City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 11/20/2025 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 11/20/2025 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 11/20/2025 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. good morning everybody. It's 10:00 in the morning on [10:00:31 AM] November 20th, 2025, and I will call to order this regular meeting of the Austin city council. We are meeting in the city council chambers, which are located at city hall, which is at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. And we have a quorum of the city council present, both in person and virtually. We're joined virtually. So let me run through how we're going to conduct the meeting today. I'm going to read here in just a second changes and corrections into the record. Then I will then what we will do is we will go to the consent agenda. There are the only items that have been pulled from the agenda. Are those items related to the budget? Those are items four, five and six. Items four, five and six. We will take up public comment for the consent agenda, and then we will go to water broadly labeled non consent items. Those include items related to eminent domain and the public hearings that we [10:01:31 AM] will conduct by 12:00 or at 12:00, regardless of where we are in the agenda at 12:00, we will pause so that we can take up our time. Certain posting, which is public communication. We will probably take a little bit of a break there. We will recess, we will have live music, and then we will come back and I'll make the call on that. As we get to it, we will come back. We have a 2:00 time certain and that are those are our zoning items. My intention would be that we will take up the budget items, items four, five and six at the at the end of this regular scheduled agenda. However, if during the course of the day we finish a section and we have something that all we have left are things that are time certain, for example, the 12:00 time certain or the 2:00 time certain, we will have public communication on those items 4 or 5 and six at those [10:02:33 AM] times so that we have an efficient use of our time. So that's unless there's questions. Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Thank you. Mayor. I would just ask before we take up the budget items that we have an opportunity to meet with our sub quorums. So a recess before. >> We're going to take a we'll take our our typical normal recess around the 12:00 time. >> Okay. And then we'll come back at. >> We'll come back at like 110 the way we typically do. >> Because about 12 we'll be taking public comment to 1230. So that gives us about 45 minutes. Right. Okay. I think that can work okay. >> Very good. So member members, any other questions. Great. Then let me read into the record changes and corrections items 30 48 49 50, 51 and 54 have been withdrawn from the agenda. Items 30, 48, 49, 50, [10:03:35 AM] 51 and 54 have been withdrawn from the agenda. On item number 57, it should add council member Paige Ellis as a sponsor of that item. And again, the only items that have been pulled from the consent agenda are items four, five and six, and those are items related to our budget. So with that, we will go to speakers on the consent agenda. Members, I want to note for the record that on the consent agenda, council member qadri has on item number 44, he has direction that you have in your backup direction to the manager's office. With regard to item number 44. So when the chair accepts a motion to accept the consent agenda, as it's read, council member zo qadri direction on item number 44 will be a part of that motion. Councilmember qadri you want to say anything about that? Okay, very good. With that, I will now turn it over to the [10:04:36 AM] city clerk to help us by calling out people to speak on the public communication. When your name is called. It's really helpful to us if you make your way to the front so that we know you're here. And if there's an open chair in front of one of these microphones, please go ahead and take that, and then we'll call on you in order. And you can state your name for the record. So I'll turn it over to the city clerk. >> Thank you, mayor. First for item one, I have Mike mince and tatties. Bill. >> Please go ahead. Just state your name for the record, please. >> Good morning. My name is thaddeus vela. I live in [10:05:37 AM] district one and I'm with the us African institute. Good morning, mayor and members of the city council. Our organization, west African institute, is a national organization that empowers immigrant communities in Austin and around the country. And today, I'm here to urge all of you to not cut funding for. Critical social service and also legal immigration support for the immigrant communities. Our immigrant communities are already carrying the weight of economic hardship and discrimination and increasingly harsh immigration policies and enforcement, reducing those supports and critical social supports to not only to our immigrant communities, but also the residents of Austin, would deepen the the struggle of our communities and also limit our community's ability to stay [10:06:37 AM] safe, informed and stable, and social service and legal immigration assistance are not extra. They are essential tools that keep our immigrant families, understand their rights, access protection, obtain legal support, and navigate the complex immigration system that shapes their daily lives. When these services are defunded, people fall through the cracks and the entire community feels the impact. Austin is a city of immigrants, and our strength comes from the people who continue to build their lives today and in the future. Here in Austin, if we want Austin to remain a welcoming city for all of us, we must protect the programs that allow immigrants and Azerbaijan residents, regardless of their immigration status. And are you all to support all these social supports and critical immigration support programs? Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> I have a remote speaker for [10:07:38 AM] item two, taniqua Brewster. Miss Brewster, are you there? >> I am here hi. Council and mayor. My name is taniqua and I'm actually speaking on item four. I think that I may need to be. >> I'm sorry. I need to call on you later. If you signed up on item four, we'll need to call you later. >> Yes. Thank you. Sorry about that. >> Ma'am. You only signed up on item two. >> Ma'am, if you're still there, you only signed up on item number two. Do you wish to speak on item number two? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> For item number eight, Brad Massingill. Brad, are you there? [10:08:57 AM] >> Please go to the next one. >> Monica Guzman, item eight. And then brant Davey for item 13. I then have bill Bunge for item 23. >> Please come forward. >> Sorry, my notes are not quite where they need to be, but good morning, mayor and council. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. Sharing thoughts from various commissioners in the revised bylaws template, specifically article seven, item J, lines 31 to 34. There is verbiage about limiting speakers to three minutes and no less than two minutes per agenda item. And there was concern about presenters. How are they supposed to give presentations in such a short time? And that is the main thing, is allowing [10:09:58 AM] the commissioners or the commissioners to set those rules. They explained to me that, sorry, I might like I said, my notes are a little bit out of it here. Like the the board of the board of adjustments. I'm sorry, I apologize. Like I said, these were texted to me, but basically they're used to somebody else setting them, not council having a one size fits all. And they're just concerned about people not being able to present. And I believe for anything going to Beaudet and community development commission, others that are critical to what's going on in the community, they really need to be able to give the amount of time needed for presenters. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. Hi. >> I'm brant Davey, I'm a performing artist. And thank you guys for having us. It's actually absolutely terrific how open this council is. I am a recovering addict and I've [10:10:59 AM] been going through the rehab process, and I've been interfacing with a bunch of assistance, you know, from state, local rise community navigation center, the works. And one of the issues this is related to the work workforce board and the city's relationship with it. I think there might be an opportunity here. One of the issues that I've found coming up frequently is even among the workforce clerks Wright that I'm interfacing with is all of these notifications are sent by mail to people. And they're these people are typically transient, you know, they're going through different housing situations. I didn't get a notice on my snap meeting till after the snap meeting. Right. So I kind of just thinking that we could email it, text it, I [10:11:59 AM] don't know, it's 2025, so maybe the city can put some pressure with the state and develop a solution there. And you might even save some money doing it. That's all I have. Thank you guys. >> Good morning bill bunch. Save our springs alliance district five I'm here speaking on item 23, which is $12 million for a couple of contractors to help manage water and wastewater capital improvement projects. That budget is way bigger than it needs to be. The one project that's mentions, and it's for managing a bunch of them is the biggest one in the water wastewater utilities budget. That's the walnut creek wastewater treatment plant. That is a project that really needs to be put on hold. We're never going to need the scale of expansion for that $1.1 [10:13:00 AM] billion project. We're at a time at record or near record municipal bond interest rates. Every single capital project that you have that's not urgent should be put on hold. Certainly recognize this is not part of the general fund budget, but these projects are driving these water and wastewater rate increases, and that's directly affecting the budget. At minimum, you should postpone this item until you reevaluate your your capital infrastructure, especially with mayor Watson's announcement last night about basically abandoning the aquifer storage and recovery project, which is the big kahuna in the middle of our water forward plan. I hope this is this is a radical shift and realignment that we can all celebrate towards conservation and reuse investments. And this [10:14:03 AM] this item right here points directly to that, because those projects that will save our water future and make us sustainable aren't these big, big, giant capital projects. They're doing a whole bunch of other stuff, that small scale and that's embracing the community to for different water culture. >> I'm going to try Brad Massingill one more time. Brad Massingill, item eight. Brad, are you there? >> Brad. >> Okay. Mr. Massingill also signed up for 18 and 20. Brad are you there? >> Yeah, sorry, I'm a little disorganized here. Item 20 and the items after it up to 23. The item that Mr. Bunch was just describing. I agree, [10:15:04 AM] there's there's a lot more room for trying to figure out how to roll these out. That's a big expenditure on the part of the city and the other outlier. And this is something I mentioned yesterday when we're talking about these big tie in projects and, and large infrastructure projects, they involve our city employees and our resources to make them happen. And some of those resources and people can be used elsewhere to do things that are more closer to the community. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> For item 44, Megan meisenbach. >> Hi, this is Megan meisenbach and the judge's hill neighborhood, and good day. Mayor Watson and council members. I'm asking for a postponement of item 44. As a [10:16:07 AM] resident and member of the adjacent neighborhood, and actually part of the homestead preservation district, D is in our neighborhood. It will have impactful reductions in the city budget, millions of dollars, the property tax dollars from west campus will be diverted forever to a private entity by this measure, and these tax dollars are are proposed to being taken away from the city budget based on old data. And in your backup, it says with a high margin of error due to the small sample size, etc. The then the median family income is not meaningfully significant. It says in appendix B, of course, you don't expect students to really have a high income. So calling this a poverty area is not really transparent. Also, [10:17:07 AM] none of the people that in our neighborhood, and as far as I know, the adjacent neighborhood and the university area area overlay were not informed of the formation of this district. So based on these items, I hope you will postpone item 44 until December when we have a chance to look at it more fully. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Trustee Dameron. Item 44. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. Thank you for your time and consideration today. First, I would like to again request a postponement for item number 44 until December's council meeting, when we have the opportunity to ask our questions of staff members. Second, I agree that neighborhoods are in fear of losing their homes, but not because of low income displacement in our neighborhood, what we fear are rising taxes, incomplete, [10:18:08 AM] incompatible zoning within our boundaries, and being squeezed out of our homes for overdevelopment. We are surrounded by the university of Texas area here. I also agree that HPD serve an important purpose, yet putting one in the campus or in our neighborhood is not appropriate given the dynamics of the UT area. HPD were created for long term homeowners experiencing low income displacement, but that does not include our neighborhood. The area has been one of success, and HPD do not appear to have as good a track record than some of the cities. You know, it adds bureaucracy. It slows down development areas where they're implemented. And if our goal is to lower rent and ownership pressures on students and neighborhoods, slowing down development and revitalization is counterproductive. In addition, the campus HPD would divert [10:19:08 AM] millions of dollars in future property tax revenue away from essential citywide services, and they would be locked into one of the most expensive, heavily invested areas in the city. Instead of benefiting communities that actually need the program, establishing HPD here misuses a tool designed for at risk, low income neighborhoods that are eligible for the program, not areas dominated by constant student turnover and enabling. >> Thank you very. >> Much, 98%. >> Also, for item 44, I have Joel Mcnew, Michael Mchone, and then item 52, bill bunch. >> Please come forward. >> Good morning. My name is Joel Mcnew. I'm the president of safe horns. I agree with the previous speakers. We are [10:20:09 AM] asking for a postponement on this to better understand. I did a quick poll last night because I was looking at the data that the previous speaker speakers talked about for low income and the benefits. Over 150 parents reached out in a quick request for information last night. To me, the average room in west campus student housing, which makes up the majority of housing in this area, is $2,200 per bed. That also is another fee for 2 to $300 for parking. There was a funny little fee for green space, which that property doesn't even have green space. The average parent is paying. Parents are cosigners, so the fact that this area is called low income really? That is curious to us. But most importantly, we want to understand what the benefit is to students for HPD, which they are the predominant citizens of [10:21:09 AM] this area. What we emphatically need most from all of you is to please help us in addressing mold issues in these properties. We have mold issues. We have physical security issues, access control, very poor maintenance, no oversight. Safe Hawkins has predominantly been the oversight and the people working to improve the health and safety and quality of life for students that make up this important area of our community. Again, the average unit is collectively $6,600 a month. Some are $8,800 a month for an apartment that then requires you to pay for parking. Utilities that are dealing with elevators that do not work, garage Gates that do not, that are not secure, doors accessible, exterior doors that are not functioning. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Mckown. >> Thank you. Mayor. City [10:22:11 AM] council, appreciate your time and your service. I've not been here in a while. A mayor. Last time I was here, I was standing in front of you and a cell phone went off. Of course, it was the William tell overture. And I believe to get this item to be postponed, I'm going to need all the help I can get from the lone ranger. But it's not an impossible I. We're just asking for a little bit of time. We know that this is not something that has to be done immediately. It is an implementation tool that is being considered. But once you start getting a situation where you have the neighbors and the adjacent neighborhood associations all confused and concerned, it doesn't do any good to then say, well, let's go ahead with something. Let's be like we did when we created uno and university area partners brought it to you wrapped in a bow with the agreement of seven neighborhoods that yes, through [10:23:13 AM] cooperation, collaboration and communication, we can create a better plan. I agree that all of these we have many problems in the university neighborhood. Overlay. It's 20 years old. It has taken property that was valued at $5 to $25 a square foot, to well over 700 to 800, even $1,000 a square foot. We have massive buildings. We have brought 80% of the student body back to the campus, so there are no longer trying to get to class on busses that get clogged on our freeways. So it's a very humble request. Let's wait. Have its meetings the first week in December, and come back to this council at your December 11th meeting and have a vote on whether or not this is a good idea. So university area partners been in business a long time. We were designated as a first pedestrian dominant zone by the city council back in 1996. So please, just a little time to [10:24:14 AM] discuss this. >> Thank you, Mr. Mckown. Mr. Bunch. >> Thank you, mayor, council members, for your service to our community. Bill bunch, executive director, save our springs alliance here. Speaking on item 52, which I'm excited to support wholeheartedly, this ordinance, accepting a $35,000 grant from keep Austin beautiful to Austin resource recovery to help the city buy more public waste and recycling bins. This is fantastic. This is exactly what y'all should be demanding of your nonprofit partners. And I just want to draw the incredibly sharp contrast between this nonprofit and the Austin parks foundation, which there's a big news story today in Austin free press, about which I encourage you and everybody to read. This not [10:25:17 AM] small nonprofit, you know, a $200,000 in assets, and they're giving you a $35,000 grant. They're giving us taxpayers a $35,000 grant to help us with something important. Austin parks foundation brings in $8 million or so every single year of money from using zilker park, our park. They're sitting on $25 million thereabouts. Y'all are in a budget crunch. Our parks are neglected, especially in east side of town, everywhere outside of downtown, where you're funneling all the money you need to demand the real audit that we were promised of these nonprofits operating in our public park lands and taking our money away rather than bringing it to us and contributing. That's the theory that we embrace these nonprofits because they're [10:26:17 AM] helping us do what we need to do for the public. This one, they're doing it, and we're excited about it. >> Thank you. >> For item 55, Carlos Leon. And then item 58, Paul Barrett, Liz Margiotta, bill bunch, and Christopher Paige. >> Please come forward. If your name has been called. >> So Carlos Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to item 55 appeal director search issue. In her application, Hannah Tyrrell claims she has demonstrated unprecedented leadership while overseeing and directing in an interim capacity as director of libraries for the Austin public library, is a superior communicator who values the importance of relationship building that promotes trust and transparency, and prioritizes being responsive to any questions, concerns or requests from elected officials, [10:27:17 AM] library customers. Advocacy groups are. Partner funding. Stakeholders know her actions. Tell the truth, though your superseding rules for public use of city properties. Rule six H says a director may deny physical access only to the specific library branch where the violation occurred. Terrell has not followed six H. Not revised library use rules to comply with six H, and not publicly addressed her alleged six H criminality. To neither heed my warnings nor enact my solutions. She heard and saw in person at library commission meetings. Those facts speak to Terrell's merit and fitness. What your municipal civil service rule 4.02 requires to choose the next director. Yet your hiring manager, assistant city manager Stephanie hayden-howard, has not followed up with city auditor regarding my allegations of wrongdoing against Terrell since saying September 8th, I am working on [10:28:17 AM] these rules. I will send you a summary about this issue and we have completed the update. Thus, hayden-howard appears to be stalling to falsely keep Terrell in good standing during the hiring process, threatening the integrity of the search scandal. Clouds are darkening overhead. Fix this now. In Jesus name I pray. >> Good morning again, bill Blanche. District five save our springs alliance on item 58, which is being brought forward by my personal council member, Ryan alter, and a few others, which I appreciate. The responsiveness here to the reporting on the financial misdoings with your office holder accounts and lack of transparency around the funding [10:29:19 AM] for your individual offices, please do this. But you've been telling the voters, all of you, pretty much since prop Q was so severely trounced that you're going to trust the voters, that you're going to increase transparency and financial accountability. That needs to go to the whole budget. You're sitting there doing nothing while your staff has told you that they're going to keep all of the budget details on the convention center project secret until 2027, and you're refusing to let the voters vote on it. This is the absolute height of financial disrespect and unaccountability. So yes, take this step. It's an important step, but it's a micro move. If you're actually serious about waking up and [10:30:19 AM] finding some fiscal accountability and trusting the voters as our mayor has promised, thank you for your consideration. >> Are you Paul? >> Yeah, I had some time. >> Yes. Is Liz Margiotta here? Okay? Four minutes. >> Thank you. Good afternoon. Good morning mayor. Good morning, council members. My name is Paul Barrett and Austin resident. I appreciate the thoughtful structure of item 58. It reflects a commitment to institutional clarity that residents value, and it creates an important foundation for strengthening public confidence. Over the past several months, I've spent significant amount of time reviewing city published materials, contracts, compliance reports, amendment histories, and audit findings. One consistent theme is that clear, predictable procedures are helpful for everyone involved. Staff, council and [10:31:22 AM] the public. That's why I'm glad to see audit and finance financial services in the city attorney's office included developing these office holder policies. Their involvement helps ensure the result will be grounded in best practices and consistently applied. If I may offer one suggestion, as these office holder policies are developed, there may be an opportunity to align this same level of clarity with larger financial processes that residents follow most closely. Major contracts, compliance reporting and significant amendments. Two modest steps could help, requesting that financial services and the city auditor return early next year, with a brief outline of how major contract compliances may be. Performance, amendment [10:32:25 AM] history and total obligations can be made more accessible. Second, ensuring that same clarity and consistency applied to office holder policies is reflected in how the city communicates progress on its largest and most consequential financial decisions. Additionally, it might be helpful to create a simple, standardized public reporting template for major contracts, one that includes compliance status, amendment history, and key performance metrics in a clear, consistent format. This kind of template would make information easier for residents to follow and support staff, and presenting updates more efficiently. Thank you mayor. Thank you council, for the time. Clear, consistent processes. Strengthen public confidence and support the work you do every day. Thank you [10:33:25 AM] very much. >> Thank you sir. >> Item 76 bill bunch. >> Good morning bill bunch again. District five. Save our springs alliance on item 76 which is council initiated proposal to direct the city manager to install some financial best practices in preparing the budget. Obviously, this important step in the right direction. Very much appreciated. It should. You shouldn't wait for the next [10:34:25 AM] budget cycle. You need to start doing financial best practices today at this meeting, because you're staring at approving a budget that's a tiny bit of tweakage from the previous adoption, when you were assuming prop Q would pass. The voter mandate is clearly for something very, very different, and you need to postpone action and do financial best practices right away. And that includes public input. That's meaningful. And this has been such a rush job. It's not happening. There's no open minds here except on very small pieces of this budget. So please financial best practices right now. Thank you. >> Mayor. That concludes all speakers for the consent agenda. >> Thank you very much, members. [10:35:25 AM] What I'm going to do is ask for a motion and a second on the consent agenda. Remember that item number 44, which we've heard comment on, has direction attached to that from councilmember qadri. I'll recognize councilmember qadri. He's indicated he wants to speak on the consent agenda, so I'll recognize him when we have a motion and a second. So is there a motion made by councilmember Velasquez, seconded by councilmember qadri to approve the consent agenda? As read, I'll recognize councilmember qadri. >> Thank you, mayor. And before speaking, item 44, just want to thank you, mayor, for leading on item 58. I think that was an important item to bring forward. But item 44, just want to thank all the speakers for coming today. I had an opportunity to have good conversations with with Mike, with with Tracy, with with Megan yesterday about the item. And I want to thank the housing department for their hard work. While the item is being led by the housing department, our goal is to work with all stakeholders in the [10:36:26 AM] west campus area to achieve housing and community goals, and specifically being accessible, sorry, expanding housing access and affordable housing for all. And then we had brought forward a motion, as the mayor had mentioned, for further direction, to ensure staff monitor census data to determine if there are more opportunities to use this tool in other places in the future. The motion also asks staff to return to have a public conversation about these potential tools, and I very much encourage our community members to be a part of those conversations. So when I when I once again reaffirm this, as I did yesterday, this item, nothing changes with this. We'd like to continue to allow staff to engage and analyze the right tools to help the community meet its needs, and that's where more conversation needs to happen. So whether it be uap or the many neighborhoods around the area like judges hill, very much welcome this conversation. >> Thank you. Councilmember qadri. Councilmember vela. >> Thank you, mayor. I just wanted to comment on item 40. [10:37:27 AM] This is an acquisition by parks of about two acres close to a breaker. And Lamar, it's something that that we've been working on for some time. The saint John's episcopal church and the congregation there, mother Minerva, is going to be selling the two acres to the the city of Austin for the development of a future park. This is an area that is a park deficient. And and I know that the congregation is also committed to that's their park, and they're going to take care of it, and they're going to love it, and they're going to make sure that it's a good place for the community and for the children in the area and for the families in the area. So again, this is a really important, small but important step. And I just want to thank the, the, the church and parks for working together to make that happen. And as council member Siegel as well, because it's on the border of d4 and d7, and it's going to help a lot of [10:38:27 AM] people in that area. So thank you all very much. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Laine. >> Thank you. Mayor. I just wanted to. >> Comment on item number four. I'm sorry, number 58. I wanted to thank you, mayor, for bringing this item forward. I also look forward to joining the upcoming audit and finance committee so that I can daylight some of the specific ideas that we have been discussing regarding these changes, and I will simply affirm that I know that we all support strengthening financial accountability and transparency in our council offices and organization wide. It's an important step toward rebuilding public trust and demonstrating responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. And I am personally of the philosophy that we are where we are and when we know more, we do more. And I am so happy with the shifts that I have seen throughout our community and coming together around these [10:39:28 AM] much needed changes. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember members. Is there anyone wishing to to abstain from a vote on the consent agenda? Is there anyone wishing to recuse themselves from any item that's on the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to be shown voting no? Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you mayor. I wish to be shouting vote! Voting no on item 44. >> Anyone else wishing to be shown voting no on any item on the consent agenda? Very good. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted with councilmember duchen being shown voting no on item number 44. Members that will take us to item number to item number 59, item number 60, and item number 61. Those are eminent domain items, and I will state the motion that I will accept once we've heard from public [10:40:28 AM] comment. Mr. Bunch, I believe you're signed up to speak on 59 and 60. So if you'd like to come forward. Mr. Bunch has waived his right to speak on items 59 and item 60 members, with respect to items 59, 60 and 61. Let me for the record, though, check with the clerk's office. There's no one else signed to speak on items 59, 60 or 61, is that correct? >> Correct. >> Mayor, thank you very much. Members. With respect to items 59, 60 and 61, those are all non condemnation items. The motion that I will accept is a motion to the effect that the Austin city council authorizes the use of the power of eminent domain to acquire the property set forth and described in the agenda for the current meeting for the public uses described therein. Is there such a motion? Motion is made by councilmember Siegel. Is there a second second by councilmember Ellis? Discussion. Hearing. None. Without objection. Items 59, 60, and 61 are adopted, with councilmember vela temporarily [10:41:29 AM] off the dais. Members that will now take us to the public. >> Mr. Mayor, without due respect. >> Councilmember harper-madison virtual. >> Yes. Well, I if I don't say anything about it, I'm counting your vote. When you're present, I count your vote. So your vote is counted. Councilmember vela indicates that he would like to be shown voting in favor of items 59, 60, and 61. It will not change the outcome of the vote. I move that he be shown voting in favor of 59, 60 and 61. Seconded by mayor pro tem. Discussion. Hearing none. Without objection, councilmember vela will be shown voting in favor of items 59, 60 and 61. Item number 62 is a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 62. The public hearing is now open. I'll turn to the clerk and ask if there is anyone signed up to speak on item number 62. >> There are no speakers. >> Mayor members. There are no speakers signed up to speak on item number 62. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 62. And I'll now entertain a motion to approve the ordinance. [10:42:31 AM] Motion made by councilmember Siegel. Seconded by councilmember vela. Discussion. Hearing none. Without objection, the motion is adopted on item number 62. Item number 63 is also a public hearing. Without objection, we'll open the public hearing on item number 63. The public hearing is now open. I'll turn to the city clerk. >> There are no speakers members. >> There are no speakers on item number 63. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 63 and we will consider the ordinance. Is there a motion? Motions made by the mayor pro tem. Is it second? Second by councilmember zo qadri. Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion is adopted on item number 63. Item number 64 is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 64. It is now open. I'll turn to the city clerk. >> There are no speakers members. >> There are no speakers on item number 64. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 64. The mayor pro tem moves approval of the ordinance. It is seconded by councilmember qadri. Is there discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. The ordinance is number 64 [10:43:33 AM] members. That completes all of the items that we have that are not set for a time certain. We have a 12:00 time certain, which is our general public communications. So what I would recommend we do is that we recess until the 12:00 time certain, and we will come back for our public communication. My hope is that what we're able to do is come back for public communication, recess for a brief period of time, for live music. Depending upon where we stand on things, we might just come right back after live music, which will allow us to do some public comment or visit with our professional financial staff before the 2:00 time. Certain. And at the 2:00 at 2:00, of course, we will take up our time certain then, and we will come back for the budget items. Is there any objection? Without objection, we are in recess until 12:00. Promptly. It is now 10:44 A.M. Thanks, everybody. [12:00:23 PM] Good afternoon, everybody. It's noon on November 20th, 2025 and I'll call back to order the Austin city council for this regular meeting of the Austin city council. We have a 12:00 pm time certain. And that is our general public communication. And so I will turn to the city clerk and ask the city clerk to help us with general public communication. >> Thank you. Mayor, we don't have anyone in the remote queue right now, so I'm just going to call the in person speakers. Marina Roberts, Eliza Mae Marbury, Rick Smith, Sam delgado. >> And by utilizing the time, certainly it looks more. Or enough. >> Please feel free to begin. We're glad you're here. >> Thanks. My name is marina Roberts. I live in district four and I'm with the no. Alpers coalition, representing [12:01:24 PM] over 30 organizations, including the central labor council, Austin dsa, vocal, and others. If you were a corporation whose profit model relied on the collection and brokering of our data, your preference would be to circumvent the need to consumers and harvesting that data. What apr companies like floc do is dress up their naked profit motive for something we don't want in the sheep's clothing of public safety. If you believe these corporations are more invested in public safety than they are in dollars, you're being hoodwinked and you're letting your constituents foot the bill for your credulity. But floc is a symptom of the real problem, which is a technology that is the functional equivalent of having a police officer tell you night and day in their cruiser without a warrant. This would be unconstitutional. But we haven't yet reached the same conclusion about Alpers because they are so new and so very profitable. Despite the false assurances you're being offered about guardrails, five minutes of research produce videos of youtubers like Ben Jordan able to hack into apr cameras in [12:02:24 PM] seconds. The uk's entire apr data set was stolen by Russian hackers and sold on the black market. Cops with access take screenshots of apr data and text it to their buddies in ice. These are not minor issues that can be resolved with guardrails. While floc touts misleading stats from studies funded by the company, in reality, no independent research has been able to confirm a measurable impact on crime rates from alpr. Floc competitor axon quietly stipulates in their contracts that there is no guarantee of accuracy in their products. But even if these companies didn't have to lie about the efficacy of mass surveillance, do you believe trading our civil liberties is worth it? Cops could solve a lot more crimes if they could enter your home without a warrant. But we drew a line a long time ago in order to preserve the civil liberties necessary to maintain democracy. Don't hand an aspiring dictator the keys to authoritarianism and call it good governance. I would also like to flag please check your spam folders. All of you. You have heard from your constituents on this issue, but [12:03:25 PM] our correspondence was being misdirected. I'm happy to answer any questions, but we have a very broad coalition of organizations and people. I've knocked doors on this issue for months, and I've had many conversations with austinites who intuitively understand the harm of this technology and the harm of mass surveillance and data collection without, you know, any kind of real security. And I would really strongly urge you not to include any mass surveillance technology or any expansions of mass surveillance technology in the budget that you're about to approve, and to reject any proposals in the future that would seek to reinstate apr in the city of Austin. Thank you so much. Have a good day. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. I called all in person speakers. Everyone else was remote and no one has joined the remote queue. >> Okay, well, in that case, members that will conclude our 12:00 time certain. The next thing on the agenda is our 2:00 [12:04:27 PM] time certain. So what I'm going to recommend is that we recess until 2:00 and we will have our live music. And so we when we recess, they'll set up for live music, we'll have live music, but we will return at 2:00 pm for our time. Certain. So without objection, at 12:04 P.M. We are recessed until 2:00. [12:27:30 PM] >> Hello, everyone. Welcome to city hall sessions in Austin, Texas. I'm council member chito vela here with my colleague, council member Krista Laine, and it is a pleasure to welcome ragabash to city hall. Ragabash is an eclectic garage band showcasing a stabbing and distorting, off kilter style, crowd pleasing organized chaos and all hands on deck approach to vocal harmonies. According to music critic jack Anderson. Inspired by post-punk, jazz and indie rock genres, ragabash combines bold dynamics, instrumental interplay and vibrant staccato sequences to create their unique sound. Ragabash released their debut album lotus eater in 2023, and are currently preparing to record their sophomore effort, and ragabash will welcome to city hall. Looking forward to hearing the music. Please go [12:28:30 PM] ahead and take it away. >> I know that we can't hold on to glory. Why can't I try? Just for tonight? Oh, memories fade, but I'd like to think that I will remember somewhere deep inside. God's cool. But I'm no fool I take it as it comes I got my heaven. The places we stood. No. I tried but I can't [12:29:36 PM] pretend. Oh. Man. Yeah, do it all the same again I don't know. When I'm gonna feel it. Won't stay. Let you forget you I need. [12:31:06 PM] My summer nights that never end. In my arms. And hold you again. Would you be here now? Could you be in. Could you be here now? Could you be here now? Could you be here now. Could you be here now? Could you be here now? Could you be here? [12:32:06 PM] Know that we can't hold on for. >> Oh. >> Wu. >> Well. >> That that was great. That was great. Thank you all so much for the show. Please introduce yourself and the band members. >> Thank you. Thank you for having us. We're just so excited to be here at Austin city council. To my left, we got Josh Levine on trumpet. We've got Caleb Powell over there on bass, Marshall Atwater on drums, and Alex newton on keys and vocals. Well, thanks for having us. We're ragabash. You can follow us on social media, on Instagram. We'll play more shows over the next year. That was a new song. We've never played it before and we're recording our second album right now, so just really happy to be here. >> And show any upcoming shows, [12:33:09 PM] any place that people can go and see you live. >> I don't know if we have anything in the books right now, maybe something in January and hole in the wall, but nothing immediately. >> Well well great. Well, it's a pleasure. Love the sound. And let me read the ragabash day proclamation, 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 with Krista Laine on behalf of mayor Kirk Watson and the entire city council, do hereby proclaim November 20th 25 as ragabash day in Austin, Texas. Well, thank you all so much. Great [12:34:11 PM] sound and look forward to to catching you live somewhere else at some point. But thank you so much for coming down to city hall and playing city hall sessions. >> Thank you very much. Thank you. >> Let's get a photo. We come over here and [1:59:58 PM] good afternoon, everybody. It's 2:00 on November 20th, 2025 and I will call back to order the Austin city council for this regular meeting. The city council, we are at our 2:00 time certain, and I will call on miss harden. We have a quorum of the council present. >> Thank you, mayor and council. I'm joy harden with Austin planning your zoning and neighborhood plan amendments. Agenda begins with item 65. In 2023 0005.01. This item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your December 11th council meeting. The related rezoning is item 66 c14 2024 0015. Again, this item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your December 11th council meeting. Item 67 is c14 2025 0029. This item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your December 11th council meeting. Item 68 is c14 2025 0057. This item is offered for consent on all three readings with the following motion. This is long [2:00:59 PM] and I have to read the whole thing. I just want to say the gist of the motion is a seven foot wide vegetated buffer that will be provided along the east property line, but I will read the whole motion sheet. Please amend the caption in part one of the draft ordinance to include a conditional overlay co combining district at a new part two and part three as follows and renumbered the remaining sections accordingly. Part two the property within the boundaries of the conditional overlay combining district established by this ordinance is subject to the following conditions a seven foot wide vegetative buffer shall be provided and maintained parallel to and measured from the east property line. Improvements permitted within the buffer area are limited to landscaping, fencing, draining, and underground utility improvements, and those improvements that may be otherwise required by the city of Austin or specifically authorized in this ordinance. Part three, except as specifically restricted under this ordinance, the property may be developed and used in [2:02:00 PM] accordance with the regulations established by the community, commercial district, and other applicable requirements of the city code. And again with that item, 68 is offered for consent on all three readings. Item 69 is c14, H 2025 0086. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. Item 70 is c14 2025 0078. This item is offered as a staff postponement to your December 11th council meeting. Item 71 is c14930047 rca. This item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your December 11th council meeting. Item 72 is c14 2025 0053. This item is offered as a postponement by council member qadri to your December 11th council meeting. Item 73 is c14 2025 0070. This item is offered as a postponement to your December 11th council meeting. Item 74 is npa 2025 0008.01. We do have [2:03:05 PM] speakers for this item. It was approved first reading at the October 23rd council meeting and approved on second reading at your November 6th council meeting. We are offering this item for consent. Third reading. The related rezoning is item 75 c14 2025 0049. Again, we have speakers for this item and we're offering this item for consent. Third reading. And this concludes the reading of the zoning and neighborhood plan amendment portion of your agenda. And as always, this is at your discretion. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any questions for miss harden? All right, members, I'll entertain a motion to approve. Let me read the consent agenda and I'll entertain a motion. Item 65, 66 and 67 would be a postponement to December 11th. Item 68. With the motion that miss harden read into the record would be consent on all three readings 69. All three readings 70, 71 and 72. All would be postponed to December 11th, as would be 73. A postponement to December [2:04:05 PM] 11th. Item 74 and 75 are being offered for third reading. I'll entertain a motion motion made by council member Ellison, second by council member Siegel. I'll now turn to the clerk to see if we have people signed up to speak. >> Thank you. Mayor, I'm going to start with item 74, in-person speakers. No one has called in remotely yet, so we have no remote speakers. Kim barker, rich haiman, Christopher Paige, Christopher, are you here? I see him walking in right now. He has time donated. Jennie Grayson, are you here? Okay. And Monica Guzman. Okay. Chris Paige will have six minutes when he makes his way down here. >> Please begin whenever you're ready. Okay. Your name for the record. >> Hi. My name is Kim barker. Thank you, mayor and council, for your time and consideration today. I've lived across the street from the property bordered by rosewood, Hargrave, Bedford and soul Wilson for the last 16 years and have spoken to dozens of neighborhoods about this rezoning case. So I [2:05:07 PM] come to you with my own personal thoughts, as well as representing some of what I've heard from neighbors. I am opposed to rezoning the entire property. Commercial mixed use as is included in this application, but I'm supportive of much of the developer's plans for the property. It's my understanding that applicants typically ask for neighborhood support of rezoning cases, and that in exchange for entitlements, it's common for them to engage in a restricted covenant with the neighborhood. That adds some limitations to the maximum allowed by the proposed new zoning. My neighbors and I wanted a restricted covenant to guard against what we view as a worst case scenario in this case, in which the historic building would be demolished in an inappropriate commercial use, built in our neighborhood that negatively impacts our quality of life. We tried diligently to engage in such an agreement, but the applicant has been unwilling. The applicant has met with us when asked, but has not been proactive in working with the neighborhood or seeking resolution to our concerns. I wish this process were different and that the [2:06:08 PM] applicant had been more collaborative and open with the neighborhood up until today. That said, I can see a world in which you approve this rezoning application and if that's the case, I want today to be a turning point to a better and more collaborative and proactive relationship with the applicant. I appreciate that tovo, as of yesterday afternoon, is committing to monthly meetings with us, a good faith effort to move access off soul Wilson street and understanding this location is within a family neighborhood. Making sure that use is our sound and lighting is compatible with that setting. We're eager to see the historic school retained and rehabilitated, and for the building to live a new life with a new use that honors its past and fits compatibly with the surrounding neighborhood. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Paige. >> How much time do I have? >> Six. >> Six minutes. >> Thank you. So I sent you all a letter. If you're not aware of that, please view your inbox. I'll share the contents of that [2:07:09 PM] with you now, respectfully, and as I'm sure everyone here understands, what has been presented to our community is an unenforceable letter to be read into the record. It was sent to us on the eve of the final hearing. After months of negotiation and multiple postponements. It's actually the second unenforceable letter that's been presented to our neighborhood and only two years. The first was presented by Mr. Suttle's colleague in September of 2023, and it epitomizes how the applicants months long unwillingness to normalize or sorry, it epitomizes the applicants months long unwillingness to normalize any of the gross overreach that's attempted in their applications. For clarity, listing on the national historic, the national register of historic places is honorific and does not regulate land use or preservation. It's disposable at will, nor does any. Nor does filing applications for competitive tax credits and grants. By contrast, municipal historic zoning does while providing [2:08:11 PM] significant tax exemptions that would allow for lower rents. The applicant not only opposes historic zoning, but they also oppose the memorandum of understanding to not oppose historic zoning should the case go before the historic landmark commission, and they oppose a restrictive covenant that would have allowed them to selectively adopt components of historic zoning. What's proposed is the discontinuation of fr rice's legacy at this site, which goes for almost 100 years in the transformation of nearly century long history into decoration, mere decoration. In terms of sound, the applicant has measured noise, but they refuse to limit their ability to fully emit up to 70db at their property lines. It's such a reasonable thing to adjust that, and they were unwilling to do so in terms of traffic. They've indicated in their letter to you that they're going to work with capmetro on a bus stop facility. What that really means is [2:09:11 PM] replacing the existing bus stop that they plan to tear out so they can construct a double wide curb cut that aligns with their requested cs base zone, which according to code, is for commercial and industrial use of a service nature that has operating characteristics or traffic service requirements that are incompatible with residential environments. Moreover, without reason, they refuse to relinquish their curb cut into an asp level one street that runs interior to the neighborhood. So that's a 3.15 acre cs property that they're asking for that sends all of its traffic onto an asp one street. In terms of use, they've listed 38 use restrictions, but 19 of those were already in place from the rosewood neighborhood plan. Additionally, two restricted uses were relaxed or eliminated, and miss shipman's list is prescribed unilaterally, not negotiated, and it retains highly inappropriate uses like hotel. In terms of durability, [2:10:14 PM] mere applications and vague operational intentions have no regulatory power. They're easily erased by amendments, revocations, resale, or the mere failure to follow through, which is what they've done so far. It's how evasive and uncommitted investors weave a marketable narrative while guaranteeing their profit, maximizing liquidity. And it's why residents with a long term interest in their community demand restrictive covenants, which are standard practice elsewhere in the city. There's lots of unanswered questions what part of creative reuse and townhomes townhouse construction requires a 1.62 acre property that's zoned sf three on the interior of a neighborhood, to be changed to cs, it doesn't. There's no justification for cs. Why not lr instead of cs, which is fully aligned with the applicant's stated intentions and preserves at least some incentive to participate in density bonus programs? We've suggested it. That was rejected. [2:11:14 PM] Why resist historic zoning that exempts 100% of city property tax on a historic preservation project? That doesn't make any sense. Why ask for an npa to get a slum designation for mixed use instead of neighborhood mixed use? And our planning department actually recently rejected a similar npa back in 2015 because it sent all of its traffic into a neighborhood. I don't know why their logic changed. There's no explanation why refuse any binding commitment to rules that are fully aligned with the applicant's narrative? Why alienate the community in which you hope to successfully operate a business by misinforming them and refusing to genuinely collaborate? Won't approval of this case set a precedent that accelerates the displacement by encouraging predatory buyers and predatory rezoning on single story, naturally occurring affordable housing that exists all around [2:12:14 PM] it? The most obvious explanation for the applicant's conduct is that they seek maximum, immediate profit off a purchase option. Plus, combined with a rezoning, they want to streamline the refinancing to soak up that value. And when it's convenient, they want to be able to sell it as untailored as possible to the highest bidder. Consistent, reasonable requests have been made by the community. Instead of collaboration, they utilize a hybrid of ham fisted schoolyard negotiation tactics and private lobbying. During discussions, they've showcased a brash insensitivity at the dynamic loss and adversity of our community. For months, what easily could have been a productive public engagement was treated like an involuntary and ineffective grieving process. It's amplified the negative feelings, and I'll have more to say on the next issue. >> Thank you, Mr. Paige. >> Aaron Collins, Kenneth Wallace, bill bunch, Kim shipman, this is again for item [2:13:15 PM] 74. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. >> Good afternoon council. My name is Aaron Cloninger. I live in the neighborhood within a stone's throw from the property in question. It is my homestead. Back in 2015, aid offloaded this property and the zoning was changed to accommodate the khan academy to be able to have administration offices inside of the building. That was the purpose of originally changing half of the property to chs zoning. There was no purpose for anything but that it retained a civic use. This occurred in the midst of the code next project and the I [2:14:18 PM] don't know if you call it home amendments or home amendments project. There wasn't any that I could find discussion in those rewriting projects that would increase the the. Commercial uses in this neighborhood. Opticos design incorporated was fired, I believe. And then it would it was continued on as the home amendments. Opticos was celebrated for the work they did in San Diego before they worked with the city of Austin. After their project was done in San Diego, they were criticized for overburdening the vulnerable. I think that's the case that we have here that our [2:15:23 PM] neighborhood is being whittled away at. >> Thank you sir, please. >> Hi, I'm Kim shipman with tovo, and I wanted to take my time to to first express, thanks to Sharon mays and the Dion office for facilitating conversations with the neighborhood. I also want to acknowledge that we know that that we are operating in a neighborhood. We wanted to read our letter into the record, to the Homewood heights neighborhood for this council, as well as council members in the future. I'll try to be condensed since our time is short, so there may be elements of the letter that you should have received that that I'm not covering. We wanted to clearly outline the commitments we are making in the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the historic rosewood school as they take shape. These [2:16:24 PM] commitments come as a result of the concerns raised by the neighborhood. Some of them will be addressed in the zoning ordinance, some will be addressed in the site plan and others in the national register process that we are in now. Some are operational things that we will carry forward as stewards of the property. We are committed to rehabilitation and reuse of the school. This includes both the exterior and interior of the building. The historic character of the structure guides both our design work and our approach to reuse. We also will look to see if it is eligible for the recorded Texas historic landmark designation and pursue that path, if appropriate. And because the school will stay largely intact. It provides itself the classrooms as a great small space for small [2:17:24 PM] businesses, which is something that small businesses, nonprofits, and creative users. That is something that tovo is has experienced with. >> Thank you. Have you submitted that letter. >> I circulated to council and. >> So it's been circulated. The letter you're talking about. Okay. That's what that's we need to just make sure it's part of the record. Thank you very much. Yes, sir. >> Good afternoon. Council. My name is Richard Harmon. I live in district nine and I'm speaking to oppose this rezoning in support of the Homewood heights neighbors, because the developer is unwilling to commit to enforceable agreements for modest community benefits. They've not been operating in good faith to make the case for why this property should be granted extraordinary zoning entitlements in this neighborhood context, we can do a better job stewarding our school sites, which are historic and public assets that belong to the larger Austin community. We cannot rely on [2:18:27 PM] unenforceable promises from developers. Thank you. >> Okay, moving on to item 75, Brad Massingill. >> Hi. I finally got through. I keep getting hung up on. >> It's not on purpose. >> I understand. It's it's we're in a tech capital of the world. These things happen. As you all well know, I'm very concerned about the commercialization of our neighborhoods. And this is a a step in that direction that this glaring right now, especially in light of budget cuts and the way things are going with the schools passing this right now and letting this slide into a commercial status is just setting it up to be [2:19:29 PM] sold off at some point in the near future to turn it into something uncontrollable. That's why folks keep talking about restrictive covenants and accountability with the developer and all these things. There's there's no guarantees the way Texas law is written right now that once you put that C on the zoning, that it's going to turn into something that's totally incompatible with the neighborhood. I wish y'all would turn this one down, or at least kick it down the road a ways. Thank you. >> Continuing with 75, Kim barker, rich haiman, Christopher Paige. And again, is Jennie Grayson here and Monica Guzman. Okay. Mr. Paige will have six minutes. >> Hi. Kim barker again. I really went very quickly through that what I had said earlier. So I just want to read [2:20:29 PM] my last paragraph a little bit slower and then tell you a little bit more about the history of the building. My neighbors and I are very eager to see the historic school retained and rehabilitated, and for the building to live a new life with a new use that honors its past and fits compatibly with the surrounding neighborhood. And we're we remain willing to work with Tapia to that end, and I at least do. And I do know that others do as well. With my next minute and 20s, I'm going to tell you a little bit about the building. The historic rosewood elementary school opened in east Austin during the era of segregation, following the Austin city plan of 1928 that called for public services for black residents to be located east of east avenue. The school began forming in the early 1930s with multiple land acquisitions. Between 32 and 35 classes were first held in frame buildings that were moved to the site, including the wheatville school building and an additional building previously located at house [2:21:31 PM] park. It was officially named rosewood in 1932 at the recommendation of Austin colored teachers, and the school grew quickly, with enrollment increasing dramatically as the surrounding neighborhoods were constructed. The permanent six room