City Council Budget Meeting Transcript – 7/30/2026 Title: ATXN-1 Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 7/30/2026 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 7/30/2026 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. [9:59:07 AM] You're watching a meeting of the Austin City Council Council members [10:00:07 AM] July 30th, 2026, and I will call to order this meeting of the Austin city council. We have a quorum of the city council present. In fact, all members are present. And, we, are meeting in the city council chambers, which are located in city hall at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. Let me quickly run through what we're going to do today. Item number one on the agenda is the presentation and discussion of the city manager's fiscal year 2026 2027 proposed budget. What we're going to do is we have a number of people that have signed up to speak on this item. We're going to go to speakers on item number one, and then we will have the presentation and the discussion with regard to that item. Item number two is a resolution related to the maximum proposed property tax rate. We have a couple speakers there. We'll do that. And then we will have that discussion. Item number three relates to the city charter and whether or not we are going to have a number of items on the proposed [10:01:08 AM] charter election. This year we will bring that up. We have some people to speak on that. And then we will, also walk through those, everybody will be allowed to speak on individual items with regard to that. So they'll speak on item three, a, three, b3c, and that's how we, the council will take those up. We will vote on each of those individually about whether to put them on the ballot. Item number four is related to a financial services contract. And then depending upon where we are today, we may recess at that point and come back for the 3:00 public hearing related to the city of Austin budget for fiscal year 2026 and 2027. And we have a number of speakers signed up on that, for purposes of the calendar. And everybody kind of keep up with where we are on the calendar. I've just gone through today's agenda, but next Tuesday, August 4th, we have not, currently put any items related to the budget, [10:02:10 AM] but we are currently scheduled to have a meeting on the fourth to address a potential bond election. We may have some issues related to the budget on that day. However, the fourth is the day that by the end of business on the fourth, we have asked that council members and the mayor have any proposed amendments to the budget and any proposed ifc items from council, to the budget by the business on the fourth. On August 6th, we will have at that point in time a discussion by the council regarding those proposed amendments and proposed ifc. We will also take up issues related to the ordering of a general election, special charter election and a special bond election. If that's necessary, then. Wednesday, August 12th, Thursday, August 13th and Friday, August 14th. We will have issues related to the budget approval. So members. With that, we will now go to item number one, which is the [10:03:11 AM] presentation and discussion of the city manager's fiscal year 2026 2027 proposed budget. And I will turn to the city clerk and ask for you to please call people so that they can speak on item number one. What I will say to those of all that are here, the way she will do this is she will call three, four, five names at a time. We would ask that if you're here and you wish to be heard, that you go ahead and get up and come down front. And if there's an empty seat here at the table, take one of those empty seats. That way we'll know that you're here. If there's not an empty seat. But your name has been called, please take one of these seats at the front of the auditorium here. And we'll make sure that you're heard. We ask that you please state your name for the record before you begin your testimony. With that, I'll turn it over to the city clerk. Unless council, you have any questions or comments. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Mayor, I've got a couple remote speakers. We'll start there with Gabe reed. >> Good morning, ladies and [10:04:12 AM] gentlemen. Council people, I want to start by thanking you for your service to the people of Austin. I am representing the universal tech movement, and I want to be clear that I support the community investment budget. And just to highlight some of our work Wright, last year, we served over 300 unique clients and this year we have over 500 more clients with applications we have received. And, the average wage increase that we see is, 3000 among the clients that we serve with, from occupational training, job placement support, even services along the lines of digital equity, helping them get access to wi-fi computers, teaching them how to use emails [10:05:12 AM] and, the skills to enterprise pipeline. And just want to emphasize that, you know, we are humbled to, to speak before you all. And, you know, this is why we support the community investment budget, because we are seeing lives transformed, among austinites. And we only want to continue to see austinites lives transformed, particularly those that may be come from vulnerable, backgrounds, whether that is, unhoused, whether that is, reducing recidivism. I was just talking to a client yesterday that said he's sleeping in his car. Another client that just signed up said that, he just got out of penitentiary. So, really want the, the people's hearts to be moved to support this. >> Thank you. Stephanie [10:06:14 AM] Hernandez. >> Hi. Good morning. My name is Stephanie Hernandez and I am the unit supervisor for the rapid rehousing department of family elder care. What is rapid rehousing? It's a lot what it sounds like we work on we work one on one with older adults experiencing homelessness and quickly get them into housing. Almost all of our clients have been chronically homeless, and our job is to get them to a place of stability. Finding housing. It is the crucial first step because it's nearly impossible to get ahead when you don't have a place to sleep at night. But honestly, that's when the real work starts. Once our clients are housed, the goal is to get them healthier, find work, increase their income, enroll them in benefits so that they, when our assistant ends, they can remain stable, housed. However, this takes very close intense case management. On an [10:07:14 AM] interesting personal note, I was once in a somewhat similar situation because of a fad. Because of a few bad breaks. My husband and I were also unable to afford the place that we lived in. So we moved in with my mother in law. However, she created weekly tasks for us, similar how we do with our clients, individual service plan. And we just kind of had to learn how to budget, spruce up the resume, you know, apply to different jobs, take online education courses. And we had to show her each week what we had done. And it worked. It actually worked. But not everyone is lucky as I am to have a mother in law or a support system like I did. Many people have nowhere to turn to and that's where family elder care steps in. I'm proud to say that the last year alone, 82% of our clients enrolled were able to find income, maintain it, or increase it because of the support that they received from family elder care. We cannot go backwards now. We [10:08:14 AM] have so much momentum, especially in our rapid rehousing program. We have learned so much. >> And thank you very much. >> So many tweaks to our program. >> Jennifer Palmero. >> Hi, I'm Jennifer Palermo. Good morning. I see that you guys got my message from last week about funding the safe alliance. Thank you. Please be sure to go ahead and formally contract with them again this year. However, here it comes. I finished going through the proposed budget and I noticed that as far as cuts, they were generally directed towards schools and persecuted social groups, Asian immigrant communities, black business, Mexican arts, and other Latino groups. I make no commentary about intention. However, I am hereby formally demanding a racial and educational equity impact statement on the proposed budget to make sure that this is not unjustly impacting those groups, or to [10:09:14 AM] simply raise the funding for the community investment budget. Speaking of impact, just so you guys know, in case you didn't already, there are people planning a rally for Antonio Williams outside of city hall today at 6 P.M. He was the victim of a suicide by cop that resulted in his fatality. You guys have already heard the statistics before, but suicide by cop is the cause of up to one third of all killings by cops. And there's actually training to prevent that that has been offered to APD. Suggested pushed on APD multiple times before, and they continued to refuse to actually take that training. Now, no matter how you feel about police politics, APD et cetera. Et cetera. Austin cannot cut funding to schools and persecuted social groups while giving raises to police who are refusing to be schooled and who are involved in deaths and suicides of members of those groups. So again, I am formally demanding an equity impact statement or that you raise the [10:10:16 AM] cib, as we've been asking. Also, no raises for APD and require the suicide by cop prevention training. Thank you so much. I'm reporting in from the district of rich Hayman. >> Nikla for tanner. >> Hello. Good morning. This is niloofar Cecile and tanner from universal tech movement. As the director of strategic partnerships and global impact, I support the community investment budget. At utm, we address community safety and stability at its root by replacing economic vulnerability with workforce readiness, structured tech education, and systematic barrier removal for communication for communities and individuals in need. In our last year's program, we served around 380 unique clients, earning industry credentials and securing high tech roles with an average annual salary [10:11:16 AM] increase of $30,000, providing that workforce development and training service far better preventive measures to enhance safety and reduce crime. Thank you, and thank you for your service and this opportunity for testimony. Have a good day. >> Courtney Jones. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is Courtney Jones. I proudly serve on the board of directors for family elder care. I am also a social worker, the founder of change one, and someone who has experienced both foster care and homelessness. Those experiences have taught me that things that I will never forget. Public safety starts long before a 911 phone call. I know what it feels like to need support before a crisis becomes an emergency. I also know what happens when that support isn't there. That's why organizations [10:12:17 AM] like family elder care matters every day. Family elder care helps older adults and adults with disabilities remain safely housed, connected to care, and supported before they reach a crisis. These services prevent emergencies, and they also reduce the strain on public systems and strengthen our communities. As you may have to make this difficult budget decision, I ask that you view the support services from an investment, not an expense. When we reduce funding from prevention, the need doesn't just disappear. It simply becomes more expensive. Through emergency rooms, shelters, law enforcement and other crisis responses before reducing funding from essential community services. I urge you to exhaust every opportunity to find other ways to preserve this funding for our community. Supporting family elder care is [10:13:17 AM] not compassionate. It is a financial responsible thing to do. When Austin is invested in prevention, Austin is stronger. Thank you so much, I appreciate you. >> Alexis Herth. >> Hi, my name is Alexis Harris. I'm a concerned citizen reporting from district six. Krista. Laine. So next year, city employees are getting a 3% raise, which is mostly consumed by the 33% increase in their health care premiums and a tripling of er visit costs. Vital city programs like parks and rec and Austin community college are struggling with funding and staffing that they have, and they're looking at hiring freezes and layoffs. Jobs are scarce, food is unaffordable, housing is unaffordable. Meanwhile, the proposed budget suggests giving a permanent 6% raise to the already bloated APD budget. APD is already over a third of the entire budget, close to 3,637%, [10:14:21 AM] and increases any increase we give them is gone forever thanks to state level meddling. So either this is something that you want to do, which makes the APD more more bloated, more powerful, while the rest of our social systems starve, or you're playing into Abbott's hands, we've already locked in any raises and we shouldn't be giving them anything else at this point. Luxury condos sit empty while our neighbors are forced to live outside and attack the city. The unhoused do not need encampment management. They don't need shelters. They need permanent housing. We spend more money managing the unhoused than we ever would. Just giving them housing. Housing programs have worked well in other cities. So why aren't we going all out on that? Why have we decided that it's acceptable to treat our fellow humans like trash instead of helping them? We are supposedly a pro-social species and we need to act like it. The city council voted to give themselves a 40% raise in 2022, while my loved ones at parks and rec struggle to make ends [10:15:22 AM] meet, the council proposes giving APD a permanent raise right after they executed another black child, Anthony Williams, the second over a water bottle clear with. The council's priorities are and we are paying attention. An election is coming up and we need to refocus our priorities to center food, housing and mental. >> Thank you very much. >> Especially Sarah Williams. >> Hello. My name is Sarah Williams. I'm calling. As a concerned citizen and local nurse. I have worked with the unhoused population here in Austin for most of my career in nursing. I want to be really clear that when we send the message that we're increasing APD budget while cutting vital social services, especially those targeted toward our marginalized communities, we're sending the message that policing is the answer to make it very clear on what happens whenever a police encounter unhoused individuals under the camping ban. They sweep their tents. They throw away everything, including their medical assistive devices, any kind of leg amputation support [10:16:25 AM] that they have wheelchairs, it all goes in the trash. As well as their vital documents. Local organizations are working tirelessly to replace these things so individuals can get recourse and increasing APD's budget so they can make it harder on those of us who are supporting. The social strain is absurd. APD killed a child last Friday, and he is being labeled as death by cop or suicide by cop. They are not hitmen. There should never be an instance where a police officer is unable to deescalate and approach a situation, whether the person is armed or not. Like many of the people in my profession do, every single day we encounter individuals with guns and knives for self-protection, and we have never had an instance where they or my team has been fatally harmed in working with the unhoused population. So I want to be really clear about the message that city council is looking to send when they offer to increase APD's budget, because we can never get that money back due to the state interventions. Please, I urge [10:17:26 AM] you to put those millions of dollars towards services that actually help our community, that save lives rather than take them, and that keep our children safe and help support individuals experiencing homelessness across our state. It is vital that we look at what we're doing in the message that we send with these funds. It should not be that cops can kill our children without impunity. They shot that boy immediately. >> There was very much. >> Brigid Walter. >> Hello, my name is Brigid Walter. I'm calling from district seven. I would like to echo everyone's sentiments, stating that, funding for the police activity here in Austin, does not reduce crime, does not, help those statistics. If that's the logic behind funding these departments, what actually helps increase safety for everyone is funding for social services for the unhoused, for communities at risk. And I would just, I would [10:18:28 AM] like for this matter to be taken seriously. I think that everyone's made some very good points. And I think that it would be great if the city council and mayor could listen to the citizens and make sure that I can continue to be proud to live in Austin. Thank you very much. >> Peter Kim. >> Both members of Austin city council. I'm calling in to register my feelings as the constituent and taxpayer in Austin and as a resident of district one. And I want to make it very clear, not another cent for killer cops. I am absolutely livid to see that the current proposal grants APD an extra $13 million over what they're contractually entitled to. Why is this even a possibility? This, to me is a budget, a document that reeks of cowardice and cynicism. It is indicative of an administration that cares so much about looking like it takes crime seriously. That would rather bankroll an institution that has a history of murdering its own constituents than actually invest in the long term, [10:19:29 AM] community based solutions that would make all of us safer. In fact, it's actively disinvesting in them so that we can make more room for police dollars. The city manager is claiming that in order to balance the books, we need to slash social service contracts by 16.8 million. I want to reiterate this current budget is granting APD an extra 13 million. Am I really supposed to believe that the city, even with the failure of the TRE last year, cannot find the money to keep those programs alive because we live in the state of Texas? Once the police budget is increased, it can never be reduced again. And so why are we sitting here thinking about increasing it more than we need to, especially after council has been telling us over and over and over again that we all need to tighten our belts. So many of you on the dais right now voted to grant APD that ridiculous $250 million contract back in 2024, after swearing up and down that we had the money to pay for it. And now here we are with the proof in front of us that that [10:20:29 AM] was a big, fat lie. And so right now, this minute, mayor Watson, council members harper-madison Fuentes, vela, alter and Ellis do not allow this budget to pass as is unamended. Invest in our communities and not in killer cops. >> That was all the remote speakers we have this time. So I'm going to transition over to in person speakers. Andrew Hairston, Savannah Lee, Ellis molina, Victoria Lowenstein, baron Shelby Evans. Please come on down and take a seat at the podium. Be sure to state your name before you begin speaking. >> Please begin whenever you're ready. >> Good morning, mayor, mayor pro tem and council members. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm with equity action and a resident of district one. I'm here today in support of the community investment budget. As we discussed public safety in this year's budget, I want to highlight two priorities from the community investment budget that are missing from the proposed budget, but are essential if we truly want a [10:21:29 AM] safer Austin. First, there should be absolutely no increase to the already bloated police budget. Let's be clear the supreme court has repeatedly held that police have no legal obligation to protect us. Yet this budget proposes cutting programs that prevent crime, reduce recidivism, and address the root causes of violence, while continuing continuing to invest in a department that has cost taxpayers millions and use of force settlements over the last 15 years. That isn't public safety. It's a failure of priorities. Our community has made its position clear. We cannot afford to spend another dollar expanding the police budget. Second, last fall, council member lane's resolution directed the city to explore creating a joint emergency communications department. The community investment budget calls on council to create that department this budget cycle and move the civilian call takers currently housed within APD into it. Public safety starts with sending the right response, the first time Austin has invested in alternatives like mental health and community based response programs. But those investments only work if our dispatch [10:22:30 AM] system is designed to connect people with the right responders when they need them the most. If we want a budget that reflects our values, we have to invest in the systems that prevent harm, not just respond to it after the fact. I urge you to adopt the community investment budget and prioritize the investments that will make Austin healthier, safer, and more accountable. Thank you. >> Please begin. >> Hello, my name is Victoria Lowenstein, and I don't know which district I'm in. I'm in unincorporated address. Listen, I know that you guys are doing the best that you can, and I think that there is a definite need to do better, right? We're always trying to do that every single day. So my biggest issue is that there's no operations management model and pipeline for like, there's no theory of management basically. The, I'm here to say that like when it comes to the community budget, I am representing the fact that it is not a professional budget. [10:23:31 AM] It isn't like we are spending 72, 000 per person in chronically unsheltered Ness. The holding yourself accountable. There's a, there's a whole document sent to you. I made an operations management model out of all your documents from city and county. I was able to do that. So the fact that we can do better has come across my lap, and the how to do that has become very evident. Now, my question is, why wouldn't we, do better with the community investment budget? Because I don't follow anyone. I follow my own path. I am a person facing domestic violence and horrible circumstances right now that I'm trying to get through. And I know that without like the American, African American foundation to give me therapy, I don't know what I would do. I've been through some horrible stuff. So I think we really need to be a little bit more motivated. When [10:24:31 AM] you look at how you're doing your budget, okay, and where you stand as a city. I'm, I, I, I think that it just top down, bottom up harm reduction model, conflict resolution, risk management and restorative justice models are required. >> Thank you. >> Emily Witt, Ashley Copeland, corby jastro, Susan Spataro, Jeff Dickerson. >> How about we start with miss Spataro and we'll work our way down the. Okay. >> Susan Spataro, district eight. And I would want to talk about the police budget, but I want to start with this quote, which was just yesterday, and that is the council on criminal [10:25:32 AM] justice. Nationwide studied crime rates in 30 major cities. They went down 31%. But now read this. However, there were four cities that had an increase between 2019 and 2026. The largest was Austin, with a 74% hike in reported homicides. We ought to be concerned about that. Our police department is not getting a big fat padded raise. That that is not true. The police budget, and I'm going to round this off in 2526. That's this year 525 million. It jumps to 549 million in the new budget. That is a 4.6% increase. Now, the important thing about that, and it's kind of an accounting thing, the big increase is in a line item called transfers, debt service and other support services. Now what does that mean? That means and this is kind of a governmental accounting thing. You put the money in the top [10:26:33 AM] and you shoot it out the bottom. It's like indirect expenses. In other words, the chief does not control that. An example might be it's not a line item budget. But if, for instance, central hr helped the police department, that's charging them. So the fact that those kind of the police budget this year, 20% of it is, is in that the police have no control over support services. They have no control what it costs in hr or it. So it's unfair to say that there's a bloat in the police budget. When you look at the increases, what you see is support services. That's this indirect increased by $15 million. In other words, it is a 13.3% increase. Thank you. >> Mr. Castro. >> Good morning. My name is Kirby jastro and a resident of district ten. Thank you for allowing me to speak today and [10:27:33 AM] appreciate the thoughtful approach to the city's budget and your continued commitment to public safety. As budget discussions continue, I encourage you to preserve the proposed funding increases for police, fire and ems. These investments are critical to maintaining the level of service that Austin residents expect and deserve. From our perspective, at the central Texas public safety commission, we regularly hear from first responders about the resources that make a tangible difference in their ability to serve safety, their ability to serve safely and effectively. Having the right staffing, equipment and support benefits first responders directly and impact response times, emergency outcomes, and community confidence. Public safety is one of the most fundamental services a city provides. Continuing to invest in the people who protect Austin is a long term investment in the health, safety and resilience [10:28:34 AM] of our entire community. Thank you for your leadership and your continued support of Austin police officers, firefighters and Travis county ems medics. We. We appreciate your partnership and hope you'll continue to prioritize these essential investments as this budget moves forward. >> Thank you. Thank you sir. Yes. >> Good morning, and thank you for giving us the time. My name is Ashley Copeland. I'm the chief operating officer at the central Texas public safety commission. And we just want to stand here today and say thank you for prioritizing public safety into the proposed budget. We truly appreciate the leadership of all of you guys and the recognition of the important role that our police officers, our firefighters and our medics play in keeping Austin safe. We would like to encourage you to preserve the proposed investments in police, fire, ems. These are investments in people who answer the call for our safety every hour, every single day. Maintaining these increases [10:29:34 AM] means departments can continue recruiting and retaining qualified personnel and provide equipment for first responders that they need safely to to do their jobs, as well as provide training to encourage and support our first responders. So they show up, effectively in the way that they need to. At the central Texas public safety commission, we have the privilege of working alongside these agencies every single day. We see firsthand incredible dedication and sacrifice of the men and women serving the community. And I personally want to say thank you to them today. It has been the best, most eye opening part of my job is to see behind the scenes how much work that is put into the thoughtfulness put into keeping us safe every day, and the sacrifices that are made, whether it's responding to a fire, providing life, saving medical care, protecting neighbors during emergencies, they consistently put others before themselves. And today, as the chief operating officer of the central Texas public [10:30:35 AM] safety commission and even more importantly, as a mother of four, I truly believe that whenever our community invests in first responders, all F us will benefit. In the end, these investments strengthen public safety. They improve response capabilities and ultimately make Austin a safer place to live, to work, and most importantly, to raise a family. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Dickerson. >> Good morning, mayor, council members. My name is Jeff Dickerson from district five. I'm here to ask you to reject the new spending in the budget. In its current form, residents are being asked and told that difficult choices are necessary and programs must be reduced or eliminated. Yet the current budget continues to show spending increases. Looking at the presentation above, you can see I highlighted five areas which is new spending as well as new o&m that are coming out of general fund. The issue is [10:31:35 AM] not whether these programs have value, the issue is priority and accountability. Before asking homeowners for higher taxes increases, let's do a full audit review. Eliminate unnecessary consultant fees, measure outcomes using true fiscal and verifiable outcomes. Do all these items before increasing the tax burden. Residents are already facing higher property insurance, utility fees, inflation this government should not automatically grow faster than the residents ability to pay. Please adopt a budget that starts with efficiency, accountability and prioritizing core services before asking taxpayers for more, I'd like to make one other comment on the previous speakers that say this service police, social services. It's not one or the other. It's the combination of policing, [10:32:36 AM] social services and citizens involvement that make Austin safer. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Sundiata, Allen, Connor, Chantelle, Chantelle, Devin, voorsanger, Monica Guzman, Benjamin Kramer, Daniela silva. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. Sir, as soon as you're ready, you can begin. Just state your name for the record, please. >> Devin voorsanger. Good morning. My name is Devin voorsanger. I'm a resident of district nine and I work in district one. And I'm here today in support of the community investment budget, because I believe public safety and workforce development are not two separate line items. They are the same investment seen from two different angles. I lead entrepreneurship and workforce programs at universal tech movement. What I see every [10:33:37 AM] day is simple. A person with a real pathway to a good job as a person who is stable. Stability is the foundation of safety. When someone has a career they can build a life on, they are less likely to end up in crisis, less likely to end up in the justice system, and less likely to need an emergency response at all. Workforce development is not an alternative to public safety spending. It is one of the most effective public safety tools this city has. That is why the $2 million allocated to workforce development in this budget matters so much. Alongside the 4.3 million for the office of violence prevention. These are not competing requests. A young person connected to a mentor and a career pathway through the workforce grants is a young person. The office of violence prevention never has to intervene with later, a resident who secures a good paying job through these programs is less likely to need the trauma recovery center or community violence intervention services down the line. Prevention and opportunity work together. Stopping the problem upstream before crisis ever happens. I know this council has real steps in recent years towards investing in [10:34:38 AM] community based programs, and that progress is worth protecting. This year's proposed budget grows the Austin police department by roughly $25 million, while asking social service contracts the same upstream workforce and prevention investments you helped us build to absorb those $16.8 million in cuts, I'm asking you to build on the progress already made, not step back from it by keeping the police budget flat and fully investing in the programs that keep Austin's workforce and Austin's neighborhoods stable. I urge council to fully fund workforce development, protect the office of violence prevention, keep the police budget flat, and support the community investment budget. Thank you for your time and for investing in the safer and more stable. Austin. >> Thank you sir. Please begin whenever you're ready. >> Good morning. My name is Benjamin Kramer. I'm a district nine resident and chief education officer of Austin pbs, located in district four. I'm also wearing sesame street socks, but you can't see those right now. I come before you today to ask you to maintain current funding for Austin pbs play to learn program, part of [10:35:39 AM] the ready families collaborative, currently funded by Austin public health. For more than a decade, our research base play to learn program has has served income eligible families with children ages 2 to 5. Whether children are about to enter pre-k, three, pre-k, four, kindergarten, or first grade, every parent who completes the program. Reports noted improvement in their child's age, appropriate school readiness skills and traits. The benefits extend beyond academics. Play to learn builds community for often isolated parents, typically mothers, and increases social contact for children. Our trusted staff connect families to additional community agencies and support services. This is especially important if we note a particular need that can be addressed during the key years of brain plasticity, social emotional development, and physical growth. Play to learn is also a wise investment. The ten week program costs just over $1,000 per family. Think about how these costs are recouped if we successfully transition a child to a public [10:36:40 AM] school, pre-k or Kinder school ready that they may not have attended otherwise, consider how school readiness at pre-k or K Kinder paves the way for subsequent transitions through grade levels, without costly retention or interventions. Consider how early detection of special needs can lead to early intervention, and reduced future needs for special education and other additional services. And think about how a joyful first schooling experience affects participation in later school and community life. If we are going to achieve the aims of generation atx, I urge you to maintain funding for the ready families collaborative. This modest investment in children and families will pay economic and social dividends for years to come. Thank you. >> Elmo would have enjoyed your testimony. Appreciate you. >> I have another remote speaker, Sarah Walter. [10:37:41 AM] >> Hello. My name is Sarah. I'm a resident of district one. And as the council considers the budget, I just want to point out that given recent decisions such as dogs head and, recent events, there's some trust that is at stake here. And I'm really encouraging you to listen to residents of Austin and especially groups like grassroots leadership, Austin justice coalition and others. I want us to preserve, the public good. And as we think about public safety, I really think it's important to define it. And some of the other speakers before me, really spoke to this, I want to preserve parks and libraries and improve them. And I also want to provide social services with my tax dollars. I want them to go towards these important needs and not towards a 24 million plus increase in APD's budget. I think you should keep the budget flat because this police force has [10:38:42 AM] shown time and again that they can't act according to their stated purpose, which on their website says they are there to create a safer Austin while serving the community in a way that bonds our police officers to its citizens. And I want to ask council, you know, are they doing their job? And if they're not, why are we giving them more funding? If I were not performing my job duties according to my stated purpose, I would not be getting a raise. Money is the only leverage we have as a city to make real change. And Anthony L Williams should be alive today. I've been sickened and saddened that this child has been silenced. And immediately, police chief Davis blamed him for, the cops who committed horrific violence. Instead of calling for an investigation. I want to see council include Austin residents in police oversight. [10:39:42 AM] I want to make. >> Thank you very much. >> These investigations. >> Andrea Abel, Lianes flores, Michael ward Jr, Hannah Thornton, Britten, Calvin, Alicia. Fishwick. Weicker. >> When we begin here and we'll go this direction. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Andrea Abel. I'm executive director of farmshare Austin, and I live in district three. I'm here specifically to address the line item in the a P H budget labeled $400,000 reduction in funding that supported the convenient healthy food program in previous budgets. This line item may have healthy food access. Since 2016, Austin city [10:40:44 AM] council has included this line item in the budget to support healthy food access initiatives, which includes a $255,000 annual contract for farmshare Austin to run fresh for less mobile markets and home delivery. Fresh for less serves over 33000 people year round with access to reduced price, affordable, high quality produce and healthy groceries in 25 high need zip codes across Austin and Travis county. In nine out of ten city council districts, we have a ten year record of providing critical food access, exceeding deliverables, and being efficient stewards of public funds. We are low cost, not no cost. We are upstream. We are enabling customers to shop with dignity and pay with snap double up food, bucks, cash or credit card. 95% of our customers increase their fruit and vegetable consumption. 60% of our customers have household incomes of $35,000 a year or less. Our mobile market [10:41:45 AM] partners include three central health sites people's community clinic and foundation communities apartment complex. Our home delivery targets people with mobility challenges who otherwise may not be able to leave their homes easily to grocery shop. We also leverage fresh for less to partner with ascension Seton on food as medicine and lone star circle of care also on food as medicine. This investment is more than food. It's about preventing chronic disease, reducing reliance on emergency food assistance, supporting local farmers, and improving health outcomes across our community. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Please go ahead. >> Hello, mayor and council members. My name is Hannah Thornton and I live in district three. I am speaking to ask council to reinstate proposed budget cuts for social services while holding flat funding for the Austin police department. I want to speak specifically about the fresh for less program, which the proposed budget cuts in a targeted manner. Fresh for less brings mobile markets with fresh fruits and vegetables and [10:42:46 AM] nutrient dense pantry staples to community spaces throughout the eastern crescent. For example, on Thursday mornings at the southeast health and wellness center on montopolis, you can bring your kids to their doctor's visit and then purchase farm fresh vegetables for dinner using your snap benefits. The fresh markets run multiple programs to keep this food affordable for shoppers, including nutrition incentive programs that cut the cost of produce in half. There are cost effective, innovative approach to bringing fresh food to food insecure communities. The proposed budget cuts a program like fresh for less that provides accessible, nourishing food to low income shoppers while increasing the budget for APD, a department that has seen dramatic budget increases year over year and has a track record of actively harming black and brown communities in Austin. This budget does nothing to address that pattern or to hold APD accountable for its failures. I'm asking council to fight for a budget that funds innovative and nourishing programs like fresh for less, while holding the APD budget flat and investing in community violence intervention strategies that can mitigate or [10:43:47 AM] prevent the harm caused by police in our communities. In short, masking council to value and support the lives of its constituents. For the city to truly thrive, we need every one of us to be nourished and cared for and to be able to walk the streets without fear. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. It's a pleasure to be here. My name is Michael ward junior, and I'm with district one. I'm the president and CEO of universal tech movement and co-founder of two word solutions and two words, one love. And I serve on several different local boards here in Texas. I'm speaking today with equity action in full support of the community investment budget. I'm wearing this love our city church from my church grito mount Zion. Shout out to y'all as a reminder of why we govern today and the work that we do is all around caring for our people. The proposed budget allocates 549.6 million to the Austin police department, representing roughly $24.2 million increase. Meanwhile, social service grants face 5.35 5.35 million cuts. That eliminates 24 vital community programs while slashing 53 others. We know there are far more effective [10:44:48 AM] ways to reduce crime and increase safety. Stream research from the university of Texas at Austin proves that $1 invested in job training returns $4.10 to our local economy. Local safety studies from Austin shows that technical training reduces recidivism by 21%, and Houston studies right across the pond proves that job placement rates. That job placement allows us to reduce rates by 60%. Government and nonprofits are supposed to collaborate to address these community gaps. Just yesterday at the city of Austin equity office webinar, they had a slide that stated every department, every decision. Together, we shape economic mobility, cutting livelihood, and digital access directly contradicts that shared goal at universal tech movement, a proud funder of a proud awardee of city of Austin, a licensed Texas career school on the etpl, we showed that collaboration looks like partnering with workforce solutions. City of Austin, Texas workforce commission. We help residents earn over 180 certifications [10:45:49 AM] just last year, secure high paying jobs, and increase their wages by $30,000. This is what reduces safety, reduces crime, and increases safety. So I urge you to fully fund the community investment budget. Keep aptt budget flat, move 911 dispatch out of APD and expand workforce development services. >> Thank you. Thank you sir. >> Daria Deptula, lily Ann Ortiz Rivas. Why are you here? Is Shelby Evans here? >> They need to be in the council chambers if they're going to donate time. >> What about Courtney? Both outside. Okay. >> Please come down. Whenever you're ready. Just begin. Thank you. Yes, please. >> Good morning everyone. My name is Daria Deptula. I live in district nine. I was a [10:46:49 AM] teacher for five years and I'm currently a master of social work student. And I'm here today because it just breaks my heart that last week, a black child named Anthony Williams the second, lost his life just because he had the courage to reach out for help when he needed it. I may not be a licensed social worker yet, but I come from a long line of people who care. My mother is a therapist and my Polish grandmother was a psychiatric nurse in Poland right after the holocaust. You've all heard a lot of statistics today, and I don't think it's really necessary to repeat them, because at this point in time, I think it's really easy to prove that de-escalatory approaches to crisis intervention are much more effective than confrontational approaches, especially when it comes to mental health crisis intervention. And my little brother is a beautiful example [10:47:51 AM] of how a police officer can be a kind, compassionate, and caring person. Please keep the police budget flat. Black boys deserve to grow old. Thank you. >> Did Shelby or Courtney make it? >> I don't believe so, but that's okay. Council. I'm extremely disappointed that we are here. De- prioritizing city resources to strip our social programs over the police budget. I'm Wright district nine. Thank you. I'm against this 24.6 million APD. While we're cutting 27 of our social safety nets. I hate that we have to be here again. I hate that I have to be here to advocate for everyone I represent with my own identity, but also that I have to be here to voice the pain of our community has felt I'm zlatina if I call APD to get help, there is more than a likely chance I will get shot. And if I am read as white by a discerning cop, there is still a chance I get hate crime and [10:48:52 AM] not listened to. A 17 year old black child will not live a full life because the cops saw him as such a black child. If they had seen him as white, it would have ended differently and 20 shots would not have been discharged. I'm also trans. If I get assaulted at a club, I have no guarantee that I won't get choke slammed into the floor. As much as APD wants to go to the lgbtq quality of life commission and say that that video was taken out of context, it is also to be said that the lgbtq liaison that they brought to said meeting didn't exist, or at least when a community member present at that meeting tried to call the provided number, they were greeted with a different person entirely from the person who was in attendance at the meeting. If the worst happens and I do get raped, I want the gold standard of care from the safe program, not a squad car ride to a religious hospital, which is more than likely in the Austin area. That still retains the right to charge me for the night stay. Why must we give six figures to clean up [10:49:53 AM] graffiti? Why must we be taking away from our community when the city council. There are city council officials that make six figures. The community will exist with or without the current city admin. So then are we not charging a cent for doghead? Why did we try to expand highways and destroy aquifers that would have greatly impacted our water supplies? Why? Why why? >> Thank you. >> Eddie, Frans, Nadia Velazquez, Richard Gartner, David wolf, Donna Williams. >> If your name has been called, please come forward whenever you're ready, sir. Just state your name for the record. >> My name is Eddie Franz, executive director of delta jobs, co-founder of at peace. And at 9:00 this morning, we were out by the flagpoles, at delta jobs, life anew, African American youth harvest foundation, community impact and others. Praying for you [10:50:54 AM] because whether we agree on what your decisions are or not, it's a hard job. I get that as a Eid. I make a budget every year, and there are decisions in there that not everybody likes, but my god has asked me to pray for y'all, to give you wisdom and knowledge and guidance. And that's what I'm going to do today. I'm not asking for anything right now. I'm offering just to let you know that there's a lot of people in the community that understand the difficulties that you're going to go through the next two weeks. We're praying for you. We're here for you. We understand the difficulties. And, just want you to know that we might not always agree, but we believe that this city is one of the best cities in the nation, and that we are going to do everything we can to help you and to help community make that a reality every day. So thank you. >> Thank you. Please. >> Hello, my name is Nadia Velasquez and I'm a licensed clinical social worker. I have spent my career working exclusively with non-profits, providing mental health and other supportive services in [10:51:56 AM] the Austin community. Currently, I'm doing that with family elder care, accessible and affordable mental health resources in the Austin community are dwindling, but this isn't true for private practice groups. Private practices are seeing their clientele grow, and the reason why is because mental health care works and people are using it. But the challenge in the Austin community is that affordable and accessible mental health services are increasingly limited. In the past few years, Travis county has seen a discontinuation of several nonprofits, offering sliding scale to no fee services for marginalized populations. Even our own program has received a 10% cut. The elimination of these services makes it near impossible for our low income neighbors to access mental health services. And when people have less access to mental health services or community suffer, family elder care is the only nonprofit providing high quality mental health services to older adults and adults with disabilities in a home based setting, and 94% [10:52:57 AM] of our clients report that they would not be able to go into the community to receive mental health services by appointment due to lack of transportation or inability to pay their co-pays. Without mental health services, our clients may experience an increase in depression, anxiety, social isolation and also become more reliant on other community resources. Please stop any further funding cuts for family and family, elder care or any mental health service programs. Mental health services are a critical component to public safety. When individuals have access to timely mental health services, they are less likely to experience crises that result in emergency room visits, law enforcement involvement, homelessness, and incarceration. This means fewer demands on first responders and a safer and healthier community for everybody. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Hello. My name is Richard Gartner, and next month I will be a well seasoned 93. I know [10:53:57 AM] it isn't funny. I'm lucky enough to be to live in one of family elder care's affordable communities for older adults. Of course, we all know the cost of living keeps going up, and it's tough to get a place as decent to live in the city now. And there's a difference between having a place to live and having a place that is really home. Home feels makes you feel safe. Home means you feel peace. Home means you feel belonged. As a gay man, I can tell you that for most of my life I didn't feel like I belonged. I'm an actor, singer, writer and was in second season of Esther's follies. As we grow older, you know there are fewer and fewer of us. It's no fun living out living people you truly love. I've outlived friends, the mother of my children, and I've outlived my son. That was the hardest. As [10:55:02 AM] you get. As you get older. Excuse me. As you get older, you have different needs in the family. Elder care is great at providing for those needs. Affordable, affordable housing, help with enrolling in benefits counseling, finding social groups, help with paying bills, and budgeting. I really don't know where I'd be without family, elder care, and I. So I here, I'm here to ask you, please keep programs for older adults. Please don't think about us. And while I have a minute, when I say there's fewer and fewer of us, let me tell you, there's a whole lot more of us that are living a whole lot longer than every everybody with. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. And we. And if we don't see you between now and next month, happy 93rd. >> Judy Bradford, Jeffrey Bowen, [10:56:03 AM] Roxana Herndon, Ben sotheby, miss. Ale Ramos, Sarah. West. >> Good morning, councilors and mayor Watson. My name is Judy Bradford and I reside in district two. And I'm here to speak in support of the community investment budget and against the proposed budget. I struggled a lot with trying to make the best of these two minutes. These hearings feel so performative. So many come to you with facts, figures, passion and persuasive arguments that seem to fall on deaf ears. We all know that budgets reflect a moral choices of those who enact them. A budget is a community's ethics in action. This budget was proposed by a man who shows little regard for the cares and concerns of so many Austin residents. He prioritizes [10:57:04 AM] funding the police above all other needs in this community. His choices spell suffering, death and disaster. For so many of my friends and neighbors, you, the members of this city council, get to choose where our deeply constrained dollars go. You decide if we give the police double the funding they require, or if we close domestic violence shelters, defund neighborhood peacekeepers, flat line housing trust fund and cut social services across the board, you decide if we increase sweeps of encampments while cutting services to the unhoused. You have a choice. My ask of you is that you find the courage to stand up to this unelected public servant and make decisions that actually serve the people. We have come to plead for the lives of the most vulnerable people in our city, and are counting on you to be the compassionate leaders that we need at this time. Thank you. [10:58:05 AM] >> Thank you. Mr. Why don't we start with you and we'll work down the row? >> Good morning. My name is Ben sutterby. I'm a resident of district four, might I add? Vanessa, it's very good to see you. Felicidades. Weighty decisions being made today. I'm here as a proud afscme 1624 member. I want to remind you all, it seems like a long time ago, back before the break, a letter you received dated may 19th outlining our budget priorities as afscme. And I wanted to highlight some of the bullet points that were in that letter, a 3% increase for all employees. The second bullet point is the one that I really want to stress. And, and I have to add that I was saddened to not see it included in, city manager Broadnax memo last Friday, as an item of consensus because this one really makes sense to me, given the economic [10:59:06 AM] conditions that we're seeing a Progressive cola structure to better support the lowest paid workers, employees earning less than the mit living wage for Austin, which is $23.71 per hour, should receive a flat rate increase. That's where they need the most help. I understand that budgets are tight. So the question is, okay, how do we fund this? That same letter provides ideas for where to find savings to fund this. No creation of new executive level positions. No Colas for executive level positions. Those high paid high executives should be, you know, down prioritized while your lowest paid workers are are raised up on that. Am I mit living wage calculator. If you look at adding just one child to a single employee, their living wage then jumps to over $39 per hour. These are the conditions that your workers are facing. [11:00:08 AM] Please prioritize them. Civil service should be a D [11:20:15 AM] all right. It's 1120 and I will call back to order the Austin city council after a brief recess so we can make sure that our public feed was working. With that, Mr. Bowen, as much as it pains me, you get a second bite at the apple. >> Well, you know. >> Sir, and you know, I'm teasing you. >> No, no, no. >> I get it. I think you ought to have the opportunity to speak where the feed is working. And I apologize that the feed went out, but it's now up and they've, they've bugged it and debugged it and it seems to be working so well. >> I noticed you hit the little button underneath your chair. >> Yeah. >> There you go. >> There you go. >> So, we'll start all over again. So, let's see if we can do this the same way. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Mayor, council members. Jeffrey Bowen, district eight. As many of you know, or some of you will know that I attend all the, all the in-person, budget town hall meetings. In fact, we attend. I attended one last night at, district two. And one of the issues that keeps coming over in my mind is about [11:21:17 AM] clarity and the lack of it in some cases, or maybe it's just the way things come across. Last night at, council member Fuentes, one of the questions was asked of miss Lang about the police overtime and trying to clarify that whole process. And I want to commend, council member Fuentes on, on being able to make sure that that was very clear to everybody. One of the issues, like I said, is clarity. And at each one of these different town halls that I go to, I go there to listen to the questions. Miss Lang does a really good job in presenting her stuff, but I go just to listen to the audience questions, and that's where there seems to be a lot of miscommunications, or adding to the clarity and making sure that people really understand what is being covered and how these issues are, we get when you look at this and it comes across with all the different items, even with the 26 pages of the recommendations. Could [11:22:19 AM] there be some more clarity in this document? Yes, there could, so that people are not, taking things out of context or how they may be. Everybody reads things differently. So I encourage all of you that are still having your town halls and even in this, in this setting here of trying to make sure that things are very clear, clear for people because we're there's many of us that are not financial wizards or whatever, and that needs to be taken into account. Hopefully I covered all my bases again, Mr. Mayor. Take two. I don't know if it's any better than the first take. I, I hate it when that happens. Thank you. >> Thank you sir. Appreciate you. Appreciate your sense of humor too. Why don't we start here on the end and, then we'll get both of y'all. Thank you. >> Hi. Good morning. My name is Lianes flores. I'm speaking on behalf of myself and about Texas, and I'm here to challenge city council and staff to reimagine public safety. All Austin residents deserve access to comprehensive and life saving health care, [11:23:19 AM] support for survivors of domestic and sexual violence, access to safe housing, resources to feed ourselves, and so much more than we have inherited. This is why we are calling on the city to reject the proposed 8 million reduction to social service contracts and maintain funding for essential services. Austinites cannot thrive at. The local government does not invest in us. We fully endorse the proposed community investment budget, which outlines a strategic use of our dollars and was creating working directly with austinites. I want to speak particularly to our request for an additional $600,000 investment in maternal health resources. As mentioned in the cib. This would allow organizations like mama San, a veteran woman, to continue to provide vital maternal health services to pregnant and parenting people. This is also public safety. Mama San has a proven track record of improving health outcomes for their clients. 93% of their participants gave birth to babies with healthy birth weights. In 2025 alone, mama San served 218 households and supported 477 children. Our only goal here should be to [11:24:21 AM] expand this reach. A greater investment in social services is critical to keeping our community safe and healthy. What does not keep our community safe and healthy, however, is increasing the police budget while defunding social services. As we discussed the budget today, none of us should forget that APD murdered Antonio Williams. The second, a 17 year old child on a playground just under a week ago. It is clear that APD's problem is not a lack of financial resources, but a lack of care for our community, safety and dignity. Again, I ask that you reject the defunding of social service contracts and maintain funding for programs that provide essential services to Austin residents. This is what public safety looks like, and I know that our city is going to fall apart if we continue down this path of pulling money away from community members. >> Thank you, thank you. >> Good morning, mayor and council members. My name is sundiata Allen and I'm the growth marketing manager at [11:25:21 AM] universal tech movement, where I help connect people from underrepresented communities to careers in technology. These are careers that provide living wages, long term stability, and a real opportunity to thrive. What I have learned through this work is that getting someone a job is only one part of the equation. People cannot build a career if they are struggling to keep a roof over their heads, access mental health care, feed their families, or recover from trauma. Workforce development succeeds because they these community supports exist. That is why today's budget discussion matters. The proposed reductions affect programs that provide housing stability, behavioral health services, violence prevention, food access, and family support. These services help people remain stable enough to pursue education, secure employment and build better futures. Public safety is about more than emergency response. It is about creating the conditions that prevent crises before they happen. When we invest in people before they reach a breaking point, we create safer [11:26:22 AM] neighborhoods, stronger families, and a healthier workforce. I urge you to protect these community investments. They are not separate from workforce development or public safety. They are the foundation of both. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Hey, how's it going? My name is Michelle Ramos, district one representative, and citizen. And I'm going to keep my comments pretty short. I just want to say, you know, I am against the current proposed budget and want to uplift the community investment budget within the community investment budget. We have several, line items that actually reinvest into our communities for mental health workforce development. And also food access and training to ensure that folks are able to live a better life. And in our district, you know, a district that's been historically disinvested in, it [11:27:23 AM] is time to finally put some money into our people, to ensure that folks who make the city run and who build this city are continuing to be able to have access to it, live, survive, and thrive here. And so I am calling upon y'all to, I'm calling upon y'all to approve the community investment budget. And really want to, you know, push that this is going to help our communities. Thank you. >> Thank you, thank all of you. >> Roger Garza Zenobia Joseph, Greg Jackson, David Garrard, David, are you here? >> He is. >> Is Timothy Olson here? Okay. And Adam fink anbinder. Okay, then you'll have six minutes. [11:28:30 AM] >> We'll start over here and work our way down the aisle. >> Mr. Mayor, in Austin, city council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak here today. My name is Roger Garza and I'm a resident of district one and the state of Texas. State director for giffords, a national gun violence group founded by associate national gun violence prevention group founded by former congresswoman gabby giffords. Here today on behalf of giffords, to ask that you continue investing in evidence informed, community driven strategies that offer proven and sustained reductions in violence, examples of successful community violence intervention approaches, also known as CVI, include hospital based violence intervention programs, street outreach and violence interruption and case management, and transformational mentoring. Each of these strategies operates under two main principles one, engaging those at the highest risk of perpetrating or falling victim to violence with the goal of interrupting its transmission, and two, providing social services to those at highest risk to heal unresolved trauma [11:29:31 AM] and change the trajectory of their lives. What we have seen in Austin through atx piece is that sustained investment in these areas leads to remarkable gains. Driving down violence. Studies done in other cities have shown that for every life saved by community based organizations means cost savings of $250,000 per life across governmental entities. A reduction of violence means ems and APD aren't cold, air surgeons aren't used, medical examiner isn't needed, and the da county jail can use their resources elsewhere. Our communities have done a remarkable job in the post covid world, making Austin an even safer city in no small part through the work of folks like atx peace and African American youth harvest. I urge you to commit and protect these important programs. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Please. >> All right. Thank you, mayor and council members, for your commitment to keeping Austin safe. My name is Greg Jackson. I'm the former deputy director for the white house office of gun violence prevention under president Biden and also a survivor and gun violence of [11:30:32 AM] gun violence. I live in DC, but I represent thousands of community activists that believe in and are fighting for community violence intervention programs. And I'm testifying here today because Austin has truly become a national example of what evidence based, community led public safety strategies can look like and complements with law enforcement. At the white house, I stood next to president Biden as we identified gun violence as a public health crisis, and worked alongside vice president Harris as we invested $42 billion into violence prevention strategies and community violence intervention. And these emboldened investments actually reduced homicides in America by 49%. And here in Austin, we have seen tremendous progress as well. I've stood alongside atx peace jail to job's life for new community justice, moms demand action, council member Velasquez, amber Goodwin and so many activists. As we established the first ever office of violence prevention here and invested in community violence intervention. And since then, we've seen homicides be cut here in half [11:31:33 AM] since the spikes in 2021. And so as we think about this budget cycle, the decision is really simple. Do we continue to invest in saving lives or pay for losing them? A single homicide in this city can cost the city up to $2 million, which is more than what the proposed investment is for community violence intervention. And so the cost of inaction is really risking another spike in violence that we know has happened in other cities across the country when they divested in community violence intervention. And if we get back to the levels of 2021, that will cost the city upwards of $100 million. And so the question isn't whether we can afford to invest in violence prevention. It's whether we can afford not to. And so I'm here to advocate and implore you to continue to lead the nation, to invest in these life saving strategies and to continue to be that national example that so many folks across the country look up to. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks for being here. Yes, sir. >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is David Girard, and I serve as president of the Austin firefighters association. Before I read my prepared [11:32:34 AM] comments on the budget, I just want to extend a heartfelt thank you to this council, for their for their demonstrated commitment to the care and support of lieutenant Suzanne la Follette as she continues to battle her occupational cancer. Mayor, thank you for your early encouragement and mentorship on this issue. Councilwoman Ellis, thank you for your ongoing outspoken advocacy and to the council as a whole, thank you for your conviction to ensure that we're on a path to increased equitability for our female firefighters. I also want to add that after attending a number of the town hall sessions, I have a renewed empathy for the impact of these budget exercises to the social programs that that go to serve our most vulnerable. And I appreciate the thoughtfulness that this council approaches these exercises. Transitioning the city manager, labor relations, the assistant city manager, Batista, fire chief baker, the budget office, the city staff for the willingness to discuss these issues with us. A F a values a constructive working relationship with the city. And we remain committed to approaching this budget [11:33:35 AM] process in a professional and collaborative way. Today, I'm not asking council to create a new commitment. I'm asking council to ensure that the budget fully supports commitments the city has already made. The city and the Austin firefighters association negotiated and executed a collective bargaining agreement only months ago. That agreement preserves four person staffing and establishes a path toward implementation of the Austin schedule. The city has repeatedly confirmed its commitment to these obligations. Our concerns is whether the proposed budget fully reflects the actual cost of meeting them. Last year, the fire department experienced a significant reduction in its overtime allocation before the current collective bargaining agreement was finalized. That reduction was tied to potential staffing changes that were not ultimately implemented. Four person staffing continued, which means the staffing obligation remained in place, but the overtime funding that had been reduced has not been fully recaptured in a way that is clear to us. This is the core issue. Reducing the overtime allocation does not [11:34:37 AM] reduce the staffing obligation. If the city continues to require the same apparatus, staffing, emergency response capability and contractual commitments, then the underlying workload still exists. Regardless of the amount appropriated in the overtime account. Over the past several weeks, afa has made good faith efforts to better understand how the budget office developed its overtime assumptions. We have asked for the data necessary to evaluate the methodology, including information related to staffing levels, vacancy, Kelly time leave usage, projected overtime, anticipated savings and operational staffing requirements. Despite those efforts, we have not yet been provided the data necessary to work through the methodology in a way that gives us, council or the public a clear understanding of how the final figures were developed. To be clear, our concern is not simply about disagreement over a number. Our concern is the lack of a transparent reconciliation between the budget office proposal and the independent projections developed separately by the afa and AFD. Those projections were developed independently of one [11:35:37 AM] another, yet both appear to identify a greater overtime need than what is reflected in the budget office proposal. If the budget office assumptions are sound, they should be explainable, defensible and capable of being reconciled with the operational data used by the department and the association. This matters because overtime is often discussed as though it is the problem. We believe that framing is incomplete. Overtime is not the problem. Overtime is the result of maintaining required staffing levels. When the number of available personnel does not fully match the number of positions that must be filled when firefighters take leave or injured deployed retire, those positions must still be filled. If the permanent staffing model does not absorb those absences, the department must use overtime to maintain service levels. That is not a lack of fiscal discipline. It is the predictable cost of meeting the staffing standards the city has chosen and agreed to maintain. As you consider the budget, I respectfully ask council to focus on three questions. First, does the proposed budget fully [11:36:38 AM] fund the city's existing contractual and operational staffing obligations? Second, are the assumptions underlying the overtime projections transparent, clearly explained and supported by operational data? And third, if the budget office proposal is substantially lower than the independent projections developed separately by afa and AFD, what specific assumptions assumptions explain that difference? The Austin firefighters association remains committed to working collaboratively with the city leadership to answer these questions. Our objective is not confrontation. Our objective is to is transparency, accountability and ensuring that firefighters have the staffing and resources necessary to continue providing the level of service that Austin residents expect and deserve. I stand ready to answer any questions now. A comprehensive report will be provided to your offices tomorrow morning, and I look forward to meeting with council members individually at your convenience. Thank you for your time, your leadership and your continued support of Austin firefighters in the community that we proudly serve. Thank [11:37:39 AM] you so much. >> Thank you sir. >> Nicholas Mcdowell, Elena Barrera, Alyssa excuse me, Alyssa Matthews and Mary Elizabeth. >> Please begin. Whenever you're ready, sir. All right. You decide. >> Good morning. My name is Alyssa Matthews, and I'm a constituent in district one. I'm here to testify against the proposed budget for the city of Austin. And I want to remind council that the things that we invest in are the city that we become. Each one of you has been elected to be responsible and ethical stewards of our tax dollars in order to make Austin a better, safer, and more secure place. Increasing APD's budget does none of that. In fact, we keep increasing our [11:38:40 AM] budget and we are not seeing the improvements that we want on housing. Unhoused individuals still are struggling in this city. People are struggling on a day to day basis, and that's why this room is full, and that's why there are people outside today. It is irresponsible to continue to invest in something that has been proven to be ineffective, particularly when there are so many programs that with much less money, have proven their effectiveness. They've proven the impact that they can have on this community. We are already paying for people's housing and their health care after they get arrested. Why are we letting that be the only time that we invest in this community after the fact, after they're in the system, we should be investing in it upfront so that it can actually have a positive impact on our community. Thank you. >> I'm sorry, did you say your name for the record? >> Alyssa Matthews. >> Thank you. >> Good morning, mayor and city [11:39:41 AM] council members. Thank you guys for taking some time. My name is Nicholas Mcdowell. I am the unit supervisor over at pecan gardens through family elder care. Every day I work with older people in our community who have lost everything, and there are some of the most resilient people you'll ever meet. Not too long ago, they were homeless, dealing with health conditions that come from living on the streets, spending a lot of time in the E.R. My job is to welcome them to pecan gardens, a family elder care community, and to make sure that they have all the tools to stay housed. I wish you could be there when they step into that apartment for the first time. Whatever burdens they are carrying gets lifted. You can see it in their eyes. They are finally off the street and they can finally rest. When we think about public safety, we often think about what happens after a crisis. Police officers, firefighters and ems are there when people need them most. But true public safety doesn't begin when someone calls 911. [11:40:42 AM] It begins when our older neighbors and have a caseworker checking on them and can afford medications, receive mental health support and maintain housing and financial stability. I'm privileged to do that every single day with the older residents of pecan gardens. Every resident who remains stable is not only succeeding in life, they're also saving taxpayers dollars because instability breeds crisis. That's why investing in nonprofits is not just compassionate. It's one of the smartest public safety investments a city can make. When nonprofit funding is cut, it doesn't make our problems go away. It just makes them more expensive down the road. You don't have to choose between saving lives or saving money. Funding social services does both. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I have one more remote speaker, Donald bull. >> Good afternoon. Thank you [11:41:43 AM] all. Mayor and city council. My name is Donald bull and I represent district oh one. I'd like to urge you all, as as you've heard from many of us today, our budget for the police, has grown tremendously over my time here in Austin. And I think we've all seen those results, not achieved the Marc in which they were intended for. So I would like for us to really lean into what everyone is here speaking about. And that's talking about real public safety, that public safety comes from the community. And that does not disregard the officers and the, those who are in uniform because they are a part of that community. So we shouldn't look at this as an either or what we should look at as the programs that have [11:42:44 AM] been funded through the city that have made real change in the lives of the community. And our program here at universal tech is just one of them. But there are many others who have spoken here today who have put forth those inspirational words that are talking about the way we really help our community. And sometimes that is not through policing, that is through getting involved and being in there and and being a contributor to the progress of our city. What has made it so attractive for others who have come from so many other places, who idolize the things that we have created, that are foundational to that growth and opportunity for all. So keeping the the police budget flat maintains current enforcement while preserving the investment that keeps our city resilient. [11:43:46 AM] Please prioritize our opportunities over. >> Imam did you sign up to speak on item number one? Was your name called? Yes. Okay. What's your name? >> Mary Elizabeth. >> Yes. Okay. Very good. Please begin. >> Hello, mayor and council. My name is Mary Elizabeth. I live in district one, and I'm here in support of the community investment budget. I urge you not to increase funding for APD this year, rather than give APD another $25 million. Council should keep the police budget flat. By offsetting the raises with other cuts. Thank you. >> Thank you mayor. >> All speakers for item one have been called. >> Thank you very much, members. As you just heard, all the speakers on item number one has [11:44:47 AM] been called. So we'll call the staff to come forward and begin your presentation. What we'll do is we'll have the presentation like we've done in the past. We'll have the presentation and then, open it up for questions and comments by council members. If you wish to be recognized, let me know. Two of you have already let me know. And so I've got, got you [11:45:49 AM] ready to go. But, that's what we'll do when the presentation is complete. And then we will go to item number two. >> Okay. >> Good morning, mayor and council Kerri Lang director of budget and organizational excellence. We will begin today with an update on the property tax revenue. We provided a memo, late yesterday to talk through the updated certification numbers. And then we'll go through the remaining two strategic plan priority areas, which is public safety and high performing government. And then we'll finalize today with a, conversation on the consulting [11:46:49 AM] contracts analysis that staff has completed. We are on the 20 on the 30th, work session. We will have continued conversations, potentially on the fourth and then on the sixth for adoption on, August 12th through 14th. >> Good morning. Eric Nelson deputy director, budget and organizational excellence we've received the tax year 2026 fiscal year fy 27 certification reports from Travis hays and Williamson appraisal districts. And we've worked with the Travis county assessor collector to calculate our official tax rates for the coming fiscal year. The total value came in at 223.1 billion, a little higher than we had estimated. But that still represents a 2.9% decrease versus the prior year. We have $3.3 billion in new improvement, taxable value a little better than we were projecting. And of [11:47:49 AM] course, that's where we really get our, discretionary, discretionary or marginal impact to the property tax revenue, the voter approval rate increased very slightly to 0.579948. And in total at that certified tax roll, all of these net changes resulted in an additional $4.7 million of property tax revenue for the general fund. I do want to note that there are downside risks to the property tax revenue that remain elevated due to protests and appeals activity. We've worked with cat to better understand and mitigate this issue, but there's still significant volatility tied to future actions by the appraisal review board and the outcome of any court appeals that may be filed over the course of the year. >> I hate to interrupt, but can you explain so that the public will understand why it is we're getting an update that changes the numbers. But so since we've been operating with certain [11:48:50 AM] types of numbers, this is obviously going to change some of the recommendations that have been made. And we've seen the memo and we understand that. But but explain to the public why it is that we had one number. And then here in the middle of the budget discussions, we end up with another number. >> Sure. So when we developed the budget, we rely on projections. Those are derived from the notice values that homeowners receive in the spring. But over the course of the spring, there's a protest process. We try to guess where the numbers will end up. And then in late July, now we receive these official certified reports from the appraisal districts, which we are required to use, in calculating the property tax rates in line with the state mandated calculation form. >> So we just finally get more accurate information. >> Yeah. We get, well, we get the, the information we were required to use. And yes, every day we move forward it's more accurate as more protests are [11:49:51 AM] resolved. >> Very good. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. >> In terms of how we would recommend using this additional revenue, we recommend adding $4.7 million to Austin housing's general fund, ongoing budget for the local housing voucher program. The proposed budget included $2.1 million for this item, and we had a longer term plan in the plan budget and future years to bring it up to the full $7.8 million annual funding need. This would get us within $1 million of that in fy 27 and in our plan budget, we would get all the way there. In fy 27 itself, we still have capacity and and housing cip budget to fund the remaining $1 million. That means that we would be able to reduce appropriations in the housing trust fund by that $4.7 million. We would move the emergency rental [11:50:53 AM] assistance dollars that are currently in the hope fund to the housing trust fund, because that's an acceptable use of the downtown density bonus dollars in that fund. And then that would leave $2.5 million that would flow to the housing trust fund ending balance and could be appropriated this year or next year for any eligible use of that downtown density bonus revenue. Finally, in the hope fund itself, we would now have reduced appropriations by $2.25 million. And so that $2.25 million would be unrestricted. One time funding that would be available. >> So now we'll begin going through our departments, beginning with our public safety, priority area and beginning with the emergency medical services department. Ems has a $1.157 million proposed budget. They have 854 [11:51:55 AM] positions, which include 714 sworn employees. The net reduction of the nine positions of the civilians is primarily due to the continued work on 1ats the transition in phase one, the operations program within ems includes providing medical emergency response, including specialized units, and. It accounts for 47% of the ems budget. Ems communications provides triage and dispatching services, and ems has responded to over 161 161,000 responses and covers over 100mi S of service territory. Looking at their programmatic highlights and performance, they are receiving additional funding in fiscal year 27 to support their overtime needs as they're going through training of the cadets, as well as, 500,000 for employee benefit payout as they see retirees happening in the [11:52:56 AM] department. It's to make sure that the funding is level with the current trend. In the new fiscal year, ems will launch a new process to improve data accuracy in reporting and update their recruitment strategies to improve retention of sworn employees. The program continues to work toward the goal of reaching their target for priority one responses. Our Austin fire department has 54 stations and 104 frontline fire apparatus, with the $288 million budget the department proposes will be providing first and fire and first responder services, including wildfire response and search and rescue. The emergency prevention program program conducts community outreach about fire prevention and ensures compliance with fire code. With 100. With 1357 sworn employees, Austin fire responds [11:53:57 AM] to 110,000 incidents annually, covering 312mi S. Looking at their performance highlights in fy 27, Austin fire will receive 32 positions to support the new Austin schedule work week that will begin October 2027. Fire also has increased overtime funding to comply with the four person staffing ordinance. The department will continue working to attain accreditation from the commission on fire accreditation international. Austin's Austin fire's performance indicators focus on response time, customer satisfaction and tracking the number of smoke smoke alarms installed in the community. The city, the city's accredited forensic laboratory, is operated by the forensic science department, with a $18.6 million budget and 96 employees. The forensic [11:54:57 AM] integrity and laboratory services program conducts crime scene investigations, collects and processes evidence, and completes forensic testing. Forensic quality management ensures the lab, the lab's compliance with the accreditation standards and controls evidence. The team has completed over 8000 forensic reports and maintains a high qualified workforce with over 72 licenses and certifications. Programmatically, forensic science is receiving funding for positions to assist with evidence processing, case management and administrative oversight. The department is also receiving funding for additional warehouse and freezer units, as noted in the performance highlights here, the department plans to continue to meet or or exceed their performance targets with in fiscal year 27. Austin's [11:55:59 AM] municipal court provides magistrate services as well as restorative justice through the community court with a 42.9% proposed budget, the. The court will serve nearly 26,000. Excuse me, $42.9 million proposed budget. The court will serve nearly 26,000 people. The community court has served, has served 75 walk in clients daily, and has cleared 165 warrants through the mobile courts events. In fiscal year 27. The municipal and community courts will see an overall reduction in funding as they are transitioning the sobering center investment to one time. And the the municipal court is eliminating five vacant positions, redistributing compliance functions across the operations. Municipal court has an increase for substitute judges for magistrate services to cover operational needs as a [11:57:02 AM] result of the transitioning of a portion of magistrates services to Travis county. When we look at the funding that is included in municipal court as a general fund department, they also have the municipal court, local consolidated court fund, which accounts for the local consolidated fees and supports costs related to courthouse security, as well as truancy prevention technology and reimbursements. Moving forward to the police budget, Austin police department has a $549 million budget, which is 76% personnel. In addition to the sworn positions, APD has over 516 civilian positions, the second largest civilian workforce in the general fund. The reduction in civilian staff is is a result of 17 positions transitioning to Austin [11:58:03 AM] technology services, three to the government relations office and one new position to support recruiting efforts. Over the past year, APD has successfully successfully recruited 162 cadets and completed 240 engagement activities. Looking at the programmatic highlights for the police department, the departmental kpis includes the documented times it takes to respond to emergency or urgent cadet calls, cadet enrollment, and and tracking non-urgent calls. The homeless outreach street team helps prevent helps people who are living in the streets in Austin. And there's a leader in knowledge and support links, which reaches out to high school students, which is part of the community engagement efforts for the department. Police is. Overall budget includes the funding from the police access. Excuse [11:59:03 AM] me, police asset forfeiture funds as well as there are $6.6 million in grants fund to support the efforts of the police department. The next few slides will dive a little deeper into the police department's budget with transitions, and shows the funding by program area, as well as the activities and services that are provided through those program areas. Neighborhood based policing is the largest program area. About 47% includes patrol, the homeless outreach, street team, community partnerships and traffic enforcement professional standards, conducts internal investigations and leads the department's recruiting and training efforts. In operational support. That includes communications, which is the largest activity in that program area, which includes the call taker and dispatch operations with 218 civilian [12:00:05 PM] positions. The program manages aerial patrol support, special operations and data analytics, as well as victim services investigations. Includes violent and property crime case investigations and interagency coordination. The support services program is the departmental administrative support functions for police, and then other requirements are the transfers and other other requirements. Covers the allocation costs for administrative services. There's been some question about the change in the police budget compared to fiscal year 26, and this slide walks through the fiscal year 26 amended budget of 525.4 million, and shows the changes by area of the increases to the budget to get to the proposed 549, [12:01:05 PM] civilian staff are projected to have a 3% wage increase, which is a $2.4 million increase to the budget. The contract with the police association members has a contractual 5% increase, including the cost that is a part of this, 4.4 1.2 million also includes the pension contributions that are statutorily required by the city. The citywide allocations of 9.9 million includes that administrative support that I mentioned earlier. Technology, rent, facilities management, fuel and fleet. And then programmatic increases include, software increases or equipment >> For sworn staff, as well as the new civilian position that I mentioned earlier. And then there are programmatic transfers, which decrease the budget 2.8 million. 17 positions moving to technology services and three positions transferring to. Government relations to support the government relations new grants. [12:02:07 PM] This slide also walks through the sworn personnel budget for police. There's been questions about how we, acquire or get to their overall budget. We do fully, fully budget the sworn staff of 18 1819 sworn ftes. But then we offset that with a vacancy savings of 30.5 million. By calculating the average cost per vacant officer by the number of vacancies that the department has had, then we then we manage the budget through an overtime budget of 28.5 million, which offsets those vacancies when we need to fill those positions, for 24 over seven operations. Moving forward to high performing government, I'll talk through our internal and support services functions. Our human resources department is, leading the city's human resources functions, providing [12:03:08 PM] direction and oversight to departments on everything from executive recruitment to benefits and leave management. With a $34.3 million budget. The human resources management program includes employee and labor relations, risk management, community services, and the wellness program. Hr leads efforts to train over 18,000 employees on Austin essentials trainings and facilitates over 2000 new hires, transfers, and promotions for the city. Hr works with departments to manage the hiring process, as I mentioned, and aims to finalize processes within 67 days. In fiscal year 27, hr will provide human resources support to acme. That's arts, culture, music and entertainment department, as well as the forensic science departments with two new positions. Those positions will reside in hr but support those two partner departments, and the department will also, lead [12:04:11 PM] implementation of the citywide market study. Our financial services department oversees accounting and reporting, procurement, real estate and redevelopment for the city, providing financial management and administration for departments, customers and vendors. Financial services led the city's efforts to receive triple a credit rating from all three rating agencies, and continues to receive award to receive awards for procurement and our accounting work, as well as leading the efforts to ensure a clean audit opinion from our external auditors. Looking at programmatic changes for financial services, the department is implementing a new procurement management system to modernize our processes and procurement. They're also completing a build out of real estate of the real estate management system, which includes modules for leasing, acquisitions and appraisals. [12:05:18 PM] Our financial services department also manages a number of funds, including their funding from the support services funds. They are responsible for our tax increment financing funds for walnut creek, Mueller and then the downtown improvement public improvement district, as well as the walnut creek reserve fund. The management services department for the city is a collection of eight offices that provide direction and oversight to the city. These departments include the city manager's office, communications and engagement, emergency management, police oversight, equity and inclusion, office climate action and resilience, and government relations. The services range from communications to facilitating priority builds at the state and federal and federal levels, as well as reviewing body cam and and budget and strategic planning. [12:06:20 PM] Looking at some of the programmatic highlights for management services in 2027, Austin emergency management will receive $250,000 to support, cost recovery efforts as we respond or look for reimbursement based on extreme weather or, reimbursable events and government relations. There are three positions that they are receiving, as I mentioned earlier from Austin police department to support their new grants division. And then you'll see a reduction in the city manager's office budget as there is a reduction of city sponsored events, as well as several line item reductions across communications and engagement. The management services department is primarily funded through the support services fund. Within our climate and resilience office, we also have the urban forestry fund, which supports [12:07:22 PM] the programs of planting trees, offsite trees and maintenance across the community. Moving forward to our clerk's office $7.5 million and is the proposed budget with 29 full time positions, the office leads the city's records and information management functions and elections and, weekly council meetings. They've registered over 7000 individual speakers to speak, as well as posted over 15,000 documents. Their programmatic highlights include, the percent of board and commission members that are completing required training. And they're anticipating 95% in fiscal year 26. And then, their goal is 80% for fiscal year 27. There is a $1.8 million of funding for elections in the city clerk's budget. Our city auditor has [12:08:29 PM] $7.3 million proposed budget in fiscal year 27, $4.9 million. Excuse me, they have 29 positions, $4.9 million covers those positions. The city auditor is charged with establishing accountability and continuous improvement in city government, championed transparency and ethical practices. They have completed 11 audit projects and cases in fiscal year 25. The city auditor's office has worked to verify 90% of recommendations are completed by or implemented by departments. In fiscal year 27. The office is receiving funding to support the efficiency audits to analyze city operations and contracting practices. Our capital delivery services department manages and oversees the implementation of various capital improvement [12:09:30 PM] projects for the city. Their costs are allocated across several departments and charged to capital projects. They have 297.5 positions which provide project management plan reviews and inspections. In fiscal year 27, we'll see a reduction to the capital delivery services budget. As we really align their budget with historical spending and reduce previously planned cost drivers, which includes some of their vehicle acquisitions for fiscal year 27. Next, I'll go through some of the analysis that we've staff has completed thus far. We have received, direction through the resolution from council to look at our consultant spend. This, this analysis began as a response to the city auditor's [12:10:30 PM] March 26th report. On our consulting spend. I sent a memo out this morning to detail some of the analysis and review that staff has completed to date. The fiscal year 25 report reported $102 million of spending across different departments. General fund at 10.6, support services at 29.8. Internal services, 24.24 million and then enterprise departments at 38.2. As I mentioned in the memo, we have dived into, staff has done a deeper analysis into our internal services support and general funds. Because of the impact directly on the general fund, we're continuing to do work analyzing our enterprise department contract spend, and we'll come back to the council in the coming weeks to walk through those findings. When we look closely at the information that, we've reviewed, it is [12:11:32 PM] important to note that the auditor's report and response looked at departmental spend holistically. But even though there are departments that are general fund departments, they also have alternative or other funding sources, which may be special revenue sources or capital improvement program funding our funding like grants or donations and things like that. And so when we dive into the actual expenditures by funding source for the general fund departments, $1.3 million was from the general fund, 6.8 or 6. Almost $6.9 million is from the special revenue funds, which includes the housing trust fund, project connect housing finance corporation, or police asset forfeiture funds. And then there is cip funding and as I mentioned before, grants and donations, as well as arpa funding. When we look at the types of contracts that are included in the general [12:12:32 PM] fund portion of that spend, that 1.3 million, the what is considered more traditional or management contracts was about $800,000. There was some social service contracting that was included in the. In the original report of $159,000, training and education is. Some of the. Some of the expenditures and then smaller costs on advertising, it. Consultants and other. Similarly, we looked into our support services departments. Their consulting spend by funding source. And so when you look at the actual funding sources for our support services department, it is 29.8 million total spend for fiscal year 25. The support services fund portion of that is 2.9 million. The special revenue funds, which includes the pits co, public improvement districts, cultural arts, historic preservation, live music and iconic venue funds, as well as the economic [12:13:32 PM] incentive revenue reserves funds. That's 10.1 million. Cip coverage is 11 million. And then the other 5.4 is a is a mixture of, again, grants, arpa budget stabilization, reserve funds and internal services. That spend that you see through the support services fund. In particular, 1.5 million is traditional consulting. There is some social service consulting spend there, as well as training, it, consulting and other. And we have details in the report of what the other consists of and the report that was given to you all today. Then finally, we have our internal services departments. The internal services departments include capital delivery service, our technology services, as well as economic development. You'll see that internal services is $11.8 million. That is the largest spend in this category across those departments. The special revenue includes our [12:14:33 PM] public improvement districts and the other special revenue funds that I mentioned earlier, as well as our grants, arpa and B srf. And let me go back and say on the cip, that is our that was what was historically known as our capital contracting department, and that is the department that has managed our capital spend for the for the city. And that's why that $10.5 million is seen there. Internal services, their spend by category 5.5 million is traditional. And that is including staff augmentation, consulting services, social services consulting is a 1.3 million. And then temporary staffing is 4.5 million. And then you see the training and other that is listed with that. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> Thank you members. We'll now go to comments and questions by [12:15:34 PM] council members on item number one. What I will do is do what we've been doing, proceed the way we've been proceeding, where we'll set the clock for ten minutes, allow council member to speak and ask questions for ten minutes, and then move to another council member. If somebody needs more time, we'll come back after we've heard from the council members that have asked to be heard. I've got a few of you that's indicated you want to speak. So we'll go first to council member harper-madison, then council member Fuentes, then council member Laine. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate you calling on me. I'm going to go off script just a little bit. I'd like to thank director Lang, first of all, and frankly, the entire team of the office of budget and organizational excellence, I, I just can't imagine, you know, the, the lift, you guys are doing heavy work and we really appreciate it. I also want to take a moment to acknowledge a loss in our community. I think it's important we say it out loud. As the council member [12:16:34 PM] representing district one where this event occurred, I'd like to speak directly to the Williams family and say I'm sorry for your loss. To you and your loved ones. Our deepest condolences. I'd also like to acknowledge that, the many neighbors and classmates and others who have been impacted, are going through a difficult time as well as a mother. I can't imagine the grief that this family is going through. I don't want to. The loss that they've experienced is great. Also as a mother, I know that no words, no public statements and no news coverage can alleviate the pain that they're going through. The community. And most importantly, this family deserves a complete and thorough investigation. I'm [12:17:34 PM] committed, and I know the chief is as well to ensuring that that process moves forward. This incident, and I think we all know what I'm referring to. Let's be clear, all incidences of violence in our community are a stark reminder of why today's discussion, specifically as our budget is being considered and public safety is being discussed. This incident, let's be clear, all incidences of violence in our community are a stark reminder of why this matters. Today's budget discussion reinforces a very important theme, maybe a cliche, that is that public trust and public safety go hand in hand. Without public trust, our public institutions like our police department and our city council cannot meaningfully represent our residents without public trust. How can we ensure safety? How can we secure our future? Our [12:18:37 PM] residents should be able to trust that their local government will offer protection. This trust can only be restored and can only be strengthened through professionalism, through transparency and through accountability. We cannot not acknowledge that respectful engagement is critical. Paramount. Today's budget conversation is about how we invest in public safety. But public safety, like many of our speakers have already stated, goes beyond policing. Public safety also includes emergency medical services and behavioral health supports. And you guys have heard the speakers today that's those are recurring themes. We know that reactionary responses do not keep people safe. They don't keep our community safe. And it's for that reason that we should also reaffirm our commitment to the safety of our communities by way of violence prevention, violence [12:19:37 PM] intervention initiatives, and leverage our community based partnerships. We've heard from them today and their commitments to continuing the work that they do in our communities. My hope also, is that the comments and insights today provided by leaders of our city's various public safety departments will answer one key question does the budget proposal give every part of our public safety system the tools required to keep our community safe? In addition to funding programs and initiatives that we know offer our residents the support and protection that they deserve, are we conducting robust community outreach, community engagement, and strategies that residents are aware of? So that services being offered are being utilized? Are we using funding to eliminate barriers that may prevent residents from obtaining the care and support that they seek for themselves and for their families? And [12:20:37 PM] crucially, are we training our public safety professionals to think, act and to engage in ways that best serve our communities? Beyond initial training programs, I implore our public safety professionals and leadership to build a culture where these principles are not only taught in academies, but are continually reinforced through supervision, through professionalism, through professional development and everyday leadership. For the entirety of each emergency response. In closing, I'd like to encourage my colleagues, both on and off the dais, to proceed very thoughtfully and with care when addressing matters as significant, as consequential, public safety items. I understand that public service and politics requires us to get out in front of important things, important events, important issues. I also [12:21:41 PM] understand that there's a some degree of virtue signaling and grandstanding that occurs. I don't love it, but I also recognize that there's some degree of political theater. I don't know that those are productive substitutes for thoughtful leadership or for meaningful action. In fact, the kind of behavior that kind of behavior rather can and does have very real consequences for people in our community. Some of us included. These conversations deserve our humility, our discipline, our commitment to solutions rather than soundbites. The most important impact lies in our actions beyond the dais and our words, beyond social media. Working in partnership with one another, our public safety professionals, our community organizations, and the [12:22:41 PM] residents that we're elected to serve. I look forward to continuing the discussion about the budget generally, but as it pertains to this one about public safety, I don't have any questions at this time. Thank you again for your presentation. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Council member, council member. Fuentes, council member. Laine then councilmember Velasquez. >> Yes, thank you. Thank you, councilmember harper-madison, for your colleague for your comments. And I really appreciate, your remarks. And my heart goes out to the family of Antonio Williams, colleagues. I wanted to first start out with the a little bit of good news that we received today in terms of knowing that we have 4.7 million in new revenue for our general fund. That is huge for us. I know that the number one feedback I had at the town hall we hosted in district two last night was around the concerns of the cuts to our social safety net. So me hearing about four, 4.7 million in new revenue for our general fund, immediately, my thought goes to, we should be putting [12:23:42 PM] those dollars towards restoring the cuts to our social safety net. And part of the question I want to ask staff, because they've identified recommendations on where to allocate that 4.7 million. It's just my understanding this correctly, that of that 4.7, the 2.5 that will be remaining in the housing trust fund is will those be dollars with an expenditure associated with it, or will it be in the fund just as a remaining fund balance? In other words, what will that 2.5 million in the housing trust fund? Let me back up. Where we zeroing out our housing trust fund? With this budget proposal and with this recommendation, is it to put 2.5 million that will then be in our housing trust fund? >> So the 2.5 million is would be savings that would flow to [12:24:43 PM] ending balance unless it was programed with, appropriation or funding needs that, that, fall within the requirements of the downtown density bonus. So it has some restrictions on it, but there's 2.25 million with this recommendation that will be available for, for programing or funding in 27. >> So essentially just to replenish the fund. >> Say that again. >> Was it zeroing out the that portion of the housing trust fund? >> No, it's not zero. >> And then for the hope fund, similar question with the 2.25 million in unrestricted one time funding capacity, can you share a little bit more about, having those dollars in the hope fund? >> So, those dollars are in the hope fund. There was a, council resolution a few years ago in creating the hope fund that flows funding from the, tepid, revenue into the hope fund. And [12:25:45 PM] those are, general dollars. Those are, those are unrestricted funds that have been set aside through the hope fund for primarily homelessness and housing efforts. And so with that $2.5 million that we are recommending for emergency rental assistance, moving into the housing trust fund, that frees up that 2.3 or so million dollars in the hope fund, which which are general operating dollars that are available. >> Gotcha. Colleagues, I'm trying to, untether here is just understanding, you know, with these new dollars would be best served to have it go towards these, programs that are identified. Oh. Or should we then have the funds go towards the social service cuts? And if there is support on the dais and having it go back into programs that go towards our seniors, our youth, I heard a lot about food access cuts. I [12:26:45 PM] will be asking questions about, are we able to fund the food plan that we adopted alongside Travis county? There have been significant cuts to existing programs that we have so far. And knowing that there have been federal cuts to snap, we, you know, we now have families who are on food stamps that have had an impact. And here we are cutting additional food access programs that go towards families most in need, as well as cuts to violence prevention. So I welcome any feedback from the dais. If there is a will to have the 4.7 million in new revenue that was identified to go towards our social safety net, my next questions are for chief Davis regarding the police department's budget. And, this is I was able to have a conversation with her a little bit yesterday on this item. I wanted to dig through a service prioritization that was recommended from the department but not included in the budget. So these are areas in which the [12:27:47 PM] department says if we had to cut, this would be, you know what we would recommend? The one in particular is to reduce the cost related to three on one call center allocation by restructuring to an internal Austin police telephone crime reporting unit. So when I saw this, I immediately thought about how we've received constituent complaints, for from residents who call through and one, they've had their car broken into, they call three one, they're told, you know, to take the complaint, but it takes a while to hear back from the department on, on a response. And so as I take it, the department has a budget amount, at least 2 million that they, transfer to 311 to be able to process those non-emergency calls. So, chief Davis, can you provide some context around, that recommendation or this service and why you believe that perhaps instead of paying 2 million to 3 on one, creating an internal unit would help [12:28:49 PM] with response times? >> Well, I think it's 5 million is what we, we give for yearly to three. One but I think two, there's absolutely a way that we can get more efficient with that. The way the calls currently come in, to your point, someone calls to report something, a report is not taken. It is just put into a bucket somewhere. And then our officers or our staff call them back to say you called 311. You wanted to report this. And sometimes unfortunately, that's several days later. And that certainly does not, that is not delivering good customer service to someone who, who is needing assistance and whether that's just for reporting purposes for insurance or whatever they need. One of the recommendations from brydan, that you all are very aware of is that we do create a telephone crime reporting unit. I think, to do that, and this has not been vetted anywhere further than just some conversations we believe we could save. I believe it was $2 million that we could save doing that, creating our own telephone crime reporting unit. But again, it's not been vetted. [12:29:50 PM] But I do feel if any way that we can give and deliver better customer service, it deserves to have a look at it. >> Very good. And it has an associated elimination of 22 ftes. I was wondering if you could talk through that. >> I think that would be through the 311. We would be hiring 22 people if we were to take this road. That's what's been at least vetted on our end is hiring 22 people to come and take those reports. That would be, employ our employees instead of 311 employees. >> So is that why? Because you said it was. >> 5 million for the overall amount that APD pays 311 for that service. But it only results in a savings of 2 million to the department, because the rest is because you'll be hiring additional. Right. Is that. >> Yes. Correct. >> Okay. Is there anything else that we should know as far as being able to? Because to me, when I see this, this is it sounds like this would be a better way for us to ensure [12:30:52 PM] that residents, if they, have a non-emergency emergency situation, that they get a quicker response from the department. >> Right. I think as we, as we're looking at those response things and we're changing those, we're, we're responding more on calls that that, you know, previously you were able to call in and we're talking prior to, you know, after covid, those changes that were made and really looking at those, it's more important that we're responding to the scene. But when it comes to the 311, we also have to remember that we would need a mechanism for people to still call that number. And so you're talking about, you know, now this, this idea of do people still call three one, one and now they need police and now it's getting sent over to police? How are we setting that up? A new phone number for people to reach. And so I don't think it's as there needs to be a very thoughtful process around what this could look like. But I do, you know, I do think we could be successful in it, but there has to be a, you know, there's nothing currently that would take the place of 311 to make those, those reports. >> And so it would be, >> You know, amplifying the I report system and getting the [12:31:53 PM] word out. >> And that is exactly what we need to do. We need to amplify that report. And we're looking at ways we can do that on our end, through, you know, communications through, through different marketing strategies. Certainly want to enhance the, I report, but, as far as 311, I'm calling that we'd have to create a new number for people to call to get to the telephone crime reporting unit. >> Okay. And, just want to be super clear, the two point, the 2 million that was identified in savings. Can you just talk me through one more time? How the results of that, because I just want to make sure I really understand the impact of 311. >> I'm going to go ahead and let Michelle handle this. >> Good afternoon. I'm Michelle Schmidt. I'm the chief administrative officer for the police department. I think the internal the savings is the reduction from the 5.4 million that we currently transfer to 311 for the services. So bringing this in-house through our current emergency communications center, the hiring of the 22, employees to assist with that. That's the [12:32:53 PM] savings that we believe we would realize in the efficiencies. Again, there's some technology component to it that would need to be vetted through ATS and, and through our partners at 311, but that's the estimated savings. If we could get through that process. >> And then the proposed elimination of ftes. >> We, we. >> Estimate I think I'll, I'll jump in. I think that is a mistake on the report because it's adding ftes, not reducing ftes on that particular request. So they would need 22 positions. And as we transition that from the detailed information into the report that was placed in the wrong place. >> Very good. >> Councilmember. Before we go to councilmember, councilmember, deputy city manager fortune would like to say something about the question. >> So, councilmember, councilmember, I thank you for the question. And I just wanted to highlight that, even though there would be in this proposal, 22 additional positions that [12:33:54 PM] the police department would request, it doesn't necessarily correlate to. 22 reduction in the 311 center. And so those costs then are still allocated across the organization. And so while it may save the police department some some resources, there may be additional costs that, you know, that go up in some other departments because of that unequal offset, because there's not 22 positions just sitting there just for police. They answer all calls in the 311 center. So I just wanted to highlight that. I think if there's interest in that, we would have to certainly do a little more, vetting of wht the true ins and outs of that would be for the entire general fund. >> Thank you. And I would just, colleagues, I'm interested in bringing this forward as an amendment. I'm really interested in the chief recommendation of creating this internal unit. I think it's a great way for us to have a better response for our residents, especially knowing, you know, how easy it is to get frustrated. If you call one platform and you're expecting a response, but it's more efficient if we're directing [12:34:54 PM] residents to, to, log their report on I-report or to have a more direct, intake into our police department. So I look forward to your consideration of that amendment. Again, this is on the service prioritization, budget list on page nine or page 12. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember Fuentes, councilmember Lang, councilmember Velazquez and councilmember duchen. >> Thank you, mayor. I appreciated that line of of questions as it also relates to some of what I'll be bringing up. So my initial questions will relate to emergency communications, including 911 response emergency and non-emergency dispatch and other related matters. While the appropriate staff are approaching, I'll just open by thanking our first responders, as well as all of the civilian public safety employees who make their jobs possible. Our police officers, firefighters, emts and 911 operators work incredibly hard under extreme conditions to keep us safe. Before we get into the details [12:35:56 PM] on this topic, I want to extend my gratitude to each and every one of you for your service to the city. So, my first question, thank you so much. Last year, council directed city staff to deliver a strategic plan and operational outline of an independent 911 department, which would allow all the first responder agencies to work in concert with independent technological and managerial experts to handle emergency calls. I see director stoner has approached in your experience at ctec, what administrative or technological difficulties have you experienced when attempting to coordinate between agencies? >> Thank you. Councilmember Laine James stoner. I'm the deputy cio for public safety. In general, it's the coordination between the different departments and how the floor operates. There are we have one technology system that has to meet all of their needs and so changes, updates, [12:36:57 PM] those kinds of things really become impactful because of the different functions between the organization. >> Are there any additional difficulties that you've observed as it relates to district six. >> District six being where it is, there's no jurisdictional issues, as you as you're aware of between Williamson county, the city, and Travis county in general. And those, boundaries tend to cause some, some issues with, with the technology. You know, that your cell phone is usually where calls come in. I can be standing here and gps puts me across the street and, and that reroutes those calls. >> So, in a significant part of my district, there are additional challenges that might not be typical, right? In central Austin. It sounds. >> Like it is. Yes. >> Okay. Can you describe for me the current state of our emergency communications [12:37:58 PM] relationship with Williamson county 911? >> So they are an entirely different jurisdiction, ma'am. So our, our engagement right now is primarily through capcom and the, the cep and how calls are transferred between us and them. The other piece that we're currently working on right now is a cad to cad integration. So that when calls come in from, to Williamson or to, Travis county, ctec, that information will be shared across that we're in the process of finishing that now. >> And how would those issues impact the reliability of 911 response time data? >> It impacts the initial call taking component of it. So very beginning of the, of the call when, when, when a resident or visitor makes that, that, that phone call, it could go from one side to the other. [12:38:58 PM] And there's a, there would be a transfer of calls between there. In either case, when we get to the cad to cad integration, the call will be logged and transferred immediately. So the data will almost arrive before the before the phone, the phone call. >> Are you aware of incidents in which people have called 911 begun to have their information taken then been told oops, that's we're getting the information for the wrong place. Let's start this process again. Or, examples of calling 911 and then having them be unable to trace and address those sorts of issues. >> I am aware that that those, those things have been have been mentioned. I have no direct knowledge of them. So I think there's some, some, some discussions that have to be had first. >> Okay. And I will say that some of those issues I have experienced firsthand when calling 911. And my understanding is that they do relate to, data integration and the way that calls gets [12:39:58 PM] transferred around. And they certainly do impact response time. I'd also, and I'll also note that, Williamson county, 60% of my district, so it's not an insignificant amount of the city. What is the current state of our emergency communications relationship with Round Rock ISD? >> I'm not familiar with, with that engagement at this time. >> And anyone else familiar with that. Okay. So Round Rock ISD is almost 95% of my district. I know we are all very concerned for the safety of students and the way in which our 911 response in emergency responders connect with our schools. And so an example of a need for additional coordination. How about our emergency communications relationship with the local sheriff's office? [12:41:04 PM] >> From a 911 perspective, we, we share the same capcoa 911 sappi. And that we're all part of that. The, capital area emergency communications district. And so, the, the 911 calls are transferred through, through that mechanism as any direct relationship. So those would be mostly with, with the departments. So the different, police, fire, ems. >> Okay. Can I raise the, local sheriff? Because in addition to my district itself, which is 60% Williamson county, there are significant amounts of etj that my district in circles that are in Williamson county. And therefore these issues between the sheriff and the police and 911 dispatch, they arise within my district on an even greater level than 60% would convey, or 95% would convey. Are you aware of any budgetary allocations, equipment, interlocal [12:42:05 PM] agreements that would directly improve our partnership with any of these entities? >> Not from a budget perspective, but as, as we discussed earlier, that the cat acid integration and working through the emergency communication districts, those are our primary connections. Like cat to cat is going to be the next big piece. And that is the integration of the ctec cad systems with wilco. Round Rock. I don't have the other ones in my head, but there's many jurisdictions that will be engaging. >> I definitely appreciate that that work is ongoing as well as I believe chief Luckritz has mentioned some work in relationship to agreements. And, and I certainly recognize and thank you for hearing my voice on these matters. In these individual instances. And I appreciate your response to what are sometimes tough questions to answer. So last night, city staff shared a memo with preliminary findings [12:43:05 PM] related to the creation of the joint emergency communications department. While I'm grateful for the summary, the fact that it took 11 months and a consultant to produce this information is another example of 911 failing to be prioritized due to its departmental status. When I look at this list of potential improvements, quality assurance program accreditation, workforce management software, I see a lot of excellent ideas that should have been implemented a long time ago. I'm glad to see that they're here now, but I would like to understand why haven't these apparently simple and relatively low cost steps been taken in previous budget cycles? >> Yeah. We've addressed some of those instances, ma'am. The, I think the, the, the bigger piece is, is the review look, looking at pieces. So we have, we have worked with, with floor [12:44:06 PM] technology and the, the cad systems to increase efficiency there between the departments. We're one of a very small handful of municipalities that has a common cad system between all of its, public safety departments. And it's just not, city departments. We share that cad system with, with Travis county, cap metro and other jurisdictions. That eases the communication between the departments and helps move those calls quickly. We're also part of the emergency communications district, which also allows that type of integration to begin. When we start looking at, the, the, the maturity of the program, I think this is the next step in maturity. And we're moving towards that. >> I very much appreciate your willingness to sit in the hot seat and, and it would not be right for me not to acknowledge that, you are sitting there, having taken on work that, is, [12:45:10 PM] is bigger than your current role and you are the one who stepped forward to answer these questions. And I just, I very much appreciate that as well as the steps that you have been taking in the last year. I will note that, just, just wrapping up. Okay. I will note that the ifc that called for looking at these matters included a few other things that are definitely outside of your purview. Looking at emergency and non- emergency dispatch, alternative response. Chief Davis and I have been talking about a call reporting unit for two years now. The concerns that council member Fuentes raised are raised are rampant in my district, and we've had pretty significant uptake on ireport.com, but I haven't seen the the shift that will make it a reliable and effective, part of our response to our community when they call for help. And as we hear from our [12:46:11 PM] city manager about the need for a service, first, customer oriented experience approach to technology, public safety, all core services of our city. I, I really think it's imperative that we take a good, strong look at the need for a joint emergency communications department and how we can move that forward in this budget cycle. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember Velazquez, councilmember duchen. Councilmember zo qadri. >> Thank you mayor. First, I wanted to say, councilmember Fuentes, I want you to know that I share your passion for exploring how we can use that additional 4.7 million in general fund tax dollars to restore our social safety net. Because while we're talking about public safety, we have to remember that things like food access is public safety, community violence intervention is public safety, mental health services are public safety. And if we're serious about a safer Austin, we have to continue investing in the services that prevent crises before they happen. And I want to make sure we keep that front of mind as we continue through this process. My questions are are [12:47:12 PM] for APD. Chief, thank you so much for being here with us. On page 402 of the budget, there is about a $7 million increase to neighborhood based policing. There are increases to patrol and homelessness and a decrease to community partnership. What does that look like in the community and on the streets? What does that translate to? >> Can you point out where the decrease is? >> It is, for the 402 increase, there's about a 402 increase to neighborhood based policing and increasing increases to patrol and homelessness. >> Michelle, did you want to. [12:48:13 PM] >> Michelle Schmidt, chief administrative officer for police, all of the increases, noted primarily are related to the, meet and confer agreement pay raise increases, stipends, associated with that. So all, all the increases in the officer and sworn activities and programs are primarily tied back to those increases related to pay and benefits. >> Okay. There on page 402, there's also a 190 K cut to victim services. What is being cut within that program? >> I don't have the exact detail in front of me for that one, but it is potentially just related to wage decreases. Related. On the civilian side, [12:49:13 PM] if somebody retired or resigned from a position and then somebody else was hired in, at a beginning salary, but there have to my knowledge, there have not been any decreases to any programmatic pieces of victim services. >> Thank you. On page 403, can you can y'all explain the rationale on reducing the internal affairs by 840 K and the impacts that could have on officer involved incidents, investigations and complaints? >> Sorry, councilmember, can you repeat that? >> Yeah, sorry. On page 403. Let me get my notes back up on page 403. The rationale behind reducing internal affairs by 840 K and the impacts that could have on officer involved incident investigations and complaints. >> Michelle, you want to handle the reduction. >> I may have to follow up with that one. Through the cbk process to analyze that one a [12:50:14 PM] little bit more closely, but that more than likely is just related to pay differences in people who are assigned there in the fy 26 amended budget versus the fy 27 proposed budget. >> Thank you, councilmember, that the staffing has not been reduced in internal. If anything, it has been since I've been there. It has been increased. >> Thank you. So there have been in each office has gotten a lot of questions around a $25 million increase to the police budget. Can somebody outline what that pays for. And that number varies between 20 to 26. But if somebody can articulate what that what that 25 pays for. >> Yeah. I would like to say, one, that these increases are all contractual. There is nothing that APD is getting from this budget that is new or exciting that that we're all on, on pins and needles for. This is contractual obligations down to our equipment, where gulls [12:51:14 PM] is getting a 5% increase. All of those are contractual. So I'll go through this looks like, again, the civilian personnel are getting a 3% base raise. That's 2.4 million sworn personnel again, through the meet and confer is 14.2 million. Citywide allocations are 9.9 million. Programmatic increases are 0.5. And that is that existing technology software uniforms. And again that's the gulls contract I was speaking on. And then those transfers 2.8 million. And that's those 17 positions transferred to technology services and three positions transferred to government relations. And that's, that is the, where that 25 million is coming from. >> Thank you chief. And then for clarity for the for the community also, I presented a question to, to hcm Bautista in what would happen if this council said we are not paying that $25 million? >> I don't know that. Can the [12:52:15 PM] council say, no, they're not paying that. I mean, I think these are these. >> Are legal question and hcm. Bautista was going to have somebody prepared to answer it. >> Yeah, councilmember, I believe Mr. Coppola from the city attorney's office can provide some context for that question. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Counsel Chris Coppola with the city attorney's office. And just so I understand your question, councilmember, are you asking about all of the contractual obligations. >> The, the so the again, the questions have been around the $25 million increase, the contractual increase, increase. What would happen if this if the city council decided it was not going to pay that $25 million. >> So, you know, I can't I can't I mean, I can't speak to all of the different contracts. I don't know that. I mean, frankly, I didn't I wasn't really quite prepared for the entire scope of that. So I apologize. So I don't know about all the different contracts. I mean, looking at looking up here, I see some of it is the 3% base wage for [12:53:17 PM] civilians. So that's not necessarily contractual in and of itself. That's a that's an increase that the council would be giving. If you're asking about the 14.2 million, that's contractual wage increase. That would be that would be handled under the meet and confer agreement. There's a grievance procedure in the meet and confer agreement. And and, you know, to provide any sort of detailed legal analysis to the council on those questions, I think we we'd prefer to discuss that in closed session, if that's the council's wish. >> And thank you for the clarity. >> Thank you. Councilmember Velasquez, councilmember duchen. Councilmember zo qadri. Councilmember Ellis. >> Thank you. Mayor. I've got some questions to start out for the public safety chiefs. If they can come on down. And I guess I'll start with APD since we're in the hot seat. So just to piggyback on some of the conversation that we just had, the budget's increasing $24 million in the budget document, [12:54:18 PM] not today's presentation, but the budget document. It shows up as about a $15.2 million increase in transfers, which is about 63%. But in today's document, they have a different way of classifying it. It's about $10 million for what they call citywide allocations, which is administrative support, information technology, rent and facilities management, fleet fuel and maintenance. I'm just wondering if you or anybody can shed a bit more light or specifics on what that category means, since it's outside the contractual piece, a significant part of what the budget increase looks like. >> Cary. Do you want to handle that? >> So, our internal services and support services departments have a allocation to all other departments for the services we provide to support the functions of the organization as a whole. Those [12:55:19 PM] costs are then allocated. So there's a methodology to determine what those prices are. And then they're allocated to departments based on their use or percentage of the budget. With police being the largest general fund department using our hr functions, using it services the fuel and fleet for their, for their vehicles. They are getting the allocated, cost related to them doing business as the police department. So what that represents is the support services functions, charging back to departments based on the support provided. >> I think the important thing for your answer that I want to capture is that's done for most departments. >> Then that's done for every department. >> That's a proportional allocation based on that criteria. So if somebody were to look in the budget and look for this, this classification, they would find something similar across the board. >> Correct. And the way that we the way that these allocations [12:56:20 PM] are distributed, the departments don't have a say. It is a corporate allocation and methodology that is then, reviewed and submitted to departments for inclusion in their budget. And so as a general fund department, those dollars are then included as to make sure that those, those services remain whole as a general fund cost, but departments don't get to, opt in or out of those allocations. >> Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. I'm going to turn to where are we on recruiting across our public safety departments. And I want to start with fire and ask, where do you think we are in recruiting? I looked at the data that was shared earlier this year. But I'd like to hear in your own words, kind of where you think over the last five years or currently, if we've turned a corner, I've got some numbers that I pulled from that, but I'd like to hear your thoughts first. >> Yes. Tom Vicki chief of staff, Austin fire. And so for for us, from a recruiting [12:57:22 PM] standpoint, we started a cadet class of 46 a couple weeks ago. We're starting a lateral class in, in two weeks. On August 10th. We plan to run another class later this year, as well as another lateral class early next year. And so we think we're in a good place. We have enough folks in the pipeline to be able to fill our positions. The use of the lateral is going to be a significant money saver. And I think that shows in our budget and some of the areas that we've looked, where we could cut the lateral classes is a big win for us because we can run them half the time and get them on the trucks twice as quick. And so, that's the, I think we're in pretty good shape right now. Obviously, you know, the trend is less folks applying for public safety and less folks showing up. But overall, I think for us, we're still able to fill our seats. >> Okay. I want to just ask also, historically, when I look back about five year a window, I'm seeing close to like 400 hires, about 266 separations. So I'm seeing a net increase in the amount of sworn. Is that match up with your experience [12:58:24 PM] or I'm just looking at not just the immediate term which you're talking about, but but where we're trending in terms of, increasing staffing or getting to the appropriate staffing. >> Absolutely. So we're, we're adding, we added 22 positions last year, adding 32 in this budget, as you can see. And that that helps us adjust for the upcoming schedule change that we're going to see in October of 27. And so overall, we also opened five stations over the last seven years, which is a net gain of personnel too. So that's a big chunk of that as well. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm going to ask the same thing of chief Davis. Where do you think we are. And I've got some numbers here also. >> Yes. Thank you for the question. I'm excited to report. I'm looking at attrition rates and I'm going to go back to 2022 when we had 141 people leave 2023 161. And those numbers kept on in 2026. We're looking at 55 people that have left through, through retirements. And so between that and the fact that just a year and a half ago, we had about 740 applicants that were [12:59:24 PM] signing up between that, between 650 and 750 applicants signing up to take a police test that is now over 1500. So those applicants are happening come September. We are going to be having a class of 100. And we have not had that in a very long time. Between that and doing some modified classes ourselves, we're going to see some success there. So we are on the right track when it comes to recruiting. >> Thank you. The same thing I'm going to offer up what I saw from the report earlier this year, and I appreciate your answer. And I appreciate the, the encouraging numbers. And I'm assuming this is all connected to, you know, a half million dollar item that you all are adding. One of the few things you're adding this year, which is the recruiting personnel. But I'm seeing about 435 hires since 2022, but almost 600 separations in that same window. So to me, it looks like a significant net loss of almost 150 officers in that time. Does that match what you know about, the net between [1:00:24 PM] hires and separations and that. >> You're going back five years? So we know that what 2020, 2020 122? That's when the, you know, what the, one of the reasons we are in a deficit that we are now was within those years. And as we're starting to build back, we are just starting to see, the fruition of the work that's been done these last couple of, you know, several years on the academy. And so I think those attrition numbers of seeing 55 people leaving this year versus 160 in 2023, those gains are happening and they're not as fast as any of us would like. But, but they are happening. >> And the intent is that the additional personnel and support that is in the budget or in the proposed budget is going to help further assist with this. >> So the one time ask is for a headhunting service that helps police departments identify candidates. And so one of the nice things about the applicants that we are getting, we're getting a lot of college students, a lot of Texas state, a lot of UT, a lot of [1:01:24 PM] universities that are that are coming in and applying. And this headhunter will help us identify we want austinites, we want we know we want to increase. Certainly women within the ranks, we want to increase. You know, those numbers. And so this headhunter will help with that as well as marketing. And then that position, that is there that will help with the administrative functions of that role, that we need to support those, those that work. >> Okay. Thank you chief. Chief Luckritz. >> Well, I'll be honest and I won't paint quite the same rosy picture. We do still have some challenges in the ems department. We have made a significant number of changes in the past couple of years in terms of streamlining our processes, and working through different barriers to entry. You know, we are on a good track. It is not a short term process for us. So we are anticipating, continued growth within the department. This week we saw 40 individuals that started a new academy class, [1:02:25 PM] which is one of our largest ever. And we are on track to continue to increase the number of academy classes moving forward. And I can speak to as well in terms of hirings and separations, you know, we do generally see that the problems that we have from a vacancy perspective is, generally speaking, from a growth of the department perspective rather than a departure perspective. That being said, we did have a slight setback this year. We have had some individuals that have left due to some new governmental ems agencies that have, appeared within the region. But that has, that process has gone through, we, fewer individuals left than we had expected. And we will stabilize that >> Through the next couple of academies. >> Okay. I appreciate that, chief. Mayor, I'd like to come back around. I'm almost out of time. >> Thank you. Thank you. Council member. Council member. Zo qadri. Councilmember Ellis. Councilmember Siegel. >> Great. Thank you mayor. And thank you for the great [1:03:26 PM] presentation. My first question has to do with slide nine. It identifies that police cadet recruitment is a one time cost, funded through the budget stabilization reserve fund, has police cadet recruitment funding of this type ever been supported using asset forfeiture funds before? Has that been done in the past? >> Has asset forfeiture been used to support recruitment efforts? >> Yeah. Has it been used to fund police cadet recruitment funding? >> No. >> But have we. Have you ever. >> No. It has never been used for recruitment. >> Okay. >> Okay, great. Thank you. And then another question. So it hasn't been used in the past. Correct? Okay. It has not. Okay. >> I don't think it's legally allowed to be used for that. >> Got it. And then, another question on, of the $9.9 million in citywide allocations that are mentioned on slide 23, [1:04:29 PM] how much is for rent and facilities management and how much is for fleet fuel and maintenance? >> On second? >> Fleet and facilities. >> I think the total for, facilities management support [1:05:29 PM] is $10.8 million. For fleet, it looks like it's 1.6 million for, for fuel and maintenance. >> Great. So it's 10.8 million for the first and 1.6 million for the, fleet fuel maintenance. Is that correct? Sorry, the audio is a little bit, quiet coming up here. >> Sorry. Pardon me. I'm waiting on a total. That's the incremental cost. So the incremental cost in in fleet fuel and maintenance was $1.6 million. And the incremental change in facility management was $4.5 million. And that's to a total now of $10.8 million. >> Got it. Thank you. And then additionally, is it standard practice for departments to absorb these costs through citywide allocations? It is. It is. Okay, great. And then have one more question on this topic. And then it's mainly just clarification, for, regarding the initial budget budget presentation that we had on July 16th when referencing the [1:06:31 PM] $13 million required through meet and confer and statutory required pension payments, approximately $11.7 million for being in confer obligations and $1.3 million for statutory required pension payments. Does the 14.2 million showed on slide $14.2 million shown on slide 23 include additional costs, such as stipends and insurance. >> Yes, the the slide that's showing this. 14.2. This that you're seeing on the on slide 23. Is that what you're asking about? >> Correct. >> Yes. Is it includes stipends insurance and the statutory pension. >> Could you give a breakdown of everything that's in that 14.2 million. >> Well we had. >> The response. Hold on. [1:08:02 PM] >> 11.7 million wage increase 800,000 pension 1.5 million insurance. >> See. >> There's feverish typing going on. >> And you're fine. [1:09:02 PM] >> Okay. Those are the totals. I'm sorry. So wage adjustments for sworn is 11.7. Legacy liability contribution for sworn is 1.3. Insurance for sworn is 1.5. That totals the 14.5 million. >> Great. So total is 14.5 million. Okay, great. And then sorry. So it's not 14.2. Then it's 14.614 point. >> The legacy liability includes. So with the, the sworn and I'm verifying that that's accurate with the legacy liability. There's a portion that is the city's annual contribution and a portion that is the. Oh I'm wrong. It's offset by the credit for aviation. So aviation has a credit to the police department for the work that they do out there. And so that 14.5 is offset by the credit from from the aviation department. That's why it's a total of 14.2. [1:10:04 PM] >> Got it. Okay. Appreciate that clarification. Stepping away a little bit from public safety, I just had some, some additional questions and I think I have about 3.5 minutes. So the staff recommendation allocates $2.5 million to the housing trust fund to be used for future purposes aligned with the downtown density bonus. I have three questions on this. Could they could these be used towards next year's local housing voucher contract needs? I know we have about a $7.8 million need annually for this. >> Yes. Those those the local housing voucher is a eligible cost for the downtown density bonus program. >> Okay, great. And then I know this was asked by councilmember alter last week, but how much of our voucher funding is from ongoing funding sources currently? >> Without this, a, just this, this recommendation, only 2.1 is included as ongoing, >> One time funding. Excuse me. So most of it is one time funding. >> Most of it is currently one [1:11:04 PM] time. >> Got it. Thank you. And then and then last question on this. And what capital needs such as affordable housing, such as an affordable housing developer needing gap financing, safer for road and money is running low by 2028. Will this money be able to be used for that as well? >> Let me check with the housing department to verify that. I'm not sure. >> Okay, great. So I just want to point out that the original use of establishing a housing trust fund was to have additional funding on hand to provide for capital funding for low income housing, and not just to depend on bond bond funding. So if we want to depend on bond funding only to get help to to get low income housing built, then we can continue to zero out the T F, but that may be creating more risk down the line, not only for capital but also for wraparound services and vouchers. So I just want us to carefully, as a as a council, think about how uses and the need to maintain funding. And then in terms of other additional housing funds, social service cuts, impact [1:12:05 PM] affordability as well. So housing is the most expensive cost in a household budget oftentimes. So it's important to keep housing whole while also fulfilling contracts that help connect folks to other services, whether it be food, child care, health care, or stable housing opportunities. So to the extent that we can as a dice, I think that's something that we hopefully can all support and move on. Thank you. >> Thanks, councilmember qadri. Councilmember Ellis, councilmember Siegel. Councilmember alter. >> Thank you. Mayor. Just a couple of questions, mostly for fire and police. There is a line item for $22.3 million in emergency prevention. Is that broken down anywhere in the budget, or could I get that information about what all that entails? I'm I'm imagining there's some wildfire prevention and things like that in there. >> Yeah. There is wildfire prevention. A large portion of that is the fire prevention or the fire marshal's office is the majority of that. [1:13:07 PM] >> Okay. Okay. And that helps handle operations as well. Things like capacity, you know, safety capacity for downtown events and things. >> Like that. Special events section, in addition to all of the other maintenance inspections and things that are done in emergency prevention as well. And there is some money that's spent on, on prevention on the wildfire side as well. >> Okay. Okay. That's good to hear. And then I think I already know the answer to this, but I just want to double clarify it. The overtime dollars that are needed for AFD are fully funded within this budget. >> We're working really closely with the budget office. >> To get closer to the money. >> Sorry that. Sorry about that. We're working really closely with the budget office. We met as late as last night. And, you know, we're using what are new projections. And things have changed a little bit with the historic projections. So we think we're really close to where we need to be. >> Okay, good. And that sets you up to be able to maintain the four person staffing ordinance that absolutely. >> We've maintained the four person staffing. We continue to maintain the four person staffing. [1:14:07 PM] >> Okay. Love to hear that. And then I noticed the civilian ftes. There's 12 fewer positions in this. Can you talk me through. >> That's just a transfer over to, to, to, for the it positions that are moving over to the, to the one ATS there's, I couldn't find ATS there it is. That's what I was looking for. >> There we go. Okay, that makes sense to me. And then increasing sworn positions is up by 32. Is that a result of the new contract and the the hours that y'all are scheduling the firefighters for. Correct. >> Correct. That's the offset. The additional hours we'll have when we change to the new schedule. October of next year. >> Okay. All right. That's great information. And now I want to ask chief Davis, I know you were able to track down some information for me about staffing levels, and I appreciate council member duchen questions about recruiting. So right now we have 1479 police officers. And it seems like over the five year projection moving forward, [1:15:10 PM] when you subtract out the folks who are potentially retiring, we might get 138 more police officers over the next five years. Is that, am I doing my math correctly? >> Well, I hope that's wrong. I hope that ends up being wrong. I think with the having the classes we have and then the modified classes where we're able to bring people in and get them through the academy within ten weeks and then off to an fto program. My hope is that we will be able to, to increase those numbers dramatically with that. I do think as we move forward and we're looking at attrition is, has absolutely slowed. I mean, from you talk about those, those five years prior, attrition has slowed greatly. And I think a lot of it is due to that contract. We can talk about the reasons why. But yes, it's not happening as fast as all of us would like, but those academy classes are getting full, I think, you know, to have a class of 100 and then to, to continue that on, with those goals, we'll get there. But it is not as fast certainly [1:16:11 PM] as, as any of us would like. >> Okay. I appreciate you laying that out because I know we've gotten a couple of questions about the contract itself. And my mindset as someone that represents southwest Austin is how to beef up some of the other divisions that y'all have had to walk back over those years. Can you talk me through the thought process of, for instance, the motors division or parks police? At what thresholds would you consider, or are you considering being able to redeploy those divisions? >> So this September will be putting, I believe it's 68 officers on the street. And so as we start walking, you know, those numbers are increasing. I have said this many times, motors is a priority traffic section to get a traffic section, a park, a park unit designated specifically for the parks. Those are things that we all want to see. And as we move forward and patrol is numbers, you know, in patrol have not been this high for a very long time. So I feel confident with the numbers that we're putting in patrol. And as people are coming out, they are staying in [1:17:12 PM] patrol. We absolutely need those numbers. But from that is where we'll be able to take some of those numbers and create those units that we want to create. >> I appreciate that. Do you have any more formal diagram or information about when we can expect some of those to come in, like as the cadet graduations happen? Is it one, two, three classes before we can get motors back, for instance? Or do you just. >> My goal was to have at least a small motors unit, meaning about 4 to 6 officers and a sergeant before the end of the year. I still want to to do that. And I know we're working very hard to see how we can create that. But how we're moving from that, we'd have to have a larger conversation on what those numbers are looking at as we're coming into the academy classes. >> Okay. Well, that's, that's, I'm glad to hear that because I think that is really exciting to be able to get that back. And then I wanted to ask a question about the asset forfeiture. Can you spell that out again for me? Exactly what that's allowed to be used for. Is it just one time funds and [1:18:13 PM] equipment or are there any other guardrails. >> You want to have Chris Coppola come up and kind of talk about the legalities? Chris, is it me asking, is he maybe he's not even here? >> So not trying to put anyone. I'm just curious. >> He's not here. >> Right now. Michelle, can you answer to what? No. Yeah. So they're the that's allocations that we get from drug seizures money seizures those type of things that are goes through a lengthy process of once those dollars are confiscated and found through through arrest. And these are our partnerships with the Dea and so forth. It is a lengthy process. And once those dollars are allocated, we cannot use those dollars. We can use them for travel. We can use them to purchase equipment, but we cannot use them to, I believe in recruiting. There's, there's, you know, federal sanctioned laws on what we can and can't use those dollars for. >> Okay. I'd love to maybe continue that conversation offline because I had a question in my budget town hall that I did earlier this week about, security cameras in parks, the ones that are hardwired, not the ones that [1:19:15 PM] are uploading to a cloud or anything like that, but the ones that are, you know, firmly mounted in park spaces and can be reviewed only by city employees. That's something that I'm getting a lot of questions about as a district that has a lot of park space and people really like that. But at the same time, we're seeing some instances where people, whether they live in Austin or they come in from other cities, they come and they commit crimes in our park spaces. And I just want to make sure that those spaces are as safe as possible for everybody, because without that, it seems to be in a position where people are coming in and taking advantage. That we don't have that parks, police. >> I agree with you and I look forward to those conversations. I know, you know, we're working very hard within the trust act that was brought by all of you here on the, on the dais, working within that to, to look at cameras. But I'm a proponent of that as well. And I think within those parks, that would be a fantastic place to, you know, to implement those. >> I'd love to hear it. Okay. That's all I've got for now. Thank you. >> Thanks, councilmember Ellis, councilmember Siegel, councilmember alter. And then [1:20:15 PM] we'll start going back unless somebody that has not already asked questions, wants to let me know quickly. So councilmember Siegel, councilmember alter and then we'll go to councilmember Laine. >> Thank you, mayor. I'm going to start with, consultant contracts with the budget folks. And, you know, colleagues, I think this is one of our opportunities to protect our social safety net and reverse the cuts to social service programs by reducing spending on general and professional consulting contracts. And a recent audit report found in the staff presentation today confirms the city spent over $100 million on consultants in fiscal year 2025, including nearly 11 million from the general fund, about 30 million from support services and 24 million for internal services. And when we're dealing with these fiscal fiscal constraints for our city, my sense of the community is folks would like us to prioritize our city workers and our social service programs before we pay outside consultants. And so I know there's a lot of attention right now from the public on [1:21:16 PM] some of our social service contractors. And yesterday, we did get a memo from city staff, including some some information about some of our contractors not meeting performance metrics. And I do want to address