Public Safety Committee (PSC) Meeting Transcript – 3/28/2022 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 6 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 3/28/2022 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 3/28/2022 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. [2:06:26 PM] >> Kelly: I am council member Mackenzie Kelly. I am vice-chair of the public safety committee meeting and I will be chairing the meeting because the chair is unable to join us in chambers. It is March 28, 2022, and it is 2:06 P.M. I am joined by two council members, mist and drizzle, councilmember alter and councilmember Ellis and virtually joining us is our chair councilmember harper-madison. We have seven items on our agenda today. Approving the minutes for briefings, one item for discussion and possible action and one item for executive session, but wildfire before we get into today's meeting I would lightning to take a moment of personal privilege and remind everyone who is watching that our city has high fire conditions outside today. There's a red flag warning until eight P.M. Strong winds, low humidity and warm temperatures have a higher risk for fire danger. Please postpone your barbecues today and make sure you properly dispose of smoking materials. [2:07:28 PM] The first item on our agenda is to approve the minutes from the February 8th meeting. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Councilmember Ellis makes a motion. Is there a second? Council member vela seconds. Any discussion? No discussion. >> I just wanted to say I'm not on the committee so I won't be voting. My vote doesn't count on the committee. >> Kelly: Thank you for joining us anyway. We appreciate you being here. There's no discussion. Let's take a vote. All in favor raise your hand. All opposed? No one is opposed. Motion passes, thank you. The second item on today's agenda is to introduce Robert Luckritz as the new chief of emergency medical services. Is staff ready? Thank you for joining us. >> Thank you. Thank you to all the council members here. It's an honor and privilege to be here with you today. [2:08:28 PM] I'm very excited to be joining you for my first public safety committee meeting and after the first two weeks here I'm very excited to say that it's been a wonderful opportunity to begin learning about the Austin Travis county ems system. In the two weeks it that I've been here thus far I've had an opportunity to meet with a number of individuals in the public safety realm and the public health sphere with Dr. Escott, our union, as well as many others including chief baker and a few others in the public safety realm. All in all I can say to you that the system that you have here is a phenomenal system. There's a reason why I sought out this position here at austin-travis county ems. It truly is one of the greatest ems systems in the country if not the greatest ems system in the country. The problems that you face here are very similar to what we face elsewhere in the country. I'm excited to see what's head for us as we look forward to what we can do in the crisis facing ems right now. It's no secret that the greatest crisis is staffing issues. All across the country are [2:09:28 PM] seeing individuals leaving the ems profession. Recruitment is becoming an increasing concern for us as we try to get individuals to join the ems profession so we can get our ranks where we need them to be. You tack on to that the growth of Austin and Travis county. And as a boom town we're not trying to fill our vacancies, but trying to expand them. I'm excited to work W I know we have some items that are due to you in the coming weeks with a staffing plan on what we can do to improve the overall staffing here at austin-travis county ems. I'm excited to look at the dispatch equity and optimization study and see what we can do to work together with public safety partners and what we do in the ems community. Over the next coming weeks I plan to continue to meet with various individuals to work on the different plans that we are working on for staffing, for dispatch optimization and equity and see what we can do to [2:10:29 PM] continue to have this be a top-notch ems system that it already is and take it to new levels. With that I thank you very much and I'm here for any questions. >> Kelly: Thank you very much. I want to say personally I want to welcome you to our great city. It would appear we may have a mutual friend in common, Scott Phelps, who I met during a disaster fellowship program. He speaks highly of you. With that I trust that we will have the city of Austin's emergency medical services in good hands. Members of the committee and mayor pro tem, do you have anything you would like to say? The chair has her hand up. Yes, ma'am. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, co-chair, I appreciate the recognition. I wanted to ask are there things that you could impart on us? I have genuine concerns about the health and safety [2:11:31 PM] and well-being of ems professionals? Are there things that you could impart on us during the course of this meeting that you think we need to know? >> Sure. The health and well-being and the resilience of ems providers is something we've been talking about for quite some time. We've seen over past four to five years mental health issues, behavioral issues, folks with PTC and other things and the experiences that individuals have has had a huge impact on the health and wellness of our profession. It is one of the drivers towards our staffing crisis that we're in today, particularly with the impact of covid-19. And what it did to all of our providers. As we look towards the future it's going to be a huge part of what we need to address. Mental health resources are critical for us as we look at what can we provide to our providers, what resources do we have internally as an organization, as a city. And what can we work to build collaboratively with other organizations across the country? [2:12:33 PM] We're seeing at the national level a huge growth of associations and organizations that are looking to develop different processes whether it's through peer to peer counseling as is done here at Austin Travis county ems or to allow programs for better recognition of our providers that might be experiencing difficulties. In general, we need to do a better job as an industry of focusing on the safety and well-being of our providers. I think we saw that during the covid-19 pandemic. The availability of ppe and how it was prioritized in the health care system and the accessibility to it, it's time for us to really speak up as an industry and focus on building programs that will not only help with health resiliency, but also ensuring that they have the tools to stay safe and the resources in order to stay fit and well because that's how folks will be able to stay in this industry. >> Harper-madison: So I think morales you answered [2:13:35 PM] my question, but -- more or less you answered my question, but I think you should take this opportunity to tell us as a body what do we need to do. >> I think as someone who has been here just a few weeks and I'm still starting to know individuals, I have met with Dr. Cruz who runs the wellness program for the Austin fire department as well as Austin Travis county ems. I think that's a great first step towards ensuring that. As for specifics actions I could take or direct you to take, I think it would be too early for me to tell you specifics of where the organization is from a health and wellness perspective. As I've said previously, this organization, this department, is light years ahead of many others in this country and I think that that gives us the springboard that we need to continue to do that. We have resources in ems that are dedicated to safety and well-being as two separate divisions, one focusing on the wellness of the individual but also on safety and how do we reduce [2:14:35 PM] on the job injuries, how do we reduce accidents? How do we make sure that they have the protective equipment that they need? I think what we need to do is to really inventory that and take a look at what do we have in place right now, what are the best practices and what are the lessons learned from covid- 19 and then take that program and grow it and build it in a way that addresses those gaps. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. >> Kelly: Council member vela. >> Vela: I wanted to say thank you. I think we met via video a few weeks ago. We wish you the best and glad to hear your opinion that this is one of the best ems organizations in the nation and look forward to working with you to continuing the excellence of our ems system. >> Thank you. >> Kelly: And councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: >> Thank you, vice-chair. I want to take a moment to say welcome to Austin. [2:15:35 PM] There are tons of people who want to be in this city so we're really appreciative that you want to lend your service to us and be a part of our great public safety here in Austin. I am working on an initiative to try to recruit more lifeguards and I've always told them that this is a good opportunity for them to see if they are motivated by public service, if they want to be a first responder. Do you have any words of wisdom for people who might be interested in becoming a lifeguard or someone who may be going through the training it takes to work for our ems department? >> Sure. You know, what I always tell folks, and I think we need to do a better job of this in getting this word out, it's a calling. It really is a great industry. And the reward of the self-fulfillment you get in this industry unparalleled, much like some of our other public safety partners and health care partners. I think that in preview to what we'll be talking about in the coming weeks in terms of staffing vacancies and how it is that we're going to reduce the vacancies that we have, we as a city need to think differently about [2:16:36 PM] how we recruit. It's going to be very similar to what you're facing with lifeguards and others and building programs that entice individuals to experience the ems profession, to fall in love with the ems profession like he and many of my colleagues did, and train them in a way that tees them up so they can be good strong ems professionals here in the city of Austin. And I think that's going to be something for us thinking differently about how we recruit and providing more community outreach, empowering those in community who might not have the resources to have already become an emt and finding ways that we can do that. So from a recruiting standpoint, I think it's going to be better outreach for us and I think very similar as you're discussing the lifeguard side, but from a messaging standpoint, I think we would love to help you in any way to express to individuals just how full filling it is to be in a role whether it's a lifeguard or ems or any of the other public services where individuals really do [2:17:36 PM] save lives everyday. >> I couldn't agree more. Thank you for those words. And you are joining us at a very interesting time where we're going through contract and labor negotiations for owl our public safety departments. So especially as we are either coming out of a pandemic or trying to prevent the next wave from coming, it's a big movement from us and I welcome you and look forward to your leadership. >> Thank you very much. >> Kelly: And mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I too wanted to join in welcoming you to Austin, chief Luckritz. We have some amazing opportunities here in Austin to improve access to medical care and obviously ems is central to that. As chief you will have many challenges, many of which have already been surfaced just in this short conversation, whether it is staffing and retention and safety, but there are also some real basic nuts and bolts of management of the [2:18:37 PM] system with respect to billing, for instance, and I look forward to you coming to audit and finance to report back on the billing system changes, which I hope will allow us to hire the additional medics that we need to fill out our system and provide the access to medical care that we can. I hope that as you move forward in your time here that you continue to approach things with a fresh eye, an eye towards innovation, an eye towards collaboration and trying to bring in the many partners that can help us with our shared goals of making sure that we're providing the best medical care through our ems as possible and it taking care of the professionals in our system. I wish you all the best and feel free to call on my office if you need any [2:19:39 PM] assistance. >> Kelly: Thank you very much. We look forward to having you here and the great things that will come to ems under your leadership. >> Thank you very much. I look forward to working with you all. >> Kelly: Absolutely. Our next item is item number 3, a report on use of of this my first responders. -- Of thc by first responders. Is staff available? >> Thank you, vice-chair quellly, ray Arrellano. As the committee will recall back in September of last year you had a conversation around the use of -- the potential use of low thc level as a prescription that was recently passed by hb1355. And in that discussion you expressed further questions and an interest as to how might employees, city employees, and more particularly public safety sworn employees, be able to [2:20:39 PM] use low thc level cannabis. By way of background, so if I might, hb1535, amended state law to allow certain positions who register -- physicians who register with the state to prescribe low thc cannabis to patients who meet certain qualifications. A section in the occupations code was amended to add cancer and this is all forms of cancer, not just terminal cancer. And post traumatic stress disorder to the list of diagnoses eligible for treatment with low thc cannabis. While that occupation code states that the physician determines the occupation risk of low thc for the patient it says nothing or is silent on whether or not a patient that's using cannabis, low thc cannabis, may or may not do in their work setting. Staff as a result of that meeting on September then went back to do a little bit of research in terms of what is the regulatory environment and then what [2:21:39 PM] are other cities doing in this regard. So far with the exception of hemp products that have a thc level of .3% or lower, marijuana, cannabis and other substances derived from marijuana or cannabis are schedule one substances and are unlawful for all purposes under a federal law. There are three different areas that I would like to cover in terms of regulations. The first is special considerations for firearms. So there is a U.S. Code as well as ATF policy documents that state it's unlawful for anyone to possess or receive a firearm under federal law who is an unlawful user of any federally controlled substance regardless of state law. So in that regard, APD officers as well as fire department arson investigators, all of which carry firearms, would not be allowed to use or to be issued a prescription under [2:22:43 PM] hb1535. Other provisions prevent -- hav drug testing for certain transportation-related employees and specifically those that are operating commercial motor vehicles. So city employees who have a commercial drivers license who are engaged in safety sensitive work, cannot be permitted to use low thc cannabis. And finally there's the federal drug-free workplace act which again requires federal grantees to maintain and enforce policies that prohibit illegal controlled substances in the workplace. Staff then went and did some research in terms of cities that to ask how are they accommodating or addressing the use of prescription cannabis or thc. We looked at both cities within Texas as well as outside of the state of Texas that may be also -- have state laws that allow [2:23:44 PM] for the use of prescription thc as well as recreational use of cannabis. So of the 20 cities that provided a response, Austin, Massachusetts indicated the use of prescription marijuana is the only city that allows for the use of it. Of the 20, nine cities indicated prescription marijuana was not allowed and the remainder of the cities provided no response on that particular question. So in terms of, you know, what should we do with regard to the use of low level -- low thc level cannabis, it's management's perspective that in order to better evaluate and address specific needs and requirements of the individual public safety departments as well as comply with regulatory requirements described above, management will keep the subject of the use of low thc cannabis as described in hb1525 within the contract negotiation process. So with that I'm happy to [2:24:45 PM] answer any questions you might have. >> Kelly: Thank you very much. I found that memo to be very full of information that was helpful before today's meeting. Colleagues, do you have any questions? Yes, chair. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, vice-chair. I appreciate the recognition. I have had the opportunity to talk to other cities where legalization has already happened. It is my sincere hope that we as a state finally figure it out. Maybe one more, two more legislative sessions. But when I asked the question the response was we just don't test people. I'd like to know what your response is to that, acm Arrellano. I mean, is it an option to just not test people? [2:25:46 PM] >> So in terms of what you've asked other cities, and certainly there are some cities that don't test as well as those cities that I identified in the table where they do test, and they are between whether or not they test law enforcement side or fire ems. Here in the city again what we're doing is leaving the question around whether or not we'll do random testing forethat matter testing when there's reasonable suspicion to the contract negotiations that are currently in progress or that will be in progress with our public safety departments. >> Harper-madison: This is maybe more of a statement than a question, but it's interesting to me that we have so many instances of domestic violence, of substance use disorder, substances that are not detected by way of the testing that we do. But you're so concerned [2:26:48 PM] about this particular substance that's -- that remains. I just think it's inconsistent. So again, it wasn't a question, just -- I think it's inconsistent. >> Kelly: Thank you, chair, for your thoughts. Council member vela? >> Vela: What's our current policy, drug testing policy, for our sworn services? >> So I'll generally say that we do random drug testing for the three departments as well as testing if there's reasonable suspicion and/or some sort of accident that occurs. Beyond that, perhaps I can defer to Dr. Escott who might be able to talk in a little more detail about the departments and I certainly have representatives here from the three public safety departments who can go into further detail if you'd like. >> Another question too, low [2:27:49 PM] thc products. What are those, what are they used for? A little context if you could. >> So I don't feel prepared or an expert in that regard, so certainly there's medical use that we're all talking about here, potential medical use. And so I'll leave it at that. >> Vela: And just talking strictly anecdotally, I know people who take the oils for like sleep, basically for sleep aid and also for kind of an anxiety, almost the same way that you would drink like camo meal satisfy or something to that effect, a very mild effect. Isn'ted to make sure I'm understanding the substances correctly and these things. No further questions, chair, thank you. >> Council member, I'm happy [2:28:51 PM] to try to answer those questions. There's some variation in each of the departments regarding the process for testing. There's some element of random testing involved and there's also as acm Arrellano said, testing for cause. If a supervisor respects that somebody may be impaired that's a for-cause especially stowed. Also for accidents involving city vehicles or other serious incidents. There may be drug testing for that particular cause as well. They all vary somewhat in their language, but they're relatively consistent. The public safety wellness center which is -- provides services for the three public safety departments, has looked at this issue along with my office and we agree with what [2:29:52 PM] councilmember harper-madison mentioned earlier that the issue is broader than just thc. Thc is really an issue at this stage because of its -- the position of the federal government where it's still an illegal substance versus the state government where it is allowed in certain conditions. But ultimately for the city and certainly for me as the supervisor of the clinical practice for ems and fire, the concern for us is more related to impairment. And impairment quo potentially come from thc but also other medications that are already prescribed in significant numbers to our personnel in all likelihood. Things like amphetamines, narcotics for pain medication, and many, many other classes of medications. Basically any medication that says on the liable "Do not operate heavy machinery, may cause drowsiness" any of [2:30:54 PM] those things can cause impairment. So I agree with the assertion that should we not lump this into other medications that have that potential? Because ultimately that's what we're concerned about. But as acm Arrellano said, there's conflicts with federal law that is hard for us to get around at this stage even if we wanted to. But we are certainly having those conversations and are involved in the discussions with labor relations and the employment unions so that we can work through those issues and do what's reasonable and legal for us to do. To answer your question about what is it used for, when we talk about the prescription low dose thc, it is for a number of things, including cancer, muscle spasticity. The most important one for public safety, though, is for PTC. And it does have to be done [2:31:58 PM] in conjunction with an investigational program because they're still collecting data on its efficacy. But that's the one causing the most angst right now because as chief Luckritz said earlier we've got significant numbers of folks who are impacted by trauma that they see on ems, fire, police and other departments that. To have this as an option. >> Vela: I completely understand and I appreciate those comments putting it had in context with so many other drugs out there that have substantial side effects that people take all the time that are perfectly legal and do not show up on any kind of drug test or anything like that. You see people soldier on all the time through different mental health medications, physical health medications. Just to be clear, very supportive of treating thc marijuana the way we treat so many other substances. I agree with that the [2:32:58 PM] federal law is really problematic. I'm impressed with Boston but I don't know if it has caused any conflicts or issues with the federal government, but we'll see what happens. Thank you. >> Kelly: Thank you, council member vela. And councilmember Ellis? >> Ellis: Thank you, vice-chair. I mostly didn't want to let the opportunity go by without hearing from Dr. Escott. I know we used to see you on the camera every week. It's been awhile for a couple of us. One thing that I've thought about is I appreciate in this memo laying out which cities answered questions about how they do testing. Is there information about public safety and thc in states where mayor pro tem manor is legal versus not legal? I see Colorado is on this list, but I think there are a couple other states where it may be legal and I didn't know if there was an increase in accidents or on the job situations that were causing conflicts in states that had fully legalized [2:34:00 PM] marijuana or thc? >> We didn't look into that particular question. I know, Colorado, going back to which states, and I can go back and annotate or indicate in a response back to the committee which states on here do allow for either prescription or recreational use of marijuana. And Arizona is one of them as well. We did not look into the -- what has been the effect or implication of legalization. >> Ellis: I would be curious if we can check in offline if that information is readily available. It might not be because it might be a matter of public information, but I also -- could I ask that the memo be added into our backup for today? I think it's extremely helpful and I appreciate the information being given to us. >> It will be added to backup. >> Kelly: Thank you, councilmember Ellis. I just had a couple of questions. It's my understanding that the questions on applications for ems workers related to cannabis use within the past three years and the associated [2:35:01 PM] disqualifier was removed from both the application for employment and the website, is that correct? >> On the application, yes. >> And then such a question does it still remain on applications for fire and police? >> I believe it currently does. >> Kelly: Can you check back with had me when you find out. I appreciate that great report and the information in it and learned quite a bit. Did you have something, council member vela. >> Vela: One more question. Pulling back the lens a little bit, is -- let's put alcohol to the side for now, is controlled substance abuse a major issue that we're seeing among firefighters, ems, police? >> I would say not, but again I would defer to the three individual chiefs to respond to that. I would say that I have not seen any significant [2:36:01 PM] disciplinary actions that result in a suspension of one day or more related to beautification of controlled substances. >> Vela: I