City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 8/28/2025 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 8/28/2025 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 8/28/2025 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. [10:00:04 AM] You're watching a meeting of the Austin City Council Council members well good morning everybody. It's 10:00 in the morning on Thursday, August 28th, 2025, and I will call to order the [10:01:04 AM] and I will call to order the regular meeting of the Austin city council for this date. We have a quorum of the city council present, and we are going with the one absence we have is zo qadri council member zo qadri. And for those that didn't hear the announcement on Tuesday when I opened the work session, zo qadri is now daddy zo qadri and yeah, and so that is that is why he's not with us today. It's a fairly recent event, so we wish him great. Congratulations in the whole family. Good luck and happiness. A lot of love. With that being said, like I say, we have a quorum present. We are meeting in the Austin city council chambers, which are located in the Austin city hall at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. What we'll do today is shortly after I give you the roundup for the day. We will read. I'll read changes and corrections into the record. We will then go to our consent [10:02:05 AM] will then go to our consent agenda, and we will hear from our speakers on the consent agenda members. The only item that is pulled from the consent agenda that has not been withdrawn is item 102. Item 102 has been pulled. Previously, item 67 was pulled, but that item has been withdrawn. And I will read that into the record momentarily. We will then hear brief remarks and discussion or comments from council before we vote on the consent agenda at or near as close to 1030 as we can get. What we will also do is we will recess the Austin city council meeting, and we will call to order the Austin housing finance corporation board of directors meeting. We will conduct that meeting and then we will when we adjourn that we will come back to the Austin city council meeting. We will have our public hearings members. Those are one items 104 1051010 and 107. Item 106 is has been withdrawn. We will [10:03:06 AM] is has been withdrawn. We will have at noon our time certain public communications. I anticipate that what we will do is we will finish the public communication at noon around 1230 to 12, around 1230, and we will recess the Austin city council meeting. We will recess until about 110, but we will have our live music during that period of time. And then at 2:00, we have our zoning matters, and that is a time certain of 2:00. So we will do that as near 2:00 as we can. Members. With that, let me please, unless there are questions, let me please read into the record changes and corrections to the. Thursday, August 28th, 2025 agenda. The only changes and corrections are items 33, 34 and 67 are withdrawn. Items 33, 34 and 67 are withdrawn. For members of the public that are here, if you came because you wanted to talk about items 33, 34 or 67, [10:04:07 AM] talk about items 33, 34 or 67, those items have been withdrawn. So they were not will not be public comment because they're no longer on the agenda. So you need to know that. All right. With that members, unless there's objection or questions, we will go to the consent agenda and I will turn to the city clerk and ask that you please call the people that want to speak to us about that. >> We'll start with item three, bill bunch on deck with. For item seven, we'll have Stacy Schmidt, Katie Childers, Doug Driscoll, Travis Krogman, and Brittany Rodriguez. >> If your name's been called, please make your way forward. Feel free to take a seat and we'll call you back again and ask you to identify yourself and hear your testimony. Mr. [10:05:07 AM] and hear your testimony. Mr. Bunch. >> Good morning. Mayor. Council members, bill bunch, executive director, save our springs alliance, long time district five resident. I'm here to speak against this item, which calls for y'all to approve $260 million of certificates of obligation for the Austin water utility for various water, wastewater, and reuse projects. There's not proper notice here, neither the notice nor the backup lists, any of the projects that you would be funding with this $260 million. It's incredibly vague, just general categories that basically say water projects, sewer projects, reuse projects. That's not appropriate. You should have real information in your backup for yourselves and for the public, and you should have notice that complies with the Texas open meetings act, especially when you're issuing [10:06:08 AM] especially when you're issuing over $200 million of debt. Probably baked in here is a big chunk of money for the walnut creek wastewater treatment plant expansion project. As I've said many times before, this is a project that should be postponed for as long as possible and instead invest in water conservation so that we're generating less sewage to that plant or recycling it before it gets to that plant. We are failing miserably on our reuse efforts. Do y'all have any idea how little amount of our wastewater we're reusing and recycling is shameful. That's where the investment needs to go. Y'all need to wake up. Times are changing. Yeah, we had a big break in the drought, but that's temporary. If we hadn't have had that break, we would be in dire consequences. Yet you're spending hundreds, literally billions of dollars as if our water future will match our [10:07:10 AM] water future will match our water past. And we know the science tells us the experience of the last 20 years tells us it will not be the same as our past. Thank you. >> Mr. Name has been called. Please come forward. Just state your name for the record. >> Good morning. Mayor, mayor pro tem, city manager council. My name is Stacy Schmidt and I am representing more than 400 businesses and organizations in the Austin region who invest in the work that opportunity Austin does to drive our economic growth and our quality of life. I'm here to support item seven, the authorizes the airport to execute new use and lease agreements. These agreements will facilitate the needed expansion of our airports, infrastructure and infrastructure and elevate the city's profile as a premier travel destination. The airport has been a valuable partner in Austin's growth and will continue to play a critical [10:08:10 AM] continue to play a critical role in defining the economic climate coming decades. As the city reach expands to international domestic and we continue to grow, the long term commitments from the airlines signal that there is substantial investment value remaining in the Austin market. I also want to thank those airlines for investing in our market and believing in the growth and the leadership in this community by approving the proposed agreements. Today, you are demonstrating the same confidence in Austin's continued growth and viability, a frequent concern from many of us and from our visitors is that demand has outgrown capacity at the airport. These agreements are a key component of addressing that trend. They unlock funding for critical improvements and expansion and provide significant service upgrades by improving reliability, reducing delays and shortening wait times at terminals and other congested areas. From an economic development perspective, local [10:09:11 AM] development perspective, local companies rely on convenient, reliable air service to connect with clients, suppliers and partners, and companies considering relocating or expanding in Austin. Cite air connectivity is an essential component of a thriving business environment. This expansion ensures the airport can continue to drive job creation. >> Thank you. Speaker. >> Thank you, thank you. >> If your name has been called, please come to the microphone. >> Good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and city council members. My name is Katy Childers. I'm the director of state and local government affairs at delta airlines, and I'm here today to also speak in support of item number seven, the proposed airline use and lease agreements. These agreements take an important step in enabling austin-bergstrom international airport to meet central Texas's growing aviation demands through the airport expansion and development program. The proposed lease structure emphasizes operational sustainability, capital [10:10:11 AM] sustainability, capital investment, and our passengers experience. It creates a framework that supports Austin's growth in the city's long term planning goals. At the same time, delta is proud to be expanding our operations at Austin. Last Friday, we announced three new nonstop routes to Denver, Columbus and Kansas City, along with increased daily flights to San Francisco and Indianapolis. With these new routes, delta now serves nearly 30 destinations from Austin. In October, we will also open a flight attendant base in Austin to support these operations and strengthen our local presence. We appreciate the airport's work in the city's work on this item, and look forward to supporting the continued development of Austin as the key gateway for central Texas. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. If your name has been called, please come forward and take a seat. That way we'll know you're here and want to talk to us. >> Hi. Good morning. Good morning. Mayor, mayor pro tem council members. My name is Doug Driscoll. I chair the aviation task force with opportunity Austin, also working with the chamber. I [10:11:12 AM] working with the chamber. I just want to reiterate a couple of points that have already been made. And in speaking here today on behalf of my role representing item seven, we are definitely for that authorization and step, not just for expanding the size of the airport, but also for giving airlines the opportunity to make their commitments and investments. And we are super appreciative of the airlines that service our city and central Texas and give us the opportunities and the and frankly, the access for both the business community and the tourism community to places all across the us, but also the world, these airlines and the airport need certainty. And I think we can all realize that they're making significant investments in the city of Austin, but also our airlines are committed and willing to make significant investments in this city to expand service. But they need the opportunity to have that certainty through the airline use agreements. And so we're asking for your [10:12:13 AM] so we're asking for your support in allowing those to move forward. I do want to thank the city council. Mayor, I know all of you have been extremely supportive of the airport and the airport expansion and allowing the airport to do its job to work with the airlines to create the opportunities for these long term agreements, as well as to keep the construction. Construction schedule on plan is critical to all of us who make use of the airport itself. So in closing, I just want to thank you. I want to send ask for your vote and send a clear message to airlines that we are invested and committed to the long term success for all of us. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Travis Krugman. I'm here with the Austin chamber of commerce on behalf of our businesses all across central Texas. And I'm pleased to speak in support of the airline use and lease agreement before you today. For [10:13:13 AM] agreement before you today. For local businesses, reliable air service is essential. Companies depend on on our airport to connect with clients, suppliers and partners. Air connectivity is also one of the first things that companies ask about when they're considering, considering, moving or expanding to central Texas. More flights and destinations will help our employers attract top talent, open new markets, and keep our economy competitive. Comparatively, our airport is just as important for our visitor and tourism economy. Millions of people travel through us every single year, supporting our hotels, our restaurants and our small businesses. With aws's expansion, Austin will be better positioned to host major events, conferences and festivals, all of which strengthen our brand as a premier destination for both businesses and leisure travel. This agreement also reflects strong airline confidence in Austin. Long term commitments from carriers show that our market is worthy of sustained investment and helps promote our region as a premier [10:14:15 AM] our region as a premier location for economic development. Lastly, we really appreciate the aws has engaged stakeholders throughout this entire process, including the Austin chamber and many of our businesses, to make sure that this agreement aligns with the needs of Austin's growing economy. The investment supported by this agreement will create thousands of jobs in construction and beyond, while setting us up for safe and efficient service for decades to come. Thank you for your leadership on this issue. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you this morning. >> Thank you, thank you. >> Good morning, Mr. Mayor. Mr. City manager, mayor pro tem and esteemed council members. My name is Brittany Rodriguez. I serve as chief operating officer with the greater Austin hispanic chamber of commerce. But I represent the diversity ethnic chamber alliance today in representation of the black, Asian, lgbt and hispanic chambers of commerce. We are [10:15:15 AM] chambers of commerce. We are here in support of item number seven, the expansion with the airport. In short, folks, we couldn't be more thrilled to support this incredibly important initiative welcoming close coordination between our airport, airlines and more specifically, our community partners. I represent a combined more than 12,000 members represented by the four chambers, and we couldn't be more pleased to consider the opportunity that is before us to consider expansion and economic development opportunity that is promised for this city. Through this opportunity, aws has spent substantial time meeting with our organization's members and the wider community to educate and learn the community and teach the community regarding what the opportunities are and the opportunities that exist, whether through workforce development or economic development and connectivity, through intentionality and deep connection to the community, they have vested themselves as dear partners that have worked tirelessly alongside us to engage communities that have [10:16:15 AM] engage communities that have long been left behind in these pivotal and critical conversations. These agreements unlock funding for future critical improvements and expansion in Austin, further proving the importance of the economic standpoint that Austin represents in the great state of Texas. We are absolutely the place where work can be done, work can be expanded, and the nation is looking at us for that. We are incredibly grateful and fortunate to consider this opportunity. Aws is a regional asset that powers job growth, trade, tourism and investment throughout central Texas. The expansion program is supported by. These agreements will create thousands of jobs in construction and beyond, and a modern airport strengthens the entire regional economy from lost to Leander. >> Thank you. Thank you for being here. >> Moving on to item eight, we have Jennifer Robishaw. Jennifer, are you with us? >> One moment. Sorry. So good [10:17:15 AM] >> One moment. Sorry. So good morning, city council, this is Jen Robicheaux. I'm a resident of district two, and I am just an ordinary citizen. I'm a wife, a mom, a homeschool teacher, a homeowner. I have called Austin home for over 20 years. My husband was raised here. We've both built businesses here. We've helped other businesses grow their businesses here. Our children were born here. We really love this city and we want it to stay a place where families thrive, where kids can grow up to chase their dreams, and where people travel here to enjoy its natural beauty and creative energy. I take time for my busy life to research these agendas because I deeply care about our city's future. I've spent over ten hours informing myself on this agenda alone, and I fear that if people like me don't speak up, we won't recognize Austin in a decade. So I do have some concerns about item eight. We've got a $22 million marketing plan to attract travelers to Austin, and this [10:18:15 AM] travelers to Austin, and this is a lot of money for ads, and residents face real issues. I do, of course, understand why we are prioritizing tourism. It's a huge revenue source for the city and it's a big part of our culture. But between the pages of glossy marketing, I am worried that we're going to lose sight of the reasons why people aren't visiting Austin. Things like public safety and transportation are taxpayers. We keep seeing rising property taxes. And, you know, we have to wonder why we're spending money on marketing campaigns. But then instead of just fixing what's broken in the city, I do believe that a safe, well-maintained city will attract visitors naturally. And the actions that we take here are going to speak much louder than any ads that we can put out. So I know you all want what's best for Austin. I just have to ask when the stronger emphasis on safety and infrastructure make our city more appealing to everyone. So as you're looking through these marketing strategies, don't lose sight in the back of your mind. We need to focus on building a city that we're all [10:19:16 AM] building a city that we're all proud to call home. Thank you for your time. >> Next in-person on item eight we have bill bunch. >> Good morning. Mayor, council members, bill bunch, save our springs alliance district five and former tourism commissioner speaking against this $23 million budget for a visit Austin, which is our convention and visitors bureau. It really should be just called a convention bureau. The overwhelming amount of the spending in this plan is still for conventions, even though that brings almost nobody to Austin. And so I urge you to to deny it jaw droppingly stupid. That's the quote from professor [10:20:19 AM] That's the quote from professor Heywood Sanders in the documentary of Austin free press, the magic hole. You can watch that 19 minutes on the