City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 7/20/2023 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 7/20/2023 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 7/20/2023 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:00:35 AM] good morning, everybody. I'm going to call to order the regular meeting of the Austin city council. It is July 20th, 2023. It is 10:00 in the morning. We are meeting at the in the city council chambers at Austin city hall and we have a quorum of our members present. So so let's get started. We have a very full agenda today. I want to give everybody an idea of the following order for the meeting for today. We will hear first the consent agenda and non and non consent speakers, both virtual and in person. First thing this morning we will then go to the vote on the consent agenda with brief comments from council members at that time. If time allows, we will recess the regular meeting and call and by the way, time allowing attempt. But it has to be by after 1030, 1030 or after we will recess at the regular meeting of the city council and we will call to [10:01:36 AM] order the meeting. We will hear speakers, if any. We will take action and adjourn the corporation meeting. We will then take non consent items. Those are items that have been referred from council committees . We will also take any items that have been pulled from the consent agenda at that time that will be followed by those items that have been posted for public hearings and any items that are associated with the public hearings for action by the way, when we do that, we will open hear from people, close the public hearings and take any take action immediately, see if that's the will of the council. I want to clarify by that that anyone registered to speak on a public hearing item may be heard at that time or during the consent speakers. That is to allow for the convenience of the [10:02:36 AM] speaker. If it's better for somebody to speak early in the morning at 10:00 or they want to speak with directly with that public hearing item, we'll make that accommodation at noon. We will hear as close to noon as possible. We will hear the public comment. We will have live music. We will stay with whatever order we still have on the agenda from pooled items, from the consent agenda, and then at 2:00, we will go to the zoning items. I'm going to now read into the record changes and correct actions to the agenda. Item number 12 is postpone to August 31st, 2023. Item 27, it says authorize execution of three key contracts that will be changed to two contracts for design and fabrication of distribution, steel poles with [10:03:37 AM] kbs electrical distributors, inc the word and will be added anticline inc and delete and Texas electric electric cooperatives each for up to five years for total contract amounts not to exceed 15,500,000 divided among the contractors is item number two should say district three three instead of district one. What I say I said to 82, item number 82. So we have changes and corrections to the changes and corrections on item number 92 postponed indefinitely . Item number 107 withdrawn. Sean item number 122 withdrawn and replaced by addendum item number. 192. Item number 126 and add as sponsor as council member Jose Velasquez, council member [10:04:38 AM] Ryan alter council member. Natasha harper-madison on item number 131 postponed to August 31st, 2023 items 150 and 161 should read when public hearings are conducted. A request to postpone these items to August 31st, 2023 will be made item 153, when public hearings are conducted. A request to postpone this item to September 14th, 2023 will be made item 191 withdrawn. An on boards and commissions recommendations. Item number three should read July 18th, 2023 recommend ended by the resource management commission on an 8 to 0 vote with three vacancy is items number three, 56, 57 and 59 should read July 10th, 2023 read [10:05:40 AM] amended by the electric utility commission on an 8 to 0 vote with commissioners Hopkins and Trostle absent and one vacancy item number six June 7th, 2023, read as amended by the environment commission on a vote of 8 to 0 with one recusal, one abstention and one vacancy items number seven and 58 should read July 10th, 2023, recommended by the electric utility commission on a 7 to 1 vote with commissioner white voting against commissioners Hopkins and Trostle absent and one vacancy. I also want to point out to the public and members is , as some clarify vacation for upcoming meetings related to the budget because there are items on the agenda that I want to make sure that he passes. [10:06:43 AM] >> Okay, I'm told I ought to wait and I'll wait. >> I'll keep you all in suspense. It's really big. It's really big. I'm okay with that. The items members that we currently have pulled from that I'm listing as non consent items are items. 111 128 129 148 I think 190 but somebody needs to let me know for certain and 195 those are the items that I currently have pulled. I will wait till after we have speakers to ask if any other items need to be pulled. Councilmember Allison alter did you say 148 because that's the audit and finance committee that's not on consent. >> It's not on consent. And that's a committee item. >> Yes, it's one coming from the committee. >> And so you just said it was pulled. I'm sorry. >> No, I'm pulling it so we can do that as a specific item. Okay [10:07:47 AM] . So let me say that again 111 128 129 148 190 and 195 okay. With that, we will go to the consent agenda to. But before I do that and before we hear from the consent agenda speakers, I want to call up the law department to give us a briefing under the law related to items that are settlement recommendations for the record, I also want to recognize that councilmember Fuentes is joining us remotely. >> Thank you, mayor. Good morning, mayor. Mayor pro tem council. I'm here today to recommend five settlements that are up here on your agenda, and I'm going to take them out of order and reference the agenda numbers as we go. First, with respect to agenda item number 86, we recommend that you approve a payment of 1.2 million to settle the bomani Barton [10:08:47 AM] versus city of Austin lawsuit. This lawsuit arises out of the may 2020 protest involving the Austin police department, where Mr. Barton seeks payment for his injuries stemming from his attendance at the protest. In exchange for his payment, a plaintiff will release all his claims against both the city and any officers stemming from the may 20th on may 30th, 2020 incident. And he will also dismiss his lawsuit with prejudice that is currently filed in the United States district court for the western district. Knell next item, number 87, I recommend that you approve a payment of $112,000 to settle the Velasquez Roldan versus city of Austin lawsuit. This lawsuit is related to a June 2019 car accident where plaintiffs Christopher Velasquez and Mary Roldan sought payment for injuries that they sustained as part of the accident. That involves a building services vehicle in exchange for this payment, the city will obtain a full and final agreement from both plaintiffs to release the [10:09:47 AM] city and its employees and the plaintiffs will dismiss their lawsuit at item number 90, we recommend that you approve a payment of $97,500 to settle the villa versus city of Austin lawsuit. This is related to a September 2019 car accident where plaintiffs Noyola Cruz villa and her child sought payment for injuries both suffered as part of the accident that involves an APD officer in exchange for the payment, the city will obtain a full and final agreement from the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs will dismiss the lawsuit that they have asserted against the city to item number 88. I recommend that you approve a payment of an additional $1,675,000 over a special commissioner's award. That was. $6,675,000. The total payment for this eminent domain lawsuit is $8,350,000. The eminent [10:10:48 AM] domain lawsuit is city of Austin versus 6315 spice wood. It is a 2022 condemnation lawsuit where the city acquires property interests necessary to complete the upper bull creek greenbelt and of course, in exchange for this payment, the city obtains the needed title and property interests and the defendant will release any remaining claims against the city on item number 88, we recommend that you approve a payment of an additional. 307,004 $307,407 over the original commissioner's award of 51,593. The total payment for this eminent domain case is 359,000. It is entitled the city of Austin versus sfc software property, and it's a 2021 condemnation lawsuit where the city acquires the necessary property interests for the south Lamar corridor boulevard project. In exchange for this payment, the city obtains a necessary re title and the [10:11:49 AM] defendants will dismiss any remaining claims. >> Councilmember Allison alter, can you please clarify which number item that one was? >> Because I think you said it was 88, which is the spicewood springs property. Oh I apologize. >> I want to make sure we have it correct. For the record, spicewood springs was number 88 and then the next one and the last one was 91. Thank you. >> Any other questions by members of the council? Thank you very much, chief. With that , we will go to speakers and I'll ask the city clerk to please go to the speakers in the order we traditionally do. >> Okay. The first speaker is Karen Fernandez speaking on item on the merits of the postponement for 92. And then items 126 and 158. [10:12:51 AM] >> Hello council. My name is Karen Fernandez and I'm the current president of the Matthews lane neighborhood association. Ann as you know, we have concerns on 92, even though that's been pulled 126 and 158. We feel for our neighborhood in particular. We have very little infrastructure as in no sidewalks, roads, drainage, Paige yet this level of density is going to put too much pressure on our lack of infrastructure without our input , which we currently have. I would love the idea of adding ads to f2's, but not this idea of smaller lots and more density. It also works against us as a neighborhood as we have deed restrictions and we still have never gotten those addressed by the city because they say they do not get involved yet. If you're trying to just stamp, send through quickly all of this density. Where do we stand in our lawsuits that we're currently having to pay for in order to enforce those deed restrictions ? I ask that you please listen [10:13:52 AM] to council member Alison alter. She was so succinct. I just want to say ditto to what she said. This is just another policy that's not really going to help the homeowners the long time residents. It's going to be an incentive to knock down the current infrastructure and build three new homes that are in completely unaffordable. Please take time and listen to the neighborhood organizations in central south Austin on this. Please I beg you. Thank you for your time. >> Next speaker is Lindsay Holmes speaking on the merits of the postponement to 92. >> Hello, council, can you hear me? >> Yes. Please proceed. Thank you so. >> Yes, I'm speaking on item 125 as well. Just a historic sort of cornerstone of Barton springs protection and Barton springs watershed. It has been official city policy for 40 years that [10:14:53 AM] absent special circumstances or preexisting legal commitments that we do not extend to the utility to support new development in the Barton springs watersheds. So it's been a critical tool to protect Barton springs from massive sprawl developments. Please vote no or postpone this item. And also item 190, the reserve police force of 75 officers that would sort of be able to act at the discretion of the police chief supposedly for special events. But that that information Ann or that sort of restriction is not in the draft ordinance, as I understand it right now. So do not do not support that. We need to support and community enrichment, not policing and continue to indefinite forever postponement. Never of item 92. Thank you. >> Next speaker is kiba white speaking on the merits of the postponement to 92. [10:15:57 AM] >> Hello, this is kiba white. >> I work for public citizen's Texas office and I want to thank you for postponing item 992. Well, I know that the extensive public engagement that you get on many issues from austinites might sometimes feel burdensome or might slow down the process of decision making. I think it's actually a huge asset for our community and we should be encouraging more engagement. I know that many communities across Texas have much lower voter turnout and engagement in civic discussions than we have here in Austin, and I think those other places are worse off for that lack of engagement. And we should be trying to encourage more people to either show up at city hall and speak their mind or call in like I am right now to share their opinions on the items that you all are elected representatives are considering for our city. So just want to thank you for postponing that and I urge you to not bring it [10:16:59 AM] back at any time. Thank you very much. Our next speaker is Dana Hager. >> Dana. Next speaker is pat Valdez speaking on the postponement of 92. >> Hi, this is pat Valdez and I can be heard. Okay. Right >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. My name is pat Valdez and I am in support of what the previous caller said about postponing. Thank you for postponing item 92. And when you bring it back, please do not [10:18:01 AM] bring it back in a method that limits public participation. We here in Austin do make significant efforts to participate in our civic process. We should be proud of that and we should celebrate it and we should allow it. As you know, democracy is under attack all over the United States. The higher the level of government, the more attacks there are. And so our city is a bastion of democracy. So I hope we can keep our democratic processes intact. Thank you. >> Next up is Jay Popham speaking on 9294, 111 and 190. >> Hi there. Thanks so much, city council members, for this opportunity to speak. I wanted to focus my comments today on [10:19:02 AM] item 111. Having to do with the diversion of arpa arpa funds to a temporary congregate shelter, housing being built and the convention center marshaling yards. I want to say that this money would be much better spent in investing in long term solutions to homelessness here in Austin, alleviating those root causes of poverty that create homelessness and all of its attendant ill effects on our city. I think that the spending of this one time funding on a temporary shelter is intentionally wasteful and shortsighted and needs to be avoided at all costs. Thanks so much for the opportunity to speak. >> Ian Stevenson speaking on 9294 111 127 and 190. >> Hello. I'm going to focus on [10:20:03 AM] 111 and then also 190 in terms of 111, I just wanted to also voice my stance against spending the, the money from the federal contract on the marshaling yard project. I think if we're going to look for a solution for homelessness, it definitely needs to be something that's long term. That's of course taking to consideration the experience of those who are most impacted and the people who are directly on the ground working with them every day. This is far too soon without any kind of, actual a solid plan of what we need. We need to be able to answer the long list of questions that comes along with housing 300 people in one warehouse. And it's not at all. And the ethical concerns that [10:21:04 AM] also come along with that. And then I also just want to take my stance against item 190 as well . Thank you. Gary dangberg speaking on 90 to 124 and 126 no offset. >> Okay. Now. Okay. So basically give us a chance to see if it's Gary, you're up. Yeah, I think with the surgery, I believe my next speaker is Julia woods. Speaking on 92 and 126. >> Thank you. First of all, I'd like to thank you for postponing item number 92 for the reasons discussed by previous speakers. Again, thank you. Moving on to item number 126, the resolution [10:22:05 AM] to modify site development regulations and minimum lot size the maximum number of dwellings regarding single family zoning. This this resolution Ann is going to increase vacation in the city of Austin because because neighborhoods with a owners association with an hoa that requires a residence owners to pay dues can afford to contest any changes being made in the neighborhood, whereas the older neighborhoods, the neighborhoods are occupied by more people of color, communities of color will have no defense whatsoever so that there are lots will be chopped into smaller pieces. There are property values will soar. There taxes will then soar and you'll find many of the older residents priced out of these neighborhoods. This is a [10:23:05 AM] gentrification provision. It will increase the number of luxury condos and it will absolutely not increase affordable housing. It's a boondoggle that I think developers keep pushing as a proposal to increase affordable housing when that is exactly not what it's going to do. Developers should be able to make money without these kinds of provisions. If they can't, they should go to Dallas or Houston because there's a lot of money being made in Austin and they can do it just fine with the laws the way they are. Thank you for your time. Please vote against this provision next speaker is Nicole Mann speaking on 92 and 126. >> Hello. >> Am I being heard? Hello >> Yes. Please proceed. Hello? >> Can you hear me? Hi. First of [10:24:13 AM] all, thank you for postponing article number 92. Hopefully as some of the previous speakers have said, hopefully it's an indefinite postponement because we are active. I mean, we should be celebrating active participation in our city. Ordinance changes in decision making as a community and then speaking regarding one, our article 126 as a homeowner who has worked really hard to become part of my community and to take really good care of my neighbors and my street and my home, we already are fighting against that over parking on the streets because I live on a street with a lot of renters and a lot of multiple, a lot of student [10:25:14 AM] renters and houses are being rented to multiples who are parking on the street. Sorry, I'm, like, super flustered. I am just so against it. 126 even the wording on this draft, I mean, it's, it says things like if it is, if legally feasible, I mean not in itself. The wording suggests it is not legal. All that you are removing rights instead of adding to your constituents rights or respecting the ones that are already in place. It says, I mean things that to preserve more tree canopy with exception . I mean we are you're talking about not blank slates, you're talking about taking our history, the history of this city and erasing it and then building it from the ground up [10:26:14 AM] at the cost of more people being pushed out. >> Thank you, sir. Your time has expired over the city. >> Okay. Well, thank you for listening. >> Thank you. >> Richard Smith speaking on items 2092 124 and 126. >> Good morning. My name is Richard Smith. I'm an attorney, a member of the board of adjustment and have been in Austin homeowner for 25 years. I oppose agenda item 126. Item 126 purports to help the middle class is a vague and undefined term used by politicians to sway acceptance of something. Item 126 fails to appreciate basic housing market economics merely decreasing lot size and increasing density does not equate to a lower cost of housing. I have seen row houses of the type depicted depicted on the council message board in [10:27:14 AM] various cities. They can easily cost one and a half to $2 million or more depending upon their location. If you look carefully, you will see that the depicted row houses show the catastrophic environmental impact caused by increasing impervious cover and replacing green spaces, yards and trees with concrete. Added 126 will decimate single family neighborhoods and hurt the so-called middle class. The most . Thank you. >> Mario Cantu speaking on 92 and 126. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Please proceed. >> Is Mario Cantu from south Austin would like to recognize item 126 and previous speakers. I concur with what they are speaking about. One of the focuses on here is the middle [10:28:15 AM] class. I believe that we need to also look at the lower class as well. If it would be nice if the city of Austin could do something like Round Rock was doing a while back at 30% mfi for the teachers, for our citizens here, the senior citizens, as well. As you might know that it's very difficult for us to walk over to areas where there is commercial because the commercial is so expensive. They can't rent any of the places out. So we don't have any accessibility to any things commercially that we need within our neighborhoods. And also the 911 system is suffering . We're having delay times for minutes. I called a couple times within a week and had a four minute delay. Luckily, luckily a house was not burning or anybody was in cardiac arrest. Had that been, we probably would have had some really major problems with those situations. So 9111 needs to be fixed first, our infrastructure needs to be fixed first. And this is going to cause a lot of displacement. [10:29:15 AM] Thank you. >> Next speaker is Gary Steinberg speaking on item 90 to 124 and 126. Gary, please unmute. Okay. We'll try him again. Marion lotus speaking on items 90 to 124 and 126. >> Hello, this is Marion mlotek . I'm very much against having all my time coordinated into two minutes for all three items. I want to speak on. That's not appropriate to me. I do not want to see any lines put in the Barton creek greenbelt regarding [10:30:17 AM] 125 and regarding 126. It is totally, totally against it and a lot of it has to do with rising property taxes and the rest of it has to do with we already have problems with water in Austin and Barton creek making more density will create more problems with water. So especially with global warming as it's happening now and more drought in the southwest. So I would like you all to vote no on 126. No on 125. No on 124. And never to be seen again. 92 thank you. More problems next speaker is Chris Harris speaking on 9294 111 and 190. >> Yeah. Hi. Want to first echo, [10:31:18 AM] people's opposition to 92. In reality the rules around public participation and council meetings should be going the other direction should be opening things up for more involvement, more engagement, allowing more time to speak and maybe implementing a phone system that doesn't require people to wait on hold for hours . With respect to 111, I think the city's experience with particularly cold weather shelters should be looked at here you have many people who are unhoused who, despite extreme temperatures, choose not to go into them because if when they're poorly run and this is not because they would prefer to be outside in the cold, but because the actual experience of those congregate shelters can be that bad if they're poorly run to approve this, it risk creating a boondoggle that sits empty or mostly empty. And again, with no plan for the other side, no actual, [10:32:18 AM] addressing of the homelessness crisis that we have in our city . So I urge you to postpone or or vote no. It's equally with item 71, I think we're talking about sweeps here. I want to register my opposition this is not,. It is inappropriate to add these big contracts right before the budget cycle. All this money should be incorporated into the budget deliberations during next month. And then finally, I want to just say that provided that some of the amendments that have been discussed are applied to item 90 like to drop my opposition to item 190. I think there's a benefit here to ensuring that unfortunately antiquated city code requiring sworn officers be involved in some of these special events if that code exists, then there's a benefit to this item provided that there are limits and controls and training and oversight over the people that are performing this duty. Thank you all. Appreciate the opportunity to speak. [10:33:22 AM] >> Next speaker is Lauren ortal speaking on 9294 111 and 190. Hi >> Good morning. I actually put in the form just speaking on 111, so thank you for the time. I do want to urge council to vote no on item 111, which would move over $9 million away from the homelessness response system and put people in a one year shelter facility. Definitely. What we really need here is a longer term plan. This current plan with this item would concentrate and segregate more unhoused folks. A majority of whom will be black or brown people in Austin, poorest zip code. Other concerns here are we've got gender safety, access to hygiene resources and transportation to the site, as well as housing resources for the people who would just be put in this warehouse. It definitely feels inhumane and I hope [10:34:23 AM] council will join us in turning down this proposal to instead develop a long term housing plan that is respectful to all. Austinites thank you for your time. >> Next speaker is Garrett. Nick on 93. >> Hello. Thank you for listening to everyone today. I would like to agree with all the previous speakers about item 92 and diminish Singh some of the options and time available to citizens to voice their opinion on issues of great importance and also to, you know, there are just some issues that are going to be more controversial. So if you continue to bring extreme controversial issues to the table, then you're going to have a lot of people show up to speak about them and so maybe before you bring those items up, they should be discussed and vetted so that they don't rile up the [10:35:23 AM] base and have all of these people feel like they need to come in and speak up. So, you know, that's one way to avoid that from taking up so much time that y'all are trying to cut out. Aside from that, as far as the zoning changes is I am not opposed to density. I don't think that people are offended by the idea of an Adu, but we need to maintain our environmental standards. Austin is in a severe drought. We have large oak trees falling over every day just from the severe conditions that they're having to endure. Our creeks are dry, our springs are historically low flow rates. We should not be doing anything to diminish the amount of water available to soak into the ground. If impervious cover limits are raised, then I'm 100% against it. This sort of density can be accomplished without without further degrading our water quality and our spring flow. So that's the reason why people live in Austin. That's the reason why people have lived in central Texas for thousands of [10:36:24 AM] years is because of availability of water. That's something we need to protect. It's at the heart and soul of this city. It's, you know, it's the reason why Barton springs flows. Please please, please protect that that as you look at ways to increase density, let's it's not we don't need to trade those things away in order to have more people live here. This can be done responsive fully. I think you all know that and you can do it . >> Just don't make these blanket time changes without taking this into effect. >> Thank you, Gary Steinberg. >> Let's see if third time's a charm. Yes >> This is Gary Steinberg. So I wanted to speak on just several items. I basically am just going to agree with what the gentleman just said about availability to speak and not cutting the time [10:37:25 AM] limit for individual speakers from 3 minutes to 1 minute. That goes without saying. All of this has been discussed before by previous speakers. My primary interest is in speaking against item. 126 and also the issues of no parking accommodation associated with item 126 and existing neighborhood. I'm just going to drill down into my specific example. I live in the west creek neighborhood in southwest Austin, which is developed around 1979 1980. The first houses built there, used using a blanket zoning chain to allow higher density and half the lot size all over the greater Austin area, exempting of course the wealthier people around lake Austin and the rural residential lots who get to keep their more than one acre lot size and are happy campers. [10:38:26 AM] These 70 subdivisions were developed by sub standard developers and have ongoing problems in the density that they have case in point, my neighborhood has recurring power outages every time we get windy or have a bad storm because of the overhead power lines and the current demand placed on the grid, they also get the streets cut up piecemeal several times a year because of substandard water lines that were put there, if you like, double or triple the density of the people in there on those same old water lines, they'll just have the streets torn up all the time. Thirdly, there already is multifamily housing and on one end of my neighborhood and the streets accommodate that because they're wider and there's more room for off street parking. But the streets that don't accommodate the area set aside for that kind of zoning. >> Thank you, speaker, your time has expired. [10:39:28 AM] >> Okay. So Mandy blatt speaking on item. 111 >> Thank you. I'm speaking on 111. When I first heard about congregate shelters, it wasn't immediately obvious to me what the problems were, but it turns out a lot was learned about them during the pandemic, including through some formal research studies. >> And we now know that these shelters facilitate the spread of disease as well as physical and sexual assault. Unlike non-congregate shelters which increase safety, stability, health program engagement and ability to plan for the future. And that's not even considering the benefits of resources other than shelters such as permanent supportive housing, which our city so desperately needs. Some of your constituents may assume that any shelter is a positive step, but anyone who takes even a brief look into it will see that this would be a step backwards for Austin to invest in a type of shelter that's no longer considered safe or humane. And as public servants, I believe it's your responsibility to look into this on behalf of your constituents [10:40:28 AM] and to vote no on any approach that may look good. On the surface, but actually poses both physical and emotional risks to the people. It's meant to serve. Thank you. Kirsten brooks, speaking on 111. >> I just want to thank you so much for the time to speak today , calling to express my disapproval for the marshaling yard. I believe that it raises several concerns that cannot be overlooked. I feel like there's been an a redirection of $3 million away from permanent supportive housing that undermines the long term goal of housing 3000 individuals within three years. I feel like it's crucial to prioritize permanent solutions and stead of a temporary shelter facility [10:41:29 AM] because we really need to address the root cause of homelessness. I feel like also there's been a lack of consultation with key stakeholders in this situation, including the people who do take so much time to assist with homelessness. The people who are homeless in the city. I feel like there's also a lack of care . And a safety risk that is posed for the 300 people that's going to be housed in this temporary situation. Ann in conclusion, I do feel like we need to prioritize long term sustainable solutions for homelessness to really get down to the root of why it's happening. And instead of. Dedicating $9.1 million towards temporary housing, we look at maybe what Denver is doing to eradicate homelessness in their [10:42:29 AM] city. They're doing a lot of great things to not only provide provide people with housing, but to transit them into the workforce and ultimately give them a better quality of life. Thank you so much for this time. I hope we can work together to address the root cause of homelessness and provide longer term solutions for what's happening in Austin. Thank you. Anthony Delfino on. 111. >> Good morning council. I'm a speaking as a concerned citizen to express my opposition to the proposed marshaling yard for individuals experiencing homelessness in Austin. There is an urgent need to address our lack of shelter for unhoused [10:43:31 AM] people. I firmly believe that the current proposal has significant flaws. Firstly evidence suggests that congregate shelters are ineffective and they fail to provide trauma informed care. The arrangement lacks privacy. It leads to increased risk stress levels and a lack of safety and it's disheartening to potentially further traumatize individuals in this environment and hinder their progress. Additionally the proposed location of the yard is deeply concerning displacing people to an area far outside the city without reliable transport options is untenable. It will only serve to isolate individuals further from essential services, including health care, employment opportunities and education resources. It will create insurmountable barriers to access to these essential services and it will just help to perpetuate the cycle of [10:44:31 AM] homelessness rather than offering a genuine opportunity for individuals to reintegrate into society and secure permanent supportive housing, which is what's needed. Furthermore, the lack of clarity regarding on site services such as case management is deeply troubling. Without these robust support services, individuals will struggle to address the underlying causes of their homelessness and won't be able to make meaningful progress toward self-sufficiency. So it's imperative that any shelter prioritizes comprehensive assistance and a seamless transition into permanent supportive housing. So there are serious doubts about the feasibility and effectiveness of this marshaling yard. Lastly it's disheartening to learn that the marshaling yard does not adhere to federal guidelines as it wasn't presented during any community meetings. Trans parent and inclusive decision making is paramount to ensuring that the needs of these people are being adequately addressed. >> Speaker your time has expired . >> Proceed with this plan. It's imperative that the ahac be involved. Thank you. [10:45:33 AM] >> Sandra Mueller on. 122 yes. >> Hi, good morning. Council members this is Sandra Mueller from D one on item now 192 is neutral. I wanted to thank council member Ryan alter for nominating a representative to the animal advisory commission who does not seem to be associated with Austin pets alive. I hope this new nominee and recent new members can work together to accomplish great things regarding all animals in Austin, it's been really nice to hear conversations about the aquarium and zilker park at recent meetings. If you all don't know your animal advisory commission has been referred to as a hotbed of controversy. See, the clerks had to sit in on meetings for a while to ensure that the commission was correctly following procedures and recently, assistant city manager Hayden Howard has instructed them to attend a retreat to increase collaboration. Additionally, a recent auditor's report on [10:46:35 AM] boards said the animal advisory commission had three inconclusive recommendations and one entirely out of scope. Recommend action. So I'd just like to remind you all that the animal advisory commission is comprised of 13 members and seven constitutes quorum. So currently it has six affiliates or supporters of Apa. Sofia had added back a seventh Apa supporter for it would have created a supermajority and would be entirely unfair to the city. And most of all, the staff volunteers and animals that Austin animal center. So thank you for giving careful consideration to your nominee. We need a balanced commission and not one that provides an unfair advantage to one animal welfare. Non profit. In Austin. The city doesn't need another member skewing the votes and rubber stamping anything Apa wants. So I appreciate your time . Have a great afternoon. And in the future I hope Austin humane society will have a seat at the table and thanks for postponing that 92 Isaac Cohen speaking on [10:47:40 AM] 124 126 and 158 at. Hi >> Hello, mayor and council. My name is Isaac Cohen. My wife and I are the owners of a very charming 91 year old, 740 square foot home on a large lot in Bouldin creek district, nine. Our home is a type that everyone loves to look at and tell us how cute they think it is. It's also the type that generally gets torn down and replaced with something larger in an effort to buck the trend we have chosen to preserve this home as it is right sized for us and in the area we want to be in. We did so knowing that this choice was bad from a financial standpoint and only possible because of our privilege. We did so knowing that to do so would actively deny us access to the full entitlements that come with our lot. It should not take privilege and sacrifice to live in a modest home in what is traditionally a working class neighborhood of modest homes, especially when there is ample [10:48:41 AM] land available and capacity for more homes, especially when the primary blocker to the existing of modest homes is manmade laws and not some physical limitations. Ann. I am here to provide my full throated support behind any efforts to incentivize a greater number of smaller homes to exist in our limited, walkable land in central Austin. These changes would enable us to preserve our existing structures without being priced out of the home and neighborhood that we love. I would love a return of Bouldin creek to a walkable community of modest homes accessible to the middle class, even if it requires densification as that actually is the neighborhood character. Thank you for your willingness to take on this topic. Thank you for initiating changes that will allow small home lovers to preserve their structures. Thank you for advocating for a financially viable path for people aging in place if they want to, like myself and my neighbors. Thank you for working to increase the supply of homes in our prime. [10:49:42 AM] Walkable location in order to manage both the environment and inflation and inflation challenges and putting downward pressure on housing prices as we face a homelessness crisis. Thank you. Derek. >> Insane speaking on 124 126 and 158. >> Hello. I just wanted to thank council for the opportunity to speak and. Just one second, please. Sorry I wanted to thank council member pool and the council at large for their leadership on moving us forward and housing and affordability. As we all know, we're in the middle of an affordability crisis in our city, and the most important thing we can do is build more housing. For me, item 126 is a very exciting, large [10:50:43 AM] step forward in taking the steps toward more affordable Austin. We must do what we can to preserve the culture of our city that makes it such a special place and most important thing we can do is to allow the amazing people who have made the city what it is, have confidence in their ability to afford to live here for the long term. On top of affordability, creating denser, transit oriented, walkable housing development is our response ability in our fight against climate change. Austin's land development code is nearly 40 years old, written for a city with a population of 392,000 people. We are well overdue for dramatic changes in what kind of housing is allowed in the city, and I'm proud of council for taking this step forward. And I urge you to vote in support of items 126 124 and 158 thank you. Susan whittle on items 124 and 126. >> Good morning. My name is [10:51:46 AM] Susan whittle. I live in congress. Congressman councilman alter district. I have concerns about 124 and 126, many of which have been spoken about. I have concerns about water availability, the infrastructure, how walkability impacts the neighborhood on street parking. Our infrastructure, which includes sidewalks, road maintenance, water and sewer lines, trash pickup, Denise city. I have very large concerns about the existing tree canopy being largely at risk. It's currently being decimated by stripping of the lots that are done as a result of constructing mcmansions all over this particular neighborhood and we have to think about increasing the density in neighborhoods and how it's going to result in [10:52:47 AM] affordable housing, whatever that might be. Is it going to result in affordable housing that's a very large question. Also, property taxes are going to continue to increase and will drive the elderly educator and the working class away from the city in favor of more affluent people who can come in to occupy these homes regardless of their size, because their values are going to go up. So I do appreciate the opportunity to have submitted my comments. Thank you. >> Jack Rainey on 124 and 126. >> Yeah. >> Can you hear me, please? >> Yes, please proceed. >> One I'd like to make note that the primary sponsor. Of 126, our district representative [10:53:48 AM] , Leslie pool, no longer even lives in district seven. >> She lives in a different district in a development that is high density. And that was her choice. I think 124 goes against personal property rights as well. Does. 126. 126 will change the character of existing neighborhoods. People who are in and people who are in adjacent and surrounding property will have no choice and have no recourse to the character of their neighborhood. 124 with respect. To 124 people properties that are in a proposed development would it would if you change the notification parameters, people who are still impacted by a specific project would have no voice of an ability to participate in the petition process. I'm against number 124 [10:54:50 AM] and number 126. Thank you. Mayor . >> Yes, this speaker and if the city clerk could tell me, the speakers name, please has mentioned me, so I'd like to respond. Sure thank you. >> Jack Rainey. >> Mr. Rainey, I hear for you say public that I do not live in district seven. That is a complete untruth. I still live in my modest little home on shoal creek boulevard, just north of the intersect of 45th street. I welcome you to come by, if you'd like, and say hello . I live in district. Seven >> David Fouts speaking on 124 and 126. I >> Hello, council Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you for the opportunity to speak. >> My name is David Fouts and I [10:55:51 AM] have the honor of representing district two on the zoning and planning commission. And I'm here to express my support for items 126 and 120 for these items will help more families stay in the city. We should not have to choose between staying in the city and having a family . I live on a small lot that is only allowable because I live in a pod where there are exceptions. I am not wealthy by any measure, but this property gives me a great quality of life where I can raise my family. I'm I am the middle class person who could buy a home back in 2020 because there was a smaller lot I couldn't afford. The larger lot single family homes in my neighborhood because of this small lot. I am a homeowner. So I ask, why is this illegal in most of the city? Houston has reduced its minimum lot sizes and is the most affordable major city in the country, allowing more infill help. Housing helps the environment as well by [10:56:52 AM] reducing the development pressure on the natural and agricultural land around our city. Mitigating urban sprawl is one of the best things we can do to preserve land and reduce emissions is what we don't allow here in Austin will get built out in green fields and suburbs and exurbs where there is minimal environmental regulations. I understand that some oppose. Item 126 because new homes will not be subsidized, but it is the continuing restrictions on new homes that will only exacerbate the lack of affordability. Displacement happens when you don't have enough housing, not when you add more. Thank you so much. Khalil James speaking on 125. >> Thank you. Khalid James north Austin community organizer with Garza reading the district. >> Seven residents statement in support of opposition to item [10:57:55 AM] 125. Dear mayor and council member. I strongly oppose item 125, which would change city code to no longer require the city council to vote for or against water and wasteland extensions east of the Barton springs and lake Austin watershed, as well as other areas such as northern bastrop county, but instead leave that decision to city staff. The city plays an important role in guiding development, as these extensions require developers to follow city and governmental and development regulations. Voters would no longer have any say in terrible developments that violate these standards. This would overturn a decades old city policy, which does not extend utility to develop in the Barton springs watershed, in particular for protecting Barton springs from sprawling development. This direct public oversight has been invaluable and denying the worst projects. Please do what's right for our [10:58:56 AM] city and surrounding areas and reject item 125 respectfully, thank you for the time. >> Sidney Nowitzki on. 126. Hi, I'm Cindy Orlowski. >> I live in district nine and I'm here to speak in support of item number 126. I feel that like the biggest problem we have as a city right now is that there are so many people who want to live here and want to make the city better, but there's just not enough options or homes available for them to live in. >> I feel that, like adding these multifamily units just increases supply. >> And also just like maximizes the use out of these limited number of lots that we have. And I feel like it's an insane restriction that there can only be one family per house. And I feel that increase like adding more freedom to build more types [10:59:56 AM] of homes and just increasing supply all around is a good thing. Thank you for, for allowing me to speak. >> Riley Patterson on 126. >> Good morning mayor and council. >> My name is Riley Patterson. I'm a resident of district ten and I live in tarrytown. I'm speaking in support of item 126, decreasing minimum lot size to 2500ft !S. As a homeowner on a 2700 square foot lot that was split from a larger lot prior to the imposition of the current minimum lot size. I support the creation of more housing options in Austin that look like mine. My wife and I were thrilled to find this rare property size exactly right for us. So we don't have to pay and maintain a larger lot. We'd love to see more density and diversity in our neighborhood enabled by other small lots like our own [11:00:57 AM] and a variety of development options on those lots. The combination of high land costs and a high minimum lot size is putting homeownership out of reach for too many austinites, even on a small lot like ours. And appraisal determine the value of the land was higher than the value of the structure amidst a housing crisis like we have here in Austin, we can't afford to keep the current requirement of over twice as much land as my lot as a minimum price of entry for a unit of housing in much of Austin's land . Thank you. Council member pool for bringing this much needed reform forward and to all of council for considering Robert Nash speaking on 126. >> Hello, this is Robert Nash and as the former president of the northwest Austin civic association, I no longer speak for anyone but myself. But I can share with you the pulse of many of my neighbors, and that is we acknowledge the need to increase housing. And even in our area, [11:01:59 AM] we've even worked with developers to improve housing in dense housing that had an affordable aspect. However we do not support this blanket upzoning reducing lot sizes to 2500 to 3 units per we in our area is very, very tree heritage, live oaks and almost and to do the kind of upzoning you're talking about would be just devastating the tree canopy. And there are so many other issues that other folks have have mentioned. We really support what the mayor ran on in his campaign, which is that the one size fits all solution is not the way to go. And that moving forward on land development, there should be district tailored solutions that acknowledge the differences in different parts of Austin. Thank you for your time, Michael [11:02:59 AM] Agresta on 124, 126 and 158. >> Hi, can you hear me? >> Yes, please proceed. >> Hi, my name is Mike Agresta. It's my first time ever calling into a council meeting and I'm calling to support 126 and the other noted proposals to increase density. I have lived in Austin since 2006. I've seen so many friends and neighbors displaced by the rising housing costs. This is all coming from city council and the regulations that you place on on zoning and the ability of property owners to build and provide housing to the many people who want and [11:04:00 AM] need it. We're turning into a town that that, you know, the people who work here and support the city work for the city. Et cetera. Are coming in from great distances through these highly zoned and regulated neighborhoods near the center where they work and can afford to live. It's right in front of you. Chance to give the people more housing. You know that the majority supports it. And you're just hearing from all these people who are, you know, have a lot of free time, can spend an hour on the phone as I just have to speak. A lot of us who support density don't have that kind of time. And I know there are a lot of people out there who share my position. So thanks for those of you who are supporting greater density in Austin, Catherine Chamblee on 126. >> Hi. Yes, I'm going to apologize in advance. Sometimes [11:05:00 AM] my reception at my office where I work is in reference to the last gentleman I work in order to support and pay for the home that I purchased. >> I'm speaking in opposition to item 126. >> I live in district seven in crestview. I want to agree with the person who spoke earlier in regards to differing Singh. There shouldn't just be a blanket, a blanket statement for all of Austin allowing for densification and in doing so by increasing impervious coverage and reducing side setbacks. I can tell you from my personal experience on my 1952 built home small, low to the ground home, that when the two homes also small homes on each side of me were bulldozed, what happened was all the water surface water runoff from those homes was shifted onto my lot. That's [11:06:02 AM] because those both buildings were built. When they tore down the small homes, they built out towards all the way to the lot or the five foot setbacks on each side. And they took up the entire impervious coverage allowance and shifted all the water towards me and what happened was I ended up having to put in $7,200 worth of drain down one side of my home, and I had to essentially threaten state state sanctions for surface water redirection on the other developer because I realized what was happening at that point. And I was able to myself force him essentially to put in more drainage on his side . Not everyone in Austin has that ability, has that legal knowledge to be able to do that . And what you're doing by blanket allowing for increased impervious coverage and reduce side setbacks, you are you are [11:07:03 AM] or you are affecting other people's homes in the land that they purchased. The other part of this is that in crestview, we already have a thank you speaker your time has expired. Every time the wind blows. >> Anthony Lusardi speaking on 124, 126 and 158. >> Yes. >> Good morning, mayor. >> Council and council member Velasquez. >> My name is Anthony. >> I'm a resident of district three. I'm speaking today in support of items one, two, four, one, two, six and 158. >> These are bills that will, without a doubt increase home accessibility and affordability in Austin. I'm also speaking because I grew up, grew up pretty broke. >> Before I was 18, I moved constantly and I lived in no less than a dozen different rentals. >> Housing was artificially constrained for us and therefore expensive. >> I actually don't like talking about this part of my life, so I'm going to leave that part at that. Today. I'm fortunate enough to own my own home in [11:08:05 AM] Austin and most importantly, I don't have to move anymore. >> And so I'm asking you to please allow other people access to this opportunity, the opportunity to a stable and productive life in Austin where they live. >> And work. Don't let them be kept out by antiquated and classist laws that restrict what a homeowner can do with their property. >> We support items 1 to 4, 1 to 6 and 158. >> Make home ownership more accessible to the people of Austin. >> It's middle classes. It's young families, it's service workers and day laborers. But most importantly, we spare their children the kind of experience that I had growing up. >> And thank you all for sponsoring and co-sponsor these respective bills. >> Thank you for working tirelessly to produce bills to help the people of Austin and thank you for serving as a model for cities and towns across our great country. Thank you. >> Barbara Epstein. On 124 and 126. By Barbara. Striker nalluri on [11:09:17 AM] 124, 126 and 158. >> Good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and members of the council. My name is Shryock and I live in district nine. >> Like many people, I came to Austin to go to school here and fell in love with the city, wanted to stay here. When I was graduating school, I talked to my uncle because he built his own home here. You know, back in the back in the 80s and 90s. And he wanted to help me do the same so that I wouldn't have to keep paying rent. But when we looked at where we could do that, all the empty lots that were available were, were really big where I couldn't afford half $1 million to buy that lot. So we thought, what if a couple of friends and I went in together and decided to build 2 or 3 houses next to each other? But but with the current regulations in place, that's not allowed in [11:10:18 AM] most of the city. So I would like to thank the sponsors of these resolutions for bringing these forward, because I really believe that they will help, people who are trying to, stay in the city long term, be able to afford home ownership as well as have the option of having a, you know, smaller house in the city instead of having to drive 20 miles to work every day from the suburbs. So thank you so much for bringing these resolutions forward and thanks for your time. >> Chris Harshbarger you're on 155 and 164. >> My wife and I own a small business in Austin as well as some office space that's located in the downtown public improvement district. >> I feel certain my objections this morning will likely fall on deaf ears, but this is the only option I have that's reasonable [11:11:19 AM] , available. Specifically, our business will derive little or no benefit from the money to be spent. Since we're not a retail establishment yet and since the pandemic and the loss of our ability to use the office, we've been trying to sell it without any luck. The proposed assessment is only going to make that process harder. Generally, I find it objectionable that there is a lack of transparency in how the money will be spent. The materials provided by the city talk in terms of nonspecific euphemisms like active urbanism, public space experience and built environment . But other examples Ralls appear intended to address problems created by the city's own policies like safety and homelessness. It's unclear to me why 43% of the $271 million to be spent over the ten year life of the program. Sam will be [11:12:20 AM] spent on these two items, especially when, in the case of homelessness, city already spends tens of millions of dollars annually or in the case of security, the city's repeatedly rejected and or defunded this item. And in the case of homelessness particularly, none of the additional money from what I've been told, is going to be spent or earmarked to address the root causes of homeless Ness. Finally there's a lack of accountability for the money spent. Many of the activities being proposed can't currently be measured. Line items such as administration marketing and communication, economic development and research provide no quantifiable, tangible benefit to the taxpayers in the downtown. >> Your time has expired despite consuming 32% of the program budget. David king speaking on 156. [11:13:23 AM] >> Thank you. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Please proceed. Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you for your service and thank you for considering my comments today. Please support item 156 to save Singh code amendment. It will help reduce the risk of injuries and deaths to people and animals from impalement and entrapment without decreasing security for families and businesses and without imposing new permitting requirements. Please require historic properties to comply with the safe fencing requirements. Please support the safe fencing code amendment unanimously recommended by the planning commission. Your support for the amendment will help prevent and reduce injuries and deaths due to dangerous fencing. I dedicate my comments and send my condolences and love to Julie, Damian and her family, whose son Katy died from asphyxiation on a spiked fence. Please unanimously pass the safe fencing ordinance. Please vote no on items 92 124 125 126 128 [11:14:25 AM] 158 and 159. Thank you. Julie. >> Damian on item 156. >> Hello, my name is Julie. Damian for Thursday, March 22nd, 2018. >> I never considered the significance importance or even the need for laws about fencing . I assumed a fence was a feature in a community that just existed and had been designed by experts who considered the safety of the people, animals and communities. The product was sold to. Sadly I found out this is far from the case after our middle son cade died on a neighbor's low exposed picket fence, Kay died less than five minutes after having a pbj snack at the kitchen table after school with his brothers. In less than five minutes, our lives were changed forever. Cade's head and neck became trapped between the pickets at the top of the fence. His feet were unable to touch the bottom rung of the fence. His head was trapped. His legs came out from [11:15:27 AM] underneath him and he hanged fences that have a simultaneous hand and foot hold are easily climbable studies show the majority of children of climbing age can climb to the top of a four foot fence within 30s some in less than five seconds. That is the time it takes to fill a 1.5l bottle. The study also states that the majority of children needed assistance to get down off the fence once they climb to the top. What happens when a child is now presented with an open or exposed picket fence? In the study's images of the children show them climbing with their head and torsos over the top bar of the fence. The study also stated that children do not perceive the hazard of the pickets like adults would as a danger. The same is true for an animal, especially young animals expose picket fences have been deemed dangerous in many communities and banned some. Making this change. Years before Kate's death, local communities of lakeway bee cave rollingwood and sun city have made these changes impalement. Is a brutal, gruesome way to [11:16:28 AM] die. Animals typically struggle to get free and will rip their insides in the process. They do not die quickly. Everyone who hears about cade says the same thing. I never thought about that. And guess what? Neither did we. That's why I'm here today. Ask Singh you to make a difference and help prevent future injuries and deaths with very minor but impactful changes . >> Since companies have said, speaker, your time has expired. >> Stiles and Telford, they forbid mayor. >> Mayor, if I may. Yes >> Council member pool. >> I just wanted to take a moment of personal privilege to extend my gratitude to Julie Damian thank you, miss Damian, for calling in today. She lost her beautiful son cade, in a tragic accident on an unsafe fence. And Julie has been bringing awareness to communities in central Texas and beyond. About the need for safer fence design to prevent future tragedies, as well as unnecessary injuries to pets and [11:17:29 AM] wildlife. And I wanted to thank you, Julie, for your efforts to save other families from this tragedy. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you. Council member. >> Next speaker is Barbara Epstein speaking on 124 126. >> Hear me. Can you hear me? Yes >> Yes, ma'am. Can you hear me okay? Thank you. And the sounds okay. I'm speaking personally, but I am the president of the Hancock neighborhood association. I thought I got two minutes. I only got one, so I've shortened my presentations and hopefully they'll both fit. Replying to a post this week, 12,800 people said they want you to fix infrastructure problems small to large and lower property taxes to make Austin affordable. All you keep saying that simply building more creates affordability, but you never give us the numbers to prove it. Now you're proposing to limit zoning change notices. Why don't you want the public to know what you're doing. To them? [11:18:33 AM] If you tell a lie? Big enough and keep repeating it? People will eventually come to believe it. That's saying that has been floating around with coined by Joseph goebbels is our is our democratic process now only obfuscation has Mark Twain reportedly quipped history doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes as so that was for 124 item 126 I've always thought that the townhouses at 1812 west 35th street were an attractive alternative to ugly apartment buildings. But council member pool small lot proposal will only benefit developer. The grove was supposed to give us affordable townhomes, but the least expensive one I've found costs $919,900. So why is it still illegal to turn a single story detached garage into an Adu pools plan? Ignores our aging infrastructure that can't support greater density and will displace older homeowners who will then no longer be able to leave a cherished home to a younger generation. You need to focus on diversity and what made Austin pleasant to live in in the first place. Instead of obliterating it. To quote Jane Jacobs, who inspired new [11:19:34 AM] urbanism. We expect too much of new buildings and too little of ourselves. Thank you very much for allowing me to speak. Oh, and item number 186. I did not get notice of it as the neighborhood association president, I've gone back and forth with her staff, although I've been on the register since January. They sent it to the past president and he did not notify me. And it next speaker is Zenobia Joseph speaking on items. 11 1660, 92 and 114. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Council Zenobia Joseph, mayor , before you start my time, I do have a technical mistake that I made in the registration. If I can ask the clerk if it's item 114, it was registered twice, but it should have been 114 and 115. If you look at the screen, [11:20:35 AM] you'll see that I in the summary have 115. >> We'll make sure the record shows that your time will start now. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you. As it relates specifically to item 92, I would ask that you look at house bill 2840, the legislative intent and recognize that when we speak before the legislature, we must speak on one bill at a time. And I would ask you to recognize that as a precedent for allowing us to speak on one item at a time before council as it relates specifically to item 85, I didn't register for it, but I did send you comments as relates to the 2023 action plan, and I've asked her to actually require you to do another public hearing as it relates to item 60, I am neutral. That's $17.8 million for Avalon and Austin. I would ask you to recognize that as council member Ryan alter mentioned during the work session that African Americans are six times more likely to be homeless in Austin than giving [11:21:35 AM] all the money to el Buen samaritano is disingenuous because African Americans are less likely to go there for any type of support. So I would ask you to give them some of the funding as it relates to the Avalon and Austin program. It is needed to curtail evictions, but I would ask you to recognize that perhaps half of the funding could go there and then you could solicit a black church or perhaps those who actually target that population to curtail the homeless issue. As it relates specifically to 11, I am adamantly opposed to John langmore's appointment. It violates the Austin transit partnership articles of incorporation, article 313 rather, as you are aware, he was at the capitol trying to kill house bill 3899 this past legislative session for item 16. I would just ask for the people's gallery that you recognize there's a conflict as relates to voting and there is. It's an authoritarian policy for the arts community and unlikely [11:22:37 AM] to have very many black artists as it relates specifically to 414. That's the aisle with capital metro, $5 million. And I would just ask you to prioritize the high speed roadways like macklemore and fm 969, where pedestre tons continue to be killed and thank you, speaker. >> Your time has expired. >> Item 4969 meeting. Thank you. If you mayor. >> That concludes the remote speakers. Miss Joseph will remain on the line as she has registered for the items. But I'm going to go ahead and move to in-person speakers. >> Thank you. And for the for folks that are paying attention , what we're going to do is, wait on the reset. Recessing this meeting. We'll wait, and then we'll go to the hfc after we have finished all the speakers so that we make sure we're we pay attention to the folks that have signed up for these items. So thank you. If you'll go to the in-person speakers, I'd appreciate it. [11:23:37 AM] >> Okay. The first speaker is Gus Pena speaking on items three and 12 on deck. Is Jeffrey Bowen speaking on five nine 1592 124 126 and 144 if your name is called, please make your way to the podium. There's Jeff coming for as he's coming forward. >> What the clerk will do is she will call typically at least three names at a time to tell you that you're you're coming up . We would ask that when you hear your name, please come forward and take one of these front row seats so that you'll be able to immediately stand up and speak and that way we'll we'll allow the other people that want to speak. We won't have them waiting quite as long. So thank you, sir. It's all yours. Primarily based upon the [11:24:38 AM] time frame. >> I'm just going to kind of condense down to 126. I would really like to thank council member Alison alter for her statements last night at the work session. When I watched the video and I found that to be very, very important, that and those warnings need to be heeded because of the amount of time that you took to, to bring out the consequences and what we've gone through, the, the, the unintended consequences probably also need to be looking at the intended consequences is what is this going to do to our property values as somebody that is now at the age of being able to be retired. So what but still having to work? What is this going to do to my property taxes, my 6000 square foot lot? I could split it, put in all of the different things that and tear down my existing house, which I'm considered probably middle income, but that will not [11:25:39 AM] alleviate what is going to happen with the highest or best use taxes that will be expended on on my property. Not only mine, but other middle income class people, single family homeowners across the city. You talk about affordability. I'm still trying to understand and I've asked this question before affordable to who our affordability in this town continues to go up and up and up yet in the 32 years I've lived here, I really don't understand stand how how it we keep running everything up and yet we complain about affordability so the impacts on our infrastructure. You put six houses on what used to be one lot, now two, where's that all going to go? We're going to end up with more sewer issues. And we just had a report of 6 billion gallons of water leaking , which supposedly is acceptable. We don't have [11:26:40 AM] anything that talks about the amount of leakage from our existing sewage systems, let alone the impacts to our power. Shaw thank you again. Thank you , council member, for your statements. >> Next speaker is William bunch speaking on six 9294 125 126 137 144 and 158 on deck is Bobby lavinsky and Angela Garza. Good morning, mayor. >> Council members bill bunch with save our springs alliance. If I understood the mayor correctly, I'd like to confine my comments right now to a few of the items and speak when the others are called up. Is that what I said is if items are pulled and not on the consent agenda, then you'll have it. >> People will have an. Okay. >> Is our 125 and 126 pulled no [11:27:42 AM] . >> So I have to address all those issues together in two minutes as best you can. >> Yeah. I would just respectfully submit to the lawyers on council, including our mayor, that that fundamentally violates the open meetings act. There's no way you can address these issues effective plea. >> Do you do you want to address that during your time or or do you want to address the issues? >> Mr. Branch I'm sorry. I didn't hear what you said because of the because the. What I was suggesting is that you address the issues. >> You want to address and we'll at some point we're going to try to revisit all of the rules to make sure we do our best and allowing as many people as want to have the time to testify by. But for right now, I would appreciate you going ahead and testifying on the items that you would like to testify on. >> Okay. I did email y'all on a letter which addresses 125 and 126 primarily. I hope you got [11:28:43 AM] it. If you didn't, I can get it to you. I ask you all to at minimum pull those items so I can actually speak to them right now. I would like to address first item six, which is a service extension request into the Barton springs watershed out on 290, about 36 acres. We're neutral on that. We haven't completely studied it, but we did notice that the staff made sure that most of that property is subject to the sos ordinance and it's not a huge amount of acreage and it doesn't look like it's going to cost the city a bunch of taxpayer money. Subsidizing sprawl into the watershed. So this is exactly the way this process should happen. That would be ruined by 125. So six is a good good to go . So on 92, thank you for the postponement and responding to the community. We support that postponement. I hope it never comes back and I hope that like other speakers, you'll go the [11:29:45 AM] other way and provide more effective public participation in your process. We oppose 94 cutting off input on the city budget. I believe the zoning matters that include the sos amendment on Brodie oaks will come up later. Is that correct? >> If yes, the zoning is later, zoning is later and those will be brought up at that time. You can testify now if you want or you can testify at that time. >> Okay, I will. I will hold off on those items as so. So I will reserve my right to speak on 125 and 126 if they're pulled, if they're not, we are vehemently opposed to both of those, as stated in my letter. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Yes. Council member. [11:30:45 AM] >> I like to pull items 125 and 126. Thank you, mayor. >> Council member could I ask you to pull the service extension request out at the same time? Because those are all interrelated items and they're really important to have that entire discussion to you. >> State your name, sorry, Bobby Levinsky with save our springs alliance. >> You're right, it's items seven, eight and nine. It would be really great to have 125 with seven, eight and nine. But I can speak right now, sir, we need you to do is speak as opposed to going asking for that kind of thing. All right. I'll just speak twice then, because on item seven, eight and nine, they juxtapose really well, two items. 125 because it highlights the environmental inequities in our system. Yes, we have drinking water protection zone. It's an important part of the environmental review process to [11:31:45 AM] ensure that when we're doing service extension requests, that we're protecting our critical water bodies that serve our drinking water. But in that we've also created a system that prioritized is west Austin over east Austin and that is the true problem in the process. It is not hitting the delete button. We need to have the environmental review on these service extension requests. But if you look at item eight, how it's cited, it goes through to critical water quality Zones. It serves a site that is a wetland and speaks about serving single family homes, even though it's posted for mixed use. It has all sorts of problems. And then the item and typically it would just go sail through the process. But it's on a council agenda. It's something that we should be looking at. It has something that affects us, our city finances, every investment that we make. And we're just told to [11:32:49 AM] wait till the site plan process where developers use vested rights. Grandfather Singh they use variances to get around our environmental regulations. The public review process ensures that somebody is looking at these issues. Do not hit the delete button at add to it. Environmental equity is taking action. We need this environmental review. We need to make sure that watershed protection has the ability to do their job, to look at these sites right now that that that item just goes to the Austin water utility. They're great. They have great staff members. But typically their mission is to get more customers. It's not to protect the environment. It please do not do that. >> Next speaker is Angela Garza. >> I just want to clarify with Mr. Lewinsky which the items were seven, eight, nine. >> I think that nine is the [11:33:49 AM] aviation department. >> Six, seven, eight. Councilmember Kelly yeah. >> Mayor, if I could please pull six, seven and eight. Okay. Thank you. >> Next speaker is Angela Garza speaking on seven 3245 7195 102 108 111 129 one 3137 and 126 on deck is Leah Ziegler. And if you can please state whether you're speaking on the items that were just pulled, if you're speaking on them now or if you will be speaking at them during the item when the item is pulled? I'm going to go ahead and handle everything at once. >> First of all, we want to thank Vanessa Fuentes in our community for teaching us the importance of having listening sessions of our community. It's important to listen to our community a big reason we're in this situation is we're not finding consensus with our community and listening to them. We spend a lot of time trying to get our community ready to speak and reducing them from three [11:34:51 AM] minutes to 2 minutes to 1 minute. We don't find out the day of is a lot of work. When I'm taking a week to two weeks to take a vacation day to come in here. So I understand it from them. The other thing that I want to say is I understand what you're trying to achieve Leslie I get it. But if you look up and you Google a row home in the Mueller, it's $700,000. That's not affordability. You just can Google that and find that today , unless you have specific language Paige in writing that's going to guarantee that families will have entry points. It's not going to happen. And that's why the community has lost faith in all this. We spent a lot of time and I get a lot of feedback. I consider a lot of you friends. I sit down with you to try to get feedback, encouragement, mentorship and how to handle the community. I've sat down with the likes of Stacy suits, who has given me information. Bridgette Shea all kinds of people have sat down to be mentored by because we have a responsibility to listen to the people of Austin, Texas. We have [11:35:52 AM] a responsibility. I'm a real estate professional who does not act right now because of an injury. You will get a lot of rich, real estate people, but until you give that confidence to the community that we're going to get affordable Katy, you have to give it to them. I would love to see the naacp sit down with my mayor, who encouraged us as well and get some kind of consensus together. When I see those two men sit down together, I'm going to know, hey, we've got something going on that actually can work for the community. We do a ton of work behind the scenes and we don't show you that we don't want to be on the phones or be on photographs just to show you that we're doing that work, we really care about our community. I want to thank the media. I contacted a bunch of you last yesterday. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. Thank you . >> Lee Zeigler speaking. On 2192 124 126 158 on deck is Victor Echevarria and Wallace Lundgren [11:36:52 AM] on today they along with many I would like to ask you to continue to refine and enhance the notification process. >> That's 124 resist lot subdivision for density without necessary checks and balances. 126 and do not delegate to staff projects requiring sewerage connections without comprehensive case evaluation. Ann in the etj that is item 125 regarding item 124 notification Ann I see improvement in the most recent condensed notice dated January July 17th. Despite the auditor's report, please make a better effort to send notices to the appropriate district neighborhood associations and contact teams and consider provide Singh a standard and secure online platform for further distribution from neighborhood association and contact team boards. Regarding item 126 do [11:37:53 AM] not permit lot subdivision burns two 2500ft !S with more allowable units and an elimination of site plan requirements. S changes in land use should not create additional conflict with the role of current neighborhood plans. The Flum and particularly existing deeds, hoa restrictions and legal private agreements respect the need for adequate infrastructure, retained biodiversity, avoid consequential health issues and establish an infrastructure maintenance plan. It is clearly inappropriate to set a goal for such density. Council appears to have lost sight of the need for any limitation upon development and density. R or expanding impervious cover. Finally regarding item 125 five shouldn't increase reporting and supervision be existing in a for existing t-c-e-q mobs be required rather than supporting less controlled cers approved [11:38:55 AM] easily and eliminating comprehensive. Review. Thank you very much. Paige. Next speaker is Victor Echevarria speaking on 25 and 26. >> On deck is Wallace Lundgren and Jesus Gonzalez. Please make your way to the podium. If your name has been called and read your name into the record. Sasha rose. Victor Echevarria. Wallace Lundgren has Luz Gonzalez. >> I at least see Mr. Lundgren on if your name has been called. [11:39:56 AM] >> Please make your way to the podium and state your name. >> Thank you. My name is Jesus Gonzalez. Hold on. Let me get my . And really, my name really isn't that important. What's really important is my experience. I experienced homelessness in two different states and seven plus different cities. Denver, Colorado. Dallas, Texas. Austin, Texas. San Antonio, corpus McAllen and Brownsville and Harlingen. I've experienced any type of shelter you can probably think of. So I want to quickly share about what we don't have here in Austin. Here in Austin, we don't have safe places for individuals living in vehicles to park and sleep. We don't have any overflow shelters for individuals who have just got kicked out of their boyfriend or girlfriend's house to spend the night. We don't have any shelters for individuals who are living with severe physical disabilities to get living assistance. As for the Marshall center, I find it really inconsiderate to ask feedback of [11:40:57 AM] a shelter that we really don't know much about. I feel like we need to get more information on floorplan up up services available before we can prop really give feedback. So I am neutral on that. That's I got. Thank you. For Wallace Lundgren Victor Echevarria. Good morning. >> I left y'all. >> I left y'all all a package that has a few items in it. And in the interest of time, if you could read that and if you do read it and you still vote to pass item 71 with that, looking at two of the bidders, there's nothing much left I can do. Thank you, rose. >> Sasha on deck. Janice Bookout [11:41:58 AM] and Michael Kent. >> Hi, my name is Sasha rose. I'm with Austin mutual aid as you may know, we have actually stepped into becoming service providers for our unhoused community. I'm here to speak on item 71. Item 111. I've done the math. It's 9.2 million on the marshaling shelter and 20 million on camp cleanups. I want to really speak candidly about these camp cleanups. I actually saw one happening on the way in here. These are incredibly harmful to our unhoused community. It's also incredibly harmful to us as service providers, as we spend weeks, months trying to get people their documentations, trying to help them get access to social services and then they're just thrown away. So that's incredibly harmful for not only our our neighbors, but as well as us. I also want to speak to that's 9.2 million on the marshaling yard. We threw 6.2 million at the Salvation Army and 20 million on the camp [11:42:59 AM] cleanups. That's $35 million in one year on very temporary solutions. And I'm going to call them marshaling yard. What I feel it is it's a displacement project. It's just meant to keep people out of the eyes. It's the keep Austin pretty initiative of mayor Watson. I heard you recently speak that you are committed to solving homelessness. Yes, but I'm concerned that what you're focus seems to be is more on cleaning it up. The trashiness around us. I actually think it's trash here for us to be investing in these band-aid solutions on this gaping wound of homelessness. We are not addressing the root problem. Our community, our unhoused community members are not problems for you to solve, y'all. They're especially not without consulting them. They are your constituents, neighbors . And for some of us, these are our coworkers, friends, and family members creating solutions for marginalized communities without consulting those most impacted is ineffective and irresponsible. This is an irresponsible usage of funds, a study came out that said $100 increase in median rent was associated with a 9% increase in the estimated homelessness rate. We're not investing in homelessness prevention. We're not investing [11:43:59 AM] in actual solutions here. We're just investing in stopgaps. It's irresponsible usage of funds. And the 9.2 million, by the way , would be the most expensive project in the United States. We'll be the laughing stock of the United States for a one year project that really doesn't solve anything but keep Austin pretty. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Janis Bookout out on deck is Michael Kent and Jennifer Myers . >> Good morning. Good afternoon or good morning. I'm a resident of district four, director of Earth day Austin and co-founder of community resilience trust, which is a multi racial, collaborative, active in community crisis and disaster response. Mayor Watson, members of council city manager Garza I want to first express my tremendous respect for you as public servants. I have worked with you to support the unhoused community at our most at risk residents during the pandemic through the vaccine distribution Ann through the formula crisis [11:44:59 AM] during storm uri and every winter response. Since you know me as someone who truly stands behind the ideas of a government that works for all, and you know that despite my own family, I do all this despite my own family barely clearing 50 mfi as a musician and contractor. So thank you for postponing item 92. This gives us a chance to respond to this change to our ability to speak at council and respond, especially to the change that would allow you to move to a consent item, something to a consent item. Even if multiple speakers are signed up to speak regarding adding item 94, please do not change the date of the budget meetings. The time certain you've already provided is more accessible for folks experiencing low income and other constraints. And please everyone, this is for everyone. Check on your unhoused neighbors. Please bring them water and cooling towels. At the very least, it's very hot out there. Yes, yes, yes. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker is R Ken R [11:45:59 AM] Michael Kent. Jennifer Myers, brant Thomas and Ben Thompson registered to speak on the merits of the postponement for item 92. Roy Whaley register to speak on 92 124 125 126 and 150 . David Weinberg on the merits of the postponement. For 92 on deck is Bethany Carson, 92 and 94. Please state your name when you're ready to speak and if your name has been called. >> Oh, hi. My name is Ben Thompson. I was just on the list of people I don't know if I'm [11:46:59 AM] out of turn or not. >> I was on the I signed up actually to speak on 92 and also 184. And 185, which are land development code cases. I've got a sick child at home. He vomited right before I left. I'd appreciate the opportunity to speak this morning on 184 and 185 if it's okay with the mayor . Just briefly, we since this on 92, I'm absolutely in support of prior speakers who have supported the postponement and rethinking of that whole process. I'm going to move on to 184 and 185, which are zoning and neighborhood development or neighborhood plan amendment cases in my neighborhood in district two, I am the president of the armadillo park neighborhood association. I'm not here speaking on behalf of the neighborhood association Asian, but I am in contact with many of my neighbors on this question and at some point I'd like to come up to this podium on a zoning case and tell you that my neighbors fully support [11:48:02 AM] and are happy about the proposed change. I want to be able to tell you that the applicant and the staff and our neighbors have had a meaningful conversation and discussion and that we are all comfortable with the new plan, a plan that we have made for our community. I want to be able to tell you that I understand Eid that zoning is not the moment when we finalize specific questions about site development plans, but I want to be able to tell you that I'm confident that as a case moves through those processes, as that myself and my neighbors will continue to have a voice in that process. Yes, currently zoning is the last moment when neighbors actually have an opportunity to speak before this body about any given case. I want to be able to tell you that compromises have been made. I want to be able to tell you that those compromises weren't just by the applicant, but perhaps by [11:49:02 AM] by my neighbors. People who maybe came in with the development with a knee jerk reaction to development. The reality is that none of that has happened in this case. And I ask you to take that into consideration. Thank you. Thank you. >> Michael Kent. Jennifer Myers. Brant Thompson. David Weinberg speaking on 992. Bethany Carson is on deck and missile Ramos. I heard you called my name. >> Hi, I'm Bethany Carson. Should I go ahead and please. Okay hi. My name is Bethany Carson. I'm speaking on behalf of grassroots leadership today, as well as myself and speaking in opposition to items 92 that. Thank you for postponing but still want to address and as well as 94 and 111. So so again, [11:50:03 AM] thank you for dismissing item 92. I do hope it doesn't come back, but I just want to emphasize that we need to be moving in the complete opposite direction. And as that item that was brought up so that all residents can participate in our democracy, we work closely with members of our organization who are directly impacted by immigration enforcement and criminal legal systems whose voices need to be at the table, both at these budget hearings and item 94 and other items that will be considered at future council meetings. They face numerous barriers and access to information and participation Ann, including lack of access to technology, transportation, Ann having hourly work with lack of advanced notice for their schedules. And the list goes on . So we make every effort to bridge the gap in our members awareness and understanding of the items that impact them that come up before this council. But we need you to stop really shutting down their ability to participate in this process. All of the meetings on the budget schedule are scheduled to happen at 10:00 in the morning when [11:51:03 AM] most residents work. Not only are members, but all residents of Austin usually have jobs in the middle of the day. So this is something that's not going to be accessible for them. August 3rd also had been on the calendar for months, and now we're changing it to the August 1st. In general, the new restrictions on council meetings are really inaccessible and unnecessarily prevent people who work during the day or have other morning responsibilities for making their voices heard. I've been at council meetings where previously it was allowed to register for an item all the way up until it all the speakers were exhausted and so why can't that continue to happen? What is the reason for shutting down that kind of participation? Ann because I also want to say that every time that somebody shows up, it is a travesty for them, not to get to speak because they lose faith in this process. So please meet with us, do everything possible to make this process accessible for all residents. Thank you. [11:52:04 AM] >> Thank you. >> Roy Whaley speaking on 92 124 125 126 and 150. Please state which items you will be speaking on. >> Howdy y'all. My name is Roy Whaley. I'm the conservation chair for the Austin regional group of the Sierra club. And I want to thank you for pulling and postponing item number 92. Now, if you would, let's do a dracula on this thing and drive a wooden stake through its heart. Never ever say we don't want to hear from the citizens and let's go back to having the three minute engagement. I don't know how many of you swim at Barton springs, but for those of you that do, you, you're welcome, because of the community got up on its hind legs and kept council here all night long long and changed a vote vote that I will say preserved. Barton springs I don't think that's an [11:53:05 AM] overstatement. So never ever say , hey, we don't want to hear from the citizens. The other thing is on on item 26, I'm surprised that you didn't reach out to us council member pool and talk with the community and the environmental groups. I don't know whether we support or oppose this because I don't know what all is involved. I know that there are concerns about imperva cover heritage, trees, water capture and reuse, stormwater runoff. If it would be a lot easier to know what to say and do. If we had had the conversation that we've had in the past, we have been supporters of yours and so it is more than just slightly insulting ING that you did not reach out to us and have this conversation beforehand so that [11:54:05 AM] we would know where we stand today and where to go forward. That's disappointing and I hope it doesn't happen again. And after that, I'm going to say thank you very much. Never stop listening to the citizens. And I will be seeing you later today. Adios. >> Thank you, sir. Mayor. Yes, councilmember pool Roy, before you get too far toward the back of the chamber, thanks for being here today. >> As you know, we're starting to have the conversation with this action here today. And thank you for all of your your work in the past. I value that work and the alignment we have had on many issues and we will be having additional these are hard conversations. I think we all acknowledge that and this is not over. This is beginning. Thank you so much. And I appreciate you that these are not easy conversations and hard conversations still have to be [11:55:06 AM] had. >> And so hopefully. Yes, sir. Thank you, mayor. Definitely is an anti sprawl. We hope that that will lead to this. Thank you. Concerned about all David Weinberg thank you. >> On deck is missile Ramos following is David Johnson. Please state your name and the items you are speaking on. >> Alrighty. Those folks in the audience today, missile Ramos Dave Johnson, Daniella silva. >> Please state your name. >> Good morning, everyone. My name is David Johnson with grassroots leadership and I am a constituent of district eight in a healthy and thriving city. The [11:56:06 AM] voices of its people should be heard loud and clear. It is through active community involvement that we can address pressing issues like the ones that face us today and continue to face us through the year. Find innovative solutions and ensure that the decisions made reflect the needs and desires of the entire community. However, the path to meaningful community involvement seems to be facing obstacles. Unfortunately recent developments make it increasingly challenging for ordinary citizens. Ordinary citizens and residents to engage in shaping the future of our community. Some city councils are making it difficult for residents to participate by manipulating schedules and limiting the opportunities for public testimony. This approach should be one that this council seeks to support is antithetical to fostering a healthy and sustainable city. When the very processes designed to encourage public participation become exclusive and unwelcoming, they erode the trust between residents and their representatives by restricting public testimony, we silence the voices of countless individuals with valuable insights and firsthand experience and [11:57:07 AM] perspectives. Our city's future cannot be solely dictated by a select few with vested interests . It's true progress comes from considering the needs of everyone from those living in affluent neighborhoods to the underprivileged communities and those who are unhoused that often bear the brunt of city development decisions. When the priorities of business interests consistently overshadow those of the residents, like land developer interests commonly do . In Austin, we need only look at gentrification and east of 35 and west of 35. And the big difference to remember it, we must remember that a city is not just a collection of buildings. It's not something you want to lead to. An unbalanced and unsustainable city scape. It's not just businesses. It is a living, breathing entity. The city is its thriving because of the collective humanity of its residents. We have seen the negative consequences of prioritizing Singh business interests over individuals time and time again. Such an approach only exacerbates income inequality, displaces communities and undermines the [11:58:07 AM] social fabric of our city. Let us recommit ourselves to fostering a community driven city. We must hold you accountable and you must hold yourself accountable and demand and provide for us excess, accessible ways to make sure that you do what we elected you to do and not what those who have donated heavily to your campaigns have paid you to do. Thank you. >> Daniela silva. Eli Cortez. Sherman perskin. Please state your name. >> Good morning, city council. My name is Eli Cortez. I am an organizer at Texas harm reduction alliance, which is located in district district three, and I'm a resident of district one. So I want to start off by saying that we absolutely do need shelter. And actually I'm going to start with the items I'm talking about. I'm here for items 127 and against [11:59:09 AM] 92 to 94 Shaw 111 one what used to be 190 and now 71. So I want to start by saying we absolutely do need shelter, but we need shelter that has pathways to housing supportive services and clear transport nation plans laid out for the people that are staying there without it. We're continuing to push the unhoused community to the margins to hide the issue to further our political clout, but without doing anything to meaningfully support people exiting homelessness. To vote today on a $9 million investment in a warehouse. Without these items planned out and clearly lined like detailed out with only funds to last a year is irresponsible, especially when it's partially funded from from the capital fund that was intended for permanent supportive housing. We've been building in Austin with our community towards meeting people with care services and compassion and away from punishing and persecuting poverty and substance use, cutting the homeless strategy division's budget by 30, while [12:00:11 PM] substantially increasing the police budget by 30,000,000in the baseline budget and voting for $20 million today for encampment sweeps and building a reserve police force for city hall. Those are not in line with the vision and the resources we've been fighting to build in Austin and reflective of the lack of authentic community input processes with our unhoused community, we urge you to recommit to ending homelessness and investing in interventions and services that are rooted in care and compassion. And you can do that today by supporting item 127 for two new permanent supportive housing projects. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Charmaine perskin. Paulette Soltani. Hi city council and mayor, good to be here and thank you for having me. >> My name is Charmaine. I'm a leader of the harm reduction Texas harm reduction alliance. And thank you for listening to me. My I used to be homeless, but I'm success story of the permanent supportive housing program. Echo has stated that [12:01:14 PM] passage is the most effective housing program. I'm here to tell you they're they're correct . They're right in my time and shelter experience, I have experience, theft, violence and even bedbugs. When I had to stay at the arch as a place where I had to stay to get my housing, I had to live with that to get my housing. And I don't think anybody should have to go through that. I mean, and at this day and age, I wanted to point out that I have become a product of member of society. I pay my taxes. I you know, I have a I pay my portion of the rent bills, whatever the there'd be a lot better to have a bunch of productive members of society. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Paulette Soltani eight track [12:02:14 PM] Monica Guzman are on deck. Hi >> Thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> My name is Paulette Soltani and I'm the director of organizing at the Texas harm reduction alliance. First, I want to state on the record our opposition for items 92, 94 and 70 and our support for item 127. I'll be speaking against item 111. Yes we need access to shelter in Austin. Ann no, we don't need shelter. That takes away resources from permanent housing. No we don't need proposals that are formed without any input from people experiencing homelessness in our community. No, we don't need rushed, reckless, shortsighted solutions that have not been planned out. Well we've seen how that results in Austin over and over again with shelters has given the city history with rolling out shelters and the chaos we've all witnessed. Most recently with the Sally downtown . It's the council's responsibility to be asking the critical questions and ensuring [12:03:14 PM] that the city has standards of care and operation that providers must follow before opening up a shelter. Much let alone one that is this size. And with this much money, how how will showers be set up? How will the needs of different gender identities be considered? And how many caseworkers will staff the shelter? Where will there be harm reduction services offered to prevent overdoses? How will oversight look different than it did in the Salvation Army before its closing? Have any of you even stepped foot in the in the marshaling yard to even understand how it will be set up? How will air conditioning run through this massive building, this massive warehouse ? I'm asking, are these details clearer to you? I'm really asking you, does anyone know? Does anyone know? Are these details clear to you? Because they're not clear to people that are going to be residents of the shelter. And if they're not clear to you and they're not clear to the people that haven't had a voice in this process whatsoever either, then I really urge you to stop rushing this [12:04:16 PM] proposal forward. That is an enormous amount of money that takes away resources from permanent housing and actually give it some thought and some time so that unhoused austinites can have a voice in the process. People can have a voice in the process to make this a successful project. Thank you. Please consider stopping this, delaying this. This does not need to be rushed through. >> Next speaker is eight track Monica Guzman is on deck. Chris Chen shop. >> Good morning, members of the council and the mayor. Thank you for allowing me to speak this morning. My name is a-trak. I'm a member of Texas harm reduction leadership team. I am also a member of street forum and I have been unhoused on this beautiful streets of downtown Austin for over seven months. The Marshall yard project is the beginning of a good idea, but unfortunate lately. That's all that it is. The beginning of a good idea. There are no assurances whatsoever that will [12:05:18 PM] there will be services provided. There is no exit strategy. Your fearless leader, the interim city manager, is on record saying, hey, I'm going to be watching this on TV when it's done. Good luck. If that's the attitude going in. This is destined to fail and it will be a waste of $9 million. And the city of Austin will be the laughingstock of the nation, not only are the eyes of Texas upon you, but the eyes of the nation as well. Let's pump the brakes and plan this right. This can work. If we actually have a plan put in place. If there is a roadway to permanent supportive housing at the end of this marshaling yard project, I will be the first to sign up. But there has to be a plan put in place. Thank you for your time today. Thank you. Next speaker is Monica Guzman. >> On deck? Is Christian Shope [12:06:19 PM] and Michael curry. Please state your name and the items you are speaking on. >> Too many items. Long list. And I think you'll be able to figure it out based on what I say. I apologize. Good morning, mayor and council. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director. Garza lugo Austin. Vamos, Austin, you have created an unreasonably long agenda, making it ever more challenging for us to speak on. Most or all of the issues we want to address. In addition, you have been and continue to limit our time to speak. But I digress. Thank you for postponing item 92 indefinitely, allowing time for a robust, community centered language accessible discussion to ensure a truly inclusive public process. Garza is opposed to land development codes, amendments tracking excuse me, lacking assurances of truly, deeply affordable housing and failing to protect vulnerable residents from potential or actual displacement, we're [12:07:19 PM] opposed to 3 to 4 unit developments being exempt from the site plan requirements, reducing zoning change notification Zones and those leading to subdivision of lots. Despite what you may think, more houses multiple multifamily on smaller units does not equal affordability. And in case you forgot, building ads doesn't lead to affordability or stability either. It is obvious you have no qualms in silencing the voices of the community, especially the most vulnerable when moving from the public process of council approval to administrat decisions. Increasing entitlements and no public process. We're also opposed to what appears to be granting the office of the city manager the authority to initiate code amendments when per city charter only you, the city council and planning and commissions have said authority to do so in front of us. The public. It may be piecemeal, but your decisions are code next 3.0 [12:08:20 PM] in violation of judge Soffer's court ruling. We oppose items 94 and 146 since, as we last heard , there is no longer an afternoon time certain for public input on the proposed budget limiting or preventing access to frontline workers and vulnerable residents who don't have the privilege to adjust work schedules to come to city hall or sit in a queue for an undetermined amount of time waiting for their name to be called. Thank you. Thank you. >> Chris Chen. Shaw on deck is Michael curry and mark dukan. Before you start, that's the second time I've heard something about not having an afternoon time to speak on the budget. >> As I announced yesterday in response to a question we purposefully create two days for our public hearing and public comment so that there could be a morning time and there could be an afternoon time. Said that clearly yesterday. Shea and I want to make sure what's on the [12:09:21 PM] agenda today solidifies that that there will be a public hearing on the proposed property tax rate for August 16th at 20 on 2023 at 10:00 in the morning. And an opportunity for public comment on the budget at that point in time. Item 146, if it passes, it will set a public hearing on the proposed budget for August 1st, 2023, at 3 P.M. At the city council chambers. So that was purposefully done so that people that might not be able to be in the morning could be there in the afternoon. I don't know what's caused at least some folks to have confusion on that, but I want to want to make sure that that's clarified. Yes. Councilmember alter. >> Mayor, I just wanted to ask you to clarify the first date, because I think you said a August date and I think you meant a July 26th date. You said August 16th. Thank you. >> Public hearing on August 16th. >> There will also be a public hearing on the 16th. But you're . Thank you for doing that. [12:10:22 PM] You're exactly right. The first time we will have a public hearing will be at 10:00. Not public public comment period like what we're doing here on the budget will be the July, July 26 meeting. And that will be at 10:00. We will also have one on August 1st. That'll be at 3:00 and then we'll have a public hearing on the proposed property tax rate on August 16th at 10:00. And an opportunity for public comment. So you're correct and I appreciate your clarifying that. >> Thank you for your clarification. I got my information from a budget officer. Well, appreciate accurate and up to date information being provided, not as much as I do, obviously. >> Thank you. Please appreciate your patience. Yeah no problem. >> How do council. I'm Christian chappie with. I live in district ten. I'm speaking in favor of items 126 and 158 championed by my council member Leslie pool, [12:11:24 PM] amongst other great council members. I don't want Austin to become San Francisco. I don't want Austin to become a city for the rich while leaving everybody else out to dry. I love Dayton and I love the nice big houses in our neighborhoods, yet we have chronically underbuilt starter homes for our lower and middle classes. There are not enough townhomes and cottage homes and condos for those who are just starting out, and these are often beautiful buildings. This past week I've made a point to go around Austin to envision what our future neighborhoods would be like. Close tight knit communities of all racial backgrounds and income classes. Neighborhoods like Mueller are beautiful. If this is what the opposition is scared of, council, you should be proud to pass items 126 and 158 allow starter homes for all support young people support young families, allow starter homes for all. Thank you. [12:12:31 PM] >> Michael curry. Next on deck is mark duchenne and Francis Acuna. >> Thank you. >> My name is Michael curry. >> Appreciate the opportunity to talk today. >> I want to focus my remarks on item 126. >> I oppose Luz item 126 for the reasons stated in my email, but I want to focus today on on a proposed compromise and I have a question if for the purpose of a resolution, the resolution that item 126 is to provide ad homeowners with the opportunity for small lot development, then a better approach than blanket rezoning. >> And then there is a better approach than blanket rezoning that covers all single family neighborhoods. It is possible to create small lot options, respond in a responsible way. For example, a new zoning [12:13:33 PM] district could be created allowing 2500 square foot lots in a property owner could then apply for that zoning in that that zoning category, highlighting their specific purpose, their specific proposal for that location and using the existing process. And that way all interested parties are involved in the decision. So there is a possibility to have small lots and involve the entire community without blanket rezoning. Families want to know when their homes are the subject of a public hearing and they want to know when the government is proposing to change the regulation on their property and all of the property around them . So I came here with a question. When it comes time to pass an ordinance to amend the code, are you going to direct the city whether you believe it's required by law or not to send individual written notice to property owners of the planning commission hearing as a [12:14:33 PM] matter of fundamental fairness and democratic due process? I think the folks here on every side of the issue would like to know if you're going to send that individual notice. I think the folks listening at home would like to know if you're going to send that individual notice when it comes time for the code amendment and appreciate hearing your answer. Thank you, mark duchenne speaking on 90 to 124, 125 and 126. >> Francis Acuna is on deck on 90 to 124 125 126 131 and 144 following is Barbara Macarthur. Speaking on 90 to 124 125 126 and 158 if your name has been called, please make your way to the podium. [12:15:35 PM] Jeff Dickerson. Good afternoon. >> Council. I'd like to speak on 125 and 126 since they were pulled later for and on 125, I'd like to give my time to bill bunch. >> Do you want to do that one? Bring it up later? Yeah, we'll talk. We'll do that at a later point. Okay. Can you speak now? >> Yeah. So what I'm going to speak about now, I'm going to speak about 125 and 126 later. >> Right now I'm going to just talk briefly about 124 and 158. Can I do that or not? >> No, no, no. >> Well, I was going to just go ahead and we'll we'll sort it out when we get to 125 and 126. Can you please state your name? >> Barbara Macarthur. Sure. >> Thank you. >> Just please go ahead. >> Okay. >> On 124, I just want to say I would hope that you're not that [12:16:36 PM] that instead of minimizing transparency, you should be making sure that not only do people get notice of change is that, but that large, visible signs are placed on their properties. >> None of the nine acres in my tiny part of my neighborhood that are currently under the rezoning process have any signs at all. So no one knows their radical changes to six zoning from small residences. There's no signs. So please increase rather than decrease on 158. My technical concern is that once you go beyond two units built Singh falls under the ibc, not the ibc. And I don't see anything in your proposal that will keep the city from mixing those things up. The ibc is the international building code, which is very prescriptive and follows strict rules for the safety. When you have more people living in a building and [12:17:36 PM] sprinkler systems, things like that, this muddles it up. The has a lot more flexibility Katy and a lot less safety requirements. So I'd like to say that I hope you look at that and I'll be back later. Thanks Francis Acuna, Jeff Dickerson on Joe Howard. >> Please state your name. Hi my name is Francis Acuna. >> First, I wanted to ask if the FCC item numbers I can say them now or later. On hfc and it's more convenient for you right now. >> Please go ahead. It'll be part of your time right now. Thank you. >> My name is Francis Acuna. I'm a climate resilience community leader, organizer with Garza Austin, vamos Austin. >> And I'm also a resident of district two. [12:18:36 PM] >> I'm against item 124, a notification requirement. People need to know what's going on in our neighborhoods. 250ft. It's the end of my backyard. So my neighbors need to know what's going on. If I decide to put four buildings in their. I'm against item 126. An increase in the number of units in a single family home. So if I put two more homes in my lot, then again, you know, my neighbors behind, they need to know what's going on in 250ft. Won't do. That is just going to cover the two. The homes that I put in my backyard. So leaving the 500ft, at least it requires, it can my neighbors in the back street are able to see what's going on in my backyard. Ed I'm against item 125. We have the city passing or [12:19:39 PM] half plants are passing water wastewater on east Williamson creek, which touches with onion creek and Colorado river. This is an environmental concern for this reason, the environmental staff has posted if anything goes wrong with with the infrastructure you are looking at contamination of the water for swimmers and animals and the item. Fc 002. I ask that you pick jc M and I ask that you push to expedite the nickells crossing bridge reconstruction to mitigate flooding for residents that are already experiencing flooding in that area. The east Williamson creek . I mean, thank you. >> Can I finish? >> Well, if you're finishing a thought, just finish a thought. >> The knuckles crossing bridge [12:20:41 PM] is planned for reconstruction and. 2025 and that's only the studies. So we need to thank you . Do that before the development. Thank you, Jeff Dickerson. >> Speak. On 124 and 126 Joe Howard. 