City Council Budget Work Session Transcript – 7/29/2025 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 7/29/2025 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 7/29/2025 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [9:00:05 AM] Good morning everybody. It's 9:00 in the morning on July 29th, 2025, and I will call to order the meeting of the Austin [9:01:08 AM] order the meeting of the Austin city council as part of a budget work session. We have a majority that we have all of the city council members present, and we are meeting in city hall, the city council chambers, located at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. The order that we will follow this morning is we will first have public comment. We have some people that have signed up to speak about the budget and item number one, which is the only item on the budget, which is a presentation and discussion of the city manager's fiscal year 2025 2026 proposed budget. We will then have a presentation from our staff and following that, we will have questions and discussions from the Austin city council. So unless there's objection, I will turn to the city clerk and ask you to please start calling out the names of the people that are here to give us public comment. For those that are here to do that, let me just mention we welcome you. And what we would like is if you could is, as she calls out, 3 or 4 names at a time, if you would [9:02:08 AM] 4 names at a time, if you would make your way down to the front and grab one of these seats. And that way we will be able to know you're here and call on you in an appropriate fashion. So I'll turn it over to you. >> Thanks, mayor. First we have a remote speaker, Jody Laine. >> Here. >> Good morning, council members. Thank you for your hard work on this budget. I know this process isn't easy and we appreciate you. My name is Jody Laine, executive director of fruitful commons and co-founder of the festival beach food forest here in Austin. And I'm here to urge you to preserve funding for the neighborhood partnering program. Npp is one of the few tools the city has that helps everyday people, especially in under-resourced communities. It brings their visions to life on public land and through it, we've created spaces that feed people, restore ecosystems and build community projects. Like the festival. Beach food forest would have been extraordinarily difficult [9:03:10 AM] been extraordinarily difficult without this program and the upcoming onion creek orchard, a community led climate smart effort in a floodplain, would likely not be moving forward. Npp doesn't just fund projects, it builds trust between residents and their government. When neighbors can see their ideas reflected in real projects, they are more likely to feel heard and more likely to trust their city council members. It helps neighbors collaborate across cultures and bridges city departments so community leaders aren't stuck in red tape. It makes public land feel like it belongs to all of us. After 15 years of working to make public land accessible for food and healing, I can tell you without npp efforts stall and communities lose heart. If cuts are necessarily necessary, these consult public works and the office of climate action and resilience to form a cross-departmental working group, including Pritchard, watershed economic development, Austin energy and more. Across [9:04:11 AM] Austin energy and more. Across departmental working group is a streamlined and savvy idea worth exploring to preserve npp funding. In this budget. Austin can't afford to lose it. Thank you so much. >> Okay, I will now move into in-person speakers. Haydn walker, trey. Salinas. Adam Greenfield, Madison. Gessner. If your name's been called, please come on down. Take a seat at the podium and don't forget to state your name into the record. And trey Salinas and I have I was about to let Carly know I have a donated speaker, Emily Coleman, in the room just for one minute. I don't think I'm going to need full three minutes, but just in case, apologies. >> We sign that up. >> We've not received that yet. >> She's in the system. >> What's the what's the name? >> Emily Coleman. She's in the back. >> Did she sign up? >> Yes. She has signed up to [9:05:11 AM] >> Yes. She has signed up to speak. Emily, are you here? >> Okay. >> Thank you. Great. I don't think I'll need the full three minutes, but just in case. Good morning. My name is trey Salinas, and I'm here speaking on behalf of the coalition for clean, affordable and reliable energy. C care C care is an organization representing the energy interests of commercial and industrial utility customers here in Austin, Texas. As you begin your discussions today on the enterprise funds, I'm here to draw attention to the utility's $90 million budget deficit, while at the same time the transfer, the general fund transfer, is continuing to increase. It is important to note that our members are supportive of a general fund transfer. Additionally, we are also supportive of a healthy growth of a general fund transfer. However, because the council has not revisited the general fund transfer policy since 2012, we're seeing general fund transfer growth that is jeopardizing Austin energy's financial health and burdening ratepayers. Austin energy is not recovering costs and has built [9:06:12 AM] recovering costs and has built up a $90 million budget. You can see on the slide there that is from the city's backup, from the electric utility commission of presentation. In may, the proposed budget would simultaneously increase the general fund transfer by $14 million this year. Can you switch to the next slide, please? This is on top of a $10 million increase last year. In fact, 71% of last year's 2% rate increase was taken by the general fund transfer. It generated roughly $14 million in ten of that went to a general fund transfer increase. This year, 36% of the proposed 5% base rate increase would go towards the general fund transfer. If Austin energy were allowed to keep more of these funds in the utility, it could curb the proposed rate increase and in your backup, and hopefully you will discuss this today. Not only are they proposing a 5% base rate increase this year, they are proposing 5% every year for the next five years. That's the type [9:07:14 AM] next five years. That's the type of deficits they're running. While the general fund transfer continues to grow as a represented representative of some of your largest Austin energy customers, I hope you will consider exploring this further today in your discussions on the enterprise funds. Thank you. >> Good morning. Mayor. Council members, my name is Hayden black walker. I'm a former member of the pedestrian advisory council. I spent years on that and I'm a current board member of safe streets Austin. A couple of years ago, transportation for America did a national survey that showed that people want more sidewalks, safe crossings, and generally more places to walk safely and comfortably to get around in their communities. Humans have been walking for thousands of years, and even today, 30% of our population does not drive. Walking is better for our health and for our environment, but the majority of our transportation, as you know, goes to fund big, expensive roads. We have the same issue in Austin, where we have an award winning strategic [9:08:14 AM] have an award winning strategic mobility plan that sets a very specific goals based on extensive feedback from all of Austin. Yet our transportation budget is still not aligned with those specific goals. So I'm here to ask you to fund sidewalks, urban trails, bike lanes, vision zero, and safe routes to schools in the budget. The majority of these programs are funded through bonds, but bonds are tricky. Require a public vote. They don't always happen on a set schedule, and we are actually in danger of losing the skilled human infrastructure that we've built to deliver those projects, because some of those projects, those some of those programs won't be funded by the time we get to a 2026 bond. Assuming that passes, it'd be really great if we could fund these programs through the budget. That said, I'd like to thank the city manager for funding five new full time equivalents in the bridge department. That funding will go toward urban trail maintenance. And I would like to ask you for another 400,000 to help cover the rest of that maintenance. I know we have limited funds and [9:09:15 AM] know we have limited funds and new constraints imposed on us by the state council. Adopted policy says that we should be allocating 32 million a year for sidewalks and Ada transition, but we're still not doing that. We still have thousands of miles to build and trails that are still missing and a lot to maintain. So thank you very much for your time. >> Hi. Good morning. My name is Madison Gessner and I'm the executive director for the greater Austin market for the Texas restaurant association. I'm here this morning because we are here to ask the city to keep the current food permit structure the same. It's specifically Paige 1213 of your budget. It is looking to change the way that food establishments have their permit structured to a gross annual sales versus the current risk and employee based model that Austin public health put in place and just modified last may of 2024. Our prediction is that if you move forward with how it is in the budget, at least a third of restaurants in [9:10:15 AM] least a third of restaurants in Austin will see their food establishment permit fees double or even triple. I always like to say that it's easy to represent restaurants because everyone goes out to eat, and every single one of you have restaurants in your district. This could have a serious impact on the bottom line for restaurants that are already facing rising labor costs, any sort of impact from tariffs, all sorts of impact fees. And so we think this will be a serious impact to their bottom line. And we're asking that you keep the current structure, which is in compliance with state law, does allow for a fair evaluation and does work for restaurants. We're reaching out to the chambers to also ask for their support to make this ask and if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer those. >> Mr. Mayor, I do have a question. Hi there. Thank you, I appreciate that. So over the course of the last couple years, we've been focusing in the district one office explicitly on food, food production, food systems, distribution, etc. And really recognize pretty early on [9:11:17 AM] really recognize pretty early on that there was going to be a lot of disruption coming. And it happened so fast, you know, so two years ago when somebody said, good luck paying 12 bucks for an avocado, I didn't realize how quickly, you know, change in federal administration, etc. Would affect us locally. That said, excuse me, we've been able to help a couple restaurants mitigate some things that just seemed easy, Y know, so a restaurant that doesn't cook chicken doesn't need a vent, you know? So some of our systems are just sort of archaic, frankly, and don't work. So recognizing that and I fully see the impact that you're referring to, I'd like very much for you to get with Sharon Mayes. She's just there to your right in our office, who fortunately for us is a restaurateur by trade. And let's sort of figure out how we can make certain that there's no more direct impact to our restaurants than necessary. And I appreciate your commentary. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, council member. Thank you. >> Good morning. Mayor and council members Adam Greenfield, [9:12:17 AM] council members Adam Greenfield, policy director of safe streets, Austin, echoing Hayden'sl, we are asking council to in this year's budget, fund the annual sidewalks maintenance to 10 million. As Hayden said, our current needs are 30 million. So 1010 million would still be far short, but would be a big, much needed increase over what we have today. We're also asking for a one time funding to ensure that the sidewalk program can operate at full capacity until the next bond. If we don't provide that funding now, the sidewalks program will have to wind down its operations and then spend time and money to wind back up after the 2026 bond. As you know, as I'm sure we all agree, sidewalks are climate infrastructure. They're equity infrastructure, safety infrastructure. There's some of the best investments of our local funding that we can possibly make. And so we ask you to approve 10 million a year for annual sidewalks maintenance, [9:13:17 AM] annual sidewalks maintenance, plus a one time fee, one time sum to keep us going through to the next bond. Thank you. >> Victoria. Nancy Crowther, Andy Brauer, Jesus Salinas, Zenobia. Joseph. >> If your name has been called, please make your way to the front. >> Ma'am, you can go ahead. Could you state your name into the record? >> My name is Victoria. >> Is your mic on? >> My name is Victoria Loewenstein Barone. >> Please proceed. >> Okay. Yeah. So I'm here trying to make a case for housing. So I think is the Paige [9:14:18 AM] housing. So I think is the Paige or the fi. And I've been studying the national alliance of low income housing advocate guide for 2025. Yeah, 2025 to 2026 I know there's a lot of cuts in federal funding for public housing that is really concerning. I went to the regional housing conference, and I saw that there was a bunch of organizations that I listed as stakeholders for the nonprofit and, you know, doing a business plan for. So my main issue is that for extremely affordable low income or Iannelli, we really have a housing problem. We have a homelessness problem. And the only way to solve homelessness is to get people into housing. But my concern is it's very possible the city doesn't know how to do that. With so many stakeholders that showed up at the regional housing council, and they are like doing the research, trying [9:15:19 AM] like doing the research, trying to figure it out, but there's nothing outside of the box. And when they hit that wall, they hit that wall. I really want to push the idea of policy and best practices. So if somebody has an arrest or medical incident or anything, they're one paycheck away from not being housed. They will be homeless. That's your children, that's your cousins, that's your aunts. They will be living on the street trying to use the system that has not kind of been ux designed to actually be successful. So that could be like an a version of hell. We don't really know if they're coming back. So that's really concerning because that can take the livelihood of a person and not give them the chance at like long term education or employment. And we haven't put a lot of funding toward employment. And there's not a regulation about employment. So once people have like mental health or anything like that, you know, you have an entire system that doesn't work. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Good morning. My name is [9:16:19 AM] >> Good morning. My name is Nancy Crowther. I'm with adaptive Texas, the personal attendant coalition of Texas safe streets Austin and a slew of other committees that I can be on to continue to make our city accessible to people with disabilities. Thousands of people are moving here daily. It feels like that have disabilities. They're aging. They're all aging in place, which is good. We need more help. On that end, we did try to build a coalition of attendants or community folks who would be available to assist people who possibly fall in their home but don't need the resources of a fire truck or an ems or all three. You know, it's just I'm sorry I fell over. I just wanted [9:17:20 AM] sorry I fell over. I just wanted to let you know that we have thousands of attendants in Austin that are not recognized for the amount of resources they save the city. And I just wanted to let you know that that's a really important recognition I'd like to see come forward for our community to recognize those that are in the background, holding everybody up on sidewalks. I cannot tell you how thrilled I am. Over the last 47 years that I've been here, that I can actually take a sidewalk from one place to another with the curb ramp with no trees hitting me or bushes hitting me. It's just keep building. 10 million is what we need. >> Thank you. [9:18:22 AM] >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Continuing on, British Britta Wallace, Glenn Coleman, harsh Doshi, Cody Carr. Lily Hughes and lily Hughes. If you're here, you have time. Donated by Alexandra white. Alexandra, are you here? Yes. Okay. Anyone can start. Please just go ahead and say your name first. >> I'm Britta Wallace. I'm a home builder and developer, and I'm a board member of the Austin infill coalition. I'm here today asking council to delay implementation of the dsd fee increases until we understand what's driving them. Some of the hikes are staggering. Erosion hazard zone review is jumping from $332 to 813. That's a 144% increase. Even though the city is just reviewing the engineer's [9:19:22 AM] is just reviewing the engineer's submittal, not actually doing the engineering TRE. Pre plan review is going up from $320 to 552. That's a 72% increase. Revision processing is up 57.9% for minor changes and 33% for major ones. Taps intake is up 176%. What has changed in the last year? Is it taking more time to complete these reviews or inspections? Has the scope of the work expanded or are are these increases just making up for internal inefficiencies? The public deserves a clear explanation. We also need to know what this means. In total, for a single family home, a two unit build, or a three unit build. And how Austin now compares to Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Fort Worth. Why does it cost so much more to build here? Please delay implementation until we have answers. >> Thank you. >> Glenn Coleman with Austin [9:20:23 AM] >> Glenn Coleman with Austin infill coalition. I want to second that. After all your hard work on home and home one, it would appear that because of some of the actions of some previous councils, when we put dsd into the enterprise fund to begin with, and that was just a mistake, I don't blame them. We tied them to the same cycle of development that we as developers, face the vagaries of the market that you would not see at the Austin water utility or Austin energy. So let me just turn this around a little bit and ask you guys to think what it's like when a voter or homeowner makes a decision to build an Adu. Mom's getting older. We've got to think about that. Do we sell the house where she, you know, next to her church where she goes, you know, and grew up and put her in assisted care somewhere? I mean, it's an economic decision. Or when a young couple decides, do we want to try one of these new triplexes that that the city is permitting now? It's expensive, it's smaller. But hey, no long lines to drive into work. I mean, there are advantages that [9:21:23 AM] mean, there are advantages that people way. And with whatever your intentionas, when you put a $40,000 fee buffer in front of that economic decision, you're kind of Luz. They're just not going to do it, and you're going to lose that housing that you worked so hard for. So I'm going to ask you to just maybe hit the pause button, look at some caps, delay adoption. You know, that's out of my pay grade. But I'm definitely going to beg you not to proceed with some of those fees as they exist. And those are the city's numbers on that spreadsheet in front of you. Thank you very much. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Cody Carr. I'm a home builder here in town. I build primarily 80 use and smaller types of housing across the city. I stayed up late last night and put together the cost of an Adu. I thought it was important not only to point out dsd fees, but just to show the total number of fees and infrastructure requirements foreign to you. I came up with about 75,000. I want to touch really quickly on the dsd enterprise fund. I believe the [9:22:24 AM] enterprise fund. I believe the system is broken. As you can see in the second page, this is just one pullout from the variance report from the budget, and fees are going up anywhere from 40, 60, 80, 100, 200% on probably 30 or 40 fees or more. I think the enterprise system is broken, but there are solutions. I think one of the core problems is that the lack of in-person services at the pdc has led to inefficiencies. If you recall, 2018 and 2019, you could go to the one Texas center. It was a beehive of activity. It was the pulse of permitting in the city. You could get so much done. Now if you go to the pdc, it feels hollow. There's not a lot of people there. You cannot get as much done. Things that used to take a day or two now take weeks and dozens and dozens of emails. And I feel like part of solving the cost problem is bringing back those efficiencies. I also want to point out that high fs encourage sprawl. They lead to lack of compliance. At some level, people just can't afford [9:23:24 AM] level, people just can't afford an $800 inspection or a $1,500 sidewalk inspection.ut I do think there are solutions. And so if I had to give a recommendation today, it would be to bring back in-person services, to try to gain efficiencies, to potentially pull dsd back into the general fund, and to really just assess the total cost for small projects and to add a split between large projects and small projects, and to make sure that small projects have the small fees that correlate with them, so regular homeowners can afford to build and to be in the city. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Council I work on engineering projects for water and wastewater infrastructure projects, and majority of those are small and lead to infill housing development. And you know, I've been doing this 11 years, and I'd like to point out that over those 11 years, you know, the fees have unproportionately increased about 300 to 400% in some aspects. And those fees alone at about $4000 to $5000 per unit, [9:24:26 AM] about $4000 to $5000 per unit, excluding construction of the utility work. In comparison, the same kind of fees in Houston or Dallas would be under $1,000, and the fees have dramatically increased so much that I feel like the private sector could do a lot of those work. Work functions far more efficiently and far cheaper than city forces can, along with the fee increases, you know, which brings into question like, hey, are you are we getting these projects out faster? As Cody pointed out, they've actually slowed down, so it used to be a lo quicker to get some of those permits and projects set up back in 2017, 2018 than they are today, and we're paying a lot more. So again, I'd just like to, you know, ask council to reconsider those fee increases. And I'd like to leave with this. You know, I recently had a project that that somebody wanted to do in the Mueller area, and it was building a 400 square foot efficiency for their disabled child that was going to [9:25:29 AM] disabled child that was going to stay with the parents longer than had anticipated. And the utility fee increases and what that project was going to cost, and just getting their utilities set up was about $30,000, and their entire 400 square foot building was going to cost them about $85,000. So it completely, you know, changed their their budget and they could no longer do that project and now have to look for a home somewhere in the suburban area. So again, these you know, it does affect a lot of people. So I'd like to urge council to reconsider those fees. Thank you. >> My name is lily Hughes and I'm here to talk about the opposite end of the housing issues in Austin. I am the outreach team lead at Texas harm reduction alliance, and I have the privilege to work alongside people who have lived experience in substance use, homelessness, incarceration, and or sex work. I'm so proud that our org is led by Maggie Luna, an executive director who is a Texan who has been incarcerated and is in [9:26:30 AM] been incarcerated and is in recovery. Having leadership that has experience with incarceration ensures that the needs of everyone at TRE and all of our participants are met because Maggie understands us, the lived experience of our team has allowed us and other organizations in Austin who prioritize lived experience of their staff to forge unique and authentic connections with our community. Outreach workers are the first line of connection for people pushed to the edge of our community. The team I lead treks deep into the woods and travels anywhere our participants go. To keep them connected to services. We provide more than just service, referral, and healthcare supplies. The people our team works with are people who use drugs, a population that often has to live a double life and have to hide themselves from stigma and punishment, meaning that they cannot tell service providers the full barriers they experience when trying to exit homelessness. Everyone on the outreach team is a recovery peer coach, meaning we use our lived experience to create relationships where our participants can be honest and openly express themselves. What we have learned from our lives [9:27:31 AM] we have learned from our lives cannot be taught in trainings or learned from textbooks. Peer coaching services are one of the few pathways for people who use drugs to access supportive services. Our peer coaches connect people seeking recovery from opioid use to medication assisted treatment. We provide support while people sit on a long waitlist to get into detox or treatment. Most importantly, we remind people that they are loved and valued. Our reentry team does outreach within the jail to connect people to services before and after exiting incarceration. People exiting jail are eight times more likely to die from overdose. In Travis county, there are hundreds of people experiencing homelessness in jail on any given night, and any time in jail only achieves creating more barriers for people to exit the cycle of homelessness. Reentry services at terra are a lifeline for this population and will help achieve our mutual goal of ending the homelessness and overdose crisis in Austin. Every day I am in our office, I am grateful to hear our office phone ring constantly and see our mailbox, full of letters from people at the [9:28:31 AM] letters from people at the reentry team has connected with the nonprofits have built here, have built cohesive relationships with each other and our unhoused neighbors, the relationships we have built with the most marginalized members of our community would not be possible without the city funding directed to those life saving services. So thank you. Budget season is a stressful time for all of us. For service providers, we wrestle with the fear of losing funding and what that means for the community we work with. I hope in the future we can find a path for sustainable funding and a longer duration than a year. I dream of a world where I can guarantee sustained services for the community I am lucky to work with and love dearly. >> Thank you mayor. >> All speakers have been called. >> Thank you very much members. As you've just heard, all the speakers have been called. We appreciate everybody being here and your input on the budget. What that will do is take us next to a presentation from our financial staff with regard to the budget, and this was posted as a work session to take up [9:29:34 AM] as a work session to take up items related to enterprise, enterprise funds and cip. So we will have a direct presentation with regard to that, and then we will open it up for questions and discussion by the council, which will can be, of course, free ranging and not just related to enterprise funds and cip. Councilmember Velazquez, did you want to say something? >> Yes, mayor. Thank you. First, I, I just wanted to give Kerri Lang and her team a huge, huge thank you from this dais. Last night. We had our budget meeting and Carrie suited up in her armor and came out to came out with us and always presents with so much grace and brilliance and just kindness about the budget. I think she's done an exceptional representation of our city, our values and what we're trying to get done. And for folks that don't know, and if you haven't had your budget town hall yet, every now in district T, they can get a little festive. And Carrie [9:30:36 AM] little festive. And Carrie remained cool and just deliver, like I said, delivered with grace and a lot of brilliance. And it is very, very much appreciated. >> Well, we all appreciate her. Yes. >> Council member. >> Thank you. Council member. With that being said, let's see what you do here. >> Pressure. >> Good evening. Council mayor I'm Carrie Lang I'm the director of budget organizational excellence. Today we'll start the conversation with a general fund discussion focusing on fire. And then we'll move forward to our enterprise departments talking through, excuse me, talking through transportation, public works, watershed protection and development services, and then talk about some of the next [9:31:36 AM] talk about some of the next steps. We are here on the 23rd to have this discussion. Excuse me on the 29th to have this discussion. We do have a another work session on Thursday where where there will be a public hearing at three, as well as the council will set the max tax rate. And then there are two additional work sessions scheduled for next week, followed by the approval of the budget beginning August 13th. So starting with the general fund, talking about the fire department in particular, a memo was distributed to council on yesterday to discuss the proposed adjustments to the staffing plan for fire. The next two slides will highlight some of the challenges that we're trying to address, and the goal of this proposed change. The staffing model allows for 25% absenteeism on each shift. That's recognizing that our firefighters have earned leave, such as vacation or the need to use sick time. But it also [9:32:37 AM] use sick time. But it also allows for the use of military leave or jury leave, or other related leaves that they may have to take. Over the last five years, we've seen an increase in the rate of absenteeism and have seen an increase in leave usage by the firefighters. And as it has gotten as high as 39% in fiscal year 23, it's averaging around at least 36% for the last several years. And so this increase in leave use results in an increase in overtime costs for the department. What we are proposing is to continue the staffing of five firefighters for every shift. That is, given that 25% grace of the usage of leave, we are ensuring that the staffing for aerials and rescues continue with four person [9:33:38 AM] continue with four person staffing to make sure they continue to operate effectively, and then we are going to continue responding. Based on the nfpa, the national fire protection agency recommendations, we're actually exceeding those recommendations, and we'll continue to exceed them with the changes. This shift is really talking through, no longer backfilling the engines on overtime. And so we will we will schedule five people. We will have four people on the engines. As long as we St at that 25% or less absenteeism when it when it triggers overtime for the engines, that's when it will go to the minimum staffing of three. Moving on to our enterprise and cip departments. We were asked to bring up some information about transportation and public works and their sidewalk reconstruction or [9:34:40 AM] sidewalk reconstruction or construction and rehab program. In particular, the department has $8.4 million for in their operating budget for sidewalk maintenance and program management. That would include things like vegetation removal, spot repair and replacement, lifting or grinding concrete to remove trip hazards. And there are several projects that they they are planning over the next fiscal year for that 8.4 million. In addition to that, they have 34.5 million planned spending in their capital program. That is, across the three different current bond programs that we have from 2016, 2018 and 2020. And the other resources include things like sidewalk fee and Lou or federal grants that fund some of these capital programs. In fiscal year 26, the plan is to spend 39. Million. And you can see, excuse me, 34.5 million is the plan for fiscal year 26. And then it goes [9:35:41 AM] fiscal year 26. And then it goes down based on the available bond dollars that they anticipate in the out years. For our watershed protection program, they have 26, 24.6 million in their operating budget for floodplain management, as well as 29.3 planned for stormwater infrastructure. When we're looking at flood mitigation, about 10% of the land in Austin is in the floodplain and is subject to dangerous to the dangers of flash flooding. This is only looking at the mitigation efforts that the city is focused on, and it is a major component in the watershed emergency management program. The cip dollars. They've used most of their cip dollars over the last several years, and it includes work at little walnut creek, onion, upper onion creek, buyouts, and walnut creek, bull creek, and shoal creek. The fiscal year or the 20 2018 bond [9:36:42 AM] fiscal year or the 20 2018 bond program is spent down to 84% as of the third quarter of this year. So the remaining spending that you're seeing and the anticipated spending is supported by the drainage fund operating transfers. Moving on to development services, there have been several questions about the development services fund and department. And these next several slides will talk through not just the department's creation and the challenges that they're seeing, but some of the things that they've been doing over the last couple of years and are planned for fiscal year 26 to manage the operations of that department. In 2016, the department transitioned to an enterprise fund. And the goal has always been for the development to pay for itself. So those those development functions to pay for itself. That's why it was moved to an enterprise fund. The transition was completed in fiscal year 19. One of the [9:37:42 AM] fiscal year 19. One of the challenges that we've been seeing is how do we continue to balance the fund with enhanced service while enhancing services, organizing the distribution of those development processes so that we can make sure that it is efficient across the across the city, and then some of the regulatory and process complexities and complications makes makes some of the development functions a challenge for the department and staff. And then finally, some of the technology limitations that we have been addressing over the last couple of years. In fiscal year 24 and fiscal year 25, the department started making some major chanss to their operations. They to reduce some of the cost of the of the fund, including and a hiring fe, as well as releasing 20 full time vacant positions or transferring those positions to other departments, releasing 16 temporary employees in fiscal year 24, and then [9:38:44 AM] in fiscal year 24, and then moving some of the expedited team, dissolving it and relocating staff, putting some of the staff at the airport for that expansion review team, and then looking at moderate fee increases thawewere implemented in fiscal year 25. The department plans to continue those efforts in next fiscal year. They've released or transferred 42 additional positions. They're really working on right sizing and making their function, their operations nimble. They're transitioning to more third party and temporary staffing to allow for adjustments as development ebbs and flows. And then they they have been working over the last several months on reviewing their cost model to make sure that their cost or that their fees represent the costs that are, that they're seeing in their in their operations. Some of the things that they are working on and continue to work on is to control costs and focus on core delivery service, core service [9:39:44 AM] delivery service, core service delivery. They're optimizing their services. So that includes implementing their expedited expedited site plan review, accelerating building plan review timelines, and then really making sure that they're focusing on customer centric culture of service. And then they we've been working on the technology capabilities, improving those capabilities across the enterprise management system. And this slide finally talks about some of the proposed fee changes there. There have been adjustments to a number of fees across the development services department. And this just represents yes, there are some fees that have increased in the over in the proposed budget. But there are also a number of fees that have decreased through that right sizing. And so the department has continuously worked on adjusting the fees. Over the last several years, we've been working to really correct the model to make sure we are charging at cost to service. There were a couple of [9:40:45 AM] service. There were a couple of years, I believe, that we did not do a cost of service analysis, or do a fee increase to represent the true, excuse me, the true cost. And so you'll see some of these adjustments seem like larger adjustments because they had not been adjusted in several years. So I'm back at the timeline to talk through some of the next steps. As you all are aware, just a reminder that August 4th, that's next Monday. Budget amendments and items from council are due for final compilation as well as kbe. So council budget questions. So if you have any remaining council budget questions we ask that you please provide those to us before or by August 4th so that we can make sure we are able to respond prior to adoption. Staff are continuing to work through those responses to your cbcs, and are really working to try to get those out in a timely manner. [9:41:45 AM] those out in a timely manner. And with that, I'm open to answering any questions. >> Thank you. If you if you want to be, if you want to ask questions, council members, please sign up here. That way I'll know and I can go in some order. And what we'll do is the same routine that we've been doing, which is I'll call on somebody, let let them do a thorough q&a, and then we'll go to somebody else. But if you're not done, we'll come back to you after the fact. So councilmember harper-madison. Council member Laine. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate it. Thank you, miss Lang. I appreciate the presentation. I am relieved to hear that there's some sort of compromise solution to the staffing question for AFD. And so I just wanted to get a better understanding of what the transition looks like. You know, so worst case scenario, we exceed that 25%. What does it [9:42:45 AM] exceed that 25%. What does it look like to transition into three man staffing if that were to transpire? Good morning chief. >> Chief. Good morning. Georgie baker, fire chief, city of Austin fire department. Thank you, council member, for that question. With the transition would look like for a three person staffing on the engine operation, basically what we would do is when needed, when staffing requires, because we don't have enough personnel at work on on a certain particular shift, working three shifts a, B and C shift, we would not hire overtime to fill the engine. However, if enough personnel come to work with about 75% of the workforce, then we will have enough personnel to staff each unit with four personnel keeping in mind the area trucks and quince and the ISDs engine, sd four engines and the rescue units still maintain a staffing of on the engine of four [9:43:47 AM] of on the engine of four personnel. >> Okay, you said sd and. >> Sd four. We have a contract with them and require four person staffing. >> You said sd. >> Four would would maintain four person staffing and then you said another. >> Sd for the rescue units and thararea trucks and the quints. >> Thank you. >> And so again, back to my original question. Worst case scenario, that 75% threshold isn't met and you are having to call in overtime. That's what the transition looks like. >> Correct. So if the 75% of the personnel are not at work, we would not call an overtime on the engines. >> Only oe aerial and sd four. >> That's correct. >> Got it. Thank you. That answers my question. Thank you chief, I appreciate it. And then, miss Lang, I'm moving over >> Council member, do you mind if I interrupt? Not at all, chief. I think that's what you're talking about. What council member harper-madison has done is she's she's focused in very smartly on what people need to know and don't [9:44:50 AM] need to know and don't understand about what it is, what the thinking is behind this proposed change and what the difference is. I think it would be helpful. In answer to her question, just then when you said just a certain type of truck, if you would describe the trucks and what is happening to specific, I said trucks, let's say vehicles. >> Yeah. >> And because I just added to the problem. Right. >> Absolutely. >> Would you would you please what we all think of fire say we all we think of a fire truck and we don't think of other things. So would you please walk in detail through the thinking and what happens with each vehicle? >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate that. And you know, my familiarity with the apparatus is I was married into the AFD family for 20 years, and so I'm familiar with the differentiation, differentiation. So my apologies to the general. >> Public and my apologies. >> Thank you. No, I think I think you've narrowed in on what the real issue is. People need [9:45:51 AM] the real issue is. People need to hear that. So if you would do that. >> So thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the opportunity to expound more on the equipment. So the area trucks or the apparatus that carry the ladders for rescue operations, for ventilation purposes, high rise operation, car extrication, things of that nature, the rescue engines are are in our special operation unit, our hazmat team, rope rescue teams, swiftwater rescue teams, things of that nature. Because of their specialty in training, we will maintain four personnel on those units. The quints are similar to our aerial ladder long long truck, but also have a pump like an engine operation. They can do both pump water as well as do ladder operations. The engine itself is a small apparatus to carry between 500 to 1000 gallons of water. We have approximately 54 fire stations, 67, 67, 67 pieces of equipment. So it's incumbent that we staff those units versus [9:46:52 AM] that we staff those units versus again, blacking out, which is the permanent closing of fire station, or bronin out, which is the temporary closing of the fire station or apparatus. My goal here is to keep every fire station open. Staff will personnel, by giving me the authority to modify my staffing measures as needed. When staffing shortage presents itself that I'm able to maintain, I'm able to keep all of the fire station apparatus running to respond on calls throughout the city. >> Now walk through what happens four versus three on aerial rescue. Quince engine, please. >> Absolutely. So what will happen right now? We have a four on on all the apparatus, on the engines, the trucks, the areas, the quints and the rescue unit. The national fire chief. >> Mr. Mayor, I'm going to interrupt also there because I [9:47:53 AM] interrupt also there because I was a part of the discussion where we made the transition to four man staffing. And so. >> Four persons. >> Four person. Correct. Thank you. I appreciate the clarification. And I wonder if that might even be relevant to the general public, why we made the transition and what the implications are of us going back to where we came from. Just even during the course of my tenure. That's only six and a half years. >> What the. Thank you, council member, Mr. Harper, the city ordinance was adopted, I believe December 8th or 9th or 2018. I start serving as the fire chief December 10th. So the city ordinance was adopted prior to my arrival, my belief that one of the reasons we went there because of the recommendation for the national fire protection association and