking about looters. We have to think about people as people. Okay? Most people in the city do not feel safer with more policeman, people who are here talking about that, it's because they're rich. The only people who are protected by the police are the rich people. So we need to end this process, and we need to fund everything else that everyone has been asking for. [Buzzer sounding] Listen to the people and listen to yourselves, and don't be fooled into thinking you have to make decisions that don't help anyone except those already privileged. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Benjamin yapan here? What about in a tash Ahmad son? -- Natasha Madison? Sarah mauler? And then should have time -- you have some time donated. Michael? So you'll have two minutes. Sir? You have one minute. >> Thank you. My name Iser Rick belle. Thank you, council, mayor. Thanks to melch I landed my3 first career job and I was able to continue my job after being incarcerated. Melch called my job and asked and pleaded with them to keep my job and employment. And because of melch I am able to stand -- to stay on track and I'm very tired after all these hours. [ Laughter ] >> Mayor Adler: You're doing good. >> Just bear with me. [12:14:51 AM] So I continue with my career job thanks to melch. I came here to say that we need the funding, and I believe that, you know, they can change and transform lives. So I believe, you know, if we can get the funding -- [ buzzer sounding ] -- To transform lives, I believe that melch will be able to come through for us. So I am a felony, but I haven't failed and succeeded in life and I think there are more people out there like me that need another chance, more than one or two or three chances out in life. I believe if we can get the funding and have more people come in as, you know -- to stand up and not be afraid to say, hey, I need another chance, that would be very appreciated. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. >> Good night. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Is roseio roseioaguilar here? You have time donated two people, [ saying names ]. So you'll have three minutes at this podium. You have two minutes. Go ahead. >> My name is sar remarks I'm the current chair of Austin parks dysfunction a former parks board member. I'm sorry that Collin Wallace or CEO couldn't be here but he's probably not that sorry since it's 1215. We support the 3.4 million pard concept menu outlined in the letter by apf with many, many key park stakeholder groups, including Michael [indiscernible] Who donated his time to me because Colin couldn't because he wasn't here. [12:16:58 AM] We thank councilmembers for adding a number of our key priorities to the concept menu and we really look forward to the support from other councilmembers too. Pard has identified approximately $700 million in needs and repairs and renovations to the system's aging parks infrastructure. This is throughout all of Austin. This $3.4 million request represents the pard's highest priorities in pool maintenance, safety, playground safety, Ada compliance, recreational security lighting, repairs, and -- repairs to aging historical buildings, museums and cultural centers. These investments will help advance each of the six strategy outcomes that you identified as budget priorities earlier this year. Save parks to make all of our neighborhoods safer, better access to quality parks, trails, open spaces, to improve the health and wellness of our residents. Not all austinites have equal access to quality parks and these investments will begin to address just some of those inequities. Pard educational programming is one of the most affordable, cultural activities for many of our residents. Austin's urban trails is key component to the transportation network. Finally by making the $3.4 million down payment towards the $700 million needed to address our aging parks and recreation infrastructure, the city council will instill confidence that our government is working to address urgent needs. [Buzzer sounding] We hope that we can count on you for the support include the $3.4 million in the pard concept menu items in the budget. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [ Applause ] Sorry is Scott turner here? What about Gabrielle Estrada? Gabriel Estrada. Is Ang gel ca Valdez here? [12:18:58 AM] You'll have two. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Good morning, mayor, councilmembers. My name is [ saying name ] And I am a parent of four students at Barrington elementary and I'm here to urge you to continue funding the prime time afterschool program in aid. Barrington is a school where over 94% of families are economically disadvantaged and nearly 70% of students are English language learners. Year after year Barrington teachers work tirelessly to ensure our school meets standards as our state continues to raise the bar. I'm not sure if you know what it is like to be in a school like this but because our state insists upon measuring success by how well they can write a bubble on a standard duesed tests our students have limited exposure to enriching hands on curriculum that develops critical thinking skills and nurtures independent learners. It is unfortunate that the state of Texas does not fulfill its responsibility to fully fund our public school in a way that would allow them to provide the wide range of educational opportunities every child deserves. But that is why as a city we have to pull together the resources to fill the gap. Most of our families do not have the