Austin City Council Work Session Transcript – 6/14/2022 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 6 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 6/14/2022 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 6/14/2022 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. [9:10:07 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Let's go ahead and convene today's work session of the Austin city council. Today is June 14th, 2022. It is 9:10. Colleagues, we have three pulled items, 52, also 80, 81 and also 95. We also have the discussion that folks wanted to have on speakers, recognizing speakers. We have an executive session and then we have -- with four items. We have two briefings. I thought what we would do is we do the pulled items, make sure we discuss anything that might help us on Thursday. Go from the pulled items to the discussion of speakers so that we can have that [9:11:09 AM] conversation, maybe talk to our clerk and also be ready as we come back after the recess, work, go into executive session in and around lunch. Come out of executive session, finish any pulled items we still need to do and then go straight into briefings as close to coming out of executive session as we can. And if we want to finish the day, finishing the conversation on speakers, we could do that. So let's begin then with pulled items. We have -- we're here in the boards and commissions room. We have a quorum present. I see Natasha on the screen. I see her box, but I don't see her. And council member Fuentes is not feeling well this morning, not with us [9:12:10 AM] probably today. >> Pool: And I see the city manager. >> Mayor Adler: The city manager is also on the screen. All right, councilmember Ellis, you pulled youring traffic resolution. >> Ellis: I did. Thank you, mayor. I pulled my own item because I wanted to make sure if there were any questions that we were able to discuss those today. I see the assistant director is here if we have any, but I want to lay out where this conversation came from. This is about narrowry targeting traffic enforcement, specifically where fatal crashes are occurring and what we've done is we were having some conversations with not only our precinct 3 county constable, but also the vision zero program, and realizing that although our police department is fully fended, we are aware that they are still training up cadets to fill the vacancy they have in the department. Often times the resources have to be allocated specifically to where crimes are occurring or 911 calls and more high profile [9:13:10 AM] situations and that doesn't leave them available to necessarily just be present and be visible and to pull people over for speeding on highways, drunk driving, other reckless things that are happening, specifically in regard to my district areas that kind of overlap closetory the edge of the city limits where we know the constables are very familiar with patrolling over there. So we just wanted to see if there were any questions or if transportation department wanted to add any elements to this that they think need to be daylighted to this. So it's just to ask the city manager to go and look at options where we might be able to come up with some creative solutions with our vision zero programming. And I see Lewis is now on the screen as well. If you would like to say anything, Lewis, I know my office talked with you extensively about this. >> Good morning, I am the Austin transportation safety officer. We're basically here to answer any questions and about any context that might be helpful in the discussion [9:14:14 AM] today. Thanks for that. >> Just to reiterate what Lewis said, we're here to answer any questions. We've been working with APD and met with the con tables and met with the council offices to talk about a potential agreement with Travis county, but this resolution is a little bit broader to look at near term strategies and changes. We're definitely here to answer any questions you may have. >> Ellis: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: It is a resolution to explore opportunities. >> Ellis: Yes. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I want to thank councilmember Ellis for drafting this up and I'm proud to co- sponsor. This is a question of traffic enforcement and public safety that is long-standing, and I think as we have this conversation, a little bit of history is really important because this is not a function of changes that were made in 2020 and a function of the staffing [9:15:14 AM] crisis. We were already dropping in our enforcement levels prior to when I came on to council in 2017. I remember in 2017 there was a huge jump, I think it was 2017, there was a huge jump in the receipts that the municipal court was having from traffic enforcement. So the issue of how much time we're spending doing traffic enforcement, how much time we need to be spending that, is a long-standing one. And I think it's really important for context. I think that the approach moving forward also is important in that it recognizes that this is about safety. It's not about raising money, it's about how do we keep our community safe. How do we make sure people are obeying the speed limits so that everyone is safe because those changes of you start getting 15 miles above the speed limit, which we do see, five miles, ever little [9:16:16 AM] bit makes a difference for safety in our community. So I just wanted to provide that history so that we understand this is a long-standing problem. I think it's an innovative solution. I appreciate our staff and I appreciate the constable's creativity and thinking about ways that we can do this in a way that target us on our most problematic areas. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: The history is helpful. Councilmember pool. >> Pool: This is a really good resolution and I look forward to supporting it. I wanted to draw attention to the be it further resolved item that talks about contracting with the constables and [indiscernible] An interlocal agreement with Travis county. I think that's really important. The city of Austin taxpayers pay taxes to Travis county, and the enforcement is historically outside of the [9:17:17 AM] city limits. So we are effectively funding the constables, but not necessarily getting as much service from those resources. And I really would urge our staff to negotiate that item very carefully. I do think there is the ability for Travis county to step up its enforcement within the city of Austin confines, not only outside of the city of Austin city of Austin's boundary lines, so I really like that particular be it further resolved. I would point to the fact that I worked for constable 5 for a number of years before running for city council so I have a sense of the work that is done in those offices and I also understand the budgeting structures that they're structure and how they go about crafting their budget. So this is a good time to go in and have those conversations with constable 3 certainly, but I would urge it to be even broader, [9:18:17 AM] specifically constable five, which has the jurisdiction for all of the central part of the city. So thanks very much for bringing this up. I appreciate it. >> Ellis: Thank you for that. And I know there's also been some discussions with precinct 4. I know this is happening on all outskirts and would absolutely welcome the conversation being about all of the precincts and we also wrote it to be very narrowly crafted so it wasn't just pulling people over for taillights and other minor infractions. Very, very focused on the high rate of speeding and the fatalities and those types of crashes. >> Pool: Absolutely. And simply having a visible presence will go a long way to deter people to remind them that there are children at play and there are folks walking and other people driving. So just to increase the level of awareness for those people who are driving and potentially breaking laws with speeding. >> Ellis: Absolutely. Some of y'all may remember it was a couple of months ago, but there was a car going down a street in my [9:19:18 AM] district at a very high rate of speed, about 80 or 90 miles per hour. I think the individual was maybe 19 years old. It jumped the curb, ended up in a tree over the sidewalk that people happen to use to walk to the neighboring middle school. So it was definitely something that impacted the community greatly and I know everybody would like to see people slow down, be a little bit more careful with the way that they're driving. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Thank you. I was going to actually say the same point that councilmember pool said, that the constables can and will stop you for traffic enforcement and this really amplifies the presence and for safety we're going to go a long way to getting back to our goal of safer roads. I appreciate this item, councilmember Ellis, and thank you so much for bringing this forward. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you for that. It's good as we're looking at public safety that we're trying to explore all different options to be able to do public safety as effectively as we can. [9:20:20 AM] I noticed in the media yesterday that Dallas is moving towards the same kind of increased reporting of events over the internet, rather than having police officers responding to take reports for many of the reasons that our police chief said. He thought that would be a better use of people's time. It's interesting that now that that's being picked up in other places. So thank you for that. What about next item, item 80 and 81. Councilmember tovo, you pulled this one? >> Tovo: The statesman tract. >> Tovo: Thanks, mayor. I can be really quick on this. I am asking staff or I will request a postponement on this. We do not yet have an ordinance. This is a very big, very complex rezoning, planned unit development rezoning, [9:21:20 AM] and I think it's appropriate that both the council and the public have an opportunity to really review that, that ordinance prior to voting on it on second reading. >> Council member, if I may add we do have a postponement request that we received from south river city citizens association. So it's from Wendy price Todd. It is the first request from a neighborhood and they're requesting a postponement to the next meeting on July 28th. >> Tovo: I understand that, but I think in this case I would have requested a postponement anyway since we didn't have the ordinance so I would regard it as a postponement either from staff or council. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Yeah, I remember back when we had these discussions one of the only reasons I voted in favor of the item was to initiate that ordinance. Does staff have an estimate of when we might have that available for review? >> The ordinance I just spoke to the law department this morning. Hopefully we'll have a draft possibly by tomorrow but it's a very lengthy complicated ordinance. It's 20 pages long. >> Kelly: I would appreciate time to review [9:22:21 AM] that so I think a postponement is appropriate. Thank you, councilmember tovo. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, council member. >> Pool: Just to confirm the postponement is at the council's request? >> On Thursday we'll see who makes a motion, but yes, that's my understanding right now. >> Tovo: Mayor? We do have some other stakeholders who want to know -- kind of get a sense of the council's will on this, so I would appreciate hearing from my colleagues, but I also want to just ask the staff, we've had various conversations, including most extensively as a council last fall, in December when we talked about the south central wastewater, we also requested -- waterfront, we also requested to have the financial documents provided to all the council, the different analysis of what had been done with the south central waterfront plan traction increment refinancing -- reinvestment zone. And so I know that my office has now gotten those files. I'm not sure if every [9:23:22 AM] council office has gotten those files, but I do think as we're talking about the balance of affordable housing in particular and the other kinds of amenities that are part of this, I think we need to have a council discussion about is it. I did request a meeting with eco northwest and we were told that we requested it. I would have to look back at when, but we were told they couldn't meet before Thursday. But I do think we need to have that conversation here as well about those financial assumptions that the developer is referencing as they're talking about affordable housing and its percentage. So my request is also that we make sure that every council office has those documents if they want to review it, but also that we make space when this comes back to us, before this comes back to us that we make space in our July meeting to talk about those financial assumptions perhaps with the consultant. I think there were several consultants who have looked at the financial assumptions for this area. [9:24:27 AM] >> Assistant city manager Rodney Gonzalez. Yes, we will confirm that every council member has received those financial documents. I'll get with Jerry and Rosie as oh to you we can carve out that time that you're requesting for council to discuss those analysis. >> Mayor Adler: There's also a broader conversation too. I agree we need to see those numbers so that people can analyze those. As we went through the numbers for the district and looked at the tirz funding it was apparent that staff was coming back and saying all the things that you want to have in here there's not the money to be able to get to. And part of this I think relates to the regulating plan in terms of what it is that's going to be developed in the area. But I know going back to assumptions that were discussed when the plan was originally discussed going back five, six years ago, there were certain height that were proposed for the buildings that were in this area and I think it was like [9:25:28 AM] 200, 300, 400-foot of height. I'd also like to take a look at what would happen if we increase the height of those buildings generally in this area which I see as an extension of downtown and I think it will develop that way. I think in the next 20, 30 years it's going to feel that way, but if the height were not 200, 300, 400, but 300, 400, 500 or 400, 500 and 600, I would like to know what that does to the tirz financing and whether that gives us the ability to be able to raise the money on a tirz that would fund all of the affordable housing that we would otherwise want in that area. And if it does, then I think that's a choice that ought to come back to the council for the council to be able to see rather than getting into an assumption that is older and perhaps made in a different time period. And I don't know how to -- I don't know how to throw that into the mix. [9:26:29 AM] Can you help with that? >> Sure. If I could, because all these issues are really intertwined. You've got of course the south central waterfront plant, you have the tirz as you mentioned, you've got the regulating plan and of course what's in front of council is the statesman pud. It may be that we collectively get together with finance and of course with Rosie and Jerry to talk about the tirz in general, just kind of like a council refresh, the assumptions that went into the tirz analysis, including the height. And you may recall that the most recent analysis was updated by Charles heimsath. And then of course we also talked about the regulating plan, what the current status; what we're contemplating in that regulating plan and then of course talk about the financial analysis associated with the statesman pud. So I can get with staff about just how that collective briefing would look ahead of the consideration for the statesman pud. Very likely it would be at that same council meeting and so we would want to of course have that discussion first. But I could get with staff [9:27:29 AM] about all those matters that you and councilmember tovo had brought up. >> Mayor Adler: To address the issues and also to lay out a calendar for when it's anticipated that we will be able to resolve and hear those issues. That would be helpful. Councilmember pool. >> Pool: Yeah. I had talked with acm Gonzalez and the city manager about requesting a briefing on both the eco northwest and the eps or -- not esp. >> Not esp. >> Although we all wish we had esp. So that we could all get a sense of what was contained in those reports, see what any -- where they align with one another, where the differences may fall, so that we can get a more in-depth understanding of the financials, which is an unusual place for us to be to have this level of data and information and I really appreciate that because I agree with my colleagues here that this conversation is a really important one and it will take us digging [9:28:31 AM] into the details in order to render the most appropriate and positive result I think for the future of the city. >> And if I could, council member, that analysis was -- will also include the comparison of the eco northwest from 2020 to the recent eps analysis so that way you can see the differences. >> Pool: That is excellent. I think that would be really helpful. I understand that that couldn't happen today because the principals weren't available, but it maybe could happen were you saying in July? >> We anticipate in July. And of course the principals aren't here. As well we haven't received the final draft. There's some back and forth between staff to make sure that everything that they've put into the draft is as accurate as possible so we want to work with them in between now and that discussion to finalize that document. >> Pool: I appreciate that. Thank you so much. Thanks, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Yes. I want to respond to councilmember tovo's question. I also support postponement. [9:29:32 AM] I think it's important for us to have the documents so that we can read through them. And also agree with what others have said. I think understanding the financial analysis for the affordable housing is important and so I look forward to getting that information. >> Yes, councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: I just want to talk about the previous question about the ordinance and when it will be ready. Is there any way you can send it to council where we can review it or is there a place online where we can put all this information where the public can see it and review it and give feedback. >> Yes, we can do that ahead of the posting. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anything else on this item? All right. We'll move on -- yes, mayor pro tem. >> Tovo: Can I ask if anybody has a concern about a postponement? >> Mayor Adler: I don't. It seems appropriate to me that there be a postponement. I had heard it was going to be a neighborhood postponement, but I hear what you're saying is you [9:30:33 AM] don't want it charged to the neighborhood since the ordinance isn't back. Is that correct? >> Tovo: Yes. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anything else? >> Pool: I wanted to -- >> Alter: I wanted to clarify one of our presentations is still on that, we're still getting a presentation today? On this? >> Tovo: It's a different planned unit development. >> Alter: It's a different one? Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Different pud. Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, chair, I appreciate it. I don't in fact have any problem with the postponement. In fact, I appreciate it very much. I support it. I agree that this timeline has been relatively confusing. I feel like we absolutely need more time to really truly wrap our heads around this very complex proposal and the potential implications for our community long-term. I always, always try to think about what my baby said, what will Austin look like in 2080? [9:31:34 AM] So I want to make sure that as we approach this complex proposal we really recognize how it fits into the larger south central waterfront vision, future facing Austin. So I really appreciate you taking the opportunity to pump the brakes. I think we really needed to. Thank you for your leadership, councilmember tovo. >> Mayor Adler: So Rodney, when you have that presentation, not only a presentation on where we are and what we've seen, but what the impact would be if we increase the height that we had talked about on those issues. Even if it's just a general feel? >> I'll get with Edmund and Kim. They work closely with Charles heimsath to do the assumptions. And if there were some concerns we'll certainly relay those to council ahead of the presentation. >> Mayor Adler: Okay, thanks. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: But just to begin -- I think this is pretty meaty, complicated financial analysis. So I really want to be sure that we're -- that that is getting a lot of attention because just looking through [9:32:35 AM] I think -- I think independently looking through these different financial analyses is pretty challenging to try to go from that to what the applicant is saying is and is not possible. So I would just ask that it's fine to look at other scenarios, but could we please first start by really understanding what scenarios they've modeled and how that -- what that suggests in terms of affordable housing and parks and other things. >> Certainly. And if I could offer a distinction. What the mayor is talking about with regard to height is overall tirz analysis, which is not the one that eps is doing for us. That's a separate one that Kim and Ed are working with Charles heimsath on. For the analysis specific to the statesman, that's one that Rosie and Jerry are working with eps on. And so you're going to see that as a separate analysis from what the mayor has been asking for. >> Tovo: I think too, though, some of the earlier anol cease, some of the earlier -- analyses, some of the earlier financial analyses that form the basis for the south central [9:33:36 AM] assumptions are also being cited as we're going through this budget. So it all is intermixed. I just want to sort of start by understanding the analyses for what is currently on -- in the plan. >> Absolutely. We'll do our best to come with that briefing to make sure we have these distinctions so council can is have a full discussion on those matters you talked about. >> Mayor Adler: Yeah. And they have different, but they are interrelated. It's hard for me to know what I want this developer to do without knowing what it is we can do absent the developer doing them. That might prioritize what it is that I want this developer to do, if we're otherwise able to take care of some of those things, and there's different things that I might want to be asking the developer to do. Our tirz enables us to -- the public to do some of the things that are a public benefit. So both -- they're different information, but for me they're interrelated on this question that's in front of us now. Yes, mayor pro tem. [9:34:37 AM] >> Alter: So from what I've seen on this pud I think it's still very far from being ready for us to vote on, not just for the postponement. There's not only the financial side, but there's also the substance of what's in the pud. I'm particularly concerned about the parkland and what we're delivering with respect to the parkland and what is expected of him. I think it's really unclear in the material that we have seen. And I think if we're going to start talking about different heights, which may be appropriate here, this should not be a fly by the night 12:00 A.M. Discussion that we have. And so we should really think about whether we need to schedule some dedicated time to looking at this. I think it rises to that level of importance for our city and we should think about whether we need not only dedicated time in the work session, but a council [9:35:39 AM] meeting that is focused on that so the community can come speak to us in a clear way and that we can focus in on the changes. The July meeting is traditionally a very heavy meeting, as is the August meeting. And I'm not saying we can't deal with it at all then, but I think we do need to give our space to have a process that leads to good decisions. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anything else? I think it might very well be something that we need to take a look at. Thank you. Anything else on this item? Okay. I pulled the next item, councilmember tovo, and I pulled it just to -- because I was in your quorum, but I just wanted to elevate that conversation you and I have had a chance to talk about this. And I fully expect us to be able to agree to language to assuage my concern. This is obviously an [9:36:40 AM] historic area that needs to be looked at so I don't have any problem with initiating the historic district that you're talking about. At the same time we passed a resolution last week that councilmember harper-madison brought that was perhaps taking a look at other issues that may or may not be contained within the initiated historic district. And I just wanted to make sure that we weren't superseding or losing track of that earlier resolution. And that by doing this we weren't limiting the kinds of things that could be part of the conversation, recognize the benefit of us sexually initiating some work but not predetermining what the ultimate conclusions would be. >> Tovo: Thank you, mayor. So you had suggested some language that would have added in something along those lines that it's not superseding or displacing it. And that it's initiating a broader conversation and I [9:37:41 AM] had indicated I'm comfortable with that kind of language. Where you and I need to spend more time talking is about the local historic district because I do think that this is the vehicle by which we achieve what was described in last week's resolution. There was a passage, I'll call your attention to talking about in the second be it further resolved, it directs the manager to prepare a code amendment and then point a of that talks will allowing a structure of building Hyatt of 140 feet or whatever is allowed under the capitol view corridor, and then the next passage talks about creating design standards with specific guidelines for the preservation of facades on historic structures to ensure any redevelopment is compatibility with the character of the historic district. Those design guidelines get created through a local historic district. And then when I looked back at the letter that we have from the -- I believe it was - - give me a minute. [9:38:48 AM] I thought I had seen something in one of the letters. In any case, it is in the downtown Austin alliance's letter that they sent us on June 7th advocating in support of these amendments. They note too for the structures to be compatibility with the historic sixth street district, the redevelopment plan should comply with the city of Austin historic design standards and they talk about maintaining the step back. So it been awhile since we've talked about a local historic district. I'm glad Jerry is here if people have questions. But that is what happens in the process of constructing a local historic district. The property owners in that area have a great role in helping shape and suggest what those design standards are going to be. There's a pretty standard set that can be modified, but I think it's in concert with the language that you [9:39:49 AM] added that was quite general about planning. I think that is the vehicle for the planning and the historic area. >> Mayor Adler: I appreciate I'm still in your quorum. I think we will be involved in the language that is in this item expected to be really an issue on their. >> Tovo: Great, thank you. Was there anything that needed to add, Jerry, or that wasn't accurate about the local historic district? >> No. One of the main functions of a local historic district is to establish design standards. In the past most commonly has been residential design standards, but there's no reason it could be be commercial. So I think that the -- there is overlap between the resolution that passed yesterday and what -- on last week and what a local historic district does. >> Mayor Adler: How does that work when it's initiated by the council and not the neighborhood? >> >> The way I would take this resolution and correct me if I'm wrong, is for staff to go out and do the work related to a local historic district, but the way it's [9:40:51 AM] set up it requires that 51% of the property owners petition for the creation of a district. So we would work with the property owners if this resolution were to pass on what a district means and to see if they support it. >> So we really can't initiate. We can -- >> Mayor Adler: You cannot create. >> Mayor Adler: We can encourage the neighborhood to initiate. >> The actual creation of a district requires the consent of the property owners. And we would bring that to once we have that consent we would bring it to the city council for approval. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Tovo: But it is the structure through which the design standards -- I mean, it usually yields a set of design standards, which is already what the council has initiated. Or in last week's initiation it called for the construction of design standards. >> It always results in the establishment of design standards. >> Tovo: One way or the other, it's all -- the design standards are -- have to be created. >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: But that would assume -- and in this [9:41:53 AM] case I don't think it may be an issue, but wins we can't do it and it requires the neighborhood, 50 plus one percent of the area, if 50 plus one percent of the area doesn't want to do it, they say we can't agree on standards and we just don't want to do it, we can't force that or otherwise initiate that ourselves. The only way we would be able to attach heights or other stuff would be through a different initiated process that we can initiate. >> Yes. It could be through straight-up code amendments, go to the code and create a special area for sixth street that has its own set of regulations. It could also be done through a local historic district with design standards, that is the same thing. A similar thing had in Clarksville many years ago, the council created a local historic district and then immediately said now go make one in Clarksville and we had to explain to the city council that the process that they created actually back then it required more [9:42:55 AM] than 51%, so we had to tell council member Dunkerley at the time that the ordinance that the council had just passed actually was a come from below type process as opposed to a come from above. But yeah, so this would say staff shall work with the property owners in the area on the idea of the greystone district and see where it goes from there. But you're right there are two ways we could have design standards. We could have the regulations through the code, they could be through a district, frankly through both that would run parallel, side by side. >> Mayor Adler: And it's just that variations that I wanted to allow for, recognizing that this is a really historic area. And I'm really comfortable with us leading in that process. >> Tovo: Thanks. I'm going to look back at the language about initiation. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Tovo: But thank you for your -- thank you for what I think I hear as support for moving forward. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Kelly. [9:43:55 AM] >> Kelly: Thank you. I also was curious to know how this might affect the previous resolution that we passed last week. So thank you for bringing that up. When it comes to historic designations, traditionally at least from what I can see it's not been the will of the council to force the homework business owner 62 that decision, so thank you for explaining that process. My question here for councilmember tovo is is there anything written in the language of your resolution? I apologize to not having it up here to look at. Is there anything that requires staff to come back to council in the event that the owners decide not to move forward with the historic designation? Because I think that would be helpful for us to get a report back from staff on? >> >> Tovo: So these come back to council for approval. That would have to come back to council before we could consider or vote on the design standards that would [9:44:55 AM] attach. >> Kelly: I guess what I'm trying to say is if the business owners are not wanting to move forward, is there anything that will create an opportunity for staff to report back to us on that? >> Tovo: Not specifically. So I guess -- it would be helpful so that we could consider other options for making sixth street historically designated, if that's the route the council wants to go. >> Tovo: Sure, I'll think about that. I mean currently it is a national register historic district so there is an historic district and if you want to put up a sign, you have to go to the board of adjustment and get certain provisions. And there are -- you know, there are a host of historic design guidelines that apply -- standards that apply in that area. The conversation now is about whether those should be adapted based on last week's -- I mean the council voted to say we're willing to initiate changes to those [9:45:57 AM] for this -- for this redevelopment, for this property owner. So I guess in answer to your question, we can certainly put in there something that asks for a report back about what stream realty's disposition is towards it since they are a 61% property owner along sixth street as I understand it. >> Kelly: I think that would be helpful just to our knowledge. >> Mayor Adler: We'll go to councilmember harper-madison, but it might allow the same thing to be done by just making amendments to the combining district overlay that currently exists. That might be an additional route that might be set up for what was done last week. I don't know that that would be the right way, might be an alternative way, but councilmember harper-madison, did you raise your hand? >> Harper-madison: I did. You guys will have to forgive me. Hopefully somebody in the room can identify the tooth [9:46:58 AM] pain, it's maybe the worst feeling ever so I'm going to be relatively quiet. How will this resolution affect the -- I absolute appreciate and understand councilmember tovo's resolution and mayor your support to make sure we take the necessary steps moving forward for preservation of a special historic district. But I guess my questions include how does the local historic district compare to the national historic district which we already have in place, what are the implications, what information should we be sharing with the general public when they ask questions about what's the difference. What does the local historic district imply. I especially want to be able to speak to folks in my district for whom, you know, we have multiple nationally registered and acknowledged assets in district 1, but there doesn't seem to be -- [9:48:01 AM] you know, I won't go into that. I will ask if we can find out what are the implications of the local historic district, what are the implications of this resolution in comparison to the one we passed last week by way of time line for progress. And then what information should we be sharing with our constituents when they ask questions about what a local historic district would do. And then lastly, this is more of a comment than it is a question. You'll notice that I try to be careful about saying -- and this was the feedback that we got, from our constituents, and I can't say that I disagree with them. You know, we've changed multiple things that we say so we don't call it -- what did we used to call it? Now I just refer to it as public -- oh, citizen communication. So we changed that, which we're phasing out the use of the word master in terms of planning and other things. [9:49:02 AM] I think we should consider as a body recognizing that -- I don't know if you guys are receiving the same feedback, but I'm receiving feedback when we use expressions like northern Arkansas character that that's -- neighborhood characters that's code for something else and I can't entirely disagree. I would just like to put that on the table that we consider if there's an alternative to saying neighborhood character, the preservation of character. I think for a lot of folks that translates into something offensive. All that said, I would like to know the questions that I asked before and the fourth question would be what happens if we don't get back 51% of the businesses that this would affect, what if we don't get that 51% that want this designation. In which case I appreciate the commentary from councilmember Kelly. So looking forward to the continued conversation, but on its face I don't see why [9:50:02 AM] this would be in conflict with the resolution we brought forward. >> Mayor Adler: Jerry, do you want to answer some of those questions? >> Tovo: Councilmember harper-madison, I don't see it in conflict. Your resolution asks for the creation of design standards -- >> Harper-madison: If I said that, what I was asking is how does it work in combination with what it is that we brought forward in terms of the time line for progress. Not conflict. That isn't what I meant. >> Tovo: Got it. I think of the staff if we can initiate it this week I see it in sync in terms of time line. The other questions are probably better fielded by assistant director rusthoven, but in terms of whether or not it is in sync in terms of focus, I think it is a mechanism for doing what you've described in terms of design guidelines. >> Councilmember, I agree, I [9:51:03 AM] think we can do both of these because they are both trying to achieve the same goal. We can do them side by side and I don't see one slowing down the other. >> Mayor Adler: Anything else on this? Yes, councilmember Ellis. >> Kelly: I -- >> Ellis: I have a question. If there is a bottom up approach where people who own these structures that can initiate this process on their own why would we as a council to create on our own and ask them to like it? It just seems like if the owners could do this on their own why are we not letting them know of that opportunity and just advising them that they can come request it. >> I believe that a lot of things as councilmember tovo stated, a lot of things directing us to work on new site development regulations for sixth street, but also consider design in that [9:52:06 AM] process. The local historic district, that's exactly what it's all about. Their historic structures. And how to set standards for the redevelopment or improvements to those structures. So I think that both of these things there's a lot of overlap frankly between these two things. Again, I think we could go about it frankly either way or both. There could be an application for local historic district that could come from the property owners. Again, what I think this resolution to do is to not actually create the district because as has been stated that requires council approval. And it does require the acquiescence of the property owners. Side by side to that, we have the resolution passed last week that said look at new site development regulations for sixth street [9:53:06 AM] and I frankly see this as being one or the other or both. And so what I see if this passes given what passed last week, this is direction to consider both and consider what the advantages and disadvantages are to having some -- two processes or two things happen side by side. >> Kelly: It seemed to me the one we passed last week seemed more in line with, you know, going to work with the property owners and figuring out what design standards might work. And maybe they are the same thing and this is a moot point, but I would hate for us to end up in a situation where your staff has put in hours and hours of work and then the property owners don't buy into it and don't necessarily want -- they don't want to get over that 50 plus one percent. In this day and age I would hated for staff to be working on things that don't pan out in the long run because I know everybody has a lot on their plate right now and I want to be respectful of that. >> I very much appreciate that, trust me I do. I think a lot of this work [9:54:08 AM] would be done either way given what passed last week so I think it would not result in a duplication of work. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, mayor, I appreciate that. Councilmember Ellis, you just brought about another question I had forgotten. I was also wondering -- so what I was along the lines what I was thinking earlier, we have some assets in district 1 that have been -- the district for facility has been designated historic and operated as a barrier for forward progress for some of our owners, private owners of buildings that have been established historic. And within a certain district, nccd. I'm recognizing that we are more and more having to help constituents navigate through the implication of the additional regulations. And that was the other question that I have, you know, how do -- when we [9:55:09 AM] receive -- because inevitably we will receive questions from our constituents who are business owners in the sixth street district if it does become a local historic district, what are the additional regulations? I'm not asking you to answer that today, Mr. Rusthoven, I was just adding that to my list. That makes five questions. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: There's one person division this week and last week. Last week's code amendments are specific to the two blocks that would further the question of stream realty. This would be a more holistic. You know, in the last paragraph of this resolution, mayor, you had language about last week's -- about additional small area planning or process. Because, you know, if year initiating -- the council has initiated changes to those two blocks. I think the question is, you know, what are the guidelines going to be for that district more generally. [9:56:10 AM] And so this is -- I mean what is happening as part of last week's resolution is not -- is not a planning effort for the whole historic district. It asks for design guidelines, but those guidelines need to be for the whole sixth street district not just those two blocks. That's an important consideration. It's been a while since we talked about a local historic district. Those were designed to get away from the kind of investment that it took from the city staff in working through individual landmark cases. And so I think that our advantage is to it. I also want to go back and talk about the initiation because I'm not sure that that's exactly true that the council can't, but it's certainly true that onwithout the -- you know, without the cooperation, councilmember harper-madison you asked are we instituting a set of regulations that are going to be cumbersome. The property owners themselves are involved in [9:57:11 AM] the conversation around those design guidelines. There are set design guidelines that are modified and so they would have an active role and frankly it would be almost certainly unlikely to pass if there's not strong buy-in from the property owners. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: I know we're talking about the property owners. I'm wondering, councilmember tovo, have you had conversations with any of them and what extent and what feedback have you gotten? >> Tovo: So the major property owner is stream realty, they own 61%. I have talked with Mr. Suttle about it and reached out to Kaitlin Ryan last week but she's not responded. >> Kelly: Could you share with us some of the feedback that you got? >> Tovo: Sure, I do this carefully so I'm going to read back the text from Mr. Suttle before I posted it. We've had subsequent conversations and I don't know, we don't usually have [9:58:13 AM] speakers here at the work session so I won't invite him to speak, but -- this is last Friday before it posted. Initial reaction is if it can go fast and design standards make sense, it may be okay. >> Kelly: Okay. Thank you. >> Tovo: After my discussion I'll characterize my discussion with Mr. Suttle this morning. In my conversations -- I'll give you my impression. In my conversations with stream realty, I sensed that -- I believe that they are very committed to the historic fabric of sixth street and support the national register historic district and have respect for it and desire to enhance. That's the impression I got from my meetings with them, that they desire their development to really enhance the national register historic district. Not to kind of prompt a major redevelopment of sixth street that would -- that [9:59:13 AM] would, you know, result in a loss of historic structures and historic -- and that historic landscape. And so, you know, as I see this action, I think it's very much in concert with what I understood to be their commitment to the historic integrity of that area. >> Kelly: Thank you for explaining that. >> Tovo: But again, I'm trying to choose my words carefully because I don't want to characterize their disposition on it, but that's where -- that's how those things align. >> Kelly: Have you spoken with constituents and gotten feedback? >> Tovo: I've spoken to a lot of constituents. As there have been conversations in the public I have heard from constituents and others who are frankly wondering how the redevelopment -- the pretty major redevelopment of those two blocks could impact the rest of it and whether we will next see requests to, you know, demolish additional structures up and down sixth street and what that really means in terms of the city's [10:00:14 AM] disposition toward that national register historic district. I don't think we've heard a lot of those concerns but I can tell you they are out there from members of the preservation committee, the business community, others who want to support this redevelopment but want to be sure it happens within a structure that acknowledges this area is an historic district and needs to be treated differently than green field. >> Kelly: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Tovo: Thanks for the questions. >> Mayor Adler: Any other questions on this item? Yes, councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: I think this is a really interesting conversation so I just would say on Thursday when people are signed up to speak it might be helpful if there's any folks that are in favor or have concerns, just -- I want to be respectful of the way that this is being council initiated when it seems like typically it's a, you know, owner initiated. Just since it's my first time through this, it would be helpful to have that to anyone who is interested in speaking to that. [10:01:14 AM] >> Mayor Adler: My hope is with the item being postponed, I don't know what the processes will be for community engagement on something like this. >> Tovo: Which item postponed, mayor? >> Mayor Adler: You are right. Sorry. I was confused. All right, so -- >> Tovo: And I would just say in answer to my colleague, councilmember Ellis, I'm going to look at the code because I think there have been strong if not actual initiations strong proactive actions from the council that have resulted in local historic work happening. I also see this as very different from others because what the action the council took last week was initiating code amendments for a particular property owner and so I think it is -- I think it is in line, again in line with the general process that's been set in place here. For the council to take an action. >> Mayor Adler: All right. [10:02:15 AM] Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Sorry about that. One last question. I just heard councilmember tovo in her last commentary just before councilmember Ellis' I used the word demolition. While we're asking people to speak to specific points on Thursday, I'd like very much for somebody to speak about the implications of the -- or use of the word demolition. I think when people hear that they hear us clearing out all the historic buildings on sixth street so I want to be explicit about our use of words that scare people. When we talk about demolition, I want to make sure we're being very clear about what we mean when we say that. Does that mean we are demolishing a building that's condemned or can't be built around and we're preserving the facade and going to reintroduce that to new construction? Does that mean we're going to take the historic buildings that exist now and [10:03:16 AM] build above and around them and preserve the historic -- I would like for somebody to speak to the specific implications about the use of the word demolition. Thank you. >> Tovo: Mayor, I made an amendment to your resolution last week that asks for that -- for the property owner to do just that very work as the code amendments proceed. I've got a list of proposed demolitions and that's their language that they've provided to me in terms of addresses of the buildings that they have proposed demolishing. And so there is likely additional conversation that needs to happen about exactly how that works with their redevelopment, but that is in essence what they've proposed doing. And as we look at the rest of the street, yes, I think we do need to be really clear about -- about when and how those would be -- demolitions would be considered. >> Mayor Adler: [10:04:17 AM] Councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: Thank you, mayor. I would just add to your list any tax implications. I don't know if that's covered under the historic district, but if there's any difference with the local historic district about tax implications, I want to be mindful of that. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. All right. So we've taken care of now all of the pulled items. Parenthetically, councilmember Fuentes the reason she is not here is because she has covid. She wanted me to announce that because as councilmembers we're out in the public a lot and she just wants everybody to know that in case they were around her over the last -- last couple days. All right. We've now handled all the pulled items. Anything else? Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Yes, councilmember Fuentes, I'm sorry to hear that and hope you have a speedy recovery. [10:05:18 AM] I want to ask staff to look at 25-242, the initiation of zoning or rezoning. I believe that the council -- I think that the local historic district works like any other code amendment or any other rezoning in that the council can initiate it. But perhaps we can take a careful look at it. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anything else? Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Mayor, I want to make sure that I'm not -- how the process should work here. But the opportunity material to speak about speed enforcement and I know there were at least a couple folks in the Ada community who were looking forward to me doing some advocacy around traffic violence and just sharing a few words. If it's appropriate for me to go back now I will. >> Mayor Adler: It would be fine. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I appreciate that. [10:06:19 AM] I just wanted to put highlights around the fact, you know, my family has been very severely impacted by traffic violence. I know there's work being done by Kathie sitolik in the Mueller district. Her nephew was victim of traffic violence also. You know, somebody just going too fast so I fully embrace the idea that we need to do a lot more when it comes to making our streets and roadways safer places for all users. I had a really great conversation yesterday, tense but great conversation yesterday with some constituents who have concerns around general traffic and mobility safety. And I real appreciate that our constituents are asking and that we're answering the call. Nobody should have to suffer a traumatic injury or lose their life during the simple course of getting from point a to point B. I'll point out my family suffering over the years, it never stops for some families, right. Sometimes it's brief and painful and, you know, then [10:07:20 AM] there's the grieving and sometimes it just lasts forever. With my family's situation just a forever situation that compromised my family members' abilities. And having to address that, you know, just thinking somebody was just going too fast, right, and we can do better is something that -- this is something that's really important to me so I appreciate the item being brought forward. I think long- term goals should really be implementing safer designs that encourage safer behaviors and modes. I want to point out something that I know members of my neighborhood and subsequently my constituents get frustrated about, whenever there's a ball game at U.T., everybody parks in our neighborhood. The streets are completely lined for blocks at a time with cars of people that walk over to the ball field. And I know that folks are upset about, you know, the cars park everywhere, but I personally real like there's cars parked everywhere because otherwise my road is like, you know, a highway, it's so wide, and people go [10:08:23 AM] so fast. All our pets, our kids, our elderly, everybody is at risk when people are flying down this residential street just to get to a stop yard 50 yards ahead. It's ridiculous and frankly irresponsible. So I appreciate watching those traffic calming measures that get introduced. Whatever it is that we can do, you know, if it's allowing parking on the street, if it's, you know, more speed humps, whatever we can do to really encourage safer design, I think that's where we start. I think that, frankly, is easier than changing human behavior. So really looking forward to being a part of that robust dialogue moving forward. I am fully aware how traffic enforcement also has disproportionately affected black and brown experiences. My family has also been severely impacted by the [10:09:25 AM] disproportionate outcomes with racial profiling and some of the other elements that happen when people, the bottom rung, people existing in poverty. I say all the time it's expensive to be pool and people riding dirty. When that happens, that snowball effect, all the things that get affected by way of that disproportionate enforcement that's something we all should be taking into -- we all need to be thinking about implications for constituents with traffic enforcement. So I want to be sure moving forward we're building in safeguards to really prevent racial profiling and gratuitous stops. We know they happen even, you know, the crow report and some of the other reporting we've had along the way implies that we have some growing to do there. So I hope as a community all of us grow in that way. So I'm proud of the revised training that we're implementing. I know it's been implied that we have more work to do [10:10:26 AM] and I think there's always more work to do. I look forward to doing it. I think, you know, at our police academy, like we've all discussed, that's the start. And if we can get the start right, I think the outcomes are better for everybody. I look forward to getting the start right and better outcomes. I would expect that anyone who patrols our streets, you know I know a lot of our constables and you do too, they work so hard. I would expect anybody working the streets on our dime would have the same training and that's the last thank I would leave you with. I think it's comprehensive and robust, so thank you, councilmember, I appreciate you bringing it forward. Mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Renteria. >> Renteria: A short comment. I've been asking for a speed bump. I have a street that I live on that runs about three blocks long. I've been asking for one for [10:11:26 AM] five years now. So I recommended to any councilmember that wants a speed bump in their district to start early because I still haven't gotten mine. [Laughter] >> Be careful what you wish for. >> Mayor Adler: All right. Let's go move forward. We've done all the pulled items. Let's move to speakers. Before we go into executive session. Councilmember tovo, you had wanted to get us back to work session on this. >> Tovo: I did. And I think somewhere I have the language, the code language. So I think -- I think a few things have shifted as we've moved back and forth in between hybrid and virtual and in-person meetings. One of the things that I pointed out last week is that the rules are actually -- and the ordinance that we use to adopt the -- approve the [10:12:27 AM] rules actually says it's the first 20 individuals on a particular agenda item. Not on the agenda more fully. So I think that was a little bit of the conversation we were having last week, mayor, is that the rules that we've approved are really about making sure that each individual agenda item if there are a huge number of speakers, the reductions happen within that agenda item not overall. That's one thing I wanted to clarify. But I also would like and if we're pressed for time today may not be the day to do it, but I would like to figure out how in this hybrid system we get back to hearing commentary on issues like in chunks. I find it really, really confusing on the consent agenda and on the zoning agenda when we are jumping back and forth on issues. It makes it hard to follow. I can follow it, but I think it makes it more challenging [10:13:27 AM] when we're switching among speakers and among different issues. I know there's challenges are how the clerk pulls those folks that that we need to better understand. But the real -- the main issue I wanted to address today is the speaking, the speaking times because I think we've lost track of what that rule really was. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Let's talk about speaking times in particular. When we have broader conversations about groups, I think it's -- you know, we can see what the council wants to do because obviously we'll do whatever, you know, the majority of the dais wants to do. For me I like having the comments in the morning because I think it helps speakers be able to sign up and speak and they don't have to wait all day. And then I've heard people say that they prefer that. I've also heard other people wanting to come in, it's easier to do time management in meetings when -- when we have all the speakers as [10:14:27 AM] we've been doing it. So I think that there are pros and cons. So when we get into that conversation, we'll do whatever the council wants to do. But we can focus today's conversation on the amount of time we give to speakers to speak. >> Tovo: Just to clarify, I wasn't really suggesting when we do it in the course of the day necessarily. I was talking about can we strive for organizing the speakers so that they are talking about -- so we don't have somebody on issue number 1 and then issue number 8 and then back to 1 and on to 9. >> Mayor Adler: Oh, I see. >> Tovo: It goes -- and the same thing happens with zoning and it's just -- it makes it much more challenging for speakers not to repeat what the previous person -- there's a building on the narrative that just happens differently when you have all of the speakers on one item talking in a clump. I know that's widely challenging with the virtual so I don't know how to solve for that, I don't know if we can solve for it. But we can solve for the [10:15:29 AM] speakers who are in person potentially. And I did find the language I was seeking and that is in 119 of our procedures manual it is the first 20 speakers on an agenda item get three minutes each and then the subsequent speakers get one minute. Unless we alter it or unless you propose something different, and then we have the ability to as a council override it. But it was again just an agenda item, not overall. I think that's a really important -- whatever the time frames we end up are, I think it's important because we have agenda items that are going to pass but there are 30 people who come down and want to speak to it. And if they are the first 30 people to sign up, they would be truncating everybody else's time on all the other items and one or two speaking on item 10, they are only at one minute because there was another item on the agenda really [10:16:31 AM] popular. I don't think that's in concert with what we were trying to do in terms of managing the et cetera moo. I don't think we intended to truncate people's times if there were a ton of speakers on one of them. >> Mayor Adler: What we've been doing and we don't have to stay there is we -- in order to avoid that, we've been giving everybody the same amount of speaking time whether they are the first speaker or the last speaker. But generally speaking, we have varied the amount of time that speakers have based in part on the number of speakers that have signed up. So as to keep us, you know, generally speaking within an hour or two of speaker time in the morning or an hour or two in speaker time in the afternoon. Never having less than one minute, never having more than three minutes. But trying to stay within that variation within that hour to two-hour period of time. [10:17:32 AM] So that's how we've been setting it. But we could certainly -- we could certainly vary from that. So if we have, you know, 20 speakers that have signed up, we give them three minutes to speak. If we have any speakers that have signed up, it goes down to a minute each. Except for those things that council has said this is really important and we want to have more time for speakers to speak to this particular issue, in which case we have varied that to say if you are speaking on those numbers, then you have three minutes to speak. That's the practice we've been following for the last -- since the pandemic. >> Tovo: I guess it wasn't apparent that we were not following our speaker rules on that front until we had the situation last week where we -- where so many of the speakers were for one or two items. Again, I guess I think [10:18:34 AM] that -- I think we want to be able to hear from the public and hear as many different viewpoints as possible, and when you have 40, you know, multiple, multiple people on one item, it just makes sense if we have to limit, it makes sense to limit on the items where you have many speakers rather on items you have maybe just a couple, maybe just one. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember pool. >> Pool: I think that the points that Kathie is bringing up are really good ones. I had missed the part about early sign-up people get the full time or more time than others even if they are speaking on something that is going to pass and may not have as much impact. >> Mayor Adler: We haven't done that. >> Pool: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: We haven't done that. When we did the first 20 get three, that's when we were calling up people by item [10:19:34 AM] number. >> Pool: With an item controversial not -- >> Mayor Adler: This pre-dates that. The first 20 speakers speak for three minutes and then one minute we did prior to covid and we did it by -- >> Pool: Pro and con. >> Mayor Adler: By item number. >> Pool: Right. >> Mayor Adler: So it was true that the earliest that signed up on that number got the three minutes. The later that signed up on that number got the one minute. Except where there was pretty clearly established sides on the issue in which case sometimes people would come in and say these are the ten speakers that would best be able to lay out the pro case or the con case. In which case I varied from the first sign-up July to say, okay, these ten people will go first and get the three minutes and the others get one minute. >> Pool: Yes, and I think that may be what you want to get back to. [10:20:36 AM] >> Tovo: That's what our rules say. That's exactly it. >> Pool: So I think that's important. What I really would like to do is resolve it so that we don't spend precious time on the dais during a meeting trying to decide how many minutes people are going to get. So I really would like to see that settled before we actually get to a meeting. For those reasons, so we're not spending time arguing about time on the dais. >> Mayor Adler: And that's why we're talking now, to try to figure out the rules. >> Pool: Precisely. >> Mayor Adler: We've been more dynamically involved in looking at the speakers they've signed up, the things they've signed up on, the numbers of speakers we have and varying it kind of in a meeting management kind of way. Again trying to keep speakers to an hour to two hours in the morning and hour to two hours in the afternoon. Never going less than one, [10:21:38 AM] never going more than three. That's how we've been doing it that way as opposed to what we could do is just say, you know, everybody that signed up on an item, the first 20 people or 20 people on each item get three minutes. That would significantly increase the amount of speaker time we have both in the morning and in the afternoon if we were to do that. And I think that's the choice that is presented. >> Pool: I would also like to encourage people to take advantage of emails and other forms of communication. I do think in person is the most impactful as opposed to being on a phone line into the meeting because of all the issues that we have with technology, even though we have overcome many issues with the technology in the last two and a half to three [10:22:38 AM] years. But we do still have opportunities to meet and talk with people before meetings. We get our emails, all of our staff are actively involved in researching and anxiousing people's -- answering people's questions from constituents by email. I would encourage this are many forms of connecting with us and for folks who are taking time out of their day to talk with us, we really appreciate and value. Those inputs. And I think all of us want to have multiple open channels for that information to be conveyed to us. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Thank you. I've spent some time talking to constituents in the community and I've heard the very time sends the -- varied time sends the wrong impression to the community. When they have that opportunity to speak and expectation is not set ahead of time they feel like their [10:23:38 AM] time is not valued from us as elected officials and we should be accessible. And I know that I had requested some best practices from our cities and how they handle public comment. I'm wondering if you might have that information available? Is that something that you have feedback about? If not that's okay. I know the city of San Antonio for example, I had the opportunity to go to one of their council meetings, they have B session and a session. B is similar to ours and they allow for public comments on Wednesday following B session which allows for more time and the councilmembers are able to speak with speakers if they have follow-up questions. I feel we might be able to solve a lot of time management issues in allowing people the time they should have to speak by allowing an additional opportunity during our council weeks to get that feedback from them. So I just wanted to throw that out as an option, if it [10:24:38 AM] might be the will of the council, it might be impactful for the community and make them feel for valued. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: I know you and your team do a lot of work before the meetings trying to get the timing right. I want to balance the expectation of first of all how late are we going because when we end up going into the late hours of the night maybe we're not doing our best work because we've been on the dais for over 12 hours. Also when people want to follow our debates and deliberations when we're voting, I know it's extremely hard for people to be up -- the latest meeting I've been at ended at 4:18 in the morning. And we very quickly who figure out how to balance the need for public input and also be respectful of not working in late-might hours people can't follow our dialogues and wake up and trying to figure out how the night ended. [10:25:39 AM] It's a careful balance trying to manage that time. I appreciate that morning block and then the zoning speaker block and kind of having expectation how long those are going to go because we do need to hear from everybody who wants to speak on those items the day that we vote on them or at least in if same meeting. I also know our meetings can go 48 hours without having to be reposted. These are difficult strategies to make sure everyone feels like their voice is heard and we ask try to do our deliberations in a timely fashion so people know we're not going to be voting on things at 4:00 in the morning. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Lela. >> Vela: I agree and particularry councilmember Kelly's comments. It's very difficult to get citizen commentary same day as the council meeting and have that commentary really [10:26:39 AM] have any follow-up or -- it's honestly it's hard to focus on the commentary when we're off in kind of working on items and last minute changes and amendments and staff is very busy on those council days. I would -- I appreciate the example of San Antonio. I think moving citizen commentary over to, for example, work session days, sometime in the work session that gives us a little more time to I think consider and respond to citizen comments and I think it would open up an opportunity for dialogue. On a lot of times I hear some very comments and subject matter there and I would love to follow up with questions. But I don't want to do that because I know we have 120 items on the agenda and I don't want to get into a 15-minute kind of you know, discussion about something. So I -- I very much agree [10:27:41 AM] with councilmember Kelly's comments about setting aside a specific time where our staff is available, where we are available, where we can, you know, respond and engage with the citizens who come and comment. I just think doing it in varied points throughout the council meeting, I don't see that serving us very well, honestly. >> Mayor Adler: You know, we had and try to post on the message board a day in advance kind of what we were doing in terms of the amount of time so that speakers would know when they were coming in. We haven't been perfect about that and could probably do better to do that all the time to say based on the number of speakers we have in the morning and recommend and this is what we would recommend in terms of speakers. That would give speakers an advanced notice of what to [10:28:45 AM] perhaps anticipate. It gets a little harder now that we have opened up for people to sign up on the day of through the first part of the pandemic we knew the speakers had to sign up a day ahead of time so we knew what the universe of speakers was. Our policies right now say you have to sign up by 9:15; is that right? Which is also a change from prior policy when you could sign up while an item was being debated on that item. The policy we have right now is we cut off speakers at 9:15. >> 9:15. >> Mayor Adler: 9:15 on the day of. The signups. And you know, having additional time for people to speak in front of council is something to be considered and probably tough cycles, you know, as you go through -- we used to have council meetings every week so there was a work [10:29:46 AM] session and council meeting every week. And we went to that in order to try to avoid having council meetings that went to 9:00, 10:00, 11:00, and thought if we meant more often we would decrease that. We had a lot of people that would come to speak. We were just there a lot. Then we had council offices that said there's no time for us to do work because we're in meetings all the time. So we're not having a chance to meet with constituents and the like. So all of these things don't have good, clear, right answers because everything you do pushes and pulls, you know, in terms of what happens. Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I have thoughts to share about. First I wanted to ask our clerk's office if there were tech things about the system [10:30:46 AM] or thoughts you had from your experience that you wanted to share as part of this conversation. >> Sure. Myrna, clerk's office. Just in hearing everyone's discussion and recommendations, the call-in process is very -- registration is very labor intensive. Pre-meeting and up to the day of. So I have three sheets -- three pages worth of duties we do -- that I've written up and we can distribute that so you can see exactly what it is staff are required to do to prepare for a meeting and then the day of. If you choose to take the first 20 speakers, say we go back to that route, then I would recommend for the call-in speakers you take the first ten and then in-person speakers you take ten and then you go from [10:31:46 AM] there. That would still be very difficult to manage on our end. I -- we've spoken about this up until today and so our recommendation would be to call the call-in speakers first and hearing discussion today those that are registered to speak in person, then you can hear them during the items that they registered for like we used to do pre-pandemic. That's an option. But we do recommend either way if you can take the speakers first because a lot of them, their calls drop or they need to take other phone calls and it's very disruptive. So although they have the information to call back in, they are emailing during the meeting I can't find the number or we have staff asking the vendor to call them back in. So on, so forth. There is a lot going on behind the scenes. [10:32:49 AM] I don't know if you have anything else to -- with regard to the vendor, another recommendation we were talking about is utilizing the work session, if you know that there is an item that's going to have or bring a lot of speakers, then if you can request a time certain of that item, that way we can coordinate in advance and ask the vendor to create additional batches. And those items will be heard at a different time and those callers will not be called out until a certain time. Not at the 10:00 time slot or 2:00, rather at 4:00 or 5:00. And they won't have to be waiting on the line for, you know, two hours or two and a half hours. A perfect example for Thursday's meeting, item 59 already has 36 speakers. That's the living wage item -- or is it 59? [10:33:49 AM] 59, not 56. It's the living wage items, and registration closes tomorrow at noon so we anticipate getting more. This would be an item that we would recommend you state that you would -- someone state that on Thursday a time certain will be requested and therefore we know that will tip us off and request the vendor to create an additional batch for us. >> Alter: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Hold on. Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: I had other comments, but as long as you will come back to me. >> Mayor Adler: We'll come back to you. Comments on staff, councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: So that -- and I hadn't had -- I had forgotten to mention time certains, but that to me avoids the issues where we'll hear three minutes from living wage and everybody else speaking about anything else on the agenda is going to be truncated to one minute because that's such a popular item. If we move that to its own [10:34:51 AM] area, then it doesn't impact -- if for some reason we're not willing to go back to what the rules state, the living wage, the first batch would be three minutes and then they would all have one minute and the other agenda items would proceed the way they always do, then I think we should move it to its own area as we used to with the time certains. So thanks for that suggestion. >> Mayor Adler: Given my druthers, my preference would be do it in the morning. If you set a time certain during the day you never know if that's going to work. Even though we had a time certain it created an expectation, we would stop, we don't stop. Because we can't when we get there. And it makes it harder to pull things up over the course of the day to be strategic about filling gaps and filling times, which is one of the reasons why we've been able to get out before [10:35:53 AM] dinner as often as we have because we've been really strategic in what we call. But hearing now what you say, we have been calling the ones in the room first for covid reasons, but I would be very comfortable given what you just said to say let's hear from people on the phone first. If we had a big item when people were calling, I would be happy to call that item first. My recommendation would be absent a specific decision on something otherwise that we would still keep the -- you know, the timing. We have, you know, 46 speakers or 36 speakers on that, that's not the in-person speakers we're going to have a lot of in-person speakers. We could be in the situation where we have 100 speakers in the morning and at three minutes that's 300 minutes, that's five hours World War [10:36:54 AM] II of speakers -- worth of experts. If you are going to give people three minutes on every topic. If you are going to give three minutes on that one, that's an hour. Then you have an hour and a half after that. So if you had the same number of speakers it would be two and a half hours of speakers in the morning. Remember we start at ten. So if we go from ten to -- 10:00 to noon, the question is do we take then the public speakers at noon and then go to lunch and come back to finish the speakers we have in the morning? What I've been trying to do is to get it so that we have all the speakers done in the morning so we don't have speakers that are having to hold and come back after -- after lunch. You know, trying to -- and adjusting the times to help ensure that we have -- if we don't do anything else, we try to get -- hear all the morning speakers in the morning. So again, you know, you pull [10:37:55 AM] a thread here or pull something else over there and it's trying to find -- but I would be really comfortable from a blocking and hearing everybody all together when we have something like that taking the phone call speakers first. And if there's an important item hearing those speakers first, then hearing the rest of the phone calls and then coming in the room, hearing on that big item first and then the balance of speakers. Councilmember Kelly and then we'll come back. We're still on this topic. >> Kelly: I just wanted to say I like the idea of allowing the opportunity for more flexibility so we can have more breathing room on council days to get the work done. And follow up with speakers. We have a lot of great people in the city of Austin who are involved in our processes, and I want them to feel like their time is valued and that we are actually taking consideration to what they are saying. I'm not suggesting we aren't, just taking speakers the day of could give the [10:38:56 AM] impression we are not considering that what voting. I really appreciate the discussion and feedback. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anything else? Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. So I'd like to know from our legal department whether we're even allowed to do it on a separate day. It's my understanding that with the changes that the legislature made for councils, I don't think they made it for themselves, we are required to allow anyone to have an opportunity on any item for someone to speak if it's on our agenda. I'm not sure if we did it the day before it would actually reduce any amount of time. It might provide another opportunity to hear from folk, but I think we'll just hear from folks multiple times. >> Right. I'm not suggesting we would not have public comment on the day of the vote. Just to have thecoma opportunity to maybe -- the extra opportunity. But I'm interested to hear from legal too. >> Thank you. [10:39:56 AM] The state legislature has required people are able to speak on the day you are taking a vote on the item. But if it's an extra opportunity not taking away the opportunity from the day of the vote, then you certainly can do that. >> Kelly: Thank you. >> Alter: Thank you. When I think about what sets Austin apart is our community engagement. We have a higher level of community engagement than most our cities by far and that's a good thing. But it's, you know, what we're trying to manage with this process. I would be curious if we've looked at all at what the county's system is and what they are use to go sign up if that's any more flexible or are they not getting the amount of speakers you are. >> You are correct. They are not receiving the same amount of speakers that we are. >> Alter: Okay. I -- I want to just express that I think that we -- [10:41:01 AM] particularly for zoning, we really need to be hearing the speakers when we're taking up the items. It lends a lot more coherence, allows us to focus on the particular issues. So I would really like to see us move to that system on zoning going back to where we were, you know, issue like item by item especially our discussion items for that. I think that also, you know, there will be a tradeoff that we're going to -- we will observe, you know, with this process. We will be here much later. I do not believe that we make good decisions when they are debating after 10:00. And I don't know what the solution is for that because we regularly when we do go behalf 10:00 we push on to try to get done. I do not believe that leads [10:42:02 AM] to good decisions or a good process for that. In terms of when you start taking the call-ins before those in person, we are at a medium level of covid and I'm not sure that to tomorrow is the day or Thursday is the day to switch that around when we have a higher level of risk in the community. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Renteria. >> Renteria: You know, to me I don't have a problem staying up late. You know, that's not my problem, you know, I don't have that kind of problem. So, you know, I'm willing to stay up as late as anybody wants to stay. Here in the mornings, I never complain about that. My biggest concern is when we start doing zoning that we delay some of these zoning issues till after 10:00. And now we have people that have been there since 2:00, [10:43:06 AM] now are there and it's after 10:00. And I've seen some people just walk out because they just have -- they have a life and, you know, they've families and they work. But to me, I really don't -- it doesn't bother me either way. You know, we've gone through this cycle every time there's a new councilmembers get elected, we go through this cycle again. And we're probably going to be repeating this thing once we're gone, I'm gone, they are still going to have that -- still a conversation about how to conduct the meetings. So I wish that someone -- we've got all these really smart people in Austin to come up and maybe recommend a solution of what they would like to see. And I'd be willing to accept whatever the outcome is. [10:44:07 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. If you have pages that -- I would suggest why don't you hand that out so we have that as background information. >> Sure, but so that I understand correctly on Thursday we will continue as we have. When we return in July, then we will take call-in speakers first. Then in-person speakers. It has not been decided yet whether or not you would -- will call time certain items so that we can create a separate batch for these contentious items. >> Mayor Adler: We'll have a time certain but call it for either the more than or afternoon so people know rather than have an item time because we don't know what time that would be. Help me understand, is there a logistic -- if we wanted to in zoning cases have [10:45:07 AM] people testify at the case, can you do that both remotely and in person? Or does that really only work for in-person people. >> For in person. We would have to depending on the number of items and the number of speakers registered for call-in, we would have to create multiple batches and I don't know how that would work. I would have to speak with the vendor. I know we've done up to five, maybe, but this -- this seems like it would call for many more. And so we would likely need to pull another one of our staff members to help us, you know, manage that process on that -- on our end the day of the meeting. >> Mayor Adler: So we could when we came back if people wanted to on zoning cases take the morning block, give people the opportunity to speak in the morning both on the phone or in person. If someone on a zoning case decides they want to speak [10:46:07 AM] at the case itself, they could be here in person but not speak at the afternoon call time and they could stay there when the case got up, they could testify. And what we would tell them is somewhere over the next eight hours we'll call the case. >> And that's where we get a lot of push-back and mean emails. >> Mayor Adler: Those would only be people in person. >> Okay. >> Mayor Adler: And I know we get push-back from that. So a question for -- I always feel badly when I know there's a person sitting there for a zoning case and it's seven hours before the zoning case gets called. But that happens sometimes if we have a lot of staff that are waiting for something to get brought up or we have consultants that are coming in or we need something to be considered before something else gets considered. Or just from a time [10:47:08 AM] management standpoint. I recognize the benefit of having people have the opportunity to speak when their case gets called, but -- but it also creates lots of -- lots of issues and inefficiencys and we'll extend the time of our meeting. And it's difficult you can't have a 10:00 cutoff and the desire to open up speaking because one of those has to give for the other win. -- the other one. >> Tovo: Maybe that's the compromise, there is a clear cutoff unless one whole group of people show up that they didn't realize this case is on the agenda. For most of the people it's a 10 cutoff because that I think preserves the most [10:48:08 AM] ability for the public to engage. Because the other choices are just more challenging. And you know sometimes frankly I think we -- it does add time if you have people from another -- the mixup of zoning folks and other issues adds time because we're saying what case are you talking about, when somebody else covered it an hour early in their testimony. I think there's a real efficiency when you have folks -- they are building ideas on each other rather than just repeating them. To me that would be a compromise. >> Mayor Adler: So right now -- >> Tovo: Also I think continuing to be the kind of work more challenging with the hybrid issues but in the morning say it sounds like we're not going to get to this item until this time so that -- and really prioritizing, trying to hit some of those issues before the lynch lunch -- lunch [10:49:12 AM] before staff can go. Last week I said comments on that real estate item, we took it up almost one of the last things of the day and Michael Gates from real estate stayed that whole day. I mean if I had known that he really was going to stay, I would have said I'll make my comments after it passes. We need to prioritize staff's time as well and try to hit those things that are pulling our staff out for a entire day as well. >> Mayor Adler: I try to do a better job of posting ahead of the meeting the number of speakers we have in each block and how I would be recommending approach that. >> Tovo: We can tack -- talk about it today. The big items appear to be C, X and Z. Living wage is one of those. Maybe my colleagues have zoning cases in their districts that are going to be -- draw a lot of speakers. Statesman would have been one. If collectively we could [10:50:14 AM] spend ten minutes these are the big items. By Tuesday we have a pretty good against what some of those are going to be. >> Mayor Adler: In the morning block in person or we'll take that item up, those speakers will speak first. Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I also wanted to just suggest that we should allow for councilmembers to make their comments right after we vote on consent. Folks don't really -- it's hard for people to follow what we voted on consent and disjointed when it happens ten hours later. We can ask people to be short and brief and keep that in mind which we should always do, but we should try to keep those comments together with the consent agenda. >> I'd like to agree with mayor pro tem because, you know, I often find myself voting no on certain items on the consent agenda and it creates more peek for me in my office because reporters [10:51:15 AM] peach out and want to know why I voted no and I just want that opportunity to provide that to the public and the media. >> Mayor Adler: I'll go ahead -- last week was the first time we did it that way. We did it that way because we were close to 1:00. But we definitely could have done the comments at that point and just -- you know, and it will extend to whenever it extends to. But I'll do that. All right. It is 10 to 11:00. We want to go into session executive session now. >> Councilmember Renteria acknowledged this happens a lot, but one of the things we try to do is ask our staff people, you know, if we are having a late night, if it's going to look like it's going to go long or the things not time certain you can pull off. I would really ask that you think about that with the items from council. There are a lot of items from council and some of the [10:52:16 AM] ones most exciting and draw a lot of folks. If it's something that, you know, as we do the consent agenda and we can do that at our next meeting, decide that early in the day so that we can plan so we can really try and not go past 10:00. I appreciate that you stay up late, councilmember Renteria, but after we had that 4:00 in the morning meeting you all committed as council we would not do that our staff, to our citizens, to residents. That that's not a wise way to do business. So thank you. We're fine to go into executive session. >> Mayor Adler: If council did an analysis before on timing and we've made pretty significant changes, can you do in your spare time -- [laughter] -- Update that review of when council meetings have been ending over the last couple years relative to when they were ending prior to that point? >> Sure, we can do that. >> Mayor Adler: That I [10:53:16 AM] think would be a way to evaluate how we've gone doing things. >> Sure. So what we will also do is compile all the recommendations and provide you -- we can provide you with options that may work for all. If not, you can continue the discussion and just to piggyback on Anne's comment, for us if the zoning items, if we can be made aware of what items will be postponed, we understand that Jerry's guesses are a draft. But we know there are conversations being had throughout the meeting with staff and the applicants or developers and whatnot. So if we can be told in advance, that would save so much time on our end. If we can just communicate, keep that communication line open, that would be great. We would appreciate it. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Great. >> [Inaudible] >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Renteria. >> Renteria: I'm just [10:54:16 AM] wondering also, you know, sometimes we know that there has been discussion about postponement but we don't make that decision until we get on the dais. I'm going to try to make sure that I get that information before noon so that I can relay it to -- >> Mayor Adler: That would be helpful. If you can post those to the message board since we can't make decisions outside the council meeting, people could express agreement or reservations on the message board, that would be helpful I think for the public to be able to anticipate as well. Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I just wanted to flag a couple things on a couple items. I believe it's number 62 which is extension of the economic prosperity commission. Rather than taking time on our Thursday meeting, just want to flag that. In audit and finance we discussed the need for us to [10:55:16 AM] take a look at our commissions and boards and make sure that they are serving the needs of the council. The request was made for that first to be a council discussion and then we can determine if we need to what end okay of public comment, et cetera, we might need to have. Looking forward to doing that in late summer or early fall. If folks can think about the board and commissions that you find useful or think about ones you feel like they are not hearing from, they are not adding to your work so we can think about how we are best utilizing the talent in our community as well as our staff, you know, for which boards and commissions we might want to take a look at more carefully to see whether we want to continue them or if we want to put a sunset clause on those commissions. We don't yet have a process for doing this, but I wanted [10:56:17 AM] to flag that and I don't think we have to have that conversation on the dais on Thursday. I can just make the motion for extending the economic prosperity commission. Some of us are working on amendments to item 50. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: But item 62 about the existence and operations of the economic prosperity commission should still move forward. >> Alter: Yes, but the calf yet in audit and finance we want a broader conversation. That commission happened to be the vehicle that sparked the conversation, it's not necessarily aimed at that commission. Because this is a second or third extension we've had to make for our commission in the last several months S so the code requires if the commission hasn't met quorum for a certain number of [10:57:19 AM] times they have to go to audit and finance committee and we have to make a determination as to whether they should continue the commission or not. We've been seeing more of those and in seeing more of those we realize it's been ten years since we looked at the commissions so it would be a good time to look at that. >> Mayor? I'm sorry, if somebody else is first. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: Which item? >> Alter: 50. >> Kelly: Will those -- >> Ellis: Will those be on the message board? >> Mayor Adler: Which number? 50 in the living wage issue. >> Kitchen: Two questions. The first question, were you talking in terms of looking at all of the commissions, and if that's the case, I think that we should learn from the previous effort that was done which involved [10:58:20 AM] the public in a conversation about the commissions, that was done in preparation for the change in council to a -- you know -- >> Mayor Adler: 10-1. >> Kitchen: Yeah, the 10-1. Sorry. Thank you. It was done in conjunction with 10-1. It was a public input process that was rather extensive that I think it was important. So I think it's timely to look at the commissions, but I don't think the council should do it without some process that involves the public. So I would just recommend that. And then with regard to item 50, on behalf of councilmember Fuentes, she asked me to let her know if there was any discussion about item 50. Can you give us an idea of -- I'm sorry, when did you say you would be posting amendments? I think it would be really important to see those at least by tomorrow. [10:59:23 AM] >> Alter: We will have them ready as soon as we can. We have meetings all day so we have to coordinate and we'll do the best we can. >> Kitchen: Can you commit to having them ready before Thursday so councilmember Fuentes has the opportunity to look at them before Thursday? >> Alter: I think that would be the intention. >> Kitchen: Pardon? >> Alter: That would be the intention. >> Kitchen: Great. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember tovo. Just a couple things from my perspective on this agenda, things lime looking at. Number 4 is the fashion incubator. Let me say about the commission on commissions. Councilmember kitchen, one thing we talked about in audit and finance, we have such limited resources now and staff time is also a taxpayer resource. So I suggested it might be helpful if we had a conversation first at the council level about which commissions -- which [11:00:25 AM] commissions we were finding most useful and which using their recommendations. I agree the public should have input into it and feedback and we would want to consult the commissions and those stakeholders who support any commission but rather than having a commission on commissions, what happened last time they came to down and council said we find this valuable. Are there commissions that you -- where they make recommendations that we -- where they don't make recommendations, but they serving a different role and we have a conversation among council first about which are the most useful. They are all useful in one way or another, but I think we're going to have to make choices. In my opinion I think we're going to have to make hard choices about when we are putting dollars and staff time because we have such limited bits of both. That brings knee to number 4 -- [11:01:30 AM] >> Kitchen: Could I respond? Gift box. >> Mayor Adler: It's not on our agenda but we need to tee it up. >> Kitchen: Maybe it's a message board conversation since those of us who weren't in audit and finance would like to weigh in. That would be great. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Alter: We wanted to start with an initial conversation. I don't have a plan for the process other than whether we have the conversation at audit and finance there was request for us to have a deeper conversation at council which I would assume would include a broader discussion on the process. I was just simply -- >> Mayor Adler: Let's -- we're talking about how we're going to approach it and we can't do that so the public can participate in this process if they want to. Councilmember tovo, you had [11:02:31 AM] something else. >> Tovo: Again, I'm trying to be thoughtful about as we move into the budget and asking departments what -- what work they are doing that has been useful and interesting and was worth investing in, but we might need to make a different choice for some of the new and emerging priorities. The continued funding on fashion incubator is one I'm looking closely at. We had a conversation about this, a vigorous conversation the last two times it came through. It was initiative of a councilmember a long time ago. Ifc that was -- I think we need to just -- well, anyway, I'm looking at that to see what kind of results are coming from that and whether it needs to be reinvest understand a different kind of program. 90 is councilmember harper-madison's item regarding telecommunications facilities. I read through it quickly. I do have questions, I [11:03:32 AM] didn't pull it but air what some of the questions are I'm going to work to get answers to between here and Thursday. I am always going to be a supporter of doing things to help out our school districts and appreciate your leadership in bringing this forward. I had a cell tower, I have to go back and think through and research the conversation, but I believe if I'm remembering correctly I had a cell tower next to an elementary school in thigh district where there was a pretty active advocacy on the part of neighbors and parents to remove that from that area. It was unsuccessful because they were kemped concerned about the impact on student health. One, I want to remind myself if I'm remembering those details correctly, but I would be interesting if you've got additional information that you can offer about whether that is something we might encounter if there are cell towers on those properties. That would be really helpful [11:04:32 AM] to know. I want to make sure we're expanding digital access to students in the district and this could very well be the best way to do it. So I just wanted to air that as something I'm thinking about. 87, I am still reviewing. I'm supportive of it absolutely and a co-sponsor. I am interested in raising this to the attention of the city manager councilmember alter had broad forward a resolution about -- it was during the pandemic. And I thought we had kind of agreed we were going to work from some of the data the county was producing about teleworking, but I'm kind of interested. This just raised my memory that I'm still awaiting kind of the answers to all of those questions that you prompted in your resolution. >> Alter: Thank you. [11:05:33 AM] So councilmember Renteria brought forward this resolution which does build on other work that I've worked on and I'm a co-sponsor and I believe that we added -- I have to look at the final draft, but I believe that we added in there looking at the county's program for telecommuting. We put reference in there to the 2020 resolution where we asked the city manager to look at telecommuting and patterns and opportunity to save money from making those steps. And we also made reference to our facilities planning process where we have plans in place were going to save us a lot of money but now with telecommuter we should revise and it will save more money with office hotels, which is what councilmember Renteria is calling for. And so you know, we had been [11:06:34 AM] talking about doing a separate resolution, but he had already kind of drafted it so we just folded what we were doing into it as well. >> Tovo: It seemed the two efforts were very much aligned. I'll have to look closely at what information we've gotten back. My question is really about what information we got back in response to your resolution, I think we're still kind of waiting for it is my feeling about it. I appreciate your leadership , councilmember Renteria, I've been speaking with both of you, so I'm glad to see it moving forward, but I personally had hoped we would have some of that information by now. >> Alter: I think you are correct that we haven't heard a lot back. I think that was a function of covid lasting a lot longer than we anticipated at the time that we drafted. We had this in the resolution where we established [inaudible] [11:07:34 AM] Conservation corps because we were looking at environmental issues that were raised buoy -- raised by the pandemic in may of 2020 and that was a function of the telecommuting and the other stuff all lasting a lot longer than we anticipated and it was premature for a long while. >> Mayor Adler: Rodney? Did you want to say something? >> If there are responses to the previous resolution, we will resend those to the whole of council. If there are no responses, councilmember tovo we'll letter office no there are no responses. >> Tovo: Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: That closes the loop for everybody. Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: If I could just add one of the things that I don't know if it was distributed to all of council, but in my conversations with city staff there was kind of one size does not fit all approach to telecommuting. And so that was another [11:08:36 AM] obstacle at the time and there was some sharing I think over time with how different departments were handling things, but not necessarily the fuller look at how we might be able to leverage what we've already initiated due to the pandemic and move forward with in the future to save money and to provide better working conditions. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. Colleagues, I have discussed, I appreciate councilmember Kelly's leadership on isc with respect to the license plate reader. I appreciate your leadership on that. I've spoken and will be posting something on the message board having an item come up just before we do the budget and needs to be appropriately part of that, something I will support in the budget process. I also want to make sure it [11:09:38 AM] contains some of the protections and guide answers and will be posting about some of the models that have been created for -- in other places by some of the advocates on how to handle and deal with those and will be posting that. >> Alter: I really appreciate that feedback and I will take a look at the information you provide on the message board to see how it alliance with some of the protections I placed in that ifc. I'm particularly proud of the research I did and the work our legal department did to help ensure that some of the I guess misconceptions and misinformation out in the community about the utilization of this technology by our police department can be used in a way that is just and right for our entire community. And so I appreciate your note about the budget also just now. We did tie the ifc into ensuring the city manager places it in the budget so it is part of the budget process. I feel bringing it forward as a resolution is impactful [11:10:40 AM] for the overall morale of the police department and officers so they are aware we are working towards giving them the tools they really do need to be able to keep our community safe. I appreciate that >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: I'm a co-sponsor of this item and I did a resolution. Now I've done two resolutions this meeting and last meeting that are also looking toward the budget. And we do a lot of great work during the budget. And a lot of really fun things and important things have come out of the budget direction. I think, for example, the hotel occupancy tax, the first switch to really investing in historic preservation came forward as not an ifc, but a budget direction. I think in our budget, in our budget direction and in our budget amendments we can do important policy work too. But there are some issues like this one and like the one I brought last week, the Rainey historic district fund, that might require a little bit of conversation and to me it's helpful if we [11:11:40 AM] have that conversation prior to the budget. So I support councilmember Kelly in the effort and also in having that conversation now where we have not a lot of time, but a little bit more time in the budget process on the policy implications and to address some of the concerns like the ones you're referencing. That makes sense to me as an ifc heading into the budget just because they're complicated issues. >> Mayor Adler: And I want to have the conversation by offering an amendment that has the resolution not telling them to put it into the budget, but ask him to consider putting it into the budget. Because when we get the budget we'll be deciding between many different competing priorities and I don't want to prejudge just from an institutional way. I don't want to prejudge priorities before all the priorities are in front of us. I think