124 126 Ana Aguirre. Item 95 if you hear your name, please make your way to the podium. So Sam martin speaking on 124 and 126, please come forward. >> Good morning. I signed up for more than just item 195, so to state what your state. [12:21:42 PM] >> Your name and state. What your. >> Good morning, mayor Watson and council members. >> My name is Ana Aguirre. I'm the immediate past chair of the Austin neighborhoods council and the immediate past chair of the southeast neighborhood plan contact team. But I'm only speaking for myself as the district two resident in dove springs, I'm in opposition to items 124 125 126 146 158 159 and 195 for every resolution related to the land development code, which the council is watering down, environmental and safety regulations, we demand a seat at the table in real time. So far we have been treated as an afterthought. True public engagement must be demonstrated regarding item 124, you should maintain the current rules as informed residents can be part of the solution. As a resident in a historically marginalized neighborhood, I can tell you there is no equitable justice, particularly regarding items. 125 126 and 158 more specifically, item 126 is will [12:22:44 PM] put gentrification in east Austin in full throttle. How is this not systemic racism? There is a function the environmental and land use commission serve when they provide recommendations to city council and you approve or reject variance requests. This process allows for public input. What is being proposed will exacerbate creek and localized flooding, further compromise our critical infrastructure, drainage issues and public safety for safety. For example, with all the proposed density, I see no plans to address fire safety. The cumulative lack of meeting traditional site plan requirements as currently done will result in catastrophic public safety consequences. No one cares about regulations until someone sustains damage to their property, loses their property and or someone gets injured. Or even worse, someone dies. This is flash flood alley. We in the lower onion creek can attest to circumstances that resulted in catastrophic damage to property and loss of life. I [12:23:44 PM] know no one on the dais was here in office when the 2013 catastrophic onion creek flood happened. The proposed policy does not match our reality. The unintended consequences if you continue with this action can only be interpreted as intentional harm. Thank you. Jeff Dickerson. >> Joe Howard, please state your name. >> My name is Sam martin. Thank you for the opportunity to address the council. >> I speak in opposition to 126 I'm saddened and disappointed that the council has abandoning the type of open process that you had with codenext process. >> Instead, you're having the this type of process where we feel there's very little opportunity for comment and really no opportunity for input at this point. The amendments proposed in this resolution, we [12:24:46 PM] can I consider to be stunningly dramatic for the city. If my next door neighbors split their lots into 2500ft !S, units and then build 2 to 3 units on each of those 20 500ft !S per properties, then my wife and I will be sitting in a tunnel essentially, because you're also saying in the proposal that you will remove or at least adjust the size front and back Mok minimum requirements setback requirements, and you'll also ignore the mcmansion protections with those kind of directions. I think the city staff is being given an opportunity to really change not only the nature of the neighborhood, but the quality of life for so many people that live in our city. I think there must be some other way to come at this that does so [12:25:47 PM] little, so much less damage. I also wanted to address that item 124 briefly and say I'm opposed to that. I think that the council needs to ask itself why ? Why do we want to reduce the number of people who are notified about zoning requirements? Why is it that Austin should try to go down to at least as low or even lower than some of the cities in state in the nation? Why should Austin not be more inclusive in its notification to people regarding zoning changes? Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Carmen Yanez Pulido, Megan meisenbach, Kate Szilagyi. [12:26:54 PM] Good afternoon. >> Mayor Watson. Mayor pro tem and council. This is my first time in person addressing you all here. First I want to say I'm I'm Carmen Yanez. I'm executive director of go Austin. Vamos Austin. I'm a district nine resident. A second generation community organizer from here and a former land use commissioner here. I want to say that I'm grateful for peace right now that we can stand under this roof together. And even in the deepest disagreements that do affect our lives and our land that we live on, we're here in peace. I'm choosing to spend my time on 126. It's related to 125. Of course, there's not enough time. As many have said, somebody just commented about wanting to see more starter homes, small homes . As for all the people and this is really for all the people with access to a quarter or a half million dollars in capital or credit because that's what it takes to build these units. And they're not small units. Your amendment is incentivizing. We [12:27:55 PM] don't get small starter homes. They're small starters for rich people. They're they're luxury. It's a proposed giveaway. It's a deregulated option. It's a windfall to property owners, but only the ones that can actually invest and take advantage of this. It's not tenants. It's not small homeowners renting to those tenants affordably. It's not working class and communities of color who have obtained housing in this city or held on to what their parents and grandparents built and cleaned up in the east side and the north and the south side, people who didn't even graduate high school people were who were exiled from all the riches of Austin, but managed to carve out communities here. You have heard from people what tear downs are doing and that's what this would encourage. These experiments have already been conducted in east Austin. We've seen the way giveaways of entitlements completely encouraged development that flipped class and race of black and brown neighborhoods. And it's being done to the whole city now. We are not those who will be able to stay. Council member pool I think somewhere in your heart [12:28:55 PM] you still mean well, but this is a let them eat cake policy. See, this is for those who can take advantage because the land value will have skyrocketed for most of us will have to sell and will have to sell to a developer, not a family. We have economic theory that can back this up. We have solutions, but we need you to actually let us implement them, not deregulate the market and let it eat us alive. >> Next speaker is Megan meisenbach Katy Szilagyi. Patricia Bobeck. Danielle Yanez. Please make your way to the podium and state your name. >> Hi, I'm Megan meisenbach and thank you for hearing the public today. >> You have a lot of wonderful people in Austin. They have expertise that you could benefit from. >> Your staff could benefit from hearing from those who know how to build, those who know how to design practically and those who are educated very well, and engineers and teachers. >> And so item 92, I think is [12:29:58 PM] very important that you encourage the people to speak and not only in this venue, but also personally, 1 to 1 or in small groups, as I'd like to spend most of my time on item 126, I think there was some good thought in the beginning with this, but now it seems to the reasons for it seem to have changed a lot. >> I feel that it's going to make a burden on the neighbors because the property value will go up so much. I know for some people they have homes around them the same size. They're paying $8,000 a year in property tax, whereas the one with the Adu is paying $22,000, that that's that's what's going to happen. But times three for all of these lots that when one sells the taxing authority will all divide this amount and say okay well they have this entitlement. You do too. So [12:31:00 PM] we're going to value your your lot very high and then you'll have higher property taxes for the rest of your time there. I think that the homeowners are not going to capitalize on this . I believe there will be builders who have the means. They have $400,000 and no loan to build something and wait around two years for it to be built and then rent it. Thank you very much. And I look forward to talking to you again . Miss Sal Ramos. >> Kate Szilagyi, Patricia Bobeck, Danielle Yanez. >> Good afternoon. City council mayor Watson. My name is Kate Selig. I'm a native south austinite working mom and the arts commissioner for district one. First, I want to say thank you to all those people that showed up to speak. You guys are [12:32:01 PM] beautiful. I'm here to speak against item 125. After decades of entrusting city council to protect our water, the lifeblood of our city, it is disturbing to think that this crucial responsibility could be handed over to city staff away from your eyes and our votes. We collectively elevated all of you, not city staff, to look out for Austin's highest and best long term interests. So several of you were elected based on your positions concerning environmental protection and affordable housing. Most of my friends and I can't really afford to live here anymore. But we stay. Hundreds of people move to Austin every day. But why do they stay? Why do people love this place? Despite the fact we're being displaced? I can't speak for everyone, but I remain here because of the water. Whatever potential benefit there is to shuffle this authority away from the light of day is extremely shortsighted. Now no [12:33:02 PM] amount of time or money is worth forfeiting the water that makes our city unique and actually livable in the climate crisis we are in. And I urge you to vote against or postpone item 125, which would be a green light to unbridled contamination of our most valuable resource water. Thank you. >> If your name has been called , please make your way to the podium and state your name. >> Hey y'all. My name is missile Ramos or messiah Ramos. >> So? >> So I'm actually on my lunch break. I just came to jot down some things and just wanted to say a few things, but on some of the points and items that are currently up on agenda, so 92, 94, I am against. 125 126 I'm also against I just wanted to say at a time where our civil liberties and our civil rights [12:34:03 PM] and communities are being silenced, our city needs to continue being a beacon of hope and a model of what's right. We all know what's happening at the state level. We all know it's also happening at the national level. But Austin can't move backwards or back to a time because some folks are uncomfortable with something new . At this time, we should be doubling down on the institutions that are helping us move forward in an equitable way to continue making our government more accessible to everyone and reinvesting in our communities to help lift up those that need the most. So basically, I just came here as a citizen today to urge and reassure our city council that folks have your back and don't be afraid to speak up. You can be that beacon of hope. And we're hoping to have you all represent us. Thank you. >> I'm sorry. This is a lot of paperwork. Patricia Bobeck, Danielle Yanez, Matt Lynn Mathis [12:35:04 PM] . Natalie Frenzel. Kristie Stevens. Becky Davis. Good afternoon. >> I'm Natalie princely. >> I live in D seven. >> First of all, I'd like to speak to 126 and council member Alison alter. >> I want to thank you. I don't believe she's here. I want to thank you for airing your astute policy concerns in yesterday's work session on item 126 has instigated community conflict by failing to listen to and [12:36:05 PM] empathize with the entire scope of public concerns. Here's the problem with 126. It treats infrastructure services, gis and geography as afterthoughts instead of real life parameters on density planning. Austinites have been repeatedly reminded in painfully hard ways that infrastructure is the foundation for what is possible in terms of density limits. You cannot deny our literally painful lived experiences of enduring infrastructure and communication collapse during winter storm uri . And then on the watch of this council's Austin energy utility oversight committee experiencing it all over again during Mario very hard lessons learned. To be clear, austinites, especially myself, we are not opposed to [12:37:07 PM] density as long as it is placed in areas designed to accommodate that concentration of people. However, the current built out environments of existing single family areas in Austin are not designed kind for retrofitting in infrastructure to support. Item 126 aims. We know from experience that cramming density on inadequate infrastructure creates misery. Austinites don't deserve by now, Austin's density infrastructure cycle is familiar. Increased density density overwhelms existing infrastructure and so forth. Unfortunately this is unsustainable. We need affordability planning. But unfortunately. 126 is not it? Thank you. Thank you so much. >> Patricia Bobeck on deck is Danielle Yanez, Madeline Mathis [12:38:09 PM] , Madeline Mathis, Christy Stephens, Becky Davis, Craig Naser. After Craig Nasr is Andy Brauer. >> Hello. City council. My name is Craig Nasr. I am the president of Austin. Environmental Democrats and I'm the conservation chair of the state chapter of the Sierra club . First, I want to make a statement for Austin environmental Democrats. Austin environmental. Environmental Democrats voted unanimously early to support three minutes for each speaker. Speaking for the council and voted for some system of donating time to [12:39:10 PM] another speaker to personally see a statement we had earlier for the first city council meeting I ever came to was the all night city council meeting in 1990. Every body got three minutes to speak. It is literally why I still live in Austin. When I come here and I hear all these wonderful people speak and tell you what they feel, that's good for our city. I sent you emails because I know I don't have much time. I want to thank Mckenzie Kelley for responding. Thank you very much for responding to my email. That was very good. Read those emails on. Item 125. I was at the state capitol all spring with the Sierra club tcu. Forget it. They're going to they're trying to jerk away our control of the etj. I don't see why we wouldn't keep that tool all to coerce [12:40:14 PM] developments in the drinking water protection zone to be better, even if we can't stop them. And that that allows a conversation here at city council. So I'm opposed to 125 also, item. 126 density does not equal affordability. It never has and it never will. I lived on Manhattan island. It's the densest place I got news. It's not affordable and it got worse and worse and worse. This up. Okay I'm out of time. Please read my emails. I went into some great detail and I think you might enjoy that. Thanks >> Andy Brower says. Chito. I'm Joe palca. Only >> Hello. My name is Andy Brower . >> I am the mission coordinator at central presbytery Ann church in downtown Austin. So I oversee the homelessness. Is the homeless outreach program. There I am for item 111. I support the [12:41:16 PM] shelter of the marshaling yard. And that is because, as we have been waiting years for more shelter in the city, we have hundreds of people on wait lists now. Is it ideal? No, it's not. Is it an ideal location? No. Would people prefer for an apartment or housing? Yes, they would. Do we have enough money to house 5000 people? No, we don't. The consequences of not opening a new shelter is that more people will continue to wait and be on the streets. We have no effectively no emergency shelter in the city right now. If somebody I have people coming to the church every week, they are disabled. They are victims of sexual violence. They they are elderly and they have significant mental disabilities. And there's nowhere to refer them. We have no emergency shelter and we all know that emergency shelter is a critical part of the homelessness response system. According to the national alliance to end homelessness stand, as I understand people's concerns about it. But I think we can do [12:42:20 PM] it right. I think we can roll it out right. Let's have an advisory committee of people with lived experience and providers to make sure that we have low barrier housing focused shelter. You know, it has been there have been a couple inaccuracies today saying that the community was not consulted. I know there was a shelter task force by the homeless strategy office. They consulted people for months. People with lived experience. I was able to give input. There are also some assumptions about the shelter that it won't be trauma informed, that there won't be access to services that that people will not, you know, have transportation, but it's all assumptions. We haven't started it yet. We can make this whatever we want it to be. If you put enough effort and money into doing it right, like other cities do. Denver was referred to here. I support a variety of solutions and I do support the marshaling yard and hope you will vote to support it today. [12:43:20 PM] Thank you. >> Sarah Cheatham, Joe Paul Conley or Linda Jackson. I think you're. >> Hello. >> My name is Sarah Cheatham. >> I live in district three. Never been here before. Glad you can see me today. I took the day off work today because. Cause I'm very concerned about I don't have my glasses on either. I'm very concerned. And about the marshaling yard project Burt as Sasha called it, the keep Austin pretty initiative. It's really to house our unhoused neighbors. And as an unhoused activist, it's as an unhoused. I was with an unhoused neighbor and we were talking to the legislation this past season and he said, we are the people who live in the bushes and die in the bushes. This place, I went by it yesterday. It's in the bushes. There is nothing around there are no stores. I mean, maybe there's going to be shuttles, but we don't know what those [12:44:21 PM] shuttles are. The only thing that's over there is the other ones foundation, which is a gated community at this point. And then some sort of like homeland security kind of vehicle, Ralls, like there's nothing over there. If there's something that happens to these 300 residents and they need to get through traffic to get to a to emergency facilities or to get their medicine or any of that stuff, they're not going to get through. It's problematic. If you haven't gone by that site, you need to go check it out. Yes we need more shelters. Like it's hard to come up here and say that I'm against this. And speaking to the last speaker , we need responsible shelters. >> Like who's going to be in these shelters, women and children will not be safe there. >> People with complex gender identities will not be safe there. If your idea of adding more police is going to keep these folks safe, well, first of all, you're misguided. And the other is just going to make it a mini police state on the side of the road over there. And I'm also very stressed out about you taking $3 million out of our supportive permanent housing. That is what we need. If you are [12:45:21 PM] going to commit to something, make it for longer than a year. We do not need to be spending the most money that we have spent on this. And anyone in the nation that has spent on something like this for one year without knowing what they're going to what's going to happen after them. Like, I mean, you know, it's already been said, but the interim city manager said he'll be on his couch like he won't be watching it. He won't be up there like he's not. He's saying where the money is going. But he doesn't feel the responsibility that he needs to see what happens to these people. >> Thank you very much, Zhao Paul Conley. >> Good morning. What can I say in a few minutes? >> I'm the co-chair of the leadership council, also Travis county, and I've been thinking a lot about what could I say in a few minutes that this council wouldn't hear in a few hours or even a few days or a few months. >> And I think if you vote today to approve the marshaling yard shelter, you will vote to approve the single largest congregate shelter contract in [12:46:22 PM] the nation. And there's a reason why nobody in the nation is doing this kind of large scale congregate shelter to use data from the national alliance to end homelessness in defense of congregate shelter is so insulting to the national alliance to end homelessness because they don't recommend congregate shelter in any instance. So there's a deeply mislead Singh message being pushed on you today, which is that there are only there's only one option, that you only have one choice. It's this or nothing. And that is not true because you can do better human scale and right size, dignified shelter as opposed to stuffing 300 individuals in a warehouse or the history of this city is marked by bad shelter contracts, unaccountable shelter contracts , front steps at the arch, the Sally, you name it. There are so many bad shelter contracts in this city because homeless people, people with lived experience, people who work in the system are consistently ignored in these decisions. But [12:47:23 PM] I don't know if I should address this council today, and I think I'm going to address instead a future council. I'm going to address a future council that actually cares about unhoused people and doesn't just see them as a problem to be hidden away. And to that council, I will say thank you for actually taking the time to sit down, work with the community, work with service providers, work with the most impacted and get the policy right to that future council that actually cares about this issue. I will say thank you for taking the time to put human dignity at the forefront of your decision making and policy making today. You know, in one year, when council comes back to figure out how you're going to find another $9 million to keep this thing open in Jesus, Garza will be watching that from home and Eid it won't be his problem as he stated on record in the work session yesterday. >> Thank you, Garza I appreciate it. >> Thanks. Council because [12:48:24 PM] because we're trying to manage time and we're at a time certain of 48 minutes ago. >> What I'm going to do and it's to recognize all the speakers and make sure we can get everybody that wants to speak the opportunity to speak. Some people got here for the 12:00 time. Certain speaking. So what I'm going to do is go to the ask the clerk to call those who were on the time certain that we set aside every week at 12:00 for public comment, and then we'll come back and finish what we're doing on the consent agenda and then move through the rest of the speakers. So I'll ask the city clerk to go to the 12:00 time. Certain. And they're going to come back to you first. >> Speaker is Michelle Estrada on deck? Is Nicholas Johnson. [12:49:26 PM] >> Hi, Michelle Estrada district . Ten Austin transportation department is about to install nine speed humps on greystone drive because of a faulty speed study measurement that contradicts four other measurements on the same street . Our neighborhood speed awareness campaign is asking for a new speed test to be to determine if this street truly merits speed humps using accurate data. To chart one shows five speed measurements of greystone drive. Each line shows how many cars were driving at each speed range, most in the 25 to 35 mile per hour range. Notice that all four dots are in the same general speed range, while the solid blue line is shifted about six miles per hour faster. A huge difference that far exceeds normal speed variations and there is no physical characteristic of the [12:50:27 PM] road to explain this large difference in speed. All engineering devices have failure modes. They are infrequent but do occur for example, speed strips accidentally placed 10.5in apart rather than 12in apart would cause the result here. Chart to only shows measurements taken from the same location and direction. These should match, but they don't. One uses radar speed signs showing nine days of data over a year and consistent with the other measurements. But different from the outliers. Solid blue line showing one day of data egregious speeding above . 40mph is a key input to atd's speed management scoring. Look at data a dsd data shows egregious speeding at 0.8% or 11 cars per day. While the speed study shows 13.4, 209 cars per [12:51:31 PM] day, nearly 200 cars more than any other speed measurement. Based on four of five speed measurements. Gray stone drive does not have an egregious speeding problem and should not be getting speed hump funding. Yet the one outlier data set has dictated speed humps for the whole road Eid data be shown is that gray stone drive outranked other streets with higher crash scores. Only because of this incorrect measurement. Rtd is about to make a huge mistake by installing speed humps on the wrong road. We request a new speed test at this location and recalculate the scores. A decision of this magnitude should be made using data that is not faulty. Thank you. It's a 24 hour speed test at. Thank you . [12:52:35 PM] >> Next speaker is us. I'm sorry . Nicholas Johnson. On deck is Jamie Haynes. >> Hello. Nick Johnson City of Austin resident voter and city employee. I'm a financial analyst for the city of Austin parks and rec department. I have a master's in accounting. I'm eligible to sit for the cpa seven years with the city and over a decade of finance experience. I'm currently on pto to be here today. Next slide please. These some base data. The averages are from multiple internet sites. I took all city positions and pulled the ones with hr it and finance related titles. Those 1600 positions we do our entire job on one of these laptops. There are other positions that are fully capable of remote work. I just don't know those various titles. So 1600 is on the low end next slide please. Let's start with the environment. Cars generate 9000g of CO2 per gallon of gas. [12:53:36 PM] Based on my research, it cost a gallon of gas each way to commute. This works out to five metric tons of CO2 per car per year. 8000 metric tons for 1600 employees, according to Google, the average American generates 14.2 metric tons of CO2 per year. So our commute is 35% of our emissions. Next slide, please. Let's talk about what people care about the most, their time and their money. The average commute is 25 minutes. One way and it takes 30 minutes to get ready for work, meaning commuting takes 14 days of your life every year or ten years of life for 1600 employees. The average commute is 21 miles. One way. That's 10,000 miles per year. Although you can't claim your commute on your taxes, the irs says it costs 66 and one half cents a mile to commute. It's at $7,000 per year or $11.2 million for 1600 employees. Remember 1600 is the low end. Next slide, please. Looking at me in my profession, the standard workweek is 50 hours in [12:54:37 PM] the private sector. Or I could spend 40 hours working and ten hours commuting for you and not have access to my private bathroom and fully stocked kitchen. Remote work is here to stay, especially for my profession. When looking at salary, you guys pay me $80,000 a year with my experience and credentials, I can get a 100 K in the private sector pretty easily. The interim city manager wants to light $7,000 of money on fire. Of my money on fire. And I just got notice that the budget office is increasing the rake of my pension by 2. Although they delayed the implementation of that by cutting in half. However, very soon I'll be making 8500 dollars less than I'm making today. The city vacancy rate is already very high. This memo is effectively cutting my pay, hurting the environment for what benefits? Why would I or anyone in my profession work for you when the analysis shows it doesn't add up? Please do everything in your power to undo the interim city manager's irresponsible. May 11th memo. Thank you. Thank you. >> Greetings, esteemed council members and mayor. [12:55:38 PM] >> My name is Jamie Haynes, former staffer for Renteria proud d1 resident. >> I'd like to first recognize the tremendous work being done to expand pedestrian bike and traffic calming infrastructure. I'd like to thank all the construction workers who are enduring this record heat to get Austin one step closer to reaching vision zero. I signed up for today because on may 15th, one of our heritage pecan trees was illegally destroyed. >> In the second slide, you can see one of our old neighbors, Bella bear, and all her cousins, aunts, uncles hit many a pinata, hung from this tree during the pandemic. She had school outside under the tree. For generations. This tree stood proudly over maple avenue, surviving two ice storms without losing a branch until that fateful day. Daisaku Ikeda shares that the desertification of the planet corresponds to the desertification of the human spirit. In other words, drought, decline and destruction are a reflection of a kind of spiritual and moral drought where justice is supplanted by the likes of greed and foolishness. The tractor arrived in the morning. Next slide. I didn't think too much of it, but thought it was strange. They had a skiff because the house had already been demolished and removed. We were just coming out [12:56:38 PM] of a few days of terrible thunderstorms, which I learned is often used as cover for that type of clandestine tree removal. Around 5 P.M, I heard a loud crack and pop as the tractor began breaking the limbs off the tree. I also heard banging on my roof as limbs crashed down on our fence. Next slide. I called 311 and our neighbors called 911. But even though a sergeant responded, there was nothing either could do. Code came out the next day to call and said they could not find any evidence of a tree removal and they had demolition permits. The workers had used a hydraulic jackhammer to remove the trunk and roots before covering their tracks. He did refer me to the city arborist who investigated it and in fact found the tree was removed without a permit. Place a stop work order on the property, calling for an environmental review. I contacted Dorris development out of San Jose. I shared what I was calling about that their property on maple and Austin, Texas. He brought up the tree and said he didn't know why it was cut down and that he was going to get to the bottom of it. I asked how he knew the tree was cut down if they had not arranged it. He told someone who called him about it the day before and tried to put him on the phone with the workers to [12:57:39 PM] tell them to stop. But his service had cut out. I responded that I did not get his phone number until the next day, so I asked who called and how did they have his number? He promptly hung up on me and did not answer subsequent calls in east Austin. We do not have the same access to greenbelts and swimming holes as the western parts of the city. All we have to defend against this crazy heat is our trees, particularly those heritage trees like the ones we lost. Not to mention the countless birds, squirrels and other critters using it for nesting. Out-of-state firms like dawes development don't care about heritage trees. Our goal of carbon neutrality, or what shade means when it's 107 degrees outside, they care about profit and are driven by greed. Punitive measures do not deter them because they'll make it up in the long run. And my property taxes go up and up while the quality of life goes down and down. Therefore, I'm asking council to consider two ideas. First, provide incentives such as density bonuses and lessened height restrictions for lots that creatively incorporate heritage trees into architectural designs. Second, create a psa informing residents of what we can do to stop illegal tree removals. My neighbors and I wanted to intervene but didn't know how or if we would be in the wrong 311 and 911 didn't know what to do either. So this type of education could prove valuable for preventing future crimes against mother nature. Thank you for your time and consideration. The remaining slides are just pictures of the aftermath, [12:58:40 PM] including a busted up sidewalk. >> Paul Robbins on deck is Laura cook. Council >> I am Paul Robbins, an environmental activist and consumer advocate. >> I currently serve as vice chair of the city's resource management commission. Two days ago, we passed a resolution ask Singh city council to expand our purview. >> We want to advise council on all matters relating to natural gas utilities that serve Austin . The resource management commission is requesting the Austin city council to allow the commission to study issues and advise on policy related to fair natural gas rates. Better franchise agreements, clean energy and affordable [12:59:40 PM] affordability for low and moderate income ratepayers. Despite Austin's ownership of its electric and water utilities, it has never municipalized its gas service like San Antonio and corpus Christi. As such, the policies and benefits that are derived from municipal ownership such as lower rates, clean energy policies and fairer treatment of low income customers, are largely absent. There's only be okay. Thank you. Thank you. Both are water and electric utilities have discrete city commissions that advise council, but the gas utilities have much less scrutiny. Since 2008, rates for Texas gas service have risen about 100, adjusted for [1:00:41 PM] inflation, the carbon footprint of the three gas companies serving Austin is about 34% of Austin's coal and gas plants. However, unlike the Austin energy, Texas gas service, Atmos and centerpoint have no comprehensive climate protection plan. These utilities have also have poorly funded, inadequate budgets to help low and moderate income customers. This council should take also take special note that the existing Texas Texas gas service franchise, its license to operate, expires in 2026, and negotiations could start as soon as this year. This is a once in a generation chance to obtain Ann long needed reforms in closing, I urge you to strongly consider our offer. I also ask you to please appoint three long standing vacant [1:01:43 PM] pieces to our commission which will allow us to function at full capacity. There are well qualified people in Austin willing to serve. Thank you. Also for folks that was just going to say we have two people on online. >> So we're maintaining a quorum. But the other thing I want to mention is if somebody if a member of the council is back, for example, eating something or doing something like that, we have everybody what everybody's saying is on the screen, they can watch this even if they're not sitting on the dais right now. But thank you. >> Next is Laura cook on deck? Is Adria Diaz. And Monica Guzman . >> Miss Guzman. If your name is [1:02:43 PM] called, please come forward. And if you're not the one speaking, please take a seat up front so that we can move as efficiently in that way. Respect the people that are also wanting to testify after you. You're the third. No wait. Hang on. Yeah. Yeah. Whatever's easiest. If. If a handheld microphone is easier, let's allow that. Please, please . [1:03:58 PM] Yeah. Perfect. The time is inserted into. >> Yeah. It's just I don't have . I have to continue. To >> Give me a quick second. [1:05:12 PM] Please >> Go ahead. All right. >> Good afternoon, council members. For those that don't already know me, my name is Adria Diaz. I am the youngest member of cap metro's access advisory committee. I rely on metro access, a disabled counterpart to the fixed route bus as my main mode of transportation and have been for many years within this time I have been subject and witness to multiple incidents of harassment by the drivers. These experiences have ranged from sexual assault, inappropriate touching, catcalling, stalking and multiple instances of sexual harassment. I have come here today not only to advocate for change and accountability from the city and cap metro, but to demand it in a call to action. I will no longer accept an apology or thank you for your testimony because, as I recently experienced incidents of harassment from drivers on and off the bus that were so frightening, it led me to contact cap metro CEO Dottie Watkins directly as a result, I was told cap metro is now working on an initiative for metro access to become a designated safe space and so I'd [1:06:15 PM] like to address the council members on the cap metro board and call for time to be set aside within each board meeting for safety briefings on how this will in fact come to light physically and financially. I cannot get around the city for the most part without metro access. Let this stand as evidence for how inaccessible the transit system in Austin truly is. And as to why, many times I felt forced to live out my traumas on loop, taking the service out. There are kind people working for cap metro that care, but that doesn't negate the inhumane, unhealthy and abusive and abusive treatment that I have experienced as a writer. I'm speaking today so that this suffering won't be in vain. This pain has caused me deep distress and anxiety and has been an extremely heavy burden to bear. But I will bear it no longer here because it is not my burden to bear, nor is it my family's or my friends or my community's council members and those on the cap metro board. I have come here today to respectfully say this very clearly and on public record that this burden is yours to bear until you can see to it [1:07:15 PM] that it stops. As I raise my voice on paratransit safety and equality continuously because I utilize the service and I depend on it. Metro access should be a healthy ecosystem for the riders , drivers and dispatchers alike as a solid resource for people to help navigate their lives. However over my lived experience has been a mirror to how poorly some of your most vulnerable constituents, the disabled community, can be treated in this world, and it is your duty to help protect us all. Yes changes are being made for the better and my advocacy work is being heard. And to address the council as a whole, I need your help to ensure that these changes will last. Because I should not have to be an advocate for safety within a service. I should already be protected on. I have said this sentence to cap metro on record. Help me not to have to say it again. I will be sure to follow up with citizen community action at the next metro board meeting with a more detailed version of this statement. Thank you for your time and I will take any [1:08:16 PM] questions. Now if you have any mayor pro tem, I don't have questions, but I just want to say I appreciate getting to speak with you about the situation Ann earlier and my team has been following up, so we'll make sure we loop back and try to assess the situation for you. Yes, ma'am. And so that's on the 24th, right? >> I can double check. I'm not sure I have my calendar open on here. Councilmember harper-madison. It should be, yes. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were done. >> I got my calendar real fast. >> Good. You did better than I would have never done. Council member harper-madison had her hand up. >> Thank you for the recognition, mayor. >> I would just like to say that I fully recognize that Audra is a consistent force in the community. Thank you. And as a person who also identifies as differently able, I want to recognize that she has offered me the opportunity on a couple of occasions now to recognize Harris. Our city is in frequent [1:09:19 PM] with our Ada compliance regulations. I won't name the establishment, but there was one that was storing bicycles in the elevator, in which case she couldn't access the facility. And she let me know immediately. And so I just want to thank her for her continued advocacy. I fully recognize that you said you don't want us to thank you for your testimony, but I do want to thank you for your testimony. I think it's critical that me and my colleagues and the city manager hear your testimony. It's critical. We need to know what you're experiencing. Thank you for being vulnerable and sharing your experiences, as and I would personally like to apologize if that's the experience that you're having in the city that you live in. I'd also like to say that I encourage you to continue to advocate for the community. It's a critical voice and if we don't know, we don't know. So thank you for sharing that information with us. Thank [1:10:21 PM] you, councilmember. >> And thank you. I also want to thank you for your testimony, but you've got people that will follow up with you. >> Yes. Yes sir. >> Thank y'all. Thank you. >> I think the next speaker, Monica Guzman, following is Kurt Burt Burt Dorf. >> Good afternoon, mayor. Council and interim city manager Garza. I'm Monica Guzman, native austinite and district four resident. While I didn't have enough time to watch the entire budget work session, I saw enough to speak on what I did hear. First, the thought of getting back to basics is absurd because those basics included unmanaged growth, gentrification , Ann and systemic racism and discrimination. When council member Fuentes asked for the rationale on collapsing the equity office and three other key offices, manager Garza's response began with, quote, what [1:11:22 PM] happens in an organization when you have offices that are relatively small? It's hard for those offices to get airtime. I can tell you in the six months I've been here, nothing could be truer than that. They don't have the gravity to be able to push an agenda that needs to get done within an organization, Ann unquote. Community conversations and engagement at the whiteboard as he called it, being inverted. That's true. And that's exactly what needed to happen. It's about centering the impacted community and following their lead, Austin sorted racist history didn't happen in six months, so it's unreasonable to expect it to be fixed in six months. This expecting quick results in six months is a corporate mentality as are adding more layers of bureaucratic red tape and silencing the voices of key staff who are the heart and moral compass of the city government at the equity office [1:12:22 PM] has been off the turf from the get go with incredible visibility. There accomplishments accomplishments include but are not limited to in collaboration with hesam throughout the summer of 2023, black dispossession study, the city's equity network supporting and hosting citizen clinics and naturalization ceremonies, partnering and advocating for the enhanced library card program that guaranteed income pilot program co-leading on racial equity. Anti-displacement tool active emergency response during and Mara and covid 19 leading the reimagining public safety task force, of which I was honored to be a member of the $2 million in rise direct cash assistance. That's just the top. I can't even go in depth. Mr. Garza, this is not about your personal morals or ethics. It's about. It's about the backward facing tunnel vision of executive staff and elected officials. I close with Margaret [1:13:24 PM] mead's quote. Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed individuals can change the world. Ed. In fact, it's the only thing that ever has. Thank you. Kurt. >> Burt off and then Frances Acuna. >> Hello, I'm Kurt Burgdorf district five resident and 31 years here in Austin. >> I know there's lots of moving parts to all of these, but here it goes. Let's keep zilker park a park. Thank you, mayor Watson, for weighing in on that some and postponing for a little delay here to think about that some more Andrew zilker would be livid if he saw acl fest on his donated property. 70,000 people on the great lawn six days a year. Fences blocking most of the park for over a month. That land was donated for all to use all days, not for a corporate entity to make millions of dollars a year. We do like the parks and recreation getting a [1:14:24 PM] fair chunk of that. But what the heck, keeping Barton springs road two lanes each way is important. I know that's in the zilker vision plan. It originally it was to go to one lane. It sounds like it may not be. We need that for commute. There are a lot of downtown Ann and neighborhood commuters who use it. Also, the vision zero pilot study that's about to start up on Barton springs road between azie Morton road and south Lamar, the they're going to merge it down to one lane each way for a while. They're going to improve and make much safer. The bike lanes thumbs up to that but reducing the size of lanes from 2 to 1 each way is going to put drivers in frustrating positions and they're going to be cruising through the neighborhood streets to unsuspecting children and pedestrians. So I think that vision zero plan of no deaths or injuries from auto and pedestrian access is probably going to fail in that regard. And please try to get us an online version of the speaker [1:15:25 PM] list for these meetings. It'd be nice to be able to check on our phones about when we're coming up. I wasn't sure what was going on. I was told to be here a little before 12, but it's all good. Austin police department. I think we do need dps's help to regain safety and the ability to respond to emergencies. He calls on the residential zoning changes proposed on what item? 126. I think we need to take a pause on potentially allowing single family lots to go to 3 or 4 units. I'm okay with over urban infill and a lot of people in the center of town are, but we're not okay with a lifestyle devastation and I don't feel and it seems like the numbers back up that this proposal is not going to produce any new affordable housing and here's a tough one. Anything you can do to try to reduce our long term property tax rate or what we pay sure would be appreciated. Ed. I know that's the biggest of all problems to solve. Thank you all very much. [1:16:25 PM] >> Thank you, Francis Acuna on deck is Cynthia Mcmillan. >> Million. Hello my name is Francis Acuna. >> I'm a climate resilience community leader. Organizer and a resident of Dutch springs. I'm here to speak on the resilience hubs, the cooling centers, warming centers. As you know, emergencies never give heads up as to the intensity and impact. That's why we need to be ready to respond to the worst case scenarios. I'm thankful for the resilience hubs as they do provide some climate impact mitigation, but in the event of serious climate disaster, that would require a standard stay. The city is not ready for the resilience hubs. You need to extend and the hub hours on the times that the heat and the cold weather are at their worst, where sometimes it's 9 P.M, 10 [1:17:28 PM] P.M. When it's still very hot. Some. Water parks, neighborhood parks, tree preservation is crucial for heat and health mitigation for the extended stay , the need to have buildings ready to be open within the neighborhood with the right protection to use the buildings to shower, cook and sleep. The resilience hubs have no plans right now. The hubs doesn't have the plans for those issues. For example, in winter storm Yuri, we had residents coming from hospitals without medications, residents needing emergency showers. As I had to take responsibility because apparently the building didn't have the liability his on site for in case anything happened. And we had the unhoused people without medications and no [1:18:29 PM] funding for copays. We need to take care of those liability issues before the next winter storm or before the next flood. We need to have funding for to support residents with copays. We need to have those spaces equipped with the right basic needs to be able to respond immediately. Going in into this space with where we have housed and unhoused and families, we need the right space for those for those emergencies. There's a lot going on in the community that the city doesn't have. The equipment to take care of like taking the residents from, let's say, dove springs or montopolis or the north Austin to the downtown hubs. It's very hard. And sometimes you don't have the right trucks or busses or, you know, to. So residents could be [1:19:30 PM] able to be transported. We need to have those places in the neighborhood. So residents don't have to go through that. That extreme trauma and everything goes back to that. You know, that trauma that they get with each disaster. Thank you. Cynthia Mcmillian. >> Hello, mayor Watson and council members, thank you for allowing me to come today. >> My name is Cynthia Mcmillian and I'm the president of disrupt management. >> And I'm here today to represent resent the owners of a rey apartments that's located on Burton drive. >> The next slide. >> So I wanted to talk about there's a lot going on on Burton drive. >> We have a homeless issue. We have illegal activity that's happening. We have graffiti, we have vandalism, we have crime. >> And we have abandoned vehicles that are not getting [1:20:30 PM] addressed. >> I've spent my entire career in property management managing apartments in Austin. >> I've managed apartments north of Austin, 183 and mopac. >> I've managed apartments on mopac and Barton skyway, 35 and stassney and then east 183 kind of Travis area. >> But I've always felt like managing apartments is a way to provide people with quality living, a clean place to live, and you don't have to have the high rises, you don't have to have the mid rises, but you should be able to provide quality living and all of the years of managing in Austin, I've never seen anything like what's happening now on Barton drive. So so the next slide and one more we'll go. >> So, so I'm really not trying to say it's just the homeless or is a homeless issue. That's happening on Barton drive on both sides of the other streets. >> There's not but Barton drive and old turf as you go down and [1:21:32 PM] we are having vacant apartments that are broken into. >> We're having our laundry rooms that are broken into all of the apartments that are down the street. >> There's prostitution that's happening. >> There's drug I mean, on the street, broad daylight. >> There's people out there with cash. >> I'm not sure if they're shooting dice or shooting drugs, but it's happening in front of all of these apartments. And I just we need help. >> You know, this Austin gets their revenue off the value of businesses like the apartments and the increased value will increase the dollars for the city of Austin. >> We cannot get people can go to the next slide. >> This is the graffiti and this is public property of the city of Austin. This is a mailbox that's on the corner of Burton drive and oltorf. This is a electrical box written on and property management 101. You allow graffiti and gang activity to happen. It will continue to happen. And so the nobody's removing it. So it's wrong on that side of the street. I don't know if it's I don't really know [1:22:33 PM] what the answer is. I just know it's there's a bus stop that's there. I mean, there's a prostitute that everybody knows her name. It's amber that walks up and down the street sometimes she has a blond wig on. Sometimes she doesn't. Sometimes she's half dressed. Nobody does anything. The police show up. There's nobody that's sighted. There's nobody that's arrested. And so the crime is continuing. So we need help. If it's police presence, something needs to take place because it's happening nonstop. So I was not going to be the buzzer person. Dang it. So anyways, thank you for your time. My >> Mayor. That concludes the Noone public communication piece . >> Thank you. If you will now go back to the consent agenda speakers, we will go back and start taking that up. Sure >> Next speaker is Linda Jackson speaking on item 111. On deck is Barry Jones is following Amy [1:23:35 PM] kreizman. Please be sure to state your name when you you are at the podium. >> With the council's permission , Ann Barry Jones had to go to a medical appointment and I would like to read his written statement. With the council's permission. Oh, I'm sorry. Barry Jones had to go to a medical appointment. He had to take the bus. Therefore it takes an extra lot of time. He has his statement written and I would like to read his statement, if that's okay. Sure. Thank you. >> As long as it's within the it will be within the allotted time. >> I promise. Good morning. Council members. My name is Barry Jones. I'm a volunteer leader with Texas harm reduction alliance. I appreciate you listening to my testimony. I have been living outside for almost nine years. During that time, I have pretty much seen the worst of homelessness, beatings, robbery, abuse. And [1:24:36 PM] I've had a friend who was murdered in his sleep. Few people want to see more homeless shelters than I do. However, I have a lot of experience with shelters and I know their problems. What I don't want to see is a shelter that costs millions yet is underutilized. And look at the arch built for 250 folks currently sheltering about 50 issues. Is that not need to be issues that need to be addressed include the question of outcome is there to be a path to permanent housing in the plan to house someone for a year only to turn their back to the street only to turn them back to the street is frankly cruel. A path to permanent housing is essential. So transportation many unhoused people have jobs and often at night. Bus service has to be adequate to service this population. Finally the capacity of the shelter needs to be [1:25:36 PM] addressed. Ask homeless people and they'll tell you the more you pack, the more people you pack into a small paint, the more you pack people into a small place, the more the problems are going to arise exponentially. By addressing these issues, the council has an opportunity to make a difference in the struggle to solve homelessness. Thank you and thank you for letting me read that. Thank you. I'm. I'm told that some people hang on one second. >> I'm told that some people are asking about items 125 and 126. Those were pulled off the consent agenda. So we're going to get through the consent agenda. We're going to hear from all the people that have signed up to speak on the consent agenda. We will vote on the consent agenda and then we will come to the items that have been pulled from the consent agenda. So I just want to be clear about what the timing is. >> Mayor, a quick question on that. Sure. Do you want people [1:26:37 PM] to hold their comments from this and they don't have to, but some people wanted to speak separately and council member alter pulled those items so that they would have the opportunity to do that. >> If somebody wants to speak on 125 and 126, although we've we've they're separated out right? So that it may be difficult to do that. Now. If somebody wants to speak on 125 and 2126 and they're called as part of the consent agenda, feel free to do that. You will not be called again on 125 and 126. They were pulled and because they were pulled, we will take those up as separate items. >> So one or the other, yes. >> Whatever's convenient for you . >> Barry. John Jones. I'm sorry. He they just spoke Linda Jackson and Amy Creasman and jj Ramirez . Got the idea is jj and jj, jj [1:27:39 PM] again, as a reminder, I don't want to interrupt jj, but as a reminder, if she calls your name, please come down because that way you're it'll be more respectful for the people that are following you and would like to, to be able to speak as well. >> So sorry to interrupt you. It's all yours. >> Council my name is jj Ramirez . I'm an organizer at the Texas harm reduction alliance. I've lived in Austin since I was 15, outside of small, honorable stint, six years in the Navy. I've been here most of my life. I'm speaking against the marshaling yard item 111. We've heard many times in this committee today from house neighbors about their issues being close to their neighbors in their house. And we're talking about sending 300 plus people out to what what members have called a homeless concentration camp. These are these are people in the street thinking about this like people and some members, some people spoke before speaking on shelter . People at 20 degrees way, whether or not they want to go to the