just feel like we're kind of searching for a problem to solve that doesn't seem to exist. For our sworn employees. >> If I might just add some context to that, I think what we're trying to do is find a solution that keeps us square with all of the regulations that are out there. >> Kelly: And I might add to what you're saying, a lot of times from what I-- I did not mean to hit that microphone. From what I've seen if people have PTC or other work that advises the work they do, they are reluctant to talk about it. So the problem may exist and we're not aware of how prevalent it is. It looks like our chair has a question. >> Thank you vice-chair Kelly. I appreciate it. I would say in addition to the questions that we've [2:37:02 PM] posed this afternoon, what we're talking about is when people are on duty, we're not talking about what they do when they're off duty. So there are things, that were substances that remain in your system for hours and hours and hours and weeks when you're off duty, but the ones that don't remain in your system I just -- we're a prohibitionist people, right? So booze is a thing that people do, we just do it. But that said, to the point that council member vela was making that our -- Mr. Escott made and to the [2:38:04 PM] point I made earlier, we are just being very inconsistent here. And so I'd like very much to see us figure out how to be more consistent. >> Kelly: Thank you, chair, for your thoughts and acm for being here today. That wraps up our discussion on item number 3. Item number 4 is our next item, a report on city infrastructure resiliency patrols and processes related to winterization. I have received a request from staff to postpone item number 4 until the next committee meeting. Do we have any objection to postponing this until our may 23rd meeting? No? Great. Hearing no objection, item 4 is postponed until the may 23rd council meeting. The next item is item number 5, report on discharge from the Austin Samsung semiconductor facility and follow-up actions. [2:39:05 PM] Staff, are you ready to do the presentation? And it looks like councilmember tovo has joined us virtually. Welcome. Thanks, staff. >> Hello, council members. My name is Katie Cowen, our city of Austin environmental officer and assistant director of watershed protection over planning, monitoring and compliance divisions. I wanted to open things up today. We're here to report on discharge from the Austin Samsung semiconductor facility. I know our I.T. Folks are pulling up the presentation today. We initially notified you of this event through memo on January 27th, 2022, with a follow-up update memo on February 10th, 2022. I'm going to hand things off to Ryan, who is joining us in person, and he will introduce himself and staff to walk you through. And then we're also joined by AFD as well who has a separate presentation that will follow ours. [2:40:05 PM] Thank you. >> Good afternoon to the public safety committee. I'd like to thank chair harper-madison and vice-chair Kelly for sponsoring this item. And inviting us to brief the committee on the spill from the Samsung Austin semiconductor facility. My name is Ryan hebrink, with the watershed protection department. If it okay with you all I'd like to first deliver the briefing from watershed protection and then hear from our partners at Austin fire department to provide their briefing before we open it up for questions. Does that meet with you all's satisfaction? Great, thank you. We also with us today have here thane mower from the watershed protection department. He supervises the department's spill response program and will be available to help answer any questions. [2:41:06 PM] I wanted to start with showing where this site is located within Austin. The Samsung site is on the northeast boundary of city limits in council district 1. You can see it shown here by the pin on the map. It's located at 12100 Samsung boulevard just southeast Parmer lane between I-35 and toll 130. When we overlay the map with watershed boundaries we see the site is in the west lower part of Harris branch creek watershed that's shown as a light shade of pink on this slide. Looking at the sequence of events for this incident, we'll start with January 14th of this year, Samsung notified the Texas commission on environmental quality as well as the national response center of a large discharge of dilute [2:42:09 PM] acidic wastewater that originated from their Samsung Austin semiconductor facility. Then on January 18th tceq notified of us this incident. They reported a spill of up to $763,000 that was occurring up to 106 days. This wastewater is a byproduct from Samsung's industrial processes. It contains sulfuric acid, hydrogen peroxide, ammonium oxide and air conditioning condensate. It's important to mention here that the Samsung site holds numerous permits with the tceq including a storm water permit for industrial facilities. Early on in the incident, following notification to the city of Austin, tceq identified themselves as the lead agency and stated that the U.S. Environmental protection agency was [2:43:10 PM] overseeing the tceq process. That same day on January 18th watershed protection visited the site, interviewed Samsung staff and verified that the storm water pond that contained much of the spill was uvalde shut to further isolate the spill from migrating off the property any further. We coordinated with the Austin fire department, the public information office, homeland security and emergency management, Austin public health and Travis county. And we conducted chemical and biological assessments of the receding waterway to evaluate impacts. Lastly, we see January 31st through February third, during remediation Samsung was pumping the spill out of the [2:44:10 PM] pond and into the sanitary sewer from Austin water. Between these dates there were two significant storms that hit the site and discharged into the pond. The amount overwhelmed the pond's ability to maintain it and had two additional releases. This time was to a different tributary that sits north of the site. In these instances the discharges were primarily storm water that was mixed with some of the residual waste that had been contained in the pond. Sample results reported by Samsung for these two discharges indicated that the levels of the discharge were within regulatory limits. Next slide, please. To put this in a bit of a spatial context for you, this is an aerial image of the area. We can see the Samsung facility on the left side of the image. [2:45:11 PM] The initial wastewater spill migrated from the buildings to Samsung's storm water pond which is outlined in purple. This is a wet pond which is a type of storm water control measure that's designed to hold water during just normal during this period of up to 106 days before the spill was protected, an unknown volume affected a tributary south and east of the facility outlined in red here. That stretch that's outlined in red is approximately one and a half miles. On the right side that is the confluence with the main stem of Harris branch creek. And lastly, the top of the image, we see another tributary outlined in green. And that was the drainage pathway for the -- during the two large storm events that [2:46:12 PM] overwhelmed the pond and resulted in those discharges. Next slide, please. Recognizing tcdq is the lead organization on this, here's some information we had that water shed protection can provide. First, there have been no documented impacts to human health by this incident. By January 19th water shed protection found ph levels have returned close to normal levels, presenting no further risk. Public access to this tributary is limited. There are no nearby parks. Water shed protection did not observe homeless encampments along the tributary. There are no drinking wells that would be affected by the [2:47:12 PM] spill. There is one complex north near Harris branch parkway as well as area of single family -- but access to the affected tributary from population centers is limited. The city continues to yields to tdcq. Austin public health officials have communicated about these elements of the incident. Next slide, please. Looking at environmental impacts that we documented from this incident, the extent of the impacts are limited to the area in red. Tcdq reported Sam sung measured levels between 3 and 4 -- far below normal levels for surface [2:48:13 PM] water. While we surveyed water shed protection found dead aquatic species and virtually no life between the Samsung pond and the Harris water shed. This indicates it had a short impact. After the confluence with the main