Austin united pac.com website or Austin free press website. It it spells out why this whole $5.6 billion venture that you're rushing forward on makes no sense, and is phenomenally wasteful and irresponsible. And that irresponsibility extends to this particular $24 million item for the budget for visit Austin. There's no due diligence here. That film is now getting around, and if you haven't seen the Houston chronicle from yesterday, Chris Tomlinson's column, he's the first statewide business columnist. Hearst now has the statesman, so you'll be seeing [10:21:21 AM] statesman, so you'll be seeing more from him. He has a big his headline column is about how five Texas cities are committing $10 billion for downtown convention center projects. The subtitle is only one mayor demands due diligence. Guess what? That's not our speaker. Please wake up and do something different. Thank you. >> Moving on to item 20, we have Jennifer Robishaw. Jennifer, are you with us? >> I am one moment. Sorry. >> It is me, Jennifer Robichaud again, district two resident. And I'm calling to speak on item 20, which is the proposed $310, $10,000 contract with the national center for farmworker health for a quality of life [10:22:22 AM] health for a quality of life study focused on immigrants and refugees. I value our shared goal of community well-being, but this plan raises concerns about fairness, cost, and priorities. First question is why does this study focus on only one group? Many residents, citizens, and long time locals of all backgrounds face homelessness, rising costs and service gaps? Doesn't equity mean helping everyone who's struggling, not just picking one demographic? The $310,000 price tag comes from our budget stabilization reserve, and that is a big chunk of limited funds for a study that we don't really have clear track record on, and it has a very limited community outreach. So it also begs the question, can we afford this when other essential services are going unmet? I just like you all to consider, could these funds better serve inclusive programs that help all residents? So I urge you all to table this project and focus on practical, fair solutions that lift up everyone. Thank you for your [10:23:23 AM] everyone. Thank you for your time. >> Moving to in-person. For item 20, we have Lauren Pena. Next item is item 23, bill bunch. >> Good morning. Council members minus the mayor bill bunch. District five save our springs alliance. Speaking against this item $2,329 million of which you only have 900,000 to approve. This is for five years of spending. I don't know why you would commit even slightly to 29 million when you only have 900,000 in the budget. This is for vegetation management. It's extremely [10:24:24 AM] management. It's extremely broad. Some of that, of course, is appropriate. Protecting our power lines, protecting structures, etcetera. But we there's a whole bunch of this money that is cutting down trees, burning forests that actually increases our wildflower risks is not scientifically sound and should be extracted from this spending budget. The whole effort needs to be revisited. We need to be managing our wildlands for water, not for cutting down trees and pursuit of some rangeland management vision that does not comport with increasing recharge, reducing flooding, increasing biodiversity and reducing urban heat islands. So please take a second look at this. Thank you for your consideration. [10:25:25 AM] for your consideration. >> Next speaker on item 27 is Carlos Leon. >> So, Carlos Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to item 27. Backup says delaying integrated library system contract approval will impact apple's services, processes and products. I say same for delaying a new director from outside APL, since former director Roosevelt weeks left almost a year ago, his protege Hanna Terrell has been interim director wrongly following his mislead, Terrell continues weeks his alleged insubordination and criminality by not complying with your rules for public use of city properties. Rule six H by issuing ktns banning patrons from all 20 library branches [10:26:26 AM] from all 20 library branches without legal authority, unconstitutionally denying the fundamental first amendment right to access information in person at the limited public forum public library. Though APL said on December 31st its Ken policy had been recently reviewed, updated and is awaiting sign off for finalization, Terrell still has not submitted a notice of proposed rule change to city clerk toward officially revising apple's rule 15 to comply with city, superseding rule six H, rightly limiting a Seaton to one library branch where the violation occurred. Therefore, in front of you now are the evidence based allegations of wrongdoing I filed this week with the city auditor to hold Terrell accountable, specifying Terrell's alleged violations of personnel policy and law, showing why she should not be director but should be fired, as well as criminally prosecuted with former director. Weeks make it happen. Have no fellowship with the unfruitful [10:27:29 AM] fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Ephesians chapter five, verse 11. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. >> Moving on to item 29, remote we have Jennifer Robishaw again. Jennifer, we have you on. We're going to keep you on the line because we have you as a speaker for three items in a row, okay. >> All right. Sounds great. >> Thank you. So this is Jen Robicheaux again, resident of district two. I'm going to talk right now about item 29, the proposed high speed internet contract for convention facilities, which includes the marshaling yard. So this plan sets aside up to $765,000 over five years, starting with $153,000 from the convention center budget to provide wi-fi in areas that are often used by people experiencing homelessness. I worry that providing high speed internet [10:28:30 AM] providing high speed internet at the marshaling yard will unintentionally support the homeless lifestyle, that it will hinder efforts to address homelessness effectively, and that will encourage people to stay on the streets. Addressing homelessness with compassion does not mean that we need to indulge people experiencing homelessness. Looking at this line item, are you confident that investing in high speed internet at the marshaling yards aligns with our community's goals? Don't we want to encourage people to lift themselves out of homelessness instead of finding ways to make it easier for them to stay homeless? With that in mind, I urge you to focus on wi-fi funding on areas that benefit tourists and residents broadly, but not on amenities that make it easier for people to stay on the street. Thank you. Regarding item 51, shall I move on? >> Yes. Please continue. Item 51. >> Okay, okay. >> Sounds good. And so this one is proposing $300,000 for the [10:29:31 AM] is proposing $300,000 for the homeless strategy reserve to spend on rapid rehousing services for immigrants. And I am concerned that this plan is prioritizing housing for immigrants, primarily because Austin already struggles with housing instability and we have scarce affordable housing options. Allocating these limited resources to newcomers over lifelong residents and Texans feels both unfair, and it risks drawing in more unhoused people to our city. This blends a combination of immigrant aid with homeless services, and I'm also worried that that raises questions about legality. I'm curious if you all have checked to see if this complies with Texas sb four, which restricts funding for undocumented immigrants, and does it comply with federal laws against harboring. I think transparency here is critical to make sure that our funds are being used legally. Overall, [10:30:32 AM] being used legally. Overall, the homeless strategy reserve should be used to help all austinites equally, and using it for immigrants seems misguided. And at worst, it looks like y'all are hiding the true intent of this budget item. Austin residents deserve clear and honest budgeting that serves everyone, so I urge you to focus on transparent homeless solutions that are going to reflect Austin's desire to reduce homelessness in a fair way. That doesn't compromise our resources, or promise any of those scarce resources to newcomers who may just end up on our streets. Thank you. >> And Jennifer, you can speak on item 52 at this time as well. >> Okay. >> Wonderful. Item 52 is similar to item 51. In this case, we have $500,000 extension for casa Marianela's shelter agreement. And I'm again concerned that this plan may draw more unhoused [10:31:32 AM] may draw more unhoused immigrants to Austin, especially because it's providing temporary housing. And that's going to add to our homelessness crisis. This amendment adds $500,000 for 13 months to provide that temporary housing, and that's on top of the 300,000 already being allocated in item 51 for rapid rehousing. So just begs the question, why are we funding services that could encourage people without permanent housing prospects to come here to Austin? This spending seems to blend immigrant aid with homeless services. And again, all the same legal questions. Does this comply with Texas law? Does this comply with federal law? And I think Austin residents really deserve clear answers to those questions, to make sure that we can trust that our budget is funding our priorities. The homeless strategy reserve should be helping all austinites equally, and using it for immigrants feels very misleading. Is this [10:32:33 AM] feels very misleading. Is this masking the true purpose of the funds? I would hope that we all want open and honest budgeting that serves all of our residents fairly, so I urge you to focus on some transparent solutions that address homelessness for austinites first, and avoid any policies that draw more people here with the promises of limited resources, only to end up on our street. Thank you for your time. >> Next. Moving on to in-person on item 58, Liz Schoenfeld. >> Good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak today and thank you for your leadership in addressing homelessness in our community. My name is Liz Schoenfeld, and I serve as the CEO at lifeworks, a local nonprofit that is dedicated to solving youth homelessness. I'm here today in support of item 58 on the consent agenda. This investment [10:33:34 AM] consent agenda. This investment of $200,000 will allow lifeworks to open the other side of our emergency shelter facility, which is currently not in operation. With this funding, will ultimately be able to add 15 additional shelter beds specifically designed for young people in the foster care system. This investment will position us to draw down state dollars in order to ensure sustainable operations moving forward. And as a result of your support today, we'll be able to make a significant impact opening doors that are currently closed, creating stability for young people in crisis, and connecting them to the services and relationships that lead to long term success. On behalf of the young people that we serve, thank you for making this critical investment. >> Moving on to item 61, we have Jennifer Robishaw remotely. >> Good morning again. This is Jen. >> Robichaud, resident. >> Of district two. >> I'm speaking on item 61 [10:34:34 AM] >> I'm speaking on item 61 which extends the mobile laundry services agreement with mission accomplished for $100,000 from the homeless strategy budget. And this is being sold as a short term assistance. But I'm concerned that it normalizes homelessness instead of solving it. I have to ask, shouldn't our compassion focus on dignity and lasting solutions like housing and job skills, temporary solutions like laundry services may unintentionally keep people on the streets longer? And as a taxpayer, I would like to see my tax dollars tackle the root causes, not just offer comfort. I know you care about our community's future and addressing the homelessness problems in our city, so why not prioritize investments in job skills, training, or financial skills? Why not set up laundry services at facilities that provide the sort of training and counseling to pair these sorts of things together? Like the saying goes, give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a [10:35:34 AM] fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Making it easier to stay on the streets doesn't solve our problems. Extending this agreement for mobile laundry services feels like a step backward from real progress, and I urge you to reconsider this amendment and focus on sustainable ways to end homelessness. Thank you for your time. >> Moving on to item 65. In person we have Liz baker. >> Good morning everyone. My name is Elizabeth baker. I'm the executive director of the other ones foundation. I want to thank you for the chance to speak to you on consent agenda number 65 today to support the Esperanza community shelter. I want to express my gratitude to David gray, our homeless strategy officer, and his team, for their support in finding these funds and ask for council support group's efforts. We are committed to addressing the needs of those experiencing homelessness in Austin with shelter, job readiness, skills training and holistic support. It's okay. I was wondering if I [10:36:37 AM] It's okay. I was wondering if I could speak to item number 101. >> When you're called up. >> Okay. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Moving on to item 66 remotely, we have Jennifer Robichaud. Jennifer, once again, we'll be keeping you on the line as you are the speaker on the next several items. >> Okay. Sounds good. So good morning, city council. I'm speaking on item 66 here. This is Jen Robichaud. For the record, austinites are frustrated and I echo their concerns about urban alchemy's contract with the city of Austin, which drain resources and fail our community. Since 2022, we have funneled over $20 million to urban alchemy, a San Francisco based nonprofit diverting funds from our homeless strategy budget. That's $20 million, not supporting local programs that could work. Urban alchemy runs the arch and eighth street [10:37:38 AM] the arch and eighth street shelters. Yet Austin's unsheltered population remains high. They claim to have housed nearly 100 people in 2024. But where's the evidence of permanent housing transitions? Worse, allegations of harassment and assault by unhoused individuals and former employees raises serious red flags. Why are we risking Austin's safety and liability? Their approach enables drug use rather than tackling root causes, which erodes community trust. Local voices, like those that I hear regularly are desperate for solutions that work. I ask you sincerely don't you want programs that truly serve austinites? We have proven local alternatives transparent, accountable, and focused on results. I implore you, stop funneling our tax dollars to urban alchemy. Redirect funds to local solutions that deliver measurable outcomes. Thank you for your time, Jennifer. >> Your next item is 74. [10:38:39 AM] >> Your next item is 74. >> Thank you. This is Jennifer Robichaud speaking on item 74, which is the resolution to update the imagine Austin plan. I take a more neutral stance on this position. I understand the need to look forward into the future and how we're going to address our plan as a community. Since this plan began in 2012, our city has struggled. Long time residents hardly recognize Austin any more. Families like mine face rising costs and many are leaving. I don't want to leave Austin, and so I'm keen to see and imagine Austin plan that enables families to grow and reach their goals here in Austin. This resolution calls for community engagement. I urge you to include families of all incomes, all racial and cultural backgrounds, and especially those who have called Austin home for generations. Please consider how families feel in today's Austin. We are now an underserved group, a $3 million investment in a new imagined [10:39:40 AM] investment in a new imagined Austin plan is significant, and it must prioritize families who are balancing work and raising kids. Your past community outreach efforts aren't reaching families, and I know because I just haven't seen the calls for them. Please consider in your planning, how can you make it easier for busy families to share their input? The city's promise is to serve all residents. Families are Austin's heart. Can you honestly picture the city without them? Families are leaving because Austin is too expensive and it's less safe by the day. I ask you to focus on the needs of families as you update. Imagine Austin, engage families directly and listen to their voices. Thank you Jennifer. >> Your next item is 75. >> This is Jen Robichaud and I'm speaking on item 75. Now this is a proposed extension to the health prevention program with UT Austin. This program focuses on African American health. I'm going to go out on [10:40:41 AM] health. I'm going to go out on a limb here to address the elephant in the room policies that single out one race over others are discriminatory health initiatives that work for one group almost always benefit everyone. Why would a city as diverse and inclusive as Austin support a program that divides us by the color of our skin, or the origins of our ancestors? From a legal standpoint, I'm curious if you all have looked into this, does this sort of program comply with state and federal laws which span racial discrimination? Financially, it pulls over $117,000 from our public health budget, and after multiple renewals, we should be asking the question, what results are we seeing from a moral perspective? Health services should serve everyone equally. A colorblind approach ensures fairness for all residents. Don't we want all Austin residents to have access to health prevention and educational services? With [10:41:41 AM] educational services? With these questions in mind and these concerns, I respectfully urge you to reconsider this contract and instead ask, how can we focus on health programs that unite our community without racial distinctions? Thank you. >> Jennifer. Your next item is 76. >> Thank you. This is Jen Robichaud speaking on item 76 now. And this is in regards to the proposed extension to the legal filing fee assistance agreement with catholic charities of central Texas. The plan allocates over $140,000 from the public health budget. That's a lot