money to send their kids to private lessons. So access to programs like prime time is likely the only way our kids will have these experiences. On top of that, we all know the workday does not end at 3:00 P.M. And this is very obvious. When our kids let -- are let out of school. Most of our families work, which means many students are walking home to an empty house. Having engaging activities for kids after school keeps them out of trouble and allows them to develop a love for learning and the arts that may not be happening during the regular school day. Last year, because of prime time, Barrington was able to offer gardening, dance, media, photography, drawing, and ca Rotty classes. [12:21:07 AM] After a long day of intensive discussion where students are expected to sit in their seats and absorb the lessons our kids need to get out of the traditional classroom and get their hands dirty, bodies moving and brains activated in new ways. I know our city has been talking a lot about equity lately so now is the time to act on those conversations. I urge you to commit city dollars to quality afterschool programs at our title 1 schools so that our children will have more reasons to want to be in school, stay in school, and grow into well-rounded individuals with the talent and confidence to one day be leaders in our communities. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] Sir? Sir? >> Good evening, mayor, council. I'm Scott turner. I'm the chair of the infill builder council at the homebuilders association and I want to say that our budgetary issues pale in comparison to some of the issues that have been raised here tonight. I'd like to thank rode Gonzalez for his significant efforts to improve customer service down it the dsd, particularly in the permitting department. I agree with the need for additional resources, particularly in the I.T. Area. But the concern we have with the proposed budget is the history of inefficiency across the board, not just in permitting. There's been little improvement in the site planning departments, fire, Austin water, Austin energy, and I.T. And one department or even one reviewer derails the process time after time. So without any improvements in these partner departments and more accountability across the board, millions in new staff and fees won't make much of a difference. It will only make our affordability problem that much worse. The proposed new fees are dramatically higher than before, 267% increase, never before been seen, all fixed costs. They hit lower priced homes the hardest and adus bear the brunt of that. [12:23:09 AM] I'd ask you to do more to above efficiency and accountability in every department before committing to such large fee and fee increases in the dsd. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Is teddy Garber here? You'll be at this podium. Sir. >> Good morning, mayor Adler, councilmembers. Many of our working members who cannot afford child care depend on afterschool programs as a key factor in their ability to work. Unfortunately, federal and state governments have been reducing support for afterschool programs as well public education in general. Thankfully, the city of Austin has stepped up as a life line through prime time to keep afterschool alive at other 30 aid campuses, most of whom are in high-needs communities. This past year clue a combination of state, private, city funding every aisd campus that needed an afterschool program was able to have one. Long-term we all need to do more to develop sustainable funding for our afterschool programs but we ask you to come to bat one more time to support 20 campuses. That need expanded prime time funding in this year's budget in addition to the 17 campuses the city is already funding through the competitive prime time grant. This is a way that the city with its common interests in the safety of children during the afterschool hours as well as the ability of working parents to maintain employment can partner with our schools in a way that aid facing the pressure of robin hood recapture is not able to do. Please take this into consideration, and thank you for all your time and your effort and everything that you have done. Please support funding for prime time. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is A.K. Brewer here? [12:25:14 AM] What about sirobi Cooke? What about Analisa plant? Paula Rojas? Nadia [ saying name ]? Candice Aler? What about Jeremy innovation go ahead. >> Thank you for your time. I would just like to encourage you to ensure we have transparency in the Austin police negotiations and as evidenced by that video, we need to make sure that we are spending money to ensure that people know to treat other people with and that's a lot more important than anything else. I think that we need to be sure that we are ensuring that is not -- it is not -- we should not be treating other people like that, and we need to try to ensure that everyone understands that. So thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> I believe I have some donated time. >> Mayor Adler: Is Susanne Litman here? Thank you. >> And Susanne I just want to thank because her husband's birthday was yesterday, since stayed September. So thank you, Susanne. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you for that. Is Scott but thekey here? You have three minutes. Then at the other podium, Jeremy nation, Rebecca leitzy, Juan bellman. Go ahead, please. >> Thank you, mayor Adler, and thank you, city councilmembers. [12:27:18 AM] My name is Candice, I'm a resident of Austin, member of Austin justice coalition, work with measure Austin. I was also on the mayor's task force for undoing racial racism. It is very late. So I'll try to be brief. Last year, in the last meeting, I did talk about our last year's efforts with ajc and better before more we were working toward that. I think you've heard from many people supporting our efforts to urge you -- strongly urge you to end meet and confer. There are several ways that, you know, you could look at the budget to find additional funds, and I wanted to highlight some of the recommendations that I made on the mayor's task force. So we are still criminalizing crisis in Austin. And I have a lot of concerns about the trauma that communities of color are experiencing. I feel like endura and the members of black sovereign nation did an incredible job today of describing their appropriate amounts of outrage and I just really want to thank you all for your comments. And the video that Chris played for y'all is -- I could see that it touched y'all and I think that it's really important for you to understand how that feels from the perspective of people that look like the person that was being thrown around on the ground. So investing in an effort that would bring our city together and address the traumas that individuals have experienced and their historical trauma, in their families, in their race and slave-based trauma. [12:29:22 AM] There are many layers and aspects so this, so that was address individual specifically in the -- addressed very specifically in the report. I've served on lots of councils, at national levels, state level, city level. I'm very familiar with, you know -- I think, mayor, you're doing a great job of trying to get together task forces, and I see you trying to do this for a purpose. You're wanting to get this information together in reports that you guys can use. But it's hard for y'all -- I know y'all can't read every single page of every single report and know every single thing so I want to try to bring the dots together for you. In that report, the third -- the health section in 3.2.2 was the recommendation to create the office of resilience within the Austin public health department. [Buzzer sounding] It's to ensure that all services and systems are trauma informed and trauma responsive, that trauma both exacerbates and leads to poor health outcomes. I would urge you to look at the study to understand how that expands to all health outcomes and that an office of resilience can implement a citywide transformation project among all city sectors, systems, and partners. This would include the police department, it would include all city sectors. So I urge you to consider that being where you could place that money to address a lot of the problems that you've heard today. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Juan bellman here? Or David Woodworth? Or Felicia fodder? Okay. Come on down opinion please. >> Good morning. I'm Rebecca, I'm executive director of American gateways. [12:31:22 AM] We provide immigrant legal services to our low-income immigrant neighbors here in central Texas so, first of all, this is not groundhog day but I do want to thank you again for the leadership that this council has provided on both sb4 and also on being selected as part of the safe cities network and American gateways is really proud to be partnering with you on that. I want to ask you very specifically to include in the budget concept items e28 and s16, which would fund legal services for the low-income community, immigrant community. The amount of these budget requests is $300,000, a drop in the bucket for the city budget, but for hundreds of immigrant families here, this is the only place they would be able to turn to. Without this funds, we would have hundreds of families who would not be able to get the legal advice that they need. [Buzzer sounding] Or have -- or have any defense from deportation. So thank you for considering this request. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Sylnovia Joseph? I think you may be our last speaker. Ma'am? >> Good morning. My name is Felicia foster. I am a building designer, and a third generation austinite. I want to address the proposed increase in fees associated with the dsd budget. And how it affects my clients, your neighbors, our community. So I want to tell you a bedtime story. I had a client in her 80s that lost her house on Christmas day. She lost everything in that house. She was located on shoal creek, so you can imagine beautiful big trees in her backyard, a little slope down to the creek. [12:33:25 AM] And after explaining to her the process that we were going to have to go to in order to rebuild her house, the time that she should have to take being displaced, the additional costs that she would have to spend, she elected to, after 20 years in that house, sell and leave the community. [Buzzer sounding] The -- >> Mayor Adler: You can finish your thought. >> That was two years ago and I just wanted to share that in the fee increases that are proposed, those fees would go from what was just under $3,000.02 years ago to just under $16,000. So I cannot support the dsd fee increase, and I feel like the council should not as well. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Joseph. >> Thank you, mayor, councilmembers. I'm sylnovia Joseph. I wanted to make my comments specifically in the context of Ms. Pool's comments earlier as related to the visitor impact task force report. I did in fact look at it and it only states African-American once. I want to you recognize that you found $69,000 for your tool, Ms. Pool, and we don't need another tool for displacement. We actually need specific funding for African-American items on this budget. And so what I want to you recognize and I wanting remiss if I didn't thank the staff when I came before this commission -- before the council on February 9, 2017, the mayor actually sent me to Dr. Washington, Dr. Washington, sylnovia abhalt, she actually helped with the information that was provided from the African-American resource advisory commission to the visitor impact task force so you have 15 members on that board, mayor, and I want to you recognize that those 15 commissioners and Mr. Lender was specifically the person. [Buzzer sounding] -- That supported that item. I just want you to recognize succinctly that senate bill is the veterans entrepreneurship bill and if you don't provide us with opportunities then it's a moot bill. [12:35:36 AM] So I'm just asking to you recognize not only African-Americans but veterans as well. Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Anyone here waiting to speak? Okay. Mayor -- >> Ninety-seven. >> Mayor Adler: We'll get to 97 -- I meant waiting to speak on 96. I'm going to close this hearing down. This concludes the public comment portion required by state law. Vote to adopt the budget for 2017 on September 11, 2017. If we don't adopt the budget on September 11 we will continue the hearing to September 12 or 13th. The meetings will be here at city hall 301 west second street, Austin, Texas, begin at 9:30 A.M. On Monday, September 11, 2017, Tuesday, September 12, 2017, and Wednesday, September 13, 2017. Is there a motion to close the public comment portion of the hearing and schedule adoption of this budget for September 11, 2017, to be continued to September 12-13 if necessary? Mr. Renteria makes that motion. Is there a second to that motion? Ms. Pool seconds that motion. All those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed. Passes unanimously with everyone on the dais. The public comment portion of the budget hearing is closed. We're almost there. We now grand jury I forget -- beforei forget about it I'm going to recess for a second our meeting here. It is 12:37. [12:37:40 AM] I am now reconvening our regular meeting. It is 12:37. We're going to go to item 97. This is the second public hearing on proposed property tax rate. We're going to take you this agenda item 97 -- up this agenda item 97 to conduct the second and last of two public hearings on the proposed tax rate, on 46.51 cents per 100 valuation for fiscal year 17-18. The actual property tax rate will be adopted here in city council chambers on September 11, 2017, at 9:30 A.M. We will now call speakers. First speaker is Mr. Hirsch, Stewart Hirsch. And you have three minutes. >> Thank you, mayor, members of the council. My name is Stewart Harry Hirsch and after 43 years I get to talk about you taxing my property. [ Laughter ] I had to wait for this one. I have four things I want to say you to tonight. One is you need to close the funding gap to eliminate the waiting list for low-income homeowners who need repairs, many of whom are in neighborhoods with intense gentrification pressures. This was recommended to you by the Austin home repair coalition, and there are a lot of seniors like me who are much less capable of repairing their homes than some of us, and they need your help, and we need that in the budget. [12:39:50 AM] I think the price tag is half a million dollars. Second is I want you to really consider support for needy residents as recommended earlier tonight by Austin interfaith. I've been attending their meetings. They have some really good ideas and they're well worth pursuing. The third is please do not create acrimony by raising taxes to a level that would trigger a rollback election. We already have enough acrimony about codenext. We don't need to add that to the mix and, finally, this comes out of town hall meetings in my district, council district 2. Our councilmember was generous enough to have the budget people at one of our town halls. We got to do polling. And the overwhelming response in my district is different than anyplace I've ever lived in Austin, and I've sure rent aid lot of different places. Is that health and human services were the highest priority overwhelmingly in district 2. So while that may not be a citywide issue, it sure is an issue in our district. And please respect the process of people showing -- I think there were 50 people in the room, all filling out surveys. Great attendance. Wonderful district to be in. So thank you very much, and I know y'all do the right thing and we'll see you after you do it. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I'll call Susanna Almanza and Adam Kahn. And those are all the speakers to speak. So is there a motion now close the second and final public hearing on the city's proposed maximum property tax rate? Mr. Renteria makes that motion. Ms. Houston seconds it. Let's now take a vote. Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed. It's unanimous on the dais. The final public hearing of the proposed maximum tax visit closed. [12:41:52 AM] Council will vote to adopt the actual property tax rate for 2017-18 on September 11, 2017 at 9:30 A.M. In these council chambers at 301 -- this vote will take place after council adopts the budget. The hearing may be continued to September 12-13 if needed. Those are all the items we have. If no one has anything else, it is 12:42, and this meeting is adjourned.