that at the outset here. First, I believe that 100% of us on council want people who win city contracts to live up to their promises. And if a vendor does not meet their goals, and especially if a vendor falls far short of their goals on multiple occasions, that should be addressed. But deciding whether a particular organization should get a contract for next year is a very different question than whether we should provide the underlying service. And from reviewing the 25 page memo we received yesterday, looking at the array of social service providers we have, I'm definitely convinced we should continue funding these services, whether it's parent support specialists and pre-k readiness at Austin ISD, whether it's permanent supportive housing or mental health support, whether it's violence prevention or at risk youth interventions, these social service programs are doing essential work for the [1:22:16 PM] city on behalf of the city, and these are programs the city is not equipped to provide on its own. So my goal is to try to restore $5.3 million to social service programs. And one of the areas I would like to look at to pay to restore these services is the $100 million on consultants spending, and I asked my staff to download all of the contracts the auditor examined over a three year period to see what I could learn. And I'll admit, these are hundreds of documents. I haven't read them all yet, but I did find a few things from the several dozen, reports I looked at first. Many of the categories of work in these contracts are for functions that our city staff can perform. Things like planning, conducting focus groups, workshops, community engagement, staff training. Second, the contractors often bill at rates of $200 or $300 an hour or more, some of them at daily rates of $10,000 per day or more, and some even more than that. One example I found was a contract for executive coaching that had rates, including $375 an hour for coaching, $720 an hour for [1:23:19 PM] customized coaching, and $3,600 an hour for ad hoc course creation. Of course, I found the consultant contracts for the city logo in there for nearly $500,000 for brand strategy and development. And we I think we know how the people of Austin feel about that one. I also found the $10.5 million contract for Gartner for it products and services that has led to, unfortunately, the controversial proposal to consolidate hundreds of city tech workers into a single department. The list goes on. But my conclusion is that there has to be room to butts in these categories. And we should make cuts there before we take $1 more from social services, especially since we made cuts there last year. So, I want to get to my questions. I really do appreciate the detailed memo sent to council about which social service contracts should be cut and why. Not that, not that I think we should make those cuts, but that level of detail and analysis was very important. And director Lang, I wanted to ask, has there been a similar analysis of each of these general and professional consulting contracts to [1:24:21 PM] determine their relative value? >> Thanks, councilmember. I will say that there has been continued analysis of these contracts, and we're still digging in to the, the how and why and what these contracts have been for. I will, I would like to, address that the $100 million spend is over several funding sources. And so when you look at the savings that you are, that you want to see for the general fund, many of those funding sources will not result in savings to the general fund. And then, I will say that we are continuing to work with the departments to identify whether or not those contracts and that contract Spann relates to, a budget that is available and, or whether it was strictly contract authority to go with that spend. And so there are several different, [1:25:21 PM] variables that result in a difference in the contract spend or the contract authority and the budget that is available. >> Thank you director. And I guess we've got about, I don't know, 4 or 5 days to get our budget amendments ready to prepare for next Thursday. But, let's assume that council agreed that we should cut general and professional consulting before we cut social services. What would be the best way to reduce the general fund commitment to consultants by $5.3 million? >> I think you have to look at what the services are that we're asking those consultants to do. And and when, you know, we we've looked at some of these, consultant contracts and spend several of them are responding to direction to, do reviews or do plans, whether it's an ifc or if it's, we're trying to, you know, move forward on a, different kind of strategic plan for, you know, the different departments, such as Austin energy's new plan was [1:26:22 PM] recently put out. So there are several reasons that we have these contracts. And I think it's asking what services do you want the the, the city to continue to do in some of these, directives that we're given. >> And in some of these cases, we could ask staff to do them. And then I guess it's fair to say that if we assign, for example, a strategic plan to staff instead of a consultant that might impact, timing of when the work product is delivered, things of that nature. >> It definitely would. And in some cases, you know, staff, we have a very good and robust and, and capable staff, but there are some nuanced, information that we may not have as professional staff that we then lean on consultant or augmentation to help us with that information. >> Do you think that, you know, you and your team could bring back some sort of analysis that could let us know, for example, if we'd like to cut some of the general fund consulting contracts, if we'd like to look at the internal services or support services contracts, what you would recommend as the [1:27:24 PM] first cuts to make. >> I'll say, well, yes, we can, we can work on, on that. I think, I just want to reiterate the contract spend and the budget may not be the same thing. And so when you look at the budget that's available, for example, if there was a contract that the department may have moved some savings to cover that contract, but that budget isn't available for ongoing savings. I want to make sure there's clarity on that, but we will look at what those contracts were when they have ended or if they're still ongoing plans for them, and what those plans are to address your concern. >> Okay. Thank you. Do you think, I know time is very short in this budget cycle? What would be a reasonable expectation for us to get that kind of information? >> I'm. >> We are working diligently. [1:28:25 PM] Our team is still looking into the information. We'll try to get it to you. I'm gonna say as quickly as possible, but as you have said, it's thousands of lines of information that we are trying to dive through and delineate. We are working with, departments to get more detail, to understand better what their plans spend is. And so my hope is to be able to get something to you in the next couple of days. But I really, want to reiterate, we'll continue to work on it. We'll continue to work to try to get you more information to help you make your decisions. >> Okay. Well, I guess I just want to indicate that I might, in the absence of that kind of detailed information, it seems like the best. For example, the sub quorum I'm working with could do is just propose a cut of some monetary amount or percentage amount and delegate to staff to figure out where exactly to make those cuts. >> And, and if you're. Yes, but I'm assuming the 1.3 million that we see as general fund spend. If that is the [1:29:26 PM] recommended cut, then we would have to identify what would not be able to be done in the general fund, because that's the only amount that is a general fund spend. And then the budget that goes along with that. >> I believe you indicated a couple days ago, it might have even been yesterday, that that if we were to cut, for example, a professional consulting contract for internal services, half of those dollars would go back to the general fund. >> About half of those dollars would go to the general fund. Correct. >> Okay. And so, I guess just specifically want to ask about the Gartner contract. Do you know how much is left on spent under the $10.5 million Gartner contract? >> I don't have that detail, but I will I will work with the team to understand what's available. >> And I guess I could direct this question to cfo van van eenoo. I guess what would be the impact if council were to ask that contract to be discontinued? And I'll yield to the mayor after the answer. [1:30:27 PM] >> And I think we. >> Sorry, I usually try to catch that before that goes off. And but I was talking to another council member, so I apologize. >> Same as what. Cary. That's what I would want to get back with you on, because that contract is used by many departments. It's used by our electric and water utilities, aviation, Austin technology services. So we have Gartner engaged in a variety of activities across the city. So I'd like to just get you a more thorough response in writing to that. >> Thank you, councilmember Siegel. Again, I apologize. I always try to catch that before it happens. Councilmember alter, and then I may have a couple questions before we go to councilmember Laine and we start back on the new rotation. >> Thank you very much. My first round of questions are going to be related to APD since chief Davis, you're already here, but I think this first one might be better directed at director Lang. Can you walk us through APD's overtime expenditures historically, and I don't know if you have last year versus [1:31:29 PM] this fiscal year, but I'm trying to understand where we have been and where we are going and how that, looks. And chief Davis, you might know this as well. I just. >> Know I'll let Cary answer, but I would like to say that since I've been here every year, I've brought down overtime usage. So I think it's important to note. >> Well, and I think that's what director Lang might might show us while she's working on that. I do have a question for you. Chief Davis, and it's not a dollars and cents number, but a question about how y'all are measuring your work and just how, how you are using in this case, the dollars. But, but the people behind the dollars to achieve those outcomes. And, and what I'm getting at here is, and I'm pulling up your. In the budget document, your key performance indicators, for instance, we've talked a little [1:32:30 PM] bit about the academy here. Average number of cadets enrolled in the academy. And that makes sense. I get why you would put that, but it seems that, you know, sometimes we, we are very focused on the inputs and not the result that we're trying to achieve. And we're not trying to get people enrolled in the academy. We're trying to get officers graduated out of the academy and on to the streets. And so I think looking at how we can shift some of these to be the result we're trying to get to. And, you know, I think also looking at, you know, our retention rates that you've been talking about, I think that's something that we, we might want to try to, to have that be our target outcome rather than what's going into the system. Does that make sense? >> Oh, absolutely. I think one of the issues, certainly from [1:33:31 PM] my perspective with the academy, is we may get them in and but are we keeping them even in the class? And so when you're looking at, you know, bringing people in, are they capable, to, to graduate a class? And so again, moving the recruiting and the academy under one commander has helped with that. We want quality people coming in to begin with, but it's also creating a culture there where it's not like we're identifying people with weaknesses to get them out. No, we're identifying people that may need help and we're going to help them stay. And whether that's through, you know, extra lesson lessons with the penal code or physical fitness, all of those things. And so as we're, we're looking at the, the changes we need to make at the academy, that is certainly something I want that attrition rate in the academy to stay. If I'm if I'm starting with 100, I want to stay with 100 when we're graduating. And so that's, that's where my focus is, is ensuring that we're creating a foster an environment where it's not identifying the weakest link to get them out. It is identifying the people that need some extra [1:34:32 PM] assistance to help them be successful. >> Yeah. And just to foreshadow, I may have a couple amendments focused on some of these, and I'm going to work with your you and your department on, you know, for instance, also like percent of non- urgent calls into the 911 system, once again, understand why we might put that. But that's an input rather than what we're doing with those calls. Or what's the resolution of those calls, right. What we want to see, how we want to see the system perform, not how, what what feeds into the system. So I know mundane, but I think it's really important that we're able to, to target our resources and track the outcome we want to see, not what is necessarily flowing into the system. >> Certainly. >> And it looks like director Laine has. >> Yes. So when we look at the, sworn overtime history going back to 2022, it was 22.9 million in 22, it increased to [1:35:35 PM] 43.1 million in 23, 48.8 million in 24. It began reducing in 25 to 40.8 million, and then 35.8 million is the estimate for 26. >> Okay. And how does that 35.8, I think it was on your slide. How does that compare to the vacancy savings that are. >> And so what you'll see, I think on the slide was the proposed for next fiscal year. What I think the numbers are showing for this fiscal year. And I'll ask Michelle to chime in if I get it wrong. Is that, with the vacancy savings and the vacancy savings budget and the anticipated, I think that's 30 million. The anticipated overtime is 35 million. And, overall with the vacancies, the budgeted sworn personnel and the overtime, we anticipate the department's anticipate going over their personnel budget [1:36:36 PM] about $500,000, but they will manage within their overall budget. >> Okay. >> Back to what has been discussed here a little bit in terms of kind of that other 10 million, the contractual, the support services. The administrative support, particularly that line item has gone up, in this budget, 1.25 million. First, can you tell me what is administrative support and why that significant increase? >> So administrative support includes the support services fund in particular. And so that is, all of the departments from human resources, financial services. Communications, our management services office as well. Management services [1:37:37 PM] department which includes several offices. Let me walk through and see what some of those details are on that particular increase. So let me take a, give me a second to look into that and then I'll let. >> You know. Yeah. >> And that's from a council member. Siegel cpq. In that contractual section, the administrative support. I'm also wondering the liability reserves are going up almost 50%. The contribution liability reserves. Can you help us understand what that. It's going from 5 million to 7.5 million. I'm wondering because that's supposed to be supported. >> So that the allocation to the liability reserve is based on a three year average. And so, that allocation to the police department is based on the historical spend through the liability reserves, funds on their different cases. >> Does that is the, the large settlement related to yogurt shop implicate that at all? [1:38:37 PM] Because I thought we were doing a different financing. >> No, that does not include the upcoming, payment. >> What would happen if we didn't increase the payment to liability reserves? We just kept it flat. >> Then that fund would be negative and and we would have to work on. Adding funding to it in a future year. So the, the allocation would still need to happen. >> Well, like the liability reserves are growing over the next two years. So the fiscal year or the proposed budget, it ends at four point almost 8 million. And the planned year 7.6 million. So I'm wondering why we need to grow the fund instead of keeping it level. >> It has to do with our liability reserve policies, which I believe call for a 25. It's a reserve fund. So we're, we're carrying a reserve balance equal to, I believe, 25% of our projected claims. So that's part of what drives the [1:39:38 PM] contributions to the liability reserve. And then as, director Lang mentioned, it's also there's a true up component to it. So, if, if a department's claims are higher than what we're projected, and then we need to true the fund up to keep that reserve level at what the policy requires. >> Is it fair to say that we've had a slightly higher three year average over the past three years because of that concentration of incidents related to, you know, the protests at APD headquarters and the number of cases that came out of that. I was like, you know, 20 some odd cases, but that we could potentially see a more leveling off. >> I think we, I would want to get you instead of like guessing on that, just get you the actual trend data so we could show you what those trends are and what our projections are. Okay. >> I'd like to take a look at this. I think it's potentially an area where we might be over contributing just based on our formula. That might have been [1:40:39 PM] impacted through a spike. And so yeah. >> But ultimately, nobody's going to over contribute because there's a there, there is a true up piece to the extent where, giving somebody an allocation and then their claims come in below that. And the next budget cycle, we will kind of correct that. So, you know, we're monitoring it over time. So whatever the liability claims were for a specific department, that is exactly wat they're paying. And then plus we get a little bit extra, more for that reserve piece. But that's the part that we true up. So everybody pays exactly what their amount is. It's just allows us to plan for those expenditures. All right. We'll we'll talk more about that. I did also want to say on the cost allocations, while I know these guys are working to get you the specific deals, but of that 1.25 million increase, typically when you see the general fund budget or any of our departments budgets going up, maybe in the range of three and a half to 4% annually just because of built in cost [1:41:39 PM] drivers, because of wages, health insurance, retirement costs, those same cost drivers impact our support service department. So like Carrie was mentioning, financial services, human resources, mayor and council management services, these are all departments that are in that support services fund. And so just for those same cost pressure reasons, you're going to see that budget status quo go up in the range of three and a half to 4%. And so that's one aspect of why the allocations are going to just naturally go up every year. There's also an aspect to cost drivers. And so if, if a cost center such as payroll is maybe being allocated out to the departments based upon the number of ftes they have. Well, if one department gets an increase in ftes relative to another department, that change in cost drivers can also affect the numbers. But again, while these guys can get you the details that 1.52 million increase is just going to be an [1:42:40 PM] increase in police's share of the support services cost based upon those factors. Sure. >> Thank you, council member members. I'm not going to walk through all of these questions, but I posted on bbc and I'm told that we're going to have a memo tomorrow, that hopefully answers some of these questions. But we've asked a number of questions about the social services contracts. And of course, we've also received a number of questions from the public. But if you haven't had a chance to look at these, I've put a list of questions and the director has indicated that hopefully tomorrow the the memo will answer these. But there are things like providing the total spending amounts divided into grants and contracts, providing the total number of contracts and grants in addition to the total spending for each for each category, providing a detailed list of which social service grants and contracts are being cut and by how much, both in numerical dollar amounts and as a percentage of the original grant money. And there's a number of questions like that, [1:43:41 PM] some of which we know the answers to, but I've been trying to get it in one place where the public will be able to see that as well. And I just want to call that to everyone's attention. Council member Laine will go to you, followed by council member harper-madison. >> Thank you. Council council member alter I was listening to your discussion of inputs versus outcome driven goals, and I thought again, an example of the need for a management level hire around emergency communications. I do have one last question about the joint emergency communications department. And it relates to alternative a versus alternative C in the memo. Alternative a refers to a higher that is a well qualified civilian 911 communications manager. Alternative C refers to an executive director hire and an assistant director hire. And I'd like to know the cost difference between this communications manager versus the executive director versus the assistant director. And if [1:44:45 PM] it is not readily available, I I'm fine to receive that and follow up. >> I don't have that those breakdowns specifically, but we'll get to we'll get those back to you as soon as possible. >> Okay. That sounds great. Thank you so much. I am now going to move on away from the joint emergency communications department. I have a question for fire. Thank you. Wildfire is a high priority concern for my district. Have there been any significant cuts to wildfire prevention or response? And what unmet needs exist within the wildfire division? >> Right now we are, we currently don't have any major cuts in that area at all. And we're working really hard to use the resources that we have available to get everything done that we need to get done. >> Okay. Thank you. My next question is for police. I [1:45:47 PM] noticed that only three possible or is related to police. I noticed that only three possible service prioritization options were listed for APD and the service prioritization report, and that none of them were included in the proposed budget. I am wondering if it's the conclusion of our city management or department of leadership, that there are no workable efficiencies to be found in our largest general fund department, and I'm hoping you can describe for me the process of arriving at the conclusion that the only three possible cuts that could be made, that there were only three possible cuts that could be made, and why none of them were included in the final budget, given its overall size. So. This is a city management level question. >> Yeah. Councilmember, could you please restate your question? I want to make sure I'm clear on what you're asking. >> Sure. In the service [1:46:49 PM] prioritization report, we saw three possible cuts. They didn't make it into the budget. And so I'm wanting to know if city management's conclusion position is that, that there are not efficiencies to be found, nor cuts to be made in any aspect of Austin police department, one of our largest cost centers. >> As you know, and I think the budget staff has articulated this, that we go through a pretty comprehensive process each year where we not only look at service enhancements, but we ask departments to identify these opportunities for savings. Through the process of developing the proposed budget, we take very careful assessment of every opportunity to save money, whether that's in the police department or any other city department. And so the ultimate recommendation that is provided to you is in the totality of minimizing service impact as much as we can, knowing that there are still demands for services that we have in not only the police department, but all the departments that have [1:47:50 PM] made have offered those cuts. And then ultimately, the management has to decide how we balance that with the overall totality of the needs that are still present for us on just day to day operations. And so, yes, that is our recommendation right now. Of course, there's always an opportunity to to continue to look for those savings, but that is the recommendation that you have from city management. >> Well, Mr. Fortune, I would alert you to the reality that chief Davis talked to us just today about an opportunity for $2 million in savings by implementing a recommendation that was made via a professional consulting report several years ago to start an online or telephone reporting division, which was followed up by a unanimous I fc to to work towards a joint emergency communications department, which I actually believe that by becoming more effective, we will also become more efficient. And so I will simply posit that, we are making a management [1:48:50 PM] error in not giving more thorough consideration to how we can improve, become more efficient. I have seen very noticeable results in my districts after the hiring of chief Davis, and I know that from more can be done from a management perspective. And so I'm simply asking for that. >> Absolutely. There's there's always going to be more that we can do. And I would like to point out specifically as it relates to the 311 conversation, while the consultant identified savings specifically in the police department, as you understood as as we explained earlier, that there are allocations for the cost of three one, one that go to every city department. So reducing the the, the calls from 311 doesn't necessarily reduce 22 positions, which the chief is advocating that she would want to have in her department. So the additional cost has got to go somewhere. And that's the assessment that would need to be carefully evaluated to determine whether that true magnitude of savings would be. So while I understand it's the police department that would save the $2 million, the [1:49:51 PM] general fund may not be at that level. And so there is that assessment that gets put into the equation when we we assess which ones we're going to propose and which ones we will not. >> And I respect that. And you have a lot to balance as you come up with these recommendations. But I will assert again, that I've seen a pattern of when we make when we do our assessing, we look around the police department with some of it. And I'll just give another really small example, which is, you know, the memo that came out last night said, well, one of the things we can do is we can rebrand, to Austin emergency communications. We just went through a logo rebranding a comms. And I, I just really think that there's something to be learned here. Like we have to turn that lens on to all parts of our, our organization. So thank you for, for hearing me out. You know that I have specific frustrations around this particular topic. So, I [1:50:51 PM] appreciate that. And with that, I'll turn to my next question. I, my, we were looking through some of the, a P D cost categories and just, we're hoping to get clarification. Under commodities, police supplies increased by 295,000. >> Yeah. That's the increase to, contractual increase to goals for our uniforms. >> Okay. Thank you. Under services, other increased by 267,000. [1:51:52 PM] >> We're going to look at that detail. But I also want to address that within a department's budget. When you look at the line item budget of a department, there may be allocations changes in those line items. And so where you may see an increase in, services, other, there may be another decrease that's offsetting that change as the departments look at what their planned budgetary spend is for the next year and makes those adjustments. So we, I want to be careful to understand, to explain. >> That, maintenance for vehicles doubled in cost. >> That's an allocation, from, from fleet. >> Okay. And then I, I'm also wondering if APD's liability reserve contribution increased by 2.5 million this year. Are they required? Is APD finding that money within their existing budget, or would it be would it come from the general fund. >> That comes from the general fund? >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you [1:52:53 PM] for, for giving me this time. Thank you for hearing me out. I'm glad we had this discussion. I'm not going to reiterate my talking points. You'll be happy to hear, mayor. But I do just want to hit a couple of high points. My district has had long standing serious problems with 911 response times and poor handling of jurisdictional overlap. While I understand the instinct is to take a less expensive approach, it hasn't been working for us to house this vital public safety function under a single agency with important priorities of its own. We really do need departmental level leadership structure that functions independently and has no other responsibilities. Competing with the work of making our 911 system work better for all of our city, not just for part of it. I really appreciate all the responses we received from staff today. I'm looking forward to finding the funding to jumpstart the improvement process during this budget cycle. For me, that includes a telephone or online crime reporting unit. As noted by council member Fuentes. But I support a budget amendment for [1:53:53 PM] all of these purposes. Thank you. >> Thank you, council member, council member harper-madison, followed by councilmember alter. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I actually don't think these are necessarily budget questions that need to be answered now, but during the course of the discussion, it occurred to me that over the years, paying attention to the various departments and their retirement funds. So we talked about the statutory contribution for retirement funds, and it occurred to me that I don't know where everybody stand in these days. I remember there was a time where, like, fire was killing it with their pension, and AFD was sort of or pd was struggling. And then there was a time where everybody was sort of, all right, I'm just hoping that here in the near future, again, not a question that needs to be answered at this juncture, but in the near future, if I could just get an update on how everybody's performing and oh, Mr. Benigno, again. >> I'd be happy to talk with you about it now, but okay. We will be doing a presentation to audit finance, typically December to give our annual update on how our pension systems are are doing. I am [1:54:55 PM] happy to report that the reforms are working. Fantastic periods are all below 30 years, which is what's the state requirement is. And, we've now been upgraded to triple a by all three agencies based upon the reforms that were implemented. So the reforms are working. >> That's why you were so happy to come and talk to me. Yeah. Happy to come. >> Up and. >> Tell that good news story. And, you know, we're the only large Texas city in the state of Texas that's triple a rated across the board. And, and those two upgrades were specifically due to the pension reforms, but we will be giving a more comprehensive update to audit finance in December. >> That's excellent. Thank you, I appreciate it. And then it also occurred to me during the course of the discussion, somebody asked for a very specific breakdown. I think it was the mayor. You asked about social services, which ones were affected. I know we heard from farm share and a few other folks about food today. As much as I wanted it to be a glowing success, there was a program that was initiated several years back. Excuse me. It was called the healthy corner store [1:55:55 PM] initiative, where essentially they were bringing healthy foods to corner stores. So in place of takis, you could get carrot sticks or whatever. The thing is. The truth of the matter is it didn't do well. And so I'm wondering, I'm noticing a lot in the way of food programs that are being cut. So I'd like to get a similar analysis about food programs. But also maybe some context would be helpful, so to say like a program was cut, but not say the program was cut because it didn't do well at all. I think contextually that's not helpful for us. So I was just wondering if when we talk about the things that are being removed or cut, if the reason is, you know, it was ineffective or it just didn't work, I think sometimes indicating that is helpful for us. You know, one of the things we're doing when we're deliberating where to find dollars, the truth of the matter is the dollars are finite. And despite some of my colleagues desires to grow money, we can't. And so I want to operate from a place of entire reality. And so just [1:56:57 PM] knowing, I think knowing sometimes contextually when things don't work, instead of fighting to find money to bring it back, if it went away because it didn't work, it's helpful to know that. And then lastly, there was one other thing. It was food programs. It was retirement. Oh, and then lastly, I'm specifically looking at you. I remember a time, you know, I was a part of the fire family for a long time and, you know, adjacently and I remember a time where my ex didn't work any overtime and then all of a sudden it was mandatory overtime. I'm curious to know. And it doesn't have to be an answer to a question at this moment necessarily, but I think my colleagues understanding how we got to a place where we required so much fire overtime, because I just remember there was none. And then all of a sudden there was so much, I think some [1:57:59 PM] chronology behind how we got here might be helpful. >> I mean, just short and sweet. We incrementally moved to the four person staffing model. And as we incrementally move to that model, it created additional out of time prior when we only had we only had a requirement for three three. It was much easier to meet the staffing on a daily basis, and typically didn't result in any overtime daily. >> So short and sweet. The answer is we need to hire more people. >> We're continuing to do what we can. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember harper-madison. Councilmember alter. >> Thank you very much. I do have a number of questions for fire here, and I want to pick up on a question that councilmember Ellis and and you said it very artfully and diplomatically, but I want to really hone in on, you know, we in our last budget, we cut overtime basically to a level as if we didn't have four person staffing. And that's why [1:58:59 PM] we're seeing in the current fiscal year, we are over our overtime allocation because we are utilizing overtime to pay for four person staffing as required. And, and we all agreed to that in the contract. And we are going to be, you know, somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 million over. Are you anticipating and I want your your truly honest assessment with the $6 million that we are allocating here, do we think that's going to fully cover fiscal year 27 overtime, or do we think there's still some little bit that we've got to figure out how to either cut down or we're going to show up with that that overage again. >> Hello council member? Yes, I know you asked, chief, and I appreciate that, but I think I want to give some context as well. When we were creating the [2:00:01 PM] proposed budget, we were looking at not just the spend, historical spend, but also the changes that were being made to, to, I'm sorry, I said police, I'm sorry, the fire budget, we're looking at the changes that are being made, such as going back to the 53 hour work week. In April, the changes that they've made from a management perspective on addressing some additional call out time. And so as we were pushing that information forward, the additional positions that they're receiving, we do believe from those aspects, just looking at all those variables, that the $6 million will be enough to manage the 27, budget for overtime. Also, we will continue working with the fire department to, look at what the budgetary needs are as we implement the new Austin schedule in October of 2027. We do think there will need to be some adjustments in the future years. But based on those [2:01:01 PM] factors and the changes that we've seen, that's why we we budgeted at the $6 million instead of the 8.3 million that was reduced in fiscal year 26. >> Okay. Well, I want to make sure we're setting them up not for failure, but for reality and not, you know, every year I've been here, we've shown up and some public service department or public safety department has been over their overtime allocation, sometimes multiples. And that's not always a function of them not doing what they're supposed to be doing. It is sometimes a function of the budget not being realistic in terms of what that actual spend was. And so I, we, we get Rosie sometimes. So I just want to make sure that we don't, if I'm lucky enough to be here for a fifth budget that we're showing up with realistic, we didn't run over, we actually set them up for success. Moving past [2:02:02 PM] that, I want to understand, we have sworn firefighters doing things like building inspections, you know, fire inspections, emergency prevention, other other issues or other jobs. Are those all required to be sworn under either state law or our meet and confer, or are there any spaces where we could utilize civilian personnel to do those jobs? >> So in our fire prevention division, we are using quite a few civilian personnel, on the administrative side, as well as the engineering staff is all civilian staff. All of the, all of the folks that are actually doing the inspections are required per C, B, a, and in some, in some times state law to to conduct the inspections. >> Okay. And I see labor relations and you can just give me a nod if you agree with that or if there's anything you want to add. >> Yes. Roxanna Stevens chief labor relations officer I just [2:03:03 PM] wanted to point out that, the statutory requirements outline, who in fire, the fire department has to be sworn. And that's by section one, 43.0034. And that outlines specifically fire prevention. And so in order to address that, we have to negotiate that in the contract. And currently the statute and the contract. Hold that we are able to use some civilians in the fire prevention as far. And we're able to use, degreed engineers for some fire prevention duties. But other than that, it's, it's pursuant to what the statute requires. >> Okay. Can chief. Okay. Can you walk me through your service prioritization, number five, which is reduce overtime by implementing an internal audit process to monitor compliance with revised leave and added time policies that was expected to reduce costs by about $800,000. What would that [2:04:04 PM] look like? And can you elaborate on that? >> So we we've implemented a new group to look at leave on a daily basis. So we're monitoring all leave use to make sure that it's being used appropriately daily. We've implemented new policies in that regard as well with follow up required follow up on all leave use. That's that's extraordinary. >> Okay. So that you're well, it's, it's shown as not included. Y'all are doing some kind of monitoring in line with essentially what that item is. >> We're about 60 days into the policy change and review right now. And so we're apprehensive to say exactly what the dollar amount will be, but we're closely monitoring it now. >> Okay. And similarly, your service priority number one, this was to reduce overtime funding by conducting community outreach and public education activities without using sworn firefighters outside of the regularly scheduled shift. Can you just what? What is that? What are what are they doing? [2:05:06 PM] >> And so we're essentially using, fire, fire engines for all of our community outreach events that we go to. And so. >> My kids love. >> They do. But at the same time, we want to make sure that we can't, we can't do as much as we would like because then we have units out of service. And obviously, our main priority is making sure that we're keeping units in service. The other thing we have with that is sometimes the events are interrupted if they're in. If we have an in-service unit coming to the event. >> I gotcha. So now I'm understanding and picturing exactly what you're talking about. All right. Sorry, just moving down my questions here. You talked about your cadets in your, in, in the budget and when right before the kpis, it, it notes that 70% of all calls for service are medical rather than fire related. And I'm curious. When I, when I first read that it, it seemed to me, [2:06:07 PM] you know, we're sending for firefighters to go handle medical call. Why is ems not doing that when we have two individuals just, you know, seems like it would be more cost effective to be more ems to, to handle those calls and free y'all up to do other things. Am I thinking about this correctly? Just help me understand that. >> I think what we do is, is pretty typical around the country that, you know, 70% of fire calls everywhere are medical calls. And so the location of our fire stations and the availability of our units helps us, helps us provide the service and get the first responders there as quickly as possible. And so in most cases, we're arriving before ems because the number of units we have and our locations. And so it works together as a system. And so without us, they can't do what they do. And without them, we can't do what we do. >> Okay. And in terms of our interlocal agreements, let's say with sunset valley or some of these other areas where we [2:07:07 PM] provide coverage, are we escalating the charge to them kind of proportionally as we are seeing our our costs go up? >> Absolutely. We're we've escalated the cost at sunset valley, and we significantly escalated the cost for as well. And we may even get an additional station added by esd for in the future as they have, you know, their esd taxes continue to increase. So we're making sure that they're covering all of our added costs for our personnel and units and all the other things that we add. So they are fully paying for all the service that they're receiving. >> Okay. My final question, and forgive me if I'm repeating and just didn't catch it. And when you were talking to councilmember duchen, in terms of our increased staffing to cover the Austin schedule, what are you projecting in terms of hiring? Are we going to hire the new 32 ftes in this next year to cover that, or will it be more a combination of that in overtime? What's the projection? >> We anticipate having those 54 positions, the 22 that were [2:08:08 PM] funded last year and the 32 that will be funded next year, filled prior to the October 1st date when the new schedule starts. >> Okay, great. Mayor, I'll yeah, I have about four questions for ems if whenever it comes back. But thank you. >> Right now, we don't have anybody else scheduled to speak. Well, guys, you got to let me know if you want to talk. So, councilmember duchen, since I essentially talked you out of it, I'll go to council member duchen. Then council member Siegel. And then we'll go back to council member alter folks, let me just point out that we have a number of speakers on item three. In particular, we have to take up item two. We have to vote individually on every item on item three. And then we have, item four. And we're going to have a public hearing that's supposed to start at three. So I just let in terms of time, your time management, I'll remind everybody of that. So, council member duchen, you have the floor. >> Thank you. Mayor. What I'm [2:09:08 PM] going to do is just reach out to, I think, chief Luckritz and a couple others. I've got some questions about the prioritization and enhancement list, specifically the a tc ems number five. Number four. And, police prioritization number two. So if you all can look out for me, reaching out the next couple of hours and trying to schedule something, perhaps tomorrow to discuss those, that would be really helpful on our end. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks. Council member, council member. Siegel then council member alter. Thank you mayor. I'll try to. >> Make these very concise. So I'm following up on council budget. Question 24 I know some of my peers already asked a few questions about it. And I guess I'll direct my questions to you. Director Lang. But feel free to assign anybody. I guess first of all, we were curious what the line item consultant others refers to. [2:10:23 PM] >> I think it's noted in the responses to cassie project manager, cost. >> Okay. Thank you ma'am. Would you please explain, the facilities management increase of 72% for an increase of $4.5 million. We understand this is a base cost driver and a or reimbursement to the facilities management fund, but it does seem like a high percentage increase from the previous year. >> So sure, the facilities management, allocation is primarily based on the public safety headquarters. As we are starting to implement those, those functions, but they also, police also has locations at the grove I believe. And so those allocations as we bring those offices online and police is using that space. That's where the allocation increase is. >> Okay. Thank you. And then we saw $1.2 million for warehouse space for the blue Santa program. Would you describe [2:11:23 PM] what that program is and why it's run out of the police department? >> I don't know. >> Right. Well, the staff is looking to provide a response. Blue Santa is a is a community outreach initiative that we partner with the blue Santa organization. And I believe the warehouse is not just for. I may be incorrect. It's not just for the blue Santa, but it's other items as well. But I'll have to defer to the department on that. >> I think that's true. When I first got here, we were paying 500 000 a year for a wealth of warehouse space that we ended up moving from because that was so expensive. So I yeah, we definitely need to see what that is. >> Anything else, director on that one? >> No, we'll look into it and let you know the details. >> Thank you. And then does that I guess program. It's assuming that it is $1.2 million. Are there performance metrics or goals that. >> The blue the blue Santa is mostly made up of volunteers [2:12:24 PM] that work throughout the year gathering, you know, gifts for children, but it's also the office of community liaison works out of that, that group. And so this is a professional staff that supports the the district representatives throughout the sectors and doing, the good work, the community work that they do. >> Thank you chief. Then going back to kind of the line items, would you all share why services other is going up 16%. >> So as I mentioned a little bit earlier, as departments are preparing their budget, they may do a reallocation between line items. And so that increase that you see there, there's a offsetting reduction in 6121 rental real estate. And so that's the offset. [2:13:25 PM] >> Thank you so much. Next question about services. Armored courier going up 76%. >> Increase in the contract. >> That is a contract that has increased. >> What kind of contract? >> You know. >> Cash that comes into the police department that they take Brinks armor. >> I understand, thank you. I see that rental other equipment is going up 169%. >> Good afternoon. Michelle Schmidt, chief administrative officer with the police department. I believe that one is related to the rental of meridian barricades for non-reimbursed special events. And so it's chewing up that line item. [2:14:25 PM] >> Thank you ma'am. And then travel increasing 155%. >> Let me look into that one. That may be a reallocation internally as well. I think the line underneath that, there's some reallocation from that seminar training fee line up to that travel city business line. >> I'm sorry, I couldn't quite hear that. Would you. >> Please speak up? >> You can kind of pull it closer to you. Move. >> Sorry. I believe that one is a reallocation as well. From the line underneath it, you'll see the negative amount there. So I think part of that seminar training fee was reallocated into the travel city business. >> Thank you. Do you have information on why educational promotional commodities increase 28%? >> Yes. That was a direct reallocation from training fees [2:15:25 PM] as well. That was related to the alarm administration unit that was transferred from development services department back to Austin police in fy 26. And so we moved that budget line item from training fees into the promotional items where they use that budget to help make awareness for alarm administration. >> Thank you. And then last one, franchise franchise fees are increasing 54%. >> Which is. >> O on the revenue side. >> Oh, I'm sorry, my you you might be right. Okay. >> Yes. That's related to our managed towing contract. And so that's the increase. And that's primarily based to, based on the fee increase related to towing fees that increased on October 1st of 2025. >> Understand? Thank you. And then the last question is [2:16:26 PM] relating to the municipal court. And so, my understanding was that under the county magistrate services on higher level charges, so that the a is for Travis county to do the work, in the presentation on page 15 today, it seems to indicate that our judges are now providing some of those services. And, I guess if y'all could explain whether that's true and if so, are we being reimbursed by the county for those services? >> I Mary Jane grub, clerk of the court for Austin municipal court, our judges are continuing to provide registration services for, a pd to review probable cause affidavits between 8 and 5. Well, eight and five during the weekdays, plus from 5 P.M. To 10 P.M. During the weekdays as well, and on the weekends from 6 A.M. To 10 P.M. Weekends and [2:17:27 PM] holidays. Cloud gavel is an electronic warrant service where it doesn't require officers to travel to a judge in person, and Travis county is not able to accommodate that during the dockets. So they're relying on our judges. >> So that's above and beyond everything we pay to the county. There's no kind of reimbursement for us pitching in there. >> I'm going to refer to the budget office to answer that question. I do believe that they're going to offer a 50% offset for this next fiscal year, but Cary would be more knowledgeable on that. >> That is accurate. We're getting a 50% reimbursement. I think there have been continued conversations with the county on, their contribution to offset some of our costs. But for fiscal year 27, there's 50% reimbursement. >> Five 0%. >> Five zero. >> Okay. And so is that reflected in the budget that is in front of us? >> That is reflected at the. So the interlocal is at the fund level. And the reimbursement is [2:18:32 PM] offset by the increase of that contract. And so you'll see that change in the in the contract. >> Okay. Thank you ma'am. >> Thank you. Council member. >> Let me clarify something. I want to I want to make sure I clarify and say the right information regarding, the facilities management change for police. I got information from the facilities management team. It is for the grove. That is a rental allocation. And then there is about, a $800,000 increase for rent at the training center, techno center and rlc. Then there's a shared services, which is a part of the administrative services allocation for their portion of, citywide security, male custodial and all the other administrative functions within facilities management. So you'll see, you'll see both of those. It does not include the public safety headquarters. I want to clarify that. >> Councilmember alter. [2:19:34 PM] >> Thank you very much. I1apd question and then chief Luckritz, I've failed to ask your service prioritization. Number two, it's about, implementing indirect cost rate for reimburse special events. And it's a $1.2 million savings. Am I reading this correctly that basically you would just charge special event third parties slightly more? And that's how we would get to this 1.2 or is it something else? >> My understanding is that, and I can say that we've already received a lot of calls. This is something to, to, to truly take a look at, are people going to be continuing to have events here if we're, you know, because we've, there's already been an increase, that we're charging due to the increase in pay. And so that's already been applied. And so looking at that at 1.2 million increases across the board to these promoters and these events would be, to some of them would be a great deal. [2:20:35 PM] >> Save a little extra here. My now for ems, I really, I'm trying to understand how many of our calls for service are the types that we don't need to send a two person ambulance to. And I'm thinking of, of, you know, I have heard anecdotally of, you know, maybe a senior citizen who can't reach the medicine on the top cabinet and they call 911 and we send ems or fire department. >> Yeah. So is it on. Each year now it's each year we, it's about 35,000 calls per year that we end up sending over to our collaborative care line, which is the secondary triage for them to be able to evaluate, to evaluate, whether or not there's alternative resources that we could send of those, about 10 to 12,000 or so still end up in an ambulance transport. And then kind of a [2:21:37 PM] little different way to answer your question overall, because sometimes there are calls that ems goes on that are medical concerns that aren't those necessarily super low acuity, but the patient may still not end up being transported because they get treated on scene or they refuse to go or something like that. So from the big picture, it's about 54% of our total calls end up with a transport to the hospital. >> Okay. Is there any way, and I know you guys have been really innovative, whether it's paramedic practitioners, c4, all. If we made investments into not converting an ambulance to a single unit, but, but having truly dedicated just single individuals in, you know, whatever kind of vehicle that could help alleviate some of those 10 or 12,000 calls that you mentioned, would that be something that over time would allow for us to see savings? Because you'd have, you know, your the paramedics on the two [2:22:38 PM] person units doing the types of calls we need them to do. >> So I think as we look at what the long term multi-year, you know, strategic plan for the department is, and we look at the growth of the city and the progress that we're seeing here. We need to recognize that as we grow, so many of these calls are of a lower acuity nature. And whether it's through basic life support ambulances or it's through single unit responders, they are most likely the best resource for us to utilize in a number of those various areas. And, and so, but I think it's a, it's a, it's an extended process for us to recognize that we will continue to grow. We will need to continue to need, to need additional resources. And so as we think about when we make those decisions to grow, whether we use an advanced life support ambulance, which is our most expensive resource, or if instead we could, we could grow with a small with a less resource intensive. And so when we talk about savings, I don't [2:23:40 PM] know that adding resources at this time would find you direct cost savings in this year. But I think over an extended period of time, when we look at the overall growth of the organization, and we could grow financially at a slower rate by investing in the correct resources. >> Okay, well, I'd love to talk more offline about some of that and just figure out how we can make sure that we're providing, you know, I know so often y'all are not you, you don't want to ask for anything new because we're, we're trying to just hold the line. But to your point, we need to grow smarter. And if there are things that we're missing out on and it goes across the board, because I know this really is not just an ems, police and fire. What types of investments, even if we can't do it all right now, should, should, and could we be making so that we are flattening the cost curve and, and providing that high level of service, but in a smarter way. >> In the long term? You know, I think as we look at what the [2:24:41 PM] ems system looks like as a whole, we need to maximize the availability of those advanced life support resources from a geographic perspective to make sure that those those smaller number of high acuity calls always have those resources available, and then identifying that the remainder of those calls can be treated with other resources. And I think that's a multi-year plan. >> Okay. Thank you very much, mayor. I'll just close. I wanted to, mention, you know, I, I very much value what, councilmember Fuentes mentioned at the top about how we can invest more into the social services, potentially with, with some of the dollars that, have now come forward. And I know councilor Velasquez also mentioned support for that. I do think that looking at plugging some of those holes in some of the cuts are very important things that we need to be. There are services that are going to be cut, that are not cut because they're low performing. They're cut because [2:25:41 PM] we don't have the right amount. We don't have enough money to to pay for all of them. But that being said, I don't want us to just restore everything without considering the fact that there are and we have seen some of these contracts that are not performing. And I think it does a disservice to those providers who are performing when just everybody gets funded, because it's assumed that this low performance is just endemic of the nonprofit world and our partners, rather than really a more limited, situation we're seeing. So I do want us to continue to scrutinize and not just reflexively fund everything back to where it is, because then we're going to be right back here next year trying to figure out how we make even larger cuts. And, and beyond that, looking at what are, what are things that we're plugging with one time dollars [2:26:42 PM] that are going to be ongoing, the local housing vouchers being a seminal example of this. We can't keep managing year to year crisis to crisis of we, we have to find $5 million to cut of this. We have to find X million dollars to cut for this. We keep setting ourselves up for these imbalances rather than just really making a hard choice at some point and saying, we need to have structural stability. And so I know we don't have a lot of time between now and budget adoption, but I do want us to try to fund those programs that are really important and, you know, have such value to our community, but also not just set ourselves up to then have to cut a bunch of those next year, but instead be in a position where we can maintain these and naturally grow where our needs grow as a city. So I'll end with that, and I appreciate the conversation here today. >> Thank you, councilmember duchen. [2:27:42 PM] >> Thank you. I don't need these questions answered right now, but I would like to get who I need to reach out to for municipal court and hr questions going forward. If I could get a recommendation from staff on who should I reach out to. >> For hr questions. >> For hr and for muni court? >> You can send them through the budget office or if you want to, speak to the director of hr, Susan Senz. And then the court clerk, Mary Jane. >> Okay. >> Gross. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to acknowledge I am the recipient of a brand new bionic knee, and I need to do some pt and I need to ice it. So I'm going to be in the building. I'm just going to take my leave up to my office so I can ice and do some work on the knee. But in the building and definitely listening, I can see folks starting to pour in. I want to make certain that [2:28:44 PM] everybody knows that I am here and I am listening. >> You don't need an ambulance. You don't need an ambulance. >> I hope not. >> All right. Well, I saw you looking right at the chief. I wanted to make sure. All right. Very good. All right, members, unless there's something else, that will complete, item number. One. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure I hadn't skipped ahead or something. I with regard to item number two, we're going to take that up now. And that's a resolution to adopt the maximum proposed property tax rate that the council will consider during the fiscal year 2026 2027 budget and tax rate approval meetings on August 12th, August 13th, August 14th and the 17th if needed, and set the public hearing on the tax rate on August 12th. Under state law, a vote on the motion to adopt the maximum proposed tax rate that the council will consider requires a roll call vote. By [2:29:46 PM] the way, this will not. This vote today does not set that tax rate. It just says what the maximum is that we would set as potentially set as a tax rate. The maximum rate, as you've heard today with the updated numbers that the city can adopt without exceeding what is known under state law as the voter approval rate is $0.579948, $0.579948 per $100 valuation, which includes an increase of 3.5% for operations and maintenance of the city. If we go above that rate, we must call an election. Before I take a motion, I'm going to turn to the city clerk and have the clerk's office call those who have signed up to speak on item number two. >> Thank you, mayor, for item number two, Jeff Dickerson, [2:30:46 PM] Jeffrey Bowen, Ben sotheby, Zenobia Joseph. >> If your name has been called, please come forward. If you wish to be heard, you have the floor. >> Hello. I'm Ben. Hit that button. Hello. I'm Ben sotheby, resident of district four. I'll be brief. The state of Texas has greatly constrained local government. They've put caps, they've put limits on the revenue that that y'all can raise to accomplish all the great work that the city of Austin does. So on this item, I'm urging you to set it right at the, the ceiling. Don't further constrain yourselves. Basically, you've got a big budget conversation that's yet to happen. Don't tie your own hands behind your back. The state's already done that for you. Set it at that voter approval rate and not any lower. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Good afternoon, mayor council. My name is Jeff Dickerson, district five. I'm [2:31:47 PM] asking you to do the opposite of the prior speaker. Reject the 3.5% property tax, as well as the proposed city, 2.7% or 2% or whatever they chose for this week. The city must first prove that it has done its part for the taxpayers before asking for more. To date, I do not believe they have done so. The argument for this increase justification is a small amount for each tax taxpayer, but that not start from today's budget. They start from a higher number. We also need to answer the question of what the taxpayers can afford, not how much the city can legally collect. For a homeowner, this may be $100 a year for renters, the impact is different. Property taxes are built on the cost of housing. Higher taxes become higher rents, making Austin less [2:32:47 PM] affordable for people who can absorb such an increase. Those who also live on fixed income suffer from these increases. I thought this city was about affordability. Now are we just listening to talking points for voting and not actual policies before raising taxes, council should answer some questions. Are we measuring programs that produce results? Are we choosing new spending over maintaining essential services? Please do not approve another automatic tax increase until taxpayers can see clear evidence that every dollar is being used wisely. Thank you. >> Thank you sir mayor. >> All speakers have been called for item two. >> Thank you. Members, is there a motion to approve the resolution setting the proposed maximum property tax rate that the Austin city council will consider for fiscal year 2026 [2:33:47 PM] to 2027 at $0.579948 per $100 valuation, including an increase of 3.5% for operations and maintenance for the city and setting the public hearing for council to receive and consider public comment on the fiscal year 2026 2027 property tax rate at 10:00 am on August 12th, 2026 at Austin city hall, 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. Council member Laine moves approval. Is there a second? Second by council member Velazquez? The city clerk will now please call the roll because as required by state law, it's required by state law that each council members vote be recorded. Please call the roll. >> Mayor Watson. >> Yes. >> Mayor pro tem vela. >> Yes. >> Council member. Harper-madison. Council member. Fuentes. Council member. [2:34:49 PM] Velazquez. >> Yes. >> Council member. Alter. >> Yes. >> Council member. Laine. >> Yes. >> Council member. Siegel. >> Yes. >> Council member. Ellis. Yes. Council member. Zo qadri. >> Yes. >> And council member. Duchen. >> Yes. >> There being nine in favor and two temporarily off the dais, council members harper-madison and council member Fuentes. The motion to approve the resolution adopting a maximum property tax rate of $0.579948 per $100 valuation for council to consider for fiscal year 2026 2027, and setting a public hearing for the property tax rate for the fiscal year 2026 to 2027 at 10:00 am on August 12th, 2026 at Austin city hall passes again. That is a vote of nine in favor. Councilmembers, [2:35:49 PM] harper-madison and council member Fuentes off the dais. If there is no objection or any questions on this item, we will now go to the next item on the agenda. All right, let's go to item number three. Members today council will hear public comment and vote on proposed amendments to the city charter. That's what item number three is about. Speakers were able to sign up to speak on each amendment in the back up. The regular speaker rules are going to apply. Each speaker will be given two minutes on each amendment they signed up to speak on, and the regular rules regarding donating speaker time will also apply. Following the speakers, we will have a vote, and the way we will do that is we will go item by item on each one of the proposed items as they are put forth in the agenda. Out of that, depending [2:36:51 PM] on what comes out of that, staff will prepare an ordinance for the ballot that will be posted as backup for next week's August 6th agenda. On August 6th, council will vote on whether to order a special charter election for November. The backup for the August 6th agenda item on charter amendments will include a draft ordinance of all the proposed amendments, petition amendment and any new amendments the council approves today. So with that, I'll turn to the city clerk and members. I think what we'll do, is hear from people they've been allowed to sign up to speak on, for example, item three a if it's if there's no objection, what I think we'll do is just do it that way. We'll go to item three, a hear from the speakers, and then we'll take up item three a unless there's objection. All right. With that, please call the speakers for item three. >> A thank you mayor for three a Zenobia Joseph. >> I've not seen her today. [2:37:53 PM] >> That's the only speaker I have. >> Okay. Item three a, as you've seen posted is clarifying the issues related to the independent citizens redistricting commission. Now, there's a proposed amendment on item three, a that council member alter has made available and is in the back of. What I will do is ask if there is a if there's a motion with regard to item three a if we get a motion on item three a, then I will call on council member alter to discuss his proposed amendment. If you get a motion, a second councilmember zo qadri moves approval of item three a it is seconded by mayor pro tem council member alter. You're recognized for a proposed amendment. >> Thank you very much. This is the amendment I talked about on Tuesday. It's that clarifying language to make sure that students aren't accidentally excluded from the irc. And I move adoption members. >> The motion has been made second by councilmember zo qadri to amend item three a the [2:38:56 PM] motion is. Ryan. Motion to amend item three a number one is there a discussion on the motion to amend? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to amend. Ryan number one. Ryan alter number one to item three a is approved with council members harper-madison and Fuentes temporarily off the dais. We will now go back to item three a, as amended. The motion is to approve item three a, as amended. Is there discussion? Yes. Mayor pro tem. >> Just a brief comment. Really appreciate the work of the independent redistricting commission. I know it's obviously called upon all the time. But it is really one of the more substantive and I think, important commissions that we have taking the decisions on redistricting, gerrymandering and whatnot off of the dais and putting it with an independent citizens redistricting commission. It's a good cleanup. Fully support it. >> Thank you. Council member [2:39:56 PM] alter. >> I neglected to thank I would not have even known about this issue, but for an individuals here he came and testified on Tuesday. So jack, thank you very much for calling our attention to this and making sure that students like yourself are not excluded. >> Thank you. Any. Yes. Councilmember zo qadri. >> I want to thank council member alter for leading the charge on that correction. I want to thank dash and jack for, being at city hall and for raising this issue. >> Thank you. Further discussion? Hearing none without objection, item three a is amended, is adopted with council members, harper-madison and Fuentes temporarily off the dais. That'll take us to item 3b3b, and I'll turn to the city clerk for speakers. >> Liam o'brien. >> Liam o'brien. >> That's all speakers. >> Thank you. Members. I'll entertain a motion with regard to item three B. I don't know [2:40:58 PM] of any motion to amend. Is there a motion? Mayor pro tem moves approval of item three B is there a second? Second by council member Velazquez. Council member Siegel you're recognized. >> Thank you mayor. With a ton of appreciation for the charter review commission. I just want to reiterate what I brought up on Tuesday that I'm concerned with the number of proposed city charter amendments and how that will impact how long it will take people to vote this November. So my plan for most of these is to vote no. But of course, if any of y'all want to advocate persuasively for any of these items, I will listen carefully. But I just don't think we should put any more amendments on the ballot than absolutely necessary. Thank you. >> Council member Siegel your. That's noted. Councilmember alter. >> I, I want to preview. Similar to councilmember Siegel, I do think 12 is too many. I do think we also need to have some. So just foreshadowing here. I'm [2:41:59 PM] going to be a yes on E, G, and K, but a no on on the rest. So, those are the ones I'll be advocating for. >> E, G, and K. Item B for. For the record, is deleting language providing the council shall meet at least once each [2:43:01 PM] week. And I'm going to show council member Siegel and councilmember alter being opposed to that. Guys, you understand the charter says that right now and we don't practice that. So if you're going to vote against it, you're voting against what you do on a weekly basis. >> Thank you mayor. But we do have a workaround, right, where we publish a schedule where we say canceled meetings. And, I think it's just like, okay, we have a clerical way of fixing that. And do we really need to make voters wait longer to complete our ballot this November? >> Fair enough. Councilmember Laine, you wish to be voting no. All right. >> One more over there. >> Sorry. I'm also going to do some foreshadowing. Not as much as maybe others. >> But I'll tell you what. Let's vote on these items, okay? It's hard enough to keep up with all this. So if you. Let's not. I'm impressed that we [2:44:01 PM] found a new way to make it more difficult. But let's try not to do that. All right. Let's vote on item three B. Those in favor of item three. B indicate by raising your hand. Okay. Councilmember harper-madison, are you voting in favor of three B? Yes. >> I don't know if you saw my head nod, but yes, Mr. >> Mayor. >> I did. Yes, I counted you. Thank you. Those opposed, please indicate by raising your hand. All right. There being [2:45:03 PM] six votes in favor, four votes in opposition. And councilmember Fuentes, temporarily off the dais. Item three B is approved. That will take us to item three C, which will, would would delete language requiring the council to determine its rules and order of business by ordinance. Is there a motion to approve that item? Councilmember Velasquez moves approval. Is there a second, second, second by council member Ellis discussion on the item. >> Thank you. Mayor. I would just note that virtually every governmental body, sets its rules not via a law per se, but just internal rules. And this would be just aligning our practice with virtually every other governing body out there. It can be a headache to change an ordinance, a lot of work and a lot of paperwork. It's unnecessary. So again, I think this is a small but important change to the charter. [2:46:03 PM] >> Thank you. We have a motion a second. I should have called on public comment. >> Monica Guzman, Jeffrey Bowen, Zenobia Joseph. >> I don't see any of them here. That well, we're on this item. Okay. >> That's all speakers. >> Thank you very much. We have a motion and a second on item three C. Any further discussion? All right. Those in favor indicate by raising your hand. Councilmember harper-madison, do you have your hand raised? Thank you. All those opposed, raise your hand. There being [2:47:10 PM] seven in favor, three in opposition and one councilmember, Fuentes off the dais. The motion to adopt item three C is approved. Three D is clarifying the meaning of the term election and to provide that the campaign contribution expenditure limits shall be modified each year by January 1st, instead of with the adoption of the budget. I'll turn and ask if there are speakers. >> There are no speakers for this one. >> There are no speakers on this item. Is there a motion and a second to approve item three D councilmember Ellis moves approval of the second by councilmember Velasquez. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of item three D, please raise your hand. [2:48:13 PM] Those opposed, please raise your hand. There being seven in favor and three in opposition. The three in opposition are alter, Laine and qadri and one councilmember Fuentes. Off the dais. Item three D is adopted. Three E is providing that initiative. Elections and petition charter amendments must be held on the next available November election date that occurs in an even numbered year, and that allows sufficient time to comply with other requirements of law. Is there a motion on item three E? Councilmember zo qadri moves approval. It is seconded by councilmember Ellis. Is there discussion? All those in. >> I do have speakers. >> Oh I'm sorry. Please. Yes. Sorry. She just she just [2:49:14 PM] reminded me. Okay. Sorry. Come on. Forward. >> I have Monica Guzman, robin Schneider and dash Koska. All right. >> Sorry. >> No, you're you're right in the right place. And that's why you get to do that. So why don't we start with miss Schneider and then we'll come to you. >> Hello. My name is robin Schneider. I live in district three, and I am opposed to this amendment. Look at one of the most important citizen initiatives in our city's recent history, which was the sos petition. That was as I wasn't here, but my understanding was that it was not, done on a regular. It was done in an August election, had high turnout, but because the city council delayed it, all of these plots were grandfathered in. We. If we, the citizens, see something important that we need a vote, either something that you folks have done that we disagree with, or something [2:50:14 PM] that bubbles up. We need to have votes in a timely way, waiting for potentially, you know, more than a year to be able to vote on something that enough of us think is urgent is wrong. And the sos petition shows the dangers of of a council that will not put things on the ballot in a timely way. So a lot of development happened because it was grandfathered, because the developers had time to put in their plats to avoid the repercussions of what passed overwhelmingly by the city, by the voters. So, you know, we don't like to be held accountable, folks, you know, who who likes that. But sometimes we all need to be held accountable. And accountability delayed can be accountability denied. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Thank you, council members. [2:51:15 PM] I was originally registered against this bill, but I'm actually just going to speak on it neutrally. Originally, I was concerned about overwhelming voters with too many choices in a high turnout federal election. But state local election law constrains the options enough that this proposal is basically the only better one of two bad options this, or allowing charter amendments to be approved in elections, as sometimes have turnout in the single digits. But I want every member of council to really internalize this fact, these two choices, either requiring that charter amendments go during federal elections, or letting them go to a vote in the closest uniform election date, have mutually exclusive trade offs that cannot be avoided. If you want amendments in federal elections only, then you're going to have to put up with two years worth of proposals stacked into one ballot. That's why we have 14 here today. If you don't like having the longer ballot, then we have to go back to putting charter amendments in may. And you have to accept the possibility that 1 in 20 registered voters could decide what the charter looks like. It's it is a case of you can't [2:52:15 PM] you know, you cannot eat your cake and have it too. Right. If there's any member of council here in the next few minutes who's arguing not to put charter amendments on the ballot because they're worried about making the ballot too long, and you don't expressively turn around and say, I want to put charter amendments in may or off year elections. You are effectively arguing that we should never amend the city charter because you can't. It's a trade off. You got to do one or the other. We've already gone five years without amending the city charter. I urge every member city council do not use the length of the ballot as an excuse to shoot down the amendments today. That's not the job you were elected to do. You were elected to vote yes or no in this room based on what is good for the city, what's good for my constituents, nothing else. And I'm a student at UT who's experienced the lines on our campus, has nothing to do with what's on the ballot or how long it is. It has to do with the fact that UT doesn't give us access to the polls. Enough access has nothing to do with that. Also, these are partizan races. Most voters are just going to be voting straight ticket. It's not like the March primary. [2:53:15 PM] >> Thank you sir. >> All speakers for three E were called. >> Councilmember duchen. Did you wish to be recognized for some weird reason, ma'am? Councilmember alter yeah. >> I just have a question for the law department to make sure we don't have any confusion here. First off, the sos petition, was that a charter amendment or an ordinance change? >> It was a. It was an ordinance. >> And this particular, the item we're talking about here only is governing when charter amendments would be every other November, not impacting an ordinance petition. Is that correct? >> So it would be both. It would be any citizen initiated petition, both for an ordinance or a charter amendment. >> Okay. And I, I wasn't sure of that distinction. I wanted to be absolutely clear that we're talking about everything or just the charter, because the charter has that two year [2:54:16 PM] moratorium, but or petitions for ordinances do not. Correct. >> Correct. And petition ordinances are governed solely by our charter. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Councilmember, any further discussion on item three E? All right. That being the case, those in favor of item three E, please raise your hand. Councilmember harper-madison, do you have your hand up? Okay. All right. There being seven in favor, three in opposition. But let me ask councilmember Fuentes, you prepared to vote on this item? Okay. And councilmember Fuentes [2:55:18 PM] abstaining on the item, the three noes or mayor Watson, councilmember alter and councilmember duchen, did you vote yes or no on that? All right, you're right. You told me that. That's why I was confused. All right, I apologize. There being eight Jesus. Those opposed, raise your hand. Okay. There being eight in favor, two in opposition and one abstaining. Item three E is adopted. That will take us to item three. F members of I have item three. F is providing the petition for an election. To recall, a councilmember must contain valid signatures of at least 15% of the qualified voters of the respective council district. If, by the way, it indicates other than the mayor in the posting language, my amendment, I hope, will clarify some issues related to that. Instead of the current 10% and [2:56:19 PM] clarifying that the affidavit on the recall petition must be signed by the petition circulator, what I'll do is I'll ask for the speakers and then we will go to, the main motion, and then I will come back with a proposed amendment. Are there speakers on item three? >> F yes, for three F Jeff Dickerson, Monica Guzman, Brad Massingill, Jeffrey Bowen, Zenobia Joseph and dash Costa. >> If your name has been called and you wish to testify, please come forward. Mr. Dickerson, you have the floor. >> Good afternoon, mayor. Council Jeff Dickerson, district five. I strongly urge you to vote no and keep the 10% threshold. Is this proposal a solution in search of a problem, raising the percentage? 15% is a 50% increase in the number of signatures required. This is [2:57:20 PM] not a minor adjustment. This. I send emails from the council member and mayor asking for confirmation and evidence supporting the increase. I haven't received anything today, so I ask again in a public forum where's the evidence of widespread abuse, if any, for the past 20 years? Where are the evidence of frivolous recall elections for the past 20 years? Who made the justification for this increase, and who can we count on? And can we count on council to have an open and honest discussion on the dias for this measure before voting? Accountability is not an inconvenience. Citizens should not have to overcome obstacles to ask their fellow citizens to vote. Whether elected officials who remain in office. A support group clarifying petitions, circulators sign the affidavit. [2:58:21 PM] Thank you. >> Thank you, sir, Mr. Costco. >> Yeah thank you council. I am opposed to this amendment. And the reason why is I don't really see the necessity for this. And I say that in the wake of, you know, the tax rate election that happened last year, you know, I was, I was one of the proud 37% who voted for it. And I campaigned hard for it. Nonetheless, the fact that it lost that badly and yet none of you were recalled for it, proves that I think that there's not a real problem with the recalls being abused. Now I know that the district that voted against it also had the one who voted against the tax rate election. So maybe that was part of it. But, I just don't see the necessity of it. And I think it would fail in the election anyway. I don't think the voters would want this and I think the better way, I think you should vote it down and be able to tell your constituents, hey, I'll accept accountability. If if there's a recall, vote me out. If I lose, I lose, but I'm not going to change the rules to make it [2:59:22 PM] harder for me to lose. >> Thank you, sir, Mr. Massengill. >> Yeah, I concur, I was doing a little research into past elections, and there's been some districts that have had a 28% turnout in an off year election. So we're running the risk of electing somebody who's just barely electable and can't be held accountable because you take over. If it was a close race, it would take every single person that voted against that person and other people to do a recall. It's super high bar. It doesn't seem feasible. And again, it's a waste of ink. You know, we shouldn't even be putting this on the ballot. I don't know, is there one of y'all up there that's concerned about getting a petition against you right now? I mean, who's pushing this? It doesn't seem it seems like a headless, initiative. I would encourage you all to vote it [3:00:22 PM] down. I also want to say I wish I'd been here earlier. I really support, everyone's efforts to keep social services fully funded. >> Why don't we stay on topic? >> Okay, I appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> All. Speakers for three F have been called. >> Thank you members. All the speakers have been called. Let me go to my proposed amendment because what my proposed amendment does is it and what you have in front of you in the yellow sheet, it's Watson amendment number one to item three F. What it does is it strikes the proposed change of 15 from the red line, changes and restores the 10% requirement to certify a recall petition. It also changes some of what I consider to be odd language, where it talked about, the qualified voters of the territory from which the council member is elected and changes it to the district which the council members elected. It leaves in the language to assure that the ten [3:01:23 PM] that the mayor can also, although the, the posting language. And we'll need we'll need to make sure that what gets put on the ballot, the ballot language, if this if this is approved, doesn't look like it's >> Excluding the mayor from this. This continues to make sure that the mayor can also have a petition to be recalled. If 10% of the qualified voters in the city of Austin do that and adds language to. To assure that it calls. It says, demand the removal of a council member or mayor. And then one of the recommendations that had come forward was that it would require the circulators, one of the circulators of the petition, not just a signer of each petition, shall make an affidavit that the statements therein are true. And it. It maintains that council member. I move approval of Watson motion to amend item three F and just for. So that people understand what I just said. This would keep the 10%. This would change the proposal that [3:02:24 PM] has 15% in it. Take it back to the 10% and. Council member Velazquez moves adoption of seconds that that my motion. Is there a discussion on the motion to amend? Yes. Councilmember Velasquez. >> Mayor, I just wanted to thank you for bringing this amendment forward. I was actually going to vote against this until until we cleared that brought that threshold back down. >> Well, assuming that this amendment passes, I was too. So now I was going to vote against it too. But. All right. Is there any further discussion on the motion to amend? Watson motion to amend. >> Natasha has her. >> Councilmember harper-madison. >> Mr. Mayor, I'd like to address the motion to amend and just the, the discussion in general, as the lone black council member on the council living in a country, with the type of federal administration we have and the kind of people who are being. >> Emboldened by our federal administration, I'd like to say my district is low voter [3:03:25 PM] turnout, in which case I don't want future facing black political power to be at risk because we have low voter turnout. And the people who would find nefarious purposes use this tool to vote out a black council member, to recall a black council member for no other reason except that they are black council member concerns me. >> Thank you. The vote will be on the motion Watson motion to amend item three F those in favor, please raise your hand on the motion to amend. Those opposed, raise your hand. There being ten votes in favor of the motion to amend one in opposition council member [3:04:25 PM] harper-madison, the motion to amend is adopted. That will take us back to the main motion on item three F, as amended by the Watson amendment. Those in there just councilmember alter. >> I practical question now that it's back to where we started, is there still a point in this? >> Well, that's the clarifying language that I talked about. We put clarifying language in it so that it doesn't have language like the territory and it actually makes specific reference to now that we have single member districts. It also requires the circulator with the recommendation to come forward, required at least a circulator of the petition to sign the affidavit, as opposed to just a signer of the petition. Sign the affidavit. So it does have clarifying language. Okay. And it takes us back to the original number. Those in favor of item three F, as amended, please indicate by [3:05:27 PM] raising your hand. All those opposed, raise your hand. Councilmember Siegel, are you voting? Sure. Well, just I'm not forcing you. I'm just just make sure you weren't asleep. Had you vote. >> I'm against. >> Okay. Okay. There. One, two. There being two votes in favor. No. I'm sorry. Four votes in favor and seven votes in opposition. The and the four in [3:06:28 PM] favor are duchen. The mayor, council member. Velazquez, council member. Ellis. The motion to adopt item three F fails and item three F will not be on the ballot. That will take us to item three G, providing that the council appoints and removes the city attorney. I'll entertain a motion with regard to item three. G mayor pro tem moves approval. Is there a second? Second by council member Fuentes? Let's turn and see who signed up to speak. >> There are no speakers for three G. >> There are no speakers on item number three G. So, is there discussion? Then I'll call for a vote. Those in favor of item three G please raise your hand. [3:07:33 PM] Okay. Those opposed, raise your hand. You're okay. There being eight in favor. Two in opposition. Mayor Watson and councilmember zo qadri and councilmember Siegel abstaining. The motion to approve item three G is adopted. That'll take us to item three. H. Making the time frame for the automatic resignation provision for municipal judges, the same as provided in the Texas constitution for other officials. I'll entertain a motion. Is there a motion to approve item three H is there a motion? Is there a motion? Council member Ellis moves approval. Is there a second? Is [3:08:34 PM] there a second? Is there a second? There being councilmember harper-madison seconds the motion. We've used the word foreshadowing many times today. I wonder what this foreshadows. All right. Any discussion? Do we have anybody signed up to speak? >> There are no speakers. >> I was going to be shocked on that one. >> Mayor. >> I was really looking. >> Can I withdraw the motion? This just seems like not a good. >> Motion is not okay. There's a motion and a second. So it now belongs to the entire council. So you can vote no. Mayor pro tem. >> And mayor, I have no concerns with this. It's a fine clean up. This is one that I am going to vote no on just to keep the the not a ton of amendments on the ballot. Again, I agree with it in substance. I don't think it's ever been a problem. And maybe next charter election. >> All right. Anybody else want to talk? All those in favor? [3:09:37 PM] Let me do it this way. Is there anyone wishing to be shown in favor of item three H other than the maker of the motion, the maker of the second. And I'm teasing them. All right. Is there? Without objection. >> Down. >> I tried to take it down. >> I know you did. So without objection. Item three H fails. And I want to say for the record, unless somebody corrects me, the record will reflect that it failed unanimously. All right. Item three, I will be to ensure that city financial practices are consistent with generally accepted accounting principles, reflect current practices for appropriations for department level work programs. Is there a motion on item three? I council member duchen moves approval. Is there a second council member Ellis seconds the motion. Is there anyone signed up to speak? >> I have two speakers Monica Guzman, Zenobia Joseph. >> Miss Guzman has indicated she doesn't wish to speak. And we haven't seen miss Joseph today. Okay. Those are all the [3:10:39 PM] speakers. Is there any discussion? Mayor pro tem. >> Just the same rationale. Agree with the charter amendment. Just, too many charter amendments. >> Let me ask the. So with that, there being no further discussion, those in favor of item three I. Please raise your hand. All those opposed, raise your hand. All right. There being one vote in favor, councilmember duchen and ten in opposition item three I fails. That'll take us to item three. J removing appointees, employees of the office of the city auditor from classified civil service. Is there a motion? Is there a motion? Is there a motion there being no motion on item three J we will now go to. I guess I ought to ask if anybody wants to talk. >> There are no speakers. >> All right. We'll go to item three K making non-substantive. Corrections of typographical errors, punctuation and sentence structure and to change or remove language that [3:11:40 PM] is moot or unenforceable because it had been superseded by state law or by a final court order. Is there a motion? Council member Laine moves approval. It is seconded by council member alter. Just is anybody signed up to speak? >> I have one speaker, Jeffrey Bowen. >> Hi. Oh, yeah. You just waving. Yeah. All right. He's waving his right to speak. Nobody nobody else has signed up to speak. Any discussion on item three K hearing none. Without objection, item three K is adopted. Council member Siegel you want to be shown voting no? All right. And council member zo qadri will be shown voting no. So item three K is adopted with those two being shown voting no. Item L removing the restriction that office holders must wait until after leaving office to solicit and accept political contributions, to pay unpaid campaign expenses, or to [3:12:40 PM] reimburse campaign expenditures made from personal funds, and to impose contribution limits on such office holders. Is there a motion? Is there a motion? Is there a motion hearing none. Item three L. Let me ask if anybody signed up to speak. >> There are some speakers for this item. >> Well, I'll ask you to call them, but I just hope you all were paying attention because ain't nobody moved it, which means it will not pass. So if you're if you're opposed to it, you just one go ahead. >> Jeff Dickerson, Monica Guzman, and Zenobia Joseph. >> You still going to talk on after you one. Thank you. You might talk us into voting for it. You have the floor. [3:13:42 PM] >> I'm going to use up some of my time to speak. Council member vela, perhaps you should allow citizens to Austin to voice their opinion rather than having council members decide what they want to do or not do. Perhaps you ought to take that into consideration. Good afternoon, mayor council, I strongly advise you to vote no on F, as well as removing it from the ballot box. The current ordinance establishes clear ethical boundaries. An elected official should not be soliciting campaign contributions to repay themselves or retire campaign debt while they are actively serving in office. This safeguard exists for a simple reason protect public trust the proposal does not solve any public problem and only serves to create new ethical concerns and unnecessary conflict. The council is supposed to adhere to transparency, accountability [3:14:43 PM] and ethical standards. I respectfully ask you to preserve Austin's commitment to ethical government. Vote no on this item. Thank you. >> Thank you. Members. There was no motion and no second on item three L I'll ask if there's any motion or second again, and I'm assuming there's not. All right. Item three L is does not have a second. So it will not be on the ballot. Item three M is requiring independent affordability and efficiency initiative before any tax rate increase, and requiring the independent contractor to identify annual and multiyear savings members. This is the item that is on the agenda as a result of a certified petition. The certified the petition has been certified by the city clerk. And under our charter, that requires us to put it on the ballot. We need to vote to put it on the ballot. So, I will [3:15:43 PM] ask for a motion and a second with regard to this item. Is there a motion to approve? Motion is by mayor pro tem, second by council member Ellis. Are there people signed up to speak? >> Yes. Mayor Philip Fitzgerald, Monica Guzman, Jeffrey Bowen, Zenobia Joseph. >> If your name has been called and you want to talk, please come forward. One. >> Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Mayor, council members on, item M, I would appreciate if we would pass this. They received the amount of petitions or the signatures for the petition. And based upon even the, the, the opposite, the ordinance that the mayor has started, I believe we are on a on a good headway to trying to find out what's going on. My main concerns, as I've told several [3:16:44 PM] of the council members, is really about performance, because I believe if we start dedicating and trying to figure out what performance is not being done, that maybe, just maybe, we can start shaking out some funds that, that are not, or there's going to be overlaps in those areas. So I urge you to, heed what the, the petition signers want. And, and I appreciate your time on this. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Bowen. Motion has been made and seconded to approve item M is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, item M is adopted. And will be will appear on the ballot. Anyone wish to be shown voting? No. All right. That will take us to item three. N and N is given gives us the opportunity to put any other proposals on the agenda. So let me ask, is there [3:17:45 PM] anybody that wishes to bring something forward at this point on? I as part of item three, in hearing none, please tell me nobody signed up to speak on this. >> We do have some speakers. >> Oh. You okay? >> I will, Monica Guzman, Jeffrey Bowen, Zenobia. Joseph. Jack Crismon. Jack, are you here? >> He was. >> There's time donated by dash dash. Are you still here? >> They both were here, but it appeared they're gone. >> And that's all the speakers. >> Okay, well, that worked out all right. There being no further items on item two to take up on item three. Let me turn to our legal staff. And you're clear on what was voted to be placed as part of the ballot. Assuming we pass an ordinance to call an election. >> Double check with the. >> We have the correct things we have going on the ballot. [3:18:46 PM] Item three a, item three. B, item three. C, item three. D3e. Three G. Three K and three M. >> That's my. That's my. Does anybody got anything different? Okay, y'all got that too. Okay, we've we've got it from 2 or 3 different angles. Thank you very much, members. That will take us to item number four, which is related to the authorization of a contract for comprehensive efficiency study of city departments for the city of Austin's auditor's office to enter into a contract with an entity known as public works, LLC. We have our auditor here. You want to make a brief presentation? >> Yes, sir. Could you bring [3:19:46 PM] that up, please? All right. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. Jason city auditor, I'm pleased to recommend this contract for council approval. You're all aware section 239 of city code calls for the city auditor to oversee a program of recurring comprehensive efficiency assessments. I want to be as transparent as possible throughout this entire assessment, starting with how we recommended our contractor. I'll go into the details of the process, but let me start by highlighting the firm that we've selected. That's public works, LLC. Public works is a national leader, bringing over 30 years of experience advising roughly 200 jurisdictions, identifying billions of dollars in savings, as well as presenting public policy solutions, addressing critical [3:20:48 PM] government functions. They've worked with multiple cities, including Chicago, Portland, Seattle, and they've worked in some of the largest counties in the country, including right here in Travis county. In addition, the partner with a local firm, E G. S research and consulting, a local hub certified women owned business based in Austin, founded by doctor Esther Smith, a longtime Austin resident. The lead consultant for this project will be doctor Marc Funkhouser, who served as mayor of Kansas City, Missouri, serving after serving as the city auditor for 18 years, doctor Funkhouser is an internationally recognized audit expert, author and teacher in public administration. So how did we get here? Let me start by reiterating what the requirements are. I mentioned two, three, nine requires my office to oversee and initiate a program of recurring comprehensive efficiency assessments designed to address cost effective performance improvements of all other departments on a repeating schedule. It also requires that [3:21:48 PM] my office hire an external consultant with expertise in municipal audits. So this is the evaluation process that we followed. After the ordinance passed in February, we started designing the rfp. We issued that in late March, kept it open for about six weeks. Once it closed, we initiated the evaluation process using a team of audit managers in my office. As part of the panel, I also served on the panel. We concluded our evaluations in late June, leading us to the contract approval item for today and if approved, will begin the assessment planning immediately. When we design the rfp, we recognize that the unique nature of the of the assessment program, the varying degrees of expertise offers, would bring to the table, as well as a wide range of cost proposals. The lowest bid for all five years of the assessment was 1.1 million, and the highest exceeded 25 million. We anticipated we might receive such a wide range of cost [3:22:48 PM] proposals to address that, and to ensure that Austin got the contractor that it needed, we designed an evaluation scoring system that rewarded experienced firms with highly skilled teams utilizing well- designed project strategies, all at a reasonable price. Points were also awarded to offers inclusive of small and local businesses. The price and small local business preference points were scored utilizing the city standard approach by the purchasing office. Essentially, my team focused just on the factors in the top row. I want to go into a little bit completed before this project. We also evaluated who the firm assigned to the team. Some teams were small with less than five people. Some teams had no experience in local government. We wanted to make sure that the right people were assigned to this project. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank every every firm that submitted an offer. This was not an easy task. There were multiple compelling offers that required us to be diligent in our scoring process. So why are we recommending public works? First, the understanding of the project was exceptional. Their experience in this field and focus on government clients resulted in a proposal that demonstrated a thorough understanding of what Austin seeks to accomplish, the challenges that we face, and a well-designed approach to find solutions. Additionally, public works understands Austin. They see the road that led us here, including the budget climate, the failure of prop Q, but more importantly, they have an extensive history with Austin, starting with doctor Smith, who I mentioned earlier. Local team members have experienced evaluating Texas cities, with one even serving on the former [3:25:23 PM] police monitor citizen review panel. Finally, their proposal is rooted in stakeholder engagement, designed to rebuild public confidence while protecting the services and workforce that Austin residents rely on. Their firm is made up of former high level federal, state and local government officials who not only understand government operations, they believe in the value of the public sector workforce. Public works sees public employees not as obstacles to efficiency. They are essential sources to it. Public works proposes completing each department assessment within three years, delivering findings and actionable recommendations as early as possible, enabling the city to begin implementation sooner, preserving two years at the end of the assessment for potential delays, deep dive analysis, validation of findings and targeted follow up work as needed. Looking at the company information section, I must reiterate that public works has over 30 years of experience supporting public sector clients. This is a major advantage in its own right, but [3:26:24 PM] we saw evidence of this focus throughout their entire proposal. Put simply, government operations are their bread and butter. They have completed multiple entity wide assessments of cities and counties, resulting in savings of at least 5% of operating expenditures. In Austin. That would amount to $75 million a year or more. I'd like to clarify that we do not set a specific goal for this efficiency assessment. I'm just highlighting the results from their prior engagements. Additionally, public works experience in Austin and partnership with E. G. S rounded out an impressive amount of corporate experience. The team assembled by public works has an impressive array of expertise. The team is comprised of over 25 subject matter experts covering all aspects of the city of Austin's operations. The inclusion of doctor Funkhouser as the project manager was an impressive factor that stood out amongst even the most competitive proposals. Doctor Funkhouser possesses a unique blend of experience. His contributions to this assessment cannot be understated, given his insight as a mayor of a major city navigating fiscal challenges [3:27:24 PM] during the great recession and that of an independent city auditor holding government accountable through performance auditing. Collectively, the team possesses an impressive blend of audit, political, operational, and financial expertise resulting from years of service as public servants themselves, I'm confident in their ability to conduct this assessment and deliver value added recommendations to the city of Austin. Lastly, I'd like to thank Sean Willett from the procurement office for helping with this. Her contributions and guidance throughout this entire process were invaluable. We really appreciate her efforts. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Before we go to speakers, I want to ask a couple of questions. And members, I will tell you that I had a lot more that I wanted to ask today just to get some stuff out into the public, into the bloodstream. But, I'm going to wait on that because we have another public hearing and I'm not going to do that right now, but I do want to ask a couple of questions. One is, I want to ask Mr. Darby and ask you to [3:28:26 PM] identify the people at the table with you, because then I want to ask a question about Independence. >> Sure. So to my left, I have James Scarborough and Sean Willett from the procurement office, from purchasing office and financial services. And to my right, I have Eric Schnur from public works LLC, the founder of the organization. >> Great. Thank you. So I'll ask this of both the auditor. And then I'm going to ask you, sir, a question with regard to the Independence of this, part of what we were very rigid about is that we wanted this to be an independent audit or efficiency assessment. That would be done in a way where the public could have trust that it was independent of the management, independent of the administration, and would cover all of the departments in the city. So my first question is, as the auditor, do you feel comfortable that what we have set up here and what you're bringing to us and this [3:29:27 PM] contract, is that it will have true Independence? >> Absolutely. >> How about you, sir? >> Oh. >> First of all, thank you for having me here today. My name is Eric Schnur, and, I'd like to address the mayor and council. And your usual question is, what district do you live in? I think all of you know I'm from out of state, but I have family that lives in district nine. So, it's my pleasure to be here. Your question is whether we will be independent. >> Or whether you feel like this gives you as an auditor, somebody coming in and do an efficiency assessment, the sort of Independence that the public ought to expect. >> Well, absolutely. >> Okay. Now, let me ask you another question. I'm I want I want to talk about public works for a second. Would you describe your business history in the state of Texas? >> Sure. We have worked here previously. We've conducted, I believe it's three, efficiency [3:30:27 PM] reviews like this. We, we carried out the, very similar project for Travis county, which was, I believe in 2016 to 2017. We were subsequently hired to do, two school district reviews in the state of Texas. One of them was through the, the lbb. I don't recall if the first one was lbb or if the separate, Texas school review program still existed in that time and was the, technically the client, but both of these were performed for the state of Texas. Reviewing two, two local school districts. In addition, we have, and have had for a long time a number of our consultants who reside in the city of Austin, most of them for either the vast bulk or their entire lives, many of whom have worked with the city in a variety of capacities. [3:31:30 PM] There, several of them have performed efficiency reviews like this for other Texas cities, although not with our firm, but prior to their having joined our firm and, at least one member of our review team worked for, I don't know how many years, somewhere between 10 and 20 years for the Texas performance review itself. And when we started doing this work, initially, it was in conjunction with, several former members of the Texas performance review who joined our firm and have been with us for, you know, several decades at this point. And our methodology was initially modeled off of the methodology of the Texas performance review, which most of you know, became the, the format for the national performance review that was conducted in 1993 to 1994 under president Clinton and vice president gore. The, the national performance review was overseen out of the vice president's office, his then deputy chief of staff, Patricia [3:32:30 PM] Ewing, who was a member of this project team, oversaw the NPR for vice president gore. So besides the work that we previously did in Texas, the roots of our process and everything we're going to be doing comes straight out of Texas. Basically. I have a long history and long roots in Texas. >> It's been, at least alleged by two people that you, that your company was delinquent on paying taxes in the state of Texas. Is that true? >> No, it's absolutely false. >> Okay. Is there any other questions? Let me ask it another way. Have you ever been delinquent on your taxes in the state of Texas? >> No, we have not been. In fact, we have. I don't know if this is an embarrassing point or not, but we actually overpaid our taxes in the state of Texas. >> Welcome to Austin. Council member duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor. >> I'd like you to help set our [3:33:32 PM] expectations, provided this contract goes through. When do you think that the management and council are going to start to get the fruits of your labor, the recommendations from the analyzes and the work that you do? >> I'm sorry, councilman, is that directed to me or to the auditor? >> Whoever wants to field that question. >> Do you want do you want. >> Me to do it? Go ahead. >> Okay. Well, so a couple of things. The, the city originally in its request for proposals, contemplated a five year cycle for this. We have done audits like this, in less than a year and normally do it in less than a year. That sometimes depends on the client. But generally we figure that, these kind of reviews can be done in roughly eight months. City of Austin one is a little bit more complex for reasons I'll get into in a second. But so, we, we, we spent a lot of [3:34:35 PM] time debating this internally about what the propose the schedule for this. We came down with a three year proposal that's broken into three I think fairly logical components. So, we look at having this completed within three years, but that's not really the answer to your question, which is how soon can can you start seeing something? The, the, the first year we're going to be looking essentially at general fund, operating departments, the kind of public facing municipal operations that most people think of as what they get from their government. The second year, we're going to be looking at more of what you can think of as a back office functions, cross-cutting functions, city operations that, service other city operations in a lot of ways, like, finance, procurement, those sorts of those sorts of departments. In the third year, we're going to look at, what are essentially the quasi independent agencies, the authorities like the most notably the airport and Austin energy. And there are reasons [3:35:38 PM] for separating them out like that. In particular, we expect that the, the independent, the independent authorities are going to require a good amount of digging in, particularly Austin energy because of its, its size and complexity. So, I think a three year schedule for this makes sense. Now that said, it's not going to be three years from now that you hear anything about us. We will be, you know, first of all, reporting to the auditor's office on a regular basis. Undoubtedly weekly at the beginning, it may stretch, stretch out as we go. And we're certainly happy to communicate with council and the administration at any point that you want. The way our process normally works is you can split, you know, and we'll be doing this three times essentially because of the three different annual phases. But, you know, basically, each review segment like that, we split roughly into thirds. And at the one third and two third parts, we do, what we call a [3:36:38 PM] toll gate, which is the terminology that actually comes out of the Texas performance review. And this, mimics what the Texas performance review did in its initial functioning. And that is that we do a lot of, a high level reviews at each of these points with, with city officials to go through. And it's essentially a triage process. Say, this is what we're, this is what we're finding, this is what we're thinking, on every single recommendation or nascent recommendation that we're able to come up with that at that point and discuss them, in a formal ongoing setting. And this is somewhat like the, I'm blanking on the term, you know, New York City and Baltimore did this sort of process a lot. You know, the former police commissioner in New York was famous for starting this and, I'm blanking on the name of it, but it's, you know, a formalized process where you can go through and have, both the city officials and the consultants all talking this [3:37:38 PM] through face to face, going through item by item. What we've found, what our comparisons, best practices with other jurisdictions, to the extent that we can early on, it's a little bit harder, but we try to put, you know, rough financial projections on it by two thirds of the way through. We've got pretty, pretty set financial projections that we think are pretty good and defensible. We work through with the budget office. So it's not just consultants say so, but, you know, these are, these are numbers that have held up over time consistently. So, you know, the bottom line is a few months into this, you will have a pretty good idea of where we're going in year one by, you know, six months or so in, you'll have a pretty solid idea of exactly what we're talking about in terms of dollar findings for the first year, exactly what's being recommended, what is not, and why, how that compares with what's been done in other jurisdictions and so forth. So the bottom line is you will be getting information and recommendations throughout this. [3:38:38 PM] And we've had instances where something that we turn up is such a no brainer that it gets implemented before we've even set it down on paper, more or less. The my, my favorite example of this was we did a, we did a, comprehensive review of the state of West Virginia a number of years ago. And, the, the auditor mentioned that we, you know, we really believe in a very participatory process involving all stakeholders, but particularly the city workforce, because we believe that city employees know a lot about how operations can be improved. So we did a focus group with the state department of highways, and it developed through the through the process of that structured conversation that they'd never properly calibrated the salt spreaders, on their snowplows. So, we ran a couple tests on this. It turned out they were putting about $3 million a year, too much salt on the road whenever it snowed. And just put that in [3:39:41 PM] context, the entire state budget, including the entire state education system, typekit billion dollars. So saving $3 million by just putting the right amount of salt on the road, out of a $2 billion budget is a fairly significant saving off of just a small tweak. Well, I think we came up with this around October or November or so when the governor said, well, we're not going to wait for June for the report on this. We're going to start, you know, putting the right amount of salt on the road this winter. So, you know, many of these things will be rolling off the presses, so to speak, as we're going. And I would anticipate that you'll start seeing, hard results that will hopefully be saving the taxpayers money right away. You know, within a fairly short time period after we start. And that will continue for the entire time we're working on this. And then for many years after, I think one, one important thing to stress, the auditor mentioned a $75 million a year figure. I'm going to say two things about that. I hope that that turns out to be a, a low number, because that's based off of the general fund, [3:40:43 PM] because we have consistently found 5% savings in general fund operations. Just about everywhere we've gone, it's sometimes been higher. In the last year, we had one that produced 7%, one that produced 10%. But in Austin, as in a lot of cities, your general fund operations are actually a pretty small share of your budget. I think about three quarters of your budget is non-general fund to be conservative. We've started figuring out about 2% savings off of non-general fund operations. It may be higher, but you put that in and you know, and you can do the math. You're talking pretty serious numbers. And the the point I wanted to make on that is that these are annually recurring savings. They're not one time things. They're not accounting gimmicks. The money that you save from doing this will hopefully start very soon, but it will last for years and years and years to come because it's a secular improvement in operations. >> Thank you. To answer your question. >> Yes. Thank you, thank you. Look forward to the work. >> Yes. Thank you. Why don't we go to speakers and see if we have any speakers that want to be heard on this item? Thank [3:41:43 PM] you. >> For item four, Philip Fitzgerald, Jeff Dickerson, Jeffrey Bowen, Zenobia Joseph. >> Mr. Dickerson, you have the floor. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Originally, I was for this contract efficiency study, but after listening to this long term and seemingly low payback, I'm on the fence about it. If it was going to go forward, I would ask, as part of the study, you add to the [3:42:43 PM] study the issue that was brought up on the dais by two council members, as well as some new on the ballot measures, length and wording. I proposed that the council add is what I call the jargon to council ordinance balance language and in general written language put forth for public consumption. If you look at the screen, you can see what you guys wrote. And underneath in plain English, this is easier language for the public to understand. This is not a hard concept. If ordinances and ballot measures were written in plain English, taxpayers could more easily understand the choices and impacts. Let's eliminate the current jargon contorted language. Remember the four letter word that you were taught at an early age? It is [3:43:44 PM] not a curse word. It's a kiss. Keep it simple, stupid. Thank you. >> I guess. Thank you. I think you just called us stupid. But that's all right. Mr. Bowen, >> Afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Mayor, council members. Yes, sir. I understand that concept very well. I'm. I'm, >> And what's your name? >> Oh, Jeffrey Bowen, district eight. Sorry. I was trying to gather my thoughts on watching the process go through and kind of amazed that we're actually here. Which is kind of exciting to some extent. We're already doing some work, and I'm glad to see that this is continuing and hopefully it will continue on. And I want to stress the fact of independent, I really hope after going through part of the processes of watching this whole thing going is that it remains independent and that [3:44:46 PM] people stay in their Laine. Also the transparency portion of that, and last but not least, which happens to be the new word for the day, according to the the guy from pbs, I guess he never said it, but I did, clarity and I appreciate that, Mr. Mayor, that you brought that back around on this entire process. I, I just find it amazing that we need to be more have more clarification if we're not clarifying it and people walk away from here I don't know what just happened, then we're not being clear to the constituents, the taxpayers, the people that you're supposed to be responsible to. I'm looking forward to this. I'm looking forward to the vote. Also, this is going to be one hell of an interesting ride to see what's going to happen and transpire. And, we'll go from there. Thank [3:45:47 PM] you, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you, Mr. Bowen. Miss Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council. I'm Zenobia Joseph. I just want to state my opposition to the $5.2 million for public works. I'm not sure why an efficiency study would be any different than what your own auditor gave you in 2023. 17 of the 20 departments that were actually reviewed didn't use data. 2026. They told you the same thing again, and the city manager has not changed his methodology as it relates to these contracts. I want to remind you, mayor, about the April 16th, 2026 letter that you received from governor Abbott that was threatening the $2.5 million that you received from the state as it related to public safety. If you want to get some kind of trust from the community, it would be helpful to use that language from the governor, it said. Specifically, our records indicate that the city was awarded roughly 2.5 million in grants in fiscal year 2026. It tells you if zo [3:46:47 PM] elects to terminate those grants, the city will be required to repay so on or before the 30th day. Right now, you have acknowledged specifically in your resolution 202605-21 related to the ordinance that was item 52. It specified that since 2011, it revealed persistent and systemic weaknesses in city contracting. And yet the city manager has not recouped any of the funds. It would be helpful, mayor, if you want to gain our trust to go back and look at the grants that you've already awarded and the contracts to tell us how much money you have recouped, it does no good to stay in the dark. We have no idea who these social service providers, the bad actors, are. You know who they are. The auditor knows. Recoup the funds, and I would ask you to recoup the funds from Joyce James, the $2.9 million sole source, no bid contract, because she told the public safety commission she was not authorized and she [3:47:48 PM] did not know how to do conversations related to racism. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> That was all speakers for four members. >> Those are all the people that have signed up to speak on item number four. I move adoption of item number four. Is there a second? Second by councilmember Fuentes? Discussion. I want to say a few things. And then, what I want to say is that that today this council is approving a contract that begins the work we set in motion several months ago when the council adopted the comprehensive efficiency assessment ordinance. Since I've been mayor and I've spoken frequently about what I've called an agenda of efficiency, effectiveness and innovation. And that agenda isn't about degrading government. It's about strengthening government. It's about making sure we're providing the highest quality [3:48:49 PM] services possible, while being good stewards of the public resources entrusted to us. Austin the city of Austin is a complex organization. We deliver billions of dollars in services every year through dozens of departments, utilities, and enterprise operations. A city of this size should never stop asking itself a very simple question can we do better? That's what this assessment is designed to answer. The ordinance that was unanimously approved by this city council calls for recurring comprehensive assessments using recognized best practices in auditing, performance management, benchmarking, and organizational review. Most importantly, it insists on something that I believed was essential from the very beginning. And this council has endorsed and pushed forward independent judgment. That's [3:49:49 PM] why we're hiring an outside firm with expertise in municipal performance auditing to work with our city auditor. We're bringing in professionals because we want professional analysis, not political analysis. Our responsibility as elected officials is to insist on independent accountability, not to script independent accountability. And that brings me to another proposal that has received attention, and one that we just discussed in a previous item. Some have suggested that because it also requires hiring an outside firm, it's essentially the same idea, and it isn't. The difference isn't whether government should be evaluated. We all agree that it should. The difference is how you create the most credible evaluation. Our ordinance establishes the objective improve efficiency, improve effectiveness, benchmark us against leading [3:50:50 PM] cities, identify opportunities for continuous improvement. Then what it does is it entrusts independent professionals to determine the methodology and follow the evidence where it leads. The other proposal takes a different approach. Rather than establishing a principle of independent review, it writes much of the engagement itself into the proposed charter amendment. It specifies broad categories that must be examined. It prescribes required analytical components. It establishes timing requirements that will ultimately, I believe, be problematic. And it requires it requires the engagement to identify savings exceeding the cost of the review itself. Those are not simply statements of principle. They are instructions about how the engagement is to be conducted. And that's an important [3:51:51 PM] distinction. Independent audits become credible because independent professionals exercise independent judgment. They don't become more independent because elected officials or political action committees decide in advance what questions must be asked, what methodology should be followed, or what financial threshold should define success. An audit should be directed by principles, not by a predetermined framework. And that's what we're doing today. We're creating an institution that will serve this city not once, but over and over again, an institution that can continually challenge us to improve, an institution that can help future councils make better decisions. An institution that earns public trust because its work is grounded in professional standards rather than in political preferences. [3:52:54 PM] Government should never stop asking how it can better serve the people. Today's contract begins that work. So council. Unless there's further discussion, the motion is to approve item number four. It's been made and seconded. There being no further discussion without objection, item number four is unanimously adopted. Thank you all. Thank you. Council. And thank you to the auditor's office. And we look forward to working with public works LLC members. Council member harper-madison was temporarily off the dais when we took up item number two, which was related to the adoption of a maximum proposed proposed property tax rate and setting a public hearing to receive and consider public comment for fiscal year 2026 2027 property tax the property tax rate she would like to be shown voting in favor of item number two. And I'm going to come back to you in just a [3:53:54 PM] second. And, it will not change the outcome of the vote is there? I move that we show council member harper-madison voting in favor of that. It is seconded by mayor pro tem any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, that is approved. Council member Fuentes also had to be temporarily off the dais when we took up that vote, and she would like to be shown voting in favor again. It will not change the outcome of the vote. I move that she be shown voting in favor. It is seconded by the mayor pro tem. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion to show councilmember Fuentes voting in favor of item number two is also adopted. Members that will take us to item number five, which is to conduct a public hearing and take possible action on the proposed city of Austin budget for fiscal year 2026 2027, beginning on October 1st, 2026 and ending on September 30th, 2027. This is a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number five. The public hearing is now open, and we will turn [3:54:56 PM] to our city clerk to begin calling those speakers who wish to be heard on the public hearing. >> Thank you. Mayor. We first have some remote speakers have requested Spanish interpretation. I'll begin with them. Arvallo. >> C. >> Bueno. Senora Toledo. >> Buenas tardes. Soy Eva Tadeo E quiero Dar las gracias a altogether porque en un tiempo dificil nos ayuda muchisimo. >> VOY a interpreter. Ahora. Good afternoon. My name is Eva Tadeo. I want to thank up together because during a difficult time they helped us a lot. Mossad. >> Nosotros tenemos un accidente automobilistico MI Hija la mas afectada no puede hablar Y empieza a Dar pasito. [3:55:57 PM] >> Okay, we had a car accident and my daughter was the one affected the most. She can't talk and she's starting to take small steps. >> Yeah. Consecuencia de eso Yo no puedo Tener un trabajo con horario porque Yo la cuido cuando me hablaron de otorgar. >> Maybe because of this, I can't have a job with a set schedule because I'm the one who takes care of her. >> Cuando se habla de October puede con la ayuda modifica el Bueno para poder Vanessa amigos. >> Gracias. When I heard about up together, it was a big blessing. With their help, I was able to modify the bathroom to be able to bathe my daughter. >> The. E si me gustaria qué asi como nosotros nos ayuda de [3:56:59 PM] estabilizacion familiar puede ayudar a otras families. >> And I would like that. Just how the the family stabilization grant for families helped us. It could help other families as well that also need it. >> También lo necesita muchas gracias de antemano. >> Thanks in advance. >> Rosie Alvarado. >> Puede pasar senen Alvarado. >> Hola. Buenas tardes, MI nowruz Jose Alvarado Y quiero Dar gracias a la verdad porque Yo recibi pages también por un Ano de parte de Gebhard. Estaba pasando por Una por un tiempo muy dificil economicamente zo. >> Hi, my name is Rosie Alvarado and I received monthly [3:57:59 PM] payments of help from up together for up to one year from the family stabilization grants. At that time, I was going through a very hard time. >> Tiempo de Haber fallecido de un ataque Al Corazon tenia muchos virus polgar a tenia muchos Anos de MI casa acumulado Y como la Ni como hacer para pagar porque el era tenia todos los gatos de lo Gaar. >> And at that time, my husband had passed from a heart attack and we had a lot of bills and expenses, and I didn't know what I was going to do. And the, the bills were adding up and I had to pay my mortgage payments and I did not know what I was going to do because he was the one who took care of all these bills and paid for all the expenses. >> Pero la Familia me cuando lo [3:59:05 PM] necesitaba. If we Brandi para me un Milagro fue Una muy grande donde poco a poco de Cada vez pagar las Dudas pendientes. >> Family stabilization grants was was a miracle to me, and they helped me to be able to little by little pay my debts that I had pending. >> He como para me gran ayuda también para mas families necesidades beneficios. I muchos necesidad en este tiempo tan dificil les agradezco con todo MI Corazon Toda la ayuda. En muchas gracias a les bendiga. >> Yes. And just like they helped me in such a difficult time, I hope they can. They can continue to help other people during this difficult time. It would be good to keep helping the because there's a [4:00:05 PM] lot of needs right now, and I appreciate everything they've done for me, and god bless them. >> Thank you. Muchas gracias. >> Maria Zavala. >> Zavala. >> Ayuda de ayuda. MI esposa tuvo un accidente Y no puede trabajar Esta ayuda como para pagar Y para comprar comida para mis hijos estaba pagar Y antemano agradezco es agradezco ayuda Y Esta ayuda llega cuando Yo mas porque no estoy trabajando Y tampoco trabajar. 30 Anos trabajar Y Esta ayuda en pues agradezco Pero por Esta [4:01:07 PM] apoyo dieron. >> Senora Zavala es por parte de oraciones. Pero puedo hacer un Pequeno resumen siquiera. >> Puedo hacer un MI nombre es Maria Maria Zavala. >> My name is Maria. >> Este es ayuda me. >> And this this help that I received. >> A tiempo porque me esposo no puede trabajar. >> It came to me at a good time. My husband couldn't work. >> Para polgar me. >> And it helped me pay my bills. >> Para comprar la comida en Ninos. >> And to be able to buy food for my children. [4:02:07 PM] >> Ayuda también ustedes. >> For that program that helped us. >> It was MI Familia. >> And it helped me and my family. >> Muchas gracias. >> Thank you very much. >> Muchas gracias. >> Allison. Susan. Allison. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Ali. Susan and I work at the safe alliance. And in my role, I work with young people through our cares and our supervised independent living program. Our cares program serves young people who have experienced sex trafficking and exploitation >> In our Sil program serves young people aging out of the foster care system. These programs are deeply connected through space. Young people leaving foster care without [4:03:07 PM] stable housing or trusted adults are especially vulnerable to exploitation. Sil builds the stability that reduces that risk and cares responds to the exploitation when it occurs. Trafficking has long been invisible in Travis county, not because it wasn't happening, but because it wasn't being seen. In 20 2024, only nine cases were identified countywide because of the training, education and partnership, care, safe and other community partners help build early identification has increased exponentially since. This is not bad news. It means we're finally seeing a problem that was always here. The scale is significant. Each year, about 12 to 1500 young people age out of foster care without permanency. In Travis county, it's roughly about 100 and trending. We often see young people come to Austin believing there's more resources here and [4:04:09 PM] fleeing for stability. What I want to bring to this council's attention today is this need cannot be met by safe alone. We work closely with other community partners lifeworks Austin police department, broader network of partners that provide mental health care, housing and basic needs. My ask for you today is that, you continue to support the system to operate as one interconnected system. And when funding is assured. >> Hello. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Ashraf. I'm at UT Austin, student and candidate for Texas state representative in house district 49. I ask you to spare us the speeches about justice. Spare us the statements about healing. Spare us the carefully crafted condolences if your [4:05:10 PM] thoughts and prayers are with the family of Ann family wounds. The second, while your budget is with the police, then your priorities are clear and so are ours. Vote against raising the police budget. You are asking the people of Austin to pour another $24 million, on top of the more than half $1 billion already allocated into Austin police department. While working people are told to settle for less everywhere else less housing, less mental health care, less public transit, less investment in our neighborhoods, less hope. Somehow there's always money for police, but never enough for the people. On July 24th, Antonio Williams, attacking an unarmed black boy, was shot and killed by Austin police. It's have accountability without excuses and victim blaming. Chief Lisa Davis ought to resign or be terminated by the city manager for failure and leadership in supporting killer cops over an innocent child. The officers involved should face a full criminal investigation and be prosecuted for the murder of Antonio Williams a second. That cannot mean immunity. Let's stop [4:06:11 PM] pretending this is just another budget vote. Police are and always have been the tangible embodiment of state violence. They exist to preserve an unequal status quo, to protect wealth, power and property. Time and again, they have brutalized protesters, terrorized marginalized communities, escalated situations that never should have become violent, and demanded endless funding while delivering less and less public trust. They are effective cowards, armed to the teeth and ready to harm and. Hold up. >> City clerk could you ask them to pause for just a second? Folks? Folks, when? Security, could y'all clear the chamber, please, of anybody that's yelling? >> Don't mind to the people. Oh, y'all must know. The community knows. Okay, the community [4:07:12 PM] knows that you are nothing but liars. Y'all murdered my son. And it was okay. It was okay, y'all. That's why y'all, y'all know who I am because y'all murdered my son. And it was okay. It was okay. And y'all have no fear for that. Guess what? Elections coming up in November following us. It's time to go. You must know that you don't know the community like I do. I'm undercover, but that's okay. Remember, Alexander Gonzalez was murdered with 18 points, one five of 2021. You don't get off. True story. True story. Okay, I'm not gonna run away. I'm not gonna go away. I'm not. But guess what? You must. See, Steve. >> City council members, if there's no objection, we're going to recess for five minutes to, let the chamber [4:08:13 PM] settle down. Thank y'all. >> Christa. >> We're in recess. [4:15:00 PM] For 14. We bring the Austin city council meeting back to order. Clerk, could you continue? I can't remember who was speaking when the, the disturbance started, but. >> Sherry. Papa, I still. If you're still here, I'm gonna unmute you. I think you have about 20s left. >> Thank you very much. >> Clerk thank you. This is a moral choice. Every dollar you hand to APD is a declaration that state violence is more important than our community. You cannot campaign. It's Progressives speak the language of justice and governance and service of wealth, power and institutions that repeatedly escape accountability. The people of Austin see through it. They're organizing. They're knocking doors. They're building movement. Some of you already have grassroots challengers. >> Dewey Smith. >> Good afternoon, mayor, mayor, pro tem and council members. My name is gio Smith. I'm a member of the safe alliance board of directors, chair of safe public policy committee and a proud [4:16:01 PM] resident of district seven for the last 15 years. I'm here because, as you do, I care deeply about my city. First, I want to thank the city for funding its family violence shelter in this budget for survivors of family violence, housing and wraparound services are life from ten years managing program evaluations for an internationally renowned and heavily federally funded, not for profit. I believe most Austin nonprofits aren't funded or staffed to meet that degree of rigorous impact tracking from that lens. I appreciate council's desire to improve efficiency and ensure taxpayer dollars have impact. Good governance, accountability and stewardship matter. As you consider spending reductions, please consider who bears the burden of those reductions, the people and the lives beyond the numbers. As vice chair of the African American resource advisory commission, I spent years unpacking with community city policies that left certain communities behind. While [4:17:02 PM] issues such as domestic violence, housing instability and family safety affect people of every race city council, council, district and income level, many of the programs facing cuts have a disproportionate impact on communities of color. Budgets determine whose needs are prioritized, whose challenges are addressed and whose opportunities are expanded. The disparate impact of cutting social services deserves your care and attention. I respectfully urge you to prioritize finding savings elsewhere before making these cuts. I hope that when it's time to vote, regardless of the affluence or demographics of your district, you will remember that Austin is one city and do right by all of us. Thank you. Thank you for continuing to walk alongside safe through a challenging fiscal season. Your partnership makes it possible for us to continue to work, and we appreciate you for it. >> Thank you. Lynn Williams. [4:18:02 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson and city council members. My name is Lynn Williams, and I serve as the executive director of director of Austin and serve on the leadership circle for the homeless advocacy project, and I am a member of district eight. Today, I want to speak about the proposed budget reductions for social service contracts and what they mean for organizations in our community and what they depend on every day during our mission to build and renovate housing facilities for nonprofit organizations, we serve neighbors experiencing or at risk of homelessness. And that gives us a unique perspective as we work alongside dozens of providers across our city, and we see firsthand what it takes to keep those doors open. When funding is reduced, the nonprofits don't simply tighten their budgets. They make impossible choices. They serve fewer families, reduce critical programs, delay repairs, and stretch overextended staff. The need doesn't disappear. It just simply becomes someone else's emergency. Safe alliance is one example. They work protecting survivors of domestic violence, [4:19:02 PM] sexual assault and child abuse, which doesn't happen in isolation. It is deeply connected with homeless prevention, family stability and public safety, and organizations like safe are forced to do more with less. The effects are felt throughout our entire community. They already have. As of yesterday, 94 adults on the waitlist, 34 of those adults are with children, and the rest are singles. These numbers will continue to rise with the budget cuts to programing. I also urge you to continue investing in family shelter and family housing solutions. We meet families who are doing everything they can to stay together, yet there's simply not enough places where they can find safety to begin rebuilding their lives. We know the need is growing. We know that stability, stable housing, and the function for better health, educational success, employment and long term self-sufficiency starts there. As of today, the family shelter, the Gebhard family shelter for Salvation Army, has a waitlist of 117 families, which equals 451 people. As you consider [4:20:04 PM] this budget, I ask you to remember that these organizations are not simply lying. >> Cassie. Sodergren. >> Good afternoon. My name is Kathy Sodergren. I'm a resident of district six, and I'm calling today in support of the community investment budget, because I believe Austin's budget should reflect community values, and I'm concerned about the proposed increase in the Austin police department's budget. When we invest in housing, public health, workforce development, youth programs, and social services, we are preventing crises before they happen. The police are not prevention. Just last week, APD murdered a teenager having a mental health crisis. Preventative investments are what make our communities healthier and safer, and they are the fiscally responsible choice because addressing problems early costs less than responding after people reach a [4:21:05 PM] crisis. In the case of last week, it cost us a life. The police are not effective for our well-being or for our budget. Public safety is not just about emergency response. It is also about making sure people have stability, opportunity and support. I urge council to protect social service contracts, invest in affordable housing and prevention, stop giving money to the police, stop the expensive, inhumane and ineffective camp sweeps and support the community investment budget. Thank you. >> Katy manger. >> Hi there. My name is Katy Magner. Good afternoon. I am from district one. I'm a full time working mom with a baby on the way. I work for one of the nonprofits that has already been impacted by the social service cuts. And I'm here [4:22:06 PM] today to urge you to oppose any additional cuts to the city's social service contracts with Austin on profit providers. As you consider the proposed budget for fiscal year 27, this is a time when our community's needs are growing. Nonprofits are already facing unprecedented financial pressure across central Texas, more than $42 million in federal funding has already been cut, frozen, or at risk. In addition to all the cuts that we've already endured from the local government, most organizations have already reduced staff, laid off staff, reduced services, or cut the number of people that they would serve. Every dollar that we invest in prevention save taxpayers far more down the road. High quality early childhood education reduces future spending on remedial education and involvement in the criminal justice system. Workforce development and English language education help residents secure high paying jobs, strengthens our local economy and tax base. Family support mental health services and case management. Reduce costly emergency room visits, homelessness, child welfare involvement and crisis response. [4:23:07 PM] When we cut social services, the needs do not disappear. They simply become more expensive, urgent and difficult to meet. We shift costs from prevention to crisis intervention, from community based organizations to emergency rooms, law enforcement shelters and other public systems that cost significantly more and are already already at capacity. Austin's nonprofit sector is one of the city's strongest partners in delivering efficient, cost effective solutions. Protecting these contracts isn't just about supporting nonprofits, it's about making fiscally responsible decisions that strengthen our economy and improve outcomes for families. I urge you to reject further cuts to social service contracts and continue investing in organizations that save taxpayer dollars by preventing crises before they happen. Thank you so much. >> Mirror vandross. >> Good morning, mayor and council. I know it's not really morning, but it's always a good [4:24:07 PM] morning in Austin, Texas. My name is mayor, also known as gumbo. I am one of the co-chairs of Austin democratic socialists of America and a proud rank and file member of acme 1624. And I was going to be, I guess, more timid, not timid, tepid with what I said. And then you kicked a bunch of people out of the chambers for rightfully protesting the police murder of Anthony Williams last week. So it's really simple. We do this every year and we're all getting tired of this. Y'all are tired of this. Just don't give a P D more money than what is contractually required. Hb 1900 means that we can't ever take that back away from them. So why give it to them? Fund social services through Austin public health, give us a Progressive cost of living adjustment for the city and the union. Give us a Progressive minimum wage increase. Preserve our benefits. Don't let executives travel, enforce the telework policy fairly, and also don't spend money on automated license plate readers. Because again, any money we spend on the police budget, on a mass surveillance does not [4:25:07 PM] stay in the city. The only safe data is data that's not collected. So just stop giving the cops more money than they need. Please. It's very simple. Thank you. Ice. The police. I yield my time. >> Reese Armstrong. >> Hello. I'm here to speak to the mayor. Is the mayor here? >> We ran out. >> Because we cannot. >> Hello? >> Hello. Yes. Go ahead with your testimony. The mayor is temporarily off the dais. But please feel free to continue your your comments. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Yeah. I mean, again, he's gone every time. It's just exhausting. I've watched a couple of police votes now. Every year he [4:26:08 PM] magically vanishes whenever it's time to hold him accountable. I'm so tired of it. You know, we we do this, we do this game and charade every year. We have hundreds of people come out and tell you to vote against police increases right after someone gets murdered or something happens. It happens every year and all you do is rubber stamp it. In the end, you never listen to us. It's it's exhausting to watch the police budget climb and climb and climb, knowing will never get that money back. The only way we'll get that money back is through inflation. Like that's not a reliable source to hold our budget against. And we're watching, you know, creep up from 30% ever closer to 40% to 50%. And a certain point we're going to we're going to start seeing austerity really set in for the social services that actually matter. We know poverty is the root cause of crime, not. And the police do not solve poverty. So we should be solving crime by actually reducing poverty, by investing in social services and not [4:27:08 PM] playing this game and dance like this, this dancing game where we just give the police more and more and more and more of our money because it makes our friends rich. It's exhausting. I someone just got murdered and we're still going to vote for an increase again, shameful. I yield my time. >> Henry Anthony duchen. >> Hello. Council and community members. My name is Henry Anthony duchen I part of district nine and the united workers of integral care. I'm here to speak as a community mental health worker. That is directly impacted by the cuts to social services. But more directly, I want to talk about its impact on the clients that we work with every single day. The, the need is growing. Understandably, lots of budgets across the country, are being [4:28:10 PM] impacted by the federal government, but none more than Texas. There's many limitations in what people can access in their social service. And the social safety net that we have here, I see clients across the spectrum, both in crisis and in everyday life. They are, are needing more support. There are cracks widening, between what is available to them and the day to day, for getting food security, housing security and basic needs met for, you know, being outside dealing with, the heat in Texas and Austin. And getting to actually, flourish beyond just the, the limitations right now they're dealing a lot. I work with the homeless specifically, people are dealing with these sweeps. [4:29:10 PM] And while it is important to have accountability in a budget, putting those that are most vulnerable on the budget shouldn't be something that we consider. I encourage you to fund, all social services at the levels that they, request and find, you know, find it within your heart to support the people that are on the front lines doing that work. It is clearly needed. I yield my time. >> Franck. Nestor. Franck, are you there? >> Hi. Yeah. I'm here. I'm calling because I am sick and tired of this police budget going up and up every year. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. We have a budget crisis. We need to [4:30:11 PM] institute austerity. We need to cut social services. My power goes out constantly. People who save my life are linemen and social workers, emts, firefighters. You know who I'm never going to call? Are the cops member of Texas state employees union? And I'm loud and proud. District one. And what I want are safer streets, cleaner air for my kid to play in cleaner parks. And I definitely do not want someone to show up at a park in the middle of the night and shoot a kid. We need to do better than that. We can do better than that. We can pay your employees what they deserve. Give them cost of living adjustment, pay our social workers who are helping our most vulnerable avoid heat death out in the street. I'm asking that you do [4:31:12 PM] not increase the police budget. All they do is use it to buy things like block and stock ex-girlfriend. You can't claim to be in favor of protecting immigrants and in favor of reproductive justice, and also institute funding for the people that hunt down our immigrant neighbors and people seeking abortion care. That is insane. I do not like the future that you are presenting for my daughter, for my family, for my neighbors, for my friends, for my coworkers. You can do better. Just don't give them more money. Tired of hearing about it year after year? Thank you. >> That's all the speakers we have. So I'm going to move to in person speakers. Carol Guthrie yes, I'm on item five. [4:32:15 PM] Thank you. Carol Guthrie, Cynthia Simmons, Cynthia, are you here? Yes. Is Ben here? Okay. You'll have four minutes. David Cruz. >> Thank you very much. Mr. Guthrie. You want to go ahead? >> Yes. >> Good afternoon. Well, I wish the city manager would have been here, on behalf. I'm speaking as a business manager for local 1624, and I wanted to thank the city manager for working with us and and finding enough money for a small cost of living adjustment. And I want to thank all of you who also supported that. And we only have one little thing that I would like for you to consider. We did not get the Progressive cola. And what that is, is like any employee that [4:33:17 PM] makes, I think it's $49,317 or below would get a flat rate of $1,470. And that is the amount that would bring them up to the mit living wage rate. It is tough times out there trying to make a living on $20 an hour is really hard. So I hope that you can look hard and find just a little bit more money so that we can help the most vulnerable employees we have. Thank you so much. >> Thank you very much, miss Guthrie. >> Hello, everyone. Distinguished council members. My name is Cynthia Simmons and I am the first vice president of afscme 1624. I'm going to trail Carol in there and saying that we would really appreciate it if you all could find the money. For the cola, some of the workers, you know, they [4:34:17 PM] can't, they're living paycheck to paycheck. They can't even afford daycare and their rent. But they are part of, you know, the, the intricacies of the city and making the city run. So we need to make sure that staff are being paid what they need in order to take care of themselves. Next, I'd like to go over to the social services cuts. Around $26.4 million being estimated. We're saying that our workers, deserve safe communities, that they deserve to be able to thrive in their communities. And they do this in part by accessing social services. When we have social services, we have safer and thriving communities. Mental health care is a need demonstrated here today. We do not have enough mental health care and services for members in our community. And we are asking that you continue to fund those things. Things like the harvest trauma recovery center, workforce development [4:35:18 PM] to include workforce development for reentry, housing, food access. All of these things are essential, and we are asking you to fully fund those things. And how are we going to do that? That takes us to the police budget increase. We are not against the police. We are in allyship with the police, but we are asking you to keep the police budget flat. We are saying that we have a crisis in our community, and that there is police budget that is left over every year. You have not zeroed out that fund yet, so why are we giving them more money when they don't need it? They cannot fill the positions that they have, and the cost of it is the bloodshed in our community. As the mother of a black son, I do not want my son shot down because he had a water bottle in over 100 degree temperature. We have to do better, and we have to continue to build on the investment and the leadership that this city council has already demonstrated. You have [4:36:20 PM] demonstrated that you care about mental health. You have demonstrated that you care about families, that you care about keeping them together. And in the community. We are asking you to continue on that chart. We are asking you to not backpedal in the time of budget deficits and stop investing in the things that have made our community safer, that have reduced the violence in our community, that have brought down homelessness, that have brought down the rates of family separation, that have helped with the criminal legal system. We are asking you to continue to take that forward. Instead of investing more money into police and bringing us ten, 15, 20 years back into crisises and social determinants that do not make our community safer. You have the leadership, you have the power, and you have the authority to do that. And we are trusting you to make those good decisions. And with that, I yield my time. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon. My name is David Cruz. I'm a board member of acme 1624, representing over 4000 members who work at the [4:37:21 PM] city. I'm here on my own time. Afscme members are asking for a wage raise that works for everyone. That means a flat cost of living increase for our lowest paid employees. I want to reiterate what my union sisters have already said. Acme is asking for a Progressive cola. We also stand with our coalition partners in asking for the community investment budget. These programs are not optional for thousands of Austin residents who we serve. Working families will need to make difficult decisions to make ends meet. If you yank away these programs as public servants, we understand the constraints on our budget. We know that there are hard choices to make, but those hard choices must be shared by everyone, not just working people. We urge you to find cuts in bloated consultant contracts and outrageous executive spending. This spring, acme fought a campaign to stop the 180 S consolidation. One demand of that campaign was to end a noncompetitive, [4:38:23 PM] unsupervised consultant contract. Despite our warnings, management proceeded unabated without proving any cost savings. That isn't efficiency, it's untransparent and reckless management has not proved they're willing to make the sacrifices they are asking of working people. Through the stop oats campaign, we discovered an ATS leader had spent $14,000 on travel in a single year. If one executive took one fewer trip each, it could save a social services contract. That's what it would look like for city leadership to make hard choices, and they have not shown they will do it on their own. Acme is looking to this dais to hold them accountable. City management is asking you to make difficult decisions in this budget at the expense of our community's most vulnerable members. It's only fair to ask management to do the same. Thank you. >> Andy Brauer, Andy are you here? Is Jesus Gonzalez here? [4:39:26 PM] Yes. Was that a yes? Okay, then you'll have four minutes. Andy then Denise molina, Cole weaver and Leslie Varghese. >> Hi, my name is Andy Brauer. I'm with central presbyterian church and I am the leader of the homeless advocacy project. I work downtown at eighth and brazos, and I work with people who are unhoused and very, very vulnerable and at risk every day. I'm here to talk about homelessness. I'm here to talk about the city's response. The recommendations that we have. Actually, I have handouts, I don't know, Peter. I don't know if you could, I, I'm sorry, I have some handouts I want to provide with some recommendations. Mayor Watson talked about, the study that is going to happen and that wants to know if we can do, do things a little bit better and if we could be more efficient and effective, I believe we can. And I have some recommendations and I really hope you guys will, will take a look at these. First of all, we're spending millions of dollars on homelessness and we don't have a comprehensive plan. If you [4:40:26 PM] look at the city's website, it points to a 2018 action plan to end homelessness. Nobody's using it. We're spending millions of dollars and we have no plan. Let's get a plan. Direct the office of, the hso to to create a plan and work with the community to make sure that we're that the dollars are flowing in a strategic direction. But the first priority that we have for hap is family homelessness. I'm going to repeat what Lynn Williams said. One of our other leaders, 94 families on the safe waitlist, 59 kids are in unsafe places right now, safe at the Salvation Army, 117 families on a wait list. These are just the folks that got on the waitlist. I think we should prioritize homeless kids in the city. I don't think kids should have to sleep in cars or in unsafe places or in tents. I hope you guys agree, and I hope that you will make the same effort that we're making in the city to try to build shelters for single adults. I also wanted to talk about shelter [4:41:27 PM] prioritization because we're spending millions on shelter, and I want to make sure that they're fair and accessible to everybody. Currently they're not. We have one bed for every five people in Austin. The handout that I give you is going to show the way we do it now, we have a very limited resource. So in my opinion, if we have a limited resource, we need to use that very wisely. And our current system, it's first come, first serve. If you're pregnant, if you're elderly or if you're sick, you're going to still be waiting for your number to be called. Most people who are homeless don't have a phone, so when your number is up, they can't get to the shelter. I, I've been talking about this issue for at least a year or two. All we have to do is direct the office to do it. It doesn't even cost anything. So I hope you all will consider it. This is also what the national alliance to end homelessness told our city eight years ago, and we never implemented it. It's really, really concerning to see vulnerable people coming into the church regularly. Just hopeless. I've met with a lot of your staff. I've said the [4:42:28 PM] same thing this year. I hope that you'll, you'll consider it. The third issue we want to talk about is camping in Austin. We know that a lot of people are camping in Austin. We know it's illegal. We also know it's still happening. They're being moved. But they really have no place to go. Some of them are being offered shelter. Most of them are not going in that shelter. I heard that $702,000 was spent from may to June on this effort. We already we all know that folks are going right back there. So it's just a shell game and it's an endless cycle. It's, it's really not, ethical, I think to tell people they have to move, but really not give them anywhere to go. So we have a tool in our toolbox that we're not using and we refuse to use. And that is that plan that the state allowed cities to apply for through the housing and community affairs to camp. I know it's not ideal. I know it's not what we set out to do many years ago to house all our people to end homelessness. But [4:43:28 PM] the reality is there are still people who are homeless. People are going to continue to camp. Let's recognize the reality. The constables are. They have a. That was four minutes. Wow. Okay, I'm going to pass these out. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Is it. >> Please go ahead. >> Okay. Just state your name for the record, please. >> This is Cole weaver speaking today as a member of united workers of integral care. Seven six local 6154. It's a shame to see that this council hasn't learned much from the police contract. Back in 2024, the community told you all back then how the astronomical increase to the APD's budget would lead to cuts. With both the city and social services we rely on daily. We also saw the writing on the wall that state and federal funding cuts were coming. Then in 2025, as much [4:44:32 PM] as I and several other labor organizers desperately wanted to pass, it failed, leading to the era of economic austerity we're in now. Despite all of that, now, council wants to further invest into a police department that just got away with violently murdering Antonio, a child. By the way, it absolutely disgusts me that Antonio's obvious cries for help was interpreted as a request to have APD come execute him. However, even if we were to believe this nonsensical suicide by cop claim, do y'all know what happened when I actually tried to die by suicide? By suicide via cop? My life was spared by mental health responders. They followed protocol to de-escalate and not once put out weapons on me. Why couldn't Antonio have been given the same dignity? If this council wants to do right by Antonio, [4:45:32 PM] do not raise APD's budget by one penny. It's not too late to protect the social services we have left. And if all my comments fall on deaf ears, the community is still paying attention to this council and they will vote accordingly, especially as the demonstrators just said to y'all, thank you. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Denise molina and I'm the Austin regional organizer with the Texas civil rights project. I am also a proud resident of district two. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I'm here to urge you to adopt a budget that prioritizes public safety, accountability, and community trust. First, I urge you to create a joint communications department and move civilian dispatch out of Austin. Police emergency communications are one of the most important services that our city provides. Every resident deserves to know that when they call 911, their situation will be addressed independently and that response will match the emergency. A [4:46:34 PM] civilian communication department would improve coordination across city departments, increase transparency, and help ensure Wright responders are sent to the right calls. Not every emergency requires an armed law officer, mental crisis and welfare checks, and many quality of life calls require specialized professionals trained to de-escalate situations and connect people to the services they need. Create an independent communications department is a meaningful step towards building a smarter, more effective public safety system. Second, I urge you to keep the police budget flat. Austin does not need more police funding. We have made significant investments in policing. The question before us is not whether we can spend more, it's whether we are investing in what actually makes our community safer. Last week, our city witnessed a heartbreaking tragedy when the Austin police department fatally shot a teenager during what appeared a mental health crisis. That loss of life is devastating and is painful. Reminder that increasing police funding does not guarantee public safety outcome. Instead, it highlights urgent need to invest in systems that can better prevent [4:47:34 PM] these tragedies from happening in the first place. Finally, I urge you to strengthen city council oversight of the police over of the police oversight. Strong oversight is essential to public trust. The police oversight exists to provide independent accountability, increase transparency and ensure that concerns raised by community members receive meaningful review. Strengthening council's oversight of the police oversight reinforces public confidence. Thank you. >> My name is Leslie Varghese and I'm here to support one voice. City leadership is looking for efficiency and effectiveness. So are we. City leadership is looking for strengthening basic services. So are we. The question is where do these efficiencies come from and what counts as basic services. The first one's easy efficiency should come [4:48:35 PM] from every corner of city hall, not just starting and ending with social service contracts. Second one is harder. Rfk is in charge of your public health, and Kash Patel and Markwayne Mullin are in charge of your safety. So Austin, much during like covid will have to partner with our nonprofits to keep austinites safe, housed, and alive. Here's the funny thing about basics. The same constituents calling about potholes today will be calling tomorrow. When there's a person in crisis outside their place of business, as is their right. But as we were reminded last week, public safety does not start with the 911 call. It starts in the moments before behavioral health care, crisis intervention, parenting support, food security and housing. This council has made strides in these areas, but it's not enough. And now is not the time to backpedal. Nobody objects to [4:49:36 PM] cutting what doesn't work. What we don't support is guessing. The 2025 audit found one instance of noncompliance. The 2026 audit same month found 19, but has now been acknowledged several times. A sample of two dozen contracts across hundreds can't justify sweeping conclusions about an entire system. That is a conclusion in search of data. Yesterday's memo shows programs achieving 87%, 90%, even nearly 100% of their goals, and they are still recommended for cuts in the very next column. If performance is the rationale, show us the evidence. >> Thank you. >> The next few speakers have requested Spanish interpretation. Obdulia. Aniceto, Jessica Alvarez, Myrna Rodriguez, Jenny Hernandez. [4:50:41 PM] >> Are they here? >> I'm not seeing anyone continuing on. Doctor. Rosa. Maria Murillo. Doctor, are you here? Yes. Is roalson Thomas here? Yes. Okay. Four minutes. Gustavo Martinez J a maverick. >> Please begin. Doctor Murillo. >> Buenas tardes. I'm doctor Murillo, chair of one voice central Texas and CEO for sammaritano. I've shared with you that I've sat in both sides of this issue. I also want to share with you that I am the result of the many social services that are provided in this city, and so is my family. I am the result of the services that el Buen samaritano provides every day. As you can [4:51:42 PM] see in the screen. Yesterday we sent you an assessment reviewing the whole process of how we understand the city, the management came to propose the budget cuts. We also sent to you 144 signed letters by faith leaders, nonprofit leaders and business leaders supporting the supporting the to restore the the proposed 5.1 million in social services reductions. I respectfully request that you oppose those reductions in fiscal year 27. And I want to make sure we don't forget about fiscal year 28. Going back to [4:52:43 PM] the assessment, after comprehensive review of the public record, our assessment concludes that these reductions have not demonstrated to be the last the last resort, after operational efficiencies were evaluated. The public record also does not demonstrate that these recommendations fully reflect the priorities many of you consistently articulated through this budget process. I posed to you that the assessment to propose the budget cuts, it is not credible. The staff recommendation proposing elimination of 77 contracts out of 155 is not acceptable. There are important questions that remain. Some contracts appear to be missing altogether, and some of the [4:53:45 PM] proposed programs to be cut have strong performance records. It makes no sense. Programs like early childhood academic advancement program, serving children in need of mental health services, are proposed to be cut. This is a critical issue facing our community. I will remind you that nonprofits already have experienced a 10% cut this year at el Buen. In fiscal year 26, our social services programs were reduced by 10%, and out of Austin housing, we experienced a 25% reduction, translating into $1 million. Translating into 150 [4:54:47 PM] families not receiving support for eviction prevention, as well as 100 families in district four not having access to food. It is difficult to understand how these proposed cuts were reached when we have not seen the analysis showing how the evaluation criteria were applied, how community impacts were way, or how some high performing programs were cut. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record. >> Thank you. My name is Hans maverick. Mayor Watson, mayor pro tem, fellow council members, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I live in council district ten, and I'm a policy and research organizer with grassroots leadership, which is a member of the community investment budget coalition. We support the cib because we want the city to promote programs that help people who are impacted by the criminal, legal and immigration detention systems. Today, I would like to add my voice to the many who have spoken out [4:55:48 PM] about the killing of Antonio Williams last Friday, within the context of the city budget that is now under consideration. His killing represents a profound betrayal of the trust that Austin residents. Have placed in law enforcement. The avoidable death of a 17 year old black kid on the east side illustrates a kind of delusion that permeates our society's approach to people whom we perceive as dangerous. Antonio's death is but a symptom. Granted a tragic and heart wrenching symptom, but a symptom nonetheless. It is a symptom of a kind of delusion that causes people to believe that the only effective response to violence is more violence. We need to address the root causes of that delusion. While I strongly believe that greater police oversight and accountability are desperately needed in Austin, I also believe in strongly in systems that support people like Antonio and prevent them from finding themselves in the situation he [4:56:49 PM] was in. This means 911 calls are routed to people who know how to recognize and deal nonviolently with mental health crises. More importantly, it means that people like Antonio know about and are able to avail themselves of the kinds of services that would have prevented last Friday's tragedy. The draft budget proposes increasing the police funding by 25 million, about half of which is discretionary, while cutting roughly 16 million over two years from nonprofit services. I'm respectfully asking you all to revise the city budget in light of the community's priorities and concerns. Thank you. >> Continuing on with item five, Rodney sands, Rosa ten, Brewster, Alma Ruiz, Philip Fitzgerald, Nathan Fernandez. I'm not seeing any movement, so I'm going to continue. Okay. Lillie Harris, Phyllis. Everett, [4:57:52 PM] Gerald. Plunkett. >> When your name is called, if you're wanting to speak, please come forward. You. Mr. Fernandez. Yes, please. You have the floor. >> Hello, mayor and council. My name is Nathan Fernandez and I live in district two. It's good to see Sam Fuentes back on the dais. I'm also a lifelong resident and a, rank and file member of afscme local 1624 here on my own time, we do appreciate the 3% cost of living adjustment that appears to be built in the budget for city workers. But as members are again asking for a wage raise that works for everyone, that means a flat cost of living increase for our lowest paid employees. Those making below the mit living wage of 2371 an hour. I want to reiterate what my union siblings said earlier. Acme demands a Progressive cost of living adjustment, which, as answer to cb Q number 12 says would only cost $5,000 and affect only 107 employees. [4:58:54 PM] Afscme also firmly stands with our coalition partners, asking for the community investment budget to be adopted. Cuts to social services threaten the work of our members, but more >> More importantly, the thousands of residents who we serve. Working families will need to make even more difficult decisions this year to make ends meet. If you take away these programs, our social safety net should never be put on the back burner. Cuts to housing, harm reduction and social service contracts will hurt the residents we serve and make all of our problems worse. Please act accordingly and explore all the tools available, including moving 911 call takers out of APD or moving APD's. Numerous vacancies, as well as cutting and holding accountable the bloated and outrageous consultant and executive spending that can be used to preserve the programs and services that matter most. And y'all, this is now my third year in a row coming out to tell you that the APD contract of 2024 was going to cripple [4:59:56 PM] our budget, and here we are living with the consequences. Thank you. >> Hello, council members. My name is Rodney Rosa. I'm here to speak on behalf of the up together funds that I received, last year, in 2016. It was a banner year for me. I moved to Austin. I naturalized to vote for the first time in this country, in this, in this state. And then also that year I was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, which kind of put a damper on everything. But ultimately the, the funds that I received from up together, helped keep me, from going underwater while I lost my job around the same time, they helped me to keep my home and to stay in Austin and to stay a functioning member of the state, excuse me, of the city, allowing me to participate in [5:00:56 PM] the mutual aid groups, of which I am a member here in Austin, as well as allowing me to contribute to the the community that I've happily become a part of with the up together funds, I was able to keep my home. I had already been dangerously close to to being evicted at that point because I lost my job due to my disability. Eventually, I was approved after several years of applying and, reapplying for disability. But the up together funds are what kept me in that home, in the home that I have still to date. Until the disability approval came through and I started receiving those, those funds without up together, contributing to my income at the time, I would have been homeless. Me and my, my partner would have been homeless. Despite all the assistance of my family, despite all the assistance of mutual aid funds that I also was able to use in that time, which is why I'm starting, which is why I'm trying to, make it front and [5:01:57 PM] center now that these funds that you contribute to people like I, like I was in need, it's, it's invaluable and it helps us to stay functioning in this community and also to contribute in our own way. Thank you very much for everything. >> Shelby Evans, Alicia Castillo, Emily Witt, Herrera Robicheaux, Jennifer Robicheaux. >> Why don't we start here and we'll start with you and we'll go down the row. Okay. >> My name is Shelby. I am a survivor of sexual assault and a former employee of the office of police oversight. APD's outsized claim on Austin's general fund has proven itself a faulty investment. The dollars siphoned from social services has led to some of our best public safety programs closing, such as the forensic nursing program at snipes Louis [5:02:58 PM] house. As a survivor without health insurance for the last several years, I would never voluntarily go to a hospital for fear of financial ruin on top of the lack of trauma informed care, according to safe, only about 10% of survivors come forward. If we see an improvement in sexual assault numbers, it is not because we fix the problem. It will be because survivors like myself are staying silent and harboring that pain in isolation, instead of getting the support and services we all deserve. The city relies on apo for police accountability. Having worked in that office, I can tell you without independent investigatory power, it has no authority to make change whatsoever in lieu of the best practice of an independent investigator. The people who do have power need to pay attention, get involved in the oversight process, and ensure that office is well resourced. As a complaint specialist, my caseload was around 75 cases. On top of admin and data duties. Each case came with a slew of documents and hours of body worn camera footage that I would review for thorough recommendations that would go [5:03:58 PM] to internal affairs and ultimately the chain of command, which they would ostensibly ignore. Looking at the most recent tragedy, the killing of Anthony L, several policy violations jump off the pages of the 866 page APD general orders that I, a civilian, apparently heed more than officers do. Throwing more money at this problem will not solve it. State sanctioned violence is not public safety. We need to see real change in the line items of this budget or you will see real change at the ballot box. Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Emily Witt. I'm speaking on behalf of myself and a vow, Texas. And I'm here to challenge our city council to invest in true public safety and care for our communities. We are in full support of the community investment budget, which asks the city council to fully fund social services and keep the police budget flat. I want to speak specifically to our request for a $600,000 investment in maternal health resources and the community investment budget. This grant [5:04:58 PM] would go to orgs like mama San, a vibrant woman, to continue providing maternal health services to pregnant and parenting people. This is true. Public safety mama San has a proven track record of improving health outcomes for their clients. 93% of their participants gave birth to babies with healthy birth weights. In 2025 alone, mama San has served 218 households and supported 477 children. With investment, they can expand this reach. Is that not the change that we want to see in our community? Reproductive health care access will also reduce the need for more costly emergency interventions later on. This very council allocated $400,000 to the reproductive justice fund in 2024. Thank you to the council members who were on the dais at the time who were part of that victory. And while that fund was attacked by the state, your decision displayed values that we must protect. Our city must do all it can to mitigate, mitigate the harm of abortion bans. In Texas, which manufactured a maternal health crisis that's led to soaring sepsis rates and [5:05:59 PM] made black pregnant Texans two and a half times more likely to die from pregnancy complications. The truth is, APD doesn't know what to do when someone is being stalked, when someone is experiencing domestic abuse, or when someone is having a spontaneous abortion, commonly known as a miscarriage. In fact, we've even seen police in Texas criminalize people for pregnancy loss. Police cannot navigate these situations, but we can resource those who can. And as we discuss the budget today, none of us should forget the APD murdered Anthony Williams, the second, a 17 year old child on a playground just under a week ago. APD's problem is not a lack of financial resources but lack of care. >> Thank you so. >> Hello, my name is Hera Robichaux. I'm a native austinite. I'm speaking against the tax increase. Some people may not be able to afford things they need because of high taxes. High property taxes hurts renters more than homeowners because renters pay the full property tax. [5:07:00 PM] Businesses have the same problem because they don't get exemptions. Austin has so many renters. Approximately 46% of Austin residents. That's almost half. If the rent. If a renter is paying so much money in rent, they don't have as much money to spend on things they want. Keep in mind that means people won't buy as many things. That's bad for city council because you won't get as much sales taxes. Lower property taxes means more people come live here because it's more affordable, which could mean more tax revenue in total. It's a win win for city council and Austin citizens. When my generation grows up, taxes might be so high that we won't be able to, that we won't be able to live here. And I love Austin. Lowering taxes helps citizens be able to afford our homes, and it helps city council because more people will move here because it's more affordable. Thank you. >> Thank you. [5:08:01 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor and city council. I'm Jen Robichaux. I'm here to speak against compounding cost increases at the rate Austin is going. One day it will be populated only by top earners paying the taxes, living in master plan developments and the bottom earners in city funded housing surviving on social services. The middle is being pushed out. My family has consistently made hard choices to be able to afford to build our lives here. We've always bought used cars. For years we only bought second hand clothes. We passed on everyday luxuries to work towards our goals. And the city also needs to differentiate between wants and needs. And when you tell us that the tax increases are capped, that isn't the whole picture either. Every time you take on more debt, you pass that bill to us, and that debt service is tacked on to the maintenance and operations budget. Your splurge is on the things you want. Cost all of us the things that we need, the rates and fees added to city services and utilities disproportionately hit households who don't qualify [5:09:02 PM] for or wish to accept assistance. And then there's project connect. When voters were lulled into approving the project connect tax revenue in a proportionate amount, a 20% increase that accounted for 16% of the overall maintenance and operations tax rate. Yet there is no line item showing us how much of our taxes go to project connect. The revenue transfers directly to Austin transit partnership, and you, the council members we've elected, have no ability to represent our interests in how those hundreds of millions are spent each year. We need you to budget more responsibly. Your job is not to take care of what we should do for ourselves, nor follow the latest fashions. Your job is to invest in the common welfare, infrastructure and public safety. The city government cannot be everything to everyone. In the end, you will pick winners and losers and create a bleak future for Austin, one where our families, creatives, dreamers and doers cannot afford to live here. Thank you. [5:10:03 PM] >> Janice Bookout. Miss Bookout, are you here? Yes. Is Doris Adams here? Yes, yes. And juniper. Lauren Ross. Yes. Okay. Miss Bookout, you have six minutes. >> Thank you, I have slides. Slides going. Okay, there we go. Thank you. Janice Bookout, district four. Speaking for myself only. You're considering. Second slide, please. You're considering a $24 million increase for the Austin police department and a $25 million shortfall. Next slide. In honor of everyone looking for answers after the death of Anthony Williams, I and a team from measure conducted an independent analysis of data from the office of police oversight officer involved shooting dashboard and the open data portal for force of use. Use of force. Sorry. Next slide. The dashboard left unanswered questions. So we use the narratives and the force of. I'm sorry, that's not can we go back, please? Can I get a [5:11:04 PM] little more time? Thank you. The dashboard left unanswered questions. So we use the narratives and the use of force data from 2018 to 26, 61% of officer involved shootings resulted in the person's death. We included five. We excluded five incidents with incomplete data, and we asked the question, what do officer involved shootings and force use of force over time? Tell us about where we should focus attention. Next slide. Next slide. First, when a weapon was present, officers fired an average of 65% more shots than when a person was unarmed. But the unarmed cases revealed significant racial disparity when the unarmed person was white, officers fired an average of two shots when the unarmed person was hispanic. Officers fired an average of 15. Also problematic next slide in incidents with a verified firearm on the subject. Officers fired more shots on average when the individual did not fire at them, compared to instances where the individual [5:12:05 PM] did this pattern appearing among white. This pattern appeared among white, black and hispanic individuals, but the greatest with black individuals, where officers fired almost twice as many shots when the person did not fire their weapon. Next slide. Next slide. The presence of a firearm alone, therefore, does not explain the intensity of police response, and the public, by public data leaves us unable to determine what does. Third, as expected, more officers on the scene were associated with more total shots. Next slide please. But we also found that the number of shots fired per officer increased as more officers became involved, with a correlation of 48.5%. Officer. Next slide. Thank you. Officer involved shootings, including shootings of unarmed people, have declined since chief Davis took office, and that should be acknowledged. But during that same period, when a person with a firearm did not fire, officers fired an average of 18.5 shots, compared with 14.3 shots when the officer did fire, [5:13:05 PM] when they when they did fire at officers. That's an increase from before Davis. Next slide. That raises serious questions about the scene coordination, training command and the possibility of contagious fire that council should require APD to answer. Next slide. Mental health and drug impairment was only visible through the use of force data. Among the 42 shootings occurring from 2021 to 2025, nearly 43% involved. Mental involved reported mental health impairment, drug impairment, or both. Three of the four unarmed people had mental health impairment not on the slides. In nine of 16 or 56% of officer involved shootings by police of subjects with an impairment. The subject never fired at police. Of those, three died and three had serious injury injuries. Next slide. Cases involving both mental health and drug impairment averaged 31 shots by officers. Next slide. Some closing thoughts. Suicide by [5:14:07 PM] cop is a term that shuts down critical thinking. And according to California law, review is based on junk science and undermines police accountability from council. We need critical investigative thinking, not protective or reactionary thinking. What's more. Next slide. Having a weapon is not a crime. Mental health crisis is not a crime. Public intoxication carries a $500 fine. Officers should not be firing first before you cut social services to make room for APD, shouldn't you first ensure that we're using our resources to prevent crises and not kill the people having them do not increase the police budget. Increase the budget for the office of police oversight, make the dashboard more usable by the community. Investigate intensity and frequency of one sided gunfire. Use funds for social services on the community investment budget. Thank you to the measure team for supporting this work and for the folks who donated time. [5:15:09 PM] As I said, this work is intended to honor Anthony Williams the second, and his family, but the data does not convey the impact on lives, families, communities. As a parent, all children are our babies. Or at least it should be like that. Anthony was killed within 16 seconds of the officer's arrival. He fell at the fourth shot and they kept going for over 30 rounds. Anthony, was our child, killed by police while reaching for a water bottle? We all need to see it, feel it. Just like that and respond. Failure to do so would be a failure of humanity and a failure of your leadership. Thank you. >> I have a few remote speakers on the line. Jacob Aronowitz. [5:16:13 PM] >> Hello. >> Council members and assembled members of the public. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Jacob Aronowitz. He him with united professional organizers and personally a proud member of Austin dsa. Our union rises in solidarity with the community demands and the coalition behind the community investment budget. We're, you know, we've been involved in these issues for a long time. Proud to represent the workers that led the petition campaign to get the Austin police oversight act on the ballots of austinites. And my members have been involved in these issues for years and years and years. Members of my union were harmed during the black lives matter protests. We've seen cops take members from our community, injure them permanently, and it's time for you to take real action. And that action has been sketched out and put together for you by advocates working hard, often [5:17:15 PM] volunteering, and you know, what the community demands are. And we'll be paying close attention, all of us in this community to see whose side you are on. Recently at my own apartment complex, a man went into a psychotic episode. Police officers came. They did not deploy even less lethal, means of subduction. They they use their hands to take that person into custody. That person was not even taken to jail. They were taken to a hospital. They were out of the hospital in mere hours, back with their spouse by 6 A.M. The following morning. And that person was in a deep state of mental crisis. And as far as I can tell, and I know there are situational differences, but as far as I can tell, the biggest difference between the man in my condo complex and the man, the child that was killed in one of our parks was the color of their skin. And I, at this point in the history of our city, I don't know exactly what can be done about that, but there is a lot that can be done [5:18:15 PM] about that in the community investment budget. >> Thank you. >> Please take a look at it, please. >> Mr. Ramos. >> Hey. So I was there earlier. I appreciate y'all, allowing me to speak remotely. I couldn't make it back down there. Yeah, it's it's been a heavy day, to say the least. Nonetheless, you know, a lot of stirred emotions, coming up with with, what's going on? 36% of our budget is what APD is taking up. This is by all because of a horrible police contract, that we agreed to now serving as an albatross to keep thinking our budget lower and lower and lower, forcing us to cut the actual services communities and people need. I think about, you know, 17 year old teenager that was killed, 17 year old y'all. It's [5:19:16 PM] unacceptable. It's unacceptable. This family should not have to bear the burden of these situations just because we don't have the services, invested in to provide for those families or individuals who are struggling. Instead, we have chosen to reinvest in a solution that actually not a solution for everyone. We're, we're told and we're taught that folks are supposed to keep us safe. And that system, as y'all can see, it's not working, right. This is, this is a continuous conversation that happened year over year, week after week, month over month, day after day. And instead of doing something different, we choose to continue to March down the same road. I'm asking for council to choose a different path. Let's March down the actual path that [5:20:16 PM] reinvest in our communities, reinvest in the services that our communities need, and that our communities want to see. The community investment budget has what we need. And so I ask that. >> Thank you sir. >> Y'all really look at the line item. >> Alexis Herth. >> My name is Alexis Harth and I'm a resident of district six. I'm here to testify against the proposed budget, specifically the APD budget increase and cuts to vital social services. I was present at the morning session, and I would like to talk about what I heard. The majority of testimony was from people against the APD increases. His testimony was overwhelmingly from Austin citizens and representatives of charitable groups. Most of them were or represent our most vulnerable neighbors, people from marginalized demographics who have historically been victimized by the police. Testimony for the APD increases was a small fraction of the testimony, and largely from special interest groups, people, and groups who represent demographics that are privileged to see APD as tech support, as safe people who see [5:21:17 PM] public safety as more people with guns, rather than as a network of community care. These people have never felt paralyzing fear during an encounter with police, knowing they can and will kill without consequence. According to the U.S. Bureau of labor statistics in 2024, being a police officer is less dangerous than being a cab driver, a courier, a nursing worker, a roofer or a construction worker farm worker, among many other occupations. Yet these other occupations are not armed with lethal weaponry or broad immunity funded by taxpayers. They are not guaranteed permanent raises year over year, or even basic worker protections or health insurance. By giving APD even one more cent, you are sending a message that you serve only the privileged, that you stand with governor Abbott and his perpetual animosity towards the city of Austin and its people. An election is coming, and all across the country people are fed up with the police state, the surveillance, state, the status quo, and are ready to elect Progressive candidates who walk the walk. The APD already consumes nearly 40% of the city's budget, and that money is gone forever. We cannot continue to shrink our [5:22:18 PM] remaining budget further. We need to completely refocus our priorities to center food, housing and mental health services and keep the APD budget flat. If you can't do that, then we will elect people who will. Thank you. >> Moving back to in person, Savannah Lee, Jen Cardenas hempel, Jeff Dickerson, Catherine Mcardle. >> Good evening, mayor and council members. Thank you for having us. My name is Savannah Lee. I'm with equity action and a resident of district one. I'm here in support of the community investment budget. Usually when I speak in front of council, I try to stay very measured. I tell you that I'm a trained social worker, that I've been doing work in the justice space for years. I bring you facts and data that prove that public safety cannot just be funding the police. With over a third of our available tax dollars. I share my own story of being justice impacted when I teach other [5:23:18 PM] social workers about how to give testimony, I tell them to establish credibility at the beginning so the folks they speak to will pay attention and listen to them. Today, I cannot be bothered to take my own advice. I do not know why we are expected to stay measured and professional in the face of the unspeakable tragedy. We continue to see. There is no data that I can bring you that could possibly be more convincing than the killing of a 17 year old boy on an Austin playground. And yet we're here today discussing giving another $25 million to the institution that killed him so that we can raise their salaries and benefits. Does that not feel entirely discordant to you, that you're considering cutting the services that could have helped this young man, and instead handing that cash over to the people that killed him? There is nothing I can bring you here that is more stark than that. So instead, I will just say this leaders are only given so many moments with which to truly make their Marc long term. This budget cycle is one of those rare moments for all of you. I imagine you chose [5:24:19 PM] this profession for the same reason I did. You care about your communities and you want to make them better. The way to do that today could not be more clear or uncomplicated. Passing this budget with the increased APD makes this council not just morally bankrupt, but complicit in APD's violence. Keep the police budget flat by funding cuts outside of the contractual obligations, establish joint communications department and create a mechanism for more council oversight over the Pio justice for Anthony and his family. Thank you. >> Please begin. >> Good afternoon, mayor and city council members. My name is Jen Cardenas hempel and I lead the Austin clubhouse, a nonprofit accredited by clubhouse international and located in district nine. We serve adults with severe and persistent mental illness, and we've done so for the last 16 years. And we are also proud members of one voice central [5:25:20 PM] Texas Austin clubhouse does not currently receive city funding, but I'm here today because we understand what's at stake for the whole sector, not just for the programs like ours. We are integral. We are an integral part of the critical infrastructure that keeps austinites sales and alive. When people with serious mental illness have a place to go, meaningful work to do, and a community that expects them, they stay stable and have a better chance of reaching their full potential. When that infrastructure disappears, the cost does not disappear with it. It shows up in emergency rooms and the jail system in crisis calls, often in the communities that least that can least absorb it. Nonprofits extend what the city can do at a fraction of the cost, because we bring in philanthropy and volunteers alongside public dollars. That's exactly why these cuts should be a last resort. I urge you, before [5:26:20 PM] reducing social services funding, the city should exhaust its own internal inefficiencies first and ensure any reductions are targeted and evidence based, not just categorical. We're also asking for real transparency and accountability. Require impact statements from city staff before approving any reductions, so city council and the public can see who loses services and what it costs down the line. We ask you to oppose the proposed budget cuts to social services and to treat any reduction in the space as a last resort. Thank you for your time. >> Please. >> Good evening. My name is Catherine Mcardle. I live in district nine, and I'm here today to again ask you to keep the police budget flat. Do not give APD a penny more than required by that ridiculous Texas law. No excuses about the cost of that new police union contract that some of you voted for in 2024. Find other ways to cut APD budget down to the [5:27:22 PM] minimum required. It can be done if you all have the courage and the backbone to do it. Keeping APD budget flat has been our message since 2021, when that state law went into effect and we could no longer ask for you to cut their budget. It was our message last week at the budget hearing when you heard hours of public testimony calling for the community investment budget to support the social services that actually keep people safe. And now you're hearing it even louder today, after yet another horrific killing of a black child by APD, how many will it take before you listen to your community, I also ask you to amend the budget to move the 911 dispatch out from APD and into an emergency communications department that is independent, so that we can overhaul training and protocols to make sure that when alternative first responders like mental health or other social services providers are needed, they are. Who gets dispatched, not the police. This is another request that this community has been asking for for many years. Not only is this helpful for mental health crises, it also helps address the fact that so many people in this community are afraid to [5:28:23 PM] call 911 in the first place, and rightfully so. Given APD's dismal track record with fatal shootings, traditional treatment of survivors of sexual violence, and now requirements to work with ice, moving 911 to an independent department is something that appears to have support among council, so make sure that the budget supports that as well. Finally, we must make moves so that the office of police oversight can be held accountable by city council. And ultimately, voters. Remember how overwhelmingly austinites voted for the opoa in 2023. It passed with 79% of the vote. But I can assure you the current Pio is not what we had in mind when it comes to APD accountability. Thank you. >> I guess you guys are getting tired of the ordinary guy from district five coming up. Again, I would not be speaking on this issue had it not been for council member duchen comments on Tuesday that he would not take a 2% increase back to his district. He thought that was [5:29:23 PM] too low. As I stated before, council has a spending problem. They don't have a cutting problem. Every time you raise tax, it impacts the various groups like unemployed, like aged, like disabled, like renters. I fall into a lot of those categories. You guys put everybody's put a lot of numbers in front of you. So I'm going to put some numbers this year. The budget proposal passes the city council, which is the highest paid city council in the state of Texas, will be earning $136,000 plus benefits. They're asking for a 3% increase in the budget in [5:30:25 PM] 2026. They are asking for a 4% increase in 2025. They are asking god for a 4% increase in 2024. They asking for a 4% increase. This money does not grow on money trees here in Austin. It comes from the taxpayers. Every time you take and raise taxes, it has to come from somebody. You are spending our money. Money we can't afford to give away. So I ask you, think about your spending priorities and raising them to taxes. Thank you. >> Continuing on, Chantal, Chantelle, Isaac, Jeremy caballero, Frederick Daniels, Monica Guzman, Calvin pope, Daniela silva. [5:31:35 PM] >> Miss Guzman will start with you and move down the road. >> Excuse me. Good afternoon. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. I'm reading a resident statement about the family stabilization grant. When I started this. My number is. Agradecer a todos ustedes por el apoyo Durante un Ano con el dinero para poder de comida Y soy Una senora de avanzada edad no trabajo es un gran apoyo de ustedes acme. We agradecido con usted Y la. Pedidos adelante. Lo siga sacando adelante Micaela gisella a la senora Monica Kim Esta en Esta la senora Erika. A ayudar a hacer la aplicacion de todo eso les agradezco mucho todo lo hicieron for me. In el consejo. Aprobar la [5:32:35 PM] financiacion para todos para qué otras families también pueden ser. Gracias. Good afternoon. My name is Abdul Lianes chito. And I would like to thank you all for the support you provided me over the past year. I use the money I received to pay for rent, food and bills. I'm an elderly woman who does not work. So your support was a tremendous help to me. I am very grateful to you all, and I pray that god helps you move forward and continues to help you succeed. Two. Micaela. Gisella, miss Monica who is helping me right now, and miss Erika who came to help me with the application and everything else back then. I am very grateful for everything you did for me. I urge council to approve funding so other families are able to benefit as well. Thank you. In closing, as a district four resident, keep the a P D budget flat. Do not arm them with funds to kill more children. >> Please. >> Greetings. My name is Chantal. I am an Austin native. [5:33:35 PM] The criminal justice campaign manager with grassroots leadership and a mother to black children. I'm here today because on Friday morning, Austin executed a 17 year old black boy named Anthony Williams, the second for carrying a water bottle. The same day the city hosted its safe to call kickoff meeting. Isn't that quite ironic? Anthony called 911 to report someone else with a weapon. APD arrived 30 minutes later, 30 minutes, and there were no additional calls. Yet it took officers less than 10s to execute him on a playground. One officer even reloaded on his lifeless body. This is what a reactive police force looks like, and we're about to make it worse by giving them 25 million. I want to address something I'm hearing from council that all of this 25 million is contractual and therefore unavoidable. That's [5:34:37 PM] not true. You have choices. You can cut elsewhere in the budget to fit contractual obligations. A 25 million increase to APD is a choice, and we're asking you to choose differently. We have a 300 million in vacancy money. We have options. We can keep the police budget flat and redirect these resources towards prevention, mental health responders, de-escalation training and healing. So I'm asking city council one do not increase the police budget. Keep it flat. Two move 911 out of police department and three move the office of police oversight to city council so you can hold APD accountable for fun, community and care. And finally, transparency and accountability for Anthony Williams and all other lives stolen by APD. >> Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record and begin whenever you're ready. >> My name is Frederick Daniels. [5:35:38 PM] And Mr. Mayor, council members and I live in district four, and I have lived experience with homelessness. And I'm just here to say that, housing first harm reduction work, not camp cleanups. You know, cleanup implies the problem is cleaned up. It's fixed. The cop just being out there on the street. The problem is not cleaned up. It's moved from one spot to another spot. You're gonna have to keep cleaning up the camps. You're not solving any problems, but I think have homes, have advocacy project. They have solutions. They have ideas to where that money can be spent rather than just wasted on, cleaning up camps that are just going to reappear again. And also, I work with the, prep for success program at central presbyterian church and it may not seem like a big deal, but, first workers, you know what I mean? I thought first workers was gone after the pandemic, [5:36:40 PM] but it's not, it's just moved. So I think, the public should be educated that there is a place where they can go to pick up workers and like a, a what do you call that, a public service announcement, letting people know that first workers is not didn't leave. It's just moved to a different location. And finally, I would just like to say I was truly affected by the testimony about that young man who was killed. I saw what happened on television, and how could anybody justify shooting somebody, reloading and shooting again, not only is that a systemic problem with social services, with the police, do we get the same kind of treatment when getting social services? So I urge you to just listen to everybody and all of the things that are going on. Thank you. I yield my time. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, mayor and council. My name is Daniela silva and I'm the policy coordinator at workers defense action fund. Our organization [5:37:41 PM] is part of the community investment coalition, and we are here to express support for all of their demands, but especially that to maintain a flat police budget in order to protect the essential services that help everyday people not only survive but thrive here in Austin, living under a state and federal government that are so hostile to immigrant communities leaves you, our city council, the last line of defense to keep families like those of our members safe, the traumatic and devastating deportations that have taken place in and around Austin have left many of our members on the brink of being evicted, unable to pay for groceries, afraid to let their kids go to school, and afraid to simply exist outside of their homes for fear of having their families ripped apart. At a time when working class people are bearing the brunt of the growing margins of wealth inequality, the most vulnerable workers are constantly having their wages stolen, with few viable options to seek compensation and [5:38:41 PM] justice. Investments should be made in developing local avenues for worker to workers to hold bad bosses accountable. All across Austin, not increasing a department's budget that can never be decreased due to state law making that money forever inaccessible to other departments and programs that need it. We ask that you protect valuable services and programs, like those that support immigrants on their journey through the legal system, by focusing on what really keeps us all safe, investments in things like health, education, housing, art, and workforce development. The budget is a moral document, and we hope you will amend this budget to be one that actually reflects the real morals of Austin. >> Marc, Remy, Jocelyn, Samantha Flinchum, Hans maverick, Betsy. Blair. Nellie. Paulina. Ramirez. [5:39:50 PM] >> Please. We'll start with you. >> Hi, my name is Marc. My brother Rajan was killed by a pd officer in 2022. Not long ago, I went by myself to play golf at a local golf course, and to my surprise, I was paired up with three young police officers. My playing partner and cart mate told me that he's someone who actually trains new cadets at the academy. At what? At one point during the round, he told me that he requests shifts at night in high crime areas because he loves the thrill and the adrenaline rush. It makes him feel more alive. That's the problem that APD has yet to address in the recruiting, training and culture. Police are supposed to be peacekeepers who protect and serve, not adrenaline junkies looking for a fix. To make matters worse, this individual is responsible for training new recruits, de-escalation and preservation of life needs to be prioritized [5:40:51 PM] in recruiting and training. Just because because someone has a gun or is holding a knife to themselves or lifts their waistband doesn't give police the right to use deadly force. They must remain calm in dangerous situations and be trained to react with deadly force. Only as a last resort to change the culture, we need to reward officers who preserve human life. Other police departments across the U.S. Have a preservation of life medal for police officers who do just that through recognition and reward. The culture within the APD will also change. De-escalation not only protects civilians, but also the officers. Our family is still willing to help fund such an award. Should the city council not be able to provide funding for it. City council members Mr. Mayor, I implore you not to provide additional funding to APD. Please require concrete changes to recruiting, training and the culture that prioritizes de- escalation so that many more lives can be [5:41:52 PM] saved. Thank you. >> Please begin whenever you're ready. >> Hi, my name is Remy Joslyn. I'm a member of district nine, and I'm against increasing APD's budget for another year in a row. I'm against putting more money in the hands of departments that cause violence and uphold racist policing policies. I passed a police car the other day inscribed on the back. It said protect protecting Austin's future. And my question to you is, whose future are we protecting? Do you think the police officers who shot a young, unarmed black teen were driving a cop car with protecting Austin's future inscribed in the back. Whose future are we protecting? I implore you to invest in social services that have been advocated for today and earlier times, and that actually support our community, like housing and mental health [5:42:52 PM] services. Listen to your constituents. Do not invest in more violence. Please invest in care. I wonder what message we're sending. I wonder what message we're sending. I wonder what message we're sending. I wonder what message we're sending. What message are we sending? What message are we sending? What message are we sending? What message are we sending? What message are we sending? I'm imploring you to keep APD's budget flat and invest in social services. How many more lives is it going to take for us to reevaluate our systems and our failed systems, and reevaluate structures that actually support us? Keep APD's budget flat? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many [5:43:53 PM] more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? How many more lives will it take? Thank you. >> Hello, I'm Betsy Blair and I serve as a volunteer on the board of farmshare. Austin. I'm asking you to restore the city funding in the proposed budget that supports fresh for less mobile markets and home delivery. These are included in the line item $400,000 reduction in funding that supported the convenient healthy food program in previous budgets. The line item was listed as healthy food access, fresh for less mobile markets and home delivery, bring affordable, high quality produce and groceries directly into neighborhoods where healthy food is hardest to find. At a time when snap benefits are being reduced, more families are struggling to afford healthy food. More than half of farmshare customers have household incomes of [5:44:53 PM] $35,000 a year or less. In Austin. That's not enough to make healthy food consistently affordable. When families lose access to healthy food, the costs don't disappear. They simply show up later in our clinics, our hospitals, and our emergency food system. This is exactly the wrong moment to eliminate a proven public health investment, one that helps families eat healthier today and reduces health care costs tomorrow. Your investment in this program does much more than provide groceries. It fills a critical gap in our community's food safety net. It will reduce future spending on the effects of chronic disease. It saves money on other emergency food assistance programs. It builds a network of local farmers growing healthy food. It's an investment Austin can't afford to lose. I urge you to restore this funding. Thank you. >> Armando Garcia, Denise [5:45:56 PM] Palacios, Scott Cobb, Marissa Dixon, Jeffrey Bowen, romy Lessig. >> Please. We'll start with you and start with you, and then we'll go this direction. Thank you. >> Good afternoon. Council. My name is Marissa. I'm a resident of district nine and I'm a member of Austin dsa. A few years ago, I was driving back to Austin from fredericksburg when passing through one of the small towns. On the way, I sped back up to highway speed too soon and I was pulled over for speeding. When the lights came on behind me, I immediately slowed down, pulled over, parked my car, turned the radio off, rolled my window down, and sat and waited. When I heard the cruiser door close, I turned my head to look in my side view mirror to see the cop approaching. In the same second that I turned and made eye [5:46:57 PM] contact with this cop walking towards my car, he moved his hand and put it, put it on the gun on his waist because I looked at him immediately. I thought, why does he feel the need to be ready to draw his gun upon looking at me? What is he going to do? I understood the implicit threat in that action. He's messing with his waistband and I actually know he has a gun in there. If the roles were reversed and I was the cop and he was the civilian, I could choose to respond to that threat by putting 30 bullets in him. Obviously, I wouldn't do that because I'm a reasonable person, but I'd have the power of the state behind my actions, and I'd have the taxpayer money to pay for my legal proceedings. I'm here today to say that I don't think we should be spending over a third of our city budget giving this kind of power, giving people this kind of power over civilians. We have so many public services in our city that contribute to public safety and are desperate for funding that should be prioritized over adding any more money to the to APD's [5:47:57 PM] already bloated budget. I ask that you implement the community investment budget and not allocate any new money to police. Thank you for your time. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson. Council member harper-madison. My name is Denise and I'm a district one resident. I just wanted to share my experiences with APD in the past. When my bike was stolen last year, I filed a report online and was emailed a response that I would be assigned a detective, and I never heard back from them. And then I got another email and they closed the case. Three years ago, I called 911, shaking, crying out of breath, and they told me that I was not experiencing an emergency and was told to call a 311 instead. And if running for my life across several parking lots with my little sister while being chased by two men in a vehicle isn't cause for alarm, [5:48:58 PM] then why does a non-responsive, unarmed teen at a playground merit several bullets? Anthony all should be alive today. He should be receiving mental health services. These are the types of things that our city could fund. Instead of using over a third of our budget on law enforcement that is allegedly supposed to protect us. But when it's time doesn't actually stand up for its people. I ask that the city instead decides to fund mental health programs, decides to fund transit. While the city inflates the police budget cap, metro had to cut back on our transit lines, route 20 that I would use to go to work and go home. No longer heads towards Maynor, so I can't take that. So I have a longer walk. This was the bus that I used to go to work. This is the bus that other people used to go to work. And the services that actually make people's lives better are [5:49:58 PM] being cut because we're inflating a budget for a program that is literally killing its residents. And I ask you to flatten the budget and also have courage in a couple of years, and instead use those millions of dollars to cut the contract and use towards legal fees. >> Thank you. Yes, ma'am. >> Hi. My name is romy Lessig. I live in district ten. I had written up my notes of what to talk about, before Antonio's death. But it still applies. I originally wanted to come because I care for my mother who has Alzheimer's, and up until last year cared also for her older brother, and, had concerns if we had ever from some stories I heard in the aging community, I had concerns about calling 911 with stories of, policemen not understanding how to appropriately deal with an agitated person with Alzheimer's or other dementias. [5:51:00 PM] They can be disoriented, confused, agitated, not able to find words or direct themselves to, to comply with an order. And that can be, easily misunderstood. And, and there's been thankfully not Austin cases, but many other Texas cases of injuries and even death of older people suffering dementia or other kinds of mental health challenges. These are medical issues. They're treatable. They're not criminal acts. An older my uncle, I mean, if he was in one of his states and someone came up, told him something, you don't know what he was going to say. And having an officer with impunity be able to harm him horrified me. And that's why I wanted to come and speak. And then. Antonio's mother, you know, is over here. And I got myself together and [5:52:01 PM] stopped crying. But I'm sorry. There are families caring for their children, for their parents that are afraid to call 911. Please fix this. It's doable. There's de-escalation training. There's structures that take 911 outside of the police umbrella. You can do this and not have us live in fear. >> Thank you. >> Robin Schneider, Bernice Craig, missile Ramos, Chris Harris, meg Jarrett, Antonio Renard. First. You can. >> Go first. >> Please go ahead. >> Chris. Good. >> Mayor and council members. My name is Sarah Craig. I'm the vice president of philanthropy at Saint Louis house, and I'm speaking to you today about the issue of the reduction in social services. For nearly 26 years, we have walked alongside [5:53:01 PM] women and their children, moving from homelessness to healthy, independent lives. And I want to thank you for the support that you've already extended to us because it has mattered. I know the arithmetic in front of you is very difficult, but family homelessness is not resourced at the level this community needs, and it has not been for a long time. I'm asking you to treat it as a priority and not as a remainder. Family homelessness is also not gender neutral. 84% of families experiencing homelessness are led by women. These mothers and children are the most vulnerable in this city. Caught in a gap. Austin has not yet closed. They do not yet earn enough to qualify for even the most deeply affordable housing available. What they need is time. More time than a shelter is built to give. And the answer already exists in saint Louis house. While Saint Louis house is a safe haven, we are not a shelter. We are an intensive case management program that comes with deeply affordable housing and is [5:54:02 PM] members of the national women's shelter network. We have found no other program in this country that stays with women led in logic model data form. Informed logic model is why it works. The mothers in our program pay rent more affordable housing sets rent at 30% of mfi. Our families pay $50 a month in year one, $100 in year two, and 30% in years three and four. That ladder building a rental history and credit history so that when families leave us, they leave these programs self-sufficient and ready to live on their own again. Ours is a two generation program with children being full clients. These children staying with their mothers stay out of the foster care system. So in this way, investing in these kinds of programs is not only preventing future homelessness, but also foster care prevention. I thank you for your time. >> Miss Schneider. >> We heard from national experts this morning about community violence intervention and how successful it's been, [5:55:03 PM] especially in the in the zip codes where they're focused. We heard from the local folks who are actually doing that work and making such a huge difference. And it made me think about what if everything that we have thought about how to make public safety work is actually wrong and off base. What if this kind of peer support is really what's going to solve the problem? And what if the numbers of the ratios that we're trying to reach in Austin, of how many police officers per thousand people are really not the solution? And we sit here not even a week after the killing of another black person in our community. I think it's time for us to just shift gears, reimagine what public safety really means. And it's your job to do that. [5:56:06 PM] We've, you know, we've gone down this path for way too long, and it's time to switch. I would say, you know, stop. They, you want to contract for more recruitment into APD. That's a contract we should take away right away. That's not an a contractual obligation. Now, that's a start for a contract to get rid of all the travel expenses. Put your staff on a travel budget so that you can fund the programs that we need and increase them because they're showing that they're working. Let's invest in what is working and not killing people. Thank you. >> Hi, my name is George Antonio Arellano and I'm the criminal justice organizer. Grassroots leadership. I'm not surprised by the police. The police do what they do, and we [5:57:08 PM] know what they do, and we fund them to do what they do. And with all due respect to the young man who, speaking earlier about the police here to protect us, the police have never been here to protect us. The police, they were born in the cotton fields of the south. Chasing runaway slaves are here to protect property. They've never been here for other. I'm here to lament the death of Antonio Williams. I'm here to lament the fact that you. That you have chosen to cut the budgets of. And thus the communities. Access to many of the city's agencies that provide social services and to the nonprofits the city contracts with it also offer social services. A city manager, Broadnax, complained. Those agencies are not providing the services quickly enough for him. The man wants results from the police complied. What? What? Broadnax doesn't seem to understand, and you seem to be apathetic to. Is it the flowering of the spirit that Antonio was desperately seeking? [5:58:08 PM] Takes time to germinate and flourish. Social services can't be rushed because they're trying to fill the wounds in our children. Antonio likely remembered in his troubled, still developing mind the message we preach to our children if you need help, you dial 911. We do that. That if you're in trouble, you call the police. He did, and he was killed and he wouldn't. Seeking death. What they're saying, man. But quiet and peace of what was troubling his spirit from the fears that maybe had no basis but that he believed it. >> Thank you sir. >> Good afternoon, mayor council. My name is Chris Harris. I'm here today [5:59:08 PM] representing equity action and and grieving. I want to first acknowledge that not long ago, we wouldn't have even known about what really happened to Anthony Williams. It is by virtue of the fact that, a previous council stood up and said, we've got to release this body cam footage. In other communities. And in this one, without a bystander, we would have heard a lie, a total, a total made up story from the police about this incident. And I have no question about that. What I also want to acknowledge is we know other things. We know that all three of the officers that were sent to this incident and killed Antonio have a history of misconduct. None of them has been on the force for more than four years. Any claim that our recent recruitment, training, whatever has improved anything is a lie. One of these officers was involved in a shooting last year. Another killed someone [6:00:09 PM] driving 50 miles over the speed limit. He received no discipline for that death, and we know this only because of the awesome police oversight act that many of you supported. Thankfully, unfortunately, the transparency that we now have about this incident, the transparency that we now have about these officers, is not did not stop it. It also does not ensure accountability, but with the transparency, with the knowledge of what this department has done, who it's sent to the scene, who it sent to our children. You will have to decide now. Do you fund them or do you fund the services that actually help someone like Anthony? Please choose wisely. >> Savannah. Night. Shannon. Sandra. Claire. Redfield, Ellen. Wilder, Mary. Kerri. [6:01:22 PM] >> Whenever you're ready, please begin. >> Okay. >> Mayor and council members. My name is Shannon sandria and I am a constituent of district one, longtime longtime resident. I'm a licensed therapist who has worked with teens in the Austin community for almost 30 years. And I'm also the senior director of safe expect respect program. Yesterday, I learned from a memorandum sent by the city's chief financial officer, and my heart sank when I saw that the youth crisis intervention program, expect respect was listed to receive funding cuts. I'm here to tell you why this is a horrible mistake. My work is personal. I was called to do this work in 2003 after the tragic death of 15 year old Ella mosley, when she was killed by her 16 year old ex- boyfriend at northeast high school. During the school day in front of her peers. In the wake of that tragedy, the Austin community came together to ensure that young people who experiencing relationship abuse [6:02:23 PM] would have access to support counseling, safety planning, education and intervention. Over the past three decades, the expect respect team has built a strong, coordinated system of care. Expect respect now works in close partnership with many schools, social service agencies and most importantly, young people and families across Austin. This infrastructure did not happen overnight. It has taken years of collaboration and trust building to create programing that is both effective and responsive to the needs of our specific community today. Expect respect team sees youth every week who are struggling in their relationships through individual counseling and trauma informed support groups. These are young people navigating dating, violence, family violence, sexual assault, often without other safe supports. Please do not reduce funding of these services. Expect respect has already absorbed multiple funding reductions across city, state and private sources. Each cut compounds the last, reducing [6:03:23 PM] our ability to provide consistent life saving services to youth. >> Thank you. Why don't we go here and then we'll call. >> Good evening. My name is Savannah knight. I live in district seven and I'm a licensed clinical social worker with the expect respect program as well. The program of the safe alliance, where I work as a counselor, providing individual and group trauma therapy for teens and children who have experienced sexual dating and family violence. Expect respect is often known and described as a violence prevention program. But I want you to understand that we are much more than just that. We intervene at the point of crisis. We meet children on the worst days of their lives, and I'm here today because I've learned you want to cut funding to this life saving program. The city has already reduced our funding by 10%, and now another 10% is being proposed. This program is a lifeline for Austin's youth and children, and I am asking you to not cut that lifeline. I want to share [6:04:23 PM] with you what our work looks like on a daily basis, so you can understand why this program is so essential. Just this past year, I received a call from school staff moments after a child disclosed that they had been sexually assaulted because of the city funding my role, I was able to immediately go to that school, provide crisis intervention, support the staff in responding appropriately, and develop a safety plan so that the student could leave school that day knowing someone was there to support them and was going to help keep them safe. Unfortunately, this is not a unique story. As an expect respect counselor, I have supported children who witnessed gun violence in their homes, teens who have experienced stalking and abusive dating relationships, and youth who have run away from home and were at high risk of being trafficked. These are children navigating unimaginable fear and trauma, and they deserve all of the support of all of the support that we can give through. Expect respect kids and youth receive crisis intervention, trauma informed counseling at no cost and the support they need to heal, stay safe and build healthy futures. I want [6:05:23 PM] to directly share with you that my colleagues and I have prevented several suicides among our youth. This program literally saves lives. This is the work we do every day. I imagine you would all say you cared deeply about the safety and well-being of Austin's children. Thank you, thank you. >> Please, whenever you're ready. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson. Mayor pro tem vela, city council members. My fellow austinites. My name is Mary Kerri. I've lived in Austin since 1986 and in district four since 1992. I'm a member of saint John's episcopal church and a leader of central Texas interfaith. It is my great honor today to speak to you about capital idea, founded in 1998, it helps working adults choose new careers, connecting them with education, training and career advancement opportunities. Students are enrolled on a semester basis, with each person completing their studies. After an average enrollment of three years. [6:06:24 PM] Capital idea provides tuition, books, tutoring, child care and other support to help students complete their training. Capital idea has made it possible for thousands of Austin area adults to work their way from low income employment to higher paying careers. Last year, 169 students found jobs in their field, earning an average starting wage of $33 per hour in 2023. The rey Marshall center at the university of Texas at Austin found that capital idea participants achieved an average increase of $19,924 in annual earnings. These are life changing results over a 20 year period. For every dollar invested, taxpayers receive $6.99 in public benefits. I think that's a good record. Thank you. >> Thank you. [6:07:28 PM] >> Phillip Riley, Carol hurley, Daisy green, Katie Jenkins, Zenobia. Joseph. >> Why don't you kick us off and we'll work down the road this way. >> All right. Hi, my name is Katie and I'm a resident of district nine. As a recent transplant from Dallas. I'm not surprised to see that the city manager chose not to bless us with his presence today, despite his half $1 million salary. I'm here today to ask the council to keep me to social services. I've spent my entire career working in nonprofit organizations that provide social services to people in the community. Before I move to Austin, I worked in a domestic violence shelter in another city. Time and again, I would hear stories from [6:08:29 PM] survivors who didn't feel safe calling the police. Survivors often said police wouldn't take them seriously, would side with the abuser, not offer help that promoted long term safety, or even Mok them and refuse to take their statements. Sometimes calling the police meant risking their own arrest for a mutual disturbance, for an outstanding warrant for defending themselves. I also heard stories of abusers using the police as a weapon. They'd call and file false police reports before their partner could, often using custody threats, immigration status or the survivors own criminal record to keep them trapped and afraid. For many survivors, a knock on the door from a police officer meant the abuse would later escalate, and when their abuser was in law enforcement, the danger intensified drastically. Survivors in those situations often had nowhere safe to turn at all. Sometimes having to leave the state. Their abuser had a badge, a gun, a network of colleagues and influence to intimidate their victims and those trying to help them, including staff at domestic violence shelters. [6:09:29 PM] Police cannot solve every problem in our community. Last week, Anthony Williams called the police for help and instead of sending mental health services that are readily available to de-escalate the situation, they chose to kill him in cold blood. What keeps the whole community safe are accessible and free social services like housing and mental health support and actual services for domestic violence. I'm asking you to invest in the things that are actually make survivors and everyone in our community safe. Justice for Anthony. Justice for all stolen lives. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson and council members. I am Phillip Riley, a member of saint John's episcopal church in central Texas interfaith. I have lived in Austin since 1974. My home is in district seven. I'm a retired teacher and school administrator, and now I work part time for Texas state university. I'm here today to support capital idea. Capital idea has helped thousands of [6:10:30 PM] working adults advance to higher paying jobs by connecting them to education, training and career advancement opportunities. Many of the participants work in health care capital. Idea covers tuition and fees and also provides support services. Capital idea also ensures that employers have access to a highly qualified workforce workforce. Truly, this is a win for everyone. A study by the ray Marshall center at UT found that for every dollar invested, taxpayers receive $6.99 in public benefits. I hope you will maintain a funding level that will let this great work continue. Our public schools support us when we are young. Capital idea supports working adults who can benefit from [6:11:30 PM] extra support to grow and thrive. Thank you. >> Good evening. May it please. >> The council and mayor Watson. My name is Carol hurley. I'm a parishioner at saint Mary's cathedral and a leader with central Texas interface interfaith. Excuse me. I have lived in district ten for 56 years. Notwithstanding a couple of temporary relocations, I am here today to encourage the council to prioritize funding for leading organizations that provide long term workforce development, like capital idea. We are living in a time where priorities and decisions are often unfortunately made based on budget costs and funding. Programs such as this, and in particular this program, fill a critical need for the community and employers by providing education and training capital idea targets a demographic that otherwise would not be served. My experience as an attorney representing children in foster [6:12:31 PM] care and as the adoptive parent of two children who came through the foster care system in Travis county has shown me how difficult it is for this population to live independently and successfully. This population does not have the kinds of supports that our typical families have, and they frequently struggle with executive functioning. The capital idea program provides exactly those kinds of supports and services that facilitate success, supports and services not typically available in college and technical school training. Our homeless population is made up in large part by those who aged out of foster care. These individuals, through no fault of their own, end up using public resources. The community bears the cost to feed them, to provide health care, often very expensive emergency health care and housing them in our jails and prisons. Capital idea allows those same individuals to take charge of their lives, obtain good, stable employment, and [6:13:31 PM] become taxpaying residents of our city. As you've already heard, but this is so significant. Thank you. >> Oh. >> Thank you, mayor Watson and city council. My name is Daisy green. I'm a licensed social worker and certified recovery peer support specialist at the Texas harm reduction alliance. And I'm here today to speak out against the proposed city budget, a $25 million increase to the Austin police department while simultaneously cutting funding for social services in our city, which includes THAs social substance misuse mobile grant is not only a disgrace to the communities you claim to serve, but a vast waste of money. Over the past year, THA has served over 2900 people from some of Austin's most marginalized communities. We provide harm reduction, overdose prevention, peer support, basic survival needs, housing, navigation, emotional support, connections to medical treatment and recovery services. [6:14:32 PM] More than 87% of our enrolled clients have reported progress towards their recovery goals. So when we talk about cutting more than $54,000 from these services, we need to be honest about what we're actually cutting. We are cutting resources for people experiencing homelessness. We are cutting recovery support. We are cutting housing, housing, navigation, and we are cutting the very services that prevent people from reaching a crisis point in the first place. And I know this because I see it every day. Several weeks ago, THR was raided by police, resulting in the arrest of two people to who are understanding were wrongfully arrested. Within the past week alone, we have witnessed two additional violent arrests directly in front of our property. Think about what this means for the people walking through our doors. That is traumatizing. It undermines the trust we work so hard to build and is a waste of time, money, and public resources. And in the wake of the killing of 17 year old Anthony Williams, the third by three APD officers, we have to ask ourselves what kind of public safety we actually want to fund, because public safety [6:15:33 PM] is not policing, public safety is having somewhere safe to sleep, having access to health care and someone in recovery support. I ask the council, why are we taking away resources from the people doing this work, while giving millions more to a system that our communities continue to experience? >> Thank you. >> Wilson. Miss Wilson, are you here? Is B ayers here? Yes. Okay, y'all. Four minutes. Sheila Jones, teak Johnson. Latrelle reed and Monet. >> Whenever you're ready. >> Good afternoon, mayor. >> And council members. My name is Kenya Wilson and I am the founder of black mamas village, a black led nonprofit serving mothers and families across central Texas. And I want to talk about what happens after a [6:16:33 PM] budget is passed, because need doesn't disappear. When funding disappears, it moves. It rolls downhill. It rolls onto organizations like black mamas village. Last year alone, we moved more than $213,000 in emergency assistance to help families keep lights on, avoid eviction, pay utility bills, buy food, and survive crisis after crisis. That wasn't because families suddenly stopped needing help from public systems. It was because when those systems become harder to access, families come to the people they trust. Let me tell you about one mother. She lives in a single hotel room with her children. One room, no stove, no place to prepare healthy meals, no way to wash clothes, a small refrigerator. And she pays nearly $2,000 every month just to keep a roof over her children's heads. Many other families don't even have that. They are literally sleeping in [6:17:34 PM] their cars. That is what housing instability looks like today. Last week, our city witnessed the collective trauma of the death of an unarmed 17 year old black boy. I watched the video of him sitting alone on the playground. His shoulders slumped, his head hung low, and I couldn't stop thinking. Whose baby was he? Somewhere there is a mother whose world will never be the same. I don't know his story, but I do know the stories of hundreds of black mothers who carry the weight of housing instability, economic hardship, untreated trauma, and systems that too often fail to respond with care before crisis. Every budget decision either strengthens and helps the conditions, or it takes away from people that are already falling. Every child we lose is somebody's baby. Every mother we fail is part of the same [6:18:34 PM] story. Let me tell you about another mother who was fortunate to have a different ending. She did what we tell her to do. She called and asked integral care for help when she was experiencing a mental health crisis. Instead of finding safety, she found fear. CPS became involved and took her children. But she came to us after she lost everything and we provided her with free, culturally responsive psychiatric care free therapy. We attended every court hearing. We became safety monitors. We walked beside her for months, and last week her babies came home. That outcome was not created by one appointment. It was created through relationships, trust, culturally responsive care, and community organizations willing to do the work that doesn't fit neatly into a funding category. That's community infrastructure. As you make difficult decisions, I ask you to remember the organizations like black mamas village, mama Sana, elwyn, Saint Louis, and so many others. Whether they receive your [6:19:35 PM] funding or not, we are not expendable. We are part of the public safety net when social services are reduced, when prevention programs disappear, when families lose access to food and housing supports, those needs don't disappear. They arrive at our door. We absorb the impacts of snap disruptions, housing crisis, mental health crisis. We absorb consequences of families being priced out of option out of Austin. And we do it because communities trust us. Black mothers have too often been invisible in policy decisions. And while creating caring, excuse me, the greatest burden of the affordability crisis, they are raising children, working multiple jobs, navigating systems that do not have them in mind, trying to stay afloat. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Calvin Kelly, Solis. Watson, Elena Barrera, Terrence Hopkins, [6:20:37 PM] Cory Hopkins. >> Let's start with you, sir. >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson and council members. My name is doctor Calvin Kelly, and I serve as the chief clinical officer for the harvest trauma recovery center. The first and only trauma recovery center in the state of Texas. The question for Austin is what happens when we leave or lose the harvest of trauma recovery center? The answer for me and countless others is very clear. More crises, more violence, more school disruptions, more homelessness, more strain on emergency services, and more families suffering in silence. [6:21:38 PM] Please be clear the harvest trauma recovery center is not just another social service agency. It is a public health strategy. It reduces harm, increases safety, stabilizes families, and strengthens the entire city. As a social science and licensed mental health professional, I understand that trauma is one of the strongest predictors of long term community care and harm, but it is also one of the most treatable. When we invest in trauma recovery, we invest again in safety, stability and the future of Austin's children's and families. The TRC is changing lives, and with your continued support, we can [6:22:38 PM] also change the trajectory of the entire city. Thank you. >> How you doing? Welcome, welcome. Thank you so much. Hey, my name is Corey Hopkins. I'm a digital media program coordinator for African American youth office foundation. I'm definitely here to have a voice for harvest trauma recovery center. That's the first trauma recovery center in the state of Texas. The first trauma recovery center in the state of Texas. So it kind of blew my mind when I heard September the 30th is the last time we had funding for this program. And you see, mental health is really out there, and there's people who really need the help that they don't even know they're in trouble. All they're doing is operating off of what they think is called normal until [6:23:38 PM] they encounter something that they're, oh, I think I'm supposed to act like this. But then something happens. If we eliminate the funding for trauma, a heart, a trauma recovery center, we eliminate that and say, hey, we don't need funding for this one. Hey, let's fund something else that's more quote unquote important. Mental health is real. I come from a family of eight, six boys. Now. We're all grown men. I've seen it with my own eyes. Mental health affect my loved ones in real life time, and I can only imagine where they would be if they did not go and find people like doctor Kelly, people like those who really care about mental health. It is real. And if you don't, and if you haven't experienced it, it's like seeing somebody that you thought you knew your whole life and all of a sudden they are completely different person, not because they want to, because the mental health [6:24:40 PM] we need to make the harvest trauma recovery center a pillar in our community. And like I said in the other one, it's no exceptions. We need y'all to help us, man. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please begin whenever you're ready. Yes. >> Hello. My name is Alice Watson. A mother, a single mother, a woman of lived experience of homelessness, a survivor of domestic violence, and someone who has been justice impacted. I would not be here advocating today without the type of support services that the trauma recovery center has been able to provide. Mental health is real. We do need the support that the harvest trauma recovery center brings to the community. A close family member, was recovering from an overdose and depression and found healing through horses. It gives me pride to be working with an organization that [6:25:41 PM] prioritizes a therapeutic healing environment where our at risk youth and families have a place to go and heal and mend their broken wings. When we talk about wraparound services, those wraparound services are encompassed with the trauma recovery center, the counseling, the peer support, the access to food pantry, clothing, closets, employment services, all of the things that make an individual strong. When we have strong individuals, we have strong families. Strong families build strong communities. These type of programs help change the trajectory of a family that's going through crisis, and they have concerns or even has gone through trauma, just like we've seen here today. There's a lot of episodes of trauma happening in our community. We have to have an outlet. We have to have a resource. We have to have trained professionals who really care about our members, [6:26:42 PM] our youth, our families in this community. What affects one directly affects us all indirectly. Thank you so much for your time. >> How's it going, guys? My name is Vincent Hopkins. I'm the youth mentor at the African-American youth harvest foundation, and I also speak at eight different schools in the district, helping kids with their social emotional learning. Teach them about the six seeds of education, communication, collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking, and also work with the unhoused, offering them job opportunity, housing. Anybody need a job opportunity or housing? We give them a job and a place to stay within that same day. But I do recall a time as I was on the streets with the unhoused, and I had a guy come to me and say, he's here, he's finally here. And he said, sir, I have to talk to you. So I said, sure. After we finished feeding everybody, we'll have on one on one conversation. And as I had the time to talk to him, he said, sir, you said last week [6:27:42 PM] that caused me not to want to get something to eat, but I'm just going to be real with you. I'm a wanted felon. I've been busted for organized crimes and drugs, and I ruined so many people's lives. But I was coming to you, so. And he said, I'm actually on the run right now, but I was seeing if you can drop me off to the police station so I can turn myself in. And as he's telling me this, I'm trying to figure out a nice way on how to say no because I didn't want to get killed. But anyways, I agreed. So as I took him to the police station, he said, Mr. Terrence, I just want to let you know you're making a difference in so many people's lives. And I'm one of them. And he said, continue to keep on doing what you're doing. And he turned himself in. November 1st, 2023 is when we first opened up our trauma recovery center. We're told by the state to serve at least 120 clients will receive that goal by serving over 896 clients within that first year. And now we're serving thousands. But at the same time, ourselves, let's just say by us not funding the harvest trauma recovery center, you take protection from our homes, protection from our schools, protection from our cities, protection from our government, protection from ourselves and protection from [6:28:42 PM] us as a people. I speak for those who misuse and abuse and mentally confused and not able to even speak for themselves. And I say, please help us to fund the harvest recovery center. Thank you so much. >> Miss Joseph. >> I have presentation, mayor. >> It's up there. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council, I'm Zenobia Joseph. I just want to say, mayor, respectfully, it's hard to trust you. This is an article from January 6th, 1999. You passed the brownfields item last week, strategically missing from that document, however, was the July 21st, 1996 fire. As you can see on the screen specifically, there's petroleum heavy metals. There was no environmental clearance and leaking petroleum. So I recognize my comments are [6:29:42 PM] not going to sway you one way or the other. So I went to Texas transportation commission today because they had the bomb item on their agenda for $7.79 million. I want you to know that's an industrial site and you need to get clearance. Same chito vela with the site on saint John's. The city got a $600,000 grant. Fy 2021. So I just wanted to call that to your attention. The city manager is not here, but his words are important as well. Next slide. I just want you to recognize specifically, this is the way the budget the document looked last week. Omission. Next slide. Here I want to talk about transportation and public works is disingenuous. I'm looking specifically on page 465 and it says to continue the work on north Lamar. Are you serious? I want you to remember the Imam Islam mossaad was [6:30:44 PM] killed July 25th, 2025, 27, 2025. And even though Mike Rogers saw the Orange paint still at the crash site, you are beautifying burnet road. These are the specs burnet road beautification, but north Lamar is the number two crash site in the state of Texas. I would ask you to do the right thing, mayor. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> Kayla Hopkins, Susannah. Carranza, Noel. Gaylord. Mary. Elizabeth. >> Welcome. Why don't we start here and we'll work down the road? >> Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Kelly Hopkins, and I [6:31:44 PM] work for the African American youth harvest foundation as a data coordinator and executive assistant. Today, I want to highlight the critical importance of the harvest trauma recovery center, a place where healing begins for individuals who are experiencing some of life's most difficult moments. Working here at the foundation has opened my eyes to a broader perspective on life. I've witnessed just how many individuals are silently navigating some form of trauma. Everyone deserves a voice and someone they can trust to talk to every day. People in our community are silently carrying the weight of their trauma, whether from gun violence, abuse, loss, or other painful experiences. These individuals often feel invisible, unsupported, and unsure of where to turn. There's. That's where our center steps in the harvest. Trauma recovery center offers more than just a safe space. We provide professional counseling, case management, crisis intervention, and most [6:32:44 PM] importantly, hope we don't just treat symptoms, we support the whole person. Whether someone is navigating the aftermath of trauma or still living through it, they are met with compassion, dignity, and care. This work is deeply personal and urgently needed. With proper funding, we can expand our services, reach more individuals in crisis and ensure no one walks their healing journey alone. Investing in the harvest trauma recovery center is investing in the heart of our community. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Noel Gaylord, district ten, and I am here to ask you to keep the APD budget flat every day in Austin. Teachers, social workers, medical professionals, and even librarians de-escalate conflicts without use of force, let alone lethal force. So why are we talking about $25 [6:33:46 PM] million for Austin police department to murder children, adults, and our elderly? Throughout this entire hearing, we have heard from people who are doing the actual work to support our communities, to keep us safe. Why can't we fund those people and their actual work of community safety? Yeah. That's it. Thanks. >> Hi, my name is Susana Carranza. I live in district nine. As we all mourn the police killing of a 17 year old who was just crying for help, I urge you to keep the APD funding flat. I urge you to use that money instead to fund the many social services that lots of organizations here today [6:34:46 PM] were talking about. Those are programs that actually keep us safe. A few years ago, I testified the Texas capital against the absurd law that prevents any city from ever reducing the police budget. I recall thinking that no city in their right mind would ever want to increase voluntary in the police budget, since it would tie their hands forever. Shame on Austin for doing that last year, causing a great budget shortfall, and shame on Austin for considering doing that again. Now we are already cutting programs. Why would we do that? We all heard the saying that one ounce of prevention is worth a pound. A pound of cure. Why do we keep cutting programs that provide the prevention and inflating the budget of an organization that really fails over and over [6:35:50 PM] to prioritize de-escalation and care? I urge you to send a clear message that Austin cares about people and prioritize care. Keep APD funding flat. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. All speakers for item five have been called. >> Thank you very much, members. As you just heard, all the speakers on the public hearing on item number five have been called. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number five. And for the record, item number five is a public hearing to take possible action on the proposed city of Austin budget for fiscal year 2026 2027, beginning on October 1st, 2026 and ending on September 30th, 2027. Without objection, the public hearing is now closed and members. That completes all of the agenda items, but I want to revisit something we have [6:36:51 PM] posted. We have posted, for a meeting on October 4th in case we needed that meeting. If we don't, what did I say? Well, but tells you how anxious I am. Yeah. I'm sorry. Good, good, good. Correction. Nice. Amendment. August 4th, which is next Tuesday. And, it's posted. We did it as a tentative post, but what I want to ask the council members to do is if you have items that you would like to discuss related to the budget post that, let us know now, or post it on the message board by tomorrow afternoon so that we'll be in a position to have all of that ready for next Tuesday. Okay. For the public, I again want to reiterate our schedule. You just heard me talking about August 4th. We will know whether we're having that pretty quickly, but we [6:37:52 PM] will also have a meeting on the fourth, perhaps with regard to, proposed bond election on Thursday, August 6th, there will be another council work session and that will, but let me stop that. August 4th. On August 4th members, we're asking that by close of business by 6:00 on August 4th. If you have proposed budget amendments or proposed budget amendments being those that change the numbers, I have cease being those that give direction or create policy around the budget. We ask that you get those, have those posted by the end of business on August 4th. Then on August 6th we will have a budget work session where we will take up, we will take up the budget amendments and the ifc. We will [6:38:55 PM] also on that day have a council vote on ordering a general election, ordering a special charter election, and perhaps if needed, ordering a special bond election on Wednesday, August 12th, Thursday, August 13th and Friday, August 14th. We will be posted. There will be an opportunity for a public hearing, council discussion and a council vote with regard to the budget. Members. We have closed the public hearing. The Texas state law requires that when you when we have a public hearing, the law actually reads that we need to take a vote. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the governing body of [6:39:55 PM] the municipality shall take action on the proposed budget. What we are going to do is we are going to take action by. We've closed the public hearing, and now we will take action by having a vote to postpone the budget adoption until the August 12th meeting. So what I would like to do is entertain a motion made by council member Siegel, second by council member Ellis, that we postpone the vote on the budget to the August 12th meeting August 13th and August 14th, and we're all supposed to be available on the 17th if needed, but we're postponing the vote on the budget until the August 12th meeting. You've heard the motion. The second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the motion is adopted with the mayor, pro tem and council member Fuentes being temporarily off the dais. There's no other business to come before us at this point in time. So thanks. And I want to [6:40:57 PM] say two other things real quickly. One is, I believe I speak for everybody when I say thank you to our professional staff. And I mean the budget staff, of course, but I also mean the staff of the different departments. The level of knowledge that they have demonstrated ought to give people confidence. And when some of these very specific in the weeds questions get asked, they, they have a tremendous knowledge base and we're very proud of them. And so I want to, I want to call that, call them out for that and say, thank you to them. And then the other thing I want to say is that, starting in January of 2023, Colleen pate started as my chief of staff and today is her last council meeting. She will be leaving tomorrow will be her last day. And, and I want to say thank you to her because. And I think everybody, [6:41:58 PM] everybody that knows her and everybody has had to work with her in one way or another, has also had the opportunity to, be guided by her in one way or another. And, I know I'm deeply indebted and I just want to say a public thank you. Colleen. Thank you. Council member Fuentes would like to be shown voting in favor of the postponement of the vote on the budget to the August 12th meeting. It will not change the outcome of our vote. Motion made by council member Ellis, seconded by councilmember zo qadri. Is there any discussion? Without objection, she will be voting in favor of that item. Folks, there being no further business to come before the Austin city council at this meeting. It is 6:42 P.M. And without objection we are adjourned at 6:42 P.M. On July 30th, 2026. Thank you everybody. Thank you.