of money, and I'm concerned that it's being misspent. Public health funds should tackle clear health needs, like preventing disease or providing medical care. Non-immigration legal aid calling legal services public health is misleading. Legally, this also raises red flags, similar to other topics I've talked on today. Have we [10:42:43 AM] talked on today. Have we checked to see if this complies with Texas laws that limit funding for helping undocumented immigrants? And does it comply with federal laws that prohibit harboring undocumented individuals, funding legal services is a gray zone that puts our city at risk morally. Using health funds for immigration, legal aid over the needs of taxpaying residents undermines our trust. Our community expects health resources to address health issues for Austin residents, for Texans not to subsidize legal services for immigrants. When taxpayers see a disconnect between what's being funded and where the funds are coming from, we have to ask, are we being told the truth about how our money is being spent? If nothing else, please consider which departments and budgets are responsible for these sorts of contracts. Thank you. >> Jennifer. Your next item is 78. [10:43:44 AM] 78. >> Thank you. This is Jen Robichaud and speaking on item 78. This is very similar to what we just discussed in 70, 76 I believe it was. Yeah. And again we have an extension for legal services, this time with American gateways using $420,000 from the public health department's budget. And I have really all the same concerns about this plan. Public health funds are meant for things like preventing disease and supporting mental health for everyone in our community, and using them for immigration legal services just feels like a stretch. On the face of it, it doesn't seem to fit the public health department's mission. I have all the same legal concerns. Have we checked to see if this sort of aid complies with Texas and federal laws? I have heard of other cities that have faced lawsuits over similar programs, and as a taxpayer, I'm concerned that we're at risk here to, financially speaking, $420,000 [10:44:46 AM] financially speaking, $420,000 from the public health fund reduces money for urgent local needs. We could be tackling homeless health issues or substance abuse, or all sorts of other things that impact all of us. And instead we're spending this money on legal services. So I urge you to reconsider allocating any public health funding to legal services for immigrants, as it just seems like a misuse of the funds and misleading to taxpayers. Thank you. >> Jennifer. Your next item is 79. >> Thank you. This is Jen Robichaud speaking on item 79 now. And this plan is to extend the legal assistance contract with American gateways using $179,000 from the health public health budget, again to fund more legal help for immigrants. The same concerns here as well. Is this legal? Have we checked [10:45:46 AM] Is this legal? Have we checked the state and federal laws to make sure that we're not putting ourselves at legal liability for providing the sort of aid to immigrants? For transparency's sake, why are we spending public health funds on immigration services? It's it's not a health concern. It's a legal matter. And I think that this if this is something the city is going to fund, it needs to be done in a transparent way, and it needs to be allocated to a department that handles this sort of service, not in the public health fund. So with ll of this, I just really think we need to pause this contract. All the other contracts that are similar to that, to go back to the drawing board and figure out where this fits in our budget. And you know, what we're doing to help the community here, because this is not a public health issue. Thank you. >> Jennifer. Your next item is 80. >> Thank Jen Robichaud again speaking on [10:46:49 AM] Robichaud again speaking on item 80. And here we have a proposed mental health services or extending our contract with UT Austin to provide mental health services for African Americans. And as I spoke earlier, this sort of race based approach raises concerns. I deeply value our city's diversity. I have friends from all racial cultural backgrounds. Their ancestors have come from all over the world. And I've been I've had friends like that my entire life. So my friends are colorless to me in the sense that it our problems should transcend the color of our skin. And so I just need to state clearly, even though it's not a popular opinion to state, which is that policies that use race to decide who gets help are inherently discriminatory, they exclude people of other backgrounds who may also need mental health services as well. Many residents believe that any [10:47:49 AM] Many residents believe that any policy based on race is unfair and violates equity. And in nearly every case, what's good for one group is going to be good for all. It's just it's kind of astonishing to me. How does a city as diverse and welcoming as Austin support policies that divide us in these ways? And I know that you aim to do what's right. So I ask you, is this the best way to serve everyone financially? It's $178,000 from public health that could fund mental health care for all residents, not just one group. So why not use these funds to help everyone equally equal? Access to mental health care is a promise we owe each other, and focusing on one race excludes others. While a universal approach would better meet the needs of our community. So I urge you to rethink the contract we have with UT Austin. It looks like it's been renewed a whole bunch of times. Is this the best way for us to go about things, or is there a better program that we could be funding? [10:48:50 AM] funding? >> Thank you. Jennifer. Your time on item 80 has expired. Your next item is 83. >> Thank you. On item 83, this is Jen Robichaud and this is a proposed extension for legal and counseling services provided by catholic charities of central Texas. And similar to the other items where we are using public health funds to provide legal services, I think we just have a lot of issues here that we need to be addressing. So I'll just sum those up real quickly. One is this legal? Have we checked with federal and state laws? Because I would hate to see our city become legally liable for something that we've overlooked in providing these sorts of services. And then probably the bigger issue is transparency. As a taxpayer, I don't understand why this is being hidden underneath public health services. That's how it's shown in the agenda. And that's incredibly misleading. I just happened to go and read into the details to discover that [10:49:52 AM] the details to discover that this is providing legal services in the guise of public health funding. So if we're going to provide these services, please do it above the table, label it what it is. So that way we can have honest discussions about whether this is something the city should be funding. Make sure that our public health funds are going to public health services. That's just what we're owed as citizens. Thank you. >> Jennifer. Your final item is 84. >> Thank you. This Jen Robichaud speaking on item 84. And here we have one more extension of a health program agreement with UT Austin. In this case it is funding maternal health care. And it looks like we have over $400,000 that are being allocated to the extension. And this raises all of the same issues that I did earlier in in the items for these UT public health services that are focused specifically on one race group, rather than [10:50:55 AM] race group, rather than providing services to the broader community. In this case, the problems that come with maternity, being a mother, having children, and all of those health problems that we have to face. And I myself had had two high risk pregnancies, one that had me on bed rest for two months. So I very clearly understand the challenges that come along with having children. And I think that these issues transcend the color of our skin. And a lot of people in the community do not have the resources to be able to handle these maternal crises in an effective way. So when we're looking at funding for this, it needs to be much broader than what color our skin is or what color our skin. Is there anything like that it needs to be about who in the community needs these services because they're not able to access them themselves. So please contracts. There must be a better way for us to help mothers in the [10:51:55 AM] us to help mothers in the community. Thank you. >> Moving on to in-person, we have Richard subtle on item 91 with Carlos Leon on deck for item 93. >> Mr. Leon, please come on down. I think Mr. Subtle was either waving at the council or indicating he's waiving his right to speak on that. Thank you, Mr. Subtle. Mr. Leon, the floor is yours. >> So, Carlos. Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to item 93. There is no publicly accessible audio or video record of the August 2nd library commission meeting violating the Texas public information act. If APL executive assistant Laura Pollio intentionally tampered with that governmental record to harm the public by its unavailability, that crime is a state jail felony, which cannot be tolerated because we the [10:52:57 AM] be tolerated because we the people, do not give our public servants the right to decide what is good for us to know and what is not good for us to know. It's one more example. Why, at that meeting, I called for a national search asap for a new APL director to fill that vacant position and remove interim director Hannah Terrell. To see what APL needs, look at Des Moines, Iowa library director. Call in front of you there. Seeking a visionary and strategic thinker who is flexible, creatively adaptive, and possesses exceptional communication skills to collaborate with their board to formulate and update library policies, then implement them. In contrast, Terrell has inflexibly not adapted and not collaborated to not formulate or update library policies to not comply with city's revised superseding rules for public use of city properties. In fact, she seems to be blocking such compliance. Her public [10:53:57 AM] compliance. Her public communication on this critical matter of access and equity has not been exceptional, but nonexistent. That's not visionary. It's myopic. Start the search now. All things that are reproved are made manifest by the light of ephesians chapter five, verse 13. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. >> Next speaker on item 94 is Greg Anderson. >> Thank you. Mayor, council members, mayor pro tem, city manager Greg Anderson, Austin. Habitat for humanity not signed up for the unlimited plan. And I'll just call out slide. Thank you. Whenever we're ready to to move over. Big thanks to the d1 team that's been really, really instrumental to help make this happen. And staff and all the co-sponsors that were behind [10:54:58 AM] co-sponsors that were behind this. I hope you all are aware of the amazing history of rosewood and all of the public housing in Austin. And slide, if you would please a lot of history here. So built in 1939, thousands of austinites have called rosewood home over the years. And there was was a big discussion here in this building not too long ago about the fact that these buildings weren't really ideal for living in today. You know, what we hope to see in housing today, just for folks who deserve hvac and want to hang up posters on their walls. Hakka did a really amazing job of having community members who live in the community open up their homes to show the folks who are going to have to vote on the rezoning and the redevelopment of this project to come in and see the conditions. And I'll never forget, an eight year old boy brought me into his room and said, look, I can't even put things on my walls, and they're cinder block and I don't like it. And so slide, please. Austin 1939. Very different place. UT towers, only two years old. Capital is a baby at 51 slide. And then you all allowed for this redevelopment [10:55:58 AM] allowed for this redevelopment to occur. So amazing redevelopment, a lot more housing, hvac, amazing things going on here. Slide. And this is the road in question today. So it's a little dead end street that used to only serve hakka residents on the right slide. And thankfully they knew that they were going to redevelop this and add in a homeowner component, which we are a part of. Very happy to be a part of this, and we are working directly with hakka to allow the folks who have been living in hakka to qualify and move into homeownership. Slide. This is it just yesterday. Notice no volunteers. It's quiet site yesterday. We don't build during the peak of summer, but shortly there's going to be many, many hundreds of austinites volunteering here to help build these homes. Slide. And this is the road from above. Big keynote. Here is this was exposition. It would be the same thing. >> So thank you. >> Speaker thank you thank you. Slide thank. >> That was that was very extra credit for the trickiness. Good job. Moving on. Thank you for being here and your comments. >> Moving on to item 103. We have Madison Gessner, Cara [10:56:58 AM] have Madison Gessner, Cara haneoka, Kimberly Caldwell and Adam Orman. >> If your name's been called, please come down and take a seat. >> Hi. Good morning as always, I have appreciation for the great breadth of issues that you deal with every week. >> My. >> My name is Madison Gessner, and I serve as the executive director for the greater Austin chapter of the Texas restaurant association. On behalf of the thousands of restaurants we represent and the families who depend on them, I'm here in support of agenda item 103, and I want to thank council members Velasquez, harper-madison, vela, alter, and duchen for their leadership and sponsoring this resolution. This conversation began during the budget process, and we appreciate the leadership it takes now to press pause and continue the conversation. Now it's clear restaurant permits are bigger than a budget line. This deserves transparency, stakeholder input, and thoughtful discussion about the real impact to our community. Austin's restaurants are already managing enormous [10:57:59 AM] already managing enormous pressure inflation, workforce shortages, tariffs and immigration uncertainty. For many of our smaller operators, a sudden doubling or tripling of their permit fees could be devastating. The current tiered risk based system works. It was built with Austin public health and shaped by broad community input. It allows Austin public health to maintain the budget and staffing to serve their community, and it keeps compliance fair, protects public health, and allows small businesses to stay in operation. For all these reasons, the tra helped write senate bill 1008 at the Texas capitol in a way that would not require Austin to significantly alter its fee structure. Austin's food scene is a big part of the city's identity. From family run cafes to neighborhood taquerias, these restaurants are what make Austin Austin. We cannot afford to put that at risk. That's why we support this resolution. It creates the opportunity for a more thoughtful, transparent process, one where Austin public health continues to lead the way and where restaurants and community voices are part of the solution. Tra and our members are ready to be active partners in this work. Thank you for your time, your [10:59:00 AM] you for your time, your leadership, and thank you again for the sponsors of this resolution for taking this very important step. We really appreciate you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm Kara hanaoka, I'm the executive director of good work Austin. We're the only nonprofit in central Texas that provides workforce development and advocates for food workers. I'm also here to speak in support of resolution agenda item 103. So why is this important? If you look at the permit fees, you might think these are not big changes. But we are at a critical crossroads in our community. Our local food businesses are struggling to survive. Many of you may have seen in the news over this last week that cheer up charlies, an iconic lgbtqia venue, had to launch a gofundme campaign to pay their back rent from the summer months that are incredibly slow for all of our food businesses. This not only impacts businesses, but our workers. Many of our workers have inconsistent income. They are able to survive on tips [11:00:01 AM] are able to survive on tips which are very low during the summer. These permit increases while small impact businesses ability to survive in Austin. So what can we do about this? Good work. Austin is a coalition of local businesses that provide living wages. I love that this resolution promotes stakeholder engagement. There is so much more to be done in that area. I've met with all of your offices and y'all are incredibly supportive and we have more work to do. The other thing is that the food plan was passed last October. Unfortunately, none of the strategies within goal three of the food plan that helps recognize and support these local businesses that are providing living wages was funded, and so we have a lot more work to do together this year, and I look forward to working with each of your offices to support our food workers, but also those businesses that are paying living wages. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Kim Caldwell and I'm proud to be here today [11:01:02 AM] and I'm proud to be here today as the board chair of good work Austin. I met good work Austin while working with the city to address food for people experiencing homelessness during the pandemic. Our food workers continue to show up for our community. They help bring in the nearly $10 billion that the restaurant industry puts into our economy. And at this moment, we're thankful for this. Item 103 to reduce that squeeze on restaurants as everyone is trying to do their best through these challenging times, we are particularly thankful for the opportunity for restaurants to be engaged within this work, because it is that kind of engagement that can come up with plans that do the most good for the residents of Austin, the folks who understand food and what food service means, working together and good work. Austin is proud to have, I think, almost 70 members across central Texas who are showing up every day as food workers, as restaurant [11:02:05 AM] food workers, as restaurant owners, as Wright the the tastes that make our community what it is. And so we are so thankful for this opportunity with item 103 and look forward to continuing working with y'all and your staff to keep our restaurant industry thriving and make sure that that thriving restaurant industry results in healthy, healthy, meaningful, and livable wages for the folks who literally feed us. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> Hi there, Adam Ormond I own two restaurants in east Austin and was one of the co-founders of good work Austin. But I also like to think that city council was one of the co-founders of good work Austin, because it was during the writing of the paid sick leave ordinance back in 2017 2018 that the initial restaurants got together and realized that there was a need for bars and restaurant owners to help each other, and to [11:03:05 AM] to help each other, and to provide consultation for other bars and restaurants that wanted to pay better wages and wanted to provide benefits. And ultimately, what we've done is create a culinary training program. And we have and we've provided over 2 million meals since the beginning of the pandemic to Austin's food insecure communities. And what was most exciting for city council and the mayor's office at the time was that they had a business association that was not going to fight with them, that when city council wanted to do things like paid sick leave ordinance or wanted to raise the minimum wage, or wanted to do or wanted to create things like the food plan, or when Ed wanted to try and create a sexual harassment, sexual harassment training for food workers. That good work. Austin was there with. We have 70 formal members, but we've worked with over 200 restaurants in the last couple of years to help and to consult and to be the voice, to be to be the voice of the industry. That could help you define some of that, could help you shape [11:04:07 AM] of that, could help you shape some of these policies. Health permits are low hanging fruit. That's something that we would absolutely like to be talked to about. So we can talk about what those tiers should be, what those, what fees make sense and how that could be structured. But there are so many other things. Summer has been really hard. This is not the first summer that has been hard. We've talked about this before. We've talked about the things that we can do to help small businesses, to help promote them. And and we hope to continue to be an asset for you in that regard. Thank you. >> Thank you, thank all of you. >> That concludes all. Consent speakers. >> Thank you, members, as you've just heard, that concludes all the speakers that have signed up on the consent agenda. Let me ask members of the council if anybody wants to pull any item from the consent agenda that wasn't already pulled. Hearing none, then the chair will entertain a motion to adopt the consent agenda. The mayor pro tem moves approval. It is seconded by council member Siegel members. [11:05:07 AM] council member Siegel members. We will now go to discussion. I will call on council member Ellis, followed by the mayor pro tem, then council member Siegel. >> Thank you mayor. I wanted to speak briefly on item number 12. This is going to add 20 new parking spaces and two new electric vehicle charging locations for the Hampton branch library. This is just one of our most beloved city owned spaces that we have in southwest Austin. And I know there's been some conversation about, you know, what is the future of that library? Will there be dollars to be able to enhance and expand it over the years? But for the meantime, even getting 20 more parking spaces for the community is is a huge win in southwest Austin. Item number 100 also is the circle C Turkey trot. We have gotten about $2,000 of fees waived for this. This is one of the only events that's actually fully in district eight. So we always carry this fee waiver every single year to support the circle C community and the run club that operates down there. So if anybody has extra fee waiver dollars left at the [11:06:09 AM] fee waiver dollars left at the end of this fiscal year, which I know dollars are getting low, it would be greatly appreciated. There's about $2,000 left to cover. Thanks. >> Thank you. Council member mayor pro tem, followed by council member Siegel and council member Laine. >> Thank you colleagues, I did want to speak to item number 96 last year. One of my constituents experienced the heartbreaking loss of their beloved dog, Wendy, after leaving her in the care of a local boarding facility. Wendy managed to dig under a fence, went missing and was later found deceased. As someone who loves and cares for my own dog, Axel, I can only imagine the devastation that comes from such a tragedy, one that was very preventable. Our pets are part of our families, and in a city like Austin, we take pride in being a no kill community. So we have a shared responsibility to ensure that our pets are safe, especially when placed in someone else's direct care. This resolution is a direct response to Wendy and her family's story. It begins the process of requiring pet boarding facilities to install [11:07:10 AM] boarding facilities to install dog guard protections along outdoor fences. It also seeks additional recommendations to improve the safety and welfare of animals entrusted to those facilities. We all have a shared goal in making sure this never happens to another family, and to ensure that we leave our pets in someone else's care, we can do so with the trust and peace of mind. Later today, we'll also consider a zoning case involving this facility where the incident occurred. While this resolution won't apply retroactively, the property owner has since installed dog guards and strengthened their safety protocols to help ensure that this does not happen again. They've proven that they take this incident seriously, that they're committing into getting into code compliance, and they have now put safeguards in place to prevent future harm. This does not by any means erase the past, but by learning from this experience, taking concrete policy action and prioritizing accountability, we can make sure that pet boarding facilities take a thoughtful [11:08:10 AM] facilities take a thoughtful step to protect the pets that we all love. I want to thank my co-sponsors, council members alter Laine, Ellis, and vela for their support. Thank you. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem, council member Siegel. Councilmember Laine. Councilmember Velasquez. >> Thank you, mayor, and thank you, mayor pro tem, for advocating for animal safety. I'd like to be added as a co-sponsor to that item. >> Without objection, council member Siegel will be shown as a sponsor of that item. >> Thank you. And I just like to offer a couple notes on the agenda. First of all, on the two items that were withdrawn, 33 and 67. I want to thank city staff for agreeing to withdraw these items from the agenda. And I also want to thank the community for reaching out to express a variety of concerns about these two items. I think the general theme that we were hearing is that there's a lot of concern about encroachment on civil liberties at the federal level, whether it's the invasion of a couple of American cities, whether it's the operation of ice with mast and unidentified agents, and even the efforts to take social security information and create [11:09:10 AM] security information and create data surveillance files on every American citizen. What I heard from the community on these two items is that we're very much concerned about contracts that allow private vendors to gather the data of Austin residents, without clear guidelines about how that data will be kept and maintained and used, and so really want to appreciate staff's willingness to kind of talk more about these items and allow for more community input, transitioning a little bit to something more upbeat. Item 74. Imagine Austin, I'll say as a first term, first year council member, my eyes glazed over a little bit when people started talking about comprehensive planning, but I've since learned how really how much of an opportunity this comprehensive planning process is. If you check out Austin's city charter title ten, section one, it describes our goals for comprehensive planning, and it basically includes every aspect of our city. It's not just land use, its resources like water and electricity. It's economic development. It's transportation, parks, you know, [11:10:12 AM] transportation, parks, you know, name your concern about the city. And it's supposed to be integrated with our imagined Austin comprehensive planning process. And also, this is the first process we've had since we've reverted to a ten one system with district representation. So I'm excited for for this process and how all of us as a community and all of our organizations and groups can be stakeholders in this process and really have a very forward, Progressive, sustainable, you know, prosperous city in the years to come. So thanks to the planning team for for leading that effort. >> Thank you. Council member. Council member. Laine. Councilmember Velasquez. Council member vela. >> I just wanted to take a moment to highlight item 55, which is an agreement between family elder care to provide support services at pecan gardens, the permanent supportive housing community for seniors in district six. At pecan gardens, residents have access to stable housing along with case management, health assessments, community building activities and basic needs, with an on site food pantry. Recently, Austin's homeless [11:11:14 AM] Recently, Austin's homeless strategy office announced that pecan gardens is also the first housing development in Austin to complete and graduate from the crime prevention through environmental design program. Cpt is a nationally recognized approach that integrates safety through building design, including the enhancement of visibility, lighting, and community engagement. I want to thank APD's district representatives officers Gabriel gabrielsson and Krissy for working diligently with our community and family elder care. I'm particularly grateful for officer Gabriel son's leadership in developing this program. Pecan gardens is better today because of effective collaboration collaboration across agencies, and I'm very grateful to the leaders at Austin's homeless strategy office, family elder care, the Austin police department and Huron city council for making this continue to improve. Thanks. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Velasquez. Councilmember vela. >> Thank you. Mayor. Colleagues, I want to take a moment to highlight item number 22. This contract invests in trauma informed training so that our police officers can better [11:12:14 AM] police officers can better support survivors of sexual assault, ensuring dignity, respect and justice for women in our community by partnering with the end violence against women international, a nationally recognized leader in this work, we are bringing the best practices to Austin to improve investigations and outcomes. We need ways to acknowledge we need to always acknowledge our failures and work to turn them into compassionate action, especially when it concerns our survivors and their families. Thank you to everyone involved in the collective sex crimes response model, or csm, who have been leading these efforts to ensure that we are improving APD's response to sex crimes and protecting our survivors. And item 103 I've been a long time small business advocate, and I'm bringing this item following the proposed change in permit fees for food establishments that I talked about during our budget. This change that was previously proposed is fundamentally inequitable and has been and has the potential to be [11:13:15 AM] has the potential to be drastically, to drastically impact Austin's independent businesses, legacy businesses and small businesses. And, you know, expecting a small business to absorb a significantly increased cost due to an unexpected across the board policy change without stakeholder engagement is unreasonable. And this is why this item direct staff to make small business a part of the solution. With our legacy businesses being able to continue to thrive in Austin, we want our legacy businesses to continue to be able to thrive in Austin. They are a central part of the fabric of Austin, and not just economically, but socially and culturally. I am grateful to assistant city manager Stephanie hayden- howard for her support and to my cosponsors. Council member harper-madison, councilmember vela, councilmember altar, and councilmember duchen. And he is watching at home councilmember qadri who asked to be added as a co-sponsor on the message board. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember vela. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor. I want to [11:14:16 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. I want to also thank council member Velasquez. It's a really good item. We had an item to try to mitigate fees around homeowners and kind of smaller scale permitting. And this is in in that same theme, we've got to minimize the fee structure for our small businesses, for our homeowners, for people, you know, replacing a, a water heater, those kind of small scale repairs. And I really appreciate him bringing this item as a co-sponsor and completely support it. And I just wanted to also highlight item 92. We also passed this at the capital metro meeting on Monday. But item 92 is an intergovernment local agreement between capital metro and the city to put into effect a traffic signal prioritization. What that means is essentially [11:15:16 AM] What that means is essentially that busses and in the future are trains will be able to basically turn red lights into green lights or hold a green light to let the bus go through that intersection, helping traffic move, especially in our central city. Our public safety can also use it. So that's going to help our firefighters and our our ems and and police also get to emergency incidents more quickly. It's a move toward a more intelligent, a more streamlined traffic system. It's a little item and it's a little thing, but over the long term, it's going to be a big deal. I appreciate staff working on this. I know they've been working on it for a long time, and great to see it move through the agenda. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor. Colleagues, I want to draw our attention to item 29, which addresses a three quarter of $1 million contract for high speed internet to four facilities. That works out to about [11:16:19 AM] That works out to about $150,000 a year for these four locations. I'll be voting no on this item. There's a number of concerns I've got here. The primary concern being that that's just a lot of money to expand wi-fi to locations in this day and age, and also just evaluating the urgency of these locations. As far as the cost, based on my experience, there's a lot more economical ways to get wi-fi out to locations like these, especially in a time where we've got a lot of financial constraints. In the q&a that we got back yesterday, it looks like part of the contract is to install a couple of internet circuits and fiber lines. It's not clear to me why the facilities need to be connected with hardwired connections. It's also not clear that if capital improvements are made in the first year, why we're paying the same amount every year in this contract. And then as far as locations, two of the locations are garages. So I'm not sure why we've got to spend $75,000 in the future. And every year for a couple of garages, one of them is a [11:17:21 AM] garages, one of them is a project that's under construction for the next four years. So in closing, I just find it strange that we're paying upwards of 40 K a year for wi-fi for a single parking garage where we can't get reliable internet in some areas here in city hall, including council offices. So I'm not sure that the 35 employees using the internet at the demolished convention center garage need a $3,500 a month internet connection for the next few years. My hope is that there may be some value in unpacking this contract and exploring the location by need. I suspect the palmer events center that's going to serve thousands of users and has a lot of complexity in their setup and connectivity, is probably way more justifiable than some of the other facilities in the contract. Thank you. >> Members. Those are all the people who signed up to speak. So let me ask you. Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Just a question for the manager. Councilmember duchen raises some really good points as it relates to item 29. If we could have an update on those questions that he's laid out, that would be helpful. Thank [11:18:22 AM] that would be helpful. Thank you. >> Very good. Thank you. Members, we have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda as read. Is there anyone wishing to abstain from one of the items on the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to recuse themselves from a vote on any item on the consent agenda? I have councilmember duchen voting no on item number 29. Are there any other council members wishing to be shown voting no on any item on the consent agenda? With that being the case? Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted with councilmember duchen being shown voting no on item number 29 and councilmember qadri absent. Thank you all and thanks for those who came out to speak on these items. Members that will now, without objection, I will. We will recess the meeting of the Austin city council and without without objection, we are in recess at 1118. [11:22:25 AM] I'll call back to order at 11:22 A.M. The city council of Austin, Texas, for its regular meeting. And that will take us to the one pulled item off of the consent agenda. And that was item 102. I pulled that because I had a couple of questions that I wanted to ask of David gray and councilmember. Sure item. I'll let you if you want to say anything. Otherwise I'll just go to the person that pulled it and that'd be me. >> Yeah. So just to kind of lay this one out for the conversation we're going to have, this item is kind of a follow on with some clarification from the budget process. It's many of these things would have been things we would have done during the budget process, but they were either taken from an amendment and made into an ifc, and it was too late to file an ifc, or just kind of some clarification [11:23:26 AM] just kind of some clarification that had to be done. So there are a couple elements to this, and that's kind of why it seems kind of disparate in some of the subjects here. One of them is around the discussion we had around a non-sworn public safety response and looking, asking the manager to identify what kind of are those roles that we could utilize. Non-sworn personnel, hopefully to help manage our public safety costs in the future and provide better public safety service for the community. Another element here is a clarification around some of the bond planning money that we had passed. Just reconciling it and making it consistent with the prior resolution passed by the council. But then the last piece is is something that I know we have discussed a lot and is very important to not only myself, but I know many on this dais and that is around addressing homelessness, [11:24:29 AM] addressing homelessness, specifically our youth population. You know, we have seen an explosion, unfortunately, in this population over four times growth in the past 4 to 5 years. And so this resolution is seeking to ensure that the proportionate amount of the youth within our homeless population, which is around 15%, that when David is administering these programs, that they are that that that population is getting a proportionate. Amount of those resources to address the need. We had started this with a hard, you know, you must have 15% worked a lot with our to come up with language that is a more workable, gives them a little more flexibility, and making that a target instead of a hard number, and just recognizing that this [11:25:30 AM] recognizing that this population is one that we want to ensure is served with the resources that we have put into our homeless response system. So that is an overview and then certainly pass it off to the polar of the item. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Gray. And I know we've gone through several versions, but but I want to ask a couple questions. One is what investments were made in addressing youth homelessness in the most recent budget? And what investments do you have planned? I mean, I know today, for example, we just voted today and had the CEO of lifeworks testify in favor of one of the items that was on the consent agenda. Talk a little bit about this, because one of the things and members, I'll just say a couple things. One is the reason I pulled this is, first of all, I must admit, I'm I'm very uncomfortable with a policy of us going through a budget process, a lengthy budget process, a detailed budget [11:26:31 AM] process, a detailed budget process, and then literally at the very next meeting of the council, we're taking up budget items again, many of which were items that were part of the budget process. We we utilize that budget process. I thought, really well to actually get to kind of consensus on where we wanted on the budget and, and then first rattle out of the box, we're looking at items again. The second part of that, though, that bothers me, is that a key part of that was the the key part of the budget and a key part of what led to us voting to go above the 3.5% voter approval rate was related to homelessness, and that was a key part of our discussions. And we have we are making such great progress, in part, I think, because we now have a homeless strategy office. We now have a plan that that homeless strategy officer is is [11:27:32 AM] homeless strategy officer is is putting into play. It's a systemic plan and not one that breaks out different groups in the way that I worry this resolution does. And that's why I've pulled this. I want us to I want to, so I want to ask some questions about that. So, Mr. Gray, if you'd answer that first question, I'd I'd appreciate that. >> Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Mayor and council. David gray, homeless strategy officer for the city of Austin. When I look at our homeless contracts across the board, our general fund, etc. For lifeworks specifically, since we've been in office, we funded $6.3 million worth of services, specifically with lifeworks for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness. And that covers a broad array of investments from shelter to street outreach to rapid rehousing. Most recently, our office had a working group around foster youth homelessness and youth [11:28:32 AM] homelessness and youth homelessness that we co-chaired with lifeworks, and that work group included representation from the state of Texas, the city, the county, and other community providers, and that the work of that working group is informing a lot of what's in the plan as it relates to youth specifically. And so as we look to the year ahead, investments that are top of mind for us are continuing investments in youth shelter, like the item that we brought today, service dollars for federal vouchers, housing vouchers for youth that help youth stabilize after foster care and ultimately achieve self-sustainability. And then I know we're also in conversations with lifeworks and the county around some new, permanent supportive housing that's coming online that life works with manage as well. So so youth is a is a priority for us. That's where the data shows that, you know, that we want to be able to prioritize as we move forward. I think that being said, as we make investments in youth homelessness and we start to see a decrease there, it's important that we're also [11:29:33 AM] important that we're also responsive to other subpopulations experiencing homelessness, like our veterans and like our seniors, who are also beginning to become homeless at at faster rates. >> And I guess that is part of what bothers me about this item is that you have a systemic plan where you're you're meeting the needs. You're working through the plan, the plan that we all just work very hard to make sure was fully funded, if you remember, was the the language of the of the budget process. What happens if even if it's it mandates a target. And what this does is even the new language says in carrying out a prioritization. It it directs it directs priority funding for addressing youth homelessness. And then it says in carrying out such prioritization, the manager shall target 15% to that as a what this refers to. I mean, it [11:30:38 AM] what this refers to. I mean, it would be us adopting this as a representative proportion of youth experiencing homelessness at 15%. Although I don't remember us ever having any discussions about what those percentages are, but I'm looking at the the the person we count on to be the expert. What does this do to you along the lines of what you just discussed? If we make those sorts of priority, call it a priority and then give you that direct shall direct you to to prioritize it in a proportional way and set a percentage. >> So when we publish the zo plan, we did not include subpopulations in that. And that's in part because we want to make data informed decision making. We want the data that we're seeing in mis and from our partners on the ground to guide the investments that we make. And it's all part of our philosophy that, you know, the ultimate goal with this work is to connect the right people with the right intervention at [11:31:39 AM] with the right intervention at the right time, to end their homelessness as quickly as possible. When we start taking slices of the pie for certain subpopulations, it limits our ability to be nimble and flexible for the other folks who are experiencing homelessness. And so in this case, if council gave us the direction to prioritize 15% of the fund for youth homelessness, we would make good on that commitment. But that does hinder our ability to to be flexible and be truly data led, data informed. And it takes away services for the other subpopulations. It could potentially take away services for the other subpopulations. The flip side of that to Mr. Mayor is that if the if the target is 15%, we will not exceed that 15% because we need to be able to reserve funding for some of those other populations. And so if the data shows that we have an additional increase in youth homelessness, as much as we would like to put more money there because of the direction, we probably wouldn't do that [11:32:41 AM] we probably wouldn't do that because again, we need to make sure that we're reserving some of the resource for other subpopulations. >> What happens is if there's an emergency for for something and for some reason there's an emergency, what does having subpopulations where you're directed to target, what does that do? >> It delays our ability to respond nimbly. I mean, and everything that we do, we take pride in doing it transparently and making sure that counts. When the public is well informed on our decision making. I think there was a data that also was passed with the budget that directed our office to do a transparency Paige, and that's something that we're now in the process of building out. But that's always meant to let people know transparently what we're doing. But in the event of an emergency, if the slices of the pie are already cut up and we have limited flexibility, it delays our ability to respond quickly, or it puts us in a position where we are having to essentially take from one subpopulations pie, you [11:33:42 AM] one subpopulations pie, you know, to to give the other population a bigger slice. And that is going to pit our provider community against each other. >> So since we've done the since you brought us the, the plan and we've been as a, as a body operating with that plan, have you made any recommendations to the council that we ought to specifically target subpopulations, whether it be youth, veterans or lgbtq? >> We have not brought any recommendations about specific subpopulations that that we are going to target. I mean, again, in all things that we do, we let the data guide us. We know and we're well aware of the increase in youth homelessness, and that's why we co-chaired that body with lifeworks in much the same way that we know there's an increase in homelessness in downtown, which is why we're co- chairing a body with the downtown Austin alliance. And so for us, it's always important that the data leads us and that we have the flexibility to really get the [11:34:44 AM] flexibility to really get the right intervention to the right people at the right time. >> Okay. Thank you. Members. Council member alter. >> I'm going to confess, I'm I'm pretty disappointed right now, and I'm pretty disappointed that when you and I work together, you told me something very different than what you're telling the body today. You told me that using the word target would give you the flexibility you needed. You told me this works. And I hate to do this right now, but I. How can I bring something forward? If you're going to tell me something different than you're telling this body, I am, I am also disappointed that we are in some way having an issue that we're trying to ensure that 15% a it says, a representative proportion. That somehow it is problematic that we want to ensure that a, that a, a, a small portion of the [11:35:45 AM] a, a, a small portion of the money that we are dedicating to homelessness serves youth and that we are saying that this is somehow. Not consistent with our values and what we want to do in serving the homeless population. It says at least a representative proportion. So if if we do have that surge, which I certainly hope we don't, you have the flexibility here. You told me you had the flexibility anyways. There are elements in here, and I appreciate that. They were brought by council member Laine about ensuring that we serve veterans. There are pieces in here by the mayor pro tem ensuring that we serve our [11:36:46 AM] ensuring that we serve our lgbtq community. These are policy decisions, and I'm not surprised that it wasn't in the plan, because that's a policy decision. You even mentioned that months ago when we had the discussion about the plan, that a policy decision is for the council to make, and that's what we're doing today. We're not saying that this should this group should be prioritized disproportionately, that they should be served to the exclusion of others. We're saying that for the representative proportion that they represent in the homeless system, we're going to ensure that they're served, and we're going to ensure that we don't see another four times growth in this population over the next four years, and that that is somehow troubling or disappointing. Beyond myself. I was going to come in here and [11:37:50 AM] was going to come in here and talk about a quote that's been in my head all week. Joy cometh in the morning. You won't hear me quote scripture very often, but it's been in my mind and this was our opportunity to say, joy cometh in the morning for our kids on the street, some of them with kids. And somehow that's problematic. I. I'm just going to leave it there. I hope that we are able to serve this group, at least in the manner that they are unfortunately represented in our population, 84% of which are on the streets. Over 1000 young people. I would hope you support this item. >> Councilmember Ellis. >> I do. I certainly appreciate the focus and the intent of what's trying to be [11:38:52 AM] what's trying to be accomplished. I also had some concerns about how how prescriptive it is. I, I know there's times that we have a delicate balance here between policymakers and decision makers and financial allocations, and then handing that over to staff. And, you know, there's an element of trust that I think we're all trying to get to the same place and trying to make sure that staff does have the flexibility to accomplish the goals that council sets, while also, you know, I ask myself constantly, too, when I do work is how prescriptive should I be and how much do we lock in the efforts that we're trying to tackle, or how can we similarly accomplish that goal and be a little less less prescriptive? I've had ifc's that that operate both ways. Sometimes they are very detailed and sometimes they say, hey, go figure it out. We trust you to be able to work through this process. And so I had also worried that it was quite prescriptive. I know that there were some conversations leading up to our budget adoption, specifically within the [11:39:52 AM] specifically within the homelessness consortium and the folks that work as service providers for the community and trying to make sure we're we're getting them the allocations they need, while also not creating an imbalance between many different service providers. And so I think this is, you know, coming from a good place, it is something that we just have to ask ourselves each and every time we work through this process, how how prescriptive do we need to be. And so I did worry it was a little too much. But regardless of whether this is approved today or not, I think there's also a further conversation to be had about, you know, the last, be it resolved talks about metropolitan splash park, which I think is a great idea. And if for some reason this didn't move forward in this way, I hope that that idea does carry forward through the bond process and would love to further that conversation, because I think there is something that we need to do more for the community, for access to places that cool us down, but also need to be mindful of water usage and things like that. So I think [11:40:52 AM] things like that. So I think there's some good things in here, but I think as it stands today, this might just be a little more prescriptive than I would want to be in this moment. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember. I'm going to recognize the city manager, and I don't have anybody else that's indicated they want to speak. I would ask that the city clerk call the name we it's my understanding we have a speaker on this item, one speaker and call that person. But while that person is coming up, I'll recognize the manager. >> Thank you, mayor and members of the council. And speaking more broadly, but specifically, I think to what seems to be of some concern, I think the mayor started out at least the line of questioning and inquiry with the disconnection between going through a lengthy budget process and articulating budget amendments and thoughts. And I think the notion or the challenge coming right after the budget being approved to prescribe, whether loosely or at all specific activities and actions of a budget that is [11:41:54 AM] actions of a budget that is about to be implemented, I think as council member alter and I had discussed it, I think I shared some concerns, and I think the modification of the ifc in and of itself got to a much more comfortable place to the, I guess, statement of concern around any conversation that you may have had with director gray. I'm not privy to the specifics of it, but I do know my team specifically. Director gray always try to work to accommodate where council may want to get trying to get to. Yes. I think as you heard his statements today, particularly leaning on whether it's the consortium of homeless providers or even our team trying to make data driven decisions, I think the challenge with proportionality, which I think I've said to many council members, even while we were discussing the budget, is always difficult. And I think to David's point around delays doesn't mean he doesn't have [11:42:55 AM] doesn't mean he doesn't have the right to move resources around and put them where they are. But if in fact, there's a resolution that speaks to something as a shell or what have you, the thought might be that we needed to bring something back for council consideration to do that and or run the risk of acting outside of policy. As I said more broadly, in my discussions around ifc's of themselves, sometimes it's a conversation and an intention and allowance for staff to make the professional decisions based on guidance, whether collectively through a committee or through council members, particularly if it's the right thing to do, allow us that flexibility to do it, to be placing items again that are prescriptive and proportionality in an ifc and or, I guess, directing us to create programs and do pilots. I think some of that, as many of you have taken advantage of, have been done in conversation and in good stead. And so, [11:43:55 AM] and in good stead. And so, again, unfortunate that I think you feel some kind of way today. And that's probably a broad statement. I'd hope you would just appreciate us always trying to get where council wants to get. But again, to the mayor's initial point and as we talk this coming right after budget and not being discussed is problematic, at least for us, particularly as we're trying to figure out whether we're going to have a TRE that's successful or not and or just how we're allocating existing resources. With respect to many of the things that council wanted to consider in the homeless space, at least. So, again, I wanted to say that and I know David and his work and his team work very hard to try to provide responses to council, and they may not always fit in line with where council members are coming from. And if we need to push back more before items get on the agenda, I guess I'll direct them to do that more. But in all earnest, I know he's [11:44:57 AM] But in all earnest, I know he's working diligently to try to manage a lot of different stakeholders, as well as this council's perceptions and opinions on homelessness, and I just wanted to make sure that I at least shared my support for his statement around being driven by the data. And so again, thank you for the comments. But I just wanted to say that in general, but I know we've talked about this ifc, particularly the last item that councilwoman mentioned around our flexibility with utilizing non-law enforcement in areas where it's appropriate and everything in the ifc, we're going to look at and review and try to make an effort to do. And I would say, as I always say, I don't probably need an ifc for that. Just a conversation. So again, thank you for allowing me to speak, but I at least wanted to share my thoughts on your discomfort. I think, with where you are with my team's approach to y'all's conversations. Thank you. >> Councilmember alter. And then we'll have the call. Call the name of the person in the public and ask them to come [11:45:58 AM] public and ask them to come forward. >> The speaker's name is Savannah Lee for item 102. >> Councilmember alter. No. Go ahead. >> So I can get a better understanding potentially of of councilmember Ellis. When we say, is it the the exact number itself the because it's a representative proportion and we put the number in because that's where it is. But it is if to to when we talk about being data driven, the guiding language here is the representative proportion. And so if if it goes up, if it goes down the instruction here is to to target. We started with a requirement. We started with very firm language in the manager and I talked about this director gray and I talked about this. And we changed the language specifically to target to make it more flexible and and using the representative [11:46:59 AM] and using the representative proportion. If, if we just get rid of the parenthetical, I mean, it's the exact same six one half does, the other, is that what causes either the manager from from your perspective, director gray, or even potentially signal my colleague to the left here, because if that's what we're is the big issue, then I'll have an amendment to strike that out right now. But the operative language is a representative proportion. So I would pose that I guess. Let me let me start with director gray, if do you read the language for that to be your guiding light is a representative proportion. >> Councilmember, thank you for the opportunity. And first, I want to apologize for the frustration that I have caused, and I just want to offer that to you. It was never my intent to to mislead you or mislead [11:48:00 AM] to to mislead you or mislead any of our elected officials on our position. The the language around target does give us more flexibility than a firm number. But what I'll say is that our office will always look at the data and let the data guide us and guide our decision making and the recommendations that we bring to you and to the others on the dais, and how we distribute the funding. You know, from our vantage point, we are prioritizing youth homelessness right now because that's what the data is showing us. If we do all the things the right way this year that we intend on doing, youth homelessness should drop extremely hopefully to zero, and then we'll be able to pivot and focus on whatever the next subpopulation is. The the language to prioritize youth homelessness means that that that is the guiding direction that will take with us in perpetuity. And so even if youth homelessness drops, even without a specific target, it from our vantage point, it [11:49:00 AM] from our vantage point, it still handicaps our ability to pivot. Or maybe within this year, youth homelessness is high, but we see a drastic rise in veteran homelessness because of changes in federal regulation. It's just one of those things where it would really handicap our ability to to pivot and to be flexible in responding to what the data is signaling to us. And that's consistently the message that I've tried to convey here is from our office's vantage point is, while we understand the goal today is youth homelessness, and we're aligned with that, we still need to make sure we have the flexibility to be responsive and for the city to be able to step in and and provide the safety net for our community. >> Well, and I go to the the language itself, because we were very careful in crafting this language because words matter. If you look at line 71, after talking about [11:50:01 AM] after talking about prioritizing funding to address youth homelessness, the very next sentence says, in carrying out such a prioritization. So when dealing with this priority, the manager shall target to allocate at least a representative proportion. So if it goes down in carrying out that prioritization, we're going to consistently target their representative proportion. That's that's different than just saying youth are priority period end of resolution I would I also want to get some clarification. You mentioned $6.3 million. That was and I'm sorry I just didn't catch the the front end that it was that amount of money to, to lifeworks over what period of time and out of what total spend in the system. Excuse me. >> I don't have the specific terms for all the contracts [11:51:03 AM] terms for all the contracts right in front of me. I can get you that, that information. But that's a combination of arpa funding that we administered HHS funding, which is funding that's passed through our office and goes to lifeworks and then general fund funding from the city of Austin. >> Is that last fiscal year or over a period of greater more than one fiscal year? >> It's I know some of this is last fiscal year, some of it could have been the fiscal year prior. Our office was established in December 23rd. So it's it goes back as far as at least to that point. But I can get you the specific contract terms. >> Well, and it jumped out at me because I know we spent over $100 million. Arpa alone was 100 million. We added general fund to that. And so to say 6.3 million. Clearly we're not giving the proportionate. >> Sorry, councilman, if I may clarify just real quick, that's only our funding to lifeworks. We also have our women and children's shelter, which serves youth. We have other programs that that serve youth [11:52:05 AM] programs that that serve youth and young adults. So that that 6.3 just represents the life works investment. But but that should not be considered our full investment for youth and foster youth. It also doesn't include any of the staff time that we've dedicated to things like the foster youth task force and other initiatives. So I just want to offer that as a point of clarification. >> No, and that's an important clarification. I will just end something that has been brought up both by the manager and the mayor. This this discussion of process. We we cannot file a budget ifc after a certain period of time, we are bound by our rules. We can it operates just like a regular meeting. You have to have put it in at a certain time ahead of the final budget. Adoption. I took amendments that cost real money, and I worked with my sub quorum to not offer them as amendments, not push for those additional [11:53:07 AM] not push for those additional expenditures. Recognizing that there were priorities of the body, and instead said, how about we follow it up with direction, just like we had during the process? The ifc is just like this. During the process that guided money for the budget that has yet to be enacted. The only way to do this is to bring it subsequent to the budget process. Because we were timed out from filing this for the budget process. So it's it's a very odd thing to to be told you can't do it during the budget process, but you really shouldn't be doing it after the budget process. That's, that's I don't understand how I'm supposed to do it then. So I appreciate the conversation. You know, we have an item on today's agenda that I supported, but that talks about bringing additional [11:54:07 AM] about bringing additional funding for community shelter. Community shelter. We we we specifically did something around community shelter in the plan. So, you know, maybe that is something that's going beyond or supplementing or clarifying the plan. Right? These are things that we're going to continue to do. It's it's a it is a very good plan. And I. Expressed my steadfast support for it. This is something that I think makes it even a little better, I hope I hope we can we can do that today. So I would if there are no other discussion, I would move adoption of item 1 or 2. >> I'll get them. We're going to get to you I apologize. Yeah. Council member alter moves adoption of item 102. It's seconded by council member Velasquez. Now we'll recognize you. Please state your name. For the record, I apologize for making you wait. >> No. You're good. It's nice to have, like, a front row seat up here for a while. I'm [11:55:08 AM] up here for a while. I'm Savannah Lee. Thanks. Council members. Mayor Watson, I'm a resident of district one, and I'm here with equity action. I just want to touch on a part of item 102. That's the non- sworn officer pilot. We understand that these programs can be useful in cutting costs for police departments, and that we are supportive of. We just wanted to come here today to make clear that should the program move forward, we would ask that it be paid for by the funds that are currently already allocated to APD, not with new funding. APD funding takes up nearly 37% of the budget, and if the aim here is to reduce costs, we think it would be appropriate that this program focus on the efficiency of the dollars already allocated to that section of the budget, as we are asking Austin taxpayers to pay more in property taxes in order to fund vital city services, it's important that we focus on the use of the dollars that are already spoken for, and use them in the most responsible way possible. Thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate your patience. Members. We have a motion and a second. >> Mr. Mayor. Yes. Council member Madison here. Sorry. True to form, I'm having tech [11:56:08 AM] True to form, I'm having tech difficulties. So for the av folks in the room, it says moderated unmute mode. And for whatever reason, I don't have control over my camera anymore. Just so you guys know, I think I'm going to jump out and try to jump back in. My face won't be visible, so my vote won't count. So I'm asking if you could hold off on you guys taking that vote so I can jump out and try to jump back in so you can see me. >> Okay. Why don't you try to do that? Thank you. We'd like to have you with us. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Councilmember vela. >> Thank you. Mayor. I there's a lot of things in here I like. One of them was just a highlighted by by the speaker. I do want to leave staff with discretion though. And I am concerned about kind of overly targeting. And I just wanted to to, to understand kind of where we are in terms of the amendments and the targeting versus kind of how much from from Mr. Gray, how do you feel [11:57:08 AM] from Mr. Gray, how do you feel about the discretion in here? Because, again, this is a dynamic environment. I mean, it's not just homelessness in particular, but, you know, it could be transportation, it could be different areas where a lot of times departments have to react to what's happening at the time. And in the circumstances, and that may differ from the, you know, the the plan that you put out, like there's that that old saying about, you know, about boxing that, you know, you, you, you go into the to the fight with a plan and then you get punched in the mouth and the, you know, the plan changes dramatically. How do you feel about, again, more kind of guidance goals versus kind of hard limits. >> Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember. Sorry. Can you hear me? Oh, there we go. Thank you councilmember. And I'll start by acknowledging that our team gets punched in the mouth a lot in plans change. But this does not feel like a punch in [11:58:08 AM] does not feel like a punch in the mouth session right now for us. You know, I'll say, you know, for from staff's perspective, from our office's perspective, given everything that's going on in the country right now around homelessness at all levels, it's really important that we have the ability to be responsive to the needs of austinites and our community and be able to do that nimbly. Now there is a system of checks and balances already in place that we follow. We present regularly to the city's public health committee. We're about to launch this transparency portal, and none of our contracts get approved without council authorization. And so we we are 100% committed to doing things openly and honestly. But I will say again, it's really important that we have the ability to to be able to operate within a certain set of parameters, right, to to be responsive to what the data is showing us or to be responsive to a change in federal funding or change in state law. And and if we are kind of to handcuffed, [11:59:11 AM] if we are kind of to handcuffed, for lack of a better word, than it really is going to limit our ability to be as effective and produce the results that we feel like our community expects us to produce. >> And I think about that also because I know, you know, we've been talking about the situations that that have come up where, again, unexpected situations will arise that all of a sudden a lot of resources are being dedicated to deal with an unexpected situation that was not budgeted for, that was not really planned for. And I just want to make sure that staff has the flexibility to do that. And then again, I mean, just having, you know, some experience in, in, in government and. It's, you know, sometimes the low hanging fruit, you know, you always kind of want to go after the low hanging fruit. And I just want to make sure that y'all are able to do that. If there is an opportunity to, for example, target a population that may [12:00:12 PM] target a population that may not be in, you know, set out as a policy priority, but is is in reality, you know, factually just the opportunity is there. There's a situation I want to make sure that that y'all have the flexibility on that. And so anyway, I just weighing all this in, just to be frank, I'm, I'm kind of digesting the, the the resolution as we, as we talk about it right now. But all right I appreciate the, the the answers, Mr. Gray. >> Thank you. Councilmember. >> Councilmember Laine, I don't know whether it's helpful or not, but the way. That my previous comments, part of what I want to point out is it indicates that it makes it a priority. And then it says it talks in terms of allocation of at least a representative proportion being 15%. In other words, it creates a floor that you don't go below this amount. It has to be at least this [12:01:12 PM] It has to be at least this amount. And that's 15%. So it sets a minimum. And that is a in my view, a problem with this. And you can say it's a target. But when you say in carrying out such a priority, you shall target to allocate a minimum that that is what creates a problem in my view. Councilmember Laine. >> I first just want to thank David gray, our city manager, our mayor and council member. Alter. This has been an important discussion, I think, and as you know, someone who who is representing a district that has had significant increases in homelessness and challenges connecting to resources, we've been watching the skyrocketing youth homeless rate in our area for some time. Also see that we're losing ground on some of the gains that have been made around veterans and seniors are often, you know, also very important population. I know that in the areas that I represent, there [12:02:16 PM] areas that I represent, there is significant concern about ensuring that these particular populations are not forgotten and lost in this. I very much respect what I've heard about being given the flexibility and opportunity to do the work and see what comes, and some of the other concerns expressed, and I don't know if council member alter would be open to considering a different path in bringing something forward a little differently, but I'm just going to raise that because I'm very torn in hearing what our senior staff, knowing the leadership they brought and hearing what they're saying here today, while also knowing that my own constituents are really going to want to see some results in these. So I think I'll know where I stand on this. And thank you for the discussion. >> Thank you, councilmember Laine. All right, members, there being no further discussion, I would ask those that are in favor of the motion to raise your hand. Those opposed raise your hand. [12:03:24 PM] opposed raise your hand. Councilmember harper-madison, if you I can't have you raised your hand yet? >> I did not, not one way or the other. Mr. Mayor, after this discussion, I'd like to abstain, and I'd like to. >> Fair enough that I'll. >> Ask why. >> Okay, I'll thank you. Let me call for abstentions. Now, those that wish to abstain. >> I'll go with abstain. >> Okay. Any other? All right. Councilmember harper-madison. Well, let me call the vote and then I'll call on you to to state your vote. Those voting in favor or councilmembers alter Velasquez the mayor pro tem Siegel and Laine. Those are five in favor. Those voting no are council members duchen and vela and the mayor and those abstaining are council member Ellis and councilmember harper-madison. And councilmember qadri is absent, [12:04:25 PM] councilmember qadri is absent, so the motion fails. Councilmember harper-madison, I'll recognize you so you can speak to your abstention. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to just it was so many parts, so I tried to narrow it. >> Down to three parts that I wanted to address. Number one, I wanted to address. Director gray, while I appreciate you always being such a team player, you recognizing that we're all always wearing the same Jersey, and I'm certain that council member alter appreciates your apology. I would just like to take the opportunity to speak for myself, and my hope is most of the body. You don't owe us any apologies. We recognize what you're up against and what you're trying to accomplish. I do very much appreciate that you didn't see this exchange as a kick in the teeth, because it's not. It never is. We're all just trying to do our best. So thank you for your grace. I appreciate that. Number two, Mr. Mayor, I wanted to highlight your concern about the continuation of the budget discussion. Passed the budget [12:05:25 PM] discussion. Passed the budget discussion, if for no other reason, in my time as a city council member, so many of the things that I would have otherwise brought for budget discussion, I spent a lot of time with my staff and city staff coming up with another solution a creative way to address it. So I very much appreciate council member alter's intention here, but I do appreciate you saying, like up to a point, we got to stop talking about budget items, in which case council member alter, I want to say thank you. Unlike a five point list including, I appreciate that when you feel very strongly about something that because we're not the kind of body like if you watch other cities and their council meetings, then people fight each other, like actually go at it. Sometimes in a way that's productively, you know. When people disagree, somebody somewhere told everybody that we all have to get along. We all always have to agree. We all always have to be nice. And that's just not true. The truth [12:06:25 PM] that's just not true. The truth of the matter is, what we came here to do is create policy that offers our general citizenry a better quality of life. Period. Point blank. And if the way you do that sometimes ruffles feathers, so be it. And if we're not always happy with each other on the dais, so be it. But we're all professionals, consummate professionals who came into the role as professionals and who conduct ourselves as professionals. I think it's perfectly appropriate for you to push back. I personally, you know, while I can appreciate oftentimes how the mayor chairs a meeting, sometimes I do feel like the remainder of the body somehow sort of by default, it doesn't get the level of recognition of the fact that we all want an election to. So I think we all should get the amount of space that's appropriate for a council member who won an election to represent their district in this forum, and platform and place in space where they should. So thank you for stepping up and expressing your your unhappiness. You should be able to do that and moving forward. I'd like very much to [12:07:26 PM] forward. I'd like very much to to work with you on the continuation of the consideration, if for no other reason. One of the things that I came into this budget process recognizing is we didn't have any money. We still don't have any money. We're really just as a body, as a people, as a city, going to have to wrap our heads around more creative ways to do things. And so I really appreciate that the manager highlighted what he's already told us. Everything does not have to be an ifc. We have so many options, so many resources, so many opportunities to serve the general public and do the work we came here to do. And it doesn't always have to be in the form of an ifc. So I don't want you to feel defeated in any way. Your effort and intention have been recognized and seen, and I will be amongst, I'm certain, several of your colleagues. We wear the same Jersey, y'all. Same team will be amongst your colleagues in support of helping to push forward what the intention was here. Although I can't support the the resolution, the reason I abstained instead of voting it down is I really appreciate [12:08:28 PM] it down is I really appreciate the spirit in which you brought it forward. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, councilmember members. That will take us to our general public comment. And what I'll do is I'll turn to the city clerk and ask that the city clerk start calling names. When your name is called, please come down and pick. Take one of the chairs that's at the table here. That way we'll know you're here and know that you want to comment and it will allow us to to recognize you more rapidly and efficiently. So if you'll please start calling the names. >> First we have Rochelle Wilson on deck. We have Jacqueline Harrington, Evan Strickland. >> Thank you. Please just state your name for the record and begin. >> Hello. >> My name is. >> Rochelle Wilson. >> In early July, tragedy struck central Texas. Lives were lost, ordinary people [12:09:29 PM] were lost, ordinary people became heroes. And once again, we saw what it means when we say Texas strong. Like many of you, I sat at home reading the news and I cried as I whispered the names of the dead and missing, imagining the grief of their families. It is a practice I know too well, because for nearly two years I have been doing the same thing for Garza reading names and grieving for children that I will never meet here in Texas. Within hours of the flooding, aid was on the way. Neighborhoods mobilized, strangers became rescuers because that is what community does, because that is what humanity is supposed to look like. But then the questions start piling up. Why is it that when our neighbors drown, we rush in with boats and blankets? Yet children in Garza are starved while thousands of aid trucks are held hostage at a border? Why? While food rots in these very trucks, are gazans tying rocks to their stomachs to quiet the ache of hunger? Why are Texans who just endured a catastrophe, being threatened [12:10:30 PM] a catastrophe, being threatened with the loss of financial assistance? Unless we pledge loyalty to the state of Israel, why are tens of millions of our hard earned Texas tax dollars funding war crimes abroad instead of rebuilding our own communities? Here at home? Are the children of gaza not also a tragedy worth pulling together for? I'm not here to ask for anything. This council has already shown its lack of moral courage. For over a year, Austin residents pleaded with you to acknowledge the mass slaughter of civilians is wrong. We asked you to add a permanent ceasefire to the agenda and you did nothing. Meanwhile, this city continues to welcome war profiteers with open arms. Capital factory proudly hosted fed supernova at the paramount bay systems, is celebrated as a community partner even as its weapons tear apart. Families overseas. Make no mistake, our silence, our city contracts and our taxes make us complicit. The tax money of every person in this building has paid to murder and starve civilians in [12:11:32 PM] murder and starve civilians in gaza. The cowardice of American politicians, both locally and nationally, is staggering. Our system has been bought and sold by aipac, a foreign lobby that serves Israel's interests and not that of Americans. And because of that corruption, the people of gaza are still dying. So, no, I'm not here to ask. I'm here to remind you the genocide continues and you all continue to look away. Austin was once a city different, a city that keeps it weird. But you all have made us into a city that is indifferent. And while it is absolutely weird to stay silent about war crimes and genocide, I do not believe that that is the type of weird we should be striving towards. And I'll also just note that one year ago yesterday, a young man in gaza named mid was murdered. He spent a year in Texas as an exchange student just about an hour north of here. He had dreams and he grew meant in a genocide. >> Thank you very much for being here. Please. >> My name is Jackie Harrington, [12:12:34 PM] >> My name is Jackie Harrington, I am here, I have a script that we want to listen to that involves an APD officer colluding with a alleged victim for to help seize my property and insurance benefits. >> But the last couple times I've reached out, they haven't been returning phone calls. So I'm just going to go do a face to face with their staff over there. And like I said, looking into some of the financial aspects of it in terms of the sales concerned. >> It's funny how no one wants to once the police are involved, no one wants to return your calls and they just hope and pray it goes away. >> You know, a lot of times people will do that and like, well, if we don't return a call, we don't answer the call. It'll just go away. But then, lo and behold, I show up in person and it's they can't really, you know, deny anything at that point. They have to communicate with me. Then when I'm standing [12:13:35 PM] with me. Then when I'm standing right in front of them. So that's the, the next step with, with Spartan title and then that manner address out there with with Jackie. >> And I can't tell you how much sheamus and I appreciate this. You know, I know it's your job, but you've sparked an interest and I think you're you're really doing you know, what you can to try to uncover what's what's being done according to the law. And, you know, we know that this isn't part of, you know, getting our money back, but it will help the case eventually or or help us get the property itself eventually. So, I mean, the attorney hasn't been able to do much so far. He did ask to see if you had like a. >> But so anyways, that is an APD officer by the name of Richard Smith. He headed a conduction for theft of property. My my home was declared a total loss. This was always a civil action involved with nationwide insurance and title insurance. But once the [12:14:37 PM] title insurance. But once the home was declared a total loss, attorneys by the name of Patrick Kemp from Segal, Mccambridge singer Mahoney limited diverted those funds into their trust accounts. Okay, then. Once I sued nationwide, they came aboard, but the money had already been taken. It had already been diverted into the trust accounts. Later, a year later, we were arrested. When I say me, me and the other insured and my common law spouse, we were arrested for theft of property. Now the kicker to that is is Mr. Grant felt like he was refinancing his home. He's elderly. We corrected it. Our mortgage company gave the money back. There was a document that was filed at the real property records for a lease back or relate back, but that document was suppressed for two years. They used those voidable deeds, arrested us, filed, acquired the title using those voidable deeds instead of our reinstated corrective deed on file. We are currently in court with about four different cases, with these same private attorneys [12:15:38 PM] these same private attorneys that have colluded with an APD officer that has turned our lives around, conducted and headed this investigation with 31 fake witnesses knowing that our deeds were voided. >> Please begin. >> My name is Evan Strickland. Thank you for the time. Mayor and council members. I'm here today about the. Oh, we have my maps. Thank you. About the game room and internet sweepstakes. Businesses are sprouting up around Austin. These places they really, you know, negatively impact the communities where they're around. And oh, and as many of you are aware, they operate as a centers for illicit activities such as drug use and drug dealing. I guess my maps there. All right. So I'm focused. If you look at my map on the left, this is south first street on Ben white. There's three of these game [12:16:38 PM] There's three of these game rooms have sprouted up in just the past two years. They're marked on the red pins. And then you can see saint Elmo school there in the green. And there's the upcoming Bergstrom spur trail to be developed in the future. And the map on the middle, there's a it's a zoomed in there. I own a condominium property there. And you can see this game room appeared right next to it. My tenant left in may. They mentioned one of the main reasons where the, you know, the various people being brought in by these game rooms, they're wandering around on our property. They're often residents here. Describe them as being, you know, after a long night, you know, they have nowhere else to go. So they're drugged out, sleeping under the TRE to the entrance of the property. They're sleeping in their vehicles on our property. So really, these these two game rooms just in this little area right here by this condominium has really decreased the, you know, you know, the value of [12:17:39 PM] know, you know, the value of the area and everyone's well-being there. One longtime resident described the this area to me as the best kept secret in south Austin when I moved there about five years ago. He's been there about 20 years. He now describes the place as a nightmare, so I really don't know. You know what can be done about these places. I understand there's some sort of loophole they're operating to run gambling machines. And then, you know, that just brings in various clientele also written there. You know, they operate all night. Motorcycles and cars will come in all night blasting loud music. There's a little apartment complex with four tenants living above it, right there, right next to their parking lot. And they complain to the, you know, the people and get directly threatened with the. So this is quite the problem. And we have this nice Bergstrom spur trail to be developed here. I can tell, you know, families or joggers are going to use it if it's just, [12:18:41 PM] going to use it if it's just, you know, clientele of these game rooms coming in and out and being drugged out, hanging out around the trail after a time at the game room and one little suggestion for the second game room up north, you could buy this little corner lot. Make a little pocket park there. So thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Our next speakers are Chris flores, van Wilson, and Patty sprinkle. Shana og informed us she would not be speaking today. Please begin. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor. Council members. Mr. City manager, my name is van Wilson and I live in district three. I'm here today on behalf of my family and my neighbors, to ask you to intervene on a project [12:19:42 PM] you to intervene on a project that has galvanized our community. So for the proposed development at 600 Cumberland, at the corner of south first street, there are two points I want to call your attention to, please. One, there is no precedent for the scale of the development in our community. And two, the community has been excluded from the process of this development. So first, this project plans to erect 120 apartments into an eight story monolith that will tower above single story, single family homes. This project has no precedent in our neighborhood or any surrounding neighborhood, including those along south congress and south Lamar. And notably, if it had not been administratively approved, this project would soon be restricted by state bill 840, with 120 new units in a single family neighborhood. This project will increase the number of cars throughout the neighborhood, particularly on my street south second. This will increase the danger for the neighborhood children who play and ride bikes on the street, including my five year old and two year old twins. Drive down south first street [12:20:43 PM] Drive down south first street and all the buildings are 1 to 3 stories tall. This building will be a five story, a full five stories taller than any in the neighborhood, and will dwarf its single story neighbors, including a daycare center, retirees, local musicians, and families with small children. Second, it is frustrating how this project was approved without any notification or engagement with the community. The site plan was administratively approved, traffic issues were not addressed, and it seems as though the entire project was pushed through in secret. To keep neighborhood stakeholders in the dark. We only knew about the project moving forward when people showed up in hard hats on the site, Mr. Mayor, councilman, and specifically councilman Velazquez, I would ask you to take the short drive up south first street and come visit the site and understand how this scale of development does not make sense to close. There is no precedent to the scale of the development, and there has been a total lack of transparency in the process. We support development and affordable housing in our [12:21:44 PM] affordable housing in our neighborhood, and I ask your help to halt this development until the developer meets with the community and we can find common cause. So thank you for your time and helping to preserve the community we've created. >> Thank you. Please go ahead. Just state your name for the record. If you don't. >> Mind, I'd like my presentation to come up. Oh, yeah. Let's get that up. And then how do I click to the slide that I'd like. >> They'll hand you a clicker. >> Okay. Thank you. >> While we're doing that let me say for those that are watching council members and staff, what I think we will do is at the end of public communication, we will go to the public hearings because there is the public hearings aren't going to have a lot of speakers. We only have one speaker. We're going to go to the public hearings, conclude that, and then we will go to our live music, because that will allow us to recess until 2:00, instead of having to come back and try to take that up before 2:00. So, council [12:22:46 PM] before 2:00. So, council members, if you could make your way back, I know you're watching. I know staff is watching, so we'll do it that way. Now that that's pulled up, it's all yours. >> Thank you