weather shelter because of the trauma and issues that [1:28:41 PM] happened there. And they and they weigh like, can I survive outside at 20 degrees? And we're talking about sending them to this marshaling yard. We have some people speaking in favor of it, in favor of it. And I know they're coming from a good place. They're saying we need shelter. We desperately do. But all these wishes and dreams and hopes that haven't been solidified, I know for a fact that at least one office and I'm sure many more didn't even get the winning rfp in their office at 4:00 yesterday afternoon. But yet we are thinking about voting on this now, right? So like there's a desperate need to bare minimum postpone this vote and think about what things need to be included in this. What's the shelter like. My partner Barry had to go to his doctor's appointment. He has to get on the bus. There's not a bus out there. There's something loosely written about about transportation. A shuttle service. But there's nothing written specifically, how many, how often? What's the time? What's the capacity? Will there shut off? Members behind me in the audience work the concerts. They work at night, the shelters also not not 24 hour shelter. [1:29:42 PM] You can't walk to it. I know that many service providers, homeless service providers in the city, close at 1 P.M. Where are people going to go to get there? Like, what are these? Have these questions been thought about and answered? I don't think so. I think this is very much a very quick what we should do something. The Salvation Army closed. Well, it's back open for one year, I should say. So really think about what we're doing here and what should be done right. Bare minimum, postpone. Yes. Yes, sir. >> Next up, is Danielle Jones on deck is Amy kriegsman, Sonia Rivera and Fran tattoo. >> Clark, just for clarification , Ann, did you say Danielle Yanez in the list? Yes. Okay perfect. I know he wasn't here earlier, but I see him now. Yeah >> Hi. I'd like to piggyback on what Barry said and jj's. Well, I'm coming from a registered nurse stance. Not a big fan of harm reduction. >> I worked in teams in New York [1:30:42 PM] City, downtown Brooklyn. >> And I really want to urge and recommend that this 9.1 million for a temporary shelter to with utilizing family endeavors to not be considered. And I have many reasons for that family endeavors although I'm sure they do great work in San Antonio. This does not seem comprehensive and it seems like a decision done in silo. What was the rationale for that? Are is there consultation between I thought there was a homeless response system, a continuity of care system, people that work here, peers that live here, that I want to know that you listen to them. And if you listen to me and I have someone that has experienced housing insecurity and I can tell you that family endeavors nothing against faith based or Christian based. They are coming from an abstinence stance point of view. And that is not going to embrace transformative and restorative practices that include harm reduction in. They're going to expect abstinence harm reduction is realistic. It's meeting people where they're at and is addressing the needs of each [1:31:44 PM] person. So what was the rationale for item 111? Who who decided that this is temporary, this is 9.1 and this is done in a way that doesn't seem in line with listening to other people and listening to people work with people who have experienced housing insecurity or who are homeless. This seems like a business deal that's done at home from the comfort of someone's home, and it's not something that is going to be sustainable and it's not a bold decision. I think Austin and the people here in Austin deserve bold decisions and not these kind of 9.1 utilizing something that preexists. I think there's something that if we can all come together, really listen to one another, not from the comforts of our own home, but also going to where people live on the streets or in the shelters, that is important. That's it. Thank you, Danielle Yanez on deck is Sonia Rivera. [1:32:44 PM] >> And Fran tattoo. Please make your way to the front. If your name has been called honorable mayor and council members. >> My name is Sonia Rivera, homeowner hoa board member, taxpayer and registered voter from Riverside meadows subdivision in district three. >> I am here today on behalf of members of my community to state our strong opposition to item 111, which is within putting the Marshall yard or the homeless shelter within 500ft of our homes. >> No consideration to our safety and security has been taken since the establishment of the Esperanza shelter. >> Across the field, we have had a disturbed woman threaten to take an 18 month old from the front of his home. We have had a drug induced man enter the home where an adolescent female was home alone. >> We have had to pay to clean up encampment outs on hoa property. We have had stolen property found at Esperanza and I have been accosted by a man living behind the fence line while unloading my car. >> We are concerned what more could happen with the shelter being placed closer to closer to us. You have given the illusion of the Marshall yard would be [1:33:45 PM] used for the convenience of the convention center. >> We now know the convention center is going to be torn down after spending $1 million in communications system. You now give the illusion that the emergency shelter is temporary for one year. Yet Austin will not have a convention center until 2029. No communication to us of your intentions was initiated via mail door hangs, email or to our hoa management company. You have shown more concern for the unhoused than you do for individuals who voted you in and pay the taxes for you to use for programs to help the unhoused. Your decision in this matter will kill our property value that we have worked so hard to increase and maintain, as well as our sense of security and safety. We urge you to find another location for your emergency temporary shelter. How about lakeway Terry town or circle C? Thank you for your time. >> Danielle Yanez. Thank you. [1:34:47 PM] >> I'm Danielle Yanez and you all know my political pedigree. >> Government of the people, by the people and for the people. Democracy is slow. Zo must include everybody. >> So you know, like I said, my political pedigree. >> But at the foundation of that, I'm a citizen of the United States of America and I have a right to petition to assemble and petition my government. >> 92 and all the other things. And what's happening with the budget right now is going backwards in democracy. I am proud to be an austinite because we are government. The people are the government. You serve us Democrat process must not be sacrificed at the expediency of bureaucrat erratic streamlining . So all of these all of these [1:35:48 PM] things that are that are trying to limit the participation Ann of us as us government, we are the government. Those people are the government. You individually are the government, but collectively you work for us. Am I wrong? Wow I'm not wrong. And so all of these things that are happening are sending us backwards. And now I'm going to address the current thing that that Monica Guzman talked about, about the consolidation and the diminishing of the equity office as the city of Austin is moving away from its racist legacy, away from it. Your attempt to streamline for the sake of bureaucratic expediency is flying in the face of that mayor Watson, city manager Garza I challenge you to take the undo and racism trainings because [1:36:49 PM] undoing racism turned away long before you got back here. And now it's a different day. So the rey will make will reach your offices and make appointments with you to speak about that. >> Thank you very much. Aspired Fran to Susan Spataro and Aaron Hyman. If your name has been called, please make your way to the podium and state your name. Thank you. >> My name is Susan Spataro and I live in district eight. For those that don't know me, which is most of you, I served as the Travis county auditor for 24 years, so I have a real commitment in this community to the rule of law and service to citizens, and that includes the city of Austin. >> The truth of the matter is, I wish the city manager were here [1:37:50 PM] because I want to say thank you to him. >> Thank you for what he is having to face and the mess in this city that he is trying to fix. It's beyond the pale, to be honest. The four items I want to discuss are I support 111 because I think we need a shelter. I think it's heartbreaking to say we can't have a shelter where people are safe. That is a failure of the people that are running the shelter. So I support it, but it needs to be safe. 124 I oppose because we need more transparency rather than less. 190 is the reserve officers. I think in a perfect world we would have a police force that could handle that, but we don't anymore. I think this is a really good solution. We get a lot of money from these special events and we shouldn't have them here if we can't provide Eid the people who come work for [1:38:51 PM] it live here safely. So I think this is a is it perfect? No, but I think it's a good solution. I want to spend most of my time on 126 and that is when all of this feeds together. I think the city has made some horrible decisions on major things that have impacted people's lives. I sit here today and listen to that. No one feels safe in Austin, Texas, anymore, whether you're homeless, whether you have a home that has terrible. It wasn't like that for a long time, but it is now. It's something you need to address changing zoning to basic diminish single family homes is a terrible idea. Thank you for being here. >> Aaron Hyman. Chadsmoor and Eric lack. If your name has been called, please make your way to the podium. Scott Strickland. [1:39:56 PM] Chloe Wilkinson Ann. >> Hello. My name is Chloe Wilkinson, mayor Watson mayor pro tem Ellis and members of the council. All I'm here today as a resident of Austin, but I am also a member of Ora. I recently moved from Dayton to d9 because of the fact that I could not afford to live in Dayton with the rising rent prices. I support items 126 124 and 153 for the fact that we need affordable housing to bring density and better public transportation so we can get closer to the goal of a ten minute city. And I think that it really speaks for itself that all the young people support this item. We are the future of Austin and we acknowledge the fact that our city is no longer [1:40:58 PM] a small town. We are growing and we know that the potential of this city has to be matched with an item and a resolution that acknowledges our growth and missing middle housing is something that needs to be legalized throughout Austin and we know this type of housing works. You can find it in Hyde park and Mueller and it's work to great success and fanfare for when people bring up the price. The problem is, is that we don't have enough of it. So when people see it, they buy it up. We need the housing throughout the entirety of Austin for this program to work. And I want to thank everyone who's put this motion forward, especially my council member. So as well as Leslie pool Paige Ellis, and also Ryan alter, who is not currently up here. But I thank you all for bringing forward this emotion and I thank you all [1:41:58 PM] to anyone who sponsored this item. These items, they are very much needed in our city. Thank you. Council members Aaron Hyman . Aaron lack on deck is Chaz Moore. >> Good morning. My name is Aaron lack. >> I'm the president of the musicians union, afm local 433 here in Austin. >> I'm speaking in opposition to item number one, two, three 123 that because it's not what the music commission recommended last year, it's been been altered. >> The rate structure proposed in this resolution is contrary to industry standards and undermines existing contracts and collective bargaining agreements for musicians. It is standard across the industry for a scale such as this, to be specific to a type of [1:42:59 PM] performance venue to include double scale for the leader and to add a contractor at double scale. When a larger number of musicians is reached. Other fees are added as the ensemble increases in size and complexity like music, preparation, orchestration, arranging copyist costs, etcetera. The base rate does not increase or I'm sorry, it does not decrease as it is more difficult to present a larger ensemble, not less difficult. There is certainly no cap at which the employer is not responsible for paying more musicians as described in the current agenda item. I believe that the resolution should be not removed from consideration. Setting an expectation that a larger group of musicians will accept a lower wage per musician will hurt all of these beloved Austin musical groups. And this is not a complete list. Beto Y los fairlanes eight musicians burns Kathie nine musicians. Austin symphony 86 musicians. [1:44:02 PM] Hard proof ten musicians. Mother falcon 17 musicians. Grupo fantasma nine musicians. Austin community steel drum band up to 25 musicians. The Copa kings ten musicians. Austin opera orchestra 56 musicians. John mills times 1010 musicians. Obviously all the jazz big bands that have had trouble since the advent of rock and roll, including the now jazz orchestra, the tonic, big band, the nacho big band, nacho Fernandez, big band, all 10 to 18 musicians. Burns we can do better. Let's do better together. Please thank you, Aaron Hyman, Chaz Moore, Scott Strickland. >> That was him. >> Why don't you go ahead and come up? Scott there were names that were called before mine, so yeah, I apologize. >> Apologize about that. >> All right. >> >> All right. >> Mayor. City manager, mayor pro tem, council. [1:45:04 PM] >> Thank you all for having me here. Good afternoon. >> My name is Scott Strickland. >> I'm a critically acclaimed artist and I'm a business owner . >> 366 days ago, I did play a blues on the green. >> I released my first full length album. >> I'm a full time artist, touring artist, studio artist, recording artist. >> I have an agent. I live in district eight and I serve at the esteemed pleasure of miss Paige Ellis as a music commissioner. For district eight. I'm speaking on behalf of item 123, addressing the $200 per hour per musician in. Item that is, that is before you all today I am in support of this. I did not it wasn't my intention to speak in support of it. My intention was to encourage Paige that you all obviously would support it. The Aaron lack is a [1:46:06 PM] friend of mine. He was here speaking before Shaw. This is a the clause in the contract that the clause in the agreement basically states that if there's ten or more musicians that we move the scale to make it more affordable for an act to be on a stage. These are initial agreements. These this is a first time thing that we're talking about here. And so I am in support of this moving forward and working this out with my brother Aaron. As we as we move forward and that's most of my time. So one thing that I do want to say that is, is in a in a country where things are moving completely backwards, it seems as though this is something that is very encouraging and moving forward. I you know, we have a live music fund that we just rolled out and I just look forward to the conversation that we would have in in addition to this item. So [1:47:07 PM] thank you. Thank you all so much. Appreciate you. >> Next speaker is Ana Aguirre on item 124 125 126 146 and 158 on deck is Nancy bessant on 124 and 126 and Caroline Reynolds will move on to 124. >> Please come forward. Go ahead and please come forward. You won the race. I'm sorry you won the race. So you get to go first. Okay just please identify yourself. >> My name is Nancy bessant and I wanted. To speak in opposition . To 92. I understand it's [1:48:08 PM] postponed. I'm. I hope that eventually some of it will be withdrawn. I it's this sudden widespread change is simply the unannounced direction of our community. Churches. I oppose also oppose. 124 forgoing public notifications or reducing the notification radius for zoning changes simply postpones problems for protests and objections that will be more difficult to address after construction has started and I also oppose item 126 when a large single family home was built next door to mine some years ago, the foundation alone completely disrupted the natural drainage. Almost a third of my [1:49:09 PM] lot, which I selected because it was on the high ground flooded to about mid calf even during small rains. I was forced to personally hire a hydraulic engineer to explain to the concerned auction company how they needed to fix it if they had not done what he suggested, I probably would have had to go to court myself. And I'm not a naturally litigious person. I fail to see how having that lot covered by three new houses instead of one would have improved the situation. I also it sounds like these properties would have to be multiple stories which would make them less useful to elderly and handicapped people who couldn't be able, wouldn't be able to go up and down. Really narrow and steep stairs. Ma'am I sent an [1:50:10 PM] email has expired. I'm sorry. >> Your time has expired. Yes. Thank you very much. >> Emailed all of you. Great. More detail. >> Thank you, Carol Reynolds, speaker on 124 and 126 on Austin Talbot is on deck as well as Mary Engle. >> I'm going to focus on item 126 as as I see people on the des are joining up with council member pool on sponsoring this item. >> It reminds me of icarus standing up on the parapet about to jump into the abyss. >> There are not hundreds or thousands of people moving to this town. The last the census data for the last three years says there's like less than a thousand a year. >> The others are babies born here. They're not going to be getting a house in fact, the [1:51:14 PM] water and sewer pipes in central Austin were designed in 1932, 1950 for a town of less than 100,000 people, 58,000 actually, in 1930. It is at capacity today . They are they have the pressure up to almost twice the recommended pressure limits set by the national. Authorities. Just so they can get water up to the fifth floor on burnet road and Guadalupe so those people can flush their toilets and brush their teeth in the morning . You know, despite the wishes and the chutzpah, informed opinions of council members, qadri and villa and pool, the 14 inch line pipe down the street in front of my house can only. Pass 4200 gallons per minute and [1:52:17 PM] council members recommendation is to jump the density in that part of town by 4,000, not 400% for 1,000. I have lots on my block with 20,000ft !S. They can put out. Eight units on their you don't have to believe in science and gravity and engineering, but it will seriously affect your jump when you jump from the parapet, whether you believe it or not. Thank you, Austin Talbot speaking on 124 and 126. >> Mary Engle. Please make your way up. If you are here. >> I think she's signaling she's not going to speak. >> Thank you. Matt Bartholomew. [1:53:18 PM] Robert bowler. >> Make your way down, Robert is registered to speak on items 124 126 and 158. >> Great. Good >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Robert bowler. >> I'm here as a homeowner in Windsor park and a district for a 12 year austinite and a lifelong Texan. >> I ask that you all support items. 124 I know it's been moved, but 126 and 156 I'm talking about those as a model together these items will reduce undue constraints on what homeowners can do with their own property. I sought out a home without a homeowner's association, but current constraints act as a kind of citywide hoa assuming sound environmental and safety constraints, people ought to be able to use their land as they like. This is Texas, after all, in the event of a redeveloped [1:54:19 PM] neighboring lot. I would rather have three new middle class neighbors in row homes if that's what they want. Then one new neighbor in a luxury mcmansion. I also have several Austin born friends who have left town. They are teachers now that they want to move back home, it is impossible for them to afford it . I would love for people who don't work in tech or in finance to be able to afford to be my neighbor, my thanks to council members. Pool alter and Ellis for bringing this forth. Chito for working toward affordability and liberty, livability and in district four and the whole council for working to keep Austin and affordable. Beautiful place to live. >> Thank you for being here. Thank you. >> Matt Bartz olomu wolf gang burst. Kai gray please state your name and the items you are speaking on. [1:55:20 PM] >> Hello. Thank you. >> My name is Wolfgang Burris, speaking on 126 158 Austin's history. >> All the all the people who were against this bill are stating Austin's history is that they're going to change the culture of the neighborhood. >> Most Austin suburbs that are originally originated were were not car centric. They were walkable like we can think of Hyde park and tarrytown, lots of different types of housing. Austin is now a city where it costs $700,000 for a single family home. >> We can look, we can say the environment is going to be messed up, but we can look at cities like Manhattan. >> We can look at cities like Los Angeles with density three times as much of Austin, and they they fare just fine. >> And in California has lots of water issues and they're still doing okay. >> Dense. >> Our cities are more equitable and the dense areas of the city account for 80% of the gdp of the city. I rather like when the guy said before I'd rather have new neighbors who are lower class students like me. I come here to represent people who [1:56:22 PM] aren't older, who can't afford homes. You know, we go to school, we work hard, and we get a six figure job. And even with that, you're not affording a $700,000 home. We can look to cities like Houston, which has changed their zoning law. And there are very affordable. We can look to cities like Minneapolis, which have done the same thing, changed their zoning law, and it costs $300,000 for an average home. Minneapolis we know that this is true. We know there's no facts based on anything they're saying. I'm bringing actual facts. >> And what you said before, there is 116 people moving to Austin every single day, and that is from the us census. >> Everything that people were saying is not based in facts. Someone mentioned Manhattan earlier. Manhattan has the exact same rules on a bigger scale that limit limit how much you can build. And that's why it's expensive. This is a this is a world. This is America wide problem. And we can be a city that decides that we're going to do something different and we're going to allow people to actually have lots of different types of homes. If you want to have a single family home, you have every right to do that. If I buy a house and I want to put multiple lots on it, multiple different houses to supplement my income or to help out, I [1:57:23 PM] should be able to do that. Thank you for speaking. >> Thank you. >> Next is Kai gray speaking on 124, 126 and 158, as well as Edgar Handel and Kelsey Hughes. >> Hi, my name is Kai gray. I'm on the board of the Austin infill coalition, Ann, and I'm the chair of the three unit per lot working group. >> I want to talk a little bit about to go back in time a little bit like ten years ago. >> Basically I went to the city and I had a lot and I wanted to build multiple small houses and they were basically they said, that's illegal. >> You can only build one large house. And I'm like, I don't want to do that. >> I want to build multiple small houses because that just makes more sense. >> It made so little sense that I was like, this has to get fixed fairly soon. And you know, here we are, ten years later. But I want to thank this council for making this courageous resolution to finally change that. There's also been a lot of talk about builders and how we should focus on builders with this resolution. I disagree with that. And this might sound [1:58:25 PM] really surprising, but builders actually make money building large single family homes. So if the goal is to worry about builders, they're going to be fine either way. You don't need to worry about that. In fact, the most financially successful builders build large, very expensive single family homes instead of focusing on that, I think we should focus on what kind of city we want to have when we take a lot. Do we want a city that has more large single family homes on that lot that are going to be very, very expensive? Or do we want to share that lot with three smaller homes? That's a question for you all. Like, what do we want to have moving forward if we have a shortage of very large homes, maybe we should keep making it illegal to build smaller homes. But I don't think that's our issue. The other thing as far as looking at pricing, I looked at increased svu and brentwood and I looked in the last 1200 days in that neighborhood, basically 10% of the sales were houses on shared lots. So a fairly small number. But if you look at the ten cheapest houses, eight of them were on shared lots, which kind [1:59:25 PM] of goes to show that. Yeah, shared lots do make stuff cheaper. The other two houses were on the floodplain. So basically if you want to get in that neighborhood at a fairly low price, you either had to live on a shared lot or you had to live in the floodplain. Those are your only options. And lastly, I want to talk a little bit. I'm in support of this resolution, but we're also supportive of an additional preservation bonus. >> Edgar Handel, Kelsey Hughes. Mr. Handel, I understand you got separate from your wife and child in sign ups. >> Sorry, say that again. >> I understand you got separated from your wife and child and sign ups. Oh, yeah. Is that your wife? Where is she on ? >> Yeah. >> Get get this question right? >> Yes, I used to find it. >> I would not want that recorded. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. In case you didn't see, he was looking for you without objection, I would hope that we could. They got [2:00:26 PM] separated, and they've got these young kids, and so they might leave. >> Okay. No, don't touch, please . >> Okay. >> Sorry. Thank you. My name is . >> Oh, say hi. My name is Edgar Handel. I live in gold valley in district three, and I came here to support items 124 126 and 158. I want my two children to grow up with thriving schools. And as the son of Honduran immigrants, I'd also love for them to grow up in a diverse neighborhood and abundant, diverse housing Lang works towards both of these hopes by supporting teachers and middle income. Austinites this will also help my children have homes of their homes of their own in the future and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. So perhaps they can have a city with a livable climate. I'd like to give my sincere thanks to the council member, Ryan alter. Council member Leslie pool. And mayor pro tem Paige Ellis and all the co-sponsors for supporting these crucial okay, I am co sponsors [2:01:28 PM] for supporting these crucial housing reforms. I hope council passes these items today and moves quickly towards allowing diverse housing options that enhance our neighborhoods and protect the future of our city and its schools. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. >> Mayor. >> Yes, please state your name. Council member, before you begin. Okay. >> I'll let her finish. >> I'm sorry. Okay. Please state your name so that we. >> Hi. Thank you for letting me join him. >> My name is Roseann. >> I live in go valley in district three with two of my kids and partner. I'm here in support of items 124, 126 and 158 I'd like to thank council member Ryan alter, council member Leslie pool and mayor pro tem Paige Ellis and the co sponsors for bringing these items as a clinical social social worker. >> I have seen firsthand that there is not only a housing shortage but also a shortage of mental health providers, especially for those who need to use insurance or cannot afford to pay out of pocket building. >> Middle income homes may not solve this mental health crisis alone, but it could go a long way towards supporting mental [2:02:28 PM] health workers and their ability to live and work in Austin. >> These items will make it much easier to build diverse housing all across Austin. >> Housing more attainable social workers, teachers and many other professions critical to the future of our city. I hope council passes these items today as a step towards a diverse and healthy Austin. Thank you. Okay >> Thank you all for being here. Councilmember ray vela mayor, I just wanted to say thank you and my deep appreciation to two young parents dragging their kids down here. >> I appreciate everybody's testimony and comments, but that takes really a lot of effort and I'll respect you all. Thank you . >> My daddy dragged me to a pool hall. >> So next up is Kelsey Hughes. On deck is felicity Maxwell, each speaking on 124, 126 and 158. >> Good afternoon, council. >> My name is Kelsey Hughes. I am a renter in district five. I am here to speak in support of 124 126 127 158 and I'm also [2:03:33 PM] against 9294 111 and 190. >> First, I want to thank councilmember pool for item 126. >> I live in a large multifamily apartment on south Lamar and I love living there. >> I have neighbors above me, below me on each side of me. I also play the violin, the Viola and the guitar for at least an hour a day. So I'm sure my neighbors do not love having me as a neighbor. I cannot afford a home in central Austin. Ideally, though, I would love to live in a small home with no yard, no parking because I ride the bus and I don't drive. >> However, this type of parking is extremely limited. >> Eid. And from what I know, it's expensive and has to go through a lot of red tape in order to be built out. >> I support removing these zoning regulations and giving property owners the right to house more people on their lots . >> And if anyone here would like to build a tiny home in their backyard Ed and rent it out to [2:04:34 PM] me, please let me know because I can play you some Irish tunes on my fiddle in the backyard. So thank you. Thank you. Felicity Maxwell on deck is Delia Obregon . >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson, mayor pro tem Ellis and members of the council. My name is felicity Maxwell and I'm ad5 resident. I would here to speak today in support of housing items. Number 124 125 and item 158 I would specifically like to address item 158 site plan light part one and thank mayor pro tem Ellis. And for her leadership on this item and for city staff on their work, for their work on this. >> We know that the complexity of the current site plan process has discouraged the creation of missing middle housing in Austin, and I believe that these revisions will be instrumental in offering alternate options for property owners and developers. >> We know that allowing 3 to 4 units to use the same residential building review will increase gentle density in neighborhoods that improves our neighborhoods. It's also an excellent compliment to the [2:05:34 PM] items brought today by council member pool and councilmember Ryan alter holistically eliminating developmental red tape for small unit redevelopments like this will bring much needed diversity of housing options to our city. >> In zilker, my neighborhood across the street from me, a 9000 square foot lot was redeveloped at the height of the property market. >> Just a few years ago. It's become a400 zero square foot single family home with a pool cabana and is now listed for $3.49 million. It sat unsold for months and I firmly believe that if we'd had options like the site plan exception, you all considering today, we would have it would have offered different and better redeveloping options for that large lot. This fall. We could have 2 or 3 more families enrolling in zilker elementary using our bike lanes, joining south Lamar Austin little league or swimming in Barton springs pool. But because of the complexity of our site plan process, the expensive land in zilker, we have a beautiful but empty mcmansion that is unaffordable to most everybody in this city. Hopefully but hopefully with your support today of streamlining regulation [2:06:35 PM] around small redevelopments in the future will see more neighborhood scale density and be able to welcome more austinites into the wonderful zip code of 78704. I would like to add finally that I'm excited to see the second round of site plan revisions focused on 5 to 16 units coming before the council before the end of the year, and I look forward to your support on that item as well. Thank you. Thank you. >> And Obregon on one 2426 and 158 following is Luis Austin lugo and anoush Roseann mayor Watson mayor pro tem Paige Ellis and members of the council. >> My name is alia Obregon. I'm a volunteer with aarp, but I'm here as a 36 year resident of Austin. I live in district ten. >> I'm here to support 126 sponsored by the Leslie pool council member pool 124 sponsored by member Ryan alter Ann 158 sponsored by by mayor [2:07:35 PM] pro tem Paige Ellis together, these three proposals would make it more affordable for middle class people to live in Austin. >> Those proposals would allow for more, more and smaller houses and increase the supply of affordable homes so people can build duplexes and triplexes that fit with the character of a single family neighborhood. Such a neighbor, such housing can generate passive income or allow family members to live together and care for each other while having their own spaces in my culture, living with or near parents is common. It's getting extremely hard to do. In Austin, we have room in our lot for a granny house, aka a granny flat , but we cannot build one. My husband and I could someday live in that granny flat and one of our children could live in the house and get married and raise a family because there's no way they could do that otherwise. >> Now, while we love our children, it does get crowded. >> Having four adults in one [2:08:37 PM] home. However our stays in our house could check in on us. It's been great having the two of them with us since I fell two years ago and broke my elbow. I'm still trying to recover. They cook and clean house and help me keep my garden alive in this drought and extreme heat. When we kick the proverbial bucket, our children could rent out that granny house and generate income to help pay property taxes. People fear that duplex houses and triplexes decrease the value of single family homes. But we cannot maintain property values if younger people can't buy those homes. Thank you for offering creative solution aens. Thank you, Luis Austin lugo speaking on 124 126 and 158. >> Following is a news a new Roseann and next is Judah rice. [2:09:38 PM] Aleem Virani. Emma kieninger. On deck as Ryan and I cannot pronounce the last name, but it starts with a P. If your name was called, please make your way to the podium and state your name. >> Hi, my name is Emma kieninger. I'm here to speak about 124 126 and 158. First of all, thank you so much. And and I wanted to say that I am a resident of district three and a current member of the east, Cesar Chavez neighborhood plan contact team. >> But I'm here in a personal capacity. I support items 124 [2:10:38 PM] 126 and 158 I have loved living near downtown. It provides more opportunities for walking and biking without diverse housing options. Those living in district three is becoming increasingly difficult at walkability and bike ability should be available to a diverse set of income levels. Currently owning and renting a home in Austin is only realistic for those with a higher income. Adjusting these zoning laws to support reduced lot sizes will increase housing affordability and support a wider variety of incomes. I support more affordable and diverse housing options in Austin. Thank you so much. >> Luis Austin lugo van eenoo rasean. Judah rice. Aleem Virani and Ryan. Ryan P go ahead and come forward. To state your name [2:11:42 PM] please. >> Hi, I'm Ryan pieszecki. Say that again. What's that say that again. Pieszecki. >> Okay, we got it. >> Good morning, mayor. Or good afternoon. Now, mayor. Council I'm here to express my strong support for item 126. When my husband and I bought our home early last year, we thought we were pretty lucky to have found a newish house within spitting distance of downtown. But I started to wonder why were big houses with big yards still getting built so close to the city center? Wouldn't such valuable land have been better suited to housing more people than just two guys in their dog ? This sent me down a rabbit hole learning about Austin's land use code. What I learned was that the code effective mandated, low density and large houses in neighborhoods adjacent to downtown, I realized that our luck was that we could afford what the code allowed. Luck is not a solid foundation on which to build broad based prosperity. In Austin, a thriving city requires a thriving middle class . We will have neither if we [2:12:43 PM] maintain a code that makes it illegal to build homes at middle class price points. Today's resolution is an important step towards building a future that includes more than just the lucky few. And it's also the right thing to do. I'd like to thank council member pool for sponsoring this and as well as my council member, Natasha harper-madison and the mayor and all other co-sponsors of this resolution. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Julio Aguilar, speaker on 124, 126 and 158. If your name has been called and the podium is available, all please make your way there. >> Good afternoon, mayor. Mayor mayor Watson, mayor pro tempore Ellis and the members of the council. I am Luis lugo, a local housing and environmental activists and I wanted to thank [2:13:44 PM] the council members for putting forward item 126 124 and 158 124 and 158 are incredibly important to help get our house Singh development to not just be good in theory, but actually be usable and doable in practice and in regards to 126, I wanted to put personally thank councilmember pool for putting this forward as it's the kind of gentle density that fits really nicely into our neighborhoods that makes a homeownership a viable reality for austinites. Like just like regular everyday austinites. And this is something, you know, really close to home for me. I immigrated from a poor out of sort of power family in Venezuela, escaping the dictatorship there. And we worked very hard and I was thankfully spiced, thankfully, because of my community, I was able to, you know, achieve the American dream. And we were like riding high. And me and my partner having the time of our lives. And then we made the [2:14:46 PM] grievous mistake of looking at the housing market here in Austin, Texas, the city that we were falling in love with, and realized that like, oh wow, you know, we could get everything right. We could do this and this and this, you know, work 16 hour days, start a business until you're out of luck. Complete shortly. And while maybe some people would prefer to have a big lawn, I'm more than happy to have a duplex if that means I really get to build a life here in Austin. You know, me and my friends, we joke about it all the time that you know, oh, if we want to build a life for the next 20 years in Austin, we should have done is get a time machine, go back to the early 2000 and buy a home then. But you know, things like, you know, item 126, it makes a real difference for folks. So I just wanted to say thank you to you and the co sponsors and that we find a path forward not just in theory but in practice. Good morning, council. >> I guess I should say good [2:15:47 PM] afternoon. Now when I wrote this, it was good morning, but good morning. Council. My name is Alan Virani. I'm a proud member of Ora and even prouder resident of beautiful Mueller. I'm speaking to you today to express my support for item 126, 124 and 125 these critical policies reflect the essence of what makes Mueller so great the diversity of housing options in our neighborhood of Mueller a neighbor is a neighbor is a neighbor. Irrespective if they live in an apartment, if they live in a townhouse, if they live in a single family home. Everyone is part of the community. And that's what makes Mueller so great. And that's what could make Austin so great as we allow the diversity of housing options, I also want to speak a little bit about my personal story. My family, my parents migrated to north America, to Montreal as refugees us and they first lived in a duplex in a townhome actually. And because of that they were able to thrive in Montreal and they were able to thrive on working class salaries and [2:16:48 PM] working class jobs. And that's one of the reasons I'm able to be here and speak to you today. So I thank you so much for your time and consideration and thank you so much for these wonderful policies. Thank you. >> The next speaker is Julio Aguilar. And draya clipper. For 125, Carol Pennington on item 125. >> Good afternoon. >> My name is Carol Pennington. >> I currently do not live in the city of Austin, although I did grow up here beginning in 1966. I currently live just south of Austin, a mile from the Travis hays county line off of state highway 45 southwest. >> My subdivs Ann and all of the land along 45 southwest is over. >> The Edwards aquifer recharge [2:17:48 PM] zone approving an scr is a major decision that should not be taken lightly. I don't mean any disrespect to the city staff, but with it requiring a city council vote, you're ensuring some level of control over developments and making sure they are in compliance with city codes and ordinances, as well as environmental standards. >> If this passes, it will also take out the public input part on these developments. >> As I have been speaking out about hays commons, who has an Sr application in house for over two years, making sure everyone knows the environmental challenges this development faces is because it is over. >> The Edwards aquifer recharge zone. >> I am waiting for my chance to speak to this city council when that application is on your agenda for without it coming before the city council, my voice would not be heard. This is not acceptable. >> So have a great impact that [2:18:50 PM] affect neighbors that need to have their voice heard. >> We also speak up for the environment that can't speak for itself until it is too late and irreversible. >> Our entire neighborhood in all of the surrounding neighborhoods are all on private or community wells. >> This is our drinking water. >> We need to ensure it stays safe to drink. This is an important topic in our lives. >> Depend on it. >> Please do not pass this amendment to remove city council approval for cers from the city code. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Andrew Herrod and mayor, before we're moving on to items the majority of item 126, we've received only one request out to speak when council takes up the item. All the others have requested to speak now. So so I [2:19:50 PM] will call those names. And if you change your mind, please let us know. Thank you. So the next speaker speaking on 125 and 126 is Andrew Herrod. On on deck is Janice Rankin for going with Greg Anderson. If your name has been called, please, please come forward so that you'll be ready . If your name has been called, please approach the podium. Don't be shy. State your name. >> Go ahead. Okay. >> Yeah. Hi there. Andrew Herrod . I'm going to just speak on 126. So so I'm a, I'm an environmentalist. I'm you know, more of an urbanist than a preservationist. And the way I way I see it, I'm all for turning more densifying the [2:20:52 PM] urban core, but I want to see it done right. And if we get rid of the tree ordinances and the impervious surface cover regulations, we're just going to make a concrete jungle. Climate change is pressing issue. We're feeling it more and more every day. And I just feel that if we do this, we're not going to do it right. So I'm against thank you. Thank you, ma'am. >> Janice Rankin, Greg Anderson . You have the mic. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor pro tem and council members. I'm Janice Rankin. I'm a district seven resident. Have been since 1992. I'd like to ask you today [2:21:53 PM] to reconsider for your votes on item number 126. There are many reasons as it contemplate its development in an area like Mueller that was not already previously developed and had the opportunity to create a new kind of structure for homes to be built in smaller lots, smaller places, smaller sizes. This proposal seems to address the land use and deregulate our established communities without proper notice and without an opportunity to protest. I would like to acknowledge my council member, Leslie pool, and I'd like to thank council member Alison alter for her thoughtful response to my email, which I sent to all of you on Tuesday. I would like to ask you to build up communities and not destroy them. What we have here are people who are constituents and stakeholders and they should be given due regard in Eid concern [2:22:56 PM] to residential voters. I would like to ask for a declaration or an explanation of your legislative intent. Is it your intent to exempt lots that have restrictive deed covenants baked into the ownership rights? Is it . I would like to have an answer for that. In terms of your deliberation. The other alternative would be to force private citizens like myself to enforce those restrictive deed covenants. If the city continues to issue building permits inconsistent, consistent with the zoning and inconsistent with the deed covenants. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your time. >> Greg Anderson on deck. Lorraine Atherton, Carol baker, thank you. >> Afternoon, mayor. >> Council members. My name is Greg Anderson. I'm with Austin. Habitat for humanity Austin's minimum lot sizes increased to [2:23:59 PM] 5750 in 1946, when the city of Austin was approximately 100,000 people recalibrating single family zoning. >> In 2023, when our population is ten times of what it was, makes a lot of sense. >> Many people want to live in single family homes but are outdated regulations burns make this unachievable for the vast majority of austinites, the skyrocketing prices of our single family neighborhoods is one of the main drivers of aisd's teachers, staff and families inability to live here , leading to a continuously shrinking enrollment, allowing middle income earners to outbid single high income earner is good policy and I promise you the high income earner is still going to be okay. They're going to find housing. City manager should this pass. I really hope that you can bring this back with urgency and go through a couple of slides real quick. This is a raw piece of dirt, a block, not even a block. Feet from Houston. Tillotson no home on it, nothing. So add to this a 400 square, $400 per square [2:25:01 PM] foot. However many square feet you want to build. And that's what can be built here. One home, maybe two. If you're really lucky. But I think there's a heritage tree, not letting you build the second one today where it is without this resolution, we know where this goes is if we don't allow for more homes to be built, where people want to live, then by default, you're only going to allow the top 5% of income earners to live here. So with that council, thank you for taking this up and really do hope that you approve this item . Good luck. >> Lorraine Atherton, followed by Carol baker and Tina Barrett . Joyce basciano Michael o'connor . Please state your name when you if your name has been [2:26:02 PM] called. Please approach the podium and state your name. Thank you. Good afternoon, mayor and council. >> My name is Tina Barrett and I'm a builder. More importantly , I'm a resident of rosedale in council member pool's district seven and I am for resolution item 126 as a builder I know I'll be okay building multi-million dollar single family homes in central Austin. That's easy. As a 24 year resident of rosedale, I'm very concerned about housing affordability, climate change and equity for less fortunate. >> Austinites. >> The proposal from council member pool to increase density on single family lots will help tremendous Leslie with all of these. But equity is on my mind today. >> A little over 100 years ago, in a major advance for human dignity, the supreme court struck down a racial zoning law in Louisville, Kentucky. >> The prohibited non-whites from moving into homes in majority white areas. >> But this hardly ended racial discrimination in housing as [2:27:03 PM] white homeowners adopted biased policies like exclusionary zoning that banned apartment buildings in areas designated for single family homes, often adding minimum lot size requirements to, in fact, just a few years later, in a 1926 supreme court decision about zoning in a suburb of Cleveland , the court reasoned that an apartment building can be, quote, a mere parasite constructed in order to take advantage of open spaces and attractive surroundings created by the residential character of the district, end quote. I'm so very grateful to the council that the council now recognizes that neighborhood character is really just a relic code. Word of that age meant to keep the poor away from the privileged. And my hope is that my rosedale neighbors will also realize that people who can only afford a townhome or a unit in a triplex are worthy of being our neighbors. Such each character only adds to our neighborhood, not detracts as many seem to think. I again want to say a big thank you to the council and especially to council member [2:28:03 PM] pool for their forward thinking outlook and for sponsoring this potentially life changing resolution. Thank you. La Lorraine Atherton, Carol baker. >> Joyce basciano. My Michael Connor. Robert crump. For following is James deli. If your name has been called, please approach. Thank you and state your name. >> Hello, my name is Robert crump. >> I'm a fifth generation austinite currently residing in one during the pandemic. >> I lived in Chicago and I've seen how entrenched systemic problems can affect a city and how hard they are to reverse this resolution. Item 26 126 [2:29:04 PM] this resolution presents an amazing opportunity to make Austin more livable long term. I applaud the council for working in the interests of the people of Austin by bringing this item to a vote. The poor and working class people of the city have been suffocating as a result of our outdated land use policies. This resolution provides a measure of much needed relief in regards to maintaining the status quo. We've seen this movie before over the last 40 years in Austin, and every city across the world. I commend the council for trying to make a sequel worthy of the empire strikes back and trying to avoid making troll two. Thank you. James >> James darling, Mary farrow. Good afternoon, mayor and council. >> My name is James Daly. I've lived in district nine for four years. >> I've come to express my support for item 126, which will allow Austin to build smaller and more diverse housing. There [2:30:05 PM] are three perspectives from which this resolution has earned my support as a renter. As a neighbor, and as an austinite as a renter. Increasing the supply of housing will lower the cost of living for people like me, making it easier for us to make Austin our home as a neighbor and friend of homeowners. It will increase the freedom of my friends to build what they want on their land and as a proud austinite it will help our city grow, protect the environment by using resources efficiently and fight homelessness at the root cause. I ever since learning how restrictive the current land development code is, when I walk around a neighborhood, I see empty space and wasted opportunities. This resolution will start turning those opportunities into reality. Thank you to council member pool for bringing forth this item for consideration. Ann. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. >> I'm Mary farrow from district seven council member pool. [2:31:05 PM] >> I wish this was a and all of you. I wish this was a proposal for to guarantee low income housing that I could support. But it's not. I don't don't see this as something that will bring gentle density to the neighborhoods. And in fact, as council member alter mentioned in her remarks, yesterday's work session. I do think that there are a lot of unintended consequences that have not been considered, and I don't take any comfort in thinking about future public participation because based on my involvement in public participation, Ann driven by consultants, I don't feel like the many voices really are brought forward. >> It feels like a preconceived notion that that finds a way to get rubber stamped. So we're continuing this headlong rush. One thing we know is that developers are going to continue to make a lot of money. However [2:32:06 PM] this works out, there are environmental concerns, tree canopy issues, flash flooding, as many people have said, I, I want affordable housing. >> I think there are opportunities is I think one person earlier said that you could come up with the same kind concept but have it come forward on a case by case basis. >> I think that would perhaps be more reasonable in terms of preserving neighborhood ids. I appreciate what you're trying to do. >> I do recognize that there is a dire need for affordable housing. >> I just don't think that this broad change to the city is the way to do it. An and it feels like you're looking for a legal loophole around the code next issues that we dealt with a few years ago. Thank you so much. [2:33:06 PM] Sharing Gillespie Betsy Greenberg and Christy green. >> Okay. Okay. >> I'm Sharon Gillespie speaking against. 