others say they recommend four person staffing. I am not advocating to change. Totally change the four person staff. What I'm advocating is [9:48:54 AM] staff. What I'm advocating is when staffing does not allow for four person station staffing, when staffing does not allow for four person staffing of the apparatus, to give me the authority to only allow three person staffing on the engine. Now why is that important? Again, nfpa, national fire protection association seven 1710 make a recommendation of four person staffing, but they also make a recommendation. This is let me slow down on this one. They alsake a recommendation that for a house fire two story wood frame house fire that you shall send 17 personnel with an aerial ladder, 17 personnel. The Austin fire department we currently send on a house fire, approximately 32 personnel. So we exceeds the recommendation for nfpa. If we WER to go to a four and three staffing model for on the trucks and three on the engine, we would still exceed the nfpa recommendation. [9:49:55 AM] exceed the nfpa recommendation. Instead of sending a 32 personnel, we would send 24 personnel. Again, nfpa recommends 17. We would send 24 personnel who would exceed that. However, if we have enough firefighters at work that day that here at work, we will be able to still send those 32 personnel. The challenge is our leave balance. We have approximately 30 plus members on injury on the job, which is significantly down. We have approximately per pay period, 400 plus or minus personnel who are on leave, whether it be vacation, exceptional vacation or paid holidays. I have anywhere between 20 to 45 personnel per day on sick leave Saturday and Sunday. I have about 40 to 50 people on sick leave and then I have personnel I don't have the number for on family leave. Similarly, military leave, special assignment training. In that [9:50:57 AM] assignment training. In that nature there are only so I have enough bodies. I don't have enough bodies coming to work on those various days to staff the unit with four and four. So the only thing I'm requesting from the city council and from city managers to give me an authority to manage my staffing level and maintain the safety of the firefighters, because the effective firefighters force is basically how many firefighters that are trained and equipment can we send to respond to an emergency with you? With a four and three staffing model, we will have enough firefighters on the scene to mitigate the incident. And when we don't, if we come across we need more personnel, then we can dispatch personnel. We have automatic aid agreement with surrounding emergency service districts, who's willing to help out as we have helped them in the past. Again, I'm not advocating to totally do away with the four and four staffing model. I'm just modification as times [9:51:58 AM] just modification as times permit for me to modify the staffing model. >> I appreciate that very much, you know, and it made me think about something. I have three fire friends who have been, for all intents and purposes, off for like two years. Plus, you know, folks who have long term covid who really ran into a lot of issues with covid. You know, I know I was listening to Mr. Lang make the presentation around leave, use the increase of leave use, you know, in that 2023 threshold is right around when some of the research that I've been doing around sleep deprivation and increases in substance use disorder and mental health disorders, I think that 2023 threshold is where a lot of sectors are finding people really hit the wall from covid. I honestly don't think that us as a society that we've collectively recognized how much impact covid had on our lives forever. And I honestly think a lot of, you know, those early calls that y'all were making [9:52:58 AM] calls that y'all were making when, you know, my then at the time, husband was living in a trailer in the driveway because people were getting covid and y'all didn't know what it was yet. Y'all were making calls where people were drowning to death in their homes, not in water. And so it was scary at first. We didn't have access to immunizations, and there was just a lot of hard that happened that first year, year and a half, two years. All that to say, I think it really had a direct impact on a lot of first responders, most especially ems and AFD. So I'd like very much to, after we finish this budget process, have some real substantive discussion around covid impact, mental health and wellness. You know, why are folks calling in and taking more leave? There's a reason there was some impetus, you know, and so I'd like very much to dig into that once we're done with this process. But a it pertains to this process, I really appreciate how you just laid out the three man, four man staffing. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for having him really delineate between the apparatus and have people fully understand because, you know, lay people we're thinking of fire truck comes it [9:53:59 AM] thinking of fire truck comes it has water and a ladder and it does all the things. But unfortunately fire trucks are not Swiss army knives and they don't do all the things. So I think that was the full extent of my I mean, you really actually answered beyond what I was asking when you made the clarification around the nfpa 17 person requirement and our excess of and the implications subsequent to us, you know, hitting that what I call worst case scenario. So all my questions here have been answered. >> Let me just add one thing because you mentioned mental health and PTSD. >> Yeah. >> Mental health is on the rise. My opinion across America in the fire service, not just in Austin, in order for our members to get the mental health care they need, they need to be off, right? They can't be off if they're working overtime. >> Right. >> So when a person takes off, I had to hire someone overtime. And the person I'm hiring overtime may be the person who needs to be off on their off day to get the mental health they need. >> The conundrum. [9:54:59 AM] >> The conundrum. >> And it's this foreign three staffing model where I don't have enough personnel andill not require me to overwork those personnel who are ready to experience some form of mental health or PTSD medical issues. Well, we give them the time off they need and give them the rest they need. The members are being overworked because they're working overtime. >> Well received. >> You don't have to sell me, chief. I fully understand personally, anecdotally and professionally. I recognize the implications. Thank you. Thank you very much I appreciate it. So moving forward, there was the one slide about development services. Well, I wrote it on this page. I think you discussed it a few pages prior to where we were talking about creek infrastructure, and you mentioned some specific assets. Walnut was one. What was the other specific creek asset that you mentioned when you were talking about creek infrastructure? I think it was we had moved to watershed protection, the 2024 six and watershed protections. It says [9:56:02 AM] watershed protections. It says operating budget, floodplain management, stormwater infrastructure maintenance and debris removal from creeks to reduce flood risk. It was right around that slide where you mentioned several city specific creek assets. >> Yes, I so the largest cip projects in the past five years for flood control include little walnut creek, near metric and Rutland upper onion creek buyouts. Numerous projects within waller creek, bull creek, shoal creek. There are others that I didn't mention, like Williamson creek, boggy creek, and slaughter creek are also some of the projects. >> I appreciate. >> You bringing that. Bringing up Bobby, because Bobby is district one. I was wondering which district one specific assets. And so adjacent to metric and Rutland with chito and then Bobby specifically. But I'd like to note that I would I'll probably bring this to the mobility committee. You remember we talked about future items that recently and, you know, just talking about that trail [9:57:03 AM] just talking about that trail connectivity component. I think an update there might be helpful with figuring out what adjustments can be made here. So I think I'll bring that up in committee. Absolutely. And so the question I had here, though, the debris removal component from creeks to reduce flood risk. In a later slide, it talks about the implications of sharing cost with other departments when their efforts are duplicative. And so I started thinking about our homelessness resource recovery efforts and creek cleanups. I just wanted to make certain that this debris removal from creeks to reduce local flood risk, and our efforts around creek cleanup because of human refuse are adjacent to one another. And I can I can get it answered later. I don't have to have it answered now. Just would like to have that discussion. >> I can give you a quick answer. Councilmember okay. Jorge morales, director of the watershed protection. Yes. Our our efforts are coordinated with the homeless strategy office, and we do have funding in our budget to help account for that as well. [9:58:04 AM] as well. >> Awesome. Thank you I appreciate it. That's my only question there. And then on the development services side, the one bullet that caught my attention was the dissolved one expedited team reallocated staff shifted five staff to airport expansion review team. Et cetera. Et cetera. I wonder if some of these discussions that we're having with our constituents around development services, it might be helpful for us to understand the dissolved expedited team is the removal of the expedition services a part of what folks are presenting as a challenge with the time it takes to secure permitting. And if so, is that something we should revisit? Hi there. >> Good morning. Mayor, council members Keith Mars, interim director of development services department. So the expedited review teams, we previously had larger teams that addressed both commercial and residential projects as the volume and development went down to better [9:59:07 AM] development went down to better utilize those staff. We saw also opportunities in city capital projects, namely the airport expansion, where there was a dramatic need for those services. So we were able to reduce our our cost for private development and apply resource to the public development to make sure that airport permitting went on schedule. So that did not come at an impact to the service and the timely services that private developments doing. >> I appreciate it. >> That was the answer to my question. And it doesn't continue. It didn't then and doesn't now have any effect on. Thank you, I appreciate that. And then my final question. Oh, it is development services. Thank you, Mr. Morris. Contingency budget for the third party if spike in development. So you know, I couldn't help but notice we had that that chart that showed, you know, we had a spike in development then a substantial decrease in Ed. And I you know, we were remarking we're looking people. And so [10:00:08 AM] we're looking people. And so just remarking that the sky looks different in July of 2025 than it did in March of 2023, you know, where did all the cranes go? And so being able to recognize visibly that development has dropped. And so that anticipate potential anticipation for the third party budget spike. What does that continge contingency budget go towards if there isn't a development spike in what's the threshold in terms of the timeline benchmark, like if we say by November 26th, we hadn't spent that contingency money, can we give it all to the northeast planning district? Councilmember? >> Just using a hypothetical. >> Right. Hypothetically, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. >> Well, since so development services being the cost of service model, it would just be costs that are not realized. So we're we're budgeting for those monies if they are needed. We do assess volume on a weekly [10:01:08 AM] assess volume on a weekly monthly basis. And once we start to see trends, then that is when we will deploy those third party resources rather than in the past of scaling up with full time employees to be more responsive to the ups and downs of the cyclical market. >> Okay. And I've actually I told a slight fib, well, it's not a fib because that was my last question. This is comments I know we have some time scheduled to meet with you guys about development services fees. I mean, we were advocating last year, most especially for commercial constituents to get some fees decreased. And now there's this extraordinarily dramatic increase. That's exactly the opposite of what we were advocating for. So really looking forward to getting some clarification there, some clarity about what fee increases look like. And to the point of the commentary from the restaurant association, just one of those things, you know, again, I can't believe how frequently I'm going back to covid, back to covid. We realize food services, food, access to [10:02:08 AM] food services, food, access to food, restaurants, restaurateurs, food purveyors, food systems, how critical those services and functions are. And if they don't work because of us, then we are the problem. And I want to make certain that during the course of us addressing how we allocate our budget, I want to make certain that our systems work effectively too, especially given the, you know, limitations with our financial our fiscal resources. Thank you for your time. Thank you everybody. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine. Councilmember Siegel. Councilmember Ellis. >> I can start with dsd since you're up there already. Okay. Thank you. So my first question is, as you were as you were building out the proposal for the fee increases, can you walk me through what type of stakeholder engagement was part of that process? >> Yes, councilmember. So we met with a broad range of [10:03:09 AM] with a broad range of stakeholders, primarily the those that that experienced the permitting system and the fees. We met with them within 48 hours after the city manager's release of the fy 26 budget, we walked them through the fees, both the fees that are increasing, but also important note of fees that are decreasing. About 60% are increasing, 40% that are decreasing. Walking through the methodology, walking through what in terms of fees, they will experience both those that are proposed to increase and those that are decreasing. >> Can you share with me what types of stakeholders were included in that mix, or how many like, what did that look like? >> So generally, the stakeholders that we engaged with are those that represent organizations, and it ranged everything from small, single family residential all the way to office, multifamily, commercial interests. And then it basically every group in [10:04:09 AM] it basically every group in between. >> Okay. So it's no mystery that it is both expensive. It is expensive in terms of both time and money to do any form of development or renovation or any sort of project like that in Austin. And it is incumbent on us as leadership of the city to find ways to streamline that process in terms of both the amount of money it costs and also the amount of time that it takes to move through the process. The stories I've heard from small individuals working on small developments that include many of the goals that we hear about, often transitional housing support for families who are experiencing homelessness, seniors having adequate place to gather. I mean it. People centered design. Access to trails. Access to green space. There are many, many goals that the city has that we don't necessarily our [10:05:12 AM] that we don't necessarily our our normal ways of incentivizing these types of things maybe don't apply all over the city. They apply more so in the central parts of the city. But for me personally, very important that we are finding ways that to move through our process quickly, effectively with minimal expense. The types of projects, especially that align with our values as a city. And so I look at something like expedited review. Okay, so we already know we're increasing fees in a lot of ways that's going to hurt some people. We heard from some stakeholders here. I, I am a proponent of fees and streamlining. But I also think that when we have these challenges within our own city for how people can navigate the system, it's incumbent on us to bring some savings before we're increasing even more. And so I guess that's actually my [10:06:12 AM] so I guess that's actually my first question. What type of time or money savings for the users of development services are we already offering as we increase these fees? You want me to clarify a little bit? Okay. So for example, when the consulting when the Mckinsey consulting report came out, talked about the number of months that it takes to go through the development process, have we delivered an overall shortening of that time, which would save our users money as well? I've heard many stories of construction loans expiring before they've gotten through the process, having to go back, and then it's much more costly for them. And so if they could have gotten through faster, then it would save them money without us giving money back just simply by providing a faster delivery. >> Thank you councilmember, I understand your question. So yes, in terms of what is one getting for the service, what are you getting for the cost? So [10:07:13 AM] are you getting for the cost? So this coming year, we will launch expedited site plan as a pilot aligns with council priorities. It will be for housing projects. Ideally this is a pilot that we're able to expand later based on the learning session and the feedback that we receive from the process. Going back to your point about the what we call the transforming site plan, we went from 18 months on average for site plan to now down to 12 to 14. The process has improved and improved dramatically, and we are hearing that feedback from stakeholders. That is good, but it is not where we want to be long term. This is part of continuous improvement. The expedited model. We are setting a target date of getting to site plan permit in six months. >> Okay. >> So the yes ma'am. >> That that is really good to hear. We were hearing about the dissolution of the expedited process, and I'm happy to hear that there's a pilot coming. And I hope that we can connect a little bit more specifically on what that looks like, because. [10:08:14 AM] what that looks like, because. Even with our fellow local governments, the challenges of getting through the process leads to projects that they are paying for getting if they're in Austin, getting pushed to the end of the line, which really hurts certain communities disproportionately. So I hope we can talk a little bit about who's included and what are some of the incentives and that kind of thing. >> Yes, councilmember. >> Okay. Thank you. I know that wasn't an easy start, but I'm good for development services. Fire chief baker, I know I've called you a lot of times. Welcome. And I'm going to try not to tread the ground that we've tried in prior work sessions, through my questions and through Natasha harper-madison questions, when I'm looking at the memo that came out yesterday, it is definitely striking to me how Austin fire department overtime [10:09:14 AM] Austin fire department overtime rates were relatively stable at 30% for many years, and then they began to grow around 2021, getting dangerously close to 40%. I appreciate the explanation that as current staffing models exist and will be maintained under any of the proposals that are at play right now, we will continue to staff based on five firefighters, which allows for a 25% call out rate. And so we clearly see what our target is on the call out rate. I also would like to note that it's interesting to me that the overtime rate and the call out rate increased at the same time. So it tells me, as you have also talked about, that we have some work to do on ensuring that the leave policies and any other factors that might be impacting the call out rate are [10:10:15 AM] impacting the call out rate are addressed, but we also are not anywhere that's sustainable. The charts really tell that story. So I wanted to lay that out and then I have a question. I understand how this proposal will impact overtime spending. I'm wondering what, if any, other approaches have been taken to from a management perspective to work on the call out rate, specifically to identify the driving factors? Has that work begun, or will it be part of what happens in the coming year? >> Well, thank you for that question, ma'am. Again, Joel baker, Austin fire department fire chief, one thing we have looked at is how many personnel can we allow off on vacation time. And we try to manage that the best way we can because we don't want to happen is to deny our members to take vacation time they have earned. And the bank so much vacation time that come close to towards the end of [10:11:16 AM] come close to towards the end of their career or the following year. They have so much vacation time we have to make them take off or they'll lose their time. We don't want that to happen, so we try our best to manage that. We had a lot of io.js injury on the job, injuries, but with the help of our hr department and other services, we have really gotten down those injuries on the job through different programs and we really see the members getting back to work, so that has helped us out a lot too. Recently we had approximately, I think, 100 vacancies, but we just graduated recruit class and now we are down approximately 60 vacancies. And come October this year we should have about 30 vacancies. So we are hiring and training as fast as we can to get to help us with the vacancies rate and getting people back to work. And we're looking at I'm currently looking at our sick leave policy, what adjustment or change I need to make in the sick leave policy without. Without telling them they can't [10:12:18 AM] Without telling them they can't take sick. If you're