stem of Harris branch creek no impacts were observed and healthy aquatic life is present. Samsung recently provided results from an external laboratory for a comprehensive suite of water parameters from the pond and within the tributary. The report indicates hazardous metals were not spilled. It's not known what the long term impacts will be. [2:49:17 PM] It's likely bacteria are gone. It will take six months to two years for the ecosystem to rebuild. Back to the north tributary outlined in green, our survey found no environmental impacts, consistent with the results Samsung had reported to us. Next slide, please. Since January 19th water shed production is conducting weekly monitoring for basic twaut Eric -- water quality parameters. This allows to verify no further discharges are occurring and the stream is trending toward recovery. Next slide, please. Okay. So for next steps, Samsung is [2:50:20 PM] continuing remediation and coordinating with tcdq. Samsung is working with property owners. This inclundz the existing -- includes the existing habitat, removing invasive species, replanting nay chif species and constructing a ripple pool glide system within the stream. Multiple engineering controls are being implemented to ensure another event release event like this does not occur. This includes upgrading sumps, additional field inspections by Samsung staff and continuing ph monitoring at discharge outfalls. We anticipate the final investigation report will be issued soon and will contain tcdq's findings and any notice [2:51:22 PM] of enforcement actions. From here I'd like to hand it to Austin fire department for their briefing. >> Good afternoon. I'm going go to give a brief report about Austin fire's information we received about the incident. I'm the supervising engineer over hazardous materials engineering group and I have our hazardous materials expert within the group. And we work for the fire Marshall's office. Next slide, please. Before I give specific information about the waste water incident I want to [2:52:24 PM] explain our relationship with Samsung. We perform review and maintenance inspections through the above ground hazardous materials program. We have a long-standing relationship with Samsung. We have five facilities in Austin and Samsung is the largest but we have that relationship with all of them. We perform inspections for chemicals. We are on site monthly, you are engineering group -- our engineers group or inspections group and we also do an entire inspection of the site through the above- ground hazardous materials program. Next slide. So we learned about the waste water incident from water shed [2:53:27 PM] protection on January 25th. And we were also at that time hearing the media reports. Since we are the regulatory authority over hazardous materials we decided to set up a meeting with Samsung to get information about the incident. We met with the director for environmental health and safety and several people from his group and these are the facts we walked away with. I believe it was mentioned the acid waste water consists of a few chemicals heavily weighted with water. It is one of approximately 160 asid water sumps located between both fabs. It is in a confined space. From there the liquid is pumped from the waste water sump to the industrial waste water treatment. The release occurred at one of [2:54:31 PM] the sumps and -- excuse me. The release occurred at one of the sumps. What occurred is a check valve failed on the pumping system which allowed back flow into the sump and there was another failure which was loss of containment in the sump. So there was a leak in the sump just below the passive overflow system which would have kept the sump from overflowing. Because of the leak, it overflowed. At that time we also confirmed that the leak did not involve a hazardous material as defined by the 2021 international fire code. My group only deals with hazardous materials as designed by the 2021 national fire code. Next slide. And so a couple of things we walked away from with at that meeting were that Samsung was [2:55:31 PM] considering some additional controls. This was very early on so this is just the two that we heard in the meeting and one was waste water pump monitoring. If they had been aware that the pump was continuously pumping they would have known something was wrong in the sump. Also, they were considering a sump inspection program for all the approximately 160 sumps, and then at that time we were also -- and we are still looking at evaluating if additional controls are needed in confined spaces where the equipment is not readily available. We also met with our afdc special operations group which responds to hazardous materials incidents and discussed the notification requirements for the emergency response teams T. Emergency response teams are on-site employees that respond to incidents and are trained to do so and are at the [2:56:35 PM] fabrication facilities. We wanted Samsung to notify us as a courtesy when there are waste water incidents that occur. That's all I had. >> Thank you very much for those presentations. Colleagues, I guess we'll get into the discussion here but before I call on anyone else, I do have a question. On slide four, it said Samsung notified of the spill on the 14th of January but notified us on the 18th of January. Can you help me understand why there was a delay in them letting us know there was a spill. >> I can do my best with that, yes. >> I understand you're not Samsung so you don't speak on [2:57:35 PM] their behalf. >> That was one of the areas of our concern as well -- the four or five day delay between notification to the state and national response center and notification to the city. It was something I feel like they did a good job touching on the last slide. When we looked at the regulations there was -- our understanding of interpretation of the regulations was there was no technical requirement for them to notify us but we feel as a courtesy it would have been the appropriate, right thing to do in this case. The notification the city received on January 18th did come from tcdq and that alerted us to where we could engage with Samsung directly. >> Thank you so much. [2:58:37 PM] Colleagues. >> Chair. >> Thank you. The question I would have is has this happened before. >> I can take that. Just to speak to the last question as well. It's something we're talking about internally is being notified by tcdq on the 18th and memo on the 27th is something we're being as quick as possible to pass that information along to y'all as well. Part of that is trying to understand that a lot of the data we were receiving was coming from tcdq and Samsung and we felt we needed to verify the data. We know we have the trust of the community and we need to honor that with scientifically rigorous communication. So I wanted to speak to that as well. In terms of has this happened [2:59:38 PM] before? That was a question I asked. I believe I'm your new environmental officer. This nothing I have seen since December. Ryan may be able to speak more to this. In his tenure, which is significantly longer than mine, I know this is not an event we feel there has been recent precedent for so it's an opportunity for us to look in hindsight what reporting could look like, how communication could be improved to the power we have to govern that, knowing tcdq is the lead agency. >> Harper-madison: I appreciate that but I really want an answer to my question. Has this happened before. >> So in terms of the notifications that were made, I also just wanted to quickly -- >> Harper-madison: No. I don't mean to be abrupt. >> Sure >> Harper-madison: Has this happened before. [3:00:39 PM] >> In my years with the water shed protection department there has not been a spill from an industrial site that this is this significant. I believe Dane would report the same as well. This is the most significant we've seen in our time >> Harper-madison: The same -- the most significant. When I have to answer to my constituents, when they're asking me questions -- so for district one -- you have to forgive me for being particular to my district. For district one, we have three semiconductor sites. Has this happened before? And if you can't answer right now, that's fine. But I would like very much for us to move forward with a substantive conversation about whether or not this has happened before and then moving forward how do we -- so this [3:01:40 PM] one, for example -- it was one that we were able to remediate with a certain amount of easily accessible products, but moving forward, let's say it's the bad