City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 06/10/2021 Title: City of Austin Channel: 6 - COAUS Recorded On: 6/10/2021 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 6/10/2021 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:06:29 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Councilmembers tovo and councilmember Kelly. Councilmember tovo, is there something you wanted a personal privilege moment. >> Tovo: I would, thank you, mayor. I would like to read a proclamation today in recognition of Austin filipino and dependents day in Austin. It is really my honor to do so and to present this proclamation on behalf of our entire city council. Be it known that whereas the Austin filipino American association better known as faa has been the leader in preserving Philippine's cultural heritage and values for the filipino American community in central Texas by organizing yearly events such as [inaudible] Or c-fair and may flower parade festival. Both honored at the state of Texas capitol grounds in 1999. Whereas faa teaches the [10:07:31 AM] traditional customary dances from various provinces in the Philippines for youth and adult showcasing festivities and events and continues to promote these customs for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations. And whereas afaa has organized annual community gatherings such as Easter celebration, fall festival, and the yearly Christmas gala to infuse the spirit of Philippine Americans. And whereas faa has been active since 1987 in the asian-american community and in the state of Texas. And as an officially recognized representative by the city of Austin. Now therefore I, Kathie tovo, mayor Steve Adler do hereby proclaim June 10, 2021, as continue filipino American and filipino Independence day in Austin. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [10:08:33 AM] Thank you, councilmember, tovo, for doing that on behalf of us all. Also another personal privilege moment, councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Thank you, mayor. Today I am presenting a distinguished service award to Austin code enforcement officer Joe Fuentes' family in his honor. The Austin code department experienced a tragic loss when Mr. Fuentes passed away on may 12, 2021. It was his birthday and his team was able to spend time with him at lunch. Born in Houston, Texas, Mr. Fuentes served his country in the U.S. Army, a retired city of how often employee and employed at the city of Austin as a code enforcement officer at the time of his passing. Mr. Fuentes was a hard worker who exemplified the meaning of a publicker is vent. In everything he did, he was always willing to go above and beyond. He was loved and cherished by his friends, family and colleagues. I've spoken with many of his colleagues who tell me that Joe not only worked hard but did so because he cared [10:09:34 AM] deeply for those he served. Austin code was fortunate to have his service and friendship. To the residents that they serve, Mr. Fuentes was a great ally. He cared very much for the community and volunteered in outreach programs. To his team he was family. He was skilled and experienced and often could be found helping teammates every day. He told great jokes and shared amazing stories. It is clear he is leaving a hole in the parts of many he worked with. Today we're recognizing him by serving the city of Austin. To the family I am sorry for your loss and sorry I was unable to meet him in person but his work will not be forgotten by the city of Austin. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mayor pro tem. >> Ellis: -- [10:10:37 AM] >> Harper-madison: I also have a proclamation. One that's very important for a member of the 02 community. A lot of you all probably know Mr. Harold Mcmillan because he's well known in the black community for having being present front and center, an active historian for the city of Austin especially as it pertains to black art. In our recognition and sign of appreciation, we would like to read this proclamation into the record. Be it known that whereas Mr. Harold Mcmillan has been a consistent respected presence and a go to in black arts and cultural heritage in Austin, Texas for nearly 40 years. Founding, co-founding, directing, publishing, serving as executive producer for many respected organizations, films, publications and events. Whereas Mr. Harold Mcmillan has been an honorable steward of Kenny Durham's [10:11:38 AM] backyard, a space for community, art and music to flourish. Creating a space that is welcoming to anyone who comes through those Gates. Whereas Mr. Harold Mcmillan has been an advocate of the arts and cultural heritage education, engaging the next generation and instilling the love and appreciation for black east Austin arts and cultural contributions. Whereas Mr. Harold Mcmillan is undeniably a keeper of Austin's art, soul, rock, funk, blues and all that jazz, now therefore I, mayor pro tem Natasha harper-madison along with mayor Adler and my colleagues on the Austin city council, do hereby proclaim June 20, 2021, as Harold Mcmillan day in Austin, Texas. [10:12:38 AM] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Again, mayor pro tem, thank you for doing that on behalf of us. All right, is the cameras running? >> We're ready to go, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Okay, great. Colleagues, I'm going to call to order this Austin city council meeting here on Thursday, June 10th, 2021. The time is 10:12. This meeting is being held virtually pursuant to the pandemic orders. And we have a quorum present. Let me read in some changes and corrections. Item number 2 on June 2, 2021, was recommended by the water and wastewater commission on 8-1 vote. [10:13:39 AM] Items 3, 6, 8 and 9 on June 2nd recommended by the water and wastewater commission on a 9-0 vote. Item number 7, the language has been changed on this item to add the words by meeting the goals with instead of through the achievements of good faith efforts for. Item number 26 postponed indefinitely. Item 39, councilmember pool has been added as a co-sponsor. Item number 42 is withdrawn and replaced with addenda item 86. And item 101 is postponed indefinitely. The number of pulled items we have thus far are 2, 5, [10:14:43 AM] 11, 77, 85, 93, and 96. Two pulled by tovo, 5 pulled by tovo, taken up with item 96. 11 pulled by tovo, 77 I pulled, 85 councilmember tovo, 93 kitchen, and 96 tovo. On the item number 38 boards and correction, late additions there, zoning and platting, Betsy Greenburg, immigrant affairs, Sara Becker, human rights commission, Kimberly [10:15:44 AM] W. Brienzi, all nominated by councilmember Kelly. We have some late backup, hfc items 1 and 2. Please help me remember to put that in. On or council meetings, 2, 11, 39, 41. 55, 77, 85, 86, 89, 91, 93, 96. 113, 119, 102, 121, 122, and 127. Colleagues, we have some speakers that have signed up that will each be given two minutes to speak, but before we get to speakers, colleagues, mayor pro tem. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, chair. I would like to pull item 91 >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [10:16:45 AM] Item number 91 pulled by the mayor pro tem. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: I think we might need to pull 78 to be discussed with 77. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Let's pull 78 as well. Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: I'd like to -- on item number 11 -- oh, I see -- I have some amendments that I think are agreed to by staff, but I see that councilmember tovo pulled that also, right? >> Mayor Adler: That's correct, that's been pulled. >> Kitchen: Well, then item 16 I need to pull that one also. We might be able to handle on consent, but not sure. [10:17:45 AM] And item 93, I think you have -- do you have -- showing me pulling that one? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: So item 93, yeah, I need to pull it. I want to say to the mayor pro tem I appreciate her message board post and I just saw it so I'm thinking about it. Depending on when we get to consent, we might be able to put it back on consent. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember pool? >> Pool: Thanks. Was item 2 also pulled by councilmember tovo? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Pool: Okay. Great. And I also want to pull item 91. I noticed the mayor pro tem has pulled that. I was wondering if maybe we should take that one up in coordination with item 77. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [10:18:47 AM] >> Pool: Thanks. >> Tovo: Sorry, mayor, would you mind asking expect to say which -- councilmember pool which item? >> Mayor Adler: 91. At the same time we're discussing 77 and 78. >> Tovo: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Tovo: I'm sorry, I meant to pull item 17. It will not take long, but I think it would be clearer for the discussion to reiterate what we talked about on Tuesday briefly as a pulled item, it should not take long. The hazard plan. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Who pulled item 16? Did someone pull item 16? >> Pool: 16 was councilmember kitchen. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [10:19:51 AM] Councilmember Kelly? >> Kelly: I'd like to pull item 89, please. >> Mayor Adler: 89. Okay. Okay. Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: We have number 89 and I think we have a [inaudible] I would like to take it up after executive session. >> Mayor Adler: We will take that up after the executive session. Okay. All right, so the consent agenda today is items 1 through 46 and also items 77 through 96. The pulled items are 2, 5, [10:20:54 AM] 11, 16, 17, 77, 78, 85, 89, 91, 93, and 96. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: Mayor, I know for several of us, some of them we've indicated are very short and I don't know if it would be helpful if we indicated which those are, but my expectation is that 11 that I pulled is very -- well anyway, I would need a moment to think about it, but I know 11 is and maybe we could make a list of the quick pulls versus the ones that need for discussion so we can be efficient with our time. I can do that with the ones I've pulled. I'm just not prepared to do that at the moment. >> Mayor Adler: After the speakers. >> Tovo: Thanks very much. And just to signal to my [10:21:54 AM] colleagues, I have -- I had distributed some amendments at our last meeting for 93, and mayor pro tem, thank you, I think you incorporated some. I know there was conversation about putting 93 back on the consent agenda which I'm happy to if the rest of my amendments are accepted. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember Kelly? >> Kelly: Could you please let the record reflect me abstaining from item number 40? >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Kelly: Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: All right. That said, are we ready to hear from speakers? >> Mayor, staff is requesting a postponement for item number 16. I think councilmember kitchen pulled this, but I think making the changes and corrections that we are -- but we are requesting a [10:22:55 AM] postponement at this time. >> Mayor Adler: That being the case then, councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: I would -- city manager, what's the date for the postponement? The postponement to what date? >> The next council meeting, July 29. >> Kitchen: That's acceptable to me, mayor, that we postpone it to the -- you say again July what? >> 29. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen removes her request to pull item number 16 and it will stay on the consent agenda as postponed to July 29th. Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, I appreciate it. Councilmember Kelly's abstention, item number 40 I would like to add myself as co-sponsor. >> Mayor Adler: So noted. [10:23:56 AM] Are we ready to hear from speakers? All right. I'm going to ask the clerk to call the speakers and I'm going to ask the mayor pro tem to take the chair. I'm going to move to city hall and I'll be back and Jo you guys. >> Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Each speaker has two minutes today. There are about -- just under 70. Is that right? >> Yes, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: When you map out a day, if everybody speaks for their allotted time, we're starting here at 10:00, it's roughly eight hours to 6:00, we break for lunch, we have executive session. We have about three, three and a half hours worth of speakers. So please go ahead and start the speaker list. >> Okay. Our first speaker, requested [10:24:58 AM] Spanish interpretation. Are you ready? >> Yes. >> The first speaker is Maria Munoz. >> [Speaking in Spanish]. >> [Speaking in Spanish] >> Translator:. That's fine, thank you. You can begin. >> [Speaking in Spanish] >> Translator: My name is [10:26:01 AM] Maria Munoz and I have been receiving a lot of help from the city and I wanted to thank you for that and they invited me to this meeting today. Proceed. >> [Speaking in Spanish] >> Translator: With the pandemic and the high cost of living, a lot of us are needing help. >> [Speaking in Spanish] [10:27:21 AM] >> Translator: More than anything I wanted to thank you and let you know we are here and we are trying to do well. And any additional help we can receive will be much appreciated. Thank you. >> Thank you. The next speaker is Richard suttle. >> Hello? Am I on? >> Yes, you are on. >> Mayor and council, I'm speaking on item number 2 on the ser that's on your agenda. I was not familiar with the process. I know it's been pulled. I wanted to see if there's a creative way we can work on this on the dais today because this item has been in the process for well over a year. There has been three previous city council votes moving this project along, and we got to the end [10:28:22 AM] realizing we were going to need a ser approval for a portion of the property that's not yet in the city. Annexation involves the problem on it, but we -- the landowner does not want to be in the city of Austin. My client is not the landowner yet. He's supposed to close on Monday and he's out of extension. So the conversation I wanted to have and get some direction from your law department and all of y'all, is there a way we can do this ser knowing that we could start annexation next week which would solve the timing issue. The ser would be approved, my client could close and they could get started on the project they've been working on for well over a year. The items that the council has already voted on previously was last year nine acres of the 35 was in limited purpose, and we had a 10-0 vote for the zoning for mf-2, a 10-0 vote to [10:29:25 AM] annex into full purpose, and a 10-0 vote to pass a resolution to start the annexation process on the 25 acres. In the interim, my client filed a site plan, completely complies with all the environmental regs, and if he was in the city, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But because of the timing glitch, we have to go through this process. I know Chris Harrington and I had many conversations about it. [Buzzer sounding] Chris is caught because he's got a process in the code with no -- no policy or no direction on it. >> Speaker, your time has expired. The next speaker is Craig Naser. [10:30:25 AM] >> Hello, can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Go ahead. >> Okay. Well, I'm here -- I'm the conservation chair of the lone star chapter of the see irrelevant are club, and I'll -- Sierra club and Austin regional group for which I'm speaking. This is concerning item 2. We think that the entire development should follow the development process for the city of Austin even though a portion of it is still in the etj. What's happened now and the environmental commission did not approve this or the watershed protection department, is the part that is in the etj, they are trying to develop without following our hill country roads ordinance or without the heritage tree ordinance. Which is going to allow a lot more development on that [10:31:26 AM] property. This is a very sensitive piece of property at one of the head waters of bull creek. There is a substantial population of a threatened species on the property and adjacent to it. And we would really like to see this property to develop following all of the rules of Austin. We fought very hard and very long to get the balcones canyon land preserved so that other development could happen more densely than environmentalists wand it. And this seems like a little tricky way to try to get around that on a very delicate piece of property, and we think this -- if you are going to develop this at all, needs to develop the whole property following the rules of the city of Austin. Thank you very much. >> Bobby Levinsky. [10:32:29 AM] >> Thank you, mayor and council. This is Bobby Levinsky with save our springs eye lines. I'm speaking in opposition to item 2. The two previous speakers spoke about. The site has a lot of history, but it's in the opposite direction. The Sers have been denied in the past because this is an environmentally sensitive site. This is immediately upstream of one of the most populated habitats for the jollyville plateau salamander, the head waters of bull creek, and studies have shown that the increased urbanization of this area has resulted in a reduction in -- a reduction in the population of these salamanders. The applicant did not inadvertently submit a site plan before getting annexed. It's an intention action to skirt zoning regulations that would apply when including the hill country [10:33:29 AM] roadway ordinance and the heritage tree ordinance that the previous speaker spoke. The process that the watershed protection department has followed for many, many years is that when they see a service extension request result in a more intense development that could increase the pollutants on the environmental site such as this one, they recommend denial because that is something that the city is increasing intentionally -- essentially the available development on the property. And as a result of that service extension request. We could do this in entirely different order where if you deny the service extension request, the applicant gets annexed, they could resubmit a site plan that is compliant with current city code. All current city code, not just the environmental regulations. I think that would be a reasonable outcome here. The developers still can make a lot of money on this property and the city will be able to protect the jollyville salamander. Thank you for your time. [10:34:33 AM] >> Kendra Esther. >> Good morning. Can you hear me? >> Yes, please proceed. >> Yes, ma'am. My name is endura Esther. I'm speaking on item 55. I reside at Santa Rita court. I've been volunteering with haca for the redevelopment. Speaking with the residents of rosewood anticipating for development, I am highly in favor for this zonement to take place in the near future for residents of which in turn would help combat the housing crisis currently develop in east Austin and reestablishment of the community which is in need of support. The support that could be established by the city of Austin partnering with the housing authority of city of Austin could make this redevelopment happen, which will that much have more impact on the east side of Austin. East Austin is rapidly growing and we need the [10:35:35 AM] support to keep up with the ever growing population for the benefit of the community and offer equal fair housing to citizens. This is why I'm in favor with the upcoming redevelopment of rosewood and the city of Austin and haca working together to build an Earth about future for residents and future residents. Thank you. >> Steve Richard. >> Hi, this is Steve Richard. I live in district 1 at Roy's wood court. I want to thank the city for its support for the redevelopment and planning for here. And I hope the support will continue as housing for low- income and poor austinites is desperately needed. And with the redevelopment we'll have even more units here than we currently have and also have some [10:36:35 AM] homeownership possibilities on the property which would help with first-time homeowners and help get more people in housing instead of them possibly being on the streets or in the shelters. Because I know I got here from the shelters. And having a roof over your head is vital to make your life a better life and to give you opportunities to move on from that. So I'm really hoping that the city can stick with this and even ask hud for more money to work with haca. Thank you very much. >> Sonya Reese. >> Good day. Mayor, councilmembers and community. My name is Sonya javette. [10:37:40 AM] I'm an artist, singer, song writer, musician and music and TV producer. Board member of Austin, Texas musicians and a long-term resident of Austin, Texas. Here to speak against the spending framework resolution to adopt item 77 of American rescue plan act. The music community is a huge part of why people are attracted to Austin. The music community and women, lgbtq, people in color are in need of the synergy infusion of financial stimulation so we can get up on our feet. Once upon a time artists were treated as highly respected members of the community, but play to pay is a thing and Austin has to pay to play for tips and beer instead of hourly wages. Ten million down to 2.2 million with a large portion of the funds being given to historic [10:38:41 AM] preservation and cultural arts, which seems to skip over the east side of Austin entertainment community. Congratulations, Harold Mcmillan. I urge council to vote against item 77. Thank you for allowing me to speak. >> Kevin Russell. >> Hello. Kevin Russell here. 30-year local musician with [indiscernible]. Thanks, mayor, mayor pro tem, council, for letting me speak. Speaking on item 77. Everywhere I go I sing the praises of the Austin, Texas brand and I'm a great lover and defender of the city of [10:39:42 AM] Austin. But recently you approved 10 million over two years from the American rescue plan monies to the music community. We rejoice about this, very grateful. But now it appears council wishes to reduce the amount significantly and spread it out over a longer period. And whereas this might benefit your budgets, I'm sure it does, it's not as helpful to our music community. Musicians and venues need all the help we can get as soon as possible. Personally speaking, I have ten musicians I employ. A sound engineer, tour manager, artist manager, booking agency, business manager, lots of jobs depend on my income. The pandemic took nearly a million dollars gross out of my pocket. I watched as all the shows canceled, I saw the [10:40:42 AM] inevitable struggle that we all were faced with. But I didn't give up. Like all of you, I look for a way to help. I wrote a song called stay at home which mayor Adler used when he announced his stay at home ordinance. Texas medical association heard the song and used it. I also continued to pay my musicians through July of 2020 until I knew they could navigate the unemployment bureaucracy. [Buzzer sounding] I didn't turn away was the point. I didn't turn way when needed. I didn't change my mind after I made that promise. Even though it would have been understandable -- >> Speaker, your time has expired. >> I found a way to help. >> Silvay Rosa proxis. [10:41:52 AM] Rosa, please unmute. Rebecca burnhart. >> Hi. My name is Rebecca burnhart and I live in district 10 and I'm here to speak on item 77. You know, I'm really confused about why the musician community is pitted against the homeless community on item 77. I'm here to speak in favor of spending $100 million on making more housing for unhoused people in Austin. I think it's outrageous what a big homeless population we [10:42:52 AM] have. We are an incredibly wealthy community and our inability to build more affordable housing is driving the crisis that we have in terms of having really twice as many, double the rate of homelessness as the rest of the state and the united States. You know, we know that homelessness disproportionately impacts people of color. We know that people who are chronically homeless have a lot of complexity to helping them get out of homelessness, and so it's not always just simply putting a roof-folks' heads. So it's going to take a decent amount of money. You know, but we have those resources from the federal government right now and we should really use them to try to address this problem. We should be leaders in this and we shouldn't, you know, skirt that responsibility. [10:43:55 AM] And I hope city council can find a way to address some of the needs of the music community and really be leaders on the homelessness issue at the same time. Thank you very much. >> Cody Cohen. >> Good morning, mayor and council. This is Cody Cowan. Live music in Austin is not back. Musicians still do not have regular opportunities to work. Music worker jobs have not come back at scale and shifts are scarce. Music venues are still 40% below regular income compared to previous years tsba grants have not arrived. Our music industry is still at a precipice. Today you all will consider the framework recommendations in item 77. On may 20th, in item 60, [10:44:56 AM] council voted unanimously to direct the city manager to provide a plan to appropriate up to 10 million over two years to be used for grants to ensure Austin music professionals, organizations and enterprises receive immediate and sufficient relief from covid-19-related losses. This resolution recommended access to multiple public funding sources and suggestions to refund three previous music funds. Staff has only identified 2.2 million for the live music fund. According to EdD's report, that fund will likely not be available to pay working musicians inside of 2021. The current staff recommendations in item 77 are grossly instuff -- insufficient. We implore sun to fund the live music funds. The save music preservation fund and the Austin creative workers funds to the maximum recommended amount of [10:45:56 AM] 10 million over two years and redirect staff to explore all available public funding sources. Thank you all for your hard work and your leadership. Please support live music today in item 77. >> Pat bukta. >> Good morning, councilmembers. Pat bukta here, executive director of Austin, Texas musicians. I'm here today to ask that you truly consider the implications of item 77 before voting. Just a few weeks ago y'all voted to support councilmember Fuentes' proposal to bring 10 million in funding to our community, but after this week's work session that number has been reduced to 2.2 million over two years. That amount will not go far in helping thousands of struggling musicians, venues and industry workers. The pandemic is not over for us yet and with federal [10:46:59 AM] pandemic unemployment insurance benefits ending on the 26th of this month, our situation becomes even more grave. While it may appear that venues are beginning to reopen, those musicians who do have gigs are not getting booked at nearly the rate they were pre-pandemic nor do venues have money to pay for performances. The live music fund will effectively be the stimulus to restart our industry, meaningful investment to make a difference. I understand priorities across our city are forefront and the issue of homelessness must be solved. Please recognize the overlap in these communities and know that many of the musicians with serve are the verge of losing everything and resources often no place to live. I don't have to make the argument losing music directly affects our economy, we know this. But losing the heart of what makes the city great is not an option when we have the opportunity to fix things. Please don't forget about us and follow through with the [10:48:00 AM] recommendations you voted on with item 60 just weeks ago. This council has been in my 30 years as an austinite the first to truly prioritize music and I thank you for your help and look forward to working with you to preserve the soul of our fair city. Also kudos on recognizing Harold Mcmillan, he's a friend and true champion for black culture in Austin. [Buzzer sounding] And bless him and all of you in the work ahead. Thank you. >> Joul Connally. >> Good morning, council. My name is Gerald. I'm community organizer at the Austin justice coalition and live in district 9. And I'm calling today to remind you all that 2,000 -- well over 2,100 Austin residents have already signed the petition calling on city council to commit [10:49:01 AM] 100 million from the American rescue plan funding towards making transformative change in the space - - on the surfaces and housing for our unhoused neighbors. Yet there are still unanswered questions, that's true, but what is before us today is to approve a budget and spending framework and we need to take a cold step to leadership. This will inspire the county and private sector to step up as well. We have an opportunity and we can't kick the can down the road. We need to take care of those in our community who most need the help and are facing an emergency life and death situation created due to prop B. This is an emergency, rioter, must be treated as such. We can ask questions all day, but at the end of the day we need to take decisive action and commit the money towards making this transformative change. Along with that, we also need 20 million for rental assistance in addition to any federal assistance that will be coming for renters. [10:50:01 AM] We need to make sure the rent program lasts until the end of the year and make sure it has the funds it needs to continue. Our representers in our city are also on the verge of homelessness. Renters are musicians, artists, is overlap is great and there is no conflict here. Let's make sure we're promoting and protecting the rent program until the end of the year and that we're -- the funds the community is asking for to build housing and to make real transformative change in the space and services that we provide for our unhoused neighbors. Let's not use the questions we have -- bus. [Buzzer sounding] As ways to stall the pro set. I believe we can get it done. There's so much momentum building -- >> Speaker, your time has expired. Amelia Casas. [10:51:04 AM] >> Good morning. My name is Amelia Casas. I'm the policy [inaudible] I'm also a resident of district 6. I am calling to speak on item 77, the American rescue plan act. I will keep comments brief today. Austin is taking the steps to help our communities recover from the pandemic, however, there's still a gap in this proposal. With the cost of living and housing rising at unfathomable rates, the living wage and the [indiscernible] Our unhoused neighbors we must take this time to invest $100 million in -- our unhoused neighbors are some of the most vulnerable residents and opportunity to recover from the hardship because of the pandemic. I ask you to please consider an increase [inaudible] To homelessness. I echo and support the [10:52:05 AM] demands of our local musicians. A real investment in our people. Thank you so much for your time. >> Yasmine Smith. >> Hi there. This is Yasmine Smith. Born and raised austinite. And I'm coming to you today as not only a constituent but also the director of justice and advocacy for the Austin area urban league. After the passing of prop B, I became even more disi illusioned in the presence of love and 'em paramedic time donated in Austin when I was a compiled. Today we have an opportunity to support the unhoused that we as a community criminalize. Today we have an opportunity to prioritize holistic services provisions. Today we have the opportunity to step up and be the Austin that Austin [10:53:06 AM] deserves. I would like to formally support item 77 and excited about the flexibility in funding especially in regards to unhoused neighbors and rise funding. As an organization Austin area urban league whose constituent base represents individuals applicable to both these budget lines, I can tell you that the need is overwhelming. And this influx of resources will help our most vulnerable thrive. I ask to allocate the null $100 million requested by our community stakeholders. Thank you. Have a wonderful day. >> Guy Forsyth. >> Hello, I'm an Austin musician working in Austin for over 30 years. And I would like to speak on item 77. Although I stand with the homeless community and believe that everything should be done to help them, [10:54:07 AM] I also stand with the continue musical community and know that the Austin musicians who have created the Austin music scene are perhaps Austin's best business partners in existence. Austin musicians work cheap, they live a subsistence level income to create the music scene that brings in huge amounts of money to every year. The last year has been the hardest on record for musicians and really anybody in the service industry. Anybody who spews droplets like myself. It's been a hard time. We are starting to come out of it, but we are not out of it yet. I think that it is absolutely necessary for Austin to protect the Austin music scene to make sure that Austin stays profitable and the investments that individuals have made in Austin maintain their value. I think that Austin is -- [10:55:08 AM] this has been a really difficult time. I don't have to explain that to any of you, but I'm sure you realize that moo executions who have not been allowed to work for the last year and living a subsistence level lifestyle to enable their career as music makers are in danger of becoming homeless themselves. I don't think that by moving funds away from the music scene is the right way to do this. I think that we need to maintain the income generator that the Austin music scene is to maintain the money coming into the hotel occupancy tax and to maintain the value of real estate in Austin. That's my point. And once again -- and I'd also like to say I'm glad to see Harold Mcmillan recognized in this chamber. Thank you very much for your time. [Buzzer sounding] >> Suzanna woody. [10:56:09 AM] >> Hello, mayor, mayor pro tem and council. I'm with the del valle ids district speaking on -- ISD district. I'm asking to you support del valle ISD B allocating $1.5 million. The city of Austin is del valle's council. Six of our nine elementary schools reside in city limits and the other three are in the etj. Please consider specifically allege indicating 1.5 million to del valle. Thank you for your time and I appreciate everything that you all are doing for us and our city. Thank you. >> Sara hall. >> Hello. Thank you all for the opportunity to speak. My name is Sara. I'm a harpist and a student living in district 9. I wanted to call out a [10:57:11 AM] concern about reduction in funds going to the live music fund as proposed in item 77 from the $10 million that passed last week to just 2.2 million. Gigs are my only source of income. I have no employer to provide me health care. I don't have a job I wake up and know I can go to. I have to find new jobs every week. Me and thousands of other musicians in Austin has gone without stable income for 14 months and gigs aren't returning quickly. Multiple musicians have had to leave Austin for cities cheaper to live in. We were already struggling before covid poring paycheck to paycheck in an economy that constantly devalues art. It was worth it because of the vibrant music seen and incredible venues and audiences. But once covid hit what was a struggle became impossible. I want to emphasize that [10:58:12 AM] some of the artists and musicians are on the verge of homelessness. This is an opportunity for prevention. Austin is hemorrhaging talent. This is a tipping point in what the city's culture will be. We are mayor what Austin needs and we don't have the energy to make Austin anymore. I encourage you to oppose item 77. We real really need the original 10 million that had passed last week. Thank you all for listening. >> Marsha Strickler. >> Hello, my name is Marsha Strickler. I live in district 6, Williamson county. Mayor Adler is directly responsible for over 20,000 of these homeless that have flocked to Austin when Adler opened up the camping ban. Crime has increased [10:59:13 AM] ten-fold, yet they still come even though the citizens have voted to reinstate the camping ban with prop B. By defunding the police and opening the camping ban, Adler has single-handedly put austinites and surrounding cities in extreme danger. Williamson county residents will now be forced to pay for a Williamson county lawsuit to fight back. And fight back we will. We the people and we have been fighting this well over four months with the people that own the two hotels. Don't mess with Texas, it comes with a $200 fine for littering. The city of Austin is full of litter from 20,000 homeless people that throw their crash out in public streets and parks. That's $4 million. That's a $4 million fine that mayor Adler should be forced to pay to clean up Austin. [11:00:15 AM] We have repeatedly provided 4 and 5 different options way better for the homeless community instead of spending $9.5 million for candle wood suites for 50 rooms, you can build 300 homes at community first or other opportunities at the Hilton hotel at the airport as discussed in yesterday's relief. That fine, that $200 fine grows each and every day. City council members, we do not support agenda eye 89. Please vote no to purchase candlewood, a lawsuit is waiting to happen. I've interviewed four businesses this week, till I's manager, homeless barefoot man bleeding all over the restaurant floor and in the bath - - >> Speaker, your time has [11:01:22 AM] expired. Next speaker. >> Hi. Good morning councilmembers and mayor. I opposes the purchase of candlewood suites. Since the city wants to go ahead of putting hotels. We presented an all person tiff to the facility -- city already owns this hotel. You can help lot more people. It is close to services. Hospital and it is not hurting schools, restaurants or businesses. As city claims, it violates FAA guidelines. But I had a -- we had a chance to look at it. It allows, hotels, hospital nursing homes. It's not an exclusive list. Also our understanding is, city has no problem violating local laws, like in case of candlewood. It is zoned for commercial use only. City is changing the use to psh. City is not following its own guidelines to schools and residences. [11:02:22 AM] Does the city council and mayor arbitrarily decide to break laws but abide by federal guidelines. There are 4,116 is people who signed opposing the purchase. We submitted 227 letters to councilmember Kelly. On the short notice showing opposition from northwest community about the candlewood purchase. So what we ask, again, is why candlewood? Why city can't reconsider or just walk away from the purchase which will destroy businesses and like said again on this call before, hospitality, music, industry restaurants, all were badly hit. We need support. We don't need more battles. We don't need any of this. We need this council and mayor to listen to us and support us wholeheartedly which I know they will. Thank you so much and thank you for listening. Have a great day. >> Freda Chang. [11:03:27 AM] >> My name is Freda Chen. I oppose buying the candlewood hotel. And I have over 50-some people working for me. I have musicians working for me. You know, every week they come here play music. And I don't want my staff and my musician people to lose their job because buying the candlewood hotel. I see -- I see a man, a homeless man without a shirt with machete walking to -- and I have a homeless lady came in scream and yell, want to burn down my restaurant and walking out because I didn't give her money and want a drink and cigarette. We just give her water and she's so mad. [11:04:29 AM] I'm here in Austin over 50-some years here. I don't -- I'm losing the word to say. I see everything is homeless is getting worse and worse. I just don't think that buying hotel is going to help the homeless. There's other way we can help them. In one room you can help them. They really need help, mental and all the abuse. So buying a hotel put them in one room is not going to help them. The money really need to focus on the mental issue and alcoholic issue. Please listen, you know, the mayor and the council, please do not buy candlewood hotel. Thank you. >> Laura Templeton. >> Good morning, mayor and council. [11:05:29 AM] I live in district 10 and I'm speaking on item 89. I'm opposed to the city buying the candle wood suite for the purposes of psh. It is not an ideal location for our neighbors experiencing homelessness. There are no medical, drug addiction or mental services closest to the hotel. The closest grocery store is a two- mile round trip. There are five schools within a two-mile radius of candlewood. The city failed to conduct an impact study before they entered into the nontransparent negotiations that have brought them to this point. The Williamson community is overwhelmingly opposed to this purchase and judge -- filed to sue the city and keep them in court as long as it takes. The purchase of this hotel would be another example of the city's inefficient use of Austin taxpayers' dollars. Your constituents are wondering why the city is insisting on buying such an obviously flawed hotel for the purposes of [11:06:32 AM] permanent support of housing. Thank you all for listening to my concerns and have a wonderful day. >> Sandy Ramirez. >> Yes. Hi. Good day. Apologies. Can you hear me okay? >> Yes, we can. Please proceed. >> All righty. Good day, mayor and council. My name is sandy. I'm calling to voice my nonsupport for item 89 on today's agenda. I understand it was -- I recently heard on the news the judge in Williamson county is going to sue the city of Austin if this item passes today. This is where my tax dollars are going. Why must we continue to play these games with our money and time