sick, you just need to be sick. I'm just having some challenges, especially on the weekend with the high numbers of sick leave. For example, Monday, Monday through Thursday, we have approximately 20 to 25 plus or minus people off on sick leave. But on Saturdays, signing the sick leave can go anywhere between 40 to 50, if not more. People off on Friday and on Saturdays and Sundays. So we're looking at ways to change that type of behavior as well. But again, it's important to not stress. I'm not here advocating reducing four person staffing when I'm here. Advocating is when I don't have enough people at work to give me the leeway as the fire chief to staff the engine. With three, I'm not advocating to reduce our staffing from 355 firefighter personnel per shift, because I need 268. I'm not advocating that. I'm just saying when I don't have enough people at work, then I should be allowed to run the engine. With three personnel, we still will have [10:13:18 AM] personnel, we still will have four and four staffing. When the staffing, when the personnel are at work and when they come to work, we'll have the members on the unit, but without making members work overtime, it would get again. I need to stress it would get them the time off that they need to work on their mental illness that they tell me they have the firefighter, they need to take their time off. But yet right now they are working a lot of overtime. I just don't have the people at work to fill those seats. >> Thank you. You anticipated my next question, which was are there any days or other indicators off? I'm sorry, are there any days, times of day, days of week that this call out rate spikes? And so we're seeing a spike on the weekends versus the weekdays is what I heard. And therefore our weekend call rate likely it sounds like is over 40% because that's where the bump is like mathematically that would be true. So that's good to know. I personally have [10:14:21 AM] good to know. I personally have never worked anywhere where there's a 40% call out rate. That's that's very surprising to me. And it is very important that we provide our leadership, you and other leadership in fire with the tools to address that. Because a 25% target, we've got to have enough things to leverage to get us back there. The rate. I really appreciate the way that this aspect of the budget was built out. City manager and Kerri, as well with emphasizing the reduction in overtime, because overtime should be something that we rely on in emergency situations as we have. That is when it started to grow. But when we are not in an emergency is when we need to stabilize and we need to use that money as effectively as we can to support our personnel. And so thank you for bringing this to the fore. The issue of overtime and the work that you've already done on it. I have a couple of other just specific questions before I'm done with fire. My district, as you all have heard many times, [10:15:23 AM] you all have heard many times, is unusual in that it is entirely comprised of outlying parts of the city. We don't have any central parts of the city in my district. Can you tell me how the proposed reforms and as it relates to overtime and these proposals on the table, would impact response times in the outlying area, if at all? >> Yes, the response time, what I have 4 or 5, six, 20 people on the truck, the response time is going to be the same. It's the apparatus that's going from the fire station to the emergency response time would be the same. And once the personnel got on the scene again, we would have the effective firefighter force to mitigate those emergencies on the scene in your particular area. Ma'am and other council member area, we have automatic automatic aid agreement with surrounding esd's and cities. So it's the closest response unit will arrive on the scene. So you may get another unit outside of Austin in your territory, or you may receive an Austin unit on the scene. But be that as it [10:16:23 AM] the scene. But be that as it may, the Austin fire department personnel, we stand at the ready to respond to these emergency calls. >> And also out in my area, something that really impacts response time is traffic. We've got a lot of places that you can get to by one very congested roadway. And so it's one of the reasons that as response times, as we think about response times, it's important to me to avoid the blackouts and brownouts, whi likely would impact, you know, some of these outlying areas. So I appreciate your responses in this area. I'll wrap up right there. Done with fire. I would like to be on the list for a second round related to transportation and public works and Austin energy. >> Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember. Siegel. Councilmember. Ellis. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. And I guess, chief baker, as long as you're there. >> Absolutely. >> I was going to mix it up a little bit, but just to save you some walking and thank you so much for your transparency and leadership and all these efforts. I know what's going on with the fire department is not [10:17:24 AM] with the fire department is not easy, and I just want to share that I've heard pretty clearly from firefighters that the four person staffing requirement is something that gives firefighters safety and security and peace of mind. And so this is obviously is not a decision we can take lightly. I want to know, are there other major cities that have gone down from a four person staffing model to a model where where three person on an engine is okay. >> I don't have in my memory bank what other cities that have gone downm 4 to 3 person staffing? I can research that and get back with you. However, there are other major cities that do not have a four and four staffing model throughout the country. So for example, the department I formerly used to work at was this incomparable comparable size to the city of Austin do not have a mandatory four and staffing model. They have a four and three staffing model. So I'm quite sure there's [10:18:25 AM] model. So I'm quite sure there's other major cities, the countryside of Austin that have a four and three staffing model, and there may be some that have a four and four staffing model. So to be transparent, but I do not know of any cities per se that have changed that. But also I'm not familiar with any cities that have a mandatory city ordinance that mandate that they maintain a four and three staffing model. I'm not aware of any cities that the city council has directed the fire chief, that you shall have a four and four staffing model. I'm not aware of any major cities where the city council or management have directed the fire chief. You cannot modify your staffing model to fit the needs of the city or the department. >> That's fair. And actually, that leads to my second question here, which is, you know, I hear pretty clearly the data is clear that we have an issue regarding the absence rate in the department and overtime costs. And I guess my question is about the process to resolve that issue. As a city. We've adopted collective bargaining right [10:19:27 AM] collective bargaining right under chapter 143. That's actually something that the city of Austin voters asked us to do is to collectively bargain with the firefighters association. And a core principle of collective bargaining is that we make decisions affecting the workplace that affect working conditions, that both the union and the city are at there. And so I will say, I've been in work settings such as working for public school districts where hr has policies about leave to make sure it's being used properly. You have to get a doctor's note or, you know, there's more scrutiny if you try to take a three day weekend, that kind of thing. But my question is, could we build a more comprehensive approach to fire department staffing and absences through collective bargaining? Right. A process that's supposed to start in just a few weeks. And when that be a way we could really dig into these issues about the absence rate. >> That's a possibility. But as you may be aware, I'm not totally engaged with the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the city manager. But you're right. The union has a as I heard you [10:20:28 AM] union has a as I heard you correctly. Their goal is to make sure safety of the employees. But safety starts with mental health as well. There was a time here in the fire service in America where the firefighters used to say, we said not a day. We said that cancer was the number one cause of death in the fire service heart attacks, but council was the number one cause of death and heart attacks for American citizens. Then we send that mental illness is number one cause of death. But mental illness is rise across the country in civilian workforce. So I'm all in favor as a firefighter and fire chief, because I have not always wore this fire chief uniform. I have worked on the back of fire trucks. I have been on calls with a roof has fallen and you got to save babies and you praise. You going in and you praise while you're inside the house that you come out the house and you. I have been on many calls for many close calls. I've been on special operations, [10:21:29 AM] I've been on special operations, the hazmat team and put myself in harm's way. So I do not take the safety of our firefighters for granted. There was no fire chief in the country, to my knowledge, would come before council and say, put my firefighters in danger. Do this. I'm not saying put my firefighters in danger and go to a four and three staffing measure. What I'm asking is to give me the authority as to fire chief to manage properly my budget, to manage properly my staffing metrics, and to encourage my members to come to work again with two with 355 personnel assigned per shift, and I only need 268, and I cannot fill 268 position, especially on the weekend and some days throughout the week. I'm constantly hiring overtime. The members have put me on notice. We have mental illness and PTSD, but yet I'm still telling those members you shall work, not you should, not you. Maybe you shall come to work and [10:22:29 AM] Maybe you shall come to work and fill these overtime seats. The only way that I can think of right now, sitting here, is to get members time off, is to reduce my overtime, to allow those firefighters time to rest and time to spend with their family. The paradigm has shifted in the fire service. When I was in as a firefighter back in 1986, I'm aging myself, but I'm proud to say you dare not call in sick. You came to work with the flu and broken arm and everything else you just laid in the bed and wait and hope you didn't get a call that day, or the member left you in the station and recall looking out for our troops and leave them in a station on the fire call because they two seats go on. Cause I'm not advocating that if you're sick, you must take off sick. I just find it hard to believe that 50 people are sick on Saturday. But you're not sick on Monday. I just I just have a challenge with that. So I'm not saying put my firefighter in harm's way. I'm saying allow me, as the fire chief, to manage the fire department. Allow me, as a fire chief to manage the [10:23:30 AM] fire chief to manage the staffing model. Again, according to nfpa, national fire protection association, which requires 17 personnel on a house fire, and we currently send 32. And if we go to a four and three staffing model, we would send 24. I was still at sea. The national fire protection association requirement. So I'm doing all I can do to protect the citizens of Austin and the stakeholders as well as the firefighters. I just need a little help from council to help me get there. >> Thank you chief, I don't have further questions, but I will say that, you know, I hear your concerns and I'm much more comfortable resolving these issues with the union at the table through the collective bargaining process instead of through, you know, council action. And just to my colleagues, I don't want to balance the budget in a way that makes our firefighters feel less safe. And so this might be one of the reasons why we do need a tax rate increase. But thank you chief. >> Thank you sir. >> I want to move on to a different department. Thank you. [10:24:31 AM] different department. Thank you. If we could actually ask Austin energy to come up, please. >> Good morning, Stuart Riley Austin energy. >> Thank you Stuart. So my first question is about what's in the budget for weatherization for low income households? I don't know if you're prepared to share today how much funding is currently proposed for both single family and multifamily weatherization. >> I don't have the specific numbers. Our customer energy solutions rebate budget overall has gone up $3.7 million, but I don't. I can get back to you on the line items of each how each of those programs. >> Thank you. And also, do you have the data on how much funding is proposed for ev charging stations? >> I do not we can get you the date on that. >> Sorry. And then I guess this is more of a general question. Do you know how Austin energy's [10:25:31 AM] Do you know how Austin energy's rates and bills for residential, commercial and industrial customers compare to those charged by other energy? Bless you. How do weompare to other energy providers across Texas? >> Yes, absolutely. So we look typically we look at at bills and not rates, but we do do a comparison based on both bills and rates. The reason we look at customer bills in particular, is because we've done so much in terms of energy efficiency, energy code. We have a very efficient customer base in comparison to the rest of the state. And while customers use less energy, we still have to get to cost recovery. So oftentimes we compare our bills against our peers across the state based on the most recent energy information administration data, eia data, our average customer bill based on that year's data is about $114, whereas the state average is about $50 per month. Higher than that, we have the second lowest customer bills in ercot. [10:26:32 AM] lowest customer bills in ercot. There have been some recent changes to some other utilities rates, which look like that would make us the lowest customer. Residential customer bills in ercot and the second lowest bills in the state after El Paso. You. And then I guess my last set of questions if I have a couple more minutes mayor. You do. >> Thank you sir. I guess for director Lang, you know I have some questions about the base budget and whether or not it's sustainable without a tax rate election. And so I want to start with the housing trust fund, which as proposed would be depleted and would not be replenished under the base budget. The big expense is about $8 million in operating costs for the marshaling yards, shelter. And I guess to the extent we know what would be the plan after this year to fund the marshaling yard. >> We are still looking at funding options. We haven't identified anything. As you know, the marshaling yard is a general fund cost, and so we haven't identified any [10:27:34 AM] haven't identified any additional or other opportunities at the moment. But we would continue to work. But we really relying on if sales tax increased or our major, our major revenue sources that we currently currently depend on, we would look at how those would be changing to potentially fund it. Otherwise there would be no funding sources. >> Okay. Thank you. And then we've also been using the trust fund for our emergency housing voucher program and emergency rental assistance program. Do we have a funding stream for these types of programs after this year? >> No. >> Okay. Do we know how many people would be affected if these programs were to go away? >> I would turn to either Mandy Demayo or David gray for that information. >> Thank you. >> Mandy Demayo housing department, regarding the housing trust fund program [10:28:36 AM] housing trust fund program currently funded programs. The local housing voucher will serve 374 individuals experiencing homelessness. The. With respect to the emergency rental assistance we provide, on average about $5,000 per person, so it scales accordingly depending on how much money is allocated. Currently in this year's budget, we have $4 million allocated for emergency rental assistance. >> So let's see. Check my mental math here. >> We're all watching. >> I'm going to leave the mental math to you. It's an average per household. And then of course there's administrative costs as well okay. We contract with el Buen samaritano to provide the services. >> Thank you director. Appreciate it. And then back to you, director Lang. I guess a few months ago, we were told Austin faced about a $33 million [10:29:37 AM] Austin faced about a $33 million structural deficit. Under the budget forecast, it looks like about half of that is being filled by lowering our reserve levels about $16 million, another third from, you know, draining the housing trust fund. Apart from those funds, the reserve and the trust fund, are there any other one time funds that are being used for ongoing expenses? >> No, there are not. >> Okay, great. Thank you. And then looking at the 2027 balanced budget, am I right that the plan budget anticipates no wage increases for civilians, significant cuts to social services and significant cuts to facilities maintenance? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Has there been an analysis of the impact on employee retention if there are no civilian wage increases? >> We have not completed that analysis for fiscal year 27 as we were as we were creating the [10:30:37 AM] we were as we were creating the proposed budget, we were looking at what levers we could use to balance. We understood that those were significant adjustments or cuts and would work the human resources department and the team to see what those impacts would be. Once we got through the budget process. >> Fair enough. Thank you. And then last question, do we havepmore detail on what the facility maintenance funding cuts would be under the plan 2027 budget? >> Say that one more time. I'm sorry. >> Would you mind providing more detail on what facility maintenance funding cuts there would be under the planned 2027 budget? So what we cut. >> Or would plan to cut is the mandated transfer to the capital rehabilitation fund. So we have a financial policy that's tied to the depreciated values of our assets to drive out that number. And then each year we would look to see what the most pressing projects are to use with that [10:31:38 AM] projects are to use with that available funding. But that analysis doesn't take place until late in the development process as we see the available funding. So we wouldn't be able to say right now what those projects would be, but we do know that we would have about $12 million less in available cash to meet our most pressing facilities maintenance needs. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nelson. And just reporting to my staff did the math. Looks like about 800 families would benefit from the emergency rental assistance program. >> And council member, I guess. Let me clafy as well. You asked about the impact of the reduction of 3% adjustment. We are also for fiscal year 27. We do have a placeholder holder for a city wide market study that will allow for adjustments as well, but it does not include the 3% wage adjustment. So there are some analysis that will be done for that market study. >> Thanks very much. Thank you. Mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember. Councilmember. Duchen. Councilmember colter. >> Thank you. Mayor. I'm going [10:32:38 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. I'm going to switch over to sidewalk conversation. Lots of good information to digest here. My first question is going to be on slide number eight. The small print at the bottom says sidewalk spending presented in the table includes construction through other programs. Funding. Can you explain a bit more what that means? What are the other programs? >> Richard Mendoza, director of transportation, public works. Majority of our annual sidewalk capital spend is funded through the bond referendums, as approved by voters in 16, 18 and 20. We also receive capital contributions from capmetro through an Ila around their bus stops. We also receive grants grant funding that will be [10:33:44 AM] grant funding that will be applied to the capital program. And trying to think of some other other sources, but those would be two of the primary, other funding sources. >> Okay. That's helpful. And then I'm curious about the top two bullet points, the 8.4 million for tpwd's operating budget for maintenance and other program management. Do you know roughly how many miles are considered in that? 8.4 million. >> So the 8.4 million in 25. Our target is to completely rehabilitate and replace approximately 17 miles of sidewalk 17. >> Okay. And the other bullet point, the 34.5 million for capital spending for I'm guessing that's going to be our new sidewalks. Can you tell me how many miles that should get us. >> For 25? Yes, I got that number. And that's primarily from the voter approved bond referendums. 26 miles of new [10:34:46 AM] referendums. 