126 six implement renting this proposal will would decimate land use compatibility standards Deegan grade and destabilize neighborhoods. Woods and give a windfall to developers all while local government abdicates responsible ability for site specific appropriateness. Developers have no obligation to pass on profits or make new homes affordable and they won't or can't. And which neighborhoods will be the first to suffer displacement? At the [2:34:07 PM] least affluent where land can be had most cheaply though cost of materials to build is still prohibitive for furthermore, the single family rental industry with its build rent model, is burgeoning and wealthy investors will compete for any and all new housing. More impervious cover in neighborhoods will exacerbate flooding by pushing existing water problems onto adjacent and downstream properties and replace trees and green space that temper our heat in our burning city by allowing developers to tear down habitable buildings is a tragic mismanagement of precious resources, not only destroy viable housing, but also promoting construct waste and contributing to climate change. More than 35% of construction [2:35:08 PM] and demolition waste. One of the top sources of pollution and environmental degradation is sent to landfills. This development developer enrichment scheme perpetrates a fraud on our community and promotes false hope to those seeking affordable housing. Please vote it down. >> Thank you, Betsy Greenberg. >> Following is Christy green. Mayor and council. >> My name is Betsy Greenberg. >> I live in district nine and I'm opposed to item 126 and 158 126 proposed is to reduce the minimum lot, size and single family zoning districts to 2500ft !S and similar taneously amend the maximum number of housing units to allow at least three units per lot on single family zoning at the same time, with less site plan review [2:36:08 PM] proposed for my home and my neighbors. >> This means three lots are possible with three units on each lot. So nine units in order to max out development, you will have to throw out impervious cover limits, tree protections, setbacks and waive standard fees. County member pool says this is a simple and elegant way to make it possible for homeowners who are being priced out to stay in their homes, she may even believe it, but I don't. I know that putting nine units on a single family lot is a job for an investor, not a middle income homeowner. If my neighbors do this, I would leave the neighborhood that I have enjoyed for over 30 years. I oppose changes that would get rid of impervious cover limits, tree protections, and other environmental standards, while record heat and flooding are killing people across the country and the planet. Before [2:37:09 PM] you vote in favor of this resolution, I suggest you take a walk outside to enjoy today's heat. Or you can stay on your comfortable chair in the air conditioning and protect and that this is for affordable housing. As you destroy people's homes and our precious environment. Thank you. The choice is yours is Christy green , Christy green and on deck is Dylan Hermes. >> Hello. Thank you for having me today. My name is Dylan Hermes. I'm a Texas realtor and I'm also on two committees on the Austin board of realtors. And I'm in favor of 126. So I work with a lot of builders and whenever people when builders are looking for lots, they are looking at all these things like trees and all the things that [2:38:11 PM] they can't change to build. But but what's important to know is that they have to build 3 to 3 and a half times the amount that they have to sell their product for 3 to 3 and a half times the amount of the lot. So if the lot costs $600,000, they have to sell their product for 101.8 million. And we have so many, we have so many homes like this already, we don't need the more $2 million homes. But if we can have lots where we have three homes on each one that are $400,000, then the builders are still getting the same almost the same, amount of ink, that it took them to build. And, and we're getting, we're getting our workforce back in Austin because I have so many clients right now who have to go to Kyle or Georgetown or bastrop and I used [2:39:14 PM] to live in lakeway, because it was actually less expensive at the time for me and to, to purchase. But my work is here, my work is in Austin, so I moved back to Austin and I have to rent here and I want my clients to be able to buy a $400,000 home or a $350,000 home in Austin, Ann and, you know, this is for the bartenders, the firefighters, these people that are our main workforce force deserve to live in Austin. So thank you. Christy green. >> Heather Hobbs. Following is Taylor Jackson and Christine Jones. >> Hi, I'm Heather Hubbs and I'm a UT physics student. I work with the campus chapter of habitat for humanity, and we get [2:40:15 PM] the amazing opportunity to help build houses for individuals in need sometime we are allowed the opportunity to meet the individuals that we build houses for. And I met an emergency medical technician who could not afford to house her and her daughter anywhere near the city of Austin. Item 126 is huge for the future of our city. Since Austin experienced a housing boom in 2021. So many individuals that are integral to our city have experienced hardships in their efforts to acquire housing or simply have not acquired housing at all. Many individuals, including first responders, medical profession, Ralls and teachers, have been displaced to nearby cities due to the extreme lack of affordable housing in our city. Approving this item will allow access to housing for the families of those whose lives or whose save lives and increase the overall quality of Austin's citizens. When debating this item, take the safety, health and education of your citizens into consideration. Thank you. [2:41:16 PM] And with the short time that the short amount of time that I have left, I would like to bring the attention to the fact that there has not been a single young person who has spoken in opposition to item 126. I plan to continue my education to a doctoral level and I would prefer for my future to be taken into consideration so I do not have to live with my parents again. Please think about young people. We're the future. Thank you. >> Taylor Jackson. >> You know your parents will get to see this right? I don't. I don't. Yeah. There you go. >> Taylor Jackson, Christine, Joan burns kymberley Colas, and Lynn Langley. >> Good afternoon, mayor pro tem, mayor pro tem and council members. I'm Taylor Jackson, the CEO of the homebuilders association of greater Austin and a constituent of council member pool. The vision of our [2:42:17 PM] organization and our members is for all people to live in homes that enables them to thrive within our community. Katy and the homebuilders association believes. Item 126 is a vital step towards that goal. The cost of land is the largest contributor to the price of a home for every $1,000 a home price increases more than. 1100 families are priced out of buying a home. Putting this into even more perspective, 73% of austinites are unable to afford the median price of an Austin home owning your own home is a number one way to build wealth for families. And 73% of austinites should have that opportunity. I commend the council members for their work and dedication in addressing housing for our workforce and [2:43:19 PM] our community. Thank you. >> Christine Jones, kymberley Colas. Lynn Langley and Jessica Lehman. Kymberley Levinson. If your name has been called, please approach the podium. >> Please just come forward. >> Hi, I'm kymberley Colas. >> Just want to get my timer going. >> Thank you for this two minutes. >> And mayor, council members, thank you for your hearing. Everybody speak in support of and against a bunch of different items. >> I just want to say I really am thankful for all the people who have spoken out both in support and against item 26 126 I live in district nine and border district five, and I'm really happy that both zo and Ryan are in the room. Thank you [2:44:22 PM] for your commitment to making a difference in the city that I've loved for 39 years. I appreciate everybody who has spoken out and yes, make Austin more affordable , but not by ruining our neighborhoods. >> More density does not equal more affordability. I am an architect and a realtor, and I'm guessing that those in support of reducing lot size to 2500 for three homes and eliminating site and building coverage simply don't understand the impact. >> While I would personally benefit greatly from the passage of 126, I'm against it because of the impact it's going to have on Austin Leslie. >> I would love to come visit you at your home. I noticed that next door at 4505 shoal creek, two homes have been built and are on the market. >> And from my math, the owners will profit by more than $1 million when both 3000 square foot homes sell easily. >> This could be any of our neighborhoods, and profits provide incentives for [2:45:22 PM] development. >> With your amended rules and size of the lot. >> Those owners next door to you could now tear down what they spent two years building and instead build 15 homes with a profit of $7 million. With the average dollar per square foot in your neighborhood each home would sell for well above the very unaffordable $750,000. Who wins every home on your street between 45th and 46th? >> If everyone increased their density as you propose, your street would go from $11. >> That was not time. >> You're shoot. Okay. Darn good. Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Christine Jones. >> Hello. I'm kymberley Levinson. >> I am the past president of the downtown Austin neighborhood [2:46:22 PM] association. >> I'm a current downtown commissioner from district nine and Ed, the chair or the vice chair of the pedestrian advisory council. >> And I'm here to speak in support of 126, because even though I've got mine already, I know too many people who have no hope right now of ever getting theirs. >> I've got two nephews, one of whom has a three year old son and they're business owners in the community and they can't afford to buy a house here because they can't find a 350 to $400,000 home in a district with a decent school system. >> They're really hurting and too many people are hurting. And as for the idea that somehow or other we're going to hurt the environment by in Phil, it's exactly the opposite. >> Sprawling out over the aquifer is going to cause a lot more harm to our environment. >> It's going to cause a lot more impervious cover to be built. That's going to cause water usage problems to accelerate even more. So what we [2:47:23 PM] really need to do is to make it possible for people to live in dense, walkable neighborhoods so that they can ride public transit, get out of the horrible Austin traffic and actually get back to having something of a life. So I applaud all of you here who are supporting this notion. And thank you very much. Thank you, Julia Aguilar Lin Langley. >> Thank you, council and mayor Watson. >> My name is Jessica lemon. I'm the senior associate state director of outreach and advocacy for aarp Texas. And we are asking for your support of item 126 as well as 124 and 158. We feel these will lead to an increase in housing stock as well as housing diversity for middle income residents allow these middle income earners to live in the city rather than outside of the city, commuting in further, taxing our roads and our environment. It will allow older adults to downsize should they wish to, while aging in their commute. Katy which the option to do that is practically nonexistent today and it allows [2:48:25 PM] our children and grandchildren opportunity to stay in Austin. Aging with their family on a personal note, I have an 18 year old who is starting college in about a month, and when I ask what he wants to do, he wants to be a high school history teacher . But he said that doesn't make a lot of sense because he also wants to stay in Austin and he wouldn't be able to do that if that was the profession he chose. And I don't want to age in a city where my children have no place here. >> So thank you so much for your time. >> Thank you. >> Julio Aguilar Lin Langley. Bill Morrison. Ryan knell. Nicole Nosek. Ben Ovard. [2:49:29 PM] Please state your name. >> Good afternoon. My name is Nicole Nosek. >> Good afternoon. Mayor and council members. >> My name is Nicole and I'm the chair and founder of Texans for reasonable solutions. >> We are strongly in support of 126, which reduces lot sizes. I'm also in support of 158. We are a nonprofit that believes the American dream of home ownership should be attainable to hard working Texans. In Austin, the average austinite spends 48% of their income on housing. That's unacceptable. The answer is entirely simple legalize smaller lots. >> This has historically worked in Houston in the late 90s, Houston enacted a law almost identical to the one in front of you. >> Right now in that that lot size brought brought the minimum required lots from 5000 square foot to 1400 square foot. >> Unsurprisingly, Houston inn's [2:50:30 PM] median home price today hovers around $350,000. >> That has a city of 2.3 million people and businesses and communities continue to thrive in Houston. >> Austin's. Is $528,000 median home price. >> Also, our our the amount of people that live in Austin are not nearly at the level of Houston at about 1 million there is a clear there is a clear parallel between lot sizes and the cost of homes. >> Let me give you another example. Westlake hills, which is only ten minutes from here, the median home price of Westlake hills is almost $3 million. And their minimum lot size is unsurprisingly one acre. You have a few folks here that are trying to tell you that there is no relationship between lot size and median home price and that is factually inaccurate . >> It in the south of the us land costs 40% of the price of a [2:51:31 PM] home. >> This is not rocket science, folks. >> As we send our toddler to a preschool where his former teacher makes between 50 to 60 K and has to drive one hour in just to make it. >> Thank you so much. Thank you . >> Julio Aguilar. Go ahead. Go ahead. State your name. >> I'm Ben. Overt. >> Yes. I'm Ben Ovard. I live in district nine and I'm speaking in support of item 126. I support this change because it allows a greater variety of housing across all neighborhoods of the city, which means a greater variety of, of income levels, lifestyles and family types can live together in neighborhoods. I'm lucky enough to live in Hyde park currently, and if anyone is concerned about what their neighborhood might look like under this change, all you have to do is drive through Hyde park, a neighborhood where single family homes, duplexes, [2:52:31 PM] fourplexes and apartment buildings all live in harmony together there. And as a great neighborhood and one of the most desirable neighborhoods in Austin. Like the previous lady pointed out, Austin has one of the largest minimum lot sizes in Texas, 5700ft !S compared to Houston's 1400. And under this change, it would still be almost double Houston's minimum lot size of 1800. As well as you know we hear a lot about the neighborhood character losing the neighborhood character is my belief that the neighborhood character comes not from the buildings that exist in the city, but from the people that live here. And every day that that austinites have to leave the city to find cheaper housing, we're losing that neighborhood character from the people. So that's why I support this this change. Thank you. Thank you. [2:53:32 PM] >> Bill Morrison. Ryan knell. >> Hello, council members. >> My name is Ryan knell. >> I am a homeowner in district four, but previously lived in district seven for, I don't know until they redistricted it last. >> Most recently. >> So we have two units on my property and since we've bought it, we've had a roommate and someone else in the second unit, which I think it would have been incredibly difficult to achieve home ownership in Austin without having the ability to have roommates and other folks who do live with me. >> And you know, right now we have a 10,000 square foot lot and a yard that's much bigger than I want to deal with. >> So. >> So for many years I lived in cooperative housing and so I just have a much greater preference for living with other [2:54:34 PM] people than alone in my single family house. >> So I really appreciate that, councilmember pool for bringing this resolution to allow me to either build some more units or maybe carve off some of this huge lot so I can sell it so I can remain in Austin for as long as I wish. So once again, thank you for bringing this proposal and have a good day. >> Mark Overstreet. I think we also have a gentleman in the front that may have been previously called. >> Yes, hello. >> You can go next. >> Y'all can rock, paper, scissors for it. >> Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I'm mark Overstreet from district three, and I oppose Luz 126. As with many things involving government in this instance, follow the money , the developers, the builders, the realtors and the council. [2:55:36 PM] Aside from any financial relationships, council members may have with developers, builders and realtors, if 126 is adopted, property taxes on the lots in question will increase and cramming more people into the same amount of space on residential lots will initially mean more cars along with more traffic. Presumably a revenue generating parking meters on residential neighborhood streets , more money for the council to spend on painting the names of activist organizers stations on the streets. But not to fix potholes. How ever following the money is only the tip of the iceberg here. 126 is really about the c40 cities program. The letter C and the number 40 onto which the council has signed. And there's the 15 Ann minute cities program. These programs are premised on the discredited idea that there's a climate emergency. There eventual goal is to eliminate fossil fuel vehicles, then all personal vehicles are to force [2:56:37 PM] people to walk or ride a bicycle, never going anywhere beyond 15 minutes from their homes, in which case a 126 would be little boxes crammed on top of one another on small lots. This won't apply to councilwoman Kelly at least, but I encourage radical left council members to set aside their ideology. We respect people who want to live in traditional single family neighborhoods and withdraw or oppose. 126 thank you, sir. Thank you. Why don't you come up? >> Get away from miss Kelly to come back. >> Why don't you come up? >> Okay. Well hi. >> My name is Julio Rojas Aguilar. >> I live in district five, and I'm here to support items 124, 126 and 158. >> Hi, Mr. Alter. >> Thank you for being my district so. So our city is at a crossroads and it is essential that we recognize that the impact of our decision on the [2:57:37 PM] present and the future we can foster a more vibrant and inclusive and economically prosperous environment for our residents. You have heard a wide range of arguments against these items, from economic to environmental. Unfortunately, the well intentioned these arguments are mal informed. At the heart of the issue lies the present stifling of market forces informed by economic signals and human forces that make up and impact our community as we restrict the construction of missing middle housing, we inadvertently suppress the very principles that drive economic growth and human flourishing. On the economic side, housing prices in Austin are skyrocketing. We see small rundown houses in and around downtown going for 1 million plus and similar rundown houses in further surrounding areas not being any cheaper. What that says is the land itself is the biggest contributor to high costs. Our present regulations restrict what a homeowner can do [2:58:38 PM] with their own land and severely reduce the housing options for new home buyers. The present homeowner will be pushed out as they no longer can afford to pay property taxes on their land. And the only people that can afford to continue to they can afford to buy the property will be the affluent. If we continue with our present system, only millionaires will be homeowners in Austin and all our principles and advocacy for diversity and inclusivity and championing of the common man will not be will be for naught. As the common man is pushed out of Austin in an unobstructed system, a land owner could divide his land up. Therefore divide up the costs and sell it to a wide range of buyers and maybe keep a portion for themselves to live in their golden years. I strongly push. Want you guys to support this movement. Thank you. Thank you. Justin poses Adam Powell. [2:59:39 PM] >> Alexandra Pavlov. >> Before you speak, let me for those that are go ahead and make yourself comfortable. Those wondering how we're going to go forward, we're going to continue to hear speakers on the consent agenda until that or everybody is exhausted and then what we'll do is we're going to vote on the consent agenda at that point, my intention would be to go to those items that were pulled. Then we will go to zoning. Then we will go to hsc. Now, I'm sorry, we will go to zoning then we'll go to the public hearings that are scheduled Eid. Then we'll go to ask. So if you're trying to organize your time for any part of that, that's that's how we'll proceed. I'm sorry to interrupt you. Go ahead. >> No, no problem. >> My name is Adam Powell. >> I'm a district seven resident, and I'm here to strongly support item 126. [3:00:40 PM] >> And the main reason why is because the reason that I can be a district seven resident and have been a district seven resident for years now is because I'm a renter and a townhouse that is part of a three plex and I'm so extremely grateful for the opportunity that that's allowed me to invest in my community, to love my community and neighborhood, to simply be able to exist there. >> And it's the simple reality that across Austin right now, most neighborhoods like mine across the city do not have a lot of opportunities for the type of living situation that I'm in right now. >> And it hurts my heart to know that other austinites who could use this housing option, this meaningful housing option to exist in, to live in, to invest in their communities, don't have this option. >> So I'm extremely in support of item 126 and council member Leslie pool I'm proud to be represented by you as your leading on this issue. >> Thank you. Alex >> Andre siegelaub, Austin [3:01:40 PM] Stowell. Jim Templeton. Please state your name. >> Good morning, mayor and council. >> My name is Alexandra cibolo. I'm a member of aura, but I'm here to speak as a resident of district one in the Windsor hills neighborhood. I'm in support of item 126, reducing the required lot sizes for single family homes because we have middle and missing middle housing that that is greatly needed. >> This would bring much needed housing options to the residents . Residents of Austin. >> Five years ago, I became a proud owner, a proud homeowner. As I've gotten to know my neighbors, many of whom have been residents here for decades, I've come to admire their strong work ethic and diverse range of professions. >> They represent from teachers to plumbers and other middle income workers. >> However, today the reality is a teacher would be priced out of my neighborhood and would need [3:02:40 PM] to look beyond the city limits to find a comparable home. As people move away from the city, their reliance on cars become greater and resulting in significant financial burden and as well as increase in pollution and climate and climate change. Paige by implementing thoughtful policies and investing in sustainable infrastructure, we can create an environment where individual goals, including teachers, can find homes within our city limits without sacrificing their financial well-being or exacerbate environmental concerns. >> I think inaction is not the solution. >> This is just one step in many steps. In order to create more housing in Austin. Thank you, everybody, for listening. Thank you. >> Austin Stowell, Jim Templeton . Scott turner. If your name has [3:03:41 PM] been called, please approach the podium and state your name is your name been called sir? >> Sir, has your name been called? Yes but Austin combs. >> Then. >> I'm sorry. >> Somebody named Austin was on the deck before. >> Yeah. Go ahead. Okay you beat him to the podium. It's all yours. I have. >> I have some slides to show. My name is Jim Templeton. I'm in district four. I'm a realtor. And on the surface, the increased housing density is. >> Yes, I get more houses to sell at a higher price, but if you scratch the surface, that's not really what's going well. It is what's going on for realtors perspective. >> But as a consumer's perspective, there's something else at play next slide. I took a look at six. I took a look at all, but I'm highlighting six of the multi unit homes that replaced single homes in the [3:04:43 PM] Austin urban corridor. You can see the map there. Those dots show where the house is. I looked at are next slide. Looking at the last six homes that were to replacing one. I made a plot showing each of the homes in green. You can see what the original price of the home on that lot was. And then in Orange and red, you can see the ab units, the one, two units and how they were priced at a minimum. You see the price increase was 50% at a maximum. You see over 300. Now I have developers who are clients and I fully support their business model and I think they should have the right to earn their paycheck. However, again, as a human and as a resident of this area, I have to divulge that we are not creating two new affordable units. We are destroying an affordable unit and we are creating two higher end units that yeah, I've sold a bunch of these for sure and that's why I make my money. But [3:05:45 PM] the truth of the matter is we're not creating more affordable housing. Next slide. This is just another look at the same data, but actually showing what the listing prices were. The last show to comparison of the sell prices, you can see we're talking about very expensive homes, 700 to 1.4 million. Thank you all right. I had more. But thank you very much for your time. >> We have your email. >> Oh, good. Thank you. Thank you. >> Austin Stowell. Scott turner . On deck is Suzanne Valentine. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. >> Scott turner. I'm here to support item 126. >> I'd like to point out that this item build on other resolutions, prior resolutions such as regulations around parking and site plan requirements that all have to work together along with the 5000 pages of the other parts of [3:06:47 PM] the land development code in order to succeed at generating more home ownership opportunities for more, austinites, as you all certainly know and as you've heard today, our housing problems are bigger than just this one item. And it's going to take a lot more work. Probably a lot more public testimony and a lot more resolution and some hard but necessary decisions on y'all's part to really get the housing that we desperately need. But this item is a very important step in the right direction. Ann it's a bold step, but as you've heard today, it's a hard step. But it really is a step that I want to applaud you for taking because it is a very necessary step if we want our friends and our families and our fellow austinites, many of you heard from here, you know, moments ago, to be able to buy a home, build wealth and raise a family here in Austin. And that's an opportunity that many of us in this room have had. But it's an opportunity that most austinites [3:07:48 PM] today do not have, and that's an opportunity that they will never have without changes like item 126 so I just want to thank you for your support of this item and for your efforts to really create some more home ownership opportunities for our residents . Thank you very much. Thank you . >> Suzanne Valentine. I'm David Whitworth, bar. Barbara Williamson. Lisa Wimberley. Shaw John Mccarthy. >> Just make your way to the podium, please. >> Hello. Good afternoon. My name is Lisa Wimberley. I'm here to speak in favor of 124, 126 and 158. I have lived in Austin for 27 years, all of them in rosedale in district seven, just [3:08:49 PM] like all of you, I've watched our city become less affordable and our Summers get hotter with more than 100 degree days, with more than 100 degree days. While my kids are making decisions to live here in Austin, to be near family, I'm worried not just about them being able to afford to live here, but what the Summers and the winters will look like for them in the years to come. I'm here today to say a huge thank you for doing the right thing for the future generations of austinites. It's not just that this may give my adult kids an opportunity to buy a home near central Austin, but maybe what's even more important , this is also a giant step towards responsive city growth, given the state of our climate. There are multitudes of studies from various universities, think tanks and even the un, which show that dense cities have profoundly positive effects on greenhouse gas emissions. One such study, for example, by researchers at the university of Texas, showed that low density housing produces nearly four times the greenhouse gas emissions of its high density alternatives. I could go on and [3:09:50 PM] on about this topic because there's so much information to support these findings, but instead I just want to give huge kudos to council member pool for doing the right thing for our city and for our future generations. Burns I'm so impressed and really grateful. Thank you. Suzanne Valentine de David Whitworth. >> Barbara Williamson in shai. Sean Mccarthy. Christine mullen . Lindsay daringer. Ten >> Miss Darrington had to leave. She's the executive director of preservation Austin. She had to leave to take her daughter to a pediatric appointment. Thank you. You're welcome. >> I'm probably next Selena CI on deck is one one Raymond Rubio [3:10:53 PM] . >> Hi, my name is Christine Mullin. >> I am seeking opposition. For item 126. I'm a taxpayer payer registered voter, home owner and one of Austin's 20,000 realtors. >> So my position is possibly financially shooting myself in the foot. >> I'm an 18 year resident of the brentwood neighborhood and a member of the neighborhood association steering committee as well as a member of the neighborhood plan committee, as a district seven constituent, I am represented by Leslie pool all I'm all for density as well as affordable housing with appropriate infrastructure. >> The blanket proposal has the potential in its current form to potentially do more harm than good. >> In my experience, I've rarely witnessed development in the city to be altruistic from the [3:11:55 PM] city. >> I've seen and experienced red tape for existing and potential homeowners tirz and seeing the red carpet rolled out for developers three years ago, I was hard pressed to find a builder to build a house for me for under $400,000, and that's on a lot that I already owned, so I'm not quite sure how. What is being proposed would be enforced and speaking to the harm, I'm not going to add anything more to infrastructure that's been talked about quite a bit or affordability because who's going to enforce that? What I will speak to is something that was mentioned in the first hour and that is substandard developer hours. So I would like to call the city council to look to Seguin. I believe maybe Laredo and one other city in the state of Texas that requires builders to be licensed. I received my certificate of occupancy for the [3:12:55 PM] second house that I built in Austin in last March. And nine months later, Travis county appraisal district did recommend that my house was 56% complete. So right now I'm living in a teardown and I think more people would experience what I have. If this isn't monitored a little bit more closely. Thanks, mayor Watson. >> Sean Mccarthy. Selena CI. One on Raymond Rubio. >> Hello. My name is Juan Raymond Rubio. >> I work with the preservation architecture firm in town. >> I also serve on the historic landmark commission. Although these opinions do not reflect that commission at all. >> These today I'm coming to you as a board member from preservation Austin. >> We want to highlight the fact that unchecked this resolution would further contribute to demolition of historic age housing and cause further [3:13:55 PM] displacement of long time residents. We're asking you all to direct staff to consider the recommendations made in the 2022 urban land institute's tap report, which discusses Austin's historic age housing preservation. This is a project that was co-sponsored by the city of Austin and preservation Austin. This report includes policy solutions to preserve historic age housing, maintain affordability in our communities and stemming displaced Swint, including home repair programs. And there's also a preservation incentive proposed by Austin info coalition in there. So, you know, we want to improve of house relocation initiatives because this is going to cause more demolitions. We also are pushing for a deconstruction and salvage ordinance that would help us reuse historic materials. The city council should also look into using affordable housing funds to create programs that keep these historic houses intact and actually help homeowners put ads in their backyards. Let's build those granny flats. Let's help convert those garages into [3:14:57 PM] units. We want to encourage that so that developers don't displace people. These neighborhoods are being demolished left and right. Without your direction. We fear that staff will approach this policy as if they're dealing with a clean lot. So most of our a lot of our board members, a majority of our board members in preservation Austin are millennials. So are the staff at preservation Austin. So this is not just a older versus younger generation thing. We are a majority millennial organization and we do want to encourage the preservation is an option that you all just look at that you allow you allow report. Many of you guys have it. Just look at the solutions. I'm glad to see an architect here. So please look at that report. Thank you. >> Next is Ann dinkler. Following is a wise Azar. Benjamin Chen. My name is Ann [3:16:00 PM] dinkler. >> Thanks for listening and your service. I'm opposed to 126 as written. I think it's misinformation to say single family is being eliminated, but I also think it's disingenuous to say this begins the discussion when the solution is prescribed and voted on during the holidays, limits testimony and establish one zoning category by Wright. This proposal is not likely to help the middle class as it's upwards of $12,000 to subdivide a lot. Add demolition costs and construction costs for new homes . Most middle class families in Austin will not be able to afford the upfront costs in order to do this. It makes it more likely for investors and the rich to be able to do this as it is legal to take into account impervious cover and [3:17:01 PM] other site development standards. Peer cities, real peer cities like Dallas fort Worth and San Antonio require open space, setback limits, parking building coverage, age limits and height limits on small lots of 2500ft !S. And these are growing cities that don't allow for density as proposed. Will staff recommend fee and Lou for drainage when no land of size is available in the urban core and there's no funding in 2012, environmental staff identified over $1 billion in need for drainage and environmental issues. Further our floodplain maps are based on data that did not include climate change as recent informatix action in the New York Times said this is likely at 10% underestimation. Please consider [3:18:02 PM] these issues when you look at this resolution. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Owais Azar on deck is Benjamin Chen and Daniel Casselman, mayor council members my name is str and I'm speaking in support of item 126 on behalf of housing works, Austin housing works. >> Austin is most of you all know is a nonprofit organization , and we're really focused on making sure that we're providing all kinds of homes in all parts of town for all kinds of folks and housing. >> Housing works emphatically supports item 126 and thanks councilmember pool and her co sponsors for their work on this item. >> We believe the changes proposed to the home initiative possess great potential for increasing access to attainable housing throughout our city and in a range of different income levels. >> Increasingly, first time home buyers are finding it hard in our community to be able to purchase homes and make a permanent home. >> Here, folks who are aging or looking for different homes, trying to resize their household [3:19:03 PM] are also increasingly finding it difficult to find those opportunities. Is expanding attainable home ownership throughout Austin can play a key role in addressing a lot of these issues. Expanding diverse housing opportunities and helping build intergenerational wealth and that is why housing works is very supportive of item 126. We also want to thank council member Ellis and her co sponsors for their work that led to bringing forth item 158. It all goes hand in hand in making sure that we're expanding home ownership opportunities for more folks in our community. Thank you all. Thank you. >> Benjamin Chen, Daniel Coleman , Lisa gray. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Daniel Coleman. I work for the nonprofit farming city and I am a resident of district three. I'm here in support of item 26 126 and 158, which together will allow for greater housing options, especially small homes and townhomes, that the city needs much more of. I've [3:20:03 PM] advocated for many different land use reforms, but this will probably have the greatest impact on my life and my own path to home ownership. My dream lifestyle is not a massive suburban home and three cars with a half acre lot and a 45 minute commute. I think a lot about being connected to the community and living close to work, amenities and entertainment. My ideal home is small and in a centrally located neighborhood, whether it's attached but small or additional auxiliary unit, I don't care. Unfortunately Austin for too long has mandated that all homeowners purchase a very large piece of land along with their home. And as land values have increased significantly, home ownership has become out of reach for many, especially young people like me. But with this proposal buttressed, of course, by the proposal for mayor pro tem Ellis, Austin's highest opportunity neighborhoods can now welcome and accommodate middle income people and families in my neighborhood. The status quo policy of large lots is leading to the total [3:21:04 PM] transformation of the neighborhood and the replacement of small homes with extremely large and exorbitantly expensive homes. What this new item makes possible is instead of a 1 to 1 replacement, we might see an addition of an Adu in the backyard or multiple smaller homes on the same lot, gently increasing the density and greatly increasing the affordability. I love living in south Austin as a renter and now it's possible for me to consider buying a house at some point in the future. Thank you to council member pool for bringing this item forward and to her co sponsors for supporting. I also want to give a shout out to Luisa and other and council member Poole's office, who did an incredible job working on this item. Thank you so much, Lisa gray, Mary kale and Susan Mcdowell. >> My name is Lisa gray. >> I'm a builder. We build primarily ads in smaller single family homes in the older central neighborhoods. >> I am for item 126. [3:22:05 PM] >> I graduated many years ago and never left. I stayed here because Austin welcomes all kinds of people and that should that should include the future population, a future population like my daughter, nieces and nephews and all future residents . >> Allowing for more units per lot will create will will create more affordable units. I know this because I do this now. >> The cost of a lot is around $500,000 at this point. That cost can be split between many people or it can be split between one or just be one person or two. Unit projects have sold to million bookkeepers, programmers, teachers, retired mothers wanting to be near their grandchildren and veterans. >> I also personally love older homes and hope they will be. I hope they will be encouraged to be preserved with an additional incentive to encourage their preservation. >> Finally, I appreciate city council being brave enough to finally take this difficult conversation on. Thank you. [3:23:06 PM] >> Hello, my name is Mary Cale. I chair the advocacy committee of preservation Austin. I'm an oral historian, Ann, and I'm in an improv troupe that performs in different theaters around town, so but I won't burden you with a show today. I'm here to express our concerns about about item number 126 regarding decreasing lot size. And I want to point out the resolution cites peer cities, San Antonio, San Diego and Philadelphia. So the San Antonio historic preservation office has over 20 staff. The Philadelphia historic preservation office has nine. I haven't got the numbers back from San Diego. Austin has two. Okay. So that's what we're looking at going forward. When you think about this resolution, I'm also going to point out what my colleague Juan Raymond talked about, which is the tap report that this city administration worked on last year to support historic preservation and affordability and some of the items they talked about were [3:24:07 PM] home repair or this is historically underfunded in this city and under advertised home repair allows people to stay in their older homes when their income restricted, disabled and have other barriers to staying in their neighborhoods. So I would encourage you to look at that. We also talked in the report about community land trusts. I have not heard anyone talk about that today. Community land trusts can support historic preservation and keep people in place their place based. They also predominantly favor energy efficient design and building. So like the Guadalupe neighborhood development corporation, fabulous, fabulous energy efficient development. So please take a look at that, because these things support historic preservation and support affordable Katy the two are not mutually exclusive. I also just want to speak to about item 160, the redevelopment of Essex street. We at preservation Austin think it's not a great [3:25:08 PM] precedent. We're not thrilled, but please honor the history of that neighborhood and thank you so much. >> Thank you. Mayor. Yes. Councilmember pool, I just wanted to let the Dyess and you know how much I appreciate preservation Austin for speaking up and bringing up an important issue around the demolition of historic age homes. >> And I'm pleased to be partnering with preservation Austin on measures to make it easier to preserve homes than to demolish them. We'll be using that report and the policy that you have in there. Thank you so much for bringing it to everybody's attention. I'll speak more to that later. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, Susan Mcdowell. All were on two 127, item 127. >> Ethan Smith what is your [3:26:11 PM] name? Okay. Good. >> Good afternoon. So next time I register for item 132, I'm going to register as neutral on item one as well. So but I did learn a lot today and I hope everybody on the dais learned something, didn't already know all the answers is here's something new. This is from my thesis a couple of years ago. So I was advocating at that time for a public private partnership with UT at healthsouth. And I still think that it should wind up as a public private partnership, even though that idea really it could be just a deal between the city and UT that pragmatically it would probably end up as a p3 and slide. And that slide, please. And that this is a different legal paradigm that you could use having to do with the Brackenridge development agreement. And it sounds like [3:27:13 PM] you're talking about a preserving a golf course for rich people in this downtown area. But this is really about green space and this is really about affordable student housing, and it's a different legal paradigm. And the reason I'm against it 132 is because if you specify that it's going to be 60% mfi, you're cutting UT out of the deal and if you do something with UT, you're going to get an efficacy of greater than 100 times what you could get in this mfi deal slide and this talks about the profit margin in the housing and dining budget which slide which the board of regents saw fit to turn into a pilot program assisting low and middle income students. And this is this is amazing. This is the board of regents. And this is I mean, for councilmember qadri, this is like Bernie Sanders. Eat your heart out. Slide this is money that goes directly $1,800 to the students from families that make less than $65,000 a year. It's affecting 3500 students right [3:28:14 PM] now. And if you can put more money into the housing and dining budget, which will be profitable, this is really great for robin hood reasons because you're taking that property tax margin and you're collecting it at UT. And I think you can legally specify this in the Brackenridge development agreement slide. I think that's it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Selena. >> Up next is Jacob Emerson, Richard suttle and sweet Gwendolyn. >> Hello. My name is Selena Shea and I am president of the Austin association and I am here speaking for item 126. I thank all the co-sponsors and you all for bringing this forward. The majority of the medics who come to work for Austin come from outside of Austin and I do hear from a lot of them at our meet and greet before they start that they were really surprised at how expensive and unaffordable Austin is for them to move here. So they're looking at places in [3:29:15 PM] hays up in Waco. And so it's no surprise that 70% of the medics do live outside of the outside of Travis county because that's where they can afford to live just this week, we had at least three people quit. Two of them quit because one of them lives in blanco and the other one lives in Waco. And they found ems jobs that were much closer to home. And then the third person quit because they want to stay in Austin. They live in Austin and start a family. But they need to make much more money than they currently make as a paramedic. Mok and so for these reasons, we're really interested in other types of options for folks who make the income range that they do to be able to work and live in Austin, especially when, as a floater, you might go to a station up near palmer in mopac or all the way down to slaughter and you don't know. So if you live in Waco, it's very hard to get all the way down to slaughter and vice versa. And so to us, it's really important that we do have paramedics that live in Austin [3:30:16 PM] and so we're just looking for this type of Ms. Singh homes for the community. So thank you. >> Jacob Emerson. Richard settle . I don't even know where you stand, but that's probably smart. Gwendolyn. Chadsmoor. That concludes all the speakers . >> Thank you very much and thank you all for being here. And all the people that signed up to speak. We appreciate it. Members what I'm going to do is now we'll vote on the consent agenda , but let me first tell you what I believe has been pulled. What I believe has been put back on [3:31:16 PM] the consent agenda so that we make sure we get that right. I'll then ask for any other items that anybody would like to pull. And then I'll have a couple of announcements and then we'll do what we typically do on abstentions and recusals and that sort of thing. And comments by members item six, seven and eight were pulled by council member Kelly. But it's my understanding that they can be put back on consent. >> That is correct, mayor. We worked on that behind the scenes and got it all taken care of. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. So for the record , item six, seven and eight are back on the consent item number 111 has been pulled from the consent agenda for items 125 126 128 129 it's my understanding that item 132 which was pulled by council member Ryan alter, has been put back on the consent [3:32:17 PM] agenda. >> I don't know that I ever pulled it, but yeah, I don't need it pulled. >> Okay, well, let me just ask. That was that was my note. Anyway okay. I'm just giving you credit for pulling and amending and everything today. Is anybody else? Let me let me make sure. Did anybody else pull 132 and I just missed it. All right. So. 132 is on the consent agenda for item 148. I had pulled because it's an item from committee and my practice is to make sure we do that. So we just know what's coming from a council committee item 190 has been pulled. An item 195 is also an item from committee. So that has been pulled. Are there any other items that anyone wishes to pull from the consent agenda? All right, then the consent agenda will be all of the other items, members, one thing on the consent agenda, you have in late [3:33:19 PM] backup up on item 192, you have appointments and some were added in late backup. I want to call attention to one because it was it's in the late backup, but I don't think it made it till this morning. And I just want to make sure everybody's aware, aware. Council member qadri appointed to the electric utility commission. Mike grant and I'm just I'm just highlighting that because of when it came on with that, let me ask if there's anyone that wishes to be shown abstaining or recuse themselves from any of the consent agenda. Yes. Mayor pro tem, I have filed a recusal on 192. >> The mayor pro tem has filed a recusal, a notice of recusal on . 192. >> Councilmember pool mayor, please show my vote as no, I haven't gotten to that just yet. Ricky Kusel's are abstentions [3:34:19 PM] right now. All right, mayor. >> Yes, I would like to be shown as abstaining from 17 and 57, please. Thank you. >> Any other abstentions or recusals and I'm looking at my folks that are here via zoom. Okay, now let's go to votes that are no councilmember pool you are recognized. >> Thank you so much. Please note my no vote on item 124 and 127. Thank you. >> Councilmember pool will be shown voting no on 124 and 127. Councilmember Kelly. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Please show me as voting no on 18 2454, 57 and 71, 1824, 54, 57 and 71. >> Yes. All right. Councilmember qadri. >> Yes, mayor, can you please show me as voting no on item 71, you'll be shown voting no on [3:35:21 PM] item 71 on the consent agenda. >> Councilmember Allison alter. >> I'd like to be shown voting no on item 124. >> Council member Allison alter be shown voting no on item 124 on the consent agenda is there anyone else that wishes to be shown voting no on any items on the consent agenda? All right. So the motion Ann on the consent and the motion to approve the consent agenda will be a motion to approve the consent agenda, subject to an abstention by council member Kelly on items 17 and 57, a recusal by the mayor pro tem on item 192. No votes by councilmember pool on 124 and 127 council member Kelly with no votes on 1824, 54, 57 and 71. Councilmember qadri voting no on 71. Councilmember Allison alter voting no on 124. And I forgot. [3:36:21 PM] And the mayor being shown voting no on 124 as well with that, I'll call for a motion. But before we vote, vote I will call on members that want to make brief comments. Motion is made by councilmember Ryan alter to approve the consent agenda with the change with the abstentions, recusals and voting no, that has been called out. It is seconded by council member qadri with that being said, I will now recognize as council member pool for brief comments and councilmember Fuentes, do you have something to add? You want to be recognized to speak? All right. The order I'm going to go in because people were good enough to let me know if they wanted to talk or pool Allison alter Fuentes Kelly harper-madison Ann and Ryan alter councilmember qadri. You'll be after council member Ryan alter okay with that, I'll recognize councilmember pool for brief comments. >> Thanks, mayor. I just wanted [3:37:21 PM] to say a couple of things about item 73, which is the Ryan drive of the Ryan drive property exchange transfer from the city of Austin to hfc. I'm disappointed that the initial proposal for the Ryan drive property didn't work out, but city staff worked really hard to make that proposal work and in the end the developer ended negotiations. Sometimes initiatives that we have real hopes for don't work out at first. I'm hopeful for the restarting of our effort and that should happen soon and I hope staff will give us some sense of that timing. I'm eager for our work to recommence. I want to acknowledge the important work, the surrounding foreign neighborhoods did. Working officials really with city staff as the Ryan drive working group, the recommendations from the Ryan drive working group report are still stand. They will continue as the framework for the [3:38:23 PM] properties next use. I've monitored the next use of the old Austin energy lay down yard for more than ten years and it would be a wonderful thing to be able to see a groundbreaking before I leave office. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you. Council member. The chair recognizes council member Allison alter. >> Thank you, mayor. >> I'd like to start with comments on two items that I support. Item 88 is the next step in the process to acquire critical trail connections and parkland along bull creek and spicewood springs road. >> I'm excited to see this potential parkland acquisition move one step closer to completion, and I want to thank the many staff, including my own, that have worked really hard to make this purchase. Item 113 advances our efforts to promote minority and women owned businesses in our area. I very much support this item and the related and forthcoming implementation of the inclusive working group recommendations. I [3:39:24 PM] believe we have real opportunities to expand supportive services to enhance participation of these firms through these efforts. >> For my colleagues, I want to flag one future related action of note that I set in motion when we approved the disparity study last fall in which to be implemented in the next month or two, namely our new small business local preference program that our procurement office will adopt in the next month or two. Before I say my comments on 124, mayor, I wanted to confirm the number of people who were voting no on 124, the number of people who are voting no on 124 or 1 to three. >> The mayor, councilmember pool and you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So as I mentioned a bit earlier, I'm voting no on item 124, which relates to zoning notice requirements for item 124. I could be comfortable with adjusting the distance requirements for our notices. However to initiate that reduction in public notice in the same week that the council majority initiate, it's a drastic regulatory change for [3:40:25 PM] small family, single family neighborhoods and to also indicate we will reduce public notice to almost the smallest legally defensible distance is not without consequence to public confidence in our decision making. I think this change sends the wrong signal to our constituents about our willingness as a body to hear from the public about the impact of the land use decisions we are making on their behalf. City manager. I hope that as you bring this forward, if there are recommendations for different distances than what was recommended in there, that you will make us aware of that given the number of folks who are indicating at this time that they don't don't support the item. Thank you. Thank you. >> Council member. Council member Fuentes as the chair recognizes, councilmember Fuentes for comments. >> Thank you, colleagues. I'm super excited to see the trauma recovery center contract on this agenda for today's consideration and on the consent agenda, no less. This has been a long time coming and oftentimes when we [3:41:25 PM] hear from our community, you know what are we as city leaders doing for our for victims of violent crime? This is one of the top things that we are doing and leading on by creating a trauma recovery center, which is we are the first city in Texas to do so. We are providing holistic trauma, informed care for victims of violent crime and their families. And this is especially helpful for those because we want to ensure that we have a system that provides care for folks after they leave the hospital and for survivors who don't report crime. This also provides holistic services through counseling, legal assistance, S, you name it. And so and I also want to give a thank you to our county partners because, this trauma recovery center is in partnership with our county. Our county is matching us in this effort. And commissioner Bridget Shea is a leader on that. And so I want to extend my gratitude for her leadership, along with judge brown and commissioner Howard in [3:42:26 PM] this effort. And I'm excited to see this move forward. And I want to thank our colleagues for their support in this effort. >> Thank you, councilmember Fuentes, chair recognizes councilmember Kelly, thank you, mayor and members. >> I'd like to thank council member Ryan alter for working with me and my office on item 124. I believe government services should work in the best and most efficient ways possible and that resolution does that. >> So thank you for including me on that important resolution. And thank you for your staff's time as well. I'm also happy to support the effort by councilmember pool with item 125 and believe that this will help clean up some of the development process within areas in district six and throughout the rest of the city. I appreciate your staff's work as well on that item. I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude to each and every one of you who participated in today's council meeting. Public input your presence and input regardless of which side of the issue you stood, was invaluable. Engaging in open and diverse discussions allows us to better understand [3:43:26 PM] the complexities surrounding the matters at hand. Your perspectives concern and ideas contribute to shaping more comprehensive and thoughtful decisions for our community. And I want to encourage everyone to please reach out to me or my office as we navigate these challenges before us together. Thank you all for being active and passionate participants in this process. Your commitment to our city is well being is truly commendable. I hope that we continue to work together, united in our efforts to create a better and brighter future in Austin for all. Thank you. And with that, mayor, I yield. >> Thank you very much. Council member. Chair recognizes council member Harper Madison. You very much for the recognition. >> Mayor, and I apologize for needing to take my leave this afternoon. I'm not feeling that great, but my brain still works. I wanted to speak on consent agenda item number 41. Colleagues, I wanted to just quickly provide some direction to staff for guidance regarding item 41 on the council agenda. [3:44:26 PM] After speaking with city management, city legal and our planning department, they've all agreed to hold on spending the over $1 million allocated for the northeast Austin planning district effort referenced in this item. This will allow for real critical conversation burns with Travis county and community leaders in the area to keep moving forward. The intent of those conversations is to potentially create an inter-local association and or collaborative, funding model for efforts like this one. That we've envisioned and committed funding to, especially in the northeast Austin area. If you're not aware. County commissioner Jeff Travillion has challenged the county to invest in organized within eastern Travis county this effort, the Marshall plan, has has great potential, in my opinion. My hope is that we can bridge the counties initiative with our own district [3:45:27 PM] planning efforts. Guided by an and centered in the decades worth of advocacy and planning already conducted by the colony park neighborhood and its community pillars. Thank you to our staff for your patience and support of these collaborative efforts and thank you to county commissioner Travillion and county staff, for your shared belief that working together in northeast Austin is our best chance for not to repeat the mistakes of our past. Colleagues , I'd like to provide some direction to staff regarding item number 41. Just a moment. City manager. Can you please acknowledge that that this direction and commit moment to working with the county towards a shared initiative and the northeast Austin area is approachable achievable or [3:46:28 PM] something we can do council member we met with commissioner Travillion and members of his staff and the county staff as well as ours and what we committed at that meeting was that we would begin to lay the get the foundation of what needed to get done. >> If I remember right, what I indicated to the commissioner that this was a this was an approach that needed a long horizon to address all the issues that we were talking about addressing in that specific sector of our of our county, our city. And the commissioner committed that the county would be our full partner in doing that. And I think to the degree that we are able to marry resources between the county and the city to try to achieve that objective, I think the staff is ready to go to work as part of a working group to achieve that objective. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate that commitment and I look forward to following up. That's the, the substance of my commentary. Great. >> Thank you very much. Councilmember harper-madison chair recognizes council member [3:47:30 PM] Ryan alter for comments. >> Thank you very much, mayor. I just wanted to comment on a couple items, starting with item 60. It's related to the contract with el Buen samaritano for rental assistance. El Buen is a district five organization with the mission of providing health care, education and other essential services to Austin's most vulnerable residents. And they have a proven track record in distributing assistance through to the rise and rent programs. >> And I'm just really excited and want to thank them for continuing to fill this vital role in our community. >> I also wanted to take a quick moment to talk about item 123 related to musician pay and just acknowledge or recognize that we've had a lot of discussions here about affordability that affects a lot of austinites musicians being one of them, and musicians are a critical fabric [3:48:30 PM] of what makes Austin who we are and special and what this item is going to do is show that we as a city truly value our musicians and create a standardized premium rate of at least $200. When the city is hiring the performer there. And with as my hope that by doing so , the city is able to send a clear message to the public and to those who contract with musicians that they are worth investing in. >> And I just want to also take a quick moment to thank atx musician burns for their advocacy and support on this issue. >> I. I lastly want to talk about item one and 27 related to the collaborative permanent supportive housing projects. I was really excited to see our staff's recommendation Ann for these projects. I think they are incredibly valuable and going to really help address some of the [3:49:32 PM] permanent supportive housing needs we have as it relates to the continuum of what we need to address our homelessness challenge. And I was also very encouraged Ed by the discussion in their, you know, discussion we've had about we really need to have a broader policy discussion of how we use this tool and where it fits in our toolbox. And so, so I look forward to having that discussion. Ann and I know there were some other other projects that that applied and wanted to take advantage of this. And at this time or are not being recommended. But in speaking with staff about ability to rework and come back and try again, they have assured me that that that is an opportunity to really allow for us to create the desperately needed affordable housing that that we need. So I look forward to that discussion moving forward. >> Thank you, councilmember, for councilmember qadri, you're [3:50:33 PM] recognized by just make comments. Yeah. >> Thank you, sir. >> Yeah. I want to quickly touch on item 123. You know, it's vital that we as a city support our local creatives who make the city the beautiful city. >> It is that the weird city it is the live music capital of the world. >> And I think with this resolution, we're not only supporting those creatives, but we're setting a standard of how it should be done across the city. So all thanks goes to councilmember Ryan alter for bringing this item forward. And then to all the all my fellow co-sponsors who co-sponsored this item. So, so thank you all. And thank you to Ryan's staff for working really hard on this. And then I briefly just want to touch on item 132 healthsouth. Last month, as we all know, the exclusive negotiating agreement between the city and aspen heights expired, which left the fate of our healthsouth property up in the air. I wanted to bring forward this item to reaffirm our commitment as a council to leverage the site for maximum community benefits, especially affordable housing. [3:51:35 PM] >> The park district plan. >> We are close to approving emphasizes the need to increase housing options on this side of downtown. So I look forward to this new council having the opportunity to recalibrate our specific goals and priorities for the healthsouth site. And that's why I've asked our city staff to provide more information on market feasibility and affordability scenarios as we start from a realistic place. So I look forward to continuing the conversation. Our next housing and planning committee meeting in September. And I want to thank Melissa from our staff for working really, really hard on this for the many conversations with other stakeholders and other folks and having the opportunity to talk to former council members and kitchen and Kathie tovo who I know are probably watching this. I appreciate their their background on this. >> Thank you. Council member any other comments from council? Yes mayor pro tem. >> I'll keep it very brief because I know we have a lot to cover today, but I'm just excited about item number three, [3:52:35 PM] which is solar panels for a church in my district. I'm really glad they're taking advantage of that. Ten and 23 are about backup generators for fire and ems stations and a handful of other city owned properties, which are really important in the conversation around climate resilience. 15 is about art in public places for the bridge near the longhorn dam and 119 bear creek elementary school in my district is getting a new school zone, which I know the parents and teachers have been asking for and are very excited to see that coming down the pipeline. >> Great. Thank you, mayor pro tem. All right, members Luz. I'll accept a motion to oh, we have a motion from council member Ryan alter, seconded by councilmember qadri. You've heard the motion, you've heard the comments. Yes. Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted with the abstentions. Recusals and voting no. That has already been highlighted. The consent agenda is adopted. Member tirz what I would intend to do is now go to the items that were pulled and that in the [3:53:37 PM] order of 111 125 126 128 129 148 190 and 195 just all I'm doing is going in numerical order. So if the chair calls up item 111 madam clerk, is there anyone that wishes that it was signed up to speak on 111 who has not already spoken? >> No, sir. >> Very good. Thank you all. The chair will entertain a motion to approve item 111. The motion is made by council member Ryan alter. Is there a second? Second by councilmember pool members? We have a motion on the table. The chair will recognize council member Ryan alter for. I'm sorry , I didn't look up. Anyway, I'll look up in make sure if you all want a second or make motions, I'm paying attention. The chair recognizes council member Ryan alter for proposed amendment number one members. You've had a proposed amendment before you. [3:54:38 PM] You now have in front of you the proposed amendment that is version two. I'll recognize councilmember Ryan alter on proposed amendment number one to item 111. Thank you very much, mayor. >> I guess I'll just move to amend and then I'll talk about it. >> Motion is made to amend. Is there a second to the motion? Seconded by council member Vella ? Council member Ryan alter your recognized on your proposed amendment? >> So what this amendment does is ensure tirz that as we go through this process, we are putting the appropriate items in place that allow for this to be successful. You know, we've had lots of discussion burns about ensuring that that the performance metric isn't just spending dollars but actually getting results. And so what this does is, is allows for us to try to utilize a funding structure to achieve goals. And [3:55:40 PM] these are goals as as they have been promised to us by the entity that has offered or responded to this rfp. What you will see in the updated version are just a couple of changes as we talked to law, particularly down at the bottom, what we wanted to make sure is should there be funds left over and it's unclear if there will be or not. But should that happen, then that those would come out last from the bucket. And so this is just how they felt would be the most appropriate way to write that. And Ed, I believe that's it. And quarterly reporting which was in the original. So with that I move adoption of amendment one. >> Thank you. We have a motion and a second because the version two was not in the backup. For the record, I'm going to read [3:56:41 PM] the changes that have been made in the second. In the first paragraph of the actual motion, it would read the city manager's directed. And what is added is comma to the extent feasible comma to include the following elements in the proposed contract concerning the one year operation of the marshaling yard . Then we go into bullet points in bullet point three. It says during the final two months of this contract, the city and the vendor will. The word limit has been stricken and instead of the word limit, it says prioritize us. So it will say the vendor will prioritize any new referrals to clients who are likely to successfully achieve housing placement by the shelter closure date in the second paragraph, it will read the city manager is further directed to and this is what's added return on any unused funds to the original source of funding for this contract. Comma with a [3:57:42 PM] prioritization to preserving any funds originally intended for permanent housing capital expenses period. There's we strike through the language really. Okay. Any unexpended funds approved for this contract to fund capital for permanent supportive housing? Those are the changes. With that, is there any further discussion on the motion to amend? Councilmember Kelly I just want to thank councilmember Ryan alter for bringing this forward. >> Over the last couple of days I've done a lot of thinking we're going to invest $9 million into this and that's with the arpa funds, which are typically one time use and I want it to be deliberate the outcomes that we get. And so I really appreciate this motion sheet because I think it will add a little bit more to the value of what we're doing. And the last thing that I want to have happen is us get to a point where we are investing in this resource for the community and we end up like the Salvation Army, where all these people then have nowhere to go. [3:58:43 PM] It feels like a little bit of a ticking time bomb. If we don't do it very direct, direct and responsibly. So thank you for bringing this forward. >> Any other comments? Without objection, an amendment number one by Ryan alter by councilmember Ryan alter is adopted. That will take us to proposed amendment number two, which you have just been given by council member qadri. And I'll recognize councilmember qadri on his proposed motion to amend. Thank you, mayor. >> Before I get into the amendment, you know, I want to reflect on the testimony that we heard around the marshaling yard. We heard from advocates who help our unhoused community. We help we heard from our unhoused neighbors. You know, I, I don't want to assume, but but I think it's safe to say there's no one on this dais who has or who has ever been unhoused or has been who has worked so intimately with our unhoused neighbors. But everyone on this dais cares deeply. And I think there's no lack of empathy on on making sure we do right. You [3:59:45 PM] know, I think the reason for this amendment and a lot of the thoughts that I've been having is that I want to be very deliberate and be very intentional with this, you know, project that because as it's been stated, you know, these are human beings and their lives at stake and making sure that we do it right is really important. So members of the amendment that was was passed out not not too long ago would allow the negotiations to proceed with the contract, but would require the contract to come back to council for final approval. The item would come back during the budget or the first week of August in a special called meeting. And, you know, I think what we need to do is give the community and council time to review the full details of this initiative and all the time to review the shelter assessment report. >> With that, I assume you move approval? Yes, sir. I'm councilmember qadri moves approval of item 111. Is there a second? Second by councilman Velasquez? Because this was not in the backup. I will read the [4:00:47 PM] changes in the authorization paragraph. It says authorize negotiation and strikes through the words and execute portion of an agreement in the last line of that sentence, it said, I'll read the third. The next last line homeless shelter located at a city owned facility for a 12 month term. And then it strikes through the words beginning August 1st, 2023, and goes forward in an amount not to exceed $9,140,000. So I've read that in the record. Is there any further comment? Councilmember Ryan alter I as as we've talked about this item and this issue over this week and beyond, I think you all know I view this challenge that we have with our unhoused neighbors, getting them the proper resources is vital [4:01:50 PM] and it is an emergency and I while I fully respect the desire . To do what is being offered here to I think as we approach the dead heat of August and the need to move this forward in a expeditious fashion, that we potentially lose out on the ability for people to receive sheltering and just what we're trying to accomplish here. >> And so I'm going to be voting no on this. And just want to kind of if it was a two week from now council meeting, that would be one thing. But August 31st is our next meeting. And that just gives me a lot of pause. >> So thank you, councilmember. Other comments? Councilmember Kelly. >> Thank you. You know, that does bring up a really good point. And so I was wondering if perhaps the city manager or [4:02:51 PM] maybe Ms. Gray could speak to how long it might take to stand up this shelter and how this might impact operations if we do only authorize negotiation and not execution. >> Well, and Diana may have more detail, but here's here's the we were the recipient of a report earlier this week and that report indicated that we had a need for about 750 shelter beds . We've had record heat, record heat in this in this region for now most of the summer. And so these individuals that are living either under bridges or in the creeks really do need to be someplace where it can where they can have a conditions that are climate controlled and not have to suffer from this heat. And we know this is an emergency. We can't even enforce effectively the no camping ban that the voters authorized two years ago, two years ago. And we've not been able to effectively enforce it because there's insufficient shelter beds. And, you know, I know that [4:03:52 PM] the issues are important and I know that it's one that we've got to stay laser focused with. If we don't mind coming back quarterly and talking to the council about how that is going and how it's working, we're we don't even mind saying if there's things that we need to do to do better in terms of making future amendments. We can do that. But this is an emergency and we this has been on top of mind for all of us, certainly the whole time I've been here. And maybe Diana has a little more to say. But I think the faster we get this set up, the better we can get. People moved out of extreme weather conditions into into shelter space. >> So I appreciate that. But it didn't really answer my question for how long it would take. Well, it's just you're waiting you're waiting a few more weeks and that means that you're a few more weeks behind. >> And what happens when you bring that contract back and we get a group of people saying, well, that's not quite right. Let's go back and take another bite of the apple, which we can do. And then and then and that's been my experience 21 years ago when we would delay. Delay meant not not delay for a week or two. It meant delay for maybe a quarter to quarters to make sure we got all the questions answered. >> So I guess what I'm getting [4:04:52 PM] at is I think we all understand we're in an emergency and we need this space to be badly used for individuals who are experiencing homelessness. But is there a way that we can potentially slow the brakes down just a little bit so that some of the council can see the plan and be responsive to the constituents? Questions about how this is going to look without completely slowing the process to the point where we're not able to help people in a timely manner. >> We'll be happy to bring back the executed contract to you. >> The one of the issues you have is, is we don't meet again. We're doing budget. So you're getting need to delay this at least until the end of August at and then as pointed out, if there's some reason that it gets delayed more Shaw but the. Professional staff is in a position we've given direction even to the point in the last in the amendment we just adopted unanimous Leslie it gives even further direction about specific [4:05:55 PM] items that need to be in the contract. The rfp lays out items that will have to be in the contract, so in a situation like this where we know we're behind on shelter beds, we know that we have the conditions, we have, it makes it very difficult to wait even a full month when you have an emergency situation like that and you have a professional staff that can negotiate and execute the contract. Right. >> So it would be my preference if this amendment for whatever reason, does not pass that we do get updates regularly on the progress of the marshaling yard because I think we owe it to the constituency that we represent and the public as a whole so that they know that we are trying to make progress on this. I think that's right. Thank you, councilmember Zavala. >> I agree with you, mayor. In terms of the August 31st, I think the 40 day delay is too much. I know council member qadri just mentioned like if we could do a special called [4:06:57 PM] meeting on or attached to one of the budget work sessions on we have one on August 1st that gives us just like I think a enough of a window to, you know, just just give it a second look, make sure everything is in order, get it passed with relatively minimal delay. I would be supportive of that. I just don't know about the calendar or the timeline for authorizing and negotiate the contract. >> One one possibility might be that at one of the work sessions, we could add this as part of a work session so that we can get a report out on the status care has to be taken. However, because there's a negotiation, there may be a negotiation Ann going on, but that way professional staff at least could get a feel for where we were on that and if they needed to execute it, they'd be in a position to execute it as the professional staff rapidly. Councilmember Harper Madison and councilmember Fuentes. [4:07:58 PM] >> Thank you very much, mayor. I appreciate the recognition and I really appreciate this dialog. Generally speaking, I'm in support of the amendment, but also recognize that the timeline to council member vela's point I. I also share some concerns about the timeline and really strongly support you. Mayor and taking the opportunity to attach sooner timeline and respectfully. Councilmember qadri I think one of the things that makes this body extraordinarily unique is our diversity of lived experience. I actually have been homeless both in my youth and in my adulthood, and I think that's one of the benefits that I bring to the body. So just wanted to make sure to say that again on the record, as a person who both identifies as formerly unhoused and differently able, a person who struggles with chronic illness, I think those are some of the things that make me special and unique as a council member. So I never want to shy [4:09:00 PM] away from acknowledging those things that make me unique. >> Thank you, council member. And what I'm suggesting is that we add it to an agenda of a work session on where we would not be voting on it, but instead we would get a report back so that the professional staff that is negotiating it would be in a position Ann to hear comments or thoughts about it at that point in time. Council member Fuentes , thank you and thank you, councilmember harper-madison, for your comments. >> I really appreciate your perspective. And like everyone on the dais, also feel a sense of urgency. I saw that the city of Denver has declared a state of emergency when it comes to their homelessness. And so I certainly want to make sure that our city is doing everything that we can and not only providing emergency, temporary shelter, but also continuing to invest in permanent supportive housing. And so I appreciate councilmember Ryan alter's [4:10:00 PM] amendment and just want to continue to express my thoughts on the importance of us invest and not losing sight of a housing first approach and I believe with council member Ryan alter's amendment and ensuring that if there are any unexpended funds from this contract, that it is redirected to permanent supportive housing. And again, in utilizing the tourism, the public improvement district for tourism as another revenue source for homelessness, as are other options that the city council should be considering as it relates to councilmember Kadri's amendment, which I am in support of. You know, this is the city will be opening the largest emergency shelter in this city and putting up such a massive of temporary emergency shelter should come with the highest level of scrutiny because these are some of our, if not the most vulnerable austinites that we have. So I do think having that additional time, just the additional layer of oversight to take a look at [4:11:03 PM] the contract to allow for us to have comments on it would make sense. And so I wanted to invite Ms. Gray to see to have her expertise on this, to let us know her thoughts. I know she's had been in conversations, on the marshaling yard and wanted to see how she felt with councilmember Kadri's amendment and any other factors that we should be considering. Council member Diana's going to give you the same answer I just gave you . >> I mean, she can get up and say it, but let me when you're 71, by the way, happy birthday. You can say some things. Maybe that would be seen as little un politic. You know, we take pride in our professional staff. We take pride in what we do. We take pride in making professional recommendations burns and we take pride in saying these are these are the things we need to do in order for us to effect policy that this council wants to see [4:12:03 PM] implemented. What strikes me about this amendment, it it gives some impression that there is daylight. There is daylight between the professional staff and the Austin city council, and that is a sure fire way to stifle progress. This by the professional staff and making professional recommendations. I want them to continue to not be worried about politics, to lay it on the line the way it needs to be. And I understand if the council wants to come back and approve a contract because that's what you want done, we certainly can do it. But it gives me some real pause about what is really happening here. The advocates have been speaking all day long about their concerns with this, and I just think that it what it does is it just delays this very important issue from taking place faster. And I think we again, we'll we'll follow whatever the direction of council is. But I want you to know that we think we need to move as fast as we can. You have the recommendation before you if you want to do something different, that's fine [4:13:05 PM] . >> Miss gray, do you have anything you're going to add? I believe the manager just told you what I was going to say. >> I'm happy to answer any specific questions that the council members might have. >> Very good. Councilmember pool I'm sorry, mayor. >> I still was just wanted to get miss gray and city manager to your to your comments. I do value the expertise of our professional staff, which is why I would like to hear from miss gray, to ensure that, you know, as policy makers, as we take a vote on this contract and $9 million contract that we are hearing from from city staff and understanding all of the factors that are at play with standing up this emergency shelter. >> Miss gray, you're recognized to make a comment. You've been asked a question by the council member, councilmember, two questions that have specific been asked are about timeline. >> And so just briefly, I would say that that our vendor is [4:14:08 PM] prepared to stand the shelter up quickly. >> They have indicated that they can be operating vinyl within about 72 hours for a number of folks and that we were generally targeting execution around August 1st. If that gives you additional information about where we would be in the process of a work session or other meeting were desired. >> Councilmember pool thanks, mayor. >> When I look at the thermostat that and think how much hotter and how much longer it's going to be hot, I really would like to see this control it with our vendor completed and executed completely negotiated and executed. Really quickly. And for that reason, I I'm not supportive of any delays. I appreciate the reason behind it . But I do think we have an emergency in front of us here. Thank you. [4:15:08 PM] >> Councilmember Allison alter. >> Thank you. First of all, I want to thank all the speakers that came. You raised a lot of really important issues that we need to be thinking about. >> And I've had some reservations. >> And you added some questions. And I do want to ask staff some questions before we vote. Can you tell us what is the plan for moving people in to housing once they're in this shelter? Sure. So we give a variety of approaches. >> You need to apologize. >> There are a variety of approaches. So the vendor has proposed, first of all, having a case management staff and does have a line item in the budget for diversion and rapid exit, which is essentially our supports for people who need fairly light touch supports to get back into housing. >> That's important, particularly for the people who may be farther down on a waiting [4:16:08 PM] list for a rapid rehousing or permanent supportive housing. Remember that in those areas we've made significant investments already with arpa funds in particular, we have dramatically increased the rapid rehousing programing in our community. And so people coming in, we're going to ensure that they're on Ann in the coordinated entry system and are in queue for housing, whether that be rapid rehousing or s- h. So I think those that really array seeks to ensure that there is some intervention for everyone who comes in the waits. The wait times may be different. The other piece is that we acknowledge and did in the rfp that because this is a temporary facility, there will need to be an orderly demobilization of the property. So we wouldn't be at at 300 census on the last day of the shelter. We begin that process at least 60 days before close doors of diminishing the number of people in shelter and [4:17:11 PM] placing them either in permanent housing, predominantly as the primary resolution or into other shelters if needed. >> Can you speak a little bit more to that demobilization strategy? >> Sure. So we when we someone comes into housing, I think I reported on Tuesday during briefing that the average shelter stay is 115 days. Right and so some some folks do leave without housing. But folks who get placed typically many of them do either self resolve, they reunify with family or friends. They find a job, they, you know, or or they get into housing using one of our programs. And so the vendor's job as people come in is to ensure that they're connected with resources, whether those more intensive resources or whether they're problem solving with those individuals day over day to resolve their housing [4:18:13 PM] crisis. One of the important methods when we have a facility that has to demobilize is that there is a point at which you if you don't stop intakes, you slow them significantly so that you are decreasing the census in a in a gradual fashion over the last weeks. And or perhaps a couple of months of operation of the shelter. >> Okay. >> So then if we have folks who are homeless or neighbors experiencing homeless, how do we determine placement into this shelter versus other shelters? We spoke the other day about how we don't really have a great coordinate system, but this type of shelter may not work for everyone. And I don't have a great clarity over of the many people who are homeless, who gets who would who would have the ability to go into this [4:19:14 PM] shelter. Correct >> So you're correct that one of our recommendations overall is that we need a bed management system across the system. Certainly for city owned and funded shelters, and hopefully that could be shared for this shelter in the rfp and in the negotiation. It's been clear that the vendor will be coordinated with the homeless strategy division to determine the referral pathways. So we're in that process now as staff of planning for our options. And once we are authorized to negotiate, would enter into those conversations explicitly with the vendor and so we will have referral pathways. There may be individuals for whom this shelter doesn't work. As you know, unfortunately, most of our other shelters are at capacity. But we have the ability we still have the ability to make referrals to those shelters, as should we have individuals for whom this particular facility is not appropriate. The reality is this is going to be the locus, [4:20:14 PM] the primary locus of available beds in the short term. >> Thank you. I appreciate that . >> Councilmember qadri, hang on one second. Does anybody else have any comments? I'm going to ask councilmember qadri to close on his motion to amend. Yes. Mayor pro, is that okay? Councilmember. Yes, sir. Mayor pro tem. >> Yeah. I appreciate the opportunity and I appreciate the advocates coming and explaining their perspective and what they see as the needs for this particular facility. I'm also a bit concerned about the timeline and the extreme heat. We don't see any days in sight that are going to hit under 100. I think the other day people started seeing 99in the weather forecast, but then it very quickly turned into 102. So I'm concerned about that as well. I want to make sure that we've got places for people to go. And I think our staff has been really dynamic in trying to make sure that we're responsive to the needs of the individuals being being served. So I'm more inclined to see it. Ryan alters way and Leslie Paul's way and [4:21:15 PM] trying to move quickly, but appreciate everyone's perspective and input on on the ideas that we've talked about. Thank you, mayor pro tem chair recognizes councilmember qadri I'm sorry, councilmember vela, just a couple of quick questions . >> I know the marshaling yard was initially intended as support facility for the convention center. Given that the convention center is scheduled to be demolished, I believe after south by in 2024, if that's if that timeline is still correct. Can we continue to use it? I mean, obviously, we have to fund it and that's a that's a big open question. But you know, could we potentially extend the time? >> And so and another part of the answer and somebody correct me if I say this wrong in any way, but yes, it was created as a launch place. But for the convention center. But after one of the hurricanes and we had so many people come up and it was utilized used as a temporary shelter for some decisions were [4:22:18 PM] made about putting it into a retrofitting in such a way where mean it's getting called a warehouse by some, but it's not. That's really not the case, but it's being done in such a way that it was like it is a is a temporary shelter for people. It will be used as a temporary shelter again, I suppose if we're not using it for those living homeless that need a shelter space. S my guess is if there's another disaster where people come up, it would be used for that purpose. I believe that in the continuum of care that we need to be providing to those living homeless and I'm I'm not de-emphasizing in any way permanent supportive housing, but through the continuum, I'm including shelter beds. We will, if we do this, we're on our way [4:23:18 PM] to adding some shelter beds that are so badly needed. But if we close it and when we close it, we're going to be back less beds. So we ought to look at those kinds of things. But I don't think that decision needs to be made right now. And councilmember, we used for the migrants the title 42 and the Central American Latin America. >> We this summer that was the way station as we got them to the airport. >> So we have experience using it to temporarily shelter people . And with that too I mean and it's agonizing slow the way that the psa is coming onto line. I wish I could snap my fingers and have them ready tomorrow. That said, there's a lot in the pipeline and I and I know there's a process for referring people to psa and there's a kind of a pecking order. But again, as we demobilize and as a psa comes online in, you know, later in 2023, 2024, 2025, can we kind [4:24:20 PM] of use that also as a as a transition area, as kind of a bridge shelter? I mean, obviously not at the same as, you know, south bridge, north bridge is that a possibility? >> Yes. >> Council member, one of the things that we have talked about is not the only but one possible referral source is reserving beds who have already been referred into a permanent supportive housing or rapid rehousing program, but they either haven't found that unit yet or they're in the process of getting their paperwork in order , allows them to be in a stable location and safe and working with a case manager. So that is something that is feasible as one of the referral pathways for a shelter. >> Yeah, and I completely understand. And that that emergency shelter is not how we're going to solve homelessness. You know? That said, given that we have, you know, 4000 to 5000 folks on the streets right now, I mean, my sense is that, you know, 2 to 300 emergency beds, there's probably 2 to 300 folks out there that that would take [4:25:21 PM] advantage of this, especially if they hadn't see a pathway to a permanent supportive housing. So anyway, thank you. >> Thank you. All right, chair recognizes councilmember qadri to close on his proposed amendment and then we will vote. >> Great. Thank you, mayor. And I appreciate the context from councilmember harper-madison. And just the unique perspective she brings on a daily basis to the dais and I'm very thankful for her staff and all the work that they do. You know, I think where I'm coming from is just a point of caution. And, you know, it's not about a lack of trust. It's about not knowing what's around the corner. And you know, the pure human lives that, you know, can be affected either in a great way or not so great way. So that's the reason for this for this amendment. So with that, I move adoption of motion has been made and seconded to adopt the qadri motion to amend on item 111. >> All those in favor raise your hand. All those opposed. I'm [4:26:23 PM] sorry. Hang on. Keep your hands up if you're on the screen, apologize. All those opposed. Raise your hand. All right. There let me get the. The vote is five in favor? Vila qadri Velasquez, Lopez, Fuentes and harper-madison on the noes are are all Ryan alter Leslie pool the mayor, the mayor pro tem and council member Kelly and one abstention, and that is council member Allison alter. The motion to amend fails for lack of a majority members. That takes us back to the main motion [4:27:26 PM] which is to adopt item 111 with the Ryan alter amendment. Is there any discussion on the main motion with the Ryan as amended hearing none without objection. The main motion is adopted as amended? Yes. Councilmember qadri I. I was going to vote. >> Oh, okay. >> I'm sorry. So show. Please show council member qadri voting no. So the item passes on a vote of 10 to 1 with councilmember qadri voting no. All right, members, I'm going to. I told you I was going to go in numerical order, which would be 125 and then 126. But I'm going to this this is not a demonstration. I don't know how to go in numerical order, but I'm going to go ahead and go to 126 at the request of a council member, council member Fuentes is on important city business and this will allow her to be [4:28:27 PM] present to vote on this. So the chair brings up item number 126 and recognize ISS council member pool on the item. >> Mayor I move approval and I do have some comments. >> Yes, toward the end the motion is made by councilmember pool. It is seconded by the mayor pro tem to adopt. Let me make. Hang on one second. I want to ask did anybody sign up to speak that we didn't call on? >> Yes, mayor. >> Okay. So, so yeah, the second I'm going to get, I'll get the motion on and then we'll hear from the motion is to approve by councilmember pool, seconded by the mayor pro tem. I'm now going to go to comments, public comments. So madam clerk, if you will, call those who have signed up to speak on 126 but we're not calling during the other comments. >> Okay. We've got William bunch [4:29:27 PM] on deck is Roy Whaley with with Barbara Macarthur. David keen and Madeleine Mathis. Please make your way to the front. >> Everyone, please come down to the front. Mr. Bunch, it's all yours. >> Thank you, mayor. Council members bill bunch with save our springs alliance, opposing item 126. Once in a blue moon, sometimes longer, the count. The chronicle actually nails the truth with a cover hellscape up people are dying from heat and floods across the planet. It's only going to get worse. You've how long has it been since it's been under 100 degrees in? And the editor asked the question, why aren't our elected leaders doing something quickly? Well, you all are doing something quickly, making it worse. The [4:30:27 PM] only way this matter goes forward and makes any sense is to further pave the central watersheds in particular, but also the suburban watersheds as well. So the resolution as worded, makes it clear you want to get rid of tree protections, you want to reduce or get rid of impervious cover limits. You want to get rid of setbacks. All of those things that preserve trees, shrubs, greenery, that is the only thing that is going to save this city from becoming an urban island. Heat hellscape in the future. What are you doing? The previous council declared a climate emergency. Why do y'all not recognize that. If you were actually going to achieve something in the way of climate affordable housing? Well maybe we could have a discussion Ann we could figure out. We could reason together. We could look [4:31:28 PM] at alternate lives like those proposed by Michael curry in a healthy dialog. But this isn't it. This is revived Singh the Steve Adler approach of cramming it down their throats. Us versus them talk to the stakeholders. Second, after you already decided the answer, ignore state law on on zoning notice and opportunity to be heard. I have a lot more to say, but I know other folks who are here to speak have good things to say as well. >> I appreciate you, Roy willing, my time to mister bunch , go ahead and keep talking. Okay >> Thank you. Zoning is a quasi judicial exercise under state law. You're supposed to look at context, sensitive and specific locations. And there's probably some locations where this, you [4:32:29 PM] know, at least three units make sense. But you're proposing to shove it onto over 100mi !S of single family home owner, lots. And none of those people will get a say so in it at the up front. Think of it, some of you been on council for years and years. Have you ever once even thought about it forcing and initiating and forcing a zoning change on a developer's property . Even once? Maybe you didn't give them everything that they initiated and requested, but you wouldn't dream of going out and shoving it on to them. And yet here you're doing it to every single single family lot, potentially in the whole city. Katy is there something wrong with this picture? I think that there is. Please your your there's plenty of room for [4:33:30 PM] affordability in the central city to work towards it. But let's recognize the truth of this situation. As developer Ed Windler tells us so eloquently, we have a housing demand problem. We're issuing building permits faster than any other city in the whole country. This is not a supply issue. It's a demand issue. And the liberty tech bros who want to blame it on central city people when they're causing the problem by stampeding the city with hyper growth and super high paying jobs so that the market is dictate ING these sky high prices on everything new that's built and you saw the demonstration from realtor Jim Templeton. This is not about affordable housing. Give me a break. That is a charade. And hiding behind an affordability and social justice argument. Thank you. >> Thank you, mister bunch, [4:34:31 PM] Barbara Macarthur. >> Then David Keene. And Madeline Mathis. >> Hi. Thank you for letting me speak. I'm Barbara Macarthur and I live in district seven. This extremely prescriptive resolution failed to consider the input of residents homes located on. The 176,694 lots that it will impact it. The resolution makes clear that demolition of existing houses is a-ok or else a nice big withoutrillionequiring existing structures to be preserved that fixed infrastructure like storm drains is somehow elastic. That increasing impervious cover by about 26,000 acres won't impact flooding or contribute to urban heat. Sink that reducing setbacks won't endanger tens of thousands of trees that people who can't afford to stay in their homes would somehow be able to afford hundreds of thousands of dollars to build additional units. Deregulation [4:35:31 PM] is not organic. It is predatory . This deregulation magnifies inequity and sanctions environmentally destructive policies. Where can you find the source of the policies in this resolution? Look no further than a web page at the mercatus institute, which was cited in the whereas, which the Washington post describes as a staunchly anti regulatory center, funded largely by Koch industries. They're in their word for word now, when you look at the source, why not look at the data and the city of Houston, all of the displacement of low income people occurred in the areas that they designated for smaller lots. One such area , low income people, population decreased from 63% to 16% after they instituted small lots. They moved. Out 1455 low income [4:36:32 PM] people 938 below poverty, 361 people of extreme poverty, 32 black, black and 1882 hispanic people and replaced them with 3000 high income people and. 2817 white people. Please think about this. >> Thank you, miss Macarthur. >> David keen followed by Madeline Mathis. >> Yeah. Thank you, mayor and council. >> My name is. My name is David keen. >> I'm a longtime resident of east Austin. I'm the president of the Wilshire. Would dellwood, one neighborhood association. I'm also on the section 106 committee for the I-35 capital express project. And I'm also on the section 106 committee of project connect under the auspices of the United States department of transportation and I urge you to vote no on this proposition Ann its we need [4:37:36 PM] affordable housing very badly. But this this plan is not it. This is not a well thought out plan that's based upon stakeholder input and it's not. More importantly, I would like to stress it's not based on best practices of other Progressive growing cities like Austin. >> It's just not. >> And I have lots of research on that from peer cities that I would love to share with the council and council staff. >> You know, this resolution really is just about handing out massive entitlement. Yes, but key key to this resolution, it's entitlements with no affordability requirement. >> What so ever. Also, total disregard to preserving existing affordable housing, completely out the window and how this happened, I don't know, because rich Lee, I look at the last 18 [4:38:36 PM] months, 24 months in Austin and there was so much good work being done by city staff, by by council, by so many civic groups in Austin, so many professional groups, so many, so even even real real estate developers and builders were doing so much research on on on real. Lee getting addrs right. There was so much research being done in proposals, even being floated on preservation incentives to, you know, to allow us to build more info infill in the city. All of that is now out the window. Why I thank you, sir. You need to vote no on this resolution Ann and come back with the resolution that builds on what we've had this. >> Hello. My name is Madeline Mathis. I'm an 11th generation Texas Tech person who was born here in Austin, and I am [4:39:38 PM] actually opposed to amendment 125, not because I'm opposed to dense housing, but I think putting in this dense housing without the environmental regulations in place first will cause long term issues for the city of Austin and make this a not desirable city to live in any longer. With the increase of temperatures and lack of water resources, we really need to focus on good Eid ordinances in place similar to countries like Singapore and cities like Portland that actually require all of their new buildings to have stormwater infrastructure that includes vegetation and includes filtration Ann that has improved the river so much that salmon populations have come back. They're growing up here. For 28 years I've seen the lady bird lake and the Colorado river really decrease in the amount of clarity with a lot more algae seagrass blooming because or not seagrass but river grass because of the increase in nutrients and pollutants. And without first [4:40:39 PM] looking at those types of things, I think that we will really lose the quality and charm of the city. People have mentioned places like San Diego as example cities, but those are coastal cities and they also have the ability to build a desalinization plant. And we do not have that infrastructure or ability to ever have that infrastructure as we are very landlocked here in comparison, places like Singapore where they use their vegetation and vegetation actually contribute to lot to rainfall through convection because they lose a lot of rain through evapotranspiration and that will actually lead to more rainfall. So creating regulations that require buildings to have more vegetation in lots before implementing higher density, I think, or in conjunction with higher density is what's really needed to have a sustainable and enjoyable city for the future. I mean, I am young, I would love to be able to buy a house, but I also think that the future of [4:41:40 PM] our city is really important. So doing it right should come first. And we shouldn't rush into doing something. >> Thank you. >> That concludes all speakers on 126. Members we have a motion and a second on the motion is to adopt item 111. >> I'll now open. I'm sorry, we got off 111. Right. Okay. I'm not reopening that right now. I'm sorry about that, folks. 126 and I'll recognize council member pool to open. >> Thanks, mayor. And I'd like to thank my co sponsors again, council members, Vella and qadri mayor pro tem Ellis, mayor Watson and those who joined this initiative on Tuesday. Council members Velasquez, Ryan alter and harper-madison. I am pleased that we are aligned in our efforts here and my thanks again [4:42:43 PM] to the staff. I look forward to seeing your good work as we go along. I want to share my appreciation for city demographer Lila Valencia, who is out there beating the drum to educate our community and the media about the dire housing situation for our middle income families, a group that is fundamental to the viability of our city and public schools is I'm grateful to the groups and the agencies who have endorsed at home housing works, capital, metro, aarp, Texas, Austin, Travis county ems association and liuna laborers international union, Austin infill coalition. Austin board of realtors home builders association. The real estate council of Texas and environment, Texas. My thanks for guidance from the folks at Austin infill coalition whose [4:43:45 PM] members do this work every day for homeowners. We've also received a letter from the Austin independent school district. The leadership there expressing appreciation for our efforts to provide more housing for middle income families. And that's folks like teachers as well as city employees, as firefighters, first responders. It's important to do a quick list about what this resolution, what this resolution does do and does not do. I'll start with what it does not do, who it does not eliminate single family zoning district. This it does not change the zoning on anyone who's property. It does not force a reduction of existing Singh single family lots. It does not eliminate environmental regulations like impervious [4:44:46 PM] cover or tree regulations. It does not alter, affect or propose chose to alter or affect any part of the sos ordinance. And importantly, it does not make any changes today. What it does do, it initiates code amendments and a process that includes staff analysis and recommendations. It initiates a process that includes public input and direct staff to provide additional regular public updates at council work, council work sessions and the housing and planning committee. It provides more entitlements for single family homeowners who may choose to opt into them. But they wouldn't be forced to do [4:45:47 PM] it. It asks staff to recommend any adjustments to site development requirements include Singh impervious cover limits that may make these programs possible for more homeowners. The watershed protection department staff will advise council with their expert recommendations on this topic. It asks staff to provide ways to enable homeowners to preserve more trees, goes above and beyond the tree regulations. We already have. I want to point out that in addition to the housing and affordability measures, we are moving, we are also making our services more accessible to more people. Today we have item 158, which is phase one of the site plan light, which was mayor pro tem Ellis's initiative. It eases the site plan process and it is a [4:46:47 PM] companion piece to this effort that she and I began discuss ING quite a long time ago. It might even have been back in 2021. Thank you, mayor pro tem for your leadership there. We recently approved a similar effort led by council member Ryan alter that I was pleased to join making the amended plat and subdivision process easier for and more affordable. And I'd like to daylight another upcoming initiative that will be crafted in collaboration. Ann with preservation Austin. When I mentioned briefly following their comments, we share their concerns about increased demolitions is as an affordability and sustainability measure. We should make the preservation and relocation of a house less shifting it on a lot or to another lot easier, easier and cheaper than a demolition permit. We are sharing this work with council member Vella and [4:47:48 PM] council member Ryan alter, and I'm confident we can bring that initiative this fall as staff moves forward with home. I'm optimistic. I am optimistic that we can achieve the goals of this initiative with a strong commitment to public discussion , Ann and engagement. Together, we will tackle the challenges middle income families face and deliver the true benefits to those looking to buy a home and staying in Austin, as well as those who continue you to work to stay. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you, councilmember pool further discussion. Councilmember qadri. I just want to echo all the points that councilmember pool has made in support of this item and I also want to point out that Austin recently broke the record for consecutive days above 105 degrees, and I know we've talked about that already a lot, and we're on track to log the hottest July in our city's [4:48:48 PM] history. >> That will break the record we set only last year. On top of that, we all remember the two historic ice storms we've experienced just in the past three years climate change is real. It is happening, and it will only get worse. It will only get worse if we don't take action to reduce our carbon footprint. We can't do that if we keep our pro sprawl land use rules that force our low and middle income earners to seek affordable housing. And the car dependent edges of our city and region. And this this change in our code will support more walkable transit friendly communities where people can get around on foot, bike scooters, busses, and one day light rail trains. It's not just good for affordability, it's not just good for mobility, it's good for our climate. And it's good for our planet. And I just want to quickly add, you know, I'm very thankful that the district nine race wasn't in 2024 then I wouldn't have the privilege to be able to work with councilmember pool on on big items like this. I just want to [4:49:49 PM] thank councilmember pool for leading. I feel like I've learned a lot from her and her amazing staff and just, you know, thankful to get this hopefully through. >> Mayor pro tem, those are both really great comments. >> I'm not sure I want to repeat anything that's already been said, but I know every time we bring housing to the table and up to the dais and we want to talk about what makes housing affordable or what is creating the lack of affordability here in Austin, you're going to get opinions on both sides of the aisle. I mean, that's natural. That's part of what Austin is about. That's part of the work that we have ahead of us. But I can't help but think about it kind of factors into a lot of folks who say, I worked really hard. I'm proud of what I built. I built a life here and I love my community and people who are saying I'm trying to build my life here and I can't make it. And I think that's something that we always have to consider is as the years go by and the decades change and we find ourselves with heat, extreme heat, extreme freezes, we see flooding, we see wildfire fires, we know that climate change is [4:50:50 PM] here. And we have to make sure that we're responsive to the people who are going to be here in 30, 40 years. And we want to make sure they can build a life here, too. We need to keep our first responders here. We need nurses and teachers to be here. We need grocery store workers who were front line workers during the pandemic to be able to build a life here. And so we may argue over what makes things affordable when we're not committing, you know, to certain levels of mfi for certain types of housing development. That is actually inclusionary zoning. If we could do that. And council member pool has been a very vocal advocate at the legislature trying to say we want to have that tool in our toolbox. But when you flip that on its head and we only have exclusion and zoning and you look at if you wanted to make housing more expensive, which I know nobody in this room wants to do, what would that look like? And it would look like huge lot sizes as the inability to build multiple units on a lot. It would look like big footprints, big floor plans. [4:51:51 PM] That's what creates sprawl. That is why people are moving to dripping springs in hays county and cedar park and pflugerville , and those are beautiful communities. I have a lot of friends and loved ones that live in those communities and I enjoy them as well. But if we want to fight sprawl and we want to fight congestion, we've got to get creative with the land we have right here in Austin so that we can build those complete communities with walkable city bike ability and so that people can go enjoy the beautiful park spaces and all of the cultural arts and events that we have happening in the center of the region. So I'm really happy to support this today. I applaud Leslie Powell's leadership on this because this is a really momentous occasion. And thank you. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem, councilmember Kelly and then council member alter and then councilmember Fuentes, thank you, mayor. >> Throughout this week, our community is engaged in challenging discussions regarding housing. >> It is evident that we require more housing as a point on which I believe we all can agree on. But before I proceed for the [4:52:52 PM] rest of my remarks, let me state unequivocally that I am in favor of promoting more housing options in the city of Austin as I considered the matter at hand before us today, I recognize some advantages of the proposed policy before us. However I find myself unable to support it today due to certain reservations reasons shared by both my constituents and those that have voiced their concerns before us today. The conversations I've had have been enlightening, leading me to believe that there may be unintended and significant consequences if this item is passed. It's worth noting that eight co-sponsors have endorsed this item and it requires six votes to pass, meaning that it will be approved today while I have appreciated fruitful discussions with individuals who deeply care about affordability and housing, I still ponder the potential costs of implementing this proposal. One of my foremost worries is that this item could allow developers to acquire properties and then subdivide them. Such a scenario could lead to increased property taxes, potentially displacing hardworking, everyday [4:53:52 PM] individuals. We seek to assist. I'm concerned about regular members of the community not being able to take on a financial risk by developing their own land. This might even make it more attractive for a property owner to sell to a developer. My conclusion is that there is no assurance that this resolution will achieve its intended objectives. I'd like to offer a very real world example of another. One of my concerns that stems from my experience when river place was part of my district. >> One Katy throughout my time representing that area, the community expressed concerns about the lack of a fire escape route in the event of a wildland fire and subsequent evacuations with that in mind, while looking into the potential effects of this resolution and its intention, it became apparent to me that infrastruc ature must adequately be planned to ensure the safety of residents in emergencies and the potential for overcrowding in certain areas without easy evacuation routes is a worrisome issue. >> Another concern that I foresee is a potential issue is a strain on our public safety [4:54:53 PM] resources as another real world example that exemplifies this issue is related to density and a lack of prior planning for those resources. Specifically, all point to the domain area. I have been made aware of an ongoing situation where the increased population in the domain has not been adequately accounted for in terms of emergency medical services resources. As a result, ems units and resources from surrounding areas of the city are being diverted to respond to emergencies in the domain, causing longer response times in other neighborhoods. This unintended consequence highlights the importance of thoughtful planning and preparation for the impact of increased density on essential services like public safety, especially when we discuss an item that aims to subdivide lots and increase housing. It is crucial that we address these resource challenges proactively to ensure the well-being and safety of all of our residents. While I am going to vote against this particular item, I am fully supportive of engaging in a broader conversation about these [4:55:54 PM] issues. As our city continues to grow, I eagerly anticipate the discussion that lie ahead. Thank you. With that, mayor, I yield. >> Thank you very much, councilmember Kelly. Chair recognizes council member. Chair recognizes. Councilmember Allison alter, then councilmember Fuentes. Then councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you, mayor. >> First, I want to start by thanking all of the austinites who testified today, emailed and called us whether in favor or against. Item 126, your voice does matter and your participation is a bedrock of our democratic process. I know that all of us on this dais share the goal of wanting all austinites to have access to safe, affordable housing options . But as I mentioned, when we discussed this item on Tuesday, I have significant concerns with this item when we allow minimum lot sizes to be reduced to 2500ft !S while simultaneously allowing three units by Wright on each of these smaller lots [4:56:54 PM] while simultaneously saying if you build 2 to 3 units on those smaller lots, you would no longer be subject to our mcmansion rules. While simultaneously eliminating minimum site area and building coverage requirement S all while knowing we are basically powerless to enforce our existing str rules. All while knowing that every day austinites will be hard pressed to access loans with our rising interest rates. But speculative bad actors and private equity firms will have no problem in that area. All while knowing that without any preservation requirement, this will incentivize the demolition of existing homes to build newer, bigger, more expensive structures and send more homes to the landfill. These factors working in combination with one another, have the real potential to lead to predictable negative consequences. I believe this resolution is much more drastic and goes much further than anything our staff brought to council for a vote during the codenext or land development code rewrite process. And let me [4:57:55 PM] repeat that I believe this resolution is much more drastic and goes much further than anything our staff brought to council for a vote during the codenext or land development code. Re-write process. Because I will not be supporting this item today. And eight of my colleagues have signed on as co sponsors, I won't be offering any amendments, but since I keep hearing that this resolution is just the beginning of a conversation and I want to take that as what is intended, I do hope that our professional staff will indeed engage in real, meaningful and collaborative conversation. Burns so city manager, you know as well as I do that we have terrific staff and we are building up our planning department and I hope that our planning staff will indeed be given the space and opportunity to do that work and to use their planning expertise and public engagement skills to explore solutions and strategies for mitigating those consequences, including looking at ways to minimize demolitions, minimize the potential for these newer, bigger structures to [4:58:55 PM] simply turn them into strs and minimize the potential for seeing neighborhoods be overwhelmed by huge mcmansions that don't actually add any density of people, just density of bigger structures. And to figure out how everyday austinites can actually benefit from these changes, to be able to access capital and expertise is to really share in prosperity , not just be forced to cash out to private interests. Thank you . >> Thank you, councilmember chair recognizes his council member Fuentes. Thank you. >> Thanks, mayor. And, for ctm, there's someone on the webex link that is unmuted that can hear background noise on so just wanted to flag there's a call in user who is not muted and I can hear background noise colleagues just wanted to share my gratitude to councilmember pool for bringing forward this initiative. It is a bold initiative that is a long time coming and I often think about, wow, what how different Austin [4:59:57 PM] might look like if we had passed this type of land use reform a decade ago because not a week goes by that I don't hear from a community member or a friend about having to leave our city because they could no longer afford to live in our city. Or when I meet city workers who do not, who are not able to live in the city that they work in. And I think we can do much better as a city. Obviously the status quo is not working. And so by passing these bold land use reforms, we are taking the much needed steps. And councilmember Paul, thank you for your strong leadership. I've appreciated how you've rolled out this initiative and have initiated this conversation with our community and just wanted to take a moment to share my gratitude. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember Fuentes, councilmember harper-madison. There you are. >> Thank you. I appreciate the recognition. I was just going to echo councilwoman Fuentes, [5:00:58 PM] observation that there was a lot of background noise. I don't know if you guys can hear it in chambers, but we could overhear people's conversation and dishes clanging and all kinds of things happening in the background. So I just wanted to make sure to point that out, to make sure it's not a archived. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Any other discussion on the motion that has been moved and seconded that we adopt? Item number 126. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no, no . The motion passes with two noes. Councilmember Allison alter and councilmember Kelly. For the record, thank you all that will take us now to item 125. And I will recognize councilmember pool on. Item 125 . >> Thanks, mayor. And I would [5:02:00 PM] move approval of item 125. >> Motion is to approve item number 125. Is there a second Ed seconded by the mayor? Pro tem is there discussion? Let me ask . We got we have two people signed up to speak. Is that right? >> Yes, there is one. Speaker Ana Aguilar. >> Okay. Sorry. Is Mr. Bunch signed up or not to be imposed? 125 he's right here. It's my understanding he was signed up on 125 I don't I have him listed as wanting to speak on 126 earlier this morning. >> But if he's here, he's here. >> But bill, did you sign up on 125? Oh, okay. I figured. Please go ahead. Okay. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Ana Aguirre. I'm the immediate past chair of the southeast neighborhood plan contact team and the current president of the Austin neighborhoods council. But I'm not speaking for them today. I'm speaking as a d2 [5:03:00 PM] resident and a dove springs resident. I strongly oppose item 125, which allows code to no longer require the environmental or land use commissions to review and make recommendations to the city council or for city council to vote for or against water and wastewater extensions into Barton springs and lake Austin. Watersheds in other areas such as northern bastrop county as they passed zoning and planning commissioner, I recall a case supporting a request to place a wastewater line in the critical water quality zone along a creek in far southeast Austin. As a result of my service on the flood mitigation task force in response to the 2013 2015 catastrophic flood events, I knew this was not a good environmental practice. If not for this vetting process, a wastewater line would have been built within a critical water quality zone without a bidding process, Austin residents will have no say on critical environmental issues such as this. Thank you for your time and consideration and service to our community. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Bunch and after Mr. Bunch is [5:04:04 PM] Madeline Mathis. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Council members bill bunch, again with save our springs alliance, urging you to vote no or postpone this item, which would reverse over 40 years of city official policy that the presumption is we will not extend water, sewer and other development infrastructure into the Barton springs watershed. That was later under mayor Watson expanded to include all of our drinking water watersheds as and that that presumption would be policed by this council and the public and the public participation before you and before the boards and commissions as this has worked beautifully. Most of these that want to seek an extension to develop more intensively in our watershed don't even come because they know it will be denied or they fall out along [5:05:05 PM] the way or or if they actually meet some standards. And the staff recommends them, then they get approved without much fanfare as item six did by y'all earlier today. So this isn't taking up too much of your time . This is definitely in the category of a solution in search of a problem only the solution means cutting the public out of the process. Kind of consistent with item 92. And it should be deep sixed by you as item 92 was was as you all know, the state legislature continues to cut back our authority to manage growth grand fathering, new legislation this session and that makes this policy even more critical for you, the council to carefully consider and review two extensions of water and [5:06:07 PM] sewer into Barton springs watershed. What that water and sewer turns into concrete. It turns into fertilizer, it turns into sewage that pollutes our springs. Please don't do this. I honestly don't even understand why it's on your agenda. Thank you for your consideration. Bartz >> Sarah Mcarthur was. So no. Okay Madeline Mathis and Roy Whaley. >> Let me ask a question. Except for this young woman here. So every these people spoke in the main on consent when we had speakers for consent and non consent at that point in time. What's happening now? They're coming up and saying that they didn't get to speak. When you [5:07:07 PM] spoke, didn't you on the last Whaley on. Oh yeah that was on a different number. You spoke on the consent and non consent agenda, did you? I spoke, but I didn't speak on everything that I signed up for. >> And this was that was one of the issues that I addressed. >> But that but that was not the way we said what we were going to do. Do do this. I'm going to grant an exception because maybe I was unclear. But for you, under these circumstances. But we didn't we didn't set this up so that what would happen is you get to speak on consent and then come back and speak on this a second time. So I appreciate that. >> I apologize to you, man. >> It's all yours. Hi >> My background is actually working for the Florida department of environmental protection, in which I oversaw wastewater drinking water wetland and state lands and [5:08:10 PM] Florida has a lot of issues with sanitary sewer overflows. One of the things that was mentioned for changing this amendment was to actually really make an improve the ability to regulate sanitary sewer overflows. But by increasing the or by getting rid of the cost prohibition for larger piping and stuff, you're going to have larger spills, a bigger pipe is going to have more wastewater and putting it in a critical drinking water zone will actually cause a lot more environmental effects to our aquifer and our drinking water in our ability to kind of filtrate that. And it'll really decrease the life of our waters as well. The springs over in Florida have actually gone down so much from sanitary sewer overflows that they have these bad algae blooms. And I know Austin has had some of those algae blooms that kill and cause amoeba that can literally contaminate and cause brain injury and other things. So I [5:09:12 PM] think passing this and making it so that it doesn't have to be regulated and have the oversight of the council is going to really increase the harm to the public and not just in that area, but to our aquifer and our drinking water overall as someone who used to regulate it and had years of experience regulating it, it's not if it's going to happen, it's when it's going to happen. There's not enough funding for state regulators to have enough people on the ground to inspect these things in fast enough times and pipes fail. That's just a reality of the situation. So not having the oversight of the council to approve those big future developments is really just going to cause more harm in the long term. >> Thank you very much. >> That's tough to follow. Roy [5:10:13 PM] Whaley, conservation chair for the Austin regional group, the Sierra club. Again and what she said. >> Thank you very much. >> You know, so you know something, watersheds one of our my favorite departments is and I don't want to put this on them. I want to keep it where it belongs on you, on the people that got elected to make these decisions. And out in the open where we can address it. Mr. Bunch was right when he says this is not something you have to deal with very often. So own those times when it is important , let's do it in the open as a community together because it has made a difference over the years. It will make a difference going forward. We need to have this open in the daylight discussion. Please say no to this. Thank you. Thank you. [5:11:14 PM] Thank you for letting me speak. Certainly >> That concludes the speakers. >> All right, members, we have a motion and a second to adopt item number 125 council member pool do you want to say anything in opening? Okay. Councilmember Allison alter, you're recognized . >> Thank you. I have some questions for the watershed. I'm not sure if it would be for Katy coin or for Liz Johnston as they're coming forward, I'm going to note that. >> And I said this earlier, but I want to note it again on the council. Member Fuentes is off the dais on important city business and I want to note that for the record. Thank you. Sure councilmember alter, you have the floor. >> Thank you. Good afternoon. I appreciate you being with us. So can you tell me, would you describe this item as a priority for the watershed department in terms of protecting our environment? >> Katy Cohen environmental [5:12:15 PM] officer good afternoon, mayor. Council thank you for your question. How do I answer this? It's not something that's come up as a staff priority for watershed. And as I understand it, not from our colleagues at Austin water. I certainly recognize that it's council's prerogative to help shape the priorities that we need to take in terms of policy in our city as far as environmental impact, this is something that we do share some concern there are says that with the current level of oversight that exist butts with with council having oversight on these request. S there are a number of cases where this has been useful oversight for us and we can share some examples if that's helpful. All that said, we also recognize that there's a lot of efficiencies that can be found with better process. And so we recognize that that is part of the attempt that's being made here. >> Thank you. I would love for you to share some of the examples of where this has been helpful. >> Thank you. Liz Johnston [5:13:15 PM] watershed protection and I believe this information is also in the q&a backup. >> And so and it's a little bit complicated because some projects have multiple some like water and wastewater and some don't. >> But in the last ten years, there have been just checking my numbers. 12 let's see again a little bit. >> So six projects where at least one board recommended against that did not proceed. >> And so some similar like on the agenda earlier today was one on spicewood springs. >> The violet crown amphitheater is another one on the Gragg track is another. >> So those are some recent ones that had a lot of concern that did not proceed partially related to the service extension request. >> So having the council have to approve helped in that process? >> I would say yes, but let me I [5:14:18 PM] just want to make so I'm clear. >> You the watershed department, which is different than the water department, correct. If there was a request, it you didn't feel pool as a as a department that you could oppose or require for an extension in accordance with whatever the environmental, whatever environmental needed to be done to ensure that there's no damage , unintended damage to the environment, you know, one muzzled you, I guess I'm asking. Or did you feel you had to step back and just let water do what it wanted? >> The only reason watershed would be in included in the decision is if we are requested to make a recommendation and at under current processes that we are only brought in if there is a council action. >> You're not consulted. >> When those extension requests come to council, correct? [5:15:18 PM] >> Well, we are when they come to council only. >> Okay. >> So it sounds like that if it wasn't on the path to council, then the watershed protection department and our environmental concerns would not automatically be part of the decision making process if I'm understanding correctly, given the procedures that are not under the current process. >> Yes. >> Thank you. And just to be clear, do you believe approval of this item would strengthen our environmental protection of our water supply and water quality. >> It is. It would not be a strengthening of environmental protection. Thank you. >> And you believe, from what I've heard, that the oversight has been helpful in advancing environmental because of the lack of oversight for watershed in the current process. >> That oversight with council has been helpful. Thank you. >> Have there been any problematic says that council has denied in recent history up [5:16:23 PM] . I would have to go back and look at that. >> I don't have it at the my fingertips right now. That's fine. Were there other cities that never made it to council? >> Because after being scheduled for a commission vote, they never came to council due to a lack of support? Yes there were, I believe, six. >> I can confirm that number, though. >> Okay. And did the violent crown amphitheater require an Sr? It did. Thank you. So my recollection is that Kayla Champlin, an environmental program coordinator with the Austin watershed protection department, reported that the violent crown amphitheaters Sr would have meant 16,000ft of wastewater and water lines crossed Barton creek and possibly Williamson creek to critical water quality Zones. And so in February of 2022, our environmental commission unanimously denied that request. Does that sound. That is correct. Okay my recollection is that representatives from the Travis county audubon society, the save our springs alliance, the Austin zoo and the nature [5:17:23 PM] conservancy, as well as residents of the area, asked the environmental commission to deny violent crown's request that. I'm not asking you to speak on their behalf, but does that align with what you recall that that that sounds correct. Okay and if we reverse this existing policy, that public hearing and the opportunity for the public to testify to decision makers about their concerns would be no longer excuse me, council member pool, I'm trying to speak. And when you're speaking right in my ear, I cannot. >> He's there. A conversation. >> Thank you so if we reverse this existing policy that public hearing and the opportunity for the public to testify to decision makers about their concerns would no longer be part of the process and instead the decision would be entirely administrative by staff. Is that correct? Correct okay. And are there any procedures at this point if watershed and the water department disagree, if it doesn't come to council, do we have internal processes to meet and discuss and make sure that [5:18:24 PM] we are in alignment on our recommendations currently? Okay. But we have gotten recommendations that have come to us that you disagree and they're not resolved before they come in the past. So yes. Yeah and I think we've worked on some of those processes. So colleagues, you know, I would really ask that we consider a postponement. I think there are a lot of issues here with 196 items as you know, I would ask for the ability to really look at this more closely, you know, with as raising the alarm, being very, you know, the folks that we have looked to historically to conserve our aquifer and our water supply by they are saying that this is a direct assault on our core policies for protecting Barton springs. I think that should give us pause as it certainly gives me pause and you know, I know the that we should , should, you know, take some [5:19:25 PM] more time for this. Again we had 196 items and I know that we're all feeling that that was too many. But I think it is not too much to ask for a postponement. I do represent an area where this would have a very big impact. I have examples of some that were very important, even in relation to other items that we dealt with today. And so I do think that a postponement would be in order and I would like to make that motion and I hope that my colleagues will provide that opportunity. This is not an item that we had discussed at length. There was no opportunity for us to have deeper conversations with watershed et- cetera. So I would like to move. >> Councilmember does your, your motion, does your motion to postpone have a date that you would like to postpone it to? >> Well, absent the ability to do it indefinitely, I would say the August 31st meeting, I will be on city business at the September 14th meeting. [5:20:26 PM] >> The motion on. There's a motion. Hang on one second. There's a motion to postpone this item until all August 31st. It's second by councilmember vela, councilmember Zavala. Seconds. The motion I will recognize councilmember pool on the motion and I'll have a comment. So I wanted to ask acm interim acm, Robert good some questions. >> Is that appropriate at this point. Thanks, Mr. Good for coming up and tell everybody why I'm why I'm calling you up. What is your purview on this? You are the acm for what do you do for a living? >> I have both watershed and water in my portfolio, so I wanted to talk a little bit about showers and wastewater and what happens when the city of [5:21:26 PM] Austin denies showers. >> Can you explain to everybody what an scr is? >> Service extension request for water and or wastewater in our service area. >> Water has a service area defined by what's called a certificate of convenience Ken and by law, water is required to provide service within that service area and the city of Austin has a policy of wanting generally to put wastewater, for example, into the pipes as opposed to spraying it on the ground or allowing if there isn't the ability to extend the service, then for a developer or a property owner would have to create its own package plant on its site and do its own wastewater elimination. >> I'm not saying that very well because this is not my area of expertise, which is why I was [5:22:26 PM] hoping that you could kind of draw the picture for folks. >> Certainly as we prefer to have a centralized treatment rather than on land application . That is some some sometimes used and or septic systems. >> So does denying service for an scr, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Well for water, again, we're required within our ccn to provide service. >> Watershed looks at it like as you all are debating and from the environmental aspect. So they're looking to ensure our our environmental requirements are met in all in all areas as well as wastewater. >> So is it more of a protection Ann to the environment to have wastewater eliminated off of a site through a city owned pipe? >> That's a challenge. I mean, we would say yes, in many cases , but it just depends on the application as well. >> Okay. Individual circumstances. But by and large, it seems safer to put wastewater running through a pipe and going into our wastewater systems. [5:23:29 PM] Sure. Okay is watershed involved in site plan review when building infrastructure? Yes. If scr approvals, as has been indicated here by other staff, if there's such a problem, why don't all cers come to council? I think there are like 400 of them. Well in a year the policy has been when we're in environmentally sensitive area drinking water protection Zones, those are specially treated. >> And then we bring those to council. >> That's been the that's been the code that this item looks to initiate an amendment change that will go through a process. And as you mentioned earlier, on 126, it starts the process and there'll be a lot of work going forward on how that looks before it comes back to council. >> When we denied the T lab to the violet crown, what happened ? They got their T lap, didn't they? >> I'm not aware of that. My understanding is they they did get it from tcu. [5:24:29 PM] >> Yeah. And it feels like it's preferable for the city of Austin to be the jurisdiction providing in that instance. But we did deny it. I will tell my colleagues on the dais that my staff was working with Austin, the water utility and watershed protection. Both of those departments told told us that they would create a collaborative process going forward to address the issues that are being raised here. Is that true? Yes. >> Going through the code initiation from at this point forward will work on a process to bring back to council that you'll see in adopting those code changes that will show that collaborative process. We want to have water. We want to have watershed involved and watershed , both of them. They're all my wishes. We want to have that collaborative relationship going forward to look at that. So yes , so we don't have staff in one department at odds with staff in another department. >> And I know that that was an issue earlier this year that we were able to resolve. Thank you [5:25:29 PM] , Mr. City manager, before we vote on the substitute, I want to go ahead and get some comments into the into the record. >> I'll ask you to close. Would that work for you? Members? I'm going to I want to say a couple things about this respectfully to councilmember pool, because as Mr. Bunch pointed out, I was around when we did some of this. In fact, when we created the I see somebody else out there, maybe I see somebody else out there do something about it. The drinking water protection zone. And we created this policy and it was a policy done so that we would have eyes on environmental protection when we thought we needed to have eyes on environmental protection. Ann because of the very sensitive drinking water protection Zones that we were, we were addressing and I appreciate Mr. Goode's answers, but in every instance, if it was going to be better or we thought we needed to do that [5:26:32 PM] in order to make it better, those are the kinds of factors that go into the consideration that the council would make. That's that's part of the process, if you will, when it comes to council, is to look at all of the options and all of the criteria. So I just want to point that out that it's worked out and it's worked for a long time now. Now, anybody else wish to speak, I'm going to. Okay, councilman. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Councilmember vela. Then. Then the mayor pro tem, and then I'll call on the councilmember to close. >> I seconded the continuance. There's nothing in the backup. I'm just, you know, there was 196 items on the agenda. I just. I don't have enough information right now. I feel like to make an informed vote, and I would like a little more time to make an informed vote. I, I don't want this to be seen as kind of like a, you know, support or not. I just I don't have enough information in front of me right now to make a decision. [5:27:34 PM] >> Mayor pro tem just wanted to daylight my thoughts. >> I'm going to support council member pool in this initiative. No matter how the votes go. As someone who gets a lot of shares that are generally pretty close to my district, you know, it it strikes me that there could be a bit of inconsistency if we just say council gets the ability to vote them up or down. I'm someone that believes firmly in administrative processes and if there's issues with the process, then council may need to direct, you know, what criteria. And when things are approved and when they're denied it doesn't mean that staff would need to approve all of them or deny all of them. But we don't have this conversation through most of central and east Austin because it's not in the drinking water protection zone. And so at that point, administrative staff is already well versed in looking at what the what the benefits or what consequences might come from people who want to tap in to the lines as someone who has worked in environmental consulting and alongside a lot [5:28:35 PM] of scientists that care a lot about environmental protection, Ann as well. I am concerned about treatment on site and I don't think there's enough oversight. I don't think there's enough follow up. If something goes wrong. And we hear a lot about how some of our neighbors further to the west, we have a lot of concerns about how they approve permits for water discharge and things like that. I think these are all very valid concerns. Nations. I just want to make sure there's parity and equity in who gets extended service and who doesn't. And I certainly don't want to run into an issue where council is just up and down voting Lang because they like someone or they don't like someone or or one neighbor has more power than the other. So I just want to make sure we're ironing out consistency and that we really know that our staff knows council's direction and intent with how we're going to protect the environment and make sure that we don't end up with on site treatment going awry or having septic overflow and it's just not caught for a long time. Those those are also very damaging to the environment [5:29:38 PM] . >> I'll. Here's what I'd like to do with permission is I'm going to ask councilmember pool this is the this is we're talking about the motion to postpone. And that's going to be the first vote we take is on whether or not to postpone until August 31st. So I'm going to ask councilmember pool and then I'm going to go to the maker of the motion and actually have a close by. Councilmember Allison alter . That's the angels have shown up. Finally, finally today, they showed up. That's great. >> So first of all, I'll just start off the resolution. Does not affect the sos ordinance or how it's applied to development , but it does change the requirement for service extension requests to come to council for approval and allows wastewater projects to cost participate when building infrastructure. That's larger than they need for their project [5:30:39 PM] . So this requirement only occurs in a small area of town that's overlapped by the etj and the drinking water protection zone, the drinking water protection zone has some of the most restrictive environmental code and that alone has successfully served to limit development and impervious cover to what I'm hearing today here is that staff, oddly, and I hope I'm wrong about this, may not feel sufficiently authorized to uphold those restrictions. So city manager would like to chase that back. Our office asked Austin water how many cities have been brought to council in the past three years and how many were denied? Austin water stated that nine cities had been had been brought previously. All were approved or none were denied. If an scr is denied, the applicant's only option is to get a permit issued by the Texas commission on environmental quality. None of these alternatives give control to the city and we have had failures in past years that discharge waste into our most sensitive [5:31:39 PM] waterways, allowing a large project to connect to our wastewater system ensures that the waste is treated to the city's standards and not discharging questionable water into our local waterways. That's a whole goal of this that aside, and I really want to emphasize this point, these are not political decisions. These decisions need to and should be made by expert staff who are aware of the benefits and problems of extend the service. Thanks mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember I'll recognize councilmember Allison alter to close and then we will vote on the motion to postpone until August 31st. >> Thank you. I'd like to call Mr. Bunch up, please. So, Mr. Bunch, you've been committed to protect our water quality and water supply for a very long time. You've heard [5:32:41 PM] some of our discussion of the pros and cons of this step. Can you briefly speak to any of the pros or cons we've discussed so far that you think would help us in making our decision today? And maybe, you know why we should postpone. >> Yes. Through that public process with watershed protection, balancing the water utilities goal, which almost always is just to expand its customer base, going through the public process, we get good decisions, decisions that protect the watershed. And it's absolutely false. Councilmember pool to say the only option besides extending the utilities is a permit for tcu. Sometimes there's an option to obtain service from another provider. Sometimes the developer is dead in the water for because they can't get a permit on the [5:33:41 PM] recharge zone. They can. The rules allow it, but it's virtually impossible to show that you can protect the aquifer. And Barton springs irrigating treated sewage on the recharge zone. The last time somebody tried to do that, we were about to beat them on that fight it and the city stepped forward and actually bought the land and now it's 100% preserved. That would have never happened if we had just given them a sewer. They can do septic systems and a lot of people say, oh, scary septic systems. But that's a much lower density development that goes on sewer system on site, septic systems, one house per two, three, five acres is much lower impact than in a giant mega intense, massive, highly impact pervious cover development that's required that desperately needs [5:34:43 PM] our sewer service has not been approved for the violet crown amphitheater. That monster city would be built if we give them sewer service and water service. It will. Right now, they're screwed without it. And I think there's I hopefully nobody on the dais that thinks the violet crown amphitheater for is a good idea. But I promise you the water utility would want to serve them if we did not have the right to bring it to you here. So that each circumstance is unique and requires looking at the facts. And sometimes, yes, the right answer is to provide city sewer service. But we get to that right answer with the oversight from the community and the council. >> Let's let the council member ask questions. If she has questions and do you have any additional questions? I, I guess I just, you know, wanted to speak to what we might be able to accomplish in a postponing to [5:35:44 PM] be able to think about this. >> Well, I think with some additional postponement, we can definitely engage with the council members and look at this issue more closely. Look at the track record, look at the violet crown amphitheater, example, which is a really good one. Look at the hays commons development which is pending right now, and that's one that we have fought off twice before over the last 20 years. It's a horrible development that the developer refuses to scale back and meet reasonable standards. It's like five miles from our current utility. So if we extend service, we're opening up a vast other area of the recharge zone for intensive urban development. So so yes, I would love the opportunity to engage with each and every one of you about this issue and we can do that with a postponement. >> And I think from my perspective, I'm still trying struggling to understand what problem exactly we're trying to [5:36:44 PM] solve. I understand there's an issue about what if we've agreed to extend it. It's an appropriate place. It makes sense, but it has to go through the process because not everywhere on the border is equally right problematic that we would want to be able to extend the service and then that may be something that we need to think about addressing. But again, I'm not fully understanding the problem. I don't know. Council member pool, I know you had three co-sponsors. If there's an opportunity for us to have some conversation so that we can really understand the problem that this is trying to solve, but I would really ask my colleagues that, you know, we have 196 item agenda. This is a very important issue. We all care about the watershed there. Clearly, equity issues, but I'm not sure the solution is to take away the protections over the drinking water. It may be that we need to think about if there if there are issues in other parts of town where we need to have more oversight, then we should add those steps. Then for [5:37:46 PM] as well. If they're if they're appropriate. But it's not something that I have had an opportunity to vet and to think about today. So again, I would very much ask my colleagues if we can have more time to think about it. I don't understand the rush here. >> That was the close. Thank you. You anything new that was I'm going to let you close again if you need to, but I'm being deferential here. >> I appreciate it. I just wanted to say that the Austin water utility did deny the water line for violet crown and the reason violet crown. >> No, no, no, no. The violence. No no. >> Well, let's get the. >> No, no, no. You know better than that. >> So the Austin water utility did did deny that line for water to the violet crown. And the fact that violet crown never came to the council for approval is because of the staff's work. [5:38:47 PM] The problem that is in front of us here, I think, mayor, is that the concerns are related to the sos Barton springs is vulnerable area of town and this piece is protected by the ordinance that that watershed is protected by the ordinance. But but the srrs in the greater Austin area do need some assistance to be able to move more quickly, more expeditiously and hopefully less expensive. Lee so I understand completely. I don't want to I don't want to fight with you, bill. I really don't. But I do want to make the distinction between what he's advocating for and what we were the larger issue that we were hoping to address. >> Thank you. Do you want to say anything more? Again I really that's helpful to understand the problem that you're trying to address. >> There are some consequences [5:39:48 PM] and there may be some ways to speed that up. And again, I don't have any of the facts of how long this is taking and how problematic it is when it's not a case that's problematic. So if it's taking more time and it's a case where it doesn't make sense, then it's doing what it's supposed to be doing. But but in the two weeks that we've had with 196 items, I have not been able to look into any any of that. And again, I think I don't know with budget that will be fully able to vet it, but I think it would be better decision than than when we would make tonight the motion before us is a motion to postpone to this item 125 to August 31st. >> All those in favor, raise your hand. All those opposed, raise your hand, mayor. I'm for the. You're [5:40:50 PM] voting for the postponement. Yes. I got you. So there being. Six yeses on the motion on three. No, I'm sorry. Councilmember harper-madison, how did you vote it? >> I voted in opposition to the postponement. All right. >> There being four votes in opposition on and I'll call out those votes in just a second. And one councilmember Fuentes off the dais. The motion to postpone pass passes the vote. So for the record, is in favor of the motion. Was council member Allison alter. Mayor Watson councilmember vela, council member Kelly council member Ryan alter and council member Velasquez. Those voting no were councilmember pool, the mayor pro tem, councilmember qadri and councilmember harper-madison. And as I indicated, councilmember Fuentes was off the dais. Yes ice manager you know, this is the [5:41:51 PM] opportunity for where future former city managers say. >> I feel strongly both ways. I mean, I think that what I'd like to have is the opportunity from the council before we begin in a community process in terms of what ought to be done, in terms of this service extension request, please give Robert myself time to work with watershed management and the water utility. We have a new director that's not even been there a year. And let's sort through what the process is are that we're using now. So we identify any weaknesses in what we're doing. That is what something was intimated a minute ago that somehow watershed was not allowed to express fully what they believed needed to be done. So we need to go through that process and then we want to work with each of the council officers that are interested on this as we go forward for that postponement. >> Thank you, manager members. I'll call up item number 128, the primary councilmember harper- madison you wish to be heard? >> Yes, please. Mayor. I'm just trying to get some clarity as to the city manager's position. [5:42:53 PM] There so I guess from a process perspective, if we vote as a body to postpone, does this mean that we reset the quorums? >> I don't know the answer to that question, and we'll have to get advice from counsel on legal counsel on that. >> Thank you. >> Yes, we voted to postpone it . So what you got? All right. Item number 128, the primary sponsor as council member, qadri , I'll recognize council member qadri for a motion. >> A motion to adopt item 128. >> The motion is made by councilmember qadri to adopt item 128. Its seconded by councilmember Velasquez and I'll recognize council member Kelly for a proposed amendment. Number one to item 128. >> Thank you, mayor. [5:43:54 PM] >> I move adoption of Kelly amendment one for item 128 members. >> You have item 128 and council member Kelly provided this to us at the work session on Tuesday. Okay. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. I'll recognize councilmember qadri on the motion to amend. Yeah I'm happy to accept councilmember Kelly's amendment and I look forward to voting on this item. The motion the motion to amend proposed motion to amend by councilmember Kelly. There's been a motion and a second to adopt it. Without objection on the motion to amend is adopted. Amendment number one is adopted. We'll go back to the main motion, which is to adopt item number 128 as amended is there any objection? Hearing no objection. Item 128 is adopted as amended. We'll now go to item number 129. I'll recognize councilmember Velasquez on item number 129 as the primary sponsor for. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And colleagues, if you'll bear with me, I only have about ten pages of notes to go through on this, [5:44:54 PM] so please. >> Please. >> Yeah. Colleagues, I'm excited to bring this forward. >> One of the things that that I ran on was, bringing more affordable housing online quickly. This resolution is a result of several months of conversations with affordable housing developers regarding our city city's oldest affordable housing program. The smart, smart housing program was intended to provide expedited review and fee waivers for affordable housing developments . And unfortunately, it's fallen short. As it currently stands, the programs fee waive fees are listed out in the ldc, meaning that exempting affordable housing developers from any new fees requires the completion Ann of the entire ldc amendment process. This item looks to simplify the ldc by instead including the waive fees as part of the annual fee ordinance council would approve this as part of the yearly budget. Additionally, it calls for an assessment of the cost of waiving the expedited review fee for smart housing developments to better inform future a future waivers of the fee. The [5:45:54 PM] resolution specifically requests an update on these amendments at the September housing and planning committee. Given that city staff at the direction of chairwoman harper-madison will be presenting their recommended changes to existing density bonus programs, including smart housing December, the September target date is simply a check in for staff to provide an update as the housing and planning committee is having broader conversations about density bonus programs, I understand that request will likely take additional time to complete the amendments and I look forward to reviewing their work at a future committee meeting yesterday, I shared version two of this. Yes via the message board. The latest version provides additional direction to the city manager on how to list the waive fees under the program. If feasible, the city manager is asked to list the fees that are not waived instead of those that are. The intent is to provide further predictability for affordable housing developers. So that they can move so they can more accurately estimate the city fees they will pay with any given affordable knell project. [5:46:55 PM] I want to thank my co sponsors, Ryan alter, Natasha harper-madison chito vela my policy advisors Judy and Jalen and the city staff for all their help and with that I move adoption councilmember Velasquez moves the adoption of item number. 129 as version two. >> It is seconded by councilmember harper-madison chair recognizes council member Kelly on proposed amendment number one to item 129. Thank you. >> I move adoption of Kelly amendment one for item 129 members. >> You have amendment number one in front of you and it was provided by council member Kelly on Tuesday. The motion to amend is made by councilmember Kelly. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Is there any discussion on on the motion to amend? Without objection, the amendment is adopted and we go back to the main motion which is the adoption of item 129 as amended. Any objection? Without objection. Item one 2129 is [5:47:55 PM] adopted as amended. Thank you. Council members. Item number 148 chair calls up item number 148 members. This was pulled off the consent agenda because it was an item that was brought to us by a committee. The chair recognizes council member Allison alter, who chairs the committee which made this recommendation. >> I move passage of item 148, which is amendment to the bylaws of the parks and recreation board. >> It's seconded by councilmember the motion is made by councilmember Allison alter, seconded by councilmember pool is there any objection hearing? Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Is there any objection? Without objection, item 148 is adopted. We will now go to item number 190. The chair will recognize, know one second. My notes are messed up. [5:49:00 PM] The chair will recognize councilmember Ryan alter on item 190. >> Move adoption of item 190. >> Motion is made seconded by councilmember Velasquez to adopt item 190 members. I'll now recognize councilmember qadri for proposed amendment to 190. Councilmember qadri, you're recognized. >> Thank you, mayor. Members the amendment in front of you would put a sunset date of two years after approval unless approved by council and a motion to adopt the motion is to adopt the amendment by qadri. >> Is there a second to the motion? Seconded by councilmember Velasquez? Is there a discussion on the motion to amend by qadri? Without objection, the motion to amend by qadri is adopted. Chair recognize his council member Ryan alter for a proposed amendment to item 190. >> Thank you very much, mayor. This item or this amendment, it just simply ensures that the [5:50:00 PM] police officers that are are utilized for this reserve force, our officers that were honorably , honorably retired or didn't really have any issues upon their retirement. >> Is there a second to the motion, second by councilmember Velasquez? Is there discussion on the motion? Is there any objection to the motion? Without objection, the motion to amend by councilmember Ryan alter is adopted members. That takes us back to the main motion Ann, which is to adopt item 190 as amended is there objection to the motion? Without objection. Item 190 as amended, is adopted . We'll now go to item 195, which is an item from a committee. Amendment >> Thank you for that, councilmember alter Ryan alter let me ask a question. >> Was your amendment in the backup? >> Yes, but I'm saying I'm [5:51:03 PM] really convinced by that. >> Here's what we're going to do to I'm going to read it into the record. Even with that absolute answer that you gave me. It's is it got emailed out. >> Yeah, it's in our emails. >> It's not in the backup. Okay. >> Well then let me read it into the record. Councilmember Taylor, do you have something you want to say? No. Okay councilmember alter's amendment in subsection B line, the fourth line down beginning with the sentence all reserve police officers shall be he is added be honorably retired comma. If applicable, comma, and shall hold. And it goes on to then say after shall hold a permanent peace officer license issued under chapter 1701 Texas occupations code. Then it adds all reserve police officers shall complete the training [5:52:04 PM] required by the police chief and the Texas commission on law enforcement in subsection D, it adds a sentence at the end of the paragraph prior to appointing any member of the police reserve force comma, the police chief shall ensure that the proposed member one did not separate from a previous law enforcement agency while under investigation for misconduct, and two has not been suspended without pay demoted, indefinitely suspended or otherwise terminated by a law enforcement agency for improper use of force, unlawful discrimination or dishonesty. Members let me ask now that I've read that in the record, if there is any member that wishes to reconsider the vote by which item 190 as amended, was adopted . All right. Thank you. With that takes care of item one 9195 is an item that was pulled because it came to us from a committee I'll recognize as [5:53:05 PM] either councilmember harper-madison or councilmember Ryan alter on 195. It came from that committee councilman harper-madison, do you want to move adoption of 195? >> I would like to move adoption of item 195. Thank you, mayor and chair. Appreciate it. >> Item 195 is the motion is made by councilmember harper-madison to adopt item 195 and seconded by councilmember Ryan alter. Is there any discussion on 195? Is there any objection to the motion hearing? None. Without objection. Item 195 is adopted members. That takes care of the items that were on the consent agenda and the items that were pulled. For the record, I want to read Eid because it involves the public knowing when there might be time to comment. I want to read some of the I want to read something really related to what we did on the consent agenda. Please note that item number four amends the council meeting schedule item [5:54:08 PM] 145 sets a public hearing on the proposed tax rate for August 16th, 2023 at ten 10:00 am at city hall. And there will be opportunity for public comment. Item 146 sets a public hearing on the proposed budget for August 1st, 2023 at 3:00 pm at city hall council chambers and there will be an opportunity for public comment also on August 1st, the council will consider the maximum proposed property tax rate and there will be an opportunity for public comment on that as well. Adopting a maximum tax rate is a preliminary step necessary before the city can adopt the actual property tax rate at a subsequent meeting. I also will point out, although it was not part of the agenda for as I indicated earlier in the day, Shea that on July 26th there will also be an opportunity at 10:00 in the morning for public [5:55:10 PM] comment with regards to the budget, with that members, I think in order to expedite and allow staff more staff to go home as we finish things, what I think I will do, unless there's objection is call up, I'll recess the meeting of the Austin city council and we will convene the meeting of the Austin housing, the board of directors of the Austin housing finance corporation. Without objection, the city council. I'm sorry, councilmember harper-madison, you want to say something? >> I did. I actually I was just looking at the calendar and I wanted to get some verification Ann but I also just wanted to take a moment of personal privilege and say that we have an oddity amongst us and that we have three council members, myself, councilmember vela and councilmember Fuentes, were all born on the same day, September 28th. And I just wanted to put it out there that I'd like very [5:56:12 PM] much for us to plan a joint, something for the three of us. There were there. >> I was born on September that on the radar. I was born on September 28th. >> Are you kidding? >> No, I'm kidding. I just want a party. I just want a party. Well if I had your dinner. Yeah. Good well, since we're talking birthdays and you took that point of personal privilege, I want to say, first of all, today is the actual birthday of our interim city manager, Jesus Garcia. >> Happy birthday, J.G. >> So happy birthday. And tomorrow, zo council member Ryan alter will be old enough to drink. Tomorrow is councilmember Ryan alter's birthday. Happy birthday. And some day is council member Velasquez's birthday. >> So this is, I'm sure how the three of us really wanted to [5:57:12 PM] celebrate our birthday today. >> Yes, he already snuck me some drinks. >> Yeah, getting some work done. >> There you go. And mayor? Yes. >> I celebrated a birthday over the break. >> Did you really? >> I did. >> Happy birthday. >> Don't sing. >> Nobody sing. Yeah, nobody singing, right? Nobody's singing right now. I now [6:06:29 PM] reconvene the Austin city council meeting at 6:06 P.M. Members what I'm going to do is go to the public hearings. In your agenda. I believe that starts at page 125 items. 