that's the most appropriate time to handle that. But we can decide that question. Anything else on this -- >> Kitchen: Yes, mayor, I had my hand up. [11:12:41 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I'm a co-sponsor on this item also and thank you to councilmember Kelly for bringing it forward. Mayor, we put some language in the resolution at this point. I worked with councilmember Kelly to make sure we had some language in protecting against the concerns people had raised. You may have additional things that you want to look at so that would be -- I can't speak for councilmember Kelly, but for my perspective that would be welcome. We did a number of things, including referencing the police oversight office as playing a role as well as some other things that are in it now. I invite you to look at what's in it and councilmember Kelly felt it was important to include those things. So the I invite you to look at what's in it right now and you may have some additional things. Do know that effort was made to address the concerns that people have raised. [11:13:41 AM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. I saw that and I appreciated that work. We can augment it to really reassure people because I know how big an issue it was because as a council we basically stopped this practice on these issues so I want to make sure it's really clear and there are really strong protections, in addition to the great work that's already been done. Anything else before we go to executive session? Natasha? Councilmember harper-madison? >> Harper-madison: Thank you, mayor. I appreciate it. Actually, it was -- I'm going to go backwards a little bit. I didn't realize we were jumping off of the topics when we were discussing specifically councilmember tovo brought up item number 90 and item number 87. This is is neither of the two, but along the conversation around things that we might highlight on Thursday. I'd like to present to the body that I've been receiving some inquiries from folks about expanding [11:14:42 AM] our work from home options for city employees, specifically in this inquiry it was about 911 dispatchers who are unfortunately by way of the lack of affordability in the city of Austin, a lot of those folks don't live anywhere near where they have to go in order to do their job as our dispatchers. And the current level of fuel cost is creating a massive financial burden and hardship for some of our 911 call takers. So that was brought to me specifically and adamantly by one of our constituents who personally is not affected, but is watching her colleagues be affected. So I just wanted to highlight that item for something for us to kind of put on the table to discuss as a body and figure out what what, if anything,, we can do in order to help relieve some of that burden, that cost burden, on some of our employees who really just frankly can't afford to do anything but telecommute. And that was all, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [11:15:43 AM] Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Quickly, I'd just like to raise a potential option for having Mr. Rusthoven present to us before we break for executive session since he's still here. I believe he has another briefing for us. >> Mayor Adler: We could certainly do. I don't know who we have waiting for us in executive session. >> We have three executive sessions and we can do them when you're ready. >> Mayor Adler: Let's stick with the plan we announced because people may have based their timing more broadly on that and we can come back and do it. City council will go now go into closed session to take up four items pursuant to 551.072, matters related to St. Johns. And pursuant to 551 roadway 0d city of Austin, we will have items e2, 3 and 4, which is the women owned [11:16:46 AM] enterprise procurement fund and St. Johns and health care. We will go into executive session here at 11:16. We'll come out after executive session for the briefings. I think that's all we have left. [Executive session]. [2:24:15 PM] >> Mayor Adler: You set? Okay. We're out of closed session N closed session we discussed real estate matters related to item e2. And we discussed legal issues related to items e2 and e4. It wasn't necessary to discuss legal issues related to item e3. But it is now 2:24. We are back. We have two briefings which will close you our day. First the pud on south Lamar and then the climate equity plan. If you're ready -- >> Yes, we are. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go ahead and start with the planned unit development. >> Thank you, mayor. And with us today we have contingent director Jerry rusthoven from the housing and planning development -- housing and planning department. >> Thank you, Rodney. [2:25:16 PM] Again, Jerry rusthoven. I'm here today to present this item, the case is cd-2022--- o1. This is a briefing on a proposed planned unit development or pud located at 517 south Lamar boulevard. Just a quick reminder to the council, the city's land development code requires that prior to submitting a pud application the developer is required to do what we call a developer assessment, a dry run of what they were proposing to submit in the future. We offer comments from the city staff for numerous city departments on that and give them back to the applicant and we give a briefing to the council on the -- some of the overall big picture and what's going to be submitted in the future for the pud. This pud is located at 5 sin south Lamar. We're calling it the bike pud. It's the location of the bike shop as well as the McDonald's at the southeast corner of Barton springs and south Lamar. It is approximately two acre property currently zoned cs-v. Applicant again is proposing [2:26:17 PM] pud or planned unit development zoning. The proposed project is a 400 unit residential project with 10,000 square feet of either retail or restaurant on the first floor. The applicant is proposing a pud as proposed to using the existing zoning because they're proposing to go up to 102 feet in height. Which the existing zoning does not allow. Nor does the vmu overlay even with the proposed vmu 2 it would still be slightly taller than that. With regard to relax of commercial design standards, those are the two major requests, along with a waiver of compatibility standards and I'll get to that in a moment. In exchange the superiority the applicant is offering are affordability at the level of 10% at 60% mfi for the entirety of the project. 95%of the parking being provided underground. [2:27:19 PM] A reduction in impervious cover from what's on the ground today or what is allowed by today's code. The varying burying of overhead utility lanes on Lamar boulevard. Green water building controls, better landscaping than today, which would be anything. Rainwater irrigation. Three star green building and improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Again, the major ask is for the height and with the height request would be a waiver of compatibility. I would like to point out that it's important to note that the compatibility on this site is being triggered on the one hand by the former he will, lodge other in the Bouldin neighborhood on the other side of the railroad tracks from this property and is zoned single- family as many lodges are, but we do not feel as we discussed last Thursday I think this came up with regard to civic uses and compatibility. There is no need to protect the he will, lodge from height. It actually is quite a ways away. The other thing triggering compatibility are the homes that are on the cliff above [2:28:21 PM] the car west at the single-family corner of Barton springs and south Lamar. It is important to note that the cliffs are so high that the homes would still be above the height of the proposed building even at 102 feet. So again, we don't see a need necessarily to protect the homes from height when the homes are in fact higher than the building that we're talking about being built. So I'm going to keep my presentation pretty simple. I'm available for any questions. Once this briefing is complete, the applicant may submit the actual pud application, we go through the usual process, reviewed by multiple city departments, input from the city staff, review by the minimum environmental board, planning commission, and then finally back to the city council. >> Kitchen: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Yes. So let me say first this is in my district, south Lamar. And yes, I don't think compatibility is an issue at all. Just what we passed, the [2:29:23 PM] resolution makes that clear because what's triggering compatibility is like you said, it's up on a cliff and it's also the other side of Lamar, which I think what we passed in item 66 said that we weren't going to count compatibility across the major streets. So I don't think compatibility is an issue and I know we're not quite there yet because we still have to pass an actual ordinance, but once we -- assuming we continue with what we passed last week, they won't need any kind of pud to reduce compatibility. The height, they are asking for more than 90 feet so I guess they would need a pud for that. I do want to point out that 10% at 66 -- 60% mfi is below the staff's recommendation that the council adopted last week. The council adopted 10%, but that was at 50% mfi, and 12% at 60% mfi at 90 feet. [2:30:25 PM] So I'm going to -- if this continues, and that's by right. So they could do that by right. So I'm going to have a question about providing them more height at less affordability than we passed last week based on staff recommendation. Let me ask another question about -- did you say something about burying the lines? >> Sure. Today there is phone poles along Lamar and they would be buried underground in front of this project. >> Kitchen: So tell me more about that. What the lines are right in front of the property or along south Lamar? >> In front of the property. >> Kitchen: Can they do that? I mean I would like to hear from Austin energy because basically you would have lines -- I don't remember where the poles are but you would have poles and poles and bury for just that front [2:31:25 PM] age and go back up? >> A good example at across the river. >> Kitchen: Is that how it's done? >> They take the lines and bury them. >> Kitchen: Where is that? >> At the stream building directly across the river from here. >> Kitchen: I didn't realize they could do that. It's great. Okay, then what was the other -- for a pud what's the other value, extra -- >> Let's see, they are proposing the affordability, 90% of parking underground, impervious cover is 97, 98%. They would take it down to 90. Let's see, burying the lines. Improve the drainage conditions. There is a small amount of floodplain on this property that wraps actually from the one side of the railroad tracks, wraps around the intersection there, so they would improve the drainage [2:32:26 PM] positions. Utilize green water quality controls, improve landscaping which as I said there's none today. And bicycle parking. >> Kitchen: Bicycle parking. Is that on a floodplain? It's not -- the floodplain doesn't extend to that. >> It does. It's mostly on the east side of the tracks. But that goes under the viaduct and comes around. It's pretty significant on the Peter pan side but here's there's just a tail that reaches in. What they are proposing is there will actually be a couple columns for the building but underneath the columns would be -- that would not have any structure in it. >> Kitchen: Do they have to get a waiver? >> That would be part of the pud process. >> Kitchen: Remind me what's being proposed in terms of number of units. >> Right now 400. [2:33:27 PM] >> Kitchen: 400 units. Okay, great. >> 10,000 square feet of restaurant or retail on the first floor. >> Kitchen: What was the other part? >> 10,000 square feet of restaurant or retail on the first floor. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Let me just say to my colleagues, I think this is a good location for this kind of -- this kind of development. It makes a lot of sense on that location. My only question is the level of affordability since it's already zoned B. I don't want to pass what we just passed and then immediately not use it. So I'm going to have to be satisfied. Immediately not use it for a taller building. >> I understand the discussion you had last Thursday, but currently in the code, even under the existing pud provisions, this is going above and beyond the existing conditions just as a heads [2:34:30 PM] up. Because they are doing the entire building as opposed to bonus area, it is more than what you passed but is more than what it's today's code. >> Kitchen: But it's zoned vmu now. >> Correct. >> Kitchen: So it isn't existing and I wouldn't consider -- >> This is more than today -- I mean it's more than what the pud ordinance if they asked for a pud would require today, but you are right it has csv zoning today and under what you passed last week it would require more affordability than what they are proposing right now. >> Kitchen: But a comparison for a pud is not based on the pud requirements, it's based on what they could do today and so I would not consider it -- I would not consider it an extra benefit to comply or not even to comply with their current zoning on affordability. So I don't see how that -- I [2:35:30 PM] don't see how you can see a pud doesn't require affordability but their base zoning does. How can we say that they are getting -- because the pud requires some extra benefits. I can see all the other things we mentioned as extra benefits. >> Agreed, councilmember. Under the code that exists today, not what was proposed on Thursday which would be future -- >> Kitchen: No, we passed a code amendment on Thursday. >> We will work on them with trying to get the affordability up. It is true on this building we're talking about the entire structure and a pud would normally talk about the bonus area but I understand your point. >> Kitchen: I'm just saying for purposes of the, you know, the criteria for pud, you know, what our responsibility is as a council is to work with the developer on -- I forget whether or not -- what the term is. >> Subpoena -- [2:36:57 PM] subperioh. I imagine they will be filing pretty soon. Usually a pud takes minimum the better part of a year we'll say. >> More about bike and pedestrian infrastructure. This particular section of Lamar was I believe part of the 2016 corridor bike lanes and those got slightly held up because there may be some other issues trying to be worked out, but would absolutely love to make sure that conversation is happening so we don't miss an opportunity away from the hike and bike trail to have people walking and biking to it so they don't have to drive to the trail. And I know this isn't part of zoning, but do you have any information about future tenants just in case people watching are wondering if this would be part of a bike shop or clinic. I'm sure people are wondering what else is going on the ground floor. >> We've not had those [2:37:58 PM] discussions yet. There's no guarantee but we can talk to the applicants to see if they have any idea at this point. >> Ellis: We love the bicycle sport shop and are happy to see what next phases take it to but make sure we're not losing one of our our bike shops. I would hate to lose that type of infrastructure in this location. I know that's not part of zoning. That happens later in the conversation. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember Vella. >> Vela: Why the 200 feet and I'm trying to understand some of the decisions that developers are making and why they are making them. If you've got the 90 feet potentially by right on the bmu2 and that just passed, but why go 102 as opposed to [2:38:58 PM] 90? Do you understand what the thinking is? >> Councilmember, I think you are right, they did submit this prior to the code amendment that passed last Thursday. I honestly don't know why they are asking for 102 feet. I presume they've asked an architect design the building and that's probably what it comes out to. >> Vela: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Kathie. >> Tovo: Yeah, a couple quick questions. This is actually under the new maps going to be district 9 or is district 9, I'm not sure when it -- when we start saying it's in one district or another. And Jerry, I think I understood what you are saying about that the only residential single-family residential to be captured was across Lamar. But I think Dawson would be too, though probably under the new changes that were initiated they wouldn't be. But can you speak to where [2:40:02 PM] the single-family homes along Dawson fall within -- do they fall within -- do they trigger come pattability? >> They do not, but the old elks lodge does. >> Tovo: But the elks lodge has single-family south of it. That's why I was asking about those residences. It looked quickly from the map as if they were within the compatibility radius. >> The zoning and the structure the use that triggered it now was both the residential the cliff by the car wash as well as -- I can't remember the new name of the elks lodge. >> Tovo: The high line -- >> It's high something. >> Tovo: I'm drawing a blank on it too. And what is the baseline -- what is the current zoning and what is the baseline? >> Current zoning is csv. [2:41:03 PM] Prior to last Wednesday would be 60 feet. But then we have what happened last Thursday. So -- but anyway, the baseline is 60, that's what's currently allowed. Without using a density bonus program. >> Tovo: So the baseline prior to last week would have been 60 -- >> Sorry, councilmember, it would still be 60 the baseline. As of last Thursday we have a bonus program V which it already has but we can go above 60. >> Tovo: But for the purposes of the pud and determining what the baseline is, it's the zoning it has it doesn't count what it might be able to access and they are proposing 102? >> That's correct. >> Tovo: So for the purposes of calculating affordable housing, it would be 42 feet. >> Correct. >> Tovo: Okay. Great. Thank you. [2:42:04 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Anything else on this before we move on? Yes. >> Just one last thought. I wanted to be mindful of green space. You said I believe this is fully impervious cover or close to it at this point so I would love to figure how we calibrate that conversation around hopefully getting some more green space involved in it because there's always that tug-of-war with impervious cover height and green space. Just would love to have this better blended into -- it's right near councilmember kitchen's eco climate district so I want to be mindful of taking opportunities to not have as much impervious cover. >> We'll work on both the impervious cover and open space at the same time. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Anything else? Jerry, thank you. >> Sure. >> Mayor Adler: That gets us to our last briefing. >> And the city manager is going to introduce this [2:43:06 PM] presentation. >> Thank you, mayor, council. This is our last presentation today and we want to just acknowledge and appreciate the opportunity to brief you on this climate equity plan. This afternoon Lucia and leading our city's efforts since its adoption last fall. Today is simply an opportunity to update you on the work in progress that's been made to this point, about out we know and acknowledge this critical work is ongoing and there's so much to be done. We are pleased to share this update and look forward to future opportunities to provide future updates. I'll hand it over to our chief sustainability officer. >> Thank you, Spencer, and good afternoon. Mayor, mayor pro tem, council, city manager and assistant city managers, we're delighted to share this update. And I wanted to -- my name [2:44:09 PM] is Lucia zoned by Zach bomber in the office of sustain biological. I just wanted to quickly set the stage for the presentation you are about to hear asbestos a reminder I wanted to -- this is an updated plan from the original plan in 2015. That plan had a goal of note zero by 2050. This plan was adopted way council in September of last year. We have been making progress on implementing the plan. There's, of course, still much more to be done, but I do want to reassure you that as soon as the plan was adopted, staff got to work rolling up their sleeves trying to figure out how to implement the new plan and that work continues. This updated version of the plan just real quickly took on a new very intensive focus on equity issues and adjust transition. And it also included a fully vetted land acknowledgment statement in the plan. Hundreds of hours of community stakeholder work went into this plan along [2:45:10 PM] with hundreds of hours of staff time from staff from around a dozen departments. And this plan really was truly a committee creation between the community -- co-creation between community and staff. I want to thank all the community members who might be listening in and staff for all their hard work and departmental support. I wanted to quickly note the plan does address multiple council directives including a resolution asking for a transportation electrification plan which was folded into the umbrella of this plan in a special situation on transportation electric if I indication. Also a council resolution about natural gas emissions reduction, the declaration of a climate emergency and also the adoption by council of a more aggressive carbon neutral goal to get us to net zero by 2040. Today's presentation is going to give you a high level overview today, plus some highlights of activities that the office [2:46:10 PM] of sustainability is directly leading. But as I think you are all aware, this is a multi-department plan. What we're planning to do is come back with subsequent updates that will drill into more specific areas of the plan and other departments that is being carried out to implement the recommendations in the plan. So I think we can go to the next slide. Our team was excited to hear about discussions that mayor and council held back in February identifying climate change and resilience as one of the top priority indicators. Obviously there's a shared acknowledgment of the criticalness of the work being done. Today's presentation includes a status update, kind of a snapshot of goals and strategies in the plan, but it's also going to address several things that were requested via 2021 council resolution. Some of those were also address understand a memo to mayor and council which you should have received on [2:47:11 PM] Friday. Some of those things include new funding and resources for implementation of the plan. The creation of a strategy tracking dashboard and also the extension of the community climate ambassadors program which we are re very proud of. Next slide. Then also just very quickly and I won't go over all of these, but just wanted to acknowledge Austin's real leadership role in this space N the country and around the globe we're one of four cities including Denver, San Francisco that have adopted that very aggressive goal along with many other international cities. And then also highlighting the last bullet just to note that progress is being made, communitywide emissions decreased by 25% over a ten-year period. The per capita emissions decreased 39% so more to be done but I think we're [2:48:13 PM] making good progress. As dire as our -- all the climate news we hear is, I always like to at least touch on the fact there is good progress being made. Next slide. >> Hi, I'm Zach Balmer. Just to remind everybody of communitywide carbon footprint and why emissions are coming from this our community that cause climate change, there are these five sectors. Each one of these chunks is essentially the ten-year trend for each of these areas. The two largest sectors are energy and buildings which is made up of electricity usage and natural gas usage and buildings. Those emissions have been dropping precipitously over the last decade because of action taken guy Austin energy and our community with solar and renewable energy. Second largest is transportation. As you can see those emissions dropped dramatically from 2019 to 2020 because of the pandemic [2:49:13 PM] and the reduction in vehicle usage in 2020. We expect those emissions to tick back up some, but that's where we are in 2020. The three other sectors of emissions are pretty small. Industrial emissions, semiconductor facilities and refrigerants and waste emissions. When you stack all these up, all these bars on top of each other, that equals that 25% in communitywide reductions over the last ten years. So just very quickly these next few slides, to remind everyone what is in the climate equity plan. This was adopted by city council last fall. At the highest level there are 17 quantitative goals which are community focused outcome goals. We're aiming at 2030 to be achieved. Then are 74 strategies in the plan which are all of the work to be done which are spread across five sections and really focused on the next five years. This plan, the first version [2:50:15 PM] was adopted in 2015. This plan adopted in 2021 so every five years we're essentially planning to do an update on this. Also really important to remember the climate equity plan fits in the context of all of these other plans and all this work being done across the city organization. Austin energy's work, Austin water, resource and recovery and more, all of their activities feed into and connect and support the whole which sort of becomes the full city response to climate change. Next slide. There were four overarching strategies passed along -- as part of the sort of guidance of this plan. They are green jobs and entrepreneurship, prioritize ING locally -- regional collaboration and carbon offsets and carbon dioxide. We're as the office of sustain built are trying to [2:51:17 PM] keep an eye on these big picture directives as we see implementation move forward. Next slide. Finally, there are five goal areas in this plan that make up what is the plan. So the first section is consumption of food and goods and products. Section is sustainable buildings, natural systems, transportation land use, and the fifth transportation electrification. It's important to note two sections focused on transportation is key because transportation is kind of the most challenging sector emissions from. The new newest consumption of products. >> We just wanted to take a moment to talk about the different aspects of implementation and the different players that are required. So obviously realizing full implementation of the very ambitious plan to meet the goal of net zero by 2040 is [2:52:20 PM] going to require action and leadership across every possible sector so that includes these different areas of government but the community. We cannot as government tackle these problems alone. We need partnerships and collaboration with the community writ large to accomplish many of our goals. There's a lot we can do on our own with our department activities programs, initiatives and policies, but it's going to take more than that. I also did just want to mention looking at the city council, city manager's office, office of sustain ability, three pieces of the pie, there's representation across all three participating in the climate and environment leadership team that meets bimonthly to oversee the implementation of the plan, to tackle challenges and problems and provide feedback on where we're going with the plan. And that blue piece about the community action, year [2:53:20 PM] working right now -- we're working trying to figure out how to bring more resources, more levers, more strategies to galvanize increased community action. That's something we're excited about. We're excited about bringing back our progress on that because we think there's a lot more that could be done in that blue slice of the pyramid. Next slide. >> So getting into implementation, as shown on the last slide, the office of sustainability has this role of coordinating and leading and reporting and summarizing, but most of the actual like real implement work is happening at the department level. So one of the role important things we do is work across all the departments and try to understand the status of all of the actions and activity happening across all of our different departmental partners. Summarize all that information and report it. So one of the first things we've done and started this before the plan was even [2:54:22 PM] developed is try to understand -- not developed, was -- before it was adopted and being implemented, was to understand where actions and strategies are in the plan and where they are in the time line of being implemented. So just the chart here sort of breaking down the 74 strategies in the plan and where they fall in terms of things that are already underway, departments are taking action, are implementing some form or fashion of something that is connected to a strategy in the plan. The second category is actions that are likely going to be in the proposed fy 23 budget. Which there will be more communication about that very soon. Then the third section is strategies that haven't been started yet. So things that are longer term. Things that are likely two-plus years out of the future. If you look at the sum total, about two-thirds of everything in the plan should be underway in some form or fashion by later this year. There is going to be a lot more detail coming in this implementation dashboard [2:55:22 PM] that I'm going to talk about in a couple slides. Next slide. Just to highlight other recent efforts. The office of sustainability is this coordinator leader sort of role in the city but we're going everything we can to make sure there's forward momentum with implementing the plan. I have been the project manager on developing the resilience hubs in our community. That's connected to the private equity plan, certainly connected to climate action. But it's the same thing our office has been spending time on. The second thing is the climate equity plan story map. We created this a few months ago. It's a story map that walks through very clearly what's in the climate equity plan and makes it very accessible for anyone in the community to understand what's in the plan. The next is the youth climate equity council. We partner with eco rise over the last year with the screen shot is, these are a bunch of high school [2:56:22 PM] students part of our youth climate equity council. They were engaged what is understanding what's in the plan and a eco rise and U.T. And aid to understand how high school students can be involved with moving forward initiatives in the climate plan. Regional collaboration has been one of the overarching parts of the plan. We hosted texas-new Mexico regional meeting that had sustainability climate staff from Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Waco, Plano, El Paso, Albuquerque, all over our region to talk about climate planning, implementing climate plans and share best practices on that. Rocky mountain institute has been coordinating these Texas learning cohorts which are cities across Texas connecting on topics. The two we're participating [2:57:23 PM] in are on resilient subs and transportation [inaudible]. We have been working basically having monthly meetings with the U.T. Planet Texas 2050 folks to try to figure out a collaboration framework between their research priorities and priorities of professors at university of Texas and how do those things connect in with the climate plan and how can we drive more action. The joint sustainability committee, they have monthly meetings which my office supports. They recently changed the bylaws to add five new members. They are going to be nominated by you all and hopefully support implementation of the five new sections of the plan. And then finally as Lucia mentioned, ongoing climate and lead ship meetings held every other months. It's really getting into the nuts and bolts of implementation within the [2:58:23 PM] city organization. Next slide. >> So a little bit on those additional resources we've been able to identify at least at this juncture to help with the implementation of the plan. Those four existing ftes under the staffing support that are being reclassified to support resilience hubs and also the mass care branch and some other efforts within hesome might seem disconnected from the plan per se but the reason there is a real nexus there is as Zach mentioned he and his team has jumped in to leading the resilience hub to dated. That leadership came when the urgency of the work very clear, but at the same time at that moment we did not have a chief resill only officer in place. Now that Laura has arrived, we're working closely with her and hesome to rebalance the workload, to transition [2:59:26 PM] that initiative. Our office will still be involved in it, but we really need to rebalance that workload to allow Zach and his team to get refocused on the climb plan and its implementation. It's been a real overload for staff for a while so we're very excited about this new staffing support coming online. So I think that's going to really put some wind in the sails for our team to be able to continue to support the resilience hub work but also drill in on a lot of the other projects and implementation to the climate plan. I'll pass it back to Zach for the rest of the slide. >> There are two other staff members brought on soon. A program where cities apply and get professional staff to come work for us on a topic and then there's also a ul/l -- U.T., lbj school. [3:00:27 PM] Two other things when we went looking for resources and projects that needed immediate funding and support. We found funding for enhanced climate activities so we're making a new climate equity plan video and we're going to likely be making a video about climate ambassadors. This will give us more funding and resources to create those videos but also promote those videos. Our climate videos in the past have been on TV, KXAN. We're moving in that direction. The other thing is there is a lot in the plan about existing buildings, new buildings and hv a. C systems, heat pumps and electrifying in buildings. This funding is to do research in our local hvac contractor market and figure out where the levers are to drive more electrification and high efficiency heat pumps throughout our community. Next slide. A really exciting thing [3:01:28 PM] we're working on right now which is going to be very useful to the community and to city council is this implementation dashboard. So this is going to provide transparent reporting on all 74 strategies in the plan as well as quantitative tracking on the goals. This page is just an example what it's going to look like. This is just one sort of mockup page. But we're essentially going to -- we're going through the process right now of having all the departments answer these questions of what's the status of the strategy that's in the plan, where are they in terms of implementation, what's next, how does equity fit in, how does the community fit in and what are challenges and issues going on with each of these strategies. We're in the process right now of collecting data from all of our like 15 department partners on these 74 strategies. We're probably about halfway done. My hope is by the end of July this is live, it's posted on the city website, [3:02:29 PM] open data platform so this will be accessible by anyone to see status on everything in the plan. Next slide. Okay, the next two slides are just a brief update on climb ambassadors. You've probably heard of the program, we created this program during the creation of the plan. The folks you see on the screen were the first cohort of ambassadors. We have now brought on a staff member and went through a whole process to determine how do we launch the second version of this program and how do we make it better than the first time around and improved and even more helpful to our climate efforts. This is going to be a paid opportunity for community members to support equitable implementation of the plan. It's going to be focused on engaging historically under served communities who are most impacted by climate change, and it's really going to be focused on prioritizing local community initiatives. The ambassadors will partner with the city to create community action projects. Next slide. [3:03:31 PM] So we went through a whole process to design the program, the application program, design how the program is expected to work. The application process is open right now. So between now and June 22nd, we are taking applications for ambassadors from the community and are looking to hire 10 to 15 this summer. The program will then launch for the ambassadors starting in August and run essentially six months. And individuals will be paid $1,500 for their time and up to $3,000 for organizations that participate as an ambassador. And the overall sort of process is ambassadors are hired, there's going to be monthly coordination meetings, there's going to be workshops in the beginning for community M embers to engage and understand what's in the climate equity plan, focuses on equity and also civic engagement. And then engage these individuals will engage with communities and design community action projects that will be focused on things in the plan and the [3:04:31 PM] city will then sort of be helping and supporting their efforts to really get grass roots efforts off the ground in communities focused on the plan. >> If anybody here has ideas or contacts within your networks and your districts that you think might be good for this program, please send them our way. >> And so finally, what's next and what's happening right now. We have a edf climate core foal he, we have one that just started. She is focused on equity metrics analysis. The title of the plan is climate equity. And it's easy to measure things like energy and vehicles, but measuring actual equity outcomes is more challenging. So we're diving into how do we actually make that a reality. >> For those that might not know, edf is the environmental defense fund non-profit. >> We're holding implementation workshops with some community members and city staff to create [3:05:32 PM] more excitement and focus around implementing the plan. The first was last week and a follow-up one in July. There's been conversation about a new implementation forecast, the joint sustainability is the main conduit to oversee implementation of the plan. But during the creation of the climb plan we had this -- climate plan we had a steering committee made up of citizens that volunteered their time. So there's now the conversations with the community about more community involvement and oversight and participation in the plan. Implementing the plan. As I said, implementation dashboard will be complete and launched in July hopefully. Climate ambassadors, the kickoff and recruitment is underway. Austin's first ever food plan is kicking on of this summer. We have hired a consultant and are now starting -- going to be starting the process very soon to kick off this regional food plan for our community. >> A part of that will be [3:06:32 PM] food resilience as well as lowering the carbon footprint of food in our community. >> And we have gathered a ton of information this spring from departments on items that are in the climate equity plan and are in their budget proposals. And we are looking to make this sort of full summary of those activities basically made available as part of the budget proposal when it comes out. And then finally we are looking for the next council briefing that we do later this year more departmental project focus based. We have these five sections of the plan, he have we have these 15 departmental partners and we want to get into the nuts and bolts and details what's happening. So likely the next briefings will be not so much us talking about the bigger picture framework but talking about the details of implementations in departments. >> We're hoping to come back [3:07:32 PM] with that next briefing this fall sometime. Has not been scheduled next. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thanks for the presentation. I'm really looking forward to the dashboard. It's pretty exciting addition. Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I think it's really important that we have these opportunities to hear from you and understand where the plan's implementation is. I think it's important for the community. This is are a vast undertaking with the goals we've set with the staff and community. To get there though we have to make the investments. And I appreciate that you were understaffed and restaffed on to resilience and that is not a fault of your unit, but I am frustrated that the only thing we're getting at this midyear is we're getting our staff back who were assigned [3:08:33 PM] to this in the first place. Again, that's not a criticism of you, but when we put together the implementation resolution and we asked for a midyear budget it was because we wanted to prioritize implementation of the climate equity plan. Instead what we had is staff charged with that were reassigned without coming up with the [inaudible] And we don't have any midyear budget amendment. So I would like to first of all ask how much was the one-time funding and where do it come from for the enhanced climate communications activities and the hvac contractor study. That seems to be the only midyear things bought I'm not sure if that was new money or your money pre purposed. >> The amounts were $50,000 for each one of those initiatives, so $100,000 total. >> Alter: Okay. So we spent $100,000 that we weren't planning on the climate equity plan since it [3:09:33 PM] passed in December despite a resolution that said we need to do have a midyear budget amendment. That's problematic to me. I'm not saying that repurposing that wasn't the right first step, but we have got to lean in and have staff to lead this. And so I guess I -- I'm not exactly sure how to frame this question, but I will call my colleagues' attention to the fact we had memo in February that had a chart about implementation and the strategy that said about 10% of the stuff was going to be fund understand the midyear budget amendment. We have instead seen $100,000 funded and the new chart on the strategy status has over 11 percentage points now put into long term which is essentially [3:10:33 PM] what we didn't do in the midterm is now being pushed to the long term. So I really need to understand what is the plan for this fiscal year 23 budget. What are you coming back with us with. What is the universe of things that you are asking for. Help me understand that. >> Sure. I understand your frustration, I hear you. I would -- >> Alter: I don't mean to direct -- I'm frustrated with the process and I want to be clear this is not meant at you personally. It is the overall process for prioritizing sustainability and climate equity within our system. >> Understood. No problem. I did want to point out one additional thing that was funded and also just the fact that the pretty intensive exercise that the team went through to work with all the departments on what was in the plan, make [3:11:35 PM] sure they were clear on these are all the things approved and how are we going to get them done. That process alone really helped the departments get ready for this budget proposal that you will be receiving. So I think that work was very much time well spent and there are going to be things coming forward in the proposed budget. And as Zach mentioned there will be a highlight document that will go through what we think some of the most important projects are in the proposed budget that will implement the climate plan. The one that you didn't hear about -- and the other piece that's useful in these exercises which we discovered that when you start kind of kicking the tires on these things, sometimes the departments are able to creatively come up with ways to pay for things they didn't realize they had the resources for. So, you know, in one caseworking with you ban forestry, there was [3:12:38 PM] investing in software -- that was part of the natural system section. And there was a cost of $113,000 allocated to that need. And that team actually found the resource, unallocated funds in existing budget to get the project done. That's part of the benefit that we can get more creative with the resources that we do have. I know that my boss Jason has stepped up so I'm going to let him respond as well. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Jason Alexander, chief of staff. Just to kind of parrot what she said, I think this was an important learning exercise for departments. I will say we share that desire to be further ahead than we are right now. We saw this as what we know we can do right now with existing resources. We were happy to bring that forward. As I'm listening to the conversation, one, for the fy 23 budget we are working with the budget office now to consolidate what those [3:13:38 PM] investments will be and we'll be getting that to you all. And just in thinking through this conversation in the short time I've chief of staff, it's conceivable that we are perhaps one learning cycle behind your expectation on this, but we are committed to getting it done. This work kicked off right after the adoption and it's just frankly taken us this long to bring to you what we have. >> Alter: Thank you. I appreciate your candor on that. I guess I feel like, you know, we pushed off the climate equity plan because of concerns about the timing and so in my mind we're already a year behind and then we consistently get all of our sustainability and climate recommendations just after budget and then they don't get fund understand the next budget and we're waiting and we can't wait. We do have a climate emergency. I would like to ask when you [3:14:39 PM] provide us with the recommendations of what will be in the budget that we are also made aware of everything that was asked for that would have been under this that was not funded. We need to have more transparency about the choices that are being made through this process and our ability to say that we want to weigh something else in addition. I think it's grated if we can find creative ways to repurpose other funding and put it towards climate. I'm not objecting to that, I think we should be doing that because it's a crisis and wee need to address it. We need to account for it so we near whether we're leaning into the strategy we've laid forward for ourselves or not. And so I think it's going to be really important that we have that transparency. The current chart, you know, has funding being kicked off for 27% of the plan. That's a lot in this budget. [3:15:39 PM] And so I really am hopeful that that chart is representing a reality and that we will see that. And obviously there are many pieces here that are, you know, already underway like project connect and the electrification of buses and there are lots and lots of pieces that come together in that. So Mr. Cronk or whoever is doing the budget piece, please make sure we have the utmost level of transparency there so that we can do that. I'm going to ask one last question and after other folks have question, councilmember Fuentes asked me to ask questions on her behalf. I wanted to get a better idea, you know, one of the biggest challenges in achieving sustainability and this is not going to come as a surprise because we've had this conversation multiple times is that to address the climate challenge we have to do things [3:16:40 PM] interdepartmentally and the sustain jacket office is not in charge of those and I think we'll see that in future briefings. Can you tell me more about the leadership structure and how the bimonthly meetings are working and give examples of concrete things that have come out of those meetings pushing forward either on the climate equity plan or with respect to sustainability and climate. >> The climate environment leadership team I think is what you were specifically asking about, mayor pro tem, that group has been I would say vital to our process because it has given Zach and our team to interface with assistant managers and department directors. I have more of an opportunity to do that than Zach does and the leader of this initiative. I don't know if I can give specific examples other than [3:17:41 PM] to say really knowing we're in lock step together and that we can problem solve something has been extremely helpful to our efforts. So Jason, I don't know if you want to add anything or Zach. >> I don't have anything to add specifically other than I think I've sat in one of these since inserting -- into becoming the new role, and it was a thoughtful discussion. It was educational for me only because I got to learn a little bit more about the a triple C program. We have another meeting in the next month and so I'll be looking forward to being in this place playing a more active role in that. >> Alter: Thank you. I hope in the future you'll be able able to highlight work but the success depends how people show up for that meeting and what they are bringing to the table and how those conversations play [3:18:41 PM] out. Again, I'm being tough on you because this is so important. I think every one of the resolutions that you cited were mine, the Texas gas and implementation obviously was co-sponsored supported by colleagues as well. But this matters. And we have to get it right. And we have to make sure you have the support and resources that you need. And the other departments to actually make meaningful change. So mayor, I will pass it on back to you and when appropriate I have some questions that councilmember Fuentes asked me to ask. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: I'm curious into the data collection. Showed the different levels from 2010 to 2020. When is the 2021 information going to be available? I've seen a lot of data collection in various conversations that there's a lag in collecting that just [3:19:42 PM] in the past two years. People have been working on other things. In the city, but just data collection across the country. >> The 2021 community gas inventory will be completed this fall. We -- the thing that holds it up is federal reporting to EPA on like large industrial facilities in the community. Those get reported to EPA flight and when they become available in September, October, we can complete the full inventory. Lit be done before the year is out which is over a year late, but it's when the data comes. >> Ellis: Is the expectation that it would be annually updated or are there midyear opportunities -- >> The communitywide inventory is done annually. >> Ellis: So it will be updated once a year. We talk about being the last big city in Texas that's still in EPA ambient air quality standards and we're proud of that but I know for [3:20:44 PM] y'all to be successful in trying to make these big changes happen for our community and help us monitor how these changes are happening we have to be proactive about not making it worse on the front end. There's only so many response you can do for climate impacts before you are having to be reactive instead of proactive. I was fascinated to see that transportation chart come down. Obviously we know as soon as the pandemic hit all the roads were empty for a some listening time, gave -- long time. I think, you know, as we had that conversation about teleworking and Pio has an item on this and councilmember alter has worked on telecommuteing, I want to make sure as we help businesses understand impacts on climate too that we take a proactive approach to trying to figure out ways not to have everybody back on the road. [3:21:45 PM] Mopac is bumper to bumper at 3:30 in the afternoon. Clearly something is changing and I want to make sure we're all hands on deck as far as affecting traffic patterns and congestion and the air quality impacts. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Thank you and thank you -- thank you mayor pro tem for all the questions. I thought those were very helpful to understand what's happening and thank you councilmember Ellis also for your questions. I just have one I think maybe we haven't covered yet and that is I had thought at one point we were talking about a steering committee that would either potentially with a subset of the sustainability committee or the new committee. Can you tell me the status was that? >> It was on the second to the last inside. We're still in discussions with the community about how [3:22:45 PM] do we copy that group and how do we focus what the group is going to be working on. You know, we already have the joint sustainability built. The initial had been about forming a working group, but that didn't get a lot of traction. Now this workshop we had last week and we're just in ongoing discussions on who would be on a group like that, what power do they have, what is the scope of what they focus on and how do we make it useful. Because during the creation of the climb plan, we had a cheering -- climate plan, a steering committee that had a clear role and that was to give me direction on oversight what's going object on the climate plan. As we move to implementation, this is department, budgets, happening throughout the city, the city system and structure and one, you know, one oversight group, it's not exactly clear where they [3:23:46 PM] fit within all the other structure we have. >> Kitchen: What do they think about it? The sustainability committee have they recommended a particular approach? >> There's been discussion of them having a working group but that's still connected to a group. >> If I could add on -- >> Kitchen: It seems like it's been a long time since the action plan as well as since the mayor pro tem's implementation and the steering committee would be one of the first things. You guys are still trying to figure how they might fit or what's going on in terms of a steering committee not being created yet? >> I'll give you my perspective, councilmember. I believe the joint sustainability committee which is a -- it's like a commission of commission. [3:24:48 PM] It's con tooted of representatives from multiple other boards and commission. In my view that body or a committee, subcommittee they could choose to create would be the logical body to connect back to. Staff has spent a lot of time over the last six months trying to work more closely with the joint sustainability can I. Because they have -- committee. Because they are on. >> Board or commission, I think it's challenging for them to be frank because it's a big time commitment. So our team has been trying to work individually with each member to try to help them kind of hone in on the particular section of the plan that relates back to the other board and commission that they represent so that they can try to have that connectivity back to the other body. I think we're making progress there. Standing up at a separate [3:25:48 PM] steering committee on an ongoing basis is frankly a huge amount of staff work and we already staff two boards and commission, the joint sustainability and with a relatively small team, from my perspective I'm hesitant to take on another standing body that we would have to manage. From my perspective, I would prefer and jack has been encouraging the joint sustainability committee to create a subcommittee that could be under the jsc. >> Kitchen: So what's holding up them creating one? Have they asked to hold it up or -- have they asked to create one. >> They recited -- they recited a working group. >> Kitchen: Do they have support to meet? >> Working groups around required to have full staff. >> Kitchen: For them to be effective they would need y'all's support to meet. [3:26:50 PM] >> Not necessarily. We have committees of other boards that don't have staff support. They just self- organize. >> Kitchen: They've created a working group, is that what you said? >> Yeah. >> Kitchen: Have they asked for support? >> Yeah. >> Kitchen: Is that something you all have the band width to provide? >> I mean -- >> Currently no. >> Kind of yes and no. >> Kitchen: It sounds like that may be an issue for making it actually work. Okay. All right. Well, we can have further conversations about Thissen a might want to talk to mayor pro tem about it but I would like to fall up with you. >> Sure. >> Mayor Adler: I think the comments relative to the things that are on our plate to do that we need to do and need to do with urgency are really well taken because this is a crisis and we need [3:27:52 PM] to be doing our part. And there have been requests from council that it would be good to have better follow-up and more timely followups so we can track them better. And that's one of the reasons I'm excited about the dashboard that you are putting into place because I think that's going to be a real good place for people to monitor what's happening and where there are opportunities. But you also said something I think that's real important which is we also have to take measure of the things that are -- that we are doing that are going really well. And it's real encouraging and great to hear that our per capita carbon emissions have gone down by 37% recently. I'm in the environment in lots of different forms with cities and jurisdictions, some national groups around the country and around the world, and I think one of the most useful and important things that the [3:28:52 PM] city of Austin is doing is providing that example to other cities. Only five cities or four or five cities in the country that have set the 2040 goal that we have set. And I'm real confident of our ability to meet that goal. And we need to, but we're in a select group. And the work that we are doing is being used by other subnational groups around the world as the example. I think the chart that you gave us that's on page 4 of the handout is one that's worthy of pausing on for just a moment that shows pretty precipitous decline this the greenhouse gas emissions over the last several years in both electricity and in transportation. Which are our two big areas. It looks like our decrease in just the last few years in those two areas exceeds our total greenhouse gas [3:29:54 PM] emissions in industrial refrigerants and waste combined. That's pretty dramatic progress for a city to be making. I put that all in the context of we all have to be making that kind of dramatic progress and more and we need others around the world doing the same thing. And I appreciate and join in the comments earlier about the urgency and following through on the things and trying to figure how we set that up institutionally in our system. But I also commend you and the staff and the city generally, the community generally for the conservation measures that people are taking, for the reduction in a footprint that is being driven as you say by more than city operations but by everybody [3:30:54 PM] in the community. It is impressive and we're recognized for that impressive work around the world. I'm going to turn the chair over to you. Thank you. >> Alter: Thank you. Does anyone else have questions, otherwise I'll ask councilmember Fuentes' questions. Seeing none, so she wanted me to ask about the status of the hiring of the two hesome staff who will support resiliency work. Do we know in they've been hired and brought on board yet? >> So those two positions have just been reclassified and moved over to hesome so we'll begin that hiring process but we have to check with the director. >> Alter: Once that is moved over, what parts of the equity plan will be priority sized and supported [3:31:56 PM] by the sustainability stuff. I assume the resiliency is not doing the climate equity. >> It's a blend of staff that are all working on this. But we will get the dashboard off the ground. We're going to be launching the climate ambassadors program and do more detailed followups with apartments and identifying priorities for their implementation. It will just enable us to do more coordination of more support of departments. >> And that communities engagement piece we were talking about, we don't really yet know what's going to come out of that in terms of, you know, identifying new opportunities for us to work with the external sector and so I'm excited about the opportunity for us to really be able to dig into that much more deeply and to, you know, build some additional relationships with folks in the community [3:32:58 PM] including, you know, philanthropic organizations and foundations, so I think there's a lot more opportunities for us to be looking for additional resources vegetables we know all the resources can't come from the city. >> Alter: Thank you all. That's a really important part. We have our plan and part of what we're doing is setting up that ecosystem for everyone to be able to invest and have incentives to do that. I think that's really important. Her last question, what other challenges remain in prioritizing the climate action and proceeding with implementation? >> I'll provide a couple of thoughts and please chime in. I think we have more work to do in the green jobs area. You know, we're very excited about the Austin civilian conservation corps that you helped to initiate, mayor pro tem. That program is still in a fledgling stage really. There are other workforce [3:33:59 PM] development green job-related activities that could be explored and we haven't had a chance to dig into that fully. I think that's an area for us to be looking at more. I think some of the other areas, you know, that are more kind of out on the edge, you know, we talk about the fugitive emissions, some of the stuff from the semiconductor industry, there's other opportunities we don't have our arms around. We know there's areas we need to work on further. We're not sure we have all the levers we need to actually drive change in those sectors. Those would be a couple of my thoughts. >> Yeah, the other only one I would mention would be regional cooperation. We're good at collaborating with other cities that have sustainability stuff, but our most nearby suburban austinite neighbors don't have sustainability staff. [3:35:00 PM] Figuring hot out how do we connect, figure out how can we better coordinate or support them or help them find resources to be more aligned with solutions is an ongoing challenge but needs to be a priority. >> Alter: On the green jobs since you mentioned it, I think you are well aware, but for my colleagues as we go into budget, it's my understanding U.T. In -- is working on a study for opportunities for green jobs in our community and what that needs to look like and kind of some of the investments that need to happen both financially but in terms of programs and policies that need to be set April -- set up for that. I don't know if that's going to come out in time for the proposed budget, but there are a lot of opportunities in there and would encourage [3:36:02 PM] us to consider that -- those ideas as we go into budget as well. Thank you very much. And again, I just want to, you know, reiterate what the mayor said that, you know, what Austin has accomplished is impressive. What we have accomplished we have done because we set goals and we worked really hard to provide the resources that we need to do reach those goals. We now have an updated plan and I think we need to push forward with even more resolve than we had before and more resources because the challenges are even greater. None of that takes away from the success that we've had as a community, as a city in moving these things forward. It does mean that we need to lean in and really push this forward and as leaders in this area for the city you have an opportunity and a responsibility to partner with us and make sure that we know what we need to do to make sure you have the [3:37:02 PM] resources to reach the goals we've set not ourselves. Thank you. Anyone else that anyone wants to bring up before I adjourn the meeting? Okay. It is now -- >> Thank you. >> Alter: Thank you very much. It's now 3:35 and I will adjourn this meeting. Thank you.