stuff. Like, I really, really want -- I was hoping that during the course of this conversation we were going to talk about if it goes bad again that we're going to do -- and if it goes really bad -- like, if something that's -- I need to be able to answer to my constituents when they're asking me questions. >> Let me answer very clearly, to our knowledge an event of this scale has not occurred in the past. To our knowledge -- I'll hand it to Ryan to speak to future [3:02:41 PM] fail-safes and other partners in the region who might offer similar facilities what is in our purview and what we can do better >> Harper-madison: Thank you. >> I'll echo that and say we have not been alerted or responded to any spill incident like this before. I think that's a testament to some of the layers that are in place from a monitoring/compliance perspective. There are a lot of layers of measures in place -- many of which happen under Samsung's permit with tcdq, by Samsung staff, routine inspections of the site. Additionally city of Austin and tcdq inspect for compliance and make sure everything is looking in order on a routine basis. I wanted to mention a program that water shd protection has named the environmental [3:03:42 PM] integrity index. It's not related to industrial sites but we routinely monitor the same locations in creeks across Austin to identify trends and water quality -- both from a chemistry and biological perspective. There are dozens of these sites across the city and we have this very robust monitoring program that has been in existence for decades now. Whether or not it would be able to detect a spill like this from happening would vary depending on what type of spill in the distance and the source and those sample sites, but I did want to call that to attention as another monitoring program that could be effective in detecting these incidents and prevent them from having greater impacts. Monitoring occurring at those sites quarterly. [3:04:46 PM] >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I have more questions, but I can pose those off line. >> Thank you. Council member vela. I see you council member tovo. >> Vela: The sump. What is a sump. >> It's a collection tank -- the product comes in gravity fed. At a certain level it will start pumping out into waste treatment. It's basically a collection tank. >> Vela: Okay. Just the residential version, that would be like the container that sits there and pushes the waste uphill into the waste system -- I don't know if you're familiar with that. >> We call them sinks in south Austin. >> Vela: How did it end up -- [3:05:47 PM] how did the material of acid end up in the storage pond right there? That's -- I'm a little bit confused. It overfilled the sump because the sump was not filling it out? I guess I'm unclear as to how it got into the tank there on site. >> Do you want to answer that. >> I can try to. >> I can answer. So once -- so the area underneath the fab actually has a partial floor, concrete floor, I guess you could say, that has a storm water drain. >> Vela: Uh-huh. >> So when it left the sump it began to pull in this area and made its way into the storm water drain. >> Vela: That makes perfect sense. And then it sat in -- going to call it a pond there -- you know, right next to the facility for about 10 to 11 [3:06:50 PM] days or so. Relatively, safely I guess sitting in the storage pond until we had the storm and then it flew out into the? >> So from the data that I've gotten from Samsung it was a fairly slow leak, a gallon or two a minute, that was leaking up to 106 days based on pump run time. It was collecting in that pond presumably acidifying the pond and some was getting into -- some got into the tributary as well. We don't know what amount got in the tributary. It was the -- the ph in the tributary was not as low as the ph in the pond which was found to be about 2.1, which is quite acidic. The tributary -- between 3 and 4 was the lowest it measured and it rebounded pretty [3:07:53 PM] quickly. >> Vela: Okay. >> And then later on, 11 days was -- there was no more discharges into the impacted tributary, and then -- those rain events went to a different tributary, but the waste had been significantly treated by that point. The ph had come up significantly in the pond and the measurements at the tributary -- the north tributary were within regulatory limits. It was still a release but it's the same volume of water. There was no additional acid that came out. It just went from the pond into a different tributary at that point. >> Vela: When we had the storm water vent, the contents of the pond had been treated. >> Yes. There was a lime treatment. Using a base to neutralize the acid. I'd been getting daily reports [3:08:53 PM] from Samsung and the ph had been trended up from 2.1, which was the lowest to I believe approximately 5 before the rain event and then the rain event raised it higher because it was so diluted by the rain. >> Vela: The rain event caused? >> That's the overflow tributary for large vain events. >> The slow leaks that had been happening, those were? >> Those went into the wet pond and then that -- all constantly discharges into the red tributary, the one to the east and south. >> Vela: Okay. Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Next we'll have council member tovo and council member Ellis and mayor pro tem -- ied you have questions? You'll be after. Council member tovo? >> Tovo: Thank you very much [3:09:53 PM] for this presentation. I'm trying to understand whether this event has anything -- is at all similar to what we experienced in 2018. I was thinking about that when council member harper-madison asked if anything like this has happened before. I think most of you were the dais when we discussed the possibility of a surcharge and Austin water asked us to phase in a surcharge and when I and others learned the reason for the discharge we were able to phase it in right away because what had happened was that Samsung changed some of their manufacturing processes and one of the results is that ammonia was being released into our waste water and needed to be treated. I may not be explaining this quite right.we needed increase the treatment of their waste [3:10:54 PM] water to remove ammonia and it amounted to more than $8 million of cost that rate payers paid to remove the ammonia from the water. They were releasing high levels of sulfate and that after a lot of explanation and review, including with Samsung, it turned out had to be really managed at the plant, at Samsung itself. So I have two questions. One is it sounds like this event is different, but are there links back to what was going on in 2018, and if so, can you talk us through those and what the relationship are between those? And then, you know, it strikes me that we're overdo for a report back on, one, whether or not Samsung has been able to [3:11:55 PM] install mechanisms for removing sulfate and, two, is the surcharge that we're assessing Samsung sufficient to cover the cost of treating that water because we want to make sure. I think we gave this direction back in 2018. We wanted to make sure the surcharge was keeping up with the actual cost. I guess that's three questions. Does this bare relation to what was going on to 2018. Two, has Samsung implemented the sulfate screening process. And three, can we could get an answer on whether or not Austin water is keeping up with that. Thanks for the explanation here today. >> I can do my best to keep up with that. So we have two separate incidents. The one in 2018 is talking [3:12:56 PM] about waste water. That is not a discharge to the environment. It's discharge to treatment works that Austin water runs. I don't have specific data on that. We're -- for this incident we had it released to the environment that we've been trying to remediate. I'm not aware of linkage between these at all. I'm happy to consult with Austin water about it. We've had brief discussions with them and they have said that Sam sung has been meeting their permit requirements from the industrial services group with Austin water but I don't have data on hand for that. I'd be happy to reach out with them and try to collect some information on that. >> Tovo: That would be helpful. I understand the release was different -- to different places. I'm just wondering if their -- well, I think I'll need to try to understand this maybe outside this meeting. I guess I'm wondering if what [3:13:59 PM] was -- if any of their strategies that they told us they were going to implement to try to make sure, you know, to reduce the release of ammonia into the waste water treatment