133 no, I'm sorry, I got it wrong. That sets public hearings. Yeah here it is. It's 150 page. 29 150. Through 161. Although item number 161 was postponed. So with that and item 150 is postponed with that, I will call up item 151 without objection, we open the public hearing on [6:07:29 PM] item 151. Madam clerk, do we have anyone signed up to speak at the public hearing on item 151? No without objection, we will close the public hearing on item 151 members. The relator item the action item for 151 is item 162. Do I have a motion on item 162? Motion is made by council member Ryan alter. It is seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there objection or discussion on item 162? Without objection, item 162 is adopted. Now, without objection, I will open the public hearing on item 153. 152 I couldn't. Yeah, I can count that high. 151 152 that's how it works. Yeah 152 madam clerk is there anyone scheduled to speak at the public hearing set for item 152? No without. Because there's no one set to speak. Without objection, we [6:08:30 PM] will close the public hearing on item 152 members. The action item for item 152 is item 163. Is there a motion to adopt item 163 motion is made by council member Ryan alter, seconded by council member harper-madison. Is there discussion on any objection? Without objection. Item 163 is adopted. Item 153 was postponed. Item 154 is to conduct a public hearing and then consider an ordinance. I will without objection, we will open the public hearing on item 154. Madam clerk, is there anyone signed up to speak at the public hearing on item 154? No. Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item 154 and we will now consider the ordinance. Is there a motion to adopt the ordinance under item 154? Council member Ryan alter makes the motion. It is seconded by council member harper-madison Ann. Is there a discussion? Is there any objection? Without objection, item 154 is adopted members I'll pull up item 155. [6:09:33 PM] Item 155 is a public hearing and we will consider an ordinance and the action item will be 164. Madam clerk. Without objection, I'll open the public hearing on item 155. Madam clerk, do we have anyone signed up to speak? No. There being no one to speak without objection, we'll close the public hearing on item 155. I now call up item 164, which is the action item. Is there a motion to adopt item number 164 mayor pro tem moves to adopt it as seconded by council member Vella. Is there a discussion? Any objection? Without objection , item number 164 is adopted. We'll now go to item number 156, which is both a public hearing and to consider an ordinance without objection, we'll open the public hearing on item number 156. Madam clerk, do we have anyone signed to speak up? No. There is no one signed up to speak. So so without objection, I will close the public hearing on item 156. Chair recognizes [6:10:34 PM] council member pool for a motion on adoption of the ordinance council member pool moves adoption of the ordinance. It is seconded by the mayor pro tem van eenoo discussion. Any objection? Without objection. Item 156 is adopted. I will now, without objection. Open the public hearing on item 157. Madam clerk, is there anyone wishing to be heard on item 157? No there being no one to be heard on item 157 without objection, we will close the public hearing on item 157. Is there a motion to adopt item 157 motion is made by council member Allison alter. Second amended. Seconded by councilmember qadri . Is there any discussion, any objection? Without objection, item 157 is adopted. Without objection, I'll open the public hearing on item 158 of. Is there anyone, madam clerk wishing to be heard on 158 no, there being no one to be heard on item number 158 with that objection, [6:11:34 PM] we will close the public hearing. The mayor pro tem moves adoption of item number 158. It is seconded by councilman Ryan alter. Any discussion Ann any objection you wish to be heard? Well it was originally mayor pro tem item. >> I want to speak to my vote. >> I have comments, but if you want to make yours and I'll close it out. Sure that's fine with me. >> Chair recognizes councilmember Allison alter. >> Thank you. So I abstained on the initiation of this item in order to see the final ordinance language. The ordinance itself is something I could support, but when coupled with all the various changes that were initiated earlier today with item 126, I have real concerns that this will no longer simply treat 3 to 4 units to the same review process as single family homes, but we will now reduce the review for these units while simultaneously, dramatically changing those rules and allowing those units to get bigger by no longer being subject to the mcmansion ordinance and to build those newer, bigger units on much smaller lots. So I'm going to be voting against this item today. [6:12:36 PM] >> Mayor pro tem, you're recognized to close on item 158. >> Thank you, mayor. I am very excited for this moment. This is something we've been working on for years. As was mentioned earlier, you know, as as we take on this work as a dais, I'm continually trying to find ways to simplify and streamline the process of building homes in this community. And so I'm really excited that what this does is bring three plexes and four plexes into to the same review process that single family homes and duplexes were already participating in. So staff already knows how to review these proposals. And so I'm just really excited that we've got the opportunity to implement this first phase of our site plan, light resolution. The second phase will be coming later on. That pertains to the 5 to 16 units that one of the speakers earlier had mentioned. This is really exciting to me because we've already got some of these processes built. This just makes it easier for people who want to build smaller homes and more affordable homes to be [6:13:37 PM] able to do so. And so I'm really excited that all the way down the line, we're finally here to approve the ordinance. Thanks >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem, is there any other discussion? She she just closed. Is there any objection to adoption of 158? And I will show councilmember Allison alter as voting no without objection. Item number 158 is adopted with councilmember Allison alter being shown voting no. Members. Item 159 was postponed and item 160. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 160. Madam clerk, is there anyone wishing to be heard on item 160? >> Richard suttle. How were you going? >> How were you going to push us? Because I may make my decision now knowing that Jake oh, sorry. >> There's more. Jacob Emerson and sweet Gwendolyn. [6:14:38 PM] >> What was the first name? Sweet. I thought that was settled. So. And mayor, very quickly on item. 159 and 153, they are postponed. >> But to what date? And action needs to be taken? Well I need to rely on staff. >> I did not know that they needed action, needed to be taken to postpone them. It's my understanding they were postponed by staff. So so staff helped me out in answering that question. On 150. How about 150? Do you need that as well? Yes >> One 5151 5153 and 159 and 161. >> So I don't. >> Joy harden before we get to that, I want to close out 160. Is there anybody else wishing to be heard on item 160? >> No more speakers. >> Without objection, we will [6:15:39 PM] close the public hearing on item 160. I'll now entertain a motion to adopt item 160. It's made by council member qadri, seconded by councilmember harper-madison. Any discussion on any objection you wish to talk? Yes, sir. Yeah. Please great. >> I just want to I want to thank city staff for getting this back to us this year. And I want to thank council member harbor Madison for sponsoring this resolution Ann last summer that got us here today. This ordinance has a promise of renewing the most famous and most historic quarter in Austin, which happens to be in district nine. It will unlock opportunities to bring more kinds of uses to what is now a strip of mostly shot bars that sit idle throughout most hours of the day. It will also preserve the historic look and feel of the street while restoring the mix of businesses and attractions that once made sixth street a vibrant and bustling district for people of all ages and backgrounds. I also want to acknowledge the red river cultural district's valid concerns around increasing development pressures that threaten our treasured venues [6:16:39 PM] and local businesses. In this part of downtown, my office is committed to working with all stakeholders to find comprehensive solutions that protect our live music culture and promote a welcoming downtown for all. Austinites. Councilmember qadri. >> Thank you. Any other discussion? Without objection on item 160 is adopted. Members on item 156. I've been informed by our legal counsel that in the back up there were two two ordinal pieces. One was a planning commission ordinance that was different than the staff recommendation Ann, but the planning commission ordinance that the difference was something that was non germane to the ordinance. What that means is because there were two in the back up, we need to indicate which one we voted for. So council member pool moves that we can reconsider the vote. [6:17:42 PM] By which item? 156 was adopted. It seconded by councilmember Allison alter and without objection, item 156 is being reconsidered. I'll now recognize councilmember pool for a motion on item 156. >> I move the staff recommendation. >> Councilmember pool moves the staff recommendation on item 156. It's seconded by councilmember vela. Any discussion on any objection without objection. Item 156 the staff recommendation is adopted. I would now ask staff to come forward and talk to us about one one 5153 159 and 160 in terms of a date, mayor and council. >> Veronica Briseno, assistant city manager hang on one second. >> Councilmember harper-madison , do you wish to be heard? >> Yes, sir. I was hoping that there was going to be more time. It turns out Briseno came too fast. I was just going to ask respectfully, it's 618. What's the plan for dinner? >> What you got? [6:18:44 PM] >> Well, not much, to be honest with you, but I'm asking, you know, I am starting to get hungry and I can't imagine that some of my colleagues aren't also. So I just want to know what we can plan for. >> Well, that's a fair question . It let's get let's get this done and then we'll take a 20 minute break. How's that? All right. Thank you. All right, mayor and council item number 150 staff would like to postpone to September 14th. >> Item 153. Staff would also like to postpone to September 14th. And the same for 159. So all three postponed to September 14th. >> What about 161? I 161 my screen doesn't go that far. >> Also with Brodie oaks pie, August 30th to August 31st. >> August 31st. >> All right. >> Thank you. Hold on one second. >> Sorry. I believe that was changed to September 14th as well. >> I have September 14th in my notes as well. >> It was changed. [6:19:45 PM] >> So 150 and 161 are changed, postponed to the 14th. Well, it sounds to me like 150, 153, 159 and 161 the recommendation of staff or the desire of staff is that they be postponed until September 14th. >> Is that correct? >> I I'm being told that 161 is actually August 31st. The remaining three are to September 14th. >> Okay. I'll entertain a motion to postpone items. One 5153 and 159 to September 14th. It's made by council member Kelly, seconded by council member Vella discussion or objection? Without objection on the motion passes and items. One 5153 and 159 are postponed to September 14th. I'll entertain a motion to postpone item 161 until August 31st. So motions made by councilmember Vella is there a [6:20:47 PM] second second by council member Kelly discussion objection without objection, the motion passes and item 161 is postpone Eid to August 31st members. It is. 620 without objection, the city council will be in recess until 645, at which point we will take up zoning matters. That's that's how many sugars we have. >> And how many discussion items you're expecting. >> Yes, I sure can. It is my understanding that we have one discussion item, and that is the board and track. And I don't know how I'm right about that. Right the answer is yes. >> Yes. >> Mayor, there will be a discussion on postponement item and then the council will decide if that will be taken up today. >> Yes, that's right. And how many people have signed up to speak, if you can tell us, madam [6:21:49 PM] clerk, on all items, zoning items, a total of 25 and eight or a little more on 180 and 181 are for 180 and 181. >> I'll just state council that many of these items are being postponed. >> So the speakers would just be speaking to the merits of the postponement. >> So we may not have as many speakers. >> Fair enough. >> But that's the answer to the question. All right. We're in recess until 645. [6:45:32 PM] From city council. We are. It is 645 and we have a quorum of the city council present. We are at our zoning and neighborhood plan section of our agenda and I will recognize wise staff, miss Hardin, for you to start talking to us. All right. >> Thank you, mayor and council, Joey harden with the planning department, your zoning agenda begins with item number 160 6c1 for 2023 00004. This item does have a valid petition, so we'll require nine votes. And there is a opposition speaker here. This request is from sf2 to SP three and was supported by staff and by commission. So we are offering this for consent on all three readings. But of course this is up to your discretion. Item 167 is C. One for r81033 rca. This is the Brodie oaks restrictive covenant amendment and there is an applicant [6:46:34 PM] postponement request to your next full council meeting of August 31st. The related rezoning to the rca is item 168 c0814 2021 0099. Again applicant postponement request to your August 31st council meeting. Item 169 is a 2022 0005.02. There's a postponement request by the adjacent property owner to your August 31st council meeting. The related rezoning is item 170, C one for 2022 0114. Again postponement request by the adjacent property owner to your August 31st council meeting . Item 171 is npa. 2022 00210.02. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. The related rezoning is item 170 2c1 for 2023 0052. Again, this item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item. Yes. Item 173 is [6:47:37 PM] c14 2020 0143. There's a joint postponement request from the neighborhood and applicant to your August 31st council meeting item 174 is c14 2022 0102. This item is being offered for consent with the following amendment for 174 and that is amend part two of the draft ordinance renumbering as necessary to include section B as follows be a building setback shall be established and maintained along the south property line, measuring as follows. One 25ft wide, excluding the westernmost 106.06ft and number two five foot wide, excluding the easternmost 70ft. And with that on this case, again is offered for consent on all three readings. Item 175 is. 2022 [6:48:39 PM] 0008.01. There is a neighborhood postponement request to your August 31st council meeting. The related rezoning is 170 6c1 for 2022 0150. Again neighborhood post request to your August 31st council meeting item M 177 is C one for 2023 0033. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 178. Is c814970001 .15. This item is being offered for consent first reading only. Item 179 is c14 2023 0039. There's a neighborhood postponement request to your August 31st council meeting. Item 180 is npa 2022 00160.02. This item is being offered for discussion postponement. The related rezoning item is number 181 c14 [6:49:39 PM] 2022 0121. Again this item is being offered as discussion postponement. Item 182 is c14 2023 0054. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 183 is c14 2022 0155. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item. 184 npa 2022 0030.01. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 185 is the related rezoning. This case. This case does have opposition. Opposition speaker and this. But this case was supported by commission and staff and we are offering this for consent on all three readings with the following motion. Amend part two of the draft ordinance to remove restaurant general from the list of prohibited uses of the property. And again, this is offered for consent on all three readings with that amendment. But this does have a opposition speaker. So of course this is up to your discretion. Ann I don't [6:50:42 PM] want 86 to see 814060175.04. There's a neighborhood postponement request to your August 31st council meeting. Item 187 is c14 2023 0008. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 188 is npa 2022 00050.01. There is an applicant postponement request to your September 14th council meeting and the related rezoning is item 189 c1 four 2022 0107 and again there's an applicant postponement request to your September 14th council meeting and that concludes the reading of the zoning agenda. >> Can I ask a couple of quick questions? You mentioned two, I think. 166 and. 185 that you which is related to 184 obviously, and 184 is the public hearing. But it so 166 184 185 [6:51:44 PM] you indicated those two you knew there were speakers right? Yes sir. Still offering them on consent, but you knew they were speakers. You also on one and just 166 that does have a valid petition. >> So it wouldn't be non-votes. But yes, you're exactly correct. >> Okay. And then on 184 and 185, you indicate that there was an amendment. Did you indicate there was a proposed amendment on another one of them? >> 506 and 508 west I read an amendment into the record. >> Right. What tell me the number again. >> Oh, yes, that would be 174. 174. You're absolutely correct. It okay, members, you all have any questions of miss harden? >> What I think I would recommend members is that we offer a consent agenda and call up speakers to speak on the consent agenda as we read it, [6:52:44 PM] because as we do know, we have a couple of speakers on what staff is recommending with regard to consent and miss harden, stick with me here because I want to call for a motion and then get it all out there. So I want to make sure I get this right. The consent agenda members would be item 166 requiring nine votes. Item 167 to postpone to August 30th, 168 two postponed to August 30th. Item 168. >> I thought I heard August 30th. >> I meant 31st. Okay. Did I say if I said 30th? Did I? Well, because that's councilmember Robert Madison's birthday. >> August 31st. >> All right. If you hear me say August 30th, you know, I mean, August 31st. All right. 167, I'll I'll start over 166 is being offered for consent on all [6:53:45 PM] three readings. 167 and 168 postpone to August 31st, 169 would be postpone. 2nd to August 31st. 170. Postpone. To August 31st 171. And 172 consent on all three readings. 173 pursue postponed to. August 31st 174. It would be adopted on all three readings with the amendment 175 postponed to August 31st 176 postpone to August 31st 177 pass on all three readings. 178 consent on first reading only 179 postponed to August. 31st 182 to consent on all three [6:54:46 PM] readings is 183. All three readings as 184 and 185 on all three readings with 185 having an amendment at 186 postponed to August 31st at 187, all three readings 188 postponed to September 14th and 189 postponed to September 14th. Members I'm going to ask the clerk to call up the speakers that we have here on the consent agenda. As I just read it, after the speakers, I will call for a motion and a second and I'll also call if anybody wants to pull something off the consent agenda as I read it. We'll call for speakers on that. I'll do the normal thing that I normally do with abstentions recusals, and then I'll get to no's and then and we'll we'll have a discussion if necessary and [6:55:48 PM] vote. And then we will go to items 181 and 180, 180 and 181 with that madam clerk, do we have speakers signed up on the items that I listed that would be on the consent agenda. >> Sir, is Karen Fernandez speaking on item. 166? Ms. Fernandez. Mendez and I am the current president of the Matthews lane neighborhood association, speaking today on 70 414 Sherwood road. >> I just wanted to clarify our neighbors position. Our petition reads that we are only in support as to. But John Connor is a longtime resident and all the neighbors approve of his request to build one additional unit on the lot. At the time, we [6:56:49 PM] were told that sf2 would be allowed an Adu, so thus we stated with the petition and stayed with sf2. But we're willing to allow an sf three if that was the only way he could add the additional units. All of the neighbors though are against the application as filed by thrower design to subdivide into five lots and with up to ten units if it weren't for Mr. Connor's position and assuring everyone that the application was not his intention and was a mistake by Victoria, then you would have a 100% petition sitting in front of you. All the neighbors hope that Mr. Connor keeps his promise. This is actually a perfect example of a case that is going to be affected by your passage of 126 today. This is why the city's push for density and disregard for owner's rights puts the burden of home owners to enforce their deed restrictions. Long time residents have always respected those limits, and the new neighbors that we've had have actually come here from other neighborhoods to get to [6:57:49 PM] the green space and have that protection of a unit limit number within their deed restriction. We have neighbors who are currently bringing suit to enforce those restrictions. But has to be done one at a time against each individual builder. The city has been made aware of these issues and until very recently used to respect those restrictions. Whenever a subdivision case or a rezone came to them. Now we are told again that we have to fight and take it to court to enforce because the city does not consider it when rezoning or subdividing. I think it would be more appropriate to say that they do not consider them in certain neighborhoods. I say this because last November I attended a board meeting. >> Thank you, speaker. Your time has expired. >> We were trying to enforce the setbacks in unit number limits. Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker is Zenobia Joseph speaking on 173. >> Thank you, mayor. Council I'm [6:58:50 PM] Zenobia Joseph. I am speaking to the merits of 173. That's one, two, one, two, one. North 35. I would just ask once again, as I have in the past, that before this item comes back, before you , that you consider project connect and transportation in this area, I will use the rest of my time just to address a technical issue and concern that I have. Respectfully, mayor, the way that you handled today's meeting was ad hoc and it was not fair. You gave bill bunch donate time and none of that is written down. So moving forward, I would just ask for fundamental fairness, not favoritism. And so doing, I would ask mayor pro tem Ellis to help you put this in writing, put the process in writing so that speakers know what to expect and also what to expect for public hearings. And I would just tell you as a point of reference, that on June 1st and June 8th, I actually testified and on June 1st I was [6:59:52 PM] in person and I signed up to speak on public hearing. And that was the deathtoll hearing. And the clerk told me, I needed to speak at the beginning of the meeting. And when you asked if anybody signed up to speak, she didn't even give you my name. And so that is going to be the process that we have to speak at the beginning. Then at least acknowledge when you get the public hearings that we signed up and put our names in the record. And so those are my comments. But it is important for you to understand that on June 8th, that's when I sent you the one pager that went to hud and I mentioned that co-mingling the public hearings actually denies us an opportunity to speak on those public hearings. So it's very convoluted. It's very unfair to these meeting the way you handled it. And I hope moving forward that you will put the process in writing so that we can have faith in this process. And if you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you for your help. Thank you for your advice. [7:00:55 PM] >> Next speaker is Andre best crony speaking on 161 167 and 168 163. >> I'm sorry, what item? >> Brodie Wright. So they can speak on the merits of the postponement at. There's three items. >> Would you say the numbers again, please? >> 161 167 and 168 161 is the public hearing for the sos and that was postponed because the rezonings were postponed. >> We're going to be postponed. So that's the Brodie. [7:01:56 PM] You run through. >> I apologize, continue to be confused with Harris one through 161 when you gave us the presentation or did you start with 166 I did start with 166. >> 161 was a related item, but it was postponed when public hearings were called. I see. So we didn't need to table it because it was going to be postponed, but it was on changes and we've already acted on. It's already been acted upon. It is a related item though. >> What was the second item you mentioned? Clerk 166, 167, and 168. Okay then I've got it. All right. Whoever's here to speak, let's do it. >> So, Andre scrawny can speak on 167 and 168 on deck is Madeline Mathis on 167 and 168. Bill bunch on 167 and 168. Good [7:03:04 PM] testimony. Roy Whaley on 167 and 168. Megan miesenböck on 167 and 168. Mark. Dukan 167 and 168. Barbara Macarthur 167 and 168. Bobby lavinsky 167 and 168. Karen Fernandez. On 166. Sarah sorby on 169 and 170. Chris Paige 175 and 176. Jane Rivera 175 and 176. Monica Guzman 175 [7:04:11 PM] 176. 188 and 189. >> Mr. Paige, why don't you go ahead, since she called your name. >> Yes, she's been called. >> Let's step up to the microphone. It's kind of low for me. In support of postponement of 175 and 176, trying to get alignment between the rosewood neighborhood contact team Kenley heights neighborhood association and Homewood heights neighborhood association, as well as the applicant. >> Thanks. I'm not speaking on 188 or 89. >> I'll wait for my next one. Okay thank you, Mr. >>. Lorraine Atherton. 179 Ben Thompson 184 and 185. Those are [7:05:14 PM] the consent zoning consent speakers. Thank you. Members. >> I'll entertain a motion to adopt the consent agenda as I read it into the record. Is there a motion motion? Is made by council member qadri is there? It's seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there anyone wishing to be shown abstaining from the consent agenda? As I read it, anyone wishing to be shown as recusing themselves from the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to be shown voting no on the consent agenda. >> Not not on this. >> It really is your birthday. All right. So nobody's going to be shown voting no on the consent agenda. Motion has been made and seconded to adopt the consent agenda as it was read. Is there any discussion? Objection. Without objection on [7:06:14 PM] the consent agenda is adopted as read for the record, let's show that there were ten votes on. Item 166, which had a valid petition and on the consent agenda as it passed, councilmember Fuentes was off the dice on important city business that will now bring up . Items 180 and 181. >> This is, as you stated, I know, 180 in 2022 00160.02 and item. 181 c14. I can't even read the number. I'm sorry. C. One four 2022 0121. Board and tracked this item was discussed at first reading and then again at second reading. The case is prepared for third reading with [7:07:16 PM] the following amendment and that amendment reads a 75 foot vegetative buffer shall be provided and maintained as measured parallel from and along the southern property line adjacent to the preserve allowable development and the buffers restricted to multi-use trails, fencing, educational signage, removal of invasive species and stormwater infrastructure infrastructure, all allowable development in the vegetative buffer area shall be located in the northern most portion and shall avoid heritage, trees and slopes greater than 15, except as authorized by the city manager. So we do have that amendment, but we are offering this case for discussion postponement as the neighborhood is requesting a postponement to the August 31st council meeting and the applicant is a postponement is opposed to that postponement request. And we do have speakers on this item there. >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you. [7:08:16 PM] Members. If unless there's objection the way I would intend to handle this matter, because it is it is prepared for passage on third reading. But there has been the request for a postponement. What I'm going to what I would suggest we do is we treat it as a complete hearing where the discussion of the merits and if anybody wants to discuss why there ought to be postponement or done as part of that overall discussion on our rules, don't allow for our our rules would normally say that you get five minutes for the applicant and then we go into those that are in favor and those that are opposed. The last time we did this, we allowed the applicant to have five minutes and a represent of the opponent to have five minutes. I'm going to unless there's objection, do that again and then we'll have pros and cons for and for and against. And then three minutes [7:09:17 PM] for the opponent want to sum up in three minutes for the applicant to close out. So I'll call now for the applicant if the applicant would like to address the council. >> Mayor, members of the council. My name is Richard suttle. I'm here on behalf of the applicant tonight hoping for third and final reading as amended. The only issue that came up at the last meeting where we had debate and discussion was the buffer between this track and the preserve. We've gone from a 60 foot building setback to a 75 foot vegetative strip and we're in agreement with that. I I got to figure out how to go about this because I'm, I want to work with you. Normally we talk about the postponement first we are in opposition to the postponement. This case has been on file for a [7:10:18 PM] year. We've had multiple meetings with all the stakeholders. We've had chances to talk about it all along the way, first and second reading. And I just don't think anything beneficial will come from a prolonging of the discussion of this case. So we oppose it and we'd like to move forward. In no way does that mean we'll ever stop talking to the neighborhood as we get into the planning and site planning of the of the project, be happy to answer any questions you might have and thank you. >> Members. Do you have any questions? Councilmember Vella, Mr. Suttle, and I understand this is this is not a pud, so, you know, we can't we're limited the council is limited in terms of kind of the issues that we can address within the zoning. >> I understand that there have been some discussions about what dark sky, meaning the dark sky required to keep the lights as low as possible in the area as well as any potential threats to [7:11:20 PM] birds. In terms of the glazing on the window. Again, I know that we can't bind those conditions, but just is the applicant willing to comply with the dark sky windows? I mean, I'm sorry, dark sky lighting and any kind of bird protection that would be deemed necessary. Again, I know this is not an extremely tall building, and my understanding is not it's not going to be a glass tower as well. But I just wanted to put that out there. >> That is correct. And for the record, yes. Yes. In answer to your question and for the rest of the council, we were trying to figure out a way to codify the dark skies, lighting and the reflectivity of glass that is normally in the area, which is 20. We view those as development regulations that could be modified through a pda was unable to convince the law department of that. So what I will tell you on the record here is that we will comply with the [7:12:20 PM] dark skies requirements in the design standards of the city code and the reflectivity of 20% or less that is currently in the code and that will become part of the project. >> Thank you very much. No further questions, councilmember. >> Any other questions? Thank you. Is there a representative of the opponents of this. >> Before you start? Oh, hold on. So, mayor, are you combining the conversation of the of the postponement request with the actual. >> My, my feeling is that the council will want to make a decision about whether it goes forward as part of the postponement. Go ahead. Merits run it. >> Okay. So first of all, of course, we're asking you to support the neighborhood position. And I want to let you know that our negotiations never got to community benefits. Our negotiations broke down on on [7:13:21 PM] the height. We were in the middle of those negotiations, and that's where it broke down. We never had a discussion. We never had any agreement about community benefits. The reason I'm asking and we're asking for a postponement Burt are three things. One is an inquiry into the validity of the board and track being exempted from the river bluff from the red bluff waterfront overlay in. 1986. We are also asking for an environmental impact study and statement from watershed protection. The last time I asked for that watershed came up and they said, we don't do that , but they do do that over the Edwards aquifer. They're required to do that over the Edwards aquifer. So if here on the east side, the water is the same water quality is the same. So the protection of the water should be the same. So we're asking for an environmental impact statement before you make a decision on the zoning. The [7:14:24 PM] second one is that we're asking for a postponement of this case once again to have the applicant return to the table. Now, show the document this is our position. What you're going to see right now, I gave this to you last time, but I want the public to see it, too. As you can see. We have a list of community benefits. You do not see the east Austin conservancy there. It was never there. Mr. Suttle jumped the gun and we never got to a discussion of community benefits. We gave him this and he came back with a piece of paper that he gave you all where he included the conservancy in order to neutralize our council member had nothing to do with that. So we're asking for you to have the applicant come back to the table and really discuss this, continue the discussion on not only of the zoning parameters, [7:15:25 PM] but the discussion about the community benefits. As you can see, that it's our community benefits target and the contact team by ordinance is the authorized voice of the neighborhood. We were in negotiations both with council member Velasquez and with suttle and they broke with us and went around us. So the third reason that we're asking for a postpone it is for an investigation into the validity, the propriety and the legal standing of council member Velasquez's recusal. As you can see by this, that recusal is a fiction. Had nothing to do with this case at all. I feel that that a fictitious recusal like this is going to put every single one of you in jeopardy going in the future. This is terrible precedent to set. So that's why we're asking for a postponement . But really, what I would love to do is for you to support our [7:16:26 PM] neighborhood position. Please do not put 120 foot building in my neighborhood. I already have talked to them. We're willing to negotiate. We're willing to talk about you know, somewhere between 120 and 60. I know that my contact team is willing to negotiate something, but not 120 foot building. And certainly this whole fiction of the recusal is putting all of us in a jeopardy. And we need to investigate that. We need to find out if that is actually, you know, where the official negotiators for the neighborhood this was our position. And the developer went around us and neutralized our council member. Now, personally, I have my opinion about that, but I'll leave it at that. So I'm asking you all to postpone this until what did you say, joy? August 31st, give a chance for the for [7:17:27 PM] the ethics commission to do their work, give a chance for the legal department and our lawyers to look at the waterfront overlay and its validity, because we think that that that it was done illegally . And then, of course bring it back to the table. Y'all are willing to come back to the table and talk so that we can come back with a win win instead of this. We're asking for a postponement. It's up to you and you know what I said last time I was here? This whole thing, this recusal thing is showing a lot of corruption here, a lot of manipulation. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. >> Madam clerk, if you would, call those who are speaking in favor of the application. There [7:18:27 PM] are no speakers in favor. Call those who are speaking in opposition. >> Gary Babbitt's on an 81, 80 and 181. Hi >> I think there was confusion. I'm Gary Babbitt's district three montopolis. I am speaking in favor of the development as proposed. I listened to the previous reading the environmental concerns, the concerns for changing the character of the neighborhood, concerns about gentrifying nation, concerns about traffic, Mok sometimes these concern are in good faith. Some times they are tried and true resistance. All of them, I think, are rooted in a fear of change. I just want to add a voice from the other side. I'm excited for this development. I'm excited for a change. I'm excited to see what this parking lot turns into seriously taking an industrial site and parking lot and turning it into a mixed use development [7:19:28 PM] for people to live, work, eat and play. 100% approval from the planning commission on this kind of development is its own community benefit. At this morning I went for a run through Roig park across the montopolis bridge. I hope one day soon there will be something waiting for me on the other side. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Mario Cantu 181. And he is against. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes, go ahead. Can you hear me? Yes yes. >> Hello. Yes, this is Mario Cantu from south Austin. I just wanted to mention to council that it's going to be really important to consider the environmental impact in this [7:20:29 PM] area. The water quality you know, we spent a lot of time today talking about affordability and housing stock in Austin today. And this is a great opportunity for affordable housing. That's a big thing that we need to look at. Also when it comes to application, there's a lot of times where they do change things. At the last minute and a lot of times the contact teams are not notified of these things. There's a history of that that takes place in this town, and I would ask you to really dig deep into that and give the contact team an opportunity to go back to the table with this applicant and have a conversation. And let's just see what comes out of that . Wright thank you. Valerie Menard against. On 181. >> Good evening. Council members and mayor Watson my name is [7:21:30 PM] Valerie Menard and I'm the project director for the Colorado river conservancy, a project of I'm testifying today to plead with you to postpone this item, this is the last stand for district three. So I'm also asking council members who do not represent it to protect it. Not only will the board and track development cause massive disruption to the neighboring community, Johnson terrace, it will degrade our beautiful, pristine Colorado river, opening the floodgates for more development. Why is development unchecked by this council with 95% impervious cover? This project will further contribute to rising temperatures. We need only look west to phenix, where temperatures have been above 150 degrees for more than a month now. Considered an urban heat island, the cause has been attributed to massive construction over decades. Do we want that for Austin? But the bigger reason to postpone approval of the board and track development is the undemocratic manner in which it has been handled and the bad precedent it sets through underhanded efforts. Council member [7:22:31 PM] Velasquez has been silenced today and is unable to represent district three and I don't believe he does so willingly. But because he's been silenced, you, his colleagues have that responsibility and you will have this legacy. How would you feel if your district and your constituents were in the same situation? In passing this item? Will the all council members vulnerable to the same tactics? But there is a solution. You do have testimony from the residents who voiced their concerns on first reading, but have also offered a compromise. A 60 foot height, a 65% impervious cover rather than 95 100 foot no build buffer rather than 75 from the Colorado river preserve. They are also asking for a postponement for an inquiry into the validity of the board and track being exempted from red bluff waterfront overlay and an investigation into validity and propriety concerning council member Velasquez recusal. Please honor these requests because our elected representative cannot out and postpone this development. Thank you. >> Okay, we're moving to [7:23:33 PM] in-person bill bunch registered against on deck is Roy Whaley registered neutral? All. Thank you mayor. >> Council members bill bunch with save our springs alliance. We've been supporting the neighbors through this process with some legal assistance here and there. There is a very serious, as I'm speaking in favor of the postponement. I think there is a very real issue about whether our this tract was properly excluded from the water front overlay back in 1986. I do think that merits further research by the neighbors with us helping and by your own staff so that you get the input that you need independently. This is a spectacular stretch of river, [7:24:35 PM] something that's been overlooked by the community for far too long. It's a free flowing part of our river above where the city's wastewater discharges come into the river, or the bird and fish and plant diversity. There's just extraordinary. A new species of plant was just discovered there a few years back. It really does deserve close attention by all of you. I don't see what you know, another four weeks or so of postponement , any harm that would be done. There and I believe Mr. Yanez has made a good case that they should be allowed some time to talk about the community benefits in addition to the question about the waterfront over Shea application. Thank you . >> Thank you, Brodie. >> Roy Whaley speaking on 180 as neutral. Megan miesenböck [7:25:36 PM] registered against on 180 and 181 for following is mark dukan against 180 and 181. Barbara Macarthur. Against 181. Following is Bobby Levinsky registered against on 181. My name is Barbara Macarthur. >> Thank you for letting me speak tonight. In reality, the only reason there is an industrial zoning at the Borden site is because it is an east Austin. We know there is a long history of zoning abuse in this area, rather than granting this excessive development request for dramatically increased height next door to the Colorado river park wildlife sanctuary, [7:26:36 PM] you need to bring equity to this part of town. I don'trillioneally understand the city council's support of luxury apartments and hotels abutting a fragile environmental wetland habitat area. Surely you could add this property into the waterfront overlay or craft an amendment overlay to protect it. This site with the same protection you give to the rest of the river rather than approving zoning that would provide a clear path to repurposing the valley neighborhood as downtown east it. I'm sad that you're so willing to erase these communities. >> Next speaker is Bobby litvinsky registe against Anna Aguirre. Red registered against 180 and 181 on deck is Monica Guzman. Red registered as neutral on 180 and 181. >> Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Anna Aguirre. I'm the immediate past [7:27:38 PM] chair of the southeast neighborhood plan contact team and the current president of the Austin neighborhoods council. I am speaking on the behalf of the contact team on items 180 and 181. The contact team voted unanimously in support of the govalle Johnston chairs, contact team and request the city council. Consider postponing the third reading until the following tests are completed. An investigation of the validity , propriety and legal standing of council member Velasquez's recusal unless and takes place and an inquiry be made into the validity of the Borden track being exempt from the waterfront overlay, please support the neighborhood's position for a postponement in order to give them time to explore these two points and to ensure the protection of the Colorado river wildlife sanctuary, which we would consider our version of zilker park, east of I 35 east Austin, has deserved equitable environmental protections as well. Thank you for your time and consideration and service to our community. Monica Guzman. [7:28:42 PM] For the record, I'm opposed to 180 and 181. >> I had to register neutral due to so many items, but it should have been in the topic box. Good evening, mayor and council. I am Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. Go Austin. Vamos Austin. I'll start by reading Garza lead climate resilience organizer in dove springs, d2 resident Francis o'connor's statement. I'm against items 180 and 181 on the board and track and the damages development will cause to the natural infrastructure to the wildlife at the animal wildlife sanctuary and the runoff water that will affect the quality of water, not to mention erosion of the Colorado river, more impervious cover increases, localized flooding that affects the quality of life for residents, animals and green space. I'm taking my Garza hat off as a dove springs resident. These items are an example of my concern as I am very concerned with all of you. What a difference would it make to include me and my neighbors in the decisions that affect me? My home, not being afraid of your [7:29:43 PM] decisions and how it's going to affect me, my friends and neighbors, or how long before I lose my home. We deserve to feel heard. We deserve to see you take actions effectively. We deserve to see you in community events for the full event and not just going to take a picture, then leave. Garza supports the residents opposition and stands with the river bluff neighborhood association as opposed to items 180 and 181. Regarding the proposed development, we're curious how many of you took up our invitation to share with us about the last time you visited this riverfront and its tributaries like country club creek share about the beauty of nature, about the wildlife. You've seen the invitation still stands because if you're supporting the developer instead of the community environment and the wildlife, you may not have an opportunity for much longer. Thank you. Council member Fuentes and Allison alter for standing with the community at second reading. We urge you and other council members to stand with them today, voting down the proposed development when it [7:30:43 PM] comes time for the third and final vote. Remember the eagles, herons and other wildlife on the river and its tributaries? Environmental protections and the community? Thank you. And we do support the postponement. >> Christa Stevens, speaking on 180, registered against Christopher brown on deck against Mary Engle, against 180 and 181 for following is Francis Acuna. >> Good evening council members. Thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm a known neighborhood advocate. My name is Mary Engle and I'm here to support the neighborhood and the contact team in their asking for a postponement, primarily because the environmental issues about at the waterfront overlay need to be explored a little bit further. It's the same water that's in west Austin. And why [7:31:44 PM] was this property taken out of that waterfront overlay? Secondly, the precedent of having a 120 foot building in your neighborhood area is concerning and there might be a room for compromise, which is another reason to grant a postponement. And third, the irony of this all is that this proposed developer, Swint, will later on cause displacement of the residents there and the generous donation to the east side conservancy for helping people pay their back taxes actually won't go very far. It's like throwing a couple nickels in a wishing well. Thank you. >> For the record, miss Acuna could not be here. She did not have the privilege to stay. Like many of us. So it was her statement that I read to you all. >> I understood that. Thank you . >> Jeffrey Bowen. Again east 180 and 181. Jonathan Davidson [7:32:47 PM] against 180 and 181. Noah Elias against 180 and 181. Craig Naser against. 181 that concludes all the speakers. >> Thank you. As I indicated, I will allow the representative of those those in opposition to speak and then allow the applicant a rebuttal. Mr. Giannis, do you want to say anything else? I'll allow you to speak and then I'm going to allow the applicant to have a rebuttal. After the second reading you had I think maybe three letters from [7:33:50 PM] some businesses near this development and you had the gentleman that spoke in favor. >> That's for since the planning commission, there has been not one. Speaker other than those four who has supported this project. And like I told you the last time I was here for the city council, you you all need to represent all of us, not just them. And he represents the 1, but we elect all of you. And like I said, government of the people, by the people and for the people. So this zoning case, like the zilker zoning case, is related to the governance is related to the rules that you push back because because you got so much push back about it. This is about democratic process and once again, I have to say [7:34:52 PM] that the fiction of a recusal is something that we all of us as a community, as a political body, need to really examine. Ann is there any ethics to that? Is there any like it's not the letter of the law that we live by. It is the spirit of the law that we live by. I don't know what else to say to you all except don't put 120 foot building in my neighborhood. We are willing to negotiate somewhere between that 120 and 60. But we can't do it if you pass it on third reading, we can if you bring it back on the on in August and we might have a deal. Dude thank you so much appreciate. Oh, and I do want to recognize mayor, that you have responded to our cry for more democratic process. And you know [7:35:54 PM] , I appreciate that very much. And that is real democracy. Government by all of us. Thank you so much. >> Thank you, Mr. Yanez, Mr. Suttle, I'll recognize you to close us. Mayor mayor, members of the council, thank you for this opportunity. >> Katy we're taking a industrial zone industrial use site changing it to a mixed use with residential a community benefits package that was chosen not for any reason other than they offered both affordable housing and funds to keep people from being displaced in this neighborhood. This tract is on average 800ft away from the river, anywhere from 1700ft to 700ft. We've got an appropriate new buffer that was is after discussing it with you both the parks, we met with the parks department and the environmental department on site walk. The entire site came up with the 75 [7:36:56 PM] foot vegeta tive strip, not a building setback, which was an improvement over the over the first time. And then we'll ask we ask tonight that you not postpone it and that we finish this phase of the project so that we can start planning for this. I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. >> Thank you. Mr. Suttle. Members that takes us to a motion and discussion on is there a motion with regard to this item? Councilmember vela make a motion to approve on third reading motion is made by councilmember vela to approve on third reading. It is seconded by council member Ryan alter. The motion would be to approve it on third reading with the amendment that was declared by staff discussion. You want to councilmember vela? I think it's a good project. >> The height has no effect on [7:37:56 PM] the runoff. It has no effect on the sanctuary heights, just not a problem. And it's going to bring a lot of houses. It's going to bring a good new place for folks on the east side, not just the near east side, but the farther east side east of 103 support the project and move passage. >> Councilmember Allison alter. >> Thank you. I first want to acknowledge the improvements with the buffer with the 75ft. I appreciate that the applicant and our environmental park staff working to address that. I'm going to be voting no. I continue to be uncomfortable with this with this process here . But I do want to acknowledge the efforts moving forward on that item that we discussed last time. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion raise your [7:38:58 PM] hand. Butts seven. All those opposed, raise your hand. There being seven in favor. One one in opposition. And that's councilmember alter. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilmember harper-madison, how did you vote ? Eight there? >> Yeah, I voted in favor. >> Thank you. I'm sorry it's getting late in the day. Although I do it all day long, so I apologize as there being eight in favor, one opposed and the record will reflect. That's councilmember Allison alter, councilmember Velasquez has recused himself and councilmember Fuentes is off the dais on important city business. The motion to adopt on third reading as amended, passes there being I'm sorry. Oh, yeah. Go [7:39:58 PM] council. >> I'll be brief before we adjourn. I just wanted to take a moment of personal privilege to congratulate joy Hardin. As you all know, she has been serving as the interim zoning officer for some time now and has really led this process well. So thank you, joy. And we're excited that she is now the permanent zoning officer. A job well earned. >> Thank you. Congratulate ations. >> There being no further business. Without objection, the city council of Austin, Texas is adjourned. It is 7:40 P.M. Thanks everybody.