26 miles of new sidewalk is the target for fy 2026. >> Okay, that is helpful. And then I had noticed in some of the budget recommendations that went to the urban transportation commission, it seems like we have a goal of 80% functionally, functionally acceptable. Can you define what that means for. Correct a layperson? >> Yeah. Functionally acceptable sidewalk meets the minimum Ada requirements for cross slope of 2%. Running slope of 6%. No significant unevenness or cracks in excess of. I believe it's half an inch to an inch. And we conduct a sidewalk condition assessment. We completed that about three years ago. The target is 80% of our existing network of over 2500 curb miles. To be in that condition in 16, with the first significant [10:35:48 AM] with the first significant sidewalk voter referendum, that percentage was as low as 25%. And right now we're hovering right around the 47 to 50% level. So we've improved it by double. >> Where would you like to be if. There was not an issue? >> 80%, ma'am? >> Okay. I really appreciate that. And I know that there's always a catch 22 of you spend capital dollars to create new sidewalks, and then obviously we're on the hook to maintain those over the years. I know that at my community fair that I did in late April, had a woman come and approach me and talk about the need for repairs in her neighborhood, even even just the basic minimum of some of the worst places where the sidewalk is buckling to be, to be fixed. And so I just know this is something that my constituents are really interested in, making sure that we're funding appropriately, but also know that we have a fantastic sidewalk department. They are, you know, performing above and beyond as far as being able to deliver projectnd get actual [10:36:49 AM] deliver projectnd get actual sidewalk miles on the ground. So I really appreciate that and want to make sure that we're bringing all those services and maintenance up to the level that I think the public is expecting. Can you talk to me about the fy 27 plan? You know, you see some of the bond dollars are getting spent, and so you start to see some of the spending go down. So for fy 26 it says 34.5 million. But then fy 27 is only $5.8 million. Can you tell me about the timeline if there's sidewalk dollars included in the 2026 bond, and voters decide to approve that bond, how quickly would we be able to utilize dollars and start building more sidewalks out? >> So if that referendum is approved for a sidewalk program, I'd have to ask finance in terms of how soon that money would be available. >> But. >> Right. >> Maybe not day one, but as soon as we can get back to [10:37:50 AM] soon as we can get back to council with a spending plan for those dollars to appropriate the funds and move forward, we don't have to wait till we actually enter the bond market and issue the bonds. We can start sooner than that. So perhaps not day one, but certainly within 1 or 2 months, we could have an item in front of council to appropriate funds and start implementing that program. >> Okay. That's helpful. And my next question is just going to be about any gaps in funding. So I know that as we close out the current fiscal year, we're seeing a lot of departments, you know, trying to tighten up the budgets and delay some other spending. Are there any more dollars that are needed to get us to October 1st, before the 26 budget will kick in? >> Yeah. The current capital spend plan will get us to October 1st of 26. >> Okay. So we'll be good for this year and then. >> To next. >> Year hopefully have enough dollars for October 1st. Yes, through the next fiscal year. And then my last question on this topic is going to be about urban trails. So I know you, director Mendoza, were a part of [10:38:52 AM] director Mendoza, were a part of dpw when it was one entity, and then it split off into transportation and public works separately. And we saw some of the sidewalks and urban trails programs get separated. Now they're back into one department again. Can you talk to me briefly about if there's any need for a more urban trails money, or if there's more information that we should have as a council >> Most certainly on page 15, five, 15 of your budget book, there's a line item there for sidewalk maintenance. That's $9.2 million of that, $9.2 million, 800,000 of that is going to be programed for urban trails maintenance. And then the residual 8.4 is for sidewalk. And so our urban trails system is relatively young compared to our sidewalk network. However, it will be reaching a point where it will require some ongoing maintenance. So we've begun that programing. Now we have placed urban trails and sidewalk programs under one division manager, and since the work is very similar in nature, [10:39:53 AM] work is very similar in nature, we used concrete for our urban trails. And so that line item in the budget will speak to the maintenance urban trails now and moving forward. >> Okay. >> Fantastic, I appreciate that. I know our urban trails program is something that the community really gets a lot of enjoyment out of. I know when a former secretary, Pete buttigieg, was in town, he was fascinated to hear about not every single bike Laine that we have in Austin is on the roadway or immediately adjacent to the roadway, that we're utilizing our park system to be able to help folks with recreation or commuting by bike. And that was something that he was pretty fascinated about. I think that's all I have for that topic. I'm going to have a couple of brief questions for the fire department. And then maybe one quick one that I don't know if that's going to be for budget staff or for dsd. Just one very quick one. Hi chief [10:40:53 AM] one very quick one. Hi chief baker, I've appreciated the conversation and the q&a with the other council members so far. I just had one brief question about overtime. Is it mandatory for folks? How do you decide if someone's calling out who to who to call in? How does that work? Is it a voluntary? Folks can come in if they want to, or is it mandatory? And the department picks and chooses who gets that phone call? Can you explain that to me? >> I'm going to go from memory, but I think my chief of staff may be able to answer that question. But he stepped on the phone call. So let me try. This way it's mandatory to work overtime. We have called mandatory mandatory added time, but we have a the uk system will pick, I believe, based on the who's next in line to get overtime. It's a whoever's next up in line. If that person is not available then we will call. I'm afraid that those members [10:41:55 AM] I'm afraid that those members who are on Canada's get first pick at overtime. Once we run through the candidate list, then we go to who's next in line. And I want to say I'm 100% sure it's based on the lowest paid firefighter. I think I'm not 100% sure about that. It's changed so many times. And then we go through those two lists. If we still need personnel, we have a mandatory at a time list that we pick from that you share work. Those members who are made are forced to work overtime. They get to turn it down one time per year. You get to say, well, I know you ordered me to come, but I want to take this option not to work, so we'll skip that person to go to someone else. They get to turn it down one time per year. And I think there's some other criteria involved. >> Okay. So it's kind of like a on call list. Like you may get that phone call when shift is about to begin, just to make sure that, you know, you've got people in the station. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you I appreciate [10:42:55 AM] >> Okay. Thank you I appreciate that. And I will point out I know the conversation around overtime budgets with fire department have been a conversation for a while. I know in 2023, there's an article I was just reading about former council member alter Alison alter, when we had two altars on the dais, and the overtime cost was upwards of 20 million. And so I think as we have this conversation, around 8 million to try to help, just make sure that we have the staffing that we need. I think it's an important perspective to see that there there have been changes made. There have been reductions in overtime costs and just trying to balance, making sure we have the right folks showing up for the right calls. Thank you. That's all I have for fire. And then my last question is going to be about development services. I had a question about on slide number 14. It talks about fees for different types of housing single family dwelling unit, infill residential resubdivision small project and multifamily. Can you explain what the small project [10:43:57 AM] explain what the small project is? Is that going to be our duplexes up to quadplexes, or how is that being defined with dsd right now? >> Yes. Council member Keith Mars again, development services department. So small project is a reflection of council's action on infill ordinance earlier this year. So this is the 5 to 16 unit small project site plan of that missing middle housing, where we do see that dsd fees are going down and going from about 20,000 and change to 15,000 and change. And council member, if I may, it's also a reflection of not just council action and policy change that's driving down fees is also what dsd has done on controlling and managing our expenses. We just in F 26 alone, we're looking at reducing our expenses by a little over $8 million. And that's from rightsizing our staffing that is moving staff to other departments that are better fit with their core missions, reallocation of some of the work to be more effective and efficient before we even start calculating fees is [10:44:59 AM] start calculating fees is managing and controlling our expenses. And that's what you're seeing in these numbers. >> Okay. So we've got our single family unit. Is that below 1800 square feet. >> That's correct. And that is a per unit up to three units. Again, as a response to council action allowing up to three homes on a single family lot. >> Perfect. And then the infill residential resubdivision is subdividing the lot itself. >> That's correct. Council member again, a reflection of council's change earlier this year for the resubdivision process for infill subdivision. >> Perfect. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure I understood how those were lined up with some of those actions. That's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember, councilmember duchen, councilmember alter and councilmember vela. >> Thank you. Mayor. I he a couple of comments. Just to start out with for the budget team. First, to thank you for your continued work and effort on this. I know you've poured a [10:46:00 AM] on this. I know you've poured a tremendous amount of energy into this and have been very available, particularly for certain meetings that might have run long, so I appreciate your patience on that. First question is regarding the scenarios that you shared with us. And I realize this is outside of specifically capital stuff that we're talking about today. But I'm just curious, you know, the one scenario covers just the one year shortfall. Whereas going beyond that, the 2 to 8 scenarios cover a four year window. I'm curious, has there been a calculation that was done to understand if there was a one scenario that covered maybe a certain subset of items for four years, what the value that we could afford of projects or ititems would be for that four year window. Does that question makeense? >> Off the top of my head, I think we if we levied that $0.01 in the first year with our [10:47:01 AM] in the first year with our inflation assumptions on both sides, we end up with about 1.7 million to the good and the general fund in the last year. So if you discount that a little bit, you could probably afford about 1.5 million in ongoing spending in the first year. And then, of course, in those early years, you'd have additional funding then to transfer you to reserves to get those would be in much better. The reserves would be in much better shape in that scenario. But you couldn't sustain a large amount of ongoing funding because of those burgeoning deficits we have just in our base budget in the out years. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you. Second question is, is it possible to get a understanding of the service prioritization report that you share with us that has the same format as the enhancement report, which breaks down items between ongoing and one time funding. Currently, there's just, I think, a single column in that service [10:48:02 AM] column in that service prioritization report that shows us what the savings would be, but doesn't really make it clear, I think, unless I interpret the fees associated with those line items, whether that's one time or ongoing, I'm going somewhere with this. So I'm curious if you have an answer for. >> So the prioritizations are ongoing savings were looking at the ongoing impact. So those would that's why it's not a breakdown okay. >> So that all of them are ongoing. Not one time okay. Thank you. So to build on that, if I look at some of those service prioritizations and let's say I'm looking at maybe aviation, which has a total of, I think about $9 million that are not currently part of the budget changes. I'm wondering how if we implemented those changes and we made changes to the budget with them, how fungible are those dollars from aviation to a different department? If we say, transfer them to the general fund or use [10:49:03 AM] them to the general fund or use them to decrease the amount of reserves, perhaps that we need to allocate this year. >> So the various funds are enterprise funds in particular. They are for specific areas, aviation in particular, everything that aviation spends or saves, or it must be within the fence of the operation of the airport. So there's no ability for us to transfer any of their savings into the general fund. >> Thank you. And but that would not be not be true for non enterprise funds. Is that correct? >> There is some nuance there. And so it would it may generate partial savings to the for example our support services fund is about 50% funded through general fund dollars. So any savings and support services would result in savings in the general fund. But the other funds in particular would not necessarily create a savings for the general fund. [10:50:04 AM] the general fund. >> Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. Then regarding specifically cip projects that are scheduled for 20 2627, what would be the implication? Let's just say let's say we identified 1 or 2 projects or X amount of projects and said these projects, we could potentially they're not urgent, so we could postpone them for 1 or 2 years until we resolve the systemic challenge between revenue and expenses in the city. Is that something that's realistic, or are these preplanned five years in advance that that would not be possible. >> So the bond dollars that we have, the cip projects that we have, they're already planned out. But typically WHA happens is delayed the more it costs. And so we want to be careful to not add cost by delaying those projects. And it it will not provide savings again on the general fund side, because those [10:51:04 AM] general fund side, because those cip one time funds. >> Got it. Okay. If we've got if I've got specific questions about a couple of, I'll just use one example that you all supervise because it's an information technology. Some of the ones that we may not make sense when I read them in the budget one is called like the vegetation risk management analysis. It's about half $1 million over a two year window with about $300,000 in the planned budget. First, maybe you can expand on or we can ask somebody in ctm what this means, what this what vegetation risk management is doing in it, and then understanding if we did delay this or or if it wasn't necessary or urgent, will we just B using those dollars for a different project then? >> Can you tell me what page you're on? >> I think it's on page 736. >> So that is information [10:52:20 AM] >> So that is information technology within Austin energy. And so when you look at that, that's not a part of our ctm or technology services department. That is a Austin energy function. I don't know if you know, let me let me pull it up here for a second. >> Council member Stuart Riley, Austin energy interim general manager. So our vegetation, I'm sorry, our wildfire mitigation program team has a new software I believe it's called techno silva, which will be rolling out to enhance our wildfire analytics and preparedness in addition to our panel ai [10:53:21 AM] addition to our panel ai wildfire detection system. >> Okay. Thank you for helping me understand that. I've got a couple more questions, actually, so I'm glad you joined us. Director Riley, I had a question, actually about the borrowing for capital improvements within Austin energy. We noticed that the it seems like the debt service costs are increasing almost by 25%. And I'm curious if you can help me understand what's going on with that borrowing. >> Well, the borrowing is to support our our growing cip needs. And so as our cip forecasts and our cip plan for the next five years has gone up substantially, not only from increasing costs and inflation, but also from the enhanced needs on our system in terms of resiliency, reliability and also making transmission investments. >> Well, specifically, I mean, I can understand the raw number [10:54:21 AM] can understand the raw number increase in the amount of debt based on the cip improvements, but I'm referring to specifically the percentage increase, which seems to be going up much faster than it was. So I don't know, again, offline, if that's a better. >> And we can get into the specifics. But one one factor there is we have had to increase our percentage of debt to equity in terms of our investments. So while we may have previously been at a 5050 split, now we might be at a 6040 split staying within financial policy, but a greater as as we have less cash to support those investments where we're borrowing more to get over the hump. >> Okay. Thank you. Second question, if we were to let's just say zero out the rate increase this year that actually is in customers benefit and helps offset some of the other fee and property tax increases that are projected for the budget. Do you have you calculated what number might be [10:55:21 AM] calculated what number might be available for reinvestment into things like hardening or other things that you all might otherwise want to continue to, to, to build on? >> So are you asking if we did if, if we did not have a net reduction to the Austin energy customer bill? What the what how much money that would generate? >> Yes. >> I, I let me see. I believe that would generate about another $40 million, something like that. I believe that would get us to around the $43 million shortfall that we will experience in fy 26, some somewhere around there. But we can do the precise math on that, because basically, right now, the typical Austin energy residential customer will experience about a $5 decrease in their bill. Overall. Some costs go up, some costs go down. [10:56:22 AM] costs go up, some costs go down. But that bill is reducing by about $5. So we will we can back into the number in terms of right now, you know what I think it would probably generate. You know actually I think my number is a little bit low. But we'll do we'll do that math. And it's probably around $50 million okay. >> Yeah I'll follow up. And if we can work on that that'd be great. Because I'm also curious if you've done any specific studies. I know you've done the, the, the below ground and above ground studies that you've shared with us, but if you've come up with a number in relation to those studies for the cost and time to do, maybe the most urgent hardening and weatherization infrastructure improvements that might have, we might have benefited from for or we might continue to benefit from if we have extreme weather events every other year, as we have been in the service area. And if you have a number associated with what that would cost. >> Yeah. So part of what we're doing now that we've completed the undergrounding feasibility [10:57:24 AM] the undergrounding feasibility study in the overhead hardening study, now that will go into our overall comprehensive distribution reliability and resilience plan. And right now, what we have built into our budget. Setting that aside because we don't have the numbers for that yet, but we do have our typical resilience investments that we're looking at. So our five year cip plan has $75 million built into it for grid hardening already to continue some of the work that's already underway for our ongoing resilience plan that we've got so far, what you're referring to would be over and above that, but that's where we are in terms of our our plans right now. >> Okay. Thank you. I'll follow up on that then. >> And that that plan will be coming. Once we have that plan, we will be bringing that plan back to council, likely to be presented at the Austin energy utility oversight committee. So that will have some numbers, at least in orders of magnitude of what we're talking about in terms of costs for that comprehensive reliability plan. >> Okay. I'll look forward to [10:58:25 AM] >> Okay. I'll look forward to that. Thank you. I have a couple questions for fire. Thank you chief. Trying again okay. There we go. So I know we've been talking a lot about three and four person staffing. I'm trying to understand since it sounds like it would be incredibly relevant, at least to me, to understand how often, based on the numbers that we've got, you all would expect we would be deploying two three people based on the current staffing trends. Have we done any calculation on that? Are we talking about? I'm just trying to generally is it rare? Is it common? Is it on certain days. [10:59:26 AM] common? Is it on certain days. Are we talking about 1 in 100 shifts that we might have to go to T person or 1 in 1000? Do we have any sense of how the frequency of what this change means to the average shift? >> If I'm not mistaken, sir, councilmember duchen, we hire overtime every day. I'm not sure we hire overtime for all. Well, almost. We don't hire overtime for all of the apparatus. Like I said, we have about 67 units all together. It's my belief we do not hire overtime for 67 units. However, I have to dig down into the data to get that exact number for you. But I would probably say before I let chief go for his memories, there will be some apparatus that will run with three. There will be some engine that will run with three because we don't have enough staffing and there will be some engines because we have enough people to staff with four will [11:00:27 AM] people to staff with four will be staffed. So I don't think it would be a 100% of our engines that I'm requesting that we would run with three. But I look at that number to get you the exact number. Thank you. I'm I'm a policy the chief fires have in addition information on that. >> So rob fires chief of staff. >> With the Austin. >> Fire department as it stands today. We pay overtime every day, as the chief said. >> And that number. >> Varies as a reference, I believe. Yesterday we paid 26 folks in overtime. We also graduated a cadet class on Friday that put 40 cadets as probationary firefighters out into operations, which left us 60 vacancies where we had 100 before. There are times with the number of. Folks not able to show up for work that day, where we'll pay upwards of 80 people in overtime. I believe there was a question before I apologize, I was out of the room on how overtime is selected. I don't want to take away from council members time, but if y'all want [11:01:27 AM] members time, but if y'all want me to explain that, I'll be happy to do that as well. >> That'd be great. I'm happy to donate my time for that question. >> All right. Thank you. So the way overtime works for the fire department is each morning, the battalion chief show up and they'll work out their board. That shows how many people we have that are present at work that day. And where we're short the number of seats. We have 268 assigned seats that have to be filled every single day. When we're short that, that then creates the overtime list of folks to be selected. The current contract requires us, generally speaking, to use Kelly day people first if they're off on Kelly shift and they signed up for overtime, they've made themselves available for overtime. They get first preference in being selected to fill overtime spots. The idea behind that, to some degree, is that was their scheduled day off. They, in theory, didn't work the two days before and are the ones that are most refreshed. As we've talked about mental health items, the where there's still a need for [11:02:29 AM] there's still a need for overtime, there's a volunteer list. And if that still hasn't satisfied all the needs that we have, it then goes to a second call out and then if that still hasn't satisfied at all, then it's mandatory overtime. And there are lists that are established for that. That's a brief overview of how overtime is selected. >> Okay. Thank you chief. Looks like I'm about of time. So I really appreciate those answers. It'd be great to get some some very rough understanding of how common it would be for us to deploy a three person apparatus. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember, followed by councilmember vela and the mayor pro tem. >> Thank you so much. I'm going to pick up right where councilmember duchen left off. I do think the practicality, right. We can all talk about all the engines are going to be three person or none of the engines are going to be three person. But understanding how often do we get to that mandatory spot. So, you know, if you could share with us those data on that and then from that [11:03:30 AM] data on that and then from that helping us understand that, you know, if this policy had been in place, let's say, just over the past month, these are the units that would have had three people. And so we can see how often and if there's a geographic concentration and understand just the practical implication of what would this have looked like in practice. Just, you know, let's say go back a month. I think that would really help us just work through this. I also wanted to understand you talked about having more people out sick on the weekends. What is the share of calls on the weekends? Do we typically have more calls on weekends or less calls for whether it's fires, crashes, all the things that the fire department does. >> The call types varies from day to day. It's been my [11:04:30 AM] day to day. It's been my experience that depending on the season of the year, depending on the day. So on the weekends I need to look at that data to get the exact I hate to be guessing and. >> And that's fine. You can come back with the data. But I'm curious, you know, less people driving, so maybe less crashes, less people at work. I don't know how that shakes out, but. >> It's just it's just hard to say because you can't schedule a heart attack and you can't schedule a house fire. >> Right. And I'm just about, you know, more people are home on the weekend. Do we have more house fires on the weekend or since they're home and they accidentally left the stove on, maybe have less. I, I would just love to see how the time out corresponds with our calls to see if those are matching or if there's a disparity there. >> I can I can break it down. The number of calls per days. Excuse me, about two days to get that done. I can make it happen. >> No problem. >> There won't be hard to get. >> I appreciate that, and I don't know if this is a you [11:05:32 AM] don't know if this is a you question or we'll just budget staff generally. What are we currently budgeted for overtime in the base budget for fire. What is the amount budgeted? >> Is she she she looked up the number I think this is about 13 or 15 million. I think it is. But let me get the exact number. >> I think 15 million was roughly the actual spend in 24. It's in the last paragraph of the memo that was distributed last night, I believe. I think their total overtime budget is 10.2 million. And in the base budget. >> There we go. Okay. Thank you so much for clarifying. So ten point would you say is a 6.1 million net decrease from 2025? And is that 2025 budgeted, not 2025 spend >> That's correct okay. >> And so if we were to restore the 8.2 million that put us at 18.4 in their overtime budget, [11:06:35 AM] 18.4 in their overtime budget, that's correct. And just looking at the chart provided in the memo, in no year except for fiscal year 21 and no year were we ever over 18 million in fiscal year 22. That was our peak. That was at 17.2. Is that correct? >> It sounds correct. I just want to point out there's that additional 2 million plus that's associated with non operations. And that's getting added because of some accounting changes where they used to be booked as expense refunds and now be booked as revenue. So we had to add the budget. So that's going to move everything up by that $2.7 million. >> So practically speaking, if we included that 8.2 it would really be 16.3. Because of that 2.1 million. >> Right. And that tracks roughly with our historical experience and the current. [11:07:36 AM] experience and the current. Absence rates. >> Okay. Okay. So then then that would leave us only fiscal year 22 being above that amount. All right. That is helpful. So then I wanted to understand practically speaking as well, if we were to approve this ordinance, but also as some of the scenarios have contemplated, restore the 8.2 million in overtime costs, what happens with that money if the chief is having the discretion to have sometimes three person staffing? But we approved an additional 8.2 million in overtime, is that just money that is not going to be spent? Or are we going to say, since we have this additional overtime money, chief, even though you have the authority to only have three people, we want you to mandatory pull them in so that it's always four and four. [11:08:36 AM] four and four. >> If I understand the question correctly, you're asking me if the ordinance is passed and then council turn around and increase our budget by the $8.2 million. Then it's my understanding, then we will have enough money to staff the personnel before and four on the apparatus. >> Okay, so in that instance, even though you'd have the managerial discretion to go to three because you have the overtime money, you would stay at the four person staffing level because you'd have that overtime. >> As long as I do not go over my budget. >> Okay. Very helpful. And let's go in the other direction. Let's say we don't approve the ordinance and the $8.2 million cut remains. What options do you have left to continue the [11:09:37 AM] have left to continue the foreign force staffing without but still meet that $8.2 million reduction that has currently been allocated to your department? >> Yeah, the option I have is the 8.2 million is cut from the budget, and I'm mandated to maintain a four and four staffing model. Then I would really have no choice but to either blackout fire station or burn out equipment. I don't have enough discretionary funds to meet the need of $8.2 million. I just cannot continue to take staff personnel from inspection, communication, training and put them back in operation to fill the gap. I just don't have enough resources to fulfill the $8.2 million shortfall. >> Okay. >> All right. Well, I really appreciate that. I just wanted to kind of understand all the different paths we have in front of us and what what those lead [11:10:38 AM] of us and what what those lead to. >> So it's a whole lot better to have personnel on the apparatus than to shut down fire stations. >> Yes, I agree with that. All right. Very much shifting gears. I'm finished with you, chief, for those questions. I appreciate it, Carrie, can you help me understand throughout the budget whether every department. But I'm really focused on some O the general fund departments. There are capital. Often it's building and improvements, but capital projects that are funded under current revenue. So take if, for instance, I understand current revenue to just be general fund is which in their pie chart so are we. Does that mean we're doing the building. We're funding the buildings and improvements out of general fund dollars. >> That is the transfer to the capital rehabilitation fund from the general fund into that fund to identify deferred or to take care of deferred maintenance [11:11:39 AM] care of deferred maintenance projects. >> And so taking a if, for example, they had I think some like hvac. Yeah hvac repairs. Is there a reason why we would transfer general fund to the rehabilitation fund to do that, instead of utilizing debt service? >> So those are some of the projects that are not debt eligible. So we look at what projects are debt debt eligible and use that cos or whatever the appropriate debt debt source is. But these are projects that have to be paid for with cash. >> Got it. >> Okay. Well that answers that question. So I also have a question for Austin water. And this actually gets a little bit into the development space. But I'm wanting to understand. We had the individual here showing us, you know here's what an Adu [11:12:39 AM] us, you know here's what an Adu the cost for that and a significant line there is the tap fee. And my understanding is if I own a property and I want to add an Adu, I have to get an additional tap for that. Adu. Is that correct? >> That's Shea roalson, director of Austin water. So the our policy is that each individual dwelling unit requires its own meter, and that is due to the possibility in the future of those units being sold separately. And then in that case, the new owner of that dwelling unit would be on the same meter as their neighbor. >> And that's a change that y'all made recently is that. >> It is part of the outcome of the of the home work that allows that future state where those two dwelling units could be [11:13:41 AM] two dwelling units could be owned separately. >> Okay. Is there. I'm all for planning for the future. And I think that what you're doing makes it. There's a it's a rational decision you've made. I'm just trying to think on if we have $75,000 in fees and 20,000 is because of a new water meter, and if I'm, you know, this homeowner and I create this problem for myself with a single tap, right? I just want to add an Adu. Is there. Is there an equally rational argument to be said that when if I want to sell the Adu later, then that's then I'm going to need to get a new meter I'm going to have. That's an expense I'm gonna have to take upon myself. But maybe that doesn't happen. And so this is a way to reduce costs a little bit. And, and you know, it's every little bit here and there. I'm not saying it's all Austin water, but. >> The we have Joseph Gonzalez, [11:14:42 AM] water, but. >> The we have Joseph Gonzalez, our chief financial officer, may be able to speak to the level of fees that it actually is okay. But I will say that we don't have a good mechanism when that property is subdivided and sold to enforce installing a meter and its own meter at that time. >> Okay. >> Good morning. Joseph Gonzalez Austin water chief financial officer you know, for a 5/8 meter, which is our smallest meter, the tap fee is approximately $7,400. You know, certainly there are some some other fees, some plan review fees. But I think all told and I'd have to look and get the exact number, but the, the cost of, you know, an Adu would, with its own meter would, would be [11:15:42 AM] its own meter would, would be serviced by our smallest meter, our 5/8 inch meter. And so I think all told, we're looking more in the $10,000 range. But I'd have to validate all of the other fees associated. Okay. >> All right. Well, you know that that is a policy choice we have made. And so I'm just as we look through these fee questions, it's you know, like I said, I think it's a rational choice. But just balancing everything. We have to decide whether or not where that fits into the overall cost structure. So I appreciate the that information. That's very helpful. >> I would offer also that we've we've recently had some escalations within Austin water for residents of Austin who are dependent onir neighbors meter and the legal cost of for disputes associated with that situation is significant for the resident of that Adu. >> Is there any and this might be a much longer term question, but is there any kind of middle [11:16:43 AM] but is there any kind of middle ground where you say, we don't have to go through this whole legal dispute, you you are entitled to get a new meter, your meter, if you want, but we're not going to force it upon you on the front end. >> The I think we could have a really robust discussion around those various scenarios and what that could look like. I would offer for consideration that the sometimes it's a homeowner that's building an Adu, sometimes it's a developer that's building multiple dwelling units on on one property. And those individuals aren't always thinking about the long term consequences of, of the choices that they're making on the front end and that that is that's part of what you all have charged us to do. >> Yeah, I appreciate that. Just two more questions. One of them for transportation public works about the sidewalk question or conversation we've been having. [11:17:43 AM] conversation we've been having. There. We are. So looking at your chart, the you have 34.5 million planned for fiscal year 26. What is your capacity to do more? If we were to add additional money for additional sidewalks, do you have the personnel to do more or are y'all kind of maxed out in your work? >> Councilmember. >> Thank you for your question. Council member I would say our capacity was utilized in the prior year, fy 25 when we. Our spend was right at 39.3 million. We forecasted about 80 million back in 2020 over six years. So that's around the 30 to 40 [11:18:46 AM] that's around the 30 to 40 million per year. >> Okay, okay. >> That is it on that. And then my last question is related to watershed protection. And Carrie might just be able to answer this question. The 25 million in fiscal year 26. Did I hear you correctly that that's primarily just coming from the duff. That's not bond dollars. I see director morales to see. >> That is their operating budget. So that will be coming from the duff. >> Okay. So none of that fiscal year 26 flood control is coming from bond programs or correct. Okay. And director morales, do you have do you guys kind of keep like a list of whether it's [11:19:48 AM] keep like a list of whether it's I assume you probably do as you look to the next bond, but like, here are the next projects up when the funding becomes available. >> Yes. Councilmember Jorge morales, watershed protection department, we have a strategic plan that we based on to prioritize our various types of projects. And we do have lists that we go off of. But as you know that we also react when there's events. And so some of that's incorporatednto our operation budget. But going back to your question, as we're going through the bond process right now, we definitely are putting together a list citywide and by district as well. >> Okay. All right. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember vela, mayor pro tem. >> Director morales, I got a quick one for you. And then actually, I'd like to return to the submetering discussion that that council member alter brought up both with Austin water and Austin energy. We added if and please correct me if I'm wrong, director morales, but we added an additional creek cleaning crew in the budget with the last year's budget two [11:20:48 AM] the last year's budget two years ago. Budget. Do you remember that? >> That's correct, council member. But that was created a couple of years ago by councilmember Paige Ellis requested that. And that's actually funded by the clean community fee. And it's housed in the Austin resource recovery department. >> Okay. That that would be the crews that go through and essentially kind of keep the creeks clear of, of debris, fallen trees, those kinds of things like that. >> Well, the primary task is to keep the creeks clean, but that's one of many components. Our department has operations staff that do that on a daily basis as well. So when we have cleanup, we work with contractors, but we also have crews that do that as well. So and resource recovery has that particular crew that responds and we coordinate with them on that. >> Great. How how are you how are we feeling about the creek maintenance budget? You know, since we added that additional crew and I asked this in the context of the obviously the recent floods. And again, there's always going to be recent floods, like every five years, we're going to be talking about the most recent recent [11:21:49 AM] about the most recent recent floods. How are we feeling about the condition of the creeks and in terms of making sure that water is able to flow and that, you know, homes aren't, aren't, aren't flooded? >> That's a great question, council member. It's a complex answer, I think, but I'll keep it simple. So the department's mission is to protect from the waterways. So many programs that we have directly addressed that obviously operation and maintenance, and we collaborate with other departments. And so there's different impacts to our waterways. As you know, homeless strategy office also has encampment cleanups, and we coordinate on that. So we tackle it in various ways through contracts through in-house and various departments assist with that. But our mission and our department is storms are coming forward. We go look at hotspots that we identify, and we make sure we keep our waterways clean. After a storm event, we actually go and respond to debris cleanup as well. And depending on the event being a storm event or winter event, there's different ways that we tackle that throughout the city. >> All right. Well I appreciate that. And you know, I was I was happy to see the initiative to add additional resources to the [11:22:49 AM] add additional resources to the creek maintenance and cleanup. I think that's that's a critically important. And we'll just kind of continue to keep an eye on that. But that's one of those kind of sleeper items that that is critically important, that just kind of comes to the surface. Unfortunately, in emergency situations. But again, just to the extent that there are needs, I just want to make sure that we're we're meeting them. But thank you very much. That's all I've got for you. And can I get Austin water and Austin energy about the submetering in particular? I want to explore this. The cost associated with this because I think there's substantial. With regard to water directed. The tap fee was in the $7,400 range. >> That yes. Shea roalson Austin water. That's correct. >> And the tap fee that's not the physical equipment or the line or anything like that. That's just again, please [11:23:50 AM] That's just again, please correct me if I'm misunderstanding the process. That's just the permitting fee that someone pays to tap into the Austin water system. >> Again. Joseph Gonzalez Austin water. That's correct. That's the fee to essentially buy into the system. >> Okay. And what about for example, again let's take your a very typical example. In the city of Austin someone is building an Adu in the back of their house. Do you have a sense of what the cost would be? The additional cost would be in terms of the purchase of the meter, the extension of the water line, the permit fee and all that. What the cost would be to that homeowner who wants to add that additional housing unit in their backyard. >> We can get you a more detailed breakdown of what a typical cost would be. It certainly varies by depending on the site plan. The additional the additional dwelling unit [11:24:53 AM] the additional dwelling unit will need to be connected to the water system. Either way, whether it has a meter or not. And so it's really the either connection to the existing service line from the main to the property, or the connection to the main. That is, the additional cost for the for the additional dwelling. >> And I appreciate that distinction because what we want to know, again, I think as policymakers is what's the cost difference between connecting to the existing and connecting to the main and my sense of it? And again, I don't know this, but but just in, in kind of conversations that it's about a $20,000 cost difference. Does that sound realistic? >> We I we're going to get you some additional detailed information rather than speculate at this time. >> All right. And honestly same question to Austin energy. You know right now the policy is that you can either do a submeter where, you know, you kind of have one wire. And again, please correct me if I'm [11:25:54 AM] again, please correct me if I'm wrong. This is not my area of expertise. I'm just trying to understand it better. But you know, you can have one kind of connection to the electric grid and then, you