could have prevented this. If you could -- I'm not articulating this well. Maybe you can sort this out afterward. I guess I need to figure out if there's a relationship between -- I understand if it didn't result in the same outcome. But I think it bares discussing. >> Absolutely. Let me try to break it down. I think it's two separate issues all together. Permanent waste water discharge that Austin water is responsible for collaborating with them on and coming to agreements on versus this is a failure of the sump. So accident -- it is not a [3:15:01 PM] permitted discharge in any way, shape, or form. This material should have not have made it into the pond. That failure allowed it to make it into the pond and then the tributary. Two separate failures, two separate systems. That's my understanding. Is that helpful? >> Tovo: That's very helpful. Thank you. >> Maybe one way to visualize it is this leak was one of 160 sumps and so we're talking about 1/160th of the water that's going to be treated. So it's a small portion of that. There was a failure and it leaked elsewhere rather than being treated appropriately. So it was a portion of the stream that escaped but I'm not aware of any reason why the waste stream process would have caused this to occur. >> Tovo: So then I think my [3:16:02 PM] other two questions aren't relevant and can't be answered here today since they are kind of separate, but I think they bare circling back around to because I want to be sure that we know kind of where we're keeping up -- whether the surcharge is keeping up with the actual cost. I'm pretty sure Samsung has implemented new procedures and maybe for ammonia too. It would be helpful to get an update on that. >> I want to make sure, too, for everyone that it is clear. What is within our purview to enforce versus what is tdcq's purview. I think that speaks to the chair's question earlier about how we keep this from happening together. I think what is in the purview of tdcq versus the purview of our city staff is different. Some of the things Samsung has [3:17:06 PM] offered to do in terms of spill detection they're willing to put forth and the restoration and mitigation they're offering to do, that's not even in relation to what tdcq has said they have to do. They're doing that voluntary. We don't have a stick to say you have to do this right now, especially without tdcq's investigation report M coming out. Ryan, can you offer more clarity on that, if that's helpful, to the committee. >> Sure. I'm not sure that I have much else to add there but I do appreciate you including the information that many of the actions that Samsung has taken to this point are voluntary and going above and beyond to make sure that incidents like this aren't allowed like to occur like this in the future and to correct the impacts that have been the result of this spill. [3:18:10 PM] >> Council member tovo, did you have anything else? >> Tovo: I don't. I'll follow up on the other questions outside of this. Thank you very much. >> Council member Ellis and then alter >> Ellis: Thank you. Do you know what their inspection process is like? I realize we're asking our city department to ask what is probably a business procedural question. I don't know if there's anyone from Samsung here to help us understand this. >> I can speak to a portion. I would imagine they have many inspection requirements that are internal to their department as well as requirements to their permits with the state and city as well. One I am able to speak to is the routine inspections that fall under their storm water permit -- the Texas pollutant [3:19:15 PM] discharge permit. Some of the inspection requirements that fall under that permit, I believe there are weekly inspections that would have Samsung staff filling out a checklist, walking around the site, looking for sources of pollution that would be exposed to storm water in the event of a precipitation event that could be carried away to receiving waterways. That's the key of what they're looking for in those types of inspections -- exposed pollutants that would be transported in a rain event. Once a year they do an in-depth, heavy-duty inspection, reviewing staff on the storm water team and it's a much more indepth inspection process. That's one of many that I expect have play. >> I can't imagine a [3:20:15 PM] hundred days of something being discharged and not being noticed. It sounds like it was such a slow leak that it wasn't noticeable? I can't imagine a city department having this problem and not having the answers we need of how to prevent something like this in the future. >> I can mention one other requirement under the permit that I think would be relevant. There is a requirement for Samsung to sample storm water -- to catch the first flush. That is implemented quarterly when there is rain. So that is a qualitative assessment where they're looking at parameters such the color, clarity, if there's detectable odor. They are visibly looking at the storm-water run off quarterly. There are quantitative analyses [3:21:17 PM] that are run on storm-water run-off samples annually for most sites under the multisector general permit in most cases. >> Thank you for that. I understand there are notification requirements for them to notify tdcq. Is there prohibition on the city. It sounds voluntary so it may have taken a few days to understand what they wanted to communicate to us and how it's best to communicate that. Can we say if you're in our jurisdiction we need to know sooner. >> It is possible but there isn't something for this specific incident in code right. Under Texas spill rules, spills are notified -- tcdq is required to be notified and if volume is large enough, the -- [3:22:18 PM] under the emergency plan and community right to know act -- if this all -- if the spill happen inned the single 24-hour period it would have been required to notify to a much larger group of persons, including local emergency -- planning commission state emergency response commission and so forth. We don't currently have a requirement for notification except for hazardous materials which this did not tech CLI meet the requirements for. It was slightly less acidic than what would be considered hazardous, and so those are not currently required under city codes. We are certainly encouraging Samsung to be -- and other agencies -- or entities to be notifying us. Many of them we have good working relationships and we [3:23:19 PM] get notified for events constantly. In this particular event there was not a required notification and tcdq looped us in when it was discovered the tributary had been impacted in addition to the storm-water pond. Initially it was the storm-water pond and four days later they discovered the tributary was impacted as well and we were notified Tuesday, the 18th. So I hope that answers your question. >> It does. Thank you. I know this is a conversation -- I think this is the end of discussing how this happened, what happened and how can we be good neighbors. There's manufacturing in my district as well. We all have a commitment to make sure we're doing what we can as council members to ensure the health and safety of the residents nearby. I'm glad they notified us. [3:24:21 PM] I'm glad it didn't rise to the level of hauz douse material but -- hazardous material but I would want answers to and I think our d-1 neighbors deserve that out of us and out of Samsung. We have to work through some of these situations as they arise and learn what steps can be taken to ensure the residents nearby are healthy and safe. I know there's been no reports of anyone getting sick because of this. Hopefully it will be a quick recovery for the tributary. But it's important to sort through the pieces at this point in time to help ensure this doesn't happen again and if it does we're learning what steps to ensure safety. >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem? >> Alter: I appreciate the last answer that there was a shift -- where it went from the [3:25:25 PM] watershed to the pond. I'm struggling with the process and trying to understand what difference it would have been made if we had known four days earlier. If we had been told four days earlier, would there have been steps we would have taken that would have diluted the water faster and so that when it did overflow it would have been less? I mean, would something have materially been able to change if we had known sooner and taken action sooner. >> I can speak to that. Our understanding that the impacts to the tributary were occurring throughout the discharge period and the notification that happened after