when unhoused neighbors are suffering when regular housed folks are trying to make a living in Austin. [11:07:32 AM] Mayor, you made a promise to Williamson county and now are breaking it. I would like to thank councilmember Kelly for -- in a way that opens the conversation for collaboration. Councilmembers, please don't give in to -- to the fight between the mayor and the -- the mayor made a promise and he's trying to break it. Please, please, listen to the voters. Have a blessed day everyone. >> Jen Dion. >> Good morning respected city council members and mayor. My name is Jen Dion. I live in district 5. I oppose the purchase of candlewood suites. I don't understand why the city council is rushing to execute the most expensive strategies for addressing homelessness without a proven action plan. [11:08:34 AM] Candlewood suites costs more per unit than any other housing hotel strategy the city has making it the most expensive purchase of its kind. If we could speed some data or studies showing the efficacy of this investment, we could have more peace of mind. If we're justifying this purchase because we're in a hurry and need it now, then I have to ask, what price would be too much that city council use the number for guidance? If you factor in remodeling, moving out long-term residents and other related expenses, then the cost per unit starts to reach the cost for building out a new unit. Look at community first -- why not partner with Allen graham. Why is the city going tore the most expensive versus alternative solutions. Implement the will of the Austin voter with proposition B to save Austin for all citizens instead of the continued recipe disaster [11:09:38 AM] the city created. Thank you so much for listening. >> Marie shah Dari. >> Good morning, mayor Adler, city council and the sponsors of 89. Agenda, 89. I speak especially to you. My name is -- the Hampton and Homewood adjacent to the candlewood. I am against the city buying the candlewood and I agree is Cynthia long, county commissioner, Williamson county and what she said yesterday, what she said in her email letter dated June 8th, to mayor and city council. I truly believe the city is rushing into this purchase as the owner of candlewood must have offered to sell his hotel to city and city took him up on the idea without making sure the location is ideal. It is not. We have never had public transportation in the immediate area, grocery stores, mental health service are not nearby. [11:10:38 AM] The city is disregarding zoning laws as this area is zoned for commercial, not residential. Plus, the city thinks they can just use our driveway without any notice to us. Since camping was allowed for two years, our community including Anderson mill neighborhood condos, Freda and our hotels have had homeless trespass, van lichl damage, break in to building, homeless lunged at employee, one homeless lady wanted cigarettes, threatened to burn down restaurants and our -- stabbed a person at academy one week later after he trespassed on our new hotel property. City is so concerned to just make to house homeless quickly without helping issues at hand. Homeless also need community to thrive. City has completely forgotten all the hard working tax paying citizens of pecan park community. What about our safety? City of Austin needs to hear our plea. Mayor Adler was at community [11:11:39 AM] first recently for the expansion news day and he called Allen graham a saint. Why doesn't he be smart and create a large mini home community like an airport Hilton proposed yesterday at our press conference and get all the homeless off the streets and make Austin beautiful again. Thank you. I say no to candlewood. I am against agenda number 89. Thank you. >> Amanda wheeler. >> Hi. My name is Amanda wheeler. I'm the dual direction tofr sales at the Homewood suites Austin cedar park. I am against agenda item 89. The homeless need better access to resources to help with mental health as well as access to jobs and public transportation. This location will not benefit them and only. [11:12:50 AM] >> It sounds like we lost the speaker. We'll try to get back in touch with that one. >> Next speaker is Bianca Ramirez. >> Hi. I'm Bianca against item 89. We've presented the councilwide -- it would be wrong since it deviates from aspects that make Houston port model a success. It doesn't have access to transportation, hospital, nor substance abuse treatment since located in resource desert of Williamson county. They do not provide mental health nor substance abuse treatment I'm disappointed with the facility on Dean avenue. Inefficient care caused people to reengage in the same lifestyle choices that contributed to their circumstances. If we're serious about helping the unhoused in Austin, we must not only treat the symptom of circumstances but attack the underlying causes with targeted care instead of casting aside the unhoused we see suffering on the streets into a building [11:13:52 AM] without access to the right services. An alternative city-owned location, one hit hard by covid-19 -- in turn, you can reinvest those arp funds from buying hotels to help revise the struggling artists struggling paycheck to paycheck and who actually are one paycheck away from being homeless themselves by allowing them to continue pursuing their dreams and perform. Thank you. >> Next speaker is mark duken. >> Good morning council and mayor. My name is mark duchen. I oppose the resolution for item 89. We've been told time and again by virtually everybody we've spoken with that the psh success [11:14:52 AM] factor is determined by how it is implemented. Unfortunately, in nearly two years, including four months of due diligence, no details have been shared with us. Although, not their responsibility when we spoke with APD, they actually apologized to us on behalf of the city for the lack of communication and details. No one we've ever spoken with have been ever to -- surrounding this purchase. This seems a lot like we're rushing forward again with no plan. A lot like the camping ban repeal. We've seen how poorly that turned out. We don't know yet the impact of the neighbors and the businesses if serving homeless with scarce access to substance abuse and mental health services will work. Or for that matter optional or -- we really have no comparable data on any of this. It feels like looking at a facility like the terrace at oak springs and housing many veterans is like comparing apples and Oranges. In the back of my head, I wonder if a closer -- is more like [11:15:54 AM] project connect throwing money at a transportation problem with virtually no publicly available data it will actually be effective in solving the root cause, congestion or, in this case, we're talking about homelessness. So I ask, slow down, get the data, do this right. We've already created a lot of avoidable concern and fear. Some of which you've heard this morning. In the process, it's led to a lot of people trying to spend a lot of time researching their own time and budget to question the city -- I've got a request over 60 days old unfulfilled and I have yet to hear from the records department. Marching forward without information is likely to create another unfortunate situation where it can neither help the homeless or the austinites to interact with. Thank you. [11:16:55 AM] >> Is. [ Inaudible ] >> Mayor pro tem and councilmember. My name is -- the advocacy committee chair and -- housing work supports item 91 sponsored by -- that would appropriate $20 million from the emergency reserve fund in addition to any funds committed by the federal government. This item would allow the funding to be returned if not needed to -- for eviction. Housing work -- supports mayor Adler's proposed framework for the American rescue plan act for item 77 which would move us closer to fully funding the homelessness summit plan and $20 million to supplement the -- unsheltered homelessness in Austin brought together businesses to -- philanthropic partners and social justice advocates to create a plan to address this issue. Housing works has long advocated to address issues related to affordability including homelessness and needs. [11:17:57 AM] To achieve such change and reach equilibrium in the rehousing system, housing works Austin is asking Travis county to fully fund in partnership with the philanthropic and private sec tofrmt at the same time, it is critical to remain focused on ensuring affordability for all. To support all austinites, we must fully fund the summit plan and add an additional 20 million to the rental assistance funds committed by the federal government. We ask that you vote in favor of the mayor's funding for item 77 and vote in favor of item 91. Thank you to all the councilmember necessary to address the critical needs and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. >> David green. >> Yes. Thank you very much. Good morning mayor and [11:18:58 AM] councilmembers. I'm here -- I live in district 8. I'm here to speak against 89. I don't want to repeat what's been said. But it's increasingly clear that this is not an appropriate location for the housing homeless. I'm going to focus more on the fact that there's no services for the homeless. It's clearly not an appropriate - - this has all the markings of a knee jerk reaction. We need a place, oh, candlewood is available, let's buy it. So there's -- clearly hasn't been enough community input. There clearly hasn't been enough discussion with Williamson county officials as witnessed by what the judge is planning on doing. I wish him all the success in the world if this is not defeated. I lived in the San Francisco bay area for 40-plus years. [11:19:58 AM] This looks like we're throwing money at a problem without specific, clear goals and as all too often, no attempt to measure impact once they move forward with this. Again, there's no services there for the homeless. And it's clearly, from the earlier comments, not anything that is comfortable for the existing residents. I urge you to vote against 89. Thank you very much for your time. >> Lisa reams. >> Lisa, please unmute. [11:21:03 AM] Fran da too. >> Good morning. I'm speaking in support of 77 and 91 today. I volunteered in the -- I want to bring thanks to them. They are you and they're me. They are people you know in your own families and communities. They're one catastrophe away from losing everything. Think about that for a moment. The level of anxiety is extremely high. I would say the need for mental health support is increasing. It does not help that it's rolling through camps -- >> One second. Please proceed. >> Yes. It doesn't help that -- demanding people leave and telling them what they're doing is illegal. It goes hand in hand with what one worker told a person that they're in the process of weeding people out. We know this is neither humane or compassionate. What is needed are social [11:22:04 AM] workers with laptops going tent to tent, not police in uniform which freak people out and further the PTSD. People need services. Everyone's housing has been dropped. I know it's hard to keep up with them. We know there's a great deal of money allotted around this issue and as a taxpayer, I'm demanding full disclosure of all the money available down to the penny of what is being spent. What is your blueprint? What's the overall plan? We haven't seen that. I agree with people calling upon 89. This could have been addressed years ago when we saw there was a problem with the homeless people on the streets. Tax -- taxes for homeowners, as I am. Affordable housing. Instead -- I ask that there be a limit on this and support our unhoused neighbors who again are you and me. They're all of us. I thank you today for your time. [11:23:07 AM] >> Monica Guzman. >> Good morning. I'm Monica Guzman. Policy director for guava. Speaking on items 39, 77 and 93. We wholeheartedly support items 39 and 77 including the food policy board recommendations as they support and move forward, work done by many in the community and beyond. As for item 93, the community has been vocal in meetings with council and city staff as well as the project connect blue and Orange line working groups. We see it as an attempt to work around the March 2020 land development code court ruling. The signs are there. The court stopped you. A bill at the state legislature. It's still owned by the Texas department of transportation. Plus, there's no funding in place for the -- north of the transit center. These are all signs telling us the mayor and council, capital [11:24:08 AM] metro and Austin transit membership must be held accountable for the voteable communities. They must center transit dependent residents, especially in vulnerable communities in the planning. Should council move forward with and approve this resolution, we urge the following. City manager Kronk and city staff participating in the studies partner and work with community organizations, engage with vulnerable communities in Austin's eastern crescent. When engaging resident, put into practice the reimagining public safety task force, meaningful community engagement -- prioritize to decision-making that's transparent and responsible with diversity of cultures -- make them more accessibility to participate in while centering the voices of experiences most directly impacted. Require development of a robust community engage the strategy to actively engage members in the districts most impacted by city council decisions. [11:25:08 AM] Ensure capital metro engages online and off with language accessible in interactive meetings. Use that authority to hold capital metro accountable for centering and engaging impacted residents whether represented by -- >> Speaker, your time expired. >> Thank you. >> Lisa reams. >> Good morning. My name is Lisa reams. I'm with neighbors at rosemont and Austin. I'm speaking on 91. Also in reference to, I guess, 77. Maybe 89 as well. Austin has to realize that the homelessness some of our families, yes we want to help them. But they also need to want to help themselves. They're not really motivated out here. They're kind of against Austin and it's a lot of, you know, [11:26:14 AM] blame. Instead, I feel like there's enough funding to get these people a safe and sturdy home and it's also -- enough money to help the music industry. I think it's also enough money to help the people out in Williamson county that have issues with this going on. We've seen what putting a lot of the homeless together can do in one building as we look at Austin. It's kind of not looking as good as it should. We're building big buildings. With high rent and it's kind of difficult for us to even like transfer into those buildings. So if it was some place where that build wasn't so expensive, then maybe a few of those places will help Austin altogether. The musicians need a place to live, the homeless need a place [11:27:14 AM] to live. We have residents leases ending that need a place to live. This is going to be continuing until we all put together. I want to thank everybody for their time and if we get it together as one, we can make this work somehow. Thank you. >> Crystal Erickson Collins. >> Hi. I'm crystal Erickson Collins. I signed up twice but I'm going to try to combine my two statements. I'm speaking on behalf of up doing white supremacy Austin. We support the city's commitment to permanent housing for people living unsheltered to the housing first approach. We ask that you vote to allocate $100 million from the American rescue plan funds for housing programs and services. We recognize that there is widespread agreements that we must solve the problem of homelessness and this is a good [11:28:16 AM] beginning. Additionally, we encourage you to look beyond encampments and vote yes for $20 million of rental assistance over and above federal funds to assist people who are housing insecure and will likely exacerbate the homelessness issue. Personally, I live in Williamson county in the adjacent city to the candlewood suites hotel and the support the city of Austin's plan to purchase the hotel and renovate it for housing and supportive services. Housing first is an evident-based successful program. I am disturbed by the amount of misinformation, judgments and myths that are being propagated, especially by those in responsible positions. I am not alone in Williamson county in support of a housing first approach and the expectation that this will benefit the entire metropolitan area, including our county. I support the equitable plan of having housing in every district [11:29:18 AM] and applaud you for having housing in the vicinity in spite of the difficulties and urge you to continue in this process. Thank you very much. >> Marla Dore add owe. >> Good morning. I serve on the leadership team of planning our community. I'm calling to voice our group support for item 91. Amend the fiscal year 2020-2021 general emergency reserve fund to appropriate 20 million for their rental assistance programs. In addition, I just want to emphasize that it would be in addition to any federal assistance. On item 77, our group also supports mayor Adler's proposal spending framework for the American rescue plan act which expends funding for the homelessness summit plan and includes 20 million to supplement their rent program. [11:30:19 AM] In Austin an estimated 3,160 people are experiencing homelessness and 18,900 renter households are at high risk of eviction, at least 300 million are required to house 3,000 households experiencing homelessness in the next three years and an estimated 109 million is required for -- of all households at this time. Critical that Austin city council lead on these issues in support 91 and 77. Thank you to the councilmembers supporting such transformational changes right now. Thank you all. >> Richard Smith. >> Hello council. I'm Richard Smith. I'm can calling in opposition of item 89. [11:31:19 AM] By way of introduction. I've had the privilege of serving the homeless in as you infor a number of years. I'd like to address item 89 in particular. It breaks a promise between the mayor and Williamson county. If we truly want to help our homeless neighbors, we need to collaborate and communicate like councilwoman Kelly has been doing. By the way, I really appreciate your efforts in that matter. This is a no win situation for everybody. The city, Williamson county and our homeless neighbors. Please do the right thing and vote this down so that the right things can be done in collaboration with everyone who is impacted, especially our homeless neighbors. I also ask you to rethink the failed social policy of housing first for addressing chronic homelessness. This policy has been an abject failure in cities like San [11:32:20 AM] Francisco and Los Angeles. It will not solve homelessness. Even if social services are provided at candlewood, most of our homeless neighbors that experience mental illness and addiction will not be helped and some will get worse. Many will not stay at the hotel and very little, if anything, will actually address the well-being of the homeless. Thank you. >> Joe Katherine Quinn. >> Hi. This is Jo Katherine Quinn. I'm the president and CEO of carrot top of Austin. Thank you all the time for your public service, especially during these extraordinary times. I am speaking today in favor of allocating $10 million of the American rescue plan funds for homelessness. I understand and want to [11:33:20 AM] acknowledge that your choices are difficult. And it does seem like you have to pick certain populations against the other in making these choices. And I want to remind you of something that I know you know and I want to point it out. Today's adults who are experiences homelessness are mostly people impacted across the span of their lives by the relentless failure of our culture and our community to provide equitable opportunity. The infusion of $10 million is a first step to right size our homelessness response system. Aarp funds provide us an opportunity we will not likely have in our lives again in our lifetime. We have neglected this form of human suffering for way too long, which is why we have the crisis which is before us. [11:34:21 AM] I urge you to use this opportunity to do what has been needed for so long, the financial resources to serve everyone in our community who is experiencing homelessness. In closing, money alone will not solve homelessness. But it will not be solved without money. Now is the time to be bold. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. >> Jessica Forsythe. >> Hi. I'm Jessica Bailey Forsythe. I'm a bandleader, mother, representative and -- a representative of the sisterhood and Austin Texas musician as well as an executive producer. Councilmember Fuentes, pushed a resolution that some of us spoke on during the last council meeting to approve $10 million in American rescue plan funding to be split over two years [11:35:21 AM] primarily to backfill the live music fund losses. I feel reducing the number to 2.2 million over two years will not only be devastating to the music community but to the minority community members in -- the creativity of working musicians, giving us the -- I ask that council does not reduce these funds so we can use them to heal the music community which was already in desperate need of help before the pandemic. Musicians are moving away, we're being priced out of the very city that we work and live in and love. My own family has had to make the hard choice to move to butte a, which had effects on my family. By moving from the city we now receive less funding help from ham and Sims and other nonprofits that we really depended on. I ask the live music fund be used specifically for its original purpose for musicians. Do not lessen the amount. [11:36:22 AM] Do not reallocate funds. These funds are desperately needed and the positive ripples it would create would plant roots within the music community that would grow for years and possibly generations. I'm not only asking council and the commission to save the music funds. This is me asking to you do so in order to save our live hi hoods. Lastly, I would love to congratulate my bandmate Harold Mcmillan, this is wonderfully deserved and congratulations. >> Calista press tab. >> Hi. Good morning respected council and mayor. My name is Calista. I work in district 6. I oppose the candlewood suites purchase. This was not actually advised by the expert -- prioritizing more energy on can some kind of political correctness to ensure a facility and each council [11:37:23 AM] district regardless of other factors is a recipe for having facilities with no consideration for access to services, employment, transit and so on that actually matters for a residents success at psh. Likewise, scrambling to do everything in three years at the expense of long-term plans and systems seems counterproductive. The city has yet to answer what is -- outside of political considerations. Stop playing politics with this issue. Everybody involved deserves better than this. Thank you for your time. >> Teresa Alpert. >> Good morning. Good morning council members and mayor. I'm Terry Alpert. I work in district 6. I oppose the candlewood suites purchase. I recently watched a documentary that came out last year called Seattle is dying that dealt with [11:38:25 AM] their homeless situation. Their council went down the same road Austin would be going down had the public not course corrected with prop B, a compassionate approach that goes way past permissiveness into incredulity where no one is held accountable, no one need get treatment for anything and the city will spend handsomely for -- with no quid pro quo from the homeless. Like apb, the police morale is in the gutter and cops fleeing the force. It's another step in going down Seattle's pass. An expensive hotel that doesn't address the root kawfts issue like substance abuse for mental illness. Anyone who talks a good game needs to help explain how homeless will be properly served with a single bus line, no nearby hospital and a 20-minute car commute from integral care. Thank you. >> Ruth Howard. [11:39:34 AM] >> Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on item 89 today. I'll be brief. I'm a lifelong resident of the Austin. Candlewood hotel is not an appropriate location for the homeless. Councilmember Kelly has been doing so many things to improve the relationship with Williamson county. This action to acquire candlewood hotel undermines her efforts to repair the relationship with Williamson county. More importantly, there has not been enough input from the community. We are angry and feel left out of the process. This is a lack of respect for the community and councilmember Kelly to acquire the candlewood hotel to house the homeless. [11:40:36 AM] Thank you for your time and consideration. And I hope you will vote against item 89. >> A nar Patel. >> Hi. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Please proceed. >> I oppose the -- so the city has yet to provide any security or crime data for a comparable facility. All we keep hearing is that will be fine. No detailed explanation is given. No concrete data provided to us. It will -- we're asking for transparency. We're talking about people who aren't required to get any treatment and there are challenges. Like substance abuse or mental illnesses near residences or schools. How is this location selected [11:41:39 AM] and how does it make sense of relocated several dozen untreated in the neighborhood? Please do not see us as someone against homeless people. We're not. We're not saying don't spend money to help them. We are in a a position to help those in need, we do have empathy and we agree we must do our share and contribute to help them. But all we're saying is candlewood is not the right location. City has picked a location where schools are close by, there are kids will be walking to school. Communities are next door where kids are playing. Not only that, no hospitals, no grocery store, no public transportation, nor any job opportunities are close by. How is this location going to help homeless people? We have seen other cities try this model and fail. Why is city of Austin following models that don't work. Why not choose to follow owe again, thank you for your time and I'm against item 89 for the city purchase of candlewood [11:42:40 AM] suites. Thank you again. >> Next speaker. >> Good morning councilmembers and mayor. I oppose the purchase of candlewood suites. I work in district 6. I oppose candlewood suites. I own two hotels right next to candlewood suites. I simply want to ask couple of questions. Who will be responsible for lots of other hotel business when city purchase candlewood suites for the facility? Is city trying to drive the other businesses in the area to the bankruptcy? Covid had tough enough on everyone, especially hotel and restaurants. Now putting hotel right next to [11:43:43 AM] the businesses, we are wondering what city plan? They have money to spend on homeless, but yet they are out of money to help the businesses. It is such a shame that the council and mayor are only interested in playing political game, what is really welfare of the city then. Thank you. >>. >> Brian register. >> Hello. >> Go ahead. >> Hi the city council tried to do something a couple of years ago. You know that you cannot outlaw people sleeping unless you're planning on outlawing them living or you give them a place [11:44:45 AM] to sleep. So we decriminalized homelessness, which is a minimally rational legal kind a thing to do. And now, you know, we don't like seeing all the homeless people around so we can't rationally outlaw homelessness without giving people a home. So we spent the past couple of years not following through. Not designating appropriate money. Not housing the homeless people that people have legitimate concerns about and here we've got a budget that you're actually arguing about where we have $120 in item 77 and 91 for housing the homeless. There should not really be much in the way of a complicated discussion on the matter. This is a problem that you should have been working on much more aggressively two years ago. You need to get on it now. Please pass these things and start housing the homeless. With respect to item 89, that site might not be an ideal site in every way, but it is quite [11:45:45 AM] the bargain and not all homeless people have exactly the same needs. The city needs to pay attention to who should be going into that particular site. So someone who has a car might be better there. They don't need transit so much or something like that. But please disregard these nimh by people. Pay attention to concerns. There's an awful lot of I don't want to see homeless people around me. That's an attitude that does not deserve respect. Send all available funding to homelessness so we can take care of this very serious problem that we have largely brought on ourselves. Thank you. >> Savoy. >> Hi. Senn he can saah voychlt resident of district 4. I called in today primarily in support of directing funds towards a comprehensive solution [11:46:46 AM] to homelessness. Including the summit goal of housing up to 3,000 people over the next three years. It's important to note the accomplishments, right, unsung as they are as a city that in the middle of a global pandemic when homelessness has been increasing in every city in the country. That Austin had a slight decline according to the count. That was for one reason and one reason only. We're housing folks faster than people are becoming homeless. That continued path is the only way forward. That means serious dedication towards allocating these funding towards streams that will be affected. Also towards rental assistance. As moratoriums expire, also become evicted. We will find that capacity to house people will be swamped by people who have become homeless. That can be prevented. It's cheaper to prevent than to [11:47:46 AM] cure. Finally, although I didn't call in about candlewood suites. I want to push back on the notion that housing first has failed, we see much higher compliance rates in terms of actually curing addiction when you use the housing first models rather than requiring sobriety at the front. It causes people to fail more. If we ultimately push back in every location at nearby residences in Austin, then you will not have permanent supporting facilities, you'll have a few towards the edge of town which won't work for anybody intermittently than chronically homeless. There's no evidence in any of the literature, businesses going out of business because of permanent supportive housing. That's been something that's been extensively studies. The average age of somebody ending permanent supportive housing is 55. If you think somebody 55 with an [11:48:49 AM] addiction is -- >> Speaker, your time has expired. >> I've got bad news for you about retirementomes then. Bye. >> Carlos Leon. >> First and foremost. Item 93's goals. Equitable transit sounds good on paper. Where the rubber meets the road. Criminal cap metro does not act equitably. There are many black bus drivers who refuse to stop for me and/or board me and/or transport. There are also nonblack bus drivers who do the same. They appear to be illegally targeting me for being a whistle-blower or lawfully -- to ride without a mask per governor Abbott's executive order 36, which cap metro is still not [11:49:49 AM] officially complying with per their covid-19 website. Therefore, going beyond race, cap metro selectively following the law for some but not others or not following the law for anyone are both inequitable actions because both are unfair and unjust. Therefore, differentiating treatment and exact same treatment can both be inequitable depending on context, process and outcome. Though equity, equal protection under the law is he -- unequal protection and no protection are inhe canable. Therefore, since criminal cap metro is not practicing that equity pillar for all passengers across all buses and drivers by not officially -- by executive order 36 though his order has the force and effect of law, cap metro cannot be trusted to equitably conduct that transit [11:50:51 AM] study much less equitably implement its findings. If you're serious about item 93's goals and actualizing them, first make them comply with governor Abbott's executive order 36 to follow the law. Out. >> Valdez shah Dari. >> Please unmu te. Marie shah Dari. Mayor, that concludes all of the [11:51:58 AM] speakers. >> Mayor: Thank you for take us through that. Colleagues, we have less than ten minutes before we begin sitcom and then go to lunch. Hopefully we can maybe reconvene back in executive session and handle that and come out at 2:00. We have the zoning speakers. What are the items that people think would be quick items so that -- on the calendar? Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: 11, I have a very quick amendment. 89. -- 85 I have a quick question. Probably for staff as well as for the sponsor. And mayor, I think before 17 was [11:53:01 AM] called as postponed, I'm not sure if it's been pulled. If you could clarify for me. In terms of what I've brought foortd forward, 11 should be quick, 85 should be quick. Frankly, I don't know how others are thinking about it, 96/5 may be quick but we probably couldn't accomplish before 12:00. The other two I think we could. >> Mayor: 17 has been pulled. Not postponed. 16 was postponed. >> Tovo: Okay, thank you. >> Mayor: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: My thing, 211 is very quick. I agree. I agree with councilmember tovo that 85 and 11 would be good to get out of the way right now. >> Mayor: Okay. Let's pull 85 first. And go through that. 85 was -- >> We have to vote on consent. >> Mayor: Oh, that's right. [11:54:01 AM] Thank you. Thank you. Consent agenda is 1 through 46. 77 through 96. Pulled items are 2, 5, 11, 17, 77, 78, 85, 89, 91, 93 and 96. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Councilmember Kelly makes the motion. Seconded by the mayor pro tem. Discussion on the consent agenda? Mayor pro tem? >> Harper-madison: I'll take the second. I was wanting to ask a question about item number 21. I thought I had pulled that one. If not, can we pull that off the consent and pull item number 21. >> Mayor: Item 21 is also [11:55:05 AM] pulled. Consent agenda. Yes, councilmember alter. >> Alter: So I just wanted to clarify that I should be a co-sponsor for -- on Friday, we were on the earlier version for the letter. -- For the related to the other counties. And then I would like to be seen as voting no on item 90. >> Mayor: Okay. Those things noted for the record. Further discussion on the consent agenda? Yes, councilmember Fuentes. >> Fuentes: Thank you. I just have a few comments on a couple of items. On item 84, which is a $4 million infrastructure fund grant, it would accept that grant and designate a representative to the Texas water board and help execute [11:56:06 AM] that $4.4 million to update our floodplain study. This is an important one and I wanted to flag and highlight that there are portions of watersheds that need to be studied that lie outside of city's jurisdictional boundaries and so since we know that flooding does not recognize such boundaries, it's very important that we leverage these funds to not only update our study but to also identify and prioritize flood mitigation projects in an equitable way. The next item I wanted to speak on is item 39 around flood resilience wanted to thank councilmember tovo on food access policy leadership. I said for far too long we've had deserts located in the eastern crescent and it is not okay to have families who don't know where their next meal is going to come from. We can and we must do better by our community and I think that [11:57:08 AM] this comprehensive and robust policy initiative certainly gets us on that path. A couple of things to highlight from this resolution is that it establishes and creates the austin-travis county food system plan that I myself have been championing through the conversations with city staff and also directs and conducts a needs assessment regarding food insecurity and access in our unsheltered community during times of both noncrisis and crisis. And it directs a creation of a prioritization matrix that can be used to assess city-owned land for the purposes of strengthening our local and regional food system while promoting equity and diversity of urban farm opportunities. I could mention there's a lot of good stuff in that resolution. I'm excited about it. I'm thrilled to be I invited to be a co-sponsor of this resolution and will continue to [11:58:09 AM] champion for the unmet food needs that we have in our community. Last, certainly not least, item number 40 which talks about the importance of citizenship for immigrants, this is especially important for me. My mother emigrated to the United States for a chance at a better life. She was seven months pregnant with me when she traveled to Austin to take her oath of citizenship to the united States. It's not lost on me how important and timely this is, I had the opportunity to co-sponsor this resolution. I want to thank councilmember Casar for his leadership in this area for bringing this forward. There are many families in my area, many families in district 2 -- anything and everything we can do to call upon congress to act 57bd bring permanent protections rooted in compassion to bring us and to together and to establish a pathway is a priority and continues to be a [11:59:11 AM] priority for the Biden administration. Thank you. >> Mayor: Okay. Councilmember -- >> I'm abstaining on item 40 and also on 39. Thank you. >> Mayor: Thank you. Other comments? Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Would you verify whether 89 is on consent. >> Mayor: 89 has been pulled. >> Tovo: I also wanted to speak to a couple of things. Including 59. The food system resolution that I brought forward and my colleague has talked about it a bit as well. During the pandemic, one of the first impacts that I I believe became publicly of concern in addition, of course, to the concerns about the virus were the disruptions to our food [12:00:11 PM] systems. Again, as we faced the weather emergency of 2021, again, we had really very stark reminder of the fragility and inequities of our systems, including the real power that -- of natural disaster to interrupt food security impacted by the storm. Food access disparities are much more pronounced throughout the pandemic. They're susceptible to the impacts of climate change and it is critically important that we endorse the work that our staff but also that the Travis county food policy board has been doing and really advance some of those important regulations -- recommendations. As our region's population is expected to double by 2040, we know we also are facing an unprecedented loss of farmland to development and this is placing greater stress on our limited natural resources. I'm very excited about the [12:01:11 PM] recommendations moving forward. I want to also mention that we've gotten some great support that I hope you've all received in your inboxes from the Texas farmers market, workers defense, go Austin, vam owes Austin, the contact team and the American heart association and various others, including some individuals. I have some important thank yous that I want to make and I'll make them quick. But they're really necessary. I have an amazing team in my office and they work collaboratively together. So both Shannon and Ashley work together on this. Shannon, holly and Ashley Richardson, Shannon helped support Ashley and lead on this. The two of them have had an enormous number of meetings. But this is really -- Ashley has been a tremendous force working on this. The page of the number of organizations and individuals [12:02:13 PM] and studies with whom and with which she consulted are huge. This represents some of the best recommendation that is are coming forward. It has been both a labor of love and passion and commitment to our community that she has done in presenting and really working so tremendously hard on this. I believe that it is going to be really change -- is going to really impact our community in very positive ways and exciting ways and I just want to thank her for really her tremendous work. I also want to thank the members of the austin-travis county food policy board and our other community partners who continued to advocate for our local food system and provided some of these recommendations. Again, excited about this work. It is definitely reflected in the recommendation that is we have before us and the American rescue plan act proposed spending. However, I will just say that it [12:03:14 PM] is -- that the funding we're currently discussing within that is not really sufficient to meet the needs. I hope we'll be creative and think about ways to fund that. With thanks to my co-sponsors, the Travis county food policy board and my tremendous thanks to Ashley Richards and her leadership on this important work. >> Mayor: Thank you mayor. I did just want to -- >> I wanted to speak to a couple of items I'm excited. Item 41 is one that I brought forward. It's a next step in the process of urban trails permitting. It's an interesting conversation that stakeholders have been involved in to make sure that get the urban trails through smoother. Thanks to my -- thanks to kitchen, Renteria and Harper Madison. It's an innovative pilot that [12:04:14 PM] the watershed department is doing. It's to help with the toxic blue algae situation that we oftentimes see where our dogs like to jump in the water. I think it's a great opportunity for our departments to be able to mitigate this problem. >> Mayor: Okay. Any further comments? >> Mayor, if I could ask ctm to mute me. I think I unfroze it. Thank you. >> Mayor: Councilmember Casar. >> Casar: I'd like to thank for the -- providing a pathway to citizenship for community members. Thank you, mayor pro tem for adding your name and councilmember Fuentes for your remarks. As we've had a conversation about voting rights lately, I I [12:05:14 PM] this important to note that there are tens of thousands of people in our community, many of whom have lived here for a long time who are denied their basic voting rights sand so while we continue to focus on keeping families together and keeping Austin here and safe, also giving voting rights to all working adults is something that I hope our society at some point vets to. I appreciate the continued work on this. I didn't get a chance to chime in at the beginning of the day on the celebrations of this month, really excited to join in the juneteenth parade with many of you and also wanted to wish everyone a happy pride month even though the parade is celebrated in August. Manager, I don't know if you've gotten the emails that we've gotten about the question of rainbow crosswalks or sidewalks along fourth street. That's been hanging out for a long time. [12:06:14 PM] I would count myself as one person that would be really happy in August if we had some temporary rainbow crosswalks or sidewalks for when we are in the pride parade together. I just think it would be so special coming back from the pandemic for that. I know that's been a long-standing issue about permanent ones. I'm sure we could work to find a way to get that. At least temporary ones would be great. Happy pride and happy juneteenth coming up. >> Mayor: Kathie? >> Tovo: I'll add my support to that. I was on the council to create them. I'm not sure everyone is aware of that. That is a resolution that is -- that the council has passed to create rainbow crosswalks. I too, when I received those emails of support voiced my support for it. I know that -- I believe my staff have reached out to our [12:07:15 PM] city staff to see where we were in that process and what would be needed to reengage in those conversations. The idea of having a temporary crosswalk is perhaps one good interim step. As the councilmember in this district, I want to make sure that I add my support, city manager, having voted and supported this in the past. I'm certainly supportive of having an interim measure as we finish the process of engaging business owners in that area. . >> I was watching you discuss that many years ago and so, hopefully, it will eventually happen. >> Mayor: Okay. Further comments? We have a motion and second on the consent. Yes. Mayor pro tem. >> Harper-madison: Quickly, thank you. Councilmember Casar, you reminded me to acknowledge that this year the first time that [12:08:16 PM] the city of Austin is recognizing juneteenth as a city holiday. It's an especially special juneteenth this year. Thank you for reminding me to acknowledge that. >> Mayor: Colleagues, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Those in favor of the consent agenda, please raise your hand. Those opposed. Consent agenda passes with all the notations that have been made. I also appreciate that with that vote, we've gone ahead and also extended the homestead exemption from 10 to 20%. I think that's significant. That goes along with the senior exemption that the council did a week ago. I know that with housing prices rising the way they are, a lot of people, especially those on fixed incomes that will appreciate this. [12:09:17 PM] I know this doesn't come as with all things, some measure of concern. Especially with respect to renters. We've had this discussion before. I think the impact is negligible. In any event, we're doing focused things for renters also on the agenda today. And I know that that was also important to members of the council. Spending decision rs hard, budget decisions are hard. We're doing everything we can to help as many people as we can. Especially those on fixed incomes. It is nine minutes after 12:00. We have some things we can handle now that I think would be quick and then we can let staff go. Items 47 through 53 - - >> Mayor? >> Mayor: Yes. >> We said we would do 85 very [12:10:17 PM] quickly and then 11 very quickly. If we could do that >> Mayor: We've identified them as being quick. I'm going to do things that don't require any -- we'll come back and do -- they're harder to control. 