know, go run two houses off of that same connection. Or you can basically have kind of two separate meters with kind of two separate connections for the house. Is that the, the, the current policy right now with regard to Austin energy. >> The current policy is if you have two separate residences at different addresses, you need two different service points with two different Austin energy meters. A lot of that is for billing purposes, but also if you have another residence and they need access to customer assistance program or any kind of other bill assistance getting access to those programs, somebody has to be the customer of record for that address. And when if you have multiple addresses under that same service point, it gets complicated there. So current [11:26:56 AM] complicated there. So current code, if you have two different addresses, you have to have two different Austin energy points of service and Austin energy meters. >> Okay. And how is that the current policy. And that has been the current policy for a length of time. >> I believe. So we still have some legacy apartment complexes that might be master metered and submetered. We might have some apartment complexes where it's all bills included that are actually commercial customers, and those customers aren't paying separate utility bills. But in terms of if you have different residences, you know, different addresses, rather than, you know, a different unit within an apartment complex or something like that, you would need separate meters. >> Got it. And then, you know, again, thinking about that same example, if you've got, you know, again, homeowner building an additional unit in the back of their home, if they don't get a new address and they're all working off one meter, versus if [11:27:56 AM] working off one meter, versus if they do get a new address, and then they're required to install the two meters, what's the cost difference to that? That person that's adding the home in in in their backyard. >> We can we can look at that. I think, you know, part of it involves their electric service panel, you know, on their side how much howh can their service panel handle at that point? Do they need a separate service panel on that separate address, what the configuration is, what the you know, what the certain characteristics are of that electric service is another transformer required, because everything that we do in terms of our fees, a lot of the time will call it a line extension fee. But really what it is dollar for dollar. If you need a new transformer for your new residence, or if you need a new pole installed that's at cost. So each year in the budget procs,s, we're going to look at all of our costs and in terms of our fees to make sure we're recovering 100% of the cost. So [11:28:56 AM] recovering 100% of the cost. So those are set at cost. If they weren't set at cost, the rest of our customers would be subsidizing that through electric rates, because we would have to recover those costs from somewhere. And so by having that 100% cost recovery policy that the city has had for quite some time, it allows us to avoid rate increases that would subsidize new development. >> And so I want to follow up on that. But what would be the to use the water, the tap fee for Austin energy. Again, I don't know what you would call it exactly, but you know, you know, the fee to. >> Extension fee. >> What is that? >> It's set at cost. So it's going to be different if we need to run, if we need to install multiple new poles to get to you and a new transformer if you have already, if you have a vacant lot, for example, with three houses that are currently being served by transformer, maybe the existing infrastructure doesn't need to be upgraded at all, and you would just need to install your electrical equipment and pay for the meter. So it's going to be it's going to vary, but it's [11:29:59 AM] it's going to vary, but it's always going to be set at cost. >> Is there a permit fee attached with that. You know line extension request. >> The permits would be separate from this. Would this would be cost. We would be collecting through the design process where we're designing how we're going to get power to that customer, and then the infrastructure that's required to get it there. And then what we recently looked at was the typical fees that would be associated with new development, for example, infill development and what the increases would be year over year for the those kinds of fees that you're talking about for reviews, for site plan for Austin energy, that looks like about an increase of $175 year over year. >> But again, what is do we know what the fee is? Theermit fee, not the actual physical cost of Austin energy to, you know, put the new pole and the new wires and all that kind of stuff like that. But the permitting fee for requesting a new, new, basically service address, right? [11:30:59 AM] service address, right? >> Right. >> Is that a question? >> Yes. Okay. I think that would be a dsd question. >> Okay. I'll follow up on that with dsd in just a second. But with regard to the new transformers, you know, one of the things again, these are just anecdotes that that that we hear from different folks in the process. But you know, when someone is putting in a new building, you know, again, infill development largely that we're talking about Greenfield development is a totally separate you know, obviously they have to install the infrastructure. So that's a completely and totally different situation. But there's this kind of game of. You know, roulette or honestly, musical chairs would probably be the better analogy where, you know, someone comes in and let's say they're going to let's say there's, you know, 12 houses on, on, on the block, you know, all connected to a transformer. And you come in and you're going to build like the 13th house on the block, but the transformer can't handle that capacity. They, you know, you're Austin energy would [11:32:01 AM] know, you're Austin energy would need to upgrade that capacity. That last person that kind of comes onto that block is then required to upgrade the transformer so as to be able to supply the proper electricity to the entire kind of service area of, of that transformer. Is that the current kind of process that we follow? >> Yes. If, if, you know, but for this, this addition, that investment wouldn't be required. So that that cost has to be borne by somebody. And we can't go back to the others who are, you know, the existing customers and collect the cost from them. So but for that, in your example, 13th customer coming online, that that would not be an investment that in the system that would have to be made. And the current policy is for full cost recovery. >> And so in that scenario, what would full cost recovery look like again, for a small scale infill development where someone [11:33:02 AM] infill development where someone is a straw that breaks the camel's back and you're like, oh, we got to upgrade the entire kind of connection. What what kind of costs are we talking about for that last person? >> It's really, you know, the it typically a transformer and a and your typical residential area can serve for customers. You typically see it on a pole at the front of the street. And then you would see the forest service drops going down to the for homes immediately proximate to that pole. In certain cases, if we need to upgrade or add another transformer to get, let's say they're building two houses in the back of one of those. For now, we have six that we can't feed off of that one transformer. So we'd either need to go to a second 25 kva transformer or add a 50, replace it with a 50. And so that's typically what it looks like. And we'd be talking about a cost of $2,500, something like that. >> For the transformer. >> Correct. >> That's not what I understand from the I mean, the anecdotes [11:34:02 AM] from the I mean, the anecdotes that I've heard have been much higher than that. Would that include the transformer and kind of the additional work and line that would be required? Because, again, the, the, the what I would hear, would that be it would be more in line kind of with the $20,000 that, that that cost of the new water meter for a house. Do you have any sense. >> That that might be referring to the all in cost? So we can look at specific examples. But, you know, ultimately they're going to need not just the transformer. They're going to need to go through the design process. There may be some limitations on how to get service to that customer. There may be challenges in terms of routing. They could be in an area that's underground. So there may be underground service. It's always going to be set at cost. And those costs are going to vary substantially from project to project. >> So I'd really like to understand a better on that because we I want to make sure [11:35:03 AM] because we I want to make sure we're pushing in the same direction here. You know, we have taken a lot of steps to try and make infill housing more affordable. And when we add a bunch of infrastructure costs and permitting costs and whatnot onto those individual properties, I just feel like we're erasing a lot of the gains that that we've recently made in terms of bringing down the cost of housing. So, for example, on the on the sub metering, I can't support the requirement of submetering for every single water. Again, I understand that there may be situations the road when someone does a, you know, a home, a three unit home project on a property and later on is going to sell. But I mean, folks can work that out. There are condo agreements. That's how they've been doing it recently, where there's an agreement to share all of the fees there, you know, access agreements that people have, where they have a shared driveway between the two properties along the property line. Again, these are not kind of new problems in real estate development. We've been dealing [11:36:03 AM] development. We've been dealing with these in relatively reasonable ways for a long, long time. So. And that's about all I got to thank all the other council members for answering the questions, because I think they hit every question that I had. So I'll stop it there. >> Great. Thank you. Council member, mayor pro tem, and then I'll have some. I'll call on myself. And then I only have one person that has signed up for a second round of questions. If anybody wants to do that, let me know. Mayor pro tem, you have the floor. >> Thank you. This question is for director bedollo with the airport colleagues. I wanted to highlight for you an area of interest for our office in exploring and ensuring that we're able to deliver on our airport expansion program. One key area that we've honed in on is around fees on private aircraft and corporate jets. And taking a look at how are we assessing fees on private raft and seeing that there is an opportunity there for us to explore, and adding new [11:37:04 AM] to explore, and adding new revenue to our airport, as well as ensuring that we're being equitable in how we assess fees throughout the airport. So, director badawi, can you please speak to the proposal around fees and considerations that you and your team are making in the weeks ahead? >> Good morning, badawi aviation. Thank you. Council member, for the for the question regarding the general aviation fees. We we're planning a comprehensive review of all the general aviation fees. It's included in our fy 26 plan. We our highest priority, has been focused on negotiations with the airlines and cargo airlines to secure the funding for our expansion program. Currently, we are charging general aviation fees, but I would like to just clarify all the fees that we collect from landing fees or general aviation fees. They go to what we call a cost center. So all our revenue is broken down to cost centers. We have airfield cost center, terminal cost center, the landside cost [11:38:05 AM] cost center, the landside cost center and cost center. So all the fees generated from landing fees or the fuel flow fees will go to offset that cost center. We cannot use them to fund the expansion program. So any additional general aviation fees that we generate, we cannot use them, for example, to fund roadways or to fund the garage through the new lease and use agreement, our airlines will be investing billions of dollars in funding the expansion, and that's how we will be funding the expansion. But it's in our work plan. We will do the benchmarking and review and come back to council with the results. >> Thank you, director badawi, and for our city attorney, I would like to have a specialized session on this portion of fees coming revenues and generated revenues generated from our airport and our ability to assess them and where that may go as part of the airport expansion program. But but I just want to circle back to the fees that our airport is considering. And I had hoped [11:39:06 AM] considering. And I had hoped that we would have had a dedicated slide or a session just talking about airport operations and our airport budget in general. But since we have you here, you know, one area that is also interest to me and my team is acknowledging that we have some really high volume, high traffic events in our city, formula one south by southwest acl. With that activity, we see an increased amount of private jets coming in and out of Austin airport. I what from the research we've done, we see that other municipalities are able to do surcharges for these high volume events and assess an additional charge during those weekends. That is another area that we are exploring. >> Yes, we will be looking into all the fees holistically, all the general aviation fees, and will benchmark with other airports. We charged special fees in the past for, for example, for events like formula one. >> Very good. So I just wanted to highlight as an area of interest, I will be bringing forward a budget rider related to airport fees for [11:40:06 AM] to airport fees for consideration of the full dais. And then last question for you, director badawi. The on the enhancements list, there was a item for the airport on funding a permanent ramp control system. And I just wanted you to speak to that. >> Yes, that's an operational enhancement. We brought a contract to council for 45 million to implement and install the permanent solution. Currently, we are managing ramp control using just existing cameras at the airport. This solution will design, construct and install specialized cameras for ramp control. And this is an enhancement to the safety and operation of our ramp. >> And it's an enhancement that is funded and is not needing additional funding. >> Correct. >> Okay. Just wanted to flag that for everyone's consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> No further questions. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem. No, no, I think we're all done. I've got a couple of questions. And, Mr. Gray, you might want to come down and just be part of this, [11:41:07 AM] down and just be part of this, but I'm not sure. I'm not sure. Miss Lang, the other day, Mr. Gray got a question about where where in the alternatives that you you all had provided through the manager's office had provided the where the plan that the homeless strategy office had put forward where that plan and the way he answered it is he said it became actualized at $0.05. So you've offered a number of alternatives $0.01, two cent, three cent, four cent, five cent and on and he was asked a question by the mayor pro tem and his answer was that the full plan becomes actualized at $0.05. And the I want to be clear on the reason that is, and that is because you can actualize that plan at a lower number. It's just that in the alternatives you provided, you [11:42:08 AM] alternatives you provided, you provided things other than just the homeless strategy office plan, right? >> Yes. Correct. >> So the homeless strategy office plan becomes actualized at five. Your five cent scenario, because it's about a 45,000,040, a little over $45 million item. And that's where the full $45 million gets played out is at the five cent alternative. Right? >> Correct. >> So if we wanted to look at it at a different alternative, say a lower alternative at 45 million. And since each penny counts gets us about 21.6 million, you could almost fully actualize that plan at $0.02. But it would leave no opportunity for other items. Is that correct? >> Yes, that is correct. [11:43:11 AM] >> Yes, that is correct. >> So if we wanted to as a as a council, look at fully actualizing. David gray, the Jesus plan, not fully actualizing David gray. The way I realize that question sounded weird as it came out of my mouth. We'll we'll talk about that another time. But if we wanted to fully actualize the plan that he has, has worked on, presented to a joint committee of the public health and audit and finance and the whole council. If we wanted to at $0.03 at the in your we could put that into the three cent plan and that would still leave about a penny available for other things. Correct. >> Yes. >> And one of the ways to make that penny go further for services is right now, you put about a penny aside for [11:44:12 AM] about a penny aside for reserves. Is that right? >> Correct. >> So if we wanted to have make that penny go further as it applies to services as oppos to something like reserves, we could utilize that penny for those services even at $0.03 instead of reserves. >> You could, however, in addressing the reserves, we are also addressing the existing deficit that we're seeing in our base rate. >> No, I understand what you're attempting to do with the way you have done those alternatives. I'm just pointing out that that another use of that penny could be for other services, and that would be one of the if that's what we decided we wanted to do. And my understanding is that that would put the reserves at a 15.8%. Is that correct? If we were to reduce the amount that would go [11:45:14 AM] reduce the amount that would go into reserves. Or you may not know that I may have done the math on that. That may be my math and not yours. >> I think 15.8% is the reserve in the proposed budget. So if you if you levied additional tax and made no change to the reserves, that's where you'd end up. >> That's okay. That's that's what I thought. Okay. Very good. Thank you. My questions have been answered with regard to AFD. And the housing trust fund was also brought up. I was going to bring those up as items as well. So with that, thank you. I'll now turn to council member Laine. We'll start the second round of this. >> Thank you. I've just got a couple follow up questions in new areas Austin energy. Thank you. So one of the significant line item changes that I saw was an expenditure of $500,000 for consulting services to support [11:46:14 AM] consulting services to support the implementation of resource generation and climate protection plan. Can you describe what deliverables we're expecting to receive from this $500,000? >> I'm going to ask Austin energy chief operating officer Lisa martin to come up and respond to that. She might be more familiar with the details. >> Plus, she's felt like she's been left out. >> She has, she has. So. >> Good morning. Council member Lisa martin, Austin energy chief operating officer so that line item, as you know, the resource generation and climate protection plan that was adopted last December has a lot of different components to it. And so that line item is for kind of any one of those that might need some additional services to make sure that we're not caught off guard, if you will. The ones that I'm thinking of most readily in the next fiscal year would be the all resource rfp. Now that we have some battery storage underway, we'll need to do an all resource rfp to see what can we do to get some additional local generation and to be able to analyze the difference alternatives between [11:47:14 AM] difference alternatives between solar offers, battery offers, and new, more efficient Peaker offers. >> Just a follow up question. Austin energy is innovative, runs amazing programs in many ways. Many of you have heard me speak about also the importance of reliability. Resilience in my district and in many other districts around the city. Have you looked at can you provide any information now or as follow up about the trend line on our spending on reliability and resilience versus some of the other innovative programs that we do? Are we increasing that as a percentage of our budget or decreasing or. >> You? Stewart Riley interim general manager so this year, year over year from last year, we're not increasing that. We do still have $10 million dedicated to resilience projects. That [11:48:17 AM] to resilience projects. That would be some of the overhead hardening type of work. But in addition to that we every we've been increasing our vegetation management spend. We have other initiatives that aren't specific to. And that's over $30 million a year on vegetation management. So we have a lot of other projects and initiatives underway that that move the needle on it that aren't necessarily just in that bucket of overhead hardening resilience projects, which is that 10 million. But during the five year cip plan that is going up. So eventually that that's why I cited earlier the 75 million over the five year period. So that is going to be going up. And then we anticipate it will go up more after we've got our comprehensive resilience plan. >> Okay. So as we've discussed the vegetation trimming, vegetation management hasn't made it around to all parts of the city since Yuri. And we have helped together to resolve some [11:49:17 AM] helped together to resolve some of the issues that impact schools. But it's part of the reason why I'm asking what the trend is, because the amount of time it's tg us to get through some of these reliability and resilience projects, I just want to ensure that we're providing the basic level of service appropriately before spending more on more innovative things. >> Got it. Yeah, absolutely. And it is one of the, I guess, one of the bottlenecks that we've had in terms of not being