City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 2/26/2026 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 2/26/2026 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 2/26/2026 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:00:07 AM] February 26, 2026, and I will call to order the Austin city council for this regularly scheduled meeting of the Austin city council. We have a quorum of the council present, and we are meeting in the city council chambers, located in city hall at 301 west second street. What I'll do is I'll walk through now the order of the day. So that everybody will be aware of what we're going to do today, and then we'll proceed in a minute. I'm going to read changes and corrections into the record, and then we will go to our consent agenda. We will have speakers on the consent agenda. There have been two items pulled so far from the consent agenda. Those are items 23 and and 38, 23 and 38 items that are not on the consent agenda. Those who have signed up to speak on those items, we will hear from you when we call up those items. We will then [10:01:07 AM] after the consent agenda, we will. After we hear the speakers, we will vote on the consent agenda. And then we will go to the items 23 and 38. Then we will go to items that are generally labeled non consent items. Those are items that come from council committees. So we will take up item 55 and item 56 members on item number 55. And for the public, just so that everybody will be aware, that is the proposed decision TRE. Council member Ellis had a number of proposed amendments that are improving that improve the decision TRE. And so what I'm going to do is I'm going to have delivered and so that everybody will have it, a copy of the one with the changes in it, a different version. Because what I want, what I think we all want is for the public to be able to look at one document and not have to go and say, oh, it was this amendment, that kind of thing. [10:02:08 AM] So we will incorporate council member Ellis's changes. We will have both. One that shows the changes in version two. But we will also have what is hopefully a final document that will be on yellow paper that doesn't have underlines and that kind of thing, so that the public will have a decision TRE and be able to look at one place and not have to look around. And that's okay with you, right? Council member. >> Yes, I think that's great and I appreciate all the work that's gone into it through the committee and and through council members input, and agree that the public would probably like a very clean version just so we can understand where it ultimately lands. >> And by the way, that will also include changes that if you go to the message board, you will see that council member Siegel had some thoughts. I reacted to those and put proposed changes on the message board as well. So anyway, I just want to explain that so when we get to it and so that the public that may be here to speak on item number 55, understand what the process will be. We'll also take up [10:03:09 AM] item number 56 as an item from a council committee. Coming from the public health committee, we will take up eminent domain items. We have a number of public hearings and we will take those up. Item number 83 is an item that requires a public hearing, and it was not on the consent agenda to begin with. We will probably go not probably. We will go into an executive session on item number 83, and we will take it up at the whenever we come out of executive session, we also at noon or as close when we get to noon, depending upon where we are, we will probably break for purposes of taking up the 12:00 time certain the noon time certain, which is public communication at 1230 or 1235, when the public communication is complete, we will recess until 110 so that we can have music, and we will come back, and at 110 we will also move [10:04:09 AM] forward. At 2:00 we have our zoning items. 2:00 is a time certain for zoning and neighborhood planning items, and we will take those up as close to two as we can. And we also have a scheduled executive session related to an evaluation of a council appointee, the city manager. So with that, unless there are questions or comments from the council, I will read changes and corrections into the record. Item number 46 has been withdrawn. Item number 46 has been withdrawn. Item number 47 has been withdrawn. So 47 has been withdrawn. So if you are planning to speak on items 46 or 47, those items have been withdrawn. They are no longer on the agenda. So we will not be hearing public comment on those two items. As I indicated, items that have been currently pulled off the consent agenda are items 23 and 38, items 23 [10:05:10 AM] and 38. With that being said, and again, unless there's questions or objections from the council, we will turn to the city clerk and I will ask you to call by item the consent agenda items that are currently on the consent agenda. And let's ask our speakers to come up for those that are here wishing to have your voices heard. What we would ask is, when she calls your name, she's going to call two, three, four, five names at a time. Please come down front so that you'll be ready. And if there's an open seat, go ahead and take that seat. And we just ask that you please state your name for the record prior to you beginning your testimony. If I stop you to ask you for your name. It's not that I'm being rude, it's just that we need to have that in the record. So with that, I'll turn to our city clerk. >> Thank you, mayor, for item three. I have Anita Shaw and then Jennifer Robichaux for item four. >> Please come forward. [10:06:16 AM] >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Jen Robichaux. I'm a long time Austin resident, a homeowner and taxpayer. I believe in common sense leadership and accountability. And I'm speaking against item four. Imagine waking up to your front door, exploding off its hinges, bullets flying through your windows, a gas line rupturing in your home. All because law enforcement used your house as cover during a neighbors standoff. That's what happened to Glenn and Mindy shield on August 6th, 2023. An innocent couple was handcuffed and detained for three hours in a police car while officers ransacked their home, causing over $23,000 in damage. They were terrified, violated in their own home and left to pick up the pieces. Glenn shield has shared openly how they spent two years calling city departments for answers and help. He said. If they had come the next day and apologized and paid for the damages, we wouldn't be here. But the fact that for two years they refused [10:07:16 AM] to answer any questions, the shields simply asked the city to make them whole. The city said no, claiming police power, immunity. Now we're spending $610,000 of taxpayer money, including this amendment today, to fight them in federal court instead of doing the right thing at a time when the city claims a budget crisis, failing to settle $23,000 in damages while approving hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend against these innocent neighbors simply doesn't make sense. Why are we taking this to court when it should be resolved outside? Why fight citizens who want restitution while passing the bill to taxpayers? Leadership owns mistakes, shows empathy, and does the moral thing which is voting no on this item and directing the city attorney to settle fairly with the shields. Thank you. >> I have Luke Humphrey on the line for item 18. Luke, are you [10:08:20 AM] there? >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you. And can everyone hear me? Okay. >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Okay. First, thank you very much for taking the time to hear me on item number 18. I am against item number 18 and we'll provide some background here. This on June 23rd, 2025, the city published this rfp for crane and heavy equipment operations training on August 7th, 2025. Proposals in response to this solicitation were received and opened. One of them is from us at train for the crane. My name is Luke Humphrey. I am the owner and CEO of train for the crane. And then on October 20th, 2025, [10:09:20 AM] train for the crane submitted a timely protest to this decision and on December 16th, 2025, we received a response from chief procurement officer James Scarborough that their determination was that they found no legal or factual grounds to sustain any of our protest claims, and I am challenging this committee on this decision, this in this agenda item, there was a file number 26, dash 1029 associated with this agenda item. It states in the additional backup information that this is a new contract and evaluation team with expertise in this area, evaluated the offers and scored crane tech, LLC as the best to provide these services based on project, concept, strategy and [10:10:22 AM] company qualifications. >> Thank you. Next, I have item 25 Elizabeth baker, Jennifer Robichaux, and Zenobia Joseph. >> Good morning. My name is Elizabeth baker, the executive director of the other ones foundation. I just want to thank council mayor pro tem mayor Watson, for for your support of item 25. The other ones foundation is deeply honored to be selected as the operator of the southbridge shelter. Over the past several years, we have refined and non-congregate shelter model that centers community dignity and pathways forward. We're excited to replicate that model [10:11:23 AM] to southbridge and partnership with the homeless strategy office. Tuf has already begun engagement with neighborhood leaders to build strong relationships and explore strategies to increase community cohesion. We're confident that through this project, we will show the power of true partnership and collaboration to improve outcomes. Thank you. >> Miss Robichaud. >> Good morning mayor and council. My name is Jen Robichaud. I'm a longtime austinite and a taxpayer. I'm speaking against item 25 authorizing a contract with the other ones. Foundation for bridge shelter operations and social services at the southbridge shelter, $2.7 million for the first year and up to $20 million over four years for 145 beds and support services for the first year. That comes to $1,400 a month per bed, roughly the same cost as an average one bedroom apartment last year. Prop Q damaged public trust. The other ones foundation was a prominent supporter. They and other [10:12:24 AM] homelessness non-profits donated to the campaign in an attempt to seek more tax dollars from voters to fund their industry, and residents. See the pattern, contribute to campaigns for more funding than secure massive city contracts. There were several other proposals from capable nonprofits, including incumbents as well as new and fresh organizations. Yet council is voting today to give yet more work to the other ones. Foundation, an organization that already holds over $20 million in city contracts and is slated for tens of millions more on this very agenda. This directly contradicts the proposed homeless strategic plan, which calls for bringing in more and smaller service providers to create a more inclusive and competitive landscape. The other ones foundation holds a disproportionate share of the homelessness related contracts. While they have struggled to articulate a clear, long term vision for actually ending homelessness, Austin residents want service providers who truly want to see an end to homelessness, not a self-serving system that seeks [10:13:24 AM] to perpetuate itself. Thank you. >> Miss Joseph. Oh, she's coming down. >> Thank you. Mayor, council, I'm Zenobia Joseph. My comments, as they always are, are in the context of title VI of the civil rights act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin. As it relates to this tough contract, up to $20 million. I would ask you, mayor, to recognize that it was approximately $4.7 million for the metro rapid to serve Samsung to apple. I want you to remember the $65 million back door deal that you did with the governor American rescue plan act funding. When I put in an open records request, there was nothing responsive to my request for that information. And here you are maintaining [10:14:26 AM] this containment strategy. I want you to remember that 217 is the bus route that was created by capital metro to get the people who are living there to downtown, I suppose, every 15 minutes. And then they changed it to 30 minute headway. But seeing as though it's black history month, I would just remind you that African Americans are over six times more likely to be homeless than our white counterparts. And I would just remind you that black people wait 60 minutes for the bus, and colony park and Craig would putting people over here at the other ones foundation is containing them. It simply keeps the homeless out of sight, out of mind. I would ask you to table this item, mayor, and respectfully to figure out how to run some type of transportation on palmer Laine between Samsung and apple. If people could get to the jobs, they would not need these social services. And so that is my request of you today. It will be repeated throughout, and I would ask you [10:15:27 AM] to recognize you need to be more transparent. Obviously, you and the governor had some communication and I would ask you to release that information. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Item 28, bill bunch. And then item 33, Zenobia Joseph. And item 34, Jennifer Robichaux. >> If your name has been called, please come forward so you'll be prepared to give us your comments. Mr. Bunch. >> Is this on? Yeah, yeah. Good morning mayor. Council members, thank you for your service to our community. Bill bunch, executive director with save our springs alliance, speaking on this item, which provides for up to $2 million for [10:16:30 AM] climate pollution reduction, that money would go to the transportation and public works department and specifically on messaging communications around low impact mobility options, getting people out of single family cars, driving too much. We definitely support this. It's important, but it's at the in the wrong department's hands. This really should be in your sustainability office, your public works and transportation department has proven time and time again that they're not really interested in reducing climate pollution. Exhibit a is the trying to destroy our historic Barton springs road bridge, where the embodied concrete that's climate carbon sequestration. Building a giant new bridge would encourage add [10:17:32 AM] travel lanes expanding from the current 3 to 4, providing for up to six car lanes in the future. That's that's encouraging people to drive. It's going backwards on public safety for bikes, pets and cars. And then we have mopac south on our table. That's not your project, but that one project alone would just wipe out every drop of climate pollution reduction, transportation demand management that this this effort would need. We really need a more systemic approach where everything that you're doing that has significant climate impacts has a climate impact statement. That's something that should have been done years ago. We hope you'll do it. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Do it now. >> Miss Joseph, I take it you're not going to speak on item 33? Well, we we try to go in order, as you know quite [10:18:33 AM] well. We may miss it from time to time, but you heard us call your name on 33, so please proceed. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council. I'm Zenobia Joseph speaking on item 33. I have here in my notes that it's $839,354, up to $3.75 million for street outreach, integral care. And the question I have really is, where are they doing this outreach and where are the outcomes? I see these homeless encampments on the ground, specifically where your staff put a bus stop shelter at cross park and Cameron road. If they're doing street outreach, is it to dismantle these encampments or is it to do something else? I will tell you that there's an encampment over at Gus Garcia in that area. What is the outreach look like in that area? And specifically, I'll tell you over on wells branch behind the B safe storage across from Sarah's creek, you'll see that there's a homeless encampment there. [10:19:34 AM] That's the city of Austin that put notice there at one point. But today there's actually a big brown dog that's off the leash. And when you go to catch the bus, they've removed the bus stop shelter. So there was a gentleman sitting on the ground two days ago. And so I am really concerned you're just throwing money at the problem. You're not actually streamlining what you're using it for. And these encampments are there if you go down rundberg chito vela respectfully, right by the shell gas station, by I-35, the people are right there in the gutter and they're right in the front. When it was cold, they were setting little fires every night. So I'm trying to understand what mental health outreach is being done, specifically in the rundberg area across from HEB rundberg. There's a gentleman who lives there with his dog. It's a black man and he has all his belongings there as well. So what outreach is being done? I would ask you to table this item as well, mayor, and to respectfully recognize that the [10:20:34 AM] outreach and the outcomes are not there. So when staff ask for more money, they need to give us the outcomes too. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> Mr. Joseph, you also signed up for 34, so don't go too far. >> Okay? >> Good morning mayor and council. My name is Jen Robichaud. I'm a longtime austinite and a taxpayer. I'm speaking against item 34, authorizing up to $16 million with family endeavors for emergency shelter operations at the marshaling yard, $8 million this year, another $8 million next year for a 300 bed shelter serving individuals experiencing homelessness. That breaks down to about $2,200 per month per bed, more than the average rent for a two bedroom condo. This facility isn't delivering good value to taxpayers, the city's 2025 data shows nearly 900 people were serving were served, and family endeavors forecasted 70% success when they took over, but only 26% exited to a positive destination, such as permanent housing, returning [10:21:35 AM] home or another program. That means 74% of what we're funding is is revolving door service in, out and back to the street. At best, that's a questionable track record of accepting millions of government funds with persistently low outcomes. Moreover, data from the last fall shows 60% of people offered shelter services don't even want them. Meanwhile, the site has become a hub for unhoused activity that harms the surrounding community, which ties directly into the homeless. Strategic plan still under discussion. The planned central strategy is more shelters, while ignoring the concerns of taxpaying residents who simply want to build a life here. We work and pay taxes for that privilege to our voices matter and we see a system that's broken. As the city insists on the shelter model, taxpayers implore you to demand genuine accountability from providers. Higher positive exits, lower recidivism, and a focus on what actually moves people to housing off the [10:22:37 AM] streets and out of community green spaces, not what keeps the shelter industrial complex going. Thank you. >> Thank you. Item number 34, miss Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor. I appreciate you reminding me. Thank you. Mayor. Council, I'm Zenobia Joseph, item 34. The endeavors contract. It specifies that it's not to exceed $16 million. Again, mayor, I just would remind you that camp Esperanza is within two miles of this particular area. I want you to remember you have about 300 people that are housed here, and specifically capital metro has not lapsed. The route 20 to serve these individuals. So once again, it is a containment strategy. I want you to remember you have the smart ordinance, safe, mixed income, accessible, reasonably priced, transit oriented. There is absolutely no reason why the bus couldn't go and serve this particular population. On [10:23:38 AM] convict hill, the bus laps every other route on convict hill for 2.9 boardings an hour. But yet Paige Ellis sits there whining about not having the transportation in her area. That same resource could serve the individuals that are at the marshaling yard. So the question is, what do you plan to do to get them to jobs? Once again, if they don't have transportation to get there, then you are exacerbating the problem as opposed to fixing it. And this amount of money could also be used. Once again. Samsung to apple. It was July 27th, 2020, when council and capital metro eliminated the metro rapid. But I will just remind you, mayor, that it was in 2014 the north corridor locally preferred alternative for project connect, told you that 58% of the jobs would be in the north corridor, Williamson county and Travis county by 2035. Yet you have eliminated the transportation [10:24:38 AM] there. And I see that you've eliminated item 46 as well. But I'm still going to show you my slides. And it is germane to this item because I would ask you to recognize the need for transportation at the marshaling yard, a fixed route. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> For item 36 brydan Summers. And is Carol Guthrie here? >> She is. >> Okay, so brydan will have four minutes and then bill bunch on item 36. >> Good morning, mayor and council. I'm Brian Summers, president of local 1624. First, I want to start by saying we genuinely appreciate the collaboration from city manager's office and from human resources. In an iterative process. We've had to improve what's coming before you today. They've been very receptive to things we brought forward. I think we're at a really good place. With one exception. There is an issue with the committee members that we are able to appoint to the consultation committee. As it is written right now, it would [10:25:39 AM] prohibit county any members from aacme that are county employees from participating on that committee. The reason that this is an issue is because our executive board members are elected at large. I'm the first president out of the last five that has been a city of Austin employee. So I will be allowed to participate. But the issue I want to raise is that this consultation process lives on beyond my term. It lives on beyond the time that this city manager will be here. And so we need to put into this ordinance now the ability for the president to participate in future consultation meetings, regardless of where they work. Our members elect at large who they want to represent them. If our city of Austin members want to be represented by a county member at the consultation committee, that seems like a fair ask. There is no ability for afscme to determine who the city manager appoints for their committee. That's fine with us. We're really essentially just asking for that same consideration. And so we are [10:26:40 AM] excited to get started. I think we're eyeing April 1st. That's no joke. To have our first consultation committee meeting. We were really looking forward to that work. We appreciate the collaboration we've had so far, but this issue is still unresolved as of this morning, and so I'm hoping we can make that change today. Pass this, pass it on consent and we can get started. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And, miss Guthrie, I understand that you did not want to donate time. Do you want to take your two minutes? >> I'm. I'm donating time to item 50. >> Okay. Did you want to speak on this item? Yes. Okay. Please go ahead. >> Good morning. It's been an interesting morning today. So I'm here to support item number 36. We are very excited about this. We look forward to working with the city manager and his team. I have had the pleasure of working with his team for quite some time now, and I think we can share much information in the future to [10:27:40 AM] help us collaborate. I hope that we are making clear why we need to have the president of afscme as a committee member, and the way to determine this is just to write that in that the president of afscme is a committee member. So I hope that we can make this small modification move on, get busy and take care of business at the city. Thank you all for your support. >> Appreciate it. Thank you both. >> After mister Bunge, I have for item 48 Carlos Leon and Zenobia. Joseph. >> Please come forward if your name has been called. >> Good morning mayor, council members bill bunch, just speaking as an individual voter. District five certainly support better communication, enhanced [10:28:42 AM] communication between our public workers union, afscme and the city manager. I but I see absolutely nothing in this resolution concerning transparency or outside third party sort of watchdog participation. Having enhanced communication can go too far, especially if it's in the back rooms. You know, we have public oversight of negotiations, communications with the police union. We see on occasion, I think that the relationship between afscme and incumbents running for office is too close, and challengers are not given a fair shake, and this runs the risk of having two close of a back door, closed room [10:29:43 AM] relationship between the city manager and afscme. So please amend your resolution. Require transparency, either public meetings or public participation by some public, you know, designated members and minutes and published so that the public can understand what's happening in these communications and what's important to both the city manager and to afscme. Thank you for your consideration. >> Miss Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor, council, I'm just speaking on the commission bylaws and that process more broadly. I just want to ask mayor for the bond election advisory task force what governs those meetings, because what happens now is that our information that's submitted is no longer posted. And I understand the city clerk has now decided she will only [10:30:44 AM] put the number of speakers and not our names. And I've asked Hernandez Nicole, who is the staff liaison for specific response, and I've gotten nothing. And so as you sit here deliberating and speaking about the lack of trust that the public has, I want you to recognize how these meetings are being run. And specifically, I am always testifying on title six, and I give them my slides well in advance. And miss Hernandez would not even put the title of my slides like she did for other speakers. So that's viewpoint discrimination. It would be helpful, mayor, if it was simply posted with the agenda. I don't want you to understand as well that the backup material is not posted until after the meeting, so it is a bit difficult to know exactly what they are deliberating on. They say they want to hear from the public. They say they want to know about the projects that are of interest. But yet when we try to give information, it isn't [10:31:45 AM] posted. So I think you can understand that's problematic. And I would also ask you to recognize July 24th, 2025 when you change these rules. You didn't post my slides even though the decision was made after the fact. I would ask the staff to go back and put those slides up. That's where the lady was pregnant, sitting without any place with her groceries at Gus Garcia across over there at doby middle school. And so I would just ask you to recognize that you're not being transparent with the public. And these rules need to be updated so that we know what to expect when we take the time to come and speak. Thank you. >> Thank you. Welcome, Mr. Leon. Thanks, mayor. >> José Carlos Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to item 48 issue. Still needing your attention, though. Your library commission met earlier this week, Kathie Donelan is still not director of Austin public libraries, though she was the top candidate for the position based on merit, fitness and experience. Instead, assistant [10:32:46 AM] city manager hayden-howard and city manager Broadnax allegedly conspired to install Hannah Terrell over Kathy Donelan in December 2025, despite knowing Terrell allegedly repeatedly and knowingly broke multiple state and federal laws throughout her time as APL's interim director, all documented in writing, with corroborating evidence officially submitted to the city auditor late August 2025 and communicated to them in writing early September 2025. APL rules two B, 315 d1 and 15 d2 still do not comply with city's superseding rules for public use of city properties or the law. Despite hayden-howard promising the city auditor five and a half months ago, she was working on them and would send an update when done. Not only has this travesty gone on two and a half years, council, but you've allowed hayden-howard and Broadnax to wrongly reward Terrel with a promotion instead of rightly punishing her by firing and criminally [10:33:46 AM] prosecuting her, because actions speak louder than words. Your inaction tacitly tells other departments to follow their lead, to ignore, disrespect and bully you because you're unwilling and or unable to hold them accountable. Part of why prop two voters communicated a lack of confidence in you all. Stand, therefore, having your loins girt about with truth and having on the breastplate of righteousness. Ephesians chapter six, verse 14. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. >> For item 49, Elizabeth baker, Marc Ramseur, Jennifer Robicheaux, bill Bryce, and Zenobia Joseph. >> Good morning again. My name is Elizabeth baker, the executive director of the other ones foundation. This item is a once in a generation [10:34:47 AM] opportunity to make significant impacts on homelessness in our community. It expands upon the successes of the Esperanza community and unlocks the ability for the shelter to grow from 200 units of shelter to 525, this will be the largest non-congregate shelter in the United States, serving more than 1000 people each year. Based on Esperanza's community model proven success, this project will produce strong outcomes for Austin's unhoused neighbors. Nearly two years ago, tuf was invited to apply for the home arp non-congregate shelter. Funding through tuf developed a comprehensive proposal to expand Esperanza and was awarded $48 million in state capital funds in December. This item is about leveraging that unprecedented state investment. In order to secure these funds requires a two year operating commitment to be available once the facility opens. We're asking this for the city. We're city's support to meet this [10:35:47 AM] requirement. It's important to note that this project will not rely solely on city dollars. This project is aligned with the strategic goals of multiple funding organizations, and with three years of construction ahead, tuf is actively working to facilitate a diversified, sustainable funding model. By the time the shelter opens in 2029, you did receive a document to support my testimony this morning, a letter written by tucker. Tucker Ferguson, district engineer of txdot that reflects years of intergovernmental coordination to make this project possible and clear roles for each government organization involved, I respectfully ask for your support of item 49 and for your continued partnership in building a future where recovery, stability, and economic mobility are truly within reach. Thank you for your time and your leadership. >> Thank you, Mr. Bryce. >> Thank you mayor. Good morning, mayor and council members, city manager I'm bill Bryce, senior vice president with downtown Austin alliance staff. Yesterday, you all [10:36:49 AM] should have received a letter from our CEO, Davon barber, supporting item 49, which I'm here to speak in support of, but also in support of items 25, 33 and 34, as well as the proposed strategic plan. The need for more shelter beds to get people experiencing homelessness safe and quickly under a roof cannot be overstated. Ready access to shelter and services saves money and people's lives in the long run. Passing item 49, as Liz mentioned, allows the city to leverage state land as well as $48 million in home arp funding that would not otherwise be available to create 300 units, in addition to the 200 units that are nearly complete in Esperanza one over the past decade, the other ones foundation has demonstrated their effectiveness as a shelter developer and operator, but also in the areas of job training and workforce development. Again, this allows [10:37:51 AM] us to unlock and partner with the state to draw down $48 million, as well as state owned land to create new shelter beds that will save people's lives. The downtown Austin alliance supports this item and we encourage you to do the same. Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Marc Ramseyer and I live in district ten. I've been involved with camp Esperanza for, I think, since its inception. And I just want I echo what's already been said and want to support and ask for you to support this resolution. Thank you. >> Thank you. Miss Joseph. Miss Robicheaux. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Jen Robicheaux. I'm a longtime austinite and taxpayer. I'm speaking against item 49, the resolution committing over $15.6 million in local taxpayer [10:38:51 AM] dollars for operations at Esperanza. Two, a proposed 325 unit emergency shelter expansion on bastrop highway. This unlocks $48 million in state funds for the other ones foundation to add units next to their existing Esperanza community. While the city is only funding a quarter of the costs, this project amounts to nearly $60 million invested in this facility. That's $185,000 per housing unit. These numbers simply don't add up. They make homelessness look less like a problem and more like an industry. This contract doesn't just support housing development, it locks in taxpayer dollars for a massive shelter expansion before residents have had any real say. No public hearings on Esperanza two. No neighborhood input, no chance for those who live nearby or pay for it to voice concerns. We're rushing to meet a state deadline, sidelining the very people whose taxes fund this. This reflects the deeper flaw in the homeless [10:39:52 AM] strategic plan it follows. The plan is one sided, shaped in an echo chamber of donors, nonprofits and departments, but excluding everyday taxpayers. The largest funders. Every new shelter shifts the burden into somebody else's neighborhood while normalizing homelessness. And the more we build, the more we attract nationwide homeless migration leadership means including the public, before committing our money and our neighborhoods. I urge you to vote no on item 49 and send it back for real public hearings and neighborhood input. Thank you. >> Miss Joseph. >> Thank you mayor council. I'm Zenobia Joseph. Mayor I would just call to your attention the mobility committee presentation I was given on September 28th, 2023, which said that camp Esperanza expansion was mitigation for I-35. That seems quite disingenuous. Paige Ellis didn't ask any questions about it when it was presented before [10:40:52 AM] her committee. But I would ask you to recognize that there's something not quite right about this, especially when you consider this is an industrial zone. So while I recognize you heard that this is economic mobility, I would ask you to recognize as well there are no stores there. There's no access to jobs. This is a shared van service that endeavor provides. And then here at camp Esperanza, it's within two miles of the 300 units that are already over at the marshaling yard. And so I would ask you to recognize the fair housing act of 1968 and to recognize that you are concentrating poverty if you want to gain some trust from the community, how about dispersing the homeless services throughout the city? West Austin gets the benefits but not the burden. And I would ask you to recognize the need to look at facilities that the city owns, as they did with your predecessor, and to [10:41:53 AM] recognize that there was a building in the convict hill area. But the white choice riders in that area didn't want it there. And so it is disingenuous, mayor, to continue to put all of the homelessness issues in one concentrated area. And yes, the rail line would terminate in that area in east Riverside, but that does not mean that they're going to have access to better economic opportunities. I would ask you to recognize as a model community. First village is a good model, but the people in wheelchairs wait two hours for the bus. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> For item 50, Stacy Schmidt, trey Salinas, brydan Summers, and Carol Guthrie. Are you still here? Yes. Okay. Donated time to brydan Summers and Taylor Nicolo. [10:42:55 AM] >> Good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and council. My name is Stacy Schmidt, and I represent opportunity Austin. And on behalf of the more than 400 investors and partners companies that work with us on economic development, I want to thank you for your quick but thorough action on this efficiency review ordinance opportunity. Austin strongly supports the efficiency review program for many reasons. The review process holds the potential to identify improvements that will greatly benefit all austinites through faster and more effective city services. The ordinance also presents opportunities for greater involvement and transparency for austinites and city employees on programs that are overlooked or not well understood. We also believe the reviews, just like any other report card, gives Austin the ability to showcase the things that it does really well, reinforcing the reasons why Austin is a great place to live and work. I want to thank you again for your work on [10:43:55 AM] advancing this idea and prioritizing the vision of the most effective city services. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Salinas. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is trey Salinas, and I'm here on behalf of the Austin chamber of commerce board of directors. We're here today to ask you to please support item number 50, the ordinance establishing the citywide comprehensive efficiency assessment program. The chamber has long advocated for efficient and effective city operations, along with accountable budget decisions, with transparency for taxpayers, and gives us a predictable environment that allows our businesses to grow. We want to thank you for your consideration of this item and ask that you pass it today. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Salinas. Yes, sir. >> Good morning, mayor and council. I'm Brian Summers, president of local 1624, the union representing city of Austin Travis county employees. Our union saw on the prop Q results that the city must regain the public's confidence as being good stewards of their tax dollars. Our citizens must [10:44:55 AM] feel that our city spends its money wisely, provides its services efficiently, and prioritizes our values. Now, I do not believe that the mistrust that we've seen is because of city workers and their performance during that campaign. We heard it door after door that people love their services, they value their city employees, but they had concerns about their tax burden and where that money would go. This trust issue is so critical to our members because as city employees, we rely on the public having faith in us. We need them to rely on what we do and have our backs every day like we have theirs. At some point, we're going to need a new tax rate election to pass, and we're absolutely going. We're absolutely not going to allow the negative framing and sort of attacks we've seen at the federal and state level attack our workers here. So afscme is proud to partner with this council, city manager and the city auditor to rebuild this trust. We are uniquely positioned to do that work as the people closest to the city's operations. But this does not come without risk to the workforce. Third party efficiency studies and the private consultants that run them usually set off alarm bells for unions. So as we do [10:45:57 AM] this together, we must remain focused on how we can provide more effective service delivery. This is not an exercise in determining how we can cut city services. This cannot be about balancing the budget constraints on civilian workers. I'm pleased that we're starting with the right framing. I appreciate the mayor, and I appreciate all of council being receptive to the issues that we've raised in this process. I want to thank the mayor and his office for listening to the concerns that we've had, and working through an iterative process to arrive at a result that gives us the assurances we need to move forward. I want to thank all the council members that worked with us today. As we begin this work, I want to take the opportunity to implore the city auditor to direct their efforts towards the largest inefficiencies that were already aware of and the largest expenditures. Please start this work with an evaluation of APD operations and the $53 million in overtime. Just last year, as the civilian departments were already undergoing efficiency studies under the city manager and reorganizations. And so my the message of the ordinance is that everything is on the table. [10:46:57 AM] All departments are on the table. So please look to the areas of greatest opportunity. First, we know where they are. I want to highlight two key components of how we can work through this together. One. The union can and will be a source of information and informing efficiency recommendations. I appreciate council members. Council member alter's amendment to ensure there's a mechanism for us to report this up. We intend to utilize that to the fullest. To the union must have a voice in evaluating recommendations and be included in any discussions on organizational changes. It is the right call for council to be briefed on recommendations brought forward by consultants that involve reduction in force, reorganizations or privatization of city services. Public oversight of these decisions that will impact our residents and citizens is so important to us. And those discussions being done here in the chambers and us with the city manager and our consultation agreements is critical. So lastly, it's the workers that will be assessed. It's our jobs and our departments that are going to [10:47:57 AM] be under review. But we understand it's necessary for us to come to the table, work with council and work with management so that we can improve this city. That is our part of the deal. For council members, your responsibility is going to be oversight. We need you to take each step seriously as you approve contracts, review reports and set direction. The success of this ordinance rests upon you just as much as the liability of this ordinance rests upon you. Please be cognizant of the costs and the outcomes of any organizational changes. But with that, we are excited that we can now all commit to work together and put forward a good effort rooted in respect for our city's workers and its services, so that we can rebuild this trust together. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Summers. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Taylor Nicolo, and I'm here on behalf of the Austin chamber of commerce to share our support for the citywide comprehensive [10:48:59 AM] efficiency assessment ordinance. We see this as a thoughtful step toward regularly evaluating how the city operates, how services are delivered, how departments function, and where there may be opportunities to improve efficiency. Establishing an independent, recurring review process through the city auditor's office with outside expertise creates a structured and objective way to take that look. During last year's budget discussions and throughout fiscal year 2026 process, members of the business community expressed interest in having a more formal and consistent way to review city operations. This ordinance moves in that direction in a constructive, forward looking way. For residents. This means greater transparency and confidence that city government is working efficiently and strategically for our city leaders. It enforces Austin's reputation as a forward thinking and fiscally responsible city, and for the broader business community. A supports a stable and predictable environment that allows our economy to thrive. [10:49:59 AM] We appreciate the council's consideration of this ordinance and the continued focus on accountability and operational effectiveness. We urge council to support and pass this ordinance today. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Continuing on item 50, Taylor Smith, Arbor, Marc Ramseur, Carlos Leone, Jennifer Robichaux, Jeffrey Bowen, and Zenobia Joseph. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Taylor Smith, and I'm with the Austin board of realtors. And we represent more than 16,000 central Texans across 16,000 central Texas realtors in Austin. We support the comprehensive efficiency assessment program ordinance because it establishes a recurring, recurring, city wide evaluation framework to regularly assess the performance and efficiency of city departments. Austin can no longer just grow or tax our way out of our financial challenges. [10:51:00 AM] We have to look at opportunities to find savings and also create efficiencies across the board. Austin residents fund city services through property taxes, fees and utility bills, and when systems and programs are inefficient, redundant or outdated, households bear the cost. As our members sit at the kitchen table helping clients find a home that they can afford in Austin for their family, they consistently hear that every penny matters not just at the closing, but over the long term. When it comes to property taxes, utility bills, and insurance costs. Item 50 is a measured approach to help rebuild the trust in the community that their tax dollars are being used efficiently and effectively. We applaud mayor Watson and council for taking a step back to develop this holistic framework, not just a one time audit that will lead the city into the future. Show the community that the city will continue to look for opportunities to maximize every value of their tax dollars. Thank you for your leadership and our and your commitment to accountability and transparency. >> Thank you. >> Good morning again, mayor [10:52:01 AM] and council members. My name is Marc Ramser. I'm. I'm here on behalf of the Austin chamber of commerce, where I'm immediate past chair of the board. I'm speaking here in support of item 50, the citywide comprehensive assessment program. I want to thank the mayor, council member, council member, duchen for meeting and and going through this. I appreciate it. I think from a business perspective, this is a smart ordinance. That's a proactive step towards strengthening Austin's efficiency and long term affordability by establishing a re occurring independent assessment led by the city auditor with external external expertise, we can optimize resources, streamline operation, and improve performance across all city departments, delivering real value without cutting essential services. I particularly like the benchmarking that's in there where we can benchmark our practices against peer cities. I think that we can adopt proven practices to keep Austin [10:53:03 AM] affordable, while maintaining high quality city services for our residents and our businesses. This should help control costs, hold property taxes in check, and ease the overall cost of living in our growing city. Cities like Houston have shown that how a targeted efficiency review can generate significant annual savings over $100 million in that case, through reforms that emphasize accountability without harming core services. Austin can achieve similar results in this ordinance sets us up for sustained success. I urge the council to pass this measure today. I believe that it is essential is an essential investment in our fiscal responsibility that will enhance the public's trust and help ensure a more prosperous future. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Leon. >> Thank you, mayor sohi. Carlos Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to item 50. You say you want public confidence resulting from independent, transparent evaluation of city [10:54:05 AM] operations for improvements. Independent, transparent evaluation of city operations for improvements that are implementable and sustainable, overseen by the city auditor. Though efficiency of city policies will be analyzed, holding city employees accountable for following those policies, city rules and local and state and federal laws is the elephant in this chamber throughout 2025, I showed and told you with evidence that since August 2023, APL's library use rules wrongly banning patrons from all library branches violated city superceding rules for public use of city properties, rightly limiting denial of physical access to the branch of the alleged violation, resulting in former director Roosevelt weeks and former interim director Hannah Terrell issuing hundreds of system wide ctns without legal authority to do so, violating our fundamental first amendment right to acquire information in person at the limited public forum library, I [10:55:07 AM] filed evidence based allegations of wrongdoing with the city auditor to hold Terrell accountable for her alleged criminal behavior and expose the need to follow city code 1-2 to revise those APL rules to comply with city rules. But city auditor deferred to assistant city manager Stephanie hayden-howard, who said she was working on those rules. Yet today, those APL rules still do not comply with city rules. Worse, as hiring manager during the APL director search, she appeared to ignore Terrell's transgressions to help city manager Broadnax appoint Terrell director over top candidate Kathy Donilon. Thus, until Terrell, hayden-howard and Broadnax are lawfully held accountable, this has no teeth in reality. >> Mr. Bowen, Mr. And Mrs. Joseph. Go ahead Jen. [10:56:14 AM] >> Good morning mayor and council. My name is Jen Robicheaux. I'm a longtime austinite and a taxpayer. This audit ordinance is a meaningful step forward toward the fiscal accountability and transparency voters have demanded. I sent detailed feedback by email, and I hope that you all have taken the time to consider it. Here, I'm going to recap the key improvements needed to make this audit policy truly strong. First, auditors must remain objective. The language in this policy undermines evidence based reporting by pre-qualifying recommendations. It sabotages the intent of an independent audit. Audits are diagnostic tools. They must surface issues and opportunities early without biased parameters. You need to remove constraints on the auditor. Second, safeguards belong on council, not the auditor. Remember, the auditor's findings are advisory only. Council retains full authority to accept, modify or reject them. True safeguards should be detailed in a separate council policy, giving [10:57:15 AM] council flexibility and transparency while preserving auditor neutrality and objectivity. And third, voters need their say to restore trust. A nine vote supermajority to amend the audit policy signals that council recognizes the audit as an act of trust building, but a supermajority provides inadequate protection, offering little reassurance that this ordinance won't be diluted or repealed in the future. Because because this council votes unanimously far too often. And I challenge you to prove me wrong today, an ordinance alone is too fragile. Only a voter approved charter amendment can lock in Independence without bias. By enshrining core principles in the charter, we add a safeguard that only voters can change. Council, I urge you to seize this moment, to lead, to refine the ordinance, to place stronger, to place a stronger audit amendment on the ballot for voters. Thank you. [10:58:15 AM] >> Shabani. Good morning, Mr. Mayor. >> Council Jeffrey. >> Bowen, I'm here representing myself. >> I'm a I'm a longtime resident of district eight. For many of you, you know that I felt very strongly about an audit. I spoke during the finance and audit committee based upon the ordinance that the mayor had provided. I found some very good things in that, and in fact, I was asked to look at that and meet with his staff on that. Yet when I sat here and I hear those behind me, they seem to have had a whole lot more influence or a whole lot more say so in this than the public. And I want to ask the question why this is not this is about our city and the taxpayers and the fact that you have no control over spending. The problem is that we we talk about, oh, we're going to have to trust the employees, those type of things. If they're bad employees, then there needs to be procedures and be able to do [10:59:15 AM] this. An audit will help provide this. I'm in I'm in fact in favor of an independent auditor, but he needs to be completely independent. He doesn't need the thumb of the council members or outside groups pushing down on those scales and not allowing the taxpayers to be able to see exactly what's going on. That lack of trust. It's still there. Whether those back behind me say, oh, it's there. It's, you know, there is trust. I don't believe it. I don't see it. And it's making it very difficult to say, yes, I'm really for this when honestly, we still need an audit to hold people accountable, departments accountable for their spending. And where's all this money going? How are you going to make this town affordable if there's no trust in what the decisions are being made? Thank you for your time and your and [11:00:16 AM] your listening. >> Thank you Joseph. >> Thank you mayor. Council, I'm just going to speak quickly. Mayor, to the July 2023 audit, which was data reliability. It said over half of the offices from 2017 to 2021 did not use the data, and departments are not using it to improve processes. I just want to show you the inefficiencies with transportation. I want you to recognize they're not using the data to determine what projects they actually implement. This is just a network. It's in southwest and central Austin, and there's no connectivity in north Austin, north northeast of us 183. Next slide. You can see here, mayor where you have all the growth in the north corridor, 425 acre development across from Samsung. This is east village. And I mentioned earlier the 2014 project connect north corridor locally preferred alternative study. [11:01:17 AM] And this is the actual information that I received it from. I want you to recognize as well that the growth is in Williamson county and Travis county, but the transportation department continues to improve airport boulevard and other pet projects. Next slide. I want you to recognize what rundberg looks like. This is specifically the 801 metrorapid. Stop. There's drug use. If you look real close, you'll see a little guy with gray, and he actually has his head on the ground. He was sitting up when I got there, but he took some type of drug and then he went out. But if you look at the sidewalk and I showed Mike Rogers, the assistant city manager, the difference in terracotta versus plain gray sidewalks here on rundberg north Lamar. But still, if you go down Cameron road today, you will see the contractor is still constructing these plain gray sidewalks, not mixed use development, not shared use paths. And there's no [11:02:17 AM] terracotta. Next slide. This is what nice sidewalks look like. This is Eric Bailey's pride. He actually has terracotta all the way to 46th street across from in-n-out burger. And he took pride in putting a bus stop shelter mid-block. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> Thank you. >> For item 53, Jennifer Robichaux. And then for item 54, Jennifer Robichaux, Jeffrey Bowen, and Kelly Greco. >> Let's change chairs. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Jen Robichaux, and I'm a longtime austinite and taxpayer. I actually support practical, community led projects, but only when they're transparent and fully funded upfront. I'm [11:03:18 AM] speaking on item 53, the resolution authorizing $6,500 from the district six operating budget for enhancements to spicewood springs park. Parks matter deeply to families like mine, and small, targeted upgrades can improve livability without imposing heavy taxpayer burdens. But we have almost no details here. The backup resolution is vague. It authorizes the $6,500 for unspecified enhancements to improve user experience and long term vitality, with only a passing reference to future community collaboration. There is no list of what's actually proposed. Without that clarity, we cannot even estimate the overall project cost is $6,500, the full amount needed to complete the work, or is it merely a down payment with additional requests likely to follow from the general fund or other sources? Councilwoman Laine respectfully, small expenditures like this are reasonable when justified, but fiscal responsibility demands showing the full picture before [11:04:19 AM] approval. Please provide the specifics. What exactly are the proposed upgrades? What is the total estimated cost of the project? Well, the $6,500 cover everything or additional funds anticipated and to the council at large, how can members approve the use of council office funds without these details? What due diligence has been performed? I respectfully ask the council to defer approval until these questions are fully answered and disclosed. Thank you. And again, speaking on item 54, I am Jen Robicheaux, longtime austinite and taxpayer. And as I said, I value our parks deeply. However, I'm speaking against the authorization of $100,000 from the district eight budget for an off leash dog area in circle C metropolitan park, which happens to be one of my family's favorite parks. The agenda backup offers almost no details on this project. The [11:05:20 AM] $100,000 is described as offsetting some cost, with nothing about the total estimated build cost. Who's going to cover the overruns and ongoing annual maintenance? The circle C dog park Facebook group, which was omitted from the backup backup, includes a 2018 cost estimate of $492,000. A lot has changed since then. What is the updated 2026 figure? Have we accounted for inflation? What are the design changes? Any changes in the current materials? February 11th Facebook post from Ed. Scruggs provides some answers indicating the design is underway for a one acre site by fall, with environmental reviews and a possible water line for a drinking fountain. He added that the long term vision is a phase two acre site with water seating, shade, lighting and landscaping. This all strongly suggests that the $100,000 is seed money. Councilwoman Ellis, respectfully, what is the plan to fund the remainder of this? [11:06:22 AM] Will it come from the general fund negotiations this summer, a future bond election or next year's office budget? And to the council at large? Why have these questions not been asked or answered before bringing this item forward? Council, I urge you to defer approval until the full scope, total cost, funding plan and ongoing maintenance are clearly disclosed. Taxpayers deserve to know exactly what they're committing to and how it will be paid for, especially when this may exceed the intent of the council member expense policy. Thank you. >> I'm here. Jeff Bowen, member of district eight, been there 35 years, well, longer than district eight. It's actually been around. I'm here to talk about the dog park in circle C now, be advised I have nothing against the parks. I have nothing against pet owners. I'm currently fostering two pets right now as we speak, but I have a lot of issues with this based upon the lack of transparency. I see this as a test case based upon y'all's [11:07:25 AM] decision to be able to move money from within your own budgets over to different departments for whatever projects you are. So I see it as kind of a if this passes, it's going to be maybe a quid pro quo. But when we look at this, miss Robicheaux was right. There was back in 2018, there was a budget that was kind of put together by, I guess it was for the city. It was a city document $492,000. That was 2018. What do you think those expenses are now? We have no idea. There are many. There's over $700 million worth of deferred maintenance in our parks. I would urge miss Ellis to make sure that maybe that $100,000 would be used for the deferred maintenance and the three parks, which would include not only circle C, but dick Nichols and also zilker. So the issue here for me is that we have very little transparency. What are the costs to put this entire process together? Not only that, throughout the entire process, [11:08:26 AM] from 2020 18 when this the Facebook group was started, there was constant reminders in there about the environmental issues. Less than 100 yards from the existing park is a dry creek, and all that water runs towards that creek. There was $25,000 in water quality ponds in that original budget. Yet where's the budget for this entire process now? So I'm asking you to put this thing aside until we get more information, more transparency on this entire issue. Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for consent have been called. >> Great. Thank you very much, members. That concludes, as you've heard, all of the speakers for the consent agenda during the process of the consent agenda on item number 36, there was a yellow sheet handed out that would amend item number 36. So I'm going to pull item 36 off of the consent agenda so that we can address [11:09:27 AM] it specifically and get the amendment in for for clarity purposes and not have any confusion about that. So that indicates that items 23, 38 and 36 are the three items that have been pulled off the consent agenda. I'm going to ask for a motion and a second, and then we will go to discussion and comments from any members of the council with regard to consent agenda. So please let me know if you wish to be heard on the consent agenda. Is there a motion to adopt the consent agenda? Motion is made by council member Fuentes, second by councilmember Velasquez. With that, I will recognize council member Siegel and then followed by councilmember Ellis. >> Thank you, mayor. Just a couple notes. Just on item 16, I wanted to celebrate the work of Austin water to address water loss through our capital improvement programs, including by replacing polybutylene pipes. No. Water conservation and reducing leaks is a big priority for the community, and this work is a great step forward on that front and on item 50, the efficiency [11:10:28 AM] assessment. I just want to reiterate my thanks to the mayor and the co-sponsors and our city auditor and his team for developing this program and for consulting with afscme in developing the revised proposal, which I am happy to support. Thank you, mayor. >> Thank you, councilmember councilmember Ellis and councilmember alter. >> Thank you, mayor. Today I am very proud to be sponsoring item 54, which allocates $100,000 from the the district eight office funds toward the construction of a permanent fenced off leash area within circle C metropolitan park. Approval of this item honors the residents of southwest Austin who came together more than ten years ago following a series of aggressive encounters between people and roaming off leash dogs, it became obvious that establishing a secure space for people to exercise and socialize their dogs was key to all users being able to safely access our public spaces through neighborhood meetings, moms groups, online advocacy, dog lovers and their families asked to enjoy a recreational opportunity long available to [11:11:29 AM] residents in other parts of the city, park staff did create a design for an off leash area, but to the disappointment of many, development stalled pending an identifiable funding source. Today, we're taking a major step forward by putting district eight funds to work directly in district eight when this off leash area opens later this year, southwest Austin residents and their puppies will enjoy an accessible, secure and interactive outdoor space that strengthens community and maximizes the safe use of one of our largest and most popular metropolitan parks. I want to thank my co-sponsors, which are mayor pro tem vela council members qadri and Velasquez for their support, as well as the dedicated park staff who are excited about the opportunity to create another user friendly facility for people to be able to enjoy and blend it with the unique landscape that is in southwest Austin. And I also want to thank thank the constituents who have advocated over the course of many, many years and supported this with emails that we have added to back up to move this project forward. This is not the first [11:12:31 AM] time that we've been able to use our district eight office budget dollars directly back into the district in 2022. I was proud to put the same amount of money into dick Nichols park, and with those dollars, we were able to resurface sport courts and fix the splash pad that is the seal slash dolphin, depending on who you ask in that neighborhood. And so I'm happy to continue to be able to put a little bit of money away every single year to be able to deliver big and meaningful projects for the district. And so I look forward to seeing the next steps. This won't be able to fulfill all of the phasing of what should be the entire vision plan of a dog park, but it will get us phase one and hopefully that will lead the way for other expansions to be able to happen in the future. So I'm very excited to be able to make this commitment today. >> Thank you. Councilmember, councilmember alter and councilmember Laine. >> Thank you very much. It's a dolphin in our household, according to my kids. >> The front and the like dolphin tale. But Cecile knows. >> It very much is a little [11:13:34 AM] amorphous, but sounds. >> Like created by committee. >> That's right. I just want to take a moment to highlight item 49. It's been discussed here today, but we are in a position to see the benefit of $50 million of investment from the state that we would not have, but for the work of the mayor. So I want to thank you very much for your dedication and helping us get that, because at the end of the day, we're going to see not only, you know, 325 people at a time, but that's going to cycle through people who are going to have four walls and a roof and a bed and a place that they can feel safe and secure and start to heal and ultimately move, get workforce training and into self-sufficiency. This is there are few things as critical as [11:14:34 AM] this that we can do. And so I just really want to to highlight the monumental nature of this, because it's not every day that we get this. And I really do mean it when I say we wouldn't have happened, but for your work. So really, thank you very much. >> Councilmember Laine, followed by councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. I have a couple quick comments. First, I wanted to comment on item five, which is the cat expansion. I'm grateful to city staff for bringing forward this item to provide increased funding for the expanded mobile crisis outreach team, which offers a first response team for mental health crises in collaboration with city first responders. Mcat helps divert people away from jail and unnecessary er visits. It provides support to stabilize someone in a crisis, and it connects them to ongoing care through integral care and other providers. Mcat is exactly the kind of response we want to see when someone is experiencing a mental health [11:15:34 AM] crisis, and we also want to see this type of response out all the way across our city to the edges. And therefore, I am pleased to see that funding for the expansion of this program to truly serve all of our city continues to be identified and allowed, and we move forward with that. I also want to quickly comment on item 36 that asks me local 1624 consultation policy. Thank you to city staff for turning this around so quickly. It was brought forward earlier this year by council member Siegel, and I firmly believe that the work done on this policy has helped us to arrive at a better place. With respect to item 50, the comprehensive efficiency assessment ordinance, and so also with respect to item 50. First of all, thank you, mayor, for bringing this item forward. I was previously listed as a co-sponsor when this item was brought forward in the last meeting, and I would like to formally add my name again as a co-sponsor now. And I will just say our constituents expect strong services and responsible [11:16:35 AM] stewardship of their tax dollars, which requires ongoing accountability across the entire organization. This ordinance ensures that an organization wide efficiency assessment begins without delay, is completed with full transparency, and occurs on a predictable schedule. It also recognizes the value of city employees as essential partners in identifying efficiencies and improving operations, while ensuring that independent audit with full access to resources as needed to deliver the most effective conclusions and useful conclusions as possible. Thank you to everyone who has been involved in advancing this effort, especially city auditor Jason hadavi, my colleagues on the dais who have worked together to ensure the input received from a wide range of stakeholders, has been considered and incorporated and asked me who has been and will continue to be a vital partner in this work. And finally, I'd like to comment on number 53, $6,500 from the district six office budget for springwoods [11:17:35 AM] park enhancements. This is, in fact, a test case of the ability of of an office to dedicate funding to a priority. There have previously been contemplated by city staff a plan for this park that includes as much as 3 to 3 to $4 million in improvements to increase access to all abilities, playscapes and related improvements. That funding hasn't been found. I have spoken at length and continue to believe that it is critically important that the city improves the structures by which it secures and makes use of a more diverse set of revenue sources. We can't continue to fund everything from the city of Austin. We know this, we hear this, and we need to be working with new partners. In this particular case, starting from a budget that had been contemplated between 3 and $4 million, we've already secured $1 million from outside of the city, thanks to [11:18:36 AM] state legislative rep William John bessy from Williamson county. I now am requesting that $6,500 from my council office budget be allocated as a means to seed private and community based donations. This is a way to bring together different parts of our community, to fundraise and volunteer, and be part of the process in improving this park, and it does fit in with the overall plans for this park, and I very much appreciate my co-sponsors on this item. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember duchen. Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you. Mayor. I wanted to briefly comment on item 50, which is the audit ordinance. This ordinance protects social services. It protects public safety and protects everything else. I think the city provides that we value. And my sense is that those services could be in real jeopardy if my colleagues and I don't act now. It didn't [11:19:37 AM] take much for city hall to find itself in its current position. It just took low growth. It took a modest decrease in sales taxes, and that was combined with some state restrictions. I worry that a more severe downturn could lead to a lot of painful decisions. It could lead to huge cuts in social services. It could lead to fewer police and firefighters on duty. It could lead to park closures and public layoffs. And I hope that doesn't happen. But my sense is that we would be wise to prepare for that. That's why I want to borrow an analogy from another space that we've tried to do a lot of work in over the last year, which is wildfire prevention and preparedness and the work that we've done trying to implement our wildfire action plan. I think of this audit as a kind of controlled burn, something that we routinely do in a targeted way, designed to prevent a catastrophic wildfire. We need to think about our finances in the in a similar way to ensure that we've got a [11:20:38 AM] process that's routine, that's thoughtful, and is intended to prepare us for what could be a more severe economic downturn or event by ensuring that we've got proper controls and guardrails, we've got visibility on performance, that we're spending each dollar as wisely as we can, regardless of the service or the project or the space. And that's a duty I feel like we owe to the entire community, and particularly those who are disadvantaged and depend on public services the most. So that's why I'm eager to support this effort. I want to thank the mayor for his leadership. It's also why, just like the wildfire analogy, the work doesn't stop here. We'll need to continue to be vigilant long after this vote. We need to work with the auditor to get regular updates and ensure that we're receiving audit recommendations in a timely way to make informed choices, and I look forward to that work. So again, thank you and I appreciate your work. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I appreciate it. I am going to try to not speak too long today, but there are a couple items [11:21:38 AM] that I'm especially proud of. And because they're connected, I'll speak about them simultaneously. So there's two items that deal with infrastructure and district one today. And it's one of those things where I hear from our constituents about, you know, failing infrastructure. You know, they talked to me about, oh, they haven't done any work on this block since 1951. And you think, surely that's not true? But the truth of the matter is, it's true. And a lot of parts of our city where our infrastructure is failing or was never installed in the first place. So seeing that connectivity with infrastructure leaves me very encouraged about the future of developments, of areas that are, I think, I think it's easy to say nobody lives there when you've never been or you don't know anybody who lives there, but there are folks who already live in these communities that are getting this additional support through infrastructure. So I'll move on to our efficiency assessment. That's item number 50. Oh, actually nope. I'm going to skip over to [11:22:39 AM] item number 51. The person who I'd like to specifically show a little bit of appreciation for is here today. So I'd like to add that I'm honored to join and item number 51, growing up in and now representing district one, I really do know firsthand that George Washington carver museum, it is long created a space and a place where the global contributions of black communities are celebrated by telling local stories and connecting them to larger histories and movements. That mission is very much alive in this moment as the museum, as the museum has served as a place to stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters of Muslim heritage month, our first officially recognized Muslim heritage month, and I want to thank you, council member qadri for bringing this together. I think it's really important that we recognize that somebody said today something that I don't want to push back too hard, but he said democracy is at risk. And I don't know that I believe that I feel very much optimistic [11:23:39 AM] about the fact that when when democracy is challenged, I am I'm encouraged to see people become emboldened to maintain our democracy and this body of people that represents the city of Austin, the 10th largest city in the nation. Just take a look at us, our diverse lived experiences, our democracy at work. It's supposed to be diverse and it's supposed to be all encompassing, and it's supposed to be inclusive. So I just really appreciate that this opportunity is represented from the dais as well. And then lastly, I'd like to speak to. Item number 14. So colony park, as you all know, has been large focus for my office. But more importantly, we had our state rep, Cheryl Cole, in the building today, and it reminded me that it was work that she did and that her predecessor did. So I will say that I'm I'm the current steward for the district, the area that [11:24:40 AM] represents colony park, but I'm trying my best to fill really big steps or big shoes. While much of this discussion around development has really focused on exterior projects, future library, health center, affordable housing all important, I'm glad to see a concerted effort to also address infrastructure. These projects rely on the infrastructure being solid. These water mains have a long history of breaks, and this project will replace more than 12,000ft of aging pipeline and colony park, including old asbestos cement lines. This investment is especially important as we continue to face drought and flooding across our city, and this project will help to preserve better and better manage the water flow in this community. The work being done is coordinated with improvements along Johnny Morris, including safety enhancements near Barbara Jordan elementary, which really matters very deeply to district one families and mobility advocates across the city. So I'm happy to see those happen concurrently. And then water roads and, you know, just basically all of our [11:25:41 AM] infrastructure needs, our utilities really are the kind of things that we can't have instability in. So I'm very happy to see that this foundational element to stabilize communities and perpetually stabilize infrastructure are happening. This project, it really does reflect a holistic approach to investing in colony park, not just what we build, but how we support the community for the long haul. I feel like infrastructure investments really say where your values lie and what your commitment is. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Council member. Council. Councilmember qadri, I forgot. Without objection. Council member Laine will be shown as a co-sponsor of item number 50. Now, councilmember qadri, you're recognized. >> I'll make my comments really quick. Just kind of going off of what councilmember harper-madison just said, how great the city is because of the people who call it home. I'm a bit under the weather the past few days, so I'm not fasting. So I feel I've heard I've always heard of catholic guilt. I don't know what that [11:26:41 AM] fully is, but I have a lot of Muslim guilt right now for not fasting. But you know, it was just last week that it was, you know, we're still in black history month. It was the start of Chinese lunar new year. It was Ash Wednesday, and it was the first day of fasting for Ramadan. And I'm like, what a what a just what a cool thing. And I remember growing up, it must have been when all the moons and stars were aligned. It was one winter where it was Christmas, I think Hanukkah and in Eid all in the same month. And I think that's just what makes Austin so special. Just the different people who call it home. And the fact that we get to celebrate, you know, black history month and we celebrated Muslim heritage month last year. So I just wanted to say those quick comments. I did have comments on item 36, but I know that's been pulled, so I'll make those later. But just wanted to. Boards and commissions are hard and real work. You know, there's still, you know, a lot of work to be done, you know, in the city. And I think our [11:27:43 AM] boards and commissioners make that work that much easier. So we just had an appointment for the Asian American quality of life commission. So I wanted to congratulate her on her appointment. And I think we still have a few appointments as an office, and I think some of my colleagues might have some appointments. So if you're in the audience or tuning on at home or you're going to watch this later on if you're interested in serving the city, there's a lot of boards and commissions, so sign up. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Members. I'll speak briefly on item number 50, because I think this is a really proud step for the city of Austin and Austin city government. It's a major step in an effectiveness, efficiency and innovation agenda for our city. We don't know of any other city that's doing it this way, where it's a systemic, citywide, ongoing independent efficiency assessment or audit. Never before has Austin done this. It's it's an interesting [11:28:43 AM] situation because it's both a back to basics and a modernization of local government. And that's really important because it arises out of a determination for us to safeguard public confidence, to assure operational efficiency with continuous improvement, and to to deliver the best value for the services that we as a city provide. And of course, this council is recognizing that we achieve that only through independent, systemic, ongoing evaluation of our work resulting in operational innovation and improvements that are real, implementable and sustained. This program offers conspicuous Independence and a concrete declaration with appropriate specificity of the work that's going to be done. Working with our professional, independent city auditor. And I want to say thank you to him. We've put together a best practices performance review process. [11:29:47 AM] It's anchored in those best practices where we're going to have clear minimum deliverables. We're going to have benchmark driven prioritization and public implementation reports. In addition to that, we've included the best parts of other recent local proposals, including how we use the auditor in order to hire an independent auditor, and based upon our work and our discussions and our research, we will avoid some of the problematic parts of other proposals. This ordinance is practical, effective, and it is unifying about good governance. I want to say thank you to all of the stakeholders and people of this community that have given input. I want to say thank you to all of the members of the city council and our professional staff and our city [11:30:47 AM] aditor who have played a major role in this. This ordinance will make Austin better, and it continues the practice of Austin being in a unique position of leading when it comes to issues like this. So thank you to everybody, members, unless there's further discussion, let me ask, is there anyone wishing to abstain from any vote on the consent agenda as read? Anyone wishing to recuse themselves from the vote on the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to be shown voting no. Council member Fuentes. >> Yes. Please show me voting no on item number four. >> Anyone else? Yes. Councilmember. Alter. Okay. Sorry, I just want to double check something real quick. All [11:31:55 AM] right. With that being said, no further discussion. The consent. Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted, with council members alter and Fuentes being shown voting no on item number four. Thank you. And thank you for everybody that showed up and spoke on the consent agenda today. With that members, we will go even though it was the last one pulled. I'm going to go to item number 36 next, and I'll recognize council member Siegel for a motion to adopt. Well, I'll tell you what. Let's go to public comment first. We'll do that. I was going to get I was going to get a main motion out. And I'll turn to the city clerk's office. We're on item number 36. >> O mayor, we called speakers already for 36. >> Oh, I guess that's right. I pulled it after the consent agenda was read. Good. If that's the only mistake I make today, we'll all be cool, right? Under those circumstances, I [11:32:55 AM] will recognize councilmember Siegel and ask him for a main motion. We'll get a main motion up, and then I'll go to councilmember qadri on the proposed amendment. >> Thank you mayor. Thank you. Mayor. I just want to thank the city manager's team and ask me local 1624 for working so productively to adopt this important and historic policy where the city will enshrine a collaborative process with staff leaders and union representatives to discuss the issues of the day and improve the management and operations of the city. This is especially important as external pressures bear down on our city, financial and otherwise, and as the efficiency audit moves forward, those reports will be discussed during consultation and that will make the efficiency process stronger and more effective. Thanks again to everyone who made this possible. To me, this policy represents hope that as a community, as a city, we can work together for the better of us all. And with that, I would like to move. Adoption of item 36. >> Councilmember Siegel moves. Adoption of item 36 second by councilmember Fuentes members. [11:33:56 AM] You have a yellow sheet in front of you that is labeled item 36. February 26th, 2026 councilmember qadri motion one. It is a motion to amend the main motion that was just made by councilmember Siegel, and I will turn to councilmember qadri for discussion and emotion on his. >> Thank you. Mayor. I want to thank city manager, his team, councilmember Siegel and his team and and the speakers today from from 1624. All we're doing here is adding a line that says, including the local 1624 president. We want to make sure that is a. A title that's that's kind of baked into this. Regardless if the local 1624 president is a city or a county employee. We think that representation is really important as that position is elected by all members, both at the city of Austin and Travis county. So I think it's a friendly amendment, and we're appreciative of everyone for the many conversations we had [11:34:57 AM] to get to this point. >> Friendly or not, councilmember zo qadri just made it a motion to amend item number 36. It is second by councilmember alter. Is there discussion on the motion to amend? Discussion on the motion to amend hearing? None. Without objection, the motion to amend item number 36 is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion, which would be to approve item number 36, as amended. Discussion. Without objection. Item number 36, as amended, is adopted members that will take us to item number 23. What I would like to do is now turn to the city clerk and ask for you to call on people who have signed up to speak on item number 23. >> For item 23, we have bill bunch and Derek biznik business. Sorry I messed this one up. Business. >> We'll let him. We won't we won't take it out of your time teaching us how to say your name. How about. >> These? [11:35:58 AM] >> Is Mr. Bunch here? Mr. Bunch? William bunch, he doesn't appear to be here. All right, Mr. Bee. >> Yeah, that works too, Basinski. Just. Just like it looks. >> Just like it looks. Yeah, sure. >> My name is Derek Basinski. I'm from district five. I'm here to talk about the agenda item 23 on the. I guess, the extension of the current system, the rec track, Vermont systems. I'm coming at it from a golf perspective. I know there's been some comments in your work meeting and also at the parks and rec meeting about the system's failure as far as scheduling. Classes for kids or just other things. I the system. I'm confused on why we're extending the system, because it just doesn't work very well at all. I, along with a bunch [11:36:58 AM] of my friends who golf try and the recently the the golf program went from a in-person system to an online system. They switched in fall for booking tee times on the weekends. And as you know, the old system wasn't great. This new system seems to just be worse because everyone has to log on at 8:00 on a Tuesday. In my discussion with people who work in golf, it's about a thousand people logging on at least every 8:00 pm on a Tuesday. And it's just like, can't get through. It's it's it lags, it logs you out. This is all these issues with trying to get a tee time. And then there doesn't seem to be. So I don't know why they're using the current system. And there hasn't been seems to be any transparency as to what that money is going to as far as the enhancements it's going to be providing. The person who spoke at the parks and rec meeting couldn't talk about what who else they considered or what [11:37:59 AM] other systems they were considering, or what exactly this was going to fix in the first place, or how it was going to get any better. So yeah, I'm just concerned about where this money would be going to and how this would be improving the system at all. >> Thank you very much. >> That's all for 23 members. >> That's all the people have spoken. Signed up to speak on item number 23. What I would like to do is get a motion on item number 23. And then I'm going to recognize council member Ellis, who had I'm going to recognize a motion to amend by giving direction on the item. Is there a motion to approve item number 23? Motion made by councilmember harper-madison, second by council member Velazquez. I'll now recognize council member Ellis. >> Thank you mayor. I have provided direction that I would like to add to this item. We had a very productive discussion at the work session on Tuesday. I had been hearing from a lot of folks, mostly parents, that were needing to [11:38:59 AM] sign up their children for some of the recreational programing, and also saying that the system doesn't quite function correctly. So that's why it came onto my radar that there were a lot of questions about why are we going with the same vendor if there are so many frustrations with the sign up process during that time, we've been able to have productive conversation with staff that there are some features and tools within the program that can be sorted out to help address those issues, but I still had a concern about the public being able to share their experiences, such as what you just heard from Mr. Basinski, who I don't know, by the way. I just love that he showed up and said he really cared about being able to make the program work better. So I'll read my direction into the record. It says the city manager shall solicit feedback on the rec track user experience, such as preregistration, registration, accessing enrollment and payment documentation, ability to complete waivers online and other common tasks, and feedback to improve the city's rec track contract and the rec [11:40:01 AM] track system implementation. This feedback collection effort should be primarily focused on the experience of parents and guardians who have used or tried to use rec track for youth program registration. To do this, the manager shall create a survey on speak up Austin directly. Invite rec track account holders to complete the survey. Keep the survey open for at least four weeks, and analyze and apply the feedback to improve the city's rec track contract and system implementation. The survey should include at least one open ended field question for feedback that may not otherwise be collected. The manager is further encouraged to seek potential focus group volunteers from the speak up Austin survey and conduct live user testing. Focus groups with parents, guardians, city staff and rec track employees to capture feedback on pain points and ways the rec track user experience could be improved. So I didn't want to inadvertently exclude a vendor that may have options that just hadn't been used. But I did want to create a more robust [11:41:02 AM] process for making sure that the end user is able to access the information that they need to do, including, you know, printing out documentation and some of these other tools that should should be available and should be easy to fix. So I'd appreciate being able to move forward with the item today with this added direction. >> So, members, council member Ellis, you have in front of you a sheet that she's provided that says council member Paige, item number 23 parks rec track contract February 26th, 2026 council meeting. And she has read that into the record. Council member Ellis moves to amend item number 23 to add this direction to the city manager. Is there a second to the motion? Second by council member Fuentes discussion on the motion to amend. Is there any discussion on the motion to amend hearing none, and without objection, the motion to amend item number 23 by council member Ellis is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion, which is the. The motion was to approve. Item number 23 as amended. Is there [11:42:02 AM] discussion on item number 23 as amended? Hearing none without objection. Item number 23, as amended, is adopted members that will take us to item number 38. And we will begin by turning to the city clerk and asking the city clerk to call people on item that wish to speak on item number 38. >> Thank you. Mayor, I have one remote speaker, Laura Earthman. >> Hi, my name is Lauren Earthman. I'm speaking in support of proposed noise ordinance number 38. My family moved to Austin nine years ago from near downtown Houston in search of a quieter, scenic and serene environment. When we purchased our home near fm 2222 in 2017, the neighborhood was peaceful. Over the past five years, however, noise from the roadway, particularly from high speed motorcycles, has increased drastically. This is not occasional traffic noise. Most typically it is repeated [11:43:03 AM] high pitched engine revving from sports bikes, riding the curves of 2222 at high speeds, often looping back multiple times. The video that you will be shown accurately reflects what residents experience on a near daily basis. Prolonged exposure to this level of noise has real health impacts, triggering stress responses, sleep disruption and making it difficult to enjoy or even remain in our homes. The problem is made worse by dangerous and aggressive behavior. Motorcycle groups openly post videos online showing excessive speeding, evading law enforcement, and intentionally creating noise. I personally experienced a rider striking my vehicle with his fist while driving on 2222, because I was unable to move aside quickly enough when he approached me from the rear at high speed. Beyond health and safety, persistent noise pollution negatively affects property values and discourages prospective homebuyers, ultimately impacting homeowners and city tax revenue. I would [11:44:03 AM] not have chosen to purchase the home that I currently live in had these conditions existed when we were exploring the neighborhood nine years ago. The city has existing rules limiting excessive noise, but they do not apply to these roadway situations, so cannot be enforced in their current state. To address this issue, the proposed noise ordinance would provide an important enforcement tool to address purposeful excessive noise when it occurs. I respectfully urge the city of Austin to pass this noise ordinance to help restore safety, livability, and quality. Of life to our neighborhoods. Thank you, thank you. >> For in person speakers. For item 38, I have Chris Lamprecht, Savannah Lee, Marissa Lipka, and Lisa Capps, and as Linda Bailey here. Okay, she's donated time to Marissa Lipka. [11:45:09 AM] >> So I guess. Okay. >> Good morning, Marissa Barrera. I'm the president of the shepherd mountain neighborhood association, and I'm going to start off with a short video. >> Oh my god. Oh my god. [11:46:24 AM] Here we go. Here they come. [11:47:24 AM] >> Okay, so that was fun. And now imagine that at 1 A.M. 3 A.M. 5 A.M. And all over Austin, we could only get video in our area 2222 but we have been posting on social media and we're hearing from a whole lot of folks from other parts of Austin, including east Austin, north Austin, south Austin, everywhere. This is not just a problem to our area. So if this ordinance is amended in any way that makes it functionally unenforceable, it will sit on the books and change nothing on our roads. We did not come this far to hand out a free pass to drivers who treat our commuter roads like race tracks, and our homes and businesses like collateral damage. This ordinance is not aimed at someone whose muffler suddenly fails, or who has a one time mechanical issue. It is designed to address deliberate, [11:48:25 AM] repeated, engine revving, racing and explosive acceleration that endanger public safety and disrupts daily lives of thousands of residents. If the standard is set so high that officers cannot act in real time, then the behavior will continue unchecked and our communities will get a clear message. The city of Austin tolerates this conduct. Council member Marc duchen and Austin police department commander Craig Smith have spent considerable time collaborating with us neighbors who contend with this problem every day. And we thank you. We finally have an ordinance that is enforceable and fair. Please vote yes on item 38. >> Thank you. Yes, ma'am. >> Mayor. Council members, thank you again for listening. I'm going to reiterate my support for item 38. As I did on Tuesday. The extreme noise [11:49:26 AM] and reckless behavior is not merely an extreme nuisance, as you saw, but a significant safety hazard to many Austin residents. I want to emphasize the seriousness of this issue, and the necessity of providing law enforcement with the appropriate tools to protect public safety. We all know that enforcement is the critical element here, and if the language in the proposed ordinance revision is not preserved as is, there will be little point in passing it. The proposed ordinance includes common sense enforcement clauses. It's not about penalizing everyday commuters, but targets the small group of individuals who use their their vehicles to create offensive noise. We trust our trained police force to use their professional judgment and more serious matters, so I find it difficult to understand the concerns that they would abuse this revised policy. My primary concern is actually the provision of APD and dps officers to enforce the noise ordinance. Can you imagine [11:50:28 AM] someone walking up in front of your house generating noise over 90db at all hours of the day on their whim? How long would you tolerate this before seeking law enforcement intervention? And how would you feel when the authorities explained to you that the existing laws give you no protection from this person's intentional disruption of your day? You've seen the noise. Let me assure you, there's an extensive library of far worse behavior danger that's not reflected in the department or state metrics. This is a constant daily threat to our peace and safety. And the noise ordinance is written as a balanced, reasonable measure that empowers our officers to protect our community from clearly irresponsible conduct. I respectfully urge you to vote yes on item 38. >> Thank you very much, ma'am. >> Could you state your name real quick? >> Yes. >> Oh, sorry. Lisa Capps. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Hey, y'all. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm here with equity action to speak on item 38, the proposed ordinance [11:51:28 AM] creating a class C misdemeanor for vehicle engine noise. While this may be framed as a quality of life measure, we are concerned that it will criminalize everyday behavior and pull more austinites, especially those already struggling into a system that punishes poverty without improving public safety. Class D offenses are often called fine only, but for people who cannot afford to pay, they trigger a cascade of harm lost jobs, mounting fees, warrants, and sometimes jail. These impacts fall hardest on low income residents and black and brown communities, and they can carry immigration consequences for our undocumented neighbors. We're also concerned about the ordinances vague and subjective standard prohibiting noise that is loud or disturbing or offensive to a person of ordinary sensibilities leaves too much room for interpretation and inconsistent enforcement. When people cannot clearly understand what is prohibited, enforcement can become arbitrary and discriminatory. Additionally, Texas law already addresses unreasonable noise with a narrower, narrower intent standard. This proposal goes further by allowing enforcement for conduct deemed reckless or negligent, potentially criminalizing ordinary situations like unexpected vehicle backfires or necessary car repairs. Expanding criminal [11:52:28 AM] liability in this way is unnecessary and risks sweeping people who pose no threat to public safety. We urge council to reconsider the ordinance, and if it moves forward, we ask you to align the intent standard with state law and require a warning before issuing a citation. Austin should invest in solutions that support our communities, not policies that deepen inequity and criminalize poverty. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers have been called. >> Thank you very much. Members. All speakers have been called on item number 38. As I understand it, we have two proposed motions to amend item number 38, one from councilmember alter and one from councilmember Siegel. Do I have that? Well, I don't, so if you could get that, then I'll make sure we take it up. And city attorney just made it available to me. Thank you. So we have three proposed motions to amend, one from councilmember alter, one from councilmember Siegel and one from councilmember Velasquez. I [11:53:30 AM] will ask for a main motion so that we can then take up those councilmember qadri moves. Approval of item number 38. It is seconded by councilmember duchen. And what I will now do is go to proposed motions to amend. The first one being I recognize councilmember alter members, you have an item that says item 38. February 26th, 2026 councilmember alter motion number one. This is a proposed motion to amend item number 38. Councilmember alter. >> Thank you very much. Mayor. This is what I alluded to on Tuesday. It is direction not ending the ordinance language, but for the manager to come back with an expansion for non-vehicular motor noise, whether that's landscaping equipment, construction vehicles in the right of way, including on our sidewalks, because often that is where a lot of the complaints that we hear about in terms of loud noise occurs. So that will come back to us within the next few months, and we will then get to [11:54:31 AM] review it. >> Councilmember alter moves to amend item number 38 by giving this direction to the city manager at a second by councilmember Velasquez. Is there a discussion on alter motion to amend item 38? Without objection, alter motion to amend item number 38 is adopted. That will now take us to council member Siegel you have you have a sheet in front of you that is labeled councilmember Siegel motion sheet item 38 two 2626 council meeting I will recognize councilmember Siegel. >> Thank you mayor. My motion would amend the proposed ordinance to clarify that you need to have either knowledge or intent to be given a citation, which would align with state law. I also support council member Velasquez Velasquez's amendment, which would require issuance of a warning before a penalty is assessed. My motivation is to support the community's demand to deal with the reckless and disturbing behavior in places like 2222, but at the same time create guardrails and protections so innocent [11:55:32 AM] behavior is not criminalized and we reduce the risk of arbitrary or unfair enforcement. Thank you. >> Councilmember Siegel moves to amend item number 38 with Siegel amendment number one. It is seconded by council member Velasquez. Discussion. With regard to this item. Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Mayor, could we talk to law about the the legal standards involved? >> I bet we can. >> Good morning. >> Thank could in this is my understanding. I'm reaching back a little bit to my criminal defense days. But you're typically you're in knowingly and intentionally type criminal statutes have a victim. In other words, the I guess let me rephrase that as a [11:56:33 AM] question. How would we prosecute a knowing and intentional standard on this type of crime? Like, I'm just trying to kind of think from y'all's perspective, from the city attorney's perspective, how do you prosecute a knowing and intentional violation of of the noise ordinance? I just in my mind, I can think of just multiple defenses. My sense would be that it makes it basically unenforceable. >> Yes. Bianca Benson with the city attorney's office, you're you're correct in the last thing you said because the what intentionally, knowingly does is basically require the prosecution to prove if it's if it's intentionally that somebody went out with their motorcycle, woke up that day and said, I'm going to take my motorcycle out and create a lot of noise so I can disturb people, right? If it's knowingly, it's sort of that, that same thing that it's instead of them waking up and saying that, it's that as [11:57:33 AM] they're writing their motorcycle, they know with a for a fact that they are disturbing other people. So those are difficult to prove if if those were to be left just in this particular alleged crime. >> And again, my sense of it from again, from a criminal defense perspective is that, well, I didn't intend I didn't know that, you know, this was over and that would be enough for a not guilty. And again, we're talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt. >> Correct. Because that exactly. They would say, well, I didn't intend to or I didn't. No, no. And and and if in fact, if well, I wanted to speak to recklessly as well because that clears up. >> And could we talk about what are the standards for recklessly and what are the standards for criminal negligence. How how would what is the mental state? How does that work? >> Yes. So the the main difference between the recklessly standard and the criminal negligence standard is that you are you with recklessly. You basically are [11:58:34 AM] aware that it's making noise, but you are don't care. I mean, to use just kind of simple lingo that it's disturbing other people. So with criminal negligence you it just means that you should know that your motorcycle is making noise. I'm just using motorcycle as the example that your motorcycle is making noise, and you should know that it would disturb other people. So with recklessly you should know and you don't care that it's disturbing people. Criminal negligence is well, we're going to say you should know that it's making noise and you should know that you're disturbing other people. >> Okay. So and in terms of and again, just trying to compare it to other motor vehicle, what is the standard the typical mental state standard for violations. You know for for moving vehicle violations. >> Well are we are we talking about just about noise related. >> No I think more kind of classes generally speaking. I'm just kind of wondering because [11:59:35 AM] my, my sense again, let's say take a speeding, you know. Well I didn't know I was right. You know what I mean? I didn't intend to speed, you know. And typically the police are not very receptive to that, that that defense. >> Yes. Exactly. So for your, for your just sort of average traffic offense, it's all of them because otherwise we'd have people just saying, well I didn't mean to speed and then that would be it. So or I didn't mean to cause that collision or whatever it is. So you're right, they, they, they encompass most of almost all of these. All right. There might be some exceptions carved out, but those are very rare. >> Yeah. And my sense would be most of them moving violations would be strict liability is that would be the case. And other words it's completely your your mental state is not relevant. The fact that you were doing 40 and a 30, whether you intended to whether you were reckless about it, whether whatever the case may be, that is a violation. >> Yes. Because if we left all traffic laws with someone, be able to say, well, I didn't mean to, then we could go 100 miles on mopac and whenever we wanted. [12:00:35 PM] >> Sure. And I just want to say I appreciate council member Velasquez. I know we're on, but as as a kind of a warning, I just I don't want to gut the entire ordinance because I think there are legitimate concerns here, and I don't want to make it completely unenforceable. >> So thank you, mayor pro tem. And for the record, I kind of challenge whether you could go 100 on mopac anytime you wanted. But that's just me. That's just me, mayor. >> People do. >> Council council member alter followed by council member duchen. >> Thank you. And I wanted to kind of understand the balance of council member Velazquez's amendment and council member Siegel's amendment. Because if an individual is pulled over and receives a warning at that point, if they're pulled over again. Presumably it would be knowing. Right? >> Correct. >> So really, this is a question of. Whether you get one chance or two chances [12:01:39 PM] before you're you're fined. >> Right? I guess I see what you're saying. Yes. So is that a question? >> Well, so my question I guess then is if we adopt councilmember Velazquez's amendment, doesn't that effectively do what council member Siegel is saying because the individuals pulled over, whether it's reckless criminal knowing they get a warning, and now the next time they're pulled over, well, they know. So they it's at least knowing, if not intentional because they've been warned already. >> So the the issue with the warning system, I'll speak to it from a prosecution standpoint. And then if someone hears from APD would like to speak about what it means on their end in terms of documentation and all of that, that might be onerous on that. But from a prosecution standpoint, that's just an extra layer we have to prove of, well, okay, now we have to actually prove that the warning was given. It was documented they received it. That's an extra layer that would make it [12:02:40 PM] difficult to enforce. >> And just add to that, I think, is that you also are going to have to to to prove that the circumstances are the same on both of those occasions. So the, you know, just because it happened before, the person may say, well, it wasn't knowingly or intentionally the second time because something changed. So that I think that does add to the layer of of proof required. >> Okay. But under the ordinance, when we talk about there's kind of two elements that whether or not you created the loud noise and whether or not that loud noise is offensive. Right. And we've talked about the mental state as it relates to making the loud noise. But under the ordinance, if it's 85db or above, that is you've already met, then the presumption that it is offensive to an individual and so that when you [12:03:42 PM] talk about situations that it seems like that would remove that barrier, that element, because I pull over Joe citizen, I say that was 90db. That's in violation of this ordinance. They now know that when they're driving down 22, it's too loud. And so when they do it again, if I'm missing something, maybe I am. I'm just I'm trying to reconcile the two amendments. >> Sure. I mean, I guess speaking to the presumption that, you know, the decibels would require proving the decibel level, which often requires a decibel meter of some sort, which officers don't always have. And then secondly, the presumption does require a warning as well. So you have to get the presumption is already a much higher standard of proof. >> And can I ask a question of [12:04:44 PM] APD? >> Morning. >> Jj Smith, assistant chief with APD. >> Do y'all have decibel meters? >> We do have decibel meters. We don't use them frequently for traffic enforcement, but they are available through our property control office. Okay. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Council member for members of the public that are here for the noon public communication, we're a little past noon, but we're going to finish this item before we go to public communication. And members. That may change what we do in terms of recess so that we can stay on schedule. I also want to say, for the record, that council member alter's motion to amend item number 38. Without objection, it was adopted, but council member harper-madison was off. The was temporarily off the dais at the time. I will now recognize council member duchen. >> Thank you mayor. We've heard from some colleagues that are [12:05:46 PM] attorneys. I'm not one, but I do want to speak to some of the concerns that I think councilmember Siegel raised on Tuesday at the Tuesday work session, and that we've heard a little bit today from, as well as we've gotten some information from some groups like the aclu and the chief request. So one of my frustrations around this is the sense that we want to take out this language that, from what we heard on Tuesday, is kind of the essential teeth of this ordinance and that I think miss Benson confirmed again this morning. And what I one of my frustrations, I'm not really hearing an alternate way to approach this problem. You know, I interpret that to mean sort of if we're going to pass something that has no teeth, the alternative is sort of to do nothing. And in this circumstance, that feels irresponsible to serving and protecting residents. You know, [12:06:49 PM] I think there's sort of a moral component. We often have challenging decisions that we make when we're balancing the needs of different civic interests up here. I'm not sure this is one of those times. Unless we're considering the needs of people who want to use our public roadways to race and drive recklessly, and use a combination of vehicle parts and behavior sort of explicitly designed to make extremely loud noise as equal to the needs of the community members who live there and work there and raise families and pay taxes and fund everything from those exact roadways to this exact council. One of the concerns that was brought up is, you know, that this might disproportionately impact poor people, people of color. When the aclu sent their letter, they strangely asserted there was no measurable public safety benefit. And I would flip that on its head and say, I haven't seen any measurable evidence from places. We know [12:07:49 PM] that this has been implemented in Dallas and El Paso and Houston, where they've got similar rules that have disproportionately impacted poor people or people of color. I know I looked I didn't find any evidence. None has been presented to us. And so I'm wondering if I'm wondering how how real that risk is. I'm also going to ask who our noise polluters are here, who our racers are. Every indication I have from visiting with the community is they race at all hours of the day and night. They apparently have the disposable income to afford vehicles and aftermarket parts designed to race and make loud noises. My sense is this is a recreational activity, and it's made possible by leveraging a key taxpayer funded public good, which is our roadways. So none of this screams financial hardship to me. I want to touch on a couple of things that we did here Tuesday that I would assume. Mr. Coppola and miss Benson can can confirm. We [12:08:53 PM] learned from our prosecutor that we don't use the state law for disorderly conduct, because it's too hard to prove. It requires knowing a mental state, basically. And it's why the other municipalities across the state have implemented their additional specific rules to address this issue. There's the idea that we're duplicating state law, but the reality is state law is just insufficient to address this. It's simply not designed for appropriate for this use case. It's literally the first thing that I think Chris and I looked at when trying to figure out what our options are. We've also learned from city legal that enforcing this is just a challenging issue, and that there are not a lot of obvious solutions, and that APD has struggled historically. And that's why the safety and quality of life has been getting worse and not better in this area. And as the the [12:09:53 PM] residents shared, it's as they've discovered, it's not just in west Austin, it's happening all over. We learned that our general city noise ordinance, the one that regulates loud bars, waives criminal intent completely so as essentially a lower standard of proof than this ordinance, we learned that those city noise rules are too narrow to help us here, because they apply to just a limited kind of noise and hours and proximity to businesses and residents that we need something that's a little bit more flexible. If we remove the criminal negligence and recklessness. As councilmember Siegel aclu would prefer, in the words of our prosecutor on Tuesday, this would be much, much harder to prosecute enforce, thus rendering it ineffective in terms of addressing citizen concerns. Quote, we would be stuck with a burden too. Great to address the concerns and criminal conduct. Someone could just say, quote, I bought the motorcycle like this and that would help them get out of the issue forever. Or that quote I [12:10:54 PM] didn't reasonably expect someone three streets down could hear this, and the last thing I'll say is the ordinance meets two of the three requests the aclu did make to us, which was establish an objective decibel level in part C, and I believe with councilmember Velasquez's amendment would codify warning, which in my conversations with HPD, they were going to do anyway. So my hope is that we can my ask for the colleagues here is to keep these four standards, ensure the ordinance has teeth, and that it can prove to be a deterrent going forward, and help resolve the community concern that we've been working on for a long, long time, including my predecessor. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember Siegel, I'll recognize you to close on your motion to amend. >> Thank you, mayor, and I appreciate the discussion, colleagues, first of all, I want to acknowledge councilmember alter alluded to was that if we adopt councilmember Velasquez amendment, that does solve a lot of the issues, right? Because if you get a warning, [12:11:54 PM] then the second time is you have knowledge, right? And that's definitely true. I did want to push back gently on my colleague, mayor pro tem vela's comments in terms of basically the required mental state, because we have to remember that traffic offenses have an objective standard, right? If you're speeding, you're going over a certain miles per hour in a zone, and that's an objective standard. It's interesting here that we're here in front of the flag of the state of Texas and talking about Texas penal code being too lenient. That's not something I would usually think about, right. We have a pretty strong set of state penal code laws, and what the state law does is refer to an objective standard 85db. So if all this, this local ordinance did was referred to an objective standard of 85db, that would be a lot more protective and that would be a much stronger guardrail. But instead we've got this allusion to, you know, what a person finds [12:12:54 PM] unreasonable. There's a subjective aspect to the standard here. Unreasonable to, you know, I guess I a vehicle engine noise is presumed to be loud or disturbing and offensive to a person of ordinary sensibilities. And so if all we were saying is that per se, you had to be 85db or above and you had to have a warning, if that's all the statute said, that that would be a lot more clear. But instead we have all these other subjective factors that are up to individual officers discretion. So again, I would I would urge the amendment, but I would also acknowledge that councilmember Velasquez amendment is really going to be the strongest protection here. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember members. The vote will be on Siegel motion to amend item number 38. All those in favor. All those in favor of Siegel. Motion to amend item number 38, please raise your hand. All [12:13:59 PM] those opposed, raise your hand. There being six noes, four yeses and councilmember harper-madison being off the dais. >> Yes. >> I'm here, Mr. Mayor. I was I was trying to raise my hand, but I know you were right in the middle. >> I'm sorry. How were you? How do you vote? >> I'm a no vote, Mr. Mayor. >> Okay. Thank you. There being seven no votes and four yeses. And for the record, those being council members. Siegel, qadri, Fuentes and Velasquez. The motion to amend item number 38 by councilmember Siegel fails. That will now take us to a motion to amend by a proposed motion to amend by councilmember Velasquez members, you have a motion sheet that says councilmember Jose Velasquez, item number 38 226 [12:14:59 PM] 2026. I'll recognize councilmember Velasquez on his proposed motion to amend. >> Thank you, mayor. Colleagues, I want to thank councilmember duchen and commander Smith for all their work on this item. I'm grateful to all the community members that came and spoke at our public safety committee meeting earlier this month. Loud engine noises are disruptive, however, creating a new offense without first giving a citation or warning can inadvertently hurt harm our most vulnerable neighbors. Right now, we have community members that are afraid to step out of their homes, send their kids to school, and go to the store for basic needs. For many of our immigrant neighbors, cars are essential to their livelihoods. This new offense could exacerbate fear around using vehicles. It could increase the vulnerability of immigrants and and being a new offense and out of an abundance of caution, I want to put it put in as many safeguards as possible and ensure that we are being as thoughtful as possible. I don't [12:16:00 PM] do not want to add fear or cause harm or further criminalize our immigrant community, and I hope that you'll join me in supporting this amendment. That would first require an initial warning before a ticket can be issued to the public. >> Thank you, thank you. Councilmember Velasquez moves to amend item number 38 with Velasquez motion to amend number one and seconded by councilmember Siegel. Discussion without objection. Councilmember Velasquez. Motion to amend item number 38 is adopted. Members that will take us back to the main motion on item number 38, as amended. Discussion on item number 38, as amended. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. Just a few general comments I want to make. And before I do that, I first really want to thank the community for their incredible patience on this. This is, I think, been like 9 or 10 months in the making, maybe longer, maybe longer, if you count the work that my predecessor started here, working closely [12:17:01 PM] with APD, having monthly meetings with us and txdot and other partners, I want to thank commander Smith, lieutenant Castillo, for their energy and creativity here, and Mr. Coppola and miss Benson for their legal options and understanding of the code. And obviously, my colleagues, for having a robust discussion and suggestions for how to enhance the ordinance. I think we've heard and those of us that were public safety committee meeting, we've heard an outpouring of concern from residents throughout the district about this problem, especially living along 2222 and 360 mopac. And I want to read just one piece of constituent correspondence that we got on this in particular. That kind of highlights the problem, because you were seeing a lot of footage from the roadways, maybe a couple of streets away, this individual wrote, and urging us to pass this item and to criminalize what they call rev bombing on 360 and 2222. They live in [12:18:04 PM] jester estates, which is a full mile from 2222 and 360. And they've got great thick windows. They've still been woken up by these noises from 2223 and from 360 worse on Saturday nights, with the same motorcycles and cars making repeated loops up and down the highways, the noise reverberates through the hills and is completely unnecessary. It's both a noise and safety concern, and they've seen the motorcycles weave through traffic at very high speeds, creating other safety issues. So really just trying to emphasize that it's not just the immediate neighbors. These are these are potentially thousands of people that are being impacted by this, that live in this community. And as you heard from them earlier, also discovering that there are other places around Austin where there are similar challenges and most are saying the same thing, that the that the noise from the racing has gotten significantly worse over the last few years, particularly on the weekends. I [12:19:04 PM] know we've spoken with APD and they've confirmed this is a growing issue throughout the city. They've stepped up patrols, but they've made it clear that we need a new tool to combat the problem. Again, I want to reinforce that we've had extensive, ongoing, coordinated efforts with APD, with the neighbors, with businesses, with multiple public safety organizations to find solutions. I think it's really been a great example of how, despite how probably frustrating and long it's taken, how stakeholders can come together and come up with creative solutions, because we've been working through everything from distancing lights to rumble strips and any other creative ways we can come to addressing this issue. We've also talked with a lot of constituents and neighborhood associations. I know that when my predecessor was here, we had public meetings about this as well, and virtually nobody opposing trying to figure out how we do more to combat this issue. I think of the correspondence that we've [12:20:05 PM] gotten something like 84 people have written in support of this, and just two against it. So my sense is that austinites want to see that we do something and take meaningful action, and that we do it in a fair and a forceful way, highlighting some of the concerns that my colleagues raised. So, just to be clear, we're not targeting normal everyday drivers. We're not targeting any particular kind of vehicle. We're helping reduce noise from vehicles that are much, much louder than the average car. And those folks that are being pulled over, they'll be given the initial warning before any tickets are written. And the ordinance provides a list of criteria that police must take into mind before issuing a citation, including a decibel level. And I'll also point out there's a financial and safety benefit for the entire city, which is if we can defer deter people from driving in this manner, we're going to free up police to fight more serious crime throughout the city and reduce response times. So I'm hoping [12:21:05 PM] that this is a common sense step for us to take, and at the end of the day, is going to make our entire community safer. And with that, I urge you guys to to support this. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember members, there any further discussion? Hearing none. Item number 38, as amended, is adopted. Councilmember harper-madison, do you wish to be shown voting on this item? And she votes in favor. So without objection, item number 38, as amended has been adopted. Thank you. And thanks to all who came and spoke to us on this. Members that will take us to public communication and members of the public that are here for the public communication. You know, you've signed up and you know where you are on the list. I would ask for you to make your way to the front of the chamber so that you can step up and make your voice heard. When your name is called, please go to calling names. >> David Weinberg, Francisco Gomez, silver white mountain, [12:22:08 PM] and Jesse Greer. >> If your name has been called, please grab a seat and state your name for the record and begin speaking. Mr. Weinberg. >> Good morning. Slash. Afternoon, council. My name is David Weinberg, a district five resident. Thank you very much for the opportunity to address you today. I wanted to make a few comments about the historic 100 100 year old Barton springs bridge, which I guess buttresses part of district five. Part of district eight. In 2023, the city council approved the demolition of this bridge. I'm here today to ask you to reconsider and reverse that decision, and instead look at rehabbing this historic bridge. A few things have changed since 2023, when that decision was made. First of all, [12:23:08 PM] the city implemented a program on Barton springs road to reduce traffic lanes and what is called a road diet. And frankly, there was some skepticism when that was put in place how well it would work. But it has, in fact worked out pretty well. And for folks who may consider themselves urbanists on the dais or in the audience, or keeping score at home, the proposed new bridge at this location would sort of reverse what we have done there. It would create a bridge that has four lanes, a turn Laine and would be expandable to six lanes. So we're talking more more cars, more traffic, more smog, and antithetical to the goals of urbanism. The second thing that happened, and this is the only place I want to go to my notes, is that, curiously, the question of what to do with this bridge finally made its way to Austin's historic landmark commission this month, [12:24:08 PM] where the chairman said, and I quote, you have a city owned property in a national registered historic district, and nobody asked, where is the landmark commission? We are not talking to them. I want to make absolutely certain that it is not going to happen again. So why we went after the fact that the landmarks commission about a very historic bridge in the city is, I think, an important question, and this will be back before them next month. The last the last point I want to make is that and I understand that most of this problem lands at the doorstep of the state capitol 1012 blocks north of here. But something is different now is that the city is running yearly structural budget deficits. And I would say that this is an opportunity. This is an addition by subtraction type of project, where the city does not have to spend $55 million building a [12:25:12 PM] new bridge here. The bridge, a new bridge is opposed by the zilker neighborhood association, Barton hills, save our springs, the Sierra club. People do not want this, and I think including it in a bond would jeopardize that. And I would encourage you. >> Not, Mr. Weinberg, Francisco Gomez, hi. >> Good afternoon. My name is Francisco Gomez, and I'm a student at the university of Texas at Austin. I'm sitting in front of you today because I believe that one of the most important things that we can do is, as members of the community, get involved within our shared community and with our representatives. We hold a lot of respect for you guys because after all, you guys are public servants and care deeply for our local communities. As an active member, I can only do my part in speaking about injustices done to my fellow members. As mlk once said, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. What I, along with my fellow peers that couldn't make it because of conflicts, because of classes [12:26:15 PM] would like to address today, is the preventative action against the unlawful acts committed by ice. This is an organization that is running rampant through our nation and needs regulation. Yesterday, with the help of our local community officials, we can make our city a safer place for all of our community members and address that. This is something that is something that we are not okay with. My second preventative measure I would like to address is in regard to data centers. I am aware that Austin is a tech capital of the us, but that doesn't mean we should put tech over people we have seen in recent months, as countless of cities and communities have been disrupted by the addition of data centers to their local infrastructures, they create difficult living conditions and take advantage of those that are less fortunate and less likely to speak up. This is an issue that we have the power to put a stop to before we're in too deep, and I urge you to keep this in mind moving [12:27:16 PM] forward. I'll end this with a famous quote called the they first came quote. They first came for the socialists and I said nothing, for I wasn't a socialist. They then came for the Jews, and I did nothing, for I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the catholics, and I did nothing, for I wasn't a catholic. And then they came for me. And by that time there was no one left to speak up. Now, more than ever, I urge you, council and everyone here, to care for your neighbor. We are all humans and we are all dealing with our own problems. A little empathy can go a long way. Thank you. >> Please state your name for the record. >> Silver mountain council mayor action. [12:28:21 PM] That sound is what I hear on my way over when I'm coming to speak. Let me tell you, I didn't want to speak on this certain topic, which is about cursing. I was fighting it and fighting it. But then this incident happened on the British academy of film and television awards, bafta. It is the equivalent to the oscars. That day was my grandson's birthday, February 22nd. He turned two on. One of the. One of the persons honored was John Davidson, a Scottish campaigner for tourette syndrome awareness, whose life inspired the 2026 bafta nominated film I swear. Bafta said it took measures to inform attendees of Davidson's presence and that they may hear strong language. The entire n-word was said by Davidson on bafta in the us. We also use euphemistic words the N word, the R word. Yet people say the four letter or seven letter F word. Others are always saying [12:29:22 PM] M F word, which is two words, 12 letters, or the gd word, which is two words, seven letters. Then there are all the other curse words. I have been feeling conviction, and it will be, and I will be the good witch today I feel these three majority said words need to be phased out, or a euphemism needs to be created for them. Also, and get this in Spanish, the N word can still be spoken as a color or in or in reference to the category of people. It is acceptable in Spanish. My ex-husband uses it all the time. He does not speak English. When he says he is referring to the people in the category of the N word, he laughed when I mentioned that I would be speaking about cursing today. He said it would never happen. I said probably not in my lifetime. He was not returning to his home country until Christmas or next year. Then suddenly he got really sick. His blood pressure shot up really high and could not be controlled. Even with medication. He is only 49, will [12:30:25 PM] be 50. In may he left for his home country because he said he didn't want to die in the us. He still has not arrived because he called me this morning and said he should arrive tomorrow or Saturday, and he said he was only feeling a little better. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> I'm sorry I didn't have my mic on. Please, please state your name for the record and sure. >> Good afternoon everyone. My name is Jesse Greer and I'm the founder of the beautiful farmers market in Buda, Texas. I'm here today to respectfully request the opportunity to host a farmers market at auditorium shores on available weekends. As a structured pilot program, Austin is known for supporting local businesses, sustainability and community wellness. A farmer's market at auditorium shores aligns directly with those values. This would not be a festival style event. It would be a curated, producer focused market featuring local farmers, ranchers, food producers, small businesses, many of whom already served the Austin [12:31:25 PM] community. The purpose is simply to create consistent access to local food, while activating a public space and a meaningful and low impact way. Auditorium shores already attracts families, runners, tourists, residents. Every weekend. A farmer's market complements the park's existing use. It encourages foot traffic, supports local ag, and provides a safe, family friendly environment centered around food access and small business growth. I understand concerns around park preservation, traffic and over programing of public spaces. That's why I'm proposing this as a pilot with clear operational standards, vendor caps, insurance, sanitation plans and a measurable outcome. We can collect data on attendance, vendor revenue, parking impact, community feedback. It doesn't. If it doesn't meet expectations, we can reassess. If it succeeds, then Austin gains a reliable food hub in one of the most iconic spaces. And this is also an economic development opportunity. Small farmers and cottage food producers are [12:32:27 PM] struggling with rising costs and limited retail access, so it would provide stability in a predictable income opportunity for dozens of local families. Austin has always been a city that supports local first, so it's a chance to reinforce that identity in a visible and accessible way. So I'm not asking for an exception. I'm asking for a pathway, a chance to work with city staff to build a compliant, data driven pilot that benefits residents, supports small businesses, and enhances one of Austin's most iconic spaces. Thanks for your time and consideration and I hope to meet with some of you soon. >> Thank you. Thanks for being here. >> Then we have Portia Riggins and Katy cam Lucas signed up remotely but has not joined yet. >> Today. >> For the record, I'm Portia Riggins. Thank you mayor. Thank you, council members, and thank you, community. Austin is one [12:33:28 PM] of the fastest growing cities in the United States. City council decisions affect where families live, how long they sit in traffic, and whether long longtime residents can stay in their communities. This is a critical moment to ensure Austin continues advancing without leaving communities behind. My name is Portia Riggins, and I'm a third generation austinite. Born and raised in east Austin. I grew up near 12th street and airport boulevard and public housing hud supported community. I attended oak springs elementary, Lamar middle school, and L.C. Anderson high school. I am running for Austin city council district one because of what I call reluctant authority. I never planned to lead, but when I saw problems not being addressed, I stepped up to advocate. Advocating for my sister after incarceration showed me the importance of mental health and reentry support. Advocating for my mother, who is deaf and hard of hearing, showed me the need for accessible health care and communication. I never left east Austin and understand [12:34:28 PM] displacement, mobility, challenges and opportunity gaps many families face. I worked at HEB for five years, starting as a teenager, and I'm currently studying finance and accounting at Austin community college. Attending meetings and forums across Austin motivated me to study local government and budgeting so I can lead with knowledge and accountability. Ciy council decisions about budgeting and infrastructure directly impacts affordability, mobility and opportunity. Austin. As Austin grows, leadership must focus on results and completion, not just ideas. My focus is responsible budgeting, strong infrastructure, housing stability, effective innovation, mobility, mental health and economic opportunity. I am committed to engaging in every zip code in district one, so every voice is heard and represented. District one is my home. I know the land, the neighborhoods and the people. I believe voters deserve leaders [12:35:30 PM] who truly understand their communities because effective representation requires both lived experience and knowledge. I am not just running to represent the community. I am the community. And thank you. Thank you to the elders that came before me. I won't let you down. Congratulations to the Austin naacp for your proclamation today. Thank you to everyone that's here. God bless district one. God bless Austin. >> Thank you. You, miss Kam. >> Yes, yes. Hi, I'm Katy Kam, a longtime Austin resident living in district nine as a volunteer for the petition drive to convention center project. I personally collected more than 4000 signatures from Austin voters. I'm here today to highlight better ways to spend the hotel occupancy tax, hot revenue, and conversations with many of the petition signers. I know firsthand that voters are enthusiastically supportive of these alternative ideas. First, you need to know that Austin [12:36:30 PM] has plenty of convention space. Even with the demolition of the Austin convention center, according to the Austin visit website, there are more than 600 local venues that provide meeting and exhibit space with room capacity to hold more than 600,000 people simultaneously. In addition, one point 2,000,000ft S of event space, including large exhibit halls, are available in the existing downtown hotels and at Cota. Let's be efficient and use the existing spaces. Hot revenue can fund concierge, convention services and local transportation services that serve the convention attendees. City staff can help event planners seamlessly book multiple local venues and transport, and provide personnel to create a uniquely Austin convention experience. The proposed multibillion dollar Austin convention center will attract only about 700,000 attendees per year. That is not a number to brag about. Examples of more cost effective and popular tourist draws abound in the us and around the [12:37:31 PM] world. The country music hall of fame in Nashville attracts 1.5 million visitors a year and reinforces Nashville's marketed reputation as music city. Denver's art museum attracts about 2 to 3 times more attendees than its convention center, the met in New York City and the museum of anthropology in Mexico City. Both attract 5 million visitors annually. The louvre in Paris attracts 8.7 million visitors a year. You're starting to get the idea culturally significant venues attract more visitors and foot traffic than a convention center, which is better for businesses, hotels, residents, tourism, economy and tax revenue. We can use the revenue to build a world renowned, immersive and interactive visitor information center that highlights Austin's history and current contributions in music, art, film writing, architecture, green building and food. At the center, visitors would learn about where they can go to the city to explore more. How else can we explore support culture without revenue? City staff continue to claim that only 15% of hot revenue can be used to [12:38:31 PM] support cultural arts, but that is false. Texas tax code section 3351 says we can use the money for promotional programing that elevates the visibility of Austin based artists, musicians, films, events and venues. We can also use the money for a city ambassador program, in which the city hires local musicians and artists and pays them a livable salary and their travel expenses to tour beyond Austin to showcase their work and promote Austin as a place to visit. Voters love these ideas. Please stop the convention center project. It's not too late. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Mayor. That concludes all human communication. >> Thank you very much, members. That concludes the public communication section of our agenda. We will now recess. And my recommendation, unless there's objection, is we recess until 120. We recess until 120. We will have our live music now during this recess. Without objection, the Austin city council is in recess until 120. [12:39:32 PM] It is 1239. [12:49:40 PM] >> Well, good afternoon, everybody. I am councilmember Ryan alter, and it is my privilege to introduce Austin Kimble today. Austin Kimble one sheet Austin is an Austin based jazz pianist, multi- instrumentalist, musical director, and educator whose work spans jazz performance, American theater, and community music making. He's a nominee for the Biden Payne awards and the central Texas excellence in theater awards, and a two time recipient of the broadwayworld Austin award for best musical direction, holding a bachelor of music in piano performance with jazz with a jazz emphasis from the university of Texas at Austin, Kimble has been an active force in the Texas music and theater scene for nearly 20 years. His work includes touring Japan, France, Cuba with the Austin Kimble trio and performing throughout Austin as a collaborative pianist with jazz ensembles and local artists. Internationally, Kimble serves as a music director, conductor, and pianist for tapestry dance [12:50:40 PM] company soles of our feet, a celebration of American tap dance tour in China, a production recognized by the national endowment for the arts as an American masterpiece, his work blends improvization rhythm and storytelling, drawing deep connections between jazz and American performance traditions. In addition to his jazz career, Kimble has an extensive background in musical theater. He previously served as a lecturer in music theory and associate music director in the bfa musical theater program at Texas state university, where his musical direction credits include pippin and urinetown. In addition to performing, Kimble maintains a private teaching studio in Austin, working with students in piano, trumpet, voice, music theory, improvization, and audition technique. Well, without any further ado, may I please present Austin Kimble. [12:56:07 PM] Well done. That was very exciting. Well. If y'all want to come on over for the proclamation here. Alright. Well, it is my privilege to present this proclamation today. So 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. So now, therefore, I, council member Ryan alter, on behalf of the mayor of the city of Austin, do hereby proclaim February 26th, 2026 as Austin Kimble day in Austin, Texas. >> Thank you so much. You got it. Thank you so much. Congratulations. Really enjoyed [12:57:07 PM] it. Thank you. >> Well, it. >> Didn't turn off. We can take a picture if you want. Yeah. Let's do it. Yeah. [1:20:30 PM] I'll call the Austin city council back to order on February 26th, 2026. We've been in a brief recess. Members, the way I'm going to go here is I'm going to go to item 5758 through 62, and then we will go back to 55 and 56, and then we'll go to be roughly 2:00 for our time certain at 2:00. What I anticipate will happen is we will do that. Then we will go into executive session on item 83, come back out, deal with item number 83 and then go back in for the personnel matters that we have to take up. So with that we will go to item number 57. Item number 57 is a public hearing is an item on for Kahn Kahn eminent domain and condemnation. And I'll turn to the city clerk and see if we have anyone signed up to speak. >> There are no speakers. >> Members. There are no speakers on item number 57. So with respect to item number 57, this being an nonconsent [1:21:30 PM] condemnation item, I will accept a motion to the effect that council of Austin 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 use that's described therein. Councilmember Siegel moves. Approval of that motion is seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the item is adopted with council members qadri and councilmember harper-madison. How did you vote? I apologize. Did you vote in favor of it? Thank you very much. So with councilmember. Oh very good. How are you all voting? Yeah, at 122. How are y'all voting? 22 oh, where are you there. I'm sorry. Yes. Okay. Council member Ellis votes in favor, so it's unanimous. Vote on item number 57. That will take us to item number 58. Members. Item number 58 is a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing. The public [1:22:30 PM] hearing is now open, and I'll turn to the city clerk. >> There are no speakers members. >> There are no speakers on the public for the public hearing on item number 58. Item number 58 is an item for public hearing only and no action. So we will now go to item number. We've. Without objection, we'll close the public hearing on item number 58. The public hearing is now closed and completed. Item number 59 is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 59. The public hearing is now open, and I'll turn to the city clerk. >> I have one speaker, Courtney Mcwhorter. >> Good afternoon, mayor council. My name is Courtney Mcwhorter. I'm here as attorney on behalf of the petitioner property owner in favor of the petition and will answer any questions that you may have. >> Murray do you have any questions? All right, members, item number 50. Those are all the people who signed up to [1:23:32 PM] speak on item number 59, the public hearing. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 59. The public hearing is now closed. I'll entertain a motion with regard to item number 59. Mayor pro tem moves. Approval of item number 59 is second by councilmember Velasquez. Is there a discussion? Without objection, item number 59 is adopted that will take us to item number 60, which is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 60. The public hearing is now open and I'll turn to the city clerk. >> Yes. Courtney Mcwhorter. >> Hi. Mayor. Council. Courtney Mcwhorter here as attorney on behalf of the petitioner, property owner in favor of the petition and will answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you. Anybody else signed up to speak? >> That's all. >> Mayor members there being no other speakers on item number 60. Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 60. The public hearing is now closed and I'll entertain a motion with regard to item number 60, the mayor pro tem moves approval seconded by council member Siegel. Discussion. Without objection. Item number 60 is adopted. Item [1:24:33 PM] number 61 is a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 61. The public hearing is now open and I will turn to the city clerk. >> One speaker Courtney Mcwhorter. >> Hi. Mayor. Council Courtney Mcwhorter as attorney on behalf of the petitioner property owner in favor of the petition, I'd like to reflect that the agenda has a typo. The property is 2707 2801 and 2802 pierce road. It's correct. In the ordinance that was prepared. I'm here to answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you very much. Members. Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 61. The public hearing is now closed, and I'll entertain a motion to approve the ordinance that's in the backup. As pointed out by the speaker. Councilmember duchen moves approval. Is there a second second by mayor pro tem? I'm sorry, I close the public hearing. Right. So is there any discussion? Without objection, item number 61 is adopted. Item [1:25:34 PM] number 62 is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 62. The public hearing is now open. And I'll turn to the city clerk. >> One speaker Courtney Mcwhorter. >> Let's see if we can. You can run the table. >> All right. Mayor, council Courtney Mcwhorter here as attorney on behalf of the petitioner property owner in favor of the petition, we'll answer any questions that you may have. >> Anybody have any questions? Without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 62. The public hearing is now closed. Council member duchen moves approval of item number 62. It is seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there any discussion on item number 62? Without objection, item number 62 is adopted. Thank you, miss Mcwhorter. Members, we will now go back to item number 55. Yeah, we'll go back to item number 55. Item number 55. Members for for the record you [1:26:35 PM] have in your packet, you you've been provided three documents. In order for us to move through item number 55, you have a red line version of the decision TRE itself. That document is marked mayor Watson, amendment one, dash V two dash red line. And you'll notice in the upper right hand corner it has it says legend and then says amendment. You'll recall that in a previous iteration of this, it had a legend where we had put some colors to specific policies and that sort of thing as it has evolved. This one only is a red line version of the amendment of the of the things that we're offering as an amendment. You also have a clean version of the decision TRE, and that is marked mayor Watson, amendment one v2 clean. And it doesn't have the legend. The reason we did that is so that there will be a clean [1:27:36 PM] version for the public to be able to see if there's no if there are no further amendments to this item. The third document you have is a red line version of the draft resolution. You have a red line version of the draft resolution. You will recall that council member alter had some proposals we made. We incorporated that in a previous version. Council member Siegel. There was a discussion on the message board between council member Siegel and me. And we've made we've made changes based upon his suggestions. And then council member Ellis had some additional suggestions, and we have incorporated all of her suggestions in both the resolution and the decision. Tree members, we'll hear from the public on this, but how we will proceed is since this is an item from a council committee, the reason I've offered these up, I'm offering these these red lines that you see as amendments, because it comes from a council, a [1:28:37 PM] recommendation from a council committee. It's not a standalone ifc, if you will. So what I'll do is I'll entertain a motion to to accept the recommendation of the committee. And then I will offer this as an amendment so that to to that motion. So that's what I just wanted to give you all a feeling for how we're going to proceed. I'll now turn to the clerk to call speakers on item number 55. >> Thank you. Mayor, we don't have anyone that has joined remotely, but I have in-person speakers. Item 55 Savannah Lee, Judy Bradford, Mel leblanc, bill bunch, Jennifer Robichaux, Jeffrey Bowen, Peter hunt, and Jim Crosby. If I called your name, please go ahead and come on down. >> Good morning council. A lot of folks had to leave, so I think quite a few people won't be able to make it from that list. But my name is Mel [1:29:39 PM] leblanc and I live in district one and I'm representing vocal Texas. I'm here today to ask that you do carry through with a bond in 2026. I know this decision decision TRE could result in maybe not a bond, but I we need for this bond to include affordable housing and specifically funds for deeply affordable housing, permanent supportive housing and shelter beds. Last year we launched a campaign. One of the pieces was to get more deeply affordable housing in our city, and this campaign grew out of the experiences of our leaders and members who were, and still are, finding it nearly impossible to access 0 to 30% mfi units in our city and permanent supportive housing units. We know through previous bonds that there's been money that has been allocated towards affordable housing, and in 2018, the blueprint scorecard came with a plan to to have 20,000 units of 0 to 30% mfi. We know as of now, only 426 of those units have been built, which is only 2%. And on the flip side, [1:30:39 PM] 60 to 80%. Mfi units surpassed their goal by 136%. So we are still seeing a need of deeply affordable housing. And we've been hearing there's an oversupply of housing units, but it's not for the deepest affordability. And I also want to recognize that there's been a lot of progress on psh. But the need still surpasses by far what we have. And a lot of units are stuck in the pipeline right now. We are also out of shelter. Beds and homeless shelters are at capacity, meaning people are still subject to sleeping on the streets and then they get caught in inhumane and horrible encampment sweeps. And then there's usually supposed to be connected to shelter, but with shelter beds not always being available, people are returned to the streets. But then without belongings, we're seeing lots of cuts at the federal, state and local level, and this is an opportunity to make sure we can fill some of those gaps. So please, yes. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> I'm Jim Crosby and but for a minute I'm going to be my friend Judy Bradford, if I may. [1:31:42 PM] She had a doctor's appointment. Good morning. Good afternoon. My name is Judy Bradford and I'm a resident of district two. I'm here today to speak to the need for a 2026 bond initiative that would fund the development of deeply affordable housing, permanent supportive housing and more shelter beds. In addition, any used bond money must be dedicated to this purpose as well. The city of Austin has made commitments and promises to the community that must be honored. 6000 austinites have no home to call their own. Half of all renters in Austin reported that they struggled to pay rent in 2024. While the city has done a fabulous job of ensuring that developers produce units at 60 to 80% of mfi, they've only reached 2% of the goal of creating deeply affordable housing. Developers are not going to address the affordability crisis in Austin. It will take bold measures such as public investment and ownership to tackle this problem. Low wealth people in our community are at extreme risk for becoming unhoused. The [1:32:42 PM] state and federal government governments have all but abandoned any commitment to help our people. It is up to all of us in our community of Austin to make sure that our neighbors are cared for and not abandoned to the cruelty of the streets. Time and time again, the people of Austin have insisted that we create a community of care. It is a matter of decency and public safety. So I will conclude by asking you to do what you know is the right thing. We need to raise $320 million, as recommended by the bond election advisory task force, so that we can begin to address the deep for the need for deeply affordable housing at 0 to 30% of mfi permanent supportive housing and shelter beds. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> If I may speak briefly as Jim Crosby. >> You have 13 seconds. >> 13 seconds. You started me over. >> Well, yeah. Shouldn't have. >> I just want to affirm, having sat through this morning's session and getting here a little early, to sign in and seeing some of the celebration of black history [1:33:43 PM] month, I want to affirm in part, what council member harper-madison said this morning about democracy and the service and the work that y'all are all doing. I want to vote. Excuse me. >> Thank you. Yeah, yeah. Your time is up. Thank you. I hate to cut anybody off saying something nice about us. >> I was signed up as well. Does that count? >> No, no, she. She needs to be here unless you're going to read it like you did. Thank you. >> Mayor, I called all speakers for item 55. >> All right. All the speakers have been called on item number 55. So, members, as I indicated, this is an item from council that came from the audit and finance committee. As a recommendation from the audit and finance committee to the entire council, I will say on behalf of the audit and finance committee and council member Laine, who also participated and told us how she would vote on the item. I appreciate the input from other members of the council to get us to this point. Again. I think this is one of those items where it shows that the council wants to take a disciplined approach to how [1:34:44 PM] we're making these decisions, and so I'm appreciative of the input. And with that, as chair of the committee, I will move approval of the recommendation of the audit and finance committee. And remember, I'm going to also offer an amendment. The vice chair of the committee, councilmember alter, seconds that motion. So we now have a motion to to accept the recommendation and approve item number 55. As pointed out, you have a motion sheet in front of you that says mayor Watson motion sheet one, item 55 two 2626 council meeting. And so I would move to amend the draft resolution with exhibit a, the bond decision framework, to reflect the changes in the two attached redlined versions, both the decision TRE and the resolution. And as I pointed out, those reflect the proposed changes that council member Segal and council member Ellis have [1:35:45 PM] brought forward. Is there is that I move to amend item number 55. It is seconded by the vice chair of the committee, council member alter. Is there any discussion? Councilmember Siegel. Mayor. Thank you. I just want to thank the committee for all of your work on this, all the thought and research that went into it. And, mayor, I did want to thank you and your team, very hard working staff, because you're making it look easy to incorporate all of our amendments and come up with new versions. And I know it takes a lot of work, so I just want to acknowledge that. Thank you. Well, I appreciate you saying that. And and I will I'll second your statement about how how strong my team works and how well they work. They have really put a lot of energy and effort into this. And I'll also use you your statement as a platform to say how much I appreciate our professional financial staff. And Mr. Benigno. He's put an enormous amount of time into this and [1:36:47 PM] helped teach and and work through things. So he's here and I want to say thank you to him as well. Is there a further discussion with regard to the motion to amend that being the case? Without objection, the motion to amend item number 55 is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion, which is item number 55 as amended. Any further discussion? The only discussion I would add is to point out that this is a decision framework that, as I indicated earlier, will create discipline in how we go about making our decisions. And so it's something to be applauded and we ought to be proud of. There are this is also brought to light. This whole process is brought to light. The policies that we deal with, the financial policies and practices that we deal with and that, frankly, have been dealt with over years in ways that may be different than they should have been. But that [1:37:48 PM] being said, there's been, as was pointed out on the message board by council member Siegel just the other day, some issues and by the council member alter specifically in the audit and finance committee about how we approach some of those things. This framework has been built so that if there are changes in our policies in the city, financial policies, the framework still survives and takes that into account. We have an audit and finance committee meeting next. Somebody help me. Next Wednesday, the fourth we have. It's actually I should remember that that's the the anniversary of the date of birth of my youngest granddaughter. So let me just say that. Anyway, birdie's birthday is the day we will happily take up policies, financial policies of the city of Austin as a gift to her. Really? And what we'll do is we'll have Mr. Van Nino there, [1:38:49 PM] and he has already put out a memo. Is that right? Have you already done that? No. Okay. He he will have a memo that will go out shortly. I put this up on the message board. He'll have a memo that will go out shortly that will provide some thought processes that he has with regard to these policies, so that we'll all get those on early. We'll take it up at the at the audit and finance committee on the fourth. And my guess is there probably will be before we before if there's any change we end up wanting to make, even if it comes as a recommendation from the audit and finance committee. Because of the magnitude of what we're talking about, we will probably have a work session where we will take that up. And also. Any any questions about that? All right. Councilmember harper-madison, did you have your hand up? Okay. With that being said, isn't there being no further discussion on item number 55, as amended? Without [1:39:50 PM] objection, item number 55, as amended, is adopted. And thank you very much, council. That will take us to item number 56, that that is a recommendation from a council committee. And that the council committee is the public health committee. And I am going to turn to the city clerk to ask if we have people signed up to speak and if they're here. >> Yes, I have one remote speaker and then some in person. Monica Guzman. >> Good afternoon. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. Go, Austin. Vamos. Austin, speaking on item 56. We support the early childhood council's fiscal year 2027 budget work group draft budget recommendations, specifically, quote, that the city of Austin maintain all current investments, contracts and maintenance agreements in early childhood programs and infrastructure, including, but not limited to maintain funding for contracts related to services for families and [1:40:51 PM] children within Austin public health and Austin economic development maintain funding for current city programs related to childcare and children's services, which have a proven track record of strengthening child care programs and providing preventative supports for families with young children. Maintain the Apa and Eid staffing budget for critical staff who oversee early childhood programs and services. If the city manager creates a comprehensive rubric tool to assess future funding for the city's existing social service contracts, the rubric should consider the following. Child care, early childhood development, and early intervention. Supports and conduct regular community engagement and public feedback sessions with social service providers, child care providers, social service program participants, and community stakeholders to understand and identify community priorities and develop the comprehensive rubric and social service contract restructuring plan to maximize service impact, unquote. In addition to [1:41:52 PM] advocate for sustained funding for the early childhood staff in Austin, economic development sustained funding for the Austin Travis county family, child care educator Fauci network, formerly known as building comprehensive network. Implementation of a direct assistance program for child care providers to integrate the home grown, thriving providers project into the Austin Travis county FCC network and strategy for a mobile lending library for home based care providers to increase access to quality early childhood. >> Thank you, miss Guzman. >> And resources. Thank you. >> And then in person, I have Gabriella Kane, Jennifer Robichaux, and Zenobia Joseph. >> Welcome. >> Thank you. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Gabriella Kane, and I'm the executive director of [1:42:52 PM] latinitas. I'm here in support of item 56. Latinitas is a workforce partner in the economic development department, a comprehensive rubric for social services would be essential to ensuring funding decisions are grounded in measurable impact, in alignment with the city's workforce strategy. Last year, nearly 100 adult residents participated in our workforce based digital literacy programs, each of them improving significantly in their digital skills. As the city invest millions into the infrastructure academy and other workforce initiatives, it's important to recognize that those programs are downstream. Latinitas operates operates upstream. Before someone can enter a technical training, they must be able to navigate online systems, complete digital applications, communicate by email, and participate in hybrid coursework. For many residents, those foundational skills are not a given. We provide the basic digital literacy and hands on support that make higher level workforce programs possible. Our recent 10% contract reduction jeopardizes critical staffing, including [1:43:54 PM] one on one instructional support. If cohort sizes shrink fewer residents residents are prepared to enter the infrastructure academy pipeline. Austin has invested millions in workforce development, protecting upstream readiness programs and ensuring those investments yield real economic mobility is imperative. A strong, transparent rubric can help ensure that contracts demonstrate measurable workforce preparation are fully funded. Austin's workforce pathway begins long before technical certification and economic resilience begins with foundational skills. It begins with digital literacy, trust and resilience and readiness. Thank you for your leadership on this. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. You've been called on item number 56. [1:44:56 PM] >> I don't know that I have my notes in front of me, but I guess I don't need them. Thank you. Mayor, council I'm Zenobia Joseph. My comments as it relates specifically to the cut and social services, is for the city manager to actually look at infrastructure. It is mentioned in the backup materials. If you look at the resolution, and I would ask you to recognize that it has pedestrian safety. And so you saw the pictures earlier that shows the discrimination that's actually baked into the infrastructure of the city. And I want you to recognize that as it relates to Austin public health, specifically, the nearest neighborhood community center is actually saint John's, which means that anybody that lives north of us 183, whether it's lakeline or whether it's in the desert Parmer area, they actually have to travel about two hours, if not more, just to get to the neighborhood center. I want you to recognize as well that it is important for you to take a look at those unilateral decisions that have been made by Austin public health, [1:45:58 PM] specifically those contracts that exceed $50,000. I want to give you just one example. You remember the life of new contract was $826,000. That was supposed to reduce k-12 disparities in education and in criminal justice as well. But it didn't even have educators included in that contract. And so I would ask you to take a look at all of the contracts that are unilateral decisions of that sort, and to also recognize the need to comply with veterans changes in the law as it relates to hud-vash, so that when you are looking at your criteria, as you heard on Tuesday from a veteran, it does not include anything about veterans specifically in this item. But I want you to recognize that we are not required to have case management. You can talk to assistant city manager Stephanie hayden-howard. I've given her that information from the federal register. August 13th, 2024. You have not updated your policy to comply with the federal register and [1:46:58 PM] would ask you to do so. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> You're welcome. >> Mayor. That's all. Speakers for 56. >> Thank you. Members, I'm going to turn to the chair of the public health committee, council member Fuentes, for a motion on item number 56. She also has an amendment because it because it comes from a council, a council committee. We'll put a motion on the floor, and then I'll recognize her for a proposed amendment. >> Okay, colleagues, I approve. I move to approve a resolution directing the city manager to create a comprehensive rubric as a tool to assess and recommend which of the city's existing social service contracts should be fully funded, partially funded, or eliminated in the fiscal year 26 to 27. >> Councilmember Fuentes moves approval of item number 56, seconded by councilmember Velazquez. I'll now turn to council member Fuentes for a proposed motion to amend on item number 56. >> Colleagues, I move to amend the resolution for item 56 by making the changes shown in red [1:47:58 PM] line in the resolution draft attached to the motion sheet that was provided earlier via email, and is included in the backup. >> Councilmember Fuentes moves to amend item number 56. It is second by councilmember Velazquez. Discussion on the motion to amend. Is there anyone wishing to discuss the motion to amend? Without objection, councilmember Fuentes motion to amend item number 56 is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion on item number 56, as amended. Councilmember Laine. >> First, I. >> Want to thank chair Fuentes and the public health committee members and staff across so many different departments who've been working tirelessly to evaluate, improve and strengthen the stability of our social services in the face of increasing financial challenges. I add my voice as well, to say that our social service providers play a critical role in keeping our communities afloat, especially the most [1:48:59 PM] vulnerable. And I, as a council member, it is my job to advocate and make sure that these services reach my district and all of the city, including areas where many different jurisdictions overlap, causing unintended barriers and challenges for both providers and those seeking services. I am really pleased to see language incorporated that will ensure that gap analysis is performed, and that new partnerships are fostered where needed, to ensure that our city funded programs reach more of our city, including areas of increasing need. I look forward to continuing to collaborate with council member Fuentes, her office and city staff to create a sustainable social service provider network that that reaches every corner of our city. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Siegel. Thank you. Mayor. I just want to thank councilmember Fuentes and the public health committee for all of your work on this. This is an extremely important tool, very valuable. Obviously, these are very tough conversations that we need to have as a city. I want to ask the manager to chime in a little bit. I have a question for you, sir, if that's okay, and just really [1:50:00 PM] want to ask if you could provide an update on your overall effort to understand social service contracts, both within the public health department, but also, as I understand, a lot of the departments have essentially social welfare type contracts. And so I'm wondering if this tool would also apply to those kinds of contracts, and if you could kind of share the state of your analysis so far. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. I know miss Kerri Lang and her team are now working with all of the departments who have various types of contracts that are not typically and or specifically addressed in what I call the social service wheel, which is what we typically discuss. And that's the $76 million number that I think we've communicated pretty extensively throughout the budget process. There's some upwards of 200 plus million dollars with a myriad of different types of funding types. And so staff is currently in the process of analyzing those particular [1:51:01 PM] services and relationships with the departments and actually what they actually do and provide to the community and the funding sources to determine how we'll review those. My perspective and understanding, at least talking with miss Lang, is that we will be taking a look at all of those types of services and contracts and run them through this similar rubric as we come back to talk with the council, as well as go out and engage with the community. When it comes to level setting, on the amounts of funding, the types of programs we fund, any overlaps and or things that may be duplicative, as well as what we know that we will be able to work with some of our external partners, particularly other governmental entities, to really figure out how we meet the needs of the community, but then be able to come and share the insights as it relates to how that might unfold in the budget process. >> Thank you sir. That's all. Mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Velasquez. >> Thank you mayor. I just wanted to thank council member Fuentes for bringing this recommendation forward through [1:52:01 PM] the public health committee. And with the current financial climate that we're facing, it's important that we create a clear public facing rubric on how we're going to prioritize our investments. And more importantly, we need to engage with the folks who are providing these services to our community. Not this year, but in the years coming. Thank you again, councilwoman. >> Thank you, councilmember Velasquez. Any further discussion on the main motion? Councilmember Fuentes, I'll recognize you if you want to close. >> Thank you. And thank you, colleagues, for your comments. This resolution really builds off of acknowledging the reality that we're in. Just a few months ago, about $5 million were cut from our social service safety net that we have here in our city. City manager has been very open and clear on signaling that for the budget cycle that we will approach in the coming months, that there will be further reductions, that total amount, I think is still to be finalized, but at least estimated in the 14 to $16 million range. Of course, we'd [1:53:02 PM] love to see that lower. And I know that him and his team are working diligently to look at cost savings across the city. But knowing what's at stake, especially for social safety net, it was important that our public health committee take action and be responsive and providing policy direction. And so what this motion does for your consideration is really three things. It creates a comprehensive rubric to prioritize the city's current social service contracts, basing it or utilizing it, utilizing the austin-travis county community health assessment form to guide our investments. It also looks at exploring sustainable funding sources, partnerships, citywide cost savings, and other opportunities to prioritize ongoing investments. And then the third and key piece is conducting regular feedback with the community, ensuring that we have stakeholder engagement and community sessions available not just for this upcoming budget cycle, but knowing that this really this social service reset will will take some time to roll out. So those are key components that we want to make sure are part [1:54:04 PM] of the process. The months ahead are going to be really challenging for our community. And so it's important that we really anchor it in the feedback and and the values that we have as our city. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember members. The motion is to approve item number 56, as amended. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. Without objection. Item number 56 is adopted. Councilmember harper-madison, do you wish to be shown voting on this item? Okay, she votes in favor. So item number 56, without objection, is adopted members. That will take us to item number 83. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to pull up item number 83. And let us begin some of the speakers. And it roughly 2:00, we will go to our 2:00 time certain, but we might as well hear from speakers that have been here today. >> Joel Mcnew item 83 remote. [1:55:11 PM] >> Hello? Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Good afternoon. I am Joel Mcnew. I'm the president of safe horns and a certified practitioner in district nine. I'm speaking on item 83 because there's been zero communication from the city regarding the proposed ice kiosk in west campus, a neighborhood with unique safety needs and a high density of students. We have several questions. Location. Where will the kiosk be located? In west campus. Depending on location, it may impact accessibility, obstructing passageway, reducing pedestrian flow content control. Who will have the final authority to approve advertisers? Will there be strict regulations to ensure as are predatory or inappropriate revenue sharing? Will the advertising dollars generated in west campus be shared back directly for community suggested safety and [1:56:12 PM] infrastructure improvements? As far as engagement and feedback from other cities like Berkeley, they indicate that five year contract is too long for the return on investment, that the average engagement time is 11 per day, with an average of 90s per engagement. So they believe that the function is more like a bright billboard than an actual engagement tool. As far as safety, will the chaos the kiosk be integrated with emergency notification systems that specifically impacts our area in real time? And finally septet, septet crime prevention through environmental design. Wayfinding is a core component of septet. We formally request that septet language, specifically explaining the role of wayfinding and public safety, be included in the city code to properly educate the community and support our efforts to standardize septet [1:57:12 PM] in Austin to improve quality of life through intentional design. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Monica Guzman. Monica, are you there? >> Can you hear me now? >> Yes. >> Okay. Hopefully I still have my two minutes. A good afternoon, I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. Go, Austin. Vamos. Austin. Speaking in opposition to item 83. The signage often includes wi-fi, and those systems can be used to track cell phones. Our cell phones. Mine. Yours, the community's signage at bus stops and bike kiosks can be used to track both riders and persons passing by, as stated in the environmental commission's recommendations to council. We agree about the lack of public engagement where there should be more transparency. We agree with and support the commission's [1:58:13 PM] recommendations, especially to ensure data on users or passersby is never, ever collected and removed. Camera camera functionality of kiosks. Nonprofit consumer watchdogs post about digital screens violating privacy laws and northeastern global news advertisers are tracking your every move, even in places you thought were off limits. Those articles speak about our lives being tracked, from shopping interests to more personal private activities, including visits to medical, mental health and women's health clinics, places of worship and legal appointments. In the current political climate, we urge council to postpone item 83 to allow sufficient time for authentic community engagement, centering residents who are transit dependent. Transit dependent riders rely on public transit transit due to lack of access to private vehicles, I.e. Bikes and cars, and the majority of transit dependent riders are low income persons of color. Thank you. [1:59:13 PM] >> That is all the remote speakers I have. So I'm going to move to in-person. Kevin cook, rich Heyman, Gabriella Kane, Betsy Greenberg, Megan meisenbach, please come on down. If your name has been called. >> Please come down. Please begin. >> Good afternoon mayor council. My name is Kevin cook, and while I serve on the city of Austin landmark commission, I'm speaking solely in my personal capacity, not on behalf of any board, commission, organization or entity. The city has tried to remove billboards for 50 years with a complete moratorium 43 years ago. Why are we weakening this now? Recently, the intent was stated as facilitating residential development and public transit projects for residential. Couldn't that property owner simply decide to end their relationship with the billboard completely? It's not a condemnation by a public entity. It's the same as a developer owning any property with an existing long term tenant. Perhaps relocation makes negotiations easier for owners, but consider relocation will [2:00:14 PM] start the 25 year sunset clock on the remaining life of the billboard in the city policy for decades to ultimately remove all billboards. If we allow relocation within that sunset be a condemnation by the city, leaving the city on the hook for the state required reimbursement in 25 years. I would hate to see this being caught after the fact, leading to elimination of the 25 year sunset sunset clock for which we now make the billboards finally go away for transit. What cost savings are we looking at? Those routes are known. The cost is able to be at least estimated. We should know what this is worth. Is this not just creating a barrier somewhere else? Requirements in the draft are to be relocated to other transit corridors where we want them removed. And most important is this facilitating relocation of any billboards being condemned by txdot for the I-35 expansion, isn't txdot on the hook to pay for billboards or moved by 35 expansion? If we allow relocation within the city, then be on the hook to pay in 25 years, where might these billboards go? Please increase the 150ft to somewhere close to the original 500ft from residential or historic districts? I could not find a map, a map assigned districts. Could the public first see a [2:01:14 PM] map of potential relocation signage districts, preferably showing where commercially zoned lots will remain that have 150 foot distance from adjacent residential? To know where these might end up in terms of equity, scenic roadways are protected from billboards. Consider west Cesar Chavez is is protected. East Cesar Chavez is not I-35. The scar itself is not protected. East east Austin I-35 could become a dumping grounds for billboards relocated from other parts of town. Please consider that. >> Thank you. Sir. Miss Greenberg, why don't you go ahead? >> My name is Betsy Greenberg and I live in district nine. I'm opposed to item 83 and urge you to vote against any changes to the sign ordinance. Nobody likes billboards. And since 1982, Austin has not allowed new billboards, only allowing existing signs to remain as nonconforming. Uses. The current code has allowances for relocating signs due to right of way takings, as long as they are moved to an appropriate location in a commercial or industrial district. Item 83 will make such relocations easier, allowing signs relocated from the interstate [2:02:16 PM] to be built on urban roads only 100ft 150ft from residential uses. Ten years ago, changes were proposed to allow digital billboards. The city council directed the manager to conduct public stakeholder meetings. The result was a decision to prohibit digital off premise signs. This decision was successfully defended in a 2022 us supreme court decision. Now, without public stakeholder meetings, someone has decided that large off premise digital signs are a good idea. The selling point is wi-fi and wayfinding capabilities that are no different from smartphones. Kiosks are just digital billboards that display a sequence of advertisements with content that will that the sign ordinance will not be able to regulate. They take up space in the public right of way that should be reserved for pedestrians, micromobility and street trees, not for constant advertising. That will generate an undisclosed amount of revenue for Ike smart and the [2:03:16 PM] city. Ike smart city will say they don't use surveillance or artificial intelligence or collect data. Instead, they use a service such as placer.ai that does that job for them, raising serious privacy and public safety concerns. Please consider the costs and risks of this ordinance and vote no on item 83. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Gabriela king Guardia, executive director of latinitas, a nonprofit committed to digital equity. I'm here in support of item 83 and continuing the conversation for the proposed ordinance changes that would allow interactive digital kiosks in the public right of way. We have witnessed the success of the smart city kiosk program in San Antonio, where they have strengthened public access to information and community engagement. That experience gives us confidence in what that means for the infrastructure here in Austin. This initiative enhances connectivity, access and cultural engagement across [2:04:16 PM] Austin's diverse neighborhoods by providing a platform to showcase the creativity and achievements of our educational and cultural organizations. One of the most meaningful benefits is free public wi-fi for many families. We serve reliable internet access, and digital devices such as smartphones are not guaranteed. Digital equity is essential to education, workforce readiness, and civic participation. Latinitas looks forward to collaborating with the smart city team to maximize the impact of this initiative. This is more than signage. It is infrastructure that expands opportunity. I respectfully urge you to proceed with the hearings to amend the ordinance. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon, council and mayor. Thank you for being here and working for the citizens of Austin. I'm Megan meisenbach, district nine, judges hill neighborhood association, and I would like to talk just briefly. I think miss Greenberg laid out all the important things to [2:05:18 PM] consider. I think these signs take four feet around them, and you have probably witnessed, as I have, people who go to a restaurant to be with their friends, and they end up staring at the television. I think this is going to do that for drivers and perhaps other children and children who are near these signs. I don't think it's a good thing for Austin. If they go anywhere. I think it should be only downtown and certainly not at every bus stop, and I hope you'll rethink it and perhaps postpone it or stop it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Continuing on, Mary Sanger, Anita Shaw, Benjamin Henry Rosa morales, Lee Ziegler. >> Your name is called. Please come forward and take a seat. Welcome, miss Sanger. Thank you. [2:06:19 PM] >> My name is Mary Sanger. I'm in district nine and I'm a long, long, long term resident of Austin. I'm asking you today to vote against the changes in our number 83 in the city code ordinance, specifically against signing a contract for these digital kiosks. I believe it's downtown. They are really no more than flashing advertisements as shown by studies from other cities, that almost 80% of the material that is flashed out are advertisements, and it's really dubious to whether the city will receive any kind of real revenue from these. So I asked [2:07:19 PM] you to vote against them. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. Why don't you go ahead and begin? >> Benjamin Henry Lamar advertising briefly, I'd just like you to go ahead and support item number 83, specifically as it relates to the billboard relocations. It would be just a continuation of the existing structures in a different area. I think it's a pro public transit move, and I think it would help reduce taxpayer dollars. That's it. >> Thank you sir. Yes, ma'am. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Maria Rosa morales and I've lived in district nine for two and a half years. My husband and I love our home in our neighborhood. So from our front steps right now, when I step out, I see a crane on the right side of our home. And that's due to the I-35 expansion. It is a temporary disruption that we can handle by placing a permanent lit billboard at the [2:08:20 PM] other end of our home. On the other end of the street, we would be seeing a billboard 100% of the time, fully lit from our front yard when I step out or from our backyard, so completely ruining our sunset views. Our views would be directly affected, and our property from our property and nearby. I also speak on behalf of neighbors. This billboard would add constant visual clutter and take away from the character and livability of cherrywood. That's not acceptable for our homes and our community. I urge the council to protect the quality of life, character, and beauty of my neighborhood and others by voting against this ordinance change. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Appreciate you being here. >> Continuing on bill bunch, gibran Muhammad, Michael Whalen, Robert Schmidt, Jen read, Jeffrey Bowen. >> If your name's been if your name's been called, please come [2:09:21 PM] forward. >> And Jim walker. >> Mr. Whalen, are you waving okay. Please, sir. Go ahead. >> Yes. Thank you, honorable council members. My name is Bob Schmidt. I am a resident of cherrywood neighborhood association, or cherrywood, near I-35 in east Austin. And our neighborhood has been fighting a billboard that they have been trying to move in that would tower above our neighbor's backyard and tower over my street. If you can move for the next slide, please. For about the last two years, this ordinance change about billboards is wrong and should be defeated. Moving billboards closer to homes, apartments, and neighborhoods will cause serious problems. I understand that the main justification for this proposal is reducing city costs, but this is not accurate and this reason doesn't hold up under the formula required by state law. The average cost to condemn a billboard should be [2:10:21 PM] about $215,000. But if a billboard is moved close to homes and neighborhoods, the loss of the property value to the homeowners directly there and to the people on the street is going to way exceed $215,000. Homes represent people's life savings, my life savings and moving a billboard that reduces my value is not fair and not right. It also hurts the city's tax base. Also, the city would still be responsible for taking down and moving the billboard, which is certainly going to cost more money. So again, this is not done based on economics and saving the city money. Also, billboards under this new proposed ordinance can be moved anywhere in this around town as long as the property is 150ft from residents. This can happen anywhere in your districts, in your neighborhoods, and it will if this change is made. The second reason is that's been offered is to allow changes for housing and if that in fact is [2:11:21 PM] a real issue, study it and make it carefully tailored amendment that will allow housing to be built near billboards, but make sure it's on the same tract and that the housing is actually built, that it's not just an excuse to move it. I urge you to get citizen input on this and to study these issues. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Appreciate you being here, Mr. Bowen. >> Mr. Mayor council, my name is Jeffrey Bowen. I'm in district eight and I'm here talking on this subject for myself. So having watched the entire process in person and also on, on the on the city network, I found it very interesting that the the conversation and how it went when it came to the digital boards that they're talking about the kiosk ones, and it brought up a lot of different information. It brought up some information, and I started doing some research and also looking that we have an issue with the privacy issue, which [2:12:22 PM] as many of you know, has been brought up recently within within this town chambers regarding cameras and the parks camera, also license plate readers, those type of things. So the question popped in my mind going, how are we handling this towards a privacy issue? But I also noticed that during the the briefing that the the staff was providing to the planning commission, that there was a portion of it said that the city was going to be getting a minimum of $2 million a year. Now, whether that's true or not, we'll have to see. But I started thinking to myself, okay, is that part of the driver behind wanting to do this when we don't want cameras here for this purpose because of civil rights or whatever? We don't want this over here. But then this is okay. So I'm I'm really kind of confused as going, what are the real priorities here? Is it really about money or is it about making sure people have information? Is it about, you know, making sure that visitors [2:13:23 PM] can go to these different places? There's too many unknowns in this, and the public has a right to understand there has not been enough public information on this, and there's a vast amount of lack of transparency in this entire process. As for the big billboards, the existing rules need to stay in. Stay as far as I see it. So thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for this item have been called. >> All right. Thank you very much. Members. All the speakers on item number 83 have been called. What I would like to do, unless there's objection, is pause on item number 83 and go to our zoning matters. Take up those zoning matters. And then at the conclusion of those, we will go into an executive session. With regard to item number 83. Once that's concluded, we will come out and conclude item number 83 and then return to executive session for personnel matters. Without objection, that's what we'll do. So, miss Hardin, I [2:14:25 PM] will call on you for our laying out our zoning items. >> Thank you, mayor and council. I'm joy harden with Austin. Planning your zoning and neighborhood plan amendment agenda begins with item number 67 nppa 2023 0005.01. This item is being offered for consent first reading only. There is a neighborhood postponement to your April 23rd council meeting. Please note that this item was submitted February 9th of 2024. It received two postponements at planning commission and eight postponements at council. Two of those requests were at the were requested by the neighborhood. So with that, staff is offering this item for consent. First reading item 68 is c1 four. >> If I might just clarify, of course you're offering it as first reading. Tell me what is being. I want to make sure I [2:15:25 PM] understood what you just said about the proposed neighborhood postponement amendment. >> Yes. >> So we're not recommending the postponement amendment, correct? Okay. And we're recommending we go ahead and pass this on first reading only. >> Yes. Thank you. Item 68 is c1 four 2024 0015. This item is withdrawn and replaced with item 69. And item 69 is c1 four 2024 0015. And this is related to item 67. And again staff is offering this for consent. First reading. And again the neighborhood is requesting a postponement. It's related to 67 to your April 23rd council meeting. And just to speak to this a little more, the applicant amended their request to G N P, removing the db 90 from their zoning string. This amendment occurred after planning commission supported the db 90 request, so therefore the council can only move forward with first reading with the applicant's amended request of grv in P, these cases would [2:16:27 PM] return on your March 12th meeting for second and third reading consideration. Should you approve this item on first reading today. Is that okay? Item 70 npa 2025 0025.03. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. The rezoning is item number 71 c1 four 2025 0087. Again, this item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 72 is npa 2025 0012.01. This item is being offered as a neighborhood postponement to your March 12th council meeting. The rezoning item 73 c1 four 2025 0092. Again, this item is being offered as a neighborhood postponement to your March 12th council meeting. Item 74 is npa 2025 0025.02. This item is being offered as a neighborhood postponement to your March 12th council meeting. The rezoning is item number 75 c1 four 2025 [2:17:29 PM] 0079. Again, this item is being offered as a neighborhood postponement to your March 12th council meeting. Item 76 is c1 four 2025 0107. This is. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 77 is c1 four 2025 0090. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. It has a related item which is item 78 c1 four 2025 0093. This is being offered for consent on all three readings. Item 79 is c81496003 .20. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings with the following motion. And that I will read the motion sheet which reads. Amend part six, subsection C one is modified to read as follows. Number one. Parcel R, a eight cocktail lounge use is a a permitted use of up to a maximum total of [2:18:31 PM] 62,000ft S. If developed and used concurrently with an outdoor entertainment use, and be a permitted use up to a maximum total of 14,000ft S, not to exceed 4000ft S per use, or C a conditional use if developed other than a other than, as provided in section a or B of this subsection, and with that, that item 79 is offered for consent on all three readings. And lastly, item 80 c1 four 2025 0080. This item is being offered as an applicant. Postponement to your March 12th council meeting. 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, miss hardy. Members, do you have any questions of miss hardy at this point in time? Let me read the consent agenda and I will call for a motion on the consent agenda. Item number 67 is on first reading. Item number 68 was withdrawn. Item replaced [2:19:32 PM] with 69. 69 is on first reading and reading and is related. Item 67, 70 and 71. All three readings 72, 73, 74 and 75 offered as neighborhood postponements to March 12th. Item 76 7778. Our consent on all three readings 79. All three readings. But I separated out for purposes of pointing out that a motion sheet was read into the record by miss harden. And then item number 80 is an applicant postponement to March 12th. I'll entertain a motion and a second and then we'll go to public speaking. Is there a motion is made by council member Laine, seconded by council member Siegel. Now I will turn. So we have a motion on the consent agenda and I will turn to the city clerk. >> For item 67. We have the applicant, Joshua bruchmann, and also Marc Vallejo. [2:20:37 PM] >> Good afternoon. My name is Joshua zisman. I'm the applicant and I'm also the owner. >> Yes. Two minutes. >> I thought it was. >> This is on consent agenda. You're entitled to two minutes. Okay. >> Yeah, absolutely. Just let me know when I'm able to start. >> You can any time. >> All right. Mayor, it's great to see you and defend the dream the other day. Thank you for being there. Council members. My name is Joshua brunsman. I've been a long time member of this community. I'm a former huston-tillotson student. I actually lived off of Riverside and montopolis in 2011 as a student and student housing. I'm here today to discuss an incredible opportunity that I am presenting to you. If we go to actually the next slide, please, this is montopolis drive. I have 1.92 acres set for approximately 150 units. Next slide please. This is location. As you can see, adequate amount of affordability around us and dense housing. Next slide please. This is also going to be at the montopolis train stop that's coming. Next slide please. If we could actually go [2:21:38 PM] to the last slide I'd appreciate that. Right there. Thank you so much. This is a five minute walk to the future yellow line and montopolis in Riverside. It's directly across the street from the east Riverside corridor plan. And this is also less than a five minute walk to jd's market and the future train stop. If we believe in equitable transit oriented development, this is it. It's near transit. It's on a corridor. It's surrounded by multifamily and commercial uses. And importantly, it's vacant. No one's being displaced. Under the current residential zoning, only about 24 units could be built in. New homes in this area are starting around 600,000. This requires incomes of roughly 120,000 minimum to afford to get in. We're trying to create housing to serve a broader housing with grv that I'm proposing. It's a smaller site. Instead of housing 24 to 30, folks in these homes will be built under residential development. This could house hundreds of austinites, working families, young professionals and seniors and renters people who want to live near transit. I've stepped back from the db 90 down to the grv, as I felt that was more thoughtful and a [2:22:39 PM] balanced approach. I've been going through this since 2021 when Pio Renteria was in office, and here we are. I feel that this is a powerful location. If we're serious about housing supply and serious about making our transit investment work. Projects like this aren't the exception, they're the model. >> Thank you very much, sir. >> Is Marc here? >> Marc is ill this date today. >> Okay, then, for 69 I also have you, sir, Mr. Brunsman and also Marc. Great. >> Go ahead. >> All right. And again, you know we are here to invest in our transit. And for in order for this to succeed and to access housing in Austin, this is the kind of opportunity that we should say yes to. Apologies. I thought I had five minutes originally, so I try to rush it all in underneath the first two, but I am open to leave this for any questions. >> Members, you have any questions of the applicant on this item? Thank you very much. [2:23:42 PM] >> Thank you very much. >> For item 70, bill bunch. Also for item 71, bill bunch. >> I have seen Mr. Bunch. Mr. Bunch. I don't think he's here. >> Okay then on the merits of postponement for 72, I have Marva Overton. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. My name is Marva Overton. I am in district one and I'm the president of the blackland neighborhood association. And I'm just here today to ask you to vote for the postponement for the zoning cases that have been mentioned. These are two cases that will have a pretty significant impact on our neighborhood, and we are trying to weigh all the options and just need more time [2:24:44 PM] to come to a decision. So we are just asking for you to vote for the postponement. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> On the merits of the postponement for 73, I have Catherine tusk and Marva Overton. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Catherine tusk, and I'm here today to ask you to vote in favor of the postponement for item 73, for the particular streets of 2108 and 2110 east 22nd street. Our neighborhood has requested one until March 12th, and the applicant had agreed to it. And it's because we're our council member was not able to meet with us prior to today to next week. So we've set up a meeting with her office. Marva helped take care of that, and it will be next Wednesday, so we can go ahead and look at the things that locally she would know, as well as details that we could share [2:25:45 PM] with her about things that we're seeing. So we're requesting that you would go ahead and vote in favor of that postponement, since you know exactly how much zoning can affect a neighborhood and what that might end up to mean for us or for the people that are actually requesting it. Thank you very much. >> Miss Overton. >> Marc Overton, district one. Nothing additional to add, but just to request a vote for the postponement. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> For the merits of postponement on item 74. I have remotely Lee Ziegler. >> Good afternoon. Lee Ziegler, chair of the oak hill neighborhood planning contact team. Early last week, the contact team requested and now request a two week postponement, which the applicant accepted to review conditional overlay prohibitions and their impact. While the application seeks approval for the addition of [2:26:47 PM] vmu to existing use, to which the contact team has no objection, the property owner wants to allow the currently prohibited use of automobile sales. We recently learned the automobile sales would include 10% on-site accessory service. This could exacerbate water quality issues from the property to Ganes creek, as well as adjacent bank erosion. It totally sidelines the assumed objective for housing to allow approximately 95% impervious cover under the redevelopment exception, and, more importantly, ignores the site's proximity to tributaries of Ganes creek, where they converge and directly join Barton creek. We would like to ascertain additional facts from the conditional overlay generated Kia by transportation engineering consultants, wondering why would current restrictions on automobile trips at this congested, congested north mopac on ramp be eliminated before any site [2:27:49 PM] design or plan? It preempts any tia and the regulating to and convenient conveniently raises the bar for traffic impact impact criteria or baseline even prior to any site design. We request two additional weeks to sort out the facts. The contact team does not object to the addition of the emu, with full retention of the conditional overlay and other possible restrictions, please allow time to communicate with the assigned engineer, traffic engineer and district eight councilwoman Paige Ellis and a request for input. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Also for the merits of postponement for 74 bill bunch. I don't believe he's here for 75. I also have bill bunch. Okay, then I'll return to Lee Ziegler for the postponement on item 74. >> I beg your pardon? I've [2:28:49 PM] already spoken. >> You also signed up for 75. Did you want to speak on the postponement for 75? >> Oh, no. No, that. That's all I have to say. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Moving on to item 77, I have Philip Wylie. Josue Howard, Maricela Maddox, Megan meisenbach. >> Good afternoon, Phil Wylie. Speaking on behalf of the downtown Austin neighborhood association, we voted unanimously in support of this project. Appreciate it being on the consent agenda. And I think kind of the punch line on this is the area's proximity to 100,000 nearby jobs, as well as the public transit spine for the entire metroplex. And Guadalupe provides an outsized opportunity to support 50 over 50 mode share by 2039. Dana supports legalizing a greater abundance and diversity of [2:29:50 PM] homes throughout the city, but to the extent that policy makers and planners selectively relax land use restrictions to allow greater density, we urge them to prioritize areas best served by current and future mobility options. So I think part of what we're talking about here is, is we upzone 500 acres at the domain. We really need to understand the effect of not zoning 500 acres downtown. Next chart please. The blue is the the the subject site. Everything else that you see there are coffee shops. These are the coffee shops you can walk to. If you want to know what compact looks like, this is what compact looks like. Unfortunately, there are no coffee shops between Guadalupe, Lamar, mlk and 15th. We've successfully blocked all of them from coming in over the last several decades. Next chart please. This chart, if is [2:30:51 PM] a a view of early polling places that we have in Austin. There is no other place in the state of Texas where you can walk to three polling places in less than 15 minutes. The one to the right takes one minute. The one at the UT mall. I walked in six minutes and seven seconds, and the one at house park I didn't go to because you have to cross 15th. >> Thank you, thank you. Miss Myers. Marc. >> Hi, I'm Megan meisenbach with judges hill neighborhood district nine, talking about this property that Mr. Wylie had in blue there. Is it been a dry cleaner there for a long, long time? 76 years. We have a licensed professional engineer and professional geologist who has reviewed the potential health effects on this land because it still has dry [2:31:53 PM] cleaning chemicals on it. This is dry cleaning chemicals in high concentration in the soil and in the groundwater. At 615 west martin Luther king junior boulevard, and in spite of years of effort by the jack brown family and despite a tc certificate, the toxicity is such that it's potentially dangerous to workers who might come in contact with the soil during demolition and building, and the groundwater is only two feet there, so they could come in contact with the chemicals through the water. There's no further obligation of the applicant to clean up or remediate the site, or to monitor the contamination, unless the council attaches an obligation to the project or delays it until a restricted covenant is attached to the deed. And I know that you're very concerned about public [2:32:55 PM] health, and that's what this is, is a concern about public health. Thank you very much for your attention. >> Thank you for being here. >> Brad snow and is Betsy Greenberg. >> Here? She is. >> She donated time to Brad. So four minutes. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for having me here. My name is Brad snow. I am a as Megan mentioned, I'm a licensed professional engineer and geologist in the state of Texas and elsewhere. I, I have been working as an environmental consultant for almost 44 years. My specialty is the investigation and cleanup of contaminated soil and groundwater sites, and also sometimes sediments and surface water. And I have a lot of experience with the same chemicals that are found at dry [2:33:55 PM] cleaning and specifically the chemicals we're talking about are tetrachloroethylene, also known as pce. And that happens to be a chemical that is very persistent in the environment. It doesn't degrade readily in the environment, but when it does, it creates other chemicals that are even more toxic than the parent. The so-called daughter products are as as toxic as the others, and it's a known carcinogen. And so when I was reviewing the tc files related to this particular property, one of the things I noticed is that the tc voluntary cleanup program staff did not require jack brown cleaners to evaluate the possibility of vapors coming out of the soil and groundwater and entering into buildings currently or into the future and future buildings. And so that was alarming. I was [2:34:57 PM] actually quite surprised to find that result, and I felt like that they should have compelled them to do it at that time. But now that the property is is going to be redeveloped, I think it's a good time to impose some restrictions on the property use and or require them to institute some measures that would mitigate the possibility of those vapors coming into the building and creating a human health risk. And so some of these measures, one of them, one option that I've outlined, outlined for the developer, is that they could conduct a site specific vapor intrusion study to determine what the with the concentrations of vapors are in the ground. Now, in the soil above the groundwater. And or they can just go ahead and incorporate a barrier vapor barrier in the foundation of the structures that they're going to be building on this property. And so I think it's [2:35:57 PM] also important that future owners of this property become aware of these potential hazards, and that there be notices on the deed about the presence of those chemicals and that they're at concentrations in soil and groundwater that potentially could affect the breathing space for humans on on the ground floor. And as you know, that property is slated to be developed for retail on the ground level. And so it would be a way to protect the workers within the building. You know, imagine a barista at the coffee shop, for example, that was alluded to earlier. They're going to be potentially exposed to vapors, toxic vapors that could cause cancer during a 40 hour week, as an example. And so the screening levels that are provided by us EPA, environmental protection agency indicate that the concentrations in the soil and groundwater are particularly the groundwater are are so high [2:36:58 PM] that this could prove a health risk. And the other thing is, is the concentrations of the pce chemical was so high in the groundwater back in 2017 that it indicates that there's probably actual dry cleaning fluids stuck in the soil in the rock, and in its pure form, and not just as dissolved in the groundwater. And so that will act as a continuing source of contamination into the future. >> Thank thank you very much, sir. >> Yeah. >> Moving on to item 78, Joe sue Howard, Mary Selig Maddox, Megan meisenbach Brad snow also has time donated by Betsy are still here. Yes. So Brad will have four minutes and then Philip Wylie. >> Please go ahead. Thank you. >> Oh, okay. I think I provided my main points to you all about this, this risk. And I just would urge you to require the, [2:38:01 PM] you know, what is a prospective new owner to institute what are fairly meager expenditures to assure the future health, the health of future residents and commercial workers in that property. Miss meisenbach also mentioned that another risk would be workers on the site, not just in the retail buildings themselves, but also working in trenches. And it happens that the concentrations of one of the chemicals, one of the degradation products of pce is trichlorethylene, also known as tce. That chemical is present in the groundwater at concentrations high enough to pose a risk to outdoor workers and residents. And so you can imagine someone's digging a trench for a utility or whatever it is, and they're going to be they're going to be potentially exposed to contaminated soil that's in contact with groundwater [2:39:01 PM] because it's so shallow. The groundwater is so shallow, like two feet down. So that's a risk. And then also the risk that they would breathe in vapors while they're working with it in direct contact without a concrete floor providing some level of production protection. And so the the developer and the owner future owner have the opportunity to incorporate into the building design. These passive vapor barriers. You know, a lot of a lot of companies will do that anyway just for water vapor alone. But they can do it dual purpose here by putting a vapor barrier. Basically, they're spray on materials that they can apply to the to the ground that will seal the ground and and prevent it. They can put in a drainage layer that would allow any accumulated vapors to vent out passively, or sometimes with a pump with a blower. And so these are the kind of provisions they can make to [2:40:02 PM] protect the public. And I would urge you to require those as part of your approval of any zoning and and buildings. >> Thank you sir. Thank you. >> Any questions? >> Nope. I don't see any. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Phil Wiley again. I just want to close by mentioning that this property is not immediately adjacent to the local historic district that was proposed many years ago. If you look at the upper right hand corner, you can see that there are in in the Orange is kind of the the border of it. There's a buffer between there and, and the proposed site. And not only that, but I just walked by and I love the building. But at sixth and [2:41:02 PM] Guadalupe, there's an 875 foot tower by the bremen district. And I love the building, but the sensitivity from the backside of that building to the district is not at the same level of what's being proposed here. This is really a class act. It'll be a welcome addition for many in the neighborhood. And I just wanted to say I, I really appreciate the willingness of the development team to work not only with Dana, but with the judges hill neighborhood association and next chart, please. This is. The epicenter of compact. If if we can't put people here, I, I think we need to tell people that, that if we're not going to put them here, we're going to put them west of Lamar, we're going to put them west of I-35, we're [2:42:02 PM] going to put them west of Barton, or south of Barton springs and north of 29th. This is where we are supposed to put people in a compact and connected environment. And there are a lot of good reasons why we haven't, but I really think it's time. And thank you all for your service. >> Thank you. >> I called everyone for 78, so that just leaves 79 Zenobia Joseph. >> Thank you mayor council, I'm Zenobia Joseph. I'm speaking on the pioneer crossing, but I just want you to recognize that in the staff report, it specifies what is the applicant [2:43:03 PM] proposing as new benefits to go from 50, 50,000ft S to over a million for this indoor outdoor sports and entertainment space. And it says that the comment is not adequately addressed. It says that citing roadway and utility infrastructure improvements that are required by the city for the property to be developed is not a considered superiority element. But you're passing this on all three readings, and I didn't hear anything about what the applicant is proposing. There is some language in there about an art plan, but art in public places, usually that's about $110,000. You may recall July 24th, 2025. That was the art in public places item for the airport. Approximately $546,000 was allocated, so this really seems disturbing. I would ask you not to just pass all three readings, but perhaps just the [2:44:05 PM] one, and have miss harden tell you what is the community benefit. If you look at the draft resolution or the ordinance, it actually has in part six and eight, it just refers to the cocktail lounge. I want to remind you of the $47.9 million environmental protection agency grant that you received, and specifically that was 46 on today's agenda. It's the climate pollution reduction grant. I did write to oig underscore hotline at epa.gov. This particular item actually contravenes the language that you have in that particular grant. And so I would ask you to recognize there's no transportation in this area. East village is mentioned 425 acre development Samsung to apple. If you have any questions I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, mayor Joseph. >> You're welcome mayor. >> That's all the speakers for zoning consent members. >> As you've heard, that's all. The speakers have signed up on the consent agenda for our zoning items. Let me ask, is there anyone wishing to pull [2:45:05 PM] any item off the consent agenda? Okay, then I'll ask. Is there anyone wishing to abstain from the motion has been made and seconded to approve the consent agenda as read. So I'll ask, is there anyone wishing to abstain from voting on any item? Yes. Councilmember duchen. >> Thank you mayor. I would like to abstain on 67, 69, 77 and 78. >> All right. Anyone else wishing to be shown abstaining on any item? Anyone wishing to recuse themselves from a vote on any item on the consent agenda. Anyone wishing to be shown voting no. I have councilmember Velasquez being shown voting no on item 67 and 69. I will vote no on item 67 and 69. Councilmember alter will also be voting no on 67 and 69. Anyone else wishing to be shown voting no. All right [2:46:06 PM] then. Without objection, councilmember harper-madison, I want to make sure I just looked up and I apologize. Is there anything you want to be? You want to abstain or vote no on any item? Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate you acknowledging me. >> Thank you. Sorry I slow up. All right. With that being said, without objection, the consent agenda on our zoning items are is adopted, with councilmember duchen being shown voting no on 67 and 69, 77, and 78. Councilmember Velasquez, councilmember alter, and the mayor being shown voting no on items 67 and 69. Abstention. I thought I just cleared that as an abstention. No. If I if I did, I misspoke. Councilmember duchen is being shown voting is abstaining on 67, 69, 77 and 78, and the no votes are Velasquez, Watson and alter on 67 and 69. [2:47:06 PM] All right. That concludes the the zoning items on our agenda members. That will take us back to item number 83. And without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 83. The public hearing is now closed, and the city council will now go into a closed session to take up pursuant to section 551071 of the Texas government code. Of the Texas government code. The city council will discuss legal issues related to item number 83, which is to conduct a public hearing and consider an ordinance amending city code chapter 2510 to authorize larger signs in the public right of way that includes electronic images, lights, and off premise advertising to change requirements that apply to existing nonconforming off premises signs aka billboards, including when bill, if you're talking and you're not on the dais, you shouldn't be. And we [2:48:07 PM] hadn't voted on the item yet. Aka billboards, including when billboards can be relocated, where billboards can be relocated, and height requirements for relocated billboards and waiving city code sections 25, one, five, oh one and 25 1502 related to initiating amendments, public hearing notice and planning commission review requirements for amendments to city code title 25 and the. This is it's on the agenda indicating funding. The item has no fiscal impact. Is there any objection? Objection to the council going into executive session on the item? As I've announced it, hearing none. The council will now go into executive session pursuant to 551071 of the Texas government code. It is 2:49 P.M. Folks. We will be returning after the executive [2:49:14 PM] council appointees and we'll do well. But I'll announce that after we complete item number 83. Thank you. [3:36:51 PM] There's no. One. In. NICU until late. [3:38:29 PM] >> It's 338 and I will call the Austin city council back to order. On February 26th, 2026, we have been in a closed executive session pursuant to 551071 of the Texas government code to discuss legal issues related to item number 83. We're back in open session, and and we're all here. The chair will recognize the mayor pro tem. >> Thank you. Mayor. I want to make a motion to postpone item 83. I would say indefinitely. I don't know if we're quite ready to kind of, you know, put a date on there to to bring it back pending additional review. >> The motion been made by the mayor pro tem and seconded by council member duchen to postpone item 83 indefinitely. Is there discussion? Without objection? Item number 83 is postponed indefinitely. All [3:39:31 PM] right. Members. And members of the public. The city council will now go into closed session to take up five item four items pursuant to section 551074 of the government code, the city council will discuss personnel matters. Related item 63, which is related to the evaluation of the performance of and consider compensation of benefits for the city manager. Item 64 to evaluate the performance of and consider compensation and benefits for the municipal court clerk. Item 65 to evaluate the performance of and consider compensation and benefits for the city clerk and item number 66 to evaluate the performance of and consider compensation and benefits for the city auditor. Is there any objection to us going into an executive session on the items that I've announced hearing? None. Without objection, we will go into executive session at 3:40 P.M. For the members of the public. What will happen is when we complete this executive session, we will not have any other items on our agenda for [3:40:33 PM] this regular scheduled meeting. So I will come back in at the conclusion of that and adjourn the meeting, because we have no further business. But we will now go into executive session at [4:48:53 PM] it is 449, and the city council has been in an announced executive session. In that executive session, pursuant to section 551074 of the Texas government code, the city council discussed personnel matters related to items 63, 64, 65, and 66. We have now completed that closed executive session, and there is no further business to come before the Austin city council at this regularly scheduled meeting on February 26th, 2026. So, without objection, the Austin city council is adjourned at 4:49 P.M. Thanks, everybody. Have a good evening.