so much for. >> Giving me the time to do that. >> Thank you. Mayor. Hello, mayor, mayor pro tem and council members. I'm Patty sprinkle. I'm currently the president of Galindo elementary neighborhood association. Why are we here today? We're here because we've been excluded through the affordability unlocked program from having any say in a proposed development that will be extremely detrimental to our neighborhood. A documented, dangerous intersection at the corner of south first and Cumberland road is slated for an eight story building, making it the tallest structure south of the river, backing up to single family homes without the normal 25 foot buffer and a loading dock positioned right at the intersection of south first and Cumberland, which, you know, why did it just go away? Good question. You can see it right there. We're here because this site plan was allowed to bypass the safeguards provided by our land development code. The steps in the development process [12:23:48 PM] the development process intended for site assessment are routinely ignored. Dangerous intersection? No problem. We'll waive the traffic study in a floodplain. No worries. We'll fix it in site plan and the PC will pass it on the consent agenda. Design standards and public safety waved. Forget about those nice wide sidewalks in the vmu ordinance. Height restriction removed. Sorry, no morning sun or fresh air for the neighbors right behind it. Galindo recognizes the need for affordable housing in our neighborhood, but notes there are several residential projects along south first that have either stalled out or not been completed. Excuse me? And then Austin has adequate apartment inventory, but a lot of it's sitting empty due to the price points and other things. The process is broken and disenfranchizes residents and property owners the to not assess all the issues and problems with any site, but especially for one that plans to dig a big hole in the ground is shortsighted, dangerous and leaves the city open to liability. This is why we have building codes in the first place. To avoid these kinds of [12:24:49 PM] place. To avoid these kinds of costly problems, we asked the city to do their due diligence when permitting site plans. Let me just show you this. This is what it will look like. This. This is to scale. Okay? We asked the city to do their due diligence when permitting site plans of all kinds. Stop the waivers and work arounds for developers. One hopes development staff makes a site visit to see for themselves what the actual conditions on the ground are. Instead of looking at a one dimensional map believing all problems will be worked out in the site plan, how can that happen if you don't gather all the information? To make an informed decision, please require stakeholder input in large structures that will reshape a neighborhood. Whether or not you live in an affordable housing complex or in a home, we all deserve to live in a safe environment, in a safe building that complies with the current land development code. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All. Public all public communication speakers have been called great. [12:25:49 PM] been called great. >> Thank you very much. And thank you all for being here. As I indicated, we will go to the public hearing items. Item number 104105 members. Remember that 106 was withdrawn. And so we will go to 107. After 104 and 105 members I before I call, open the public hearing on item number 104, let me recognize that item 104 is brought forth because there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of dedicated parkland, and all reasonable planning has been and will be taken to minimize harm to such lands. The date of public notification in the Austin american-statesman. There were three dates August 3rd, August 10th and August 17th, 2025. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 104. As I have just set it out, there being no objection, the public hearing is now open on item number 104. >> There are no speakers on item 104. [12:26:51 PM] item 104. >> Members. There are no speakers that have signed up to speak on item number 104. So unless there's objection, we will close the public hearing. We will close the public hearing on item number 104. The motion that the chair will recognize is that since item 104 is brought forth because there is no being there, no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of dedicated parkland, and all reasonable planning has been done and will be taken to minimize harm to such lands, and that the dates of public notification in the Austin american-statesman were August 3rd, 10th and 17th, 2025. Move. Approval of the motion will be to move approval of the resolution. The mayor pro tem moves approval of the resolution and is seconded by seconded by council member vela. Is there any discussion without objection? Item. The resolution item number 104 is adopted with council member alter and council member council member Madison is there, so council member Siegel temporarily off the dais and council member qadri absent. That will take us to item number 105 members. [12:27:53 PM] to item number 105 members. Item 105 is also brought forth because there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of dedicated parkland, and all reasonable planning has been and will be taken to minimize harm to such lands. The dates of public notification on this item in the Austin american- statesman were August 3rd, 10th and 17th, 2025. Without objection, we will open the public hearing. Under those circumstances, there being no objection, the public hearing on item number 105 is open. >> One speaker registered bill bunch. >> Mr. Bunch, Mr. Bunch. Bill bunch. I don't believe he's here anymore. >> That concludes 105. >> There are no speakers, no other speakers signed up on item number 105. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 105 members. The chair will recognize a motion on item 105 is being brought forth. Because there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of dedicated parkland, and all reasonable planning has been and will be taken to minimize [12:28:53 PM] and will be taken to minimize harm to such lands. And notice that the date of publication of the in the Austin american-statesman for this item were August 3rd, 10th and 17th, 2025. The mayor pro tem moves approval. It is seconded by council member vela council. Is there any discussion? Council member vela. >> Thank you, mayor. Just a quick comment. This is a spot of land. It doesn't have any structures on it right now. We are. This is in district four. We are in the planning process for a park. I'm hoping that in the 2026, bond will be able to fund improvements to this park. But in the meantime, it is needed for a storage for the improvements that are going to be made to little walnut creek in that area. So I just wanted for the public to know what's going on. It's just a temporary use so that we can get this flood control project done. When the flood control project is done, we're going to turn it into a nice park for the community. >> Thank you. Thank you, councilmember vela. Appreciate the explanation. Councilmember [12:29:54 PM] the explanation. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. I just want to highlight one thing about 104 105, because this has come up in a couple of parks in d-10 just noting that we are and I understand the constraints. I support both these items. I want to be clear about that, but we're using parkland in other capacities, sort of dual use for including these two items water treatment, water retention, etc. And I do think it speaks to the need to have a really good conversation around how we approach acquisition and parkland in the bond next year. That's all. >> Thank you. Great. Thank you very much, members. There being no further discussion without objection, item number 105 is approved with council members alter and Siegel temporarily off the dais and council member qadri absent. That will move us to item number 107. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item 107. The public hearing is now open. I'll turn to the city clerk. >> There are no speakers members. >> There are no speakers on the public hearing for item number 107. So without objection, we will close the public hearing [12:30:56 PM] will close the public hearing on item number 107. It is now closed. The mayor pro tem moves approval. It is seconded by council member vela. Discussion. Hearing. None. Without objection. Item number 107 is adopted with council member council members alter and Siegel temporarily off the dais, and council member qadri absent members. The next item on our agenda is it is a 2:00 time certain. So without objection, we will recess until 2:00. We will have. We will set up now for our live music and have our live music. But the city council of Austin, Texas on August 28th, 2025 will be in recess until 2:00 P M it is 1231. Thanks, everybody [2:00:08 PM] It's 2:00 pm on Thursday, August 28th, 2025 and I'll call back to order the Austin city council for this regular meeting of the Austin city council. Members, before we begin our 2:00 time, certain council members, alter and Siegel, were temporarily off the dais when we took up items 104, 105, and 107. They both have asked that they be shown voting in favor of items 104, 105 and 107, their votes being recorded in favor will not change the outcome of those votes. So I move and the mayor pro tem seconds a motion to show council members alter and council member Siegel voting in favor of items 104, 105 and 107. Is there any objection? Without objection, they will be shown voting in favor of those items with council member qadri absent. All right. We will now go to our 2:00 time certain and [2:01:10 PM] go to our 2:00 time certain and I will recognize our staff to give us the rundown. >> Thank you, mayor and council. I'm joy harden with the planning department. Your zoning agenda begins with item number 109, NPR 2024 0020.01. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. The related rezoning is item 110 c14 2024 0168. Again, this item is offered for consent on all three readings. And this is what the planning commission's recommendation I don't want 11 ac14 2024 0151. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. Item 112 is in pa 2024 0018.02. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. The rezoning is. Item 113 c14 2024 0152. Again, this item is offered for consent on all three readings. And lastly, item 114 c14 2025 0063. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. [2:02:11 PM] consent on all three readings. This concludes the reading of the zoning and neighborhood plan amendment. And as always, this is at your discretion. >> Members, you have any questions of miss harden? Okay. The motion it will be to. >> Items 109. >> 110, 111, 112, 113 and 114 on consent and each one of them on all three readings. Is there a motion? Motion made by the mayor pro tem, seconded by council member Velasquez? And what I'll do is we'll go to public comment on these items, and then any comments from council will bring up at that point in time. Is that okay with you, councilmember vela? All right. So with that we have a motion on the consent items, and I will turn to the city clerk's office. >> On item 109. We have Krista Krista Sutter. Okay. Do you want to speak on item 110? Okay. We will move to remote. We have Barbara Mcarthur on item 114. Barbara, are you with us? [2:03:19 PM] Barbara, are you with us? >> This is on the zoning that's happening on south Lamar, but I don't see it on the agenda anymore. Was it pulled? >> It's on the agenda. >> It yes it is. >> Okay. I just want to speak briefly and say thank you for listening to me. But I'm very disappointed that a project that was approved and supported for affordable housing is this easily changed to a hotel, because I think in general, hotels don't provide a lot of affordable housing. Thanks very much. >> Thank you. Our next speaker is in person, Lorraine Atherton on item 114. And that concludes all zoning. Oh. >> Yes. [2:04:19 PM] >> Yes. >> We have Betsy signed up for remote, but she is here in person. >> Thank you. My name is Betsy Greenberg and I live in district nine. I'm opposed to what was described as a change to a condition of zoning in the case on 2323 south Lamar mixed use. When the cmu proper zoning for this property was approved, there was a conditional overlay included. Conditional overlays generally represent a compromise between an applicant, neighbors and the city council. When you remove a conditional overlay, you are reneging on an agreement which damages the faith that the community has in the city government. Vmu gives developers relaxed development standards, allowing for more impervious cover and larger buildings in exchange for affordable housing, but is only one story of cmu. Building is required to be residential. This can result in a lot of bonus with very little [2:05:20 PM] bonus with very little community benefit. The conditional overlay that is being removed today says the commercial uses on the property are prohibited until at least 165 dwelling units are built with a goal of 200 dwelling units. If you approve the removal of this conditional overlay, Austin will get hotel rooms instead of housing and affordable housing. This is completely counter to not only the agreement that was made when the zoning was approved. It is also inconsistent with the goals you claim to care about. I don't recall any of you saying in your campaigns that Austin needs more hotel rooms. Please keep your word and say no on item 114. Thank you. >> All speakers names have been called at this time for zoning. Okay. Lorraine's joining us. Lorraine Atherton, item 114. [2:06:20 PM] Lorraine Atherton, item 114. >> Hello council members, I'm Lorraine Atherton. I'm here on behalf of the zoning committee of the zilker neighborhood association. We sent you a letter on August 25th asking that this case be withdrawn. And we noticed. Because it's throughout the process up to this point, it was about the [2:07:21 PM] this point, it was about the removal of condition two. C and your it said nothing about changing the 60% mfi affordability. That's rate that's in the the that's conditioned to E in the ordinance. In fact the redlined ordinance submitted to the planning commission showed the deletion of only conditioned to see the ordinance draft ordinance before you today has just the the 60% mfi condition two has just disappeared. That's. A violation of of the [2:08:22 PM] That's. A violation of of the open meetings act. Beyond that, I would ask you to. Look at the second and Paige of our submission. Listing many, many questions concerning the fiscal impact of this change. >> Thank you. Speaker. All speakers names have been called at this time. >> Thank you very much. Members. We have a motion and a second. I recognize councilmember vela to speak on the consent agenda. >> Thank you. Mayor. I just had some questions for transportation staff on items 112 and 113. >> Okay. >> Yes. Curtis Katy with transportation public works. [2:09:24 PM] transportation public works. >> You might want to say your name again. Poke that button and then say your name again. >> Curtis Spady with transportation. Curtis Spady with transportation. >> Somebody help! Curtis. Transportation. >> I'm actually better at my job than this. >> There you go. >> I am Curtis with transportation and public works department. There we go. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Beatty. I just wanted to ask a question about this project. This is going to have a very long frontage on Lamar, and I just wanted to make sure that my understanding and again, please correct me if I'm wrong. Is that a project that is this long, that has that much street frontage within the crestview? Tod does have to have some provision for access through the property. Is that correct? And if so, could you just describe kind of that rule a [2:10:24 PM] describe kind of that rule a bit? >> Sure. This property has approximately 620ft of frontage along north Lamar and in the tod for the crestview area that has to be broken up. Anything over 500ft. We have already communicated that with the applicant, and they are well aware that we need to provide a bike and pedestrian connection through the property so that it's less than 500ft, primarily, so pedestrian bicyclists don't have to go around the property to get to the other facilities, such as the Justin on north Lamar intersection. >> Great. And but I know at this point we're just doing the rezoning. We don't know where that connection is going to be. Is that a part of the site plan process? >> That's part of the site plan process. We have indicated to them where our preference would be, and they are looking into that as they do their site plan. >> Okay, great. Well, I appreciate that. I just wanted to make sure that that was the case. I'm supportive of the project. We'll be voting for it. This, you know, the corner there of of of Lamar and airport, the crestview tod. We have the red line going through [2:11:25 PM] have the red line going through there. We have the 801 going through there. We will hopefully sooner than later have the light rail, a major light rail stop there. There's multiple 150 foot plus developments going in the the crescent market, which is some of the best food in the city. So I just want to make sure that the neighborhoods are going to have easy access to through and around the area. And I just wanted to clarify that and appreciate your comments. >> Thank you. Any other questions of staff or any discussion with regard to the consent agenda? Let me ask, is there anyone that wishes to be shown abstaining from a vote on the consent agenda as it's been provided? Anyone seeking to recuse themselves from voting on any of the agenda items that are on consent. Anyone wishing to be shown voting no. Yes. Councilmember. >> Thank you. Mayor. No on 114. >> Okay. Anybody else? All [2:12:28 PM] >> Okay. Anybody else? All right. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. The consent agenda 109 110, 111, 112, 113 and 114 is adopted, with council member duchen being shown voting no on item 114 and council member zo qadri absent members. There being no further business to come before the Austin city council at this scheduled meeting of the city council. Without objection, we will adjourn. No objection. We are adjourned at 2:12 P.M.