brick building was completed in 36, funded in part by the public works administration and it. Over the decades it continued to grow and adapt, with the school expanded in 1940 and as well as 5156 and through the I think 1960s, it transitioned to the free school in the mid 1980s as an alternative high school for a short period of time, named in honor of a one time principal of the school, friendly rice. The building returned briefly to elementary use before being sold to Texas Ken in 2003. It's an important building and I'm glad we're keeping it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Paige. >> Thank you. So repeating some [2:22:33 PM] of the questions so that, I mean, you really should think about these. Why do you need cs here? There is literally no rational basis for it. We've actually had that question multiple times. Their best answer was that they want to make ceramics, which they already have the right to do on their southern abutting cs zoned property. Generally, cs is incompatible for this kind of a space, unless it's highly tailored, and they've suggested that there should be no tailoring. Another thing that is probably more puzzling than all the questions you've already heard is why would you buy a split zoned property when the whole area is teeming with unoccupied cs zoned property? It's only to realize a value gain because they felt like lawyers fees and filing fees would be a lot less than the profit that they'll soak up [2:23:34 PM] with the refi. Concerns. Going back to the part I didn't finish, consistent, reasonable, achievable requests from the community have been met with total disregard. Instead of collaboration, they utilized a hybrid of ham fisted schoolyard negotiation tactics and private lobbying. During discussions, they've showcased a brash insensitivity to the dynamic losses and adversity in our community. And you know about this. You know about the schools that were losing the facilities that have been closed, including our libraries, our parks, for months. What easily could have been productive public engagement was treated like an involuntary and ineffective grieving process, and it predictably amplified feelings of distrust and resentment. If this case is approved without any modification, it invigorates a vile notion that communities in our part of the city lack the rights and agency of others, that the glimmer of one [2:24:36 PM] investor can outshine the multigenerational vision that this community has created for itself. That the ladder of opportunity is built on overpriced coffee cups instead of the transmission of skills and knowledge that last a lifetime. I urge the council to reject the rezoning and ncpa in its current form. Reliance on dialog and collaboration through public process has yielded nothing, and their unjustifiable overreach conflicts with the core principles and municipal zoning code equity based preservation plan adopted just last year, the African American cultural heritage district, which has ongoing work imagine Austin, the rosewood neighborhood plan, which our community has supported and defended every time it's been challenged. And there is wisdom in that plan that the city is still trying to catch up with elsewhere. And the generation atx initiative as we lose another school. Is this an environment where it's [2:25:37 PM] going to be a great place, one of the best places to raise a child where our parks are closed, our pools are closed, our schools are closed. I don't think it is. I have two and an overwhelming majority of residents because we have done extensive outreach to our entire neighborhood. We have knocked on doors, even on the border of our neighborhood, into the booker T housing complex. We have reached out, we have met in person, we have met with the applicant constantly. And what we've gotten is nothing. I am also committed to working with whatever we're left with at the end of this, because that's just what you have. You have no other choice. But all of you have a choice right now to maybe have some additional dialog to maybe I don't know what's in your toolbox, but if there's anything in your toolbox that can prevent 100 year old school from being wiped out and turned into an [2:26:37 PM] almost Disney like feature that usurps the rich history of east Austin as decoration? I mean, they're talking about turning school supply closets into narnia doors. They don't want to turn off amplified sound next to neighbors. They want their traffic to go wherever they want it to go, and it's probably not going to be them who directs it. It's going to be someone else who buys it. We've seen this, too, with Springdale green, which was a huge land buyout. Rezoning turned into commercial property, and right now there's about 900,000ft S of commercial property that has sat vacant for over a year and a half. There's another new commercial property on webberville road right near this property. It's had almost identical space in terms of spaciousness and, you know, hookups and all that, unoccupied for over a year and a half. My entire neighborhood is ringed in cs zoning, and that has everything to do with the segregationist past of [2:27:38 PM] Austin and how it's sprinkled in tense land uses into neighborhoods to break them up. There's an incinerator that used to be across the street and scattered ash on homes. Every day. There's a dump site that our neighbors live over, and it the remediation was never even completed, but when they discovered it, they had to cut down every TRE and cover it with clay. This is the history that people have survived through that kept a school going for 100 years, even when it was sold off from the district. And you're telling me that the best use we have for today is narnia closets? I don't think so. Thank you for your time. >> I council recommend district nine. I'm here to speak again to oppose this rezoning, and I'm speaking in support of the [2:28:40 PM] holmwood heights neighbors. I want to elaborate on a point that I made at the end of my comments on the previous item that we cannot rely on unenforceable promises from developers. We know from the history of many public private partnerships and development agreements in this city, that private entities change their plans to meet changing market conditions. This happens all the time. It is they they do not represent the public interest. It is the role of our government, of our city government, as stewards of the public interest, to ensure that that development results in and serves the public interest. That is your job. We need to ensure that just going along with what the developers want, with promises that are unenforceable, is not in the public interest, does not ensure that development serves the public interest. Thank you. [2:29:44 PM] >> I have on the line Joshua Collier. >> Hello. >> Yes, we can hear you. Go ahead. >> Hi. Just speaking. >> Out in on this matter to one support. All the previous speakers have shared. I live on the same street as several of the speakers for Wilson, named after one of the educators from east Austin. As is the school in question here. And I was born in Austin. Increasingly, people are surprised to hear that, but I, when I was little, lived in east Austin. And to speak to the fact that, as most people who've spent any time in Austin know, this part of the city has been affected more than others and in unfair ways [2:30:47 PM] by development. And we all know, at least in theory, that the law should be applied equally to all those whom it affects. And of course, in the case of land development ordinances in Austin, that unfortunately is not been the case. And so, as previous speakers alluded to, there's an opportunity here to apply these ordinances in terms of land use and and also to address the blatantly, I think it would be found without beyond a reasonable doubt or to be the use of changing zoning to increase the value of property, to enrich a very few people at the expense of many people in the community who, in a very United Way, have, I think, made very logical arguments about why this change [2:31:49 PM] is not necessary and why this space in particular is significantly important to the history of Austin. >> Thank you very much. So thank you. >> Alexandria Anderson. Alexandria, are you there? >> Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay. Good afternoon, mayor Watson. Mayor pro tem Fuentes and council members. My name is Alexandria Anderson. I'm co-chair of the east mlk contact team. I'm speaking in support of the Homewood heights neighborhood association. Their concerns and the community benefits that they have outlined. Our area, with its closest proximity to downtown, has seen some of the highest levels of rezoning and up zoning over the last several years. Those proposals, similar to the one that you see today and has been proven by the city of Austin demographer reports, [2:32:49 PM] have led to some of the highest levels of displacement, have triggered speculative sales and rising property values. These are the same concerns of the families that live in Homewood heights. Booker T and the rosewood area, although the developer's attorney attorney has shared that this is not a speculative sale and that the firm intends to preserve the historic structure that has not been shown in good faith with the community, with action. These areas for decades have been given indeed intends, will consider, and it's just been words and not action. The neighbors and family in this area are, frankly, sick and tired of getting screwed over until both website's about us page. They believe that responsible growth means creating spaces that both our community can grow and pay tribute to its roots. Intentional development is needed in our area, and that only comes with collaborative effort, with the community agreeing to collaborate, collaborate and meet with a minimum of the neighbors, which I think is only four, would be [2:33:50 PM] paying tribute to their roots. Tovo put actions behind their words, sign the restrictive covenant because we are over false promises. Thank you. >> Aaron Cloninger, Kenneth Wallace, bill bunch, this is item 75. >> Hello again. Council. My name is Aaron Cloninger. I live in the neighborhood. A big issue is traffic. That's a a nice provision that would ease this if we didn't have commercial traffic fed onto our neighborhood street. Also compatibility in general, this property is hemmed in by residences, single family dwellings, and the booker T [2:34:53 PM] Washington terraces. The reason why I would because of the state of negotiations right now, urge you to either do an indefinite postponement or a no vote is largely these things. But I'd also like to include discussion about the peril of future possibilities. As you all know, the state has passed senate bill 840, which goes fairly uninterpreted as of yet in Austin. And it takes cases like this to understand it. If the developer were to seek a a higher heights allowance in the future, they have a, a phase, a, phase B and phase C, the phase C evidently was originally [2:35:55 PM] where they placed the residential. Now there's no claims as to having any residential. And so that face C, the easternmost part of the property is a big rectangular square right in our neighborhood, and that would be a real pity if you all were involved in setting up for that to happen. >> Thank you sir. >> Okay, mayor, Alls zoning speakers have been called. >> All right, miss harden, you look like you want to say something. >> Yes. Staff just received this from the applicant. So for the last item, item 75, as you know, the applicant is requesting. Ksmu co mp and the co. The conditional overlay [2:36:55 PM] would limit the height to no more than 40ft and prohibit 27 uses. And that's in your staff report. The applicant also wants to prohibit some additional uses that I'd like to read into the record. And those are automotive sales. Bed and breakfast group one. Bed and breakfast. Group two commercial off street parking. Off site accessory parking. Outdoor entertainment and pet services. And I'd just like to put that on the record, please. No they're not, I checked. Yeah, but it wasn't I didn't read it into. >> We don't need to do that. Yeah. Miss Mr. Paige didn't get to call out the audience. >> So this was not in it was not in the ordinance in backup. And I would like to add these additional uses. >> All right. In that case, what I would like to do is make sure that the motion on the consent agenda includes those [2:37:56 PM] items that miss Hardin just read into the record. So is there a motion to amend? Council member vela moves to amend the the main motion, which is to adopt the consent agenda as read. Is there a second second by council member duchen members? We will vote on the motion to amend the main motion, which will be and the motion that has been to amend is that the items that miss Hardin just read into the record as restrictions on this item will be restrictions on the item. The motion to amend has been made and seconded. Is there discussion? Without objection, the motion to amend is adopted with council member harper-madison temporarily off the dais and not on virtually. Do you have anything else you want to add? >> I think that's it. >> Okay. Very good. Council member vela you're recognized. >> Miss Hardin. Hold on just a second. And I'm looking at the [2:38:57 PM] letter from miss shipman, and I understand they've already submitted the application for the national register of historic places, and they're they're going through that process. And again, I'm not intimately familiar with that, that process. But speaking to the potential, the future of the buildings, just theoretically, if they were to want to demolish one of the buildings on that property, what would what would have to happen? In other words, does that need to come back to council to to a demolition permit for, for one of those buildings? >> So I'll say two things if you want to assist. So I'll say two things to that. The process that the applicant is proceeding with is a state process, not through the city as the neighborhood stated as well. But if a building permit of any type is pulled, it would [2:39:57 PM] go through the historic, our historic process. Then that would go if they were demolished, demolishing the structure. Of course, that would be elevated all the way to the council if that's was the case. I don't believe that to be the case. However, even any building permit would be looked at by historic preservation office because if they're modifying the structure, we want to see that. >> Great. And that's just what I wanted to confirm, because clearly we all want to preserve the historic buildings. And again, the applicants clearly want to preserve the historic buildings. I understand that there's concern about about the, you know, whether that's going to happen or not. But in other words, even again, let's say that for whatever reason, it changed hands and the next owner wanted to come and tear the buildings down. They have to come back to council. >> Have to go through all the process and come to council. >> And I'm not. I'm going to speak for myself. That is not a demolition permit. That's going to be approved by I mean by from my end, you know. So so again, I just wanted to. >> Offer that that would be [2:40:58 PM] supported by staff and that would be our recommendation to the council. >> Great. And I just wanted to put that out there that, that, you know, we my intent just speaking on behalf of myself and I've been talking with council member harper-madison and her staff about this. Everybody's intent is to preserve this historic property and make it an asset for the neighborhood. And even though there's not maybe like a legal kind of promise, the reality is that the path to any demolition comes through council. And again, I'll speak for myself. I would not be supportive of demolition permit going for those buildings. So just given that I feel very, very comfortable with with the what the what the applicant has laid out. >> I can add that while listening to the national register in and of itself, does not provide local protection like a local historic landmark. It does have implications for kind of enhancing the criteria. [2:41:59 PM] So if it was listed to the national register and it were to come to our office, it's automatically eligible. It's eligible now, but it enhances its eligibility. >> And and I know, I know just enough about this to kind of, you know, mess it up. But in talking with the the saint John's association, the Baptist association, they were interested in that national register of historic places because it gives you a little more flexibility that that they liked that designation because they intended to both a preserve the building and develop kind of other land around it. And so again, this seems like a very similar context to what we're talking to the association about. You know, months back, unfortunately, the fire has changed everything, but I'll leave that there. But I just wanted to get that on the record and. Provide that insurance. >> Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions, miss harden? All right, members, the motion has been made and seconded. It would be to adopt the consent [2:43:01 PM] agenda as amended. Is there anyone wishing to abstain from a vote on the consent agenda, as amended? Is there anyone wishing to recuse themselves from a vote on any item on the consent agenda? Is there anyone wishing to be shown as voting no on any item on the consent agenda again? Members. The motion is to approve the consent agenda as amended. Without objection, the consent agenda, as amended, is adopted with council member harper-madison off the dais and not present virtually. Members. That concludes all of our time. Certain 2:00 zoning items, the next items that we have on the agenda are items four, five and six related to the budget with the indulgence of the council. What I would ask is that we recess until 3:00 so that everybody can get ready on the budget items, and people will know that we're going to take up public communication on those items, and we will take up the public communication on all of the items at one time. [2:44:03 PM] So then we can go into our deliberations without objection. The city council of Austin is in recess until 3:00 pm. >> Good luck. Thank you. [2:59:44 PM] >> So. Well, if it's something that something. Yeah. I just need to understand. >> Yes. >> Good afternoon everybody. It's 3:00 on November 20th, 2025 and I will call back to order the Austin city council meeting. The next items we're going to take up are items four, five and six. In addition to the meeting that we're having today, where we're going to hear from the public on items four, five and six, we've had additional opportunities for the public to speak on the proposed amended budget. We had a work session Tuesday during which we heard from all speakers, and we had a meeting on Wednesday in which we included a public hearing where we heard from all speakers on [3:00:44 PM] the proposed amended budget, in addition to hearing from speakers on a specific budget agenda item. We've also we also have meetings posted for tomorrow, which is the 21st, Monday the 24th, and Tuesday the 25th. However, for members of the public, I want to again emphasize that those meetings will only be held if the council does not get to the needed number of votes in favor of the proposed budget amendments beforehand, and needs to have those meetings for the required votes to pass the items that are on the agenda. If council gets to the needed votes before any of those meetings, we will be canceling those remaining meetings. Also for today. If council can get to a vote on the amended budget by 10 P.M. Tonight, we will reset. If we cannot get to a vote on the amended budget by 10:00 tonight, we will recess and we will continue the meeting to tomorrow. If that happens, we will cancel the separate [3:01:45 PM] meeting that's posted for tomorrow so that we don't end up having overlapping meetings if it comes to that. In other words, if we don't have a vote by 10:00 tonight and we recess and come back tomorrow, if we do that, we won't have speakers tomorrow since we will have already had them for this meeting today. And that's just a continuation of the meeting. Therefore, if you signed up to speak today, I encourage you to do so rather than waiting for the other posted meetings in the next few days, as today may be the last guaranteed opportunity to speak on the budget and the tax rate amendment items that are before us today. Again, we're going to take up public comment on items four, five and six. We will do that in order, but we're going to take up the public comment before we go to a discussion by the council on the budget. So I'll now turn to the city clerk and ask you to please feel free to start calling people's names. >> Thank you. Mayor. First [3:02:46 PM] speaker Maria, under item four. Maria, are you there? I'm. Patricia Nunez. >> Yes. Good afternoon, mayor Watson and city Austin city council members. My name is Patricia Nunez, and I have been a bilingual public school teacher and advocate in the Austin area for nearly 30 years. I am here today to ask the city of Austin's continued to ask for the city of Austin's continued support, financial support for academia cuauhtli, which is soon to return home to the newly renovated Mac. As a longtime collaborator with academia, I can attest to the powerful learning space this program creates for our [3:03:47 PM] students and families. It is not a typical classroom environment. It is a community space where culture, language, and identity are honored as central to learning. For students. This space. This is the space where they see their history, their home language, and their family knowledge. Treat us as assets to towards academic growth. One of the greatest strengths of academia cuauhtli is a deep level of parent involvement. Families are not only invited into the learning, but they are co-creators of it. Parents participate and share their knowledge through cultural activities and support with and gain support with resource navigation for being residents of the city. This vibrant city. I also think that it's a space where parents walk alongside their children as partners in education, which strengthens [3:04:50 PM] familial relationships and offers a different experience from traditional school settings. So for many parents, academia provides a welcoming space where their knowledge and experiences are valued and essential to the children's school success. The bilingual programing that. >> Thank you very. >> Much in Spanish and English. >> That's all the remote speakers we have in the queue. So I'm going to switch over to in person. For item four. I have brydan Summers, Janice Bookout Orlowski Shaw, trey Salinas, rich Haymon. >> Please come down if your name has been called. >> Good afternoon mayor and council. I'm Brian Summers, president of local 1624, the union for city of Austin employees. >> As I've told you throughout this week, we have five priorities one. No rifts, two include the Progressive cola. So I want to thank the city manager, the budget office and [3:05:50 PM] council for supporting these. We also want to include bad weather pay in the stipend for essential employees. So I want to thank council member Velasquez for adding that back into the conversation. The two priorities that are left are actions. We want the city to evaluate, where we can get more money for the rest of the city from the police budget, and that's going to take leadership. In addition to that, we want the city to be good stewards of public dollars because we're in an inevitable conflict. We're going to continue to run into this each year. And so today is a good day to start. I also want to address consolidations and efficiency and optimization, because after this budget is adopted, we're going to be heading down that road. I think the key to success for that plan is that we are all partners together. Council. When you're working with the city manager, you're right to put your benchmarks and and priorities on that. What is your direction for measuring success? The city manager working with council and afscme, [3:06:51 PM] please continue to give us clear communication and guidance on the process, and for us, we'll need to make sure employees feel safe and prepared as we move forward. But all of this has to be predicated on shared goals. Two has to be on ensuring stability for the city's budget. Definitely ensuring job security, fair treatment and compensation for workers and ensuring it's not just civilian workers carrying the load. I hope that we can all commit to a partnership built on good faith and shared values, and so we hope to see that leadership starting today. Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Orlowski Shaw and I'm the president of the united workers of integral care. I would first like to thank mayor Watson for his amendment and inclusion of expansion of court into the city of Austin fiscal year 26 budget. Thank you for your recognition of the value of the work that we do as a vital part of the public safety system in Austin. Unfortunately, 1 million won't be enough to sustain 24 over seven Escott the annual operating cost to keep em running around the clock is 3 million to be at our [3:07:52 PM] best. So we are asking for an amendment to fully cover these costs so we can maintain quality 24 over seven services and avoid layoffs. I would also like you to consider if the cuts and partial funding that have been made to housing and ems are truly in the best interest of the community. All of these systems work together in collaboration on the ground to make life better for all austinites. I would like to uplift the possible solution cuts to vacant positions. While you're asking social service and other public safety providers to do more with less, APD has not been considered at all for places that might generate savings if housing, mental health, and ems are all working at full capacity, there will be less need for police overtime in the first place. We need balance in the system and this balance will lead to a better society. I would like to uplift the need to keep the other integral care contracts intact as we are. We as we are another governmental agency and make sense for these contracts to be exempt and for interlocal agreements for these services to be explored as the local mental health and idd authority of the area, we are one of the largest social service providers for the community. [3:08:53 PM] Our services are key to keeping our community safe and healthy. Our contracts had integral care include services for adult behavioral health, housing, substance use and crisis response. Our employees deliver these services every day to our community with expertise and compassion. We cannot afford to lose more funding, more workers, and more programs, as we have already been hit hard by federal and state cuts. I urge all of council to support this and full and full funding for 24 seven Imam. Thank you. >> Good afternoon council. My name is rich Harmon. I live in district nine. The message from voters is clear austinites want the council to exercise more fiscal responsibility. It is not fiscal fiscally responsible to hold unspent funds in one part of the budget, while not funding community priorities and key services for the most vulnerable in our community, thus endangering the health and [3:09:54 PM] safety of all residents. I'm talking, of course, about the police budget. Council needs to invoke section four B of the police contract and proportionately reduce its obligations to APD, share the budget. Tens of millions of dollars are irresponsibly not being put to their intended use, which is to improve the department's recruiting and training processes. The hundreds of vacant officer positions are evidence that we have not seen progress on this front. This is a clear case where simply throwing more money at an issue does not fix it. Therefore, the responsible thing to do is to reallocate those funds to where we have a reasonable chance of making progress on community priorities, such as following through with the promising headway we've begun to make on our homeless strategy. As the mayor pointed out in his Watson wire in October, we can't let those gains slip through our fingers. The funds stranded in the police budget need to be put towards more fiscally responsible and productive uses on community priorities, [3:10:55 PM] including fully funding social service contracts, rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, rental assistance, Austin public health, ems and parks, and supporting our city workers. It is imperative that council takes this opportunity to mitigate the structural deficit that the previously proposed budget puts us in. You must act now on section four B of the police contract. Thank you. >> Continuing on with item four, Daniella silva, Savannah Lee, Eli Cortez, Roxana hurden, Alfredo Reyes. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Daniella silva. I'm the Austin policy coordinator at workers defense action fund. In today's political environment, people are getting kidnaped off the streets and homelessness is [3:11:56 PM] being criminalized nationwide. Our neighbors are facing constant danger, and it is the duty of this council to do everything in its power to keep the people of Austin safe. Every department is being asked to make cuts after the failure of prop Q, which many people felt they couldn't vote for after council agreed to such a bloated police budget. Knowing that we would be facing a deficit this year if every other department should have to make sacrifices, why should the police department be any kind of exception? I want my tax dollars to fund lawyers for immigrants, deeply affordable housing to keep people of all races and nationalities off the streets. The hungry hill resource center that provides vital, essential resources and workforce opportunities to many of our immigrant neighbors and many other programs. I don't want my tax dollars being spent on things like ai surveillance technology such as apr or the 300 police department vacancies, a departmental budget that needs to remain flat this year. Our community, our immigrant community, needs the safety that comes from robust ems, parent support specialists, [3:12:57 PM] rent stabilization, and the ability to pay their bills. That is the public safety that our community wants funded, and it can only be done by reallocating money from the police department, make the fiscally and morally correct decision, and reallocate money from pd to fund all of the other forms of public safety that our communities so heavily rely on. Thank you. >> Good afternoon y'all. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm here with equity action and I'm a resident of district one. I had planned to talk about something different today, but then I saw some of the cuts that came overnight and was reminded of something that happened earlier this week. On Tuesday, a question came from a council member that I think encapsulates the choice that's being made today, and the attitude that got us here. The question was something to the tune of can we consider citations as a source of revenue for the city? What I heard was, can we use the police force to extract money from the least of us in order to avoid making cuts to said police force? I would say that was shocking, but that's not [3:13:57 PM] really true. That is the ethos of any governmental body who funds the police to this degree, while making cuts to rapid rehousing and emergency mental health care. This week, you've heard over and over and over again that the people of this city want their services funded and want the police budget to remain stable because it's the fair thing to do. While a question is direct, is the one that came from the dais this week may be grating. At least it's honest. At least it gets to the heart of what we're talking about. Here. We are choosing between providing aid, housing, healthcare and food to folks in Austin or adding additional funding for APD while asking everybody else to make sacrifices. I'm not sure why any of you got involved in politics. I can say from my experience, people generally begin this journey because they look around and they care deeply enough about the place they live, that they want to give of their time to make it better. That's why I that's what I assume everyone in this room is doing. I have to or I will lose my mind. If that's why you're here, I would urge you to listen to what we're all saying, if not in different ways. All that's being said really is, don't you care about us? Can't you fund the city in a way that tells us that you [3:15:00 PM] care about us? Can't you show us that you would rather see the folks of this city housed and fed than ticketed and arrested? That is what is at the heart of this issue. You've been given a choice to make, and all we've done this week is ask you to make the right one. Thank you. >> Thank you. Savannah. My name is Eli Cortez. I'm an organizer at vocal Texas and a resident of district three. It is undeniable that our federal administration is carrying out a clear agenda to attack the most vulnerable and poor in this country and dismantle safety nets and long term housing resources. We may not have had that clarity when we entered the city's budget process, but now we're in it and we can't deny it. We are facing multibillion dollar reductions in our federal housing department. That means hundreds of thousands of Americans losing their housing vouchers, shelter and homelessness funding being significantly reduced, and a guaranteed return to a boom in homelessness that we haven't seen since covid. We need to be moving every single resource and dollar to housing and [3:16:00 PM] homelessness right now. We cannot wait. We never should have set aside critical and crucial services and programs to a tax rate election year after year. This dais in front of me and before shows its solidarity with police. There's endless supply of funds for police, raises for police, quality of life, for improved surveillance technology. And you choose APD over us every single time, every year, despite lower crime rates, despite 300 vacancies in the department and despite the growing need and hunger in your districts, the crisis that we're facing is not going to be solved by policing. Community safety is not policing. Your police are not going to get people into a shelter. Your police are not going to make sure that our families are fed in this city, and federal cuts that are coming to our shelters, permanent housing resources, homelessness response system are not going to be supported by policing. We need to invest in real solutions that keep people housed and with access [3:17:02 PM] to true care and services. And right now, we just our city just conducted a three week sweep effort. There are people today that are hiding from police in creek beds, and there's a flood warning right now. We don't know what's going to happen to those people. And I just want to know, what are you all going to do about it? What are you going to do in this budget to stand up for your people and your community and your residents? >> Thank you very much. >> Hello. I'm an organizer for vocal Texas. My name is Alfredo Reyes. I'm a home. I was homeless for seven and a half years. Now I'm housed through the rapid rehousing program, which ends in January. I'm so upset because proper, proper queue fell into the federal government is cutting snap medicare housing money. That means fewer people will get access to the resources and opportunities I got. More people are on the street will suffer, and the entire community will suffer. For the last few weeks, I have been doing outreach and camps that have been swept. I've heard stories and witnessed people being destroyed. People lost [3:18:02 PM] their survival gear, identification pictures and their belongings is horrible. Last week we came to the city council with people who have been swept. Those people share their stories and ask the city to stop the sweeps and invest in things like shelters and rapid rehousing, and which helped me get off the street and said, we're back here today. Because while shelters and rapid rehousing and other many things get cut by the millions, APD budget remains exactly the same. As I asked myself, how can that be? APD has 330 vacant positions that can be that can never be seen to be filled. That means money is just sitting unused. Why not reallocate money to to help people? Trump's administration is attacking poor people and cutting hud. Why not help us? Why do you think it will? Why do you think will happen if poor people in our community have less access to food, shelter and facing more policing, I will lead. It will lead to more sweeps, ticket and arrest. You said homelessness [3:19:03 PM] is a priority on your budget, but all I've been seeing is cuts. Only a few investments on the table. Now. The city council should reallocate money away from APD and put it towards housing services and care for people. Don't double down on funding police at the expense of shelter beds, rapid rehousing vouchers, services and permanent supportive housing and many critical other programs that help people. These are programs that help me. >> Thank you. >> Continue with item four. Hans maverick, Chris Harris, Benjamin Santos, bill bunch. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson, mayor pro tem Fuentes and council members. My name is Hans maverick. I'm a resident [3:20:04 PM] of district ten, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you this afternoon. Today, I would like to talk to you about the distinction between spending and investing. Spending is what happens when you use financial resources to fix a problem that has already occurred. Investing is what happens when you use financial resources to prevent a problem from occurring in the first place. In this context, spending means giving even more money than last year to the Austin police department. Money on the kinds of services that prevent people from encountering law enforcement in the first place, something I think gets missed too often in conversations about police encounters with people who are struggling with substance abuse, substance use disorders, mental health challenges, and homelessness is that those situations are usually temporary. The right kind of intervention at the right time can make all the difference. What's more, policing in this country has an invidious history of disproportionately targeting targeting people of [3:21:05 PM] color, undocumented people, poor people, and people with mental health challenges. I know a lot of fellow austinites who have gotten back on their feet with the help of city programs. These programs prevent arrest, being arrested, by contrast, and spending time just a few days in jail often means losing everything your job, your housing and your property. The programs I'm asking you all to support go to nonprofit organizations staffed by folks who have themselves dealt with being unhoused and related challenges. These orgs are in the best position to understand and help people overcome those challenges. While I'm up here, just a reminder that one group of organizations that absolutely don't need any of our money are those ai tech surveillance corporations. Thank you for your time. >> Please. Whenever you're ready. >> Sure. Hi, everyone. My name is Chris Harris. I'm here today [3:22:07 PM] representing equity action. I'm a resident of district nine, and I'm here to say something predictable, which is that this budget needs to keep the police budget flat. And the dollars saved from that can help people in real ways today. And I am personally extremely frustrated by the extent to which the hoops that this body will jump through itself, the the hoops it will have the staff jump through and the hoops it will make the this community and those that care about it jump through in order to avoid even a very minor cut to the police department budget, which of course we know is not actually a cut, it's simply keeping it flat from last year. And and again, for what reason? None. No real reason has been given. No, no reason that involves actually helping people in this community for not taking $13 million has been given. But we do know all the things that that $13 million can fund. We've heard many examples just [3:23:08 PM] in the speeches today, much less the speeches the last two days that you've heard. And I just want to bring your attention to the fiscal side of it, beyond that which is this council has talked about, the city staff has talked about for the last two years, regular tax increase, elections in order to address ongoing budget shortfalls. That was before those conversations started, before trump took over again and started cutting all these programs. Well, that's off the table. So what are you going to do? What are you going to do? You have a part of a budget that can never come down. And if you keep raising it, you are consigning the city to austerity forever. And just know every $13 million does matter. It matters to people in this community who will be fed and housed, rather than you just funding empty chairs for political reasons. Thank you. >> My name is Benjamin Santos and I'm a resident of district [3:24:09 PM] nine. First, I'd like to echo the sentiments of your constituents that you've heard so far. I'm here today to voice my opposition to raising the police budget and encourage you to invest in the long term fiscal health of our city and the community of Austin. I read that the budget proposed in July has since been amended to save 9000 or $9 million by restructuring overtime scheduling. I'd like to commend you for that. With that said, I believe further amendments to APD's budget are necessary and ethical. Take, for instance, the fact that sworn officers stand to receive a 50% higher wage increase compared to other city employees. Senate bill 23 of the 87th legislature requires us to hold elections before reducing our reallocation or reallocating our law enforcement budget, so every dollar allocated towards APD's already inflated budget will be a dollar that won't fund preventative wraparound services that ensure the safety of our community's most vulnerable members and their [3:25:09 PM] families. Thank you. >> Wrapping up with item four, Christopher Paige, Ashley Copeland, Ben sotheby, Monica Guzman, Alicia Castillo. >> Please begin whenever you're ready. >> Hi. Good afternoon. Thank you for having us. Council and mayor. My name is Ashley Copeland. I'm the chief operating officer for the central Texas public safety commission. And I've prepared a statement, regardless of where we stand today on so many issues, many not all of us agree on one thing that I know that we can come together and agree on is that we love the city, and that we want Austin [3:26:10 PM] to thrive and to remain safe, and we want it to be a welcoming home for its residents. That shared belief is what brought us together today, and it's what brings me here today on behalf of central Texas public safety commission, the commission recognizes that the men and women who make that shared goal possible is our first responders. They show up every day in unpredictable, high pressure situations so that the rest of us can go about our lives with confidence and security. Their commitment is the backbone to the safety. In Austin, the commission supports sustaining and strengthening funding for our city's first responders. Public safety is not another line item, but it's a foundation on which every other priority should rest from economic growth, transportation, education. None of it works without our commitment to public safety. In my position at the commission, I see firsthand the dedication, professionalism, and compassion that our public safety officers demonstrate every single day. I also see the strain placed on them when resources do not keep [3:27:10 PM] on pace with the demand. Investing in their well-being, readiness and capacity is not just an investment in them, but it's an investment in our city. Today, we ask that you prioritize the budget that reflects the essential role of these individuals, and that they consistently sorry that our budget reflects the essential role these individuals play in our city's health, safety and future. They consistently show up for us, and I ask today that we show up for them. Thank you all so much for your time. >> Miss Guzman. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza, reading a resident statement. My name is taniqua Brewster and I want to speak against the current budget plan. That probably means a $38 million loss for social services that are needed for the sustainability of lower income communities. The improper allocation of these funds means more strain and stress on an already unaffordable Austin. [3:28:11 PM] You need to invest in the people and not for the for profit corporations and developers. We are losing affordable housing. There is an increase in homelessness, and the loss of these programs means you've chosen profit over people. Those of us directly affected are creating valuable solutions. But the cut in the budget will make it harder for a lasting change. GABA hopes that the council takes this opportunity to restore trust and build accountability with the communities most in need of basic services and critical programs. Garza urges you to prioritize the needs brought up in the community investment budget and to take immediate action to identify sources outside of the general budget to restore funding to those you cannot fund inside it. Thank you. >> Thanks, Monica. My name is Alicia Castillo. I'm here representing the Texas civil rights project and a resident of district three. We are [3:29:11 PM] supportive and thankful to the council for all the work that they've done in the past to fund critical services like like immigrant legal services, like emergency rent assistance, like the youth summer programs and youth development programs that we have in the city, like the hungry hill day program that serves so many districts in the city. And we are opposed to the slashing of those services in this budget. And we're also opposed to any proposal that might come out that punts the decision about whether to reallocate funding from vacancies and overtime to support these critical services, that punts that decision to mid-year. And the reason we are so vehemently opposed to that is because hb 1900 passed in the 87th legislative session, makes it so that whatever budget you pass today for the police cannot be reduced. I understand that there are different interpretations of the law. That is, Texas civil rights project's official interpretation of hb 1900, that you will not be able to reduce [3:30:14 PM] the budget today, and we're asking you to keep it flat. I'll say personally, it is really shocking and frustrating to be in an era where it feels more politically palatable for us to slash emergency rental assistance and homelessness programs than it does to slash vacancies that have been vacant for two years. That's really offensive to the conscience. So I wanted to mention that. But also just note that when the federal administration's secret police descend upon the city, people will lose their jobs. People who look like me will lose their jobs because they will be afraid to leave their homes. And that's when we need things like emergency rental assistance. That's when we need an immigration legal resources in the city, not the police, who will once again, probably pepper spray me when I'm out there protesting the secret police. So thank you for your time. >> My name is Ben suddaby. I'm a resident of district four, [3:31:14 PM] speaking on behalf of myself and not anyone else. I want to thank the council for the work that has gone in in these these short few days into adding and proposing some changes that try and preserve as much of our social safety net as we can. I want to echo what was just said, because I know what fiscal prudence is, and is that an ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure. We're going to have to pay for things one way or the other, and it is better to take care of our neighbors. It is better to take care of it in a prevention early on than it is to pay to clean up the mess. It is cheaper to keep somebody housed than to rehouse them after they've already lost a home that they lived in. It is cheaper to vaccinate our community than it is to have mass outbreaks that we have to scramble and and deal with. This is things that you know. You also know where the money is. I don't think that anybody's asking for anything radical. What we're asking for is a balance, a smoothing out. [3:32:16 PM] All the burden should be borne by certain sections of your employees. I want to thank you for listening to afscme priorities. I am a proud member of that union. I really do feel for our city members as they face uncertain times. I also feel for our community as we face uncertain times and uncertain economic times is when we most need a social safety net. That is what will preserve our tax base. That's what's going to preserve the folks who go to the restaurant and spend money. You know, we have heard many times about the fickle nature of sales tax revenue. We bolster our community is by taking care of each other. And I want to see those priorities reflected to every extent possible in the budget that you all pass. I know that this is what my my fellow austinites want. >> Thank you. >> Moving on to item five, rich [3:33:19 PM] Hamman, Angela Valenzuela. >> Good afternoon council. My name is rich Hamman. I'm a resident in district nine. In just about an hour from now, I'll be heading to Lockhart to teach an urban studies class at the women's prison. There. The students are amazing, and they are worth the rush hour drive to Lockhart twice a week. And by the way, this is a volunteer gig I'm talking about. I don't get paid. All of my students are either from poor backgrounds, formerly homeless, or had mental health challenges. Yet they all came from communities that did not have adequate services to address these struggles. Instead, their issues were left to the criminal justice system. We know such a system is really a [3:34:19 PM] difference of funding priorities. We need to prioritize social services for our most vulnerable, not irresponsible spending on policing. Thank you. >> For item six. Rich Hamman, brant Davey. >> Mr. Haam is passing. >> The mayor. All speakers have been called for four, five and six. >> Thank you very much and thank all of you for being here and and commenting on this. Members. As you just heard, we have heard from all the speakers that have signed up on items four, five and six. I want to kind of get a feel for the council. We can either right now go ahead and get emotion out on the table and begin the discussion of that motion, including any questions that anybody might have. But I want to make sure that [3:35:19 PM] everybody's is ready to go to that, I guess, is what I'm I'm asking about. In that case, then, if our professional staff will come forward, members that will take us to item number four. Item number four is an ordinance amending ordinance number 20250813005, by which we adopted the city's budget for fiscal year 2025 2026. We conducted a hearing on this yesterday, and we also allowed for public comment on this item just now. And two days ago, the base motion that I will accept is to adopt version two of the ordinance, which includes as exhibit a, the city manager's proposed amendments to the adopted budget. After that motion is made, we will take up any amendments to the ordinance that's recommended by staff and then council. Amendments to the [3:36:21 PM] ordinance, as amended by the staff amendments. So let me walk through that again. The motion is and I'll ask for the motion to minute, but the motion is it will be to amend. It will be to it'll be version two of the ordinance, which includes the exhibit a the city manager's proposed amendments to the adopted budget. And then what we will do is we will turn to staff for the staff proposed amendments, and then we will take up any council amendments to the ordinance as amended by the staff amendments. Is there a motion and a second to adopt the ordinance amending ordinance number 20250813005, adopting the city's fiscal year 2025 2026 budget. Is there a [3:37:22 PM] motion? Motion is made by council member Siegel. It is seconded by council member alter. What we will do now is we will have a staff presentation of the staff recommended amendments. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Kerri Lang, director of budget and organizational excellence on yesterday evening. Then again this morning, we gave a memo that walked through some of the proposed amendments that we are recommending to the budget for this fiscal year. I just have a couple of slides to talk through those amendments. And so what you'll see here in this first slide is a breakdown of the reductions that we are we are recommending for us to [3:38:22 PM] get to a balanced budget. We looked at several items, whether or not those were items that were included in the city manager's recommended proposed amended budget or items that were included in baseline funding for some of for for some of the staff, as well as the proposed budget earlier this year. This first item that you see up here, and I won't go through every single one, but this first item in particular is moving some of the funding for the funding for navigation services to the hope fund. As if you remember, the hope fund was created fully in this fiscal year. We have appropriation that should be coming in December for the hope fund, and that will give that $500,000 instead of being in the general fund to the hope fund. The additions that we are recommending include the non-congregate shelters at 2.9 million, the permanent [3:39:24 PM] supportive housing that you see here at 200,000, that is the general fund portion of the permanent supportive housing. There is 2 million in the housing trust fund that will continue to be funded for one year for for that permanent supportive housing services. The 2.5 million for to eliminate brownouts for ems sworn stations, as well as 1 million for the cat program. Then there is $120,000 for the child advocacy services in Williamson county, and for to address food insecurities. There are food pantries at title one schools, as well as home delivery meals for our older community. Those are the amendments that we're recommending be added to or be changed from. The city manager's recommended proposed for for this fiscal year. >> So members, what we'll do. First of all, I get a motion and a second on the staff [3:40:26 PM] amendments for clarity purposes. What I think we will do is we will then go to council amendments, and the council amendments will be motions to amend the staff amendment. Now, I'm doing that so that we have clarity that that's that's that's what we're addressing. And and so I'd like to get a motion and a second on the staff amendments. And then I'll recognize for discussion. Do we have a motion and a second on the the staff amendments that miss director Lang just laid out? Ken is the motion is made by councilmember Laine. Is there a second? I'll second the motion. Councilmember qadri. >> This is the time that we can take to ask questions. Sure. Great. I had my first question. >> Councilmember Siegel, you'll be following councilmember qadri. >> I had my first question for for Ed. Could you clarify that [3:41:27 PM] as it relates to the APD budget, is it locked in at the level set today, or is there a room for movement? >> I think you're questioning in regard to the state statute that doesn't allow the ap budget to be lowered from one year to the next? Yeah, yeah. So the the benchmark there is the budget that was approved for fiscal year 25. And so as long as our fiscal year 26 budget, whether it be the adopted budget or amended budget, because you can amend the budget, any council meeting, as long as we don't go below the fiscal year 25 appropriation, we are not in violation of that statute. >> Got it. Could you could you remind us what that number was for for fiscal year 25? 24? >> I believe the the difference between the two years was was about 12.3 million in just the general fund. We believe we need to also take into account [3:42:27 PM] some other non-general fund, police department funds and the delta. There was about $9.5 million. So in other words, the fy 26 total appropriations for police across various funds is about $9.5 million more than what it was in fiscal year 25. >> Okay, great. And then I have a question for Carrie. Could you explain in the proposed base budget, could you explain any cuts that have already occurred to the police budget? >> Yes. So the police did have a $9 million reduction in overtime, and that was based on the staffing model that the chief put into place in in fiscal year 25. And that carried over to to result in $9 million of annualized savings. There was $500,000 in savings with the move of the blue Santa warehouse to a city facility. I [3:43:32 PM] believe those were the two major ones. And let me double check and make sure I don't. I didn't miss one. >> Okay, so about 9.5 million in reductions. >> The last one, right. The last one was the police department has historically had the Travis county jail Ila in their budget. And we moved that out to the fund level. And I believe that was 16.1 million. >> I'm sorry. >> 16.1 million. >> Point one okay. So that is what, 25.1 million. >> Yes. 25.6 I believe. >> Oh, sorry. 