47 to 53, being nonconvent. Condemnation. Is there a motion to the effect. City council authorizes the power of eminent domain. Described in the agenda for the purpose of the public use described herein. Kitchen makes the motion. Is there any second? . Councilmember Ellis seconds. Any discussion? I didn't think there would be. Ann kitchen? >> Kitchen: Very, very quickly. A number of these impact south -- they're very important steps in our proceedings, rapid transit along south Lamar. Proceeding with the bicycle [12:11:19 PM] improvements between Riverside -- not Riverside. Barton springs road and the lake. So I'm excited that we're taking this step. >> Mayor: Okay. Clerk, don't let za November I can't Joseph leave. I'll give her a chance to speak in a second. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: I wanted -- I'm supportive of this. I wanted to call our staff's attention to the email that we all received as well as the appropriate city staff from Chris Riley on behalf of bike Austin. Reminding our staff and reminding us about the important stakeholder input that took place and the calls for having separated bike lanes as we move forward with some of that infrastructure which I'm supportive of as well to the extent it's feasible in those areas. >> Mayor: Okay. Those in favor of that motion which concerns items 47 through 53, please raise your hand. Those opposed. [12:12:19 PM] I'm seeing it's unanimous on the dais. Those pass. Zahnoivia signed in to speak. >> Mayor? >> Mayor: We have -- we still have the noon citizens is communication. I'm not sure what order you want to take that? . >> Mayor: We still have what? >> Noon citizens communication. >> Mayor: You're muffled. I'm afraid I couldn't hear you. >> The noon citizens communication. >> >> Mayor: We'll get to that. >> Mayor: She signed up to speak with the morning group of speakers. So we're going to call on her first. I'm going to recess the city council meeting here sat 12:12. I'm going to convene at 12:12, June the board meeting of the [12:13:20 PM] Austin housing finance corporation. Meeting is being held virtually. We have a quorum of the directors that are present. Do we have any -- we have one speaker that Staten Island up. Can you please call her. >> Za November I can't Joseph. >> Thank you. >> We heard her say thank you and then we lost her. >> I didn't realize you based it on the number who actually sign up. Otherwise I would have called sooner. I didn't want to be on hold. I figured you'd call me back like you had in the past. >> I just wanted to make a few comments related to Rutland. Candlewood suites. Actually applies to this area too. I want to call your attention specifically to the March 11, [12:14:22 PM] 2020 board book for the Texas department of housing and community affairs. That is where the information as it related to the bus stop was located. So I would just say if you plan to refer to a bus route, it needs to be an actual application and just FYI, mayor, 803 metro rapid is not within a half a mile walking distance from 1934 Sara Rutland. I want to call your attention to section 3 of the housing and urban development information. It specifically talks about financial assistance and to to low income persons. I want to ask you to consider the need to actually use some of the American rescue plan funding for transportation, specifically for the individuals that you're going to place in permanent supportive housing and that amount would be about $5.7 million. You'll talk about that it later. You have 14.6 million in your [12:15:23 PM] contingency. I wanted to call your attention to that. I wanted you to recognize that there was a lack of transparency as it related to the summit goals. The March 23, 2021, work session, the transcript on where councilmember alter said that the summit itself was opaque. And councilmember pool actually mentioned that she didn't know who the convener of the summit was. If the members on council are unfamiliar with what was happening with the summit, we in the public don't know either. I would ask transparently for Diana gray to tell us if Sara Rutland became the priority. I want to call your attention to KXAN. There was a report may 3rd after account ban passed. It actually showed only 50 units for -- Sara Rutland. Now it's 101 out of 171. So I'm just not sure -- >> Speer your time expired. >> Please restore 240 Rutland. [12:16:28 PM] $945,000. >> Mayor: Thank you. Mandy, is everything on consent for -- >> This is Maggie Austin housing finance corporation. We have three items on today's consent agenda. Please note that there are two late backup items. One was the meeting minutes from the June 3rd meeting and the second is a memo related to item number 2. That's $3.2 million from our Austin community builders for affordable units within the grove. Item number 3 is related to a Rutland authorizing us to move forward with the grounding. I offer all on consent. I'm happy to take any questions. >> I was assuming is that we would be doing this after lunch. I still need to review something with respect to the milestone items. So if we can vote later. [12:17:28 PM] We'll get that resolved. I'll appreciate it. >> Mayor: We'll recess the Austin housing finance corporation meeting. Here at 12:17. I'm going to reconvene the Austin city council meeting here on June 10, 2021. It's 12:17 P.M. We're going to listen to our citizen communication speakers. >> The first speaker is Susanna along za. >> Hello. Can you hear me. >> Go ahead please. >> I have a slight presentation. Don't start my time until it gets [12:19:05 PM] up. >>. >> Of economic and environmental burden causing many injustices for low income communities ever color in Austin. Slide 3 by analyzing the demolition permits between 2010 so may of 2020 we can see the trends and understand how housing demolition impacts the east Austin community. Slide 4, in 2010, demolition -- increase around 13% a year. In 2015 and 2016, the city approved around -- demolition permits. 77% of the approved demolition permits were for single family homes, 13% for accessory dwellings and 9% for commercial buildings and 1% for multifamily homes. Slide 5 in zip code 78702, there was a 35% increase of residential demolition permits issued after the single member district council took power in 2015 to 2019. [12:20:06 PM] Slide 6, there was 111% increase of demolition in zip code 78721. Slide 7, 17% increase in zip code 22. Slide 8, 63% increase in 78723. Slide 9, 17% increase in 78741. And slide 10, 154% increase in 78744. Slide 11, you can skip that. Slide 12, increase in taxes. Demolition of family homes replaced in luxury and unaffordable housing increasing in property taxes and displacements of community. Slide 13, by looking at the taxes paid on homes in 2010 versus 2016, we can see that the zip code 41, 23, 22, 21 -- taxes paid increased by 48% for 56% of [12:21:08 PM] the demolished homes. For the other 43% demolished homes, the taxes more than doubled as multiple properties were built on the same lot. These same zip codes had an average of 45% property value increase. Slide 14. The demolition permitting process does not ensure trees are protected. 13 out of the 23 sampled properties have protected trees and only five of those sites is had tree review prior to demolition. Slide 15, recommendations. Notifying neighbors in community on an upcoming demolition, 120 days ahead. Allowing valid petitions to dispute demolition and requiring demolition permits to be appealed. However, most applications are reviewed and approved by the city staff on the same day. For example, in fiscal year 2016 and 2017, the city approved over 90% of the 1,700 applications on [12:22:09 PM] the same day. >> Speaker, your time has expired. Next speaker. >> Leslie Rucker. Leslie Rucker. Please unmute. Leslie Rucker, you're up. She's on the line, mayor. I'm not sure what's going on. >> Mayor: What number does she press to unmute? >> Looks like she dropped. [12:23:10 PM] One second. We're trying to get her back. Leslie Rucker, can you hear us? >> Yes, I can now. >> Okay. Thank you. Go ahead. >> Thanks. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me today. I am in district 6 in north Austin. I just wanted to call in and I know it's obviously a big debate and you've probably heard a lot [12:24:10 PM] about this. But I just wanted to voice my concern with the potential for establishing homeless camps in my area. We have a really wonderful community. It's a safe community. I personally have two kids. I live in a neighborhood with a lot of kids. And they are able to ride bikes to their houses, their friends' houses. It feels very safe and I have concerns that putting a homeless camp near this suburban community full of kids could increase crime. I heard somebody say that that's not factually accurate. I have an app, I see a major increase in crime near an area that I've not seen before. That's where there is a homeless camp currently sitting. I wanted to share that concern. Excuse me. Share that concern. Also, thank you all for taking into consideration the recent changes with the proximity to schools and services for those [12:25:12 PM] folks as a consideration for where you do decide to end up allowing those camps to reside or hopefully a more permanent solution. That's all. Thank you. >> Mayor, that concludes all the speakers. >> Mayor: Okay. Great. Councilmember Kelly? >> Kelly: Mayor, I would like to make a motion that before we break for lunch, we take up item 85. >> Mayor: Do you want to take up 85 before we break for lunch? Seems like your colleagues will indulge that. This is pulled by councilmember tovo? Do you want to make a motion councilmember Kelly? >> Kelly: I would like to make a motion to pass item 85? >> Mayor: Is there a second to at that motion? [12:26:13 PM] Councilmember kitchen seconds it? You want to speak to it first or hear why it was pulled? >> Kelly: I can speak to it. My first resolution of an important issue. I would like to thank the co-sponsors in tackling the issue of homelessness on a -- I would like to for their work on the resolution. I want to thank the presidents of the Avery ranch hoa and Anderson mill neighborhood association located in Williamson county as well as the Austin hindu community for the letters that they wrote in support of the resolution which have been submitted for late backup. The catalyst for the item came from their effort to purchase a hotel for permanent supportive housing in my district for a lack of engagement and nearby residents or business members. It prides itself on seeking input on -- this solidifies -- it is a significant reason why [12:27:14 PM] Austin take a frustratingly long time -- what we end up with a long time -- we have buy-there N. From stakeholders. It's difficult to understand why we haven't -- addressing homelessness in the same way and so I felt compelled to introduce this resolution to formalize that goal. I have worked during my term to collaborate with you all here. And to listen and learn from your concerns to so that I can better represent my community. This resolution will bring more stakeholders and bring about robust conversation related to homelessness. Thank you. >> Mayor: Councilmember tovo. You pulled this. I want to go to you next. >> Tovo: Yes. Thank you. Thanks to my colleagues who brought this forward. I have a couple of questions that I'd like to ask the sponsor and then the manager. So I have -- well -- let me just [12:28:15 PM] cut to the chase. In the first be it resolved, it talks about online 68, it says this discussion should include as soon as legally and practically possible, information about any real estate transaction in a portion of the city within their county. And so let me say that I'm supportive of a regional approach that's what is required on so many issues, including this one. My reason in asking the questions I am about that line is that I'm not sure how many members of the public know, but we have -- we have certain ways in which we as a city need and have to operate to protect the interests of the city. Real estate transactions have certain rules governing them and one is -- I'm sorry Debra Thomas, our city attorney, I'm going to summarize them in non -- in my layperson's terms. I invite you to correct me. We can have real estate -- we [12:29:15 PM] can have executive sessions for real estate matters to discuss real estate matters but we can't share that information outside of a public forum or outside of that -- outside of that privileged conversation. So sponsor, I want to be sure that in line 68 when you're talking about as soon as legally and practically possible, you are talking about at the point where we might have entered into a contract or some other public kind of arrangement where we are no longer negotiating and under the -- where we're no longer negotiating. We already have a contract. >> Yes, ma'am. That is the intention. We went back and forth with the legal department and also the mayor raised concerns related to this and so my thought process here is that once we do enter into contract negotiations and [12:30:16 PM] we have secured that part of the process, we start speaking with the counties involved and we bring them into the conversation during the due diligence period. >> Tovo: Great. We can't share information about a real estate transactions. In most cases we can't share information about a real estate transaction with our county partners before we would share it with the public at large. So I just want to be sure that we're all on the same page about what this means and that there's clarity in the public about what it means and what it does not mean. It does not mean that elected officials and another government body will get a heads up about a project before we're in a position to be able to do that with members of the public as well. >> Correct. Thank you for raising that concern. >> Tovo: City managers that your understanding of the direct here as well? >> It is. But I appreciate that clarification as well. [12:31:16 PM] So we can have that on record and what the timing looks like. Thank you. >> Tovo: Thank you so much. >> Mayor: Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: Thank you for that clarification, councilmember tovo. I do want to state that in the future, if we do work in collaboration with our other counties, I don't know that we will. We haven't done that ever in the past, but if we were to do some kind of joint activity or joint purchase or something like that, then it might not be at the point of contract. It might be before. But the -- so I want to make sure that our city manager understands that, that by putting this on the record, we're not foreclosing how we do this with other counties. As it states here, it's as soon as legally and practically possible. That's something that this [12:32:17 PM] entire council would be part of identifying what that is. So I think that's fine. Under the way that we operate currently, because we don't have any kinds of joint kinds of purchase opportunities with other counties, then yes, I absolutely agree that this is at the point of contract. I also want to -- I also want to really say -- I want to thank councilmember Kelly for bringing this. I think it also captures what we've all been saying. That is that as we address homeless, it's a community effort. It extends beyond the boundaries of the city of Austin. You know, it involves our counties. Williamson, Travis and Hayes. We'll all be stronger as we work to have these conversations and be in a better position to address homelessness in our [12:33:18 PM] communities. Thank you everyone for this. Bringing this forward. >> Mayor: I appreciate this item as well. Councilmember Kelly, I think it's real important that we be as collaborative as we can with our partners in the region. I think that are lessons to be learned from candlewood and I think that this policy here represents that change. Because I think we could have, after this property was put under contract, given tlts and heads up and -- notice and heads up. I think it's important to take a moment to elaborate for a second, the conversation that you had with councilmember tovo and I appreciate that conversation. Because I [12:34:20 PM] helpful. During the negotiation period, things are kept confidential so there's not things that happen in the community that could impact a seller to sell or the price that the taxpayers have to pay. After there's a contract signed, the property then locked or tied up. At that point notice can be given. After that notice is -- the community can then be involved in the discussion. So when the contract is signed, it is not an obligation on the part of the city to actually close on the contract or to actually buy the property. We enter into a deliberation period of time to investigate the property to be able to talk to neighbors and community and stakeholders and everyone and the council then can take into account the information it's [12:35:21 PM] getting from all the different places and ultimately make a decision. I heard some of the speakers speak today in the signup. It appeared to me that some of those speakers under the misimpression that any one or more of us made a decision to buy the property because that has not happened. We're in this period of investigation where we're listening to people, continue to be up until the point when we close on the property or say we're not going to close on the property. That's where we are right now in this process. I think that that's not really understood by a lot of people out there. And sometimes when I hear some of the comments from the county judge, I'm not sure that he understands a decision hasn't been made by anybody to buy the property. But it's really important that we have this period of time to be able to hear from everyone who wants to weigh in so that we [12:36:22 PM] can ultimately make the best decision possible. Further comment or discussion on this issue? Councilmember alter? >> Alter: Thank you, appreciate councilmember Kelly bringing this forward and just wanted to reiterate that I should be listed as a co-sponsor. I think we didn't get our approval on some last-minute changes in on time. It was fully my intention to co-sponsor. I think as councilmember kitchen and Kelly put so eloquently, I think it's really important that we work collaboratively, regionally and that we will be stronger and better able to address the challenges of homelessness if we work togeth. Thank you. >> Mayor: Okay. Let's go ahead and take a vote. Those in favor of this item, please raise your hand. Those opposed, unanimous on the dais. Looks like this, Greg Casar is not present for the vote. Otherwise, unanimous on the [12:37:25 PM] dais. Colleagues, it is 12:37 right now. 12:40. -- I mean -- yeah. 12:40. Let's take an hour for lunch. At 1:40. I'm going to suggest that we don't go into executive session. We won't be able to accomplish much before the 2:00 speakers. We'll handle the items that will enable us to let the greatest number of staff leave in that 20 minutes that we have. Then we'll take the speakers on the consent -- the speakers on zoning and see if we can handle the consent at that point. It may make sense for us to go into executive session and come back out and finish. With that, it is 12:37. I'll see you back here in this meeting at 1:40. See you all then. [1:46:15 PM] Meeting to order. We've been on recess for lunch. It is 1:46. June 10, 2021. Continuation of our meeting. Quorum is present. Colleagues, just wanting to note for the record that item number 55, the city action plan, is a hearing only. And we had taken public hearing period. So we've taken care of item number 55. >> Mayor: Councilmember tovo, do we want to pull up item number 11 here. Item, manager, staff here? Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: I have an [1:47:16 PM] amendment, also, I don't know if councilmember tovo wants to go first. I've got an amendment I've worked out with staff. I think it is acceptable to staff. >> Mayor: Okay. >> Staff has reviewed that and we are comfortable with that, councilmember, thank you. >> Mayor: Okay. Has that been posted? >> Kitchen: Yes, it's posted in backup. It is amendments to addendum 2 and addendum 3. It's posted to backup as my amendment. I can give you more detail if you'd like. >> Mayor: At a really high level, can you tell me what the amendments do? >> Kitchen: Addendum 2 is about the project. It's clarification language, not a change of content that aligns with the iconic venue project. It's language to align that. And then addendum 3 is the one that relates to the creative space bonds. [1:48:17 PM] And it aligns the language with the language that was used in the rfi about the scope of projects that might be potentially pursued and then, of course, all of that is subject to legal review. >> Mayor: Sounds good. Can you tell me, just how are they not in alignment? >> Kitchen: Which one, addendum 2 or 3? >> Mayor: Just both, real fast? >> Kitchen: Addendum 3, we had talked about the potential for lease purchase types of arrangements or the potential that after a bond was paid off, there might be an opportunity for an operator to purchase a property? >> Mayor: Okay. >> Kitchen: That language, that content was not reflected in here? >> Mayor: What was the -- >> Kitchen: It was in the rfi and not in here. We worked out language -- >> Mayor: What about the other one? >> Kitchen: It just acknowledges that in addendum 2 there's a number of different ways that the aedc can pursue [1:49:19 PM] funding to work on the different cultural activities and we wanted to make sure that the iconic venue project that could also take advantage of those other opportunities -- because right now all we have is hot tax. It talks about the 2.4 of hot tax going to the iconic venues and leaves open the possibility if aedc raises private funding or -- [ inaudible ] They could raise that funding for in addition to what other cultural projects they were working on. >> Mayor: Got it. Great. Does anybody have objection to adding the kitchen amendments to these? Hearing none, the kitchen amendments are added. Further discussion on this item number 11? Kathy, you had pulled this one. I want to give you a chance to go next. >> Tovo: I appreciate it. Thank you. This is the economic development item. Of course, there's a port above it. Sponsored the resolution to [1:50:19 PM] carry forward the work that mayor pro tem Cole had done to create it. I would like to make the amendment that's consistent with our earlier conversations and the conversations that we had with our instruction at the -- I'm going to have to figure out where B is. I've forgotten what page this is where it talks about leveraging the investments and assets of the city with economic development, affordable housing and job creation to insert historic preservation. That is, again, consistent with our creation of the economic development corporation and the commitments that we made at that point. But somehow it is not -- it did not make it into the recitals. >> Mayor: Does staff have any concerns about that addition? >> No issues. >> Mayor: Thank you. Any objection to that amendment being added? Hearing none, that's added as well. Thank you, councilmember tovo. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: Sorry. [1:51:25 PM] My printer decided not to cooperate. I have a small amendment that I have discussed with staff. It was just distributed by Casey. It would add the following language to 6.1. Organization and operation of the aedc. This is the -- where it discusses whans if the aedc enter interlocal with another body or organization. And my amendment simply makes sure that the -- [ inaudible ] Is copied so that if there is an issue to raise with the city manager during the process, we have the ability to do that in a timely manner. Does not give the city council an additional vote over those. It just allows us to be able to voice concerns to the city manager through that process by being alerted and so it would add the language and copy the mayor and council in the sentence that says the aedc will provide the city manager, the city manager's designee and copy the mayor and council with a [1:52:26 PM] substantially final copy of any interlocal agreement that aedc intends to enter into even if the city is not a party. >> Mayor: Okay. Where is that language in the section? >> Alter: 6.1, organization and operation of the aedc, part a. Should have in your inbox at 149 the motion sheet. >> Mayor: Okay. Staff okay with this change? >> We are, mayor. >> Mayor: Okay. Do we have somebody here with the aedc? >> We do. >> Mayor: Is that other -- were the earlier amendments okay with the people from -- who is here -- I guess Veronica is present. I should probably also ask the aedc as well. Are you okay with the amendments we've approved so far? >> Mayor Ver -- I'm here as the interim president and CEO of the aecd. We are comfortable with the [1:53:26 PM] amendments as outlined today. >> Mayor: You're also comfortable with the amendment that was just brought forward by councilmember alter? >> Yes. >> Mayor: Is the city staff okay with that one, too? Thank you, manager, yes. Any objection to that alter amendment being added? Hearing none, that is added. Anything -- any other amendments or thoughts? I had three questions that I wanted to raise with respect. I'm not sure we need to slow down aedc moving forward at this point. This comes back to the council for review annually, is that correct? >> That is correct, mayor. With the economic development department. Representing the city side. [1:54:26 PM] >> Mayor: Would the city have the opportunity every year to make changes to this document if it wanted to? >> Yes. Interlocal back yearly. >> Mayor: Okay. So knowing that, I don't feel the pressure to do it right off the bat. But I'm going to note these now. These are things probably that I want to bring up next year when this comes back. The first is this has a term limit of five years. And I wonder how that works recognizing it comes back to us anyhow. The council has an annual ability to review. But a lot of the things that an organization like this might do, you know, authorize for a period of ten years, some of the debt instruments going back five years, since it comes back for a yearly review, I don't understand a term -- I don't [1:55:28 PM] understand a current term provision or a current term of five years as it's annually reviewable. The second issue that I have is real estate transactions having a secondary approval by the city manager. Again, the city staff is involved in these things. It's taking direction from the city council with respect to everything it does. It's the body that we want to be able to move and that's one of the reasons why we create this. So then to put it back into a city review process like that is something a year from now I want to understand better. And then there's -- there's the issue of whether or not city-owned assets -- we had [1:56:29 PM] identified when we were talking about the cultural trust, earlier, the council identified some city-owned assets that might be particularly wonderful if put to that kind of cultural trust use. The city has some really historic buildings, for example, that are being used just as city offices. There might be cultural trust use of some of these buildings. As I understand it, the city-owned assets are either not envisioned or not allowed by the existing document. And I'm going to -- at some point when this comes back to city council review, I'm going to want to understand if we need to do anything to put those tracks at play or possible play. But I had given staff a heads up [1:57:31 PM] on those three things. Since I've raised those issues, do you want to respond to them now in any way? Rodney, I recognize you to do that if you want to. >> Thank you, mayor. Assistant city manager Rodney Gonzalez, a slight correction. The initial term is for ten years, not five years. It is a fairly long contract. There's an option to renew for 15 years. With regard to the portfolio of assets that the city has, we do envision that the aedc will from time to time be transferred various city assets. However, at each juncture that that happens, we intend to bring that to council so that way council can inform the aedc of the goals to be achieved by each property. What we want to do is with an addendum to the main contract every time that happens. Now, of course, this is the will of the council. If council wants to offer all the properties all at once, that's at the council's purview. [1:58:33 PM] That recommendation is like we do currently. As each property comes up, council has an opportunity to provide goals and objectives for each parcel. >> Mayor: There's nothing to stop the aedc from petitioning a councilmember to collectively make this property available for these uses? >> Yes. Same thing with property that we have currently, when staff tore a community wants council to do something with a piece of property, we currently have that as it is right now. However, the process is that it does go to council so that way council has an opportunity to look at goals and objectives from that particular property and then we take the next step forward in terms of what we want to do in terms of the transaction itself rather than providing all the properties above what it wants. >> Mayor: Thank you. Colleagues, any further conversations on the items? Councilmember alter and then councilmember tovo. >> Alter: Thank you. I just wanted to acknowledge all [1:59:36 PM] of the work that has gone into getting us to this point. We have a huge number of staff, probably tons of other staff within EdD who worked hard, as well as our consultant, and importantly, I want to recognize the leadership of then mayor pro tem Cole, now representative Cole and our colleague councilmember tovo, who has been extremely persistent in pushing this through the years so that we would have this additional capacity through this lgc to advance projects that we need for our city and move things forward. I was pleased at a number of the various points where we had to keep moving this along to join her in support and I know several of my other colleagues were as well. Things sometimes take a long time at the city to get things done. And to get them right. [2:00:39 PM] I'm really pleased that we're making the step today to give us this enhanced ability to act more swiftly and quickly and to have this real estate expertise at our -- to use. Thank you. >> You're on mute. But I think I heard him say councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I want to echo what councilmember alter said and my thanks to councilmember tovo. I know she worked on this a long time ago to get it initiated. It's exciting to see it at this point right now. I think our staff were really poised to use this tool to really leverage the dollars that are available and both with regard to the south central waterfront, as well as the various aspects of cultural [2:01:40 PM] activities included in this. I think it's very exciting and I appreciate all the work gone into it to this date. >> Mayor: Colleagues, it's after 2:00. Ready to take a vote? Rodney, go ahead. >> Mayor, do you want to make a clarification, that it's the budget that comes back annually to mayor and council for consideration, not necessarily the agreement itself. I know that was a question you had asked. But I do want to clarify, it is only the budget that comes back annually. >> Mayor: Thank you. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: So it's my understanding that there will still nonetheless be a report every year and addendums will be added when we need to add them and they will in that report, there will be the plan for each of the projects that are under there. We don't necessarily -- I don't know whether there's a vote on the report, per se, but there will be information coming back on a regular basis to us so that we have the transparency in [2:02:41 PM] addition to the budget piece even if this part about how this functions doesn't come back to us every year. >> Councilmember, you are correct. We will be very transparent. We have got that as an agreement with the aedc to provide reports to mayor and council. You're correct that every time a new property or project is tasked, we will do that through the addendum. I want to thank the council for the earlier comments. You're right, the staff has worked a tremendous amount of time to bring this forward. I'm excited as I mentioned on Tuesday to bring this main last part of this to council. >> Rodney, if I could just add, I forgot to include you in my list of staff. You've been working really hard on this. I wasn't able to see you on my grid there. I apologize for that. I know you've been leading the effort as the acm. So thank you. [2:03:45 PM] >> Mayor: Is councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Thank you, colleagues, for the kind support. I want to add my thanks to the staff who have also been involved in seeing and advancing this over the last years. I just want to signal to my colleagues that when we get to item 5, I'm going to provide some direction that was suggested to us as a really thoughtful idea from the downtown Austin alliance. That is to provide some direction that the manager include a consideration of whether or not the economic development corporation might be involved in potential public/private partnerships related to the convention center. I want to air that here while we have the economic development staff and our economic development corporation staff here on the line and just -- [ inaudible ] If they have any comments. I think it fits squarely within the economic development commission. [2:04:46 PM] I don't know that the timing alliance. I raise that in case they have any feedback at this stage. >> We'd be glad to do that exploration, for sure. >> Mayor: Okay. Anything else on this item 11? Want to add my thanks to the staff as well. Councilmembers? A trip we took to see the new York aedc as a body and then to see the capability and potential of something like this tool is pretty extensive. It's taken a while. I also want to thank the consultants that have worked on this that have been real helpful and have also joined in helping to teach us. But certainly, Veronica, Rodney and others. Let's take a vote. All in favor of this item number 11, please raise your hand. Those opposed. It's unanimous on the dais. Colleagues, let's go ahead and [2:05:47 PM] take the speakers that have signed up on zoning. We'll then try and take care of the zoning consent at which point we're going to go into executive session. We'll take the Austin energy item up first. We'll come back out of that. My hope is to be able to take the arp item then. And we'll continue on with other items on the agenda. But let's begin with the speakers. We have about 20 or so. It's three minutes each speaker. Yes, we are. >> The first speaker is David king. >> Thank you. Can you hear me? >> Go ahead please. >> My name is David king. [2:06:47 PM] I'm speaking on item 10 approximate 3. The Springdale pud. It adds insult to injury of residents of east Austin neighborhoods by layering racism on top of environmental racism. This council's predecessors sanctioned and facilitated the location of the killer gasoline storage facility in east Austin communities of color. This and previous councils willfully avoided responsibility for poisoning families of color in cleaning up the killer gasoline storage facility. Yet, this and previous councils have enthusiastically granted over $40 million in property tax rebates to wealth re -- to wealthy corporations including Samsung and the domain. These corporate welfare rebates have been and will continue to be paid for by communities of color in east Austin. This council is willing to cut a deal with gentrifying land developers who have appetites [2:07:49 PM] for willful displacement of low income families and small local businesses struggling to remain and thrive in east Austin communities. Although they promise to restore the sites, two toxic plumes will not be mitigated by the pud. It will set precedent for more buildings and more development that accelerates gentrification and displacement of families of color, low income families and small community-based businesses against their will. The inequitable pud ordinances are designed to be exploited by developers and intimidate, divide and throttle residents, neighborhoods and communities. The pud ordinance gives developers the upper hand and puts residents, neighborhoods and communities on the defensive. The pud ordinance should be immediately repealed. The city should provide free health care to families. Buy and restore the site and give the land to a community development corporation to build [2:08:50 PM] affordable income restricted housing and facilitate local community-based businesses. Please don't approve a deal with developers that perpetuates environmental racism and imposes economic racism on communities of color in east Austin. These communities have a fundamental right to both environmental and economic justice and equity. Thank you for considering my comments and for your service. >> Michael Floyd. >> Hello? >> Go ahead. >> I have a powerpoint that's supposed to be up. >> Give us one minute, [2:10:16 PM] please. Your presentation is up. >> Will I be able to see it on the screen? >> You will not. Let us know when you're ready to proceed to the next slide. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Good afternoon mayor Adler and councilmembers. I'm Michael employed. I live on Stuart circle. I'm a gentrifier. We moved with my daughter and our family because we loved the neighborhoods and wanted to become part of one. We're saddened by the way the neighborhoods are now threatened. Next slide. I'd like to focus on two aspects of the Springdale green proposal. Flood control and height. Next slide. [2:11:23 PM] Please. >> Go ahead. >> Deserve relief. However the way in which Springdale proposes to solve the problem is no solution at all. When the runoff from both Springdale general and Springdale green is released, where will they go? Next slide. Into the tributaries of boggy creek, some of which, including one through my backyard, already overflow their banks in the heavy rain. The additional runoff will make the area downstream more dangerously flood-prone. Next slide. The flood control problem needs to be solved at its point of origin by the developers of Springdale general who created it in the first place. Next slide. Height. At the planning commission meeting when they approve Springdale green, one commissioner said, especially in places like this, we shouldn't be afraid of height. Another one asked, what height -- what harm does height cause? Well, let us see. Here are a couple of examples. [2:12:28 PM] Next slide. Some of us like to go to the broken spoke area now and then. Here's what happened there. Next slide and next slide. Next slide. Here are a couple of examples of what happens what harm height can do. Next slide. Some of us like to go to the broken spoke every now and then. Here's what happened there. Next slide. Next slide. Some of us remember reading the little house. [2:13:28 PM] Here's what happened to it. Next slide. Next slide. Next slide. Height that is out of proportion leads to displacement. In some cases the straight off may be worth it. In this case, it isn't. If you want to accelerate. Displacement, vote for this. You can rationalize it by something by -- this may make it easier to sleep at night. Along with this, goes the defamation of east Austin. In effect the repossession of 1928 segregationist zoning. >> Speaker your time has expired. >> Next slide, please. >>> At some point, if east Austin is going to survive, you've got to say stop. >> Michael [2:14:38 PM] Whelan. [ Inaudible ] Michael Whelan. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, city council. Michael Whelan on behalf of the applicant. Over a year ago on may 20, 2020. We submitted the development assessment for the Springdale green pud. I want to read you the second sentence from our cover letter. "Through pud zoning, Springdale green will be able to address mistakes from Austin's tank farm pass and deliver on the vision of sustainability and managed growth contained in imagine Austin and many of the city's policies and planned and it will do so in a way that is superior to what could be achieved under existing code." . We have a clear vision for this project for the ways in which it could correct the site's past and deliver on the goals the city has set for its future from the very beginning of this [2:15:38 PM] process. I believe that the proposal before you today has delivered on that vision. Puds are often extensive cases in which it's complicated to sort through the code modifications and community benefits. This is different. It's much more straightforward. Because rather than trying to ballet long list of code modifications, this case at its core boils down to a single policy question. Whether to leverage an increase in height in return for better outcomes on environmental restoration, sustainability and housing and neighborhood benefits. Or in other words, whether to leverage the ability to do two additional stories, that is a 15% increase in square footage, that's all we're asking for in order to obtain an $8 million value in benefits. Every dollar of which is above and beyond what would be required under the current zoning gr. That's the question. [2:16:39 PM] And the answer from your staff, from a unanimous environmental commission, a unanimous environmental commission from the planning commission and from the people who live right next to this site on Saucedo, all of them have said yes, this project is superior and deserves your support. Springdale green will restore much of the natural environment and biodiversity. It will implement and -- resource footprint doing our part to help the city remain resill yint yet in the face of climate change. It will fund in addition within a 15-minute walk of the site, four new ownership opportunities and also, within a 15--minute walk new park improvements at go valley and givens park and improve the lives of nearby neighbors currently living in one of the worst areas of the [2:17:39 PM] city for shallow flooding. None of these items are required under traditional zoning. Each is made possible by your decision to leverage the two additional stories. It's a 1,129% increase in benefits made possible by a 15% increase in square footage. This is the decision before you today. >> Speaker, your time expired. >> I hope we can count on your support. >> Ben Ramirez. Ben, please unmute. >> Hello. >> Go ahead. >> Councilmembers, I appreciate your time and attention. My name is Ben Ramirez. I represent the Springdale airport neighborhood association. We are the neighborhood this [2:18:41 PM] development is proposed to go into. I don't speak on behalf of myself but I speak on behalf of the people in my community which I talk to every day which -- on behalf of the people in the community. The seven residents that end in Saucedo street affected by the Springdale general poorly planned development I really feel for and I want their problems fixed. Today I'm here to ask of you four things. I ask that you respect our community's wishes by not allowing the 93-foot building in our single family neighborhood. I ask that you reensure community confidence within our community and local government. I ask that you protect the residents from contaminants on the site and running off the site in the form of testing. I ask that you make Springdale general the responsible party for flooding and not a [2:19:43 PM] bargaining chip for moving an unwanted development into the neighborhood. Mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers, thank you for yur consideration. I really appreciate you listening. And considering all residents in our neighborhood. I hope you have a good day. Thank you. >> Barbara Macarthur. Barbara Macarthur, please unmute. >> Hello. Can you unmute me? >> We can hear you. Go ahead. >> Okay. It would be ironic that 25 years after the last cases against the big oil companies that use the Springdale east site as storage over ten millions gallons of gas -- asking for a entitlements as -- [ inaudible ] Springdale is a two-lane road [2:20:44 PM] that runs through the highest African American and minority stretch in Austin. There is much interest in this corridor because there is much money to be made. This is the precedent that will kick the domino. There is no other zoning on Springdale over 60 feet. Probably the best idea for redevelopment of the site because the -- held to higher standards and requires more community benefits. This site is zoned gr and rr categories, allowing 60 and 35% -- 35 feet of height. Increase in entitlements make a property more valuable. That is a fact. Developed over 30 acres with existing height entitlements. The applicant is asking for -- whopping 265 increase over the rr. Mr. Whelan opined in an article in community impact that the new land development code would have -- that is not true. The property would be S 25 [2:21:46 PM] likely because of toxic history. So as if it is not possible to develop enough office space on 30 acres without 93 feet, the developer is also asking for compatibility waivers to the nearby houses because you know it's hard to site your tall buildings anywhere but next to the homes. The other curious parts of the developer's presentation is that they're going to decrease footage by 15% over what they say they can build with the gr. This is convenient because required donation toss city of Austin housing funds are -- [ lost connection ] >> Mayor: Did we lose the speaker? >> Not to lessen their entitlement. This is not downtown. Not their domain. [2:22:47 PM] After their victory against the tank farm. [ Lost connection to speaker ] >> Next speaker is Harrison Hudson. In line is Carmen -- >> Hello. I'm Harrison Hudson. Engineer with -- [ feedback ] [ Echo ] Is that better? [ [2:24:01 PM] echo ] >> Mayor: Try it now. >> Okay. No echo now? >> Yes. Please proceed. >> Sorry about that. Hello. I'm Harrison Hudson. An engineer working on the Springdale green pud. As you have heard, the streets adjacent to the site regularly flood. They flood during regional events and smaller localized storms as well. According to city staff, the adjacent -- is the largest shallow flooding area in the city. This will help address the issues as city staff confirmed. This includes diverting and channeling it to detention facility which we have doubled in size. From there, the water will be released at a slower rate than existing today. It will -- we will also be capturing rainwater in a proposed 600,000 gallon cistern system. A strategy that is in addition to the storm water detention I just mentioned. The only zoning tool available [2:25:02 PM] to require these benefits is through a planned unit development. They would not be required under traditional zoning and we have committed to implementing them as part of the community benefits package. Thank you for your time and consideration. I'm also available for any engineering questions if the council might have any. Thank you. >> Next speaker in queue is Mary ingallon. >> I heard Mary ingallon's name. My phone beeped. Is that okay? >> Yes, please. >> I know you have a very long day. I appreciate all of your time and attention on this difficult case. I want to ask you all that if you haven't watched the tank farm organizing for justice documentary that was just [2:26:02 PM] released on the 7th by your own watershed protection department, it is a must watch. And if you haven't seen it, if you're not really familiar with that history, then I hope you will abstain from voting on this case or vote to support the project at 60 feet with community benefits. This is a pud. It's not just a change in zoning entitlement. There is an a sums that you can't guarantee community benefits at 60 feet. Where there is a will, there is a way to fund through subsidy and through the very funds that this community has allocated again and again for drainage improvements in water quality to address these issues as well as at the lot to lot flooding and the Springdale green property -- I'm sorry. The Springdale general property owners liability in this case. I'm speaking to you today as the community organizer who has grown up knowing the [2:27:04 PM] internationally known and really special environmental history, environmental justice history of this site who has seen and felt firsthand the impact of the tanks. I want to remind you all that they weren't just on the site, they were in 52 acres in east Austin, including all the way down to Chavez where I grew up playing in the lower Colorado river growing up in B 3 in addition to district 9. So if you think -- if you zoom out of this and look at the context, these are basic amenities that need to be guaranteed to the community, protections that have to be looked at and the environmental concerns only a week of postponement doesn't answer the still really hard questions to answer. But if you're going to make the compromise, do it in a way that supports the community at 60 feet and with community benefit. Thank you. >> Next speaker is Mary ingall. Next up is Alexandria Anderson. >> Hello. Can you hear me? [2:28:04 PM] >> Yes, please proceed. >> Hello? >> Thank you. I'm speaking on item 103, Springdale green. This is Mary ingall. As a former president of the Austin neighborhoods council. I feel compelled to weigh in on this case. Folks from other neighborhoods all over Austin have been challenged and criticized for their testimonies and letters as to their direct connection to this project. I'm speaking in solidarity with the other neighborhoods and people opposing this pud. This is what Austin neighborhoods council does. We stand together in solidarity when it's necessary, when it's the right thing to do. We are in solidarity with keeping the height limit at 60 feet and restoring compatibility standards. This California developer can make the Monday incompetent numbers work without extras of increased height. He has had a conventional mortgage with Goldman Sachs with since January 25 -- which are [2:29:06 PM] hard to get for a purchase price of 58 million plus. That is about 2 million an acre, a bargain price for land in other cities and other states. Within a pud agreement, more needs -- within this pud agreement, more needs to be prescribed. The site has a host of environmental concerns from the past. Restrictive covenants from Exxon's past lawsuit needs to be included, especially the prohibition of residential uses. Water and soil testing need to be required annually by the city and the data needs to be accessible by the public. There will be increased runoff and that on site detention, the on site detention will not be able to capture it all. Whose responsibility is that? The developer or the city? This proposed office park will cater to high tech companies most likely which usually include on site daycare. This is not just any office park. It's being built on contaminated [2:30:06 PM] land, a former tank farm. I have a concern about children being exposed to lingering toxicity on the site. Hence, shouldn't daycare be a prescribed, prohibitive use in this pud agreement. You are responsible for the health of the people who work on the site. You are responsible for determining how many entitlements are enough. Listen to the community. 60 feet tall buildings are enough. Restore compatibility and do the utmost testing needed to protect the people who might work on the site by making more prescriptions in the pud agreement. Please write these things in there. Thank you. >> Alexandria Anderson. Monica Guzman is in queue. >> Hello. Can you guys hear me? >> Yes, please proceed. >> Okay. [2:31:07 PM] Good afternoon, mayor, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. My name is Alexandria Anderson. I am a vice chair of the martin Luther king association and -- I'm speaking on behalf of myself as well as my neighborhood association. We stand in support of -- views on this pud development. The neighborhood community support redevelopment of this site with 60 feet with compatibility standards and community benefits. We are worried that the 93-foot height limit would set a precedent on a two-lane street corridor that runs through a highest minority tract. They -- they do not oppose a 60-foot building that -- compatibility standard. Additionally, the site has potential toxic soil and water issues that are not being addressed. There are many unanswered [2:32:08 PM] questions regarding the pollution and toxicity of the site, the runoff and the quality of the water leaving the site and how that will affect the neighborhood and water waste downstream. We want to ensure that there would be periodic testing on this previous toxic site, the old tank farm. They build in a 60 feet shows respect and a desire to integrate into the neighborhood and contribute to the tie of systemic race -- legacy of this displacement through zoning. This project is bigger than one street, one neighborhood, one area. This is going to affect the entire area. This is going to affect my area, the martin Luther king neighborhood association, this is going to affect Seabrook, it is the a sums that the community benefits for the developer [2:33:09 PM] cannot be given at six feet deep. If it is about community benefits and helping and uplifting and working with the neighborhood, then they should go above and beyond to meet them where they want to be met. Thank you. >> Monica Guzman, Daniel wood Roth is in queue. >> 60 feet, yes. 93, no. 60 feet, yes. 93, no. 60 feet, yes. 93, no. Good afternoon. I'm Monica Guzman. Council district 4, resident. 78758. Last week I spoke in support of the mlk planning neighborhoods in their opposition to the Springdale green pud. I still do. I still support their request for a 38-acre pud at 60 feet with compatibility standards and community benefits, as well as their request for time to address existing flooding and [2:34:12 PM] environmental concerns. Residents have a right to live, work and play in their neighborhoods. They are stepping up in defense of their neighborhoods, their lives and cultures. Other residents contact team representatives and individuals like me. We may not live in the mlk planning area. We may not live in council districts 3 but speaking for myself, I have the right and an obligation to speak in support of other brown and black residents fighting for their collective rights to stand in solidarity with them when there's a call to action. Surely community leaders with lived experience as an organizer understand the importance of standing together. Remember, the people united will never be defeated and peb la -- >> Daniel wood Roth is up. Jeannette did he eliah is next. [2:35:17 PM] >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, council, this is Daniel wood Roth, president and design director. We're the landscape architect for the Springdale green pud. As a result of the mechanics of the pud application process, we've put together an extremely extensive environmental remediation plan that corrects for the site's past as a tank farm. By soil testing, by implementing ecological restoration. An enhancement of 20 acres of environmental creek and floodplain. We're implementing an invasive species management plan and planting thousands of native trees, shrubs and herbaceous plants. This project proposes to use silver cells to increase and enhance their growing conditions for the trees and would likely be one of the largest examples [2:36:18 PM] of this level of innovation in the city. We're console dating our building area by reducing impervious cover by over two acres. By building up rather than out. And also, reinventing the Springdale green right-of-way with new grade separated by plains and tree lined sidewalks. We've proposed to implement the state of the art sustainable building and landscape practices that will reduce our energy and resource footprint. We propose a huge 600,000 gallon system to meet most of our irrigation needs through the collection of storm water and the harvesting of condensate among other strategies. That cistern, the bioswales and the rain gardens will have a profound, positive reduction of storm water flow. [2:37:18 PM] This is an extensive package that is innovation at its best and goes significantly above and beyond what could otherwise be required under traditional zoning and would take the next step in addressing and helping to correct for the damage that this site did during its time as a tank farm. I thank you for your consideration and I am also available if you have any questions regarding the landscape architecture of the project. >> Janet deeliah is next. Chip Harris is on deck. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers. I'm Jeannette did he Leah. Chief operating officer, the applicant for the Springdale green pud. Thank you again for your consideration of our pud. It's been an extensive process. But I believe we've put together [2:38:18 PM] a truly superior proposal. Lefrnling at 15% increase in square footage to provide over $8 million in environmental restoration, sustainability efforts, housing and other community benefits. Every component of this package has been designed to address the site's past as a tank farm. Meet community needs or supports key city goals and each of them is above and beyond what the city would otherwise require. These commitments will help provide affordable ownership opportunities in the neighborhood, improve neighborhood flooding, upgrade neighborhood parks, implement extensive environmental restoration to correct for the site's past. Additionally, it's important to note that the -- discuss, our large commitments to landscape strategies will meaningfully reduce energy and resource footprint, strategies that will be critical to adopt if we are to build resiliency as a city in [2:39:19 PM] the face of climate change. Further, the project will be built in accordance with all environmental rules and regulations. I'm proud of the vision we have put forward for the site and we appreciate your consideration. Thank you for your time. >> Chip Harris. Brad Russell is on deck. >> Mayor, councilmembers. This is chip Harris. I'm speaking on items 110, 111 and 112. 7113 road rezoning. These professional planning staff has done a remarkable job and written a compelling report recognizing the benefits of growth, but cognizant of its potential unintending consequences, city staff alternate recommendation of mf 4 finds a balance between the two. [2:40:22 PM] City planning guidelines state that mf 6 may be applied to a use near commercial facility and area adjacent to a business district or a major institution employment center. This property fails to meet any of those criteria to qualify for Ms 6. I'm in support of staff's alternate appropriate recommendation of mf 4. The staff's recommendation lays out the path to reasonable sustainable growth in our community. Over the past decade, the city of Austin has grown about 24%. But the crestview community has grown by 100%. Leaving the infrastructure needs horribly behind, particularly when it comes to traffic issues. We need to recognize that we have a choice in this case. We can be guided by carefully crafted planning criteria or we can make a decision based on the developer's financial desires. City staff's report offers [2:41:25 PM] guidance in this area. It says, "The proposed zoning should satisfy a real public need and not provide special privilege to the owner." . I encourage you to approve of staff's alternate mf 4 zoning zoning as something that benefits a city without degrading our neighbor. In addition, the conditional overlay should be included to ensure adequate protections for the nearby single family home. Thank you. >> Brad Russell with Janice Rankin on deck. >> My name is Brad Russell. I'm speaking regarding items 110, 111, 1b 12 for the 7113 rezoning. I represent the crestview residents that live closest to [2:42:26 PM] 7113 Burnett opposed to the project. My understanding is there's a request for postponement on this item. That the applicant agreed to. We join that request for postponement. Thank you. >> Janice Rankin. With Joseph Reynolds on deck. >> Am I unmuted now? >> Yes, please proceed. >> Hello? Thank you. I wanted to confirm whether we do have an agreement to postpone this item or not. If not, then I have things I would like to say. And so I don't want to necessarily take the council's time if there is an agreed-upon intent to postpone. >> Mayor: Which number case is [2:43:27 PM] this? >> It is 112 that I'm speaking to. >> Mayor if I may? >> Mayor: Yes. >> I do intend to make note of the request for postponement that has come from the neighborhood and indicate my support for that postponement. >> Mayor: Okay. >> But it was good to hear the commentary from folks going in. Which is why I haven't said anything up to this point. >> Mayor: Is Jerry with us? >> Yes, mayor, I am. >> Mayor: Is it an agreed postponement? >> To the speaker, sounds like the case is going to be postponed. >> Okay. Should I continue with my other remarks or save time for everybody? >> Mayor: You certainly can come back when the case is called up from postponement. It will be another meeting. >> Okay. All right. Then I'll step aside and wish you good day and thank you for [2:44:28 PM] the time. >> Mayor: Thank you for giving us some time back. Next >> Joseph Reynolds with Eugene Sutton on deck. >> Council, this is Joe Reynolds. I was prepared to request the neighborhood postponement, and since you all have agreed to that, I'll save you some more time myself. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Eugene Sutton with Karen Fernandez on desk. >> Are we good to go? >> Yes, please proceed. >> This is item 126, 1609 Matthews lane. Matthews lane neighborhood association met with miss Victor I can't remember Haas and she presented zoning requests on .046 acres. [2:45:29 PM] Our group seeks six family units and/or duplexes mix of two story, 35 feet. Recent joining cases within our boundaries cooper, railroad tracks, Matthews lane and Dittmar have yielded densities of four units requested at 1105 Matthews on one acre, nine at Matthews park. Neighborhood consists of multiple 15- plus acres and multiple properties, six listed for sale. There is recognition of a need for increased density, but requests 10 and 1103 Matthews. Traffic and roadway concerns exist on both Matthews lane and cooper lane. And drainage is problematic within our boundaries. Both Matthews and cooper lane are dangerous to [2:46:30 PM] pedestrians, bicyclists. Matthews lane has duplex parking spilling over on to the narrow roadway. The road funnels to 26 feet at the tracks. Drainage issues are ongoing as there are several large retention end of the Dittmar, south stone development, 232 units is beginning construction at Dittmar and day Monday and long Sherwood. Additional retention ponds will be required. The 12 units being constructed on 3.1 acres fronting the tracks and next to 1507damon have drainage. Additional units will be constructed from Damon towards Dittmar. Drainage comments also are consistent with 1103 to Sherwood road and down towards elm forest. I even close photos also and [2:47:31 PM] I don't know if you can see them. The best photo is the rapids that are running down the stream that is on the other side of the tracks from the planned development. This is during our latest wet period. The 1609 site is a low-lying area that appears to have multiple drainage issues. Thank you. >> Karen Fernandez. With Jeffrey Dickerson on deck. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes, go ahead, please. >> Okay, thank you. Yes, this is Karen Fernandez, live on elm forest road. I wanted to talk to you about this request because we are going from sf-2 to multi-family 3 and it's not keeping with neighborhood characteristics and doesn't take into account drainage issues. Cooper lane is already [2:48:32 PM] affecting drainage issues upstream and this property on 1609 when you look at the old maps sits inside the creek bed. I know your desire for density is important, but this is not the appropriate neighborhood for this. A rezone would only criminal justice realtors that keep calling me every day and neighbors and promise they can sell the house and lot for a million dollars. When I call them to let them know about our deed restrictions and setback and drainage issues, they don't care. I need your council to take a stand to protect our homes from the flooding that will absolutely ensue if this level of density is allowed in this watershed. There's a reason it's named south boggy creek. It's low lying and slow draining. We do this because we understand what's going on. We do this because we consider the soil sacred. [2:49:32 PM] Quite a few of the homeowners have created native and edible landscape to mitigate against this excessive runoff. We've installed berms and Swales to slow and clean the runoff and provide a habitat for local critters. We lovingly care for this space. We have created these space. This is beyond any remedies a developer is going to deploy to deal with flooding. I've seen too many new developments promise flood mitigation that only leads to flooding of older homes that in the past were not a problem. We are all long-term residents and great stewards. That knowledge should be utilized by all involved. It's my hope the new owner will make an effort to work with us rather than send a representative to under mine efforts to protect our homes. I also ask you the council respect our single-family zoning and unique need for less density in south boggy creek. We are open to more homes in [2:50:34 PM] the neighborhood, but not at this level of density. Thank you for your time. >> Jeffrey Dickerson, with Victoria Lewis Dunn on deck. Jeffrey Dickerson, please unmute. Jeffrey Dickerson. Victoria Lewis Dunn with Zenobia Joseph on deck. [2:51:34 PM] >> Good afternoon to the mayor, mayor pro tem and council members. My name is Victoria Lewis Dunn and I am the director of contracts and compliance for big Austin. I'm here in support of items 107, 108, and 109. I think this is an amazing project and I'm employing all of eye education and training have led me to this moment. I cannot express how much it pleases me and touches me to get support from the community, from federal agencies like the housing department, from Travis county, from the city of Austin that we pursue this American dream concept. This is something that I look forward to helping develop, and I think it's going to be great for those [2:52:36 PM] people who are looking for affordable housing, for opportunities for good training, for learning, for social justice. I mean, it's so much more than three minutes I can explain, but I really love it and I think -- and I wouldn't be behind it if I didn't. I don't -- you probably haven't heard from me very stay -- tend to stay in the background. But I thought it was important to step out and let everybody know that this is -- this is one that needs to be forward. This is a rezoning that needs to happen. And I thought it would be a good idea for me to say that. And I thank you for allowing me to speak today. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, anything else I can say. Thank you. >> Jeff Dickerson is up with [2:53:37 PM] Zenobia Joseph on deck. >> This is Jeff Dickerson. Can you hear me? >> Yes, please proceed. >> Yes. Can you bring up my power point presentation, please. >> What item are you speaking on, sir? >> I'm sorry? Repeat that. >> Give us a second. We're searching for your presentation. >> Okay. Okay. While the presentation is coming up, I'll go ahead and speak. Mayor, councilmembers, I appreciate you listening to me today. I am speaking on item 126 in opposition on the Matthews lane rezoning. It's high density zoning change requested by the developer does not protect the unique neighborhood characteristics. It results in detrimental impact both physically and environmentally to the [2:54:37 PM] neighborhood and negative impact comes from increase impervious cover as well as significant reduction in green scape. This location is not close to any imagine Austin designated activity center. This location is more than a quarter mile from any public transportation. The applicant brings up issues about the neighborhood fear of building heights and density. The actual fact of the matter we are not opposed to any new development, we are merely opposed to developers that come in do not have a footprint in the neighborhood. One of the things -- looking at here is overview of the south boggy creek area. The development is in upper left-hand side. Go back to slide 1, please. [2:55:45 PM] Okay. On slide 2, this slide represents creeks and water flow. Next slide. >> Go ahead, sir, we're on slide 3. There is a delay for you if you are watching on television. >> Okay. Slide 3, yeah. Slide 3 shows all the creeks, all the water flow, plus known springs that are in this area. You can see with increased development there will be increased water flow due to this area. Next slide, please. This slide shows the cost of the nearby high density developments. If this is truly affordable project, you can see at the current selling price of half a million dollars, [2:56:46 PM] $400,000, $600,000. Next slide, please. It shows the streets up and down. They have a 10, 15-degree angle going up and down. Next slide shows drainage pipes. That's all there is to controlled water flow. Next slide, please. This last slide shows recent water runoff examples. You can see how much water is flowed both ways. Some final thoughts for councilmembers. [Buzzer sounding] Once this green ecosystem is gone, it's gone. It will not come back. It will be supplanted lie concrete and dense housing. Once this green ecosystem is gone, trees, birds will be gone. Once this ecosystem is gone, there will be increased costs borne by the city to control flood runoff. >> Speaker, your time has [2:57:46 PM] expired. >> Thank you for your time. >> Next speaker is Zenobia Joseph, with Ruth Lauer on deck. >> Thank you, mayor, councilmembers. I'm Zenobia Joseph. I'm speaking on item 61, 62, 63 in opposition to 1, 2 and 3. That's 558 units off of brakier and wedge wood. While 392 is mentioned on page 10 of the document, specifically it mentions 801 at Lamar which is a mid-block stop and that's where pedestrians are killed the most. That's in a 2009 Texas transportation institute study on page 75. It also mentions the 803, which is at Braker and burnet. [2:58:46 PM] I want you to understand it's 45 minutes the bus runs and it's a 30-minute wait to get to the west side. Except on soccer days they will run the best every 20 minutes. But to get the work the bus is not going to operate. I do oppose the north wind apartments, which is item 72. That's 240 multi-family units, and the reason in part is because staff has stated that it's substandard transit in that area. No connectivity. And the accountability rating for decker model school is a D from 2019. I want you to understand that when I testify before the legislature, government code 305.021 false communication is specified on the forms and you cannot misrepresent the facts. I want to call your attention to Natasha harper-madison's post. Many residents lost bus [2:59:47 PM] service in 2018 when capital metro overhauled its network. And that's false information. The bus runs 2.9 boardings an hour on convict hill. The senior citizens that are in the vicinity lost their bus route across from this development. Capital metro has, in fact, done a disservice to the people that live in this area. I want you to understand as well that route 30 runs for the people on Walsh Tarlton and that violates state law because they have withdrawn from capital metro service area west lake in 1988. I just want to call your attention, lastly, mayor, to the hearing on the American jobs plan where secretary buttigieg and secretary fudge testified together. And they understood the importance of transit. Getting people to jobs. And I'm just going to quote, it says public transit is key to building vibrant and interconnected communities, creating jobs, reducing pollution, come patting [3:00:49 PM] climate change, advancing racial equity and providing travel options for everyone. And that's the secretary of transportation. These two projects are disconnected. It is not contacted -- [buzzer sounding] -- The staff report actually support these developments. I want you to understand, mayor, and I know you don't remember everything I say, but -- >> Speaker, your time has expired. The final speaker is Ruth Lauer. >> Hello, this is Ruth Lauer. I live in the Matthews lane neighborhood and I speak both for myself, my long-term tenants and the city's future. The area south of Matthews lane including 1609, and again, this is item 126 on the agenda. [3:01:50 PM] 1609 Matthews lane. This area was annexed in 1984. We still retain our rural roads with not curbs or cutouts for storm water drainage. There are no sidewalks or walkable road shoulders in many places. My point is that the city has not invest invested in urban infrastructure, yet developers call this the urban core. In 2 last ten years, this square mile has seen lots of development on undeveloped land. 232 condos are going in, I think Eugene covered this in his talk. We're not against change and we know that Austin needs housing. But that's a lot of impervious cover to add to an area without adding storm water infrastructure to manage it. I know there's an affordable housing crisis in Austin. [3:02:51 PM] However, none of the new developments in our area address that crisis. Thrower design states that more density make the units less expensive. Less expensive does not equal affordable. It's the market and in these times especially the out-of-state real estate mark that determines the price of homes. I feel badly for tenants that want to buy houses but can't afford to. My most recent vacancy was my tenants decided if Austin was as expensive as San Francisco they might as well move there and they did. The 2017 audit report on the flood buy outprogram found that retroactively buying flooded homes results in higher costs for the city. Of the nine buy-out layers [3:03:52 PM] six are in Austin. Over 300 homes in onion creek, another 25 off Williamson creek and stassney lane. Much of this flooding was caused by construction and increased impervious cover upstream from the flooded neighborhoods. Williamson creek and boggy creek are the ultimate destinations for runoff for this development. Is the city prepared to buy more expensive housing? I want to be very clear what you are exchanging here. You are granting developers would they would like now in exchange for potentially losing properties to flooding in the future. The city will be forced to buy expensive lots back -- [buzzer sounding] -- Lose long-term tax revenue. In more sustainable development would avoid both problems. I ask that impervious cover and -- >> Speaker, your time has expired. >> 12 large homes is too dense. [3:04:53 PM] Thank you. >> That concludes all the speakers, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Jerry, do you want to take us through the consent zoning. >> Sure, mayor. Before we start that, I need to note items 57 through 76 have been withdrawn and replaced by the items I'm about to read into the record. With that, the first item is item 102. I have two things to offer. The first is the interlocal agreement with the central health which will be attached to the ordinance as an exhibit, I would like to note that the build better labor protections will be added to the Ila. And then also that we have an addition to the ordinance which will allow for alternative water sources and I need to read this in quickly. Under part 7, a new section B that says is landowner [3:05:54 PM] shall comply with city regulations regarding the use of alternate water sources in effect time site plan is filed for development of the property. Additionally landowner shall work with city to identify methods to additional water resources including but not limited to connecting to the city's reclaimed water is reclaimed water is available within 5 unfeet of property and incorporate use of alternative water supplies. With that addition, I can offer 102 on consent on second and third reading. Item 130 is discussion. 104, this is a postponement. Item 105 ready tore all three readings. 106, c14-20201-009, consent on all three readings. [3:06:54 PM] Item 107, this is offered for consent approval on all three readings. Item number 18c14-2021-0027, I can offer this for consent on all three readings, tract number 1 has has been reduced to 27.4 acres. Item 109, I can offer this for consent on all three readings. Item 110, npa-2021-0017.01, this is a postponement request by the neighborhood to July 29. Item 111, c14-72-032 rct, postponement to July 29 with no opposition. Item 112, postponement request to July 29th. No opposition. All three are related cases. 113, c14-2021-0025, I can [3:07:57 PM] offer this for consent on all three readings with one notation. An agreement that the additional prohibited uses pawn shop and bail bonds because this just outside the criminal justice overlay and liquor sales would be conditional use. With those additional conditions, we can offer for consent on all three. Item 114, c14-2021-0017, postponement by staff to July 29th. Item 115, y14-2021-0041, consent approval on all three readings. Item 116, I can offer this case for consent on all three readings. Item 117, c14-2021-0042, consent approval on all three readings. Item 118 related to 10 which was indefinitely postponed. Staff is quick indefinite [3:08:58 PM] postponement of this case as well. >> Mayor Adler: Did you say indefinite postponement on 118? >> Yes, mayor, indefinite. Item 119, I can offer this for consent approval on all three readings. Item 120, postponement request by neighborhood to July 29th. Item 121, y14-76-083 R ct offered for consent. Item 122, I can offer this for consent approval on all three readings. Item 123, I can offer this for consent approval on all three readings. Item 124, postponement request by staff to July 29th. Item number 125, I can offer this for consent approval on all three readings with the [3:09:58 PM] notation that the approval is for the zap recommendation of G.O. Which applicant is in agreement. Item 126, c14-2021, 0 # 56, discussion. And 127, consent approval on all three readings. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. So we have two discussion cases. >> Yes, mayor, the Springdale and the Matthews. That would be 103 and 126. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Colleagues, the consent agenda items 102 through 127, pulled are 103 and 126. First, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Councilmember Ellis makes the motion, seconded by councilmember -- mayor pro tem seconds. Discussion on the consent agenda? [3:10:59 PM] Councilmember alter. >> Alter: I just wanted to get clarification on 117 because our note says indefinite postponement but I thought you said consent and 103 P indefinite. I wanted to clarify. >> 117 consent all three and 118 indefinite postponement. >> Alter: Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: And 116 was approval all three readings. >> Yes, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Mayor, recusing on -- Jerry, Mr. Rusthoven, you said the earlier ones are the numbers that are jettisoned. >> Correct. >> Tovo: I'm recruising on 113 and I have filed an affidavit with the city clerk this morning. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, discussion on on [3:12:02 PM] the consent agenda? It's been moved and seconded. Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed? Consent agenda is approved unanimously. 103 and 126 pulled. Colleagues, we're going to go into executive session -- yes, councilmember alter. >> Alter: I just wanted to flag hfc can go on consent if you wanted to do it before executive session. If you want to do it later, that's fine. And 17 will also be quick. >> Mayor Adler: We called that a second ago and some people wanted to discuss it. We're past that now? Let's try that then. Are those folks here? >> We will move them over shortly, mayor. >> Tovo: This may not be the right timing, but I just [3:13:04 PM] wanted to thank the applicants representatives for working on the central health pud alternative water and other commitments that Jerry read into the record. That's a very -- I appreciated that responsiveness and that's all. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go ahead and recess the city council meeting here at 3:13. We're going to convene the Austin housing finance corporation meeting here on June 10, 2021. Time is 3:13. A quorum of the board is present. Take us through the consent agenda. >> Absolutely. Austin housing finance corporation. Mayor, we have three items on today's agenda. The first is approving the June 3rd, 2021 meeting minutes of hfc. The second is initial [3:14:04 PM] incentive payment to milestone community builders for the first tranche in affordable housing at the grove. And the third approving the execution of a ground lease with espiro at Rutland. Late backup on items 1 and 2 and I offer these three items on consent. >> Mayor Adler: Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Councilmember Renteria makes the motion. Councilmember Ellis seconds. Let's take a vote. All in favor, of the consent agenda, raise your hand. Those? It passes unanimously. I think that's all the business so we can let you go hang out a second. Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I'm sorry, I have something to ask when you go back into the -- >> Mayor Adler: With that, then, the meeting of the Austin housing finance corporation is adjourned here at 3:14. [3:15:06 PM] Now at 3:14, I'm going to reconvene the Austin city council meeting here on June 10th, 2021. I'm going to take us into executive session. Before we do that, councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I just wanted to suggest, it's up to you, 126 I expected to be quick. It's really only a presentation from the applicant and then I'll be making a motion. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. If the applicant is going to make a presentation, let's go ahead and do the executive session and come back out and then we'll get there. City council is going to go into closed session to take up three items. Pursuant to 551.086, we're going to discuss matters related to item number 7, Austin energy. Pursuant to 51 he .071 and 2 legal and real estate matters related to motel conversion strategy. And pursuant to 551.0 '1, [3:16:08 PM] legal issues related to item 77. Which is the arpa spend. Without objection, colleagues, let's go straight on over to -- to the executive session. We'll give everybody, like, two minutes to go to the restroom if they want to, but let's get over there quickly. Be there in just a second. [3:39:08 PM] >> >>> >> >>> [4:30:21 PM] [Music]. [5:07:27 PM] >> The nl [5:39:31 PM] >> Ready when you are, mayor >> Mayor Adler: We're out of closed session. We discussed various issues -- related to items 77. It's 5:39. We have a quorum. We're back in session. Before we start here back in, I want to recognize Deborah Thomas to talk to us about an impending loss here at the city, one of those that concerns someone we have all relied on so much. And I have learned so much from. Deborah? You're muted >> Thank you, maymayor, I wanted to acknowledge the service of [5:40:35 PM] mitsy cotton. She's retiring after 36 years with the city. She is currently the head of one of the -- the law department divisions but she's probably best known for the many years she provided legal advice to the city's environmental department. Over the years we've come to appreciate her no-nonsense, common- sense approach to addressing issues. She has been a true mentor and trusted advisor. We wish her well on the next leg of her journey, but we want her to know that she will be sorely missed. Mitsy, we thank you so much for your dedicated service to the city >> Thank you, Deborah >> Thank you, mayor >> Tovo: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes >> Tovo: Some of you may have known that news. I didn't so this is kind of a shock. You worked with my staff this week and I worked with you. [5:41:37 PM] If I had known this was your last meeting, I would have thrown up some harder challenges this week. Seriously, I've known you a long time. I knew you when I was a committee member on some boards. It's been a privilege to work with you. I wish you the best >> Thank you. That's very sweet >> Mayor Adler: Council member kitchen >> Kitchen: I want to say the same. I hope you have wonderful plans for retirement. I'm excited for you and have really appreciated working with you >> Thank you >> Mayor Adler: Council member pool >> Pool: Damn it, mitsy. Good luck to you, and congratulations and enjoy what's ahead and don't look back >> You got it. >> Mayor Adler: You've taught us all a lot and you have been [5:42:40 PM] here through all of it, it seems. Thank you. Council member >> Thank you. This is the first time hearing of it. You were so gracious explaining things to me being new here. I really appreciate it and will carry it throughout my term. Thank you >> Thank you >> Mayor Adler: Council member Renteria >> Renteria: Yes. Thank you. I also want to thank you. Your smile and -- it always made me feel good. Thank you for what you have done for the city of Austin >> Thank you. I could say the same about your smile >> Mayor Adler: We'll be back to you in a minute when we handle zoning cases. Let's see if we can handle the three -- 77, 78, and 91. [5:43:43 PM] With respect to 77, we'll go ahead. I'm looking at the comments on the message board. I think the appropriate-based motion is to substitute out exhibit a with the data posted by council member alter and council member tovo. Is there a motion for that resolution with that attached exhibit? Council member alter makes that motion. Is there a second? Council member tovo seconds that. Do you want to address it before we get into the amendments? First thing we're going to do is add the amendments posted and there will be opportunity for [5:44:44 PM] everyone to amend. >> I think we have been working really hard to seize the opportunity of the America rescue plan to be able to make investments in our community for the future that will help us to be more resilient. What we are offering in this exhibit a covers a lot of the ground that was covered in the staff proposal. It includes the money we have allocated to cover health expenses. We are also expecting FEMA assistance to help with that total. We are including the colony park [5:45:45 PM] sustainable health center. We have a large bucket for homelessness, which I might let the mayor speak to more specifically. Under economic development we are making some key investments of child care, early childhood that would hopefully fund about half of the proposals that have come in. There's been I think five different proposals that have come in by our success by coalition and United Way that will help us approve more child care, after-school care, pre-k classrooms, aid to women with infants so that they can be healthy over time through the family connects program. There is significant funding for workforce that our staff will work out the details on and then [5:46:45 PM] money to support the Austin civilian conservation core, which is one of the pandemic programs that I sponsored and hopefully to move it into being a more permanent program. There is money for resilience, food security resilience hubs. We are adjusting the creative sector with 12 million, and we are providing emergency relief -- I think it's 42 million there. And we are doing so in a way that allows us to see all of the sources that we have out there. We have accompanied this with various direction but I'll wait until the appropriate time for that. My hope is that this alternative exhibit allows everyone council to see some of the things they care most about invested in and allows us to do what we laid out in resilient atx to try to take [5:47:45 PM] a few areas like homelessness, workforce, child care and food security and take some leaps forward to help our community as we move through this transition out of the pandemic. Thank you >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. This has been a group effort, going back to April, to try to say, hey, let's use the dollars in transformative ways to do things that otherwise aren't available to us. There are so many needs across the city that we're not able to address and that makes these kinds of things really hard, but I think we have focused on the priorities that we set and then, you know, tried to pick up some other immediate areas of relief [5:48:46 PM] that are needed as well. Highest priority in the city and the council for a while has been homelessness and I think it's the highest -- the thing in the community people seem to be talking about the most as well. We've never really had the resources to be able to do what it takes to get people out of tents, and now we have a way to start if we can get the rest of the community to join in and help. But I think it's a real important signal for us today to be moving forward with a hundred million dollars, hoping to get other partners and governments and philanthropy and business to join in that effort. That's a real opportunity for [5:49:47 PM] us. This is a contingent approval by the language of this, and we really need others to step up. This is a big list, but at the end of the day, we don't want people living in tents anywhere in our city. We don't want people living in tents in public places. We don't want them living in tents in sanctuaries, in rivers, in streams. We really want to do to get people in places where they can get services. It does include money for beginning to deal at least with those perhaps women that we -- now that we're moving forward with proposition B, we want to make sure that they have alternatives available to them. So there's that progress as part of this, but it also includes homelessness workforce dollars [5:50:47 PM] and the like. I appreciate that we're part of this. You know, this is something that not only gives the spending plan manager dollars directly in arpa but also addresses a use of the portion of the excess dollars, the dollars over 12 per cent in the budget stabilization fund. There's going to be -- one of the things in front of us is the appropriation for those dollars in item number -- I think it's item number 91. But there may be $3 million that is being directed to be used that way by way of direction. So, manager, if there's need to be an ifc that appropriates that money at our money in July, please let me know if you're going to bring that back, which [5:51:48 PM] might be the easiest way to effectuate this. But we'll make sure it's on the agenda. Otherwise, I think we have agreement on the directions and contingencies. These are addressing challenges that are too big for the city to do alone. But I think that we're going to find that we have partners and perhaps with this we can really make generational transformative changes. And my hope is begin to take the challenge of homelessness off the table. My concern is, as is always yours, that if we don't deal with this now while the scale is something we can handle, it will get larger and larger. We know what happens to cities that don't deal with it, and I excited that Austin has an opportunity to be a city to meet this challenge head on and demonstrates who we are as a [5:52:49 PM] community. Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: I want to -- I just want to comment on this package. I think it is a strong -- thank you, council member alter. As you said, I think it balances the interest in needs. And when we get through the directions we'll find that it offers us a path to address the kinds of concerns that have been raised. And I want to thank you, mayor, for your leadership on this transformational effort around homelessness. And of course as always, must thank council member tovo for the work she's done over the years with homelessness and I appreciate the work she's brought forward. Not to spend a lot of time but I want to say I'm excited and hopeful about this investment in [5:53:50 PM] homelessness. I think it -- as I've said before, that I think now it's time for our community to come together to address homelessness in a systemic way that accelerates our housing plus services response, that increases efficiencies while emphasizing coordination, that really addresses some infrastructure issues. In other words, it builds in workforce and housing infrastructure gaps that are causing system break downs right now and that's really critical that we pay attention to. Also as we've been discussing and we'll see in the direction that we have accountability for results and regularly track progress, sharing that with the public. P and I really think and I'm hopeful that what this can do is put us on a path as a community towards zero for homelessness. [5:54:51 PM] I know it's something we can and I know it's something Austin deserves. I'm excited about taking this step and taking it in this such a way that we challenge the community and ask them to take the steps with us >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, it's a little before 6:00. Let's see if we can move forward. I'm going to ask some people to -- so we can add to motion some direction. Council member tovo, do you want to introduce yours >> Tovo: Sure. Thanks. First of all I want to say that because I was expecting this to be taken up sequentially I have two amendments I haven't circulated yet. Hopefully they're on their way to you. Otherwise, I'll have to read them. I would like to move forward as pasted and distributed on the [5:55:53 PM] message board >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to council member tovo's direction? >> Tovo: First of all I want to say sometimes things look pretty easy. This was not easy. This has been extraordinary. Several of us look exhausted. It's because we were talking about this until -- I don't know - - 1:30/2:00 in the morning and then again at 7:00. Anyway, I also want to say sometimes we bring things forward and it looks like a product of our own bringing when there's lots of -- council member alter has talked with me about this all week. Council member kitchen has done the same thing. She and I talked through the posts prior to the message board post and several of the points came from -- mayor, thank you for your input as well. I think between the framework -- I'm going to speak to the direction and then I'll speak to the framework. My intent with the direction and [5:56:53 PM] with the help of my colleagues is to put those guardrails in place but make sure that we are always acting as good stewards of the dollars that come to us as a city. And I think this is critically important with this effort especially because it is a fair amount of money. It is designed to be transformational and we have great expectations for it. And, you know, on this council we have struggled to look -- you know, scour the budget and find available pockets of funding and we have had budget sessionings where we're paging through what used to be a large budget book looking for little bits of funding to reallocate for restrooms downtown and some of the other critical needs and I'm so excited to be at a place where we are able and have some significant funding to allocate [5:57:54 PM] to a long need in our community to work toward housing all of our neighbors who are experiencing homelessness. As the motion sheet for the direction makes clear we are already investing significant in working to end homelessness, so this is not a new direction for us, but it is providing an influx of resources that I hope will be transformational and will with that of our partners put us on a path of ending homelessness. I'm happy we've arrived where we are issuing and making that challenge directly to our community partners because we have talked, you know, at least for the last three or four or five years about the need for others to invest in this. And so we are issuing this as a challenge. We are willing, we are ready. We are about to take the step to invest to -- to commit to investing these dollars, but we [5:58:54 PM] are doing so in a way that is contingent on that other public participation and on the private philanthropy and we are doing so in a way that I think is very responsible. I will say also as part of that, though, I do expect, manager, there are some specific provisions within this direction about what we would like you to do to help make sure that we are looking at all the details of the funding plan, that we're clear with ourselves and our community about what is going to be included within each of those components. We have high-level components but we want to be able to talk about it in real deliberate detail. It was real interesting and, you know, community summit. I appreciate the summit leadership for convening that and the people that they involved in that process. It will be exciting later this summer, I hope, if that's the appropriate timing, manager, for you to convene several broad [5:59:54 PM] public meetings to present this plan to the community and help them understand not just what is intended by the increased investment but also what we have achieved with our existing and past investments. There have been lots and lots of communications about that coming to my office and I know to all of yours and having those conversations in very clear ways so people can see the results of the previous investments I believe will help them have confidence and want to invest -- want to be participants in the future investments. I'll leave it there for now just to say thank you, council member alter, for your leadership in providing a framework -- the framework before us. I think it does a great job of balancing and highlighting key areas. I want to signal to the community that we will likely have to go back and as I've said, either affirm or revise the framework in certain areas. Council member alter and I [6:00:54 PM] worked yesterday on revising some of the categories and what we call them so we have some high level priorities, resilience which includes food security and resilience hubs. Economic development is now the heading for workforce and child care. For too long we haven't treated child care as the economic issue it is. One of the issues of the pandemic for so many is the connection of availability for child care and our ability to sustain healthy and vital economy. So just note that's not something we talked about, but we did reconstruct -- we did rename and reconstruct the framework a bit to really highlight what those categories are so if there are funds available, if we get other resiliency funds available, we can look to that and say this is a perfect opportunity to shift some of the funds up to food [6:01:55 PM] access and food security, which is at this moment really underfunded in my opinion. Anyway, that's all I think I'm going to say. But happy of course to answer any questions >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to making the tovo direction based motion? Hearing none, that's added. Council member kitchen, you want to talk about your direction? >> Kitchen: Yes. Thank you. I am -- this really works well in line with the direction that council member tovo just spoke to. This design to make sure we're as effective as possible in working with the community and we're looking to all appropriate funding sources, so it's asking the city manager -- and I know you'll be working closely with the homelessness strategy officer -- to really look at places where we can get reimbursement from. That's medicaid, medicare, the medical assistance programs. There are community partners that I know we've worked with to [6:02:56 PM] some extent but I think there's more that can be done. For example, with integral care, health plans, managed healthcare organizations, around the opportunities for reimbursement for services provided. Many individuals are covered by these healthcare programs and we need to be sure that we're working in partnership with them, seeking reimbursement where we can for health and mental health services, particularly substance use disorder services, housing services, and other services related to the social determinants of health. And also, we have the opportunity to explore opportunities for collaboration on investing in infrastructure. Many of these entities do that. It's part of their mission, and so sitting down and working together with them gives us much more opportunities, and it will -- it's advantageous to these entities as well as the city to work together. [6:03:56 PM] So that's what my direction is about, and we also have language asking the city manager to report back to the city council on the progress with these discussions. When reporting back to the council on other opportunities for additional funding sources. So -- >> Mayor Adler: Council member kitchen has posted her amendment. Is there any objection to including council member kitchen kitchen's motion? Hearing none, that's included as well. Council member Casar? I have called up concurrently here the three motions -- 77, 78, and 91. I think 91 you brought up -- had some money -- extra moneys in the budget stabilization. Because of the schedule that's now been posted it looks like the number would be 6.7. [6:04:56 PM] Is that the number that should be filled in to item number 1? >> That's right. I think council member alter's motion has it at 6.7 million >> Mayor Adler: Do you make the motion to include that number >> Yes. Except it's 91 >> Mayor Adler: Yes. Is there a second to council member -- council member Fuentes is seconding that. Council member, do you want to speak to that? >> Casar: Speaking on the overall item I appreciate the work that has been done on this over many months. The investment in homelessness and drawing down those philanthropic and other governmental dollars is something we've needed for so long, and I appreciate that our community has come together to say that it is really time for [6:05:59 PM] us to drastically reduce homelessness in the community and I feel really confident we can get it done. 3,000 in three years may sound really big but looking at the work we've done as a body even in my own district -- we've done over 250 new psh units in this past year. We haven't done it alone. We are at tdhca working on one together in district four. But thinking of in a year -- I know we've done that many outside of d-4 but thinking of that it shows that doing 300 in a small slice of the city in a year -- we could very much do 3,000 across the whole city in three. So I feel a lot of hope about the possibility of getting that done. And the investments and child care and workforce development are so critical and we have seen in the pandemic how necessary [6:07:01 PM] each of those are. My direction to the manager is to ensure that we make -- that we don't run out of our rental assistance fund over the course of the year. We've done a good job that an eviction wave doesn't hit us like other cities in Texas. We have the lowest -- us and Minneapolis have the lowest eviction rates in the country that they track. People have been carrying debt when they lost work for several months. They might be back at work -- likely are but are carrying this debt of several thousand dollars. This eviction fund is what we require landlords to apply for before they evict anyone. We need to make sure there will be funds available. At the current expenditure of 8 million a month that means we [6:08:02 PM] likely need 48 million through the end of the year which is when we expect the order is granted down by. This puts us at 42 million and I think that is a strong number and I appreciate us working towards that. The boost in federal funding helps us get there. There's a little decrease on the Travis county side but there's a boost for us. So 42 million I think is a strong number. My direction says that if it turns out that's not enough and, for example, the 48 million dollar number ends up what we need that the manager will bring back a budget amendment to make sure we don't run out of funding by the end of the year -- just to know if it seems that eviction wave may come and we didn't do enough, for them to bring that back for our consideration. I appreciate everyone's work making sure people can stay in their homes and also making sure we get folks off the street and [6:09:04 PM] in houses with services while addressing these critical issues for us in live music, workforce and child care >> Mayor Adler: Is there an objection to council member Casar's direction? Council member alter >> Alter: I have a question and I want to get some clarity. First of all I assume you're muting the revised version of it and not just revised by the amount but with the additional direction that it can be substituted out. So I guess what I want to just we have clarity on in terms of how the city manager is interpreting things, that we would ideally be using the 35.3 million of emergency rental assistance first before our reserves. I understand that there may be some accounting issues where we have to use reserves and then use the other. [6:10:04 PM] I'm assuming that on the back end you can make it so that the money that's used up first is the 35.3. We want to make sure, and we've led and I appreciate council member Casar, your leadership focusing on this. And I'm proud to be on a council that has navigated this well but I want to make sure since we have unknowns about this that we use the rental assistance before reserves. It's possible that the county puts in a lot of money and maybe we don't have to use our reserves, depending on how all that shakes out. So I just want to make sure that we've built in that flexibility to maximize our ability to meet the needs of the community and to work with our partners to encourage them to deliver that. Is that -- Mr. Casar, is that [6:11:07 PM] your attention? And, Mr. Cronk, is that clear enough? >> Casar: Absolutely. I would expect the direction we generally give and the policy of using restricted funds first would apply here. Only if those funds aren't available or they're out or whatever other reason we would use the most restrictive funds available to help a person first. And of course if the level of eviction is lower than projected, if the county puts in enough money that we don't need to use all of it, the goal is not fund expenditure; the goal is to prevent a wave of evictions that I know we're all working on. So, council member alter, everything you've said makes a lot of sense to me >> Mayor Adler: Manager, do you have enough direction to -- >> I'll make sure that the [6:12:12 PM] others confer but generally I understand your direction. >> It's clear, mayor and council, and that's exactly what we'll do >> One other thing, we've heard a lot from folks who want us to put more and more money. I want to invite them to speak with our counterparts at the county who are going through a similar process. They were not allocated as much directly before emergency rental relief but they were allocated more money overall from arpa than we were in the particular bucket for them to use. So I hope you will be encouraging them to also assist in that way and I understand that that is something that our commissioners are concerned about as well. So thank you, council member Casar. I appreciate the chance to make those clarifications >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Any objection to council member [6:13:15 PM] Casar's direction being included? Council member pool? >> Pool: I don't have an objection. I had another item to bring >> Mayor Adler: Okay. We'll get there. I promise you. Council member casasr >> Casar: Before we close, I appreciate everybody working together on this. Since you mentioned the county, council member alter, an important thing to note is that in the past some of the county funds that came from the federal government were restricted to outside city residents. That is no longer the case. So the line of communication is open with the commissioners and with the county judge because I think the more we collaborate, I think there's even mou being sign ped between the city and county so everybody who needs help and is facing eviction gets the chance of getting help and I hope this 42 million covers it but I want to flag here that with this direction the expectation would be if we [6:14:17 PM] undershot it we don't want to find out afterwards. I would really want the manager based on this direction to come forward with an item for us to consider to plug the gap, hopefully as we said in conjunction with the county efforts >> Mayor Adler: I think it's important to recognize the county's involvement with the city as has been done, including the orders of the county judge, judge brown, with respect to eviction that have dove tailed really nicely with mine, dovetailed with the ordnanceens on eviction that we have adopted as a body. Any objection to council member Casar's direction being made part of the base? Want to thank everyone for using the message board. That makes these moments that much easier to navigate through and move efficiently. Council member Fuentes, did you have a direction >> Fuentes: Yes, I do. Thank you. [6:15:18 PM] Okay. My direction is -- has two components. The first is on childcare where it will direct the city manager to allocate the success by six supplemental recommendation of 1.5 million to the ISD to expand prek classrooms in the Dell valley area. The city will fund the entire amount if the county does not contribute. Going back to what council member alter shared earlier about the entire childcare practice presented by the united Way coalition, the thought is to get the county to fund the other half. If that's the case, the city would fund the Dell valley recommendation to the extent that is needed, but at least here it gives clear direction that we would like a -- we would like 1.5 million to go to Dell valley ISD should that not happen. The second component is related [6:16:19 PM] to food access and provides more direction as to how to allocate that 3 million that is included and so with that there's a number of programs that we've highlighted. Most of these are included in the nourish Austin proposal. They include funding the Austin Travis county food policy board's recommendation for a regional food system plan, and it also includes initiating a study to see what it would look like to bring a grocery store co-op into an underserved area and establishes a targeted program in the eastern crescent to provide food relief in addressing immediate food needs. And then we're looking at, you know, some seed funding for emergency regional food hubs and also establishing an emergency food plan. We've all seen and witnessed [6:17:20 PM] what has happened in our community with the pandemic and with the winter storm. So this would send in motion that work and ensure that we have the outcome of creating an emergency food plan so we know what to do in times of emergency and then last but not least it also includes funding for city-wide food recovery pilot program that would go along our I have forts with food waste prevention. This lays out specific direction on, you know, programs to look at when we're allocating that $3 million. This proposal here, we've been in conversations with city staff, and this is the motion I'd like to put forward >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. Any objection to including council member Fuentes direction? >> I have a question >> Mayor Adler: I'll recognize you. Council member Renteria also has [6:18:20 PM] his hands raised. Council member tovo? >> Tovo: Yeah. Thanks. I'm supportive of the first one. I guess I need to talk a little bit about the second one. So it was my understanding that the staff proposal that came forward was to do several of the things on here -- to consider the development of the co-op grocery store, to consider the development of the food system plan that was the subject of the resolution, and also for emergency food distribution. And so I guess, council member Fuentes, just help me understand -- to me this seems not a different direction from what the staff brought forward that we've been talking about as being funded within that category, and it also seems to just reiterate several components of these. A couple are a little different, but it seems to reiterate the [6:19:22 PM] amendment, the resolution we just passed that specifically talked about creating a food system plan. It talked about a plan for disaster, emergency food relief within disasters, especially our house community. And it addressed this as a source of funding. The two have come forward together and, again, I don't see this as -- a couple of these -- my understanding is one and two were already part of the funding framework, as is four. And three, you've got a little bit of additional language, but I think that's well within emergency feeding. So could you walk me through -- >> Fuentes: Sure. Thank you. Really I was pleased to see this program as part of city staff's recommendation, and I think that really shows that -- the hard [6:20:23 PM] work of my team working together with city staff to ensure those programs were considered, and so we were thrilled and excited to see that came through and the recommendation this week. But to get to your question, what this does, it codifies that direction, right? It adds more emphasis that these are specific programs that we want to be sure receive funding as part of the spending framework, and for -- and what I like about it is it builds off the resolution that we passed earlier today. Your resolution around the food resilience plan in that it specifically calls for that plan to receive funding, so it builds off that work and helps provide more clarity and specific direction on what type of programs we would like to see funded in the food and security bucket amount. >> Tovo: Okay. I think especially with the food system plan, my resolution which you cosponsored asked to [6:21:26 PM] consider this to be funded and we heard from staff it was one of the programs they intended to fund through the framework. I want to be clear about that. I mean, I don't disagree with your direction because, in fact I brought some of it forward today on our council agenda, so it just is -- I guess that's my point. I want to as much as we can build on and not necessarily repeat. But I appreciate the addition of the couple bullets that are new and perhaps at the end of the amendments we can talk about how these go together in one document. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: Yeah. I just want to say thank you. I think it's a really nice collaborative effort, council [6:22:27 PM] member tovo, council member Fuentes -- to see y'all both bringing these forward and I think repeating it is great because I think it just makes more emphasis there. So -- and it's consistent and a nice follow up to the leadership that you brought to the table, council member tovo, so I think that's great. I -- at the right time, mayor, I wanted to talk some more about the deadlines and the direction. I know you may want to go through some additional things from other council members first, but I -- >> Mayor Adler: Let's do that. Let's get it laid out and we'll have a chance to do that. We'll break for dinner at some point. We have in front of us the direction coming from council member Fuentes. Is there a second to that? Council member Renteria seconds that. Did you want to comment? >> Renteria: Yeah. The only thing that I do not support -- the education and the [6:23:29 PM] amount. I want to understand what that last bullet -- the last sentence is that we should fund the -- the amount the county does not contribute. I feel like if we leave that in there, the county is not going to contribute. I don't mind spending 1.5 million but they should double that because Dell valley is also in the county. So that was my only concern about it. You know, I support the, you know -- the dual language, for pre K. But it also sounds like it gives the county a way out of working with us on that. So that's what I was just wondering, council member >> Thank you. I'm there with you. I hope to see Travis county chip in because there are schools that lie within our jurisdiction. I know the school district is engaging the county and having [6:24:31 PM] the conversation about what that type of funding looks like. So I hope to see a commitment made and -- but if not, at least we have this type of language that will ensure those unmet needs with regard to pre K access in the Dell valley area get met >> Renteria: I hope also the Dell valley school district is listening, that they also get those funds from the state that they're going to distribute in August, for them -- making a contribution to the language and they should also set aside some funding because I think it's a very important item. And we really need to help these young children. There's a lot of immigrants that are in Dell valley school that are really struggling with English. The sooner we can get to them, the better. And I think that the school should also add resources to it at the county. [6:25:34 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Sounds good. Any objection to including council member Fuentes' part of the directions part of the base item? Hearing no objection, it's included. Council member alter? >> Alter: Thank you. Appreciate the chance to present my direction on, again, as I said earlier, this has been a very collective effort and I think we're all bringing different perspectives on what the needs of our community are and I think the product is better for everyone's contributions. So the direction that I'm bringing, the first two parts of it are really about -- >> What? >> Mayor Adler: Please mute if you're not talking. >> They're willing to just do that? >> Alter: Ann, you're not muted [6:26:35 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Ann, would you mute, please >> Alter: No problem. It's happened to all of us. So the first item is just, you know, some reporting. If there is funding that we've been using for homelessness in the past that our staff believes might be better redirected to help us to reach this additional 3,000 folks, they should present that to us during the budget proposal. And the second piece is to notify us if we don't spend on the pace that we were anticipating for the health portion of the arpa funds so that we can consider what we want to spend that on, but including recommendations on what that might be spent on and that, to me, also includes reserves as an option if there are savings. And both of those things would allow us to either repurpose some of these funds or to [6:27:37 PM] replenish the reserves over the course of time. So those are really kind of reporting items. The third item references back to something I think I brought up on Tuesday, if I can remember when we did this, with respect to Austin energy. So as has been shared with each of the council members, Austin energy is going to begin their process again of disconnection. They have put together a very elaborate plan to help their customers so that there are no disconnections, including significant amounts of money to help with utility support. My third direction asks the city manager to have Austin energy's customer assistance programs coordinate with other departments that are able to connect folks with services. We know from other cities that doing this at the point where you're doing it with the utility services helps to connect more people. They're making this enormous effort to let people know about [6:28:38 PM] resources. We should include other things, and I have highlighted in particular the snap program where we have about 42 per cent of eligible community members not accessing that snap. Many of the folks who might be in those conversations with Austin energy could be connected potentially to that program and bring in other money for food for them and their family. The fourth is, you know, to keep us abreast of early outcomes of our American rescue plan act and other related allocations, and the fifth item is to implement our deployment of these funds in such a way to maximize opportunities to leverage funding matches from private sources, philanthroies and other federal government sources to address homelessness in the community. As my colleagues have said, in taking this step today we are [6:29:38 PM] offering a challenge to our government partners and our philanthropic and community partners to join with us in trying to house 3,000 more people and to get our system to functional zero. So that's just providing that direction. And then finally, I wanted to call out some work that I have been doing with council member tovo and commissioner and an ISD trustee -- we have formed a joint committee, which from the city commissioner Shea created the last -- chaired the last meeting and we talked about arpa and childcare and I'm really excited about the five different proposals that we are looking at and really hopeful and confident that the county is going to join us in making these [6:30:39 PM] investments. So this direction is really designed to clarify that our amount is roughly half of those requests, but we have to negotiate and work with the county to maximize what we can do with respect to childcare. And exactly what we can fund is going to be a function and part of what they also bring to the table. And that may mean scaling some programs back or changing the numbers or not doing a particular program. I understand also that there was one program set of policies that was not part of the consideration of conversations with aph, but was very much the subject of the conversation of our joint committee's subcommittee, which are the aid parallel to the del valle work, which would be full day pre- k and there's various levels of that. The funding that we put in there was for about half of [6:31:42 PM] 15 classrooms. It's doing similar thing to del valle. It's not saying it has to be bilingual, but it is all day pre-k. And then there's another element to the aid supplement, and I want to call attention to also the rebuilding systems innovative shovel ready items? I just wanted to make charity on that. I did not manage to put together an item for workforce. We have received suggestions from workforce solutions, from capital idea. I think that our staff is going to have to work that out. I don't know what was already set aside in the budget, say, for capital idea or workforce solutions, but I want us to maximize what we're doing. I'm very excited about the opportunities with capital idea for getting 50 more nurses in the pipeline this fall through accc, but these [6:32:43 PM] need to be vetted through the process with staff, the workforce solutions proposal also had a lot of interesting things, but I don't know that those have been. Where's the success by six and United Way have been largely worked out with aph and the entire group of folks who are involved with those. Thank you. I was really excited about the investments we're about to make and the way we're coming together as a council behind them. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to the inclusion of councilmember alter's direction? Hearing newspaper that's included as well. The clerk should make all these directions part of the resolution so that they are [6:33:48 PM] attained or above the signature as a motion. These are all directions to be incorporated. We have a motion in front of us. The third motion that we have, I'm going to get that one laid out too, item 78, actual appropriation of 49 million in the arp funds is there a motion do that? >> Pool: Mayor, I had an item for 77. >> Mayor Adler: I'm going to come back to that, I promise you. Is there a motion to have on the table with us the item 78? Councilmember Ellis makes that motion. Is there a second to that? Councilmember Renteria seconds that. Now all three things are in front of us. Councilmember pool. >> Pool: Thanks, it's pretty simple and listening to the comment of the folks who came in front of us today they sent us emails and who we've promised to fund, I would like to offer direction to the city [6:34:50 PM] manager to find an additional eight million dollars for the live music venue to get that fund up to the 10 million in the framework that we had promised. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember pool has made that motion. Is there a second to that motion? Councilmember Kelly seconds that motion. Is there a discussion? Councilmember pool, you can go first if you want to, otherwise we'll move. Councilmember Kelly? >> Kelly: I just want to say that I'm glad councilmember pool brought this up and I think it's a great thing to support and I enjoyed listening to the comment from the people in the community today to spoke out about why it's necessary. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Further discussion of this issue, councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Yes, I just want to direct staff to find additional dollars to bring that up. So thank you, council [6:35:50 PM] member, bring those amounts up. Thank you, councilmember pool, for bringing that up. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: I'm sorry, I didn't hear the amount. >> Mayor Adler: Eight million dollars is the number in the motion and the amendment to 77. >> Alter: Okay. And just eight plus four is 12. I thought we were -- >> Pool: I was working from two million. Councilmember alter, I was working from the two million that was in the committee member a originally. I know yours brought it up to four, but I didn't know if that --. So let me put it this way. I'm looking for sufficient funds be it eight million or six million to get the total funding to the 10 million, which is what we had indicated for live music [6:36:51 PM] fund previously. And that does acknowledge the additional two million that you would put in your amendment. But I think I did say that to take it up to the 10 million. So whatever it would take. >> Mayor Adler: So right now on the base the two million is directed to non-profits in art and music APD then there's six million dollars in other arts funding and four million dollars in other music funding. >> Pool: Again -- this is part of the problem. I'm looking at exhibit a that staff sent around, specifically live music fund. For a total of 2.2 million. I think councilmember alter had added two million to it for four million. Whatever it would take I'm asking my direction to the city manager is to find the funds to top it up to the [6:37:53 PM] 10 million, which was the original amount we had promised for the live music fund. >> Mayor Adler: So that I understand because I'm trying to figure this out, are you suggesting we go deeper into the reserves than we have? What kind of direction -- >> Pool: I'm not saying where to find it. I'm too tired to find it. I do think that there is a little bit of margin in our numbers. A lot of this is contingent anyway and so I'm hoping that we will be able to find the additional money through our efforts here. And I trust that the staff will be able to locate it. And again, it's something that we had made a commitment to and I want to make sure that we're not falling short on that commitment, just like some of the other commitments that we're making here [6:38:57 PM] today. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: Maybe I'm guessing that councilmember Fuentes is going to say that I was going to say and it was her resolution so I'll let her go first. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Fuentes. >> Fuentes: Thank you. I was going to say we did check in with staff and perhaps director holt-rabb would speak to this. It's my understanding that staff is working on that recommendation that was part of the resolution that we passed and they are going to -- they are actively working on it or waiting to spend today's spending framework and then come back. Of course, director holt-rabb if you could speak to that as well. >> Good afternoon, council, [inaudible]. In conjunction with our chief financial officer to come back with a report -- in response to your ifc. >> Pool: That's really great and I think that will help with folks who came APD spoke with us today -- who came and spoke with us today looking for assurances. I know I was looking for assurances too. It's great that staff is [6:39:59 PM] working on it and that's the direction is that we are able to fund the promise. >> Mayor Adler: So in essence it's asking staff to follow through on the ifc, which we passed as a council to follow through. Does anybody object to adding that, that we're using this instrument as well to ask staff or remind staff or to affirm staff with that ifc that we passed collectively as a council they should continue to move forward on. Okay. Yes, councilmember alter. >> Alter: That's. That's where I was going to go. I don't object. I wanted to clarify in the resolution and we had the whole conversation one of the issues I raised was that it there was more money than we were going to be able to allocate with arpa and we had indicated that we were going to try our best and it is going to be a very [6:40:59 PM] difficult budget, so I want to be clear about that to identify other sources that may not be out of arpa to reach those goals. >> Mayor Adler: And that ifc put timing requirements on and we'll come here in the next couple of months as part of that process. So any objection to including -- if I characterize this correctly, councilmember pool, to reaffirm for staff that the ifc that we passed collectively as a council try and find the additional funding in fact, I think it even allowed for a number beyond that if possible. >> Pool: It was a lot simpler than that. It was simply direction to ensure that the 10 million that we had previously indicated we would allocate [6:42:00 PM] for the live music venue fund would indeed be available and the concern I had was that this had cut it to 2.2 million. And I'm responding to that because that is why people came and spoke to us today because they were responding to that too. So in some ways this is a reassurance to them that by hook or by crook we're going to find the additional six to eight million necessary in order to fulfill the ifc and the additional previous direction that this council has committed to our musicians. So it's just simple direction, mayor, to identify the funds, to get the live music fund to the 10-million-dollar amount. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: So I completely understand what you're trying to accomplish. [6:43:01 PM] I'm concerned because we haven't also funded the arts piece of that up to the amount that was promised in there either, so in both cases we had said we were working with arpa and the other pieces. And I'm not sure that all of the music piece went to the live music fund. So I'm -- it's creating some more confusion for me than if we were to reiterate that we are still -- it's still our goal to try to achieve of what was laid out in that resolution through other means for both the art and the music pieces. So it's just a matter of I think that referring back to the resolution and reaffirming that is the goal even within a difficult budget requirement is I think the way to I would be most comfortable with it because I don't remember it as being 10 million in the live music fund. There was a lot of [6:44:02 PM] stipulations in the resolution that I can't regurgitate right now, but we're not as simple as the live music fund as I recall. >> Pool: I think we are all on the same track and I think staff is pretty clear where worry going with this and however succinctly the staff wishes to put it down there include the reference to the previous ifc or not and acknowledging the work that staff will be bringing to us with regard to all our cultural arts funds and specifically again the live music fund because that was specifically brought to our attention today. I wanted to make sure we were checking that box. >> Mayor Adler: Are you comfortable then, councilmember pool, making this amendment one that references and reaffirms that ifc and its elements? >> Pool: Sure. >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to that being included? Hearing none, that's included. Further discussion on this item. Councilmember alter and then [6:45:03 PM] councilmember kitchen and then councilmember tovo. >> Alter: Thank you. I wanted to clarify in your direction to make everything part of the resolution that means that each of our items become a separate be it resolved. Councilmember tovo's is already in that format. So for instance, in mine, my first point would be be it further resolved the manager is directed to, and each would be a separate be it resolved or combination under a be it resolved? Is that what your concept? >> I think that would be a way to conform it so that they were all part of that. Any objection to each of the directions becoming a be it resolved? It will be that way and that's the will of the council. Councilmember kitchen. >> Thank you. I want to speak to the dates in councilmember tovo's direction and invite her to [6:46:03 PM] speak to it if she would like to. And also to invite our homeless strategy officer to speak to these dates. We also want to -- these were strong mandates that were put in here and we obviously want to move as quickly as possible. I want to suggest that the funding plan could perhaps come back to us sooner than August 24th. Perhaps could come back to us by the first of July. And then perhaps the request of the fund-raising plan, the request by the summit partners would be to get back to us by July 15th. I wanted to throw that out there, but also ask our homeless strategy officer if she wanted to speak to these. >> Thank you, council member. I feel like we in terms of the funding man we're actually very close to having the items that are requested ready to share and so I do want to invite [6:47:03 PM] folks, acm Gonzalez and to give any of their feedback in terms of at capacity on their side to do so, but certainly because it is so important that we begin to work with our partners to identify other funding sources, we are anxious to have this out in the community and have summit partners be back on this as soon as possible. >> Kitchen: Yes. My thought is that moving that back for the funding plan would help the funding that needs to occur by the community partners. >> Acm Gonzalez or cfo Ed van eenoo if you have any feedback there that would differ? >> Thank you, Diane. I think you can which hear me. I want to echo, Diane, what elements have gone through on the funding plan and I have acknowledged the work [6:48:03 PM] of Diana, [indiscernible] And Ed van eenoo. Everyone has been working diligently to put together a really good funding plan for the summit housing initiative. We still have some work to do with regard to some other components like the encampment response and we intend to get to the summit leadership as soon as possible. So yes, we want to do that quickly. And there are some holidays coming up, July 4th and some other things. It's going to be trying to work to folks to get it scheduled as soon as we can. But we certainly will put every effort forward to make that happen. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter. >> Alter: Thank you. I wanted to make sure that the city manager felt like he had enough direction and our homeless strategy officer had enough direction on the emergency shelter and [6:49:04 PM] capacity building to move forward on the pace they were hoping when they raised that funding with us. And that if you need further direction to be able to expedite those steps then you let us know now. But I just wanted to make sure that that was clear. >> Thank you, council member. Certainly the most important piece was to get the funding allocated so it looks like we're moving in that direction. I'll allow Diana to confirm anything else I missed. >> So I believe that -- we may need office of real estate services to chime in here, but we are moving forward certainly on looking at multiple options to increase either shelter capacity or designated encampment. And I think the direction would be should we identify lease extensions, etcetera, that that might be something that we would come to [6:50:05 PM] council for ratification at the July 29th meeting. So city manager, if you want to chime in there in terms of process and what is appropriate under the guidance that we believe -- we currently have from council. >> Thank you. Certainly this may be a point where we do have to come back for ratification as opposed to authorization because of the timing of this. So I think the general direction that our homelessness strategy officer outlined in previous council work sessions, we heard there was general agreement with that and so we will be moving forward in that direction or any additional feedback that we hear today. >> Tovo: Mayor? So I actually have some questions about the encampment strategy and at the appropriate time I was [6:51:06 PM] going to ask if we could spend some time tonight talking about it. So I know that it's almost 7:00 and we haven't had a break. So I would just ask that we make space for at least a brief conversation about this because we really haven't had a good opportunity to ask questions because of the focus on the actual funding decisions. And I just feel like going into several weeks of the meetings, knowing what the next phase of encampment reinforcement is I will have some questions tonight. So we can do that after we pass this, but I want to make sure that we have space for a little bit of back and forth on that question. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go ahead and pass this. It's almost 7:00 now. Let's make sure we do that so that we can talk about the scale of that and the direction of that because I think that that would be important direction for us to give our staff. >> Kitchen: Mayor? Mayor, I need to close the loop on the language change I was asking for. [6:52:06 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Kitchen: On page 2 where it talks about the date for bringing back the detailed funding plan, I would say using the summit work as appropriate by July 1st the city manager shall present. So I think I just heard from our homelessness strategy officer from Ms. Gray and also from acm Gonzalez that that was a reasonable target. So I would like to say that instead of on that same date I would like to say July 1st. >> Mayor Adler: Where are you reading that? >> Kitchen: It's on page 2 of the direction, councilmember tovo's direction. It's the third paragraph under funding plan. >> Mayor Adler: How does it begin. >> Kitchen: Using the summit work. >> Mayor Adler: Got you. >> Kitchen: And the second one is on page 3 under fund-raising plan. [6:53:08 PM] The city manager shall request that summit partners provide by July 15th the following. So you just insert by July 15th. >> What was the first one? >> Mayor Adler: So using the summit on -- instead of the same date what date were you proposing? >> Kitchen: July 1st. >> Mayor Adler: Staff, Rodney, do you want to except? >> Absolutely, thank you, mayor. I can appreciate, council member, the commitment from staff to meet the time frame. When we talk about partners, though, of course we're dealing with partners from another agency so we can't for certain say they would have that date. We can certainly push that date to them, but we can't guarantee that they would actually meet that date. >> Kitchen: Yeah, I understand that. It's more of a request so it would be a request to them to provide that information by July 15th. [6:54:09 PM] >> Absolutely. We will pass along that request. >> Mayor Adler: And just by way of reference when we're talking about councilmember tovo's direction, we're talking about her v2, which was the last one that was distributed when the changes are made. >> Kitchen: Yes. >> Mayor Adler: Further discussion on this item? Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: Yeah, I have a last amendment. And councilmember kitchen, thanks for making the date changes. I know you were going to help with the earlier dates, but these are an improvement. We were trying to take more time rather than less, but I'm glad that work will be come back to us as soon as possible. Just to clarify, I want to say that on the change with the summit partners could we just put the by July 15th at the end of the sentence? That fine with you. >> Kitchen: That's fine. >> Tovo: They provide the following by July 15th. I like that better. >> Kitchen: Yes. >> Tovo: And I have distributed two versions and I'm going to pass -- hopefully pass the second one. These are additional [6:55:11 PM] amendments that I would like included. And one deals with historic preservation. And I have a question for you, mayor Adler. One is about a creative funding. And then the third is about -- refers to food access and just states -- you know, as I indicated earlier, one of the good things about having the categories is it helps us as there is additional funding know what means we should prioritize. So this third item just gives staff the direction that if there is additional funding that we would want to see it go toward fuse access. So I motion approval of my amendments, please, on version 2. >> Mayor Adler: Where do I find those amendments? >> Tovo: They were circulated by Katie powers. Apologies again. I thought we had more time for this so hadn't realized that I hadn't circulated [6:56:11 PM] that one yet. I can read them. Historic preservation, mayor, is the one that I shared with you and that you added language. >> Mayor Adler: Got it. >> Tovo: The creative sector is in -- I'll read it. To the extent possible the city council desires to see the funding within the creative works not designated for non-profit emergency relief, used for programs that benefit [indiscernible] With area schools and some of the other ideas described in the city's 2009 create Austin cultural plan. The create Austin plan, by the way, it's been awhile since I've read it. Mayor Adler, I know you served as a community member on one of the groups. I did as a community member as well. There are some great ideas within there and I think this is just the right time for us to see some of those into fruition and really use this funding to think about new ways in which we might [6:57:11 PM] support our creative artists while also benefiting schools, our youth and others in our community who could benefit from notify interactions with those artists. And I already described the third but I'd be happy to read it if anyone wants me to. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Let's pick these up in pieces. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: I had a question about the third one, and -- >> Mayor Adler: Let's hold on for a second. First one is historic preservation. Councilmember tovo, I support this. And I appreciate your inclusion of the language legal and feasible. Is there any objection to the historic preservation clause being included in this item? Into the base motion? Hearing none, that's included. >> Tovo: Mayor, take a minute for me. [6:58:12 PM] I know you added the language legal and feasible and I was happy after a conversation with you to do so. We had a conversation about how you would define feasible, but I think I just want to make sure we have here on the record. And it is feasible and legal. Would you explain what you mean by feasible? >> Mayor Adler: We don't want to do anythinghat detrimentally impacts the existing operations of the convention center as differentiated from decisions with respect to convention center expansion or something like that. >> Tovo: Great. Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Next item is the creative sector item. To the extent possible, creative arts not designated would go to create Austin. Boy, that takes me way back. Seems like a lifetime ago. Any objection to that being included in the base motion? Councilmember alter. [6:59:13 PM] >> Alter: So I don't have a objection to it. I just want to point out that the civilian conservation corps has been working in the arts sector in some of this manner already. Was involved in the raisin in the sun and Lamar street bridge and some programs with covid and etcetera. And that one of the items that we are funding in the framework is money towards the civil conservation corps. And I pulled out one million of it that would go to homeless and other creative sector to be determined in the future, but that creative sector portion is somewhat along the lines of some of the things that in my conversations with councilmember tovo. So it is one vehicle that we already have built in here and just wanted to flag that that there is additional [7:00:13 PM] money for the creative sector. It was a matter of trying to fit everything in the framework and in as logical a way as possible. So that's not any sort of change to her amendment, just something that I want to point out for those following what we're doing. >> Mayor Adler: All right. Any objection to including that section, the creative sector? Hearing none that's included in the base motion. The third one is food security and language. Councilmember tovo says that any unspent funds within that food security, three million dollars, I think line item. Prioritize any unspent funds -- can you -- [7:01:18 PM] >> Tovo: Let me go through this because this is one we had to pull together quickly. Basically it's saying if we have any unspent funds within the arpa, total funding pool, that we look to prioritizing some for food security and food access, especially those high impact investments within the staff's revised nourish Austin program. And if the language is of concern, [inaudible], we want to balance it against other priorities, we can do that. But I think as I mentioned earlier, we have underfunded our food insecurity, food access segment of this. We have other important priorities as well. So I understand why that's happening. I know that we will need additional funding in that area and I'm suggesting that as we have changes or additional funding that this be one of -- at least one of the very first areas we look toward to funding. [7:02:21 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Councilmember tovo, I appreciate that but my concern is I couldn't at this point say that I would put this area ahead of arts and music, for example, which we already have direction on to try to find additional funds for, or rental assistance for that matter which we already have direction on. I am certainly willing to if we have unspent funds to give this a lot of weight, but I'm at this point not prepared to say that any unspent funds must first go to food security and food access portion. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Casar. >> Tovo: How about this? Can I respond to this? What if it says unspent funds within the resilience category if there are unspent funds within the [7:03:21 PM] resilience category that those get prioritized? >> Kitchen: Sure. I don't have any concern about that as long as we're talking about within that category. But I thought you meant everything. >> Tovo: Well, I'm seeing and hearing a level of concern that I'm readjusting. I mean, I think as far as I'm concerned I think feeding people and keeping people housed are kind of our top priorities. I know we're trying to do that in a variety of different ways, including supporting our creatives. Anyway, I think that might accomplish an aim if -- I'll think of some language here in a minute. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember tovo is recommending that any unspent funds in the resilience category, there are two items there, be prioritized as she has set out. Is there any discussion on that issue? Yes, councilmember alter. [7:04:25 PM] >> Alter: I was just asking if that's where we were landing because that's what we discussed before. So I think that's a great solution to this conundrum. Do we need to make sure the language says that or just staff understands that? When I was confused before I was going to suggest that it would work that way within the tonighted framework for the resilience portion to the food, food access category. That would solve the issue, which is what I thought it was originally supposed to say so I appreciate that conversation. >> Mayor Adler: The city manager is directed to prioritize any unspent funds within the adopted framework for the resilience category to the food access, period. >> The city manager should look to allocate these to the highest impact investments within the [7:05:25 PM] nourish Austin proposal. How about that? >> Mayor Adler: Yeah. >> Tovo: Okay. I'll type that up real quick. >> Mayor Adler: Say it one more time. >> Tovo: The city manager is directed to prioritize any unspent funds -- let me make some easier. The city manager is directed to prioritize any unspent funds within the resilience category to the food security/food access -- to the food security/food access, end sentence. In particular this fund -- in particular the city manager should look to allocate this funding to the highest impact investments within the revised nourish Austin proposal. >> Mayor Adler: Debra, was that clear enough for you? I think we will have to watch the tape. >> As clear as most of the other things. [Laughter]. >> Tovo: I'm going to type [7:06:26 PM] it up very quickly and send it to y'all. >> Mayor Adler: I think that works. Councilmember Fuentes. >> Fuentes: Yeah. So my question is around -- councilmember tovo, if you could describe what you mean by most high impact investments? The nourish Austin proposal is over$100 million to fully fund that proposal. So how would you describe most high impact? Investments. >> Tovo: And I would look to our staff to determine, number one, I think they're going to have to determine how much funding they have available and that will determine what they -- what are the feasible programs that can be accomplished within that available funding. So I wouldn't venture a guess without knowing how much funding we have available because, as you know, the nourish Austin proposal does have a range of recommendations. But I do think -- I know from my conversations and my staff's conversations with [7:07:27 PM] the city staff and the community members who have built out that nourish Austin that there certainly are some priority within that proposal. >> Okay, thank you. I think that -- looking at the proposal and working with city staff and my team also working with city staff on what we could do around food policies, which is why we added the previous amendment about, you know, really identifying those programs that were part of the proposal. And the needs of our community and so -- and the ones that we outlined in that motion I will say aren't completely fully funded investments, but they are -- we're wanting to at least get some dollars towards it so that we can get the ball rolling on those food access initiatives. [7:08:29 PM] >> Mayor Adler: So are you suggesting a change or just the discussion? >> No, not suggesting a change, just -- I guess sharing with staff the importance of us providing direction with the spending framework because there are instances when we'll have unused funds and so how do we best allocate those funds to address our unmet needs. So that's why we brought forward those recommendations to include as part of the direction for the spending framework related to food insecurity. So I was just highlighting it for staff that the ones that we have in that motion are not completely fully funded, but enough that we hope would get some movement behind them. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Then with that commentary, any objection to the language as was edited or changed by councilmember tovo be included in the base [7:09:30 PM] motion? Hearing none, that's included. >> Tovo: And mayor, you know, I think councilmember tovo raises a point that I hope -- councilmember Fuentes raises a point that I want to emphasize to the manager. There will be as we've talked about in each of these changes, additional funding and changes, revisions. I hope we can keep in very close communication, manager, with you. I hope you will keep us apprised as additional funding is identified or as programs come in at different or unexpected rates so that we can be really thoughtful about making shifts. There are a couple of areas and the creative amendment that I just -- the creative sector amendment that I just -- that we just passed is one example where there may be follow-up ifcs to provide more direction. So I see this as a very iterative process where the categories are broader. It may be appropriate to bring forward an ifc to provide more specificity. [7:10:31 PM] And most of these categories we've done a lot of talking about them already and there's no excess of projects that can be funded that I think you will move forward with. Councilmember alter talked about workforce earlier. And I think the programs you identified are very exciting, especially with regards to the one like capital idea. I want to, manager, emphasize that within the workforce spending I hope that your staff will work really closely with workforce solutions, capital idea, any other like organization to see how we can invest that dollar, those dollars in helping us meet the gap in cases of individuals experiencing homelessness. I know we haven't talked about that today and I don't want to lose sight of that very important priority of workforce dollars in helping to create that pipeline of case workers, case managers who will really help support the other elements of our plan to end homelessness. [7:11:34 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Guys, it's 7:11. We ready to take a vote? We have all three items. This is now a vote on item 77, 78 and 91. Those in favor please raise your hand? Those opposed? I'm showing the vote on all three of those as being unanimous. Unanimous on the dais. Congratulations. That's really good work. This could be an historical moment for the city, assuming that we get the partners we're going to need in order to be able to tackle challenges that are bigger than what this city can do by itself or the county can do by itself or any of the service organizations can do by themselves. It's going to take us all working together and pitching in. All right. It is 7:12. You guys want to take an hour break? For dinner and then come [7:12:34 PM] back? Mayor pro tem? >> Harper-madison: I reserve my commentary during the course of the deliberations so I could say something on the tail end. Do you mind if I do that now? >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I want to acknowledge there are parts of this plan that I'm thrilled about, super grateful that we're going to get the much needed $1.5 million that was earmarked for the construction of the health clinic at colony park. It also brings that critical health infrastructure to this part of town that has long been overlooked, which leads to outcomes like residents being disproportionately impacted by global pandemic. I'm also glad for the funding for the creative sectors, each now. They make Austin a truly unique place so we should do our best to protect and support them. However, I did have some initial concerns around our consideration for investments to address homelessness. And I think, mayor, you [7:13:35 PM] might have just spoken to that, not having the concrete plan for how to utilize them, especially considering we're going to need that additional help. So I'd like to say just through the commentary today, the liberation today, the amendments brought forward by councilmember kitchen, tovo, alter, pool, Cass czar, Fuentes, I think a lot of my concerns have been addressed. I would also like to additionally say that this council has expressed so many times that the best thing we can do to address homelessness is to build more affordable and permanent supportive housing projects. So it seems to me that we need to be able to do that faster than our current pace. So over the break my team and I, we intend to work on some potential changes to our system, changes that we can make to our code that will help to expedite the development of those permanent supportive housing projects. And I welcome my colleagues to -- who are interested in making that happen to reach [7:14:35 PM] out to my office and let's work together on it. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. All right, colleagues, we have at this point three items that I think we might be able to handle quickly and let people go and not have to come back after dinner. And I don't know if that's true or not. Let me test this. Items number 17, which is the hazard plan. Item number 21, which is carver. Item number five and 96, which are the two convention center items. It's my intent not to call 89. And I don't know if item 83 is something that etod is something that can be worked out or whether that's going to take time. >> >> Pool: Mayor, I have something on two. [7:15:36 PM] >> 126 will be very fast. >> Mayor Adler: Let's see what we can do here. Let's see if we can move through these quickly. Item number 2, do you have something that looks like it's agreed -- councilmember pool? >> Pool: Yes. The applicant has agreed and I am agreed to and would like to recommend that we postpone item number 2 to July 29 and that will give everybody time to work through the issues that had accumulated. But Mr. Suttle had offered that postponement and I told him that sounded fine and considering the work in front of us that sounded like a plus. He can -- >> Mayor Adler: Is there any objection to postponing? Yes, councilmember Kelly. [7:16:42 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Without objection, then, it is the will of the council that item 2 will be postponed. Let's now look at item 17, the hazard plan. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: Thank you. I want to apologize to the staff for keeping you this long. So this hazard plan is 400 pages. It was submitted before storm uri. Obviously we have experienced a lot of issues and, you know, I understand that there's a plan to come back with that. I'd like to hear a little bit -- if you could just tell me again what that plan is, and I'd like to understand if at that point that there are amendments to other parts of the plan that we would have had a better chance to dig into that we want to raise issues on or whatever if we can change [7:17:42 PM] it. I understand there's a FEMA deadline and I don't want to jeopardize anything with respect to that. But I do want some clarity because I'm fairly uncomfortable with us being given a 400 page document on a week we have two council meetings and, you know, many of us are very concerned about our planning for just these hazards given the experiences. So can you speak to that process and explain how we would be able to plug in when that comes back? >> Thank you, council memberment we do have staff from homeland security that can speak to that. Eva? >> So council member, Eva [indiscernible]. I want you to know this is a living plan. And so the adoption does meet our FEMA requirements so that we're maintaining [7:18:42 PM] eligibility for -- sorry, I hope you can hear me. So that we're maintaining eligibility for mitigation grants. However, we can incorporate changes as we move forward and we would be happy to do so with the winter storm uri lessons learned as well as if there are -- if there are any revisions needed potentially to wildfire. >> Thank you. I just want to signal that I'm going to probably want to make some adjustments with respect to -- to take the time to understand better how you came to your conclusions because they don't always match up with what we're hearing in our other wildfire conversations. We do have some other facilities like our water utility facilities that are in high wildfire. We had a q&a today that [7:19:45 PM] talked about Austin water's land plan and work that they are actively doing to things about the level of risk that was cited. That also made me want to look at some other hazards. Our audit and finance committee is looking at cyber risks in various ways. We will have an executive session on the work that we're doing on that. And I just wasn't able to get into it at that level. So I would like to engage on that in the future. For today I'm going to just abstain because I'm not comfortable voting on it, but I understand it needs to go forward. If someone wants to make the motion. Thank you for staying. I apologize for that. >> Mayor Adler: I'll make the motion to pass it. Is there a second? Councilmember kitchen seconds it. It's something that we need to pass and if we need to make changes we can always make changes, but we need to [7:20:46 PM] pass it. Let's take a vote. Those in favor of passing please raise your hand. Those opposed? It's unanimous with one abstention, councilmember alter. All right, guys, the next item that I think we might be able to handle here is item 21, carver. Will that move quickly, mayor pro tem? >> Harper-madison: Absolutely. I pulled that item and I do believe it will go quickly. The carver is such an important institution for east Austin. This facility got its start in 1933 as a segregated library known simply as the colored branch. When we invested in a major expansion and renamed it in 1979 it became the first African-American neighborhood museum in the state of Texas. But we are a growing city and it's time for the carver to grow again. [7:21:47 PM] It's been more than 20 years since our municipality first started making big moves towards this latest expansion and I appreciate the work and the long hours put in by the community and our staff over the past few years. That engagement got us over the hump. This is a new green space, the plaza, the theater space and so much more. This is going to be an incredible project for the community. However, I do have concerns about the amount of parking. Under this proposal we're talking about increasing the amount of parking spaces by five fold. And doing it in a way that plants a giant lifeless structure right on the edge of rosewood and makes it a less welcoming place for people on foot or bikes or on wheelchairs. I appreciate that putting it there would block the theater loading docks from view, but it also blocks the view of the mural on the side of the library, which is actually getting a [7:22:50 PM] facelift right now as well. And Quinn type he willing the amount of parking also doesn't seem to align with our 50/50 mode split goals. The asmp explicitly identifies as target goals that we decrease the amount of parking space per capita and that we increase the amount of developments that reduce parking. So when our on the part parking requirements lead to outcomes like this, it seems to me like some of our policies are working against one another. So I'd like to add the following amendment to address it. On page 38 after the sentence that begins further design work should explore and underground parking structure, I'd like to insert, because one of the goals of the Austin strategic mobility plan is to right-size future parking supply, to encourage sustainable trip options. The size of the garage and the amount of parking provided should be [7:23:50 PM] reassessed when funding the expansion is -- when funding the expansion plan is secured. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is there any objection to the language of the amendment? Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: Did you ask -- I support the amended language. I didn't know if that was what you were asking. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. Wanted to make sure we got a second. Discussion on the amended lapping? Colleagues? Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Yes, I just want to thank the mayor pro tem for that historical background on the site. It is very encouraging and something I definitely want to be supportive of for this city. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Further discussions on the amendment from the mayor pro tem? To this item? Councilmember Renteria? [7:24:50 PM] >> Renteria: Yes, mayor. You know, we're really trying to move away from automobile parking and I believe that, you know, what Natasha -- my colleague, Natasha recommended, it's the right way to go. You know, we're trying to make it into a transit-friendly space. And by encouraging more parking, especially there, I think this will [indiscernible] In the rising costs. So I hope the city really looks into this and tries to reduce as much parking as possible. >> Mayor Adler: We ready to take a vote on it this item number 21? Without objection that amendment is included. Those in favor of item 21 as amended please raise your hand? Those opposed? [7:25:51 PM] I'm seeing it as unanimous vote. That item 21 passes. What about convention center, 5 and 96? Councilmember tovo, do you want to handle that quickly and let staff go? >> Tovo: Certainly we can try. I would like to request that we take up item 96 first, please? >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Tovo: I will move passage of the version that was September out today for the -- the version with the amendments that were sent out I think it was today. It seems like a week ago. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember tovo makes a motion, seconded by councilmember pool. Any discussion on item number 96? Those in favor of -- >> Tovo: May I have one or two comments? I'll make them very quick. So next up is going to be the proposal that the staff brought forward talking about a particular methodology it for how they would want to do the construction and an [7:26:51 PM] expansion. The motion that we're I hope about to pass just takes a step back and asks the staff to really make sure that any architect, any design team hired for the convention center is really working within the parameters that we've set for them in the palm district plan. And I could say more about that, but I'll just leave it there. I think it's really critical that if the staff move forward with a convention center expansion that we do so in a way that really benefit the area and creates a flexible space that's really valuable for austinites as well as visitors. So we have started out trying to do a design competition, which was a very exciting, fun idea that is impossible or nearly so to do within -- [audio drop]. >> Mayor Adler: Did we lose Kathie's voice? [7:27:52 PM] Kathie, I think we may have lost you. While we're waiting for Kathie to come back to us, councilmember kitchen, can you move us through 126 quickly? >> Kitchen: Yes, I move passage of 126 with the with the staff's recommendation of mf2 on first reading. >> Pool: Looks like Kathie's back. No, she isn't. >> Mayor Adler: Kathie, hang on one second. Council, while with lost you completely we're trying to make use of time here. Councilmember kitchen on item number 126 has moved passage of the staff's recommendation of mf2 by approving it on first reading. Is there a second to that motion? Councilmember Renteria seconds that motion. >> It was item 126, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. If I said anything else, it's 126: There's been a [7:28:53 PM] motion and a second. Any discussion? Those in favor of the motion please raise your hand? Any opposed? I'm showing that unanimous on the dais. 126 is taken care of. Councilmember tovo -- >> Kitchen: Mayor, can I say like two words, that's it. My two words are that I appreciate the neighborhoods and the developer will continue to work on these issues, particularly those related to flooding concerns and will be working with the water -- with atd and our water department to work on flooding issues. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Councilmember tovo, we're back -- you're back. >> Tovo: I was talking about what a fun idea it is. Am I echoing? >> Mayor Adler: You're okay. >> Tovo: An innovative thing to have a design competition, although it's [7:29:53 PM] not really upon within the framework of the city but this is our next best option. And I have a couple of comments to make for number five, but I'll leave it for 96. >> Mayor Adler: Manager, staff, are you okay with this item 96? >> We are. As the revised version, yes, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. All right. The revised version in front of us has been moved and seconded. Those in police officer please raise your hand. Those opposed? It passes unanimously on the dais. Councilmember tovo, do you want to talk about item number 5? >> Tovo: Sure. I'll move 5 with the amendment that I distributed or that Katie distributed at 6:44. >> Mayor Adler: Can you tell us what that amendment does? Kathie, can you tell us what [7:30:54 PM] that amendment does? >> Tovo: I heard the question, I just closed it. This is an amendment to a point that the downtown Austin alliance made that it would be good to make sure that nothing about the project method that's being contemplated or being recommended, the construction manager at risk, but nothing in that method would preclude us from doing two things. One, working with any private partnerships if we wanted to have a public-private partnership on the side of the convention center, and two, would not preclude us from a potential collaboration with the Austin economic development corporation. So the language of my amendment reads as followed. The city manager shall ensure that this product delivery contract does not preclude the possibility of private partnerships and/or a potential collaboration with the Austin economic development corporation. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember tovo moves passage of this item number 5 with the amendment included. Is there a second to that motion? [7:31:54 PM] Councilmember Renteria seconds that motion. Any discussion? >> Tovo: Mayor, I have one quick question/comment for staff. It's my understanding, and I think it came out of one of the documents that we received or maybe it was in the question and answer and the responses to councilmember alter, but it's my understanding that at the time that if this passes and the convention center continues to proceed forward with doinghe initial groundwork for considering a really -- did demolition and rebuilding and significant redevelopment of that site that they will also at the same time be doing a financial feasibility study. Is that accurate? Is my understanding accurate? >> Hi, council members, this is [indiscernible], interim director for the convention center. That is correct and we will be coming back after the summer break with the updated feasibility study. [7:32:55 PM] [Garbled audio]. >> Tovo: Thank you very much for that information. I know that's very important. As this was on our agenda, it was the C mark item that was on our agenda and it was important that we not move that way and if we move forward that it has great design and it respects the work that we've done to initiate great placemaking in that space. I do know it's a good question before our staff and for our city about whether this -- whether the financial models that were done pre-pandemic continue to hold true when it comes to convention center and that history. So I know several people have written and said what kind of financial studies are done, have you updated those assumptions and thank you, Tricia, for verifying that that work is also underway and that we are not going to take this that next step until we really fully understand those financial -- what the financial assumptions are and whether they've changed [7:33:55 PM] and can proceed in a way forward that makes good sense from multiple directions. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Those in favor of this item as amended please raise your hand. Those opposed? I'm showing unanimous on the dais. It passes. Colleagues, I think that leaves us three things: Item number 93, which is the etod. 103, which is the Springdale pud. And then the conversation about the first encampment. Do we want to try and power through and get these last three? Let's try and get through. Let's call up the -- >> Mayor, not to sir sum [7:34:59 PM] vent your power as the chair, but I don't think the etod matter is going to be fast here. Are you sure you want to take this item up now? It appears to me as though folks are we'rely and looking for some re-- weary and looking for some reprieve. >> Mayor Adler: I can't tell if the greater reprieve is power through and -- >> Harper-madison: Maybe gauge from our colleagues. >> Mayor Adler: That's what I asked. We have the three things here might take a little bit longer and the question is do we want to try to do this without a break and work our way through these things and end the meeting or do we want to take a dinner break and come back? Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: On 93, which is the tod, I think that mayor pro tem has accepted my amendment, but I do think that councilmember tovo and the mayor pro tem had some discussion that they needed to have on councilmember tovo's amendments. >> Mayor Adler: There's no question and that may take [7:36:00 PM] us longer. We're no longer in speed items. The last three things may not be speed items. And the question is do you want to take a dinner break or should we power our way through these? >> Harper-madison: Mayor, I don't know if councilmember tovo is with us currently? >> Tovo: I'm here. Realistically we have 45 minutes to an hour. So I think the question is -- I think the question is, you know, can we continue on for an hour without taking a break? Could we take an extremely short dinner break, even if it's just 15 minutes, but I think -- I think we're looking at at least 45 minutes with three topics ahead of us. >> Mayor Adler: I think that's probably right. How many people want to take a dinner break, raise your hand. Okay. I see three. Four. If we took a 20-minute break [7:37:00 PM] would that give people a chance to refresh? I'm seeing some yeses and -- >> No. >> Mayor Adler: We don't have a majority to make any break at all. So we're either going to just power through or we can take a 15-20 minute break. >> Casar: Mayor, each though I didn't raise my hand for the break, if folks need a break, I'll -- I'm good with that. >> Kitchen: And mayor, I just -- I need probably 25 minutes. >> Mayor Adler: All right. Let's do this. And I think that's probably right that people need a break, even if it's not a majority, we should accommodate that. So it is 7:40 right now. Let's do half an hour and let's come back at 10 minutes after 8:00 and we'll handle these last three items. With that, it is 7:40 and we're going to recess the city council meeting, I'll [7:38:00 PM] see you at 10 minutes after 8:00. [8:00:08 PM] [Switch captioners] [8:15:48 PM] >> City council meeting here at 815. Today is still June 10th, 2021. We are going to call up the etod our first just to double back real fast manager, in order to effect item number 77 when we come back, are you going to be doing your budget and getting that out the fist week or so of July. Would you please let me know then whether I need to bring in ifc in order to affect the intent of item 77. Whether I need to bring one for the last meeting in July or whether it happens at the meeting to do that >> We will mayor. >> All right. Thank you let's go ahead and call up item number 93. Mayor pro tem moves passage of item 93 with the most recent [8:16:50 PM] version that was handed out which is I think your version six. Is that, correct? How do we identify your most recent one? >> I think it is v6 mayor. Let me make certain >> Okay if it's not go ahead and correct that. >> I will. Thank you. >> It looks like v6 is there a second to the etod? Councilmemer kitchen seconds that. What if anything is outstanding issue at this point? I think councilmember tovo indicated a second ago as people are coming on that it appears as if the issues are significantly simplified prowhere we thought they might otherwise have been. To your motion, mayor pro tem do you want to speak first or should we ask councilmember tovo to tell us her view of the world? >> I certainly have some opening remarks then I would love to welcome councilmember tovo's remarks then if we have [8:17:52 PM] more to deliberate from there, so be it. My office has really worked hard on this. I was inspired by councilmember tovo's really heartfelt expression of appreciation of her staff. And I don't know I always take the opportunity to do that, but Lauren hartnet she when I say she has worked hard on this item she has eaten and slept and breathed this item for a very long time. I'm very happy it's back before us today and all the work she put into it. I'm so grateful we had the opportunity to attend the E today webinar out of Chicago I mean, our intent behind this is nothing but renewed and having them answer some of questions has been eye opening and inspirational and tells us [8:18:54 PM] we're on the right path. We talk about prop B voters gave a mandate with prop B I also want to point out a lot of voters gave us a member with project connect. And bond. 240,000 austinites con tpeufrpled they want a more walkable bike-able transit city and actions we as a council have previously adopted the imagine Austin comprehensive plan are packed and encourage more contact connected see by promoting walkable micible transit or tkoers it also says, we should strive to engage with people. Who have not historic spoken with to ensure that these community members V the opportunity to make decisions and give input on transportation decisions it was so great during this webinar to [8:19:54 PM] hear people talk about the way to do community engagement is not to have your plan fully fleshed out then present it to the people it's actually to in earnest have the people come to the table with you. So, land use policy number one in the asmp recommends, we plan and promote transit supported density along the transit priority network to be clear, we are not voting on implementing , any changes today the direction is to work with capital metro so we can have a suite of options, we can unpact later with project connect allowing the highest possible ridership is how we're going get the most out of our investment having in place clear, actionable and equitable transit oriented development policies will get us there. It will also make it more likely that we get as much federal funding as possible. Capital metro recently announced they secured federal grants for the expo line and [8:20:56 PM] the pleasant valley lines the reason they brought those to project. Enhance connect bus lines to fta first is the most competitive according to the fta report across categories and sub categories scored medium of land use, on transit supported plans and policies in place medium. On the performance and impacts of those policies, medium low. And on the tools to maintain or increase share of affordable housing along the line, medium low. It would be a great disappointment to we failed to address these ratings and lose out on funding for the other project connect investments so I'm eager to pass this and to see what fruits can come from our partnership with capital metro. And that is all. Thank you. [8:21:59 PM] >> You are muted chair. >> >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Councilmemer kitchen? >> Councilmemer kitchen: Thank you mayor pro tem I appreciate the opportunity to work with you as we have worked through amendments you know the past month or two I appreciate that and arrived at a good place and hopeful with the suggestions that councilmember tovo has. So, I do think we have huge opportunities with project connect. And you know one of the channels and opportunities for us is to align our land use planning with our transit planning. Which I think that this resolution helps us do. I appreciate your example about engaging with the community and are you exactly right. It's a conversation with the community not giving them something to react to. So, I think that that approach is written into this resolution and it's part of our tod processes where we are actually [8:23:00 PM] sitting down and cocreating with the community. I know I'm looking forward to with the area in district five which is the menchaka area with brt, I'm looking forward to working with the neighbors along Menchaca to talk with them about what they would like to see. And how they have been wanting the bus line to come down there the fast bus line for a long time. This is an opportunity to work with them and work with them in a way to ensure we get federal funding this line along with the line in councilmember Ellis's district are the next ones up for funding I was really pleased the pleasant valley line did get funding but we're learning a lot from the way that that was scored. It did make it to get funding at this stage and that's good but we now have the opportunity to look at how fta really scores those brt lines. So, [8:24:03 PM] the collaboration with capital metro also and atp will continue to be, you know, something that makes us all stronger. And the other thing that's in this resolution that I appreciate that you have in here, mayor pro tem is the alignment with ant displacement efforts atp is doing. We got to get our timing working so our transit planning and displacement and land use planning are synch. Thank you so this. I think our work over the last couple of weeks has really improved what we have in front of us now. >> Mayor pro tem: Cath did we lose you? >> No mayor. [8:25:03 PM] It's freezing thank you mayor pro tem. I appreciate you accepting I think nearly all of my changes I know there were a couple different amendments to my amendments that you rested today and using the last line allowed me to go through it. So, thank you colleagues for agreeing to it. I think even a short time away was helpful. I have a couple quick questions. I think that as I have used naturally occurring your draft changes it to non-income restricted which I think is fine. I want to ask our city staff if that is a difference with a distinction from their perspective or if those terms are synonymous. I guess that's--oh, I guess that is really a question for housing staff I'm not immediately seeing anyone from our housing staff on the call. [8:26:05 PM] >> Councilmember they are available they just need to be moved over give us one second. >> Councilmemer kitchen: That is the question I had. And mayor pro tem, there is one example where you changed it to market rate affordable. So, I didn't know if you intended them all to be consistently changed from naturally occurring to non-income restricted or if you wanted there to be market rate affordable. And I can tell you what that is. I will just run through all of--and I think that's it. That is my one and only question. If the staff tell me those terms are synonymous, then I'm fine with that and we just need to resolve the question of the one that appears on the message board post to have changed naturally occurring to market rate affordable rather than non-income restricted I think [8:27:06 PM] that is the only one that is inconsistent >> Rosie. >> Hi thanks Rosie from the housing and planning department generally speaking market rate affordable housing and non-restricted affordable housing are all kind of saying the same thing. I think you can use that you know pick the term you would want to use and that would be appropriate >> Okay. That's great. Thank you director true love and mayor I call your attention to the one that is different. I'm sorry, I don't know if you can all hear my dog in the background I'm sorry about that. Line 61 be it further resolved and it is section B and on the draft that posted at 431, it appears to me it changed encourages the preservation of income restricted occurring to market rate affordable. If I'm aligning my drafts [8:28:06 PM] properly. >> The version I'm looking at 161b non-income restricted affordable multifamily housing and mobile home communities around stationary to vulnerable. And gentrification displace thement >> It is. Are you reading from the message board are you reading from the 431 message board post >> This is the latest iteration and it's non-income restricted councilmember tovo okay. Okay. That sounds good to me then. That is all mayor. Thank you. Thank you mayor pro tem for your work on this >> Thank you mayor pro tem has made her motion p6 it's been seconded those raise your hand those opposed I cannot see councilmember pool or council member Kelly. So, the others voting aye, it passes. All right. [8:29:07 PM] Colleagues, let's call up item 103. Springdale. >> This is Jerry rest oven from housing and planning department if I could quickly add at the last discussion whether the tier three of the pud could be restricted to a geographic area, the staff determined it can. And we are proposing, we mimic the language from the camel back pud and the moneys be restricted to council district number three. It would be limited to period of seven years, if after seven years those moneys are not spent within district three they would revert back to the general housing trust fund. That is all staff has to add on 103. >> You are on mute. >> We begin with the applicant give them a chance to make a [8:30:09 PM] presentation. Jerry is that where we are? >> Michael whellan I have already spoken. Thank you. >> You did earlier. That is correct. Okay. Is there a motion on this item? Councilmember [inaudible] >> Yes I move we approve the third reading. >> Been moved to approve this item. As earlier proved but now on third reading. Seconded by councilmember Ellis. >> Mayor sorry to interrupt. I think councilmember pool is having trouble accessing the meeting. >> Owe oh, no. >> And she may be on a different device that needs to be moved over. >> There she is. Maybe I don't know if she wanted to say how she voted on [8:31:11 PM] the last item. >> Need to log into this one, too. Okay. >> I say we got you. A second ago, Leslie we took a vote on the etod matter >> I was trying to raise my hand to be seen to vote yes. >> Okay the record will reflect had you been there to vote you would have voted yes. All right. That gets us now to item the pud case Springdale pud 103 by councilmember Renteria has made the motion to approve as it had been approved but now on third reading. Councilmember Ellis seconding that. Is there any discussion? >> Mayor? >> Yes. >> I have a frozen hand up from earlier. I left it up in hopes you would see it. Jerry, how said the time period at which the money would have to revert to the city, would you mind just repeating that? I [8:32:12 PM] missed it I don't have the back up in front of me. >> Sure I will read it from the ordinance it says the fee in lieu of donations for council district three. From the date the fee in lieu by the city. [Reading] [Inaudible] Seven years staff may use the funds in other ways that calls the city strategic housing blueprint [inaudible] For any building within the pud include the bonus area until the fee in lieu has been paid to the city's trust fund for a period of seven years council district three. >> Right. >> And from there the general housing for money. >> Thank you and able to affect that change thank you. I think councilmemer kitchen you had raised that so that's a great thing [8:33:14 PM] >> Muted. >> Mayor Adler: Had done with this item. 103 pud moved and seconded. >> [Reading] With the restriction I read into the record just to be clear. >> Mayor Adler: That restriction. Those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed? I'm showing unanimously approved except for council member Kelly who I do not see >> That concludes zoning. >> Thank you very much. Colleagues I think that includes everything now except for the discussion about encampments. Strategy to see if there is additional direction that we can as a council provide. Councilmember tovo you asked for this conversation. You want to lead it off. >> Councilmember tovo: Yeah. I do. Thank you. Like many of those folks writing, I'm concerned and confused with what happens [8:34:15 PM] next. I know Diana grey presented to us some of the alternatives moving forward absent action that don't require action from us because they are consistent with previous direction so we didn't have an opportunity to really drill down into the bird shelter and I just want today ask Mrs. Grey if you could tell us I believe the bridge shelter is ready if you could tell us how many beds are available and kind of what the process is from here and then I have some questions about the designated encampment conversations going on. >> Yes councilmember thank you Diana grey homeless strategy officer. So, there are two I would talk about salespeople to bridge shelter in two categories one is that we are in the process of converting the road way in that was purchased by the city into the south bridge shelter. [8:35:16 PM] That is underway. We have demobilized as a pro[inaudible] It will be the site for dedicated shelter for people who are served in the heal initiative at least initially on the four sites we want to ensure as we go to those encampments, we want to offer explicitly that interim shelter as well as the long term housing resource. In addition to that, because we recognize that of course, there is a shared sense of urgency around crisis beds whether they be in shelter or in encampments, we are looking at the feasibility of taking one of the prolodges that seem to be demobilized and converting that also into shelter. And these are leased facilities we are looking at presently. [8:36:20 PM] But that is something that we believe could be achieved fairly quickly both because we have the relationships with some of the hotels those leases are not finalized yet in their discussions. We have the hotels that are already sided we have the staffing patterns it would not be precisely the same of course, the prolodges had a different purpose than shelter overall. There are certainly still questions there that need answered but the amount of money that council set aside for this sort of crisis response during the recess is sized to allow for potential operation of such a shelter. So, that allows us to move forward there. In addition to that, this is not bridge shelter, we had [8:37:21 PM] mentioned that we will be seeking guidance from our health authority regarding the potential for increase density or restored density or capacity at our conjugate shelters at the arch and at the salvation Army. That is to be determined. I think we still have vulnerable folks and it's obviously, a space in which it is difficult to social distance. So, I will pause there, councilmember, and then, you know, can speak also too encampments certainly. >> Sure. Thank you. I will ask a couple of questions and maybe my colleagues will have questions about the information and I do have some about the designated camping. Thank you. It sounds as if there--so the bridge shelter is identified for heal but there may be a [8:38:21 PM] possibility of getting 1 or 2 of converting 1 or 2 of the leased prolodges into shelter for individuals who are currently, um...in encampments but not part of heal? >> That's accurate. And it's likely just one councilmember but of course, things are still a bit fluid councilmember tovo >> Councilmember tovo: Okay. Thank you how soon will you have answers about that possibility and the same question and answers for the capacity shelters. >> I believe we would certainly have substantial update for council within the next two weeks, if not, final determination. This is all of course, moving relatively quickly. >> Councilmember tovo: And based on those solutions, how many individuals can be accommodated through those [8:39:21 PM] different solutions or is it too soon to know because you are not sure what the health authority will okay occupancy in terms of shelter. >> That is correct. What I can provide I don't have that on hand at the moment what the decreased capacity was for single family shelter individuals. And in the hotels bridge south has 87 rooms. At present, we are still contemplating single occupancy of those rooms, unless it is household unit of some sort that enters, but there too, we might over time assess the possibility in increasing you know, the number of people per room >> Councilmember tovo: Got it. Thank you. Thanks very much. And you are right. I could just go back to what and we of course, have gotten those numbers in multiple forms [8:40:22 PM] of our existing conjugate shelters what they were prepandemic and assume that would be the top capacity. >> That's correct. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues? Councilmember Renteria? >> Councilmember Renteria: Yes. Diana grey. I'm really concerned I have been seeing the reports and some of the news segments about the rp homeless that are real concerned having to go out into the wood. They are afraid what I have seen in hospital is that we have seen some people who are females having severe health problems and wheelchairs and I'm just concerned that we don't run both those people out [8:41:24 PM] into the wood because it's just inhumane to try to do those kind of thing so I hope you have something in there reserved for people like that are experiencing that type of homelessness especially our female population out there. >> I appreciate that councilmember. And you know our first stage is really sort of determining what capacity we might be able to establish. We are certainly open to thinking about some set asides for essentially vulnerable populations and can, you know, report back to council on that front as we have those discussions. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter then council member Kelly. >>. >> Councilmember alter: Thank you I appreciate councilmember Renteria raising that issue I [8:42:24 PM] have--rise to thrive victims of sexual assault or domestic violences to hotels disbursed around the city and they have interesting ideas and proposals building off partnership with the city after covid with respect to domestic violence I think theurs % of ours are Vik tepbls of sexual assault victims I may have that wrong at this hour. If we are able to do that for the right people that can handle being in that disbursed environment but don't have shelter while we're still able to have those contracts and support through an organization like that that has the technology along with it, I think that would be something that would be worth pursuing. I know they have been in touch with a ph, but I don't know how much the domestic violence and homeless response are coordinating I did want to flag that and it was one of the [8:43:26 PM] issues that you know I was struggling with as we were talking about the investment in the 3,000 as we have to do the sort of immediate shelter kind of thing and trying to figure out where funding for something like that would come. They have been working closely with victim services as well. So, I think there is connections whether it's that program or another. I happen to know that one. It's a model that is slightly different for sub population like Renteria just mentioned. So, I did want to flag that. I may have another question after other folks go. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember Kelly. >> Thank you this is top of mind for me it literally just happened while I was walking to take a break earlier I was downstairs and several of the individuals experiencing homelessness here at city hall have expressed to me they have not been contacted by the host team about anything yet. So, we have been trying to help them getting a coordinated assessment could you speak to [8:44:28 PM] how you are helping to reach these people here and get them the services they might need? >> So councilmember, my understanding was the host team had been on-site and had some contact with folks there but we can certainly check into that and ensure that those coordinated assessments if they have not been done are completed and that we connect them with any existing available resources although we have certainly spoken before about our capacity for immediate housing placement being constrained at the moment councilmember Kelly: Thank you I know at least two individuals who were able to secure jobs it's possible. The host team came where they were at work it's great to get to know them in a way where they talk to me about what their needs are so thank you. [8:45:28 PM] >> I appreciate that. >>. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues? I want to make sure Diana and Spencer, that you are getting all of the direction that you need from the council. I read a couple media reports where it's represented that the staff was waiting to get further direction from the council which is not my understanding but if it is, please just make really clear to us what distribution if any you are waiting for if you are, I mean don't get to that place, if there are things you need now, let us know. If there are things you need in the future let us know. Otherwise the council is assuming at this point that you have the direction that you need >> Mayor, whey would say, I don't know if Kimberly Mcneilly has joined us yet I believe she was available. So, we--the presentation we made during [8:46:29 PM] worksession was quick because we had such a loaded agenda. So, there we discussed multiple approaches that we might be taking including the conversion of hotels inputting rfi that would invite community partners to explicitly say how they might like to partner with the city. While con continuing to pursue and assess the city sites. I think director mcneally did have some feedback and potentially questions for council about the assessment and potential selection of any of the city-owned sites. So, I don't know if she has yet joined us. >> Mayor Adler: I see Mrs. Mcneally now. >> If you can hear me, I'm prepared to provide--okay. So council officers, the things we are still challenged with as a team in having conversations [8:47:30 PM] with your offices and also receiving just general feedback. [Audio cutting out] There is criteria that are on different ends of the spectrum it would be very useful to be able to find a suitable site and consider suitable sites to come to some consensus about these criteria there is four of them I would like to be able to just put forward. One of those is about the proximity to schools so the department, in my mapping, I started with 1,000 feet from schools. I had been given feedback 1,000 feet is not nearly enough distance from the site I have also been given feedback that maybe that is too much. So, I'm hoping to understand because depending upon that distance to schools, that may or may include certain sites or may exclude certain sites. So, that's one set of criteria. I can go through all of them. We can come back for discussion or I can be quiet and allow [8:48:31 PM] discussion. >> Mayor Adler: Why don't you list them. >> Okay. The second is consensus about proceeding when a particular property has multiple directives. So, by way of example, there are a number of properties that were included in the real estate list that are considered surplus properties because they have not yet--there hasn't been a discussion as to the use that would happen the development that would occur on those particular sites from is a number of sites that are in some stage of solicitation maybe they are about to have a community engagement to put together a solicitation to go out for bid maybe there are proposals being reviewed at this particular point in time maybe they are in the process of negotiating a development agreement or perhaps somewhere in between all of those. Some of the feedback I received was that's great because this will provide us a very finite [8:49:36 PM] timeline and everyone understands this is temporary and the temporariness of those particular sites will be dictated by the solicitation timeline. Others felt as though including any of those properties that are in some spectrum of the solicitation might put that development opportunity in jeopardy and they were not willing to take that chance or didn't feel comfortable taking that chance. Another these two are tied together. Existing infrastructure versus investing in infrastructure. In many places many locations where existing infrastructure is located, put those particular properties city center or close to neighborhoods or very close to specific locations that maybe we are receiving feedback people don't feel comfortable about. However they would not cost substantial amounts of money or they would have amenable start [8:50:37 PM] up costs to investing in infrastructure. Other sites, we would have to have a large investment in infrastructure maybe a half million dollars for those particular sites to be available to mitigate fire, to bring water, to bring electric service to those particular sites but they were in location that some individuals thought was appropriate because they weren't so city-centered. So, the question then becomes, do we prefer minimal investment or do we want to dictate a certain amount of investment to get those sites ready and what does that look like in the eyes of the councilmembers? That kind of goes along with the second item which is I heard feedback from the offices about well why are we trying to do this? Why are you bringing forward pieces of property, we already know have some plans. Why are we just not acquiring new property that we can then invest in and perhaps something [8:51:38 PM] that looks like a community first like it could be temporary but be more substantial and provide a community-based approach to things. But that would require substantial investment and there were individuals who said well that is something that would be interesting to them. They would prefer taking the funding that we do have for homelessness and investing it in permanent support of housing rather than investing in campsites or an encampment locations that are temporary. If I could get a little bit of direction on those four items, I certainly would be able to provide more, apply the criteria appropriately and be able to provide suitability standards for each of those properties and hopefully be able to bring forward a city recommendation. >> Mayor Adler: Kimberly the first is proximity to schools the second is proceeding with properties in multiple directives the third is minimal investment or not and as that impacts location. What is the 4th one? [8:52:39 PM] >> The 4th one is tied to the third one mayor in that do we want to invest in a regional approach where we had something that's a little more long term like a community first or are we really interested in something much more temporary that is not a community first type of operation? >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Colleagues? Councilmember Fuentes? >> Councilmember Fuentes: Thank you so my preference is definitely this regional approach. I think there's a lot of opportunity there for us to think collaboratively and innovate ily with our partners community first is an excellent example and as you all know, community first is expanding and phase four, their expansion will lie right outside my district in district two in the etj portion and I think that is a proven model that works and that's an opportunity for us to [8:53:41 PM] work together on you know, permanent supportive housing and they already have a plan in place. They have a timeline that is going, so if we can invest our dollars in helping accelerate their timeline, I would be supportive of that effort. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem then councilmember Kelly. >> Mayor pro tem: I echo that sentiment. Councilmember Fuentes. And mcneally. You said do we want a shorter term or longer term approach in my mind's eye I wonder why we can't have both or we can't have something that has stages, phases it starts more temporary and phases into more permanent? >> I don't know there is any reason why we can't. I think the point I was trying to make is that I'm receiving [8:54:42 PM] feedback that is opposed to one another. So, I if could get clarity I could provide better information. >> Councilmember harper-madison: For what it's worth my vote to do something that would give us both what we need to temporarily address the challenge then longer term solutions, but built into one package. Actually have an idea I would like to run past you at a later date, but that said, the other thing you said was it would take a large investment I was hoping you could expand on that >> So in some cases, pieces of property could take upwards of $1 million to be able to do ingress, egress roads, water, electricity, which is a substantial amount of money. In my mind, a million-dollars is substantial. Something that would be less substantial in my mind, minimal would be between 100,200,000 [8:55:44 PM] and there are properties in the brief assessment of the situation are more in align with that kind of investment. >> Councilmember harper-madison: I understand. Let me ask you this. Is any of that expense that us policy makers can help us get out of our own way, we could as a body help figure out how to not incur those expenses just by way of our timeline based in our processes? >> I would have to think through that question mayor pro tem. I think we're talking about infrastructure investment so it's the physical piping, >> Councilmember harper-madison: That was the question. >> Physical lines here. >> Councilmember harper-madison: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Kelly. >> Councilmember Kelly: Thank you I echo the sentiments of mayor pro tem and councilmember Fuentes thanks for bringing that up. We passed 85 which is [8:56:45 PM] collaborating with our county-level partners in this endeavor so, I think it would be appropriate to take a regional approach to this issue. My question is, um...I wonder--and maybe you can explain this for me. Do you see any challenges for us not meeting for six weeks for you to be able to accomplish your goal to move towards a solution in locating places? >> I think there is mechanisms for me to provide feedback to the council offices that don't require you to meet. I think with good direction tonight, I could probably accomplish that without meeting, however, I certainly would alert this body that if I were to not be able to do that in a sufficient manner, that would meet the needs of the council that perhaps something, some other alternative to make this final decision would be [8:57:46 PM] needed. >> Councilmember Kelly: Thank you I gladly welcome any and all communications between our offices to ensure are you able to accomplish these goals and I'm sure my colleagues feel the same. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Director, if you need the council to give you any direction, even though we don't have any scheduled full city council meetings here until July the council many of us are--and all of us are here brave portions at this time. There are committee meetings that are scheduled. We are still meeting, many of us still in the offices so we're here and we can also convene a special called meeting with people that are remote. Obviously, we're doing that here. So, if there is stuff you need, please make sure you reach out to get that. A couple questions with respect to the things I would really [8:58:47 PM] like to hear from Diana with respect to kind of her view on some of these questions, I think kind of the threshold question is trying to figure out what kind of numbers we're trying to deal with. I heard you say we'll have a better feel for numbers and how that breaks out as you get more information and data. We have a lot of people in our city right now that are without homes and there is not places for most of those people to go to or they would be and we've never had the resources, never had the determination of the city to actually build out that infrastructure and when you don't build out the infrastructure we just don't have the spots, and that's why -- one of the reasons why we are where we are. [8:59:49 PM] And I'm real excited about the action we took earlier today to step up in a way that challenges our community to meet us and match us, but as you look through the numbers I would imagine that with the change in the ordinance going back to where we were two years ago, a lot of people are going to go back to what we were doing two years ago as well because there aren't other places for people to go. And certainly on the timing that the manager has indicated he's moving to enforce proposition B, I would reiterate the sentiment that a couple of my colleagues, starting with councilmember Renteria, to the degree that we can provide a choice for women so they don't have to go back to some of those places where life was particularly unsafe. I would like to see us doing that. As far as proximity to schools, I would like to hear the best judgment of [9:00:52 PM] staff on that issue because I don't know what the world of the possible is or is not. As we're locating permanent supportive housing now and the like, sometimes you're closer to things and sometimes you're further away from things and I'm not sure there's any one issue that becomes the sole determining factor as much as it is an additional thing to consider and I think that's where I would come down as opposed to a black and white rule. My hope is that anything that we're doing on a term basis -- temporary basis to provide anything akin to sanctioned camp areas is something that we're not doing for very long because we know and, Diana, I would ask you to speak to this, my understanding is that the success rate of someone being able to actually use [9:01:56 PM] mental health services or substance use services or worse development services and actually turn around their lives and maintain a life that doesn't have them on the streets is many fold more effective if they're not in a sanctioned camp area, but in a home, a room or a door they can do in and close. And if that's the case then, the dollars we're spending on services, which is even half of the 500-million-dollar program that we're hoping and considering here, near half, is those services. So if we're going to spend that much money on services we should be trying to deliver them in a way that they're most effective and have the greatest uptake. So I would say -- I would be generally in favor of spending minimal lower dollar amounts on things that we want to have to be temporary so it doesn't drain us of the funds that are necessary for us to be able to do the work that [9:03:02 PM] will actually help and get people off of our streets. There are other cities that developed temporary places and invested a lot of money in them and then they learned that both -- they weren't really successful in getting people off the streets, but there were there, and it's really hard to close down something that's intended to be temporary -- it just really hard to close them down and cities start having a lot of success in doing that once they stand them up. So I would rather us spend the money on the services and the resources that will actually sustain that. If we don't do that then we'll be spending more and more and more on an annual budget line item that doesn't do anything but sustain people not being in [9:04:02 PM] homes and continuing in lives without homes and the number will just get bigger and bigger and bigger and at the end of the year we won't have advanced any of those people, they will just still be where they are. And again, Los Angeles at a scale way behind ours has a billion dollar line item in their budget to do that and we have to dooring we can to not end up in that place. When we talk about ream national locations or talk about things like community first, I think community first is a great model. It has a success rate over 90% of getting people and then keeping them off the streets. And I think they have a little over 220 people now. Caritas also has a model that has a similar success rate. Water moreau also a similar [9:05:05 PM] success rate. And all those programs are capable of funding through the big program, the summit program or the Barbara poppy program that we're moving toward funding. So that kind of thing I think would be really good. And it's not just permanent supportive housing although we're pointing that way. There's rapid re-housing and the other components that build out an entire system. And I hope we're really investing in that system because that's our way out of this. But obviously in the meantime, in the short time there's some measure of sheltering that our system needs. And I would try to build it out in a way that has us move through that as rapidly as we can and I would also face the reality of the fact that we have so many people on our streets right now, the capability and the resources to house all of [9:06:09 PM] them or each every camp all of them is not realistic. So a lot of people will go back to the ordinances we had two years ago and a lot of people go back to where they were two years ago, but make sure we take care of those like women that might face the greatest potential harm. But eye Diana, I would like to hear your thoughts or assessments on the questions that the director is asking and how you would approach this proposition B work. >> So -- thank you, mayor. A couple of things in response to some of yourments first. I would agree that in terms of the resources we have and the strategy, what we're looking to do here is provide a release -- a release valve or relief value for which the return of the camping ordinance [9:07:10 PM] creates serious danger. And I would say certainly that as -- remember that council has -- I'm very happy and thank you, council, for the approval of the arp funds earlier this evening in the larger pool, but, what we are talking about here is that smaller pot of funds, and my primary value I think in looking through this process is timeliness. The reason we are talking about shelter here or encampments is that permanent housing takes awhile to get online. So when we look at options if in fact they are going to take longer than the establishment of permanent housing, one begins to question the relative value. I also agree that when we [9:08:11 PM] think about the capacity of whatever it is that we establish, we remember that what is most effective is that those crisis beds, if you will, are used many times over in the course of a year because we are re- housing. Out of that base so that it is not a static population. So I think that to a couple of -- to director Neely's points, one in terms of infrastructure I think again that really runs counter to the value on timeliness. Even if we are moving with all haste, it would be unlike that we would be ready by August or potentially even near that time. I think the specific [9:09:12 PM] distance from schools probably depends on what we are talking about in terms of whether we're talking about dozenated encampments or a hotel or some sort of sheltering option that do not have a specific baseline for you that we can come back on that front, and in terms of the permanent versus temporary nature of these site, I think again to the point of wanting to strategically use our resources focused on resowing people rather than shelter, I would lean towards a solution or intervention that can be temporary where we are not building for the long-term. I think councilmember Fuentes, certainly I think Alan graham and community first village were approached about possibility [9:10:13 PM] of temporary use on their property and it's very important to them with community they built that they have that stability and that stable community and so it doesn't really fit with their model. I think should we have a site to mayor pro tem harper-madison's point that offers us opportunities for both shorter term and longer term, so shelter that then would be converted at some point to permanent housing. That's certainly attractive. All of those things for me point to particularly during council's recess, is that we are looking at the hotels for conversion. We are planning on doing a simple, but I think important request for interest to the community to come to us as people who have ideas or resource and that what we need to do is [9:11:14 PM] to identify the best options that get us as close to an August effective date as possible, and that we would then, depending on what those options are within the constraints of the money that's been set aside for this purpose, we would work with cmo to determine if we need additional guidance or council approval during that period. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Councilmember Casar and then councilmember alter. >> Casar: Mayor, thanks. I think it important to reiterate the point that we -- we are taking really important steps today to actually solve the challenge and the problem and part of the reason that it's so hard for it to be criminal for folks to be sitting or lying down places is that we know it would take time to [9:12:17 PM] establish appropriate housing services for so many people. But I do appreciate what a lot of my colleagues here have said, Mary, your occasion that Ms. Gray we had would be an appropriate option I think is interesting if we could find a place if something we're setting up temporarily, but it had the potential for being converted into tiny homes over time and being a more -- a piece of property that had a longer potential runway, I think is really interesting and I would be interested in what those options might look like so that the -- that the initial investment in something more temporary actually maybe help leverage an expansion of something like what's happening where we're at like community first if that's possible. I also like the idea of some of the hotels we've been leasing. If we could have a place that was 50 tents but [9:13:19 PM] instead of 50 tents we have 50 rooms and if that means you have bathrooms and walls and air conditioning here in the summer, that's even better. So I don't have a lean towards it being housing or tents or air conditioning or whatever. But I think if we could have one or two of those that we could keep going. And I think the rfi you will hear and we will have interest and it's important to reiterate to the community that we want to hear from you. I've responded to churches in my district that have reached out and sent that contact information along. Just private neighbors who have identified pieces of property. I think that is really good for us to source. So I think all three of those make sense if there's something that's temporary but has the potential to be something really good, I think that's really interesting and I think the [9:14:21 PM] immediate hotel extensions and rfi makes sense. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember alter and then councilmember kitchen. >> Alter: Thank you. I think we're all beginning to fade here, but I would like to understand I'm not sure that we're all using the term regional approach. I have a couple of other comments and questions, but if either -- or if Diane could explain what a regional approach means, I don't know how to -- I've not heard that term. , Per se with respect to encampments or whatnot to understand that. So council member, the resolution specifically said one -- coming back with a minimum of 10 openings, one encampment in each district. And then receiving feedback from multiple offices the comment or term that was used is we don't know if that's really feasible. Maybe we should be looking [9:15:22 PM] at a regional approach. So in my mind without having a clear testify definition what it is, I would take that to mean that there might be a single location that might appropriately serve multiple district that perhaps are touching or within a certain distance from one another or using a heat map where we understand where individuals experiencing homelessness currently are residing to be able to create a solution that would be within that region. I'm telling you what my understanding is, but if it's defined differently about other council offices, that would help. >> Alter: That helps and makes sense to me. I do want to clarify that it was never my understanding that the goal was 10 encampments. It was go figure out if this is a strategy we should do and if it's a strategy, give you options in each district that we could evaluate if [9:16:23 PM] they were worth moving forward with encampments. And I know I was never expecting 10. I was expecting maybe two or three and I wasn't each sure what the financials were involved, if that would be. I think we have spent a lot of staff time and r4s trying to figure -- resources to figure this out trying to dot all I's to see if that's possible and I think that has affected timeliness in our ability to respond and I recognize that was in response to the resolution. I'm not faulting anyone. But I think that we have identified -- we said one 24 spots that set a lot of the criterias. And we look at those spots and if those spots are not going to work we move on to another. You said you asked for some feedback on some of the criteria. I do think that there are some properties that are quite a bit out where if we found ourselves in a position where we needed to move people to -- more [9:17:26 PM] quickly that we could have tents or something in some parking lots and things of some properties that are not going to be developed for a long time and we may need to do that depending on how things evolve and how effective the prop B enforcement is and helping people to choose alternatives that they may already have available to them and using that. I don't know what the one or two locations are. I have no idea where those emerged, but I think it is a -- it is problematic from a staff time perspective for us to let you keep spinning wheels on encampments, you know in the districts. I think that the whole exercise of encampments has been very instructive to the challenges of trying to house everyone and come up with the resources and, you know, I hear people all the time saying, you know, do [9:18:27 PM] community first development. I think that was the intention of what we were hoping to do with sort of small pop-up houses and it's been very difficult and challenging to find a location within Austin that we could do it. And I think that's something that we need to be Andrew open and onnest about and this is a complex challenge and we need to house them using the tools that we can the best we can. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen and then mayor pro tem. >> Kitchen: Just to provide some feedback, I agree, Kimberly, with your interpretation or the way you're describing regional. I think that we have to go with that approach and it makes more sense to me. And I agree with what councilmember alter just said. [9:19:27 PM] I've never thought in terms of 10 encampments either. I don't think that's feasible. And I want to make sure that we really focus on our re-housing system and not divert too much in the way of resources or time to try to find encampments everywhere. So I would just provide that feedback. I do think it's useful to reach out to people in our community. I've never that with my district. And it's just not very possible. And I do appreciate, Diana, what you have said is because I agree with everything you said about how we need to move forward. So we really need to move front and center and get our re-housing up and running [9:20:28 PM] and quickly do as much as we can on encampments, but not divert our thinking that way. That's what I would say. >> Mayor pro tem. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I would like to be able to gasoline from Diana what you think is an appropriate amount of acreage. So when we're talking about this potential property that could serve as a gradual from temporary to permanent supportive housing. And if we're talking a community first village then we're talking sort of an ecosystem of sorts. It includes access to amenities, ways to learn money, it includes the [indiscernible] And the farm. If we're talking about a place like that. And to be clear, one of the things that Alan graham talks about when he's talking about community first is he's saying there's nothing if you're talking [9:21:29 PM] approximate housing people. What is great about community first is the component of the person component. If you give them a house but no services, it doesn't matter. We're talking about a population of people who sometimes don't maintain the housing so community component is essential. That said. How many acres do you think would accommodate that kind of initiative. In your experience. >> So council member, I have more experience with more dense solutions, but I think that in this next phase one of the parcels for either phase 2 or three or four is like 7 unache he. It's quite large. Those parcels don't exist in close proximity to city center and if they do we can think all be assured that they are being pursued [9:22:30 PM] adepressively by folks who want to do development there. So what I would say to this question about sort of community first versus more conventional multi-family development, what community first is amazing and an apartment in the city close to amenities and services is fantastic for other people. So I'd like to answer what I think wasn't your question, but I think is relevant. When I think about the most likely kinds of sites that could serve both temporary and permanent purpose, I think about sites within the city. I think very difficult for it to be under an acre in order to build anything in [9:23:31 PM] terms of multi-family. I think director Mcneeley has said that she feels like probably two acres is the minimum. And based on my experience in trying to do multi-family projects on very small sites, I think we would hope to be north of an acre to be thinking about having a small multi-family building on that property eventually. >> Harper-madison: You're right, it doesn't answer my question, but it is important to know. Along the lines of my question, what I would like to ask staff to do for us is compile a list of city held assets that are two acres or more. And I think that's too broad, right? In my mind I was going to ask staff to compile a list for us of city held assets, land we already own that's 50 or more acres. I know for a fact that there are several in my district and I would venture to guess that all of us have some. [9:24:33 PM] Some more than others. I think I would like to see that kind of list and I'd like to ask for that. I don't know who the appropriate department is to ask for that. >> Can I clarify, council member. I thought I heard you say two acre and then 50 so I think I misunderstood one of the things you said. >> Harper-madison: So you said not under two, but again you we also speaking to your direct institutional experience which you already said was you were accustomed to more dense. But I was thinking along the lines of something that emulated a community first which wouldn't be dense, which would be fa vast. So I wanted to see a compilation of what assets does the city possess currently that could accommodate that. And in my mind's eye I was thinking 50 or more but I would defer to what staff thought was pertinent to add to the list. >> So that is essentially how we began this process and by we, I mean directly [9:25:34 PM] Mcneeley and the office of real estate looking at city properties. Essentially above one or two acres. So let me turn it over to directorcneeley who may be able to give a sense of the preponderance or scarcity of larger parcels as the one you described. >> Harper-madison: And if I may preempt is, director Mcneeley, I know the ones I'm thinking of in my district didn't make the list, so I'm just wondering what other considerations there were that made it so that these parcels, very, very large assets that the city owns didn't each make the list. >> First of all, the list originally came from the real estate office. The real estate office had a list of approximately -- I'm going to say approximately 45 acres. I'm sorry, 45 properties. I added to that list in the very beginning of this process. I added to that list pieces [9:26:35 PM] of parkland, right? So we came up with a number of approximately 78. Of that 78, 15 were immediately eliminated because they were either in the floodplain or they didn't meet the minimum criteria that had been set at 2 acres. So now looking with the elimination of parkland based upon house bill 1925 passing and the likelihood that at least the governor signaling that he will sign that particular piece of legislature that says that parkland shouldn't be included or cannot be included in encampments. We're now to many fewer sites. We're down to less than 30 sites to even be able to consider a city-owned properties. So certainly I'm not sure the properties that you're thinking of in your area. That might be larger than 50 acres if they're not parkland. If they are parkland, I have an idea perhaps of what they [9:27:36 PM] are. If they're non-parkland I might need to correct to your office to do a bigger scrub or better review of the tuation. >> Harper-madison: Let's do, because they're not parkland. And then the last thing that I was going to say there is -- and I don't know and maybe I need to reach out to the two people. But how long is the lease for the other ones foundation out at the Esperanza community? I heard it was originally 10 years, but the last thing I heard is it's looking like they will only have it for two years. And I would like to get some clarity there because if that's the case, that's going to make it virtually impossible to do anything each remotely sustainable and I wonder if we need to be going ahead and partnering with them from the part of whatever it is that we're doing because if they're going to need another house if in two years I think it's something we need to be thinking about already. >> I'm not aware of -- I'm not aware of their lease, their commitment, their [9:28:36 PM] agreement commitment over the length of time. Perhaps Diana is aware, but I am not. If I could add one more thing before she answers that question. I do want to make sure that the council offices know based upon the guidance that councilmember pool provided, I did run another set of calculations with planning folks that are better at dimensions and able to understand site setups and also spoke with the fire department with regards to how far tents should be from each other and how far -- how much roadway would be needed to make sure that we could keep it safe. So with that being said I do want you to know that councilmember pool was correct in that it's likely that you might be able to add additional tents to a given two acre site. It would really depend upon the site constraints if there were any and it would also just depend upon the other amenities that were put in that location. I did try to take account [9:29:37 PM] for showers and restrooms and some office space and some gathering space. I did not take into account a community garden or other amenities that might be part of one or the other operations that we've discussed. So I wanted to put that out there so you were aware when I reran the calculations with some planning folks, it's possible for tents to be more than the 50 individuals that I had originally said, but it will really depend upon the site. I would like to say maybe between 50 and 100 depending on the site constraint. For an acre. >> Council member, the last time I spoke, that lease was not yet executed so I'm not aware of the current status. But certainly I think that the other ones foundation is a partner that we'd be very [9:30:37 PM] interested in hearing from as part of this rfi and if there are ways to utilize their expertise and at the same time sort of solve for any challenges that they have on that current parcel, of course we would be interested in. >> Mayor Adler: Council member -- yes, Debra? >> Yes, mayor. If we could sort of move back to discussing the framework under item 77. We're getting a little bit far afield. >> Mayor Adler: I think we're talking about how to spend the prop B. I want to hear that, but at the same time this is a conversation about how we spend the prop B response money and that was one of the line items in the framework. [9:31:40 PM] Let's continue on. Anything else? >> Tovo: Mayor, I have some questions. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Thanks very much. And some feedback. Thanks for the opportunity to have this conversation. I want to address some things that my colleagues have already said. First of all, several of you have hit on this point, but I want to emphasize both to the public and to our staff, mayor, as you said, we are -- the council does not go on eviction for six weeks. We take a recess from our full council meetings and a tremendous amount of work continues during all of that time for all of us each if we're not meeting as a full council. So I also just want to offer my -- to support what several of you said. If there is a need to come back together virtually to have a final decision for staff on some matter related to this, you know, count me in. I am pretty concerned that, you know, we've done some [9:32:42 PM] great work toward to the rescue plan, but we have had to because that has taken so much time. We've had to really minimize our conversation about this. And for hundreds and hundreds of our neighbors the clock is ticking. And they need alternative places to go. And the reality is it is super and I appreciate Diana you and your staff and others identification of those other resources from shelter to the bridge, to the potential hotels and the -- and to the potential hotels, but that's not going to be sufficient. So I regard it as really critical that we try to identify at least a couple of places that are available for camping. With regard to the question of resources, I am -- all of what you said is what all of you said is true, community first is terrific. They've got great amenities. Of course we want to focus on housing, but again the reality that we need, we [9:33:43 PM] need low barrier sites where people can go and be legally and safely during this time period to me speaks to using really minimal resources. So in the answer to your question, director Mcneeley, about the amount of resource, I would say the mineral resources. And I would say the minimal resource, which I would say are really required,, restrooms, lighting, security, are going to provide more safety and a healthier space than most of the places people have been camping. So I I am -- I hate to be in a position of saying please allocate minimal resources to these when the resources people actually need are far more, but to keep that balance betweening our resources on permanent housing, but fayeing the reality that we need places for people to go right away, that's where I come down on the question. And I would also urge that we look to temporary [9:34:46 PM] versions of those. I'm hearing the concerns about infrastructure and of course installing permanent lighting is probably costly. Are there things we can do with temporary lighting. Can we have mobile shower units along the lines of what we've used in other situations? Can we use mobile restrooms if restrooms adopt exist on the site? -- Don't exist on the site? Because you've asked for our feedback, I know these are ideas you're considering, but because you've asked for feedback that's where I would go. And I am interested in talking possibly not today, but I am interested in sight that -- where it would be appropriate in allocating a little bit staff money toward structures. So if it's true that we can get -- that we can secure those temporary structures such as those that are out at camp Esperanza for five to $10,000, I would regard that as a good investment of our crisis services funding that we just voted on earlier today because it is vastly better than -- vastly [9:35:47 PM] better than tents. And I am also -- as we look at the different districts -- and we did. The resolution did ask you to identify a site with the goal of having a site in each district, and we may have changed our minds about that, but that was the direction. And for some areas, they're not going to have two acres of empty site. As I look around at the places in district 9 that might be possible, I know I forwarded you at least one potential parking lot site, which is again not ideal obviously, but could it be with some turf, with an overhang, could it be recrafted to be a safer area for people to be in this time where they need an alternative immediately, but maybe those are the sites where instead of asking people to camp in tents, that we are able to provide some of those structures. So to me some of the questions you're asking are a little bit site specific. [9:36:49 PM] I might provide -- I would support an investment in the structures if the terrain that people would be on is less accommodating to tent. Thank you. I think councilmember Casar, you talked about churches and private properties. And it's my understanding that private property owners have an ability to do this and would encourage people who are inclined that way to come forward and make yourself known to our staff. Can you help us understand, director Mcneeley, or Diana, what process you're in in terms of vetting the ideas that have come to you and are there any viable designated camping areas that you believe you could take action on in the month or so ahead? Because again, you know, we can talk about the benefits of these other kinds of housing, but reality is we need places for people to go right away. [9:37:52 PM] >> So after today's direction, council member, I can prepare to reconvene with the team of individuals who have been working on this and vet the different ideas or the different suitability of the properties that we have. So therefore based upon after we have that conversation I would probably be able to give you a better idea or our team would be able to give you a better idea of the funding investments and then the suitability of being able to move forward or the timeline for being able to move forward. >> And also, I want the council offices to know that as you send me suggestions, I do try to run those down immediately and so I have -- I have had conversations or reached out to individuals, private property owners or other entities to discuss suitability or willingness to assist in the funding associated with that. So I just want to give you comfort in knowing that as you send them to me this [9:38:54 PM] team is running it down. >> Tovo: Director Mcneeley, are any of those viable? I'm not asking you to name sites necessarily in this context, but are there any that have come to you or any that -- yeah, are any of those ideas proving to be viable suggestions and can you give us the contours of what some of those properties are if so? Are they -- what kind of location in general terms or what kind of site in general terms? Or are there just at this point no viable possibilities? And we're just all going to commit to continue to try? I just want to get some sense of like where we are in reality on this. >> After -- again, after getting additional direction from you today, I'll be able to apply suitability criteria, so I don't have an answer for you today without really combing through the original list and [9:39:54 PM] systematically taking a look at investment opportunities, for funding that will be required and then be able to apply the criteria based upon what I've heard today. So I don't want to say there's no properties, but I don't want to say that there are substantial properties either. I'm not trying to be evasive, I just want to make sure that I give you accurate information. >> Tovo: I appreciate that, thank you. Again, I stand ready to engage in conversations individually or collectively. I regard it as a real high priority to have places for people to go within the weeks ahead. So thank you all. Thanks for the conversation. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Fuentes. >> Fuentes: Thank you. I had one more comment to add around the lens that you might take when you're considering a regional approach. I think that it's important that we have an equitable lens. And that we're contract of the -- we're considerate of [9:40:54 PM] the current resources and infrastructure that the city has invested in when it comes to housing our unhoused neighbors as well as those entities that have been set up by state and with other community partners. So for example, where camp Esperanza is located, looking at where community first is located and the proposed expansions so we really need to have a holistic view of where throughout the city of Austin have we set up strategies and efforts to reduce homelessness and to house our unhoused neighbors. And if we are going to propose one or two camp sites that we're doing it in a way that is reflective of our community values and rooted in equity and mindful of what we're saying by selection of these sites. And one more thing I wanted to mention is community engagement piece. If we are trying to move [9:41:55 PM] very quickly a and have something in place by August, we would -- I would think that we would want to have ample time or sufficient time so that we can engage the surrounding communities on the potential site as well. >> Mayor Adler: Also make sure as you go through this -- as I am sure you are putting in the voices of the people that we're working with. It's one thing for us to pick locations. It's another thing to have locations that people actually want to stay in and be in and will stay in and be in. Ann? >> Kitchen: Just quickly, I think you may have answered this already, Diana. But we did mention Esperanza community. And I don't know if their [9:42:55 PM] site is already full at this point, but I am curious about -- I think I heard you say that we could explore working with them because that could be a place that serves that shelter approach. And then if we're working with them to help them so that folks who are there can would be a place that could turn over in terms of shelter. I think I heard you -- >> Perhaps I should clarify, council member. Esperanza community has been full for some time. And at present they do have plans to install additional infrastructure, etcetera, with the construction on-site that constrains them further. What I was referring to was the possibility of them being interested or another [9:43:57 PM] similar organization and should be able to identify an additional site. And so we're just really, I think, -- we have been attempting to assess options as they come across our desks because of course we've not only heard about sites, but people with pop-up shelters that they're interested in and being a vendor for or service providers. And so we would Luke to have a more -- we would like to have a more open process. Again, timely. We're not going to make this a long drawn out procurement process, but where we invite people to the table and then from there we are able to determine our best options going forward for doing this well and relatively quickly. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Colleagues? [9:44:58 PM] >> Renteria: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes, councilmember Renteria. >> Renteria: I have a quick question. And you know, a lot of these locations like the community first village and Esperanza, it's state land and the other ones are etj. And what I would like to know also is if there were some private landowners or we identify some property there, are we going to be looking into any of the problems with [audio drop]. And I would like to know that before we reach out too far out to find out what the restrictions that we have and what we would have to do to relax those rules. >> So council member, I think that you touched on a couple of points there. [9:46:00 PM] One was there could certainly be community concern about any site, whether it's city owned or otherwise. And so really that is site specific, and similarly, you know, should there be any -- this is where I think I would need the support of some of our other departmental partners. Should there be concerns about zoning or appropriate use, allowed usage, etcetera, and all of that would be part of some of that due diligence. And again, you know, I will simply say that I would anticipate that over the next two months we will identify some limited number of opportunities that look like our best bets and that we would expect, you know, several of those to fall away as we look into it and identify some of the challenges that are typical [9:47:01 PM] for these kinds of projects with the idea of following through with one or more good options for council to consider. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, it's before 10. Anything else? Manager, do you have anything else you need from us on this issue at this time? >> Cronk: I'll just give staff one more time because I was asking of that of them earlier. So Diana, acm hey deposit -- hayden-howard, anything else? >> Mayor Adler: Manager, don't let us hold you or your staff up. If you need anything please let us know so that we can get together from wherever we are and give you whatever you need. Councilmember Casar? >> Casar: Just to be really clear because I think we've gotten some questions from press or folks watching. Although some things are up in air based on the criteria in this conversation, it [9:48:01 PM] sounds like at minimum to the extent of opening up some hotel space on an emergency base coming through the summer is currently part of the plan, right? That is something that we are planning on doing, is that right? >> That is something that we are actively pursuing, and it still -- it appears -- we have not come across any barriers that would make that infeasible, but we are still in the process of looking at standing that up. >> Casar: Right. Things aren't finalized until they're done and you announce it, but the fact of the matter is that there are -- it does seems that we're planning to do that barring something unforeseen. For folks watching, there are rooms that you plan to open up unless there's an unforeseen thing that comes up. >> That's correct. >> Mayor Adler: All right, colleagues, I'll be seeing some of you next week at committee meetings. And I'm sure in other [9:49:01 PM] meetings here over the weeks. Stay tuned to looking for the message board and the like. Still probably the best way for us to be able to communicate. We're going to continue to get weekly reports on covid. That will be those packages and reports that we've been getting with meetings with Travis county, but they will be coming to us in a written form. And with that, everybody safe. >> Thanks, mayor.