tcdq was notified was only because they realized the impacts to the tributary, which is in our purview. It's not to say they only [3:26:25 PM] occurred within the four-day period >> Alter: Presumably -- even if you'd been notified four days earlier, would the city have -- what would we have done. >> We would -- it's likely the impacts had already occurred so it would have changed our response time and we would have responded sooner but it's my opinion -- it would not have changed the outcome in terms of -- >> Alter: So it wouldn't have changed the outcome. I guess I would like to understand how we revisit the reporting. Now I'm hearing we have an opportunity as a city with respect to the reporting to require something additional above and beyond tcdq on the reporting side. Is that correct. >> Currently that's [3:27:25 PM] not a part of any requirement. Certainly willing and would be supportive of exploring adding that as a requirement of reporting for projects or facilities that are within our jurisdiction. >> Alter: Okay. Well, if any of my colleagues are interested in meeting on that, let me know. I don't believe I have any of these facilities in my district. If someone else has a better feel for some of the issues, please let me know if I can support that. The other thing I wanted to ask in going back to council member tovo's question about the surcharge, I think the connection is that there's these chemicals in the water that we don't always think about that's being discharged from these facilities and that that has an impact on our water [3:28:29 PM] system. And while one was going -- is going into our wastewater on a regular basis, the other was a discharge into the water shed so they're qualitatively different. But I think with the surcharge, we do need to have more information as council member tovo suggested on where that is at, whether that's covering the cost that we're experiencing at this point because I believe these companies have further accelerated the amount of production, which might equate to further ammonia and whether it's a linear or logarithmic or whatever type of discharge -- I have no idea. But I don't think that our community should be paying for the clean-up of their ammonia discharges that they are currently allowed to do under state regulations. [3:29:33 PM] I'm not in the chambers so I can't see who's there. But we need need Austin water as opposed to water shed to provide an updated memo to us about the surcharge and status and what we've collected and what the costs have been to remove the ammonia above and beyond what is normal expectation for -- I don't know if other things contribute ammonia in an appreciable way. Can you or someone in the chamber ensure someone from Austin water gets us that information. >> I just signalled to the city manager in the room and he understand our request. >> Alter: Thank you. That's all my questions. >> Council member tovo >> Tovo: Let me reiterate. I was drafting an e-mail to you, Katy, asking if you would [3:30:34 PM] get that information. This is a great way to do that too. The second part is if we could get updated -- it was ammonia and sulfate. If we could get updated on what processes Samsung has implemented to pretreat their waste water before dispursing it to deal with the sulfate issue. If we can cover both of those, I will leave off drafting this e-mail. >> Thank you for that contribution. It has been received. I want to follow up real quickly, does staff know if there have been any penalties from any regulatory agency assessed to Samsung. >> Not at this time. That's still pending the final investigation report. >> Can you clarify what "Soon" might mean? A month, less than a month. >> Less than a [3:31:35 PM] month. >> That would be available for us to review as council members. >> I need to confirm but I believe it would be public information. >> I want to take a quick moment as we wrap things up and recognize Samsung and the city of Austin for their quick response. I learned during the clean-up it was discovered the creek had become an illegal dumping ground. My understanding is that there's no public access to this creek but it was full of litter. I'm thankful that Samsung is dedicated to environmental stewardship. Colleagues, do we have anything else to follow up with? No? Thank you. We will move up to item number 6 after we go into executive session. Next item is item 7. Our committee will go into [3:32:36 PM] closed session to take up one item pursuant to section 551 of the government code. We'll discuss personnel matters related to item 7, discussing candidates for judicial appointments. Any objection to going into executive session? Hearing none, the committee will go into executive session. [4:05:56 PM] >> Chair: We are out of closed session. We discussed personnel matters related to item number 6. Sorry. We are out of closed session. In closed session we discussed personnel matters related to item number 7. Next item is number 6. In closed session we discussed items related to item 6. We recommend the following individuals at substitute judges for city council for consideration. Richard Olivo, rayen alone -- do I have a motion? Seconded by council member vela. We will take a vote. And it looks like it is unanimous on the dais. We will take those [4:06:56 PM] recommendations for the judicial appointments and they were approved by the public safety committee. The final item on the agenda is for the body to discuss future items. Are there any future items you would like to discuss? Chair, you always have some great ideas. Oh, you were muted. I can't hear you. Because you're muted. Chair? And now you're frozen. Oh, you're not frozen anymore. >> Harper-madison: Am I frozen. >> You're good now >> Harper-madison: I have some ideas but I think we should take the opportunity to talk through them, vice chair, to make certain these are appropriate to bring forward. One of the things I was thinking of the other day, you know, my uncle lives in round Rock and his neighborhood got [4:07:57 PM] hit by the tornado, so we were thinking why doesn't Austin have tornado sirens or something? So that's one of the things I'm thinking about, but I would like very much to more articulately think through what's the most appropriate path for things around that. There's one other thing. But, again, I'll hit you up. >> That sounds good. You've got my digits, so I would also that's a good suggestion to discuss. I know when I worked in emergency management we talked about how the city of Georgetown had tornado sirens, roundrock does, but we still don't. There has to be a person to make the sirens go off. I would encourage people to use [4:08:59 PM] warn central Texas so you have that emergency contact information. It might good to hear why we don't have them. I'm sure there's reasoning for that >> Harper-madison: I'm one of the neighborhoods that still has moon towers. It's a foreign, ancient, you know, old-school thing. We have moon towers but not tornado sirens. It makes you go? >> I appreciate that >> Harper-madison: Sounds good. >> I have questions about the report released to council. Do any other council members have any other suggestions? Council member Ellis? >> Ellis: I don't. I had one earlier today. I am not able to recall what it was so I will take it off line. >> That sounds wonderful. That happens to us. >> Ellis: It was brilliant, [4:10:00 PM] though, I swear. >> Are there any final comments? I want to thank our chair who has given me the opportunity to grow and chair the last two meetings now. I feel so much better about this. It's going to prepare me better for my future as a city council member >> Harper-madison: If you wouldn't mind offering me a moment. I was at an event this weekend where one of my friends had to do the walk of shame and tell everybody they were exposed to covid. That's why I'm not in person today. I just want to remind everybody, while I can appreciate that in most instances covid is presenting with mild symptoms, it is still very real and is still out here, and if you find out you were exposed, it is absolutely your responsibility to stay at home. So I am shelters in place [4:11:02 PM] currently because I know that I was exposed. So I just want to remind everybody to do the same. Let's keep each other safe. >> What a poignant reminder at the close of this public safety meeting of council today. Thank you for raising that. We hope you have the best outcome possible given your circumstances. Hearing no further comments, the time is 4:11 P.M. I will adjourn the public safety meeting for March 28th, 2022. Thanks, everyone, and be safe, Austin.