25.6 I wrote that I can count. And then my last question as it relates to all this, I have a question for chief Davis. If she's she's here. I have a question for chief Davis. Really quick. Thank you. Chief, I just had a question on as it relates to cuts, if APD has any additional [3:44:33 PM] cuts, let's say it's 2 million, 4 million, 6 million, 8 million, 10 million. I'm throwing around numbers. How does that affect how does that affect APD and the work that you all do? >> Well, I think I kind of go back to when I was hired by all of you here just a year ago and all the changes and that you wanted to see here within the police department. And I do feel that I have certainly been responsible with this budget that I have, looking at the changes we're doing, implementing the researchers that we've brought in, we have very done recommendations where 13 recommendations, we are going to do those recommendations, and there's going to be a budget and a cost to those recommendations. And so as we're moving forward and getting progress here, which I feel we are, and so any thing from this budget will take away from that progress. >> Okay. Great. Thank you. >> Councilmember Siegel. Thank you. Councilmember qadri. >> Thank you, mayor. And I just want to share something with you as our master of procedure, [3:45:33 PM] the sub quorum I'm working with has a proposed substitute motion for the staff motion. >> Has anyone seen that? >> So I'm just sharing that now. They're bringing it down. I'm going to start with questions okay. But procedurally I just want to give you a heads up that we are going to propose a substitute motion. >> Go ahead with your questions. We'll see what we have. >> Thank you. And thank you again to the budget team for all of your hard work. I want to start with the proposed additions. Director Lang, if you could explain the $2.9 million for non-congregate shelters and in particular, you know, there's a lot of different providers for shelters. We have the other ones foundation. We have foundation communities, we have the safe alliance. So if you could explain, give us a little more context of, you know, who would qualify for this funding stream. >> So in the adopted budget, there was $5.1 million, I [3:46:36 PM] believe, for emergency shelters. And that included the dollars for the other ones foundation and several other agencies in the adopted budget that was relying on the TRE. And with that change, with the TRE not passing, and the understanding that the other ones foundation, I believe the city has already already. Paid into the development of that site, and those dollars would allow for the other ones foundations to to open up that development. That 2.9 million was focused on that site versus the other dollars that were not included or that were not available because of the failure of the TRE. >> Thank you. And then in terms of the other providers, they would probably not be receiving funds under this proposal. >> Correct. >> Thank you. And then in terms of the miss item, Ms. Swarm overtime to eliminate brownouts, [3:47:37 PM] $2.5 million. You know, previously we understood that $4.3 million was needed to prevent brownouts, especially in the context of avoiding brownouts and also avoiding other major cuts to ems programs. So if you could explain the difference between the $4.3 million number and the $2.5 million number, sure. >> When ems created their enhancement request during the proposed budget process, they were looking holistically at their programing, including brownouts, as well as the academy and recruiting functions. And so we broke down those cost to show what was specifically needed for eliminating the station brownouts, the funding that was needed for that versus the other programmatic functions. And so that 2.5 million represents the dollars that are required to eliminate the station brownouts in the coming fiscal year. [3:48:38 PM] >> Thank you. And then moving on to what we call em cut in this staff proposal, $1 million is proposed for expanded mobile crisis outreach team. And our understanding was that the actual budget number to guarantee 24 seven Escott was roughly $3.8 million. Could you explain the the $1 million recommendation in that context, please? >> Sure. As we were talking to staff about the cat funding and the possible needs related to that funding, it was determined that about $1 million would allow for cat to continue to continue the same level of services that they're doing right now, which is a little bit more expanded services that I think they did before fiscal year 25. And that would this 1 million would allow for that continued service. And the conversation that I believe has been had was better understanding the data [3:49:39 PM] behind the 24 seven request and understanding whether or not the data supports the 24 seven, or if there's a way to expand the hours with with these additional funds that they that we've included. >> Thank you, director. And then on the proposed adjustments and reductions, if you could share, I guess first of all, give an overview of how you came to these recommended adjustments and reductions. >> Sure. As we looked at. The items that are as we feel like we heard from the council on the items that were priority, we understood that the major priorities were including funding for homelessness, particularly emergency shelters, as well as psh. We understood that there was a need to [3:50:41 PM] address the ems brownouts, and we understood that part of that need or part of that priority included working through an understanding or making sure we have funding for mcot with the limited dollars that we had and understanding that we we wanted to make sure we balanced and kept as much of the priorities in place. We looked at how we could address those specific priorities without completely removing all the other things, but it did take a reduction in several areas. And so we we looked at what departments had, what we already put into place from departments. We also looked at the areas of homelessness that we we thought we could balance out and continue to serve at the the baseline levels. And so those are the general ideas that we looked at as we tried to come up with the correct balance of dollars to reduce, as in comparison to what we were trying to increase. [3:51:43 PM] >> Thank you. I appreciate it, mayor. I believe now the Dyess has in front of them the substitute motion as well as the exhibit that goes with it. So of course, I'm happy to defer to other questions of. >> What I'd like to do. Councilmember is, in fairness, as staff is has staff seen this? >> I mean, they've seen it through the development, but this is just produced. Yes. >> Okay. So what I what I would suggest we do in in fairness to the sub quorum and being recognized to have a substitute motion that's now just hitting the dais and I'm, I want to be fair in that, but I think it's only appropriate for staff for for the rest of the council. >> Yes. >> And for staff to have have a moment to actually look at what's in this. Yes, sir. What is being suggested? And the rest of the council may have questions of the professional [3:52:43 PM] staff about what it is that this substitute motion does, because that's why we rely on them. >> That's right. >> So, councilmember Velazquez, you're the only. Well and now the mayor pro tem, do you all want to do questions before we take a break and allow the staff to look at this? >> My questions are related to the staff amendment. So yes, before we consider the substitute okay. >> The councilmember Velasquez, what's your situation? >> Mr. Mayor? I don't want to disrupt the proceeds, but I have questions now to okay. >> Fair enough. Then then what we'll do is, is I'll tell you what, let's let let's do just so that staff has an idea of what's in this thing. And the other council members have an idea of what's in it. What I'm going to recommend we do is that we recess until 430. At that point, we'll come back and I'll recognize the mayor pro tem for questions on the staff recommendation. Actually, I recognize councilmember Velasquez first, then the mayor pro tem, then councilmember harper-madison, councilmember vela. So, without objection, we're in recess until 4:30 P.M. [4:29:56 PM] All right, everybody, it's 430 on November 20th, 2025, and I will call back to order the Austin city council at this regular meeting of the city council members. We have a couple of items that I want to clean up before we go back into items four, five and six. What we're going to do is on item number 62. During the break, it was brought to my attention that on item number 62, the ordinance in the backup has the incorrect effective date. Effective date. The date should be December 1st, 2025. So the mayor pro tem moves that we reconsider the vote by which item number 62 is adopted and seconded by council member vela discussion on that item. [4:30:56 PM] Without objection, item number 62 will be reconsidered. The. Now the mayor pro tem moves that item number 62 be adopted, with the effective date being December 1st, 2025. It is seconded by council member vela. All those in. Without objection, that item is adopted with the effective date being December 1st, 2025 with council member Laine and council member qadri Bein temporarily off the dais. Members on items. They will be voting in favor. It was unanimous. On item number 74 and 75, which were two zoning [4:31:56 PM] items. Council member harper-madison had to be temporarily off screen and so she was not counted in that vote. She would like to be shown voting in favor of items 74 and 75. It will not change the outcome of the vote. Council member vela moves and councilmember Siegel seconds that council member harper-madison be shown voting in favor of item 74 and 75. Is there any objection? Without objection, council member harper-madison will be shown voting in favor of item 74 and 75 members. The manager has asked that we give him a couple more minutes. So what I'm going to do, I was hoping that that would take a little longer than it did, but y'all are very efficient, so thank you. We will be we'll stand at recess, but I hope everybody kind of stands by their chairs until 440. Without objection. We're in recess. It is 433. [4:42:26 PM] Folks. There's some additional work going on on the numbers. I know that surprises everybody. But so because we want to make sure we have a a thorough and a thoughtful process, I want to make sure I give the manager's office and our financial staff enough time to go through those numbers, including the new numbers or the new proposals that they've seen. So what we're going to do is we're going to be in recess until 5:00, try to give everybody another 15 minutes, and then we'll come back. We'll start with questions the council members had. But I also, I know Mr. Benigno can probably answer all of them with his hands tied behind his back. But in case we need we need them. We'll want them if that's okay with you. Okay? He says we need them. All right. Without objection, the city council is in recess until 5:00 pm. It's 4:43 P.M. Now. [5:23:05 PM] Back to order. The Austin city council is 5:23 P.M. On November 20th, 2025. Members. When we took a break, it was so that our professional staff would have a chance to look at a document that was provided to them and have a chance to look at those numbers, but we when we broke, we were going to have some questions, and I want to go back to those. My memory was councilmember Velasquez, followed by the mayor pro tem, and then I don't remember who else had punched the button. And for some reason it's been cleared here. So if you want to speak again, put your name up there. And but we'll start with councilmember Velasquez and you've got the floor. >> Thank you. Mayor. My first question is for chief Luckritz. And while he's coming down, I guess I can ask staff on the on the mcot money. Can you clarify if the proposed 1 million for mcot would help achieve the 24 [5:24:05 PM] over seven response? And if not, what is that 1 million guarantee? >> Thanks, councilmember. So the 1 million, my understanding is, would allow for mcot to continue the service level that they began in mid fiscal year 25. So they did hire up some additional staff based on that one time funding that we provide in fiscal year 25. And it would allow for that additional expanded hours. I'm not sure of the exact expanded hours, but it will continue the services that they began mid- year. >> Thank you. Chief. We asked earlier or somebody asked earlier of staff about the 2.5 and funding for ems. Can you share if and how that proposed 2.5 funding for ems sworn overtime? Will it will it eliminate the brownouts? >> So the the 2.5 million in funding gives us the resources we need in order to to, I'll say ensure. But based on the current run, maintain all of [5:25:07 PM] our stations open and functioning with ambulances in them. Certainly we cannot predict what the future year may hold or any of those other things, but based on our current projections, that would be adequate for us to keep those those stations open. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. Councilmember mayor pro tem, followed by councilmember alter and councilmember vela. >> Thank you. Colleagues wanted to start with the staff's proposal for the amendment that they are offering for the budget, that we were emailed this the staff amendment last night, I think around 11:00. So I want to first thank our staff and public who perhaps are watching. Just appreciate your patience, because we've had less than 24 hours to deliberate what staff has come up with, and then have also worked on an alternative amendment that lays out different ways in which we can fund our priorities. So I want just want to acknowledge the time here because we are being very thoughtful and intentional and disciplined in how we approach this budget. And so I [5:26:07 PM] wanted to share that out. So staff has proposed taking our priority amendments that we've discussed or priority areas that we discussed yesterday and put forth before us a $7.2 million amendment that that, you know, lays out. I mean, it lays out here on page one, the areas in which we would invest in. My main issue with this is that nowhere during yesterday's conversation did we say pull it from parks or pull it from homelessness. And yet what we see with staff is recommending is that in order to fund our priority areas, they have pulled more than half of it from homelessness investments. They've also decreased half of the new parks investments. And so I'm really wanting to focus on the areas that staff is proposing to reduce in order to fund areas that we have deemed priority, including a portion of the 24 over seven mental health response as well as ems. [5:27:09 PM] So I guess, first and foremost, before I go through my line of questioning here, I just wanted to ask staff if they could, if there's any other context or insight that they want to provide as to why the reductions that are proposed here to fund our priority areas lean so heavily, half of it being homelessness, and then an additional. 1 million from parks. Talk us through why you identified those areas versus looking through other parts of city departments for efficiencies. >> Sure. So as we began looking at how to rebalance the budget or what the options were, we understood that the priorities for moving forward included the non-congregate shelters as well as the permanent supportive housing. Among the other items that you mentioned. And so when [5:28:10 PM] we started looking at ways to balance those things we have looked at, we already looked at a number of the amendments and changes that were in the city. Manager's recommended proposed that we give that we gave on November 7th. We went back and looked at a number of the prioritization items and several of those items, even though we when we went through the proposed budget process, those items were put in place in may. Department's recommended those changes in may of this year. As we continue to move through this process and begin this fiscal year, several of those items are no longer viable for a number of reasons. One, as the department started doing their operations for fiscal year 26, we gave the instruction to stay at fiscal year 25 levels, and they started looking at hiring positions that they may have held because they were not reduced in the budget process. Some of those dollars were one [5:29:12 PM] time dollars and were not viable for fiscal year 26. So we combed through some of those previous recommendations, and we looked at what we thought was an understanding of the permanent supportive housing to mcot ems. Those were the priorities that we understood council to have for our updated recommendation. We recognize that there are some give and take in in the recommendation we put forward, but with part in particular, those additional ten positions would allow for them to continue the work. In my mind, that would mean that we would still look at years two and three and four of this forecast period to see how we could potentially add more resources to part, but we were committed to doing at least those ten this year. I think this is just a an overview or a recommendation that allows or or appreciates the give and [5:30:12 PM] take that we have to do because of the fiscal restraints that we have and just choosing what we think we could implement in this fiscal year. >> And just for colleagues, you know, part of what I reference through this process was the prioritization list that staff developed in part of the budget process, and in that departments were asked for their own areas in which they would recommend cuts. And as miss Lang laid out here, this information is old now because it was last done in may. And so I guess my next question is, was, were the departmental leaders asked to update this information as part of consideration for this updated budget process? >> We did not ask departments to go back and give more or updated cuts. What we did was we looked at the ones that were still listed and we asked questions of the departments, but we did not go back and give new instruction to provide new reductions for this budget. [5:31:14 PM] >> 2.0 thank you. I am worried about not having that built into our process here, knowing that we're poised to adopt a new budget and not knowing. Knowing that there have been changes to the city and how we operate in the last few months, that we don't have our departmental leaders weighing in on areas that they see as opportunities for for efficiencies or areas to reprioritize, which is why I'm very concerned with the proposal that the staff has laid out, because there's a number of reductions, continued reductions within homelessness and parks. And so I'm wondering if director gray is here so he could speak to some of the reductions that are being proposed here on the homelessness front. The first item I'd like to go through is the recommendation to move the homelessness navigation services to hope fund, and the hope fund was a new fund that was created, I believe, just in the last year. And it might be helpful, miss Lang, if we could [5:32:14 PM] go over how the hope fund is funded and how it gets its revenue sources. >> I pause because I'm trying to think through how to best describe. But the hope fund is funded primarily through tpid dollars, and those dollars, and I'm going to lean to Ed to see if he can give the if he has the details of how those dollars rolled through for pet to hope. >> So that we're talking about the tourism ped the council established. And so there's a different provisions now in general, when the convention center is up and running, to the extent they provide incentives to events to come to Austin and occupy the convention center, the tourism Pichette can reimburse the city for the incentives that we've had to pay in order to get events to come here. And of course, those people then use hotels. So that's kind of how the funding cycle works. Council passed a resolution [5:33:14 PM] that as the tourism pitch starts putting off revenue, that that revenue would get deposited into the hope fund. >> And that first deposit. When was that? Because it was recent. >> It's so the first deposit will come in on a December 11th on the next council meeting. That's when we plan on bringing it forward. >> And is it what amount is that will that. >> We anticipate $942,000. >> Okay. Thank you, director gray. If you could speak to the reductions that are being proposed here by the city manager on areas where we can reallocate dollars, there are a number of cuts to homelessness services, including around rapid rehousing, reduced funding for the bridge shelter, landlord engagement, homelessness, diversion services and as well as emergency rental assistance. Can you talk through what these reductions proposed reductions would do to our homelessness response system? >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you. David gray, director, Austin homeless [5:34:16 PM] strategies and operations so, as you may recall, earlier this year, council directed our office to lay out some recommendations on how to continue to develop our local homeless response system. And so staff presented those recommendations in June. Those recommendations, in turn, informed what staff brought to council in August for the budget that you ultimately adopted with proposition Q failing, we've now had to readjust and reprioritize what we think is most critical for us to sustain. As I had mentioned on yesterday, our top priority right now is to do no harm to the infrastructure that we've already invested in and things that we are already building. And so what that would mean for us is first sustaining our investment in the marshaling yard emergency shelter, so we don't lose those 287 beds that we currently operate. The second is in continuing our investments in new shelter beds, particularly [5:35:17 PM] ones that the city has already invested funding in. I think, as miss Lang alluded to earlier today, we've invested about a million and a half into the construction of new shelter beds out at the Esperanza community, and we're aware that if we are not able to find ongoing operating dollars for that investment, not only might we not see the new hundred beds out at the Esperanza community, but the existing hundred beds might also be forced to close. The third is investments in supportive services at the permanent supportive housing developments that the city of Austin has funded. This is even more important, we believe now for us to consider than it was when we first adopted the budget, because in that time, the federal government has shifted their funding priorities and they are significantly reducing how much cox can spend on permanent supportive housing. And so all the more important for us to [5:36:19 PM] sustain our investments there. The other big thing that we did this past year is get more upstream of homelessness by investing in homeless prevention services, homeless diversion service, land services, landlord engagement et-cetera the staff recommendation that was presented last night and discussed today, as you mentioned, eliminates the ongoing funding for those services from this year's budget. Our office does have its our existing contracts that are funded with one time funds. We can sustain those contracts through fy 26. So we'd still be okay this fiscal year. However, we have to reconsider if we're going to provide ongoing funding for those investments next fiscal year or if we're going to get out of the business of providing that minimal housing assistance, which is not something that our office would recommend that we do. So I'll pause right there, mayor pro tem, to see if you have any additional questions [5:37:20 PM] or anything else you'd like me to clarify. >> Well, I mean, if you could speak specifically to the rapid rehousing, the 1 million reduction in rapid rehousing beds, the 750,000 reduction in bridge shelters, the 600,000 reduction in landlord engagement, 500,000 reduction in homelessness diversion services. Yes, ma'am. Those specific reductions would impact the homelessness response system. >> Yes, ma'am. So for the 1 million elimination in the the new funding for rapid rehousing programs, that would leave us with our existing baseline of about 4.8 million for rapid rehousing, which makes up 8% of our social services budget. We've had to pause rapid new rapid rehousing intakes this fiscal year, or, I guess, last fiscal year, to transition people who were in the one time arpa funded rapid rehousing programs into the ongoing general fund funded rapid rehousing programs so that [5:38:20 PM] those clients didn't exit the arpa programs back into homelessness. Because of that pause and new intakes, the backlog for the rapid rehousing has grown. This million dollars would have allowed us to address some of that backlog. So without it, the backlog remains. We will still continue to provide rapid rehousing as a city funded program. But our ability to catch up is is going to be limited. In addition, I had spoken about the federal government shifting their funding priorities that shift in funding priorities also affects federally funded rapid rehousing programs in our community, too. So we are going to see some rapid rehousing programs that are not city funded. They're federally funded. Those programs may lose that federal funding. So just wanted to note that when it comes to the 750,000 for bridge shelters, those dollars would have enabled us to provide [5:39:20 PM] housing assistance to our northbridge and southbridge clients to help those clients move on into housing. And essentially is is the output. And it allows us to free up more beds in the bridge shelters. So when we do our healing initiatives or the encampment closures, we have beds to place people into. And so by removing this 750,000, we won't have funding for that dedicated housing support at the bridge shelters. And so it just it slows our bed turnover at the shelters. The loss of $600,000 in landlord engagement. Again, we have our existing contract with housing connector. It's funded for this fiscal year, so it wouldn't have an impact on us this fiscal year. But if we weren't able to identify funding for next fiscal year, then we would have to reevaluate if we keep that relationship with housing connector and then the 500,000 [5:40:22 PM] for homeless diversion services. We have our existing contract for the wayfinder program that's good for this fiscal year. So we're again, we're covered for this fiscal year. We also have one extension on that contract. So we're assuming we get funding next fiscal year at our baseline. We'll have that program covered in fy 27 as well. >> So for the landlord engagement and homelessness diversion services we have sufficient funding to hold us over for this fiscal year. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Very good. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> And then the other question I wanted to dig into is if we could get chief Luckritz back. I just want to talk through the overtime for ems and better understand the proposal that is before us. This, to me, is key. And I just want to make sure. Because chief Luckritz, you mentioned for the record that having this amount that staff [5:41:22 PM] is proposing would be sufficient to keep us from having to have brownouts, ambulances that are not in use due to staffing shortages, and that amount would be 2.5 million. That is different than what the association says is needed for to prevent brownouts. And it's different than what was in the prior the enhancements list that was shared with us earlier this summer. So can you just talk us through the differences there and and what other context we should be aware of, and how this 2.5 million is sufficient to eliminate brownouts? >> Sure. So as I mentioned earlier, as we look at what our spend was last year in terms of having all of the available resources and all of the initiatives that we had across the entire department moving forward, it was a higher amount. We look at kind of the need for us to focus in on these core services and ensure that we have adequate station coverage across the county. The 2.5 million represents what it would, what it would require for us to have the funding [5:42:24 PM] necessary to ensure that we have an ambulance in every ems station. The difference that you see between that and, say, the 4.4 million represents the vast majority of that represents the efforts that we were making towards our onboarding and recruiting efforts to really address the ongoing vacancies, what we've seen and in our discussions, as we kind of weigh the the pros and cons and where best to allocate our resources, we were running coming into 2025 with a significant number of individuals on our recruiting list that we were trying to bring on board and and the increased cost, as I described earlier, of both recruiting, but even more so that onboarding and the long time that it takes for us to bring people from adjoining the department to becoming fully productive within the workforce, our current academy, right now that we have going on is, is 17, which is dramatically lower than what we had seen in 2025, with the academies, up to 41 individuals. And so as we look [5:43:25 PM] at the timeline for bringing those individuals from previous years fully online and fully productive, and we look at what this year would look like given where we are at, you know, already into this fiscal year of the need to do recruiting and then application process and then onboarding, trying to be realistic about how many new people we would actually bring on in this fiscal year that then we would have to do. And so we're not at a place from a pipeline perspective, as we were in the beginning of 2025. We need to prime the pipe this year. We need to put a lot of efforts into our recruiting and getting back out into the national stage, getting back out into the communications of the great work that we're doing here in Austin. Build that pipeline, and then we'll work through work with the city manager, the city manager's office, look at our own structure to see then how do we take the folks that are in that starting pipeline and actually bring them on board into the coming years? >> I guess I'm just because at the beginning, you said that the rest of the 4.4 million was [5:44:25 PM] for recruitment, but you just also shared that the need to prioritize recruitment. So how do you plan to prioritize recruitment if you don't have the funding that is needed for those efforts? >> Yes. The bulk of that was really the onboarding piece and the academies. And so I'm kind of maybe blending those together a little bit, recruiting and onboarding in the academy piece. It's really going to be a lot of marketing. It's going to be a lot of getting our teams back. We really trimmed our travel last year as well. And so we were not marketing ourselves at some of the large national and large regional conferences across the country. We and so we want to get back out there and try to again reinvigorate the community, to come to Austin and set some realistic timelines as we're out there of what that would look like for us moving forward. It is a long process for us from start to finish to get folks to come to Austin and and what we see [5:45:26 PM] sometimes is individuals that want to come to Austin. It's a it is a long process, and I think it's important for us to evaluate those processes, to work through a comprehensive plan for how it is that we can streamline that process. As we go into fiscal year 2027. >> You provide more details, specifically how that portion of funding, the gap, funding that would have gone to onboarding for the new medics going through academy. How like if we don't have that funding, how does that affect onboarding specifically? >> So. We would look at or we are looking at Wright the number of individuals that say are in queue to potentially join us in an academy. And in order for for us to really get to where we want to be from a staffing perspective and to fill our vacancies, you know, we need to make sure that the number of individuals that we're putting into our academies exceeds the number of individuals that are departing the department. And as we grow, we had reached that period in 2025 when we were having, you know, 30 to 40 individuals per [5:46:27 PM] academy. At times where we are at now, with those lower numbers, what it does for us from an onboarding perspective is it keeps us whole as we really start to rethink that strategy of of going into future fiscal years and how it is that we can change the way that we do onboarding as a department to be able to facilitate in a responsible manner, getting ourselves to being able to continue larger academies and and have that pipeline built up to be able to, to, to staff those academies as well. >> Thank you. I just, you know, I'm struggling here in, in understanding how having a reduction in the funding that ems needs for recruitment and onboarding, but knowing that we have a 15% vacancy rate within the ems department and knowing the importance of us recruiting and having that pipeline as a way to offset the overtime funding that we are essentially trying to address with this amendment. I mean, those two go [5:47:28 PM] hand in hand. So for reducing the portion that's focused on recruitment, we'll every year we'll have to come back and add more for overtime because we're not getting the necessary amount of of medics through the pipeline. I mean any any thoughts on. >> Yeah, I think it's important for us in this, this coming year, I should say this existing year here to really work with the team, work with the city manager's office, really work towards, I think, as many of the other public safety departments are seeing is what is how can we rethink overall? You know, one of the challenges that we have is the, as I've said, the exponential growth that we're seeing in our departments, we're certainly in our department. And and that's a unique challenge for us to, you know, we are up more than 100 people in seats, staff in seats from when I started in in 2022. The challenge that we have here is as much about dealing with that growth as it is with dealing with with turnover. And so it's a [5:48:30 PM] slightly different mechanism for us as we look to not just maintain the turnover, which is historically what many of these agencies have done. Right. We have enough folks coming through and to maintain us in the size that we are today or the size that we were in 2022. But if we are going to grow the department as quickly and as we we need to see in order to fulfill the those those initiatives that you have funded over the years, those additional positions that you have given us, we're going to need to vastly expand that recruiting piece and vastly expand that onboarding piece. And so that requires us to really build a solid infrastructure. You know, when I when I spoke earlier this week, you know, this year for us in 2026, fiscal year 2026 is is a little bit of about. Back to the basics. I think many departments are going through that same thing of looking at our overall infrastructure. We've grown by by several over 100 new positions since I came here. And, you know, our overall operations has grown by almost 50%. We need to take a pause and really think through. [5:49:31 PM] Do we have all of the pieces that we have in place from a recruiting perspective, from an onboarding perspective, from all of the other pieces that we have that operate so much in the background to support that exponential growth that you guys have so graciously funded us over the past few years. And I think that taking this fiscal year to really have a little bit of a of a reset for ourselves, maintain where we are and understand how do we properly make sure that coming into fiscal year 2027, giving the financial climate that we are in, that we have built out a fiscally responsible mechanism for us to be able to meet the growth, meet the demand of the community, meet those programs that you have funded, and have us on a good trajectory to make sure that that we're serving the growth of Austin and the residents of Austin and Travis county. >> Thank you, chief, for your comments. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem, councilmember, councilmember alter, and councilmember vela. >> Thank you very much. I just want to understand from financial staff. Some of these [5:50:33 PM] items that are different from yours just to fully. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Should we wait for that? >> Yeah. Why don't you wait on that? >> I'm happy to do. That then. Yeah. >> Councilmember vela. >> Thank you. Mayor. Just wanted to I saw the talk about the sobering center. The cut 125,000 cut. Again, I know there is there's a shortage of of funds, but what was the thinking kind of behind that that that 125 cut? I know that it had original proposal came out with adding 500,000 again, which was down from the prop Q amount. And and now we're down to the 375, which is kind of thoughts on that. >> Sure. My understanding is that the team from the sobering center made a. Presentation in August that indicated that [5:51:34 PM] their funding needs were the 375 for the year, the additional 375 for the year, not an additional 5 million for this coming year. So we made that adjustment based on that information. >> Okay. Now, an additional 500,000. >> Correct. >> The and now with that, the sobering center that they had a board meeting last night, the central health again just kind of for background information for for ourselves and for the public. Central health has. Given the sobering center a $600,000 contract to help with some of the the what they call the holdover. In other words, folks that are taken to the sobering center for criminal diversion purposes. But then at the sobering center. Realize [5:52:39 PM] that they need much deeper substance abuse treatment. And the sobering center has been. Doing this kind of on a really ad hoc basis with very limited resources. Central health in the past year has stepped up to provide additional resources. And now this year is really stepping up. And my concern with that, that that cut there also would be that I don't know if that's going to be able to I don't know if they're going to be able to operationalize the, the, the additional services without the kind of the base support from, from the, the city of Austin. So I would hate to to lose kind of central health or, you know, because there's such an important part of the kind of the downtown, they're such an important piece of the downtown public safety puzzle that I would hate to to lose that additional benefit from the, the, the central health, especially because it's just very hard to get into an indigent substance abuse care. [5:53:39 PM] But all right, I'll leave it at that. >> Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember. All right. I think that covers the questions on the staff's recommended amendments to the proposed amendment. We will now go to amendments to the staff's recommended amendment to the proposed amended budget. Yeah I know. So so let me remind everybody where we are. We've made a main motion and that is to and unfortunately, the word amended gets used a lot here. But the main motion is to amend the budget that was originally passed. The council passed a budget. That budget included a tax rate that required a tax rate election. The tax rate election failed. And so we are [5:54:40 PM] here to amend that budget. So. The original motion, the main motion will be a motion to amend that budget. We now have an amendment to that which is recommended by the staff. And that will be the first item we take up. The council. Amendments will be proposed. Amendments to the staff recommended amendment. And unless somebody wants to start with something else and I'm not seeing anybody doing that, I'm going to go in this order. I'm going to first call on council member alter for his proposed amendment. I will then go to council member Ellis. Followed by the mayor pro tem. It is my understanding and I'll the next in line would be council member Laine, but it's my [5:55:42 PM] understanding that those amendments are going to be withdrawn. But I'll. I'll wait till I get to you to make sure that's the case. Then. Council member Siegel. I have one, and then we will go back to council member alter and then there's my understanding that there's also one by council member Fuentes and, and I misspoke the. >> Yeah, I mean I want to check with what you have. >> Yeah. Well that's what I'll do is I'll call them out because I know we've we've all been moving around. So I'll be real flexible on trying to make sure we have all of those. So actually the first amendment that I'm going to bring forward is one that is from from me. And folks, you have the yellow copy and it's, it's labeled item for motion sheet 211 2025. And I'm going to read this so that the. >> Mister mayor, if I may, I. [5:56:43 PM] >> Yes, ma'am. >> Have been in the way that I would like to. And this is a very important thing and I can't tap in like I would like to. >> Okay. >> You know, I got nothing. You guys are doing it great. Okay. I just want to make sure that you don't miss the opportunity. I said I'm here. >> I got you. Thank you. I see you, and I appreciate you letting me reminding me. So thank you very much. So the first. So here's the order, mayor. Yes. Sorry. >> You know, our sub quorum has a substitute. >> Well, that's that's why I was looking right at you. >> Oh, I thought you understood that. Okay. >> I did, and that's why I was looking at you when I was saying. I don't see anybody asking for it. Do you want to make a substitute motion? Yes, sir. Okay, well, then then here's the order. I'll go in. I will, because you've indicated you want to do that. I'm going to recognize you on a substitute motion. And so we will recognize that we will determine whether or not the substitute motion is adopted. Members. You'll recall that if a substitute motion is made and [5:57:45 PM] this will be a substitute motion, it will be a motion to replace or substitute the motion that council member Siegel makes. It will be to replace or substitute the staff recommended amendment to the proposed amended budget. We have we have a motion and a second on that already. If and the debate will be then on the substitute motion and whether we want to adopt the substitute motion, we will vote on not the sub to adopt a substitute motion, but on whether or not it will be substituted. In other words, will it replace the staff recommended amendment and that and and that will be the first vote if it is voted to replace that, then we will have it as the amendment. And if there's other amendments to that, those will also be offered up at that point in [5:58:46 PM] time. So, council member Siegel, you are recognized on a proposed substitute motion. >> Thank you, mayor, and I'm going to describe it briefly. Sure. A clean copy is coming downstairs because during the last break, we met with city staff and they gave us a couple notes. It's largely what is on the dais, but there are a couple changes. The intention of this substitute motion is to fully fund some of council's shared priorities, including ems, mcat, better services at parks and items for city employees like bad weather pay, and also to improve wildfire mitigation. So those are so basically enhanced investments on the expense side. And then on the pay for side, our sub quorum felt that some of the [5:59:48 PM] cuts were very painful and and especially to the homeless strategy office, some of the parks cuts and other cuts. And so the intention is to replace some of the pay Fors that are in the staff motion. So I will describe as we're waiting for the document, the key changes to investments. So to staff recommendation 19, which is the emergency medical services sworn overtime to eliminate brownouts. We propose spending $3 million instead of 2.5 million to address part of what chief Luckritz referred to about improving our ability to recruit and retain new cadets. We also propose adding $1 million to the cat expanded mobile crisis outreach team item, so that it would go up to $2.86 million. And from what we understand, that would enable the program to truly operate 24 over seven. I have agreed to [6:00:50 PM] reductions into a couple of the food items to free up a little money. So reducing the food pantries item to 150,000 a year, reducing the home delivered meals to older adults to 100,000 a year, but then adding bad weather. Pay for essential city employees $150,000. Adding dental benefits for part time employees. That's about $119,000, and then adding $1 million to wildfire mitigation that would be paid for through the urban forest replenishment fund. So those are the enhancements to the staff proposal on the on the, you know, payment side, we propose reducing funding for imagine Austin by $2 million. We propose vacancy savings for positions that have been vacant for more than two years of $1 million. We do propose transferring from the reserve [6:01:50 PM] fund $2 million, but we've removed a lot of the cuts that were in the staff recommendation, and those are apparent in the attachment that's actually now being distributed. In addition, we want to cut fewer positions from parks from the staff amendment. So instead of reducing the manager's proposal by ten employees, we propose only cutting five. We want to reduce the cut to rapid rehousing. So instead of cutting 1 million, we want to reduce it to $500,000 reduction. And then there's a number of cuts that are based on the service prioritization report that are basically at the bottom of this chart. So that's the overview. I know there's going to be questions. And you know, my my peers in the sub quorum can answer some of the questions more broadly. But big picture we want to strengthen [6:02:51 PM] emergency response ems and cat. We want to improve our parks maintenance. We want to take care of our city employees, and we want to improve wildfire mitigation without cutting so deeply into zo and other essential programs. >> Councilmember, before I go to people that are signed up to ask questions, I just want to make sure I'm clear on something. On the reducing funding for imagine Austin, I heard you say that you reduce that by 2 million. You're the one of the versions that I had before had it at 2 million. The version I was just handed has it at 1 million. What number are we dealing with? >> Okay. My apologies. I think at the manager's recommendation, we have removed that to reduce that to $1 million. Thank you for the clarification. >> Councilmember alter. >> Thank you very much. I wanted to just ask financial [6:03:52 PM] staff to get some clarity on a couple of these new items. The I'm just going to start towards the top. The wildfire mitigation with those dollars are those funding contracted positions or would those fund new ftes? To do this work? I see chief baker working his way down. >> Joel baker, Austin fire chief councilmember, alter that wildfire mitigation. I have a list here. To start with. It is [6:04:54 PM] to fund advertisement for billboards for various advertisement initiative to to help us identify wildfire hazards in various communities, as well as various softwares. Our annual fire aside software, along with scheduling software to help us schedule wui inspection, as well as the structural initiative zone evaluation. I mean, yeah, evaluation also provide public safety services. It's a central database sharing platform for awareness for first responder agency. Various agencies that we use also to help us get five shelters and packs, which is the nfpa 1977 compliance for regional wildfire policy that we should have in place. It also to help us with wui co educational seminars, to [6:05:54 PM] educate the community and our other stakeholders about wui code and also for embers initiative zone compliance. That's what the funding is for. >> Okay. So I just want to make sure that we're not using one time dollars that then next fiscal year we would have an ongoing need for these expenses. >> That's correct. It's not for ftes anything of that nature. >> Okay. Thank you very much. That's very helpful. Appreciate it. Moving on to imagine Austin, the reduction is listed in the ongoing. Should that be one time because it's a one time cip transfer. >> Yes. Those are one time okay. >> Just want to confirm on the vacancy savings. As my understanding, since this is kind of this would be up to the manager to implement. But essentially in practicality [6:06:55 PM] what this would look like is if a position, let's say right now, when you calculate your vacancy savings, you think that a position might be open for three months and so you fund nine months worth. But to do this, you might say, all right, we're going to hold that position open for 5 or 6 months and then fill it so that there is a savings achieved in various departments. Is that a kind of accurate way how this would be implemented? >> Yes, that is accurate. >> Okay. And that would be, as it's mentioned citywide, there's no no requirement in this that it would be for a specific department. >> It's listed as citywide. The savings from any vacancies in other funds. Enterprise funds cannot be used for the general fund. So we would primarily look at general fund and support services fund. >> Okay. >> Sorry. >> Yeah. >> With the stipulation for [6:07:56 PM] vacant positions that have been vacant for more than two years. >> I see the manager shaking his head. So I. >> Manager thank you. So. That I think is what the note say. And I think the intention was to look at vacancies that were two years or more. And as I think I described in conversation, those types of vacancies that are two years or more are already accounted for in our normal salary savings or vacancy savings as we look annually, because that is either a choice and or what has consistently happened, given the types of positions and the difficulty to fill them. Those costs, as I understand it, are already accounted for. No different than your example, councilmember alter of something that normally takes two months to fill, that we may actually want to extend to five. What's calculated in the current vacancy savings would [6:08:56 PM] probably be the normative three months. So as I indicated, the norm and how that's grossed up across the city, whether general fund or not is the number, I think Ed kind of walked through an example of. And so my understanding and my intention would be something different, as you described, would have to happen to realize additional savings that are not currently accounted for. And that would mean to extend the length of what is normal, whether it's always been vacant for two years, or if there's one that's been vacant for one year, that would have already been accounted for in our overall number. So those numbers would already exist. So again, I think the note says that. But in practical and reality, we'd have to do something different than what we started with and what we normally see. >> Okay. All right. Then I see this transfer from the reserves that's also put in ongoing. Should that be one time? >> Yes, that would be a one [6:09:57 PM] time transfer okay. >> Going down. These are all in the existing 500,000 reduction for rapid recovered reduction in parks. We covered third party contracts. Okay. This Austin human resources commodities and contractual. Can you just help us understand what this is? >> I'm going to ask Susan to come up from the human resources department. >> Rebecca Kennedy with the human resources department. We've looked at our contractual [6:10:59 PM] and commodities budget and identified potentially $75,000. It's mainly coming from printing costs. We'd be looking at reducing our computer software budget, our postage budget, office furnishings. So we would be looking at just the things that aren't already committed for contracts and seeing what we could pull for the 75,000. >> And would those be ongoing savings or one time? >> It appears to be in the ongoing. So it would be a looks like a permanent reduction to our budget. >> Okay, okay. >> Very good. And then. The sir the cost savings from reducing contracts for facility maintenance, offset by increased in-house staffing for 441,000 facility management services, can Ed or somebody speak to what this is? [6:12:16 PM] >> Good evening. Gerald Alexander, director of Austin facility management. The impact of that would be five to almost 10% reduction in some of the service in our contracts, and also it will impact several different disciplines like hvac, plumbing, electrical, landscaping, custodial, security. With that said, then we have to prioritize which which things we don't do. And I'll give you an example, like right now we're doing the navigation center, that security I that's a security. So that's contracted landscaping. We do landscaping for the fire department. I don't have landscapers. Right. So those are the things that that will impact going forward. >> And when it mentions that it's offset by increased in-house staffing. But I hear you saying is these are just maintenance facilities maintenance that we just won't [6:13:17 PM] contract for to achieve the savings. >> I don't have, I don't have landscape, I don't have any landscaping. >> Okay. >> Right. So I'll have to contract that okay. >> All right. >> Thank you very much. On the financial services reduce the budget contractual in the accounting and financial reporting program. Can someone speak to that? >> Kim Olivares director, Austin financial services. So the amount there was the the the staff recommended reduction in our it services. That is maintained in this in this sub quorum proposal that would impact a number of our current temporary employees, decreasing [6:14:18 PM] hours on the projects that they're supporting. It also impacts some of our consulting services for it needs. It also impacts the the processes. There's an effort to help resolve some. I don't want to get too like inside baseball in the weeds on terminology, but some various processes that support all of our financial systems, including most recently in. In most recently launched workday to help ensure that data is is flowing between those systems. So it's overall it has a potential impact on our ability to continue to support our financial systems when it comes to the support services, it does provide would probably decrease hours by about 15% amongst various temporary employees that we use. It's also would impact various funds that we have set aside [6:15:20 PM] for consulting services and legal services that we use to support across the organization. So it's not necessarily aligned to a single department. It's very often that a department will encounter a situation where they need legal or other consulting services to, to help them handle whatever that situation may be, and they don't have the funds to do that. And financial services often steps in to provide those funds to help them carry them through. So that would definitely impact our ability to continue to support departments across the org. >> Okay. So and then I'm. >> Sorry that 275 the financial the support. >> So that was the 275 on the accounting. And I forgot to cover the accounting and reporting part. I apologize for that. There. That includes budget we have for consultants that assist the review of our electric and gas rate cases. It would also reduce budgets for legal services related to review of franchise agreements. And there was also $170,000 in [6:16:24 PM] rent included in there that we use to help. That was already removed from our budget that we used to help, similar to those other consulting contracts that we, I noted, that were used to help other departments across the org. That is all the also a similar situation. >> Okay. >> I men to thank you very much, miss Olivares. I meant to ask it up top on the urban forest replenishment fund. Can someone just remind me how much is in that fund currently? How much would this million impact? And I'm. I'm is not a. >> New question. Okay. >> I believe it's around. >> 1111 okay. >> I think so. You can double check my math on that. [6:17:29 PM] >> And I guess while that is being looked up, I just want to confirm that this it this million dollars would otherwise at some point be used for TRE planting. Is that correct? That's what this fund is. >> Yes. >> Let me look up the language from the. Authorizing resolution. >> Okay. >> And I'm also happy to provide some clarification as well, since it was one that I advocated for. >> I'm I'm open to. >> Any wherever it comes from. >> Yes. >> Our our understanding is that this fund is an allowed use for wildfire mitigation, specifically in and around pruning, brush cleanup, things like that. So I don't know if we just need a clarification from staff. I knew that there was some equipment costs, like software, to make sure that wildfire risk is being assessed [6:18:30 PM] and addressed in a strategic manner. But my understanding was it was more about debris and pruning rather than educational materials, or maybe including educational materials. I'm not sure. >> Okay. >> The criteria manual states that payments to the urban forest replenishment fund may be used for off site TRE planting and maintenance, promoting TRE care and preservation, urban forest conservation and enforcement of city TRE protection and mitigation regulations. >> Okay, okay. >> Well, thank you for that clarification. This one's this one's tough I I'll. The goal I share the goal I think we need more for ems. I think we need more for cat and less harm to homelessness. I do have concern of moving $3 million or funding [6:19:31 PM] 3 million of this with one time revenue, which means next year we have to figure out how to plug that hole, plus the holes that we are going to have. That being said, there's a reason why we have a reserve fund and it's for. Situations like this. Yeah, I'm gonna have to think about it, but I appreciate the clarification. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Council member, can I ask a question? And the folks sponsoring this, I just want to make sure I understand. But I'll also ask the financial staff in looking at, for example, reduced funding for facilities management services. And it has an ongoing general fund, ongoing expenditure reduction of 100,000. But then it takes from enterprise funds. [6:20:32 PM] Would you explain how that works? >> Sorry, which number was it? >> Well, just I'm using an example. There are a couple of them in here. For example, if you look down. 1234567 lines, it says reduce funding for facilities management services. Third party contract for one Texas center. >> Yeah okay. So what we call our support service and internal services departments, they provide services to other city departments and to recoup their costs. We have cost allocation models. So their costs are allocated out not just to the general fund but to enterprise departments as well. And so what you see on the spreadsheet is reflecting that on average, about half of the cost of these departments are provided by the general fund. >> So about half. And then and then you double that for the enterprise fund. [6:21:32 PM] >> That's correct. Sorry. The other half would come from the enterprise fund. What. >> But it takes. >> It's double because it's reflecting the impact that would take place in the support services fund or that department's other fund, facilities management fund or information information technology fund. So the the full impact to that department would be twice the impact to the general fund. >> I see. Okay. Thank you. >> Can I respond to that? >> Sure. >> Certainly. Because I know the amendment that I brought forward that was specific to ems overtime. We worked with you all on the formula that is used to better pull out the portion that impacted the general fund. We realize that many of these services go across general fund and enterprise departments, but the amendment we are bringing forward, the amount, the total amount was really focused on impacts to the general fund. And so I would say, you know, for any of these services that go across to the enterprise and staff would have to share with [6:22:35 PM] this context if if there is a rationale why we should keep the enterprise portion or the funding to continue the enterprise work, I would be totally open to that. You know, we really focused in on general fund impact, given where we're at right now with the general fund budget, but certainly recognize that there is a formula that can be utilized to extract the specific impact amount to the general fund overall. >> Manager. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem. And so it sounds simple and I think Eric tried to describe it. And I was trying to share with the mayor at least my understanding of it. And so as Eric said, the internal service funds provide service to everyone. And so whether it's one employee, 2 or 10, unless the enterprise fund is paying for it specifically because it is solely related to them in this case, for these types of services, it's basically a [6:23:35 PM] shared cost. So in theory, the simple way to look at it is in order for the general fund to endure, let's say, $100,000, and in let's say it's a position, as Daryl talked about or contractual services. So if each position was worth $100,000, if you just cut one position, you would only get $50,000 for the general fund and 50,000 spread across the enterprise fund. So in order to get $100,000 from the general fund, you've got to cut twice as many positions. So you'd have to cut two to basically get a full $100,000. And so then again, that would be one position for the general fund and one for the other. And so I don't think we can tease it out the way you're describing it, because I don't think those positions are funded like that. >> The distinction here being is that we paid special care and attention to not impact full time employees. So these services are contracts either [6:24:35 PM] for consultant work or other type of third party services. So, you know, how does it how does that interplay work when it's that type of service. >> Correct. I'm giving you an example of the funding mechanism. So example is if they spend $500,000 on contracts, if you want it to save $500,000 in the general fund, you'd need to cut $1 million, because only 500,000 of that was coming from the general fund. And the other 500 is coming from the other funds. And so that's why you see, for the $150,000, the enterprise fund related costs are 300, which is double that amount. And so we were just trying to explain and share with the mayor why there were costs. Showing up in the other funds is because you have to cut that amount to get to the $150,000. The resulting impact is the other cost that got you that are newer and would actually [6:25:36 PM] show up in the enterprise funds, I think. >> Yeah, I guess I need more help on this because some of the services for, for example, maintenance facility, if it's across multiple departments and it's across enterprise funds, if that contract amount went from 10,000 down to, let's say 3000, because we're keeping just the enterprise fund, wouldn't we just reduce the scope of service for to account for the work that's related to enterprise related needs and functions? >> And I'll defer to carry them if in fact, it's more complicated than I'm explaining. I was giving you a general answer for how and why it shows up in other funds. If it's the position, it functions like that. Again, I'll defer to where the contract costs are and where we spend the dollars. >> So you see the savings based on the reduction of the function. So it's it's budgeted in the support services fund. And when you make that reduction in the support services fund, and that fund goes down $300,000. But the [6:26:38 PM] impact of that $300,000 savings in that fund is only $150,000 savings to the general fund. And because of how the allocations work, it is not only in very specific spaces is it where the cost of a service provided by internal services, that it goes directly to the enterprise department, for example, financial services has procurement staff embedded into various enterprise departments. That function is charged directly back to that enterprise. However, all the other procurement staff and financial services is allocated across the city because they support across the city. So if there was a reduction in procurement, it would be a $300,000 reduction in financial services, but it would be $150,000 savings to the general fund. [6:27:40 PM] >> Okay. >> Can I ask? >> It sounds like certainly the impact would be greater in what we're what we're proposing here. But colleagues, we really centered in on general fund impacts because we wanted to pay special care to the balance of one time costs and ongoing versus what we would need to pull from reserves. So, you know, if anything, you know, this just indicates how we're all learning more about the nuances with our contracts and services across general fund and enterprise. I wish we would have had more time to unpack this with city staff. This amendment was put forth as in response to the city's amendment, which we were delivered late last night. So we're working with, you know, 12 hours of work time here to develop this. And we're still