able to make more progress more quickly on vegetation management, is our contractors limited availability of finding qualified TRE trimmers who can trim around power lines. And so we've been working with those vendors to help them create job training programs and recruit more employees, and really taking more of a hands on approach with them to try to get the staffing levels up to where we would like so that we can be making more progress on that, and we will continue making the full cycle. [11:50:17 AM] full cycle. >> That's great. I have some ideas in relatio what you just said that I'll share later. Thank you, thank you. I want to thank council member alter and vela for the submetering metering discussion. As a former multifamily housing specialist in the Austin market for a decade, I will say that in my experience, it's far more common to see not submetered when it's water and wastewater than electricity. I thought you gave a great explanation of how that becomes necessary at addressing when there are separate addresses, but I also, and I don't know if Shea will want to say anything else after I make this comment, but I also think that one it's more common to see not submeter units. And you mentioned as one of the leading reasons why you would require a tap fee is because if in the future this is sold separately, and I just want to put out there for discussion where y'all who [11:51:17 AM] for discussion where y'all who have been deeply engaged can hear and we know that this is at play. Perhaps we could consider a trigger for it that relates to whether it's legally possible to sell a separate units, because the subdivision process is costly. Developing a condo regime is costly. Those are the two mechanisms by which they could be sold separately. And if the property owner hasn't contemplated that, to add on water tap fees for something that legally can't happen could be probably. Maybe not where we want to add fees. And as a final note, where we do ten to see not submarine metering of water and wastewater is in more affordable housing types as this is one. >> We do have exception. Thank you. Council member Shea roalson Austin water. We do have an exception protocol in place that we look at individual development scenarios on a case by case basis. And so to your point, if it's not possible to subdivide it in the future, that, you know, that would be something that we would look at. [11:52:18 AM] something that we would look at. I will also say, as it relates to the overall cost, particularly in infill development where new the new development will have more water fixtures, more people living there, a higher level of water use, the existing infrastructure on the private side, you know, the public side service line, the private side service line, the existing meter is likely undersized to serve that new development. And so that cost is needed regardless of whether we place a new meter. And so the actual meter cost is a limited addition to the overall cost of infill development. When it comes to if you're going to have a bunch more bathrooms and other kitchen or two, then you will need to upsize the service line. Regardless of whether or not you have a you need a separate meter. So we have we do review these applications on a case by case basis to make sure that [11:53:18 AM] case basis to make sure that what is installed is no more and no less than what's required to serve that new development. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Transportation and public works. We have a question on sidewalk. So those were some I'm just going to lay it out while you're walking up. Those were some stunning figures of a goal of 80% functionally acceptable, acceptable sidewalks. We started three years ago at 25% of that goal. We're now at 45 to 50. That means there's a lot that hasn't been constructed yet. I am looking at the detailed spending plan. And, you know, I noticed that in our capital spending, we are providing for building sidewalks that were planned many years ago before a lot of new growth that's already on the ground in apartments is in place and needs have changed. So I, I'm wondering if the way that we're looking at funding, this is our next steps which [11:54:19 AM] this is our next steps which would put out into the future with the next bond. But we know that there's such a shortfall, and we know there's no guarantee that a bond will pass, nor a TRE, you know, nor anything necessarily. But the bond would be the one that comes up last. So I am wondering why in the trees scenarios, we're not seeing a proposal that would help to help us with that gap, that funding gap in both time and money. >> Thank you. Council member. Yeah, historically, we've utilized referendums to pay for capital and new construction. And our operating budget to address the needed deferred maintenance and major repairs. We do some new construction, like with fee and lieu related to development. And I named the grants also, but we've not historically paid as we go [11:55:19 AM] historically paid as we go capital out of our annual operating budget just because the repair needs are also a demand on that operating budget. >> Absolutely. Demand we hear on almost every meeting about needs. Just thinking of palmer all the way from dessau and northeast Austin and to the to the far boundary and to cedar park. I am just wondering if we may want to consider more allocation that's certain for construction of sidewalks. We had a speaker who very well summarized all the different ways that this relates to Austin's goals, from equity to transportation to quality of life and spending time with families. >> Certainly something that we can explore for a little bit of context on our annual operating budget for fy 26, we have 8.4 proposed for maintenance. That represents a three fold increase [11:56:20 AM] represents a three fold increase since 2020. Funding and eight time increase since 2016, when the original major mobility referendum was passed for new sidewalks and our sidewalk network. So we have been increasing over time. But of course, balancing that with all the other needs and our mobility network ongoing. >> And with our new financial reality, where we're constrained on revenue in certain ways and we have to go to election for the TRE and then the bond, it just I'm opening that up may be a time to look at building in that progress a little more deliberately before the bonds. So thank you. Thank that's it for tp. I have, I have a comment that I'd like to make about fire staffing. I don't I don't think I'll need you, but just in case you know, we all here care about the safety and security of our constituents, our firefighters. And I just want to really recognize that a [11:57:20 AM] want to really recognize that a lot of time and energy went into identifying before I ever arrived here, a fire leadership team that has significant experience. And I think it's important for M to rely on what they're telling me. Is the mechanism available that would have the least cost to safety and delivery of these fire services and the management tools that they need. And it is quite striking that you have shared information with us about how you have fewer tools as a manager than many other many cities. And so I want to thank you for your statement on that. I guess I do have a question, so I'm glad you came forward. I, I'm thinking of councilmember eagles questions and comments relating to the upcoming contract negotiations. And so and I heard you, chief baker, say very clearly that what you're looking for is an action [11:58:21 AM] you're looking for is an action by council on policy that will give you back a tool in your tool belt. For this, let's say that council does not act on that request. And then we are in the budget negotiations. To me, from what I understand of the process, what that would mean is we would have shifted from the ability to control overtime to we would be looking at cost savings for base salary or raises over the life of that contract if we wanted to find the savings in other way. Am I missing something, or is there another way that we could potentially handle these issues through the negotiations? >> Council member Laine I'm not sure I'm following your question, but since it's a cba related question, with the permission of the council, I. I refer to refer that question to the labor relations officer, officer or miss Rawson to handle that. >> Okay. >> If before we do that. Council member. [11:59:22 AM] member. >> That's my last question. >> Well, no, I'm not worried about time right now, but I'm worried about is having a discussion about collective bargaining and strategy related to collective bargaining and what might go into a collective bargaining strategy on the dais. >> Okay. >> Thank you. So if you don't mind, I'm gonna ask that that's. >> Given your. >> Maybe you withdraw your question so we don't get into that. >> I'm happy to revise and I appreciate that. >> Sure. >> And I. >> Think and I will allow us to end as well. >> So in that case there was a double whammy. So good. >> So I want to thank you for your clear statements of what your request is of this council. And note that we do are moving through a much longer process and hope that we give the tools that are needed and will help us all. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember vela. >> Thank you mayor. I just have a couple of follow up questions for dsd, actually. And with regard to the water usage and the need to submeter, I mean, when I think about it, per [12:00:25 PM] when I think about it, per capita water usage has gone down substantially. I mean, I think about my neighborhood. It was built in the 1950s, you know, with water infrastructure to in the 1950s, much higher family sizes, much higher water usage. I just I'm wondering, you know, how where the need is there. And I would also just I because my understanding is that most adus are on on one taps. Most ads the CI has built since we legalized them in that 2016. I would also just kind of wonder if there are if we've been seeing infrastructure problems for those homes that are going from single family to multi- family two units or something like that. If we've seen problems within, you know, single tap Adu residences. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Again, Shea roalson Austin water. I, I will get you better than anecdotal evidence of [12:01:27 PM] than anecdotal evidence of whether or not we're seeing problems with existing adus, but the one of the things that we do over in the course of our business is go out and run flow tests on the older infrastructure to determine if it can adequately serve the existing or proposed, you know, homes that would come off of that existing service line, you know, infrastructure that was built 60 years ago was built to different standards, different service level standards than we have today. Infrastructure itself, age is over time and becomes less reliable and needs to be replaced. And so when you have infill development in these areas that were built to different standards over many years ago and have aged over time, then you do see infrastructure that needs to be replaced. And certainly while per capita water use has gone down, when we bring in additional dwelling units on an existing lot, we do see overall [12:02:29 PM] existing lot, we do see overall water usage for that lot go up, of course. And so that's our our design standards today are designed to provide the service level that our customers expect and that meet industry standards. And that does require upgrading infrastructure. Again, regardless of whether or not we implement a second meter. And we do have exceptions for when a second meter is required. And that is related to water fixture counts and whether or not the second dwelling unit has a kitchen and other factors that we look at on a case by case basis with the applicant. >> So I appreciate that in my experience as an attorney, exceptions are difficult. More paperwork, more time, more effort. I think clear and simple rules are probably better than waivers and exceptions. >> We do. We do strive for clear [12:03:29 PM] >> We do. We do strive for clear and transparent, and we strive for moving through that process as quickly as we can. I would say that because these developments are so variable, every site is different. It's we strive to have rul that are clear and accessible and easy to understand. We also want to provide applicants the flexibility to demonstrate to us that their particular situation, you know, has its own particular needs. >> Thank you for the comments. >> Thank you. >> Director. The I know do we know what the dsd permit for the electrical drop? The discussion that I was having with. >> With Keith Myers development services department? Yes, we do. So a standalone permit fee. Let me let me just give you a [12:04:29 PM] me let me just give you a summary number, roughly about $300 for the electrical service application and then additional connection fees from Austin energy. >> Okay. So $300 from dsd plus whatever energy is charging. Okay. Got it. With regard, I just wanted to talk a little bit about the budget situation that that that dsd is under have we. What has the deficit. Because I know y'all have been pulling from your reserves for, I believe the last year or the last two years. And I was just wondering what that what those amounts were that we had to pull from the dsd reserves. >> Bear with us. Just a minute, council member. >> No problem. >> And as miss Lang is, is [12:05:34 PM] >> And as miss Lang is, is finding that I also wanted to ask because it's you know, I know you mentioned that in the presentation that some of the fees have been lowered, you know, others have been raised. Do we have a few questions? Do we have a kind of an apples to apples comparison? Again, I'm thinking about the home initiative just because this is a recent effort of this council. What would the fees look like pre the current increases and what would the fees look like post current increases. So we could have kind of that apples to apples comparison of someone that is going to do, you know 2 or 3 single family homes on a on a project. I don't know if y'all have that number, but it would be great to, to, to for our purposes to, to see something like that. >> Council member I have a great example for you. So the infill ordinance from earlier this year, also known as site plan lite part two, and that is where council focused on 5 to 16 units and reduce the regulatory [12:06:34 PM] and reduce the regulatory requirements while still safeguarding public interest, public safety. But streamlined regulations, right sized regulations. Dsd then took that action and said, okay, this is these are no longer the reviews that are required or these are the review times that are going to be shortened by no longer having these regulations. Those inputs went into how we determine cost of service. So from that change alone, we are looking at 5 to 16 unit site plan, all in cost for dsd, so that your permitting in your inspections going from $20,700 to $15,600. So roughly a $5,000 decrease in the permitting fees as a result of policy changes. >> From the site plan light perspective. >> That's correct. Also, as I mentioned earlier, that's also a reflection of dsd doing what all we can to control the cost in. >> Appreciate that very much. I would love to get that number. Also for your one, two and three house combination, which is now [12:07:36 PM] house combination, which is now our kind of by right ready to go. And honestly we're seeing quite a number of home developments go up. And again I very much appreciate that calculation. If we could also GE the same number for the home, those properties that are home type developments. And then the other thing that I would be very curious about is how our fees compare to other Texas cities. And I think that's always again, we hear these anecdotes about Austin has such high fees. I don't know that, you know, and I want to get out of anecdotes and I want to get some data because I think that's very important to the extent that our fees are much higher than our peer Texas cities. That's a that's a concern to the extent that we're more in line with them than that gives me a lot more comfort moving forward. >> So. >> Councilmember, we anticipate that question and are working that with our peers around the state. >> Great. Thank you very much. And that's all I had. [12:08:37 PM] And that's all I had. >> Thank you. Councilmember vela. >> Sorry, councilmember, just your earlier question about dsds dipping into reserves. They operated at a $21 million deficit in fy 24, and their fy 25 estimate is to be in a $10.6 million deficit. So that's a combined 31.7 million dip into the reserves over two years. >> Great. And are there any reserves left? >> There are not estimated to be any reserves left as of the close of this fiscal year. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember vela. >> Sorry, Mr. Mayor, I had a clarification for your earlier question. >> I was told that you. >> Did okay. Yeah, I mentioned levying a tax, but presumably you then appropriate those dollars. And if you did that, while the reserve balance was stayed the same, the percentage of ongoing expenditures that balance represents would decline. And so it would be about $65 million for three pennies if you appropriated that [12:09:38 PM] pennies if you appropriated that all and changed nothing else, you'd be down to a 15.1% reserve level. >> Okay. And we were talking that in the base budget is 15.77, right? >> That's correct. >> Good deal. All right. Thank you. Question on behalf of the council, with the number of questions that have been asked today, primarily, I would say of fire and water with regard to specific issues and questions that H come up. And I'll ask the financial staff, too, what would be the preference. Do you want council members that had questions to put those up on the q&a? Or can we rely on y'all just answering the questions and get and putting those up in the q&a in that way? What's the best way to get that out there? >> Staff will debrief and verify the questions that were not answered, and then respond to [12:10:39 PM] answered, and then respond to them through q&a. >> Everybody. Any objection to that? I think that's good. That's why I wanted to ask that question. All right. For the public primarily, but also members. Tomorrow we have a at 330, an audit and finance committee meeting where we will be talking about these issues. On July 31st. We have a meeting that begins at 9:00, and we will have a 3:00 public hearing also on. But it's one agenda item. So if you want to be part of the agenda, any part of the day, if you want to be part of the 9:00 day or the 3:00 day, you need to sign up in the ordinary course. The 3:00 is a time certain public hearing. So you need, but you need to sign up in advance. You will not be able to sign up on that day just before the hearing starts, as was suggested by by somebody previously. In addition, that is the day that [12:11:42 PM] addition, that is the day that the council will adopt a maximum tax rate under the state, so-called truth in taxation law. Again, I'm going to say it. I'll say it every chance I get. Probably what that does is it says this is the maximum tax rate that the council will consider in the budget. It is not the tax rate the council is adopting yet in the budget. That will happen when the council adopts a budget. However, with the community discussion and the council discussion related to a potential tax rate election, I anticipate and I'm I'll speak, I think fairly on behalf of everybody that the maximum tax rate the council will consider will be high enough to not preclude the council looking at a tax rate election and being able to come in and doing something less or equal to that, that maximum tax rate. But it is [12:12:42 PM] that maximum tax rate. But it is not passing a tax rate, it is simply setting the maximum. And I do anticipate the council will not want to cut off options on that day. On August 4th at 6:00. That is when we're requesting that amendment. Potential amendments and if will be will ask you to provide all of those so that everybody will have time to look at those. The way I anticipate this will work, folks, is that what we will do is we will take a motion, a base motion, and the base motion will be the proposed base budget, just to get a motion out there in front of the council. And then the amendments and things that amendments to that will be to the base proposed budget of the city manager. I see somebody wanting to do something else. [12:13:43 PM] wanting to do something else. Okay. That was a that's a hell of a process to internalize that anyway. Okay. So with that, that that's August 4th. On August 5th, we will probably have a special called meeting of the audit and finance committee to make sure we have now that we've been through a number of work sessions, it will have allowed us to, I think, be in a position to go through the decision TRE more completely with regard to needs and assessments, which is whathe decision TRE calls for. There's also scheduled on put on the schedule a potential work session. We may not use that work session. And I say that each time, but I want to remind everybody we'll make a decision about that at a different point. That will give everybody time to also look at the amendments and ifcs that might have been submitted the night before on August 4th, and it will give staff more time to look at fiscal notes with regard to those August 7th. We do have a [12:14:44 PM] those August 7th. We do have a work session. That will be when we also lay out those amendments and ifc, and so that we have clarity. And then of course, August 13th, August 14th and August 15th, we are scheduled for passage of the budget. If we need all three days to pass it on three separate days. Council, are there any questions or discussions to come? Any additional discussion for this work session? Well, hearing none without objection, we are adjourned from this Austin city council budget work session at 12:15 P.M. Thanks to our staff and thanks to the council members. Thanks, everybody.