City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 9/25/2025 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 9/25/2025 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 9/25/2025 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. [10:01:40 AM] >> I'll call the meeting of the Austin city council to order at 10:01 A.M. September 25th, 2025. We have a quorum of the council present. We are meeting at 301 west second street, which is city hall in the city council chambers. Members. The order of business that will follow today is I will go through the process of. Letting you know which consent items have not have have been pulled. Those are items. 349 I'm sorry. Three, nine and 45. We will then hear from speakers on theconsent agenda. We will as soon as the consent agenda is done, I will hear from. I will call on those who wish to speak on the council. If you wish to speak, you need to let [10:02:42 AM] wish to speak, you need to let me know or go ahead and post on the board here. And that way that will let me know. What we will do is we will then go to we will recess the city council meeting and we will call to order the Austin housing finance corporation board of directors meeting. We will conduct that meeting. We'll adjourn it and we will come back to the city council meeting. We will take up the non consent items and that includes the items that are public hearings. Those are items 61, 62 and 63. At noon we will have our time certain public communication and we will have a recess for music. And then of course at 2:00 we will have the time certain on zoning matters. Members. There are no items that are listed in the changes and corrections that need to be read into the record. However, again, I will point out that items three, nine, and 45 have been pulled from the consent agenda. When we hear the consent agenda members on item 45, the draft [10:03:42 AM] members on item 45, the draft ordinance is version two, item 52. The draft resolution is version two. Item 57. The draft ordinance is version two. Item 62. You have a revised exhibit a, and that is a version three. Before we begin hearing from speakers, because I want to make sure that everybody understands how our rules operate during any public comment period. I want everyone to please be aware that behavior that violates the rules of the council meeting won't be permitted. So if you're here to speak on an item you may not speak out of turn. You may criticize a public official, but you may not use personally derogatory or disparaging remarks. You may not defame another person, use obscene language. Use abusive language that is likely to incite a breach of the peace. Make threats of violence against any other person, or otherwise disrupt the orderly conduct of the meeting, such as screaming. Comments. I want everyone to please note. Also, [10:04:43 AM] everyone to please note. Also, please note that comments from a member of the public on agenda items must be relevant to that item. There's been apparently some confusion about an item, and some people have signed up to speak on an item related to cameras in parks. That is not on today's agenda. It was on a previous agenda, but withdrawn. It is not on today's agenda. So if you're signed up to speak and want to talk about that, you're not going to be recognized on that. And if you're talking on another numbered item and you want to visit about that, I will I'll I'll point out and we'll call that out of order. And you won't be able to do that if you have signs or anything of that nature. We ask that you do those in the back so that you don't block anybody. Now, we also have had a number of people sign up using names that do not appear to be real, and those names will not be called in some instances, those names have, while perhaps labeled creative or or vulgar. [10:05:45 AM] labeled creative or or vulgar. And so we won't we won't call out those names. I'm not going to ask anybody to do that. But if in fact your name doesn't get called, let us know. And because if we've made a mistake in terms of your name, in fact, if Anita bong is really here. I mean, it's it's it's it's I haven't seen any bong hits in a long time. If Anita bong hit, if Anita bong hit is here. But I haven't seen any of the bong hits in a long time. Even though bong hits have have have long been an iconic part of Austin, Texas and and brought much happiness to our city. In fact, if if if if any of the bong hits are here, it would be a high point in our day for us to get to hear from them. But, but. We probably. Well. And by the way, if miss bong hit is here, she will be limited to two minutes. A two minute bong [10:06:45 AM] two minutes. A two minute bong hit is about all we can handle. And and we will limit her two minutes because we don't want any bogarting of our council meeting. So with that, we will go to the people that have signed up on the consent agenda to speak, and I will turn to the city clerk and ask you to call names. Except for miss bong hit. >> Thank you, mayor, for item one. I have a remote speaker, Beverly Luna. >> Hi, my name is Beverly Luna. I'm with Austin Lawson. Found pets. I first want to address agenda item number one regarding the contract with Travis county for animal services. For an amount not to exceed $1.3 million for four month period, to be paid by the city based on a cost recovery model. The cost of recovery amount per animal per day that I have seen from the Austin animal center is between 56 and $58 per day. I'm not sure if that's just for boarding, but it's an amount that appears to [10:07:46 AM] it's an amount that appears to be substantially above the cost. It isn't clear if that includes other costs, like an expensive vet bill, but just at that boarding rate that only covers the city holding 144 county animals for four months. I see no reason why there should be a limit on the amount to be paid by the county. That's for the county with input from their constituents to decide. I respectfully, respectfully request that this council remove the limit that they can negotiate with the county to pay on agenda item number two. Again, I question the reasonableness and validity of the cost recovery model that arc has come up with, and I'm not sure what to do about agenda item number three. I heard the mayor say that it's been pulled from the consent agenda, but is it going to be on the regular agenda? And if so, do I speak to it now or have this? >> No, ma'am. Well, we'll call you when we bring up item number three. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. >> Sure thing. >> Now I will go to in person [10:08:48 AM] >> Now I will go to in person speakers for item one. Pat Vasquez, Robert Vonderhaar. Moises Saka Chris Chen Gabriel beidelman. Mr. Clinton, if your name's been called, please make your way down to one of the podiums and then just make sure to state your name into the record. >> Hello, I'm Robert Vonderhaar. >> Please feel free to make yourself comfortable and have a seat. >> Thank you. Hi. Thank you for having me. I wanted to come last month, but I wasn't able to. Looking at this, the amount of 1,000,331, whatever. I think that that's a better way to spend the money than 2 million on surveillance cameras. Thank you very much. >> That was crafty. But we're [10:09:53 AM] >> That was crafty. But we're not going to be talking about surveillance cameras today. >> I agree with what the previous speaker has said. Thank you. Goodbye. >> Please. >> Mayor and city council members, thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is pat Walsh and I am in fact here to speak on item one. I signed up as neutral on item one. I signed up as neutral on item two, and I signed up as in favor of item three. I will now limit my comments to one. And may I also comment on two? Or should I wait. >> If there's any? Is there anyone else signed up on one? >> Yes, there are several. >> We'll hear from people on item one and bring you back on item two. [10:10:53 AM] item two. >> Okay, my comment on item one is that although I was initially neutral on it, I am now in slight opposition to it only because we have not had a chance to discuss this item in a process of either the animal advisory commission or the strategic plan working group that I am now on again, and there is no at least there was no backup documentation. So what I am requesting is that you amend this item to only approve the extension for one month. I understand that you need to approve it so that it can move forward for October, but that you bring it back in November or October for approval for the next three months. This is a an item that should have been discussed. I'm asking you for a process change, which is that instead of approving it for four months, [10:11:55 AM] approving it for four months, you approve it for one month and come back before you approve it. And here's why. This is for $1.3 million. If you approve something for $1.3 million for four months, the rest of the eight months, you basically have to do the same thing. So thank you. >> Thank you. >> Continuing on with item one, Ethan Epperson Jones, George Moore, Jake parker, Ian Brennan, and Adam corvus. Again, if your name has been called, please go ahead and make yourself down to the podium and state your name into the record. >> Jake parker, please. Thank you. I am here to talk about item one. I'm not here to talk about a $2 million surveillance state initiative. >> Quit doing that. Just just please talk about the item. >> Sure. I am in favor of it. [10:12:55 AM] >> Sure. I am in favor of it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Please, anyone, either one of you, begin. This is on item one. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Adam corvus, and I'm here to analyze the principles embodied in agenda item one, the interlocal agreement with Travis county for animal services. First, let's examine the methodology for service delivery. This agreement relies on trained animal service officers, ensuring that any enforcement action involves a person who can be held accountable. A person our residents can face. This model is fundamentally different from systems where violation is determined solely by a recorded image produced by an automated device. Such systems, regardless of the specific technology used, effectively bypass the core Texan principles that enforcement should involve a human accuser creating a loophole that violates the spirit of established state law. Second, the fiscal structure of this agreement is a public to public cost recovery model. Its [10:13:55 AM] cost recovery model. Its purpose is explicitly tied to animal welfare, which prevents any propensity for the city to act out of greed or self-interest by turning animal control into a high volume, automated shakedown for revenue. The data collected under this agreement is for specific case management, not for the mass harvesting of community data to be fed into ai training models. This public service framework is a direct safeguard against the monetization of enforcement. Finally, the nature of this contract is an interlocal agreement provides a layer of public accountability and control. This is crucial because it protects the city from the well-documented financial risks of entering into a prohibitive, long term contracts with private, for profit technology companies. We've seen how other Texas municipalities and other areas of enforcement were left holding the bag. Legally forced to continue funding these private vendors well after the systems they provided had been ruled improper and against the public interest. >> I'm going to rule your testimony out of order, and we appreciate you being here. Thank you for your time. We'll go. >> To council. [10:14:56 AM] >> To council. >> Please begin and speak only to item number one, please. >> Thank you. My name is Ian Brennan. I'm opposed to live view technologies surveillance policy. >> Here in Austin. You're out of order. Thank you. >> For item two, Beverly Luna. >> This is Beverly Luna with Austin lost and found pets. I just questioned the cost recovery model that ark uses. It is dramatically above the cost today for Apa and wish that that be carefully evaluated before any decisions are made. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> On item two. Vice. And after pat is George Moore and Kennard Randolph. [10:15:58 AM] Randolph. >> Mayor and council members, thank you again for this opportunity to speak. My name is pat Ellis. I live in district three and I very much respect the work that all of you do for our community, and it makes me really upset to see how this process is being treated. And. I just want to say that I just feel very emotional about it, because I really think that those of us who were here should respect each other, and we should respect you, and you should respect us. And the the members of the public should respect each other and not not do what they're doing right now. Thank you. I do want to say that I served on the strategic planning working group with Beverly Luna, who has spoken twice already, and she and I [10:16:59 AM] twice already, and she and I sometimes disagree, sometimes agree. But one of the things that we did not have a chance to do is discuss this issue ahead of it, coming before you. And, you know, with all due respect for the work you put into the budget process, this we should have been given an opportunity to discuss this cost recovery model during the budget process. So I am again asking for a one month extension. I support the city getting reimbursed from the county for this, for the cruelty cases, but I also would like to have more of a discussion about the cost recovery model and and just everything else that is included in it. And I want to end by saying that I thank you very much. I appreciate when you listen to us, and I do not appreciate when people make it harder for you to listen to us [10:17:59 AM] harder for you to listen to us because you have to be playing referee or whatever. And thank you, mayor, for your jokes. >> Yeah. You're welcome. Did wait, did she just say thank you, mayor, for being a joke? What'd she say? Yeah. Please. >> I'm honored right off. Thank you all for letting me speak. I think that trust is earned and underhanded tactics that this council uses to obfuscate certain issues is conniving. It seems like the city has more compassion for animals than it does humans. And it's interesting that the government has proposed letting humans be surveilled, but not animals. I guess because they don't. >> I'm going to recognize your testimony as being out of order. Thank you for being here. >> Just as a reminder, item three has been pulled, so I'm going to move on to item four. J Madison George Moore, Calvin Lawrence, Kenneth Anaya, and [10:19:02 AM] Lawrence, Kenneth Anaya, and Paul Carter. >> If your name isn't called, please feel free to come forward. Grab a seat and we will recognize you. Please, sir. >> I want to thank you all the public servants for their time today. It's important that you show up and participate. It means a lot to me and I think it means a lot to the constituents. Also, I want to be thankful for all the people that showed up in the crowd today. Set aside time from their work, their family, whatever their challenges might be of the week. >> Sir, could you state your name, please? >> J Madison, I want to voice my support for this agenda item, but I also want to take the time to get some clarity on what all is covered in the acquisition and construction of the electrical utility capital improvement projects that's being reimbursed. I think it makes sense from a fiscal standpoint to rebalance this budget, utilizing the reimbursement tools that we have on hand. But I also want to understand if the funding for this infrastructure is [10:20:03 AM] for this infrastructure is going to support the integration of any systems that might be similar to those presented today by live view. >> Sir, I'm going to recognize your testimony as being out of order. >> May I proceed with other subjects? >> If you're talking about item number four, we're we welcome your testimony. But as you can tell, and I think you probably were part of the effort, there's an effort to try to disrupt a meeting over an item that is not on the agenda. So I'm going to recognize that as being out of order and ask that you not violate what we have laid out as our rules. >> Understood. My goals here today are to understand what all is included in this budget reimbursement. I looked through some of the PDFs and documentations that were attached online, and some were very clear and some were a bit ambiguous. So that's why I was asking. I didn't know if any of this utility improvement projects have been related to, say, previous integrations of technological systems that are [10:21:03 AM] technological systems that are used for whether it's supplying power to roadway lighting or traffic control cameras. And from the bottom of my heart, I want to ask you all to not trade our freedoms today for a sliver of perceived safety and security. >> Thank you for being here. Please, if you'd state your name. >> My name is J. >> You need to state your full name. >> Madison. I would, sir, I would just like to. >> That was the previous speakers name. >> I have the same name. >> We only have one J. Madison signed up, so. >> And he's already spoken. So thank you for being here. >> Well, I would just like to say that. >> No, sir. You're out of order. >> Moving on to item five, Timothy hodges, George Moore, Paul Carter, Marc Maddox, Lisa [10:22:05 AM] Paul Carter, Marc Maddox, Lisa Gilmore. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. Just grab any seat there in front of the microphone. Please state your name. >> My name is Timothy strong hodges. I thank you for listening to me today. For the council members on item number five, the water service contract for the Austin energy warehouse. The. My stance is rather neutral, although I am fairly. Hold a positive view with it. The reliability of the water for city facilities is important, and I don't necessarily oppose it. But this item reminds me of how infrastructure infrastructure [10:23:06 AM] infrastructure infrastructure agreements often explained quietly. A simple contract today becomes easements tomorrow, and sometimes those expansions carry consequences far beyond what the what is discussed. That is why I need to speak about another item that proposed citywide camera networks. >> Sir, as I've already indicated, that's not on the agenda. Thank you for being here. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. >> My name is Lisa Gilmore. I approve of the funding for Austin's infrastructure in terms of water. I am happy to see funding for Austin's infrastructure and future. Though a warehouse for water may seem boring, these ordinary projects have massive ripple effects on the morale of the people. The allotment of tax money always elicits great effect, intended and unintended. Indeed, the most effective, effective types of investment in a city are things that protect people's freedoms and [10:24:07 AM] protect people's freedoms and ability to manifest how they can positively contribute to their city as much as possible, and other types of infrastructure may not prove as effective, such as well, surveillance. Those sorts of things. Make people feel constantly, passively. >> Accused is now out of order, and I appreciate you being here. >> For item six. I have Jaden Howe on the line. Jaden, are you there? >> My name is Jaden ho. Yes. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Please proceed. >> Excuse me. Can you? I find the go purple pilot program interesting? Initially, I signed up to speak as neutral, but I'd like to save myself in favor of the agreement. I find spending millions on reusing water to be great, but I really wish we'd spend less money on [10:25:08 AM] wish we'd spend less money on surveillance and parks. I oppose that very heavily. >> Thank you for being here. Thank you for your time. >> Continuing on item six, John Roberts. Tim Turnipseed, George Moore, Paul Carter, Vince Mcmahon Jr. If your name's been called. >> Your name's been called, please come forward. Doesn't look like anybody's here. >> On to item seven George Moore Keith Lowry. On to item eight George Moore. >> Please, please come forward. >> My apologies. >> Howdy. Thank you all. >> State your name please. >> My name is Keith Lowe. Thank you for having me. On the circuit of the Americas resolution. We see a clear, transparent arrangement. And the city would let Sealock handle state funded applications and keep the money in view the whole time, which [10:26:08 AM] in view the whole time, which is a simple zero cost example of accountability. The new eye camera proposal is nothing like that. >> Thank you for being here. We appreciate you being here, but you're out of order. >> Item eight George Moore, Calvin Lawrence, Zenobia. Joseph. >> If your name's been called, please come forward, okay? >> For item. Nine nine is pulled. Correct? Item nine has been pulled. I'm going to move to item ten. Oh, Zenobia is making her way down for item eight, but I'm going to call for item ten while we're waiting, okay? Nigel Farnworth, George Moore. Tully. Blanchard. >> If your name's been called, please come forward. Welcome, miss Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor, council. I'm Zenobia Joseph speaking on item eight. That is [10:27:08 AM] item eight. That is specifically the applied materials foreign trade zone board. So you're actually going to relieve them of $119,000 in ad valorem tax. I want you to recognize that this is actually deceitful. It does not specify in the back. So I would ask your executive director, segura, to give you the amount of funding that applied materials has been forgiven over 30 years. Specifically, I want you to recognize that there's no transportation to applied materials. While the backup material does actually say that they're doing some community good. And the thing that makes me an opposition to this item is because it is relieving them of the tariffs. So while you're going to give this tax break to the corporation, the little people everyday taxpayers are still having to pay more for their goods. So I would ask you to table this item and to recognize that times are different. And I would ask that when staff brings forth items such as this, that they actually show the bus routes. I want you to recognize that you [10:28:10 AM] want you to recognize that you have an urban technology group that got $500,000 from Travis county commissioners court, but specifically, even if they train people in semiconductors, they cannot get to that area. It's three miles, approximately from 392 for this road to get to Samsung and applied materials is farther than that. So respectfully, mayor, this is not going to be something that's good for the public. This is not going to give us a good return on investment. And I would ask you to recognize the need to table the item and allow them to get their tax breaks another way, because it's not a fair representation of the tax breaks that you're about to give here. And even though it mentions a different project in backup, that does not justify giving this break to applied materials. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> You're welcome. >> For item 11, Amanda Lawson, George Moore, Madison J. [10:29:10 AM] George Moore, Madison J. >> Your name has been called. Please come forward. >> Okay, not. >> Just any microphone you want. >> Hi, my name is Amanda Lawson. I'm here to speak against the contract for live view technologies. >> Well, that's not on the agenda, so we're not talking about that. >> Good morning. Council. My name is George Moore. I just wanted to say that I don't trust law enforcement with a massive, detailed, unregulated, non auditable. >> You're out of order. That's not an item on the agenda. >> Out of order. >> Yes. >> That's pat bessy or whatever her name was. >> Well, I'm I'm ruling. >> I'm a full minute. And you didn't say that. That was out of. [10:30:11 AM] of. >> I'm ruling you out of order. Thank you for your challenge to me. >> Item 12 George Moore. Item 13 George Moore, bill bunch. >> Mr. Bunch, do you wish to speak? He's waiving his right to speak. >> Item 14 Joseph Mccarthy. Shane Rectenwald, Alex Johnson, George Moore, Jay Madison. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. >> Item 15. >> No, I don't see anyone coming forward. >> Neither do I. Item 15 George Moore. Item 16. Nick Cavallaro, George Moore, Zenobia. Joseph. >> Your name has been called. Please come forward. Miss Joseph, do you wish to speak on 16? Please come forward. Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record. [10:31:11 AM] the record. >> Nick Cavallaro. >> Okay. >> Speaking on item 16. >> Yes. >> I was initially neutral, but now I'm actually quite positive. Building a finishing a a bike trail, especially a bridge, is a costly investor. So 3,000,000 in 750,000 dollars. That seems like a reasonable expense of public money. 2 million on cameras is not. >> Sir, we appreciate your being here, miss Joseph. >> Thank you. Thank you. Mayor. Council. I'm Zenobia. Joseph. This is a $3.7 million contract for Muniz, which is a contractor that is building the sidewalks for the monon trail phase five. I just want you to recognize, mayor, respectfully. This contractor discriminates if you go north of us 183 northeast, specifically Ramberg north Lamar chito vela. It's just a plain gray sidewalk. Plain pavement. If you go to burnet road northwest. Mike [10:32:12 AM] burnet road northwest. Mike Siegel, council member respectfully, it's terracotta all the way. 46th street. Same thing on airport boulevard. Mike Rogers, assistant city manager, and I did a recon and he has seen for himself. I would ask you to rebid this contract and give it to someone who is actually going to be equitable in the distribution of the infrastructure. Specifically, there are no shared use paths, but the people are dying on north Lamar, I told capital metro. January 15th, 2020 2015 2025 pardon me that people were dying on north Lamar and as you are well aware, it was July 27th, 2025 when Imam Islam mossad was killed on north Lamar. But yet we're going to spend $3.7 million for a trail. Well, who's on the trails? Mayor, I can tell you that it's the transit dependent minorities that are on the busses north of us. 183 and you are double counting and triple counting us, because there are no one seat rides anymore. You have to take a 30 minute weight [10:33:13 AM] have to take a 30 minute weight transfer to the other side of town. I would ask you to use this money. Mike Siegel table this item and respectfully put the pedestrian hybrid beacon where it's needed. 37,500 vehicles traverse north Lamar on a daily basis. You've known this since 2020. I told you that there was a gentleman that was killed in his wheelchair in 2016. Donald Norton January 30th, 2016. How many more people have to die needlessly? A trail is nice, but that can't be the priority. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them. Thank you, thank you. >> For item 17 Justin Shryock George Moore. >> Good morning. My name is Justin. Swoosh good morning. Thank you mayor Watson mayor pro tem Fuentes and members of the city council I'm here to speak in support of item 17. Physical security is very important especially in the aviation industry. Given issues like in 2020 when an individual [10:34:14 AM] like in 2020 when an individual was struck by a landing southwest plane at austin-bergstrom airport. In addition, mayor Watson, if I may slightly correct you, your disdain for cameras is noted, but it is on the agenda for the noon session. There are individuals who have a financial stake in the cameras that will be here to ply their trade, but I'd like to point out that I was here last month to speak against them, and I'm here this month to speak against them. Thank you very much. >> So. So now that I understand what some of the confusion might be, the agenda is set for the council under the open meetings act. An agenda is set with specific items. However, the open meetings act also provides that public communication, generalized public communication may be set at the same time. The council's rules allow for for ten slots for generalized public communication. That is not on the agenda. It is. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. No, please let me finish those items. Can anybody can sign up for any reason to [10:35:15 AM] can sign up for any reason to speak on any item that doesn't place it on the agenda such that a group of people try to take over the council meeting to rebut or respond to somebody they may not like, that is signed up for general communication. And that's why your testimony is out of order. >> So no discussion of cameras today at all. But that's incorrect. There will be discussion of cameras at noon that is on the agenda. >> Well, it's not on the agenda as an agenda item that allows you to speak to it. Thank you, thank you. >> For item 18 and 19 and 20, George Moore. Also item 20, Brendan flisk. For items 21 through 29 George Moore. Item 30 George Moore. Kathryn Garcia, item 30 she's remote. [10:36:17 AM] item 30 she's remote. >> Hello? Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay, excellent. So I'm here speaking in favor of the contract with solid border. There are small Texas business that seems to be rated well and has an excellent privacy policy. The services they list on their website are to set up, to perform checkups upon, to consult upon, and to search for holes in your firewall. The reason I support this contract is because this company can provide a basic foundation for the city cybersecurity, which is 100% necessary before the city attempts to engage with more advanced emerging technologies, which pose tremendous security, risk and privacy concerns for the city. I am convinced that the city has yet to secure their own firewall, is not in a position to negotiate or understand radical and emerging technology, and while the people of Austin, like myself, have been subjected to a process which resulted in us not allowed to comment directly on the contract, I assure you that we [10:37:18 AM] contract, I assure you that we will not be silent. >> And we thank. Thank you very much. We appreciate your your testimony, but you're out of order. This is not that's not the topic of that item. >> Continuing with item 30, Oscar Velasquez, Nolan academia and Xander Roberts cousins. >> If your name's been called, please come forward. >> Item okay. >> Hello. >> My name is. >> Nolan Adamek. I'm from district four. I'm here to speak on item 30. I am for building out our cyber security. I believe that it is a massive necessity, especially with the more data that the city will be having. It is very important to make sure that we don't just stop at this level. I think it is important to increase our cyber security, especially within the city. Even more so, [10:38:19 AM] within the city. Even more so, I would push to as in favor with this, to increase the cyber security. Allocating approximately 2 million funds towards that would be much more of a useful endeavor for the city. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Please go ahead. >> Hello. Yes, I'm Oscar Velasquez, and I'm generally in favor of the cybersecurity plan. I do believe that it's quite a bit more money than it should be 1.7 million. And I don't think that we've done the groundwork ahead of time to make sure that we're appropriately spending that money. That, coupled with the new logo for another million dollars and then $2 million for the new ai security surveillance cameras, I think is just a waste of money for the city. >> Thank you. >> 31 and 32 George Moore, also on 32 Daniel Dejesus. Item 33 Michael hull tucker. Ramsar, George orwell, George Moore, Eugene Harrington. [10:39:21 AM] Eugene Harrington. >> Please state your name. >> My name is Michael Walkes. I'm speaking on agenda item 33 in regards to the virtual private network that you guys are setting up for. Seems you guys understand that privacy and security is an important thing for the city council members. We just appreciate, if you extend it to. >> Thank you for being here. >> The residents, thank you for your time. >> Agenda item 33 authorize a contract with Alan Mcclintock. This contract will provide absolute secure vpn access supporting 11,600 users with a select few involved in disaster recovery. Some intense stuff. Important stuff. Mission critical stuff. We need to be sure Alan Mcclintock is up to snuff for this stuff. But who is Alan Mcclintock and why [10:40:23 AM] is Alan Mcclintock and why can't I find any info on the guy? This last week I spent 145 agonizing seconds searching for the name Alan Mcclintock on bing.com. All I found was a picture of a tall, buxom blond. So I deduced Alan must be her. Now on to task two. How to find and vet Alan. My dearest, my sweet. The Austin government might give her a hefty responsibility, and I need to be sure she's up to task. But Austin is so big. If only I could hire out a company to monitor and record all of the bodacious blonds within Austin parks, an ai company, something we're not all sick of with cameras that look, and. >> I quote, sorry, sir, but you've now you're out of order, sir. Thank you. >> Jennifer. >> That's not to suggest. That's not to suggest you may not have started there, but certainly you are now. >> Jennifer Robichaux, item 34. [10:41:24 AM] >> Jennifer Robichaux, item 34. >> Pardon me, I'm not Jennifer, but I am signed up for item 34. Alan Setzer. >> We will call you in just a moment. >> We'll call. We'll call you in order. >> Jennifer Robichaux. >> Is she. >> Running city council? This is Jen Robichaux. Yes. I'm remote. You all can hear me now. >> Yes we can. >> Thank you so much. It's been quite an eventful morning for y'all. So I'm Jen Robichaux from district two, and I'm calling in to speak about a few items. Item 34 caught my attention. This is dealing with ratifying a contract to improve processes within the Austin police department. And on face value. This looks super positive. I think all of us want to see our police department functioning more smoothly and soundly. But there were a few things in this item [10:42:25 AM] were a few things in this item description and as I dug through that caught my attention. One is that this was termed as an emergency ratification, and it seems like that's stemming from some information that was delivered to the police department back in may. So we are looking at several months down the road since then, and we're just now looking at ratifying this contract. The other two really strange things about this is that there was no open competition on this. There was no request for proposal. And so we are lacking transparency into what are the actual objectives that we're that we're aiming for with this particular contract. Not to mention actually that this contract began on June 23rd, 2025. There's a record of this in our contracts saying that there was an approved contract issued for $415,000, which is the same amount that you all are approving today. So I'm a little confused about why that contract was started before you [10:43:26 AM] contract was started before you all gave approval to it. And then the other part of this that was bothering me is that this is a company based out of Maine. They look to be a general purpose accounting, assurance, tax and consulting firm, but I couldn't find any evidence that they had expertise in law enforcement. They don't have any offices in Texas. And when I just did a cursory search through Texas, I found that there are several companies in Texas between Austin and Houston. >> And thank you, miss. >> All throughout the state. >> Thank you very much. >> Continuing with item 34, Alan Setzer, George Moore. >> Hello. So my name is Alan Setzer. This is about the proposal for APD to contract with Barry Dunn for consulting services. Barry Dunn recently agreed to a $7.5 million settlement over a data breach, which occurred a couple of years ago, that affected the [10:44:26 AM] years ago, that affected the private financial information of over 1 million people. Why are we about to pay $415,000 for consulting services to a company which couldn't handle its own client's information securely? And if I may speak generally to the city council itself, it's very difficult for people to speak on topics which matter to us as a community. The agenda is only published 1 to 2 weeks in advance and as we've recently seen, can be items can be pulled with less than 24 hours notice after people have made arrangements to take off of work and be here. And I think that the city could do a lot more to be transparent and communicative and allow for feedback and information from its citizens. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Item 35 through 38 George [10:45:26 AM] >> Item 35 through 38 George Moore. Also on 38 Michael Lopez. >> Your name has been called and you wish to speak. Please come forward. Please state your name. >> My name is Michael Lopez. Hello. Council members, first, I would like to thank you all for being here today. I think 4.5 million over five years on figurative numbers is a bit much for portable containment. Mobile containment. I think it's a bit too much, especially when we're talking about in the future, when our budget this time was so rough. Right. And I just want to make my voice heard. I also do not like you already know. [10:46:29 AM] already know. >> Yeah, I do, because you already know. >> I do not like it. >> Fair enough. Thank you. You're you've spoken on the item that you can talk on. Thank you. >> Item 39 Jennifer Robichaud. Thank you. >> Good morning. This is. >> Jen Robichaud, district two resident. I'm speaking on item 39, which is to ratify a contract for consulting services for the Austin police department with the mayor, don Harold. And a couple of things caught my attention here. So this looks to be a new contract, except the city of Austin issued a contract to her on June 25th in the amount of $228,000, and I could not find any record of where that was approved by city council. So in addition, here, we're looking to set up a new contract which will, you know, initially issue 145,000, but a total of 302,000, on top of the $228,000. This was a contract issued [10:47:31 AM] was a contract issued non-competitively. And this particular individual has strong ties to Cincinnati, which, incidentally, is also where our police chief is, which raises tremendous transparency issues. We don't have any information about what the contract entails. There was no request for proposal. There were no competing bids. And we are now issuing looks like half $1 million to somebody who has strong ties to the national institute of justice under the department of justice and the Biden administration, which is also where a lot of our police problems came from. So this individual also is not from Texas. Currently, she's working in Las Vegas, Nevada, and again, has this Cincinnati ties. So I think something like this really needs to go to an open competition. I know that there's a concern about delaying momentum and that's why we're issuing this emergency contract. But we really don't want momentum in the wrong direction. Austin has some serious concerns with the police department, and we [10:48:32 AM] police department, and we should be having some Texas eyes. Look at this problem. Thank you. >> Miss Roberts. You also signed up for item 40. Would you like to speak to that item as well? >> Certainly. Thank you. >> Yes. This is Jen Robicheaux, resident of district two. And item 40 is authorizing an amendment to contract for engineering services with the corridor improvement project with hdr engineering. And there's just a tremendous amount of money that is going to this firm hdr engineering. It looks like we've been working with them since 2017, and they're keep getting noncompetitive contracts. So we're not putting anything out there to try to see if somebody has a better deal for us that can handle these problems more effectively. They're based in Nebraska, so we're missing a huge opportunity in order to fund local issues. And we're talking millions. This contract is part of an $81 million contract for the extension [10:49:33 AM] contract for the extension today. Within this, we have $60 million in staff augmentation services, which I'm guessing means that we just don't have enough people in Austin to handle this. But for a project we've been working on for eight years or longer, we should certainly think about bringing that in-house. Our budget next year for transportation and public works. We have 243 million assigned the personnel costs, and then 225 million for contractual, which includes things like these sorts of contracts. That's almost as much as we're paying the people that are actually working here. And, you know, we cannot track that productivity nearly as well. We don't have the same level of transparency. And if we need this much of these kinds of works being done, we should really look at bringing in-house. So that way we have the skills locally. Those paychecks stay local. And, you know, we're able to really benefit as a community from those ongoing services. I also found a line item that looks like part of their contract involves minority and women owned business enterprise [10:50:34 AM] owned business enterprise outreach, development plans. And I really didn't understand what that had to do with corridor improvement work. So I would love to see more transparency on this. Get some copies of the details. >> Thank you, miss Robichaux. >> For items 39 through 41. George Moore also for item 41. Gates and Foisy. Who's on the line? >> Hi, I'm gaetan Foisy. Thank you all for your time. I'll take as little of it as possible. I couldn't find another form to speak out against live you, so I'd like to do so now. I'm not interested in my tax dollars going to assist him with so many opportunities for misuse. Thank you all. >> Thank you. >> Item 41 Jared Diangelo's. >> Deangelis I believe. >> Thank you Jared Deangelis. [10:51:34 AM] >> Thank you Jared Deangelis. Item 42 through 44 George Moore. Also on 43 I have Daniela silva. >> I don't see her okay. >> 45 has been pulled. So I am moving on to 53 Peter litz and Brantley Mcminn. >> I see her now okay. Miss silva. >> Morning mayor and council. My name is Daniela silva. I'm the Austin policy coordinator at workers defense action fund, and I'm here to express concern regarding item 43 and the negative impact some of the language could have on our undocumented neighbors. One of the concerns is that this item has the possibility of [10:52:35 AM] has the possibility of expanding the number of people who could be detained for up to 20 hours before having the chance to see a judge for something as minor as a class C misdemeanor. This is particularly concerning for both undocumented community members, as well as folks who are perceived to be undocumented, who could then be at risk of entering the deportation pipeline. As we have seen certain law enforcement agencies using various tactics to to be able to get ahold of folks who are immigrants. And this is especially true as sb eight is looming ahead of us and there's higher risk for our communities. I understand the need to ensure that with previous class C arrests are seen by judges, it would make more sense for APD to take a person straight to muni or dac to see a judge, rather than wasting our time, energy and resources on getting someone booked and then holding [10:53:35 AM] someone booked and then holding them there for unnecessarily long periods of time, especially compared to higher class arrests and, you know, leading to higher likelihood of recidivism. But I just ask that in general to remove the provision holding people overnight on dac charges at all to ensure that the policy actually offers redemption rather than punishment. There are hundreds of people a year who are held under this provision, and there are possibly others that are put into ice detainers that don't end up going into this record at all. So I just please ask that you consider removing that provision. >> Thank you, thank you. Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record. >> Brandi Mcminn. >> Good morning, council. >> I'm here to. Speak on the item 53, authorization of negotiation, execution of the amendment and interlocal agreement with Travis county for the provision of public health services. I'm quite in favor of this, I am. Sorry, as a resident of Austin, born and [10:54:38 AM] a resident of Austin, born and raised here, the last 35 years, I wicked. I witnessed and recognized the benefits that such investments in the community have made, both personally and just at large, as opposed to the growing concerns over privatization of various infrastructure that we all depend on. And I would just like to see the council continue to support matters that pertain to the community's best interests. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Item 54 Joel getter's cat. Hustle, hustle. 55 Zenobia. Joseph. >> Please come forward and have a seat and state your name for the record. Oh, okay. >> Good morning council, and thank you for your time. I'm Joel gators in Austin, resident of district five. Concerned about the economic development of the Austin San Antonio corridor as the city looks to renew its membership in the [10:55:41 AM] renew its membership in the project, I think it should ensure no proposed or future funding should go to license plate readers, cameras or any advanced surveillance. All it takes is the wrong person to have access to these systems for horrible problems to occur that threaten all of our freedoms. Many cases demonstrate people being misidentified by tools like cameras and license plate readers. Misreading a single number on license plate can lead to innocent people being wrongfully stopped by law enforcement for crimes they did not commit. These people will do so at our expense to put these systems in place, and in my opinion, they have no place in any part of our city's infrastructure here or in San Antonio. These people or these types of systems do not belong in a free society, as in my opinion, this level of surveillance under any circumstance for any place in America. [10:56:41 AM] America. >> Imam thank you council. Thank you mayor. My name is kat Hulsey. I am a resident of district five. I know it's taken a lot of patience to listen to testimony today, and a lot of us have had patience waiting to come speak for the last few weeks. I would like to add my voice to the dissent of live view technologies. >> Thank you very much, miss Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor, council, I'm Zenobia Joseph. Item 55 is the standing item you have on the agenda for boards and commissions. Public facility corporations each week. I just wanted to speak in opposition to the fact that you still don't have a separate Austin housing finance corporation agenda posted. I also want you to recognize, mayor, that as long as you put late backup in the backup materials, we should be able to provide our slides. Today. I had an issue with the clerk's office because I had [10:57:42 AM] clerk's office because I had terracotta sidewalk slides that already submitted to the clerk. There's nothing in the rules that say that archive footage cannot be provided on the day of another meeting. You circumvent the law. And that was just one way to circumvent the rules to. I want you to recognize as well that the bond election advisory task force is ambiguous. I don't know if these rules apply to them or not. They simply have stopped posting our presentations. So they unilaterally made this decision. It is difficult to know what the boards and commissions do as opposed to the task force. I did put in an open records request to try to figure out who actually made this decision, and of course, there was nothing responsive to my request. So I would ask the city clerk, and I've asked her before to be transparent about these rules to post them online, because, as it states right now, basically you say you want to hear from us about this bond, this tax rate election. But respectfully, when you don't post our materials and we take the time to actually put it [10:58:44 AM] the time to actually put it together, you don't want to hear from us. And you also have people on that board that don't want to talk about what this will do to taxes. So it is just a pretty ambiguous mayor, and it's disingenuous for you to actually say that the rules apply, when in fact, 551 .141, which is the Texas open meetings act void ability provision should apply here as well. And I would ask you to please post the agenda so that people know exactly what you're talking about when you reconvene for the Austin housing finance corporation. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> For item 56, I have Jennifer Robichaux. >> Good morning, city council, this is. >> Jen Robichaux from district two. And item 56 is dealing with issuing an ordinance waiving or reimbursing fees from a cultural event. And this is a relatively small amount of money. It's $1200 or $1255. But [10:59:44 AM] money. It's $1200 or $1255. But in a time when our city is looking to tax our residents at a substantial increase, you're looking at a 20% tax rate increase. It is inappropriate to be issuing reimbursements to nonprofit groups. Nonprofits are businesses. They're not for profit. They do reinvest in their missions. But as businesses, these sorts of fees are a cost of doing business. If the city determines that these fees are too high across the board, that's a different matter that I think you all should seriously consider, because fees do affect everyone, whether they're nonprofits or businesses or even individuals that need to get these sorts of city permissions. And I'd like to remind you that the $1,255 waiver here amounts to at least four households worth of increased tax rate election revenue. So that's not nothing. There's four households that would like to keep that money. Thank you. >> Miss Robichaud. You also signed up for 57. Would you [11:00:46 AM] signed up for 57. Would you like to speak to that as well? >> Yes ma'am. >> I'm Jen Robichaux from district district two and I'm speaking about another reimbursement. And this is the amount of $1,350. And we should be remembering that these nonprofits are businesses. So this is just the cost of them doing business. And if the city is concerned that they're charging too much in fees, let's take a look at those rules. Because there are tremendous fees across the board. And you know, these just being able to use city services is, you know, one of the many ones. I'll try to stay on topic here, but it is part of the bigger budget issue. We have a tremendous tax rate being presented to us at the ballot this year. The three $1,350 is at least four and a half households worth of increased tax revenue. And instead of robbing money from four and a half households in the city, we [11:01:47 AM] half households in the city, we could just make this nonprofit pay the fee and then reassess the fees across the board with the city. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> On item 57, I also have Benjamin Medina. Okay. And then I'm going back to Mrs. Robichaux for item 50. >> Good morning, city council, this is Jen Robichaud again from district two. And here we have a smaller fee waiver. It's $759. And again this is being waived for a nonprofit. And I would like to remind us all that nonprofits are businesses. They have to budget just like the rest of us. They reinvest in their own missions instead of paying out profits. But this $759 fee is a cost of doing business for them. At a time when we are looking to increase [11:02:47 AM] when we are looking to increase taxes on residents across the board, every household, renter, homeowner and business in the city would be seeing a higher tax rate instead of imposing higher tax rates. I think we should be wiser about what fees we are reimbursing. Back to groups $759 does not seem like a lot, but if we watch our pennies, we don't have to worry about our dollars. So I urge you to vote no on this, and to find a better way to deal with unaffordable fees for the city. Thank you. >> Miss Robichaud. You also signed up for 59. Would you like to speak to that as well? >> Yes, ma'am. This is Jen Robichaud from district two. And this last fee waiver is for $1,400. It's the largest of the bunch. And again we are refunding fees back to a nonprofit that has it within their means to be able to pay these fees as part of their business model. These exist throughout the city. They affect businesses and [11:03:48 AM] affect businesses and homeowners. And when we start reimbursing some versus others, we're picking winners. And this is an inequitable solution to the problem. If our city fees are too high where we need to be considering waivers, we should look at restructuring our fees. $1,400 also represents about four and a half households worth of increased tax revenue. That's being proposed to us on the ballot this year. I think those households would rather keep that money and just see the city spends their money a little bit more wisely. Thank you for your time. >> Also on 59 I have colter Putnam. And then for 84 drew and Eddie Guerrero. >> I don't see the person, any of those three coming forward. >> Mayor. That concludes consent speakers. >> Members as you've heard that concludes. >> Item 63. >> Item 63 is a non consent item. Will be calling that up later. [11:04:49 AM] later. >> Thank you. Members. That concludes all the speakers that signed up on the consent agenda. Let me ask first if there's any other item anyone would like to pull from the consent agenda. I have council member duchen pulling item number 11. So now the items that are pulled are items three, nine, 11 and 45. Although although we may not go in exactly that order, but that I want to make sure I have that pulls any other item need to be pulled. All right. In that case, the chair will entertain a motion with regard to the consent agenda as read. The motion is made by the mayor pro tem. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Yeah. Look at you, I got you, I got you. Discussion and I don't have anybody signed up to speak, so. Oh, council member Siegel. >> Thank you. Mayor, I just want to comment on item number 43. This is a comment on the consent agenda. Right, sir? >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you very [11:05:49 AM] >> All right. Thank you very much. So item 43 is the interlocal agreement between the city of Austin and Travis county to cover booking and registration of people who are arrested by the city and brought to the county jail. Travis county is implementing a new system that gives people attorneys at their magistration hearings. This is sometimes called first appearance before a judge, and it's a very positive change. But that also means our magistrate judges, the city judges, are no longer handling registrations at the jail and therefore cannot magistrate people who are brought in on class C tickets like rolling stops, jaywalking and loitering. So this means that some people are being jailed, released to appear, and expected to go to court later and request jail credit. A lot of people don't take this step because they're afraid to go to court. They don't know that they can get jail credit and think that if they don't have the money to pay their tickets, there's no point in going. So then they fall into a cycle where they get picked up on the same ticket multiple times. So my office has been meeting with others on council, the municipal court and our law department about this problem. And I want to thank city staff [11:06:50 AM] And I want to thank city staff for taking these concerns so seriously and working to address them. When this item was originally posted, one of the solutions to this problem was to hold more people in jail overnight until they could be transferred from jail to the community court if they'd been arrested multiple times on the same ticket. And so we requested that this option be removed from the interlocal agreement. And I'm happy to see this change was incorporated. We also suggested two alternative solutions that were incorporated into the new contract. First, to bring people directly to court instead of booking them in jail. First, many people arrested during court hours, so there's no need to bring them to jail. And second, there's a Harris county model for class C arrests, which allows county judges to magistrate city class C tickets and wipe out court debt with jail credit, which ends the revolving door of arrest on the same tickets. So there is a working group that's exploring these options, and I hope to be involved in the process that moves forward. But I also want to say that I remain concerned about a provision that is still in the local interlocal agreement that allows overnight holds for [11:07:50 AM] allows overnight holds for people who are arrested on tickets at out of the community court. So we have data from the community court that reveals some concerning statistics. This is in the q&a backup, but in a 56 day period, there were 48 people held overnight for transport to community court. Under this provision for an average of 11 hours, and some were held for longer. For example, a man was arrested at 1230 at night for jaywalking and held for 20 hours before being brought to see a judge, and like many others, he was arrested during regular court. Sorry. So he was arrested at 12:30 P.M. For jaywalking and held for 20 hours. So this was while the court was open and he could have been brought directly to court instead of being booked. And about 65% of cases are for public intoxication. So some of these folks could be brought to the sobering center instead of to jail. And this is important for many reasons. You know, one of the speakers, Daniella silva from workers defense, shared that that there's a risk that undocumented austinites would be subject to an ice hold if they're booked into the jail. And after being booked, every minute counts. So in our conversations with the judges [11:08:51 AM] conversations with the judges and law department, we know there's a common concern for these issues. And I'm glad there's a plan to minimize preregistration. Jail stays for all people who are arrested and brought to the jail for both class C tickets and higher level charges, and just look forward to continuing the work with city staff and our counterparts at the county. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine. Council member duchen. >> Thank you. >> I want to speak to items one and two on the consent agenda. And then some of this will carry forward. >> To three when we discuss it. I, I want to very much recognize our staff for the ongoing efforts that we have all seen to bring forward action items that can streamline processes, save money, and identify new funding sources for long standing programs and services. I saw this during the budget cycle. I see this now and ongoing. It is critical that we find new ways to collaborate with each other and to support the essential services and programs that are so critical for a healthy and strong and connected community. [11:09:53 AM] strong and connected community. And excuse me, and that align with our values. And this is at a time when grants to both the city and nonprofits operating in Austin are being canceled and frozen at levels not seen previously without additional support at the state level. And so I just want to take the opportunity to thank our staff who have brought forth these three items that are related to animal services, opportunities for improvements and cost savings so that we can rededicate these funds to providing the compassionate care that we all value. I personally have said to staff, I have said to staff in private, and I have said publicly, I want to personally see every opportunity we can to work together more effectively in the new circumstances that we all find each other in. I do not know how this relationship became what appears to be fairly adversarial, but I really invite us all to reset [11:10:54 AM] really invite us all to reset and move forward from the perspective of finding our common ground and using getting as much value out of every dollar any one of us spends on these services. And I will also elevate one of our public commenters, who also called into question how much sacrifice we will make to the programs that support our human community members in order to save more of our animal community members. I think that if we can find a way to work together that is not this adversarial, we won't have to mak as many of those difficult choices. But we must find new efficiencies. We must update our our contracts and other ways of processes and other ways of working to reflect current realities. And we cannot do it at a great cost to time. And so I just invite you all to reset. I will say right here and right now that I have not so far in my time on council, nor will today vote [11:11:54 AM] council, nor will today vote for any resolution that is intended to undermine no-kill status of the city. My office and I myself have been in frequent communication with Austin pets alive and other stakeholders in this community, and I personally will continue to work on these issues so that we can find new and more and better solutions and move forward instead of backward. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. I just have a couple of contracts I wanted to flag quickly. One is on item 28, which is related to on site space planning, which I understand to be things like office reconfiguration and employee moves and ergonomic changes beyond, I suppose, what building services would typically provide. I intend to support all these contracts, by the way, but I think one thing that we can do better in this time of restraint and and scrutinizing city contracts, and every dollar that we spend in our expenditures is evaluating whether these are indeed critical investments and if they are helping explain [11:12:56 AM] if they are helping explain them in terms of backup and information we provide. We've we've heard from testimony today in, in prior meetings that there is a appetite for more detailed explanation about how some of these contracts work. And so I think going forward, it might be helpful to explore more expansive information to help people understand and justify these expenditures and contracts. And that holds true to some extent also for item 33 and 30, these are technology contracts. In the case of item 33, it's a software solution that I wonder if it can be brought in-house. This this vendor manages a service called netmotion, which one can purchase directly from vendors like AT&T and Microsoft. And so there's a scenario where you could have a single fte and and potentially directly contract out with the specific service rather than go through a consulting company. And I know we're going to get an audit report on consulting that may help clarify some of these things. But related to this and [11:13:56 AM] things. But related to this and and item 30, I understand that ctm is in the process of overhauling a lot of functions and licenses. I'm looking forward to the outcome of that effort, but I'm hoping as part of that, we can make sure that we can, again, better explain whether or not these things can be brought in- house, whether there's opportunities to save some money or create some efficiencies, and whether in the case of item 30, the cybersecurity contract, whether whether we can even just explain how we've got similar contracts, provide similar scopes and purposes that aren't duplicating these contracts. So with that said, it's really just a request for additional information. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember members. Is there anyone wishing to be shown abstaining from a vote on the consent agenda? Councilmember duchen. >> I'm standing on item 33. >> Councilmember duchen will be shown abstaining on item number 33. Anyone wishing to be shown recusing themselves from a vote on the consent agenda. Anyone [11:14:56 AM] on the consent agenda. Anyone wishing to be shown voting no on an item on the consent agenda. All right, without further discussion and without objection, the consent agenda as read is adopted, with councilmember duchen being shown voting no. Councilmember harper-madison is present virtually and is voting with the council, so, councilmember I'm sorry, councilmember duchen will be shown abstaining on item number 33 and the consent agenda is approved. Members. What that will do is now take us without objection. We will. Without objection, we will recess the city council meeting at this regular scheduled meeting, the city council at 11:15 A.M. I will call back to order the council. The Austin city council meeting at 1127, and we will then go to items that were pulled from the consent agenda. As I indicated, members, I may not go in exact order because I'm trying to manage so that we we can adjust for our 12:00 time certain. The first item that I will call up though is item number nine. Item number nine. That was an item that was pulled by council member Siegel. And so let me recognize council member Siegel [11:28:09 AM] recognize council member Siegel for to briefly discuss the pulling of the item. >> Thank you so much, mayor. Let's see here. So item nine is our Kahn creative content incentive program. And I really want to thank the economic development department for their detailed work on this program. The program update brings a bigger grant opportunity to film, TV, and video game projects that are made in Austin that proudly represent Austin and employ people from Austin, and the goal of this amendment is to increase the minimum required wage on projects applying for this incentive to be either what are called union wage rates or the city's living wage, whichever is higher. Film and television industry is a vast majority. Gig workers or intermittent employees. Commercial shoots are often between 1 and 3 days. Films are a matter of weeks, so workers strive for consistent employment. But they do have gaps between their projects, so good hourly wages are very important to make up that time [11:29:10 AM] important to make up that time between jobs. Union wage rates are reflective of the struggle of union members to improve conditions not just on their job sites, but across the industry. They are often representative of the best and highest wages and benefits the industry can offer. So this amendment, which has been developed with staff, ensures that our incentive program is an investment in Austin's creative workforce. >> Thank you. Thank you members. What I'm going to do is we have it's my understanding we have two people signed up to speak on item number nine. What I'm going to do is call for a motion, get a motion on the floor and then hear from the speakers, and then I will turn to council member Siegel for his proposed amendment. Councilmember qadri moves approval of item number nine. Is there a second? Seconded by council member Siegel. Now turn to the city clerk to call the speakers. >> Thank you mayor. We have two speakers, George Moore. Christopher, this is for item nine. >> Or either one of those speakers present. I don't see either one of them. [11:30:12 AM] either one of them. >> That's all. >> Speakers. Council member Siegel I'll recognize you on your and you may have covered it, but on your proposed motion to amend members, this is labeled motion sheet creative content incentive program, item number 9cm Siegel motion. >> Thank you mayor. Just a little bit to add, I mean, there's basically two different amendments here that are built into the one motion. One is to a couple lines of the code and the other is to the program qualifications. Nothing further. >> Council member Siegel moves to amend the item number nine. It is seconded by council member qadri. Is there discussion on the mayor pro tem? >> Yes. Thank you. Colleagues, I just want to highlight that we are updating our local incentive program and it comes at a really good time for us to update the film incentive program, because the state legislature passed a massive incentive at the state level to help spur our creative industry. And that is an area in which Austin is strong. We have incredible history with our [11:31:12 AM] incredible history with our creative economy, and it's an industry in which our unions are strong. So I'm very pleased with this amendment that councilmember Siegel is bringing forward. I was able to join a couple, or at least one of the stakeholder groups meetings and participate in the conversations from industry professionals, and I'm just really excited that we're moving forward and know that this is making incredible headway in our economic efforts. >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem, any further discussion with regard to the motion to amend hearing? None without objection. Siegel motion to amend number one to his his first amendment to amend item number nine is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion, and I'll, as amended, the main motion, as amended by the Siegel motion. Is there any discussion with regard to that item? Hearing? None. Without objection. Item number nine, as amended, is adopted members. I might just point out that I know somebody that worked real hard on this [11:32:12 AM] that worked real hard on this and that. Councilmember Siegel also was talking about how hard staff has worked, but I see Sabina Romero in the back of the room. She is retiring at the end of this month. She's been with the city of Austin for 17 years, and we want to say good luck to you and thank you for all your public service. We really appreciate it. Thank you too. Thank you. Members that will take us to item number 11. And I'll recognize councilmember duchen as the person that pulled the item to discuss why the item was pulled. >> Thank you. Mayor. First, I just want to say I originally intended to just abstain on consent, but due to the scope of the dollars here and the potential impact on the tax rate, I thought pulling it to get some very hopefully quick clarity would make more sense and apologize to my colleagues for the impromptu pull up. In our defense, we had requested some information from the tax [11:33:13 AM] some information from the tax implication of this item, including the specific dollar impact that would impact the average taxpayer. And unless I've misread this item, it looks like this is going to trigger an impact in the tax rate starting in 2027. On the other hand, it also looks like this is potentially servicing a lot of needed infrastructure across the city. So my hope was just to get clarity from staff on what this actually does. Is there a way to get Kim Olivares or somebody from finance to help me get some clarity on this? >> Mr. Benigno, do you want to come forward? I see miss Olivares to. Yeah, sorry. Thank you both. >> Thank you. So the question. >> Was related. Item number 11. >> That's right. >> Yes. So item number 11 is a reimbursement resolution, which is an irs requirement where the items that were approved by the city council that were capital [11:34:13 AM] city council that were capital related, where our intent was to fund those items with debt, we do the reimbursement resolution now, which essentially says we're going to we're going to fund the expenses first. And at some point in the future, when the market conditions are favorable to us, we will issue the bonds to reimburse ourselves for those expenses that council approved being funded with debt in the fiscal 20 fiscal year 26 budget. So when we talk about the tax rate associated with it, it's not an additional tax rate to what council has already approved. It's embedded in what council's already approved. >> Okay. And then the other question I had was the list of items that are here, all of the infrastructure that have been answered in q&a is that are those items that were approved during prior budget periods, or were they? My challenge was when I looked at the backup, it references the documents that were from this year's budget. So I was confused whether those items were part of things that we were listed in this year's [11:35:13 AM] we were listed in this year's budget in August, or items that were previously approved that were just financing in after 2026. >> It's likely a mix of the two, but most of the items that you would be seeing on that list in the q&a are items that we had included in the capital portion of the fiscal year 26 budget that we brought before council in August. >> Okay. That's all right. >> That's correct. Yes. So it's there were all each of those, each of the dollars, both the certificates of obligation and the pefkos, the contractual obligations. The vast majority of that was included in the budget as proposed. Then there were there was a $10 million amount for sidewalk projects that was added during adoption that that was a new thing. But all of these items were included in the the budget as adopted for fy 26. >> And when you say the budget that was adopted, that includes [11:36:13 AM] that was adopted, that includes both the items that will be on the ballot November, the tax rate, election items, as well as the base budget you originally proposed back in July. Is that correct? >> So these are all in the capital budget. So it's not impacted by the TRE. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you for clarifying all of that. That's all I needed. >> Thank you all. Thank you. Councilmember duchen. The chair will entertain a motion to approve item number 11. Council member qadri moves. Approval of item number 11 is seconded by council member Siegel. Do we have anyone signed up to speak on item 11? >> We called all speakers. >> Called them all previously. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Item number 11 is adopted with councilmember Velasquez temporarily off the dais. Members, I'm going to now take us to item number 45. Item number 45, and item number 45 was pulled by council member vela. And I recognize council member vela. >> Thank you mayor. I just had a couple of questions about implementation on item 45. So I [11:37:16 AM] implementation on item 45. So I just wanted to to touch base with staff, either transportation or or police. >> If someone would come forward to answer his questions and then. >> Maybe, maybe both. Maybe combination of. >> Police, whoever wants to do it, whatever makes it work. And would you call the names of the two people that signed up to speak so that if they're here, they can make themselves ready? >> Yes. Vance, Helen and hiroshi tanahashi. >> Thank you. If you're if your name was called, please make your way to the front of the chamber so that we'll hear from you as soon as councilmember vela questions are answered. >> Well, thank you all very much. And first off, I just want to thank everyone for how much we've moved on the vehicle abatement issue. This was just to be honest, not an issue that was on my radar until I got to city council. I mean, and since [11:38:17 AM] city council. I mean, and since I've come to city council, I've realized how critical of an issue it is, especially along certain streets and in certain neighborhoods where there's lots of abandoned vehicles and people are just extremely concerned about the environment around them, and they can bring vandalism and problems and all that kind of stuff. And, and in learning about the issue, I, I realized that we had two APD officers who were our vehicle abatement team who were really doing the best they could, but overwhelmed by the amount of calls that they got. And there's a state mandated process for how you tag and ultimately tow an abandoned and inoperable vehicle. The item and please correct me if I'm wrong, but we're moving from a APD first response to vehicle abatement and then shifting it [11:39:17 AM] abatement and then shifting it over to where transportation public works dpw is going to be the lead agency. Could you just tell me a little bit about that, the process and how we're kind of moving forward, how we're going to be implementing the changes and what the kind of the strategy is. That's kind of what I was hoping to get at. >> Okay. No. Absolutely. So thank you. Council member vela and members of the diocese. We appreciate it. And we appreciate your support too, sir. And so to that end, I just want to highlight that we have always had a good working relationship with transportation. And we've we've known each other and had a working relationship for quite a number of years. So looking forward to working more closely with his team. But as far as the specifics of implementation, want me to defer to you first? Are you ready to go? >> I'll jump in. Yeah. Lewis love, assistant director of transportation, public works. This item is clarifying within our city code that the occupations code has changed at the state level. So it's it's pointing to that change to allow non-sworn officers to be able to do this work. That does not necessarily mean it's just going to come to one department. [11:40:19 AM] going to come to one department. That means that even civilian staff at APD or any other department at the city could support this work moving forward, because we do have parking mobility service officers that work on parking enforcement. It is a fit to a degree of us being able to support that work in future time frame. I think what we're looking at is APD still will be the core service provider for this service. As far as 311 requests coming in, what we need to do after this item passes is have that discussion about which pieces of the process would tp potentially help with, or any other non civilian or non-sworn staff help with, to understand where those opportunities are, to make that process a little more efficient and get to that backlog, as you mentioned, that already exists. So this is the first step in that process to be able to have that ability to have non-sworn staff, regardless of department, to be able to work on these issues. >> Okay. Got it. So essentially right now we're in ordinance allowing non-sworn staff to tag and tow the vehicles. But we still again, I'm just thinking [11:41:20 AM] still again, I'm just thinking about future work for us to continue doing in the budget or otherwise, but we still need to set up the the staff and kind of administrative process in APD staff or for dpw staff. Is that the basic sense of it? >> That's right. It'll allow for non non-sworn staff. So that I think that's what we want to take as a next step is to be able to talk through which pieces of that process could be handled by civilian APD or tpw staff or whoever else would be responsible for that, and then be able to see what kind of resources that takes, because right now we'd be basically repurposing some resources as there's not new money or funding coming into this. So we want to take one step at a time to be able to see what that level of resource is, to meet that level of service. And then in future years, we can make that budget request or however else to meet that need. >> Got it. And I appreciate that clarification. So now we need to talk budget again. Not now, but in the future. We're going to essentially have to allocate some funds to have a [11:42:21 AM] allocate some funds to have a civilian staff be able to to take over this. Where that is, is a future discussion for, for this council. And my final question, are there any possible non-general fund sources? I know that, you know, when we we tag and tow a vehicle, there is there's some fees that are attached to that that I think make their way back to the city again. This may be outside the scope of y'all's knowledge, but is there any kind of impact fee or something to that effect that we could levy that would enable the funding of staff to enforce the vehicle abatement program. >> And to to that and the funding part I can't speak to I'll leave that to the budget office, but I know that there are some associated fees when it comes to towing. And sergeant Huling, who is currently overseeing the program, can speak to those fees and how they're processed. >> Yeah, unfortunately, I don't know the details on the on the fees. I know that there [11:43:21 AM] fees. I know that there obviously are some and as I understand it, it gets put into a budget that is available to, I think, outside APD as well. But I could be wrong about that as well. So I apologize, but I don't have the details on exact fees that are associated. >> Yeah, no, no worries at all. We're we're still looking into that ourselves. My understanding right now is that any fees just go straight into the general fund, you know, for, for all purposes. But I just want to make sure that we, we grow the program, that we have sufficient resources to be able to address a lot of the abandoned vehicles. I know in district four, it's probably in the top five of constituent complaints and concerns that we get. And so we've been really pushing to, to try to, to, to get these abandoned vehicles towed in and out of there. So great mayor, there were just questions. I just wanted to highlight this change. And we still got work to do. But but looking forward to to doing it. >> Thank you all very much. Thank you. Vela moves approval of item number 45. It is seconded by council member [11:44:22 AM] seconded by council member Siegel is there. I'll turn to you and see if we have people signed up to speak. We've called them their names but we haven't seen them. So call them again. >> Hiroshi tanahashi and Vance Hillen. >> I don't see anybody coming forward. So the motion has been made and seconded to approve item number 45. Is there any discussion? Seeing none. Item number 45, without objection, is adopted. Members. Council member Velasquez was temporarily off the dais when we adopted council item number 11. He would like to be shown as voting in favor of item number 11. It will not change the outcome of the vote. I move that we show council member Velasquez voting in favor of item number 11, seconded by council member Ellis. Is there any objection? Without objection, council member Velasquez will be shown voting in favor of item number 11. Members. What I think we'll do as I look at the clock is we will go to item number 61. Item number 61 is a public hearing. [11:45:24 AM] number 61 is a public hearing. This is a public hearing. So without objection we will open the public hearing on item number 61. There being no objection, the public hearing is now open and I will turn to the city clerk. >> I have two speakers for item 61, Eric Ellison and Marcus Schwartz. >> Please come forward if you'd like to be heard in the public hearing on item number 61. Whoever look at you first. Go for it. Good morning, council. Mr. Mayor, my. >> Name is Eric Ellison. Children do stupid things. >> And. >> It's for. >> Parents and. >> Their community to protect them. I should know, I was one once. >> Mayor Watson, you may not. >> Remember me. >> About 30. >> Years ago, I was your neighbor on las Lomas drive. I was the kid who removed the brakes from his bike and then [11:46:25 AM] brakes from his bike and then tried to ride it with a basketball that. >> Ended. >> With a bike, spoke through my leg and you taking me to Seton to get patched up. I still have the scar on my shin to show you. I'm grateful for how quickly and kindly you acted that day. If I never thanked you personally, I do so now with great gratitude. That's why I'm so disappointed today. >> Back then, you. >> Didn't hesitate to help when someone was hurt. Yet now it appears that you and this council are playing games with the agenda. My ask is simple and respectful. Place the surveillance proposal on an upcoming agenda. >> Item that you're out of order and. And I appreciate your being here. No you didn't, but but but. Well, I guess it is you to. Mayor council. Thank me. You get a tattoo over my my my name over that scar, right? Yeah. No thank you. I wasn't going that far. Yes, sir. >> Mayor. Council members. My [11:47:27 AM] >> Mayor. Council members. My name is Marcus Schwartz. I'm an alcoholic beverage lawyer with the firm of bracken Schwartz. I'm here on behalf of HEB. This item is supported by the school, del valle ISD that the location is directly against. This is in southeast Austin. Underserviced area for full service groceries just south of Mckinney falls park. We would certainly appreciate your your support and I'm here to answer any questions should you have any. >> Thank you very much. Anybody have any questions. Appreciate you being here. Thank you. >> That's all. Speakers for 61 members. >> Those are all the speakers that have signed up at the public hearing on item number 61. So without objection, we'll close the public hearing on item number 61. The public hearing is now closed. I'll entertain a motion with regard to item number 61. Council member Velasquez moves adoption of the request under item number 61 is seconded by council member Ellis. Is there any further discussion with regard to item number 61? Hearing none. Without objection. [11:48:29 AM] Hearing none. Without objection. Item number 61 is adopted with council member Laine and council member vela temporarily off the dais. Oh well, I've already called the vote, so I'll move that. Council member vela be shown voting in favor of item number 61. And I would add to that an amendment that he moved just a little bit faster in the future, but seconded by council member Velasquez. Is there any objection to council member vela being shown voting in favor of item number 61? It doesn't change the outcome of the vote there being no objection, it is adopted and council member vela will be voting in favor of item number 61. Members that will now take us to item number 62, which is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 62. The public hearing is now open and I will turn to the city clerk. >> Tristan piper. That's the only speaker for 62. >> Members that it concludes. [11:49:29 AM] >> Members that it concludes. All of the speakers that have signed up to speak at the public hearing on item number 62. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 62. The public hearing is now closed, and I'll entertain a motion to approve the ordinance on item number 62. Council member vela moves approval. Is there a second second by council member Velasquez? Is there a discussion with regard to the motion hearing? None without objection. Item number 62 is adopted. Councilmember Laine, would you like to be shown voting in favor of item number 61? Council member Laine I would like to be shown voting in favor of item number 61. It will not change the outcome of the vote. I will move that she be shown voting in favor of item 61. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Is there objection? Hearing none, the motion is adopted. Councilmember Laine will be voting in favor of item number 61. Members. That will take us what I'm going to do. We have [11:50:31 AM] what I'm going to do. We have ten minutes before we have our time. Certain. So what I'm going to do, unless there's objection, is go ahead and call up item number three and have us begin on item number three. We will not complete. If all the speakers are here, we will not complete item number three. But when we come back after the music recess, we will go straight to item number three for the public. Here's what I anticipate will happen is we will begin item number three. We will have ten minutes of public comment at noon. We will go to our 12:00 time certain which is general public comment. Council member vela will be chairing the meeting during the public comment, and he will recess the meeting when we finish that public comment until 110, he will recess until 110, and at that time we will take up the remaining speakers and take up item number three. [11:51:32 AM] and take up item number three. We will then go to item number 63. And my anticipation is we will probably do our 2:00 time certain and then go to the executive session. But if something changes I'll try to announce that in advance. So with that we will pull up item number three and I will turn to the city clerk. Oh, members, one other thing that that before we take up item number three, item number three is an item that has come from the animal services office. But as council member Laine has pointed out, it is related to an item that she had during the budget process and the items one and two. I have provided a proposed motion with regard to to that it is version two. And for the record, as and as we hear public comment, I'll get that out there so we can hear any public comment on that as well. What it would do is it would I would move to provide direction to the city manager as follows. The city manager [11:52:33 AM] as follows. The city manager must notify Austin pets alive of animals that are lactating, so that Apa can pick up lactating animals within three hours of aso providing notice, and that will I'll offer that at later in our conversation. So I said I was going to go to you and I didn't do it. But here we are. >> Thanks, mayor, for item three. I have several remote speakers. We'll start with Heather Myers. Heather, are you there? Okay, we'll try Heather again. Sandra Mueller. >> Hi. Hello, mayor and council members. My name is Sandra Mueller, and I fully support item three. Except for the amendment the mayor just made. I opposed the original code change in 2019, and I'm happy to see it being removed because it's time for Austin to be [11:53:34 AM] it's time for Austin to be proactive rather than reactive. When it comes to animal services, we shouldn't be bringing more animals into an overwhelmed system. So, for example, there have been 307 kittens and puppies born in care from maternity dogs pulled from the ark, according to Apa's records, just through June of this year. That's 614 additional unwanted animals we will be birthing here in Austin. With this ordinance currently in play, ark's intake date are now in December. And you know, as you all know, Apa wants the puppies and kittens for marketing and sales. It's easier to play the savior with adorable photos and heart tugging stories, rather than public safety, education, and proactive work that is really badly needed. Clearly after ten years of no kill. So just a reminder that last month social media fully supported Austin doing spay boards. And don't forget that doctor Jefferson of Apa has stated that pet [11:54:34 AM] Apa has stated that pet overpopulation is a myth. So I'm really proud of this council. I don't want to be divisive here, but thanks for bringing forth a commonsense resolution and thanks for your time. >> Sonal Patel. Sonal Patel, are you there? Kathryn Chamblee. >> Good morning, council members. Mayor, my name is Katherine Chamblee. I'm a resident of district seven. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak today. I spoke back during the time frame that we were allowed to speak for the resolution. I am speaking now to continue my support of items of this item. Amending the city ordinance to give spay abort decision making back to the veterinarians. [11:55:34 AM] back to the veterinarians. Austin is currently an unwanted animal crisis. They are being given by ask for intake or in December. Now that is three months away. In addition, the multi-purpose room at our shelter, Austin animal center, is full of created dogs. Medium large dogs of course not puppies or kittens. All this to say that it makes no sense in any rational world that we should be birthing more kittens and puppies for any reason whatsoever. I'm going to go ahead and cut off my time and just say thank you again for considering this and for making this ordinance change. Thanks so much. >> Beverly Luna. Beverly, are you there? >> Yes. I'm here. Sorry. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Please begin. [11:56:35 AM] >> Yes, we can. Please begin. >> Hello? Yes. Okay. Sorry. This is Beverly Luna. I'm with Austin. Lost and found pets. I fully agree with the mayor's amendment. I think that would help dramatically. Keep in mind that intake at ac is still restricted, with immediate intake only for very sick and injured dogs. I have taken a dog to ac and was told by vet services that pregnancy is not an emergency. And as the previous speaker said, the wait period to get in to get a dog into the Austin animal center is now basically almost three months. A dog's gestation period is 57 days. Right now, ac will take dogs that are pregnant, dogs that are producing milk only because Apa will take them, since Apa won't be taking them anymore. If this passes as it's written, these dogs and cats will be having their puppies and kittens on the streets. Not only is the cruelty of that abhorrent, but it will dramatically worsen Travis county's dog and cat overpopulation problem. There's no requirement in this provision that the Austin animal center take the pregnant [11:57:36 AM] animal center take the pregnant dogs, and I assure you, my dealings over the years with the Austin animal center since the prior manager came in and started restricting intake, is they will not be taking in these pregnant dogs. They're going to be having their dogs in this, their puppies in the street. I'm not as much of an expert on what they do with cats, but I expect something similar. Anyway, thank you so much. >> Sonal Patel. Sonal, are you there? Sonal, are you there? >> Hi. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> We can hear you now. >> Thank you. Okay. My name is sonal Patel and I am here to urge you to vote no on item three. The city council packet claims the proposed amendments to section 3-1 27 will save money, which is simply not true [11:58:37 AM] money, which is simply not true in practice. Item three creates a loophole that increases costs while hiding outcomes from the public. Notably, this ordinance undermines the strategic plan adopted earlier this year. That plan commits to transparency, accurate data maximizing live release, expanding behavioral support, building community trust, and improving efficiency. Item number three moves in the opposite direction by removing court ordered euthanasias from the live release rate, council will create a false signal of progress reported. Euthanasias will decrease in lives. Income outcomes will be inflated. That corrodes trust with the public, rescue partners and other stakeholders who depend on accurate reporting. It also diverts staff time away from lifesaving work into costly legal processes that worsen morale and reduce efficiency. The strategic plan calls for building foster networks, behavioral programs and staff capacity. This amendment instead incentivizes bypassing [11:59:38 AM] instead incentivizes bypassing those commitments in favor of a shortcut to use the courts to kill dogs. To avoid the consequences of performance metrics. And to be clear, ark's current leadership was hand- picked by a former director who never prioritized no kill until the hire, until the city hires a permanent chief animal services officer who believes in and executes Austin's no city commitment, sorry, no kill commitment. Every ordinance changed like this one will continue to serve that same failed agenda. Council has a choice to enforce transparency and accountability, or enable ark leadership to manipulate metrics. Please honor your commitment to this community by rejecting item three and hiring leadership capable of delivering on Austin's decade long, decades long, no kill promise. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. What we'll do at this point is it is noon, so we will go to our 12:00 time certain, which is public comment. As I've indicated, the schedule for the day will be. [12:00:39 PM] schedule for the day will be. We'll do the public comment. Council member vela will be chairing the meeting during the public comment period. He will then at the end of the public comment period, recess until 110. Excuse me? Until one. I get choked up. Anytime I think about recesses. He will recess until 110 while we have music. When we come back at 110, we will begin with the next speaker on item number three. So with that, I will virtually pass the gavel to council member vela. >> Thank you very much, mayor. Clerk, can we go ahead and start calling the speakers? >> Yes. Thank you. Stephanie stoll, Kierra Francis, davao row, silver white mountain, Matt Dayton. >> If you want to go ahead and start. >> Hello, my name is Stephanie [12:01:40 PM] >> Hello, my name is Stephanie stoll. It's disappointing. >> To see. >> So many people exit at this moment. I'm a parent of. >> Two Barton hills elementary. >> School students, second and fourth grade, and a concerned citizen of the neighborhood. I respectfully speak in strong support of maintaining Barton hills elementary as a vital, cost efficient and inclusive school within aid. If school closures are really about finances, the dollars do not justify the closure of Barton hills elementary school, according to the a, a data rubric, we are among the lowest as far as cost per student and staffing and academic support. We are in the bottom 23% of schools in cost per student, pertaining to building and operation costs. In contrast, we are among the top third of all aisd elementary campuses in percentage of students receiving special education services. Its reputation as a small, calm environment is ideal for an array of learners. [12:02:40 PM] ideal for an array of learners. We have the eighth largest percentage of seats filled by resident zoned population. Which leads me to my second topic closing walkable and bikeable. Neighborhood schools like Barton hills elementary does not align with the city's investment and the Austin strategic mobility plan. The safe routes to school program helps children choose human power to get to school. You aim for students across Austin to walk, bike and roll safely to school. Mba students are a great example of that. The 2016 mobility bond included 27.5 million for safe routes to school, and an additional 20 million in the 2020 bond, according to the transportation and public works department. Over 385,000 of that investment in sidewalks and the intersection leading to our school on Barton hills drive alone. Our school is the central hub of the community, and one of the reasons these [12:03:41 PM] and one of the reasons these resources were allocated to the Barton hills neighborhoods. My final factor is the cultural contribution. For several years since 2009, the choir comprised of third, fourth and fifth grade students, has performed at Austin city limits. One of those kids is mine this year and they are singing on Saturday, October 4th. We would love for you to join. This is a great example of how our school's talents enrich our community, and these young austinites add to the fabric of our musical landscape. Please do everything you can in your power to keep Barton hills elementary school open. Thank you. >> Thank you very much for your comments. Next speaker sir, do you want to? >> Hi. >> I currently. >> Live in district. >> Seven and I'm moving to. >> District eight. I was born in saint David's hospital on 32nd street and have always called Austin home. Not even our times, but only this moment [12:04:42 PM] our times, but only this moment has made me consider speaking to you, my city council. My topic is why and how to avoid a deployment of the national Guard to Austin. The notion that the us executive branch might deploy troops in our city seems more and more likely. As you learn about this happening in other cities. The us executive branch sent Marines and National Guard to la in June. They're still there, then into Washington DC, where they will stay as long as the administration likes. Next is Memphis, Tennessee, where the state's governor, bill Lee, welcomed the presidential overreach. The Memphis rollout is a replica of the DC action, as the president said, meaning DC is not a special case because of its constitutional status. A false emergency is declared. The emergency of the crime spree in Washington is fabricated. Where crime was was falling. Troops are sent in against the phantom crime spree. Chicago avoided this overreach. When the administration tried. Chicago avoided troops because [12:05:43 PM] Chicago avoided troops because the government and the people spoke up peaceful protests, but also persistent, sane opposition by the local government. We don't have a jd Pritzker, but Greg Abbott, a trump ally, as governor of our state. But I think the mayor and the city council's voice is more powerful in this matter. Our governor is more in the mold of bill Lee, who said the federal intervention would move the city forward. Imagine phrases Abbott would find for moving Austin forward if given the same chance. Find new motivation to act early against guard deployment to Austin on federal whims. Vacancies are no in our police force. National Guard troops would undermine our success with community driven policing. Research for yourself. But experts agree the National Guard is a clumsy tool for municipal safety. Austin would be chosen on the model of Memphis or like la, in a rare moment of minor civil unrest which the administration would seize upon. And as the false [12:06:44 PM] seize upon. And as the false emergency. In my view, we are not so different from Memphis, where the administration expected and received state level encouragement. I say Lisa Davis is doing a fine job. Thanks, but no thanks to federal militia. Thank you, Mr. Siegel and miss Ellison, who will be my future representative. Thank you, mayor and all of my city council. >> Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker. >> Council members. >> Thank you for your consideration today. My name is Kierra. >> Francis. >> And I'm here to address the escalation of crime in the Barton hills and zilker neighborhoods. I'm a resident of Barton hills and have been a parent at Barton hills elementary for nine years. The events of September 10th are not the first dangerous or deadly crimes that have begun at Barton springs, but we ask that you understand the magnitude of the situation and make changes to prevent what happened and what could have been. A meeting is scheduled at our school for this Friday to [12:07:45 PM] our school for this Friday to talk about the topic, but I'd like to go on record to ask for a clear path forward. We demand more explicit guidance for citizens and shelter in place and other active threat situations. How should the community report a suspect's location, and what action should be taken during a shelter in place? How does APD act to prevent residential entry in these situations? It has been 15 days and we don't know the answer to any of these questions. To start, we are asking for increased patrols of the Barton springs area, including the ballfields, the south side of zilker park, and the vacant site at 2800 south Lamar Barton skyway and south Lamar. These spaces serve as functional town squares for illicit activity, which continues around the clock in plain sight, without threat of consequence to the criminals or, in the case of the property on south Lamar, the site owner. Begin by enforcing the voter passed local ordinance and [12:08:46 PM] passed local ordinance and state law. Ban on camping in public spaces, as well as laws against drug use, alcohol consumption, firearm possession, littering and dumping. We should not have to ask for the cleanup of hazardous waste litter, needles, glass and flammable materials around the baseball fields, parks and homes. The city is quick to enforce the wildlife urban interface code on area residents, but completely complicit in allowing illegal campers to build forts, smoke and cook over open flames, driving up the risk of wildfire all without consequence. We are calling for a no tolerance safe zone within a five mile radius of all public schools. Protecting citizens is the government's number one responsibility, not a burden for parents to shoulder on their own enforcing existing laws within these Zones on camping, drugs, alcohol, firearms, littering and dumping would create a clear, consistent boundary where kids, [12:09:46 PM] consistent boundary where kids, parents, guardians and teachers can move safely and confidently every day. Thank you. >> Thank you very much, ma'am. Next speaker, if you want to just move the microphone a little closer to you, there you go. >> Good morning everyone. I'm here today as a representative of lwv, and I want to start by thanking the city council in this community for giving me the opportunity to speak. We know that when you hear about security cameras, especially in Austin, you think about privacy. >> And, sir, I'm sorry, could you state your name for the record? >> Matthew Dighton, thank you with. Privacy, concerns are valid. It's an issue we hear about all the time, and especially when some companies don't prioritize privacy. I want to take a few moments to directly address some of the questions that have come up regarding our units and privacy. I've been speaking to members of the community all morning out in front of the building. Our cameras are not designed for mass surveillance. They are strategically placed in specific locations to address security needs. It's important [12:10:48 PM] security needs. It's important to understand that our systems do not use facial recognition or track specific individuals. Our focus is on making an area safer. We take our commitment to your privacy very seriously when it comes to the video footage. Our customers own and monitor their units. The video is automatically deleted after 45 days and on average, over 99.99% of it is never kept longer than that. If the city as our customer needs to share footage with law enforcement, that's their choice. We don't share any data or video footage ourselves unless required by a valid subpoena or warrant. The strict policy ensures privacy is protected and that we follow the law. Our employees only have access for valid business reason, and even then they must have explicit permission from the customer to view the the camera footage or feeds. Ultimately, our top priority is to provide a safe and secure environment for everyone. Our units have features like lights and loudspeakers that are designed to deter crime before it happens. We do not share [12:11:49 PM] it happens. We do not share footage with third parties unless authorized by a customer or required by a legal process. We are committed to making sure our technology is used responsibly to build a safer community. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Any other public speakers? >> Yes. After silver white mountain, we have Amy Winslow, Clarissa Ortiz. Koa or rami and Tatiana Arnold. >> Hello, council. Silver white mountain here. First of all, we shouldn't be so serious all the time at this half hour. Now, this would be out of character for the norm, but not in my case. It's my three minutes and I can talk about anything I want. So the topic today is about fashion for summer 2025 men's shirts. The color on trend included soft pastels like lavender, pistachio, and mint green. Also popular were classic blues and buttery yellow. Some men were even brave enough to wear pink. This [12:12:50 PM] brave enough to wear pink. This past summer, I saw one gentleman wearing an entire outfit of pink. Now I'm going to speak about what y'all wear on camera. This took place on the city council budget work session on eight seven, 2025, televised on eight nine, 2025. The mayor wore a floral tie that was very captivating. Then he added a lavender shirt or that's the color it looked like on TV and it was very pleasant. He also added a gray sport coat. Then the pin on the lapel was very striking. It took him over the top. What I saw was very becoming to the eye. I tried to expand it, but then I remembered I was not on my phone. I'd like to also mention Marc duchen district ten. He also wore the color lavender. He chose to wear a lavender polo shirt and light gray sport coat. He was also on trend. Not everyone can pull these colors off, but these shoot this two shirt. These two sure did. Just letting y'all know your public is watching and not just what comes out of your mouth now. Pedantically speaking. This was [12:13:50 PM] Pedantically speaking. This was televised five minutes later than the actual time when it took place live. It could have been synchronized since I still got time. Next time I'll be I will be speaking in regards to the police, constables and sheriffs who moonlight as security and who are stationed at certain department stores stores as deterrents. I'm concerned because there are always on their phones texting and I can bet it is not security related. Now my pretties, in the meantime, I'm going to need you to create an app where y'all can tell what the police phones are doing while they are working. I'm leaving now before someone drops a house on me. Thank you. >> Thank you very much for the the levity and the fashion tips. Next speaker. >> Hello. >> My name is. >> Amy Winslow. >> And I've been a proud resident of the Barton hills [12:14:51 PM] resident of the Barton hills neighborhood for almost 40 years. In the light of the terrifying acts that took place in our neighborhood on September 10th, I stand here as a concerned citizen asking you, our city officials, for help. We need your help to realign our attention, focus and funds alongside APD to prevent this from ever happening again in the future. If you aren't familiar with the events that took place that morning. A man murdered his girlfriend, then shot a police officer near Barton springs pool and then made his way into our neighborhood through the greenbelt in the early morning hours. Still armed, he ultimately passed by saint mark's episcopal church, where my youngest son is a preschool student, and Barton hills elementary, where my oldest son is a second grader. The messages we receive from APD and aid sent conflicting language about the safety of our neighborhood, and therefore many families had either already dropped their children off at school or were in the process of doing so. During this time, the armed fugitive walked freely among unsuspecting students, families, and educators, all making their [12:15:51 PM] and educators, all making their way to these campuses. Even after repeated identifications to aid, pd, and APD by concerned parents, he forced his way into a private home doors down from the school, where he was finally stopped by the homeowner. The. These movements have been reconstructed and a community created map, which I've shared with you today. This map and timeline also captures the communication and lack thereof from both APD and aid to our neighborhood and school families. Not only are there giant gaps in the communication, please note the time stamps, but the messages themselves are conflicting and misleading. The truth is, we are lucky we are not living out our worst nightmare with the loss of any of our children. But this was way too close. What this event opened our eyes to is that there are so many holes in the system that can't be ignored. We need a clear plan, real accountability and focused attention. And today, I'd like to invite your help and support on the following action items. First, we ask that APD align [12:16:54 PM] First, we ask that APD align its incident terminology and procedures with SDPD, including triggers for shelter in place and lockdown orders. Universal language between APD, aid, aid, pd and eventually us families is crucial. As a parent that morning, having to decipher these mixed messages layered with the chaos of the and fear of the situation was truly unacceptable. I ended up relying on firsthand accounts from my friends and neighbors of what they were seeing in real time. Secondly, we asked that the city of Austin, APD, and aid adopt a child focused, shelter in place playbook. This would need to include developing protocols to individually notify licensed childcare centers, preschools and all other schools when such a campus is in the boundaries of an APD shelter in place order. We believe this could prevent tragedies on an even wider scale. >> Thank you. Thank you ma'am. >> Thank you for having me. >> Mister chair. Council member alter. [12:17:54 PM] alter. >> Yes. First off, I just. >> Wanted to thank you and the other Barton hills parents for coming. I will be at the meeting tomorrow, so I'm hoping that we can address some of the questions and concerns that have been put here today. And as as someone who tries to get two kids to elementary school every morning, I know the the challenges in doing just that and the fact that you had this incident layered on top of that with the confusion and of course, the the desire to to keep your kids safe, I, I can't imagine just what that experience was like. And I want to make sure that it never happens again. And so I've been working with the police chief and our management staff to put some of the protections in place that you've talked about, and hopefully tomorrow we can talk more about that. But I really appreciate you being here. >> Thank you. And we're looking forward to tomorrow as well. >> Thank you very much. Next speaker. >> Good afternoon, council members. >> My name is Tatiana Arnold. I graduated from dripping springs high school in 2012 and from Texas A&M university in 2016. Although I traded a hookham for a gig. I love this city. I was [12:18:55 PM] a gig. I love this city. I was raised here and I plan to raise a family here, but I'm deeply disappointed and alarmed by the city of Austin's reckless approach to public safety, specifically, your willingness to undermine our fire department while simultaneously exploiting their public trust to advance your political agenda. You know, the fire department holds widespread public support. You know this so well that you're attempting to leverage that goodwill to secure endorsements for your property tax increase. The proposed tax rate exceeds the legal limit in Texas, forcing a public vote. And you need the fire department's endorsement to help sell it to voters. Without their support, you denied them the raises they deserve. This is political opportunism at its worst. Using our first responders as props while cutting the very resources they need to keep us safe. The hypocrisy of your treatment of the fire department is staggering. While you've approved raises for police and ems, you've offered firefighters an insulting 0% raise. Except for those with less than five years experience who represent less than one [12:19:56 PM] who represent less than one third of the department. The justification you give is you can't pay them more if they work fewer hours, yet you reduce ems hours by six per week while still giving them a 16% raise. The fire department requested a modest schedule change that would reduce their hours by just 1.2 hours per week, but you still use this as an excuse to deny them the raise they rightfully deserve. So this isn't about work hours. It's about leveraging compensation to force their endorsement of the TRE. In addition, your proposed budget cuts would also reduce fire engine staffing from the national fire protection association's recommended four person crews to three. Each firefighter on every crew has a critical role proposing to cut staffing on any fire apparatus not only forces AFD to change established policies that are proven to save lives, but also goes against Texas state law, the rules of Texas administrative code four 3517 specifies that at least two firefighters must enter a hazardous environment together and maintain visual or voice [12:20:57 PM] and maintain visual or voice contact simultaneously. At least two other firefighters must remain outside the hazardous area to serve as a rescue team for those inside. That's the law for firefighters for rescue. So council members, if one of your loved ones was in need of rescue and our firefighters were forced to delay a search due to only having three men or women staffed on the first arriving unit, what would happen then? In fire emergencies, those lost seconds can mean the difference between saving a life and losing one. Three is a risk. Four is a rescue. Now all of this occurs while the city spends over $1 million on a logo rebrand that has been poorly received and widely dubbed as a waste of taxpayer money, you could have achieved better results contracting a graduate student with an art degree. The spending reveals how completely out of touch we are with both fiscal responsibility and public priorities. >> Thank you very much. Next speaker, if you want to shift the microphone over, there you go. >> Thank you. >> My name is kojo Rahimi. I'm here with lve again, just to speak on the. [12:21:59 PM] speak on the. >> Previous item. >> 33 agenda. So again, all, you know, all council members that are here today, thank you for the time and the opportunity to be able to share this with you. So first let me pull this a little closer here. First, I want to acknowledge the concerns that many of you and many of our neighbors across Austin have raised. When we talk about cameras and technology in our public spaces, people understandably worry about privacy, about being watched, and about whether their personal information will be misused. These are real concerns and they deserve to be addressed openly. That is why our approach is simple. The city of Austin, not liveview technologies, owns and controls every second of video. We do not monitor it and we do not share it. Footage is encrypted, access is tightly controlled by the city and it is not released without proper legal process. Our systems do not record audio. They do not use facial recognition and cannot track individuals. In short, this technology is about safety, not surveillance, and that safety is urgently needed. Too often we hear from families who feel unsafe in their own [12:22:59 PM] unsafe in their own neighborhoods or at their local parks. We've seen how visible deterrence units equipped with lights alerts in real time access can change that story. In communities across the country, these solutions have reduced crime by as much as 40 to 70%. More importantly, they've restored a sense of peace for residents who just want to walk home at night or let their kids play without fear. This isn't about technology, it's about partnership. And our commitment is to stand alongside the city of Austin, providing a solution that strengthens, not replaces law enforcement, empowers community safety while respecting civil liberties. Council members Austin is a city known for innovation and for inclusivity, as well as for doing things the right way. By moving forward with this partnership, you are affirming that we can have both safety and privacy as both progress and accountability. On behalf of live view technologies, I thank you for your time, and I hope that the members of this council will approve this step toward a safer, stronger Austin for all of us. >> Thank you very much. >> All the speakers for noon have been called. [12:24:00 PM] have been called. >> Thank you very much. Clerk. And with all the public comment, speakers called and the city council will stand in recess until 110. >> Thank you. >> All right. Hello everyone. [12:38:43 PM] >> All right. Hello everyone. It is my honor and privilege to read the proclamation for city hall sessions. It's today we have raddix one and looking forward to hearing their music. And let's go ahead and have you play. And then we'll read the proclamation and let us hear a little bit about yourself. All right. >> This is for the. >> Broken hearts. >> That just can't be fixed. Made a love potion. And I took a sip. This ain't doing it. But I know I'll be fine. When you look to the moonlight. And you think of me. Know that I'm [12:39:44 PM] think of me. Know that I'm alright. Ooh. Could you go. When you feel all alone. There's no one around. And we're all on our own. We're one in the same. In a world that turns so cold. But still moving down this lonely winding road. Turn it up. Wu. Feel a it anymore. No turning back. Ain't no looking back I just keep moving on. Ain't no turning back. Yeah, no no, no. Yeah no no no no. Whoa. Whoa oh 0000. Yeah yeah yeah. >> Oh. >> Let's be honest. You and I know that they don't treat you [12:40:45 PM] know that they don't treat you right. And they could treat you better. Let's be honest. You still think of me. And that night we had when you fell for me. So who could you call when you feel all alone. There's no one around. And we're all on our own. We're one in the same. And a world that turns so cold. But still moving down this lonely winding road. Whoa! Wu. Take a little more. Turn it back. Ain't no looking back I just keep moving on. Ain't no turning back. Yeah, no, no, no. Yeah, no no no no. Whoa. Whoa oh oh. Oh. Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa oh oh. Yeah. Thank you [12:41:50 PM] whoa oh oh. Yeah. Thank you guys. >> Wright raddix. >> Wow. Thank you very much. Great performance. And now I do have to read more about you because it's a tremendous success in history. Raddix is a Austin based producer and vocalist specializing in various genres including pop, trap, hip hop, and several variations of electronic dance music, including dubstep, house, and melodic bass. In 2023, raddix was inducted into the grammys recording academy as part of the new member class. Raddix is also a member for grammy. You students mentor for grammy youth students, teaching up and coming artists with an interest in working in the music industry from across the United States. Raddix was also featured in iheartradio's top 12 indie artists of 2023. Wow! Tremendous success and and a [12:42:53 PM] Tremendous success and and a tremendous recognition. Please tell us a little more about yourself. What's the next show? When, when? How can we see you? >> So next show October 11th is actually going to be in San Antonio. So if anybody would like to travel a little bit, we're going to be doing a this is a little bit different, but we're going to be doing a church rave, a Christian edm church rave. So if you want to go spread the worship gospel, just have a good time and connect with the lord. It's a good opportunity to go do that. I was originally born and raised in San Antonio, lackland air force base. Shout out to both my parents. They're over there. They both served our military. So thank you guys very much. But yeah, I've been doing music for maybe about ten years or so now and just had amazing opportunities because people have led me down that path. And I just want to say thank you to everybody who's been a part of that journey and guiding me to just even this moment right here with you guys. So I just want to say thank you for everybody who's here in attendance as well. Thank you [12:43:54 PM] attendance as well. Thank you guys so much. >> Thank thank you. And it's a it's a pleasure to to have you here and let me go ahead and read the raddix day proclamation in Austin, Texas. Be it known that whereas the city of Austin, Texas, is blessed with many creative musicians whose talent extends to virtually every musical genre, and whereas our music scene thrives because Austin audiences support good music produced by legends, our local favorites and newcomers alike. And whereas we are pleased to showcase and support our local artists now, therefore, I. Chito vela, council member for the city of Austin, on behalf of mayor Kirk Watson and the entire city council, do hereby proclaim September 25th, 2025 as raddix day in Austin, Texas. >> Thank you so much. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. And I got to get a jacket just like that, man. For those that is a sharp looking jacket. No. Let's go ahead and take some photos. And we'd love to have mom and dad [12:44:55 PM] we'd love to have mom and dad join us too, please. >> Thank you so much. Exactly. Exactly. [1:10:05 PM] Exactly. Exactly. >> Good afternoon everybody. It's 1:10 P.M. And I will call back to order the Austin city council meeting on September 25th, 2025. Thank council member vela for presiding. Earlier with that, we will take back up item number three. We were listening to public comment on item number three. So I will turn to the city clerk's office to continue that. >> Thank you mayor. I have one more remote speaker in the queue. Heather Myers, are you there? You know what? I think my screen froze. I'm going to call in person speakers and we'll go back to Heather. Okay. Lori Mikel Paige Nilsson, Craig nazer, Anthony. Comstock, Julie. Oliver. >> Please, please come forward. As your name is called, find a seat and just state your name [1:11:06 PM] seat and just state your name for the record so we'll know you're here. Please go ahead. >> Thank you, mayor Watson. Council members, my name is Lori Mitchell. I am an attorney here in Austin and a longtime advocate for Austin's lost and homeless pets. I reside in district nine. Mayor Watson, I'd like to thank you very much for your longstanding steadfastness to help the homeless pets of not only the city of Austin, but the state of Texas during your time as a state senator. I'm very grateful for your service and your commitment. I am also equally grateful for your amendment today on agenda item three, and for pulling it from the consent agenda. This said, I would also like to thank your staff for their accessibility, their openness and respect to us as we have communicated with various issues concerning the animal shelter over the last few years. I am asking, despite [1:12:08 PM] few years. I am asking, despite the amendment, which is a huge move in the right direction, that the council either vote against item number three or at least table it for more input, information and discussion. Agenda item three is a vast and dramatic departure from the long standing city policies that were designed to protect our homeless pets. If passed, the city will spay visibly pregnant females at the shelter. If they are lactating and thereby abort until their lactating. If the amendment is added and thereby abort their babies even when there are rescue partners ready and willing to take them. The item also creates reporting loopholes to give that cover up the true number of animals being killed at the animal shelter. If you have ever fostered a pregnant mother, as [1:13:09 PM] fostered a pregnant mother, as I have, you will see how hard wired they are to give birth and to disrupt that process is a terrible form of cruelty. Thank you so much for this opportunity. Mayor Watson. >> Appreciate that. Yes, ma'am. >> Six minutes. Yes, I. >> You have some time donated by pat. Pat, are you still here? Pat? Yes. >> Yeah. There she is. >> And Chelsea. Cortilla. Cortilla. Thank you. Okay. Six minutes. >> Hello. Austin city council, thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Paige Nelson. I'm a resident of district four. I'm a practicing veterinarian, and I have worked as a veterinarian at Austin animal center since 2016. Prior to vet school, I was a neurophysiology research associate at UCLA. As additional background, I am the chair of the animal advisory commission, but I am not speaking in that role today. I'm speaking as a practicing [1:14:10 PM] I'm speaking as a practicing veterinary professional who is familiar with the workings of our municipal shelter, and I'm a passionate animal advocate in support of agenda items one through three. But not, as amended, this amendment will have major disastrous unintended consequences. I have personally dealt done exams on dogs and cats in coming to the shelter that I discovered were lactating. I was then able to let animal control officers know and they were able. I said, these dogs and cats likely have puppies and kittens out in the community still, and they were able to reunite those dogs with those puppies, much to the relief of the owners and many of those situations. So the unintended consequences of this would be the death of left behind puppies and kittens in our community. If these animals had to go to Apa, how would Apa reunite them with their puppies and kittens? It wouldn't happen. So when the right to rescue [1:15:12 PM] So when the right to rescue issue was brought up as a resolution last month, doctor Jefferson of Apa released a video on social media opposing the resolution with three claims. Her claims were. Pet overpopulation is a myth. Spaying pregnant animals is inhumane and dangerous. This ordinance is not a mandate that the animals give birth. These claims were utterly rejected by nearly everyone who took the time to respond to the post. People ranging from Apa's own fosters and volunteers to national animal welfare organizations who commonly practice and advocate for pregnant bays, expressed shock and dismay that Apa would profess views so out of line with reality. The response to doctor Jefferson's claims was so negative that Apa took down the video and posted an apology in its place. I have noted the Apa did not make any public post prior to today's meeting, but doctor Jefferson seems to be using these misleading and outrageous claims to try to sway people in one on one conversations where she is not exposed to the same pushback [1:16:12 PM] exposed to the same pushback and public debunking. Pet overpopulation is not a myth. I know doctor Jefferson claims to have data to the contrary. I have seen the supposed data and it is nothing of the sort. The veracity of the pet overpopulation burden on our public and and on our shelters is self-evident to anyone working in animal rescue or sheltering. And I support city council allowing the shelter vets to to to perform more of the spays needed to address this issue. Spaying pregnant animals is safe and humane. I dedicated my full two minute allotment to the science behind this when I spoke on the resolution last month, and I'm happy to answer any questions that still may remain on this subject. Lastly, I want to reiterate that our larger Austin community does not support legislative burdens that remove decisions about pregnancy termination from medical professionals. Apa has claimed that the current ordinance is not a mandate that the animals get give birth, but [1:17:12 PM] the animals get give birth, but in practice, that is exactly what it is. Apa has never said, no, we won't take that pregnant animal. You can go ahead and spay it. That has never happened. Even though they have not taken all of the pregnant animals. They've strung us along and many of those animals have given birth at the shelter. And then Apa never took them, leaving the shelter to raise them for ten weeks and care for them. As someone who watched the ratcheting restrictions on abortion care for people, this language is all too familiar. We're not preventing pregnancy termination. We're just making it safer. We're just making the whole making sure the hallways are big enough. We're just mandating a wait period. We're just putting in a pause. I encourage our city council to reject this wolf in sheep's clothing. The vets at the shelter know full well that if there is a pregnant animal, that would be better off going to a rescue than being spayed. They know exactly what to do in [1:18:13 PM] They know exactly what to do in those instances, and they will not hesitate to reach out to Apa or any other appropriate rescue. The veterinarians will will reach out to rescues if they feel that is appropriate. There is no need for the patronizing current ordinance, or any proposed amendment to today's ordinance to remove subsection D, trust the shelter veterinarians medical judgment and expertise. Since the passage of the current ordinance, no visiting, no visibly pregnant animal has been spayed at the shelter. That is not to say that Apa has taken all those pregnant animals. They certainly have not. I worked with one just a few weeks ago who she was. Apa was alerted that we had a pregnant dog when she came in over ten days later, they still had not taken her. She gave birth at the shelter. She had to raise seven puppies in the 600 buildings for ten weeks. No puppies should be exposed to that kind of noise, stress, [1:19:14 PM] that kind of noise, stress, communicable disease, and the city should not be responsible for taking care of those pets and paying for them. When we could have humanely spayed her. Additionally, passing today's ordinance to remove subsection D without amendment will correct a very harmful, vague city ordinance. The basis for notifying a rescue in the current ordinance is visibly pregnant. That is meaningless. It depends on the viewer. It depends on the animal. It depends on their coat. It's meaningless. Thank you. >> Mr. Nazer. >> Hello. Craig nazer Austin, environmentalist and past chair and eight year member of Austin animal advisory commission, the endangered species act has been extremely successful in protecting biodiversity. It continues to be supported by over 80% of Americans. Nevertheless, there are powerful interests that constantly try to weaken it because they just don't think it works. They know better than to try to repeal it because it is so popular, so they try to [1:20:15 PM] is so popular, so they try to make it less effective piecemeal, in committee, behind closed doors, without citizens input. You know what I'm talking about. No kill is popular in Austin and exceeded extremely well less than ten years ago. But poor past hiring decisions have left our shelter dysfunctional. On June 13th, 2020, the Austin animal advisory commission clearly warned you in a resolution of no confidence of this fact. Now, the anti no-kill minority, who continues to believe without any real evidence, that there are too many pets and too few homes in Austin, are trying to undermine what's left of no kill in a misguided attempt to make the shelter functional again. If you believe that there are too many animals and not enough homes in Austin, then there is no way you can logically claim that you support no kill, and you can't call yourself an expert in no kill. That one false assumption simply makes no kill impossible. [1:21:17 PM] simply makes no kill impossible. You are making these decisions without commission input and without responding to constituent input, allowing you to succeed in weakening. No kill, but it will not leave you with a better shelter. Operations. The key to a successful no kill shelter is a chief animal officer, who believes no kill can work, and is willing to do what is necessary to make it work. Thoughts are creative. Now it's you who have to believe no kill can work and hire the person to make it work. I am deeply disappointed in the lack of desire of this city council to discuss this issue with those of us who care the most. >> Appreciate you. >> I'm going to try Heather Myers one more time, but she might have dropped off. Heather Myers, are you there? Heather? Are you there? Okay, going back to in person, George Moore, Joanne Norton, Nancy. Nemer, [1:22:19 PM] Joanne Norton, Nancy. Nemer, Susie chase. >> Please come forward. >> Good afternoon. I'm Joanne Norton, although I'm on the animal advisory commission, I'm speaking as a private citizen from district three requesting your support for agenda item three. I'm also a retiree from the city law department and a retiree from the city of Austin retirement system. As an arc medical, foster and one of the founders of the arc dog walking team that supports shelter staff caring for sick and injured animals, I have worked closely with the arc veterinary staff since 2018, so I know firsthand how much thought and care goes into their determining a path for each pet. Arc's vets have a lot of training and need to use their knowledge and experience to make medical decisions. The ordinance changes put the [1:23:20 PM] ordinance changes put the medical decisions for city owned animals back in the hands of arc's capable professional veterinary team, without delay and undue suffering. The decision making power regarding whether or not to spay or neuter a city owned animal will be fully restored to the city's veterinary professionals, as it should be, without tying their hands with this with the amendment. We are not talking about rogue vets not providing proper care and tossing animals into the trash. We're talking about professionals using their knowledge and expertise to make decisions for animals in a way that works for the situation they are in, humanely carrying out their decision and treating all pets with dignity. Regarding reporting after consultation with arc management, I support the recommended changes and appreciate their commitment to transparency. For example, court ordered euthanasia will not be are not part of the live outcome, but they are reported to the animal commission monthly in a section of the arc report. I really appreciate your time. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, ma'am. [1:24:20 PM] >> Thank you. Yes, ma'am. >> My name is Nancy Nemer, and first of all, I'd like to thank you, mayor, for your motion or amendment to this. It's very much appreciated. I am a local attorney and a current long standing member of the animal advisory commission, an appointee of Travis county. I am not here in my official capacity on the commission, but am instead speaking for myself. I want to voice some personal concerns that I have with agenda item number three, and the lack of transparency with not only stakeholders like rescue partners, including Apa and one of the foremost experts in the no kill movement, doctor Ellen Jefferson and the public. But with the animal advisory commission that was basically formed to advise this council on animal affairs, but was completely bypassed by the Austin animal center in regards to agenda item number three. In short, I was blindsided to hear that this council would be taking up a complete reversal of the long standing ordinance about offering visibly pregnant [1:25:20 PM] about offering visibly pregnant animals to rescue partners before performing spay aborts. This is not a cost saving measure for the city at all, as the cost of sometimes very expensive spay aborts could be avoided by transferring the pregnant animal to a rescue, which in turn opens up a kennel at the Austin animal center for intake. This proposed change should have been brought before the commission to let the commissioners and the public voice their positions on a literally life changing proposal. It is my belief that this was done intentionally, because the backers of this proposal knew that the public and many commissioners would come out against it. That is not the way that the city is supposed to conduct business. It is neither clear nor transparent which city government should be 100% of the time. Similarly, the proposal now on the table to change the way live outcomes are calculated by adjusting for court ordered euthanasia cases, was slipped past the commission and the public. This is also a serious concern to me as aocc often seeks court orders. [1:26:22 PM] often seeks court orders. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, city manager, mayor and council. My name is Susie chase. I'm a district ten constituent. I'm a former aide in two city council offices, and for more than four years, I've had the privilege of working with animal advocates at organizations across central Texas and my role at Austin pets alive. Mayor Watson, thank you for pulling item three and thank you for your amendment. There's a dog that I want to tell you all about that was living at Austin animal center until last week. Named polo. As the decision makers in the city, you need to know some important things about her. As you can see, she is visibly pregnant. We took her after we were told by Austin animal center that she was in surgery to get spayed. You need to know that polo fell into our safety net after funded city of Austin programs failed her 15 years ago. The council funded and approved a medical make ready program. That means that animals are processed at the city shelter, and it means they're supposed to be spayed or neutered. But unfortunately, polo stated Austin animal center for six weeks. So these [1:27:23 PM] center for six weeks. So these animals are not going in and getting spayed and neutered immediately, or at least not all of them, because this one certainly didn't. So we've provided a safe place for her. And I gotta say, nine city council members should not have voted last month that it's fair humane for dogs like polo to undergo that procedure at this stage. When the council approved program and department failed her for pregnant and nursing cats at Apa takes in from aac, the mom cats help feed orphaned kittens if that's right for them, the aac public information manager said to Austin American statesman last month. Quote, generally, Austin pets alive won't take the newborn kittens or puppies. Well, the truth is that you can find on the city of Austin dashboard. Austin pets alive has taken so far this year. 780 neonatal or bottle baby kittens 780. Without Austin pets alive, these kittens and spayed moms would still be at the city shelter. The budget item last month was brought forward without consulting Austin pets alive, your largest shelter partner. Everyone on the second [1:28:24 PM] partner. Everyone on the second and third floor should have already received training on the Bleicher training of informed consent. If you don't. Okay, so thank you so much for this time. I'm sorry that I have to stop, but if you have any questions, please feel free to email me. I'm happy to send you my additional comments. >> Appreciate it. Continue on with item three. Ben zohaib, Alex Ortiz, Ellen Jefferson, and Benjamin Lagunas. >> Hello, council mayor, city manager. My name is Ben suddaby. I am speaking on behalf of myself as a d4 resident, not on behalf of the union that I'm a proud member of or any other board or anywhere else that I serve. I'm here in favor of this item. My perspective, like many issues that come before you, is from a worker perspective. This is the way I see it as as a city, you hire professionals into their roles to oversee this. I think about [1:29:24 PM] to oversee this. I think about all of our hard, dedicated, animal loving workers at our city shelter and all the work that they they do to care for these animals. I think about veteran veterinarians Wright someone who went to years and years and years of school to become a veterinarian. They love animals so much they made it their life's work. Probably went into student debt for that. They not only did that, then they opted to go into public service to use these veterinary skills not, you know, probably could make a lot more money out in the private sector. But they are people who love these animals. What we're doing here is a great idea. Trusting their judgment, putting it in their professional hands and letting them have that discretion. And, you know, use their best expertise in these cases. That's why I'm very much in favor of this and would support it unamended. I don't want any [1:30:25 PM] it unamended. I don't want any kind of rules about who they have to notify within certain hours. I think that's very onerous. They are clearly paying attention to this item. They probably got the message that, hey, if there's an opportunity to alert partners, I fully trust that these professionals will do so. But I view this item as showing great respect to them, and you've hired them for a reason. You're paying them now. Allow them the freedom to do their job. >> Thank you. >> Can I go? >> Yes, please. >> My name is Ellen Jefferson. >> You need to use that microphone. >> Sorry. My name is Ellen Jefferson, president of Austin pets alive. Thank you, mayor, for pulling this item and for recommending a motion to save our partnership. That's worked for most of the last 17 years, saving dogs and cats near birth, near giving birth without impeding our city's 95 live release rate, 95% live release rate, and without sacrificing [1:31:26 PM] rate, and without sacrificing intake for most of that time, as a veterinarian and national expert in no kill, sheltering with 25 years of 25 years serving Austin's animals, founding, emancipate and leading Austin pets alive, I can tell you that the core of what makes Austin no-kill is access and transparency. Prior to the no kill resolution in 2011, animals died behind closed doors and no one knew and no one helped. When the city council voted on the implementation plan of 34 points, it opened doors, allowing the community to help removing extremely pregnant animals from the code that requires notice to rescue organizations, and removing mandatory reporting of terminal spays and court ordered euthanasias starts closing our city doors to the community again. This allows city public servants to legally remove animals without community knowledge. As we know there are good intentions behind that, but it's antithetical to Austin's values. I know that arc is overcrowded and suffering. That 2011 amendment. Sorry, that 2011 implementation [1:32:27 PM] Sorry, that 2011 implementation plan had key programs that desperately need to be reinstated at arc. They worked before many are restated again in the 2025 strategic plan, and they will open your doors immediately. We believe in collaboration and speaking for Apa. We also believe that every animal deserves a second, third and fourth chance and and at least a fair trial. We believe in transparency and community access, and we believe that Austin can operate as the premier no kill city right now with the resources it has. Collaboration works best when we are all heading towards the same goal. Even if we argue over the exact path, policy won't fix programing and your community can't inform policy when we're not invited. Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for item three have been called. >> Thank you members, you've heard all the speakers on item number three have been called. What I would suggest we do is I'll recognize council member Laine to make a motion on item number three. We'll get a motion in a second on item [1:33:28 PM] motion in a second on item number three. And then I will offer the motion that I've put out in front of everybody version two. And we can discuss that. And then we'll come back to the main motion. So council member Laine you're recognized. >> Okay. >> Is it sufficient for me to simply say I move for passage of item three without amendment? >> Say that again. >> I move for passage of item three without amendment. >> That's fine. Okay, councilman, you want to say anything more than that? >> Do we need a second first? >> You don't need a second, but I'll be happy to wait for it. We have a motion to approve. Item number three. Is there a second? Seconded by council member vela. What I'll do now is I'll offer up an amendment. We'll discuss the amendment and we'll offer the amendment on. So members you have in front of you it's item number. It's labeled item number three, motion one, version two. It's Watson motion to provide direction on item number three. And and I will move adoption of this proposed motion to provide [1:34:28 PM] this proposed motion to provide direction on item number three is it's indicated. Let me say it this way. This leaves the ordinance largely intact and consistent with the vote that the the overall council took by supermajority. Back when we were talking about budget items. It it allows for some animals to be sent to a rescue partner late in the pregnancy. And the truth of the matter is, I firmly believe that regardless of how you feel about the main motion, we need partners. We need collaboration in order to protect the animals that we all feel so strongly about and we love. And this this motion does that. It allows for greater. It allows for the continued partnership, allows for greater collaboration in some instances. And I'll end it by saying that we all care very deeply about this. There's really strong different points of view, but [1:35:30 PM] different points of view, but we all care deeply about it. We all want to do the right thing. This direction is a is just a part of of how we can continue that collaboration, how we can continue those partnerships without significantly changing the main motion, which, I mean, I kind of votes a couple of weeks ago, so we know where those are. So with that, I would offer motion, motion to amend version two to provide direction on item three. Is there a second second by council member alter discussion with regard to the motion to amend council member Laine. >> Yes. Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to discuss further, and I really appreciate all of the public comment that we've heard today, the emails and the meetings that we have all taken around these issues, and the passion that we all have around providing compassionate care for our animals. I as a council member, absolutely ran on and [1:36:33 PM] member, absolutely ran on and will continue to bring forward attempts to streamline processes, separate policy from process, work on them in the ways that create the most efficient practices for our city. It is with that objective that I begin to bring these things forward and to support them, and I absolutely understand and appreciate the efforts that the mayor and others have done, including myself, to reassure Austin pets alive that we do not want to radically and I did not, I'll speak for myself, did not bring this forward, but any of anything forward, out of an attempt to radically reinvent Austin's relationship with Austin pets alive. But I do think that in moments of financial challenges that we are all facing, it is important to be as streamlined and collaborative in coming to solutions as possible. So I with that, I have a concern and a question. So I, I have [1:37:33 PM] a question. So I, I have concern about enshrining into policy a requirement to notify a single nonprofit partner out of a community that is rich and diverse. And I think that if we have a policy that restores judgment and discretion to our trained professionals that are on our staff, that that's appropriate, and that if we do want to enshrine certain notification and policy process, process improvements with a single partner, in past experience, I would say that comes through contract negotiations. And I've heard a lot and seen a lot of information that it does need to be looked into more deeply. It does need to be worked out into a working relationship with common expectations. So my question and mayor, I don't know if you would want to answer it or if I should call on staff, but my my question is, why wouldn't we handle this [1:38:35 PM] why wouldn't we handle this type of thing through a contractual process rather than choosing a winner or a loser? >> Well, I mean, I'm happy to have professional staff answer the question, but we have a license agreement already with Austin pets alive. This would this. What this does is simply and I've checked with legal and I've checked with the professional staff. My original thought was along the lines where we would direct that there be an amendment to that if, if needed, an amendment to that licensing agreement. I'm told we do not need to make that amendment. We do need because the licensing agreement would allow for this to happen simply by allowing the direction about how you operate within that licensing agreement. So there's no need to go back and try to reinvent the wheel. There may very well be a time, and it may be soon where we need to have negotiations regarding that licensing agreement. But in order to achieve what you want to achieve with your ordinance, [1:39:36 PM] achieve with your ordinance, this amendment, which as I indicate, leaves your proposed ordinance largely intact with one aspect to it. You don't need to have an amendment to do that. >> So, as amended, we wouldn't need to do anything with respect to the licensing agreement if not amended, if it passes without being amended, would we then need to amend the licensing agreement in order to address those concerns? >> No, but you don't have the direction that if the council if the council's desire is to provide this direction under this ordinance that you're wanting to pass, then the best way to do that is to give that direction. You don't need to amend the licensing agreement in order to give that direction. >> Thank you. I just have one additional comment and then I will. I'll be finished. I, I want to highlight the additional requirements around data and reporting that are [1:40:36 PM] data and reporting that are part of everything that's passed so far. What we're looking at today, that is a significant change from pre no kill plan Deegan. I believe it is a more appropriate way to track our progress towards our goals as a city to ensure that we're getting reliable, regular data reporting, starting with a baseline and measuring our progress or backsliding and then adapting our processes work in real time. Based on that, for me as a council member, I would very much prefer that we limit our policy to the big picture restoring the management authority within the city of the highly skilled professionals that we that we pay, and also ensuring that this data reporting is carried out. And with that, I would appreciate hearing anyone's else's perspectives. I am opposed to the amendment. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Any further discussion on the amendment? Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor. I want to build on some of the comments [1:41:39 PM] build on some of the comments that councilmember Laine touched on just now, as well as earlier today. I've been incredibly frustrated with the animal services situation, maybe more accurately described as a stalemate or impasse since starting back in January. And a lot of the advice I frankly got was just to steer entirely clear of this issue and not touch it. And so even my comments right now are in relation to that probably incredibly wise advice. And yet our shelters are overcrowded. My staff and I have seen that with our own eyes on our own trips out there. We've got big dogs that have been there for months and months and months, and we've got what seem to be a lot of systemic challenges in this space. And so I worry that doing nothing doesn't seem realistic or appropriate. And it's particularly frustrating to me that we can't in the process of researching this, we can't even find basic, common ground on some what seemed to [1:42:40 PM] ground on some what seemed to be relatively easy to find facts when we try to find out how many animals were transferred to partners, I got completely and wildly different answers from city staff and from Apa. And so the only real consensus I've witnessed in the last nine months is just the disappoint with our prior director, and and we're past that. And so we're at an impasse. I came in with a philosophy of trying to listen to as many viewpoints as possible on this, to research, collect information to, and then make the best informed decision with imperfect information. That's what I feel like we're always doing up here. But for this issue, we talked to at least four vets in and out of my district to get their thoughts vets that in some cases had experience in working with a lot of the partners in the space that we've heard from today, Apa, emancipate the city and so on. And so I really just want to read a couple of their comments that they had allowed me to share, which touched on the mayor's amendment, but also touch on just item three in [1:43:40 PM] touch on just item three in general. From one vet they mentioned. And this is in the context of animals and, and the mayor's amendment, that while there are situations where it may be appropriate to postpone surgery on a particular lactating animal, I think the person best equipped to weigh the pros and cons and make the ultimate decision is the veterinarian who will be performing the surgery and making and managing the shelter population. And a lot of the goal that I a lot of the value, I thought, with councilmember lane's initiative here was to restore. Restore more autonomy to the professionals that are in the space to empower the actual practitioners. And again, that's one reason I very much valued hearing from vets and other medical professionals in this space. Because their knowledge and discretion and how they make decisions is [1:44:41 PM] how they make decisions is really important to how we solve this problem. I think we can all agree there's a problem here. How we break this impasse and solve it, I think, is the key question. They've also sent us a lot of what do they call it, Jama articles about this. That's the the medical journal in this space, as well as the information from the association of shelter vets. And so the bottom line is, well, I wanted to raise one last point on this, actually, which was one of the refrains that we keep hearing is the challenge is with administration. And I worry that having gone back and looked at administration for the last decade at aso, across multiple directors, it just seems implausible that it's only administration. That's again and again for years that's creating the overcrowding situation that we've got and that there's no other factors involved that we [1:45:42 PM] other factors involved that we should be looking at to try and address. I mean, even the idea of having a pilot or some kind of trial to say we'll have all the other shelters and vets be control groups and we'll select a few, a few to adopt this procedure and see how things shake out in six months. Seems like it would cause another six months of very heated discussion and impasse. So my hope was let's figure out how to restore autonomy to professionals in the space. And again, I've got a lot more comments that I can share my articles. But I was curious. But let's get away from hyperbole. Let's try and settle on facts. Let's try and figure out how we address some of the concerns that have been raised about the reporting and getting better stakeholder engagement on this. As I explained to some of the folks when we talked to them, the budget process was heated. And this is not the only space where we had to make tough and quick decisions on. [1:46:42 PM] tough and quick decisions on. And that's unfortunate, but we certainly had time in the interim to visit with stakeholders and and do research on this. So all to say, support council member lane's initiative. And based on the feedback I've gotten from multiple vets, feel like it'd be better to move forward without the amendment. Thank you. >> Thank you. Unless there's further discussion, I'll close simply by saying that, as I've indicated, this leaves the ordinance primarily intact, most of it intact, with one small exception, and I think it's an important exception for collaboration and continued partnerships with our rescue partners. With that being said, the vote is on the motion to Watson motion to amend those in favor of the motion, please signify by raising your hand. Those opposed raise your hand. [1:47:42 PM] Those opposed raise your hand. Those abstaining, raise your hand. How are you voting? Council? I did not catch your hand. >> Stared at me for. >> A minute. Yeah. I keep looking at you, I keep. Yeah, okay. There being six votes in favor, four votes in opposition and council member Ellis abstaining. The motion to amend is adopted. Those voting in favor for the record are alter Velasquez, the mayor pro tem, the mayor, council member qadri and council member harper-madison. Those voting against are duchen vela, Siegel Laine and then one abstention, and that is council member Ellis. So that will take us back to the main motion, which is item number three as amended. Is there any further discussion on item number three as amended? Hearing none. Yes. Council [1:48:45 PM] Hearing none. Yes. Council member harper-madison. >> It's discussion, but not necessarily about the item. So much the subject matter. And because the people that I would be addressing are in the room, I'd like to take a moment of personal privilege. >> Well, try to keep it on the item and we'll be I'll recognize you. >> You got it. This this discussion in and of itself, is exactly why I'm going to break the very advice that I offered council member duchen coming in, which was to avoid the subject matter altogether. And that's if for no other reason, it's so difficult to make some of the decisions already when when the people that are fighting for are fighting with one another, it's it's impossible. It's untenable for us as policy makers to choose sides. We can't because we know respect. Like all of you guys, you're our neighbors. Your coworkers are the people we do stuff with. We want to hear both sides and be able to make a rational judgment based on what information we have, in addition to what information you have. But I will say, I've never been in a room with the all parties present and myself [1:49:48 PM] all parties present and myself present, where I felt like I walked out of that room, like we had a really good collaborative discussion where everybody entered the room in good faith and wanted to walk out with real solutions, recognizing that when good, when good collaboration goes well, that means good. That means good, compromise goes well, and when good compromise goes well, everybody leaves the room feeling like they like they lost something. And that just has to be how it is. This is democracy. Everybody has to give something I like very much on my way out, as I'm breaking the seal on talking to folks about the subject more in depth, I'd like to have all parties present with me and my staff and have a real conversation about what it is that I'm leaving for my successor with the district attorney's office. As it comes to this subject. I don't want to leave them. Don't touch it. Advice. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, councilmember harper-madison. And before we vote, I, I believe she just spoke for probably 11 members [1:50:48 PM] spoke for probably 11 members of the Austin city council. That. I'm not going to say I'll speak for all of them, but I'll speak for myself as well. This has become untenable. This is this is to the point of and you can shake your head at me and you can grin and but, but but the the vitriol with which people speak to each other is a real problem. And it needs to be addressed and everybody needs to address it. This has become a even prior to council member Laine making her attempts to to to make good changes. This was an issue with the prior council. And I agree with councilmember duchen that it can't be seen as just an administrative problem, just one person, regardless of how people feel about the job that one person did or may have done [1:51:50 PM] one person did or may have done that that's not. This has become almost partizan politics. And it's we've got to get it past partizan politics. Otherwise we're not going to be making good policy. So with that, if there's no further discussion, without objection, item number three as amended, is adopted. All right. That'll take us now to item number. Thank you all. That'll take us to item number 63. Item number 63 members is a public hearing. By the way. The plan would be we'll take up item number 63. Then we'll go to our 2:00 time certain. And after that we will have the executive session. So item number 63 is a public hearing. Without objection we will open the public hearing on item number 63. The public hearing is now open. And I'll turn to the city clerk. >> Thank you. Mayor, I have some remote speakers. Kai haydn. >> Hello. Can you hear me? [1:52:52 PM] >> Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Hello. Good afternoon. Council. My name is Kai haydn. I'm here to say that I wish to change my initial opposition to an endorsement. It's great to see Austin developing centers for the community. However, I want to say that I strongly oppose the installation of cameras. >> Thank you. You're you're you're out. You're out of order. And we're going to turn off the microphone. >> Bobby Levinsky. >> Thank you, mayor and council, this is Bobby Levinsky, an attorney with silver springs alliance, speaking on behalf of our board of directors regarding item 63, which is a public hearing and consideration of a site plan that establishes development regulations for the Austin convention center with a posted address of 500 east Chavez, Austin, Texas 78701. This site plan was previously approved by you on July 24th, after which I sent a letter on August 13th highlighting deficiencies in the notification used and the [1:53:53 PM] the notification used and the lack of posting of the site plan. I presume that this item is being brought back to you today to address some of those concerns. However, some of the concerns remain unresolved. My understanding is that this item is being approved pursuant to 20 525 81 of the land development code, which requires council approval for a convention center use. I do not see a designation of the development regulations that are being established. However, it's my understanding that the city is interpreting the site plan approval by establishing whatever development regulations are necessary to build the plans that are approved. I also understand that based on the posting language in page two of the staff report that this item does not include approval of waivers. The specific language for that is waivers none. However, if you go to the backup material, find the link that was added. Copy and paste it into your web browser. Register for a third party dropbox account and download the 126 page site plan. From the website, you can review the 126 pages, and you will see there that there are at least [1:54:54 PM] there that there are at least 17 waivers included in the site plan, two of which are on pages one and 71. Section 5.71 F of the Austin drainage criteria manual, and 15 waivers to different sections of the utility criteria manual, which can be found on pages seven, 71, 72, 85, 86, 89, 90, and 96. There is also remaining deference to future considerations for the drainage outfall location that affects walnut creek, which the site plan will be required to align with at a later date. >> Thank you, Mr. Levinsky. >> Decisions that are made. >> Thank you sir. >> That's all the remote speakers I'll move to in person. Daniel Dejesus, Dante Chen, Vanessa Resnick, Corbin Martinez. Bill bunch. >> Mr. Bunch, if you'd come forward. >> Christopher slintec and Zenobia Joseph. >> Good morning. Mayor, council [1:56:04 PM] >> Good morning. Mayor, council member bill bunch. District five. Save our springs alliance urging you to vote no on the site. Plan for the. What your own staff has said is a $5.6 billion, not 1.6 billion, 5.6 billion, all in, including undisclosed amount of interest payments over 30 years. In addition to the 1.6 billion upfront cost, there's tons of reasons why you should just stop right now, including one that you've not let us vote on it. We're going to force that and we will have a vote. Second being this is a phenomenal waste of money. All of the projections and claims that we need this because we're turning away business are completely false and unjustified. Mayor Watson, you know that. And you shouldn't be repeating to the public these claims in the backup that you have today is the most fantastic admission I've ever seen from staff on [1:57:07 PM] I've ever seen from staff on something like this. In response to council member Duncan's questions, he had tried to get from you all the actual budget, the details of how you get to that $5.6 billion all in estimate. And that was refused in the springtime. It was March or early may. I can't remember your staff. Katy zamesnik convention center department told you point blank she would get that information to you as soon as possible. You have no budget. Still, you're marching ahead here. He asked for it. Where's that information? Budget information we're supposed to be getting as soon as possible from months ago. The answer and I'll read it. Current scheduled completion of buyout of the contractor. Scope has the final package being completed second quarter of 2027. Additional detailed information will be available [1:58:08 PM] information will be available at that time. >> Thank you, Mr. Bunch. >> They're going to hide the actual budget for two more years. Are you kidding me? >> Thank you, Mr. Bunch. Miss Joseph. >> What are they hiding? Y'all need to find out. >> Bill, you know better. >> We know that we have a right to know this. >> Mr. Bunch, your time is up. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council, I appreciate Mr. Bunch's passion. I just want to say, as it relates specifically to the expansion of the convention center, I just had to go back to the history. It was the visitor impact task force that met 12 times. There was a 2016 resolution, August of 20, August 18th, 2016 and may 23rd, 2017 was the last meeting of the visitor impact task force, and then mayor Adler rolled out the downtown puzzle, which was the expansion of the convention center. That's one footnote. [1:59:09 PM] center. That's one footnote. The other one is I can't get past John Yancy's artwork. I recognize that it was saved, but there's still been a lack of transparency as it relates to how any of the artwork was even picked for the convention center. It is deeply disturbing because there is language about community benefit, but I don't see what the community benefit will be. I would just ask you to table this item as Mr. Bunch recommended, and I just want you to recognize that we are not getting a good return on investment. This is not been a transparent process, and I would ask you to recognize mayor, the history and to the new members. I would ask you to do your homework before you vote on these types of items. There is long standing history. It was in the dark that mayor Adler put forward this item, and so I would just ask you, mayor, to recognize that that artwork would not have been saved had it not been for the public. But still to this day, I have no idea how the artwork [2:00:09 PM] I have no idea how the artwork has been selected for the convention center, so I certainly don't support this item. And I would ask you to recognize some of the reasons that I mentioned as it relates to the permit. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> You're welcome. >> Mayor. All speakers for item 63 have been called. >> Thank you. Mayor members, all the speakers on the public hearing on item number 63 have been called. Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 63. The public hearing is now closed. Councilmember Siegel, I was going to get a motion on the table and allow for discussion and recognize you at that point. Is that appropriate? All right. I'll entertain a motion. With regard to item number 63. Is there a motion motion made by the mayor pro tem to approve? 63 seconded by councilmember Ellis. Councilmember Siegel, you're recognized on item number 63. >> Thank you. Mayor. Just a brief question for staff, maybe dsd staff. I just wanted to ask [2:01:11 PM] dsd staff. I just wanted to ask for staff response to the callers, pointing out that this, you know, case review sheet says that there were no waiver requests. And then additional documentation seems to say there were several waivers. Thank you. >> Mayor. Council members Keith Mars, interim director, Austin development services. The the waivers. Everything has been approved. Administratively, there are no waivers before council to take action on. >> Understand. Thank you. >> Thank you. Council member. Any further discussion or questions with regard to item number 63? Council member duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor. Just to illustrate my frustration, I'm going to be abstaining on this item, in part because we just got a ton of information back, like at the 11th and a half hour. So I need time to process that. And and so does my staff. And so I'm abstaining until we can get through that. >> Thank you. Fair enough. Thank you. Any further discussion on item number 63? [2:02:12 PM] discussion on item number 63? Without objection, item number 63 is adopted with councilmember harper-madison temporarily off the dais and council member duchen being shown abstaining. Members that will now take us to our 2:00 time certain which are zoning items. Miss harden, you have the floor. >> Thank you mayor and council. I'm joy harden with the planning department. From looking at your agenda you can see many of the items have been removed. The these items have been re noticed and will appear on your October 9th agenda. So your zoning agenda begins with item number 66. That's NPR 2022 0010.02. This item is offered as a staff postponement to October 9th council meeting. Your next item is item 69, lpa 2024 0016.04. This item is [2:03:15 PM] 2024 0016.04. This item is offered as a staff postponement to October 9th council meeting. Your next item is item number 81 for 2025 0058. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. Item 81 is NPR 2024 0019.01. This item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your October 9th council meeting. The related rezoning item is 82 c1 for 2024 0121. Again, this item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to October 9th council meeting and item number 83 is c1 for 2024 0163. This item was granted a postponement from your September 11th meeting to today. Another postponement request has been received for the council meeting date of October 23rd. There are oppositional speakers to this item. Staff is offering this item for consent on all [2:04:16 PM] this item for consent on all three readings. And of course, this is at your discretion. And this concludes the reading of the zoning and neighborhood plan amendment portion of your agenda. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss Harding. Anybody have any questions of miss harden? All right, members, I'm going to ask for a motion on a consent agenda. That would be the following. Item number 66, postponement to October 9th. Item number 69, postponement October 9th. Item number 80. All three readings item 81 and 82. Postponement to October 9th. And item number 83, all three readings. Is there a motion? Motion made by councilmember Velazquez, seconded by council member vela. We will now go to speakers. >> Thank you. Mary mayor. Speaking on the merits of the postponement for item 66, I have Zenobia Joseph. >> Thank you mayor council, I'm [2:05:18 PM] >> Thank you mayor council, I'm Zenobia Joseph speaking on the merits of the postponement of item 66 as it relates to the plaza saltillo development. I just would say that I support the postponement and will speak just broadly when staff brings this item back to you. I would ask, as I've asked in the past, for an overlay, a map overlay that shows the number of affordable housing units, specifically the equitable transit oriented development units. And I would ask you to put the area median income so that we in the public can actually see who is living in these developments. I would just point to you that on capital metro's web page, there's a 323 page report specifically for the equitable transit oriented development. It's actually disturbing because it includes north Lamar transit center. And as chito vela knows, the rail will never go north of us 183 northeast in perpetuity, but you will still collect taxes from everyone there. So at my request, mayor [2:06:20 PM] there. So at my request, mayor is really for when these items come before you. Any housing items, but specifically those on the rail line that they actually show you the overlay. Because when we go to the map online, it still shows the 30 year plan as originally proposed. Andy Demayo should update it as opposed to trying to make the numbers look good for the federal transit administration capital investment grants document. So I just want you to recognize that what we see is not accurate. It does not reflect the June 6th, 2023 vote by Austin transit partnership when they voted for phase one to only go up to crestview station. So that's general comments. But I would just ask you to recognize that postponement is good, but the staff needs to be more transparent and to provide you with the information as it relates to the income levels and the demographic data as well, and any of the cultural issues that are related. If you have any questions, I'll gladly [2:07:21 PM] have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. Thank you. You're welcome. >> For item 69. I do have a some remote speakers. Garrick young. >> Hello, Mr. >> Staying on. >> Yes it is. >> All right. Thank you very much. So that's my name is Garrett young. I'm actually calling today to speak on the pro shift on. On code for industry. Used to mixed use land use. So I would say this I'd say I support it. I think it's a fine opportunity for Austin. I'd say it's a great opportunity to create a vibrant, more interconnected space for housing, commerce and public amenities. And I think in the right circumstances, mixed use development can create a more walkable, sustainable city that serves the needs of a diverse community. And and it can foster local businesses, reduce [2:08:22 PM] foster local businesses, reduce congestion, and make neighborhoods more, more dynamic. And I support this kind of growth, especially when it is thoughtful and integrated with existing communities. And however I do, I do think that it's often moves forward with these kind of changes. I urge you to remain vigilant, and the balance between progress and preserving the core values that makes awesome so special. Its openness, its inclusivity and commitment to individual freedoms. And it's interesting to a point of concern that that has been at the forefront of local debates. And it is the implementation of ai powered surveillance systems. >> Thank you. I'm going to rule you out of order. I wondered when you'd get there. >> Kelly Kenny win for item 69. Kenny, are you there? Okay, we'll try Kenny one more time. I'm going to go to in person. I have Alberto Johnson to speak [2:09:24 PM] have Alberto Johnson to speak on the merits of the postponement for 69. >> Alberto Johnson. I don't see anyone. >> Okay? I the next ones I have for are for 83. Ellen Fagan. >> Hi. Good afternoon, council members. My name is Ellen Fagan and I have lived and owned at the flamingo condominiums on Collier street for over 11 years. I am here today as a newly elected member of our hoa board, and I am representing our entire board. We are asking that you postpone this item for two reasons. First, although the members of our hoa board are new, we have made a good faith effort to work with the developer Stonelake. Unfortunately, every single one of our requests has been denied. [2:10:24 PM] of our requests has been denied. At the same time, has already granted meaningful concessions to nearby higher priced communities like the lyric and the sage. Flamingo residents deserve the same protections. We are a small, diverse community and without safeguards. We face not only daily safety and quality of life impacts, but also risks to our property values and displacement. Second, south Lamar is already overburdened, and the city has not coordinated a comprehensive plan for traffic safety, utilities and displacement in our area. Lot by lot. Rezoning only make these problems worse. Our neighborhood deserves a clear, data driven analysis of how much density the area can safely handle without major capital improvements, especially as budgets and funding are tight. We also need a commitment to mitigation strategies if limits are exceeded. I also want to note that we have official documented support from at least 50% of our 29 units shared with the council through emails and signups to oppose the item, along with verbal support from additional owners [2:11:26 PM] support from additional owners and renters. In closing, I urge you to postpone this case. Flamingo residents deserve the same treatment as our neighbors, and the city owes our community a more coordinated, long term plan for responsible growth. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Valery feigin. >> Hello, my name is Valerie Siglin and I am an owner of the flamingo condo condos. And we have been trying to work with the developer, but there's been no reasonable agreement that has been offered. As Ellen has stated, Stonelake has provided protections to other nearby condo developments, and flamingo residents deserve the exact same fair treatment. We're asking for protections to preserve equity and prevent displacement. Without this, the project puts flamingo residents at risk of safety issues, displacement and loss of property value. Please delay or deny approval until until these [2:12:26 PM] deny approval until until these concerns are addressed, we urge you to stand with the neighborhood and require changes before allowing this project to proceed. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I'm going to try Kenny Wynn one more time for item 69. Kenny, are you there? Okay, moving on to item 83 for in-person. Steven Barriga, Tonya Payne Marc may, Joe Smith and Beth Friedman. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. Just grab any chair and we'll get you going in whatever order you want to go. Are you Mr. Barragan? >> I'm Mr. Smith. >> Okay, well, we'll start with you. How about that? >> Sounds good. So I also live at the flamingo condos on Collier street. Our community has both short and long term [2:13:27 PM] has both short and long term concerns about the project being planned at 1700 south Lamar. Today, I would like to focus on the long term issues. The project will be split into two tracks. Our home sits directly across from track one. The biggest concern. Track one has been approved for height allowance of 90ft. That's about 7 to 8 stories. I would like to request that the 90 foot height only be allowed on the Lamar facing side. For the side that faces our building, we're asking for a limit of 45ft for at least a 60 foot setback from the sidewalk. That would help protect our community's character and also quality of life. Now right next to us at 1430 Collier, there's another rezoning request for the same db 90 designation. That property runs along our west side just a few yards from our building. If both of these projects move forward at full height without protections, we could end up being boxed in by tall structures to our west side and to our front facing south side. Not to mention the 85 foot affordable housing building that was recently [2:14:28 PM] building that was recently built on the east side on Lamar. And this brings me brings me to a bigger issue capacity. In the past few years, we've seen six major developments go up on south Lamar, all within a half mile of us. If you add in those with these two new proposals, we're talking about more than 2000 units, all packed within a half mile of each other, all feeding on to Lamar boulevard. So my questions are fairly simple. Has the city done a serious impact study? If so, shouldn't those plans take priority in these issues fixed before moving forward with any new projects? Because Lamar boulevard and the surrounding streets just can't handle this kind of density as things are now, we all understand that Austin needs to grow and that housing is critical and we all support that. But the way we grow matters. We need solutions that address housing concerns without stripping the soul from our city, causing mental financial distress from our neighbors, and destroying the reasons we choose to live in Austin. Thank you. >> Thank you sir. Yes ma'am. >> My name is Beth. [2:15:29 PM] >> My name is Beth. >> Friedman and I also live at the flamingo. My neighbors and I were at 1402 Collier street. And we're here to ask that you please think carefully about the impact of rezoning 1700 south remar. For those of us who reside there, Collier street is most of that. That whole area and hundreds of your constituents constituents reside there. We've already endured a nearby project at 1508 south Lamar called zilker studios, and it was extremely disruptive to our lives during construction for nearly two years, we were woken at 7 A.M. Sometimes earlier, by jackhammers, noise from heavy machinery, shouting workers and constant hammering. Parking around our home was taken over by construction workers, and cars often blocked our line of sight when exiting our lot, creating dangerous situations on a daily basis. 1700 south Lamar is on a much grander scale than zilker studios, so the disruption will impact our lives for years and the impact for us will also be financial. Many residents will have to move during construction, apparently, especially those [2:16:29 PM] apparently, especially those who work from home, myself included, and residents who work night shifts like one owner who is a nurse. Owners of rental units will struggle to keep tenants, and those forced to move out won't be able to rent out our units at market value, because nobody's going to want to live in a construction zone and will have to discount our rent next week. We'll be back here asking for protections from another development at 1430 Collier Collier right next door. Just imagine living through these two projects at the same time, or one ending only to have another one start. We're all for growth, but we pay our taxes and we matter just as much as the developers. We simply ask for three protections before approving. Limit construction to weekdays 9 to 5 without weekends require workers to be shuttled off site parking. Not in our neighborhood, and especially not the south side of Collier, require strict rules so workers do not block our parking or enter our property. Developers assure us that they follow city code, but it's developers assure us that they follow city [2:17:29 PM] assure us that they follow city code. But it's ultimately the city's responsibility to protect its citizens. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for zoning consent have been called members. >> You've heard all speakers have been called on the consent agenda as read. And the motion that we have in front of us, we have a motion. And a second. Let me ask if there's any discussion with regard to the consent agenda is read. Hearing none. Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted. Council member duchen. >> I wish to be shown voting abstaining on 83. Please. >> Council member duchen is shown abstaining on item number 83. The consent agenda is adopted with. With that one exception of to the votes members. That takes us to the item number 64. The city council will now go into a closed session to take up one item pursuant to section 551071 and 551072 of the government code. The city council will discuss legal issues and real [2:18:31 PM] discuss legal issues and real estate matters related to item number 64, the discussion of legal issues and real estate matters related to the acquisition of approximately 1.39 acres, including an office. Retail. Okay, hang on one second. Before I finish reading that councilmember qadri was off the dais on the zoning on the vote. We just took on the consent agenda for zoning. He wishes to be shown voting in favor of the consent agenda. It will not change the outcome of the vote. I move that councilmember zo qadri be voting in favor of the consent agenda on zoning and seconded by councilmember Velasquez. Is there any objection? Without objection, the motion is is granted and council member qadri will be voting in favor of the zoning consent agenda. Thank you, councilmember members, I want to go back on item number 64. So we have it completed. And that is we're [2:19:32 PM] completed. And that is we're going to discuss legal issues and real estate matters related to the acquisition of approximately 1.39 acres, including an office retail building for the homeless strategy office located at 2401 south interstate 35 on or otherwise known as E 35. The private consultation with our legal counsel will be pursuant to section 551071 of the Texas government code, and the real property discussion will be pursuant to section 551072 of the government code. Is there any objection on going into executive session on the items announced? Hearing? None. The council will now go into executive session at 2:20 P.M. For members of the public. When we complete the executive session, whenever that is, I will come back out. There are no other items for the city council to discuss on this agenda for the September 25th, 2025 meeting. So I will come out and adjourn the city [2:20:32 PM] out and adjourn the city council at whatever time we complete this closed executive session. We will now go into closed executive session. Atkin [3:07:35 PM] Atkin I'm standing here. I'm assuming everybody's ready. Okay, good. In that case, it is 3:07 P.M. And we are out of the closed session. In closed session, we discussed real estate matters related to item number 64. There being no further business to come before the Austin city council at this regularly scheduled meeting on September 25th, 2025. Without objection, the city council is. The meeting is adjourned at 3:08 P.M. Thanks, everybody.