working through the differences. And so just wanted to offer that context, context for everyone. >> Can I ask a question, mayor pro tem, real quick and then I'll. But when you were talking about contractual services, I want to make sure that I [6:28:41 PM] understand the last item on page one of this reduced funding and financial services for it staffing and office relocation services. That doesn't include contractual, right? >> Right. Okay. Because the relocation. >> Yeah. That's what that's what I thought. I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss here. And before I go to councilmember Ellison and councilmember alter, I have another question. I want to make sure I understood what the manager was saying when he was talking about vacancy savings and how that works, because he said, you said we would have to do something different because and and let me say this back and see if I'm getting it right. Currently, the way this is worded is it would be to leverage vacancy savings for positions that have been vacant for more than two years. But as I've understood what you've been saying this week, if a position has been vacant for that period of time, we're [6:29:44 PM] already not putting money into that. So there's not a savings there. If you say we're going to try to do it from vacancy savings for something that's two years, is that correct? >> Yes. We already adjust the vacancy savings requirement, knowing that there's a long term vacancy that we have. >> So if we were going to say if we were going to have vacancy savings, it would have to be for positions that have been open. As the manager seemed to indicate, three months, two months, three months, something like that. And you manager, you indicated you would have to do something different. I'm not sure I completely understood what it is you would have to do different to our. And my question is two parts to it. What does that do to our our staffing of people? If we've got a two month or three month and we have to extend that, what does that do to our workforce and our ability to recruit people for that workforce? And what does it do to the work that's being done [6:30:45 PM] in those areas? >> So speaking specifically to what would need to change or what would be different? And thank you for asking the question. We would have to, as I gave the example request that in some cases we review and touch and understand any hiring, basically a hiring freeze or chill for positions or a justification for why you want to fill it and extend the normal time that we typically have granted and or we assume for that vacancy to exist. And so again, as an example, if in fact, a normal turnaround time is 2 or 3 months, we may say, okay, but I need you to hold that for two additional months, or you know what, you need to go ahead and fill that because it's mission critical. And we do that on a selective basis, which again, we would do just to ensure that we could, I guess, stretch to the number at [6:31:45 PM] some point throughout the year. And so it would mean an intervention would have to happen. And it may show up differently depending on size of the department, what the position was. We just have to make sure that we're working with hr and the directors to understand and make the request right up front that we do something different and, you know, create processes that would allow us to make sure we could ensure that we are doing something different, and we're controlling the speed at which things get filled. So, again, we would do our best to try to not have any negative impacts on operations. It would just mean more people doing more longer because there's not a person next to them and or a function that's being done by someone else. >> Got it. Okay. Councilmember Ellison, councilmember alter. >> I think my questions have been answered with with this conversation. I just wanted to make sure if we have things that are in this service, prioritization that we're selecting from that, you know, we're getting the full picture and understanding the the full [6:32:47 PM] potential impact of some of these changes. And if there's anything that's being shared between enterprise funds that could be better allocated with enterprise funds, I think that's a conversation I'm willing to have. >> Fair enough. Councilmember alter. >> I just wanted. To further understand a little bit, and I, I get that like, let's say it's workday, right? Where we share that cost. It's a contract across enterprise and general fund. And so that's that's a shared cost. But I'm going to oversimplify this. But let's say for facilities management they manage five general fund buildings and they manage five enterprise buildings. Are we unable to say just don't manage the general fund buildings and only have a general fund impact? Or does it have to be if we want to have the general fund savings, you can't manage all ten of those buildings. [6:33:51 PM] >> So a lot of our administrative facilities for sure are multi-departmental. So that adds a wrinkle to what you're saying. But we certainly could just not cut the grass at our fire stations and save money just in the general fund. Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor, I've got a couple of questions about a couple of different line items here. Is there somebody from planning I can talk to to understand what the current sunk cost is of our investment in the imagined Austin update. Or perhaps budget office knows offhand. >> Good evening. Lauren Middleton Pratt, director of Austin planning. And so the question is just how much have we spent to date? >> Yeah, maybe you can just even provide a bit of context for what this item, what the [6:34:53 PM] total cost of this item is. This is a $1 million reduction that's been presented here. So I'm just curious, how does this what sort of final product would we wind up with with this $1 million reduction? And what sort of the sunk cost to date of investing in the total cost of the plan update? >> Sure. So in the fy 24 budget, council approved the $3 million. And so with a $1 million reduction, we would go back and just rescope the project. We have a number of community engagement processes that we're looking forward to executing, that respond to a future places map process. We have a temporary staff that we are currently covering with the cip funding and a reduction just means a rescope. And so we would work with the consultant [6:35:53 PM] to make sure that we had a viable implementation plan of the imagined Austin update and something that the residents could be proud of and that council could be proud of. We do think that we could make the project work, make the the update work with a $2 million budget line item. >> Okay, that's the main thing I was working to that we still get a product that's that sounds like a game, but also be able to save what would be essentially a one time expense here. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. The next question I've got is regarding the economic development contracts, the third party economic development contracts. This is where I believe there's a change from reducing these from $110,000 to almost half $1 million. And I'd like to try and understand what the if the purpose of the economic [6:36:53 PM] development team is to help essentially create the economic engine for the city to provide future opportunities for potentially sales tax, property tax, construction, whatever those things are that help us project out in the future to have the resources we need. What's the practical implication of taking this down? Another couple hundred thousand dollars. >> Councilmember. Thank you for the question. Anthony segura, interim director for economic development department. The contracts that we are bringing down are the ones that we currently have with opportunity, Austin and the deck of chambers. And so they're partners with us in recruiting, but we would still be able to do our own in-house recruiting that we currently do and still work with them. It's just these contracts would be especially with opportunity offset reduced. >> Well, I'm confused because I don't want to. It sounds like the impact would be negligible. Is what you're saying on the [6:37:55 PM] actual work that the contracts would otherwise produce opportunity? >> Austin still does recruitments, of course, within the region, so I'm not going to be able to say that it would negatively impact the department or the city, because they're still going to do the recruitments. We just may not have as strong a partnership as we had with them beforehand. >> Okay. Is that the only thing out of the. It looks like three different items here that are listed would be adversely impacted, correct? >> We would reduce the chambers of the deck chambers contracts by a small portion, but they would still be working with us on our business and retention goals that we have set out for them. So it would be a slight impact. >> Okay. All right. Thank you for clarifying that. Last question I've got are about the urban forest replenishment fund. I think councilmember Ellis said that we've got about $11 [6:38:57 PM] million in that fund. What is the mechanism for replenishing the replenishment fund? >> I'm sorry, I was just clarifying with staff on, excuse me, the economic development reduction also includes the creative space assistance program reduction, and that would be a aacme conversation that is no longer in economic development. That was moved over to aacme. So I'm going to ask the director to come down. >> That would be helpful. Thank you. >> Good evening. My name is Angela means. I'm the director of aacme. The reduction that you see for our creative space assistance program would reduce our current program, which is the fiscal year 2026, by 500,000, leaving $1.1 million to be able to award around 18 spaces this year. The [6:39:58 PM] elimination would eliminate the program moving forward if it is a permanent reduction. >> Thank you. So there's a big difference between if it's a one time or if it's a permanent, because that would spell the end of the program. That's correct okay. And in terms of help me in a very layman way, understand what's the implication of not awarding those of reducing the awards. >> So this is for our creative spaces. And it is a, a part of our community where we provide spaces for our creatives throughout Austin. If we did not reduce, we would still just reward 26. So it's an approximately seven spaces that will not receive funding this year. So we would be in a good place at least to be able to still provide 18 awards this [6:40:59 PM] year. The applications are are open at this time, and we know that it is a priority for our creatives, so we will work with them this year as we go through this process. >> Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. I'd like to just touch on the urban forest replenishment fund. I don't know if we've got an answer yet for sure. >> The source of revenue is developer mitigation fees. So when they do a project that requires taking down trees, they pay into the fund so that we can replenish those trees somewhere else. >> And do you know roughly how much goes into that fund a year? >> I can very shortly. >> Okay. I know that last year it looks like we increased our output of that fund from about the resolution to like a little over $1 million. And it looks like this would be another year. We'd spend about $1 million out [6:41:59 PM] of that fund. So there's a question to say that I'm just curious about, about how quickly we're putting money in versus how quickly we're taking money out. So as you're as you're getting to that, my next question about that fund is just to making sure that it's how restrictive the use cases are for that fund. I heard chief baker say, for instance, we might put up billboards, which might be a marketing or advertising expense, I'm wondering, and the use cases that are listed there that we talked about, it was off site TRE planting and maintenance, promoting TRE care and preservation, urban forest conservation and enforcing the city TRE protection and mitigation regulations. So I would assume that we do have billboards. It has to be about one of those four items. Is that correct understanding or do we have more latitude than I think here. >> Councilmember Keith Mars, interim director, Austin development services I can help with some of the historical context of the fund. That fund for many years was managed by [6:43:00 PM] the development services department, Austin development services. So the the fund is a development exaction when trees are removed and they can't be planted back, a fee is paid into that. That fund is volatile because it's dependent heavily on economic activity. That fund did have a large influx of funding during peak development here. In the past five years. We have seen those moneys come down. There is a spend plan for that fund. It's currently managed still within within the city, and we work together with office of climate resiliency to get you the fund balance. Now to answer your question about the how the fund is used. So rules establish that there's there has to be a nexus of how those monies are spent. And that's why those it needs to be it needs to be. There's proportionality, but also has a nexus between the TRE being removed or trees being removed, and then a public good around trees. That's why you see things like TRE planting, wildland wildfire mitigation, land management, [6:44:01 PM] TRE care. As long as there is a nexus between those things and we have used the fund for those purposes over time. >> Okay, so it sounds like it's a bit more broader than I, than I read it out to. >> Be than just replanting. That's correct sir. >> Okay. Got it. That's all the questions I've got. So I'll look for whatever the whenever you're able to share the update for. The net in and out for that fund. >> So the the development fee revenue budget is 3.5 million in fy 26, with planned total requirements of 5.8 million. But as is just shared, it does fluctuate with development. So in 2024, those fees are about 7.8 million. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember alter. >> I wonder if I could get miss Middleton Pratt back. [6:45:07 PM] >> Bless you. >> Bless you. And I might have just missed this. I was listening in the back as I was running back and forth. The. I heard councilmember duchen asked how much money had been spent to date. Was there a number? >> It's a roughly one 40,000 140,000 to date. The imagine Austin resolution was just passed a few months ago, and so now we're ramping up with our consultant. >> And we, I assume, have a signed contract that would envision some of the other spending. But are we on the hook today for any money over 140,000. Like if we if we said. We're going to wait a year or two, do we have to pay any more money out the door or are we 140 in. And that's where we are today. >> We've encumbered 2.24 [6:46:08 PM] million. >> But I understand we have contracts for that. But are those for things that if we decide not to do, we don't have to pay. So if we cancel the contract today, can anyone come to us and say, you owe us $200,000 or $300,000? >> Assistant director Andrea bates has additional information. >> Okay. Excuse me. >> Yes, sir. We have recently started working with a consultant, and I do not think we have received an initial invoice. And so the amount of money spent to date reflects mostly the pre-planning. We have entered into a contract and obligated a significant portion of the cip funds. And the consultants have produced some billable hours that I think we haven't been invoiced for yet. And so if you were looking what you know, we have perhaps our most obligated to spend, there would be some additions above the 140. >> But probably in like the [6:47:09 PM] like $100,000, not not hundreds of thousands. >> A small, relatively small amount. Yes, sir. >> Okay. I just want to understand what the actual spend to date is. And I see. >> The mayor pro. >> Yes, because I mean, councilmember alter brings up a good point. He's asking if we have a clause in our contract that allows us to back out of a previously authorized contract. I would assume so, because how else are we going to trim 10% off of all of our social service contracts? So if you can please confirm for the record. >> I would have to defer to the budget office for their expertise or financial services for the expertise on how contracts are normally drafted. >> Most of our contracts do have a clause where we can, based on budgetary, budget, availability, make, make or back out of those contracts. I think we have to look at the individuality of them, but there's probably something in that contract that would allow us to reduce the amount of the contract. I think what Andrea [6:48:10 PM] was indicating was there has been some work done, not saying that they can't reduce the authority for that contract, but we would be on the hook to pay for whatever has been done thus far. >> Thank you. >> But it sounds like it's mostly service contracts. If we stopped asking them to bill or to do anything, they would stop billing us. >> And that would be. >> Just like a lawyer. All right. I just want to get clarification. >> All right. Members. Mayor pro tem. >> I want. >> To thank you. I just wanted to speak to the amendment that's brought forward by our quorum council members, Ellis Velasquez and Siegel. This amendment was drafted, as you all very well aware, in response to the staff amendment that is before us. And so there are a few areas in which we're we're still learning and working out with staff based on the feedback that they're provided. But I think this really gets to the the point of our amendment is that we we recognize that we've all shared out our shared priorities, and we're pleased to see that commitment in ensuring that [6:49:11 PM] we're able to improve and better our emergency services. But what we were not comfortable with as it relates to the staff amendment, was the areas in which it sought to reduce and cut, to be able to fund those shared priorities. So our amendment really is focused on looking at other areas that we can pull dollars for in order to improve our emergency response, to add more funding for parks, to add more funding for homelessness, as well as adding for wildfire mitigation and including key benefits for city workers. This also preserves the sobering center reduction that was made in the staff amendment, and staves off the reductions in rental assistance and rapid rehousing. And again, this really is just about finding other areas for us to cut. Certainly, we're having a really great conversation with staff on the impacts of what that might mean. We're open to further conversations and deliberations on how we might best reallocate our funds to ensure that we're able to fund our high priority services, but [6:50:12 PM] I just wanted to add some context to the rationale behind our amendment. >> Thank you, councilmember vela. >> Thank you, mayor. My sense right now would be to try and merge the substitute amendment with the staff. I kind of would like to to and again, I'm just the suggestion, but to try and kind of coordinate them because there's some cuts that I don't think are really feasible. And, and there's some other sources that some cuts that they left on the table that were in the staff, you know, in other words, I don't think we're, we're if again, maybe give staff a little bit of time to kind of work through both documents and come back with a kind of a consolidated proposal. I mean, I hate to, to, to, to pause [6:51:13 PM] that, but just to I, it's it's tough to track all the different changes here from our perspective on the Dyess right now. And I feel like if we took a little bit of time to kind of merge the documents and come up with kind of a version two kind of staff suggestion, we might be able to get there and get this done tonight. >> Councilmember Ellis. >> I just wanted to flag that our spreadsheet includes all of the categories that staff had. So there's nothing that they had proposed putting in that we reduced. We actually increased a number of those financial commitments and then found other ways to come up with those cuts that weren't necessarily cutting into the parkland and grounds maintenance as much. You know, there's some things we left on the table and there's some things we heard from the community they would prefer not to have cut. So ours kind of does absorb staff's original proposal. >> You probably respond to that. >> Thank you. And and I think just for clarity, and I think [6:52:15 PM] the work that staff has done and obviously has shared multiple times provided to you late last night, just to give some context, when we first met and shared our first recommendation, and particularly as it relates to this characterization of what we cut, the first amended budget was one to cut. That brought us down from 109 million back to the original baseline, where we kind of started. And then based on our best understandings, I believe, of what was prioritized in the TRE, we lifted up and pushed forward several items identified, particularly around homelessness as well as parks and and carved out from that additional amended budget an additional $7.2 million in [6:53:15 PM] those categories that we believe was what we heard and thought through priority without a lot of conversation with council so clearly noted. Upon sharing that, I think we heard from council, and I think whether it was the mayor and others around what we should have taken away from the conversation and where your priorities were as a council, particularly around homelessness, notwithstanding being very specific in the communication about we wanted to do some things with tooth or non-congregate shelters and public, I mean permanent supportive housing. We walked away with the priorities being homelessness and ems. I wish we would have heard, obviously, parks and recreation. It was an assumption that since we didn't hear and I asked the question a couple of times, did they articulate that they wanted to do more in parks in this second iteration, but it was not put forward as a priority. So therefore, that's why those [6:54:16 PM] resources, as well as quite honestly, the homeless dollars of our first amended budget in those key areas, we thought that if we were going to find additional monies, staff's priority or council's priorities were the two bigger areas that you illuminated, which were the tooth shelter and permanent supportive housing, and may not have wanted to do those other things. So that's why we reallocated those to those. Not stating if council would have said, hey, we want to keep those, but we want you to go and find additional resources for these other things in homelessness and don't touch these because we like those. That's the direction we would have went. We didn't get that guidance. So I just wanted to clarify the context of that and would say, going forward, if there is a clear articulation of what your priorities are and or anything we might lay out, we would love to just hear them that way so that we can then accommodate and find ways to meet what you want to get. But I just want to [6:55:17 PM] give some color to why that happened. And again, those things were important to us, but we believe that they were less important than trying to find sustainable revenues for the two bigger non- congregate shelters. And so again, I just wanted to say that because that was our intention, it wasn't to remove what we had added. It was really to try to get where y'all wanted to get. So I just wanted to say that just from staff's perspective, that I think David has done a great job of sharing with you the priorities and those things are important. But again, as we talked when we started this whole conversation, I think we were under the reality of we've got to do things different. We've got to find ways to make some tougher choices and to continue to do everything that comes before us without any sacrifice. In some respect, we took the prioritization that council shared with us last week, as that was your statement of that's what you really wanted to do. And we got to make tough choices and we pivoted. And so again, if we misread that, we will apologize in advance for thinking that. [6:56:19 PM] And so the clarification today has left us with you wanted to do both. And so I think this amendment and this suggested giving us some time to reconcile them together and figure out where we come back. I think that might be appropriate now that we understand that you wanted to do, in addition to what we had initially recommended. >> Members, this is the key question, and it seems to me that if we get past this question, then everything else ought to move pretty quickly at that point, because a lot of amendments probably don't matter anymore. So. I with if there's not an objection to at least the effort to to correspond these, if there's no objection to that, what my recommendation would be is that we give at least an hour for our staff to look at this and, and report back to us, which would mean, you know, let's say 8:00, because then I think we would be in a position if, in [6:57:20 PM] fact, this can be worked that way in a way that the council also agrees, then then it would make it would make sense. So unless there's objection, the council will be in recess until. >> I did want to comment in response to the manager. >> Okay. Mayor pro tem. >> Thank you. And thank you, manager for sharing your your thoughts and feedback. And it just really illuminates that, you know, this is the first time we're navigating this second type of budget process, and we're learning as we go through it. And us, you know, it's helpful for us to have these conversations with the dias because it really underscores the value of us affirming what we agree with and what staff is bringing forward and providing more direction and guidance on where we would have liked to have seen the cuts come from. And I certainly recognize that that was an area that that I, as a council member, can provide more of that on the dais as part of these public [6:58:21 PM] deliberations and just how important they are to the overall process. But I just want to share my appreciation for you and your team. We recognize all of the hard work they all are doing and know that us, you know, going through this process of cutting and reallocating and wanting to ensure that our priorities get the funding they deserve is is just that. It's just part of of us deliberating and just want to, again, share my gratitude for all the work that you all are doing. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem councilmember harper-madison. And could we change the screen so that we don't have the the flow chart up there? >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That means I can't see you guys. Yeah. I just you know, I'm so tired and I know and I want you to offer me this moment of personal privilege. You didn't tell anybody that I have this terrible injury, but I'm doing everything I can to sit up. You guys, we cannot sit here all night. >> Now. We're not going to. And. And that's why I say we'll be [6:59:22 PM] done by 10:00 tonight, no matter what. And. But my hope is that if we take an hour, we come up with a better result. And one that is of greater consensus. >> Mr. Mayor, with all due respect, if I may, you are the smartest person on that dais, and you've been telling us all. >> Night I could win that vote. >> Listen, don't play with me. I gotta tell one injury. No, what I will say is, you know, we're not going to get this done tonight. So we're going to all respect your professional opinion. You know, this is not this is not happening tonight. So you are as a chair as a mayor. Please just call it. >> Well, I apologize to you, [7:00:24 PM] council member. I very much would like to be able to do that, but I, I want to I want us to try to get it done in a way that there's greater consensus by the council that respects the work that has gone in by all the members of the council and by our professional staff. And I think the better part of valor is to take give them an hour to see what they're able to do. And if we decide we can't do it, we'll come back tomorrow. But I want us to try to at least try to get there. One of the ways that will be helpful in that regard is members. If you have an amendment that you are planning on offering and you've been listening at all to this discussion, you will know whether your amendment is likely to be needed or wanted or necessary. So keep that in mind, because you may come back and ask me to pull your amendment and that would speed things up as well. So, councilmember harper-madison, I appreciate very much the situation you're in, but I'm going to try to get us to a to a vote tonight with that. >> I appreciate you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. That being said, we're in recess until 8:00. It [7:01:26 PM] is 7:01 P.M. [8:12:54 PM] Hey there, council chambers. Just checking in. Can you hear me? Okay. >> We can hear you, hear you and see you. Thank you, council member. >> Thank you sir. [8:23:14 PM] >> But when did we get it? Really? Okay. I'm. I need a how many know that was for keeping. You? [8:24:16 PM] What about the. Tell me about one more. [8:26:50 PM] Okay. I think. [8:29:20 PM] >> Folks, we're waiting on some things to be printed out, and and we'll we'll be back just so that you'll know what's going to happen. Council member Siegel had the substitute motion. Although he explained his motion and we discussed it and debated it and did what what what you witnessed. But he never made a motion. And so there's not a motion on the floor to substitute. I will tell you that what I anticipate is going to happen is that we are going to have a proposed substitute motion. It will be a staff substitute, but we will make a motion to utilize version two of the staff amendment, and it'll be a substitute motion to the, the, the motion that we've been looking to amend. So just now I know you all were sitting there wondering what we were going to do. So I thought I'd just share that with you. So now debate that. Yeah. And I will [8:30:25 PM] recognize council member Siegel so he can make a motion there. I'm told by the manager they're printing it right now. I anticipate somebody's going to disagree with what I just said. So just feel free to come up. [8:37:10 PM] >> And. >> Thank you. >> Good back to you. Thank you. I appreciate that copy. >> Y'all let me know when you're ready. >> Yes. >> Are you ready? Director Lang, are you ready? Okay. Okay. Good [8:38:12 PM] evening everybody. It's 838. And on November 20th, 2025. And I'll call the Austin city council back to order. When we took a break, the break that we took was we had been discussing a potential substitute motion that was laid out by council member Siegel, and there had been discussion and questions and some debate on that. Councilmember Siegel never made a motion to substitute that amendment for the staff amendment that was made, that was brought forward so we don't have to withdraw or table any motion in that regard. We now have in front of us an exhibit E, which is labeled exhibit E, final staff amendments as of 8 P.M. 1120 at the bottom of the page. Members. It is a five page document. And I'm going to [8:39:13 PM] ask the financial staff to describe this for us. When we broke, it was we they they were going back to to work on whether they were able to synchronize or correspond the potential substitute motion that had been laid out with their proposed amendment. And so I'll turn it over to the director to give us a description. >> Thank you. Mayor. Staff heard you all loud and clear, and we went back and worked on how do we combine the two amendments into one that shows and funds the priorities that this council has, and I will walk through the changes that were that are in front of us. The first is the decrease in the general fund by 900,000. In order to fund those items [8:40:16 PM] through the hope fund by 900,000, we will be reducing the. Original reduction from the sobering center so that the sobering center is fully funded at 2 million. At $3 million. Then we are going to reduce the job training, the reentry workforce training at $500,000, reducing rapid rehousing by $500,000, reducing funding for bridge shelters by 250,000, reducing landlord engagement by 600,000. Reducing our homeless diversion by 500,000. Delaying the five new positions in [8:41:18 PM] forensic science. We are fully funding 15 positions for park ground maintenance, reducing the funding for parks, athletic athletic fields at 375,000. We are going to be reducing the funding for third party contracts for facilities management at 100,000, as well as reductions to financial services for it staffing at 150. The general fund transfer to the housing trust fund will be reduced at 1.2 $1.1 million, and then there will be a reduction in the housing trust fund for $539,000 for to eliminate the tax and estate planning pilot. We will then reduce the housing trust fund $600,000 for the emergency rental assistance, giving that funding $3 million. Total funding for fiscal year 26. [8:42:21 PM] Reduce the third party contracts and economic development. A total $220,000 reduction for a $110 $110,000 impact to the general fund. We will reduce the planning cip. This is one time funding for $1.5 million into the general fund, also, reducing human resources, commodity and contractual for $75,000. The total reduction is $151,000. Facilities management will have a reduction in their contracts for facilities management. Total $882,000 for a $441,000 reduction to the general fund, and then contractual and commodities and financial services at $270,000 to the support services fund, impacting the general fund $135,000, $550,000 and financial services reductions for support services with a [8:43:22 PM] general fund impact of $275,000. We will be removing the planning position one planning positions for $100,000 savings to the general fund contracts across the general fund. So we're looking at our software contracts, the work that we plan on, the savings we can anticipate receiving through our it optimization, the $406,000 that would allow for funding for non-congregate shelters at 2.9 million permanent supportive housing, 202,000 in the general fund, and 2 million in the housing trust fund. Emergency ems overtime at $3 million Escott $2.1 million. Child advocacy at $120,000. Food pantries $150,000, as well as home delivery meals for older adults [8:44:22 PM] 100,000. Bad weather pay stipend 152,000. Dental benefits for part time temporary employees 120,000. Emergency vet services 100,000. We will be increasing the funding for wildfire through the fire urban forest replenishment fund at $1 million. And then there's the staff amendment to reduce D five budget by $71,000, to increase the auditor's office by that same amount. Those are the staff amendments that we are recommending for the fiscal year 26 budget members. >> Councilmember Velasquez, do you have a question? Okay. Any questions? Yes. Councilmember alter. >> Has confirmed a staff recommendation. 17 is the 1.51 time revenue. >> That is one time. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And and I'd like to confirm that the workforce savings that we saw in the potential substitute motion that we [8:45:23 PM] discussed, that's not included in here as part of any reductions or savings. >> Let me say that again. >> Yeah. Salary savings I called it workforce I apologize. >> The vacancy savings. >> The vacancy. >> Savings is not in this in this amendment. >> Okay. Very good. Councilmember Siegel, do you have a motion? Yes. I move this as the base amendment. Okay. Councilmember Siegel has moved to substitute what is labeled exhibit E final staff amendments as of 8 P.M. On November 20th to substitute this for the staff recommendation. Recommended amendment to the main motion. The mayor pro tem seconds that discussion with regard to the motion to substitute, and the vote will only be on whether or not we replace whether or not we we use this to substitute [8:46:26 PM] staff's exhibit D with this exhibit E. Is there discussion? Without objection, the motion to substitute is adopted members that will take a. That now means that exhibit E is the motion is a is the amendment to the. And I know this sounds crazy, but it is the amendment to the proposed amended budget. Now we have a couple of amendments that are really direction. I don't believe we have any other amendments that deal in numbers as such, but we do have budget direction. The first one we will take up is labeled item four, motion sheet one for mayor Kirk Watson. November 20th, 2025. And that is related to the efficient and [8:47:26 PM] effective use of government contracts and direction to the city manager city manager to determine a uniform process for procuring social service contracts and city distributed grants. I'm not going to read the whole thing. This was laid out, I guess yesterday. I will move approval of Watson amendment number one. It's seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there discussion? Without objection. Watson. Motion to amend number one is adopted. And for the record, councilmember harper-madison is joining us virtually. And she is also voting on these items. The next proposed amendment is labeled item for November 20th, 2025. Council member, alter motion one. Councilmember alter you're recognized. >> Thank you very much. This is was also laid out yesterday. It's having the auditor help us [8:48:26 PM] catalog some of our new and prior work on efficiency, and then help us get that information to the public. And I move adoption. >> Seconded by council member qadri. Is there discussion? Without objection? Alter amendment number one is adopted. That will now take us to item number four, November 20th, 2025. Council member alter motion to council member. Alter. You have the floor. >> Thank you very much. Also discussed yesterday, just for us to be able to work with our boards and commissions so that they can help us identify potential priorities and savings moving forward. >> It is seconded by. I'll second the motion. Is there any discussion without objection, alter motion to amend. Number two is adopted. All right. Members, I don't have any other motions to amend the main motion, but I want to verify that because with all that's going on today, I want to make [8:49:27 PM] sure we're clear. Okay. So. We've now considered the staff amendments. And that was the original substitute motion. That is now the main that is the main staff amendment. We've considered the council amendments to the proposed amended budget. So we have a motion and a second, and we're now ready to vote on item number four, amending the city's adopted city's fiscal year 2025 2026 budget, as it's been amended by the staff amendment and by the council amendments. Will the clerk please call the roll so that each council members vote is recorded? >> Mayor Watson. I mayor pro tem Fuentes. >> Yes. >> Council member harper-madison. [8:50:30 PM] >> Councilmember harper-madison. You're muted. I'm sorry. >> My apologies, Mr. Mayor. >> No. Thank you. >> Council member Velasquez. I council member. Villa. >> Yes. >> Council member. Alter. >> Yes. >> Council member. Laine. >> Yes. >> Council member. Siegel. Yes. Councilmember. Yes. Council member. Qadri. >> Yes. >> And council member duchen. >> Yes. >> There being 11 eyes and zero nays. The motion to adopt the ordinance amending ordinance number 20250813005 to amend the city's budget for fiscal year 2025 to 2026, as amended, is approved on a vote of 11 to 0. >> First time I've been a part of a budget cycle where we've all voted for the budget. >> Yeah. >> Well, we ought to quit while [8:51:31 PM] we're ahead. >> I can always change my vote. So. >> Councilmember duchen, yes, I did want to look down that direction. All right, members, item four is adopted on all three readings. So we will now consider item number five to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the budget. This is not the vote on amending the tax rate. We will take a separate vote on amending the tax rate after this vote, is there a motion to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the amended fiscal year 2025 2026 budget adopted by council today? Councilmember Ellis moves adoption. Is there a second second by councilmember Laine members? We have a motion and a second to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the amended fiscal year 2025 2026 [8:52:34 PM] budget. Is there any discussion hearing? None. Without objection, the motion to ratify the property tax increase reflected in the amended fiscal year 2025 2026 budget passes on a vote of 11 to 0. We will now take up item number six to approve an ordinance amending ordinance number 20250813001, by which we adopted and levied a property or ad valorem tax rate for the for the city of Austin for fiscal year 2025 2026. We are amending that ordinance to align it with the voter approval tax rate, which is what the city's tax rate is reduced to. Now, that proposition Q did not pass members. This will be a roll call vote, and the motion will include language provided by law. I want to note that while this language includes the word [8:53:35 PM] increase, that is effectively in reference to last year's tax rate, the amended tax rate in the ordinance we are adopting today is actually a five cent decrease per $100 valuation from the tax we adopted in August, and that was presented to the voters in proposition Q. The motion that I will accept is as follows I move that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of $0.524017 per $100 valuation, which is effectively a 8.4% increase in the tax rate. And the approval of the ordinance. Amending ordinance number 20250813-001. Is there a motion? Motion is made by council member Ellis. It is seconded by council member vela. Is there [8:54:37 PM] any discussion? Hearing? None. We have a motion and a second. So I will ask the clerk to please call the roll so that each council members vote is recorded. >> Mayor Watson. I mayor pro tem Fuentes. >> Yes. >> Council member harper-madison. >> Council member. We you're you're muted. Councilmember harper-madison you're muted. >> My apologies, Mr. Mayor. That's right I. >> Yes she's an I. >> Council member. Velasquez. >> Aye. >> Council member. Villa. >> Yes. >> Council member. Alter. >> Yes. >> Council member Laine. >> Yes. >> Council member. Segal. >> Yes. >> Council member. Ellis. >> Yes. >> Council member. Qadri. >> Yes. >> And council member. Duchen. >> Yes. >> The motion to approve the ordinance. Amending the ordinance, adopting a property tax rate passes on a vote of 11 to 0. Yes. Members. That [8:55:40 PM] concludes the three items that we needed to vote to adopt an amendment to the budget following the defeat of proposition Q. I'm going to ask if you want to speak on the budget, please let me know. Before we do that, I will simply say and not give a long speech, but I want to say the deepest thanks to our voters, the voters that engaged in this process, the voters that told us, I mean, that's the purpose of a vote. And we I said the night we passed this, we originally passed the budget that it was now time to trust the voters. I believe the budget that the budget amendment that we just adopted reveals that we trusted the voters. We heard the voters and we reacted to the voters. But I want to say thank you to the voters for engaging in in the election and for sending the message. I also want to say a [8:56:40 PM] deep thanks to the manager and his staff, the financial staff that's sitting here in front of us has done a remarkable job of of helping us get to where we need to get today. And we we couldn't do this without you. And we know how much work you've put into it. Yes. And I add to that the general staff of this city, our professional staff, is really wonderful and it works very, very hard and does a lot of things that nobody knows and gets relatively little credit for it most of the time. But even during a budget process like this, where we're trying to sort out what we do to make sure we can provide services well to this very successful city that we live in, the amount of time and energy and emotion and effort that you've [8:57:41 PM] put into it. I feel I speak for everybody when I say thank you to all of our city staff for the role you play. And then finally, I want to say thank you to the council. There's been a lot of work and and including tonight, the level of work, the, the, the, the discussion and debate has been very healthy and one that our constituents, I hope can be proud of. So I want to say a thank you to each member of the council and your level of commitment to this job. With that, I'll recognize the mayor pro tem and then council member Carter. >> Thank you. >> Colleagues. During this budget process, my north star was clear to support public safety and to protect the services that keep austinites safe, housed and stable, we prioritize ems funding to help in staffing shortages because when you're in a crisis, no ambulances should sit empty. We secured a 24 over seven mental [8:58:41 PM] health crisis response, because access to lifesaving care should never depend on the time of day. We funded food pantries for our children and seniors, and direct response to the longest government shutdown in American history, because no one should go hungry due to political gridlock, and we protected our most effective homelessness service programs because our unhoused neighbors deserve stability and a dignified path forward. We know that the tough decisions aren't over, but my commitment remains with the austinites. We represent the services they depend on the most and the workers who keep them running. Thank you to every austinite who made their voice heard to our dedicated city staff, and to every partner who has helped shape this year's budget. And a special thank you to the district two team for their enduring and endless support. >> Councilmember zo qadri, followed by council members Ellis and alder. >> Great. Thank you mayor. Yeah, I want to just kind of kick this off with just deep [8:59:42 PM] appreciation for everyone who's been a part of this process, everyone who's come to city hall to to speak on, on the budget, whether it was the first time we did the budget or this time whether you you voted in the election or not, regardless of how you voted on it. But just just want to thank everyone for being a part of the process. I think that's what makes Austin so special is people deeply care about the city, and they have such a love for the city. You see that through our constituents voters. You see that through the staff in front of us. So deep appreciation for city staff, for always doing the hard work, much appreciation to to council staff, mayor and council staff. You guys work your tails off. You guys make us look as good as as we do. You make Jose look look great. You make Ryan look great. You make everyone on this council look so great. I was looking at you two. That's why. That's why I went there. But you make me. >> He wasn't suggesting it takes extra work. >> No, no, not at all. Not at all. But but but really, I do [9:00:43 PM] so appreciate, you know, council staff for all their work that that you all do and want to thank all my colleagues, whether, you know, you were a part of my my budget, the first budget this year or the second, or maybe we weren't a part of any budget. But, you know, during my almost three years on the council, there's often things we all agree on. And at times there's things that we disagree on, but we're council always comes together is just once again love for the city, love for this community and making sure we do right by austinites. So I think that's what we saw. That's what we've always seen, in my opinion, when it comes to the budget or any item that we bring forward. I think that's what that's what we see when we comes to tonight's budget. And I know this council will continue to love the city and do the work for the city. So thank you all for for everything. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Ellis, councilmember, councilmember Laine. >> I'm really proud of this budget. I know there's a lot more items that if there were a few more dollars, that we would absolutely be able to spend in [9:01:44 PM] a way that served our public as best possible. But since we were at 3.5%, we said we have to absolutely make the most of this. We have to make as many tough cuts as possible to make sure that we can make each dollar stretch as far as possible. I think this budget reflects something that takes care of our city employees and our first responders, and we're showing up for them the way they always show up for us. So, like other folks have said about city staff, you know, no matter how big the task, no matter how long the work day is, we're always here to make sure that we get it done and we get it done responsibly. I'm really proud of the million dollars for wildfire mitigation that we're going to be able to do. I think keeping our public safe from wildfire is one of my highest priorities. As I do this work, ems is getting more money for overtime, and Escott is going to be able to produce more hours and make sure that they're available to folks in need when the moment comes. And we also got to do some work for part time temporary employee [9:02:45 PM] benefits. We weren't able to take it as far as we want to, so I just wanted to flag that although we were able to do $120,000 for 84 acute or 84 new employees that have been working with the city for 12 months or longer, this is a really important need. The actual cost of being able to do medical and dental for our part time employee, part time temporary employee staff is 2 to $3 million. It's something I continue to work on as we move through this budget now that it's being implemented. And I really want to make sure that we are leaders in providing the best working environment and the best benefits for our employees. So I'm proud of the work that's been done today, but it won't end here. I know this is a bit of deja Vu. Getting to do another budget in 1 in 1 year, but I think it's important that we go through this exercise and we really understand what we're up against and to make sure that we're delivering for the public. So I'm proud of all the work [9:03:45 PM] that has gone into this. >> Councilmember, followed by councilmember Laine. >> Thank you so much. I just want to start with, you know, this process was very truncated, as we all have experienced, and there are things that we wish we could have explored more, understood better and and tools we wish we had available. And and one of those that I just wanted to highlight here for a moment as we look towards our next budget, which is going to be, I believe, equally as difficult, if not potentially more, is we have to bend the cost curve and we have to do that across our departments, but we have to really look at our public safety departments. And as chief you, there are multiple chiefs back there. Chief Davis, in the middle, you talked about some of the reforms y'all are working on. One of the ones I really want us to continue to focus on is [9:04:46 PM] within the brydan report about how we can utilize alternative non-sworn response to help make that service delivery better, and potentially at a lower cost. I know you're committed to doing that, but I want to continue that work. I know councilmember Velasquez has also been working on this, and so through his committee, I would like to to continue moving that forward. But I also want just to, you know, that this this experience today didn't certainly happen in a vacuum. You know it. As much as we all love being here, I, I wish we weren't Wright. I, I fought for prop Q because it wasn't just a policy debate. It was a lifeline for many in our community. Neighbors sleeping on the streets, seniors trying to decide between groceries and [9:05:46 PM] prescriptions, families relying on public health workers just for the basics. And it would have let us take better care of our cities, whether that's the parks our kids play in, the trails we walk, the air we breathe would have strengthened ems, strengthened fire so that when anyone dials 911, that response gets there fast. And that's that's not politics. That's just the basic promise that we make to our people. You know, unfortunately, we have just too many people who are hurting, not because of bad luck, but often because of decisions made outside this chamber, whether that's Washington, D.C. Or right up the street. And some of those services have just disappeared overnight with the stroke of a pen. And when I talked to these families who are literally at a breaking point, what they have conveyed is, yes, they are [9:06:47 PM] tough, but they are incredibly tired. They're they're maxed out that even in this squeeze, they do value what the city does value. Our first responders, value our workers who keep this city running but have said you need to do more with less. And so that's why we have spent the time scrubbing every corner of this budget, justifying every use of our dollars, showing our math to the public. And and I think our budget staff has done that three times over now, but I just I don't want us to forget that this budget does have consequences. You know, there are real services that we heard about that people depend on that will go unmet. People will fall behind, people will potentially fall into homelessness. And that's not because they have failed. It's because their community just didn't have the resources to [9:07:48 PM] catch them. And that is really concerning. But what is really I'm excited to see is what we were united on, and that was protecting our ems medics so that we can keep saving lives. Holding the line on homeless investments, investing in mcas so that people suffering from a mental health crisis can get that help they need. And so going forward, we're not just going to talk about trust, we're going to rebuild it brick by brick with dashboards, more community oversight, greater accountability. And it's not going to be easy. It's not going to be fast. And on days like today, it will it will just hurt. But we owe it to the people of Austin to look them in the eye and say, we honored every single dollar you gave us. We fought for every service we could save and we never forgot who we worked for. >> Thank you, councilmember, councilmember Laine and councilmember duchen. >> Thank you. I also want to [9:08:49 PM] start by thanking our city staff and in particular, budget office director Carrie Lang, deputy director Eric Nelson, and cfo Ed Benigno for your diligence, your long hours of hard work, and making yourself available to us to answer our questions literally around the clock so that we are able to arrive at consensus as a council and move forward together. I also really want to thank my colleagues in our sub quorum and the rest of the dais for being open to collaborating, respecting each other's priorities, and also understanding the sacrifices that we each have to make in order to meet this moment. And finally, I genuinely, very much want to thank everyone who has engaged so actively throughout this challenging budget process. Your voices have been an essential part of our collective effort to remain on the right path as a city while navigating significant financial constraints. I am pleased to see that we found a way to fund child victim services across our entire city, including investing our fair share towards the Williamson county child advocacy center. I'm relieved that we are able [9:09:50 PM] to fund food insecurity assistance through food pantries at title one schools and home delivered meals to our seniors through meals on wheels. I am also grateful that council coalesced around public safety priorities that include expanding our mental health emergency response, keeping enough ambulances on the road to reach us all, keeping our eyes on and keeping our eyes on additional investments needed to continue improvements across our public safety agencies and in effective collaboration between them. At the same time, we know our work doesn't end here. My priorities remain clear keeping our community safe, addressing homelessness with solutions that are compassionate and effective, continuing to work and support our city's workers, and optimizing our resources across the board to make our city's operations more efficient, transparent, and responsive, while enabling us to continue to invest in accordance with our collective values. Moments like these, unfortunately, are a reminder that when resources are scarce, it really does take all of us government, [9:10:50 PM] nonprofits, schools and neighbors working together, coming together and showing up for every moment. Our hard work will continue, and it will take every single one of us to keep showing up and help us make this city the best place for us all to live in and thrive. Thank you all. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you mayor. I know it's been said by everybody here already, but I want to start by just commending our incredible city staff for all of their hard work. I know that everybody here on the dais, and really all of our staff are immensely thankful. We've got an incredibly strong team of people to work through this process because city budgets are complicated thing, and I'm learning every day about how to navigate that and your impressive expertise and a lot of dedicated work and long hours has made those discussions possible. So thank you. I also want to thank my colleagues on the dais for taking up the city budget again, with continued commitment to [9:11:51 PM] the city's priorities and concerns. Probably don't need to remind anybody, but I did not vote for the previous budget. I voted no because not because the programs that I preferred were absent, but because I was uncomfortable. How we were meeting this particularly challenging time. My sense was before this year, we wrote a decade of rapid growth, which led to a lot of expansion in our city services programs that may not have been needed in the past became vital priorities, and basic services also had to grow very quickly to meet with increasing demand. And we needed to move quickly and often say yes, and we're simply in a different place. We're in a different place than we were back in 2019. We're in a different place than we were two years ago. City revenue is increasing at a at a breakneck pace, and many of our services, while strained, are catching up to our needs. And this is a big change for all of us, for our [9:12:52 PM] entire city. I believe that this change did afford us this opportunity to discuss priorities, to identify savings, and to take an important stock of what's working and what's not. And so I think the passage of the budget this year marked a moment to reset and rebuild. My sense was that prop Q's failure showed how concerned local residents are when it comes to how we spend money here, and I believe my colleagues and I have taken a first and important step to restoring trust with those constituents. This budget strengthens public safety. It provides first responders with resources they need to protect our neighborhoods and communities, and invest in parks and green spaces that our neighborhoods rely on. It also refocuses money on homelessness initiatives, allowing those programs to work better for the people who need them most. And so now, from my perspective, it's a time to just look ahead. City hall has got to still work on addressing the structural deficit that keeps our spending under control. Otherwise, we [9:13:53 PM] may find ourselves back in the same spot as we were this year. And so I'm grateful that our city manager and other staffers have begun to already identify areas where we can conserve funds, and I look forward to expanding that effort with an audit or other studies that look hard at each and every public dollar and expense. It's our job to set up Austin for success over the next decade, and that won't be possible unless we continue to put this financial house in order. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. I'm checking on one thing before we adjourn, but I need to get somebody's attention. Members, if y'all just hang on one, please come up here. Hang on one second while I double check one thing. [9:15:45 PM] So when you go through this kind of process and you have as much change as we've had, I sat here and I want to be clear with my colleagues, I was listening to everything you had to say, but I got myself worked up about worrying about something. I just wanted to double check it. So everything's cool. They just wouldn't have been able to sleep tonight if I hadn't checked on that. The last thing I want to do is I want to say a special kind of thanks to Eric Nelson, who. Tomorrow at 10:00 or shortly thereafter, I'm not going to, but sometime in the morning he's going to become a new father. And. And so that's the real reason we're getting done tonight. But we want to say congratulations. We pray everything goes beautifully. [9:16:47 PM] And tomorrow night you're as tired as you are right now. Members, we got nothing else to talk about unless you all just want to talk. So, with that being said, thanks again to everybody. Thank you all. Without objection, this this regular meeting of the Austin city council is adjourned at 9:17 P.M. Thank you, councilmember harper-madison, for sticking there with us. Thank you ma'am.